동사이동의 재분석, Do-지원의 동인, 그리고 축약 부정조동사의 문법화
The Reanalysis of Verb Movement, the Triggering of Do-Support and the Grammaticalization of Contracted Negative Auxiliaries
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the reanalysis of verb movement, the introduction of do- support and the grammaticalization of contracted negative auxiliaries during the early Modern English period from a diachronic perspective. The internal Merge of a tense verb was reanalyzed from V→v*→T→C in Old English to V→v*→T in Early Modern English. Although inflections were almost lost in Early Modern English, overt verb movement from V to T via v* was applied to satisfy the grammaticalization of V2 during this period. The optional application of the internal Merge of a lexical tense verb in T continued to the 18th century when the contracted negative form n't onto T started to be used as a full-fledged grammatical rule. As a lexical verb couldn't undergo internal Merge any more, do-support was introduced as an alternative mechanism for feature Agree. This means that the external Merge of auxiliary do in T is related to the observance of V2. Negative contraction onto T and successive development of negative auxiliaries into one lexical item like don't came to be triggered by feature Agree between T and V in terms of external Merge of auxiliary do or a modal verb according as overt lexical verb movement stopped from the Late Modern English period. Therefore, if not undergoes negative contraction without the Internal merge of a lexical verb in T, the cliticization of n't is licensed only when auxiliary do or a modal verb is merged in T.
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the reanalysis of verb movement, the introduction of do- support and the grammaticalization of contracted negative auxiliaries during the early Modern English period from a diachronic perspective. The internal Merge of a tense verb was reanalyzed from V→v*→T→C in Old English to V→v*→T in Early Modern English. Although inflections were almost lost in Early Modern English, overt verb movement from V to T via v* was applied to satisfy the grammaticalization of V2 during this period. The optional application of the internal Merge of a lexical tense verb in T continued to the 18th century when the contracted negative form n't onto T started to be used as a full-fledged grammatical rule. As a lexical verb couldn't undergo internal Merge any more, do-support was introduced as an alternative mechanism for feature Agree. This means that the external Merge of auxiliary do in T is related to the observance of V2. Negative contraction onto T and successive development of negative auxiliaries into one lexical item like don't came to be triggered by feature Agree between T and V in terms of external Merge of auxiliary do or a modal verb according as overt lexical verb movement stopped from the Late Modern English period. Therefore, if not undergoes negative contraction without the Internal merge of a lexical verb in T, the cliticization of n't is licensed only when auxiliary do or a modal verb is merged in T.
참고문헌 (40)
- 박상수, "보문소로 문법화된 that과 for의 통사자질", 언어과학, 15(2), pp.61~80 (2008), 한국언어과학회
- Biberauer, Theresa, "Changing EPP- parameters in the History of English: Accounting for Variation and Change", English Language and Linguistics, 9, pp.5~46 (2005)
- Biberauer, Theresa, "Subjects, Tense and Verb-Movement in Germanic and Romance" (2005), University of Cambridge
- Chomsky, Noam, "The Minimalist Program. Cambridge" (1995), MIT Press
- Chomsky, Noam, "Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework. In Step by Step: Essays on Minimalism in Honor of Howard Lasnik", pp.89~156 (2000), MIT Press
- Chomsky, Noam, "Derivation by Phase. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language", pp.1~52 (2001), MIT Press.
- Chomsky, Noam, "Beyond Explanatory Adequacy. In Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures", pp.104~131 (2004), Oxford University Press
- Chomsky, Noam, "On Phases" (2005), MIT
- Chomsky, N, "Three Factors in Language Design", Linguistic Inquiry, 36, pp.1~22 (2005)
- Chomsky, Noam, "Approaching UG from Below" (2006), MIT.
- Chomsky, Noam, "The Biolinguistic Program: Where Does It Stand Today?" (2008), MIT
- Clark, Robin, "A Computational Model of Language Learnability and Language Change", nguistic Inquiry, 24, pp.299~345 (1993)
- Fischer, Olga, "The Syntax of Early English" (2000), Cambridge University Press
- Greenberg, Joseph H, "Universals of Language. Second Edition" (1966), MIT Press
- Haegeman, Liliane, "The Syntax of Negation" (1995), Cambridge University Press
- Haegeman, Liliane, "English Grammar: A Generative Perspective" (1999), Blackwell
- Iyeiri, Yoko, "Multiple Negation in Middle English Verse. In Negation in the History of English", pp.121~146 (1999), Mouton de Gruyter
- Jack, George, "Negative Adverbs in Early Middle English", English Studies, 59, pp.295~309 (1978)
- Jespersen, Otto, "Negation in English and Other Languages In: Selected Writings of Otto Jespersen", pp.3~151 (1917), Senjo Publishing
- Jespersen, Otto, "The Philosophy of Grammar" (1924), Norton and Company
- Jesperson, Otto, "A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Part Ⅴ" (1961), Allen and Unwin
- Kemenade, Ans van, "Syntactic Case and Morphological Case in the History of English" (1987), Foris
- Kemenade, Ans van, "Jespersen's Cycle Revivited: Formal Properties of Grammaticalization. In Diachronic Syntax: Models and Mechanism", pp.51~74 (2000), Oxford University Press
- Kroch, Anthony, "Verb-Object Order in Early Middle English. In Diachronic Syntax: Models and Mechanism", pp.132~163 (2000), Oxford University Press
- Lightfoot, David, "The Development of Language, Acquisition, Change, and Evolution" (1999), Blackwell
- Lightfoot, David, "How New Languages Emerge" (2006), Cambridge University Press
- Nevalainen, Terttu, "An Introduction to Early Modern English" (2006), Oxford University Press
- Park, Sangsoo, "Multiple Negation and V2 in English Negative Sentence", Studies in Modern Grammar, 34, pp.213~232 (2003)
- 박상수, "A Diachronic Analysis of that-t Effect between Complement and Relative Clauses", 현대문법연구, 50(50), pp.231~257 (2007), 현대문법학회
- Park, Sangsoo, "A Diachronic Analysis of Focalization in English", Chomskyan Studies, 2, pp.47~65 (2007)
- Radford, Andrew, "The Syntax of Clauses" (2006), University of Essex
- Radford, Andrew, "Analysing English Sentences" (2009), Oxford University Press
- Rissanen, Matti, "Spoken Language and the History of Do- periphrasis. In Historical English Syntax", pp.321~342 (1991), Mouton de Gruyter
- Roberts, Ian, "Verbs and Diachronic Syntax: A Comparative History of English and French" (1993), Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Roberts, Ian, "Verb Movement and Markedness. In Language Creation and Language Change", pp.287~327 (1999), Cambridge University Press
- Roberts, Ian, "Diachronic Syntax" (2007), Oxford University Press
- Roberts, Ian, "Syntactic Change: A Minimalist Approach to Grammaticalization" (2003), Cambridge University Press
- Sadock, Jerold M, "Speech Act Distinctions in Syntax. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description: Clause Structu", pp.155~196 (1985), Cambridge University Press
- Sapir, Edward, "Language" (1921), Harcourt Brace and Co.
- Shakespeare, William, "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare" (1996), Wordsworth Editions