Comparative Properties of Zero Anaphora between Tagalog and Korean
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
“Comparative Properties of Zero Anaphora between Tagalog and Korean.” This paper comparatively studies the distribution and interpretation of zero anaphora in Tagalog and Korean in terms of typological perspective by drawing a comprehensive account. The two restrictions, SAPs and topicality in both languages, are touched upon with the corresponding examples. For SAPs in the interrogative, imperative, exhortative, (and promissive) mood, the reference with the overt pronouns can be categorized within the discourse deixis rather than within the discourse anaphora. In those constructions, the overt pronouns in Tagalog are considered the discourse overt deixis, the overt pronouns and optional zero anaphors in Korean are also considered the discourse overt or zero deixis. Meanwhile, other examples discussed in terms of topicality in two languages are considered the discourse anaphoric or zero expression. For topicality, the reference for the topical referent is preferred by the overt pronoun, while the reference for the non-topical one is preferred by the zero anaphor in Tagalog. In contrast, the zero anaphor takes preference over the overt pronoun in referring to the topical referent, while the zero anaphor and the overt pronoun are optional although the overt pronoun is more preferred in referring to the non-topical referent in Korean.
Abstract
“Comparative Properties of Zero Anaphora between Tagalog and Korean.” This paper comparatively studies the distribution and interpretation of zero anaphora in Tagalog and Korean in terms of typological perspective by drawing a comprehensive account. The two restrictions, SAPs and topicality in both languages, are touched upon with the corresponding examples. For SAPs in the interrogative, imperative, exhortative, (and promissive) mood, the reference with the overt pronouns can be categorized within the discourse deixis rather than within the discourse anaphora. In those constructions, the overt pronouns in Tagalog are considered the discourse overt deixis, the overt pronouns and optional zero anaphors in Korean are also considered the discourse overt or zero deixis. Meanwhile, other examples discussed in terms of topicality in two languages are considered the discourse anaphoric or zero expression. For topicality, the reference for the topical referent is preferred by the overt pronoun, while the reference for the non-topical one is preferred by the zero anaphor in Tagalog. In contrast, the zero anaphor takes preference over the overt pronoun in referring to the topical referent, while the zero anaphor and the overt pronoun are optional although the overt pronoun is more preferred in referring to the non-topical referent in Korean.
참고문헌 (23)
- Ariel, M., "Accessing Noun Phrase Antecedents" (1990), Routledge
- Ariel, M., "Interpreting Anaphoric Expressions : A Cognitive Approach versus a Pragmatic Approach", Journal of Linguistics, 30, pp.3~42 (1994)
- Chomsky, N., "Lectures on Government and Binding" (1981), Foris Publications
- Fillmore, C. J., "Towards a Theory of Deixis", The PCCLLU Papers, 3, pp.219~241 (1971)
- Givón, T., "Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-language Study", pp.1~42 (1983), John Benjamins
- Gundel, J. K, "Studies in Syntactic Typology", pp.209~239 (1998), John Benjamins
- Gundel, J. K., "Cognitive Status and the Form of Referring Expressions in Discourse", Language, 69, pp.274~307 (1993)
- Han, N., "Korean Zero Pronouns: Analysis and Resolution", Ph. D., pp.2006
- Himmelmann, N. P., "The Lack of Zero Anaphora and Incipient Person Marking in Tagalog", Oceanic Linguistics, 38(2), pp.231~269 (1999)
- Huang, Y., "A Neo-Gricean Pragmatic Theory of Anaphora", Journal of Linguistics, 27(2), pp.301~335 (1991)
- Kameyama, M., "Zero Anaphora : The Case of Japanese", Ph. D., pp.1985
- Kim, S., "Division of Labor between Grammar and Pragmatics : The Distribution and Interpretation of Anaphora", Ph. D., pp.1993
- Lambrecht, K., "Information Structure and Sentence Form : Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents" (1994), Cambridge University Press
- Levinson, S., "Pragmatics" (1983), Cambridge University Press
- Levinson, S., "Pragmatics and the Grammar of Anaphora : A Partial Pragmatic Reduction of Binding and Control Phenomena", Journal of Linguistics, 23(2), pp.379~434 (1987)
- Levinson, S., "Pragmatic Reduction of the Binding Conditions Revisited", Journal of Linguistics, 27(1), pp.107~161 (1991)
- Levinson, Stephen C., "Presumptive Meanings : The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature" (2000), MIT Press
- Nagaya, N., "Preferred Referential Expressions in Tagalog", Tokyo University Linguistic Papers, 25, pp.83~106 (2006)
- Nagaya, N., "Topicality and Reference-tracking in Tagalog", 9th Philippine Linguistics Congress, pp.25~27 (2006)
- Nagaya, N., "Information Structure and Constituent Order in Tagalog", Language and Linguistics, 8(1), pp.343~372 (2007)
- Naylor, P., "Topic, Focus, and Emphasis in the Tagalog Verbal Clause", Oceanic Linguistics, 14(1), pp.12~79 (1975)
- Oh, C., "Topic and Focus Construction in Spoken Korean", Ph. D., pp.2007
- Yi, H., "Exploring the Formal Representation of Discourse Units with Korean Noun Anaphors and Null Pronouns", Ph. D., pp.2006