Auxiliary verbs of Korean and Japanese could be strategically designed or structured to intend to deliver certain sociopsychological backgrounds of the speaker. These auxiliary verbs appear in both languages with high frequency and considered as one o...
Auxiliary verbs of Korean and Japanese could be strategically designed or structured to intend to deliver certain sociopsychological backgrounds of the speaker. These auxiliary verbs appear in both languages with high frequency and considered as one of the most important and common part of daily linguistic practice.
Auxiliary verbs generally add grammatical meanings to the given sentence, of which many roles, especially the central issues of aspect, have been studied. Recently, some such studies include an interest in modality but only within the domain of general linguistics, not related to the crucial issues of what semantic roles, social functions or psychological effects the auxiliary verbs in sentences are accomplishing or aiming at. On the other hand, there has been in recent times a strong tendency toward a sociolinguistic analysis on contrastive studies of Japanese and Korean in regard to the ethnic context of consciousness, common sense, and communicative strategy displayed in language usage or habits.
However, what is important is not the data and graphs exhibiting the difference in linguistic behavior between the Korean and the Japanese people, but what communicative or psychological roles the auxiliary verbs of both languages play in social context. This dissertation aims at catching, analyzing and explaining such sociocontextual functions of the auxiliary verbs. To do so, it adopts pragmatics to reveal hidden sociopsychological features of auxiliary verbs in the way they are presented in each language and society. Pragmatics is a branch of linguistics investigating the dynamic union or relationship of semantic analysis and sociolinguistic analysis of the language given.
The purpose of this dissertation, thus, is first to unfold and analyze the previous studies on the auxiliary verbs of Korean and Japanese from the standpoint of contrastive linguistics through the employment of pragmatics, then to shed light on disparate features out of both languages. Pragmatics helps not only deal with the auxiliary verbs of both languages more comprehensively, but assess what semantic functions and what sociopsychological strategies such auxiliary expressions play in the scenes in which they are adopted.
There are three main standpoints regarding the Korean auxiliary verbs according to traditional grammar, generative grammar and grammatical meanings. But each researcher takes a slightly different position even within the same categorical standpoint, so there are various claims about the forms or types of auxiliary verbs. Nevertheless, there are a few types almost all researchers accept and acknowledge as standard auxiliary verb forms. They are ‘-eo bo-da’, ‘-eo ju-da(deuri-da)’, ‘-eo ga-da/o-da’, ‘-eo noh-ta/du-da’, and ‘-eo beori-da/nae-da’. In contrast with the Japanese auxiliary verbs, there could be matches or parings like ‘-eo bo-da’ with‘-temiru’, ‘-eo ju-da(deuri-da)’ with ‘-te yaru(ageru)/kureru’, ‘-eo ga-da/o-da’ with ‘-te iku/kuru’, ‘-eo noh-ta/du-da’ with ‘-te oku’, and ‘-eo beori-da/nae-da’ with ‘-te shimau’. These Japanese auxiliary verbs, like Korean counterparts, appear very often in use and have been the subject of numerous researches.
These five pairs are merely dictionary counterparts, though. This dissertation purports rather to explore difference in the detailed usage of the paired auxiliary verbs in Japanese and Korean to the extent that, for example, the Japanese counterpart of the Korean ‘-eo nae-da’ is not considered as an auxiliary verb but as the post-verb out of a compound verb, and sometimes it is regarded as the Japanese ‘-te yaru’ in some particular expressions. To take other instances, it can be observed that ‘-te yaru’ matches with ‘-eo beori-da’ while ‘-eo noh-ta’ pairs with ‘-te shimau’. These prove there are no exact one-two-one correlations, but one-two-two or two-two-one matches if the actual usage of the auxiliary verbs of both languages are closely examined and appreciated in their sociopsychological contexts.
，韩语毕业论文，韩语论文范文 |
