RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    국어학 : 국어의 형태소 분석에 대한 일고찰(1) -고유명사를 중심으로- = A Study on Morphological Analysis of Korean (1) -For Proper Nouns-

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A60123780

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    It is considered in general that we cannot divide proper nouns any deeper. In respect of many linguistic phenomena, however, they should also be analyzed morphologically if they are a composite of two or more morphemic forms. Whatever linguistic form a word may have, if it is once analyzed into parts, its meaning as a whole gets lost. However, if the linguistic form is a composite, we should try a morphological analysis of it. In case of common nouns, they are objects of morphological analysis if they are a composite, even though they do not always refer to their referents by their etymological meaning and the referents may not be referred to by the analyzed components of the composite. Therefore, it cannot be the reason for not doing the analysis of proper nouns morphologically that they do not refer to their referents by their etymological meaning and their analyzed components may neither carry their composite meaning nor refer to the referents of the composite. Since the difference between common nouns and proper nouns is not whether they are analyzable morphologically and to divide a linguistic form into smaller parts has nothing to do with the number of its referents, if common nouns are morphologically analyzable, there is no reason for avoiding morphological analysis of proper nouns. In fact, the morphological and semantic discussions on proper nouns so far presuppose the morphological analysis of them. Obviously, if we do not analyze proper nouns morphologically, then there would be a problem that we have to treat proper nouns of composite form as single morphemes, and that the same forms used in both proper nouns and other words must be treated differently. And a morpheme used in a proper noun itself is a general independent morpheme, having no relation to the unique meaning of the whole proper noun. It is thus necessary that proper nouns undergo morphological analysis. Use of one syllable or two for first name in personal names and calling a person of two-syllable first name only with one syllable suggest that personal names can be morphologically analyzed. The possibility of morphological analysis of geographical names and business-firm names is supported by those names composed of two or more languages, the coexistence of a pure Korean name and a Sino-Korean name for the same place, the place names made up of one syllable each from two Sino-Korean place names, and a code in the ``Law of Roman Alphabetic Transliteration of Korean`` that stipulates a hyphen (-) should be inserted before a form representing an administrative district unit or ``ga`` meani ng street.
    번역하기

    It is considered in general that we cannot divide proper nouns any deeper. In respect of many linguistic phenomena, however, they should also be analyzed morphologically if they are a composite of two or more morphemic forms. Whatever linguistic form ...

    It is considered in general that we cannot divide proper nouns any deeper. In respect of many linguistic phenomena, however, they should also be analyzed morphologically if they are a composite of two or more morphemic forms. Whatever linguistic form a word may have, if it is once analyzed into parts, its meaning as a whole gets lost. However, if the linguistic form is a composite, we should try a morphological analysis of it. In case of common nouns, they are objects of morphological analysis if they are a composite, even though they do not always refer to their referents by their etymological meaning and the referents may not be referred to by the analyzed components of the composite. Therefore, it cannot be the reason for not doing the analysis of proper nouns morphologically that they do not refer to their referents by their etymological meaning and their analyzed components may neither carry their composite meaning nor refer to the referents of the composite. Since the difference between common nouns and proper nouns is not whether they are analyzable morphologically and to divide a linguistic form into smaller parts has nothing to do with the number of its referents, if common nouns are morphologically analyzable, there is no reason for avoiding morphological analysis of proper nouns. In fact, the morphological and semantic discussions on proper nouns so far presuppose the morphological analysis of them. Obviously, if we do not analyze proper nouns morphologically, then there would be a problem that we have to treat proper nouns of composite form as single morphemes, and that the same forms used in both proper nouns and other words must be treated differently. And a morpheme used in a proper noun itself is a general independent morpheme, having no relation to the unique meaning of the whole proper noun. It is thus necessary that proper nouns undergo morphological analysis. Use of one syllable or two for first name in personal names and calling a person of two-syllable first name only with one syllable suggest that personal names can be morphologically analyzed. The possibility of morphological analysis of geographical names and business-firm names is supported by those names composed of two or more languages, the coexistence of a pure Korean name and a Sino-Korean name for the same place, the place names made up of one syllable each from two Sino-Korean place names, and a code in the ``Law of Roman Alphabetic Transliteration of Korean`` that stipulates a hyphen (-) should be inserted before a form representing an administrative district unit or ``ga`` meani ng street.

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼