‘-아 있다’ 구문의 통합 제약 현상에 대하여
1
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
‘-eo-issta', representing the function of resultative aspect, has constraints on the verbs which occur before it. It has been widely accepted that only the intransitive verbs which has telicity as their aspectual character, can occur as V1 in V1-eo-issta' constructions. We can call the verb constraint semantic, and the transitive verb constraint syntactic. But semantic constraint cannot be explained fully by telicity condition which demand V1 to be telic verb. Because there are many examples which telicity condition cannot explain. So some other argument were offered to elucidate the semantic constraints: existence condition, resultative condition, etc. But these arguments have defects, too. So I offered cognitive condition to explain the semantic constraints. For the explanation of syntactic constraints there have been several suggestions: existence condition, ‘-eo iss-' syntagmatic constraint, and dynamic condition. But they could not solve the problem of the syntactic constraints completely. So, in this paper I argued that thematic role can solve the problem. ‘V1-eo-issta' compositionally assigns ‘theme' role to subject. Therefore in the transitive verb sentences object cannot be assigned thematic role, ‘theme', because this thematic role is assigned to subject by ‘V1-eo issta'. Assigning theme to object violates the thematic criterion. Therefore the ungrammaticality of transitive verb sentences is explained by thematic criterion.
Abstract
‘-eo-issta', representing the function of resultative aspect, has constraints on the verbs which occur before it. It has been widely accepted that only the intransitive verbs which has telicity as their aspectual character, can occur as V1 in V1-eo-issta' constructions. We can call the verb constraint semantic, and the transitive verb constraint syntactic. But semantic constraint cannot be explained fully by telicity condition which demand V1 to be telic verb. Because there are many examples which telicity condition cannot explain. So some other argument were offered to elucidate the semantic constraints: existence condition, resultative condition, etc. But these arguments have defects, too. So I offered cognitive condition to explain the semantic constraints. For the explanation of syntactic constraints there have been several suggestions: existence condition, ‘-eo iss-' syntagmatic constraint, and dynamic condition. But they could not solve the problem of the syntactic constraints completely. So, in this paper I argued that thematic role can solve the problem. ‘V1-eo-issta' compositionally assigns ‘theme' role to subject. Therefore in the transitive verb sentences object cannot be assigned thematic role, ‘theme', because this thematic role is assigned to subject by ‘V1-eo issta'. Assigning theme to object violates the thematic criterion. Therefore the ungrammaticality of transitive verb sentences is explained by thematic criterion.
참고문헌 (28)
- 고영근, "국어 진행상 형태의 처소론적 해석", 어학연구, 16(1), pp.41~53 (1980)
- 고영근, "한국어의 시제 서법 동작상" (2004), 태학사
- 김종도, "문법과 개념화" (2001), 박이정
- 남기심, "국어문법의 시제 문제에 관한 연구" (1978), 탑출판사
- 양인석, "Progressive and Perfective Aspect in Korean", 언어, 2(1), pp.125~140 (1977)
- 양정석, "국어 동사의 의미 분석과 연결이론" (1995), 박이정
- 양정석, "시상성과 논항 연결" (2002), 태학사
- 양정석, "-고 있-'과 '-어 있-'의 상보성 여부 검토와 구문 규칙 기술", 한글, (266), pp.105~137 (2004), 한글학회
- 우창현, "상해석의 이론과 실제" (2003), 한국문화사
- 이기동, "조동사 ‘있다’의 의미 연구, 눈뫼 허웅박사 환갑기념논문집", pp.359~387 (1978), 과학사
- 이남순, "에’, ‘에서’와 ‘-어 있(다)’, ‘-고 있(다)", 국어학, 16, pp.567~595 (1987)
- 이수련, "‘있다’의 문법화에 대한 의미·화용적 연구", 國語學, 42, pp.177~205 (2003), 국어학회
- 이호승, "국어의 상 체계와 보조용언의 상적 의미", 국어학, 38, pp.209~239 (2001)
- 이홍배, "최소주의 통사이론과 영어" (1999), 한신문화사
- 임홍빈, "부정법 {어}와 상태진술의 고", 논문집, 8, pp.13~36 (1975), 국민대
- 정태구, "-어 있다’의 의미와 논항구조", 국어학, 24, pp.203~230 (1994)
- 최동주, "국어 시상체계의 통시적 변화에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.1950
- 최현배, "우리말본" (1937), 정음사
- 한동완, "-고 있-구성의 중의성에 대하여", 한국어 의미학, 5, pp.215~288 (1999)
- 한동완, "-어 있- 구성의 결합제약에 대하여", 형태론, 2(2), pp.257~288 (2000)
- Comrie,B, "Aspect" (1976), Cambridge University Press
- Dahl,O, "Tense and Aspect System" (1985), Blackwell
- Grimshaw,J, "Argument Structure" (1990), MIT Press
- Jackendoff,R, "Semantic Structures" (1990), MIT
- Jackendoff,R, "The proper treatment of measuring out, telicity and perhaps even quantification in English", Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 14, pp.305~354 (1996)
- Rhee Seongha, "Semantics of Verbs and Grammaticalization: The evelopment in Korea from a Cross-Linguistic Perspective" (1996), Hankuk Publisher
- Rothestein,S, "Predicates and their Subjects" (2001), Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Smith,Carlota, "The Parameter of Aspect" (1991), Kluwer Academic Publishers