Earticle

While kanji often correspond to similar sounds in both Japanese and Korean, sometimes dissimilar sounds occur due to consonants or various vowels. Therefore, systematic investigation of these correspondences is necessary for Japanese kanji education. Korean and Japanese have different consonants, resulting in differences in how kanji sounds are accepted. When consonants and kanji sounds are similar between Japanese and Korean, the sounds of the two languages ​​are similar. However, when the sounds of the kanji are different from those in Korean and Japanese are different from those in Korean, differences arise in how the sounds of the kanji are accepted in both languages. In other words, a single kanji sound is accepted as a different sound. Of course, since the sounds of kanji in Japanese and Korean reflect the original sounds of the kanji, even if there are slight differences between Japanese and Korean, they will generally be accepted as similar sounds. While the pronunciation is created in the same way, differences exist between the languages ​​due to differences in the number of consonants and vowels in each language and the unique development of pronunciation methods. There are differences in consonants and vowels between Japan and Korea, and different sounds exist; however, consonants are pronounced in the same way even if the position in which they are produced is slightly different, so they generally end up sounding the same or similar. Therefore, it is common for kanji sounds in both Japanese and Korean to appear as the same or similar consonants. However, if a kanji sound does not match a sound in Korean or Japanese, Korean and Japanese may accept that kanji as having different sounds. Furthermore, because phonology changes independently for each language, kanji sounds can change due to phonological changes in the native language, and the sounds of kanji in Japan and Korea can end up sounding differently. In this study, we have compiled a table of the correspondence between consonants and single vowels in Japanese and Korean kanji sounds, and described their characteristics in an attempt to prevent errors in the use of kanji in Japanese language education.

漢字は日韓両言語の間で類似した音で対応することが多いが、子音や多様な母音によって類似しない音で対応することもあり、日本語の漢字教育にはこの対応関係を体系的に究明することが必要である。 韓国語と日本語は子音が一致しないため、漢字音を受け入れるのに違いがある。日韓間の子音が類似し、漢字音も同様の場合は、日韓両漢字音は類似したものになる。しかし、漢字音が韓国語と同じではなく、日本語も韓国語と同じではない場合は、日韓両言語の漢字音の受け入れ方には違いが発生する。つまり、一つの漢字音を異なる音で受け入れるということである。もちろん日韓漢字音は漢字の原音を反映するものであるので、日韓間に若干の違いがあるとしても基本的には同様の音で受け入れることであろう。 発音が作られる方法は同じであるが、各言語の間に違いがあるのは、子音と母音の数が言語ごとに異なったり、発音の仕方が独自に発展するからである。日韓間には子音と母音に違いがあり、異なる音が存在するが、子音は音が作られる位置が少し違っても発音の仕方は同様であるので、大概は同じか類似した音になる。従って、日韓両言語の漢字音は同じかまたは類似した子音として現れるのが一般的である。しかし、漢字音が韓国語や日本語に一致する音がなければ、韓国語と日本語はその漢字を互いに異なった音として受け入れることもあり得る。また、音韻は言語ごとに独自に変化するものであるため、自国語の音韻変化によって漢字音が変化することもあり、日韓両漢字音は違う音になることもある。 本研究では日韓両漢字音の子音と単母音における対応関係を表でまとめた上でその特徴を述べ、日本語の漢字使用に誤謬が発生しないように試みた。

This paper focused on the single verbs and the compound verbs which can be replace by each other, and compared the meanings of these words according to the types of meanings expressed by the preceding verb ‘sasu’. We clarified there are four major types of meanings of the preceding verb ‘sasu’: (1) something happens that cannot be resisted, (2) to hold out in front of or toward the other party, (3) to indicate or instruct, and (4) to intervene. As for type (1), we considered ‘semaru, sashisemaru’ and ‘sawaru, sashisawaru’, and clarified the meanings of the compound verbs ‘sashi-’ are limited to which have the element “something that cannot be resisted approaches or happens”. As for type (2), we consider ‘noberu, sashinoberu’ and ‘dasu, sashidasu’, and clarified the meanings of the compound verbs ‘sashi-’ are limited to which have the element “in front of or towards the other party”. As for type (3), we consider ‘hiku, sashihiku’, ‘hikaeru, sashihikaeru’, ‘tomeru, sashitomeru’, ‘mukeru, sashimukeru’, and clarified the meanings of the compound verb ‘sashi-’ are limited to which have the elements “indicate a certain object” or “instruct the other party”. As for type (4), we consider ‘hasamu, sashihasamu’ and ‘kaeru, sashikaeru’, and clarified the meanings of the compound verb ‘sashi-’ are limited to which have the elements “break continuity” or “only the inside or between them while keeping the surroundings and before and after as they are”.

Japanese academia needs to reorganize its academic societies due to a sharp decrease in the number of researchers. To this end, it is necessary to reorganize dispersed researchers to an appropriate size through the method of improving the operating system of the current academic society and reform of the academic world. It requires internal reform and a realignment of the entire academic world. First, it is necessary to improve the system of holding large-scale international academic conferences twice a year and publishing academic journals with a large number of papers four times a year. Due to the nature of regional studies research, this academia is a system in which unrelated research fields are gathered in one academic society. Academic conferences are held at different times by dividing them into ‘language’ and ‘culture’ according to the major field, and the method of recruiting presenters is always prepared by inviting excellent researchers to present, providing good research methods for younger students. In addition, if an international conference is co-hosted, once as a domestic conference and once as an ‘international conference’, the size of the conference can be set with even a smaller number of presenters from one country; thus, high-quality international conferences can be held. In addition to promoting exchanges, the level of academic conferences can be greatly improved. The second is to reconstruct the academic world by integrating current societies by region or by field. This is to divide the country into 5 regions or to reorganize it into an academic society based on ‘language’ and ‘literature’ according to the nature of the major. From academic societies that can bring about integration, some joint work on academic conferences and publication of academic journals in the form of an alliance can be made, and integration bylaws can be created to achieve integration in a short period of time.

日本学界は研究者数の急減で学会を再整備しなければならない。そのためには、現学会の運営体系を改善する方法と学界改革を通じて分散している研究者を適切な規模に再編成しなければならない。内部の改革と学界全体の再調整が必要なのだ。 まずは、年2回の大規模な国際学術大会を開催し、年4回の大量の論文が載った学術誌を発行する体制を改善しなければならない。本学界は地域学研究の特性上、互いに関係しない研究分野が一つの学会に集まっている体制である。学術大会を専攻領域に合わせて｢言語｣と｢文化｣に分け時期を別にして開催し、発表者募集方法も優秀な研究者に発表を依頼する招待発表を常時的に準備し、後学に良い研究方法も提供できる大会を作るのである。 また、国際学術大会を共同主催し、国内大会と｢国際大会｣を交互に開催すれば、一国の少ない発表者でも大会規模も保て、質の高い国際学術大会を開催することができ、研究者の交流増進だけでなく、学術大会のレベルも大きく引き上げることができる。 第二に、現学会の地域別統合や分野別統合を行って学界を再構成することだ。全国を最大5つ程度の地域に分け、専攻の性格に応じて｢言語｣と｢文学｣を基本とする学会に再構成するのである。統合を引き出すことができる学会から連携して学術大会と学会誌発刊業務を一部共同で作業し、統合会則を作って短い時間内に統合を成し遂げることである。 最後に、学会の改革には研究者の自覚と実践が重要である。すべての研究者は1つか2つの学会の加入にとどまり、複数の学会で役員を務めることも控えなければならない。地域別または専攻別に新しい形態の学会を再設立し、研究者が自分たちの所属する学会でのみ活動する時、学会は適正規模の学会に再誕生し、研究者の学術活動が安定を齎すであろう。

This study set out to identify problems with the paper examination system of the Japanology circles and propose their improvement measures by reflecting on the nature of research in the Japanology circles and analyzing the examination materials of five years at 『Japanese Language & Culture』 that is the journal of Japanese Language & Culture Association of Korea. Problems with the current paper examination system stem from the uniform research management system due to the lack of understanding of the academic area, which does not produce many papers. Since they have to present a good number of papers through abnormal academic activities, the examination system by the association that manages them is run in irrational methods that only meet the form requirement. Since the National Research Foundation of Korea established the society management system, the Japanology circles have distorted their paper presentations. The present study discussed the nature of research that the Japanology circles should pursue and the methods to implement it in order to promote normal academic activities and improve the research environment. Furthermore, the study reviewed whether the composition of the editorial committee that managed the publication of 『Japanese Language & Culture』 was effective for fair examinations along with the regulations of paper submission and edition and the overall aspects from examination to publication. By analyzing paper contributors and examiners in the paper examination materials of 『Japanese Language & Culture』 for five years, the study specified the irrationalities of paper examination in objective data and proposed a paper examination system to supplement it.

本論文は日本学界の論文審査制度の問題点と改善案を提示するために、まず、日 本学界の研究の本質について省察し、韓国日本言語文化学会の学会誌『日本言語文化』 の五年間の審査資料を分析した。 現行の論文審査制度の問題点は学問領域に対する理解不足からくる画一化した研 究管理制度のために発生する。論文が多く出にくい分野であるのに、非常識的な学会 活動をし、多数の論文を発表しなければならないため、この過程を管理する学会の審 査制度も形式のみを揃えた非合理的な方法で運営されている。 韓国研究財団の学会管理制度が構築されてから、日本学界の論文発表の在り方が 歪められ、正常な学術活動及び研究環境の再考のために、日本学界の追究するべき研 究の本質とその遂行方法について述べた。 さらに『日本言語文化』 の発行を管理する編集委員会の構成、論文の投稿･編集規 定、審査から掲載に至る諸事項が公正な審査に有効に働いているかを検討し、また『日本言語文化』 に投稿された五年間(2015年~2019年)の論文審査資料から論文の投稿 者と審査者に対する分析を行い、論文審査の不合理性を客観的なデータで具体化し、 これを改善する論文審査制度を提案した。

The writing of Japanese in Korean is an important element influencing the provision of information and study of Japanese. The writing of カ行, タ行, バ行, and special phonemes in Korean causes the loss of the words’ discriminating functions, thus needing improvement. In the writing of か行 in Korean, the beginning is ‘ㄱ’, and the middle and end are ‘ㅋ,’ and it fails to show the differences between カ行 and ガ行. As a result, ‘ㅋ’ should come in the beginning, and ‘ㄲ’ in the middle and end. In the writing of タ行(タテト) in Korean, the beginning is ‘ㄷ’, and the middle and end are ‘ㅌ.’ This shows no differences between タ行(タテト) and ダ行(ダデド). It is thus needed to have ‘ㅌ’ for the beginning and ‘ㄸ’ for the middle and end. In the writing of チ in Korean, the beginning is ‘지’, and the middle and end are ‘치.’ The beginning should be ‘치’, and the middle and end should be ‘찌.’ In addition, ツ should be written as ‘쯔’ instead of ‘쓰’ in Korean. パ行 is written in ‘ㅍ’ in Korean, but its beginning should be ‘ㅍ’, and its middle and end should be ‘ㅃ.’ Prolonged sounds of Japanese are completely different from those of Korean, which calls for different marks. When consonant signs are not allowed in the management of Korean to write Japanese words in Korean, vowels should be introduced. In the case of 促音 (ツ), it should be written in Korean as‘ㄱ’ before ‘カ’行, ‘ㅅ’ before ‘サ,タ’行 and ‘ㅂ’ before ‘パ行 instead of ‘ㅅ’ all the time. The writing of 撥音(ン) should not be ‘ㄴ’ all the time. It should be written in ‘ㅇ’ before ‘カ,ガ,ハ’行, ‘ㄴ’ before ‘サ,ザ,タ,ダ,ナ,ラ’行, ‘ㅁ’ before ‘バ,パ,マ’行, and ‘ㅇ’ before vowels or at the end of a word. The writing of Japanese in Korean should be revised to have discrimination and reflect the original pronunciation of Japanese. In many parts, current Japanese can be written correctly in Korean, which raises a need for an urgent revision. Once revised, the writing of Japanese in Korean will contribute to the provision of information about Japan as well as the study of the Japanese language.

日本語の韓国語表記は情報伝達及び日本語の学習に影響を及ぼす重要な要素であ る。か行、た行、ば行及び特殊音の韓国語表記は言葉の識別機能を失いつつあり、改 善すべきである。 か行の韓国語表記は語頭が‘ㄱ’、語中･語尾が‘ㅋ’になっているが、が行との違いも 考慮し、語頭が‘ㅋ’、語中･語尾は‘ㄲ’にすべきであろう。 た行(たてと)の韓国語表記は語頭が‘ㄷ’、語中･語尾が‘ㅌ’になっているが、だ行と の違いも考慮し、語頭が‘ㅌ’、語中･語尾は‘ㄸ’にすべきであろう。 ちの韓国語表記は語頭が‘지’、語中･語尾が‘치’になっているが、語頭は‘치’、語中･ 語尾は‘찌’にし、つの韓国語表記は‘쓰’になっているが、‘쯔’にすべきであろう。 ぱ行の韓国語表記は‘ㅍ’になっているが、語頭が‘ㅍ’、語中･語尾は‘ㅃ’にすべきで あろう。 日本語の長音は韓国語と全然異なり表記しなければならないものである。韓国語 の運用に長音符合の使用が不可能ならば母音を入れて表記する。 促音は‘ㅅ’になっているが、‘か’行の前は‘ㄱ’、‘さ/た’行の前は‘ㅅ’、‘ぱ’行の前は‘ㅂ’ で表記する。 撥音は‘ㄴ’になっているが、‘か/が/は’行の前は‘ㅇ’、‘さ/ざ/た/だ/な/ら’行の前は ‘ㄴ’、‘ば/ぱ/ま’行の前は‘ㅁ’、母音の前や語末は‘ㅇ’で表記する。 日本語の韓国語表記は原音も反映し、弁別力も揃えたものに改訂しなければなら ない。日本語の韓国語表記は多くの部分が韓国語に正しく表記し直せるもので、それ だけに早急に改訂し、日本語の学習のみならず、日本に関する情報提供にも役立てる ものにしなければならない。

In Japanese, Sokuon and Hatsuon are two special sounds that are written in single characters and have different pronunciations according to the environment of their location. Single characters have diverse pronunciations, which is a universal phenomenon found in Korean as well. Two final consonants that look the same can be pronounced differently according to different methods of pronunciation even under the same environment, which points to a difference between final consonants in Korean and special sounds in Japanese. In Korean, final consonants make up a single syllable, which means that the entire syllable is pronounced as a sound. In Japanese, special sounds have two-beats. Although they seem to comprise a single syllable, in entirety, they are not pronounced in a single sound. As special sounds settled down in the pronunciation environment of Japanese with an open syllable structure, they developed different pronunciation characteristics from final consonants sounds in Korean. Korean people can acquire Japanese pronunciation quite accurately, but the two languages have no complete correspondence in terms of pronunciation. Special sounds in Japanese need to be taught more accurately to Korean learners in two aspects of ‘diversity of pronunciations’ and ‘length of sound’ so that they will acquire natural pronunciations. Sokuon and Hatsuon can be acquired right through the educational methods of providing accurate knowledge and promoting repetitive training to prevent interference from the mother tongue.

日本語の特殊音と言われる｢促音｣と｢撥音｣は、ともに一つの文字で表すが、位置する環境によってその発音が異なっている。いくつかの異音があるということである。一つの文字が状況によって多様な発音を持つのは韓国語においても存在する言語の普遍的な現象であろう。しかし、環境が同じであっても発音の仕方が異なっていれば、同じ音のように見えても異なった発音になることもあり、これが韓国語の終声(バッチム)と日本語の特殊音の間に存在する違いであろう。韓国人の日本語学習者において｢促音｣と｢撥音｣の発音教育は、この点をどういう理解でもって教えるかに関わっていると言えよう。 韓国語の終声は一つの音節を構成する要素であるだけに音節全体(CVC)が一つの音として発音されるが、日本語の特殊音(｢促音｣と｢撥音｣)はそれ自体が一つの拍という長さを持っており、一つの音節を構成する要素のように見えるが、実は全体(CVC)が一つの音として発音されないのである。特殊音の発音が開音節構造である日本語の発音環境の中で使われてきながら、韓国語の終声とは異なった日本独特の発音上の特徴を構築するようになったのではないかと考えられる。 韓国人において日本語の発音はほぼ完全か形で習得できる言語であるが、日韓両言語の発音が完全に対応しているわけではない。特に、韓国人学習者には 日本語の特殊音を｢発音の多様性｣と｢音の長さ｣という韓国語にない発音上の二つの特徴を踏まえた上で、正しく教育しなければ自然な発音を習得させることはできないであろう。両言語の真の違いに基づいた正確な知識の提供と母国語の干渉が排除されるような反復的な練習こそが｢促音｣と｢撥音｣を正しく習得させられる教育方法であろう。

The pronunciation of consonants depend on whether they are used alone or in relation with their preceding letters. When pronounced under the influence of a preceding letter, consonants tend to be pronounced in fortis. In general, ‘か’ and ‘た’ in the middle or end of a word are pronounced in fortis unlike those at the beginning of a word. Even the same word can be pronounced differently according to the way it is read. When a word is read with a pause between its syllables, even the letters in the middle or end of the word are pronounced like the letters at the beginning. Positions at the beginning, middle, and end of a word determine whether the pronunciation of a letter is under the influence of its preceding letter. The pronunciation of voiceless ‘か’ and ‘た’ sounds are influenced by their positions, but those of voiced ‘か’ and ‘た’ sounds are not influenced by their positions and can be pronounced ‘ㄱ’ and ‘ㄷ’ like ‘g’ and ‘d’ and should not be pronounced ‘ㅋ’ or ‘ㄲ’ and ‘ㅌ’ or ‘ㄸ,’ respectively. Even when they are pronounced ‘ㄱ’ and ‘ㄷ,’ their pronunciation should be heavy and not strong. The pronunciation, ‘か’ and ‘が’ sounds correspond to ‘ㅋ’ and ‘ㄱ’ sound, and ‘た’ and ‘だ’ sounds correspond to ‘ㅌ’ and ‘ㄷ’ sounds. In the phonological aspect, however, their phonetic values do not correspond one-on-one. There are subtle differences in the sound band between ‘か’ and ‘た’ and ‘ㅋ’ and ‘ㅌ’ and between ‘が’ and ‘だ’ and ‘ㄱ’ and ‘ㄷ,’ which means that a good understanding of the differences is required for accurate pronunciation. Compared with ‘ㅋ’ and ‘ㅌ’ in Korean, ‘か’ and ‘た’ sounds have weaker ‘k’ and ‘t’ elements. That is, ‘ㅋ’ and ‘ㅌ’ should be pronounced a little weaker for ‘か’ and ‘た’ for their original pronunciation. ‘ㅋ’ and ‘ㅌ’ have a stronger pronunciation than the original sounds of ‘か’ and ‘た,’ and ‘ㄱ’ and ‘ㄷ’ have a weaker pronunciation than their original sounds. ‘か’ and ‘た’ sounds are between ‘ㅋ’ and ‘ㄱ’ and between ‘ㅌ’ and ‘ㄷ,’ respectively. In addition, ‘が’ and ‘だ’ sounds are also close to ‘ㄱ’ and ‘ㄷ’ in Korean, but the strong pronunciation of ‘ㄱ’ and ‘ㄷ’ cannot reflect the accurate pronunciation of ‘が’ and ‘だ’ sounds. One can pronounce ‘ㄱ’ and ‘ㄷ’ comfortably for ‘が’ and ‘だ’ sounds in the middle or end of a word, but ‘が’ and ‘だ’ sounds at the beginning cannot be reflected simply by ‘ㄱ’ and ‘ㄷ.’

子音の発音は単独で発音されるかそれとも前の字との関係の中で発音されるかによって変わる場合がある。前の字の影響を受けて発音される子音は濃音になる傾向があるが、｢か｣行と｢た｣行の音は、語頭ではなく語中･語尾に位置すると濃音に発音されやすくなる。同じ字でもこれをどう読むかによって発音が変わったりするが、単語を音節単位に切って読むと、語中･語尾に位置する字でも語頭に位置する字のように読むことがある。結局、語頭に位置するか、語中･語尾に位置するかは前の字の影響を受けるか受けないかを意味するのだと言えよう。 無声音である｢か｣行と｢た｣行の発音は位置に影響を受けるが、有声音である｢が｣行と｢だ｣行は位置に影響を受けず、｢g｣｢d｣のように韓国語｢ㄱ｣｢ㄷ｣として発音すればいいが、｢ㅋ/ㄲ｣｢ㅌ/ㄸ｣として発音してはいけない。但し、｢ㄱ｣｢ㄷ｣といっても強くならないようにやや低くて重そうな感じで発音する。 ｢か｣行と｢が｣行、｢た｣行と｢だ｣行の発音を｢ㅋ｣と｢ㄱ｣、｢ㅌ｣と｢ㄷ｣の発音に対応させるが、音韻論的な面からしてこれらの音価が一対一と対応しているとは言えない。｢か｣行｢た｣行と｢ㅋ｣｢ㅌ｣、それから｢が｣行｢だ｣行と｢ㄱ｣｢ㄷ｣が微妙に音の領域を異にし、その発音の違いを理解しなければ正確な発音はできない。 ｢か｣行と｢た｣行は韓国語の｢ㅋ｣と｢ㅌ｣に比べ｢k｣と｢t｣の要素が弱い。つまり、｢か｣行と｢た｣行は｢ㅋ｣과｢ㅌ｣をやや弱めに発音しなければ原音に近く発音できないということである。｢か｣行と｢た｣行を韓国語の｢ㅋ｣と｢ㅌ｣のように発音すれば原音より強く聞えるし、｢ㄱ｣と｢ㄷ｣のように発音すればやや弱く聞え、｢か｣行と｢た｣行は｢ㅋ｣と｢ㄱ｣、｢ㅌ｣と｢ㄷ｣の間の音である考えなければならないであろう。 また、｢が｣行と｢だ｣行も韓国語の｢ㄱ｣と｢ㄷ｣に近いが、これも｢ㄱ｣と｢ㄷ｣を強く発音しては｢が｣行と｢だ｣行を反映することが難しい。｢が｣行と｢だ｣行が語中･語尾に位置する場合は｢ㄱ｣と｢ㄷ｣として発音してもかまわないが、語頭に位置する｢が｣行と｢だ｣行は｢ㄱ｣と｢ㄷ｣として単純に発音してはいけないのである。

Verbal expression is a direct means of affecting people, and the value of humanities is also embodied via language. By using language, people can move the hearts of others and deliver a desirable and positive image. When proper language education is provided to help members of the society use language to respect one another, they will be able to fight less and build a mature and sound society. There are vast changes happening in the use of the Korean language including the decline and misuse of honorifics, the universalization of status words, the generalization of feminine expressions, the rising frequency of blunt remarks, the increase of improper uses of English words, and the expanding of wrong words, expressions, and reading by punctuation. This study set out to examine the meanings of language education and propose instructions for three areas influencing language education: home, broadcasting media, and school in order to prevent the society from facing undesirable changes due to the wrong use of language based on the actual state and evaluation of Korean uses. An analysis of the Korean language through various cases would present more accurate uses of the language to Korean language learners; thus, promoting their accurate and natural understanding of the language as foreigners and offering some useful clues to the research of the language. Both the Korean and Japanese languages are moving along the same path of changes. It will be essential to make research efforts for the contrast and comparison of changes to these languages.

There is considerable similarity in the grammar structure and linguistic form between Korean and Japanese, but their corresponding relations are complex due to both similarities and differences in the end of sentence form such as “Noda” and “Wakeda” that are modality forms. It is difficult to figure out the meanings of grammar forms right in which there is no one-to-one correspondence between Korean and Japanese and further not simple at all to translate them. Unless there is the right understanding of semantic differences between “Noda” and “Wakeda,” both of which exhibit a mental attitude, it will be difficult to translate them into Korean clearly. The judgment will depend on whether to take a linguistic perspective that translation should reflect the meanings of every word clearly or a practice one that translation should suffice to deliver overall meanings. There is, however, a basic need to be loyal to vocabulary during translation even in the position that translation should suffice to deliver meanings. If there is, in particular, the intention of the speaker(writer) that has chosen the form, his or her intention should be respected. The translations of “Wakeda” into Korean have been arbitrary mostly, and its original meanings have not been reflected right in many cases. There may be many different ways to translate it, but its translations into Korean must reflect its meanings of conclusion, understanding or substitution in order to convey its meanings correctly. It is necessary to make use of sentence-ending particles, adverbs, conjunctions, and exclamations to accompany “것이다” in the translation of “Wakeda” into Korean as well as “것이다” alone. If one assumes there will be no big differences in Korean sentences according to its translation and accordingly chooses to omit its translation in moderation or be liberal with its translation, he or she will fail to convey the intention of the speaker(writer) and contribute to the decreased literary value of literary works through the simplification of its meanings.

Japanese and Chinese are completely different languages with different grammar. There are words that was borrowed from China to Japan or borrowed from Japan to China. They was seem that their meaning expands, narrows, changes such as meaning shifts as time goes on. So Just writing as same words can not be said to be the same. The Chinese corresponding to the Sino-Japanese is quite the cases that were not change homotype, but were change heteromorphy. Therefore, the correspondence between the two languages needs to be clarified. Especially, on the relation of confrontation of Sino-Japanese and chinese, the case of verb that is ｢verb+verb｣ type has the preceding and following verb is used in the same sense such as ｢gakusyu-suru｣and the two verbs: a preceding and following verbs are used in the other sense such as ｢syoutai-suru｣. So the semantic and grammatical relationship of the components makes the two languages correspond differently. The former corresponds to Chinese of the homotype generally. However, the meaning of a verb is expanded or reduced. It shows the difference between verbs and predicates, and it may also correspond to heterosexual verbs. The latter corresponds to Chinese of the heteromorphy. It is seem the context and the causal relationship generally. If there is no semantic difference between the two verbs, the same type of Chinese correspond to the Sino-Japanese verb in the context. But, if there is semantic difference between the two verbs, the semantic and grammatical role of components is different. So, because the location of each component and the main role of the verb will be different, it gets the heteromorphy.

To study the Japanese-to-Korean translation of “uchi- (打ち-),” a compound verb by the first word, a preceding understanding of “打つ (utsu)” must be provided: on each of its semantic meaning as a verb and as a part of a compound verb. The compound verbs that take “打ち- (Uchi-)” as the first word can be indexed into four categories, depending on the word structure. Among the four types, the “verb+verb” form and the “prefix+verb” form are the focus of this analysis given the inaccuracy of the Japanese-to-Korean translation of such types. In translating the “verb+verb” form, there were cases in which the compound verb by the first word “打ち- (Uchi-)” was translated into “쏟아” (to pour), “밀려” (to be pushed), or “때려” (to strike), resulting in simplified sentential meanings that do not reflect the height of strength or force. In case of the form “prefix + verb,” there were many cases in which the emphasizing meaning of the prefix was overlooked. Simplified or erroneous translation of semantic meaning must be avoided. It is important to express the author’s intentions as appropriately as possible, and the translator ought to neither rearrange nor omit based on her subjective judgment. The Japanese-to-Korean translation of the compound verb “打ち- (Uchi-)” can sufficiently reflect the original meaning by attaching phrases such as adverbs that indicate degree.

The Sino-Japanese Verbs of [V+N]type can be used some section that relative the noun element or cannot it. In the case, but, the Chinese of [V+N]type can’t be usually used it. In the result, the equivalent words of [V+N]type are varied between the Sino-Japanese Verbs and the chinese. In the sentence with not an indirect object(the ni case) or a direct object(the wo case), Sino-Japanese Verb and the Chinese can be used same letters(alphabets). In the sentence with an indirect object(the に case) or a direct object(the wo case), however, Sino-Japanese verb and the Chinese cannot be used same letters. At a time like this, the Chinese system is had an independent structure is ｢ba＋something＋VN｣ type, which is the object before the verb. There are the verbs of [V+N] type in Chinese. one case can be used like a vocabulary, another case needs a kind of new noun ,which is an indirect object(the ni case) or a direct object(the wo case). The other case, it equals the Sino-Japanese Verb. The equivalent for the word is varied since the diverseness makes a start to the difference of the meaning and the grammar between two languages. That is, the Chinese language rarely gets the section in sentence , the Japanese language has a unique sentence structure and the letters of Sino-Japanese are not always same the china alphabets. I think to needs the study is some inconsistency between the Sino-Japanese Verb systems of [V+N] type and its grammar. Accordingly I should study the point later.

In general, “WAKEDA” represents a conclusion that is drawn as something natural from a ground. It takes the form of “WAKE” in interrogative sentences during conversations, and “WAKE” has different forms and meanings from “WAKEDA” in such a case. Previous studies reported that “WAKE” in the interrogative form had no semantic differences from “WAKEDA” representing the concluding, convincing, and paraphrasing nature. “WAKEDA” is originally a form to state a conclusion drawn from certain objective information or a fact concluded from some information. It is not used in cases of raising a question about something. Discussed in the study, “WAKE” represents the negative feeling of the speaker in the form of doubt inherent in an interrogative sentences when he or she draws a natural conclusion from the statement, attitude or act of the listener during a conversation and is not convinced of the conclusion. “WAKE” in interrogative sentences can be understood as the noun “WAKE” from a morphological perspective, but it represents making a connection from a semantic perspective. Its polite version is “Wakedesuka”, and its normal version is “WAKE”, based on which it is estimated that “WAKE” with the interrogative postposition “Ka” omitted is used as an interrogative form in interrogative sentences with the normal version. At a first glance, it may seem logically contradicting to express a fact concluded as something natural from the information that already exists in the form of interrogative sentences, but the interrogative form of “WAKE” is not to express a result accepted as something natural but a strong feeling of doubt that the speaker has about the result.

In Japanese language, Sino-Japanese verb is made of Chinese character and suffix [suru]. Generally Sino-Japanese verb can be explained by corresponding to its homologous character in Chinese. However Sino-Japanese verb can be translated in various ways. Depending on the grammar of homologous character [suru] can be abbreviated. Homologous character of Sino-Japanese function not only verb but also as noun. It’s common to see that in certain cases homologous character of Sino-Japanese verb in Chinese is not a verb. Generally in Japanese and Chinese [suru] corresponds to Chinese verb [zuo]. Meanwhile [zuo] can translated in other verb such as [da], [xia], [qu], [chuan, shenzhuo] and [jinxing] etc. Verbalized [suru] implies events, behaviors and actions as causative verb. In addition, it functions as suffix to verbalize nouns leading to wider applications. Chinese [zuo] corresponded to [suru] mean of behaviors and actions are used more than a suffix. In the case of Sino-Japanese as transitive verb, its homologous Chinese character can be used independently without [zuo] but [da], [xia], [qu], [chuan, shenzhuo] and [jinxing] etc . Involving grammer and meaning aspects, the differences between Japanese and Chinese are clear. It’s not well explained until now so studies are important for comprehensive understanding.

The thesis says a study of the replacement possibility about ｢wakeda｣ & ｢hazuda｣ and the semantic relation as ｢wakeda｣ replaces with｢hazuda｣, vice versa. ｢wakeda｣is an expression concluding a definite fact and｢hazuda｣is an expression conjecturing an unrisen or uncertain fact. The two expressions cannot be replaced to do generally, because it’s unnatural if sure judged something is used as conjecture. However, the thesis finds similar cases about the two expressions on the base of assurance. In brief, it’s possible, that the conclusion cases show the conjecture cases. In these cases have the replacement possibility. In case that the relations between P and Q don’t have difference in meaning, ｢ wakeda｣ & ｢hazuda｣ can show from a concluded expression to a conjectured expression. A concluded expression and conjectured expression appear subjective judgements. In case to select anything but the results are same, the two expressions are close in meaning. As ｢wakeda｣&｢hazuda｣is accepted, it’s possible to exchange each other because the two types are close. The concluding a definite fact and the conjecturing an unrisen or uncertain fact are not close expression. Consequently, there are a little bit similarities. The exchange of ｢wakeda｣ & ｢hazuda｣ is characteristic meaning. The exchange of ｢wakeda｣ & ｢hazuda｣ that show causes and results and so on has separate meaning.

｢わけだ｣文は、関連づけを表し、一般的に関連づけられる先行文との関係からその意味が捉えられる。しかし、｢わけだ｣文と関連づけられる先行文が直接に現れていない場合があり、それが「わけだ｣文の特殊な意味を表すものとして扱うべきかの問題がある。また、｢わけだ｣文が表す当然な帰結とは客観的に位置づけられるものであるが、それが主観的に位置づけられる場合などがあり、先行研究の捉え方からでは｢わけだ｣文の意味を正しく捉えられない。本稿では、先行文が直接に現れていない「わけだ｣文の意味を捉えるために、先行文というものをどう位置づけるべきかについて記述した。また、話し手が主観的に位置づける「わけだ｣文の意味を捉えるために、先行文から導き出される当然な帰結という意味をどう解釈すべきかについて記述した。｢先行文｣というのは「わけだ｣文になるための情報や根拠として働いていればよく、つまり、何かの文脈であってもよいのであって、それが「先行文｣として「わけだ｣文の前に存在する必要は必ずしもないのである。文脈とは、明示的に現れていない事実でも、一般に通用する常識でも、かまわないのであって、こうした文脈も「わけだ｣文の先行文としての役割を充分に果たしうると考えられる。また、｢わけだ｣文における帰結過程とは、客観的な外部の情報から導かれるのが一般的であるが、話し手の内部の情報、つまり、話し手の経歴や経験などから導かれる場合もあり、話し手が自分に関する事柄を述べる際に「わけだ｣文が用いられるのであると考えられる。

「わけだ」文の意味はまだ明らかにされていないところがあり、外国人学習者の中にはその使い方が難しく、使用頻度が落ちるどころか誤用例を探すのも難しくない。その意味さえ正しく捉えられていない「わけだ」文が「からだ」文と同じような意味を表し、両形式間における混同が生じる場合もあり、本稿ではその意味の違いを明らかにすることを試みている。類似した文法形式の意味の違いを究明するのはそれほど簡単なことではない。理由を表す形式の場合も同様であり、これらの形式間に存在する意味の違いを明らかにするのは極めて難しいことである。本稿では、理由を表す文に「からだ」ではなく「わけだ」を使い、間違った使い方をする外国人学習者の誤用例から、「からだ」文と「わけだ」文が表す理由の意味の違いについて考察した。「わけだ」文が表す理由は、対象から納得し、それを理由として位置づけたもの、つまり、話し手が何か認識の過程を経て位置づけたまさにモダリティの形式であり、そのような認識․納得の過程のない直接的な理由を表す「からだ」文とは異なっている。納得の形として提示した理由の文でないと「わけだ」が用いられることはない。納得の形で提示した理由の文、つまり「わけだ」文は「からだ」文に置き換えられるが、その「からだ」文は「わけだ」文が持っているモダリティ的な意味はなく、単なる理由を表す文になってしまう。

「時の表現」は事象が状態を表すか、それとも動きの成立を表すかによってその意味が決められる。動きの成立に用いられる動詞も、それがどの事象に用いられるかによって、動きの成立はなく、動的な状態が事実として位置付けられる場合があるのである。このような場合、動き動詞は状態動詞化し、「ル」形で現在を表すようになるのである。 文の状態性は「時の表現」を決定するのに関係する事象である。 しかし、この状態性は、動詞だけでは決められず、様々な要素から構成される事象の意味によって決められる。つまり、文は動詞自体の意味としてではなく、文全体の意味として「時の表現」に関係するのである。事象が、状態を表すか、動きの成立を表すかは、動詞だけの問題ではない。動詞は文中での使い方を考えなければならないので、動詞が「時の表現」の意味と形式を決める絶対的な要素にはならないということである。 動きの成立を表す動詞が恒時的な事象に用いられると、動詞は事象レベルで考えなければならないため、状態を表すものとして位置づけられるのである。こういう場合の動詞は、状態動詞化文を構成するので、「ル」形で現在の状態を表す表現になる。