earticle

영어

This study contrasted the response relationship and constraints of the Chinese phrase ‘S+給+NP1+V+NP2’ between ‘给’ and Korean ‘에 게’. Both ‘给’ and Korean ‘에게’ have something in common that they can lead to the objects of grant, communication, or benefit, but there were also certain constraints on the response relationship. In order to clarify this constraint, this study first classified semantic items according to the following nouns and trailing predicates of the phrase ‘S+給+NP1+V+NP2’ and their semantic relationships. Based on this, this paper compares Chinese ‘给’ with Korean ‘에게’ and analyzes the differences between the two. As a result of the analysis, the correspondence between the two was affected by the following constraints. First, the correspondence is established if the object ‘에 게1’ and ‘给1’ are living beings. Second, when ‘에게1’ contains [+benefit] or [+transmission] positive semantics, it is impossible to communicate with ‘给2’ to each other. Third, when both the subject of action and the posterior object are living things, there is a correspondence between ‘에게3’ and ‘给5’. However, there is a difference in the meaning of ‘给5’ and ‘에게3’ in Korean. ‘给5’ has a function that emphasizes the posterior predicate, but ‘에게3’ in Korean does not have such a function.

중국어

本文针对汉语“S+給+NP1+V+NP2”句中的“给”与韩语“에게”的对应关系以及 约束条件进行了考察。发现汉语“给”与韩语“에게”的共同点是两者都可以诱导 一种“授予”、“传达”、“受惠”的对象,但在对应关系上存在一定的制约条件。为了进 一步阐明这一制约条件，本研究首先根据“S+給+NP1+V+NP2”句子的后置名 词和后置谓语以及它们之间的语义关系进行了分类。在此基础上，将汉语“给” 和韩语“에게”进行对照，并对两者的差异进行了分析。分析结果显示,两者的对 应关系受到以下制约条件的影响。 第一,“에게1”和介词“給1”所带宾语为有生物 时,对应关系成立。 第二,“에게1”含有[+受惠]或[+传达]的积极语义时，无法与 “給2”对应。 第三,行为主体与后置名词都为有生物时,“에게3”和“給5”存在对应 关系。但“給5”与韩语“에게3”在传达语义上存在强弱差异,介词“給5”具有强调后 置谓语的功能, 但韩语“에게3”没有这种功能。