On the Semantics and Pragmatics of Response Particles in Korean
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper points out a few challenges Kim and Wee encounter while adopting Krifka’s proposal and subsequently accounting for the distribution of Korean response particles ung/ney and ani(yo) as an anaphor, on a par with English yes and no, that directly refers back to the propositional discourse referent introduced in the previous sentence and carries out the assertion speech act. I argue that the so-called positive response particles ung and ney are not ASSERT operators, nor do they directly pick up the propositional discourse referents. I propose that they should be treated as ADMIT or AGREE speech act markers that involve an anaphoric link with the previous utterance in an indirect way, namely via zero pronouns whose presence is independently motivated due to their syntactic requirements. I show that the new account can explain a wider variety of relevant examples.
Abstract
This paper points out a few challenges Kim and Wee encounter while adopting Krifka’s proposal and subsequently accounting for the distribution of Korean response particles ung/ney and ani(yo) as an anaphor, on a par with English yes and no, that directly refers back to the propositional discourse referent introduced in the previous sentence and carries out the assertion speech act. I argue that the so-called positive response particles ung and ney are not ASSERT operators, nor do they directly pick up the propositional discourse referents. I propose that they should be treated as ADMIT or AGREE speech act markers that involve an anaphoric link with the previous utterance in an indirect way, namely via zero pronouns whose presence is independently motivated due to their syntactic requirements. I show that the new account can explain a wider variety of relevant examples.
참고문헌 (13)
- Asher, Nicholas, "Belief in Discourse Representation Theory", Journal of Philosophical Logic, 15, pp.127~189 (1986)
- Claus, Berry, A, "Puzzling Response Particles: An Experimental Study on the German Answering System", Semantics and Pragmatics, 10(19) (2017)[DOI]
- Cornish, Francis, "So Be It: The Discourse-semantics of So and It", Journal of Semantics, 9, pp.163~178 (1992)
- Farkas, Donka F, "Polarity Particles Revisited", Semantics and Pragmatics, 12(15), pp.1~16 (2019)
- Guerts, Bart, "Presupposition and Anaphors in Attitude Contexts", Linguistics and Philosophy, 21, pp.545~601 (1998)
- Hamblin, Charles Leonard, "Questions in Montague English", Foundations of Language, 10, pp.41~53 (1973)
- Holmberg, Anders, "On the Syntax of Yes and No in English", Newcastle Working Papers in Linguistics, 18, pp.52~72 (2012)
- 홍민표, "Alternative Questions in Korean: Their Prosody and Denotation", 인문과학연구논총, 41(1), pp.68~93 (2020), 인문과학연구소[DOI]
- 김종복, "On the Anaphoric Nature of Particle Responses to the Polar Questions in English and Korean", 언어, 42(2), pp.153~177 (2017), 한국언어학회[DOI]
- 구종남, "국어 부정의문문에 대한 응답 방식 연구: 통계적 접근", 국어국문학, (136), pp.193~229 (2004), 국어국문학회
- Kramer, Ruth, "Polarity Particles: An Ellipsis Account", NELS, 39, pp.479~491 (2009)
- Krifka, Manfred, "Response Particles as Propositional Anaphors", Proceedings of SALT, 23, pp.1~18 (2013)
- 위혜경, "A Semantic function of Korean Response Particles as Anaphors", 언어, 44(4), pp.831~852 (2019), 한국언어학회[DOI]