전형유형론에 근거한 한국어와 프랑스어의 피동태 대조 연구 : 구어 병렬 말뭉치를 바탕으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The main objective of this study is to interpret the similarities and differences between Korean passive voice and French passive voice by comparing and contrasting, and to figure out an effective teaching-learning method of passive voice for French-speaking Korean language learners. To reach the purpose, the problem is addressed by Canonical Typology, which is a methodological framework for conducting typological research following the principles of the canon (i.e., canonical ideal) (Corbett, 2005; Brown et al., 2012; Bond, 2019), and the present study explores bilingual spoken parallel corpora as its content database.
This paper starts with a brief review on how the Korean passive voice has been dealt with in related academic disciplines, it then presents some concrete characteristics of the passive voice. Passive constructions vary with respect to a range of properties linked to semantic, syntactic, and morphological restrictions they display, and the properties of canonical passives in terms of cross-linguistic are as follows: (i) the passivization is accounted for in high transitivity, (ii) the subject of the passive is generated from the direct object in the corresponding active, (iii) the subject of the active is indicated in the form of an agentive adjunct or unexpressed in the passive, and (iv) the verb is marked passive (Siewierska, 1984; Shibatani, 1985; de Mattia-Viviès, 2009).
These four features are set into the criteria for establishing the canon and identifying each instance. As a result, some cases quite fit the canonical passive, on the contrary, there were also cases that were totally opposite to the canon. Even if Korean passive markers ‘-i/hi/ri/gi-’ represent multiple functions (e.g., potential, spontaneous, and causative, etc.) in the same form, the polysemy is not considered properly as they are presented in mixed types making learners even more confused. From the analysis, it is concluded that the polysemous markers should be presented selectively in a certain order so that learners can recognize and distinguish the difference between polysemous markers.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 1. 서론 1
• 1.1. 연구 목적 1
• 1.2. 선행 연구 4
• 1.3. 연구 구성 15
• 2. 이론적 배경 16
• 2.1. 전형유형론 16
• 2.2. 대조언어학 20
• 2.3. 말뭉치언어학 25
• 3. 피동태의 전형성 분석 30
• 3.1. 태의 정의와 특성 30
• 3.2. 피동태의 전형성 35
• 3.2.1. 높은 타동성 40
• 3.2.2. 피동작주 목적어의 승격 47
• 3.2.3. 동작주 주어의 강등 55
• 3.2.4. 태 표지의 결합 61
• 4. 한국어와 프랑스어의 피동태 71
• 4.1. 한국어의 피동태 71
• 4.2. 프랑스어의 피동태 79
• 4.3. 연구 방법 94
• 5. 한국어 피동태에 대응되는 프랑스어 표현 분석 99
• 5.1. 한국어 피동태에 대응되는 프랑스어 표현 분석 99
• 5.2. 교육적 제언 111
• 6. 결론 119
• 참고 문헌 121
• ABSTRACT 150