CONTRASTIVE STUDY OF CLOSED INTERROGATIVE SENTENCE IN KOREAN AND INDONESIAN LANGUAGE

Diyah Hayuning Pertiwi, Putu Pramania Adnyana
{"title":"CONTRASTIVE STUDY OF CLOSED INTERROGATIVE SENTENCE IN KOREAN AND INDONESIAN LANGUAGE","authors":"Diyah Hayuning Pertiwi, Putu Pramania Adnyana","doi":"10.24071/llt.v26i2.5270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study discusses Korean and Indonesian morphosyntactic characteristics of closed interrogative sentences. The method used is descriptive qualitative with literature review and contrastive analysis. The results showed that there were differences and similarities in terms of closed interrogative markers, sentence structure, and sentence negation. The first difference in closed interrogative markers is that the marker in Korean is an interrogative sentence-ending (eomi) at the end of a sentence rather than a question word, whereas the marker in Indonesian is the question word apa at the beginning of the sentence and particle -kah at the beginning, middle or end of the sentence. Second, there are differences and similarities in sentence construction. Subjects that refer to the second person are omitted in Korean, whereas in Indonesian, the subject is required. The parallels lie in the fact that the predicate is a necessary component of sentence structure and that the presence of the object depends on the kind of verb used as the predicate. Thirdly, there is a distinction between Korean and Indonesian sentence negation in that Korean has a wider range of negation forms.","PeriodicalId":31957,"journal":{"name":"LLT Journal A Journal on Language and Language Teaching","volume":"15 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LLT Journal A Journal on Language and Language Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v26i2.5270","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study discusses Korean and Indonesian morphosyntactic characteristics of closed interrogative sentences. The method used is descriptive qualitative with literature review and contrastive analysis. The results showed that there were differences and similarities in terms of closed interrogative markers, sentence structure, and sentence negation. The first difference in closed interrogative markers is that the marker in Korean is an interrogative sentence-ending (eomi) at the end of a sentence rather than a question word, whereas the marker in Indonesian is the question word apa at the beginning of the sentence and particle -kah at the beginning, middle or end of the sentence. Second, there are differences and similarities in sentence construction. Subjects that refer to the second person are omitted in Korean, whereas in Indonesian, the subject is required. The parallels lie in the fact that the predicate is a necessary component of sentence structure and that the presence of the object depends on the kind of verb used as the predicate. Thirdly, there is a distinction between Korean and Indonesian sentence negation in that Korean has a wider range of negation forms.
朝鲜语和印尼语封闭疑问句的对比研究
本文探讨了朝鲜语和印尼语封闭疑问句的形态句法特征。本研究采用描述性定性方法,结合文献回顾和对比分析。结果表明,英汉两种语言在封闭疑问句标记、句子结构、句子否定等方面存在异同。封闭疑问句标记的第一个区别是,韩国语的标记是句尾的疑问句结束词(eomi)而不是疑问词,而印尼语的标记是句首的疑问词apa和句首、句中或句尾的助词-kah。第二,句子结构有异同。在韩国语中,指代第二人称的主语被省略,而在印尼语中,指代第二人称的主语是必需的。两者的相似之处在于,谓语是句子结构的必要组成部分,宾语的出现取决于用作谓语的动词的种类。第三,韩语与印尼语的句子否定有区别,韩语的否定形式范围更广。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信