지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Ahn & Cho (2009, 2010) suggest that ellipsis is licensed by functional heads such as C, T, and D which can bear an [E] feature. In the same reasoning, they suggest that a lexical category like V or semi-lexical category v which gives a theta role cannot have an [E] feature. Under the analysis, it is predicted that when DP is directly selected by the lexical category V, which cannot bear an [E] feature, DP ellipsis isn"t allowed. However, there is an example which apparently shows that DP ellipsis seems to be allowed. Ahn & Cho (2009, 2010) argue that the missing constituent is in fact a pro, but not derived from DP ellipsis which is theoretically impossible. Recently, Lee & Kim (2010) claim
that Korean has both pro and DP ellipsis. This paper aims to explore the examples that seem to be DP ellipsis and argue that it indeed involves pro.
that Korean has both pro and DP ellipsis. This paper aims to explore the examples that seem to be DP ellipsis and argue that it indeed involves pro.
목차
1. Introduction
2. Ahn & Cho (2009, 2010)
3. The Interpretation of Pro: A Reply to Lee & Kim (2010)
4. Concluding Remarks
References
참고문헌 (1)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
On the Absence of CP Ellipsis in English and Korean
Hee-Don Ahn
,
Sungeun Cho
언어
2009
.06
Identifying Null Arguments : Sometimes pro, Sometimes Ellipsis
Bum-Sik Pa
,
k
,
Suyoung Bae
언어
2012
.12
매스미디어가 텍스트와 신조어에 미치는 영향 : 매개적 분기를 중심으로
백승익
언어
2014
.03
Nominal Ellipsis with Focus Remnants
Seungwan Ha
언어
2013
.06
Asymmetry Between CP and TP Ellipsis and Its Consequences on Extractability : Evidence from Korean
Myung-Kwan Pa
,
k
,
YongSuk Yoo
어학연구
2013
.08
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-700-003105084