러시아어 존재문의 의미구조: 소유와 질적 정체성의 문제 - у Х (есть) Y 구문을 중심으로 (The study of the possession and qualitative identification in Russian existential sentences - on the syntactical models of у Х (есть) Y)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국러시아문학회
· 수록지 정보 : 러시아어문학연구논집 / 49호 / 143 ~ 164페이지
· 저자명 : 백경희

초록

Existential sentence is considered as a general linguistic phenomenon of all languages, including the russian, construction of which has typical syntactical models у X(N2) + (есть) + Y(N1). Existential sentence represents generally existential, attributive, possessional, locative thesis. In the russian existential construction у X(N2) + (есть) + Y(N1), the proposition X(N2) refers not only the physical space, where the object exists, but also the subject(X), that possesses or experiences the object(Y). As compared to English, in russian existential construction the semantic phase of possessor(X) is passive and static, mostly the object(Y) functions actively, it comes into the space-possessor(sphere of subject). (cf. у меня есть книга I have a book.) So, this research have investigated the correlations between space-subject(X) and object(Y) in russian existential sentence. The Pragmatical and semantic meanings of EC are variative, according to usage of existential verb есть or not. It can be divided into usage of existential verb(EV) and omission of existential verb(∅EV).
I. Existential construction with EV: у X(N2) + есть + Y(N1) 1) EV construction signifies just presence of Y, assuming latently unrevealed possibilities of Y0, Y1, Y2...
ex) У вас есть дети? Do you have a child? 2) EV construction signifies just presence of Y, assuming latently unrevealed possibilities of Y(Y0, Y1, Y2...). One or some attributes of Y appear in reality. (Y, AY ⊂ Y0, Y1... Yplural, AYplural, anti-AY ). ex) У него есть седина. У него седые есть волосы. He has gray hair.
3) EV-construction signifies just presence of Y, assuming latently unrevealed possibilities of Y groups. Attribute of Y is partitive, one or some attributes of Y appear in reality, assuming latently unrevealed possibilities of Y(not-AY, AY, AY1, AY2, AY3...anti-AY, anti-AY2.). ex) У него есть хорошие друзья. he has some good friends.
4) The correlation between space-subject(X) and object(Y) in russian existential sentence is in fixed and stationary connection. Object(Y) is definitive factor, that prescribes the subject-possessor(X). ex) У горбатого человека есть горб.
II. Existential construction without EV: у X(N2) + Y(N1) 5) ∅EV construction focuses on the qualitative identification, the attribute, the category, the type of Y rather than its presences, which is previously presumed. Speaker is more interested in an attributive characteristic of Y. ex) У вас хорошие дети? Do you have good child? Your child is good? 6) ∅EV construction signifies the attribute of Y. All of Y are of the same attribute. ex) У него хорошие друзья. All his friends are good. ex) У него седые волосы. He has white (hoary) hair.
7) The correlation between X and Y in ∅EV construction is in temporary, unfixed connection. ex) У меня радость. I am glad(happy). cf.) *У меня есть радость. *I have happiness.
In conclusion, the study argues several aspects of space-possessor(X) and object(Y) to consider. First, according to correlation between X and Y, this study explores how the object(Y) exists in space(X). As stated above, EV construction signifies just presence of Y, assuming latently unrevealed possibilities of Y0, Y1, Y2... The modality of object(Y) assumed unrealistic aspect of numerous Y groups. One or some of Y emerged from latent possibilities of Y. Contrastively, ∅EV construction focuses on the qualitative identification, the attribute, the category, the type of Y rather than its presences. The modality of object(Y) presumed realistic aspect of Y. ex) Он неплохой человек, но у него есть мания величия. → space-subject(X) and object(Y) is in fixed and stationary connection. ex) Он нездоров. У него мания величия. → X and Y is in temporary, unfixed connection.
Second, it is noticeable that EV can't coexist with strong partitive(each, every, all). Because strong partitive (each, every, all) assumes every constituent unit, it may not represent some of Y. On the contrary, ∅EV construction signifies all attribute of Y. All of Y are of the same attribute.
Third, in comparison with typical EC, in ∅EV construction is weakened the meaning of existence. It is more interested in qualitative identification of Y (type or attribute of Y) rather than its presence. ex) В футляре скрипка. (Что в футляре? то, что лежит в футляре, скрипка). Further, it argued that EC(EV ∅EV) can be exponent to mark thematic 'topic' and informative 'comment'. It expands argument on theme and rheme of functional sentence perspective(FSP).
Further, this study argues that EV emphasizes the existence of Y, so it can't coexist with adverbial modifier of time (обстоятельство времени). Therefor, it can be with ∅EV or verb бывать. ex) *Сейчас есть занятие по химии и физике. cf.) Сейчас как раз идёт одно из занятий по русскому языку. In sum, it is expected that the analyses in this manner assure the logical condition of suggested proposition above, correlations between X and Y, their opposite factors (temporal-permanent, fixed–unfixed modality).

영어초록

Existential sentence is considered as a general linguistic phenomenon of all languages, including the russian, construction of which has typical syntactical models у X(N2) + (есть) + Y(N1). Existential sentence represents generally existential, attributive, possessional, locative thesis. In the russian existential construction у X(N2) + (есть) + Y(N1), the proposition X(N2) refers not only the physical space, where the object exists, but also the subject(X), that possesses or experiences the object(Y). As compared to English, in russian existential construction the semantic phase of possessor(X) is passive and static, mostly the object(Y) functions actively, it comes into the space-possessor(sphere of subject). (cf. у меня есть книга I have a book.) So, this research have investigated the correlations between space-subject(X) and object(Y) in russian existential sentence. The Pragmatical and semantic meanings of EC are variative, according to usage of existential verb есть or not. It can be divided into usage of existential verb(EV) and omission of existential verb(∅EV).
I. Existential construction with EV: у X(N2) + есть + Y(N1) 1) EV construction signifies just presence of Y, assuming latently unrevealed possibilities of Y0, Y1, Y2...
ex) У вас есть дети? Do you have a child? 2) EV construction signifies just presence of Y, assuming latently unrevealed possibilities of Y(Y0, Y1, Y2...). One or some attributes of Y appear in reality. (Y, AY ⊂ Y0, Y1... Yplural, AYplural, anti-AY ). ex) У него есть седина. У него седые есть волосы. He has gray hair.
3) EV-construction signifies just presence of Y, assuming latently unrevealed possibilities of Y groups. Attribute of Y is partitive, one or some attributes of Y appear in reality, assuming latently unrevealed possibilities of Y(not-AY, AY, AY1, AY2, AY3...anti-AY, anti-AY2.). ex) У него есть хорошие друзья. he has some good friends.
4) The correlation between space-subject(X) and object(Y) in russian existential sentence is in fixed and stationary connection. Object(Y) is definitive factor, that prescribes the subject-possessor(X). ex) У горбатого человека есть горб.
II. Existential construction without EV: у X(N2) + Y(N1) 5) ∅EV construction focuses on the qualitative identification, the attribute, the category, the type of Y rather than its presences, which is previously presumed. Speaker is more interested in an attributive characteristic of Y. ex) У вас хорошие дети? Do you have good child? Your child is good? 6) ∅EV construction signifies the attribute of Y. All of Y are of the same attribute. ex) У него хорошие друзья. All his friends are good. ex) У него седые волосы. He has white (hoary) hair.
7) The correlation between X and Y in ∅EV construction is in temporary, unfixed connection. ex) У меня радость. I am glad(happy). cf.) *У меня есть радость. *I have happiness.
In conclusion, the study argues several aspects of space-possessor(X) and object(Y) to consider. First, according to correlation between X and Y, this study explores how the object(Y) exists in space(X). As stated above, EV construction signifies just presence of Y, assuming latently unrevealed possibilities of Y0, Y1, Y2... The modality of object(Y) assumed unrealistic aspect of numerous Y groups. One or some of Y emerged from latent possibilities of Y. Contrastively, ∅EV construction focuses on the qualitative identification, the attribute, the category, the type of Y rather than its presences. The modality of object(Y) presumed realistic aspect of Y. ex) Он неплохой человек, но у него есть мания величия. → space-subject(X) and object(Y) is in fixed and stationary connection. ex) Он нездоров. У него мания величия. → X and Y is in temporary, unfixed connection.
Second, it is noticeable that EV can't coexist with strong partitive(each, every, all). Because strong partitive (each, every, all) assumes every constituent unit, it may not represent some of Y. On the contrary, ∅EV construction signifies all attribute of Y. All of Y are of the same attribute.
Third, in comparison with typical EC, in ∅EV construction is weakened the meaning of existence. It is more interested in qualitative identification of Y (type or attribute of Y) rather than its presence. ex) В футляре скрипка. (Что в футляре? то, что лежит в футляре, скрипка). Further, it argued that EC(EV ∅EV) can be exponent to mark thematic 'topic' and informative 'comment'. It expands argument on theme and rheme of functional sentence perspective(FSP).
Further, this study argues that EV emphasizes the existence of Y, so it can't coexist with adverbial modifier of time (обстоятельство времени). Therefor, it can be with ∅EV or verb бывать. ex) *Сейчас есть занятие по химии и физике. cf.) Сейчас как раз идёт одно из занятий по русскому языку. In sum, it is expected that the analyses in this manner assure the logical condition of suggested proposition above, correlations between X and Y, their opposite factors (temporal-permanent, fixed–unfixed modality).

참고자료

· 없음