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.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This paper has been written in order to review the understanding of the syntagmatic scope of Endings reflected in Korean Grammar(1910) written by Ju, Si-Gyeong. The present school grammar has restricted the governing scope of an ending to verbal stem. On the contrary, the theoretical grammar since nineteen eighties regards as an ending as governing propositional sentences or pre-complete sentences as a whole.
Then, Ju's opinion which never coincided with that of school grammar, and didn't completely coincide with that of the theoretical grammar, ― which we may call the third line of reasoning, could be summarized as follows:
First, as never admitting the independent status of pre-final ending, Ju(1910) didn't naturally show his recognition of its scope of government.
Second, as for sentence-final ending, Ju(1910) thought that its scope of government varied from phrase to phrase.
(1) the government of predicate phrase : ggeut(final ending)①
(2) the government of complex verb phrase : ggeut(final ending)②
(3) the government of predicate clause : ggeut(final ending)③
(4) the government of propositional sentence : it(conjunctive ending), pre-nominal ending, ‘-gi’ nominal ending, ‘-ge’ and ‘-i’ adverbial ending
As shown above, it follows that the governing scope of ggeut(final ending) ranges from predicate phrase and complex verb phrase to predicate clause, while those of it(conjunctive ending) and pre-nominal ending, ‘-gi’ nominal ending, ‘-ge’ adverbial ending coincide with that of theoretical grammar of today's.
Third and lastly, Ju(1910) didn't have all of grammatical elements which are now called final-endings, and furthermore it revealed some inconsistencies of above-mentioned endings according to the concrete descriptive fields. It could be summarized as follows:
(1) what he regards as rendering elements of parts of speech(gimombakgum) : nominalizing suffixes of ‘-eum, -ji’, adverbializing suffix of ‘-eo’
(2) where he reveals descriptive contradictions : nominalizing ending of ‘-gi’, pre-nominal ending, adverbial ending of ‘-ge’ and ‘-i’(which he regards as a governor of propositional sentence in some places, and as a rendering element in another.)
Then, Ju's opinion which never coincided with that of school grammar, and didn't completely coincide with that of the theoretical grammar, ― which we may call the third line of reasoning, could be summarized as follows:
First, as never admitting the independent status of pre-final ending, Ju(1910) didn't naturally show his recognition of its scope of government.
Second, as for sentence-final ending, Ju(1910) thought that its scope of government varied from phrase to phrase.
(1) the government of predicate phrase : ggeut(final ending)①
(2) the government of complex verb phrase : ggeut(final ending)②
(3) the government of predicate clause : ggeut(final ending)③
(4) the government of propositional sentence : it(conjunctive ending), pre-nominal ending, ‘-gi’ nominal ending, ‘-ge’ and ‘-i’ adverbial ending
As shown above, it follows that the governing scope of ggeut(final ending) ranges from predicate phrase and complex verb phrase to predicate clause, while those of it(conjunctive ending) and pre-nominal ending, ‘-gi’ nominal ending, ‘-ge’ adverbial ending coincide with that of theoretical grammar of today's.
Third and lastly, Ju(1910) didn't have all of grammatical elements which are now called final-endings, and furthermore it revealed some inconsistencies of above-mentioned endings according to the concrete descriptive fields. It could be summarized as follows:
(1) what he regards as rendering elements of parts of speech(gimombakgum) : nominalizing suffixes of ‘-eum, -ji’, adverbializing suffix of ‘-eo’
(2) where he reveals descriptive contradictions : nominalizing ending of ‘-gi’, pre-nominal ending, adverbial ending of ‘-ge’ and ‘-i’(which he regards as a governor of propositional sentence in some places, and as a rendering element in another.)
목차
영어 초록
1. 머리말
2. 문장 성분과 어미의 종류
3. 어미의 지배 범위
4. 맺음말
참고문헌
저자소개
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
어미
황해문화
2013 .06
-
국어 선어말어미와 종결어미의 연속성-때매김 어미와 종결어미를 중심으로-
한글
1993 .09
-
선택형어미의 '거나'와 '든지'에 대하여
국어국문학
1979 .12
-
연결어미의 종결어미적 쓰임에 대하여
한글
2003 .09
-
선행어미 "-가/거-, -아/어-, -나-"고찰
한글
1963 .09
-
어미 '-아/어'결합에 대한 사적 연구
우리말글
1990 .05
-
국어 연결어미의 통합 관계
민족문화연구
2006 .01
-
어말어미의 비어말어미화에 관한 연구
한글
1996 .03
-
종결어미 `-거든`에 대한 연구
어문논총
2005 .08
-
15세기 국어 연결어미에 결합한 [더+시] 통합순서의 변화에 대한 管見
돈암어문학
2016 .06
-
접속어미 `-되`에 대한 고찰
어문논총
2005 .08
-
종결어미 결합형 접속어미 새로 보기
한글
2019 .12
-
[고찰과 연구] 어미 《-고》와 《-아(어)》에 대하여 - 방법을 나타내는 것을 위주로 하여 -
중국조선어문
1995 .11
-
종결어미 통합형 접속어미의 사전 표제어 분석
어문학
2002 .02
-
의문형어미고
한글
1958 .10
-
한국어 연결형 어미의 의미 분석 연구 1
한글
1981 .12
-
뺑덕어미 小考
한국민속학
1999 .12
-
명사화 어미 '_음'과 '_기'
언어
1983 .12
-
강릉방언의 `-잔쏘`류 복합 종결어미 연구
서강인문논총
2014 .08
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-710-017255952