Comparative Study On The Korean Question Word

This article mainly observes and analyzes the similarities and differences between interrogative pronouns in modern Chinese and Korean in terms of morphological, syntactic, semantic and other aspects. This thesis is further categorized into seven parts.Chapter1is a brief introduction relevant to the classification of interrogative pronouns, current research status, targeting research objects of this thesis, research value, research contents and methods. In the meantime, this chapter also consists of theories, and language materials applied to it.Chapter2observes to compare the lexical characteristics of interrogative pronouns between Chinese and Korean from mainly the word‐formation and morphological aspects.Chapter3makes analysis of the similarities and differences over sentence form distribution, sentence category distribution, placement distribution, repeat form, co‐occurrence form and syntactic functionality of the interrogative pronouns in modern Chinese and Korean languages. It reveals commonality and individuality of the Han Korean and Chinese in syntactic. In the co‐occurrence form, the Chinese Mandarin interrogative pronouns are often associated with seven grammatical forms, such as interrogative pronouns, modal particles, auxiliary verbs, adverbs, conjunctions, demonstratives and negatives. Whilst, the Han Korean interrogative pronouns usually coexisting with eight grammatical forms, for instance interrogative pronouns, auxiliary, suffix, nominals, predicates, adverbs, demonstratives, negatives. Chapter IV and chapter V examine the semantic features of interrogative pronouns in Korean and Chinese. The semantics of interrogative pronouns are divided into interrogative sense and non‐interrogative sense, in which the interrogative sense is further categorized into direct questioning and indirect questioning; the non‐interrogative sense is divided into non‐interrogative reference and non‐interrogative non‐reference. Non‐interrogative reference mainly reflects in the vague reference, indefinite reference, successive reference, different reference, example reference and borrowing reference; while the non‐interrogative non‐reference is mainly reflected in rhetorical, exclamatory, negative and discourse marker usage of the interrogative pronouns.Four non‐interrogative non‐references. are reflected in both Han Korean an Chinese interrogative pronouns; in the other six non‐interrogative reference s, the vague reference, indefinite reference, different reference, all exist in both Han Korean and Chinese. However, the rest three, successive reference, example reference and borrowing reference, only exist in Chinese. In the case of usage regarding interrogative and non‐interrogative reference of the interrogative pronouns, Both Chinese and Han Korean bring up different features.Chapter VI adopts the approach of two‐way comparison, by which a corresponding study for the co‐relations between Chinese and Han Korean was conducted. In the meantime, we try to analyze and interpret the relevant conditions.Chapter VII is the final piece, in which a conclusion is drawn for this thesis, and it also examines the major findings and inadequacies.