부정사 구문의 to의 인지적 기능 분석

Abstract

이 논문은 인지문법의 틀을 통해 부정사 구문의 to의 의미적 기여를 분석하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 주로 의미가 없는 기능어로서 다루어졌던 부정사 구문의 to에 대해 본 논문은 문장 해석에 반영되는 to의 인지적 기여에 대해 살펴보고자 한다. 그리고, 이러한 to의 인지적 기여가 문장술어에 따라 어떻게 반영되는지 의미도식을 통해 제시하고자 한다. 이 논문의 구성은 다음과 같다. 제1장에서, 본 논문의 목적과 구성, 기여도, 그리고 연구에 필요한 인지문법의 기본 개념을 소개하겠다. 제2장에서, 부정사 구문에 대한 인지문법적 의미구조의 기본 유형에 대해 알아보겠다. 그리고 인지문법의 입장에서 다룬 부정사 구문의 to에 대한 선행연구를 살펴보고, 각 연구의 한계점을 알아보겠다. Langacker(1992)는 ‘동사의 시간경과의 속성을 제거’해 부정사 구문을 ‘복합비시간적 관계’로서 나타내는 것이 to의 인지적 의미라 주장한다. 반면, Kim(1993)과 Lee(1998)는 ‘목표지향적’ 또는 ‘미래지향적’인 관계를 나타내는 것으로 to의 인지적 의미를 제안하고 있다. 부정사 구문의 to의 인지적 역할에 대해 학자마다 주장이 다르다는 점에서, 문장술어마다 다양하게 반영되는 to의 인지적 기여에 대해 이를 체계적으로 제시해보려는 시도는 의의가 있다고 본다. 제3장에서, 문장해석에 미치는 부정사 구문의 to의 인지적 기여를 제안하고 그에 따른 to의 의미도식을 제시하고자 한다. 본 논문은 ‘탄도체를 지표 방향으로 유도하는 관계’를 서술하는 것이 부정사 구문의 to의 인지적 의미라고 주장한다. 이러한 to의 인지적 영상이 문장술어의 인지영역에 따라 미래지향적으로, 또는 설득이나 유도의 관계로, 또는 추측과 판단의 관계로 해석에 반영될 수 있다고 본다. 제4장에서는 부정사 구문의 to가 나타내는 영상이 구체적으로 여러 예문에서 어떻게 반영되고 의미해석에 기여하는지 분석하고, to의 방향유도의 영상이 문장술어의 의미와 병합되어 상태지시관계, 미래관계, 전경화관계, 척도관계, 간접적 영향관계 등으로서 문장 해석에 기여하는 바를 살펴보고자 한다. 제5장에서는 문장술어 try, want, expect, persuade, promise, seem, be easy, be likely와 부정사 구문의 to의 인지적 병합을 분석하고 도식으로 제시하는 한편, 문장술어에 따라 제2탄도체가 부정사 구문의 참조점으로서 부각되는지, 그리고 그에 따라 문장술어의 의미구조가 어떻게 달라지는지 살펴보고, 각 문장술어의 의미도식을 제안한다. 제6장에서, 본 논문을 요약하고, 상위도식과 하위도식으로서 to의 의미망을 제안하고 결론을 내린다. | The purpose of this dissertation is to analyze the cognitive meanings of to in the infinitival constructions under the framework of Cognitive Grammar(Langacker 1987, 1991a, 1991b, 2008). It has been widely claimed that the infinitival to is a meaningless grammatical element(Chomsky 1981). On the other hand, the semantic contrast between the bare and the to infinitive in infinitival complement constructions has been also argued as to whether each infinitive is meaningful or not(Bolinger 1974, Palmer 1988, Duffley 1992). This dissertation has considered what to in the infinitival constructions expresses. In other words, I assume that to in the infinitival clause not only has its own meaning, but also contributes to the conceptual construction it occurs in. In this respect, I have attempted to focus on the semantic contribution of the infinitival to in the relationship between the participants in cognitive images. Furthermore, I have argued that although the infinitival to in various sentences profiles different conceptualizations, the conceptual meanings of the infinitival to are interrelated by a network of meanings. In chapter 1, as a preliminary to the analysis, I have mentioned the purpose and organization of this dissertation, and presented several basic notions of cognitive grammar that are related to the infinitival constructions. In chapter 2, I have reviewed the previous cognitive analyses of the infinitival to constructions. I have also demonstrated some problems each analysis contains. Langacker(1992) suggests that the infinitival to has the function of atemporalizing a process. In other words, it has the same conceptual content as the verbal structure, and keeps all the component states in profile, but it is viewed in atemporalized sequential scanning. Meanwhile, Kim(1993) and Lee(1998) assert that to in the infinitival clauses retains the goal-directed and future-oriented sense. However, it seems essential that the meanings of the infinitival to in various contexts be examined in cognitive sense and proposed by means of a network of meanings. In chapter 3, I have proposed the conceptual meanings of the infinitival to from the standpoint of Cognitive Grammar, i.e. the infinitival to is construed as a predicate indicating the relation in which the trajector(tr) is led to the landmark(lm), an atemporalized holistic image. More specifically, the tr of the main clause(event 1: e1) is led to the infinitival clause(event 2: e2) as the lm. I have taken this image to be the base meaning of the infinitival to. From this point of view, I have argued that if the semantic values of the verb of the main clause involve potential meanings, the infinitival event is construed as expressing future-oriented senses. Moreover, in the causative constructions, the images of to in the infinitive clauses can be conceived as indirect causation, which is construed as persuasion or inducement rather than direct, immediate causation. With regard to the perceptual domain, the meanings of the infinitive event can be indicated as inference or logical conclusion by means of mental shift in cognitive terms. In chapter 4, I have analyzed how the base meaning of the infinitival to is reflected on its various usages, and examined how the base meaning is extended metaphorically. Metaphorical shift can be dealt with as an instance of an extension of meaning based on spatial domain. I have suggested in chapter 3 that the infinitival to is construed as profiling a relation in which a trajector is led to an event characterized as a landmark. Here I have proposed that the relative prominence of the landmark can evoke the semantic differences. In other words, if the trajectory is prominent, the infinitival clause is construed as a purposeful event. On the other hand, if the landmark is salient, the infinitival clause is construed as a resultant event. Moreover, I have examined that the images shifted metaphorically from the spatial domain may be formed on cognitive domains such as EMOTION or PROBABILITY, which can be conceived as images obtained by means of scaling metaphorical domains. And the images of the relation profiled on scale can be construed from the point of view of the conceptualizer. In chapter 5, I have presented another aspect of the infinitival to related to the so-called raising construction. In Cognitive Grammar, raising constructions are analyzed in terms of active zone, and the active zone in the infinitival clause is a matter of focal prominence as well. In this respect, I have argued that the meanings of the infinitival to involved in raising are construed as more complicated schemas with reference to cognitive images, i.e. if the trajector(tr2) in the infinitival event(e2) is more salient than any other image, the trajector represents both reference point of e2 and the landmark(lm1) of the main clause(e1). In chapter 6, as part of the conclusions, I have summarized each chapter, and proposed a cognitive account of the infinitival to, i.e. the symbolic image of to is conceived as a predicate designating the relation in which the trajector is led to the landmark. Moreover, I have represented the superschema of to and its subschemas, interrelated by means of the network of meanings.; The purpose of this dissertation is to analyze the cognitive meanings of to in the infinitival constructions under the framework of Cognitive Grammar(Langacker 1987, 1991a, 1991b, 2008). It has been widely claimed that the infinitival to is a meaningless grammatical element(Chomsky 1981). On the other hand, the semantic contrast between the bare and the to infinitive in infinitival complement constructions has been also argued as to whether each infinitive is meaningful or not(Bolinger 1974, Palmer 1988, Duffley 1992). This dissertation has considered what to in the infinitival constructions expresses. In other words, I assume that to in the infinitival clause not only has its own meaning, but also contributes to the conceptual construction it occurs in. In this respect, I have attempted to focus on the semantic contribution of the infinitival to in the relationship between the participants in cognitive images. Furthermore, I have argued that although the infinitival to in various sentences profiles different conceptualizations, the conceptual meanings of the infinitival to are interrelated by a network of meanings. In chapter 1, as a preliminary to the analysis, I have mentioned the purpose and organization of this dissertation, and presented several basic notions of cognitive grammar that are related to the infinitival constructions. In chapter 2, I have reviewed the previous cognitive analyses of the infinitival to constructions. I have also demonstrated some problems each analysis contains. Langacker(1992) suggests that the infinitival to has the function of atemporalizing a process. In other words, it has the same conceptual content as the verbal structure, and keeps all the component states in profile, but it is viewed in atemporalized sequential scanning. Meanwhile, Kim(1993) and Lee(1998) assert that to in the infinitival clauses retains the goal-directed and future-oriented sense. However, it seems essential that the meanings of the infinitival to in various contexts be examined in cognitive sense and proposed by means of a network of meanings. In chapter 3, I have proposed the conceptual meanings of the infinitival to from the standpoint of Cognitive Grammar, i.e. the infinitival to is construed as a predicate indicating the relation in which the trajector(tr) is led to the landmark(lm), an atemporalized holistic image. More specifically, the tr of the main clause(event 1: e1) is led to the infinitival clause(event 2: e2) as the lm. I have taken this image to be the base meaning of the infinitival to. From this point of view, I have argued that if the semantic values of the verb of the main clause involve potential meanings, the infinitival event is construed as expressing future-oriented senses. Moreover, in the causative constructions, the images of to in the infinitive clauses can be conceived as indirect causation, which is construed as persuasion or inducement rather than direct, immediate causation. With regard to the perceptual domain, the meanings of the infinitive event can be indicated as inference or logical conclusion by means of mental shift in cognitive terms. In chapter 4, I have analyzed how the base meaning of the infinitival to is reflected on its various usages, and examined how the base meaning is extended metaphorically. Metaphorical shift can be dealt with as an instance of an extension of meaning based on spatial domain. I have suggested in chapter 3 that the infinitival to is construed as profiling a relation in which a trajector is led to an event characterized as a landmark. Here I have proposed that the relative prominence of the landmark can evoke the semantic differences. In other words, if the trajectory is prominent, the infinitival clause is construed as a purposeful event. On the other hand, if the landmark is salient, the infinitival clause is construed as a resultant event. Moreover, I have examined that the images shifted metaphorically from the spatial domain may be formed on cognitive domains such as EMOTION or PROBABILITY, which can be conceived as images obtained by means of scaling metaphorical domains. And the images of the relation profiled on scale can be construed from the point of view of the conceptualizer. In chapter 5, I have presented another aspect of the infinitival to related to the so-called raising construction. In Cognitive Grammar, raising constructions are analyzed in terms of active zone, and the active zone in the infinitival clause is a matter of focal prominence as well. In this respect, I have argued that the meanings of the infinitival to involved in raising are construed as more complicated schemas with reference to cognitive images, i.e. if the trajector(tr2) in the infinitival event(e2) is more salient than any other image, the trajector represents both reference point of e2 and the landmark(lm1) of the main clause(e1). In chapter 6, as part of the conclusions, I have summarized each chapter, and proposed a cognitive account of the infinitival to, i.e. the symbolic image of to is conceived as a predicate designating the relation in which the trajector is led to the landmark. Moreover, I have represented the superschema of to and its subschemas, interrelated by means of the network of meanings.