우리가 세상을 바라보고 인지하는 방법은 개념화에 의지하고 있으며, 개념화는 인 지적 범주화의 과정이다. 본고는 광운의 物名 중에서 蟲名에 대한 고대인의 인지 범주적 특징을 살펴보았다. 또 물명이 하나의 글자에서 두 개의 글자로 합성되는 과 정 역시 두 개의 개념이 확장되고 변화하는 과정이라고 보았으며 이를 유형별로 나 누어 의미를 분석해 보았다. 합성어를 이루는 형태는 네 가지로 나눌 수 있다. 의미 A와 비슷한 의미를 가진 한자 A′가 합쳐져 A의 의미가 되는 경우, A와 B가 합쳐 서 A의 의미를 가지는 경우, A와 B가 합쳐서 B의 의미를 가지는 경우, A와는 다른 B와 C를 합쳐 A를 설명하는 경우이다. 이렇게 합성어가 되었을 때 그 구성한자는 해당의미가 변화하거나 유실되고, 다른 의미를 포용하여 의미항이 늘어나기도 한다. 이러한 합성자를 이루는 의미를 모두 연결망을 이어보면 어떤 한자가 서로 이어져 새로운 의미를 만들어내고 있는지, 어느 동물이 서로 친근한지를 알 수 있는데 이런 경로는 복합적인 표현의 의미에 포함되며, 표현들 사이의 의미차이를 설명해 줄 수 도 있다. 우리는 스키마(schema)를 통해 이러한 복합적인 의미표현을 이해하고 인지 하며 추상화시킬 수 있는 것이다. 또한 한자가 가지는 다의성, 동의자, 통가자 등의 이해를 도식화하여 이해하게 되면 한자를 이해하는 데 더 도움을 줄 수 있을 것이라 생각한다.

This paper aims to discuss the semantic types of subordinate compound words between Korean and Chinese. First, we discussed the concept of subordinate compound words, then analyzes the concept and the location of the head words in the subordinate compound words. We know that Korean is the head-final language, for the head of is at right. On the contrary, the location of the head of Chinese compound words is not fixed. There are many left-head word structure of compound words in Chinese nouns, verbs and adjectives. By analyzing the semantical structure of the compound words, most of the words are the right-head structure in both korean and Chinese. There are many left-head semantic structure of subordinate compound nouns, verbs and adjectives. By contrast, there are a little left-head semantic structure of subordinate compound verbs and adjectives. There are many same points in right-head semantic structure of subordinate compound. In chapter 4, By analyzing the specific words, we studied the semantic types of subordinate compound nouns, verbs and adjectives between Korean and Chinese. Finally, we came to the conclusion of this paper. We wish this paper will contribute to comparative Study between Korean and Chinese.

This paper aims to discuss the semantical　structure of coordinative compound words between Korean and Chinese. There are four kind of relations between the factors of coordinative words, that is overlapping, complementary, contiguous, inclined etc. Furthermore, in this paper we analysed the figurative meaning of coordinative words from cognitive linguistics. especially viewed from the metaphor and metonymy points. and analysed the reason of the figurative meaning of coordinative viewed from extension of meaning and semantic shift. Finally, we discussed the cultural connotation in the coordinative compound words from the social and psychological standard, the semantical compound words can reflect the same and different social culture features of Korea and China. Both Korea and China are seated east Asia, so there are so much same social culture. such as, 'male superiority' etc. We wish this paper will contribute to the study the relation of them.

Kim, Sook Young. 1996. Interface between root compounds and synthetic compounds. Studies in Modern Grammatical Theories 9: 205-228. The aim of this study is to reach the interface between root compounds and synthetic compounds using the theories of Roeper/Siegel(1978),Selkirk(1982) and Fabb(1984). A compound is a lexical unit consisting of more than one base word and functioning both grammatically and semantically as a single word. It can be divided into two classes: root compounds(or primary compounds)and synthetic compounds(or verbal compounds). Root compounds are those compounds whose second elements are not derivatives from verbs. On the other hand, synthetic compounds refer to those words which contain deverbal second constituents. Roeper/Siegel generally assume that both sentences and synthetic compounds are formed from subcategorization frames associated with verbs. They propose the First Sister Principle, which applies to the formation of synthetic compounds. Selkirk`s theory consists of two claims: (i) synthetic compoundings and root compoundings are generated by the same rewriting roles, (ii) the interpretation of a synthetic compounds is due to the optional rule for assigning grammatical functions to the nonhead element. Fabb regards -ing and -er case-markers, and specifies that they may be attached in syntax. The differences of the theories were found in the different explanations of phrases and non-heads with complements, etc. They show the interface between root compounds and synthetic compounds. In conclusion a distinctive syntactic explanation on the deverbal words, the second constituents of the compounds, may thus be the key to the understanding of the interface between root compounds and synthetic compounds.