Multiple Case Marking and Null Argument Phenomena

Abstract

This paper deals critically with An's (2012) argument that the second clause (i.e. target clause) of a sentence is derived from the multiple case marking (MCM) construction via null pronominalization (i.e. pro) of the second nominative phrase with the optional introduction of a relevant discourse particle such as the topic marker -nun. This paper identifies the following by examining some empirical phenomena involved in this argument. First, though the genitive construction in the first clause allows MCM counterparts, the target clause does not always permit null pronominalization. Second, only when the genuine grammatical subject or object in the target clause is selected by its predicate, it can undergo null pronominalization. At this point, body-part or kinship expressions are a typical example which can be represented as pro. Third, the target clause may or may not be equivalent to the MCM counterpart when it involves pro. Finally, the genuine grammatical subject or object in question necessarily shows up as a null argument when the target clause involves null pronominalization, regardless of whether one or more genitive elements appear in the genitive construction in the antecedent clause.