This research is looks into differences, similarities and related conceptualization of Chinese and Korean based on cognitive linguistics through semantic comparison of spatial terms in the two languages. Spatial concept is defined by cognitive ling... This research is looks into differences, similarities and related conceptualization of Chinese and Korean based on cognitive linguistics through semantic comparison of spatial terms in the two languages. Spatial concept is defined by cognitive linguistics as the foundation to express many concepts in languages. However, spatiality does not exist alone, it must be recognized by objects within it. Therefore, the description to the objects means the description to the spatiality. This research selects the spatial nouns which describe orientation of objects (such as ‘안/밖, 위/아래, 앞/뒤, 왼∼/오른∼’in Korean and ‘内/外, 上/下, 前/后, 左/右’ in Chinese) and the spatial adjectives which describe size of objects (such as ‘길다/짧다, 높다/낮다, 깊다/얕다, 멀다/가깝다, 넓다/좁다, 두껍다/얇다, 굵다/가늘다(잘다), 크다/작다’ in Korean and ‘长/短, 高/低(矮), 深/浅, 远/近, 宽/窄, 厚/薄, 粗/细, 大/小’ in Chinese) in Korean and Chinese to look into the correspondence relations and evolution mechanism of their prototype meaning and extended meaning. These terms’ prototype meanings which express spatiality are defined as spatial terms. They share common semantic features, such as spatiality, dimensionality, polarity though in different parts of speech. They need common standard in semantic expression to form a part of spatial semantics. At present, there are two main disadvantages in cognitive linguistics study on spatial terms in Korean and Chinese. First, regarding to research object, it only focus on isolate parts of speech, but not the comparative study of the whole spatial semantic system. Therefore, it shows limitations in examining the users’ spatial definition of Korean and Chinese. Secondly, regarding to range, it mostly focus on extending meaning, but rarely on the differences of prototype meaning. As lack of deep analysis on prototype meaning, the research of extending meaning is mostly related to the summary of target domain, not detailed evolution mechanism. This research selects spatial terms which describe orientation and size in Korean and Chinese to compare their prototype meaning, extending meaning and evolution mechanism. Meanwhile, in order to improve Korean spatial terms’ teaching to speakers whose mother language is Chinese, it analyzes problems of spatial terms teaching in three typical books which is widely used in teaching Korean in China and raises solutions of improving content and methods. The main researches are as follows: First, it analyzes comparatively prototype meaning of spatial terms from cognitive linguistics. It not only analyzes semantic features, but also features of nouns which collocate with. It discovers that the meaning and usages of these spatial are related to our bodily experience through analysis of prototype meaning. Rules of experientialism and anthropocentricism needs to obey in explanation of prototype meaning. Morphological character, function and observer’s way of recognizing also take effects. Secondly, it analyzes theory and evolution mechanism of spatial terms’ extending meaning based on comparative study of Korean and Chinese spatial terms’ prototype meaning by using cognitive linguistics methodology. It discovers that spatial terms’ extending meaning is related to our bodily experience. It is not the result of projection from all image schema to target domain, but the result of projection from a image schema to target domain. It concludes that evolution mechanism of extending meaning is the prototype meaning’s metaphor mapping of container schema, object schema, orientational schema. Both Korean and Chinese are using spatial terms to express feeling, time, abstract, value etc. but some are different in detailed target domain. The common expressions come from our same body structure and similar physical experience. But the differences indicate that Korean and Chinese use different spatial meaning to express similar target domain or use same spatial meaning to express different target domain. It dues to Korean and Chinese speakers’ different conceptualization to the same concept. Thirdly, it raises some advice on Korean spatial terms teaching to the learners whose mother language is Chinese based on result of semantic comparison of spatial terms in Korean and Chinese by using cognitive linguistics methodology. Spatial terms are not only highly frequent used, make semantic extension to many cognitive area but also take positive effects on vocabulary generation. Therefore, spatial terms teaching play important role in vocabulary teaching. The research discovers that spatial terms teaching does not form to be systematic, but focus on simple explanation of spatial terms in the text especially on prototype meaning by analysis on Korean textbooks. It does not consider learning discipline, meanwhile, lacks of semantic explanation of extending meaning and guidance of theory of semantic extending. The research raises solutions in four aspects. First, learners cognitive order must be considered in textbooks. Spatial terms should occur by the frequency of usage. Regarding to spatial terms which have various meanings, besides frequency of usage, achievements of extending meaning in cognitive linguistic should be considered. It means to study basic meaning in the elementary level and to grasp extending meaning in intermediate or advanced level. Second, in the explanation to Korean spatial terms, besides marks its Chinese meaning, semantic and usage difference should be added in case of eliminating negative transfer of first language. Third, it suggests to add extending meaning of spatial terms in textbooks and shows its orientation of semantic extending with examples. Forth, it suggests to use conceptual metaphor in the semantic guidance of spatial terms and explains with examples of teaching process. In conclusion, the research looks into semantic features in different spatial meaning, explores physical foundation and cognitive mechanism of extending evolution and reveals differences and similarities and related conceptualization between Korean and Chinese through comparison of spatial terms’ spatial and extending meaning. Meanwhile, it raises practical advice on Korean spatial terms teaching in terms of content and method. ，韩语论文网站，韩语论文 |
