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118號
- 발행연도
- 2019.10
- 수록면
- 137 - 161 (25page)
- DOI
- 10.25021/JCLL.2019.10.118.137
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This paper analyzes the Korean correspondence of Chinese topics by comparing the original Chinese and Korean translations of the novel 『Luotuoxiangzi』, and examines the differences between the two languages.
First, in the process of translating Chinese topics into Korean, 47.2% of all survey items are translated into the same topic. This is the most unmarked aspect, which conforms to the law of information equivalence between the original text and the translated text. In addition, 25% of Chinese topics were omitted and 15.8% of Chinese topics were converted to subject. It is common that a gap with the original text occurs in the translation process. Linguistically, differences in translation can be used as a contrasting resource between two language operating systems. Therefore, this paper attempted to analyze Chinese topics and Korean topics and subjects by paying attention to the omissions and transitions to subjects.
Omission is one way of anaphoring to a preceding word. Omission occurs only when accessibility and restoration potential are high, and the topic of discourse is a component that is easily omitted because it satisfies the above characteristics well. In both Chinese and Korean, the omission of the topic is frequent, but the omission of the topic occurred in the process of translating Chinese into Korean. In other words, we can see that Korean is more frequently omitted than Chinese. As a result of analyzing the semantic features of the vocabulary, the omission phenomenon was concentrated on the three vocabulary items (“他”, “祥子”, “自己”) that refer to “Xiangzi”, the main character of『Luotuo』. On the other hand, the frequency of these words appearing as topics or subjects in Korean translations was very low. These are vocabularies with [+ Human] feature, and the omission of Chinese topics in Korean translation shows a close correlation.
In the case where the topic of Chinese is converted into subject, subject has attributes of focus, exclusivity and new information. The subclauses of Korean sentences use subjects rather than topics, which is also because the subjects of subordinate clauses require focus and exclusivity. On the other hand, even in the case of short sentences rather than subordinate clauses, the subject was used when the following discourse was in the context of giving focus, exclusivity and attributes of the new information to the subject. When analyzing the semantic features of the vocabulary used as the subject, it is very rare that the "meta topic" of "他", "祥子", and "自己" is used as the subject. In other words, these vocabulary words with high topicality were rarely selected as subjects in Korean translations, and general noun vocabulary was used as subjects. This suggests that Chinese sentence head NP generally has a topical nature, but there are differences in the individual attributes of sentence head NPs present in the discourse. This result is derived from the analysis of correspondence with Korean language, which may provide clues for future research.
First, in the process of translating Chinese topics into Korean, 47.2% of all survey items are translated into the same topic. This is the most unmarked aspect, which conforms to the law of information equivalence between the original text and the translated text. In addition, 25% of Chinese topics were omitted and 15.8% of Chinese topics were converted to subject. It is common that a gap with the original text occurs in the translation process. Linguistically, differences in translation can be used as a contrasting resource between two language operating systems. Therefore, this paper attempted to analyze Chinese topics and Korean topics and subjects by paying attention to the omissions and transitions to subjects.
Omission is one way of anaphoring to a preceding word. Omission occurs only when accessibility and restoration potential are high, and the topic of discourse is a component that is easily omitted because it satisfies the above characteristics well. In both Chinese and Korean, the omission of the topic is frequent, but the omission of the topic occurred in the process of translating Chinese into Korean. In other words, we can see that Korean is more frequently omitted than Chinese. As a result of analyzing the semantic features of the vocabulary, the omission phenomenon was concentrated on the three vocabulary items (“他”, “祥子”, “自己”) that refer to “Xiangzi”, the main character of『Luotuo』. On the other hand, the frequency of these words appearing as topics or subjects in Korean translations was very low. These are vocabularies with [+ Human] feature, and the omission of Chinese topics in Korean translation shows a close correlation.
In the case where the topic of Chinese is converted into subject, subject has attributes of focus, exclusivity and new information. The subclauses of Korean sentences use subjects rather than topics, which is also because the subjects of subordinate clauses require focus and exclusivity. On the other hand, even in the case of short sentences rather than subordinate clauses, the subject was used when the following discourse was in the context of giving focus, exclusivity and attributes of the new information to the subject. When analyzing the semantic features of the vocabulary used as the subject, it is very rare that the "meta topic" of "他", "祥子", and "自己" is used as the subject. In other words, these vocabulary words with high topicality were rarely selected as subjects in Korean translations, and general noun vocabulary was used as subjects. This suggests that Chinese sentence head NP generally has a topical nature, but there are differences in the individual attributes of sentence head NPs present in the discourse. This result is derived from the analysis of correspondence with Korean language, which may provide clues for future research.
목차
1. 서론
2. 중국어 화제에 대응되는 한국어의 형태
3. 대응 양상 분석
4. 대응되는 어휘의 의미 분석
5. 결론
參考文獻
ABSTRACT
참고문헌 (23)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
한국어와 중국어의 주어와 화제에 대하여
이중언어학
2016 .01
-
불한번역과 주어
언어와 정보사회
2018 .01
-
현대중국어 주어절의 한국어 대응 양상 고찰
중국어문학논집
2016 .12
-
A Linguistic Transfer in Coding English Sentencesby Chinese EFL Learners
언어학 연구
2019 .07
-
한중 주어와 화제에 대한 재분석
중국학
2022 .09
-
The Patterns of Coding English Sentences by Korean EFL Learners
영어영문학연구
2015 .01
-
중 · 한 관계화 제약 화제의 특징과 화제문의 정보구조
중어중문학
2015 .12
-
대조 언어학적 관점에서 본 화제 유형과 모문 현상
중국어문논역총간
2025 .01
-
한영 법령 번역에서 이중주어 구문 번역 양상
통번역학연구
2020 .01
-
Topics of English Sentences in Expository and Narrative Proses
Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics
2020 .01
-
중국어의 비(非)화제 주어 (1)
중국어문논역총간
2017 .07
-
중국어의 비(非)화제 주어 (2)
중국어문논역총간
2018 .01
-
A Data-based Analysis of Topic Continuity and Information Status in English
언어학 연구
2018 .07
-
한국어 정보구조표지 ‘은/는’의 의미 - 대조 의미를 중심으로
언어학
2019 .12
-
한국어 이중주어 구문과 중국어 주술술어문의 단일 주어 고찰
인문과학연구
2021 .03
-
문장성분으로서의 주제어
언어
2019 .09
-
한국인 중국어 작문과 중국인 중국어 작문의 텍스트 특성 비교 연구
중국어문학논집
2023 .04
-
영어 무생물 주어 타동 구문과 자동 구문의 한국어, 일본어에서의 번역 양상
일본연구
2022 .06
-
독립어로서의 주제어 설정에 대하여
한말연구
2020 .01
-
숙달도를 고려한 한국어 교재의 주제별 어휘 제시 양상 분석
이중언어학
2017 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2020-820-000095185