Authors

  • Yunusova Gulshoda Dilshadovna
    Associate Professor, PhD, Higher School of Korean Studies, Tashkent State University of Oriental Studies, Uzbekistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71337/inlibrary.uz.eijps.129011

Keywords:

Equivalence linguistics language theory

Abstract

This article analyzes the concept of equivalence in linguistics, with particular focus on the theoretical and practical aspects as illustrated by the Korean auxiliary verbs “가다” (to go) and “오다” (to come), which express direction of movement and semantic change. The research is grounded in the study of verb valency and various models of equivalence (formal, dynamic, semantic, pragmatic), exploring the internal structural units of the language system and their syntactic and semantic functions. The article contributes to a deeper understanding of the linguistic features of the Korean language and offers insights into resolving issues of equivalence that arise in the translation process.


background image

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

18

https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps

TYPE

Original Research

PAGE NO.

18-23

DOI

10.55640/eijps-05-07-05



OPEN ACCESS

SUBMITED

21 May 2025

ACCEPTED

17 June 2025

PUBLISHED

19 July 2025

VOLUME

Vol.05 Issue 07 2025

COPYRIGHT

© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.

The Theoretical and
Practical Foundations of
Equivalence in The Korean
Language: On the Example
of The Verbs

'

가다

'

(To Go)

And

'

오다

'

(To Come)

Yunusova Gulshoda Dilshadovna

Associate Professor, PhD, Higher School of Korean Studies, Tashkent State
University of Oriental Studies, Uzbekistan

Abstract

: This article analyzes the concept of

equivalence in linguistics, with particular focus on the
theoretical and practical aspects as illustrated by the

Korean auxiliary verbs “

가다

(to go) and “

오다

(to

come), which express direction of movement and
semantic change. The research is grounded in the study
of verb valency and various models of equivalence
(formal, dynamic, semantic, pragmatic), exploring the
internal structural units of the language system and
their syntactic and semantic functions. The article
contributes to a deeper understanding of the linguistic
features of the Korean language and offers insights into
resolving issues of equivalence that arise in the
translation process.

Keywords:

Equivalence, linguistics, language theory,

verb valency, Korean language, auxiliary verbs, verbs

가다

”,

오다

,

lexical-semantic

equivalence,

grammatical-syntactic

equivalence,

pragmatic

equivalence, intralingual equivalence.

Introduction:

In linguistics, the concept of equivalence

is one of the central issues of language analysis. Initially
interpreted merely as formal correspondence, over
time it has come to include semantic, pragmatic, and
functional dimensions. This article covers the
theoretical foundations of equivalence and offers an
analysis of structural models that express direction of
movement and semantic shifts in the Korean language.


background image

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

19

https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

In particular, it examines the semantic functions within

the language of Korean auxiliary verbs like “

가다

(to

go) and “

오다

(to come) and their relation to the

notion of equivalence. The issue of equivalence holds
significant importance in linguistics, especially in
language theory, contrastive linguistics, and language
education. This concept involves identifying and
analyzing linguistic units that correspond in meaning,
function, and context within a single language or
between two or more languages (Jakobson, 1984).

METHODS

The methodological framework of this research
incorporates several approaches. Firstly, using the
contrastive analysis approach, the study identified
semantic and syntactic correspondences between
Korean and Uzbek. This approach made it possible to
analyze how linguistic units are similarly or differently
realized across the two languages. In addition, through
a descriptive approach, the study clarified the place of
Korean auxiliary verbs in the linguistic system and
examined their functional and semantic capacities.
Based on the theory of verb valency, drawing on the

ideas of Tesnière, Mel’čuk (1988), Kim (2001), the

research deeply investigated how verbs combine with
actants within syntactic structures.

The theoretical foundation of the article was built upon
translation studies theories, particularly the models of
equivalence proposed by Nida, Newmark, and House.
Through these frameworks, the research analyzed
literal and functional correspondences in translation,
dynamic equivalence, and pragmatic matches.

As research material, the study used examples from
written and spoken Korean texts, specifically focusing

on sentences containing the verbs “

가다

and “

오다

.”

Additionally, a comparative analysis was carried out
based on modern Korean grammar references,
translated texts, and their equivalents in Uzbek.

Analysis of Types of Equivalence and Verb Valency

Earlier approaches mainly focused on lexical and
syntactic correspondence; however, the need to
consider semantic and pragmatic factors later
emerged.

Grammatical-semantic

equivalence

emphasizes not only grammatical correspondence but
also the accurate conveyance of the primary meaning.
This requires an analysis of semantic roles, verb
valency, and other content-related factors.

Modern research aims to define various levels of

equivalence, ranging from “formal” to “dynamic”

(Newmark, 1988).

Formal equivalence seeks to preserve the form, word
order, and grammatical structure of the source text as

closely as possible. This approach is typically applied to
scientific, technical texts and poetic translations, but in
other contexts, it may hinder the full conveyance of
meaning.

For example, the Korean sentence “

나는

학교에

갑니다

is translated as

“I go to school.” From the

perspective of formal equivalence, this could also be

rendered in fuller grammatical and stylistic form as “I
am heading to school” or “I set out towards school.”

Dynamic (or functional) equivalence focuses on
ensuring that the target audience perceives the
message with the same effect as intended in the source
text. According to linguists Eugene A. Nida and Charles
Russell Taber (1969), the aim is for the audience to
understand and interpret the text as if it were originally
written in the target language. This approach considers
cultural and contextual differences.

For instance, in Korean, the expression “

진지

드셨어요

?” literally means “Have you eaten?” in an

honorific form. In dynamic translation, this may be

adapted as “Have you had breakfast?” or “Have you had
lunch?” depending on the situation, to better reflect the

intended meaning.

Semantic equivalence

Semantic equivalence focuses on preserving both the
denotative (primary) and connotative (additional,
implied) meanings of words as fully as possible. This
approach emphasizes the importance of subtle nuances
of meaning. In Korean, for instance, there are verbs like

맑다

(clear, clean) and “

개다

(to clear up, become

clear after being cloudy), both of which describe

weather condition

s. However, “

맑다

refers to the

quality of the weather itself, while “

개다

denotes the

process or result of the weather clearing after it was
previously cloudy. When translating them, it is
important to consider these distinctions in line with the
principle

of semantic equivalence: “The sky is clear”

(

맑다

) vs. “The weather has cleared up” (

개다

).

Pragmatic equivalence

Pragmatic equivalence is a type of equivalence aimed at
conveying the communicative purpose of the text and
its effect on the listener (or reader). Here, pragmatic
factors such as the aim of the text, context, and
audience play a significant role (House, 1977). For

example, the Korean expression “

다녀오세요

is

usually said to someone who is about to go somewhere

and literally means “Go and come back.” P

ragmatically,

however, it is better rendered as “Have a safe trip,”
“Take care on your way,” or “Go safely and return well,”


background image

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

20

https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

which better reflects its intended emotional effect on
the listener.

Adequacy and absolute equivalence

Due to differences in the structure of language
systems, cultural connotations, and stylistic means of
expression, it is recognized that achieving absolute
equivalence in translation is practically impossible. As

a result, the concept of “adequacy in translation” has

been developed. According to this concept, a
translation should meet the communicative purpose
and the expectations of the target audience. Adequacy
is a broader notion than equivalence; it includes
various levels of equivalence and helps to find the
optimal solution for conveying meaning within and
between languages.

Verb valency: The core category of equivalence

Verb valency refers to the syntactic and semantic
capacity of a verb to combine with a certain number
and type of actants (participants). Actants are syntactic
units usually expressed by nouns, pronouns, or
nominal groups, and they can be obligatory or optional
depending on their role. Valency thus determines the

verb’s syntactic “environment” (Tesnière, 1959). In

linguistics, valency is an essential category that reflects

a verb’s ability to connect with other units, and it can

be divided into two main types: quantitative valency
and qualitative valency.

Quantitative valency

Quantitative valency shows how many syntactic
actants (subject, object, destination, etc.) the verb
requires:

A monovalent verb requires only a subject.

Example:

울다

(to cry) →

아이가

운다

.

The child is

crying.

A divalent verb requires a subject and an

object. Example:

만나다

(to meet) →

친구를

만났다

.

I met my friend.

A trivalent verb requires a subject, an object,

and an indirect object or destination. Example:

보내다

(to send) →

그녀가

친구에게

편지를

보냈다

.

She

sent a letter to her friend.

Qualitative valency

Qualitative valency determines the semantic roles and
grammatical forms required by the actants. Example:

보다

(to see) requires the object in the accusative case

(-

/

):

그는

영화를

보고

있다

.

He is watching a

movie. Here,

영화를

(the movie) functions as the

object a

nd semantically performs the role of “the thing

being watched.”

Valency can be further divided into obligatory and
optional types:

Obligatory valency refers to actants that are

necessary for the verb to form a complete grammatical
and semantic meaning.

Optional valency refers to actants that may

appear depending on the context but whose omission
does not break the grammatical completeness of the
sentence.

Example of obligatory valency:

그녀가

전화를

받았다

.

She answered the phone.

전화

(the phone) is

obligatory because removing it leads to ambiguity:

그녀가

받았다

.

She received (received what?).

Example of optional valency:

그녀가

집에서

전화를

받았다

.

She answered the phone at home. Here,

집에서

(at home) is optional; it adds contextual detail

but is not essential to the grammatical structure.

The importance of verb valency

Studying verb valency is essential for understanding
sentence structure, developing automatic syntactic
parsers, improving natural language processing
algorithms, and enhancing translation systems. In
particular, accurate knowledge about which actants are
required by verbs is necessary when creating valency
dictionaries and grammar guides. In Korean, valency
structures require in-depth analysis because auxiliary
verbs often expand the semantic and functional
components of verbs. Equivalence relies on these
valency structures to show the connections between
language units (Kim, 2001).

Valency structure and intralingual equivalence

A verb’s valency structure is identified by the number

and syntactic positions of its arguments. The intralingual
equivalence model, on the other hand, studies the
functional correspondence of lexical and grammatical
units within a single language. This model highlights
potential linguistic and semantic problems that can arise
even with

in the same language system (Mel’čuk, 1988).

Main and auxiliary verbs in Korean

In Korean, main verbs carry the primary semantic load
and have their own syntactic and semantic valency.
Auxiliary verbs add extra meanings, enhance the
semantics, or clarify the meaning in ambiguous
contexts. This layered semantic structure reveals the
linguistic functions of auxiliary verbs (Lee, 2010).

The verbs “

가다

(to go) and “

오다

(to come)

In Korean, these verbs function both as independent


background image

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

21

https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

verbs and as auxiliary verbs. As auxiliaries, they express
various additional semantic functions such as direction
of action, completion of an action, or change of state.
Finding their intralingual equivalents can be
challenging because their meaning depends heavily on
context and the specific grammatical system of the
language (Nida, 1964).

These verbs are highly productive in Korean and their

auxiliary use illustrates the language’s rich expressive

capacity. They can specify starting and ending points of
an action, its duration, result, or direction of effect.

Let’s consider other Korean grammatical forms or

lexical units that reflect these meanings.

가다

as an auxiliary verb

The auxiliary verb “

가다

is often used to express

completion of an action, its progression, or the fact
that the action happens away from the speaker:

a) Completion or finalization of an action

(Complete an action / Finish): In Korean, it can show
that the action has finished and moved away from the
present focus or become irreversible.

Original usage:

책을

읽어

갔다

.

Finished reading the

book. (The reading process is completed and the action
is seen as having moved into the past.)

Equivalent form 1: -

/

버리다

(to finish, to throw

away, often implying regret or relief)

책을

읽어

버렸다

.

Finished reading the book (completely,

sometimes with a nuance of regret or finality). Here,

버리다

more strongly conveys the sense of

irreversibility and completion.

Equivalent form 2: -

말다

(to ultimately end up doing

something, often unexpectedly or against intention)

책을

읽고

말았다

.

(He/She) ended up finishing

reading the book.

This construction also expresses the completion of an
action, but it often carries a nuance of inevitability,
regret, or an unexpected outcome. It highlights that
the action was completed despite external or internal
resistance, or in an undesirable way.

Equivalent form 3: -

끝나다

(to completely finish)

읽는

것을

끝났다

.

Finished reading the book

entirely. Here, the particle “

(meaning “all” or

“entirely”) and the verb “

끝나다

(to end) together

emphasize the total completion of the reading action,
leaving nothing unfinished.

b) Gradual progression / Continuation

In this context, the auxiliary verb “

가다

indicates that a

certain state is gradually changing or that a process is
continuing over time.

Original usage:

날씨가

추워져

갔다

.

The weather

gradually became colder. This construction captures not
only the progression of coldness but also implies that
the state is moving further away over time.

Equivalent forms:

-

/

지다

(change of state):

날씨가

점점

추워지고

있다

.

The weather is gradually getting

colder. This form clearly expresses “gradual change.”

However, the nuance of “distancing” present in “

가다

is not included here.

-

되다

(to come to be, to turn out):

날씨가

추워지게

되었다

.

The weather came to be cold / The

weather turned colder. This emphasizes reaching a
certain result or state as an outcome.

점점

~

(gradually ~):

날씨가

점점

추워진다

.

The weather is gradually becoming cold. Here, the

adverb “

점점

(gradually) itself indicates gradual

change.

c) Direction of action and distant result

In this usage, “

가다

shows that after the action is

completed, its effect or result becomes distant or moves
away from the speaker.

Original usage:

저쪽으로

버려요

.

Go over there

and get rid of it / Let it go away to that side. This shows
directionality and the idea of sending something away
or letting it go.

Equivalent forms:

떠나다

(to leave, depart):

저쪽으로

떠나세요

.

Go and leave for that direction. Highlights the act of

leaving and the direction explicitly.

향하다

(to head toward):

저쪽을

향하세요

.

Head toward that direction. Emphasizes movement
towards a specific target.

떠나가다

(to go away, to depart and keep

going):

그는

멀리

떠나갔다

.

He went far away.This

compound verb underlines both the act of leaving and
the result of distancing.

The auxiliary verb “

오다

(to come): extended meanings

and equivalents

The Korean verb “

오다

is not limited to physical


background image

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

22

https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

motion. As an auxiliary verb, it can describe entering a
new state, starting to experience a process, emotional
changes, and more. Its equivalents in Uzbek (and
English) vary depending on the context, but always aim
to preserve naturalness.

I. Beginning of an action / Approaching

The most basic meaning of “

오다

is movement

toward the speaker or the start of a state.

Example:

잠이

오고

있다

.

Sleep is coming on / I am

starting to feel sleepy.

Here, “

오다

is used with an abstract noun (sleep) to

describe how the feeling gradually comes over the
subject.

Equivalent forms: -

시작하다

(to begin to):

잠이

오기

시작했다

.

Sleep started to come. Emphasizes

the exact starting point of the state.

-

/

오다

(to gradually come closer, to

progress toward a result):

점점

잠이

늘어오고

있다

.

Sleepiness is gradually increasing / I am getting

sleepier over time. Adds nuance of continuity and
gradual accumulation.

생기다

(to appear, to arise):

갑자기

잠이

생겼다

.

Suddenly, sleepiness appeared. Focuses on

the sudden, unexpected emergence of the state rather
than physical movement.

II. Other semantic aspects of “

오다

and their

equivalents

1.

Coming as a result or consequence:

소식이

오다

.

News has arrived.

2.

Arrival of time or season:

봄이

오다

.

Spring

has come.

3.

Emergence of thoughts or emotions:

생각이

오다

.

A thought comes.

화가

오다

.

Anger comes (I

become angry).

4.

Occurrence of an event:

비가

오다

.

It is

raining.

In each case, the core idea of “approaching,”
“starting,” or “emerging” remains central.

Equivalent forms: -

/

지다

(change of state):

상황이

점점

나빠지고

있다

.

The situation is

gradually worsening. Focuses on transformation rather
than movement toward the speaker.

점점

~

(gradually ~):

상황이

점점

나빠진다

.

The situation is getting worse. Emphasizes progressive

worsening.

계속

~

(continuously ~):

상황이

계속

나빠지고

있다

.

The situation keeps getting worse.

Stresses uninterrupted continuity.

III. Result of a previous action

Sometimes, “

오다

shows that an action was performed

and its result affects the current state.

Example:

결과를

보고

왔다

.

(I) went to see the result

and have now returned.

Analysis: This implies the speaker went somewhere,
observed the result, and returned, so now they possess
the information.

Equivalent forms:

-

/

다니다

(to go and come repeatedly):

결과를

보고

다녔다

.

(I) went and checked the result

several times / regularly. Emphasizes repetition and
habituality.

완료하다

(to complete):

결과를

보는

것을

완료했다

.

I completed seeing the result. Clearly

shows the action was fully carried out.

-

/

두다

(to do and keep the result for

future use):

결과를

확인해

두었다

.

I checked the

result and kept it noted for later. Emphasizes doing
something in advance and preserving the outcome.

Conclusions about the rich expression system in Korean

These examples demonstrate that the meanings

convey

ed by Korean auxiliary verbs “

가다

(to go) and

오다

(to come) are not limited to these verbs alone.

Instead, the language uses multiple grammatical
constructions, auxiliary verbs, and lexical items to
express similar or overlapping semantic functions.

This highlights several key points:

Semantic complexity: Simple verbs like “go” or

“come” in Korean can carry diverse, layered meanings

that require detailed analysis.

Understanding linguistic universals: Studying

how different languages express concepts like
movement, change of state, or result helps identify
universal and language-specific features.

Importance in translation: Translators should

avoid overly literal translation and instead choose target
language expressions that reflect equivalent meaning
and nuance, making the text sound natural. In Korean-


background image

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

23

https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

to-Uzbek translation, understanding such internal
equivalence ensures fluency and clarity.

CONCLUSION

In linguistics, equivalence is studied drawing on
achievements from cognitive science and language
theory. Verb valency is not only a linguistic term; it is a

key feature defining a verb’s syntactic behavior and

interaction with other sentence elements. An in-depth
study of verb valency helps analyze language structure
and improves tasks in natural language processing.

The multi-layered semantic functions of Korean

auxiliary verbs like “

가다

and “

오다

create

challenges in finding their exact equivalents. In cases
where absolute equivalence is hard to achieve,
functional and context-based approaches become
essential. Viewing equivalence as a dynamic and multi-
dimensional phenomenon helps reduce semantic
distortion and supports effective, natural translation.

REFERENCES

김윤신

.

보조

용언

구성

'-

가다

'/'-

오다

'

의미

.

사단법인

한국언어학회언어학언어학

52

.

서울

: 2008.

손세모돌

.

국어

보조용언

연구

.

서울

:

한국문화사

,

1996.

Jakobson, R. Lingvistika va tarjima. Moskva: Nauka,
1984.

Kim, J.H. Korean Verb Valency and Translation. Seoul:
Hankuk University Press, 2001.

Yunusova G.D. Koreys tilida ko‘makchi fe’llar. T.:

Bookmany print, 2023.

Yoo, E. J. (2002). Auxiliary verbs and structural case

assignment in Korean.

어학연구

.

Ҳожиев А. Феъл. –Т.: Фан, 1973.

Шахматов А.А. Историческая морфология русского
языка. –

М.: Юрайт, 2019.

Расулов. Р. Ўзбек тили назарий грамматикаси
муаммолари. Монография.

-

Тошкент, 2019.

Lee, S.Y. Semantic Functions of Auxiliary Verbs in
Korean. Busan:: Korea University Press, 2010.

Mel’čuk, I.A. Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice.

Amsterdam:: John Benjamins, 1988.

Newmark, P. A Textbook of Translation. London:
Prentice Hall, 1988.

Nida, E.A. Language Structure and Translation.
Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1964.

House, J. A Model for Translation Quality Assessment.
Tübingen: Narr, 1977.

Tesnière, L. Éléments de syntaxe structurale. Paris:
Klincksieck, 1959.

References

김윤신. 상 보조 용언 구성 '-어 가다'/'-어 오다'의 의미. 사단법인 한국언어학회언어학언어학 제52권. – 서울: 2008.

손세모돌. 국어 보조용언 연구. 서울: 한국문화사, 1996.

Jakobson, R. Lingvistika va tarjima. Moskva: Nauka, 1984.

Kim, J.H. Korean Verb Valency and Translation. Seoul: Hankuk University Press, 2001.

Yunusova G.D. Koreys tilida ko‘makchi fe’llar. T.: Bookmany print, 2023.

Yoo, E. J. (2002). Auxiliary verbs and structural case assignment in Korean. 어학연구.

Ҳожиев А. Феъл. –Т.: Фан, 1973.

Шахматов А.А. Историческая морфология русского языка. – М.: Юрайт, 2019.

Расулов. Р. Ўзбек тили назарий грамматикаси муаммолари. Монография. - Тошкент, 2019.

Lee, S.Y. Semantic Functions of Auxiliary Verbs in Korean. Busan:: Korea University Press, 2010.

Mel’čuk, I.A. Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice. Amsterdam:: John Benjamins, 1988.

Newmark, P. A Textbook of Translation. London: Prentice Hall, 1988.

Nida, E.A. Language Structure and Translation. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1964.

House, J. A Model for Translation Quality Assessment. Tübingen: Narr, 1977.

Tesnière, L. Éléments de syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klincksieck, 1959.