영어 접어, 부사전치사, 전치사 구문의 운율 특성

한혜승(Han, Hyeseung),이주경(Joo-Kyeong Lee) 한국음운론학회 2009 음성·음운·형태론 연구 Vol.15 No.3

Han, Hye-seung, and Joo-Kyeong Lee. 2009. Prosodic features in the English phrases including particles, adverbial prepositions and prepositions. Studies in Phonetics, Phonology and Morphology 15.3. 499-514. This study attempts to investigate prosodic features in the English phrases including particles, (e. g., the second element in a verb phrase such as give up the exam), adverbial prepositions (e. g., the second element of jump off the wall) and prepositions (e.g., the second element of study in the room). A phonetic experiment was conducted to see if there are any differences and /or prosodic structures among those three phrases. The stimuli were varied with two different objects, noun and pronoun and two kinds of rate, slow and fast, and pitch accent distribution and phrasing were measured within the phrases. Results showed that pitch accents were very frequently realized on both the particles and the adverbial prepositions, but that prepositions were rarely implemented a pitch accent. When the objects were a pronoun, a pitch accent consistently moved to particles, adverbial prepositions, and prepositions. Moreover, there are more phrase involved in the boundaries of the particle + the following noun phrase and the preceding verb + adverbial preposition and the adverbial preposition + the following noun phrase. It was interpreted as stating that such patterns reflect the differences in semantic weight among the three elements and the degree of semantic cohesion with the preceding verbs and the following noun phrases, and that adverbial phrases show distinct prosodic features from both particles and prepositions. This suggests that adverbial prepositions should constitute their own category semantically and/or prosaically. (University of Seoul)

제1차 국제학술대회 ; 학교 문법에서 `-기 때문에` 구문은 부사절인가?

이관규 ( Kwan Kyu Lee ) 국어교육학회 2012 國語敎育學硏究 Vol.45 No.-

언어 표현 가운데 중심이 되는 핵(核, 머리어)으로 N, V, A, P가 인정되고 있는 것이 일반적이다. 관형어가 명사를 수식하고 부사어가 동사와 형용사를 수식하며, 또한 비록 전치사 혹은 후치사(조사와 어미)이지만 이것들도 핵으로 역할을 하고 있다. 한국어에서 `그 집`, `천천히 달려.`, `매우 예뻐.`, `집에` 같은 예들을 들 수 있다. SOV 언어인 한국어는 이처럼 통사적으로 중심 되는 것(핵)이 뒤에 오는 후핵 언어에 속한다. 한편 태국어는 중심 되는 핵이 앞에 오는 선핵 언어에 속한다. 태국어는 한국어와는 다른 SVO 언어에 속한다. 그리하여 중심어는 앞에 오고 수식어는 뒤에 온다. 그런데 같은 SVO 언어이지만 영어는 성격이 조금 다르다. 영어는 중심 되는 핵이 뒤에 오기도 하고(예: the book / Uncle`s house), 앞에 오기도 한다(예: House of uncle / to the school). 흔히들 SOV 언어는 후핵 언어이고 SVO 언어는 선핵 언어라고 말하지만, 반드시 그런 것은 아니라는 것을 알 수 있다. 이러한 언어 유형론적 차원에서 볼 때, `비가 오기 때문에`는 부사절이라고 보기가 어렵다. `비가 오-`에 `-기`가 붙어서 명사절 `비가 오기`가 만들어졌고, 이어서 이것 전체가 `때문`이라는 의존 명사를 수식하고 있으며, 연이어서 명사구(NP) `비가 오기 때문` 전체에 부사격 조사 `에`가 붙어서 부사구를 이루고 있다고 보아야 할 것이다. 이는 핵이 오른쪽으로 이동하였다고 보는 설명 방식이다. `비가 오는 가운데`도 부사절이 아니라 통사 구조상 부사어구라고 보는 게 설명적 타당성이 있다. `비가 오-`에 관형사형 어미 `-는`이 붙고, `비가 오는`이 `가운데`라는 명사를 수식했기 때문에 명사구가 되며, 이어서 비록 `비가 오는 가운데`에 `에`라는 부사격 조사가 붙지는 않았지만, `비가 오는 가운데` 전체가 `행사는 예정대로 열렸다`의 배경이 되고 있어서, 통사 구조적으로는 부사어구가 된다. It is known that N, V, A, and P are nucleus in sentence. In Korean, a determiner modifies noun, and adverb modifies verb. Also, postposition plays a role as nucleus. We can find examples as follows: `그 집`, `천천히 달려.`, `매우 예뻐.`, `집에`. Therefore, Korean, SOV language, belongs to head-final language. On the other hand, Thai belongs to head-initial language, meaning head comes ahead, dependents come back. As a result, Thai belongs to SVO. But even though Thai and English are the same SVO languages, English is different from Thai. In English, head comes back(ex: the book / Uncle`s house), or front(ex: House of uncle / to the school). In an opinion of language typology, it is not difficult for `비가 오기 때문에` to be adverbial phrase. `비가 오-` becomes nominal clause `비가 오기` after `-기` adds to it, and `비가 오기` modifies N`때문`, successively NP `비가 오기 때문` in help of adverbial case particle `에` becomes to adverbial phrase. This is explaining way that head moves to right.Also `비가 오는 가운데` is not adverbial clause, but just NP phrase, and adverbial phrase, I suppose. `비가 오-` becomes `비가 오는 ` in help of determiner ending `-는`, and then `비가 오는` modifies N `가운데`. Therefore `비가 오는 가운데` is NP phrase. And even if it has not additional adverbial case particle `에`, it becomes background of `행사는 예정대로 열렸다`, so it is adverbial phrase syntactically.

동사 서술어 앞에 위치한 동사성 어구의 성격에 관한 문제

임명화(Im Myung hwa) 동양한문학회(구 부산한문학회) 2017 동양한문학연구 Vol.46 No.-

2015개정 한문과 교육과정의 ‘성격’에서 한문 문장의 독해력을 강조하고 있고, ‘내용체계’에서는 ‘핵심개념’의 하나로 한문의 독해를, ‘내용요소’로는 문장의 구조, 문장성분의 생략과 도치 등을 설정하고 있다. 한문의 독해는 문장 구조의 파악, 그리고 문장을 이루는 요소인 문장성분에 대한 이해가 필수적이기 때문이다. 본고는 문장성분 중 부사어를 대상으로 하여 고찰하였다. 부사어는 부사·형용사·명사·동사· 개사구 등 다양한 품사와 이로 이루어진 어구로 충당된다. 그 중 동사 혹은 동사구가 동사 서술어 앞에 위치한 ‘V₁+(而·以)+V₂’구조의 경우, 그 결합관계 및 의미에 따라 병렬구조, 수식구조, 연동구조의 세 가지 유형을 보인다. 그런데 수식구조와 연동구조의 경우, 문장에 따라서는 양자의 구별이 쉽지 않고, 심지어 학자에 따라 동일한 예문을 달리 분석하기도 한다. 예컨대 ‘子路拱而立’의 ‘拱而立’을 ‘부사어+서술어’의 수식구조라고도 하고, ‘서술어+서술어’의 연동구조라고도 한다. ‘臣與將軍戮力而攻秦’의 ‘戮力而攻秦’은 ‘VO₁+VO₂’ 구조인데, 이 역시 수식과 연동의 두 견해가 존재한다. 본고는 이러한 구조의 문장들을 고찰하여 두 구조에 대한 구별기준을 제시하고자 하였다. 이를 통해 학교 교육현장과 이에 관심이 있는 학계에도 도움이 되고자 하였다. 연구의 진행에 있어서는 같은 한자, 한문을 대상으로 연구하는 중국문법학계의 의견도 함께 살펴보았다. 고찰 결과는 다음과 같다. 1. 부사어인 V₁은 서술어를 수식한다. 그러므로 V₁과 V₂간에는 의미면에서 主와 次가 있다. V₁이 차, V₂가 주이다. 2. 서술어인 V₁은 V₂와 마찬가지로 진술의 내용이 된다. 그러므로 V₁과 V₂간에는 의미면에서 主와 次가 없다. 3. 부사어인 V₁은 서술어인 V₂와 동시에 일어나거나, 일어나는 시차가 크지 않은 동작·행위이다. V₁은 V₂와 함께 지속되고, V₂의 상태를 묘사한다. 4. 연동구조에서 서술어인 V₁과 V₂는 별개의 동작·행위를 나타내고 분명한 시차를 두고 발생한다. 시차가 크지 않다 해도 두 동작·행위가 별개의 것이라면 V₁은 서술어이다. 5. 연동구조에서 서술어인 V₁은 흔히 V₂의 진행 방식이거나 목적·원인이고, 실제적인 동작·행위를 나타낸다. Reading comprehension of chinese sentences in the 2015 revised Chinese Classics curriculum is emphasized. The Chinese reading in the part of the content system is established as key concepts and so do the sentence structure and the omission and the inversion of the sentence components in the part of the content component. These are based on the idea that the understanding of the sentence structure and the sentence components is essential in the Chinese reading comprehension. This article examines the adverbial phrases among sentence components. The adverbial phrases are adverbs, adjectives, nouns, prepositional phrases, and the phrases consisted of these. In the ‘V₁+(而·以)+V₂’ type that a verb or a verb phrase is located on the front of the verb predicate, there are three types, a parallel structure, a modification structure, and a serialization structure according to the combination relation and the meaning of those. However, it is difficult to classify a modification structure and a serialization structure according to sentences. For an example, the ‘拱而立’ in a ‘子路拱而立’ is classified into a modification structure of ‘adverbial phrase + predicate’ or a serialization structure of ‘adverbial phrase + adverbial phrase’. The ‘戮力而攻秦’ in a ‘臣與將軍戮力而攻秦’ with a ‘VO₁+VO₂’ structure is classified is classified into a modification structure or a serialization structure. In this article, we suggest classification criteria of these structures in sentences. In this study, we considered the study results of Chinese grammar academy. The results of the study are as follows. 1. An adverbial phrase, V₁ modifies a predicate, and so V₁ and V₂ have primary and secondary in meaning. 2. V₁and V₂, as a predicate, becomes the content of the statement, and so V₁ and V₂ have not primary and secondary in meaning. 3. An adverbial phrase, V₁ occurs simultaneously or almost simultaneously with a predicate, V₂ in the time of occurrence. The V₁ continues with the V₂ and describes the state of V₂. 4. The V₁ and the V₂ in a serialization structure are predicates occurring sequentially and show distinctive behaviors. Even though occurring almost simultaneously, the V₁ is a predicate if the two actions of the V₁ and the V₂ are separate. 5. The V₁ in a serialization structure is the proceeding, the purpose, or the cause of the V₂, and also is the actual action.

名詞句を構成する「ところ」に関する一考察 : 前接語の特徴とその用法を中心に

황윤실(Hwang, Youn-Sil) 일본어문학회 2021 일본어문학 Vol.94 No.-

本稿は名詞句を構成する｢ところ｣の用法について考察を行ったものである。｢ところ｣は空間概念から時間的な状況へ意味的に抽象化し、名詞や副詞に後接してさまざまな働きをしている。｢ところ｣句(名詞や副詞に後接してつくられた名詞句)は文の中で副詞的な成分として振る舞う場合と、副詞的従属節のような働きをする場合がある。まず、文の中で副詞的な成分として振る舞う場合では、コトガラ(出来事やありさま)をとりまく外的な状況を表す状況語と陳述面に関わる陳述語として働く場合が観察される。｢ところ｣は前接語の表す特定の状況を取り立てる働きをし、それにおける状態や判断が後続する。 また、副詞的従属節のように振る舞う場合には時間的状況を表す時間節的な場合と逆接関係を表す逆接節的な場合がある。前者では前接語に動作の継続を表す表現や出来事名詞が来るのに対して、後者では出来事性を含む名詞なども来うるが、特に数量詞や時間表現が多く現れる。なお、後者の逆接節的な場合では通常の事態や予測の事態と今の状況とを対比させることによって逆接の意味が生じていると思われる。以上のような働きの違いには前接語の種類や｢ところ｣の意味が関わっていると言えそうである。 In this study, I describe the usage of tokoro forming noun phrases. Tokoro expresses a place or a location. It is semantically abstracted so that it expresses temporal meaning and has various functions in connection with nouns and adverbs. The main findings of this study, based on the analysis of actual examples collected from a corpus, are as follows. A noun phrase followed by tokoro is used either as an adverbial component in a simple sentence or acts as an adverbial subordinate clause. First, in the case of an adverbial phrase, it functions as a temporal adverb expressing an external situation surrounding an event or a modal adverb related to a statement. Tokoro represents a temporal situation and emphasizes the meaning of the preceding words when it combines with a noun phrase. Next, in the case of an adverbial clause, it represents a temporal situation or a contrastive relation. In the former, it is preceded by expressions of continuation or event nouns, whereas in the latter, it can also be preceded by nouns expressing eventuality but numeral and temporal expressions are especially frequently used. In addition, it can be said that this contrastive relation arises through comparison of a current situation with the normal situation or the predicted situation. The above functional differences appear to be closely related to the type of preceding words and the meaning of tokoro.

『論語·孟子』에 나타난 ‘以’의 빈어 이위와 생략

蔡藝玲(Chae, Ye-ryeong) 중국어문학연구회 2016 중국어문학논집 Vol.0 No.100

Through the process mentioned above, we could know that there are various usages of objectives of preposition ‘以’ in the Analects of Confucius and the Discourses of Mencius, when it shifts locations or is omitted. This study aims at figuring out differences of interpretations in cases of the preposition letter ‘以’ used as adverbial, complement, double-syallble phrase, and fixed form, respectively, as well as why the word ‘以’ has appeared through the analysis on partial usages of the preposition letter ‘以’. First, 1) in three usages of ‘以’ used as adverbial, when the phrase of ‘NP+以’ as adverbial one is front of the verb, it emphasizes the object or the condition which action depends on. That is, in order to lay stress on, an objective before ‘以’ should be preposed for such an effect. 2) In case of omission of NP of ‘以’, verb which is not noun is placed behind. In such phrase, we should check if the word before ‘以’ is a verb. If it is not a verb, the used ‘以’ is a preposition. the phrase of ‘以+NP’ used with the objective of ‘以’ is located behind a verb or a verb phrase, indicating purpose of action of the former predicate or its level to reach. In such a situation, objective of ‘以’ can be omitted. 3) In case of adverbial located in back, ‘V+之+以+NP" is a fixed form. A noun-type objective or ‘之’ can be located between a verb and ‘以+NP’. The objectives in these phrases consist of one or two syllables. Second, when ‘以+NP’ is used as like complement, its predicative, verb consists of one syllable accompanying an objective or the accompanied objective is one syllable. For objective, most of them are ‘之’ or may be omitted, accompanying its own objective. In addition, 90% of them consists of four letters while the rest 10% consists of five letters. These forms are relatively clean and basic when they are delivered to listeners. Third, for the reason of different usage of "以’, its origin is studied. "以’ was actually a verb but have been developed as a function word with several changes. That is, "以’ becomes a core function word essential to a phrase. The phenomena of "以’ as function word have made various double-syllable phrases and even conjunction developed as fixed form. In Chapter 5 of this study, five conjunctions ‘是以,何以,足以, 所以, and 有以’ developed as double-syllable phrases and fixed forms. For the results, in the Analects of Confucius, 38 conjunction words are used and among the entire prepositions, they are 18% of ‘以’. In the Discourses of Mencius, total 89 conjunction words are used with 14% of "以’. For their frequency of usage, that of the preposition "以’ are higher than that of conjunction words. In addition, for the conjunction word not sufficiently covered by this study will be further studied in future.

부사절과 관형사절의 수식

김건희(Kim, Keon-hee) 한국어문학회 2012 語文學 Vol.0 No.118

The purpose of this study is to examine the modification of the adverbial clause and adnominal clause which has been not studied comparing with the modification of the word class, adverb and adnominals. The adverbial clause modify the predicate like the general adverb and the subordinate conjunctive clause which has been considered to be similar to the adverbial clause doesn’t have the semantic function ‘modification’ from the point of these: (1) the movement of place, (2) the expression of ‘어떻게’ which is the referent of the adverb, (3) the temporal relation of the clauses, (4) the semantic scope of negation. The adnominal clause show the loose modification relation between the modifier and modificand like the adnominal phrase and so called new adnominal clause which show the loose modification relation exhibit the essence of modification parallel to the adnominals, adnominal phrase. Also the adverbial clause and adnominal clause share the conjunction as well as modification and they are similar to the word class, adverb and adnominals from the point of the ellipses.

‘명사구+부사’ 구성의 성립과 유형 -의미 관계와 통사적 관계를 중심으로-

황화상 한국어의미학회 2020 한국어 의미학 Vol.69 No.-

This study aims to examine the grammatical basis of ‘NP+Adv’ constructions and to type them according to the syntactic relation between their internal constituents(that is a noun phrase and an adverb) and a predicate. ‘NP+Adv’ constructions are based on the semantic relation between a noun phrase and an adverb. An adverb in ‘NP+Adv’ construction is incomplete in meaning, and a noun phrase supplements the incomplete meaning of an adverb. ‘NP+Adv’ constructions are syntactically classified into two types, that is an adverb expansion AdvP and an adverbial consolidation AdvP. The adverb expansion AdvP is a construction that an adverb is syntactically related to a predicate and it is expanded by a noun phrase. The adverbial consolidation AdvP is a construction that two adverbial constituents(that is an adverbial noun phrase and an adverb) are consolidated into one. But not all adverbial constituents can be consolidated into one. They have to be semantically related to each other.

어미의 지배 범위에 대한 주시경(1910)의 인식

김정대(Kim Jung-dae) 우리말글학회 2006 우리말 글 Vol.37 No.-

This paper has been written in order to review the understanding of the syntagmatic scope of Endings reflected in Korean Grammar(1910) written by Ju, Si-Gyeong. The present school grammar has restricted the governing scope of an ending to verbal stem. On the contrary, the theoretical grammar since nineteen eighties regards as an ending as governing propositional sentences or pre-complete sentences as a whole. Then, Ju's opinion which never coincided with that of school grammar, and didn't completely coincide with that of the theoretical grammar, ― which we may call the third line of reasoning, could be summarized as follows: First, as never admitting the independent status of pre-final ending, Ju(1910) didn't naturally show his recognition of its scope of government. Second, as for sentence-final ending, Ju(1910) thought that its scope of government varied from phrase to phrase. (1) the government of predicate phrase : ggeut(final ending)① (2) the government of complex verb phrase : ggeut(final ending)② (3) the government of predicate clause : ggeut(final ending)③ (4) the government of propositional sentence : it(conjunctive ending), pre-nominal ending, ‘-gi’ nominal ending, ‘-ge’ and ‘-i’ adverbial ending As shown above, it follows that the governing scope of ggeut(final ending) ranges from predicate phrase and complex verb phrase to predicate clause, while those of it(conjunctive ending) and pre-nominal ending, ‘-gi’ nominal ending, ‘-ge’ adverbial ending coincide with that of theoretical grammar of today's. Third and lastly, Ju(1910) didn't have all of grammatical elements which are now called final-endings, and furthermore it revealed some inconsistencies of above-mentioned endings according to the concrete descriptive fields. It could be summarized as follows: (1) what he regards as rendering elements of parts of speech(gimombakgum) : nominalizing suffixes of ‘-eum, -ji’, adverbializing suffix of ‘-eo’ (2) where he reveals descriptive contradictions : nominalizing ending of ‘-gi’, pre-nominal ending, adverbial ending of ‘-ge’ and ‘-i’(which he regards as a governor of propositional sentence in some places, and as a rendering element in another.)

Pedro ha terminado el trabajo no sabemos cómo: 단지 또 다른 절 생략의 예인가 아니면 비전형적인 부사구의 존재인가?

정원석 서울대학교 라틴아메리카연구소 2019 이베로아메리카硏究 Vol.30 No.1

The aim of this paper is to investigate a non-compositional sentence like Perdro ha terminado el trabajo no sabemos cómo in which on the surface there seem to be two subjects and two predicates in a simple sentence. According to Borgonovo(2011), this kind of sentences does not involve any explicit marker showing that either two clauses are coordinated or one clause is subordinated into the other, so they seem to violate the well-known principle of compositionality in a simple sentence. For this reason, Borgonovo explores the hypothesis that the incomplete form no sabemos cómo which appears at the end of the sentence mentioned above is indeed a constituent and could be considered as an instance of a wh-adverbial phrase. In this paper, however, I argue that what we see in the aforementioned sentence is a sort of clausal ellipsis which involves a bi-clausal rather a mono-clausal structure. Concretely, I propose that such kind of elliptical sentences comes as a result of a combination of two clausal ellipses, namely sluicing and why-stripping. This bi-clausal analysis plus PF-deletion is more simple and adequate as far as empirical data is concerned. In conclusion, the incomplete clause shown in the sentence mentioned above is derived from PF-deletion, just like other instances of clausal ellipsis. 본 연구에서는 Pedro ha terminado el trabajo no sabemos cómo와 같은 스페인어 문장이 통사적으로 어떻게 도출되는지에 대해 탐구하고자 한다. Borgonovo(2011)에 따르면, 이와 같은 문장에는 등위접속(coordination) 또는 종속(subordination) 등과 같은 복문의 존재를 추정할 수 있는 어떠한 외현적인 표지도 겉으로 드러나 있지 않으며, 우리가 흔히 알고 있는 기본적인 문장 구성 원리(compositionality)를 위배하여 마치 두 개의 주어와 두 개의 술어가 하나의 문장에 나타난 것처럼 보인다고 한다. 이에 따라 Borgonovo는 해당 문장을 단문으로 간주하고 문미에 출현한 no sabemos cómo를 일종의 부사구(adverbial phrase)로 분석할 것을 제안한다. 하지만 본고는 위에 언급한 문장은 단일절(mono-clause)이 아닌 이중절(bi-clause)로 구성되어 있는 복문이며, 문미에 나타난 no sabemos cómo를 일종의 생략문으로 보고 절 생략(clausal ellipsis)의 대표적인 사례인 수문(sluicing)과 why-최소 공백화(why-stripping)의 결합으로 분석하는 것이 훨씬 더 간결하며 경험적 자료를 설명하는데 있어서도 적절하다는 것을 주장한다. 이러한 분석에 따르면, 결과적으로 언급한 문장에 출현한 no sabemos cómo는 후행절에 적용한 음성부 삭제의 결과로 나타나게 되는 불완전한 절로 도출되며 여타 절 생략 구문들의 경우와 유사하게 분석된다.

중국어‘PP+NP’의 부사적 용법과 인지격

김정필 대한중국학회 2012 중국학 Vol.42 No.-

For analysis the distributional characteristics of ‘PP + NP’ structure (prepositional phrase) in Chinese syntax, we have approached through the relation between adverbial phrase and complement. Until recently, analysis of grammatical function of adverbial phrase and complement has been conducted. In addition, analysis of ‘PP + NP’ structure of ‘adverbial case’ which has the same grammatical function and position is divided into ‘prepositional phrase’ and ‘special structure’. It is probably result from the conflict between ‘function’ and ‘meanings’. Therefore, we are going to approach this topic ‘why ‘PP + NP’ structure is differently divided into ‘prepositional phrase’ and ‘special structure’ through the investigation of ‘Zeitlichkeit’ and ‘congnitive case’.