Non-nominal Tul as a Local Part Operator
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The semantic contribution of non-nominal tul in Korean is widely known as distributivity. Yet, Kim (2005) observes many examples in which Korean non-nominal tul is compatible with collectivity. To capture the seemingly conflicting properties of non-nominal tul, Kim (2005) claims that the distributivity sense of non-nominal tul is presupposition rather than denotation. However, it is attested that the distributive sense of non-nominal tul cannot survive under negation and this fact tells us that the distributive interpretation of non-nominal tul should not be considered as presupposition. Instead, this paper claims that Korean non-nominal tul is a local Part operator which is intrinsically a distributivity operator but can also allow a collectivity sense to arise. By explaining the core properties of non-nominal tul with a pragmatic operator, this paper also explains that the notorious interpretational fluctuation of non-nominal tul, which has frustrated many researchers working on it, comes from its inherent pragmatic nature.
Abstract
The semantic contribution of non-nominal tul in Korean is widely known as distributivity. Yet, Kim (2005) observes many examples in which Korean non-nominal tul is compatible with collectivity. To capture the seemingly conflicting properties of non-nominal tul, Kim (2005) claims that the distributivity sense of non-nominal tul is presupposition rather than denotation. However, it is attested that the distributive sense of non-nominal tul cannot survive under negation and this fact tells us that the distributive interpretation of non-nominal tul should not be considered as presupposition. Instead, this paper claims that Korean non-nominal tul is a local Part operator which is intrinsically a distributivity operator but can also allow a collectivity sense to arise. By explaining the core properties of non-nominal tul with a pragmatic operator, this paper also explains that the notorious interpretational fluctuation of non-nominal tul, which has frustrated many researchers working on it, comes from its inherent pragmatic nature.
참고문헌 (14)
- Bittner, Maria, "Cross-linguistic Semantics", Linguistics and Philosophy, 17, pp.53~108 (1994)
- Brisson, Christine., "Distributivity, Maximality and Floating Quantifiers", Ph.D., pp.1998
- Brisson, Christine, "Plurals, All, and the Nonuniformity of Collective Predication", Linguistics and Philosophy, 26, pp.129~184 (2003)
- Cable, Seth., "A Lecture Note of Ling 753", Topics in Semantics, ~ (2012)
- Choe, Jae. Woong., "Anti-quantifiers and A Theory of Distributivity", Ph.D., pp.1987
- Dowty, David, "Word Meaning and Montague Grammar" (1979), Reidel
- Joh, Yoon-kyoung., "Plurality and Distributivity", Ph.D., pp.2008
- 조윤경, "A Unified Analysis of the Three Uses of Distributive Quantifiers", 언어와언어학, (44), pp.205~234 (2009), 언어연구소
- 조윤경, "A Unified Syntactic Account of the Two Uses of Tul in Korean", 언어과학연구, (54), pp.233~252 (2010), 언어과학회
- Kim, Jong. Hyuck., "The Korean Plural Marker Tul and Its Implications", Ph.D., pp.2005
- Mittwoch, Anita, "On the difference between eating and Eating Something. Activities versus Accomplishments", Linguistic Inquiry, 12, pp.113~122 (1982)
- Schwarzschild, Roger., "Pluralities" (1996), Kluwer
- Song, Jae. Joong, "The So-called Plural Copy in Korean as a Marker of Distribution and Focus", Journal of Pragmatics, 27, pp.203~224 (1997)
- Zimmermann, Malte., "Boys Buying Two Sausages Each: On the Syntax and Semantics of Distance-Distributivity", Ph.D., pp.2002