남북한 규범문법의 격 표시 형태소 처리의 비교

I would suggest the base that unified grammar through comparison ‘case’ in South Korea with ‘격토’ in North Korea could be systematized. While ‘case’ is recognized word in South Korea, ‘격토’ is not recognized word in North Korea. In South Korea subjective complements ‘-이’,‘-가’, ‘-께서’, ‘-서’, ‘-에서’ are described, on the other hand, only ‘-이’, ‘-가’ ‘-께서’ in North Korea are dealt with subjective complement without exception and ‘-에서’, -서’ are dealt with ‘위격’. Only sentence component which is required a narrative word is recognized as complement. In South Korea, 보격 postpositions ‘-이/-가’ are situated before narrative words ‘되다, 아니다’: In North Korea 보격 postposition not only is not recognized but is dealt with ‘-이’, ‘-가’ as subjective complement. In North Korea since the sentence component and the object connected to an advervial postpositional word play a part in aiding incomplete narrative words, it is dealt with complement. As complement is a sentence component necessary and adverb is not indispensable, I think that dealing with them as complement is valid. A narrative word ‘-이다’ is not regarded as 격토 in North Korea. Instead ‘-이’ of ‘-이다’ changes into conjugated ending word, ‘바꿈토’. There is a pause before or after ‘-이다’ and it can be recognized as independent language unit. However, as it has a function of narrative word, it must necessarily discuss dealing with ‘-이다’. In South Korea, I am sure that Syntax theory on the basis of Structures and Transformational of Generative Grammar is different from ‘토’ theory and study sphere. I think it is necessary to look into the developing process by approaching comprehensive grammar theory of ‘토’ characteristics which is thought to be different between the two Koreas. Also, It is necessary to standardize on setting up the scope of each case between the two Koreas and it will be the next project.