On the nature of the optionality of the morpheme te in Korean phrasal comparatives
2
조회
0
다운로드
11
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In this paper, I discuss the nature of the optionality of the morpheme te in phrasal comparatives in Korean. I first show that the morpheme te is used only as the comparative degree morpheme, unlike the morpheme more which can also appear in metalinguistic comparatives. I further show: (A) In phrasal comparatives that respect parallelism (exhibiting the semantics of direct comparison), the morpheme te can optionally appear, while (B) in pure phrasal comparatives that do not respect parallelism (exhibiting the semantics of indirect comparison), its presence may or may not be permitted, depending on speakers and/or syntactic contexts; and (C) it tends to obligatorily appear in clausal comparatives. I suggest that (B) is the case because the morpheme te can trigger the semantics of indirect comparison for some speakers, but not for others, and also that there are two te's: the morpheme te that triggers the semantics of direct comparison and the morpheme te that triggers the semantics of indirect comparison (which I call te* here). As for (A), by assuming that phrasal comparatives which respect parallelism can be ambiguous between derived and "base-generated," I suggest that the optionality of te (not the optionality of te*) can be attributed to derivational ambiguity: Derived phrasal comparatives require the presence of the (phonologically-overt) morpheme te (just as clausal comparatives do) while "base-generated" phrasal comparatives may not, employing covert te. During the discussion, I show that certain phrasal comparatives (which I call PP phrasal comparatives) tend to require the presence of overt te to suggest (I) that they should be considered derived from clausal comparatives, and (II) that -pota ('than') can select only a noun phrase, complex or simplex.
Abstract
In this paper, I discuss the nature of the optionality of the morpheme te in phrasal comparatives in Korean. I first show that the morpheme te is used only as the comparative degree morpheme, unlike the morpheme more which can also appear in metalinguistic comparatives. I further show: (A) In phrasal comparatives that respect parallelism (exhibiting the semantics of direct comparison), the morpheme te can optionally appear, while (B) in pure phrasal comparatives that do not respect parallelism (exhibiting the semantics of indirect comparison), its presence may or may not be permitted, depending on speakers and/or syntactic contexts; and (C) it tends to obligatorily appear in clausal comparatives. I suggest that (B) is the case because the morpheme te can trigger the semantics of indirect comparison for some speakers, but not for others, and also that there are two te's: the morpheme te that triggers the semantics of direct comparison and the morpheme te that triggers the semantics of indirect comparison (which I call te* here). As for (A), by assuming that phrasal comparatives which respect parallelism can be ambiguous between derived and "base-generated," I suggest that the optionality of te (not the optionality of te*) can be attributed to derivational ambiguity: Derived phrasal comparatives require the presence of the (phonologically-overt) morpheme te (just as clausal comparatives do) while "base-generated" phrasal comparatives may not, employing covert te. During the discussion, I show that certain phrasal comparatives (which I call PP phrasal comparatives) tend to require the presence of overt te to suggest (I) that they should be considered derived from clausal comparatives, and (II) that -pota ('than') can select only a noun phrase, complex or simplex.
참고문헌 (23)
- Abney,Steve, "The English Noun Phrase in Its Sentential Aspect", 박사, pp.1987
- Beck,Sigrid,Toshiko Oda and Koji Sugisaki, "Parametric variation in the semantics of comparison: Japanese vs. English", Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 13, pp.289~344 (2004)
- Bhatt, Rajesh, "Late merger of degree clauses", Linguistic Inquiry, 35, pp.1~45 (2004)
- Bresnan,Joan, "Syntax of Comparative Clause Construction in English", Linguistic Inquiry, 4, pp.275~343 (1973)
- Bresnan,Joan, "Variables in the Theory of Transformation. In Peter Culicover, Tomas Wasow and Adrian Akmajian. eds., Formal Syntax", pp.157~196 (1977), Academic Press.
- Chae,Hee-Rahk, "A Comparative Analysis of tough- and Comparative Construction in English and Korean (written in Korean)", Language Research, 34(1), pp.33~71 (1998)
- Choe,Hyon Sook, "On the categorial ambiguity of the morpheme kes in Korean", Language Research, 43, pp.229~264 (2007)
- Choe,Hyon Sook, "Korean clausal comparatives as subcomparatives", paper read at TEAL-5 (2008), Potsdam University
- Choi, Hyun-Bae, "Wuli Malpon (The grammar of our language)" (1929), Gengumsa
- Chomsky,Noam, "On wh-movement. Peter W. Culicover, Thomas Wasow and Adrian Akmajian (eds). Formal Syntax", pp.71~132 (1977), Academic Press
- Grosu, Alexander, "Reply to Bhatt and Pancheva's "Late Merger of Degree Clauses": The Irrelevance of (Non) conservativity", Linguistic Inquiry, 37, pp.457~483 (2006)
- Ha,Kil-Chong, "1999. hyentayhankwuke pikyokwumwun yenkwu ('A Study on the comparative construction in Korean')", ~ (1999)
- Huddleston, Rodney, "Comparative Constructions. In Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey Pullum eds., The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language", pp.1097~1170 (2002), CUP
- Jhang, Sea-Eun, "Comparative Constructions in Korean", Comparative Korean Studies, 9, pp.1~18 (2001)
- Kennedy,Christopher, "Projecting the Adjective: The Syntax and Semantics of Gradability and Comparison" (1999), Garland
- Kennedy,Christopher, "Comparative deletion and optimality in syntax", Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 20, pp.553~621 (2002)
- Kiparsky, Paul, "Fact. In Manfred Bierwisch and Karl Erich Heidolph, eds., Progress in Linguistics: A collection of papers", pp.143~173 (1970), The Hague: Mouton
- Lee,Jeong-Shik, "Ellipsis in Korean Comparatives", Studies in Modern Generative Grammar, 30, pp.155~179 (2002)
- Napoli,Donna Jo, "Comparative Ellipsis: A Phrase Structure Analysis", Linguistic Inquiry, 14, pp.675~694 (1983)
- ' comparataives and gradability?(written in Korean), "Korean Linguistics", 2003, 277~418
- Suh,Cheongsoo, "kwuke mwunpep ('The Grammar of the Korean language')" (1994), The Deep-Rooted Tree Publishing House
- Sohn,Ho-min, "Korean" (1994), Routledge
- Stassen,Leon, "Comparison and Universal Grammar" (1985), Blackwell