CAJ | 학술논문

朱德熙先生建立的“名动词”类别存在两个问题，一是标准不好把握，范围难以确定；一是导致理论上矛盾，体系上不一致。标准可以进一步明确和改进，比较严重的问题是“名动词”的定位最终导致放弃“汉语动词做主宾语的时候没有转化为名词”的立场，违背朱先生一贯看重和坚持的“简单性原则”。本文指出，“名动词”和英语的“V-ing形式”并不是对当的同类现象，英语所有的动词都有“V-ing形式”，而“名动词”只是汉语动词中的小部分，汉语里跟英语的“V-ing形式”对当的不是“名动词”而是整个“动词”类。我们提出的解决问题的对策是两条：一，确立汉语“名动包含”的模式；二，首先用单音双音来区分动性强弱不同的动词。
주덕희선생건립적“명동사”유별존재량개문제，일시표준불호파악，범위난이학정；일시도치이론상모순，체계상불일치。표준가이진일보명학화개진，비교엄중적문제시“명동사”적정위최종도치방기“한어동사주주빈어적시후몰유전화위명사”적립장，위배주선생일관간중화견지적“간단성원칙”。본문지출，“명동사”화영어적“V-ing형식”병불시대당적동류현상，영어소유적동사도유“V-ing형식”，이“명동사”지시한어동사중적소부분，한어리근영어적“V-ing형식”대당적불시“명동사”이시정개“동사”류。아문제출적해결문제적대책시량조：일，학립한어“명동포함”적모식；이，수선용단음쌍음래구분동성강약불동적동사。
The category ＂nouny verb＂ as established by Zhu （1982, 1985a, b） has two problems. First, it is difficult to delimit the scope of the category with certainty using the proposed criterions. Second, the definition of the category leads to inconsistency in theory and the whole system. While the criterions have room for improvement, the definition of the category is in conflict with Zhu＇sview that there is no nominalization in Chinese and violates the Principle of Simplicity. We point out that the category ＂nouny verb＂ in Chinese is not equivalent to the ＂V-ing form＂ in English, because in English all verbs have V-ing forms but in Chinese ＂nouny verbs＂ constitute only a small part of the verbs. What is equivalent to V-ing forms in Chinese is the whole verb category. In other words, all the verbs in Chinese are verbal nouns in nature. To solve the above problems we propose to establish the ＂noun includes verb＂ pattern in Chinese and to differentiate degrees of ＂nouniness＂ with the more reliable monovs. disyllable criterion.