Both in modern Chinese and Korean there exists some negative expression modes derived from negators themselves or by using some other words containing the inner negative meanings. In this the author will theoretically analyze the negative expression modes of the two languages and try to make a generalization about the similarities and differences between them. The conclusion will prove that the author’s effort may have broken with the convention in the research field on the above subject.
The conclusion is as follow:
First: There are two forms of negators in Korean:“안”(do not want to), and“못”（can not do）. But neither for lexicogrammar or for semantic differential, the word“말-”can not be put into the negative parts of speech, although it can be used to express the prohibition meaning, In Chinese，the negative words are“不”（not） and“?有”（no, none）,while the word “?”（do not want to）is a synthetic word containing the meaning of “不”(do not) and “要”（want）. So, this word can not be classified into the word group of negators. It is necessary to make a distinction between the two Korean words “안” and “못”. It is also very important to make some revision for the traditionally adopted terms of “negation by will” and “negation by ability”. And then a new classification standard for the terms of “negation by word” and “negation by will” should come to be set up. This can clear up the contradiction and ambiguity of the old classification method. By the way, it also can be taken to deepen and widen the analyzing of the Chinese negators “不”(not) and“?有”(no,none) and to break through the limitation of the “tense-dominating” research theory of the Chinese language. The newly created classification system is just based on the linguistic phenomenon-based on if the “action” has finished or if the “state” has been over.
Second: There are two modes of negative sentences in Korean language: the short negative sentence (in which a negator can be used before the predicate or after it), and the long negative sentence. The long negative sentence is formed by using the intrinsic suffix “-지”. This feature clearly embodies the characteristics of Korean as the agglutinating language. There is only one form of the negative sentence in Chinese. But the negative meaning can be realized by changing word order or by adding different kinds of complement, such as the complement of degree and the complement of possibility. This shows the characteristics of Chinese as an isolating language. Generally speaking, in agglutinating language, the grammatical meaning is completed by using connectives, while in the isolating language by changing the word order to realize the grammatical function.
Third: In history, the Korean once borrowed a large amount of Chinese words. Until nowadays, there are still many ancient Chinese negators surviving and still in use in modern Korean, such as the derivatives“无”(there is no), “非”(be not),“不”“not”and “未”(not yet). Of course, many of these borrowings have lost their original meanings, or have melted into Korean word formation. Take “무려, 무루, 물경, 물론” as examples. In ancient Chinese, these words once had the grammatical function of predicate. But when they were borrowed into Korean they specifically became adverbs. In modern Chinese, some ancient words are mainly taken as solitary words in sentences, but sometimes they still have the grammatical negation functions. This is because in isolating language, different words can be put together to represent the meaning of a sentence. But in Korean, the conjunction words “무（無）”，“비（非）”，韩语论文网站，“불（不）”,“미（未）” show us the characteristics of an agglutinating language as analyzed above.
Fourth: Both in Korean and in Chinese, negators are always used as the adverbs to modify and to restrict the predicate with negative meanings. But in Korean, a negator always has its particularly fixed position, and always binds to the predicate in the sentence. The negator is always placed at the last position of the adverbial phrase or clause. On the contrary, in Chinese, a negator can be used very freely and flexibly in a sentence. It can be placed not only in front of the adverbs, but also in front of the adverbial phrase or clause. It even can form the term of “preposition / noun” or “adjective / ly”. And it also can be acting in the sentence structure compromised by both the “complement of possibility” and the “complement of degree”, which are mainly used to modify the core predicate in order to emphasize the ability or degree. As to Korean, the position of a negator in a sentence is regularly fixed. It can be used to express the negative meaning up on the other complement parts of the sentence. It can be placed both in front of the part of complement or behind it. But in Chinese, although a negator can be used very freely and flexibly in a sentence, yet it can only express the negative meaning of the sentence element most directly and closely following it.
Conclusion:
Korean and Chinese belong to different language families. One is the agglutinating language while the other the isolating language. To make a deep analysis on the negative usage of the two languages in order to acquire a good understanding about the similarities and differences of them will undoubtedly be very helpful for learners to improve their command of the languages study.
|
