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
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
Tae Sik Kim (Seoul National University of Science & Technology)
저널정보
한국언어학회 언어 언어 제45권 제3호
발행연도
2020.9
수록면
515 - 535 (21page)

이용수

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

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
This paper defends an analysis of a bound noun swu in Korean provided in Kim (2014). The bound noun swu in Korean is ambiguous between Root Modality (RM) and Epistemic Modality (EM) (Ha 2007). Recently, Lee (2017, 2018) criticizes Kim (2014): we find an argument transfer operation (Grimshaw and Mester 1988) only in RM but not in EM; Kim (2014) cannot account for data when an NPI occupies an object position; Swu + eps with the EM reading is problematic. However, the argument transfer operation, which is assumed to be only in RM, is not a problem at all, since we have two different structures for the bound noun swu. Also, Kim (2014) can easily account for an NPI in an object position. The unavailability of the EM reading with swu + eps can be attributed to subcategorization framework, Phonology or a PPI/NPI distinction. Rather, Lee (2017, 2018) suffers from several problems. Her tensed/untensed distinction with RM and EM is not tenable due to problematic data, and the grammaticalized nature of the bound noun swu cannot be explained. Furthermore, Lee (2017, 2018) cannot capture a theta-role relationship between a subject and an embedded predicate in the case of RM. Lee (2017, 2018) also assumes unnecessary lexical entries, which begs additional motivation.

목차

1. Introduction
2. Kim (2014)
3. The criticism of Kim (2014) by Lee (2017, 2018)
4. Lee (2017, 2018) and shortcomings
5. The advantage of Kim (2014) over Lee (2017, 2018)
6. Conclusion
References

참고문헌 (28)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2020-701-001291556