Classifier in Korean is what called “quantifier” in Chinese. This common term exists
in most nowadays languages, even though with various names. In general, Korean vocabulary is divided into three groups: vocabulary deriving from Chinese, inhe...
Classifier in Korean is what called “quantifier” in Chinese. This common term exists
in most nowadays languages, even though with various names. In general, Korean vocabulary is divided into three groups: vocabulary deriving from Chinese, inherent Korean vocabulary, and vocabulary deriving from other foreign languages. Correspondingly, Korean classifier falls into: classifier deriving from Chinese, inherent classifier in Korean, and classifier deriving from other foreign languages. The first group: classifier deriving from Chinese is the main content of this article. Even though originating from Chinese, its usage and domain has changed tremendously under the various cultural influences during hundreds of years. Therefore, this article aims to
research developments, changes and features of Korean classifier, by comparing the examples and analyzing the usage and domain in both Korean and Chinese existing
historic references.
Of nine chapters, chapter 1 presents research objective, reviews the prior research of classifier in Korean and Chinese and introduces research materials and method.
Chapter 2 analyzes classifier’s systems in both Korean and Chinese. First, discuss the definition and name of classifier in Korean and Chinese. Then, compare completed research of subtypes of classifier in Korea and China. Finally, organize and categorize classifier deriving from Chinese. Rather than use any existing research method to analyze subtypes of Korean classifier, this article divides this term into two groups: entity classifier and event classifier, by referring to classification of noun. Entity classifier consistsof: human, animal, plant and individual(entity without life), and event classifier is same as verbal quantifier in Chinese. However, Korean verb is quite different from Chinese verb. The former is composed of action verb and status verb. Action verb is describing a concrete motion, such as “eat, drink, look” but status verb equals to Chinese adjective, such as “pretty, deep, high”. Based on the feature of Korean verb, this article divides event classifier into: that related to action verb, such as “番，次，回”, and that related to status verb, such as “丈, 尺, 秒”, which is excluded this time as it is more like measure quantifier.
As this article is a historic research, it is crucial to divide lingual developments in Korean and Chinese with accepted criteria. The phrases of Korean include: ancient
Korean before 9th century, early middle ages Korean between 10th and 13th century, late middle ages Korean between 14th and 16th century, modern Korean between 17th and 19th centry and contemporary Korean after 20th century (source: 李基文『国语史概论』). In Chinese, some classifiers occurred in the Pre-Qin Period, but abundant classifier with clear functions did not prevail until the Northern and Southern Dynasties (source: 刘世儒『魏晋南北朝量词』).
From chapter 3 to 7, the article depicts more detailed comparisons about 4 subtypes ofentity classifier and classifier related to action verb (belonged to event classifier). The research of humanity classifier (the first subtype of entity classifier) centers around “名，个，介，位，员”. The research of animality classifier revolves around “头，匹，首，尾”. The research of plant classifier is mainly about “茎, 根, 本, 株，朵”. About individual classifier that occupies the largest proportion, its research revolves around “件，枚，張，副，部”. When doing research about classifier related to action verb (one subtype of event classifier), the focus is on “番，次，回” which are used most frequently.
Based on the comparative analyses in the last five chapters, chapter 8 summarizes the developments of Korean classifier and generalizes the changing process and features of Korean. It is universally acknowledged that Korean classifier deriving from Chinese has Chinese root, and some usage is the same in both languages. Yet, some usage is quite different from those Chinese classifier, and even impacts the latter. This could attribute to the appearance of inherent “训民正音” and Korean classifier.
Restricted by the length, this article does not accomplish the comparative research of all Korean classifier deriving from Chinese. The flowing research will focus on establishing appropriate subtypes of individual classifier and continuing all-aspect surveys on depth.
|
