In this study, a researcher transcribed Korean negation sentences presented on four episodes of the [Love of 7.7 Billion] and analyzed the discourses of foreign panel members by focusing on Korean negation sentences. The aims of this study are to (1) analyze types and accuracy of Korean negation sentences in foreign panel members’ discourse and (2) present pedagogical implications for efficient Korean education on negation sentences. This study was launched as an attempt to analyze how correctly and variously foreign panel members in the program use Korean negation sentences in their discourse. Since discourse is closely related to the ordinary life of humans, discourses which appeared on the [Love of 7.7 Billion] would be suitable data to analyze since it is a discussion-based program. Therefore, discourse is useful from a pedagogical standpoint to look into the Korean language proficiency of them. Through discourse analysis, several implications were found. (1) foreign panels tended to use short negation sentences rather than long negation sentences; (2) panels’ use of Korean negation sentences was not various; (3) panels divided Korean negation sentences into often-used negation sentences and rarely-used negation sentences; (4) the use of negative polarity was not found that much.

Heinrich Manns Professor Unrat weist charakteristische Merkmale des ‚Gesellschaftsromans’ auf: Repräsentativ zu erwähnen ist die Darstellung der Schule als ein Modell der Gesellschaft. Heinrich Mann zielte mit seinem schulsatirischen Professor Unrat darauf ab, die kaiserliche Bildungsanstalt zu kritisieren, und weitergehend psychologisierende Kritik an der zeitgenössischen bürgerlichen Kultur und Gesellschaft auszuüben. Zu diesem Zweck gestaltet der Autor die Schule und die darin agierende Figuren als eine Art Modell, das in einer vertretenden Funktion für die Gesellschaft steht. Dieses Gesellschaftsmodell führt eine Reflexion über den Bankrott der humanistischen Bildungsvorstellungen in der Wilhelminischen Zeit und ebenso über die Doppelmoral des Bürgertums in der Übergangssituation zur Moderne herbei. Hinsichtlich dieses Gesellschaftsmodells ist zu betrachten, inwiefern das Verfallen der neuhumanistischen Bildungsidee und das Verkommen bürgerlicher Kultur im Roman unterbreitet werden. Vor diesem Hintergrund kann der Protagonist des Romans Professor Unrat als Repräsentant des Bildungsbürgertums dieser Übergangszeit verstanden werden, in der die neuhumanistische Einheit der Bildungstradition verfällt.

The purposes of this study are to understand the influence of L1 on learning Korean negation and a developmental sequence of Korean negation forms through examining English and Japanese learners of Korean. In particular, we aim to investigate whether linguistic distance between L1 and L2 affects learning Korean negation. Forty English and twenty Japanese students who were learning Korean in colleges participated in the written production test. As a control group, forty Korean native speakers took the written test. We observed that the English and the Japanese groups produced less number of long form negation sentences than the Korean adult group did. The English group showed a developmental pattern to advance from short to long forms, while the Japanese group demonstrated the opposite tendency. These results suggested that an influence of L1 negation structure on L2 learning coexisted with that of a general developmental sequence. The pedagogical implications of the findings are two-fold:1) the findings would provide practical suggestions for instructing Korean negation forms in multilingual classrooms and 2) the findings would help researchers and language teachers understand the learning patterns of Korean by L2 learners.

예이츠가 인류의 구원을 위해 옳고 그름이라는 이분법의 사슬에서 해방되어 제 3의 지점을 지향한 사상은 예수의 사상과 관련성을 맺는다. 예이츠가 반자아를 통해 지향적 자아를 추구한 과정에는 부정의 방법론이 제시되고 있다. 이러한 점들은 인류 구원을 위하여 부정과 해체의 방법을 사용한 예수의 사상과 유사한 점들이 포착된다. 예이츠의 시 세계 속에는 현실과 초월에 대한 균형이 존재한다. 이것은 성경의 사상과 일치하는 면이 있다. 그리고 예이츠의 예술세계 속에는 영혼의 연마의 과정을 통한 신과 인간의 연합 사상이 담겨 있는데, 이것은 기독교의 동방정교의 신화사상과 유사성이 있다. 이처럼 예이츠의 예술의 세계의 중심사상 속에는 기독교와 연관성이 의외로 많은 것을 보게 된다.

독도는 고대의 신라시대부터 오늘날까지 한국의 고유영토이다. 대한제국은 1900년 칙령 41호를 선포하였다. 그래서 독도는 행정적으로 울도군의 소속이 되었다. 그럼에도 불구하고 일본은 독도를 침략하기 위해 독도를 주인이 없는 섬이라고 했다. 일본은 독도가 일본영토라고 주장하기 위해서는 칙령41호를 부정해야만 했다. 칙령 41호에는 “울릉전도, 죽도, 석도” 를 행정구역으로 지정되어있다. 여기에서 석도는 독도이다. 일본은 석도가 독도라는 것을 부정하고 있다. 일본은 석도가 관음도라고 주장한다. 그 이유는 울릉도 주변에는 죽도와 관음도만 있다는 것이다. 울도군의 관할구역은 울릉도 주변에 있는 섬들이어야 한다는 것이다. 1899년 울릉도 시찰위원으로 임명된 우용정이 울릉도를 조사하고 울릉도의 범위에 독도가 포함되어있지 않다는 것이다. 사실, 칙령41호로 울도군을 정한 이유는 울릉도와 독도를 관리 하게 위한 것이다. 독도를 관리할 이유가 없었다면, 명칭으로써, ‘울도군’이 아니고, ‘울릉군’ 으로 충분했다. 위키피디아의 ‘석도’는 내용적으로 죽도문제연구회가 날조한 것이다. 죽도문제연구회는 칙령41호의 ‘석도’는 독도가 아니라고 주장한다. 일본의 주장은 다음과 같다. “한국은 1904 년 이전에 독도를 알지 못했다. 명칭상으로 ‘석도’가 ‘독도’로 변경된 이유를 알 수 없다. 한국의 주장대로라면, 석도는 우산도가 되어야 옳다. 1905년 일본이 독도를 편입하였을 때, 한국은 일체 항의를 하지 않았다.” 일본은 칙령41호의 ‘석도’는 ‘관음도’라고 주장한다. 울릉도 주변에는 독도가 없고, ‘죽도’와 관음도뿐이라는 것이다. 이런 주장은 설득력이 없다. 그것은 추측이고, 합당한 설명은 없다.

In spite of numerous theoretical studies on sentential negation in Korean (an V for short form negation and V-ci anh for long form negation) in the literature, much of the discussion has focused on its abstract features, relying on the researcher`s intuition or introspective judgment of limited sources. This paper presents an empirical observation by investigating the actual distribu- tion of sentential negation in corpus, based on the Sejong Spoken Corpus. Two analyses of sentential negation were done: frequency analysis and compatibility with predicate types. The frequency analysis revealed that long form negation was used more often than short form negation. The analysis in terms of compatibility with predicate types showed that long form negation appeared more frequently with Sino-Korean predicates and with adjectival predicates than short form negation. The findings were discussed in relation to register variation and discourse strategies.

The aim of this paper is to analyze the grammatical status of English core negative element ne and not in the process of diachronic changes. Negation was generally expressed by the negative particle ne throughout OE. It came to be expressed by the weakened ne in combination with the negative adverb not in ME, and as ne disappeared, not started to be used exclusively from around the fifteenth century. There was a temporary tendency to place not before a lexical verb until the verb do became fully grammaticalized as an auxiliary, but negation began to be derived with the syntactic structure of `a finite modal verb/do＋not＋a lexical verb` from the later period of Early ModE. Contracted negation came to be optionally expressed through negative contraction in terms of encliticization of not to the preceding finite verb from Late ModE.

It is well-known that not may have scope over the universally quantified subject, even though it cannot c-command the subject. When surface structure does not correspond to logical form, we can resort to such scope-shifting operations as QR or reconstruction. However, I propose that those syntactic operations do not work for the relative scope of negation. Instead, I argue that a relational analysis of negation enables us to explain the phenomena without recourse to those syntactic operations. That is, I claim that not takes VP as a first argument and the subject as a second argument, negating the relation between the two arguments.