朴勝彬의 文法書에서 바라본 韓國語와 日本語의 文法 –品詞論을 中心으로 – (Korean and Japanese Grammar fromPark Seung-bin’s Grammar Books –With a Focus on the Theory of Word Class)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국어문교육연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 어문연구(語文硏究) / 53권 / 1호 / 41 ~ 67페이지
· 저자명 : 김주상

초록

본고는 박승빈의 1930년대 문법서의 품사론을 중심으로 한국어와 일본어의 문법을 비교하였다. 먼저 용언의 분류에서 박승빈은 한국어 용언을 동사, 형용사, 존재사, 지정사 4종으로 파악하였다. 그러나 일본어 용언은 존재사가 동사에 편입되고, 지정사는 조동사의 단어들이 담당하여, 동사와 형용사 2종으로 파악하였다. 형용사의 경우는 한국어나 일본어 모두 be 동사 없이 직접 서술어가 될 수 있다는 점에서 공통점이 있으나, 일본어의 형용사가 그 자체로 서술 기능과 체언 수식 기능을 모두 가지고 있음에 비해, 한국어 형용사는 그 자체로는 체언을 수식할 수 없기 때문에, 그 자체로 체언을 수식할 수 있는 단어들을 관형사로 설정하였다. 또한, 접속사는 한국어 고유의 접속 방법에서 조사를 통하여 단어나 구, 절 등을 접속하는 것이 자연스러웠기 때문에 별도로 설정할 필요가 없었는데 한문식이나. 외국어 문법이 수용되어 접속사를 설정해야 하는 상황이 왔으나, 결국 한국어 문장 구조에는 접속사가 적절하지 않음을 비판하였다. 마지막으로 박승빈은 조사를 체언조사, 용언조사, 별동조사로 나누고, 조용사는 일본어 조동사에 비해 시상, 태, 존경을 나타내는 특징이 있음을 강조하였다.

영어초록

This paper compares Korean and Japanese grammar, focusing on the word class theory in Park Seung-bin’s 1930s grammar book. In the classification of predicates, Park identified Korean predicates as four types of verbs, adjectives, existential predicates, and copula, whereas in the case of Japanese, the existential predicates were incorporated into the verbs, and the copula were in charge of the words of the auxiliary verbs, so Japanese terms were identified as two types of verbs and adjectives. In this regard, even in the Japanese grammar books of the same period, it was found that “ある”, which is generally the existential predicates of Park Seung-bin, was included in the verb and “なし” was included in the adjective. In the case of Yamada(1922/1926), “ある” was set as the existential predicates to classify the predicates into three types: verb, adjective, and existential predicates. In addition, Park said that there are “이스[is]” and “업스[eops]” in the Korean existential predicates, but it was shown that in Japanese, these two words and the meaningfully corresponding “ある” and “なし” cannot be grouped into one word class due to a difference in their conjugation. In addition, in the case of copula, it was argued that only one “이[i]” exists in Korean and there is no copula in Japanese. The reason is Japanese “だ”, “なり”, and “です” cannot be predicates, and because they are auxiliary verbs rather than predicates, it is not in line with the universal principle of language to exist without predicates in sentences. In the case of adjectives, both Korean and Japanese can have direct predicates that are not verbs, but while Japanese adjectives have both predicating and modifying functions in themselves, Korean adjectives cannot modify substantives by themselves, so words that can modify substantives by themselves were set as Gwan-hyeong-sa(adnominals). This is in line with the tradition of “언” set by Ju Si-kyung and inherited by his disciples. Also, considering Korean’s unique access method, it is natural for conjunctions to connect words, phrases, and clauses through Josa(postpositions), so there was no need to set up conjunctions specially. However, after the introduction of the Chinese, English, and Japanese systems of making sentences, a situation in which conjunctions had to be set arrived, but Park Seung-bin criticized that the conjunctions did not fit the sentence structure of Korean. Finally, Park devided Josa(postpositions) into a Che-eon-josa(postpositions for substantives), a Yong-eon-josa(postpositions for predicates), and a Byeol-dong-josa(special postpositions). In Hashimoto(1933/1934: 12-14), he found a part similar to Japanese postposions divided into first to third type, and emphasized Korean Joyongsa has characteristics of tense-aspect, voice, and honor comparable to Japanese auxiliary verbs.

참고자료

· 없음