http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 목정수(Mok Jung soo)(睦正洙) (검색결과 41 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
목정수 ( Mok Jung-soo ) 국어학회 2013 국어학 Vol.67 No.-
The prefinal ending '-si-' have been traditionally defined as a subject honorific marker. But in this case, the concept 'subject(=주체)' is a little different from the grammatical concept 'subject(=주어)'. Korean grammar generally describes that '-si' doesn't accord only with the subject(=주어), but also with the subject(=주체). So '-si-' is split into '-si1-' and '-si2-'. Even certain Korean grammars describe '-si1-' as direct honorific and '-si2-' as indirect honorific. It is mainly because of the so-called nominative case marker 'i/ga' that Korean is characterized as having 'double subject constructions'. But I argue that the first NP1 is a real subject of the double subject constructions and the second NP2 is not a subject, so it should be described as a sort of complement in (1c), (1d), (1e), (1f), etc. In addition, it is recently reported that '-si-' is being abused/misused and that '-si-' is grammaticalized as a hearer honorific marker in (1i), (1n), (1o). (1) a. 얘들아, 할아버지 오셨다. 얼른 나와서 인사 드려라. b. 할아버지, 할머니도 안녕하시죠? c. 할아버지, 할아버지도 애인이 있으세요? d. 할아버지, 할아버지는 참 책도 많으세요. e. 할아버지, 왜 허리가 굽으셨어요? f. 할아버지, 할아버지도 마누라가 그리 무서우세요? g. 할아버지, 커피 그렇게 많이 드시면 잠이 잘 안 오십니다. 아셨죠? h. 할아버지, 보청기를 끼셔야 라디오가 잘 들리세요. i. 할아버지, 무슨 음악 좋아하세요? j. 할아버지, 건강한 한 해 되시길 바랄게요. k. 할아버지, 할아버지는 가격대비 요금제를 쓰시면 할인이 많이 되십니다. l. 할아버지, 지금 계신 곳이 어디세요? m. 할아버지, 자식들이 그리도 맘에 안 드세요? n. 할아버지, 이쪽으로 누우실게요. o. 할아버지, 할아버지는 돈이 남으세요. 저는 모자라는데요. But, in this paper I argue that '-si-' is always related to the real subject of the sentence, whether the subject is explicitly realized or not. So the hearer-related grammaticalized morpheme '-si-' in Lim(2011) is not necessary, and the concept 'situation subject' in Lee(2010) are not necessary to explain the usages of '-si-'. In fact, the hearer related to the morpheme '-si-' is simultaneously a real subject in the sentence. And this is just an expanded example of the double subject constructions.
-
이중 주어 구문 새로 보기 - 기본문형 설정과 관련하여
목정수(Mok, Jung-soo),조서희(Cho, Seo-hee) 국어국문학회 2021 국어국문학 Vol.- No.196
In this article, we demonstrate in the framework of psychomechanics of language founded by Guillaume that the combination of NP and particles such as ‘ga’, ‘neun’ is not a morphological construction but constitutes a syntactic construction. And we claim that the form of basic sentence pattern should reflect information structure or discourse structure so that it can be consistent with the theory of markedness. So the patterns [X-(neun) Y-(ga) V-ending] and [X-(neun) Y-(leul) V-ending] replace the traditionally established patterns [X-ga Y-ga V] and [X-ga Y-leul V], respectively. The basic pattern [X-(neun) Y-(ga) V-ending] is, in itself, analysed as a simple sentence, even though it was regarded as complex sentence embedding ‘sentential predicate’ in school grammar. Among different types of ‘double subject constructions’, only two types like ‘코끼리는 코가 길다(Elephants have a long nose)’ and ‘나는 호랑이가 무섭다(I am scared of tigers)’ should be classified as basic sentenc patterns. In these constructions, the predicates ‘길-’ and ‘무섭-’ have the usages of two-place predicate. Therefore, their argument structures or semantic structure can be represented as follows; 〈X have_long Y〉 and 〈X be scared of Y〉. The other so-called double subject constructions such as ‘커피는 잠이 안 온다(With coffee, I can’t sleep’ or ‘철수는 마누라가 회사를 다닌다(As for Paul, his wife works in a company)’ are excluded from the category of basic sentence patterns, which are derived by topicalization from the marked construction ‘커피를 마시면/커피로는 (나) 잠이 안 온다(If I drink coffee/with coffee, I can’t sleep)’ or can be described as a part of the complex sentence as underlined in ‘철수는 마누라가 회사에 다녀서 돈 걱정을 안 한다(Paul does not have any financial concern, because his wife works in a company)’.
-
목정수(Mok, Jung-soo) 국어국문학회 2015 국어국문학 Vol.- No.170
In this paper we attempt to practice reflection on the concept of “fusion” in Korean syntax and look for a way of building a nitty-gritty Korean grammar on the basis of the new order of particles and endings, in which particles and endings are all dealt with as syntactic units. In order to attain these goals, we justified the reason why the particles ‘가ga’ and ‘를reul’ should be defined as a class of determiners like ‘도do’ and ‘는neun’ in particle system. And we took the concept of “subject” into reconsideration and presented two types of transitive constructions, those with ‘ga-type object’ and those with ‘reul-type object’. So the so-called double subject constructions such as ‘코끼리는 코가 길다.’ and ‘나는 호랑이가 무섭다.’ were analyzed as transitive constructions in parallel with the typical transitive constructions like ‘코끼리는 과자를 코로 받아먹는다.’ and ‘나는 호랑이를 무서워한다.’. That is to say, “split-O system” is newly proposed in the academic world of linguistic typology; [코끼리는subj [코가obj 길다pred]], [나는 subj [호랑이가obj 무섭다pred]] On the other hand, we reclassified a number of endings only on the basis of their distribution so that we established the mood system in Korean; endings of quasi-nominal mood {-음eum, -기gi; -은eun, -을eul; -아a, -게ge, -지ji, -고go}, those of subjunctive mood {-(는)다(neun)da, -(느)냐(neu)nya, -자ja, -(으)라(eu)ra, -(으)려(eu)ryeo} and those of indicative mood {-니ni, -어eo, -나na, -지ji, -게ge, etc.}. In particular, we described the usages of the ending of quotative-subjunctive mood ‘-(는)다(neun)da’, utilizing authentic oral and written corpora and showed how it is related to the category of 3rd person in comparison with the ending of indicative mood ‘-어eo’, the person information of which is connected with 1st person. This difference between ‘-(는)다(neun)da’ and ‘-어eo’ permits us to explain why the former is used in diary or narration styles while the latter is used in letter or dialogue styles. In sum, we did not merely emphasize the importance of endings in parsing the Korean syntax with regard to person, but also carried out syntactic analyses of some constructions with the ending ‘-을게eulge’ in terms of person structure.
-
계사 유형론의 관점에서 본 한국어 (시적)이다/(유명)하다의 정체
목정수 ( Jung Soo Mok ) 시학과 언어학회 2010 시학과 언어학 Vol.19 No.-
This paper is against the traditional position that `hada` of `yumyeong-hada` is a derivational suffix, arguing that it should be analyzed as a support verb like support verb `ida`. My argumentation is grounded on their similarity on the syntactico-semantic level. It means that the lexemes X`s in the construction `X-hada` and lexemes Y`s in the construction `Y-ida` behave the same syntactico-semantically. For this, I compared `yumyeong-hada` with `gyeongjejeok-ida`. Both `yumyeong(=famous)` and `gyeongjejeok(=economic)` do not function as a argument of predicates, and show the same adjectival properties, so that `ida` and `hada` are in complementary distribution. I define this kind of lexemes as `nouny adjectives`, including `adnominals` in contrast with verby adjectives such as `keuda(=be big)`, `nopta(=be high)`, etc.
-
한국어 조사 {의}의 문법적 지위와 의미 기능에 대하여
목정수 ( Jung Soo Mok ) 한국어교육학회 2007 국어교육 Vol.0 No.123
This paper puts a question to the particle ``eui`` as a genitive case marker. This paper comes to a conclusion that the particle ``eui`` can be defined as a ``possessive determiner(=소유/연결 한정조사 in Korean)``. Arguments are as follows: First of all, the distribution of the particle ``eui`` makes us doubt whether it is really a case marker or not. Second, the ``possession relation`` in Korean is expressed generally by means of juxtaposition, that is to say, it is syntactically realized by word order <N1+N2>. Third, the presence of the particle ``eui`` in the construction <N1-eui N2> presupposes the existence of N1, while the definite article ``le`` plays the role of determination in its corresponding construction in French ``N2 de N1``. For instance, compare the pairs, ``chien du berger`` : ``chien de berger`` and ``yangchigieui gae 양치기의 개`` : ``yangchigi gae 양치기 개``. Fourth, in terms of the parallelism between the particle ``eui`` and the determinative endings ``(eu)n, (eu)l`` and the fact that determinative endings can function as nominalizer, we can suppose that the construction ``X-eui`` can function by itself as a NP(=possessive pronoun). The hypothesis can be supported by synchronic or/and diachronic data, the comparison with Japanese data, and the comparison with the ``possessive article`` in Rumanian.
-
유형론과 한국어 연구의 상관관계 -한국어 구문 유형론에서 경계해야 할 것들-
목정수 ( Mok Jung-soo ) 국어학회 2022 국어학 Vol.- No.101
It is better and more advantageous to study Korean by comparing it with many other languages from a typological perspective rather than to study Korean for and by itself. Typological studies can help us gauge the objective status of Korean among the languages of the world and simultaneously to recognize the generality/universality and particularity/peculiarity of Korean. But we should not take a leap of faith in typological researches and always caution ourselves against the distortions of Korean through the blind application of results of typological studies to Korean. Keeping these in mind, we try to make some remarks for the precise and consistent study of Korean constructions, focused on possessive verb constructions, psych verb constructions, potential passive constructions, and impersonal constructions. In conclusion, the basic sentence pattern of those constructions would rather be [NP1-은 NP2-가 V-어미] or [NP1-이 NP2-가 V-어미] than [NP1-에게 NP2-가 V]. Possessive verbs and psych verbs and potential passive verbs in Korean have many things in common. First, they are all two-place predicates. Second, they require NP1 as a subject and NP2 as an object whose semantic roles are possessor/experiencer and theme, respectively. If these new discoveries were turned out to be true and were reported to alignment typology, we could establish a new alignment typology where Korean is described as a ‘split-O pattern’ language. Last but not least, we can say that there are impersonal constructions in Korean by referring to the typological studies on the impersonal constructions in indo-european languages. For example, ‘비(가) 오다(rain)’ is a vP, or a support/ light verb construction in which the constituent ‘비(가)’ is not a true subject, but a complement as a predicative noun.
-
-
-
KCI연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
