Earticle

초록

영어

Wechsler (1997, 2005) argues that the DOR is not real by citing some counter-examples to it. In contrary to Wechsler (1997, 2005), this paper argues that the DOR stands as a viable standard condition on the resultative construction. Wechsler’s first case of the counter- examples, which concern the manner of motion verbs, can be successfully explained under the DOR through the conflation analysis of McIntyre (2004) and Mateu (2005). Wechsler’s second case of the counter-examples, which are on the subject-oriented resultatives in transitive constructions, is not the target of the DOR because the putative subject-oriented resultatives are in fact directional adjuncts. While the DOR is a fine regulative constraint for English, it does not hold in Korean. This paper argues that this difference between the two languages attributes to the syntactic status of resultatives. To be more specific, resultatives serve as an argument of the verb in English while those in Korean function as an adjunct. This view is also supported by the Japanese data. The DOR does not hold in Japanese because Japanese resultatives are adjuncts.

목차

I. Introduction
 II. Preliminaries
 III. The DOR Regained
 IV. Argumenthood of Resultatives and the DOR
 V. Concluding Remarks
 Works Cited
 Abstract

키워드

저자

• Lee Chang-Su [ 이창수 | UI University ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 간행물명

  영어영문학연구 [The Jungang Journal of English Language and Literature]

• 간기

  계간

• pISSN

  1598-3293

• 수록기간

  1968~2026

• 등재여부

  KCI 등재

• 십진분류

  KDC 840 DDC 810