´ëÇѾð¾îÇÐȸ ÀüÀÚÀú³Î

´ëÇѾð¾îÇÐȸ

26±Ç 3È£ (2018³â 9¿ù)

Á¦ÁÖ Çѱ¹¾î À½»ó °­È­Çü ¹Ýº¹ ºÎ»ç¾î ¿¬±¸

°­¼®ÇÑ

Pages : 89-116

DOI : https://doi.org/10.24303/lakdoi.2018.26.3.89

PDFº¸±â

¸®½ºÆ®

Abstract

Kang, Seokhan. (2018). A study of emphatic adverbial reduplication in Jeju Korean. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 26(3), 89-116. It is argued that adverbial reduplication in Jeju Korean intensifies the sound effect through the template extension and rhythmic realization. Two types of reduplication (total and alternative) have been investigated, with consideration given to the relationship between input and output as well as between output and output. To accelerate the sound effect in the total reduplication, the consonantal and feature addition, and vowel alternation have been used, resulting in emphatic forms as the output patterns. The alternative-reduplication pursues Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP) between the base and the reduplicant against OO-Identity. As a result, the OCP constraint caused the sound effect between the base and the reduplicant, using the asymmetry of f0 and duration. The final pattern of the emphatic reduplication involved adding lak(lang) to the second emphatic reduplication with the liquid coda. The study implies that the alternative forms in the adverbial reduplication of Jeju Korean pursue the melody effect, using markedness constraints.

Keywords

# À¯»ç Áßø(alternative reduplication) # ¿ÏÀü Áßø(total reduplicatiion) # Á¦ÁÖ Çѱ¹¾î(Jeju Korean) # Á¦¾à(constraints) # ÃÖÀû¼º ÀÌ·Ð(optimality theory) # °­Á¶Çü »ó¡¾î(emphatic ideophones

References

  • °­°øÅÃ. (1986). Á¦ÁÖ ¹æ¾ðÀÇ ¹Ýº¹ ºÎ»ç ±¸Á¶ ¿¬±¸. Á¦ÁÖ´ëÇб³ ¼®»çÇÐÀ§³í¹®.
  • °­¼®ÇÑ. (2010). Á¦ÁÖ Çѱ¹¾îÀÇ ¹Ýº¹ ºÎ»ç¾î º¯ÀÌÇü Çü¼º¿¡¼­ÀÇ ¹ßÈ­¿Í ÀÎÁö¿ä¼Ò ¿¬±¸. ¿µÁ־, 20, 5-26.
  • °­¿Á¹Ì. (1993). ¿îÀ²¾î ³»¿¡¼­ ÀϾ´Â Çѱ¹¾î À½¿îÇö»ó. ¾î¹®³íÁý, 3, 11-22.
  • °­¿Á¹Ì. (1998). Çѱ¹¾îÀÇ ºÎºÐÁßø¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ´ëÀÀÀÌ·Ð ºÐ¼®. À½¼ºÀ½¿îÇüÅ·п¬±¸, 4, 31-54.
  • °­Á¤Èñ. (2005). Á¦ÁÖ ¹æ¾ð ÇüÅ º¯È­ ¿¬±¸. ¼­¿ï: ¿ª¶ôÃâÆÇ»ç.
  • °íµ¿È£. (1996). Á¦ÁÖ ¹æ¾ðÀÇ À¯±âÀ½°ú °æÀ½ÀÇ Çü¼º °úÁ¤. ÇѱÛ, 234, 163-189.
  • ±è±¤¿õ. (2001). Á¦ÁÖÁö¿ª¾î À½¿î·Ð. Á¦ÁÖ: Á¦ÁÖ´ëÇб³ ÃâÆǺÎ.
  • ±è¿µµ·. (1965). Á¦ÁÖµµ ¹Î¿ä¿¬±¸(»ó). ¼­¿ï: ÀÏÁ¶°¢.
  • ³²±â½É, °í¿µ±Ù. (1993). Ç¥Áر¹¾î¹®¹ý·Ð. ¼­¿ï: žÃâÆÇ»ç.
  • 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>. ¼­¿ï: °í·Á´ëÇб³ ¹ÎÁ·¹®È­ ¿¬±¸¼Ò.
  • ¹ÚÁ¾Èñ, ±Çº´·Î. (2010). À½Àý ¹«°Ô Åõ¿µ°ú °ãÀÚÀ½È­. ¹è´Þ¸», 47, 93-114.
  • ¼Û»óÁ¶. (2007). Á¦ÁÖ¸» Å« »çÀü. ¼­¿ï: Çѱ¹¹®È­»ç.
  • ¼ÛÁ¤±Ù. (2010). ÁßøÀÇ µÎ À¯Çü. Çѱ¹¾î ÀǹÌÇÐ, 33, 131-152.
  • ¼ÕÇü¼÷, ¾È¹Ì¾Ö. (2009). Çѱ¹¾î¿Í ¿µ¾îÀÇ ¸ðÀ½ ¹ßÀ½¿µ¿ª¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ½ÇÇèÀ½¼ºÈ­Àû ¿¬±¸. ¾ð¾î°úÇבּ¸, 49, 117-140.
  • ½Å¿ìºÀ, ½ÅÁö¿µ. (2012). Á¦ÁÖ ¹æ¾ð ´Ü¸ðÀ½¿¡ ´ëÇÑ À½Çâ À½¼ºÇÐÀû ¿¬±¸. Çѱ¹¾îÇÐ, 56, 63-90.
  • ÀÌ°æÈñ, Á¤¸í¼÷. (2000). Çѱ¹¾î ÆÄ¿­À½ÀÇ À½ÇâÀû Ư¼º°ú Áö°¢ ´Ü¼­. À½¼º°úÇÐ, 7(2), 154-170.
  • ÀÌÀͼ·. (1982). Çö´ë±¹¾îÀÇ ¹Ýº¹º¹ÇÕ¾îÀÇ ±¸Á¶. ±¹¾îÇבּ¸(¹é¿µÁ¤º´¿í¼±»ý ȯ°©±â³ä³íÃÑ). ¼­¿ï: ½Å±¸¹®È­»ç
  • ÀÌÈñ½Â. (1955). ±¹¾îÇа³¼³. ¼­¿ï: ¹ÎÁß¼­°ü
  • ÀüÁ¾È£, ÀÌÇý¹Î. (2006). Çѱ¹¾î ºÎºÐÁßø¿¡¼­ÀÇ °¡º¯Àû Á¢»ç. À½¼ºÀ½¿îÇüÅ·п¬±¸, 12(1), 149-159.
  • Á¤Ã¶ÁÖ. (2015). ÀÇ»ç 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). ±¹¾î¾î¼øÀÇ ¿¬±¸. ¼­¿ï: žÃâÆÇ»ç.
  • Çö¿ëÁØ. (1980). ï¿Á¦ÁÖµµ¹«¼ÓÀÚ·á»çÀüÀü, ¼­¿ï: ½Å±¸¹®È­»ç.
  • ÇöÆòÈ¿. (1985). Á¦ÁÖµµ ¹æ¾ð ¿¬±¸. ¼­¿ï: ÀÌ¿ìÃâÆÇ»ç.
  • Alber, B. (2005). Clash, lapse and directionality. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 23(3), 485-542.
  • 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.
  • Balle, M. (2017). Types of reduplication in Helong, an Austronesian language in Eastern Indonesia. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Payap University.
  • Boersma, P. (2000). The OCP in the perception grammar. University of Amsterdam. Retrieved from http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/paul/papers/ocp_perc.pdf.
  • Flemming, E. (1996). Evidence for constraints on contrast: The dispersion theory of contrast. UCLA Working Papers in Phonology, 1, 86-106.
  • Flemming, E. (2005). Speech perception and phonological contrast. In D. Pisoni & R. Remez (Eds.), The handbook of speech perception (pp. 156-181). Cambridge: Blackwell.
  • Itô, J. (1989). A prosodic theory of epenthesis. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 7(2), 217-259.
  • Goldsmith, J. (1976). Autosegmental phonology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT.
  • Hayes, B. (1989). Compensatory lengthening in moraic phonology. Linguistic inquiry, 20(2), 253-306.
  • Kang, S-H. (2008). Non-morphological motivation in Cheju Korean emphatic reduplication. Proceedings in ICKL 2008. Cornell University.
  • Kang, S.-K. (1992). A moraic study of some phonological phenomena in English and Korean. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
  • Kim, J.-H. (1997). An optimality-theoretic approach to reduplication in Korean ideophones. Language Research, 33(4), 737-752.
  • Leben, W. (1973). Suprasegmental phonology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT.
  • Lee, J.-S. (1992). Phonology and sound symbolism of Korean ideophonies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University.
  • MacCarthy, J. (1986). OCP effects: gemination and antigemination. Linguistic Inquiry, 17, 207-263.
  • McCarthy, J. J., & Prince, A. (1995). Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. Linguistics Department Faculty Publication Series, 10, 1-126.
  • Marantz, A. (1982). Reduplication. Linguistic Inquiry, 13, 435-482.
  • Silva, D. J. (2006). Acoustic evidence for the emergence of tonal contrast in contemporary Korean. Phonology, 23, 287-308.
  • Yang, B. (1996). A comparative study of American English and Korean vowels produced by male and female speakers. Journal of Phonetics, 24, 245-262.