Historical speaking, there is a long interchange between Korea and China. The two countries had a close association in history; especially the Chinese culture has a profound impact on its neighbor: Korea. Coupled with the increasing cultural exchanges... Historical speaking, there is a long interchange between Korea and China. The two countries had a close association in history; especially the Chinese culture has a profound impact on its neighbor: Korea. Coupled with the increasing cultural exchanges between Korea and China in recent years, academic exchanges also advanced by leaps and bounds. We can see the research of language universality has made great achievements. A comparative study on interrogative sentences in Korean and Chinese is ed here. Based on view points of Linguistic typology and comparative linguistics method, this research analyzes the similarities and differences of characteristics and functional properties in various types of Korean and Chinese interrogative sentences. This study will focus on several aspects of interrogative sentence like: its realization, its classification, and its characteristics. The following is the results from this study: 1. Through linguistic typology perspective, Korean interrogative sentence is mainly achieved by intonation, interrogative ending, and interrogative word. Interrogative intonation and interrogative ending are the main forms in Korean interrogative sentence. Chinese interrogative sentence consists ofinterrogative intonation, interrogative modal particle, and interrogative pronoun, 'X not X 'type, conjunction ' (yes) ... or'. Intonation belongs to phonologic category; the other two parts belong to morphologic and syntactic category. Based on the form of Phonology, Korean interrogative sentences can be implemented by the forms of morphologic and syntax. 2. By analyzing the features of Korean Interrogative endings and Chinese Interrogative modal particles, it is easy to find out their similarities and differences. (1). With regard to morphologic and syntactic functionality, Korean interrogative endings can not only terminate an article, but also achieve interrogative function. In accordance with the categories of endings, there are various combination forms in pre-final endings which include subject, person, predicate, tense and aspect etc. On the other hand, Chinese modal particle is just one of the empty words, it has nothing to do with the contents and structures of an article and it can only play the role in easing mood or adding some syntactic meanings. (2). Through the aspects of meaning and functionality, most of Korean interrogative sentences have honorific degree. So the interrogative endings not only implements mood function, but also implement honorific function. Chinese modal particles do not have such function. In Chinese the so-called honorific can only be achieved by several vocabularies. Korean mood is achieved by the variation of predicate, on the other hand, Chinese mood is achieved by modal particles, and the mood that was shown by modal particles does not represent that of predicate, but represents that of the whole article. 3. In order to analyze the characteristics between Korean interrogative endings and Chinese modal particles more clearly and explicitly, this study reconfigures interrogative index, i.e. abandons the traditional method whichcategorizes interrogative endings based on different honorific degrees. The index that this study has includes some interrogative endings which belongs to the same honorific degree and has higher frequency being used in real life. The reconfigured index is shown as follows: Simple questions: -아/어, -는가/은가, -나, (느)냐/(으)냐, -니 Intent questions: -을까1, -을래 Surmise questions: -을까2 Confirmed questions: -지 The main Chinese interrogative particles have several words like “吗, 呢，吧，啊”，“吗”is a kind of modal particle which has interrogative information. “呢，吧，韩语论文题目，啊” do not have such kind of information. However, the forms and functions are not consistent in language’s actual application. For example, some interrogative sentences have some functions other than interrogative, like invitation, command, and appreciation. This type of sentences have interrogative endings but do not have question functions. So there should have a unified method to categorize interrogative sentences. This study provides a general definition of interrogative sentence based on Searle’s theory(1969) which defined an interrogative sentence based on different conditions. Based on the perspective of Linguistic typology, this study discusses Korean and Chinese interrogative sentences. The previous studies mainly discussed the comparison of different types of interrogative sentences in their forms and characteristics. However the general researches of interrogative sentences have been poorly studied. So this study mainly discusses several areas which have not been studied, for example, it researches the way of implementation between Korean and Chineseinterrogative sentences,the comparative study between Korean interrogative endings and Chinese modal particles etc.
|
