惯青扁包 郴 埃青拱

  • 埃青拱 郴 八祸 八祸

积己巩过楷备

八祸搬苞 :
9
傈眉急琶 Endnote Refworks
This paper explores the derivation of the constructions known as direct passives, indirect (or adverse) passives and causatives in Korean. In the literature, there are two major points generally accepted: 1) Korean has passive and causative morphemes, 2) these morphemes are syntactic functional categories which decides the Voice or Causativity of the construction. But I will provide a different analysis by arguing three points: 1) so-called passive and causative morphemes are not syntactic functional categories. 2) they combine, in a highly unpredictable way, with a predicate in the Lexicon but not in narrow syntactic components. 3) the function of these morphemes is to produce a lexically derived predicate through the modification of the argument structure or through the change of the -role assigned to an external argument. In other words, I will put forward the hypothesis that Korean passive and causative predicates are lexically derived and that this language has no syntactic Voice and Causativity distinction. In the passage, we will see, as a by-product, that there is no inchoative construction in Korean.
This paper defends an analysis of a bound noun swu in Kim (2011, 2014) which argues that the bound noun is crucially related to a small n projection. He claims that in a Root Modal reading, the small n assigns a theta-role, but in a Epistemic Modal reading, it does not assign any theta-role. Other researches (Ha 2007, Chung 2007, Tchoe 2015) also have been proposed to account for the bound noun swu. Recently, Chung (2017) provides a neat literature review of those studies and concludes that no theory thus far is adequate. He criticizes Kim (2014) on several accounts: the violation of A-over-A principle; the unaccusative predicate without vP in a Epistemic Modal reading. However, A-over-A principle is somewhat strong; CP with vP and T adn P without vP can be dealt with a further distinction of vP and v*P (Chomsky 2001). More importantly, Kim (2014) provides theoretical uniformity with other bound nouns.
Coordinated Multiple Wh-questions (CMWHs) in wh-in situ languages have received scant attention in the literature. Citko and Gracanin-Yuksek (2013) propose that UG allows for three types of structures for CMWHs: a mono-clausal structure and two bi-clausal structures of bulk-sharing and non-bulk sharing. Kasai (2016) puts forth a bi-clausal backward ellipsis analysis, based on Japanese. In this paper, I argue that neither Citko and Gracanin-Yuksek’s (2013) typology nor Kasai’s (2016) ellipsis analysis can properly accommodate the properties of CMWHs in wh-in situ languages. I propose alternatively, based on Korean, that CMWHs in languages without wh-movement are constructed via a sideward movement of wh-phrases in a mono-clausal structure, adopting Zhang (2007), which is triggered by a special coordinating head & 0 , and then the conjoined wh-complex remerges to a typical scrambling site already available in the language: SpecvP or SpecTP. This paper thus teases out the interwoven properties of wh-questions and scrambling, and suggests that CMWHs in wh-in situ languages are simply an instantiation of scrambling of which focus meaning is interpreted through its ‘labeled’ projection at CI (Chomsky 2013).
Since the inception of phase theory (Chomsky 2000), there has been considerable debate over the exact nature of phases. Chomsky (2000, et seq.) proposes that unaccusative and passive vPs are not phases. On the other hand, Legate (2003) argues that unaccusative and passive vPs are also (strong) phases (see also Sauerland 2003). However, Legate (2012) suggests that v is not a phase when it does not assign case. Although there is no consensus on the phasehood of v, researchers seem to agree that every (finite) CP is a phase. This is based on a variety of empirical data showing that elements moving across a clause boundary land in Spec,CP en route to their surface position. However, in this paper, I will argue that not all CPs are phases, using Korean Exceptional Case Marking (ECM) construction, and Fox and Pesetsky’s (2005) Cyclic Linearization.
This paper aims to investigate the derivation of pleonastic it out of the clausal complement in English. The derivation is correlated with the so called sentential subject constructions, so we will first review issues on movement of the clausal complement found in the previous literature, and discuss the distribution of it. The previous literature has observed two empirical facts for sentential subject: 1) the distribution of sentential subject appears to be correlated with the availability of DPs in the complement of the predicate, and 2) the sentential subject occupies on the left periphery - i.e. a topic position -and a null pro occupies SpecTP. To account for the facts, the previous literature suggests that a null determiner merges to the clausal complement prior to topicalization. The null determiner bears an uninterpretable feature that can be checked off by the topic head, which in turn implies that all clausal movement involves a null determiner. Based on the findings that the previous accounts have made, I propose that the morphological composition of pleonastic it is not uniform in English, and that the null determiner can be topicalized out of the clausal complement and morphologically realized as it.
We present, in this paper, Flexible Null Topic Analysis (FNTA), a novel analysis of null argument constructions. FNTA is the same as Huang’s (1984) Null Topic Analysis, except that it takes flexibility of topics into consideration. We mean by flexibility of topics that a topic can be revised in a suitable way for a given context. We also demonstrate that, by means of flexibility of topics, FNTA can nicely deal with issues regarding null argument constructions such as sloppy reading, indefinite expression ellipsis, and CP ellipsis.
In this paper, I explore a uniform analysis of the NP-coordination construction, the comitative construction, and a particular type of comparative construction in Korean, which have usually been investigated separately and as a result, received different analyses in the literature. One common property that can be easily noticed is the fact that these constructions all involve juxtaposition of NPs where one of the NPs bears the special morpheme wa, while the other NP bears a case marker. I show further that these constructions manifest a parallelism in other important aspects as well, based on which I argue that they are related by means of movement from a shared underlying structure. I also show that the proposed analysis can correctly capture the interpretative properties of the constructions in question. Some of the important consequences of the current analysis include relaxation of the Theta Criterion and the fact that what has been traditionally considered to be NP-coordination does not involve a genuine instance of coordination.
This squib focuses on fragments with tag questions in English and Korean. Barros & Craenenbroeck (2013) explores tag questions in fragment constructions in English. They observe that when the host is a fragment answer, the tag question consistent with an isomorphic ellipsis site is degraded and the cleft tag question is preferred. The preference for the cleft tag question poses a challenge for Merchant s (2001, 2004) non-cleft ellipsis analysis of fragments. They suggest that tag questions can be used as a window into the internal syntactic structure of clausal ellipsis sites and that cleft structure is default clausal source of fragmentary utterance. In this squib, we explore interaction between tags and fragment answers in Korean. Nominal fragments in Korean are classified as case-marked ones and caseless ones. Ahn & Cho (2017a, b, c) suggest that case-marked fragments are derived from full clauses and that caseless fragments are derived from copula clauses. On this view, the latter is predicted to occur with a copula tag question while the former is predicted to occur with a regular tag question. We show that the phenomenon in Korean is a non-trivial empirical argument for Barros & Craenenbroeck s claim that the well-formedness of specific types of tag questions in fragment constructions is used as a window into the internal syntactic structure of clausal ellipsis sites.
The paper begins with introduction of the properties of VPF such as connectivity, reconstruction, strong island effects, etc. Then Ott’s dislocation analysis of VPF analogous to the DP-Left-Dislocation construction is reviewed employing three striking strategies: (i) postulation of pro-VP null that in the host clause (ii) bi-clausal structure parallel to each other (iii) ellipsis approach to the external clause. I investigate the pros and cons of the VP-dislocation analysis, and address strong points in comparison with the traditional movement analysis, arguing that the VP-dislocation analysis is superior to the movement analysis in explaining the auxiliary doubling phenomenon. I point out shortcomings with the dislocation analysis: It is demonstrated that the VP-dislocation approach to VPF cannot explain the tense-doubling effect, allows to elide non-constituents in the external clause, and also suffers somewhat from examples exhibiting strong island sensitivity due to the nominal-gap requirement which can cause inconsistency in the analysis. I claim that the semantic type mismatch arises in the VPF construction according to the VP-dislocation analysis. I thus suggest the necessity of a more refined formulation in order to obtain mutual entailment relationship between propositions of the two clauses in the VPF construction.
1