중국어 형식동사 ‘주(做)’와 ‘고(搞)’의 의미·기능 비교

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In this paper, we examine the change of functions of the representative ‘hada(do)’-like dummy verbs ‘zuo(做)’ and ‘gao(搞)’, in-depthly distinguish between syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic differences from a Diachronic and synchronic perspectives.
Through this study on ‘zuo(做)’ and ‘gao(搞)’, we reached several conclusions as follows. First, diachronically, ‘zuo’ originated from the original ancient word ‘zuo(作)’, and only after the inter-Korean dynasty came to have the meaning of ‘do’ and ‘to die’, and the frequency and scope of use gradually after the Tang five Dynasty. Began to expand and become vain. On the other hand, ‘gao(搞)’ is a Southwest dialect, and was absorbed into modern Chinese until around 1950, and the vocabulary meaning and grammar function of modern Chinese were established. These two verbs are similar but have different syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic differences due to the difference in historical origin and transition process.
Second, syntactically, ‘zuo(做)’ is mainly combined with a two-syllable noun or verb object, while ‘gao(搞)’ is combined with a one-syllable bore or a complex object form of three or more syllables. This is considered to be the influence of the trend of two syllables and four syllables in modern Chinese phonemes. In addition, the common adverbs, syntax forms, and types of bore that the two verbs combine were somewhat different. ‘zuo(做)’ is mainly combined with ‘modal adverb’, which indicates the way of action or attitude, while ‘gao(搞)’ was strongly combined with the ‘degree adverb’, which mainly indicates the state or degree.
Third, semantically, ‘zuo(做)’ and ‘gao(搞)’ showed differences not only in their intrinsic verb meanings, but also in the semantic qualities of the object components they combine. ‘zuo(做)’ is mainly [+status] [+relationship] [+industry] [+activity] mainly [+Independent] [+specific] [+action] [+medium･positive], etc. In addition to the meaning of ‘to engage’, the meaning of ‘to become’, ‘to take on’, ‘to produce’, and ‘to proceed’, while ‘gao(搞)’ mainly refers to [-status] [-relationship] [+industry] [+system]. In combination with semantic features such as [±Independent] [+abstract] [+state] [+negative], the meaning of ‘to engage’ or ‘execute’ was expressed.
Fourth, pragmatically, ‘zuo(做)’ and ‘gao(搞)’ have a difference in stylistic colors, and ‘zuo(做)’ derived from ‘作’ used in ancient texts is mainly government agencies. It is used in formal documents such as the system and official documents, and is mainly used in written form in modern Chinese, whereas ‘gao’, which originally originated in the Southwest dialect and has a strong regional character, naturally has a strong regional color, so it is a significant part of the colloquial language in modern Chinese.
In conclusion, the two dummy verbs of Chinese ‘zuo(做)’ and ‘gao(搞)’ have considerable differences in actual syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic terms, although they seem to have similar usages formally. It is the result of changes in connection with each other.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 박덕준, "형식동사의 의미론적 접근" 31 (31): 1999
• 2 김의수, "형식동사 ‘이다’의 문법" 언어교육원 38 (38): 879-906, 2002
• 3 김선아, "현대중국어 형식동사 연구" 연세대학교 대학원 2002
• 4 조은경, "현대 중국어 '고'류 동사 연구" 연세대학교 대학원 2003
• 5 서정수, "동사‘하-’에 관한 연구" 연세대학교 1975
• 6 손경옥, "동사 '고(手+高)' 연구" 한국중국언어학회 15 : 93-122, 2002
• 7 刘正光, "语言非范畴化的工作机制" (1) : 2005
• 8 刁晏斌, "虚意动词“搞”的使用情况及其变化" 2015
• 9 袁杰, "虚义动词纵横谈" (2) : 1984
• 10 马庆株, "自主动词和非自主动词" (3) : 1988
• 11 蒋铭, "现代汉语虚义动词非范畴化现象与表现形式" 长沙理工大学 2013
• 12 刁晏斌, "现代汉语虚义动词研究" 辽宁师范大学出版社 2004
• 13 齐丽娟, "现代汉语泛义动词探析" 南京师范大学 2008
• 14 苗传江, "现代汉语动词例释" 北京师范大学出版社 2011
• 15 吕叔湘, "现代汉语八百词" 商务出版社 1980
• 16 杨亚楠, "泛义动词“做”、“干”、“搞”、“弄”的比较研究" 南京师范大学 2017
• 17 周刚, "形式动词的次分类" (1) : 1987
• 18 胡裕树, "动词研究综述" 山西高校联合出版社 1996
• 19 赫琳, "动词句同义句式研究" 崇文书局 2004
• 20 张春秀, "动词“搞”的句法、语义、语用分析" (3) : 2007
• 21 扬丽君, "动词“搞”在现代汉语中的语用考察" (2) : 2002
• 22 王健, "“干、搞、做”的词语搭配范围及其词义对比分析" (2) : 2002
• 23 홍연옥, "‘搞’의 문법화 연구-형식동사와 대동사 용법을 중심으로" 한국중국언어학회 (65) : 125-142, 2016
• 24 Hopper, P.J, "The Discourse Basis for Lexical Categories in Universal Grammar" (60) : 703-752, 1984
• 25 Hopper, P.J, "Grammaticalization" Cambridge University Press 2003