Plural and Anaphoric Definite
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
It is well known that a plural marker is optional in languages that allow bare nouns, unlike English that does not allow bare nouns. This is so as a bare noun can denote either a singular or a plural meaning. However, in recent studies, it has been identified that even in a bare noun language such as Persian or Korean a plural marker is obligatory to indicate a plural meaning. The requirement of plural marker in these languages is identified to be only possible in an anaphoric context. This paper addresses an issue of why such a context in a bare noun language requires a plural marker. In particular, this paper focuses on the syntax of plural and anaphoric context that make possible the obligatory presence of plural. By building on the previous approaches on this issue, this paper proposes that a plural instantiates the Num(ber) head with a binary number feature such as [±plural]. Via Agree (Chomsky 1998), the feature on the Num head values an uninterpretable number feature on the D head that is the locus of definiteness. This paper shows that Korean allows an obligatory plural marking similar to English, but only in a restricted context, i.e., anaphoric context. Moreover, this paper identified that the strict presence of plural marking in Korean is cross-linguistic phenomenon found in other bare noun languages, which has not been paid much attention in the literature.
Abstract
It is well known that a plural marker is optional in languages that allow bare nouns, unlike English that does not allow bare nouns. This is so as a bare noun can denote either a singular or a plural meaning. However, in recent studies, it has been identified that even in a bare noun language such as Persian or Korean a plural marker is obligatory to indicate a plural meaning. The requirement of plural marker in these languages is identified to be only possible in an anaphoric context. This paper addresses an issue of why such a context in a bare noun language requires a plural marker. In particular, this paper focuses on the syntax of plural and anaphoric context that make possible the obligatory presence of plural. By building on the previous approaches on this issue, this paper proposes that a plural instantiates the Num(ber) head with a binary number feature such as [±plural]. Via Agree (Chomsky 1998), the feature on the Num head values an uninterpretable number feature on the D head that is the locus of definiteness. This paper shows that Korean allows an obligatory plural marking similar to English, but only in a restricted context, i.e., anaphoric context. Moreover, this paper identified that the strict presence of plural marking in Korean is cross-linguistic phenomenon found in other bare noun languages, which has not been paid much attention in the literature.
참고문헌 (22)
- Bale, Alan, "Syntactic complexity and competition : The singular-plural distinction in Western Armenian", Linguistic Inquiry, 45(1), pp.1~26 (2014)
- Barrie Michael Jonathan Mathew, "Numeral classifiers in Korean -ki nominalizations", 언어연구, 39(3), pp.499~518 (2022), 언어정보연구소[DOI]
- Borer, Hagit, "Structuring sense, vol I : In name only" (2005), Oxford University Press
- Chomsky, Noam, "Minimalist inquiries: The framework, Number 15 in MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics" (1998), MITWPL
- Chierchia, Gennaro, "Reference to kinds across languages", Natural Language Semantics, 6, pp.339~405 (1998)
- Corbett, Greville, "Number" (2000), Cambridge University Press
- Ghaniabadi, Saeed, "Count and mass across languages", pp.112~128 (2012), Oxford University Press
- Gomeshi, Jila, "Plural marking, indefiniteness, and the noun phrase", Studia Linguistica, 57, pp.47~74 (2003)
- Jenks, Peter, "Articulated definiteness without articles", Linguistic Inquiry, 49(3), pp.501~536 (2018)
- Kang, Arum, "Marking definiteness in an articless language The role of the domain restrictor KU in Korean", Language and Linguistics, 22, pp.301~336 (2021)
- Kang, Bum-Mo, "Plurality and other semantic aspects of common nouns in Korean", Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 3, pp.1~24 (1994)
- Kim, Chonghyuck, "The Korean plural marker -tul and its implications", pp.2005
- Kim, Kyumin, "Modifying plurals, classifiers, and co-occurrence: the case of Korean", Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 3(1), pp.25~ (2018)
- Kim, Kyumin, "On the complementary distribution of plurals and classifiers in East Asian classifier languages", Language and Linguistic Compass, 12(4), pp.e12271~ (2018)
- Kwon, SongNim, "Number from a syntactic perspective: Why plural marking looks ‘truer’ in French than in Korean", Empirical Issues in Formal Syntax and Semantics, 5, pp.133~158 (2004)
- Lee, Chungmin, "Korean Syntax and Semantics: LSA Institute Workshop", pp.23~ (2000), Thaehaksa
- Lyons, Cristopher, "Definiteness" (1999), Cambridge University Press
- Ojeda, Armerindo, "The semantics of collectives and distributives in Papago", Natural Language Semantics, 6, pp.245~270 (1998)
- 박소영, "The Role of Human and Definite Features in Korean Pluralization", 생성문법연구, 30(2), pp.175~196 (2020), 한국생성문법학회[DOI]
- Park, So-Young, "Two types of plurals and numeral classifiers in classifier Languages: The case of Korean", Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 31, pp.139~177 (2022)
- Ritter, Elizabeth, "Syntax and Semantics 25", pp.37~60 (1991), Academic Press
- Rullmann, Hotze, "Where semantics meets pragmatics", pp.175~196 (2006), Elsevier