Appearances Are Deceiving: Polysemization and Grammaticalization of Korean and Thai Lexemes of Chinese Origin
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1508.32Keywords:
grammaticalization, polysemization, contact-induced change, semantic map, false similarityAbstract
From crosslinguistic and grammaticalization perspectives, uniquely valuable insights into the role of conceptual and cognitive operations in language change can be obtained when observing myriad developmental patterns of lexemes in multiple languages which originated from the same etymon in a donor language. These historical borrowings undergo diverse changes within a language, often independent of the characteristics in the donor language. While Korean and Thai are typologically distinct and genealogically unrelated, both have been extensively influenced by Chinese in historical times, albeit with little or no documentation at the time of borrowing. This paper addresses the polysemization and grammaticalization of the two lexemes yang in Korean and yàaŋ in Thai, whose etymon is the Chinese yàng ‘appearance, shape, etc.’ In the recipient languages, a number of lexical meanings were borrowed or innovated, with different foci in each instance. The lexemes were also grammaticalized into a prefix, preposition, conjunction, modality markers for probability and false similarity (counterfactual), and a similative denoting ‘like’. A notable aspect is that Korean yang and Thai yàaŋ, unlike their Chinese etymon yàng, developed into markers of false resemblance, i.e., counterfactuals. This paper shows the influence of the morphosyntactic characteristics of the recipient languages on grammaticalization processes.
References
Adamou, E., & Matras, Y. (Eds.) (2020). The Routledge handbook of language contact. Routledge.
Andersen, H. (1973). Abductive and deductive change. Language, 49, 765-793.
Bentley, J. R. (2001). A descriptive grammar of Early Old Japanese prose. Brill.
Bisang, W. (1998). Adverbiality: The view from the Far East. In J. van der Auwera (Ed.), Adverbial constructions in the languages of Europe (pp. 643-812). Mouton de Gruyter.
Bisang, W. (2006). Contact-induced convergence: Typology and a reality. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed. Vol. 3. pp. 88-101). Elsevier.
Bybee, J. L. (2007). Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford University Press.
Bybee, J. L., Pagliuca, W., & Perkins, R. D. (1994). The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. The University of Chicago Press.
Carston, R. (2021). Polysemy: Pragmatics and sense conventions. Wiley Online Library.
Craig, C. (1991). Ways to go in Rama: A case study in polygrammaticalization. In E. C. Traugott & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization (Vol. 2, pp. 455-492). John Benjamins.
CTP (The Chinese Text Project). (n.d.) Accessible online at https://ctext.org/, accessed in January-March 2025.
Culioli, A. (1990). Pour une linguistique de l’énonciation. Opérations et représentations [Towards linguistics of enunciation, operations and representations], Tome I. Ophrys.
François, A. (2008). Semantic maps and the typology of colexification: Intertwining polysemous networks across languages. In M. Vanhove (Ed.), From polysemy to semantic change (pp. 163-216). John Benjamins.
Geeraerts, D. (1993). Vagueness’s puzzles, polysemy’s vagaries. Cognitive Linguistics, 4, 223-272.
Genetti, C. (1991). From postposition to subordination in Newari. In E. C. Traugott & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization (Vol. 2, pp. 227-255). John Benjamins.
Givón, T. (1971). Historical syntax and synchronic morphology: An archaeologist's field trip. Chicago Linguistic Society, 7, 394-415.
Givón, T. (2015). The diachrony of grammar. John Benjamins.
Glynn, D., & Robinson, J. A. (Eds.). (2014). Corpus methods for semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy. John Benjamins.
Grant, A. P. (Ed.). (2020). The Oxford handbook of language contact. Oxford University Press.
Ha, Y.-S. (2021, 2014). Hanca ewen sacen [An etymological dictionary of Chinese characters]. Tosechwulphan 3.
Handian. (n.d.). Online Chinese etymological dictionary. www.zdic.net/hans.
Hankwuke taysacen [A comprehensive Korean dictionary]. (2011, 2009). Korea University Research Institute of Korean Studies.
Haspelmath, M. (1999). Optimality and diachronic adaptation. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 18(2),180–205.
Haspelmath, M. (2025). Ambiguity avoidance vs. expectation sensitivity as functional factors in grammatical change. Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. ms.
Heine, B. (1997). Cognitive foundations of grammar. Oxford University Press.
Heine, B. (2002). On the role of context in grammaticalization. In I. Wischer & G. Diewald (Eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization (pp. 83-101). John Benjamins.
Heine, B., Claudi, U., & Hünnemeyer, F. (1991). Grammaticalization: A conceptual framework. The University of Chicago Press.
Heine, B., & Kuteva, T. (2005). Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge University Press.
Heine, B., Yang, W., & Rhee, S. (2024). Discourse-pragmatic markers of (inter)subjective stance in Asian languages. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 28(4), 751-770.
Hicky, R. (Ed.). (2020). The handbook of language contact (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Higashiizumi, Y., Shibasaki, R. (forthc.) The emergence of pragmatic markers from Chinese compounds in Chinese, Japanese, and Korean: Perspectives from East Asian languages and beyond. Brill.
Hopper, P. J. (1987). Emergent grammar. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 13, 139-157.
Hopper, P. J., & Traugott, E. C. (2003, 1993). Grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press.
Jones, M. C., Esch, E. (Eds.). (2002). Language change: The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors. Mouton de Gruyter.
Khammee, K., & Rhee, S. (2025). The goal-over-source asymmetry in Thai and Korean. Language and Cognition, 17, e27, 1-26.
Kim, J. (2020). Korean. In T. Tsunoda (Ed.), Mermaid construction: A compound-predicate construction with biclausal appearance (pp. 283-332). De Gruyter Mouton.
Koe taysacen [A dictionary of Old Korean]. (2016). In Y-P Hong, J. Park, & H. H. Lee (Eds.). Sunmoon University Press.
Koe Taysacen [A Dictionary of Old Korean]. (2010). J. Park (Ed.). Hakkobang.
Kuteva, T., Heine, B., Hong, B., Long, H., Narrog, H., & Rhee, S. (2019). World lexicon of grammaticalization (2nd ed.) Cambridge University Press.
Kuryɫowicz, J. (1975, 1965). The evolution of grammatical categories. In E. Coseriu (Ed.), Esquisses Linguistiques II [Linguistic sketches] (pp. 38-54). Fink.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1991). Cognitive grammar. In F. G. Droste & J. E. Joseph (Eds.), Linguistic theory and grammatical description (pp. 275-306). John Benjamins.
Lehmann, C. (1991). Grammaticalization and related changes in contemporary German. In E. C. Traugott & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization (Vol. 2, pp. 493-535). John Benjamins.
Lessau, D. A. (1994). A dictionary of grammaticalization. 3 volumes. Universitätsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer.
Levinson, S., & Mejra, S. (2003). ‘Natural concepts’ in the spatial topological domain – adpositional meanings in crosslinguistic perspective: An exercise in semantic typology. Language, 79(3), 485-516.
Majid, A., Bowerman, M., van Staden, M., & Boster, J. S. (2007). The semantic categories of ‘cutting and breaking’ events across languages. Cognitive Linguistics, 18(2), 133-152.
Martin, S. E. (1953). The phonemes of ancient Chinese (Supplement to the Journal of American Oriental Society 16). American Oriental Society.
Maschler, Y. (2000). What can bilingual conversation tell us about discourse markers?: Introduction. International Journal of Bilingualism, 4(4), 437-445.
Matras, Y., & Sakel, J. (Eds.). (2007). Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter.
Narrog, H. (2010). A diachronic dimension in maps of case functions. Linguistic Discovery, 8(1), 233-254.
Narrog, H., & van der Auwera, J. (2011). Grammaticalization and semantic maps. In H. Narrog & B. Heine (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization (pp. 318-327). Oxford University Press.
Nerlich, B., & Clarke, D. D. (2001). Ambiguities we live by: Towards a pragmatics of polysemy. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 1-20.
Paul, H. (1920, 1880). Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte (5th ed.). Niemeyer.
Rhee, S. (1996). Semantics of verbs and grammaticalization: The development in Korean from a cross-linguistic perspective, Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin. Seoul: Hankook Publisher.
Rhee, S. (2000). Frame of focus in grammaticalization. Discourse and Cognition, 7(2), 79-104.
Rhee, S. (2005). How far likeness can go: Grammaticalization of kath- in Korean. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 30, 391-402.
Rhee, S. (2021). Linguistic forms at the border of lexis and grammar: Grammaticalization of adpositions across languages. Global Contents Publishing.
Rhee, S., & Khammee, K. (2024). Grammaticalization of future-time reference markers in Korean and Thai. GEMA: Online Journal of Language Studies, 24(3), 1-19.
Rhee, S., Koo, H. J. (2015). Analogy-driven inter-categorial grammaticalization and (inter)subjectification of -na in Korean. Lingua, 166, 22-42.
Rhee, S., Shibasaki, R., & Chen, X. (2021). Grammaticalisation of discourse markers in East Asian languages: Introduction. East Asian Pragmatics (Special issue), 6(3), 271-281.
Robert, S. (2008). Words and their meanings: Principles of variation and stabilization. In M. Vanhove (Ed.), From polysemy to semantic change (pp. 55-92). John Benjamins.
Royal Institute Dictionary, The. (n.d.) Bangkok: Royal Society of Thailand.
SEALANG. (n.d.). http://sealang.net/thai/chinese/middle.htm, accessed in January 2025.
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.
Thomason, S. G., & Kaufman, T. (1988). Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. University of California Press.
Traugott, E. C., Heine, B. (1991). Introduction. In E. C. Traugott & B. Heine (Eds.). Approaches to grammaticalization (Vol. 1, pp. 1-14). John Benjamins.
Traugott, E. C., & König, E. (1991). The semantics-pragmatics of grammaticalization revisited. In E. C. Traugott & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization (Vol. 1, pp. 189-218). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Treis, Y. (2017). Similative morphemes as purpose clause markers in Ethiopia and beyond. In Y. Treis & M. Vanhove (Eds.), Similative and equative constructions: A crosslinguistic perspective (pp. 91-142). John Benjamins.
Tsunoda, T. (Ed.). (2020). Mermaid construction: A compound-predicate construction with biclausal appearance. De Gruyter Mouton.
van der Auwera, J., & Plungian, V. A. (1998). Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology, 2, 79-124.
Vanhove, M. (2008). Semantic associations between sensory modalities, prehension and mental perceptions: A cross-linguistic perspective. In M. Vanhove (Ed.), Towards a typology of semantic associations (pp. 341-370). Mouton de Gruyter.
Vicente, A., & Falkum, I. L. (2015). Polysemy: Current perspectives and approaches. Lingua, 157, 1-16.
Wulimal khunsacen [A comprehensive dictionary of Korean]. (1996, 1992). The Hangeul Society.
Xiandai hanyu cidian [A Modern Chinese dictionary]. (2016). Commercial Press.
