메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국언어과학회 언어과학 언어과학 제18권 제1호
발행연도
2011.1
수록면
233 - 251 (19page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
This paper argues that typical generic sentences are topic constructions crosslinguistically, supporting Lee's 1996 initial claim, but argues against Cohen et al's 2002 claim that focused bare plurals are interpreted existentially. Contrastive Topic and Contrastive Focus can apply to either generic or anti-generic/existential phrases. Therefore, contrastively focused bare plurals can be generic, not necessarily existential. PL-marking and NumCl-marking in Korean and Japanese are anti-generic (existential) and distributive in nature, interacting with information structure. Generic sentences are about generic DPs, which function as Topics as semantic definites such as a bare singular common noun with a Topic marker in Korean (a 'definitional' generic, Krifka 2009), bare plurals (or indefinite singular) in English, and definites in French, typically combined with individual-level predicates of characterizing or kind-referring nature, as in (1) Say-nun nal-n-ta 'Birds fly.' An existential sentence in Korean, on the other hand, has a NOM marker in the subject DP and is PL(ural)-marked, followed by a stage-level predicate, as in (2) Say-ka/-tul-i nal-a ka-ko iss-ta 'Birds are flying,' as opposed to the atemporal PRES predicate in (1). Focus-sensitive cases such as Even mammals lay eggs and cec-mek-i-tongmul-to al-ul nah-a (???cec-mek- i-tongmul-un al-ul nah-a) will be discussed and dynamic genericity is proposed to meet from context to context changes and existential-like generic situations

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (22)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0