이중목적어구문의 구조와 LF 복사본 삭제 제약
The Structure of Double Object Constructions and Constraints on the Deletion of Copy at LF
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The aim of this study is to represent the structure of English Double Object Constructions. To meet the goal, however, it is attempted to avoid using ad-hoc DOC-specific grammatical apparatus or functional category. Once it is permitted, we encounter another problem why we are not able to meet a verb construction which has three or more nominals complements. To meet the constraint, IO is forced to bear two theta roles in the course of its DOC derivation. However, once an argument, IO in DOC, is allowed to have more than one theta-role, it can be explained the peculiarity DOC has shown compared to other alternating 3-place verb constructions just only with grammatical apparatus and grammatical categories widely accepted in the field. Also the property of IO which has been proposed in the filed can help explain why IO has had shown different syntactic properties compared to other nominal complements. Furthermore, from this property it can be derived a constraint on deletion of copies at LF. However, it has to be clarified in further studies that what happens when an argument gets more than one theta-role between the theta roles in the same argument. It has stated that IO is able to bear creator role as well as possessor role depending on the nature of DO.
Abstract
The aim of this study is to represent the structure of English Double Object Constructions. To meet the goal, however, it is attempted to avoid using ad-hoc DOC-specific grammatical apparatus or functional category. Once it is permitted, we encounter another problem why we are not able to meet a verb construction which has three or more nominals complements. To meet the constraint, IO is forced to bear two theta roles in the course of its DOC derivation. However, once an argument, IO in DOC, is allowed to have more than one theta-role, it can be explained the peculiarity DOC has shown compared to other alternating 3-place verb constructions just only with grammatical apparatus and grammatical categories widely accepted in the field. Also the property of IO which has been proposed in the filed can help explain why IO has had shown different syntactic properties compared to other nominal complements. Furthermore, from this property it can be derived a constraint on deletion of copies at LF. However, it has to be clarified in further studies that what happens when an argument gets more than one theta-role between the theta roles in the same argument. It has stated that IO is able to bear creator role as well as possessor role depending on the nature of DO.
참고문헌 (32)
- 정원돈, "심리 동사의 의미 구조와 논항 구조", 영어영문학연구, 55(2), pp.265~282 (2013), 한국중앙영어영문학회
- Akmajian, Adrian, "An Introduction to the Principles of Transformational Syntax" (1980), MIT Press
- Baker, Mark C., "Object sharing and projection in serial verb constructions", Linguistic Inquiry, (20), pp.513~553 (1989)
- Baker, Mark C., "Phrase structure and the lexicon", pp.7~34 (1996), Kluwer Academic Pub
- Baker, Mark C., "Elements of grammar: Handbook in generative syntax", pp.73~138 (1997), Kluwer Academic Pub
- Barss, Andrew, "A note on anaphora and double objects", Linguistic Inquiry, (17), pp.347~354 (1986)
- Basilico, David, "Object position and predication forms", Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, (16), pp.541~595 (1998)
- Bošković, Željko, "D-structure, theta-criterion, and movement into theta-positions", Linguistic Analysis, (24), pp.247~286 (1994)
- Bošković, Željko, "A-movement and the EPP", Syntax, (5), pp.167~218 (2002)
- Chomsky, Noam, "Lectures on government and binding" (1981), Foris
- Chomsky, Noam, "The view from building 20", pp.1~52 (1993), MIT Press
- Chomsky, Noam, "The minimalist program" (1995), MIT Press
- Emonds, Joseph, "The blackwell companion to syntax Vol II", pp.73~144 (2006), Blackwell Publishing Ltd
- Fujita, Koji, "Double Objects, Causatives, and Derivational Economy", Linguistic Inquiry, (27), pp.146~173 (1996)
- Grimshaw, Jane, "Argument Structure" (1990), MIT Press
- Harley, Heidi, "Possession and the Double Object Construction", Linguistic Variation Yearbook, (2), pp.31~70 (2002)
- Hoekstra, Eric, "Syntax: Critical Concepts in Linguistics Volume II Transformation" (1991)
- Hudson, Richard, "So-called ‘double objects’ and grammatical relations", Language, (68), pp.251~276 (1992)
- Jackendoff, Ray, "Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar" (1972), MIT Press
- Jackendoff, Ray, "On Larson’s Treatment of the double Object Construction", Linguistic Inquiry, (21), pp.427~456 (1990)
- Johnson, Kyle, "Object positions", Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, (9), pp.577~636 (1991)
- Koizumi, Masatoshi, "Object agreement and the split VP hypothesis", MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, (18), pp.99~148 (1993)
- Larson, Richard K, "On the double object construction", Linguistic Inquiry, (19), pp.335~391 (1988)
- Lebeaux, David, "Where does binding theory apply?" (2009), MIT Press
- Levin, Beth, "English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation" (1993), The University of Chicago Press
- Lopez, Luis, "On the (Non)complementarity of θ-Theory and Checking Theory", Linguistic Inquiry, (32), pp.694~716 (2001)
- Napoli, Donna Jo, "The Double-Object Construction, Domain asymmetries, and Linear Precedence", Linguistics, (30), pp.837~871 (1992)
- Oehrle, Richard T, "The grammatical status of the English dative alternation" (1976), MIT dissertation
- Postal, Paul Martin, "Edge-based Clausal Syntax: a study of (mostly) English object structure" (2012), MIT Press
- Radford, Andrew, "Transformational grammar: A first course" (1988), Cambridge University Press
- Rizzi, Luigi, "Wh-Movement: Moving on", pp.97~133 (2006), MIT Press
- Schäfer, Florian, "Two Types of External Argument Licensing—the Case of Causers", Studia Lingustica, (66), pp.128~180 (2012)