고려대학교

초록/요약

In this paper, we investigated the transition process of ‘Qilai’ construction in Chinese, particularly with emphasis on evaluative ‘Qilai’ and we have found a few facts. First, it is also valid to divide the phrase ‘Qilai’ into expressions A type and M type based on the semantic orientation of the AP, that is, we have looked from A type to M type in the modern times. Although this has already been mentioned in previous studies, they did not clearly distinguish between A and M, or discussed together. Secondly, through the example analysis of several modern literatures, we also examined syntactic commonalities and differences in the process of transition between A type and M type. Although many expressions of M type without a comma appear today, the loss of a comma, one of the characteristics of the middle construction presented by Huang & Ma(2008: 36), is not an essential element of change, and the expansion of verb scope is more important factor in transition process. Thirdly, we can see that Evaluative ‘Qilai’ has developed into a different path of subjectivity through the common stage the deletion of agent, and unlike A type, M type is based on virtual(generic) structuring of repetitive occurrence. In short, the distinction between A tyep and M type of ‘Qilai’ is historically justified, and we can see that it contains a different internal structure of A type and M type.