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
- 발행연도
- 2016.11
- 수록면
- 193 - 222 (30page)
- DOI
- 10.20405/kl.2016.11.73.193
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The purpose of this paper is to introduce the notion of detransitivizing in line of linguistic typology, and try to explain Korean object case marker LUL in terms of a marker (=particle) that indicates one (or more) of the transitivity features of Hopper & Thompson (1980). Detransitivizing is a various kinds of non-typical transitive sentences that have been cross-linguistically found when transitivity features become disappeared or weaker.
To define transitivity, this paper takes stance on prototypical transitivity, and it argues against markedness transitivity (Comrie’s generalization (de Swart 2003, Næss 2007), saying that the former can explain better about the transitivity and detransitivizing phenomena cross-linguistically than the latter can, based on which the long-term syntactic dichotomy between transitive and intransitive cannot be more retainable. According to prototypical transitivity, transitivity is defined as a bundle of 10 or so semantic features that composes transitivity. Basing on the various typological data and some Korean evidences dwelt with in this paper, we proposed that among 10 or so features 2 (or more) participants (A and O) appear to be most typical elements that compose prototypical transitivity, but other features are not given any different weight among them.
In line of this foundlings, we propose that Korean objet case LUL can be better explained if we understand LUL as a particle indicating transitivity features, contrast to the Case or the special definitive markers. As a result, the LUL can appear whenever the one (or more) of the transitivity features occur in the given sentences, regardless of transitive or intransitive sentences.
To define transitivity, this paper takes stance on prototypical transitivity, and it argues against markedness transitivity (Comrie’s generalization (de Swart 2003, Næss 2007), saying that the former can explain better about the transitivity and detransitivizing phenomena cross-linguistically than the latter can, based on which the long-term syntactic dichotomy between transitive and intransitive cannot be more retainable. According to prototypical transitivity, transitivity is defined as a bundle of 10 or so semantic features that composes transitivity. Basing on the various typological data and some Korean evidences dwelt with in this paper, we proposed that among 10 or so features 2 (or more) participants (A and O) appear to be most typical elements that compose prototypical transitivity, but other features are not given any different weight among them.
In line of this foundlings, we propose that Korean objet case LUL can be better explained if we understand LUL as a particle indicating transitivity features, contrast to the Case or the special definitive markers. As a result, the LUL can appear whenever the one (or more) of the transitivity features occur in the given sentences, regardless of transitive or intransitive sentences.
목차
Abstract
1. 서론
2. 타동성의 원형 이론
3. 타동성의 유표성 이론
4. 탈타동성 현상의 예들
5. 결론
참고문헌
참고문헌 (67)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
국어의 목적어를 어떻게 정의해야 하는가? : 유형론의 관점, 서술어의 타동성에 의한 목적어 정의
한국어학
2015 .08
-
한국어의 타동성 발현 양상 분석
돈암어문학
2020 .06
-
영어 서술 형용사 구문에 내재된 타동성의 정도성
언어학 연구
2018 .07
-
Relative Transitivity of the English Reflexive Construction
신영어영문학
2016 .02
-
L2 Learners’ Sensitivity to the Transitivity Bias Continuum in English Verbs
언어학
2020 .04
-
‘把’자구문의 ‘타동성’의 ‘정도성’에 대한 소고
중국어문학논집
2021 .10
-
Transitivity and Case Assignment in Ígálâ
Journal of Universal Language
2020 .03
-
‘타동성’의 문법 교육적 위상 정립을 위한 시론
국어국문학
2016 .03
-
‘N1+把+N2+V1+在/到+장소(위치)’ 문형과 ‘N1+把+N2+〔V1+R(결과보어)〕’문형의 유사성과 ‘타동성’의 정도성 차이
중국언어연구
2022 .10
-
중국인 고급 학습자의 한국어 타동성 인식과 ‘을/를’ 중출구문 습득 양상 - 인터페이스 가설의 측면에서
언어과학
2018 .01
-
한국어 학습자의 타동성 인식 조사
우리말글
2016 .09
-
Realizing the Discourse of Power : A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Language of Newspapers
언어학 연구
2015 .10
-
L2 Learners’ Awareness of Transitivity Bias of English Lexical Verbs: A Corpus-based Comparative Study
언어
2021 .09
-
L2 Acquisition of English Verbs’ Syntactic Distinction on Intransitivity and Transitivity
영어영문학연구
2020 .01
-
Topics and Transitivity Choices in Iranian Learners’ English Writings
Journal of Asia TEFL
2018 .01
-
A Study on Subject Selection and Transitivity in English
언어학 연구
2017 .10
-
日本語の複合動詞 「V1-疲れる」、「V1-慣れる」、「V1-飽きる」のV1＋V2結合と他動性
일어일문학
2021 .05
-
日本語有対動詞の自他交替の可能性 ─他動性の観点から─
일어일문학연구
2018 .01
-
Syntactic Bootstrapping in Korean Speakers’ Acquisition of Telicity in English: Link between Transitivity and Telicity
영어영문학21
2015 .01
-
2015 개정 한문과 교육과정에 기술된 ‘有/無+목적어’의 문제점과 개선 방안－타동성의 관점에서 본 ‘有/無+목적어’－
한문학논집(漢文學論集)
2016 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2017-701-001850289