´ëÇѾð¾îÇÐȸ ÀüÀÚÀú³Î

´ëÇѾð¾îÇÐȸ

28±Ç 4È£ (2020³â 12¿ù)

Á¦ÁÖ Çѱ¹¾î¿¡¼­ÀÇ ¹Ýº¹ ºÎ»ç¾î ¸ðÀ½ º¯ÀÌ ¿¬±¸

°­¼®ÇÑ

Pages : 1-28

DOI : https://doi.org/10.24303/lakdoi.2020.28.4.1

PDFº¸±â

¸®½ºÆ®

Abstract

Kang, Seokhan. (2020). A study of vowel variations in the adverb reduplication of Jeju Korean. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 28(4), 1-28. In the emphatic reduplication of Jeju Korean which implies emphatic meanings, a vowel change takes place as a form of total reduplication. It is argued that vowel variations in the reduplication occur through both changes in vowel quantity and quality, using the extended duration of nuclear syllables and wider formant differences between F1 and F2. To provide the morphological evidence, 512 reduplicative adverbs have been checked and then divided into two forms: basic and emphatic. The forms are classified into two groups depending on the direction of vowel change: height and frontness. To demonstrate the direction of the phonological change, speech experiments have been carried out for ten native speakers of Jeju Korean over 60 years old. The analysis focuses on the principal features of acoustic/phonetic signals, namely, the fundamental frequency (Hz), intensity (dB), formant structure of F1 and F2, the duration of vowels, and the syllable nucleus. Out of six acoustic cues, formant structure (F1 and F2) and duration of the syllable-nucleus show statistical differences between the basic and emphatic reduplicants. The results imply that adverb reduplication, in the case of Jeju Korean, uses the perceptual effects through mora extension for acoustic quantity and rhythmic realization for vowel quality.

Keywords

# ¹Ýº¹ ºÎ»ç¾î(adverbial reduplication) # ¸ðÀ½ º¯ÀÌ(vowel variation) # Á¦ÁÖ Çѱ¹¾î(Jeju Korean) # ¸ð¶ó(mora) # ¸ðÀ½ ÀÚÁú(vowel quality) # ½ÅÈ£ ¾ç(cue quantity)

References

  • °­°øÅÃ. (1986). Á¦ÁÖ ¹æ¾ðÀÇ ¹Ýº¹ ºÎ»ç ±¸Á¶ ¿¬±¸. Á¦ÁÖ´ëÇб³ ¼®»çÇÐÀ§³í¹®.
  • °­¼®ÇÑ. (2008). Á¦ÁÖ Çѱ¹¾îÀÇ °­Á¶ Áßø¾î¿¡ ³ªÅ¸³­ ÀÚÀ½ À½º¯È­ ¾ç»ó ¿¬±¸. ¾ð¾îÇÐ ¿¬±¸, 13, 1-16.
  • °­¼®ÇÑ. (2010). Á¦ÁÖ Çѱ¹¾îÀÇ ¹Ýº¹ ºÎ»ç¾î º¯ÀÌÇü Çü¼º¿¡¼­ÀÇ ¹ßÈ­¿Í ÀÎÁö ¿ä¼Ò ¿¬±¸. ¿µÁ־, 20, 5-26.
  • °­¼®ÇÑ. (2018). Á¦ÁÖ Çѱ¹¾î À½»ó °­È­Çü ¹Ýº¹ ºÎ»ç¾î ¿¬±¸. ¾ð¾îÇÐ, 26(3), 89-116.
  • ±è¿µµ·. (1965). Á¦ÁÖµµ ¹Î¿ä¿¬±¸ (»ó). ¼­¿ï: ÀÏÁ¶°¢.
  • ±è¿øº¸. (2005). Á¦ÁÖ¹æ¾ð ¸ðÀ½ÀÇ À½ÇâºÐ¼®. ¾ð¾îÇÐ ¿¬±¸, 10(2), 161-174.
  • ¹Úµ¿±Ô. (2000). ¾îµÎ ÀÚ, ¸ðÀ½ ´ë¸³Çü ¹Ýº¹ º¹ÇÕ¾îÀÇ Çü¼º¿¡ °üÇÑ °íÂû. Àι® °úÇבּ¸, 5, 75-95.
  • ¹Ú¿ëÈÄ. (1988). Á¦ÁÖ¹æ¾ð ¿¬±¸ (ÀÚ·áÆí). °í·Á´ëÇб³ ¹ÎÁ·¹®È­¿¬±¸¼Ò.
  • ¼ºÃ¶Àç. (2005). Ãæ³²Áö¿ª ´ëÇлýµéÀÇ Çѱ¹¾î ´Ü¸ðÀ½ Æ÷¸ÕÆ® ºÐ¼®. ¾ð¾îÇÐ, 43, 189-213.
  • ¼Û»óÁ¶. (2007). Á¦ÁÖ¸» Å« »çÀü. ¼­¿ï: Çѱ¹¹®È­»ç.
  • ¼Õ´ÞÀÓ. (2012). Çö´ë±¹¾î ÀǼºÀÇžîÀÇ ÇüÅÂ¿Í À½¿î ¿¬±¸. ÀÌÈ­¿©ÀÚ´ëÇб³ ¹Ú»çÇÐÀ§³í¹®.
  • ¼ÛÁ¤±Ù. (2010). ÁßøÀÇ µÎ À¯Çü. Çѱ¹¾î ÀǹÌÇÐ, 33, 131-152.
  • ½Å¿ìºÀ. (2015). Á¦ÁÖ ¹æ¾ð ´Ü¸ðÀ½°ú ¾îµÎ Àå¾ÖÀ½ÀÇ À½Çâ À½¼ºÇÐÀû ¿¬±¸. °í·Á´ëÇб³ ¹Ú»çÇÐÀ§³í¹®.
  • ¿©»óÇÊ. (1998). Àý´Ü Â÷¿ë¾îÀÇ ÃÖ¼Ò ¿ä°Ç. ½Å¿µ¾î¿µ¹®ÇÐ, 10, 233-251.
  • ¿ÀÁ¤¶õ. (1993). ±¹¾î\'¤©\'À½ÀÇ ¾çÀ½Àý¼º°ú °ãÀÚÀ½È­. ¾ð¾î, 18(1), 19-46.
  • ÀÓ±ÔÈ«. (2015). ±¹¾î ¸ðÀ½ÀÇ À½»ó°ú ÀǹÌÀÇ À¯¿¬¼º. ¾ð¾î°úÇבּ¸, 74, 189-216.
  • À̹®±Ô. (1996). À½¿î±³Ã¼¿Í »ó¡¾îÀÇ ¾î°¨ ºÐÈ­. ¾î¹®ÇÐ, 57, 173-198.
  • À̼þ³ç. (1978). ±¹¾î À½¼º »ó¡·Ð¿¡ ´ëÇÏ¿©. ¾ð¾î, 3(2), 1-19.
  • ÀÌ¿µÈñ. (1982). Á¦ÁÖµµ ¹æ¾ðÀÇ »ó¡ ¿¬±¸. Á¦ÁÖ´ëÇб³ ¼®»çÇÐÀ§³í¹®.
  • ÀÌÀͼ·. (1965). ±¹¾î º¹ÇÕ¸í»çÀÇ IC ºÐ¼®. ±¹¾î±¹¹®ÇÐ, 30, 121-129.
  • ÀÌÈñ½Â. (1955). ±¹¾îÇа³¼³. ¼­¿ï: ¹ÎÁß¼­°ü 26
  • Á¤½Âö. (1998). Á¦ÁÖ¹æ¾ðÀÇ Æ¯Â¡¿¡ ´ëÇÏ¿©. »õ±¹¾î»ýÈ°, 8(4), 133-152.
  • Á¤Ã¶ÁÖ. (2015). ÀÇ»ç(ë÷ÞÄ) ¹Ýº¹ ÇÕ¼º¾îÀÇ À¯Çü°ú Çü¼º. Àι®°úÇבּ¸, 26, 69-96.
  • Á¦ÁÖƯº°ÀÚÄ¡µµ. (2009). Á¦ÁÖ¾î»çÀü. Á¦ÁÖ: ÀϽſɼÂÀμâ»ç.
  • ä¿Ï. (1986). ±¹¾î ¾î¼øÀÇ ¿¬±¸ (±¹¾îÇÐ ÃѼ­ 10). ¼­¿ï: ÅÂÇлç.
  • Çã¿õ. (1982). (°³°í½ÅÆÇ) ±¹¾îÀ½¿îÇÐ . ¼­¿ï: Á¤À½»ç.
  • ÇöÆòÈ¿. (1985). Á¦ÁÖµµ ¹æ¾ð ¿¬±¸. ¼­¿ï: ÀÌ¿ìÃâÆÇ»ç.
  • Assman, W. F., & Kartz, W. F. (2000). Time-varying spectral change in the vowels of children and adults. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 102, 28-40.
  • Flemming, E. (2005). Speech perception and phonological contrast. In D. Pisoni & R. Remez (Eds.), The handbook of speech perception (pp. 156-181). Cambridge: Blackwell.
  • Inkelas, S., & Zoll, C. (2005). Reduplication: Doubling in morphology(Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 106). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Kang, S.-H. (2008). Non-morphological motivation in Cheju Korean emphatic reduplication. Paper presented at the 16th ICKL, Cornell University, 3-5 August.
  • Kang, S.-H. (2013). The phonetics and phonology of emphatic reduplication: A case study of Jeju Korean. A Study of Phonetics, Phonology, and Morphology, 19(1), 3-32.
  • Kawahara, H., Katayose, H., Cheveigné, A. D., & Patterson, R. D. (1999). Fixed point analysis of frequency to instantaneous frequency mapping for accurate estimation of F0 and periodicity. Retrieved August 15, 2019, from https://www.isca-speech.org/archive/eurospeech_1999.
  • Kent, R. D., & Read, C. (2006). The acoustic analysis of speech. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group.
  • Liénard, J. S., & Di Benedetto, M. G. (1999). Effect of vocal effort on spectral properties of vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106(1), 411-422.
  • McCarthy, J., & Prince, E. (1995). Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Martin, S. E. (1962). Phonetic symbolism in Korean. American Studies in Altaic Linguistics, 13, 177-189.
  • Niebuhr, O., Jarzabkowska, P., Lorenz, U., Schulz, C., & Sodigov, F. (2012). Say it again, Sam! The prosodic profiles of emphatic reduplication in German. Retrieved August 12, 2019, from http://www.isca-speech.org/archive/sp2012.
  • Onn, F. M. (1980). Aspects of Malay phonology and morphology: A generative approach. Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
  • Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. New York: Routledge.
  • Yang, B. (1996). A comparative study of American English and Korean vowels produced by male and female speakers. Journal of Phonetics, 24, 245-261.