환유, 문법에까지 영향을 끼치다 : 한국어의 이중목적어구문을 중심으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In English, sentences in (1) through (3) are all acceptable regardless of what type of direct objects they have.
(1) a. We wrote John a mail. b. We wrote John a note. c. We wrote John a novel.
(2) a. We read John a book. b. We read John a poem. c. We read John a letter.
(3) a. We bought him a pencil b. We bought him a big house c. We bought him lunch
However, in Korean, depending on the direct objects the verbs have, their acceptability changes as in *chinkwu-eykey sosel-ul ssu-ss-ta vs. chinkwu-eykey meyil-ul ssu-ss-ta and *chinkwu-eykey yenpil-ul sa-ss-ta vs. chinkwu-eykey cemsim-ul sa-ss-ta. Then a question arises: Why do Korean verbs change their compatibility with an indirect object while the corresponding verbs in English show stability? In order to answer the question, we need to observe more data relevant to the issue with other verbs such as to hold and to pick. The verbs are usually used as transitive verbs. In English, the corresponding verbs do not occur in ditransitive constructions.
(4) a. *He held him his backpack b. *He held his backpack to his friend
(5) a. *He picked his friend his pen b. *He picked his pen to his friend
In Korean, the verbs tul- ‘to hold’ and ppop- ‘to pick’ are normally used as transitive. They are not compatible with an indirect object. However, sometimes, the verbs can occur with an indirect object as in (6) and (7) when they have different direct objects.
(6) simintul-un pwunno-ttaymwuney imeyngpak cengpwu-ey chopwul-ul tul-ess-ta
citizen-Top anger-because president.Lee government-Dat candle.light-Acc hold-Pst-Dcl
‘Anger drives people to hold lighted candle toward President Lee’s government’
(7) yulep-i sengmayswu-ey khal-ul ppop-ass-ta
Europe-Nom prostitution-Dat knife-Acc take.out-Pst-Dcl
‘Europe took a knife out towards the problem of prostitution’
The research that is proposed here will be conducted based on the idea that the above-mentioned special cases of Korean double object constructions utilize the ACTION FOR CAUSED EVENT metonymy. In case of the verb ssu- 'to write,' sosel-ul ssu- 'to write a novel' is not compatible with an indirect object because the action of writing a novel is not directly connected to giving/sending it to someone. However, the action of writing an email is more easily connected to sending it to someone. Then, it looks like that when the combination of a verb and a direct object is interpreted as an action which can easily create a caused event, then the combination can have an indirect object, creating a double object construction.
The verb sa- 'to buy' shows the similar pattern. It is not easy to connect the action of buying a pencil directly to the action of giving it to somebody else. However, it is very easy to imagine the situation where buying lunch results in buying it for somebody else, especially in Korean culture. It makes the sentence more readily acceptable. The explanation can be applied to the other examples. The action of holding a lighted candle is interpreted as showing it to someone as a sign of protesting. Therefore, a double object construction is allowed.
In summary, when the action is interpreted as a cause of affecting the indirect object, then the sentence with a dative-marked indirect object is more easily acceptable. Therefore, we can temporarily conclude that, in Korean, the existence of the dative-marked indirect object is allowed when the combination of a direct object and a verb is an action which means a caused event which can affect the indirect object. Therefore the metonymy ACTION FOR CAUSED EVENTare utilized in Korean double object constructions. If the meaning of a direct object plus a verb is an action which can be easily interpreted as a caused event, then the existence of the indirect object is allowed.