The subject of this paper is the language usage within legal discourse, with the corpus sourced from the legislation of the People’s Republic of China. Zhang Deming (1989) believes that “register is a scientific term in the category of language stylistics, a ‘functional style’ of language formed due to different communicative functions of language use. This system has a series of commonalities in linguistic materials (elements) and rhetorical methods, and there are a series of differences and corresponding patterns between different systems.” According to his view, the legal register has distinctive features which differ from other registers. This paper describes and interprets the syntactic, lexical, and register aspects of legal discourse, along with the linguistic style inherent in legal language.

This paper makes a detailed description and analysis of the syntactic function and semantic orientation of “Ba+O+V”, and draws the following conclusions: a. “Ba+O+V” has various syntactic functions. Besides being a predicate to form the Ba Sentence, it can also be a subject, an object, a prepositional object, an attribute, a complement, etc. In addition, it can also form the De phrase with De, and form the location phrase with some location words. It presents different structural features in different syntactic positions. b. “Ba+O+V” is the most free when it acts as predicate, and is more or less limited in structure when it is used as other syntactic components，so the frequency of it in different syntactic positions is different. c. Because “Ba+O+V” can appear in different syntactic positions in the sentence, it can be semantically related to different components in the sentenc e，showing the diversity of its semantic direction. d. In teaching Chinese as a foreign language, we can’t just limit ourselves to the teaching of Ba sentence with “Ba+O+V” as the predicate. In order to improve students’ overall understanding of the function of “Ba+O+V”, we should also pay attention to the explanation of the usage of it in the non predicate position, so as to effectively improve their practical application ability.

The adverb “Jianzhi” is used frequently in modern Chinese, but most of its previous research focused on “subjectiveness”. To break through this limitation, this paper focused on the syntactic features and main semantic functions of the adverb “Jianzhi”. Firstly, in syntactic features, by organizing the structure with high frequency of “Jianzhi”, it is found that the common feature presented in the verb structure is to pay attention to the characteristics of the nature of the things, and in the adjective structure is to show that mainly modifies the high degree of complements. Secondly, we found that “Jianzhi” has two main semantic functions. The first one is “non-true value marking function” and the other one is “boundary function”. The former means the speaker reminds the listener that the central meaning in the “Jianzhi” sentence is not true, and the latter means when “Jianzhi” is modifying the degree component, it will set a boundary for the component, indicating the degree limit. The commonality of these two semantic functions is [+ default], so the main semantics of “Jianzhi” can be summarized as a temporary default to reach a certain amount or form a certain result, situation.

‘hǎohāor+de’ is composed of the syntactic superimposed form ‘hǎohāor’ and the structural auxiliary word ‘de.’ It is a structure that occurs very frequently in modern spoken Chinese. ‘hǎohāor’ can only act as an adverbial (have a good time) or an attribute (a quite good book in a sentence). ‘hǎohāor’ cannot be used alone, or act as a subject, an object or a predicate. Nor can it modify a noun or a noun phrase directly. However, ‘hǎohāor+de’ can be used alone, and can be used as a predicate, a complement, an attribute and an adverbial. Different syntactic functions of ‘hǎohāor+de’ have different semantic features. This is a difficult point for the students who are non-native speakers of Chinese. This paper discusses in detail the syntactic functions and the related semantic features of ‘hǎohāor+de,’ and also tries to probe into the source of it, hoping to provide some help for Chinese language teaching.

In modern Chinese, nouns act as adverbials, which are very special grammatical phenomena. Nouns as adverbials refer to the question of whether or not the adverbials mark "de(地)". By means of syntactic and semantic analysis, common nouns of table time, place and position are used as adverbials without markedness. By the constraints of context, weaker means the meaning of reference expression tools and compares. The common names of people, animals and objects, This is the ancient Chinese syntax structure of the results of the grammaticalization. In modern Chinese, abstract nouns act as adverbials, which are related to the "subjectivity" of linguistic typology. These abstract nouns carry the semantical case of mark "de(地)" to express subjective meaning. In particular, it was manner adverbial that the common nouns are expressed in the form of juxtaposition, and the quantity structure is expressed by the reduplication structures. Nominal component modified action behavior whether there is mark divisded into two kind of meanings in the semantic for the objective and subjective sense. Objective meaning refers to the speaker has nothing to do and Subjective meaning refers to the speaker's subjective beliefs and attitudes associated with the significance. The reduplication structure and the noun juxtaposition structure express the subjective meaning, while the preposition structure does not have the subjective and objective points. It only expresses the semantic meaning of the prepositive markings which have been completely grammaticalization.

한국어 접속문에서 두 절을 연결시켜 주는 중요한 요소는 연결어미이며, 연결어미를 통해서 두 절의 상 호관계가 드러난다. 반면에 중국어의 접속문은 주로 관련 사어를 이용하여 두 절을 연결한다. 중국어의 관련 사어는 연사와 관련부사의 결합형식으로 한국어의 연결어미와 같은 기능을 담당한다. 이러한 언어 적 특성의 차이로 인해 중국인 학습자가 한국어를 배울 때에 연결어미를 학습하는 것은 특히 어렵고, 많은 오류가 발생하게 된다. 양보 연결어미의 사용 빈도가 비교적 높고 각 항목은 특징에 있어 차이가 존 재한다. 그렇기 때문에 학습자들이 각 항목의 통사적 특징을 모두 파악하여 습득하는 것은 쉽지 않다. 그래서 본 논문의 목적은 중국어권 학습자 위한 한국어 양보관계 연결어미 ‘-아/어도’, ‘-더라도’, ‘-ㄹ 지라도’, ‘-ㄹ망정’, ‘-ㄹ지언정’, ‘-ㄴ들’을 중심으로 통사적 특징을 살펴본다. 본 논문의 목표는 한국어 양보관계 연결어미의 통사적 특징을 정확히 파악하게 할 수 있고, 문법 요소 사용 능력을 향상시킬 수 있다는 점에서 의미가 있다.

Systemic Functional linguistics considers Modality as the speaker’s attitude betwe en “yes” and “no”. Based on this, we discuss the Chinese modality system. First, we review what has been done on Chinese modals by the previous researchers. Then, we introduce Halliday’s modality system in English to establish a Chinese modality system and analyze the syntactic and semantic features of the typical modal verbs to point out the negotiation of Chinese modality.

This study uses a sentence recall task to investigate syntactic priming effects in English prepositional object dative (PO) or double-object dative (DO) structures by Korean speakers of L2 English. The purposes were (1) to determine whether syntactic priming occurs during L2 production, and if it does, then to determine how it affects the subsequent utterance of target structures; and (2) to determine whether syntactic priming during production is lexically specific or independent. Thirty-two sets of target-prime sentences were developed using 12 dative alternating verbs, creating DO-DO, DO-PO, PO-DO, PO-PO target-prime pairs. Syntactic priming effects occurred with the PO priming irrespective of targets (whether DO or PO) but only when the verb used in the prime was the same as the verb used in the target. The results suggest that lexical dependency of syntactic knowledge during L2 production does not accord with the lemma stratum model. A pedagogical implication of successful learning of lexical entries is discussed.

This study investigates the effects of syntactic priming on the learning of the ditransitive construction by 49 Korean elementary school English learners. In this study the effects of syntactic priming were scrutinized more in detail by implementing it in three different input frequency conditions: Skewed-first distribution, balanced distribution, and the control. Results indicated that syntactic priming overall had facilitative effects on the oral production performance of the participants. When it comes to the participants’ comprehension of the target construction, however, it was only in the skewed-first distribution that priming had a substantial learning effect. It is concluded that priming combined with the skewed-first type of input distribution would have generalizable and durable learning effects.

한국어 정도부사 ‘좀’은 피수식어의 정도를 약화시킨다는 점에서 대표적이며 중국어 정도부사 ‘有點兒’과 통사적으로 비슷한 점이 많다. 본고에서는 한국어 ‘좀’을 기준으로 중국어 ‘有點兒’과 대조하여 그 통사적 특성을 피수식어의 범주에 따라 피수식어와 공기할 때의 수식제약을 중심으로 살펴보고 그 차이를 밝히고자 했다. 그 결과를 종합하면 ① ‘좀’은 형용사와 제약 없이 공기할 수 있지만 ‘有點兒’은 상태 형용사를 수식할 수 없다. ② ‘좀’은 일반적으로 일부 성상 관형사만을 수식하며 이런 성상 관형사는 중국어에서는 형용사로 표현된다. ③ 정도부사 ‘좀’은 일부 부사만 수식할 수 있으나 ‘有點兒’은 부정부사와 제한된 시간부사를 빼고 다른 부사와 거의 공기할 수 없다. ④ 체언의 수식에서 정도성을 나타내는 명사일 경우 ‘좀’은 ‘명사구+이다’의 형식과 같은 지정사 구를 수식할 수 있다. 중국어에서 원칙적으로 정도부사는 직접 명사를 수식할 수 없지만 어휘 의미가 전환된 결과로 ‘정도부사+명사’의 구조가 많이 사용되고 있는 추세이다. ⑤ 일부 동사도 ‘좀’의 수식대상이 된다. 이럴 경우 중국어에서 ‘동사+得+有點兒+형용사’의 형식으로 표현되면 더 자연스럽다.

本文以“介词（到、在)+NP”为研究对象，进行句法和语义方面的分析，考察汉语“介词（到，在)+NP”结构在动词后充当结果补语的区别。很多句法结构都要求具有一个动补结构。句法上必须带补语的句子中，要求“在NP”和“到NP”结构作为补语的有“把字句”、“物体存在句”、“物体处置句”、“空间移动句”和“时间移动句”。我们将“到+NP”和“在+NP”结构在动词前充当状语和在动词后充当结果补语的区别分别来讨论。“在+NP”结构做结果补语和状语的区别我们将其归纳为五类， “到+NP”结构做结果补语和状语的区别我们将其归纳为三类。“介词（到、在)+NP”结构可以位于动词前也可以位于动词后。根据时间顺序原则（PTS)，“介词（到、在)+NP”结构时间上先于动词的状态可以接受它排在动词前。但是，如果“介词（到、在)+NP”结构是通过动作出现的结果，时间上结果出现于动词之后，因此不能接受“介词（到、在)+NP”结构排在动词前。“介词（到、在)+NP”结构位于动词后面时，具有[+终点], [+到达], [+完成], [+附着], [+达成], [+结果], [+实现], [+持续]等语义特征；“介词（到、在)+NP”结构位于动词前面时，不具有这些语义特征。但是，有些动词和介词结构之间的时间顺序是模糊的，所以PTS不起作用，这时“在+NP”做结果补语和做状语，其意义差别不明显，这种动词主要有两类：第一类是“死”，死的动作是瞬间发生的，但是死后的状态一直持续；第二类是“住”、“生活”、“工作”等动词，它们本身具有持续的状态，而不是短暂的动作。

L2 speakers often encounter difficulties caused by a dual problem both with vocabulary and structure in delivering his or her intended message. This qualitative study reports on how the dual problem involving both lexical and syntactic problems can be managed by employing CSs. The participants were 12 Korean students studying in a university in the USA, whose language proficiency varied from limited to high advanced. For the data, the participants’ natural conversations in various settings were recorded and stimulated recalls were conducted on the recorded conversations. The study presents various CSs for managing dual lexical-syntactic problems (DL-SCSs) identified from an inductive analysis of the data. Based on a taxonomic analysis of the data, this study presents a taxonomy in which various DL-SCSs are organized in multiple levels. In this paper, examples illustrating how participants employed each DL-SCS are also provided. These examples show that L2 speakers employing appropriate DL-SCSs are likely to communicate their intended meaning despite massive dual problems. Based on the findings, this study suggests that L2 speakers should be encouraged to use DL-SCSs.

동사복사 구문은 중국어의 다른 구문과는 분명히 다른 통사적 특징을 갖는 구문이다. 이에 본 논문은 동사복사 구문의 통사적 특징을 명확히 규명함으로써 동사복사 구문의 정의와 범위를 보다 더 분명히 하고자 한다.<BR> 동사복사 구문은 동사복사 구조가 술어가 되는 구문으로 통사형식은 (S)+V1+O1+V2+C+(O2) 이다. 이러한 통사형식을 갖는 동사복사 구문은 연동 구문의 일종이라 할 수 있다. 그러나 일반적인 연동 구문과는 달리 동사복사 구문의 V1과 V2가 반드시 동형의 동사이어야 한다는 차이가 있다 문법화 과정이나 정보구조의 관점에서 보면, O1은 동사복사 구문 생성에 있어 중요한 역할을 하며 문장에 반드시 출현해야 하는 성분이다. V1과 O1은 이합사로 충당될 수도 있다. 그러나 V1과 O1에 위치하는 성분이 동사성이면서 V2와 부분적으로 동형인 경우는 동사복사 구문이라 할 수 없다. C(보어)도 문장에 반드시 출현해야 하는 강제성 성분으로 C가 없는 구문은 동사복사 구문이 아니다. 결과보어, 정태 보어, 정도보어, 시량보어 등이 C가 될 수 있다. 반면에 S와 O2는 비강제성 성분으로 문장에 출현할 수도 있고 출현하지 않을 수도 있다.<BR> 동사복사 구문은 확장 형식을 가질 수 있다. 즉 O1과 V2 사이에 시간부사나 어기부사가 위치할 수 있다. 이러한 확장 형식의 동사복사 구문은 관련 부사가 있는 긴축문과 유사한 형식을 갖는다. 그러나 긴축문은 복문으로 동사복사 구문이 아니다.

This research examines the L2 output of young Korean ESL learners with respect to early child English grammar. From the comparison of the frequency of clause elements between L1 and L2 clause elements with respect to semantic theta roles, both language data showed that the ""agent-action-object"" structure was most prevalent. The dominant clause structures of Korean ESL language data were the SVO and the SVA structure. The frequencies of the V, the VO, and the SV structure in EFL language data were higher than those of Korean ESL utterances. The syntactic development of the Korean ESL language data was formed around the SVO and the SOA structure, whereas the EFL language data did not reveal any specific order of the development. Much more English language input should be provided to the students in natural ways for their acquisition and we should take into consideration the language difficulty and the natural development of English clause structure at the same time when developing EFL textbooks.

The present study examines the interpretation of Korean relative clauses (RC) by English speakers of L2 Korean. The purpose of the study is to see if these learners employ the same parsing strategy as native Korean speakers in the processing of a complex NP followed by a RC. Processing strategies were investigated with two different conditions, which were distinguished from each other by animacy presence in the second NP of a complex NP (e.g., chayk-ul ilk-nun apeci-uy atul ‘the son of the father who is reading a book’: [+ani, +ani] condition vs. kyosil-ey iss-nun haksayng-uy chayk ‘the book of the student who is in the classroom’: [+ani, -ani] condition). Korean speakers showed equal preference in the [+ani, +ani] condition, while they showed low attachment (LA) preference in the [+ani, -ani] condition. On the other hand, English speakers showed LA preference in both conditions. We assume that this LA preference by the English speakers might have been due to either the universal processing principle (recency) or influence from their L1, both of which make the same attachment site. The source of the Korean speakers diverging behavior is discussed on the basis of difference in verb meaning used in each condition. The discrepancy between the two language groups leads us to propose that English speakers do not rely on the same processing strategies as Korean speakers.