Earticle

초록

영어

The purpose of this paper is, first, to point out the fact that there is a considerable amount
of disagreement between scholar’s definition about word in Korean and the general public’s understanding about word, who are engaged in Korean language teaching in general, and second to try to theoretically revise the definition of word on a realistic basis. To put concretely, this paper claims that the current 9 parts-of-speech system must be revised on the grounds of
ones as follows. First, the current 9 parts-of-speech are chosen based on misguided word functions. Second, there are no clear-cut standpoints available about the basic syntactic unit. The morphological criterion such as the minimal meaningful unit can no longer hold itself for the syntactic criterion. Syntactic criterion must be chosen strictly only by syntactic functions, not by
morphological units. Third, phonetic, phonological, morphological, syntactic, semantic, orthographic, and vocabulary words are all different. They are not interchangeable. Fourth, in a language like Korean being one of agglutinative language, the vocabulary word and syntactic word corresponds one to one in principle. Therefore, the existence of inflectional suffixes in Korean cannot be approved, which can only be approved on the ground of not being in
correspondence between vocabulary and syntactic word. Fifth, the so called conjugated body (e.g., mek-ess-ta) is not a syntactic word, but an orthographic word. And the orthographic word is not a member of syntactic units. Therefore, it is morphology where the orthographic words are formed not in syntax. Based on the aforementioned, I would claim that the current 9
parts-of-speech must be revised as follows; -the current 9 parts-of-speech: noun, pronoun, numeral, pre-noun, adverb, interjection, josa, verb, adjective -to be eliminated: pronoun, numeral, adjective -to be added: ending, idiom, collocation, light-verb-construction,
temporary-word-construction, temporary-idiom-construction (Dankook University)

목차

Abstract
 1. 서론
 2. 기존 단어의 정의
 3. 기존 단어 정의의 문제점
  3.1 단어의 기능적 분류가 잘못됐다.
  3.2 통사부의 기본 단위에 대한 입장이 없다.
  3.3 음성적, 음운적, 형태적, 통사적, 의미적, 정서법적(어절), 어휘적 단어는 서로 다른 것이다.
  3.4 활용어미 결합형(예, '먹었다')은 단어가 아니라 어절이다.
 4. 결론
 참고문헌

키워드

저자

• 한정한 [ Han, Jeonghan. | 단국대학교 ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 간행물명

  언어 [Korean Journal of Linguistics]

• 간기

  계간

• pISSN

  1229-4039

• 수록기간

  1976~2017

• 등재여부

  KCI 등재

• 십진분류

  KDC 710 DDC 195