그리고'의 형성과정에 대한 연구

안주호 韓國語文學會 2002 語文學 Vol.0 No.76

안심사본 〈진언집〉과 망월사본 〈진언집〉의 비교 연구

안주호 배달말학회 2002 배달말 Vol.31 No.-

이 글은 진언집의 형성과정과 최초의 진언집인 안심사본(1569년)과 진언집의 집대성이라 할 수 있는 망월사본(1800년)의 언본과 실담장을 비교해 본 것이다. 진언은 번역해서는 안 되는 불번어인데, 한글이 창제되기 전까지는 한자로 음역한 진언들이 보이며, 한글이 창제된 후에는 한글로 활발히 음사하는 작업이 행해졌다. 진언집의 최고형태로 보이는 안심사본에서는 당시의 한글 음사의 기준이 된 언본16자모와 실담문자 50개의 음을 한자와 한글로 대응시켜 놓았는데, 이것은 당시에 읽히던 현실음으로 표기한 것이다. 이후에 만연사본(1777년)에서 용암화상은 잘못된 범어음을 수정하였으며, 이것을 저본으로 수정한 것이 망월사본이다. 망월사본에는 진언집총론, 실담장해의총론, 흥무정운지도, 진언집범례, 언본16자모, 범본오십자문실담장의 제목으로 실담문자와 한글표기 방법에 대해 상세히 설명되어 있어, 진언집의 집대성본이라 할 수 있다. 따라서 안심사본은 당시에 관송되던 현실음을 중심으로 표기한 것이라면, 망월사본은 범어음에 맞게 이상적으로 한글 음사를 했다는 점에서 큰 차이를 보인다.

의존명사와 관계된 형태들의 표기실태와 문제점

안주호 한국국어교육연구회 1999 국어교육 Vol.- No.100

만연사본 <진업진(1777년)>의 표기법 연구

안주호 국어국문학회 2003 국어국문학 Vol.- No.133

This paper is concerned with investigating the Siddhama￣trka￣ and its counterpart Korean pronunciation of Manyeonsa <Jineonjip 1777>, published by Monk Yong Am, who was very knowledgable of Sanskrit, and his disciple Monk Baek Am. It also studies the characteristics of actual mantra spelling system, and have made following observations. First, in the Siddhama￣trka￣ mantras are spelled in Korean more closely to Sanskrit pronunciation based on the Ansimsa <Jineonjip>. Unlike the Korean counterpart pronunciation for the 12 vowels in Mangwolsa which is spelled as the letter "ㆆ", the 12 vowels are closely matched with the Ansimas version. Secondly, Korean counterpart consonant pronunciations are matched in categorization of ① voiceless consonant sound, ② voiceless consonant sound/aspirate, ③ voiced sound, ④ voiced sound/aspirate, ⑤ nasal sound as in Sanskrit. Thirdly, in actual mantra spelling the Manyeonsa version was presented in the order of ˝Korean → Chinese → Sanskrit and the letter "ㆆ" was used as for the Korean counterpart pronunciation of long vowel "O^m, a￣". Lastly, in actual mantra spelling the same letters(各自竝書) "까, 짜, 따, 따, 빠, ㆅㅏ" were used. This is very particular in comparison with other Juneunjips (Mantra books). In addition, "ㅿ, ㆁ, ㅸ" were matched in accordance with Sanskrit categorization. These cases were explained in the <Jineunjip Beomrye>. In conclusion, the Korean counterpart pronunciation of Siddhama￣trka￣ is well reflected in the mantra spelling of Manyeonsa version, using Korean counterpart pronunciation in clear categorization of Sanskrit pronunciation.

현대국어의 의존명사 목록에 대하여

안주호 한국어문학회 2006 語文學 Vol.0 No.93

]This paper is mainly concerned with comparing five previous studies on dependent noun list in general and discussing the situation of dependent noun. Categories related with dependent noun include independent noun, derivative ending, connecting ending, suffix and so on. Independent nouns, having been diversified in meaning, started being used as dependent nouns, and at certain point in time they were separated into homonyms. Those having been separated as homonyms are divided as dependent nouns, which can remain in the list. Independent nouns and those having flexibility seem to be used in a depending manner of independent noun. Those that became dependent nouns are restricted by preceding or succeeding elements, with the overall composition including dependent nouns functioning as composites. When these composites are solidified in their connection, they can naturally be recategorized as 'concluding ending, preceding ending, connecting ending,' or as such grammatical elements 'suffix'. And it was observed that there existed middle steps between dependent nouns and adjacent categories.

'-는 법이다'류의 양태표현 연구

안주호 국어학회 2004 국어학 Vol.0 No.44

이 글은 자립명사인 '법(法)'에서 '-는 법이다[-어야 한다], -는 법이다[-는 것이 당연하다], -는 법이 있다/없다[대개 -- 한다], -ㄹ 법하다[-ㄹ 것으로 추정된다]'의 양태용언으로 발달하게 된 과정에 대해 탐구한 것이다. 양태는 인식양태와 의무양태의 두 종류로 나눌 수 있다. 의무양태는 주어에게 부과된 책무와 강제를 나타내는 범주이며, 인식양태는 사실과 다르다고 하더라도 명제내용에 대한 화자의 지식이나 믿음의 정도성을 나타내 주는 범주이다. 자립명사 '법'은 선행의 보문소 '-는, -ㄴ, -ㄹ', 그리고 후행하는 '-이다, -하다'와 결합하여 '-는 법이다[법1], -는 법이다[법2], -는 법이 있다/없다[법3], -ㄹ 법하다[법4]'의 구성이 되어 양태의미를 표현해 준다. 법1은 '-어야 한다'의 의미로 주어에게 부과된 의무를 나타내므로 의무양태이며, 법2, 법3, 법4는 명제내용에 대한 화자의 태도를 나타내는 인식양태로서, 확실성의 정도에 따라 나누어 보면, 법2는 '필연성', 법3은 '개연성', 법4는 '가능성'을 나타내 준다. 이러한 양태의미는 '권위의 원천, 상호주관성, 힘의 영향력' 등의 측면에서 살필 수 있다. 자립명사 '법'에서 양태용언으로의 발달은 은유적 확장에 의한 의미의 주관화의 경향 때문이었다. 이런 발달 양상은 일반적으로 자립명사 혹은 동사 > 의존명사구 혹은 보조동사 > 의무양태 >인식양태 등의 발달과정을 거친다는 사실과 잘 부합된다. This paper aims to investigate the process in which the noun 'pep('law') in Korean is evolved into modality verbs of [-nun pep-ita] 'must be--', [-nun pep-ita] 'natural to do--', [-nun pep-i issta/epsta] 'largely to do--', [-ul pephata] 'expected to do--'. Modality can be categorized into deontic modality and epistemic modality. While the former represents [obligation] and [compulsion] on the part of the subject, the latter shows the degree of knowledge and confidence of the speaker on the statement content, irrespective of the validity of the statement. The bound noun 'pep' is combined with the preceding complement '-nun, -un, -ul' and succeeded by '-ita, -hata' to represent the meaning of modality in the forms of '-nun pepita[pep1], -nun pepita[pep2], -nun pepi issta/epsta[pep3], -ul pephata[pep4]'. The [pep1] meaning 'must be--' is a deontic modality, indicating the obligation laid on the subject, while [pep2], [pep3] and [pep4] are epistemic modalities showing the attitude of speaker on the statement content. The [pep2] refers to the inevitability, [pep3] to the probability, and [pep4] to the possibility of the statement, respectively, depending on the degree of certainty. The modality form can be studied in terms of the 'source of authority, intersubjectivity, and power influence.' Reviewing of usage of modality verbs related with 'pep' using the Corpus of Korean history, it is found the [pep1] and [pep2] are increasingly used after the 16th century and the [pep3] is most widely used during the modern Korean, while the [pep4] eventually emerged in the modern Korean period. This development mode is an example well consistent with the fact that the modal category typically develops from "main verb, noun" to deontic modality and then to epistemic modality.

조사 '-ㅅ'과 '-ㅇㆎ/의'의 통시적 고찰 : <內訓>과 <御製內訓>을 중심으로

안주호 연세대학교 국어국문학과 1995 연세어문학 Vol.27 No.-

명사 파생의 문법화 연구 : '터ㅎ'를 중심으로

안주호 서울대학교 어학연구소 1996 語學硏究 Vol.32 No.1

This paper intends to describes the processes of grammaticization of the Korean noun. I define grammaticization as the process whereby lexical items come in certain linguistic contexts to serve grammatical functions, and, once grammaticalized, continue to develop new grammatical functions. By studying grammaticization, there is a 'cline of grammaticality' of the following type, "content item>grammatical word>clitic>inflectional affix". It has as its leftmost component a lexical, or content, item and moves through stages of being syntactic (grammatical word, clitic) and finally morphological (inflectional affix). Firstly, in the case of the Korean noun, an independent noun spreads a dependent noun by semantic bleaching. Secondly, the dependent noun integrates with NP complement construction which includes a complementizer(-nin/-in/-il), dependent noun, and case marker or verb stem by ranalysis and analogy. Lastly, the integrated unit of syntactic structure components become a morphological grammatical element due to fusion and change of semantic function. Typically I dealt with the process where the independent noun "t??" becomes of the grammatical elements, preceding sentence ending. In this process the dependent noun 't??' (circumstance) in modern Korean diverged from the independent noun 't??(h)' (a site) in middle Korean. Further the dependent noun 't??" fused into complementizer(??l) and verb stem 'i-'. So this integrated NP complement construction '??ltæ-' functions as a modality marker (speaker's intention) in present. In conclusion, this paper shows the tnedency of grammaticization 'from syntactic construction to morphological constructions'.

≪眞言勸供·三檀施食文 諺解≫의 진언표기방식 연구

안주호 국어학회 2002 국어학 Vol.40 No.-

이 글은 사찰에서 쓰이는 진언을 불교의례에 맞게 모아놓은《진언권공·삼단시식문 언해》를 중심으로 진언표기방식에 대해서 알아본 것이다. 진언은 불번어로서, 우리나라에서는 직접 범어음을 음사하기보다는 주로 중국에서 한역된 것을 다시 한글로 음사해 왔다. 《진언권공·삼단시식문 언해》의 진언은 총 52어구로 한글음역의 전체 음절수는 840음절이며, 음절 종류수는 95개이다. 이에 비해 한역 음역수는 856개로, 165개의 한자가 사용되었다. "한글음역-한자음역"순으로 표기되어 있는데, 현실음을 반영하여, 본래 범어 발음법에서 많이 벗어난 표기를 보이고 있다. 현재에도 이러한 불교식 독송음의 맥을 잇고 있다. This paper is concerned with investigating the spelling methods of mantras based on the original <Jineongwongong·Samdansisingmun Eonhae>. Jineon(mantras), containing praises and virtues, are the words recited in buddhist ceremonies. They are not supposed to be translated, but are written in Korean or in Chinese in accordance with the original pronunciation. <Jineongwongong·Samdansisingmun Eonhae> published in 1496 shows the Hankul orthography system at that times. There are 52 phrase of Mantras in the text, 840 letters and 95 kinds of phonemes in Hankul, and 165 kinds of Chinese Characters. Understanding of the spelling methods of Mantra provides insights into precise discussion of the borrowed spelling methods, the Korean pronunciation system of Chinese characters in the studies of mantra, and the history of phonology of Korean language.

한국어교육에서의 담화표지 위계화 방안

안주호 국제한국어교육학회 2009 한국어 교육 Vol.20 No.3

Ahn, Joohoh, 2009, A Study on Presenting Sequence of Discourse Marker in Korean as a Foreign Language Education. Journal of Korean Language Education 20-3: 135-159. In this study, discourse markers which have traditionally been called as ‘unnecessary words,’ ‘habitual saying,’ ‘hesitating words,’ ‘additional words,’ ‘discourse unchanging conjugation,’ and ‘interjection’ are discussed in the perspective of Korean as a foreign language (KFL) education. Since these discourse markers have been treated as unnecessary elements, being syntactically unnecessary and not affecting the transmission of meaning, using them was taken as a mistake and thus should be avoided in learning and teaching the language. However, in view that the discourse markers are universally used in spoken language and have certain conversational function, they should be considered as an essential teaching-learning element, not a negative thing that should be avoided in KFL education. Discourse markers work to connect between the speaker, listener, and the topic in the scene of speaking and thus can contribute to improving the communication skills of KFL students. Particularly, they can be used strategically for expression and understanding in expression education of KFL. This study originally had the ultimate goal to select the discourse markers that KFL students should learn, and then to provide teaching methods needed for teachers by classifying them specifically and systematically. This study, however, first investigates the discourse markers that are present in several KFL teaching materials. Based on this investigation, basic discourse markers need to be selected. At the same time, this study is limited to analyzing teaching materials only, while the discourse markers that are preferred by KFL students in their direct speaking should also be analyzed. These shortcomings need to be discussed in future studies together with specific teaching methods and pragmatic function aimed at each level. (SoonChunHyang University)