Comparative Study On Korean And Chinese Affirmative Imperative Sentence

Based on the theories and methods of comparative linguistics, directed by the structuralism, compared with syntactic structure, semantic features and pragmatic functions, this thesis mainly talked about the similarities and differences between Korean and Chinese affirmative imperative sentences as well as their corresponding reasons. And then it also researched the essential natures of imperative sentences. This thesis includes five chapters.Chapter I. Introductions. It mainly presented the reasons why this topic had been chosen and its significance. At the same time it defined the scopes and research methods, introduced other research statements in this fields. Also, it illustrated the linguistic data sources and imperative sentences'developing conditions at home and abroad. More important, previous research achievements gave us the theoretic basis.Chapterâ…¡. It mainly described the syntactic features of Korean and Chinese affirmative imperative sentences. Such as subject, predicate, and vocative expression, etc. Both in Korean and Chinese affirmative imperative sentences, subjects are often omitted, which reflected the subjects-invisible conditions. Though it could not reflect on the surface structure, it also had the same functions as those subjects-visible sentences. After all, the subjects in Korean and Chinese affirmative imperative sentences are the second persons. Through the statistical analysis, we could get such conclusions that the subjects-invisible conditions are more often used in Korean than in Chinese. While predicate expressions are much richer in Korean than in Chinese. The reason is Korean imperative sentences follow the honorific rules and select different ending words.Chapterâ…¢. In this chapter, we analyzed and compared the main parts of Korean and Chinese affirmative imperative sentences from the semantic aspect, that is, verbs and adjectives as predicates. Verbs in Korean affirmative imperative sentences must have the semantic natures, that is, [+person mention] and [controllability]. Among them, active verbs (person mention) can be used both in affirmative sentences and negative sentences; while passive verbs (non-person mention) can only be used in negative sentences. And both the commendatory terms and the derogatory terms will influence the verbs'selects used in imperative sentences. Commendatory verbs can be used in affirmative sentences easily while derogatory verbs in negative sentences. Neutral verbs can be used either ways. It's the same both in Korean and Chinese. Adjectives used as predicates will be restricted in both languages. Only verbalized adjectives which have the adjective semantic feature and verbal syntax natures, can be used in affirmative imperative sentences. The limited terms are:[+person mention],[+active]and[+ commendatory].Chapterâ…£. From the pragmatic views, imperatives can be divided into mandatory sentences, request sentences and suggested sentences. In specific language environment, in order to get the best expression effect, both Korean and Chinese adopt various types of linguistic strategies, including tone, accent, modal ending words, implement verbs and implement auxiliary words. We also compared the corresponding terms of modal ending words between Korean and Chinese imperative sentences.Conclusion:we summarized the view point in this thesis and at the same time, indicated the advantages of it.