이분법적 대립책략을 이용한 ‘포함’ 동사 사용 구분: Contain vs. Include

Abstract

Many corpus-based studies of words have depended simply on collocation and lexico-grammatical patterns. This can lead to a distortion of the truth of words, For effective distinction of a confusingly similar pair of lexical/grammatical near-synonyms, Kim (2014) has proposed the “Binary Opposition(BO) Strategy,” the basic idea of which is that in order to distinguish sharply and effectively between a pair of near-synonyms, focus on a pair of (contextual) BO features, such as [actual vs. non-actual], [cause vs. effect], etc., makes the critical difference between them. By using Kim’s BO Strategy, this study attempts to distinguish between the confusingly similar contextual uses of ‘contain’ vs. ‘include’, which are interchangeable or not depending on context. It demonstrates that in the case of non-interchangeable uses, ‘include’ and ‘contain’ are distinguished in the context by BOs like [+agentive vs. -agentive] in subject NP respectively, on one hand, [close-ended vs. open-ended] in the semantic relation between subject and object NPs, on the other hand. In case of non-interchangeable uses, the two verbs tend to be distinguished by minor BOs such as [collective vs. individuative], [whole vs. part], [given vs. (additional) new], and so forth