1

On Origins of Korean supnita and Japanese desu/masu:

Deriving Addressee Honorific Markers
from Verbs of Announcements*
Alan Hyun-Oak Kim
Southern Illinois University at Carbondale

1. Introduction
In this study I am concerned with a particular aspect of the theory of grammaticalization--the question of conditions licensing grammaticalization, more specifically, as Traugott and
Heine (1991:7) put it, given that a form A exists, what is its potential for becoming
grammaticalized, and how do we know when this is happening?
The present paper is organized in four sections. Following this introduction, in Section 2 I
establish a working hypothesis in order to account for grammaticalization involved with
honorific verbs of saying/telling. In Section 3, I show evidence from Korean and Japanese
to support the hypothesis. Section 4 is my conclusion.
2. A Working Hypothesis
The hypothesis, with which I work in this paper is as follows:
(1) Hypothesis on Sentence-final Polite Markers
If a language has verb-final word order, and if it has a system of
honorification (as seen in Korean and Japanese), verbs of communication
(such as say, tell, inform) tend to undergo grammaticalization along
two pathways: (i) shifting the lexical categories; and (ii) shifting in
functional categories of the following:
(2)

A. Changes in Lexical Categories

I. Lexical Verb Auxiliary Verb
II. Auxiliary Verb Grammatical Morpheme
B. Changes in Functional Categories
I. Subject Honorifics
Non-subject Honorifics
II. Non-subject Honorifics Addressee Honorifics

3.

Evidence from earlier Korean and Japanese data

3.1. Standard Modern Korean supni-ta

*

This paper is a revised version of Kim (2006). I am grateful to Kaoru Horie, Kyoung-Sun Hong, Gregory
Iverson, Chin-Wu Kim, Hae-Yeon Kim, Hyun-Sook Kim, Joungmin Kim, Young-Key Kim-renaud, Tetsuharu
Moriya, Mira Oh, Byung-Soo Park for their valuable comments and encouragement. Dale Kim and Leonel Bender
gave me editorial help, which I thank. My deepest gratitude goes to Professor Fernando Torres and the devoted
members of his organizing committee of the 15th ICKL on the campus of Universitat autonoma de Guadalajara,
Jalisco, Mexico.

The Korean sentence-final polite marker supni may be separated into two segments: sup
and ni. We owe the two-part analysis of supni previous studies by two authors, Ogura (1929
and elsewhere) and H. K. Kim (1947 and elsewhere). In his 1929 and 1938 diachronic studies
of Hyangga, Ogura isolated two series of morphemes sVp (5a) and Vi (5b) as separate entities,
and he suggested that the former may be derived from Old Korean sVlp, and also that both sVp
(5a) and Vi (5b) have developed to the present-day (su)p and ni, respectively.
In this conjunction, Kos (1944:125) following observation is intriguing. Namely, the form
p-ni is found only from the late 19th C. The earlier appearance of sup-ni may be explained
naturally from the assumption that sVp is ancestral to the modern sup-ni form, which serves as
the base of the p-ni form.
H. K. Kim notes that the verb sVp became the marker of Referent Honorifi-cation,
particularly Non-subject Honorification, and further it had lost its original function by
resulting in a simple grammatical morpheme of Addressee Honorification incorporated into
the second component Vi. The grammaticali-zation through the categorical conversion is said
to take place during the late 15C and the early 16C. More detailed derivational paths of the
two morphemes can be seen on Heos (1963) chart below.
Shilla/Koryo
Subject
Honorific
Referent
(DO/IO)
Honorific

Late 15C/Early 16C

()
()

sVp

si
zVsi

17C

si
Vpsi

sVp1

18C & thereafter

si
apsi/opsi

(yeccu-ta/pweop-ta)
sVp2

sVp2

op/sap/jap

V
(hanaita/haopnai-ta)

Honorific
Addressee

Vi

{Vi, i} {Vi, i}

syosy

syosy

V
(e.g. kali-ta/ kapni-ta)

sose

Table 2: Historical changes in sVp and i (Heo 1963)

Heos chart above is particularly significant on four points. (i) Three modes of honorification
are identified; (ii) The split of sVp1 and sVp2 around the 17th Century (The subscript is devised
by AHK.); and (iii) Making distinction between two subtypes in Addressee Honorification;
(iv) Isolating the honorific imperative form sose. Heos identification of sVp1 and sVp2 is
critical from the grammaticalization point of view. The process of verb to morpheme is neatly
shown in his analysis. The form sVp1 maintains the status of a full-fledged verb to tell
something to Superior up to Modern Korean with the original meaning intact. The second
sVp2 , on the other hand, reduced its form to that of an auxiliary verb from the 18th century
and eventually it turned into the functional polite marker (su)p-ni-ta, the sentence-final
function word for Addressee Honorifics. The last item sose, which seems to correspond to
Oguras so-series (5c), appears exclusively in imperative (the speakers petition for the
superiors merciful favor). Thus, (su)p-ni may be said to have undergone stages of I and II of
the A category and I and II of the B category as well. 1, 2

3. Evidence from earlier Korean and Japanese data

3.1. Middle Korean sV lo-ta and Classical Japanese soV roV
Evidence suggests that the present day addressee honorific markers such as Korean (su)pnita and Japanese desu/masu, seem to be derived from full-fledged verbs of communication.
In Middle Korean texts, there are many occurrences of the non-subject honorific auxiliary
sVp-ta or its variant sVlo-ta, convey messages to Superior, which is first observed by Ogura
(1929). The auxiliary verb sVp-ta and its variants are exemplified below, which I borrow
from Lee & Im (1983:228).
(3) Sinha-i nimgVm-Vl top-spa[sVp-ta]
sibjects-NOM King-ACC help-HONO-and
Ministers assist the king, and . (Seogbosang Jeol 8)
(4) Taejung-tul-iputhy-lVl
po-zapae s tni [zVp-ta]
people-PL-NOM Buddha-ACC looked-at-HONO PAST-then
When People looked at Gautama. (Seokbosang Jeol 13)
(5) Ayu-i.sejon-s anpu-lVl mut-jap-ko [jVp-ta]
Ayu-NOM Shakamunis safety-ACC
ask-HONO-and
When Ayu asked about Shakamunis safety (Seok Jeol 6)
Unlike sVp-ta, the lexical item sVlo-ta in (6) below is used as a full-fledged di-transitive verb
reports/tells messages to a third party who is superior to the speaker. (Quoted from Nam
1997: 936)
(6) mV sV il-Vl
sV lolila
what thing-ACC say-would
What should I say? (Songgang Gwangdong Byeolgok)
(7) kV paskVi sto
syl-un il-lVl jVsehi sVlolila
that other than again sad thing-ACC in detail tell
Tell (your Senior) in detail about all your sad stories. (Boguk. Haein. 31)
(8) ilhum-Vl sVlotVi syngin-ila
name-ACC say holy person-be
He is called a sage. (Weongak sang 2:2)

(9) Vmsik-Vl
kVchoa tVliko
sVlo tVi
dishes-ACC prepare submit-and said that..
(She) prepared dishes to put them in front of him and said (Oryun1:54)
In (9), the noun Vmsik food/dishes is Direct Object of the lexical verb sVlo-ta and Superior as
Indirect Object thereof. Recall that Old Korean sVlp ( in the Idu transcription) was
originally a di-transitive verb with the meaning of yeccwu-ta tell an honoree about
something or pweop-ta have an audience of Superior. Modern Korean salwe-ta/sal-ta
goes back to sVlp, according to Pyojungugeo Daesajeon Standard Unabbreviated Dictionary
(1999:3110). Heo (1963) claims that sVlp underwent two separate paths: (i) it changed to sVlo-

ta and further became sal-ta with its original meaning intact; and (ii) it turned into an
auxiliary verb of Non-Subject Honorification and eventually became a grammatical marker of
Addressee Honorification in Korean.
As for Classical Japanese polite marker sourou, its usage in letter-writing was extremely
popular in Medieval Japan and throughout the Japanese feudal periods up until the turn of the
19th century.
The Japanese politeness auxiliary verb sourou is suffixed to the infinitive (the literary
negative infinitive) for addressee-oriented honorification. It had established itself as a bound
morpheme (or auxiliary) far back in pre-Middle Japanese. Particularly, it became omnipresent
in pre-modern Classical Japanese spoken among samurai intellectuals of the Edo period 1.
Thus, Old Korean referent (non-subject) honorific verb sVlp-ta underwent
grammaticalization (verb grammatical bound-morpheme) to become an Addresseeoriented polite marker. Classical Japanese sourou may be contrasted as shown in Table 1
below.

CJ
souro
u
MK
sVlo-

Phonological
shape

Meaning

Indirect object
referred to

Grammaticalization
Processes

sibilant/liquid
and low vowels

say tell

Superior to the
speaker

Lexical Verb Object Hon

Addressee Hon

Table
sibilant/liquid
and low vowels

say tell

Superior to the
speaker

Lexical Verb Object Hon

Addressee Hon

1:

Correspondences between CJ sourou and MK sVlo-ta

It is particularly remarkable that both Old Japanese sourou and earlier Korean sVlounderwent the three-stage grammaticalization paths in a parallel way, namely, Phase I (Fullfledged lexical verb) Phase II (Non-subject (object) honorific auxiliary verb) Phase III
(Addressee honorific morphemic marker).
On the basis of etymological resemblance and diachronic parallelism in
grammaticalization, one might suggest that Classical Japanese sourou and Middle Korean
sVlo-ta (for that matter, Old Korean sVlp, la Ogura 1938) shared a genetic ancestor at an
earlier time.2

3.2

Classical Japanese mousu

One will find the Japanese verb mousu is highly homophonous, and there are three distinct
usages. Let us call them mousu1, mousu2, and mousu3, and their functions are:
(10) a. mousu1 (Lexical verb to serve Superior, to wait on Superior,)
b. mousu2 (Lexical verb to tell Superior, to say to Superior, )
c. mousu3 (Auxiliary for Referent (IO) Honorifics with loss of the
original meaning)
Mousu1 is a full-fledged transitive verb having the meaning to serve Superior, to attend
1

It is said to be related originally to the noun samurai. Sat (1962) shows the etymological development of
sourou as in (13) below.
(13) samorapu > saburapu > saurapu > sourou (Sat 1962: 2.138-9 from Martin 1975:1039)
2
Cf. Sat Kiyoshi (1962) for a different analysis.

Superior, to accompany Superior, etc. as seen below.

(11)Mifune sasu situo-no tomo-ha kawa-no se
mouse. (Man 4081)
boat draw servants-TOP river-shallow water inform
Boatman, explain to your master that the river is shallow.
(by Nakanishi 1981)
Mousu2 is equivalent to tell or say in English. The verb expresses Speakers deference
toward Superior as Indirect Object (not Superior as Addressee) in a sentence.
(12) Sin dainagon-mo hira-ni mausare keri
new chief counselor-too sincerely say-PAST
The newly appointed Chief Councilor of State also said so.
[Heike 1] (Kjien 1981:2183)
The third kind (mousu3) is attached to the main verb expressing Speakers deference toward a
referent Superior, i.e. Indirect Object, and its function is merely that of an auxiliary verb with
no specific meaning of saying, as shown in the following examples.
(13) Sensei-no otaku-wo
o-tazune-mousi-ta.
teacher-GEN house-ACC
visit- HON-PAST
I visited my teachers home.
The item mousu3 does not seem to have the meaning of announcement, and we may
conjecture it may have derived from either mousu1 or mousu2. The former may have changed
to an auxiliary by keeping its semantics of servitude intact. The second choice, i.e. mousu2
may have lost the original functions of full verb status as well as the semantics of saying
altogether. Of the two, mousu1 would cost less for the subsequent grammaticalization in
comparison to mousu2 in terms of the degree of the relevance, which is roughly similar to
Yoshidas (1971) suggestion that the modern masu might have its root in mawosu tells,
humbly does. Note that the analysis proposed here has a two-stage process, namely, first,
from verb to auxiliary, then from the auxiliary to bound morpheme of the polite marker masu.
Now let us turn to Korean data corresponding to Japanese maosu. The Korean lexical verb
moesi-ta or its variants moysi-ta/msi-ta have one meaning to serve Superior, but in two
different functions, that is, the former as a lexical verb and the latter as an auxiliary verb, as
exemplified for the first kind in (14) and for the second in (15) below.
(14) K. Ce pang-ey cosang
sincwu/wiphay-ka msye-ce
iss-ta
J. Ano heya-ni senzo-(no) ihai-ga
matur-are-te aru
that room-in ancestor
mortuary tablet-NOM enshrine-PAS-be
They enshrined their ancestral tablets in that room.
(15) K. Cal annay-hay msi-e-la
J. Yoku go-annai mosi-age-yo
well guide serve-IMP
Give a nice guide (to the guest).
Functions of these three different mousu are summarized below.
(16)

Japanese
a. mousu1 ~
b. mousu2 ~

Korean
moesi-ta1
-

Functional Category
(full verb of servitude to Superior)
(full verb of reporting to Superior)

c. mousu3

moesi-ta3

(auxiliary verb of servitude to Superior)

Two things are noteworthy: first, the resemblance between the Korean and Japanese data is
quite remarkable in terms of their phonological shape and semantic/ pragmatic functions (to
serve Superior). Second, the Korean counterpart of mousu2 is missing in (16b). Korean
speakers use a verb salwe-ta or Older sVlo-ta in the place of mousu2. One can assume that
Japanese mousu2 might have an origin entirely different from mousu1. Namely, mousu2 may
be related to Middle Korean malsVm or malsam, which corresponds to Japanese o-kotoba
word, speech, language or Superiors message. The following seems to support this thought:
(i) the phonological resemblance between Old Japanese marasuru and the Middle Korean
noun malsam; (ii) a parallelism in a sentence-final idiomatic expression: Korean ~la-nun
malssum-i-yeyo and Japanese ~ to iuu koto desu-yo thats the way it was: (iii) a parallelism
between the sentence-filler na-mosi (you know) in Japanese dialects (Prefectures of
Tokushima, Gifu, Gunma etc.) and colloquial Korean la-n-malssum-i-ya. (Cf. a detailed
discussion in Kim 2006.)

3.3 Middle Korean op-sose and Old Japanese asobase

Pervasive occurrences of the phrase op-sose are found in Middle Korean material, Buddhist
narratives in particular. The honorific imperative form op-sose is frequently found in prayers
even today. Now let us consider the following:
(17) Melli ttena-ka-nun
ku-eykey unchong-ul payphwule cwu-si-op-sose.
far away leave-ATTR him mercy-ACC provide give-HON-please do
Give thy mercy to the person who is going far away.
In (17), the speaker asks the Lord to give His mercy to a third person (not to the speaker
himself) in the sentence. The imperative mood expresses the speakers soliciting mercy of the
addressee (Lord).

(18) Yehowa-ye cwu-uy pun-ulo na-lul kyenchayk-haci ma- op-si- mye

lord
Your anger-with me
rebuke
do-not please-and
cwu-uy cinno-lo
na-lul cingkye-ha-ci ma- op-sose
Your
hot displeasure-with me
chasten-do-not
please
Lord, do not rebuke me in Your anger, nor chasten me in Your hot
displeasure. [The Old & New Testament (Psalms 6:7) The King James
Version and Korean Revised Hangul Version), Daehan Seongseo
Gonghoe. 1985:806]
The above is a quotation from the Old Testament. This type of honorification survives only in
literary writing and in dialects of a much simpler form.
At this point, I would like to invite the reader to consider an honorific format of pre-modern
Japanese somewhat similar to Korean archaic op-sose. Many dictionaries define asobas-e as
the imperative form of asobas-u, a full-fledged intransitive/transitive honorific verb play,
go hunting, or play musical instruments. The item can also be used as an auxiliary verb.
For instance, Kjien (1981:40) gives examples O-tori-asobas-i-ta (He) took it and Go-ran
asobas-e Please take a look, where o-tor-i is a gerund form prefixed with the honorific
marker and go-ran is in the form of Prefix+Noun. According to Tsujimura (1968), the word

asobasu is the oldest of the nine honorific expressions in earlier Japanese. Two examples are
from premodern Japanese.
(19) kotira-he o-hairi-asobase
this way-to enter-HON
Please come in this way.
[Sugahara Denju Tenarai-kan 4.] quoted from Shinch Kokugo Jiten. 36
(20) mohaya kidukai-asobasu-na
no longer worry-HONO-don-not
Do not worry any more, Sir.
[Chikamatsu, Koori no sakutan 3] quoted from Iwanami Kogojiten 29.
It is particularly noteworthy that many examples are presented in the imperative form, i.e.
commanding expression to Superior or petitioning. The auxiliary asobase does precisely the
job ofrequesting to Superior in Japanese. The petition expressed by asobase is particularly
suitable in honorifics. It magnified the Superiors authority to grant his subordinates petition.
In (21) below, where Korean si-op-so-se and Japanese asobase are contrasted, the segment
ha-si (do+subject honorific marker) is supplemented to the base form as seen in (48a).
(21) Korean:
Japanese:

ha si
si
a
a

o p so
se
o ba so
e
syo ba soe
so
ba se

[Insertion of low vowel a]

[de-palatalization of syo
and delabialization of glide oe]

Each of the four syllables in the contrasted set is in fairly good correspondence, if we assume
two historical processes, namely the a-insertion, the syo-depalatalization, and the oedelabialization, in addition to the adopting the light verb ha do suffixed with the honorific si
marker. Both are in the format (petition honorifics), which involves the notion of causer and
cause discussed above. In the petition honorifics mode, the causer is the (humble) speaker,
who solicits his superiors favor, while the party solicited is Superior, the performer, who is
to grant his subordinates petition. Consequently, verb-phrase construction like (21a) and
(21b) may involve two sets of honorification, respectively: Non-Subject Honorification (for
Superior as the party requested), and Subject Honorification (for Superior as the causee
performing the imposed demand.)3

4. Concluding Remarks
The notion of grammaticalization is a historic one. The recent revival of the notion has been
productive in the investigation of various functional morphemes in individual languages of
the world. I demonstrate in this paper that the theory of grammaticalization is indeed
instrumental in exploring some aspects of sentence-final politeness markers in languages like
Korean and Japanese.
In this study, a working hypothesis was introduced: verb-final languages like Korean and
Japanese have a grammaticalization process that saying verbs may undergo from a fullfledged verb to a functional marker of bound morpheme via a stage of auxiliary verbs. The
3

This dual nature of the honorification mode involved in the expressions such as one in (48) above has given rise
to considerable confusion and discussions in the literature (H. K. Kim 1954 elsewhere; Heo 1954 elsewhere;
Cheun 1958; Ahn 1961, 1982; S. N. Lee 1954; S. O. Lee 1973; I. S. Lee 1974, among others.)

study demonstrates that the Korean polite marker (su)p-ni-ta may have two components sup
and ni which may be traced back to Old Shilla lexical verb sVlp-ta to let Superior know about
x, of Referent (In-direct Object) Honorification and Vi, a bound morpheme of the same
Referent Honorification. The original sources of grammaticalization of Japanese polite
markers desu and masu are explored. Both forms are seemingly proved to be the endproducts of grammaticalization. Other items of Japanese, such as sourou, mousu, asobasu,
etc. are originally honorific verbs of communication (to report, to announce, to inform, and
the like) are highly susceptible to grammati-calization, as the hypothesis predicts. The
syntactic environment (i.e. the sentence-final position of these communication verbs) is by
nature found in the sentence-final position in Korean and Japanese, and, as a result, it has
relatively more probability of change. Since honorification is viewed as a linguistic ritual or
symbolism, its stylization, the reason for which might be that such stylization
(grammaticalization to bound morphemes in the simpler forms) will make participants
exercise rituals in simpler but more effective ways with less cost. Findings also seem to
indicate that some Japanese functional markers are found to have their origins unexpectedly
in earlier Korean data.
REFERENCES
Ahn, Byung-Hee. 1961. Juchae gyeomyang-beop-ui jeopmisa -sVp-e daehayeo. Jindan Hakpo 22: 105126.
Cheun, Jae-Gwan. 1958. SVp-ttawi Kyeong-Yang-sa-ui Sango. Kyungpuk Dae-hak-gyo Ronmun-jip,
2:117-137. Essays on Subject and Referent Honorification of sVp, etc. in Collection of Treatises,
Kyungpuk national University 2: 117-137.
Choe, Hyoen-bae. 1958. Uri malbon Our grammar. Seoul: Ulyu Munhwasa
Heo, Ung. 1954. Jondae-beopsa: Gukeo Munbeopsa-ui han tomak. Seonggyun Hakpo. 1: 139-207.
Heo, Ung. 1962. Jondae-beop-ui munje-rul dasi ronham. Hangul 128:5-62.
Heo, Ung. 1975. Uri ye s malbon. Seoul: Sae Munhwasa.
Kim, Alan Hyun-Oak. 2004. Nihongo no keigo taikei no gensoku to meta-gengoteki bump
(Principles and Meta-Linguistic Grammaticalization in the System of Japanese Honorifics) In
Taro Kageyama and Hideki Kishimoto (hen) Nihongo no bunseki to gengo ruikei - Shibatani
Masayoshi Kyzyu Kanreki Ronbunshu (Analyses of Japanese and Language Typology:
Festschrifts for Professor Masayoshi Shibatani26-46. Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishers.
Kim, Alan Hyun-Oak. 2006. Grammaticalization in sentence-final politeness marking in Korean and
Japanese. In Susumu Kuno et al. (eds.) Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics XI. Department of
Linguistics, Harvard University. 72-85.
Kim, Hyeong-Kyu. 1954. Gukeo(hak)-sa. Seoul: Baekyungsa
Kim, Hyeong-Kyu. 1960. gyeogyang-sa-wa ka jugyeok to munje. Hangul 126:7-18
Kim, Hyeong-Kyu. 1962.Gyeong-yang-sa munje-ui jeron. The issues of Subject honorification and
referent honorification revisited. Hangul 128: 60-73.
Kim-Renaud, Young-Key. 1990. On banmal in Korean. In ICKL 7: Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Korean Linguistics. Osaka, Japan: ICKL and Osaka University of Economics
and Law. 232-255.
Ko, Yung-Geun. 1974. Hyeondae gukeo-ui jonbi-beop-ey daehan yeongu. Eohak Yeongu 10.2.
Lee, Ik-Sup and Hongbin Im. 1983. Gukeo-munbeop-on. Seoul: Hakyeonsa
Lee, Kyu-Chang. 1992. Gukeo Jondae-beop-ron. Seoul: Jipmundang.
Lee, Sung-Nyung. 1954. Gojeon Munbeop. Ulyu Munhwasa.
Lee, Sung-Ok. 1973. Gukeo munbeop chaekye-ui sajeok yeongu. Seoul: Iljogak.
Marin, Samuel E. 1975. A reference grammar of Japanese. New haven & London: Yale University
Press.
Martin, Samuel E. 1992. A Reference Grammar of Korean. Rutland, VT and Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle
Company.
Nishida, Naotoshi. 1987. Keigo Honorification. Kokugo ssho 13. Tokyo: Tokyo-d.

Ogura, Shinpei 1938. Chosengo ni okeru kenjho/sonkeigo no jodshi. Tyy bunko ronsh 26.
Sat, Kiyoshi. 1962. Nihon bump ysetsu, Kogo-hen. Essentials of Japanese grammar: the historical
aspects 2 vols. Tokyo: Nihon Shoin.
Seo, Jeongsu. 1984. Jondaebeop-ui yeongu: hyeongae daeu-beop-ui chegye-wa munje-jeom. A study
of honorifics: The current honorification system and its problems. Seoul: Hanshin Munhwasa.
Seong, Gi-Cheol. 1970. Gukeo daewubeop yeongu ronmunjijp Chungbuk Dae-hakgyo 4. 78-99.
Traugott, Elizabeth and Bernd Heine. 1991. Approaches to Grammaticalization. Volume I: Focus on
Theoretical and Methodological Issues. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Traugott, Elizabet C. and Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge University Press.
Tsujimura, Toshiki. 1968. Keigo no siteki kenkyu. Tokyo: Tokyodo.
Yoshida, Kanehiko. 1971. Gendaigo jod-shi no shi-teki kenky. Tokyo: Meiji Shorin.
Dictionaries:
A Korean-English Dictionary. 1967. eds. by Samuel E. Martin et al. New Haven and London: Yale
University Press.
Gyohak Goeo Sajeon. 1997. ed. by Gwang-Wu Nam. Gyohaksa.
Iwanami Kogo Daijiten. 1974. no Susumu hoka. Iwanami Shoten.
Kjien. 1976. ed. by Izuru Shinkura. Iwanami Shoten.
Kadokawa Kogo Jiten. 1981. eds. by Senichi Hisamatu et al. Kadokawa Shoten.
Pyojun Gukeo Daesajeon. (sang-jung-ha) 1999. Gukrip Gukeo Yeonguweon. Dusan Dong-A.
Shinch Kikugo Jiten. 1980. eds. by Toshio Yamada et al. Shinchsha.
Shgakkan Kogo Daijiten. 1983. Nakada Norio-hoka. Shgakkan.
Yijoeo Sajeon. 1964. ed. by Chang-Sun Yu. Yeonse Daehakgyo Chulpanbu.
Alan Hyun-Oak Kim
Department of Linguistics, Foreign Languages and Literatures
Southern Illinois University at Carbondale
Carbondale, Illinois 62901-4521, USA
alanhkim@siu.edu
http://mypage.siu.edu/alanhkim

(6)

One often hears expressions like the following in the dialect of Andong, Kyeongpuk Province (the south eastern part of the peninsula.)

Pakk-ey

pi-ka

nii- te.

outside-LOC rain-NOM come- POL-SE

Its raining outside.

(7)

Kwen-sensayng-nim-un caknyen-ey
Kwen-professor-TOP

(8)

unthwe-ha- si-ess-

last year-LOC retire-do-

nii-te

SH-PAST-POL-SE

Professor Kim retired last year.

Sensayngnim-uy pankawun sosik ce-uy pwumo-nim-kkey

your

wonderful news my parents

yeccwu-ess-

DAT

nii-de

inform-PAST POL-SE
I told my parents about your wonderful story.

Here, the morpheme nii in the above examples are regarded as the modern variant of Middle Korean Vi, which Nam (1997:1155) identifies as nii-ta. The
following is a Middle Korean example from Nam (1997:1155).

(9)

talom

epsu

Vi-ta (Nunghay 2:9)

difference exist-not POL-SE

There is no difference, Sir.

(10) ani Vi-ta, Secon-ha (Nunghay 5:21)

not-be POL-SE Shakyamuni/Gautama
No, it is not, Gautama.

As we note in Heos chart in Table 2, sVlp-ta was a full-fledged lexical verb having the meaning of tell Superior about something, from which Referent
Honorific auxiliary verbs sap/op/cap and Addressee Honorific polite marker sup are derived. In contrast, the item Vi seems to be in existence as an auxiliary
verb even as early as in the period of the Shilla kingdom (356-935). Therefore, the polite marker Vi may have gone through grammaticalization of AII and
BII but not beyond.