This study investigates most frequently utilized Korean action verbs ‘go/ come’, ‘go up/down’, ‘grab/let go’ and their Chinese counterparts ‘qu/lai’, ‘shang/xia’, ‘jin/chu’ with technical analyses according to definitions in th...
This study investigates most frequently utilized Korean action verbs ‘go/ come’, ‘go up/down’, ‘grab/let go’ and their Chinese counterparts ‘qu/lai’, ‘shang/xia’, ‘jin/chu’ with technical analyses according to definitions in the dictionary. Based on such analyses, similarities and differences were found in the contextual meaning of the verbs in the two languages as well as how the counterparts correspond to each other. To clearly elucidate the similarities and differences of the action verbs, we used ‘Standard Korean Dictionary’ and ‘Dictionary of Our Language’ for Korean and ‘Xiandai Hanyu Cidian’ and ‘Xiandai Hanyu Babai Ci’ for Chinese, which are frequently used for linguistic educational purposes. Through comparing the listed meanings of the action verbs in the dictionaries, we sorted the similarities and differences in the literal definitions while also finding new, contextual definitions of the verbs based on how they’re actually used. The study is organized into six parts.
The first part is an introduction describing the research purpose, previous literature, and research methodologies and composition.
The second part introduces the theoretical background describing the definition of action verb, theory of comparative analysis in comparative linguistic studies, spread and interference, original definition and expanded definition.
The third part seeks out the similarities and differences in dictionary definitions and contextual definitions between action verbs ‘go/come’ in Korean and ‘qu/lai’ in Chinese. First, in contextual definition, these action verbs share definitions of ‘moving’, ‘displacement’, ‘entry’, and ‘arrival’, and ‘go’ and ‘qu’ show meanings of ‘extinction’ and ‘loss’ and ‘come’ and ‘lai’ show meaning of ‘generation’. However, these action verbs have complete correspondence with each other. They differ in contextual meaning as ‘go/come’ are associated with meanings of ‘breakaway’, ‘interest’, ‘marriage’, ‘continuation and progress’, ‘operation’, ‘alteration’, ‘consumption’, ‘elapse’, while ‘qu/lai’ are associated with meanings such as ‘do’, ‘get off’, ‘pleasure trip’, ‘go’. In Korean, there were more expansive definitions in ‘go’ than ‘come’, while in Chinese, ‘lai’ contained more definitions, although none had synthesis of time and abstraction.
The fourth part discussed ‘go up/down’ and ‘shang/xia’, which were not used in contexts of time but were used for meanings of entity, subject, and abstraction. First, in contextual similarities, the action verbs showed similarities in meanings of ‘movement’, ‘boarding’, and ‘entry’. ‘go up/down’ and ‘shang’ shared correspondence in meanings of “arrival’, ‘increase/ decrease’, ‘go up/down’ and ‘xia’ shared correspondence in ‘addition/ removal’, ‘entry/exit’. Moreover, ‘go up’ and ‘shang’ showed partial correspondence in meanings of ‘registration’ and ‘topic’ and ‘go down’ and ‘xia’ shared partial correspondence in ‘issuance’ and ‘deduction’. In contextual definition, ‘go up/down’ in Korean have shared meaning in ‘displacement’, ‘go up’ have additional definitions in ‘start’, ‘contagion’, ‘completion’, and ‘go down’ have definitions in ‘ termination’, ‘penetration’, and ‘synthesis. In contrast, ‘shang’ in Chinese have meaning in ‘going to work’, and ‘xia’ have additional meanings in ‘leaving work’, ‘production’, ‘occupation’, ‘utilization’, and ‘put’. There are more expansive definitions in ‘go down’ in Korean, and ‘xia’ in Chinese. In the expansive definitions depicted in Korean, there seems to be correspondence in ‘shang/xia’ of Chinese, but as auxiliary verbs instead of main verbs.
In the fifth part, the action verbs ‘grab/let go’ and ‘jin/chu’ were analyzed in four terms entity, subject, time, and abstraction. First, in contextual definition, these action verbs have similarities in meanings such as ‘entry/exit’, ‘arrival’, ‘inclusion’, ‘enlist’, ‘expression’, ‘production’, but again not in complete correspondence. The verbs contrasted in that ‘grab/let go’ had association in ‘move in/out’, ‘pregnancy/birth, ‘satisfaction/dissatisfaction’, ‘marriage,’ ‘service’, ‘inclusion’, ‘completion’, ‘development’, ‘appearance’, ‘start’, ‘elapse’, ‘generation’, ‘increase’, and ‘deduction’ while ‘jin/chu’ had association in ‘progress’, ‘accept’, ‘publication’, and ‘excess’. In contextual meaning, the Korean action verbs had more expansive definitions.
The 6th part is a conclusion including summary of the research, research significance, and future directions to cap off the investigation.
The outcome of this research contributes not only to education of Korean and Chinese language, but also in interpretation and translation of the two languages and publication of Korean-Chinese dictionary. But there needs to be more research on the following to have deeper understanding in the action verbs of Korean and Chinese. First, ‘go and come’, ‘go up/down’ and ‘grab/let go’ and ‘qu/lai’, ‘shang/xia’, and ‘jin/chu’ need further study in their symmetry and asymmetry. Second, these action verbs all have active use as auxiliary verbs, and thus the meaning of these words as auxiliary and linking verbs should be investigated.
|
