古代國語의 敬語法에 대하여

徐鍾學(Jong-Hak Suh) 영남대학교 인문과학연구소 1987 人文硏究 Vol.9 No.1

한국어 교재의 사동 표현 구성에 대하여

서종학 ( Jong Hak Suh ),강수경 ( Su Kyong Kang ) 대구가톨릭대학교 인문과학연구소 2013 인문과학연구 Vol.0 No.20

This study is to make suggestions on how to organize causative expressions effectively by analyzing Korean teaching materials. Causative expression is one of the most significant topics in learning Korean, so it have been included in a number of Korean language tests. In addition, many learners have difficulties in acquiring causative expressions because their formation is irregular. Therefore, it is essential to carefully organize Korean teaching materials with regard to causative expressions. In order to achieve this goal, several materials which were already published were first selected. After that, they were compared and analyzed in terms of morphological causative expression, syntactic causative expression, causative verbs, causative suffixes, causative forms, ways of formation, causative words and so forth. As a pilot paper, it is expected that analyses on various grammatical phenomena such as passive expression will be made as well if more elaborate and logical material analyses are developed. They will contribute to the standardization of Korean teaching materials and availability in teaching and learning.

"시키-"의 통사와 의미에 대하여

서종학 ( Jong Hak Suh ) 한민족어문학회 2011 韓民族語文學 Vol.0 No.58

현대의 여러 글에는 ``시키-``를 동사로 사용하기도 하고 접미사 ``-하-``의 자리에 사용되기도 하는 것을 볼 수 있다. 이 글에서는 현대의 사전과 여러 글을 검토하여 ``시키-``가 사용된문장의 구조(structure)를 분석하고 그 의미(meaning)를 파악하려 하였다. 그 결과 ``시키-``는 동사로 사용되는 경우와 접미사로 사용되는 경우가 있음을 확인하였다. 동사 ``시키-``가 사용된 문장의 구조는 매우 다양하였고 그 의미도 조금씩 차이가 있음을 밝혔다. 접미사로 사용된 경우에는, 이를 ``-하-``의 오용으로 해석하거나 문법화로 해석할 수 있는데 이때에도 앞의 어근에 따라 의미가 다름을 구명하였다. 이런 결과는, 비록 한 어휘에 해당하는 것이지만, 사전을 편찬할 때에 동음이의어로 보고 별개의 표제어로 처리할 것인지 아니면 다의어로 보고 한 표제어 속에서 처리할 것인지를 결정하는 데 큰 도움이 될 것이다. 그런 한편, 하나의 어휘가 문법요소(grammatical element)로 변하는 과정이나 양상을 살펴봄으로써 문법화(gramma-ticalization)의 설명에 도움이 될 것이다. It is witnessed that ``시키-(sikhi-)`` is often used as a verb or is sometimes substituted for ``하-(ha-)`` in a number of modern writings. In this article, sentence structures containing ``시키-`` were analyzed and their meanings were identified through the examination of various writings and modern dictionaries. The result was that ``시키-`` was be used as a verb and sometimes was functioned as a suffix. ``시키-`` as a verb was found in a variety of sentences and its meaning was a little different depending on the sentences. When ``시키-`` was used as a suffix, it could be interpreted that ``시키-`` was misused in place of ``하-`` or it became a grammaticalized form. In this case, its meaning was also different depending on its root word right in front of ``시키-``. These findings will be helpful in determining whether it is categorized as a synonym which has a separate entry word or as a polysemy which is placed under the same entry word when it comes to publishing a dictionary. In addition, they will be conducive to our attempt to explain the grammaticalization of a word by looking at the process of a word which is changed into a grammatical element.

한국어 교재 평가의 실제 : Lukoff(1993)를 대상으로

서종학 ( Jong Hak Suh ) 한국어교육학회 2002 국어교육 Vol.- No.109

借字 ‘令是-’ 攷

서종학(Suh Jong-Hak) 구결학회 2004 구결연구 Vol.12 No.-

본고의 목적은 이두학습서나 사전 등에서 ‘시기-’로 읽어 왔던 吏讀 ‘令是-’의 독음에 대해 면밀히 논의하고자 하는 것이다. 이를 위하여 형태론과 조어론의 면에서 각각 접근ㆍ검토하여 그 어형을 날벼고, 아울러 통사적 검토를 통하여 그 결과를 뒷받침한다. 이런 논의로 신라와 고려 시대의 이두 ‘令是-’는 ‘?이-’를 표기한 것이란 결론을 얻었다. The purpose of this research is to have a scrupulous discussion on the way of pronouncing "令是-" which has been marked as "sigi-" in books of Idu or dictionaries. To do this, the word form of "令是-" is clarified by investigating it from the perspective of morphology and word-formation theories, and the results are supported by syntactic study as well. Based on those investigations, this research leads to a conclusion that Idu "令是-", loan-letters used in the period of the Shilla and Goryo dynasties, is considered to signify "h?i-".

『경서역의(經書釋義)』를 다시 찾아

서종학 ( Jong Hak Suh ) 한민족어문학회 2008 韓民族語文學 Vol.52 No.-

국어의 음운현상과 음절 구조에 대한 계량적 연구

서종학(Jong-Hak Suh),김주필(Joo-Pil Kim) 영남대학교 인문과학연구소 1995 人文硏究 Vol.17 No.1

經書釋義에 대한 書誌 및 國語學的 考察

徐鍾學(Jong-Hak Suh) 영남대학교 인문과학연구소 1989 人文硏究 Vol.11 No.1

‘독도(獨島)’ㆍ석도(石島)’의 지명(地名) 표기(表記)에 관한 연구(硏究)

서종학 ( Suh Jong-hak ) 한국어문교육연구회 2008 어문연구(語文硏究) Vol.36 No.3

‘石’과 ‘獨’ 그리고 ‘梁’과 ‘督’ 은 오래 전부터 사용되어 온 전통적인 借字로서, ‘石’과 ‘梁’은 ‘돌, 독’(<돓<^*돍)을 표기하는 데 사용된 훈차자이고, ‘獨’과 ‘督’은 ‘독’을 표기하는 데 이용된 음차자이다. ‘獨’과 ‘梁’이 표기될 자리에 한자 ‘道’가 사용됨은 이들의 관계를 잘 보여주는 것이다. 따라서 ‘돌, 독’을 훈차자를 이용하여 표기하면 ‘石, 梁’이 되고 음차자를 이용하여 표기하면 ‘獨, 督’이 되는 것이다. ‘石島’가 표기된 勅令은 古文書의 敎書에 해당하는 문서인데, 교서는 한문으로 기록하는 것이 하나의 전통이었으므로 ‘돌섬, 독섬’을 표기하려면 이를 훈차한 ‘石島’를 이용하는 것이 관례였다. ‘獨島’가 기록된 報告書는 고문서의 牒呈에 해당하는 문서인데, 첩정은 吏讀로 기록하는 것이 하나의 전통이었으므로 ‘돌섬, 독섬’을 표기하려면 음차한 ‘獨島’로 기록하는 것이 자연스럽다. 따라서 ‘獨島’와 ‘石島’는 동일한 지물을 가리키는 異表記인 것이다. The place name, ‘Dokdo'(獨島), appeared first in 1906 in the report from Sim, Heung-taek who was the county chief of Ulleung-gun in Korea. On the other hand, in the previous year(1905), the announcement from Shimane county(島根縣) in Japan announced that the island belonged to Japan. Based on this assertion that they announced dominium of the island first, the Japanese insisted that the island was theirs. Koreans, however, proclaimed that ‘Seokdo'(石島) fell under the jurisdiction of Ulleung-do according to the Royal Order 41 in 1900. For this reason, Koreans contended that they claimed the island earlier than Japan. In this respect, the question whether ‘Dokdo'(獨島) and ‘Seokdo'(石島) are referred to as the same island arises. Apart from a number of political and diplomatic issues regarding the island, this study tried to clarify the argument that ‘Dokdo'(獨島) and ‘Seokdo'(石島) referred to the same island, but they were spelled in a different way in terms of orthography of the borrowed sino-letters. In addition, this study attempted to show that the orthography varied depending on the form of documents. ‘Seok'(石) and ‘Dok'(獨) were traditionally the borrowed sino-letters which had long been used historically. ‘Seok'(石) was a meaning- borrowed sino-letters (i.e. its meaning was borrowed from the character) to indicate ‘Dol'(돌), ‘Dok'(독)(<돓<^*돍). And ‘Dok'(獨) was a sound-borrowed sino-letters (i.e. its sound was borrowed from the character) to spell Korean ‘Dok'(독). In the same fashion, ‘梁' and ‘督' played the same role as ‘Seok'(石) and ‘Dok'(獨) respectively. That is to say, ‘梁', a meaning-borrowed sino-letters, was used to indicate Dol(돌), Dok(독)(<돓<^*돍), and ‘督', a sound-borrowed sino-letters, was adopted to spell Korean 독(Dok). In addition, it could be confirmed that 道 could replace ‘獨' and ‘梁’ based on research materials. Therefore, ‘Dol'(돌) and ‘Dok'(독) were written as ‘石' or ‘梁' if we use the meaning-borrowed sino-letters and they also were written as ‘Dok'(獨), ‘Dok'(督) if we use the sound-borrowed sino-letters. The Royal Order where ‘Seokdo'(石島) was spelled is an ancient document with a king's message and the message was traditionally written in Chinese. It was a custom to use the meaning borrowed letters ‘Seokdo'(石島) in order to spell Dolsum(돌섬) or Doksum(독섬). The report from Sim, Heung-taek where ‘Dokdo'(獨島) was recorded was chupjeong(牒呈), a kind of an ancient document, which was customarily written in idu(吏讀). Thus, it was a natural custom to have Dolsum(돌섬), or Doksum(독섬) recorded as Dokdo(獨島) by using borrowed sino-letters. All in all, ‘Dokdo'(獨島) and ‘Seokdo'(石島) are different orthography while referring to the same object.

띄어쓰기의 역사와 규정

서종학(Suh Jong-hak) 영남대학교 인문과학연구소 1996 人文硏究 Vol.18 No.1