• 인문언어
• /
• 제6권
• /
• pp.321-357
• /
• 2004

In this article the structure of modern Russian humor is analyzed on the basis of some theories: bi-sociation theory (Koestler 1964), semantic script theory of verbal humor, using the concept of semantic presupposition, pragmatic felicity condition (Searle 1969; Levinson 1983) and grammatical rules (Chomsky 1965). Up to now the listed former theories were not examined and less analyzed by the semantic structure in the study of the structure of Russian humor(HcaeBa 1969; 3 $a_{OPHOB}$ 1991; 1992). Kreps (1981), who analyzed the works of Zoschenko, presented 21 types of humor, using the term 'humoreme'(Kpenc 1981, 36-37). These types are the list of the available means of humor that work not in the base of semantic criteria, but in the base of means of literary rhetoric. Kreps presented types of humor means, such as contradiction, antonymic substitution, macaronic speech and correlation of humoremes in the various types of humor. Apart from Kreps, Manakov (MaHaKOB 1986, 61-79) also studied these problems. He also set the system of the basic types of humor. Manakov introduced the linguistic means of humor of some Russian writers: Gogol, Tchechov. The means that Manakov showed with detailed examples, are trope, epithet, comic comparison, comic metaphor, comic periphrasis, euphemism, pun, zeugma, comic toponym, comic onomatopoeia, mania of foreign vocabulary, folk etymology, dialect etc. But these studies don't explain why these means make the works humorous. An, B.p tried to answer this question (안병팔 1997 a; b). An B.p. explains contexts of humor through the Release theory, the Superiority theory and the Incongruity theory. An, B.p. explained the process of deviation from the grammatical norms through morpho-syntactic and lexical means. But in these studies the humor was not analyzed by the semantic criteria. In order to linguistically evaluate various means of humor formation, it is necessary to elicit its deep structure, which makes it possible to research the formation and interpretation of humor. For this purpose this article, being based on the Incongruity theory, defined the structure of humor as negation of presupposition. Of course the former traditional studies also well shared the concept of 'contradiction' and 'contrast' of humor structure, but they didn't explain the structure by semantic differential features. This study, analyzing the works of' Zadornov, M., tried to note that through the negation of semantic presupposition the structure of contradiction is formed with semantic differential features on the semantic, syntactic or lexical dimensions.

• 한국음향학회지
• /
• 제42권4호
• /
• pp.271-284
• /
• 2023

본 연구는 IEC 60050-801:1994 국제 표준을 기준으로 남한 산업표준과 북한 국가규격의 음향학 전문용어 431개를 비교 분석하고 통합 알고리즘을 사용하여 남북한 음향학 용어 통합안을 제시하였다. 용어가 완전히 같은 형태인 AA형은 139개(32.3 %), 어문규범의 차이로 인해 표기 형태가 다른 Aa형은 35개(8.1 %), 형태가 완전히 다른 AB유형은 257개(59.6 %)로 확인되었다. 형태적으로 같은 유형의 용어보다 다른 유형의 용어가 2배 이상 많았으나 내용 면에서 대부분 용어는 충분히 이해하고 유추할 수 있는 범위 안에 있었다. 형태가 다른 음향학 전문용어 통합에서는 북한 전문용어가 178개(61 %), 남한 전문용어가 76개(26 %)로 채택되었다. 이와 같은 결과는 북한 전문용어가 고유성이 압도적으로 높았고, 남한 전문용어는 경제성이 상대적으로 높았기 때문이다. 용어 순화를 통한 고유성과 최신 기술 용어의 대중 활용을 높일 수 있는 경제성 기준을 충족하는 음향학 전문용어 통합 체계 구축이 필요하다. 본 연구는 남북한 음향학 전문용어를 최초로 비교하고 통합안 제시에 의의가 있으며 다음과 같은 제언으로 연구 한계를 극복하고자 한다. 첫째, 정부는 남북한 학술 교류 및 표준화 공통 안을 마련할 수 있도록 지원 및 법적인 장치를 마련하고 북한 관련 연구 데이터에 쉽게 접근할 수 있는 연구 환경을 조성해야 한다. 둘째, 음향학 용어 데이터를 남북한이 공유하고 통합 음향학 용어사전을 발간하도록 노력해야 한다. 셋째, 추후 남북이 전문용어 위원회를 함께 발족하여 표준 개정이 동시에 이루어지도록 노력해야 한다.

• 대한간호학회지
• /
• 제23권4호
• /
• pp.585-601
• /
• 1993

Data on 63 patients who had had motorcycle accidents and who were admitted to four general hospitals in the Chung Chung Nam Do area from July / 1993 to August 1993 were analyzed. The tool used for this study was a structured questionnaire which consisted of ten items on self- esteem, 18 items on health locus of control and 37 items profiling health prometion lifestyle. Injury severity scores were calculated bated based on data from the patients’ medical records. The collected data were analyzed using the SPSS, yielding descriptive statistics, t-test, ANOVA, Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation. The findings of this study are as follows. 1) Of the 63 injured motorcyclists, 35(55.6%) were helmeted and 28(44.4%) were nonhelmeted, and the nonhelmeted motorcyclists were predominantly young and male. The demographic variables for the helmeted and nonhelmeted groups were heterogeneous for age and occupation. 2) The results of the comparison between the two groups showed a statistically significant difference in the injury severity score(t=-4.70, p=0.000). The helmeted group had lower scores on injury severity score (9.00±3.93) than the nonhelmeted group(14.32土5.05). More than 60% of the nonhelmeted motorcyclists had brain injuries compared to only a third of the helmeted cyclists. 3) There .was a statistically significant difference between the two groups on self esteem(t=4.5, 000). The helmeted group had a higher mean score (31.27±2.72) than the nonhelmeted group(27.46±3.80). 4) The means for Internal health locus of control (IHLC), Powerful others health locus of control (PHLC), and Chance health locus of control (CHLC) in the two groups were similar to instrument norms reported in other literature. The mean scores on the IHLC in the two groups were higher than scores on the PHLC or the CHLC. However, there was a significant difference between the mean scores for the two groups on the PHLC (t=2.85, P=0.006). 5) The mean score for the helmeted group on the health promotion lifestyle profile was higher than the mean score for the nonhelmeted group(107.30±11.10, 96.57土 15.54 respectively), and there was a significant difference between the mean scores (t=3.64, p=0.001) . The highest score for helmeted group on the health promotion lifestyle profile was in the health care domain. However, for the nonhelmeted group the highest score was in the exercise domain and the lowest score was in the health care domain. 6) With regard to the relationship between health promotion lifestyle, health locus of control and self esteem in the two groups, the correlation coefficient between health promotion lifestyle and internal health locus of control for the helmeted group was 50(p〈0.01). For the nonhelmeted group, there was no correlation between health promotion lifestyle and internal health locus of control. However, there were significant correlation between health pro-motion lifestyle and external locus of control(r=0. 46, p〈0.01), and self esteem(r=0.495, p〈0.01). 7) Among the demographic variables, age and education had an impact on individual’s self-esteem The modifying factors of age made a contribution to explaining health - promoting lifestyle. In the present study, more than 40% rf the motorcyclists were riding without a helmet. The incidence of brain injury for patients riding without a helmet was nearly twice as high in the nonhelmeted rider as compared to the helmeted rider. The nonhelmeted motorcyclists in this study had lower self-esteem, obtained a higher score on the IHLC, and were not strongly engaged in performing health promotion activities as compared to the helmeted riders. However, some of the nonhelmeted riders who had a strong belief in PHLC were positively associated with engaging in health promotion activities. Based on the results obtained from this study, strategies to promote helmet usage for motorcyclists have to be developed.