The research aims to identify vocabulary meaning of “resentment” in Chinese and Korean language. For this, words were extracted, meaning “resentment” in 『A Dictionary of Modern Chinese Usage』, 『A Dictionary of Modern Reverse Chinese Usage』, and 『The Korean Standard Unabridged Dictionary』 published by The National Institute of the Korean Language. Through analysis of these words, distributions by parts of speech and types of word formation were analyzed. The results are as follows: in Chinese, the meaning of “resentment” are the most common in verbs, followed by nouns and adjectives. On the other hand, nouns includes the most “resentments” words, followed by verbs and adjectives. In terms of word formation, most of the Chinese “resentment” vocabulary are compound words; their internal structure mainly consist of verbs and objectives, or modifier and nouns. On the contrary, in case of Korean language, compound nouns and derivative verbs are the most common. Finally, in respect of representative vocabulary of “resentment”, metaphor concept for “resentment” in Chinese and Korean language are in the following: both Chinese and Korean words conceptualize the meaning of “water, red, fire (or heat or hot vapor), thing, food, climate, and weapon.” However, conceptualizing as “plant” appears in only Korean language, and as “letter” and “dangerous animal” in only Chinese language.

The study aims to identify significant features and cultural differences of fear-related vocabulary in Chinese and Korean language through contrastive analysis. As a consequence, it is revealed that words for fear are mainly included in psychological verbs, and that there is a great deal of replacing members in the semantic field. Also, these types show clear tendencies towards bisyllabification. In Korean, by contrast, most of the words denoting fear fall into the category of verb, the rest of which, on the other hand, consist of nouns or adjectives. Their members are included in either Korean native words or hybrid ones formed as ‘Chinese character and Korean language’. Then, fear-related idioms, too, are contrastively analyzed in Chinese and Korean, and the analytic outcomes are as follows: there are innumerable idioms based on metonymy and metaphor, and meanwhile, they have a great deal in common, yet with several differences in both languages.

As part of research on the Chinese subjective decrement markers, this study is aimed at analyzing the combinatorial aspect and semantic characteristic of them through a synchronic and diachronic research especially into ‘不怎么’ and ‘不那么’, both of which are of profound significance for expressions denoting the subjective decrement. By means of doing so, the work seeks to understand the background, and further to clarify the grammaticalization process whereby they are used as markers showing the subjective decrement. “Quantity is an important category with which humans perceive, understand and make expressions of the world”, and “the quantitative category of the linguistic world is divided into objective quantity and subjective one”. The subjective quantity is defined as that which comes to have subjectivity due to the speaker's subjective evaluation of the objective quantity, and is usually divided into large and small one. Research related to the subjective quantity has attracted the attention of many scholars and there have been remarkable achievements made with regard to it even in Chinese language studies. However, there has been a limitation, on the other hand, that most of the studies have focused only on the syntax, semantics and pragmatics of expressions denoting the large subjective quantity and small one. What needs to be paid attention to, in this respect, is that the Chinese language also has expressions for the subjective decrement such as ‘不怎么’ and ‘不那么’ in addition to those for the large and small subjective quantity. For all that, few researchers have observed and analyzed them from the perspective of the subjective quantity. For such a reason, this study considers ‘不怎么’ and ‘不那么’ to be the subjective decrement markers most of all, analyzing the combinatorial aspect and semantic characteristic of and the difference between them through a synchronic research. Then, another analysis of their degrees of lexicalization is conducted through a diachronic research into their semantic expansions and frequency increases based on the examination of their periodic examples. The work, in the last analysis, deduces their grammaticalization processes along with the background analysis of how meanings of the subjective decrement have come to be generated in them despite the fact that they have not in other interrogatives or demonstratives.

Buddhist Texts written in Chinese are important data not only for studies of Buddhist texts but also for studies regarding the history of the Chinese language. Seonmun Yeomsongjip (hereafter SMYSJ), a book compiled by monk Hyesim during the Goryeo era, is the oldest and largest Buddhist scriptures in the nation and has always been one of the must-reads in the Buddhist community. This Zen dialogue-type SMYSJ which details quotations by founders of religious sects has many interrogative sentences. From such an aspect, this book is highly valued as precious data for studying colloquial words during the Song Dynasty. However, there have not been many linguistic studies with regard to this text. Considering that there are plenty of interrogative sentences in SMYSJ, for this study, efforts were made to understand the patterns of development of interrogative sentences based on an analysis of the kinds, types, and frequency of interrogative sentences that appear in the book. Based on this kind of analysis, interrogative sentences appearing in SMYSJ can be divided into six categories. The ‘何’ category, which has the largest number of lower types and is used the most frequently, has been used in the forms of 如何, 云何, 若何, 何物, 何者, 何等, 何处, 何方, 何所, 何在, 何人, 何故, 何以故, 因何, 何以, 以何, 作何, 何似生, 何时, and 如何 has enjoyed the highest frequency of use. The ‘什么’ category of the second-highest frequency of use contains the forms of 什麼, 什麼生, 什麼处, 什处, 什麼人, 什麼时, 什摩时节, 作什麼, followed by the ‘怎么’ category to which the forms of 作麼, 作麼生, 作生, 怎生 belong. An interrogative pronoun of the fourth-highest frequency of use is the ‘怎么’ category to which the forms of 作麼, 作麼生, 作生, 怎生 belong, followed by the ‘那’ category with just three forms of 那箇, 阿那箇, 阿那个, and the ‘几’ category with 幾箇, 幾何, 多小, 大小. In the ‘几’ category, 大小 appeared most. Regarding the study on the usage of interrogatives, those interrogatives for asking men, things and places were connected by type and their semantic functions were analyzed. According to the analysis, each type had very different forms of expression, but there were significant differences in terms of frequency. Regardless of types, most of the interrogatives appearing in SMYSJ were used in interrogative sentences. A considerable proportion of them, of course, were used for rhetorical questions but some of them were used for directing. In conclusion, regarding interrogatives appearing in SMYSJ, expressions used for colloquial words during the Song Dynasty appeared, but some types of usage during this period did not appear. Considering these aspects, interrogatives appearing in SMYSJ did not have the complete features of the modern version of the spoken language.