Korean Resultative Construction Redux
1
조회
0
다운로드
9
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
I claim that the result phrase in Korean resultative construction is an adjunct à la Shim and den Dikken (2007). At the same time, diverging from them, I argue that the result phrase in Korean transitive resultative construction projects a finite CP, whereas the one in the intransitive resultative construction projects a nonfinite CP, based on important differences between the two resultative constructions. The present proposal can address various properties of Korean resultative construction in their entirety, including case on the antecedent NP, iteration of the result phrase, and obviation of the direct object restriction (Levin and Rappaport,1995) as distinct from English resultative construction. The present research has an important implication on the cross-linguistic variation in the syntactic representation of the result phrase: adjunct in Korean and complement in English (Kayne, 1985; Van Voorst, 1986; Hoekstra, 1988; Carrier and Randall, 1992)
Abstract
I claim that the result phrase in Korean resultative construction is an adjunct à la Shim and den Dikken (2007). At the same time, diverging from them, I argue that the result phrase in Korean transitive resultative construction projects a finite CP, whereas the one in the intransitive resultative construction projects a nonfinite CP, based on important differences between the two resultative constructions. The present proposal can address various properties of Korean resultative construction in their entirety, including case on the antecedent NP, iteration of the result phrase, and obviation of the direct object restriction (Levin and Rappaport,1995) as distinct from English resultative construction. The present research has an important implication on the cross-linguistic variation in the syntactic representation of the result phrase: adjunct in Korean and complement in English (Kayne, 1985; Van Voorst, 1986; Hoekstra, 1988; Carrier and Randall, 1992)
참고문헌 (33)
- Carrier, J., "The Argument Structure and Syntactic Structure of Resultatives", Linguistic Inquiry, 23(2), pp.173~234 (1992)
- 최영식, "Adjectives in Korean are NOT", 언어학, 27(1), pp.122~141 (2019), 대한언어학회[DOI]
- Chomsky, N., "Lectures on Government and Binding" (1981), Foris
- Chomsky, N., "Barriers" (1986), MIT Press
- Chomsky, N., "The Minimalist Program" (1995), MIT Press
- Dowty, D, "Governed Transformations as Lexical Rules in a Montague Grammar", Linguistic Inquiry, 9(3), pp.393~426 (1978)
- Folli, R., "Deriving Telicity in English and Italian", Doctor, pp.2001
- Hamann, C, "Semantik: Ein Internationales Handbuch der Zeitgenossischen Forschung", pp.657~673 (1991), Walter de Gruyter
- Higginbotham, J., "Tense, Aspect, Indexicality" (2009), Oxford University Press
- Hoekstra, T, "Small Clause Results", Lingua, 74, pp.101~139 (1988)
- SungshimHong, "Raising to Object in Small Clauses", 현대문법연구, (30), pp.89~108 (2002), 현대문법학회
- 홍기선, "영어의 결과구문과 한국어의 “게” 구문", 언어, 36(4), pp.1143~1169 (2011), 한국언어학회[DOI]
- Kang, E. -Y, "The key Constructions in Korean Predicate : Head or a Complementizer", Harvard studies in Korean linguistics, 9, pp.433~442 (2001)
- Kayne, R, "Grammatical Representation", pp.101~140 (1985), Foris
- Kim, J. -B., "Constraints on the Formation of Korean and English Resultative Constructions", Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society, 29, pp.137~151 (1999)
- Kim, M. -J., "Does Korean Have Adjectives?", MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 43, pp.71~89 (2002)
- Kim, S., "A Cross-linguistic Perspective on Resultative Formation", Texas Linguistic Forum 38, pp.189~204 (1997), University of Texas Department of Linguistics
- Kim, S., "Resultatives : English vs. Korean", Journal of Korean Linguistics, 7, pp.363~379 (1998)
- Kim, S., "Telicity and Mode of Merge in L2 Acquisition of Resultatives", Language Acquisition, 27(2), pp.117~159 (2020)
- 고희정, "On the Typology of Small Clauses: Null Subject and Mode of Merge in Resultatives", 생성문법연구, 25(2), pp.347~375 (2015), 한국생성문법학회[DOI]
- Kratzer, A, "Event Arguments: Foundations and Applications", pp.177~212 (2005), Max Niemeyer Verlag
- Levin, B., "Unaccusativity : At the Syntax-lexical Semantics Interface" (1995), The MIT Press
- Rothstein, S., "The Syntactic Forms of Predication", Doctor, pp.1983
- Schein, B., "Small Clauses and Predication", pp.1982
- Shim, J., "The Tense of Resultatives : The Case of Korean", Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society, 38, pp.337~350 (2007)
- Simpson, J, "Papers in Lexical-Functional Grammar", pp.143~157 (1983), Indiana University Linguistics Club
- Sohn, H. -M., "Korean Grammar" (1996), Cambridge University Press
- Sohn, H. -M., "The Korean Language" (1999), Routledge
- Son, M., "Resultatives in Korean Revisited: Complementation versus Adjunction", Tromsø Working Papers on Language and Linguistics, 35(1), pp.89~113 (2008)
- Song, H., "Causatives and Resultatives in Korean", Doctor, pp.2005
- Vendler, Z, "Verbs and Times", Philosophical Review, 66(2), pp.143~160 (1957)
- Voorst, J., "Event Structure", Doctor, pp.1986
- Wechsler, S., "On Resultative Predicates and Clauses: Parallels between Korean and English", Language Sciences, 23(4-5), pp.391~423 (2001)