본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

‘자기’ 재검토: 엄홍준(2014), 허세문(2014)에 답한다

Caki Revisited: A Reply to H.-J. Um 2014 and S. Hoe 2014.

최기용
한국생성문법학회|2015.11|생성문법연구 (Studies in Generative Grammar)|제25권 제4호|pp. 801-824|DOI 10.15860/sigg.25.4.201511.801

2

조회

0

다운로드

6

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

KoreancakiBinding Condition Bbound-variable pronounde re blocking effectsde se readinglogophorspropositional attitude verbs
주제분류언어학

초록

In this reply, I examine H.-J. Um’s (2014) conceptual arguments against caki as a bound-variable pronoun and S. Hoe’s (2014) empirical arguments against a unified analysis of local caki and long-distance caki. I contend that Um’s claim is misleading in that a source of a pronoun’s bound-variable reading is semantic and co-indexing of caki with its antecedent is not warranted. As for Hoe’s claim, I suggest that some differences between local caki and long-distance caki are not real and the others are derived from differences in a structural context in which each caki occurs. In conclusion, I claim that K. Choi’s (2014) proposal which unifies the two cakis as a bound-variable pronoun can be maintained.

Abstract

In this reply, I examine H.-J. Um’s (2014) conceptual arguments against caki as a bound-variable pronoun and S. Hoe’s (2014) empirical arguments against a unified analysis of local caki and long-distance caki. I contend that Um’s claim is misleading in that a source of a pronoun’s bound-variable reading is semantic and co-indexing of caki with its antecedent is not warranted. As for Hoe’s claim, I suggest that some differences between local caki and long-distance caki are not real and the others are derived from differences in a structural context in which each caki occurs. In conclusion, I claim that K. Choi’s (2014) proposal which unifies the two cakis as a bound-variable pronoun can be maintained.

참고문헌 (32)

  1. 성광수, "국어 재귀 대명사에 대한 재고", 한글, 172, pp.29~55 (1981)
  2. 양동휘, "확대 결속 이론", 한글, 188, pp.147~195 (1985)
  3. 양동휘, "한국어의 대용사론", 국어학, 15, pp.41~162 (1986)
  4. 엄홍준, "한국어 재귀사 ‘자기’의 속성", 언어, 39(4), pp.899~919 (2014), 한국언어학회
  5. 임홍빈, "국어의 재귀사 연구" (1987), 신구문화사
  6. 장석진, "조응의 담화 기능 : 재귀표현을 중심으로", 한글, 194, pp.121~155 (1986)
  7. 최기용, "피결속-변항 대명사로서의 ‘자기’", 생성문법연구, 24(2), pp.325~364 (2014), 한국생성문법학회
  8. 허세문, "한국어 대용어 ‘자기’에 대한 비통합적 접근", 언어학, (70), pp.141~178 (2014), 사단법인 한국언어학회
  9. Anand, Pranav, "De de se", 박사, pp.2006
  10. Anand, Pranav, "SALT XIV", pp.20~37 (2004), Corenell University
  11. Chomsky, Noam, "Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use" (1986), Praeger
  12. Chomsky, Noam, "Three factors in language design", Linguistic Inquiry, 36, pp.1~22 (2005)
  13. Clements, George, "The logophoric pronoun in Ewe: Its role in discourse", Journal of West African Languages, 10, pp.141~177 (1975)
  14. Cole, Peter, "Principles and parameters of long-distance reflexives", Linguistic Inquiry, 21, pp.1~22 (1990)
  15. Cole, Peter, "The Blackwell Companion to Syntax Vol. III", pp.21~84 (2006), Blackwell
  16. Hagège, Claude, "Les pronoms logophoriques", Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris, 69, pp.287~310 (1974)
  17. Han, Hak-Sung, "On reflexive movement", Korean Journal of Linguistics, 17, pp.203~238 (1992)
  18. Hornstein, Norbert, "Move! A minimalist theory of construal" (2001), Blackwell
  19. Huang, C.-T. James, "Long-distance reflexives", pp.141~192 (2001), Academic Press
  20. Kang, Beom-mo, "Two theories on unbounded reflexives", Korean Journal of Linguistics, 12, pp.1~24 (1987)
  21. Kang, Beom-mo, "Unbounded reflexives", Linguistics and Philosophy, 11, pp.415~456 (1988)
  22. Kim, Soo-Yeon, "What should we do with Condition A", Korean Journal of Linguistics, 25, pp.291~314 (2000)
  23. Kuno, Susumu, "Pronominalization, reflexivization, and direct discourse", Linguistic Inquiry, 3, pp.161~195 (1972)
  24. Kuno, Susumu, "The structure of the Japanese language" (1973), MIT Press
  25. Lee, Hye-Ran, "A feature-based account of long-distance anaphora" (1997), Hankook Publisher
  26. Lim, Dongsik, "Perspective shifts of Korean evidentials and the effect of contexts", Proceedings of SALT, 22, pp.26~42 (2012)
  27. Reinhart, Tanya, "Reflexivity", Linguistic Inquiry, 24, pp.595~652 (1993)
  28. Reuland, Eric, "Primitives of binding", Linguistic Inquiry, 32, pp.439~492 (2001)
  29. Reuland, Eric, "The Blackwell Companion to Syntax Vol. III", pp.1~20 (2006), Blackwell
  30. Reuland, Eric, "Anaphora and language design" (2011), MIT Press
  31. Sells, Peter, "Aspects of logophoricity", Linguistic Inquiry, 18, pp.445~481 (1987)
  32. Yang, Dong-Whee, "The extended binding theory of anaphors", Language Research, 14, pp.169~192 (1983)

관련 논문AI추천

피결속-변항 대명사로서의 ‘자기’최기용한국생성문법학회 · 생성문법연구2014 · 제24권 제2호한국어 재귀사 ‘자기’의 속성엄홍준한국언어학회 · 언어2014 · 제39권 제4호한국어 대용어 ‘자기’에 대한 비통합적 접근허세문사단법인 한국언어학회 · 언어학2014 · 제70호A Presuppositional Approach to Binding in Korean, with the Focus on Locally Bound Caki조진우한국생성문법학회 · 생성문법연구2025 · 제35권 제3호“-self”와 “자기”의 화용적 지시성에 관한 연구오명기언어과학회 · 언어과학연구2010 · 제52호한국어의 ‘나’, ‘자신’ 그리고 ‘나 자신’최기용사단법인 한국언어학회 · 언어학2015 · 제71호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (6건)

On Strong Distinctness손광락pp. 755-772Head Movement, Extension Condition, and Labeling이정식pp. 773-800Ways of Deriving Bare Fragments: Case-stranding and Postposition-stranding under Ellipsis박범식pp. 825-849A Crosslinguistic Semantic Analysis of Again오세랑pp. 851-872When can Topics be Questioned?김광섭pp. 873-885
원문 보기