• Cross-Cultural Studies
• /
• v.38
• /
• pp.501-521
• /
• 2015

In this paper, through the comparative analysis of Korean syntactic structure of Chinese auxiliary "Aspect" and with this correspondence, find out the semantic differences between the two languages, and the "Aspect" of aspect are analyzed, and results obtained are as follows.

• Cross-Cultural Studies
• /
• v.42
• /
• pp.451-474
• /
• 2016

Analysis of the syntactic structure of the modern Chinese adverbs for time 'Cengjing (曾經)' and 'Yijing (已經)' was performed to examine the tenses and aspects of the terms. The corresponding Korean words were examined and the terms in both languages were compared. The syntactic structures used in China and South Korea were found to be different. We hope the study of the Chinese language will help Korean students. 'Cengjing (曾經)' specific projects with 'aspect' of, 'Past experience aspect', 'Past continuous aspect', 'Past continuous aspect' in the past tense. [ED: unclear, please reword] These correspond to '_었 (았)_', '_었었_' in the Korean language. 'Yijing (已經)' has 'finished phase' of concrete projects, 'Past experience aspect', 'Past continuous aspect', also has a specific project tense, the 'past tense', 'present tense', 'future tense', and so tense. [ED: unclear, please reword] Adjectives can also be modified with a 'change of status'. These correspond to '_었 (았)_', '_고_', '_었었_', '곧' etc. in Korean. 'Cengjing (曾經)' and the dynamic auxiliary 'Guo (過)' were compared to determine whether they have the aspect and tense features. However, 'Guo (過)' can only modify the predicate verb, so it possesses only aspect characteristics. 'Cengjing (曾經)' modifies the range more widely. 'Yijing (已經)' may be modified by the adverb 'Zai (在)' whereas 'Cengjing (曾經)' may not. Additionally, 'Yijing (已經)' can be modified by predicate adjectives and noun predicates, while 'Cengjing (曾經)' cannot.