DAU Library

학위논문 동서

우리말 어휘소 되기 연구

김철남

부산: 동아대학교 1997. -

ii,151P: 삽도; 26cm. -

학위논문(박사)- 동아대학교 대학원 국어국문학과 전공 1997년8월

영문초록 : This study is designed to find out the essence of korean lexicalization by the examination of its cause and process. Korean lexicalization is divided into two types with one by the structural change and the other by semantic one. Structural change is done by the fossilization of linguistic elements which consist of linguistic forms, with fossiles being diachronic which remain in synchronic language. Fossiles remaining in modern Korean have the ones of phoneme, morpheme and rule, while words with fossiles, though analytic, producing no constructive structure. Phoneme fossil is of phonological peculiarity, with the very phoneme fossil/ㅂ/ in ＇jop-ssal(좁쌀), mep-ssal(멥쌀), whip-sseul-da(휩쓸다)＇ being beyond explanation by phonological rule. These worlds with ability to analyze morpheme but with inability to synchronically explain /ㅂ/ attached to morpheme boundary can not be regular structure. Morpheme fossiles are divided into two ones, one of lexical form used as base for word formation or inflection and one of grammatical form as affixes. One of lexical-form refers to 'gat(갗), seul-geut-(설겆-), mit-(및-)‘, remaining in 'sal-gat(살갗), seul-geu-gy(설거지), mi-cheu(미처)’, with one of grammatical form '-goudae(-꼬대), -ouy-(-외-), -soo(-수), -y(-ㅣ)’ in 'jam-go-dae(잠꼬대), a-rouy-da(아뢰다), son-su(손수), naey(내)’. The words of morpheme fossiles, synchronically having none of constituent, produce no regular structure. Rule fossiles, keeping nullified grammatical rule, have two kinds: of phonological rule and of word formation rule. The one includes /ㄹ/omission as in 'ba-neu-gil(바느질), bu-sap(부삽), seu-da-deum-da(쓰다듬다), ou-jit-da(우짖다)‘, and the other includes word formation rule like '[ []_(V)+-이]_(N), [[ ]_(V)+[ ]_(N)]_(N), [[ ]_(V)+[ ]_(V)]_(V)', which forms 'meuk-ii(먹이), gam-bal(감발), gam-dol-da(감돌다)’. Words formed by that rule, which is of transparent inner structure, are hardly regarded as lexeme with their rules already nullified having no more productivity. In general, linguistic forms by productive rule easily able to predict their meanings with the meanings of constituents, the meanings of linguistic forms have compositionality. However, any semantic specialization and conversion in linguistic forms lead to a loss of compositionality.) A semantic specialization is a specialized homonym with great gap between the original normal meaning of a linguistic form and its transferred meaning. Here, 'pal-gaeng-ii(빨갱이←빨강이), mu-chi-da(무치다←묻히다)’ are used with linguistically-rooted words and specialized ones together, while 'an-seung-mat-chum(안성맞춤), geung-chi-da(경치다), baek-ju-yea(백주에)’ with specialized ones alone. A semantic conversion is the use of suggestive expression to spotlight the features of referents like in 'gwan-ja-nol-ii(관자놀이), gam-ga-ba-wii(감자바위), bok-euy-bae(복의배), gu-wuo-sam-da(구워삼다)‘. With these linguistic forms able to understand their meanings in regular contexts, any generalization out of the contexts makes it impossible to foretell the meaning of a linguistic form by the meaning of a constituent. Any loss of compositionality by a meaning change causes the recognition of regularity hard due to the semantic peculiarity of a linguistic form in spite of guaranteed transparency in forms. As stated above, linguistic forms lexicalized by structural or meaning change, listed on lexicon without regularity, are only used on memory.

바로가기