Volume 25, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0929-998X
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9765
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


This paper provides an account of interpersonal resources in Korean from the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics. The focus is upon the paradigmatic interdependency of and , and the syntagmatic interaction of their realisations with and the in this language. Specifically, this paper puts two arguments forward. One is that the system of is fundamental in Korean. The system has two choices: formal and informal. and belong to formal resources, and involve power-oriented language use. and are informal resources, and involve solidarity-oriented language use. The other argument is that realisations of interpersonal resources are scattered across ranks in Korean. The paper advocates SFL’s top-down paradigmatic perspective, which enables us to pull resources together in an account that formalises their interdependency while respecting their divergent realisations.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra
    2004Evidentiality. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aikhenvald, Alexandra & R. M. W. Dixon
    2003Studies in evidentiality. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.54
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.54 [Google Scholar]
  3. Brown, Lucien
    2015a Honorifics and politeness. In Lucien Brown & Jaehoon Yeon (eds.), 303–319.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 2015b Revisiting “polite” ‑yo and “deferential” ‑supnita speech style shifting in Korean from the viewpoint of indexicality. Journal of Pragmatics79. 43–59. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.009 [Google Scholar]
  5. Browng, Lucien & Jaehoon Yeon
    (eds.) 2015The handbook of Korean linguistics. Oxford: Wiley.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chafe, Wallace & Johanna Nichols
    (eds.) 1986Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Cho, Choon-Hak
    1982A study of Korean pragmatics: Deixis and politeness. Seoul: Hanshin.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. DeLancey, Scott
    1997 Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology1(1). 33–52. doi: 10.1515/lity.1997.1.1.33
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1997.1.1.33 [Google Scholar]
  9. Halliday, M. A. K.
    1984 Language as code and language as behaviour: A Systemic-Functional interpretation of the nature and ontogenesis of dialogue. In Robin Fawcett , M. A. K. Halliday , Sydney M. Lamb & Adam Makkai (eds.), The semiotics of language and culture Vol 1: Language as social semiotic, 3–35. London: Pinter.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
    2014An introduction to functional grammar. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Hur, Woong
    199520 seyki wuli maluy hyengtaylon (Korean morphology in the twentieth century). Seoul: Saem Munhwasa.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Kim, Chung-sook , Dong-Ho Park , Byung-kyu Lee , Hai-Young Lee , Hee Jung Jung , Jeong Soon Choe & Yong Heo
    2005Oykwukinul wihan hankuke munpep (Korean grammar for international learners) Vol 2. Seoul: Communications Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Kwon, Jae-il
    2012Hankuke munpepnon (Korean grammar). Seoul: Tae Hak Sa.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Lee, Hyo Sang
    2015 Modality. In Lucien Brown & Jaehoon Yeon (eds.), 249–268.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Lee, Ik-Seop & Wan Chae
    1999Kuke munpepnon kanguy (Lectures on Korean grammar). Seoul: Hak Yeon Sa.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Lee, Keedong
    1993A Korean grammar on semantic-pragmatic principles. Seoul: Hanguk Munhwa Sa.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Lukoff, Fred
    1977 Ceremonial and expressive uses of the styles of address in Korean. In Chin-W. Kim (ed.), Papers in Korean linguistics, 269–296. Columbia, SC: Hornbeam Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Martin, J. R.
    1992English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.59
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.59 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2013Systemic Functional Grammar: A next step into the theory – axial relations. Beijing: Higher Education Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Martin, J. R. & Peter R. R. White
    2005The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Sohn, Ho-Min
    1999The Korean language. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Song, Jae Jung
    2005The Korean language: Structure, use and context. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203390825
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203390825 [Google Scholar]
  23. Strauss, Susan
    2005 Cognitive realization markers in Korean: A discourse-pragmatic study of the sentence-ending particles ‑kwun, ‑ney and ‑tela . Language Sciences27. 437–480. doi: 10.1016/j.langsci.2004.09.014
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2004.09.014 [Google Scholar]
  24. Suh, Cheong-soo
    1984Contaypep yenkwu (Research on Korean honorifics). Seoul: Hanshin.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Sung, Ky-chull
    1985Hyentay taywupep yenkwu (Research on contemporary Korean honorifics). Seoul: Kaymunsa.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error