논항 실현의 한 양상: ‘있-’의 두 존대형
One aspect of argument realization: Two honorific forms of iss-
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
A main approach regarding the two honorific forms of iss-, issusi- and kyesi-, is that each form is an honorific form of two different entries of iss- in the lexicon (adjective vs. verb or possession vs. location). We show that such an approach fails to account for distributional aspects of the two honorific forms and their combinatorial patterns with –n(un)ta. Along with a further claim that the failure is due to the implicit assumption that there are two different lexical entries of iss- in the lexicon, we propose that there is only one lexical entry of iss- having two theta roles [theme] and [location], between which there is no inherent hierarchy and that two or more variants of iss- are the results of various syntactic realizations of its arguments. Finally, we claim that each honorific form reflects the grammatical difference of the expression that it shows deference to. Issusi- shows deference to the grammatical subject of the sentence, while kyesi- to its [theme] argument.
Abstract
A main approach regarding the two honorific forms of iss-, issusi- and kyesi-, is that each form is an honorific form of two different entries of iss- in the lexicon (adjective vs. verb or possession vs. location). We show that such an approach fails to account for distributional aspects of the two honorific forms and their combinatorial patterns with –n(un)ta. Along with a further claim that the failure is due to the implicit assumption that there are two different lexical entries of iss- in the lexicon, we propose that there is only one lexical entry of iss- having two theta roles [theme] and [location], between which there is no inherent hierarchy and that two or more variants of iss- are the results of various syntactic realizations of its arguments. Finally, we claim that each honorific form reflects the grammatical difference of the expression that it shows deference to. Issusi- shows deference to the grammatical subject of the sentence, while kyesi- to its [theme] argument.
참고문헌 (37)
- 고석주, "‘있다’의 의미에 대한 연구 - 어휘개념구조 표상을 중심으로 -", 한말연구, (20), pp.1~25 (2007), 한말연구학회[DOI]
- 고영근, "우리말 문법론" (2018), 집문당
- 김선영, "ʻ계시다ʼ의 양용 용법에 대한 연구 - ʻ있다ʼ와 관련하여 -", 어학연구, 50(1), pp.3~24 (2014), 언어교육원
- 김용하, "한국어 생성 통사론" (2018), 역락
- 김정남, "국어 형용사의 연구" (2005), 역락
- 남기심, "표준 국어 문법론" (2014), 박이정
- 박소영, "직접존대와 간접존대, 그리고 ‘-시-’의 실현: 보충법 실현에 대한 형태-통사론적 관견", 國語學, (95), pp.141~166 (2020), 국어학회[DOI]
- 박양규, "소유와 소재", 국어학, 3, pp.93~118 (1975)
- 서정목, "한국어의 문장 구조" (2017), 역락
- 서정수, "국어의 이해와 인식: 갈음 김석득 교수 회갑 기념 논문집", pp.25~37 (1991), 한국문화사
- 신선경, "‘있다’의 어휘 의미와 통사" (2002), 태학사
- 양정석, "국어 동사의 의미 분석과 연결이론" (1995), 박이정
- 양정석, "‘느’ 분석론과 ‘있다’, ‘없다’의 문제", 한글, (296), pp.81~122 (2012), 한글학회[DOI]
- 유현경, "국어 형용사 연구" (1998), 한국문화사
- 유현경, "‘있다’의 품사론", 어문론총, (59), pp.187~210 (2013), 한국문학언어학회[DOI]
- 이상억, "국어의 사동⋅피동 구문 연구", 국어연구, 26 (1970)
- 이익섭, "국어문법론 강의" (1999), 학연사
- 최기용, "‘있-’의 범주와 논항 구조 그리고 능격성", 국어학, 32, pp.107~134 (1998)
- 최기용, "장형 부정 구문의 격 교체", 언어, 31(3), pp.441~461 (2006), 한국언어학회
- 최기용, "한국어 격과 조사의 생성 통사론" (2009), 한국문화사
- 최기용, "UTAH와 공존하는 반례의 성격: 한국어 대격 피동문의 경우", 생성문법연구, 27(1), pp.37~60 (2017), 한국생성문법학회[DOI]
- 최기용, "피동 구문의 VP periphery: 한국어의 ‘-에게’ 피동 대 ‘-에 의해’ 피동", 생성문법연구, 28(2), pp.295~346 (2018), 한국생성문법학회[DOI]
- 최기용, "한국어에서 형용사 구하기", 생성문법연구, 29(2), pp.441~458 (2019), 한국생성문법학회[DOI]
- 최현숙, "Some Distributional Differences Between Adjectives and Verbs in Korean: A reply to Yeo (2004)", 어학연구, 41(2), pp.331~362 (2005), 언어교육원
- Chomsky, Noam, "Lectures on Government and Binding" (1981), Foris
- Chomsky, Noam, "The Minimalist Program" (1995), MIT Press
- Chung, Inkie, "Suppletive verbal morphology in Korean and the mechanism of vocabulary insertion", Journal of Linguistics, 45, pp.533~567 (2009)
- Cuervo, M. C., "The End of Argument Structure?" (2012), Emerald Group Publishing Limited
- D’alessandro, Roberta, "The Verbal Domain" (2017), Oxford University Press
- Hale, Kenneth, "Prolegomenon to A theory of Argument Structure" (2002), MIT Press
- Does Korean have adjectives?, "Kim, Min-joo", 71~89, pp.MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 43 (2002)
- Kratzer, Angelika, "Phrase Structure and the Lexicon", pp.109~138 (1996), Kluwer
- Levin, Beth, "Argument Realization" (2005), Cambridge University Press
- Marantz, Alec, "Verbal argument structure : Events and participants", Lingua, 130, pp.152~168 (2013)
- 박종언, "Decomposing iss in the Dative-Nominative Construction in Korean", 언어, 34(3), pp.553~582 (2009), 한국언어학회[DOI]
- 여승주, "What is it LIke Being an Adjective in Korean?", 어학연구, 40(4), pp.1013~1033 (2004), 언어교육원
- 여승주, "On the Syntactic category adjective in Korean", 언어학, (42), pp.23~40 (2005), 사단법인 한국언어학회