Be와 Get 수동 구문 번역의 오류 지도 방안

강선옥 한국통번역교육학회 2015 통번역교육연구 Vol.13 No.3

The purpose of this study is to find out how to teach English learners about get passive constructions for translation. Many English learners make errors when they translate English get passive constructions into Korean. I review the features of Korean passive and English be passive and get passive constructions in English. There are three passive constructions in Korean: phrasal, lexical and adversity passive. In English, get passive has several properties, different from be passive. They are mostly interchangeable, but have very different grammatical properties. Verb be is auxiliary but verb get is not. And get can be used as an idiosyncratic expression, holding various semantic and pragmatic properties according to context. In this paper I focused on get passive constructions in order to find out the semantic differences between get passive and be passive. For this, I looked into the six properties of get passive constructions.

Get-수동구문의 빈도 및 의미 제약에 관한 코퍼스 기반 연구

임진지(Lim, Jin-Ji),이필환(Lee, Pil-Hwan) 한국영어학학회 2020 영어학연구 Vol.26 No.1

This article is concerned with the frequency changes of the get-passive construction. The frequency change is examined through the Corpus of US Supreme Court Opinions, the TV Corpus, and the Movie Corpus. The results of the search are as follows. First, the frequency of the construction is so low that the analysis is impossible in the Corpus o f US Court Opinions which has the most f ormal style. This means that the get-passive is under the stylistic constraint. Second, it is difficult to find the relationship between the be-passive and get-passive in regard to the frequency change. Third, the frequency change of the get-passive is stable rather than increasing in the TV Corpus and the Movie Corpus. That is, the argument that the get-passive is increasing is not ascertained in the corpus examination. Fourth, the frequency of the get-passive combined with a verb of neutral or positive connotation is about twice as many as with a verb of negative meaning. Thus the semantic constraint that the get-passive is used in negative context is lessening. It is also found that the get-passive prefers informal style and it is used with the limited number of verbs with dynamic meaning. Conclusively, the get-passive seems to be used independently from the be-passive, conveying the construction-specific meaning.

A Schema Category Theory-based Analysis of the Get+V-en Construction

Jing Ying Li,Kyu-Hong Hwang 한국언어과학회 2020 언어과학 Vol.27 No.3

The purpose of this paper is to investigate English Get+V-en construction on the basis of the schema category theory proposed by Langacker(1987, 2000, 2009). Contrary to the passive or non-passive attribution of the Get+V-en construction, this study proposes that the Get+V-en construction is a fuzzy set that designates the gradient feature and its schema instantiates itself by abstracting the general features of the prototype and its extension. The passivization of the Get+V-en construction ranks in three layers, where the central Get-passive (agentful or agentless) serves as the prototype at the first layer. The psychological, reflexive, and reciprocal Get-passives are regarded as semi-Get-passives, functioning as instantiation one at the second layer. Both the adjectival and the formulaic Get-passives can be construed as pseudo Get-passives, representing instantiation two at the third level. The component get shows gradient features from lexical to copular, and V-en demonstrates a dynamic change being either verbal or adjectival in different variants of the Get+V-en construction. The schematic characterization of the central Get-passive can be summarized as follows: Get is a ‘semi-grammaticalized’ word that lies in between lexical verbs and genuine auxiliaries; The Get-passive is generally compatible with dynamic verbs with a causative meaning denoting a resultative state; It is subject-oriented and characteristically used in clauses involving adversity or benefit.

A Corpus-Based Study on Historical Changes in the Usages of the Be/get Passives in American English

김은영 학습자중심교과교육학회 2023 학습자중심교과교육연구 Vol.23 No.11

Objectives The objective of this thesis is to explore the semantic and syntactic characteristics of the be-passive and get-passive constructions and their usage in corpus data. The primary focus of this thesis is to distinguish between the be-passive and get-passive constructions by providing multiple examples for comparison. Furthermore, it delves deeper into the get-passive construction, categorizing it into different levels of usage. Methods This study examines the frequency and usage patterns of be-passive and get-passive constructions from 1810 to 2010, with a focus on their overall frequency and historical evolution across four different time periods. It also investigates how these constructions are used in different genres and analyzes the bonded verbs frequently linked with the get-passive. Additionally, corpus data will be analyzed to gain insights into the real-world contexts of these constructions at the lexical level. Results The usage of get-passives has been progressively rising between 1990 and 2010, whereas the occurrence of the be-passive has been decreasing. This suggests that the usage of these constructions may be influenced by social context. There are specific verbs that tend to be more frequently used with the get-passive construction. Conclusions The get-passive and be-passive in English have distinct characteristics that set them apart from each other. Although they can usually be used interchangeably, each type of passive creates unique grammatical features. Analyzing the actual usage of the be-passive and get-passive through data from the COHA corpus is a viable approach for evaluating their overall properties.

A Corpus-Based Study of the Auxiliary-Like Get, the Copular Get, and the Causative Get

Cho, Eun Jung,Ahn, Byeongkil 미래영어영문학회 2017 영어영문학 Vol.22 No.1

The purposes of the paper is to present Dixon’s notion of a connection between the auxiliary-like get in the passive and the causative-get and check the hypothesis, that is, if the auxiliary-like get is derived from the causative-get, it should be different from the be-passive in terms of register distributions or the frequence of the past particle. A corpus of 100 million words constructed out of the British National Corpus (BNC) were searched for the functions and differences of the two get constructions. The results show there are some differences between the be- and the get-passive by examining frequency breakdown result and similarities between the get-passive and the causative get constructions. The results also indicate the frequency breakdown result of the be-passive has not been restricted to the spoken texts.

Distinguishing Factors in Semantic and Pragmatic Differences between Get- and Be-passives

김경열(Kim Kyung-Yul),조세연(Cho Sae-Youn) 강원대학교 인문과학연구소 2009 인문과학연구 Vol.0 No.22

본 연구에서는 get-수동형과 be-수동형 구문사이의 의미·화용론적 차이점을 살펴보고, 두 수동형의 의미·화용론적 차이점을 구분해주는 변별요인을 제시하고자 한다. 특히 get-수동형의 빈번한 사용이 get-수동형의 의미구조와 화용론적 필요성과 밀접한 관계가 있음을 밝힌다. 동사 get의 다기능적 의미, 주어-지향적 표현, 화자-중심적 전략들과 같은 변별요인들이 get-수동형의 특징을 설명해주는 증거로 제시된다. 첫 번째 요인으로는, 동사 get의 다의적 의미(어휘적 의미부터 기능적 의미까지 포함)로 인해 다양한 get-문장구조(기동형 get, 수동형 get, 의무형 조동사 get 등)가 존재하고 통사-의미의 변화가 가능하다는 사실을 제안한다. 이러한 특성으로 인해 get-수동형은, be-수동형과 비교해볼 때, 주어-지향적, 사역적 특질을 더 보여주고 있으며, 화용-중심적 성격을 지니게 된다. 두 번째 요인으로는, 동사 get이 지니고 있는 내재적 의미로 인해, get-수동형은 수동구문 주어의 의미역할을 강조하는 경향을 보임으로써 주어-지향적 장치로서의 기능을 지니고 있다고 할 수 있다. 세 번째 요인으로는, 화용론적 관점에서 볼 때, 담화에서 get-수동형은 화용론적 동기(감정, 태도, 입장에 대한 화자의 화용론적 필요성)를 전달하는 기능을 담당하므로 화자간의 담화적 구조에 영향을 미치는 중요한 변인으로 작용할 뿐 만 아니라, 다른 시각과 입장에서 수동적 행위를 표현할 수 있는 대안으로서의 역할을 담당하고 있다. This study seeks to verify whether the semantic and pragmatic differences between get-and be-passives are reflected in the possible competition between them. The main purpose of this study is to find out the distinguishing factors that characterize the semantic and pragmatic differences between get- and be-passives, and examine a close relationship between the overall frequency of get- and be-passives and their semantic structures and pragmatic motivations. Some distinguishing factors (i.e, multi-functional meanings, subject-recipient oriented devices, and speaker-oriented strategies, etc.) governing the choice of get-passives are suggested as evidence of the central characteristic of the get-passive. In this study, it is proposed that the polysemy in get (i.e., from lexcial meanings to functional meanings) reflects a change in the syntactic distribution of get-constructions (e.g., inchoative get, passive get, deontic modal auxiliary get). In addition, get-passives have more subject-oriented or more causative qualities than be-passives and receives a more pragmatic-oriented interpretation. Semantically, thanks to the receptive or agentive meaning of the verb get, get-passives tend to put emphasis on the semantic role of the subject and on what happens to the subject-referent as a result of the event. Finally, from a pragmatic point of view, pragmatic motivations (i.e., the speaker's affective and attitudinal value or stance) in discourse provide a relevant perspective to perceive the function of get-passives as an interpersonal grammar, which allows the speaker to report passive events with different perspectives and attitudes.

On the Structure of English Get-Passives

Ju-Eun Lee 한국영어학학회 2006 영어학연구 Vol.- No.21

  This squib aims to propose a bi-clausal structure analysis of the get-passive construction in English. English get-passives show different properties from the canonical be-passive construction in terms of the thematic properties of the subject and the nature of the passive participle. Based on the agentivity tests data from the literature and the new data set from quantifier interaction, I show that the subject in get-passives is not derived by raising of the underlying object, as Haegeman (1985) proposed, but rather is base-generated in its surface position as the subject of a control verb get, which selects a small clause complement, similarly to Huang"s (1999) analysis. However, I claim, contra Huang (1999), that there is no internal NP-movement of the underlying object within the complement, which occurs due to the syntactic formation of the verbal passive participle and accusative case absorption thereof. I show, drawing data from Taranto (2002) and Hallman (2000), that the passive participle in get-passives is adjectival. It is also shown that get-passives as a whole convey eventive interpretation although the participle is categorially adjectival, which is partly due to the semantic contribution of the verb get.

A corpus study of English get-passive and its implication on grammatical education

김경민 전북대학교 문화융복합아카이빙연구소 2021 디지털문화아카이브지 Vol.4 No.2

This article aims to investigate the distribution of the English get-passive in comparison to that of be-passive. We conducted a corpus study to explore what factor groups constrain the usage of get-passive and be-passive and the order of significance of the factor groups affecting the choice of one passive type over the other type. We suggest that the results of the present study and its implications shed light on the grammatical teaching of get-passives in the English as a foreign language (EFL) context.

A Unified Approach to the Get-Passive

이은석(Eun Suk Lee) 언어과학회 2011 언어과학연구 Vol.59 No.-

This paper attempts to adopt a unified approach to the diverse semantic properties of the get-passive. The get-passive, as opposed to the similar be-passive, possesses the following semantic properties: (i) it is used only with dynamic verbs, and not with stative verbs; (ii) it is used when a situation occurs in a sentence due to the subject`s certain intentional causal action or when the subject is responsible for the situation; (iii) it is used when the subject feels that the situation is good or bad, or when the situation is well or badly reflected in the subject; (iv) it is used with a human or animate subject. Singling out those properties of the get-passive, this paper proposes the following unified approach: The get-passive is a kind of linguistic expression that describes an event related to a patient, while simultaneously emphasizing the patient. (Daegu University)

TOEIC Part 1의 수동구문에 관한 번역지도 방안

강선옥(Sunok Kang) 한국통번역교육학회 2021 통번역교육연구 Vol.19 No.4

The purpose of this study is to explore how to teach passive construction to students who are studying TOEIC in Korea, especially focusing on TOEIC Listening part 1. It is not easy for Korean students to understand passive construction, specifically to catch different meanings between be+past participle and have/has+been+past participle, and get+participle. There is no problem for TOEIC Listening Part 1 with one photo provided, but most of the students cannot easily figure out their meanings in these structures if no photos are provided. Therefore, in this paper, I highlight such a problem rooted in the passive meaningful differences of English sentences by conducting a survey about the passive construction. Also, I emphasize the meaningful distinctions when translating the passive sentences into Korean, even in the TOEIC listening test 1.