‘-은 것이 아닐까’ 구문의 사실성 교체와 양태 확산 — 양태 의문문과 허사 부정의 상호작용 —

Abstract

This study investigates how epistemic bias is modulated through the interaction of factivity markers, expletive negation (EN), and modalized question (MQ) markers in Korean. Specifically, it examines how a factive complement, typically associated with presupposed truth, undergoes reinterpretation when combined with a modal element. The analysis identifies two key mechanisms: (1) the MQ marker shifts the epistemic stance of the embedded proposition, allowing for an open-ended evaluation of its truth value, and (2) EN reinforces a positive bias toward the truth of the embedded proposition. These interactions contribute to what can be analyzed as factivity alternation, where a factive complement transitions into a modalized interpretation based on syntactic and semantic configurations. This study further argues that modal spread—a phenomenon observed cross-linguistically—plays a critical role in determining the strength of epistemic commitment in such constructions. By integrating insights from modal semantics and compositional meaning, this research provides a more comprehensive understanding of how expletive negation and modal elements function in embedded clauses. Future studies may expand on this framework through corpus-based analysis and experimental methodologies to refine our understanding of the relationship between factivity, modality, and negation in natural language.