관계절에서의 전치사/후치사 탈락과 관련한 한국어와 스페인어의 대조에 대한 통합적 설명
A Unified Account of the Contrast between Korean and Spanish regarding P-omission in Relatives
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Postpositions in Korean cannot be deleted, since they have their own semantic contents. However, in relative constructions they must be deleted. To account for this contradictory phenomena Kim, K.S.(2006), by adopting the strategy 'repair by ellipsis', claims that a Korean relative clause is another context in which a grammatical violation is repaired by ellipsis. By assuming that Korean postpositions are affixes which must be attached to their overt complement, he argues that in relative constructions they can be deleted to avoid a grammatical violation, since Korean has no overt relative pronoun to which they can be attached. Spanish relatives apparently raise a problem for his analysis, since Spanish prepositions, whose behaviors are very similar to those of Korean postpositions, cannot be deleted. However, I show that there is a way of dealing with this fact in such a way which is consistent with his analysis. Based on Shim's(1999) claim that the relative ‘que’ shows properties of typical relative pronouns, I argue that Spanish prepositions, although they are affixes, must not be deleted, since the relative ‘que’ is a wh-operator and so can be their lexical host.
Abstract
Postpositions in Korean cannot be deleted, since they have their own semantic contents. However, in relative constructions they must be deleted. To account for this contradictory phenomena Kim, K.S.(2006), by adopting the strategy 'repair by ellipsis', claims that a Korean relative clause is another context in which a grammatical violation is repaired by ellipsis. By assuming that Korean postpositions are affixes which must be attached to their overt complement, he argues that in relative constructions they can be deleted to avoid a grammatical violation, since Korean has no overt relative pronoun to which they can be attached. Spanish relatives apparently raise a problem for his analysis, since Spanish prepositions, whose behaviors are very similar to those of Korean postpositions, cannot be deleted. However, I show that there is a way of dealing with this fact in such a way which is consistent with his analysis. Based on Shim's(1999) claim that the relative ‘que’ shows properties of typical relative pronouns, I argue that Spanish prepositions, although they are affixes, must not be deleted, since the relative ‘que’ is a wh-operator and so can be their lexical host.
참고문헌 (26)
- 심상완, "제한적 관계절의 que를 어떻게 이해할 것인가", 서어서문연구, 14, pp.87~120 (1999)
- 최기용, "구조격 조사의 비출현: 구조격의 형태적 비실현", 생성문법연구, 17(2), pp.199~232 (2007), 한국생성문법학회
- Almeida, D, "A Problem for the Preposition Stranding Generalization", Linguistic Inquiry, pp.349~362
- Bošković, Z, "Be Careful Where You Float Your Quantifiers", Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, pp.681~742 (2004)
- Bresnan, Joan, "On complementizers: towards a syntactic theory of complement types", Foundations of Language, 6, pp.297~321
- Brovetto, C., "Spanish clauses without complementizer”, Current Issues in Romance Languages", pp.33~45 (2002), John Benjamin Publishing Company
- Brucart, J. M., "La estructura del sintagma nominal: las oraciones del relativo; in Gramatica Descriptiva de la Lengua Espanola & I", pp.395~522 (1999), Espasa
- Campos, H., "Presposotion Stranding in Spanish", Linguistic Inquuiry, 22, pp.741~750 (1991)
- Choe, H. S., "Focus and Topic Movement in Korean and Licensing; in Discoursal Configurationality", pp.1~87 (1995), Oxford University Press
- Chomsky, N., "Minimalist inquiries: the Framework; Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik", pp.89~155 (2000), MIT Press
- Chomsky, N, "Derivation by phase; A Life in Language", pp.1~52 (2001), MIT Press
- Den Dikken, M., "Phase Extension" (2006), New York University
- Gregg, Alvin, "Is that ever a relative pronoun?;Mid-America Linguistics Conference" (1972), Oklahoma State University
- Kim,Jae-yoon, "WH-운용자로서의 관계사 That", 새한영어영문학, 44(1), pp.299~312 (2002), 새한영어영문학회
- Kim, K. S., "Missing Affixes", Studies in Generative Grammar, 15(3), pp.275~292 (2006)
- Kim, S. W., "Preposition Stranding, Complementizers, and Phase Extension", Studies in Generative Grammar, 17(3), pp.253~270 (2007)
- Lasnik, H., "Verbal Morphology: Syntactic Structures Meets the Minimalist Program; Minimalist Analysis", pp.97~119 (1999), Blackwell Publisher
- Lasnik, H., "On Repair by Ellipsis", Proceedings of the 2002 LSK International summer Conference (2002)
- Law, P., "Preposition Stranding; Syntax vol III", pp.631~684 (2006), Blackwell Publishing
- Merchant, J., "Subject-Auxiliary inversion in comparatives and PF output constraints; The Interfaces: Dderiving and Interpreting Omitted Structures", pp.55~78 (2003), John Benjamin Publi
- Ninuma, F, "The Syntax of pro in Japanese: Evidence from Postposition Dropping; Minimalist Views on Interfaces, The Korean Generative Grammar Circle", 217~234 (2005)
- Radford, A., "Transformational Grammar" (1988), Cambridge University Press
- Rivero, M. L., "Las construcciones de relativo" (1982), Taurus
- Rivero, M. L., "Minimalist Syntax" (2006), Cambridge University Press
- Shim, S. W., "Spanish Null C as a PF-Prefix", Revista Iberoamericana, 18, pp.227~262 (2007)
- Torrego, E., "More Effects of Successive Cyclic Movement", Linguistic Inquiry, 14, pp.561~565 (1983)