Middle Korean ㅿ and the Cheju dialect* | Bulletin of SOAS | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Abstract

All records of Middle Korean are exclusively in the Central dialect, the prestige form spoken in the capital, and all printed material in the newly-created Hangǔl script emanated from there. For this reason, historical studies must rely on modern dialect data for comparison and reconstruction, since there are virtually no early dialect materials. In this study, I investigate the nature of the MK ㅿ, which is most often realized as /Ø/ in Modern Standard Korean, but which often surfaces as /s/ in Southern varieties, including the most conservative of these dialects, Cheju Korean. Sino-Korean forms in Cheju dialect containing an /s/ reflex of ㅿ demonstrate not only that ㅿ was realized as /z/ in such forms, but also that the dialects must have had special phonological rules to deal with their pronunciation. A further important issue concerns the nature of doublets and their treatment in both Middle Korean and Cheju dialect.

References

——, . 1588. Non.e enhay [Translation of the Confucian Analects].Google Scholar

Bickerton, Derek. 1975. Dynamics of a Creole System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cedergren, Henrietta J. and Sankoff, David. 1974. “Variable rules: performance as a statistical reflection of competence”, Language 50/ 3, 333–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cheju Special Autonomous Province. 2006. Melthi-midie Ceycwu Minsok Kwankwang Taesacen [Great Cheju Folk Multimedia dictionary] (= CSAP).Google Scholar

Cho Seung-Bok, . 1967. A Phonological Study of Korean. (Studia Uralica et Altaica Upsaliensa, No 2.) Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.Google Scholar

Choi Hyon-Bae, . 1940. Hankul Kal [The Study of Hangul]. Seoul: Chongeum Sa.Google Scholar

Choi Myong-Ok, . 1978. “ㅸ, ㅿ wa Tongnam Pang'en” [ㅸ, ㅿ and Southeastern Dialects]. Ohak Yongu 14/ 2, 185–94.Google Scholar

Chung Sung-Cheol, . 1995. Ceycwuto Pang'en.uy Thongshi Umwunlon [Cheju Dialect Historical Phonology]. Seoul: Taehaksa.Google Scholar

Culin, Stewart. 1895. Korean Games with Notes on the Corresponding Games of China and Japan. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar

Huh Woong, . 1983. Kukohak [Korean Linguistics]. Seoul: Saem Munhwasa.Google Scholar

Karlgren, Bernhard. 1915–20. Études sur la phonologie chinoise [Studies on Chinese Phonology]. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar

Karlgren, Bernhard. 1923. Analytic Dictionary of Chinese and Sino-Japanese. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.Google Scholar

Klein, Wolfgang and Norbert Dittmar, . 1979. Developing Grammars: The Acquisition of German Syntax by Foreign Workers. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Kroch, Anthony. 1994. “Morphosyntactic variation”, in Beals, K. et al. (eds), Papers from the 30th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society: Parasession on Variation and Linguistic Theory.Google Scholar

Kwen Cey, , Ceng Inci, and An Ci, . 1445. Yongpi echen ka.Google Scholar

Labov, William. 1972. “Some principles of linguistic methodology”, Language in Society 1, 97–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ledyard, Gari K. 1966. “The Korean Language Reform of 1446: The origin, background, and early history of the Korean alphabet”, PhD Thesis, University of California at Berkeley.Google Scholar

Lee Iksop, and S. Robert Ramsey, . 2000. The Korean Language. Buffalo, NY: State University Of New York Press.Google Scholar

Lee Ki-mun, . 1961/1998. Kuk.e um.wun-sa yenkwu [Research on Korean Historical Phonology]. Kwuk.ehak chongse, No. 3. Seoul: Thap Chwulphan-sa.Google Scholar

Lee Ki-Mun, (comp.). 1997. Sae Kuk.e Sajon. [New Korean Dictionary] Dong-A Chulpan.Google Scholar

Lee Sung-Nyong, . 1956. “ㅿ Non-Go” [A Study of ㅿ]. Seoul National University Nonmun Chip: Inmun Sahoe Kwahak Phyeon 3, 51–235. [in Kukohak Non.go. Seoul: Tongyang Chulpansa, 1960.]Google Scholar

Legge, James. 1861. The Chinese Classics, vol. 1. London: Trübner & Co.Google Scholar

Martin, Samuel E. 1982. “On the consonant distinctions of earlier Korean”, Hankul 175, 59–172.Google Scholar

Martin, Samuel E. 1994. A Reference Grammar of Korean. Rutland, VT: Tuttle Publishing.Google Scholar

Martin, Samuel E. 1997. “How did Korean get -l for Middle Chinese words ending in -t?” Journal of East Asian Linguistics 6/ 3, 263–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Martin, Samuel E., Yang Ha Lee, and Sung-Un Chang, . 1967. A Korean–English Dictionary. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Ogura, Shinpei. 1944. 韓国語方言の研究 Chōsengo hōgen no kenkyū [A Study of the Korean Dialects] v. 1–2. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.Google Scholar

Pulleyblank, Edwin G. 1970a. “Late Middle Chinese I”, Asia Major, New Series 15/2, 197–239.Google Scholar

Pulleyblank, Edwin G. 1970b. “Late Middle Chinese II”, Asia Major, New Series 16/1–2, 121–68.Google Scholar

Pulleyblank, Edwin G. 1983. Middle Chinese: A Study in Historical Phonology. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar

Sankoff, David and Cedergren, Henrietta J.. 1976. “The dimensionality of grammatical variation”, Language 52/ 1, 163–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

de Saussure, Ferdinand. 1974. Course in General Linguistics. New York: Philosophical Library.Google Scholar

Sohn Ho-min, . 1999. The Korean Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sohn Ho-min, . 2006. Korean Language in Culture and Society. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.Google Scholar

Song Sang-Jo, . 2007. Ceycwumal Kun Sacen [Great Cheju Dictionary]. Seoul: Hankuk Munhwasa.Google Scholar

Stonham, John and Kim Eun-Sook, . 2010. “The phonetic value of Middle Korean ㅿ”, in Lee, Sang-Oak (ed.), Contemporary Korean Linguistics: International Perspectives. Seoul: Taehaksa, 348–78.Google Scholar

Yi Hee-Seung, . 2007. Kuk.e Taysacen [Great Korean Dictionary]. Seoul: Minjung Seorim.Google Scholar

Yu Changton, . 1964/1987. Ico.e sacen [Choseon Language Dictionary]. Seoul: Yonsei Taehakkyo Chwulphan-pu.Google Scholar