개인구독
소속 기관이 없으신 경우, 개인 정기구독을 하시면 저렴하게
논문을 무제한 열람 이용할 수 있어요.
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 중국어문학연구회 중국어문학논집 中國語文學論集 第142號
- 발행연도
- 2023.10
- 수록면
- 71 - 96 (26page)
- DOI
- 10.25021/JCLL.2023.10.142.71
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This paper examines the functional and semantic differences between the Chinese "V得A" and "VA" phrases and their cognitive models. To this end, we first examined the differences and features of the two phrases, and then used the "dynamics model" of cognitive linguistics to explain the reasons for the differences between them in terms of topicality, discourse, and object positioning. The results of the discussion are summarized as follows.
First, the difference between "V得A" and "VA" phrases was confirmed by [±actualization]: "V得A" phrases are mainly established by air or contextual situations with related lexemes, while "VA" phrases are established by air with "了". The difference is that the "V得A" phrase allows for subjective intervention by the speaker, while the "VA" phrase shows only relatively objective behavior.
Second, depending on the action of the discourse mechanism, the "V得A" phrase, with or without a "premise", required a "premise" for the realization of the action only when it was a description of a situation, but not when it conveyed new information to the listener. On the other hand, the "VA" syntax requires a precondition for an action to be realized. Based on the discourse criterion of "prediction", the switch between the two phrases was allowed only if the outcome was "predictable". If the outcome was "unexpected", the phrase "V得A" was not selected. As long as the adjective selection conditions of the "V得A" and "VA" phrases were predictable, the "V得A" phrase could occur as the complement of the "VA" phrase. However, there were adjectives that could not occur, and their properties were mainly that the "amount" of the degree was unchanged, and they had properties such as [-degree] with continuity. These are not adjectives with the function of degree, so they are out of the range of [+expectation] or cannot be established as a relationship with unchanging "amount".
Third, we examined the event perception structure using a cognitive model (dynamical model) to analyze the speaker"s selection criteria for object selection in the "V得A" and "VA" phrases. The results showed that the "V得A" phrase could not postpone the object because the semantic center of the phrase was in the complement. On the other hand, "VA" phrases are categorized into "expected outcome", "non-ideal outcome", and "unexpected outcome", and among them, "VA" with an object, when the "expected outcome" is certain, the speaker will postposition the object to focus on the object rather than the outcome of the action. However, for the remaining "non-ideal outcomes" or "unexpected outcomes", object backing is only allowed when there is no intentionality.
Thus, although the phrases "V得A" and "VA" are considered to have the same meaning of indicating the result of an action, the semantic and functional differences are due to the fact that they are influenced by different event recognition structures.
First, the difference between "V得A" and "VA" phrases was confirmed by [±actualization]: "V得A" phrases are mainly established by air or contextual situations with related lexemes, while "VA" phrases are established by air with "了". The difference is that the "V得A" phrase allows for subjective intervention by the speaker, while the "VA" phrase shows only relatively objective behavior.
Second, depending on the action of the discourse mechanism, the "V得A" phrase, with or without a "premise", required a "premise" for the realization of the action only when it was a description of a situation, but not when it conveyed new information to the listener. On the other hand, the "VA" syntax requires a precondition for an action to be realized. Based on the discourse criterion of "prediction", the switch between the two phrases was allowed only if the outcome was "predictable". If the outcome was "unexpected", the phrase "V得A" was not selected. As long as the adjective selection conditions of the "V得A" and "VA" phrases were predictable, the "V得A" phrase could occur as the complement of the "VA" phrase. However, there were adjectives that could not occur, and their properties were mainly that the "amount" of the degree was unchanged, and they had properties such as [-degree] with continuity. These are not adjectives with the function of degree, so they are out of the range of [+expectation] or cannot be established as a relationship with unchanging "amount".
Third, we examined the event perception structure using a cognitive model (dynamical model) to analyze the speaker"s selection criteria for object selection in the "V得A" and "VA" phrases. The results showed that the "V得A" phrase could not postpone the object because the semantic center of the phrase was in the complement. On the other hand, "VA" phrases are categorized into "expected outcome", "non-ideal outcome", and "unexpected outcome", and among them, "VA" with an object, when the "expected outcome" is certain, the speaker will postposition the object to focus on the object rather than the outcome of the action. However, for the remaining "non-ideal outcomes" or "unexpected outcomes", object backing is only allowed when there is no intentionality.
Thus, although the phrases "V得A" and "VA" are considered to have the same meaning of indicating the result of an action, the semantic and functional differences are due to the fact that they are influenced by different event recognition structures.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. ‘V得A’와 ‘VA’ 구문의 차이와 특징
Ⅲ. ‘역학 모델’의 차이와 그 영향
Ⅳ. 결론
參考文獻
ABSTRACT
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
현대중국어 조사 ‘得’에 관한 한국인 학습자의 오류 분석
중국어교육과연구
2017 .12
-
조선어학습에서의 모어전이연구 - 한어 모어자의 조선어 모음습득을 중심으로
중국조선어문
2024 .07
-
입력빈도가 조선어 련어습득에 미치는 영향 - 련결주의를 중심으로
중국조선어문
2024 .07
-
현대중국어 ‘A地V’와 ‘V得A’구문의 인지모형 비교 연구
중국학논총
2024 .03
-
교육을 위한 ‘AV’, ‘VA’, ‘V得A’ 구문의 기능 차이 고찰
중국문화연구
2016 .05
-
일본어 거절화행 양상 및 전략에 관한 고찰
일본어학연구
2018 .12
-
韩国学习者汉语致使义“得”字句习得研究
중국언어연구
2022 .02
-
初級韓国人日本語学習者の誤用からみたテ形の習得様相
일어일문학
2017 .11
-
현대중국어 ‘V-得’구문분석 및 동사분류체계 구축을 위한 통합적 연구
중국어문학논집
2015 .04
-
고대시대 ‘得’의 문법화 경로 고찰
한국중어중문학회 학술대회 자료집
2018 .11
-
‘V/A+得+全+Nm+X’구문의 하위분류와 ‘全’의 ‘배경선정’기능 연구
중국언어연구
2017 .08
-
한국인 학습자의 중국어 ‘得+AP’ 상태보어 구문 습득 양상에 관한 연구
중국문학
2020 .01
-
문법 교육을 위한 구의 개념 정립
한글
2022 .12
-
현대 중국어 ‘A地V’와 ‘V得A’ 구문의 비대칭성 연구
인문사회과학연구
2024 .02
-
複合連体句内の意味関係 : 動詞句と形容詞句の意味関係を中心に
일본연구
2019 .02
-
韓國學生漢語聲調習得實態考察
중국어문학논집
2020 .10
-
표기이론과 중한 목적어 구문 습득에서의 모국어 간섭현상
중국어교육과연구
2017 .12
-
중국어 혼동어에 관한 소고 ‘想’･‘覺得’･‘認爲’의 예를 중심으로
人文科學硏究
2019 .01
-
継承日本語における連体修飾節の習得について : L1 · L2との比較を通して
한국일본어학회 학술발표회
2019 .03
-
Notes on Mood Phrase and Modal Phrase for English
새한영어영문학회 학술발표회 논문집
2022 .05
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-151-24-02-088278213