Earticle

This study investigates the acquisition of preposition stranding in the syntactic contexts, such as elliptical wh-questions and non-elliptical ones, by Korean speakers learning English. An acceptability judgment task was conducted to examine the effects of clause types (non-elliptical vs. elliptical), preposition placement (preposition stranding vs. preposition pied-piping), and the V-P dependency (Dependent vs. Independent vs. Irrelevant). The results showed that preposition stranding was rejected in elliptical wh-questions while preposition fronting was favored over preposition stranding in non-elliptical wh-questions. Though the results were seemingly contradictory to the saliency hypothesis proposed by Bardovi-Harlig (1987), the study will provide an Optimality-theoretic analysis for the learners’ interlanguage grammars by adopting the constraint ranking proposed by Choi (2008).

This study investiages the syntactic properties of English infinitival relative clauses, with particular attention to the presence or absence of wh-operators and the conditions under which prepositions may be omitted in such clauses. Infinitival relatives are divided into wh-infinitival and non-wh-infinitival clauses based on the overt realization of the wh-operator. In wh-infinitival relatives, the wh-operator must serve as the complement of a preposition and undergo pied-piping to satisfy grammatical constraints (e.g., I have no place to which to go vs. I have no place which to go to). In contrast, non-wh relatives may also involve a prepositional phrase that includes a null operator, in which case the possibility of omitting the preposition depends on whether the prepositional phrase functions as an adjunct or a complement. Through structural analysis within the X-bar theoretical framework, this study seeks to clarify the syntactic nature of infinitival relatives and enhance theoretical understanding of wh-operator distribution and preposition usage, especially for learners of English as a foreign language.

This paper examines how extraction of an NP out of an object DP is possible given the Complex NP Island constraint. Since the Complex NP Island Constraint prohibits extraction of an element out of CP or DP, it is puzzling how a sub-element is extracted out of DPs in certain cases. This paper shows that DPs which allow extraction of their sub-elements have definite determiners which do not project any definite meaning or sense to noun heads. This paper also show that this is due to fact that the merge of definite determiner the with a noun is not semantically triggered but simply the result of syntactic merge operation. The optionality attested in the use of the for this type of DPs is compelling evidence which supports this claim. Second, I also argue that extraction out of an indefinite DP having a PP as its complement is determined by the scope of the PP. The scope of a PP can expand as proposed by Park (2014). I show that the expansion of the scope of a PP is triggered by the interface of the meaning of the main verb and the denotation of the object DP. Lastly, I briefly address the asymmetry attested in the extraction out of subject and object.

This article proposes a parallel-architecture approach to the class of preposition-noun (P-N) compounds in English such as downstairs. In this approach, it is argued that P-N compounds are not words but phrases, more specifically not adverbs but prepositional phrases, particularly when used with some verbs of motion such as He brought the suitcase downstairs. They are also differentiated from so-called particles like down and prepositional phrases like down the stairs, though sharing the same head down. The article argues for a class into which all these three cases can be unified. The resulting unified class is basically a preposition and can be divided into intransitive and transitive types. The article puts forward a sub-categorisation of the transitive preposition into two types; one is lexical, and the other phrasal. A classification of P-N compounds as the lexical type is suggested together with a lexical PP analysis using the notion of representational modularity.

The meaning expressed by a spatial preposition indicates how its arguments physically relate to each other in space in English. The locations assigned by the spatial preposition on as in ‘We saw a boat on the lake’ and ‘John has a cabin on the lake’ are a surface and a side of the reference objects, respectively. The first example gives us an image that a boat is floating on the lake, but the second causes us to imagine that a cabin is near the edge of the lake. The same prepositional phrase can be used to represent different locations in these examples. Expressions containing prepositional phrases representing spatial relations such as inclusion, contact, or contiguity are prime examples of spatial expressions. This work is concerned with the semantic study of spatial expressions to identify what kinds of spatial relationships are represented via a spatial preposition. In addition, how can the same preposition represent different spatial configurations? Is it a case of ambiguity, or of generality of meaning? To find out answers of these issues, first, this study presents various spatial configurations represented by the same spatial preposition. Two main approaches are devoted to representing spatial prepositions: a monosemy-based approach (Bennett 1975; Cooper 1968; Leech 1969; Lindner 1981; Miller and Johnson-Laird 1976) and a polysemy-based approach (Brugman 1988; Brugman and Lakoff 1988; Hawkins 1984; Herskovits 1986; Vandeloise 1991). Second, this study employs zeugma to verify that different configurations of a spatial preposition have sufficient privileges to belong to a polysemy; or they are simply due to vagueness or indeterminacy. The study presents standard ambiguity tests that are used to confirm if the lexical items are really ambiguous or not; then it describes the way of meaning extension.

The English compound preposition into, as in He went into the shop, is not formed in the way that it is interpreted. Its semantic interpretation, [TO [IN [SHOP: DEF]]], is constructed in the reverse order of its two components in and to. A growing body of analyses of this opposite nature assumes that one component (in) is incorporated into the other (to) to form the compound preposition (into). This paper addresses and discusses issues that arise from this incorporation theory with respect to modification, complementation and alternation. It argues that the preposition is not incorporated at the level of phrasal syntax, but listed in the lexicon through associations between its two components and their modular properties. It also offers an analysis of the lexical item in the spirit of both parallel architecture of grammar and relational morphology.

전치사 ‘在’와 ‘于’는 현대중국어에서 가장 많이 쓰이고 있는 전형적인 전치사들이다. 본 논문에서는 성분분석법과 의미소분석법 그리고 격문법 분석법으로 중국어 전치사 ‘在’, ‘于’와한국어 조사 ‘에서’를 대조 분석하였다. 본 논문은 이들 의미구조에 대한 대조 분석을 통하여중국어 전치사 ‘在’와 ‘于’, 한국어 조사 ‘에서’의 의미자질을 고찰하였고 나아가 이들의 변별적자질도 고찰하였다. 본 논문은 중국 북경대학교 CCL말뭉치에서 ‘在’, ‘于’의 예문들을 축출하여 성분분석과 의미소분석 그리고 격문법 분석법으로 중국어 전치사 ‘在’, ‘于’의 의미자질을비교, 묘사하였고, 이들의 변별적 자질도 찾아냈다. 그리고 본 논문은 이들과 한국어 조사 ‘에서’와의 의미구조 대조분석도 하였으며 이런 대조 분석을 토대로 ‘在’, ‘于’와 ‘에서’의 대응관계를 찾아보았고 한국 학생들의 오류를 줄일 수 있는 중국어 전치사 ‘在’, ‘于’ 교수법을 모색하였다.

This article in the analysis, using the componential analysis, semantic structure analysis method and case grammar. This article through to the Chinese Preposition ‘Zai(在)’, ‘Yu(于)’ and Korean auxiliary ‘Eseo(에서)’ the semantic structure of the comparative analysis, trying to grasp the features of its languageform, and analyzes the difference between their semantic features location. Inthis paper the preposition to the Peking University Chinese corpus of ‘Zai(在)’and ‘Yu(于)’ example analyzed composition analysis and sememe, find out thepreposition ‘Zai(在)’ and ‘Yu(于)’ semantic feature, and by further analysis ofthese semantic features, the preposition ‘Zai(在)’ and ‘Yu(于)’ the root of thedifference of the description. This paper also examples of the Korean auxiliary‘Eseo(에서)’ has carried on the analysis component analysis and sememe, andthrough the Chinese Preposition ‘Zai(在)’, ‘Yu(于)’ and Korean auxiliary ‘Eseo(에서)’ the semantic structure of the comparative analysis, find out their semanticfeatures, in order to further prompt Chinese Preposition ‘Zai(在)’, ‘Yu(于)’ teaching method provides effective basis.

영어 전치사 ‘of’는 [X of Y]의 형식을 가지고 한 개체가 다른 개체의 내재적이며 제한된 하위 부분에 해당하는 종속관계로 두 개체 사이에는 특별한 관계에 놓여있는 것으로 보고 있다. 또한 X는 탄도체(trajector)로서 부분을 나타내고 Y는 지표(landmark)로서 전체를 나타내는 동시에 탄도체에 해당하는 요소의 자리는 지표의 요소에 비해 현저성이 부여된다고 본다. 그러므로 전체인 지표를 강조코자 할 때는 [Y of X]로의 전도현상이 발생하여, X와 Y의 자리가 전환될 수 있다. X에 해당하는 요소는 다양한 품사로 나타날 수 있을 뿐만 아니라, 경우에 따라서는 전혀 나타나지 않는 경우도 있다. 본 연구는 영어 전치사 ‘of’를 재고찰 하면서, 그 동안의 선행연구에서 보여준 ‘of’-구의 구조를 X의 출현 여부에 관계없이 2항 술어로 간주하고, 전치사 ‘of’가 가지고 있는 다양한 기능이 외부논항의 적절한 정의에 따라 일관성 있게 설명될 수 있음을 보이고자 한다. 이를 위하여 의미역(theta-roles)에 대한 포화 이론 (Saturation Theory)을 근거로. 논항이 술어로부터 의미역을 부여받는 것이 아니라, 술어가 취하는 논항 자리에 의미역이 제공됨으로서 해당하는 항(place)의 자리에 논항이 위치하여 의미역 조건이 해소되는 것으로 본다. 본 연구는 [탄도체(X:명사) ‘of’ 지표(Y:명사)]를 ‘of’의 기본 형식을 보며, [동사 of 명사] 또는 [형용사 of 명사]의 형식에서처럼 탄도체가 표시되지 않는 경우는 암시적 논항(implicit argument)으로 간주되거나 탄도체 자리에 기저 생성된 주어가 상승하여 흔적이 남겨진 경우라는 대안을 제시한다. 또한 소절(small clause)이 공(empty) INFL을 머리어로 하는 IP임을 근거로 소절 형식을 취하는 유형과 그렇지 않는 유형의 의미적 차이점을 비교하여 선행연구에서 제시되어온 전치사 ‘of’의 [X of Y]의 구조가 [X/(IA) of Y]의 구조임을 주장하고, 이러한 구조로 전치사 ‘of’의 다양한 활용이 일관성 있게 설명될 수 있다는 사실을 밝힌다.

It has been assumed that the preposition ‘of’ takes the form ‘X of Y,’ where one entity falls under a restricted inherent sub-part of the other entity. Typically, ‘X’ plays as the trajector, being the part of ‘X of Y,’ while Y, as the landmark, being the whole of it. The position of the trajector is considered to be always more salient than that of the landmark. Therefore, the shift from ‘X of Y’ to ‘Y of X’ can occur to emphasize the landmark. Based on the facts above, this paper proposed that the preposition of in English uniformally be treated as a two place predicate. Given its nature of transitivity, the preposition ‘of’ takes two arguments of ‘X’ and ‘Y.’ This proposal is based on Higginbotham’s (1985) revised version of Theta Theory and Burzio’s (1986) the analysis of implicit argument in the causative construction. Under the premise that the preposition ‘of’ adopts a predicate construction like a verb, this paper further suggested that the prepositional phrase where the trajector (noun) does not appear like ‘X(verb) of Y(noun)’ or ‘X(adjective) of Y(noun) carries an implicit argument in the place of ’X’ in the structure of the preposition ‘of.’ This paper further contended that the subject generated from the place where the trajector is supposed to appear is raised for the Case reason, leaving the trace behind. The passive sentences were also discussed to make a distinction of the cases where the ‘X of Y’ is involved in the small clause and the cases where the ‘X of Y’ is not. Given that the small clause has an IP, which carries the empty INFL, the form of ‘product (IA) of material is made’ was defined as being constructed within the small clause, whereas the form of ‘product is made (IA) of material’ is not. Therefore, this paper has shown that the analysis of two place predicate for the preposition ‘of’ in English is well maintained, such that not only the cases where the preposition ‘of’ takes the external as well as internal arguments, but the cases where the external argument does not appear can be accounted for in a unified and systematically way.

This paper is intended to define some of the meanings of the English preposition UP, which is one of the typical polysemous forms. It discusses meanings of UP according to two basic ideas to avoid contingent misunderstanding. One is to the effect that every one of the meanings in a semantic network of a word has to share some family resemblance with at least one of the member meanings, and the other is that the selectional restrictions of the traject and the landmark of a lexical form are most useful in defining the meanings of a lexical form. The preposition UP can represent upward movement in a three dimensional physical space, subjectivized upward movement of a scanning line of vision, subjectivized upward movement of a searching line of vision, subjectivized upward supporting force, upward movement of the top point of a physical body, getting up and being synecdochically active and being static after upward movement. Up can also represent upward movements in a two dimensional geographical space, proceeding of a process, and synecdochic proceeding of a complex process.

In ancient Chinese, the phenomenon of object inversion (including the object of the preposition) is relatively complex. There are two cases of the phenomenon of inversion, that is preposition and postposition of syntactic element, liveliness and literary of expression of the sentence. There are various reasons for the use of sentence of object inversion, in ancient Chinese, it was used in normal order. The inversion sentence was widely used in the Pre-Qin(先秦) period, but at the same time, a sentence of object postposition was sprouted, and it was almost fixed in the Han(漢)Dynasty throughout the southern and northern(魏晉南北朝) dynasties. However, in later times, the literati still imitated the rules of word order in the appeal period. As a result, there is still a phenomenon of object preposition in the works imitated by them. In conclusion, learners of ancient Chinese have been recognized that object prepositional sentence patterns are a kind of special sentence patterns and it resulted learning difficulties.

인지언어학의 연구가 언어의 다의성을 해명하는 데 전력을 기울였다 고 해도 지나친 말이 아닐 것이다. 동일한 단어가 두 가지 이상의 의미 를 가지는 현상을 다의성이라고 한다. 또한 전치사 연구에 관해, 동일 한 하나의 전치사가 여러 가지 관련된 의미를 가지는 전치사의 다의성 현상이 인지언어학의 초창기 연구에서 핵심적인 주제였다. 이 논문에서 는 이런 인지언어학의 정신을 받아들여 하나의 언어 단위에 둘 이상의 서로 관련된 의미가 있다는 다의성이라는 의미 속성을 논의할 것이다. 특히, 이 논문에서는 다의성, 그리고 다의성과 함께 논의되는 동음성과 모호성의 본질을 밝히고자 했다. 먼저 다의성, 동음성, 모호성을 전통 적인 입장에서 구별했으며, 다음으로 범주화 모형에 입각해서 그 세 가 지에 대한 모형을 제시했다. 더 나아가 Lakoff(1987)가 제시한 전치 사 over의 다의성을 살펴보고, 그의 분석이 다의성 오류를 범한다는 점을 지적하면서 Tyler & Evans(2003)의 논의를 그 대안으로 제시 했다.

In this paper, semantic property of polysemy, in which a single word could have more than two relevant meanings, will be discussed. It is not too much to say that research on cognitive linguistics elucidate polysemy of language. The main theme of the earlier research of cognitive linguistics has to do with the study of propositions: a single proposition could mean various relevant meanings. In his paper, by comparing homonymy and vagueness which are concepts closely related with polysemy, the semantic property of polysemy will be explained. For this purpose, in chapter 2, polysemy, homonymy, and vagueness are classified in a traditional method, and by extension, above three groups are further subdivided based on the categorization model proposed by cognitive linguistics. Chapter 3 presents a phenomenon of polysemy of the proposition word 'over' founded on the research of Lakoff (1987) and exposes problems to clarity solution, offering a polysemic structure from a new standpoint.

영어전치사는 구조주의 언어학에서 명사, 형용사, 동사, 부사처럼 자족적인 의 미를 갖추고 있는 내용어와는 달리 의미가 없는 것으로 간주하여 기능어에 포함되 었을 뿐 아니라 변형생성문법에서도 의미가 없이 문장구조상에서 빈틈을 메워주 는 문법적인 목적을 위한 통사규칙으로 취급되었다. 하지만 인지문법의 창시자로 알려진 랑가커(Langacker)는 한 낱말의 의미는 그 낱말이 가지는 여러 개별 의미들 이 서로 밀접하게 연관된 의미망이라고 주장함으로써 전치사에 관한 인지언어학 적 연구를 가속시켰다. 이에 본 연구는 인지문법을 토대로 하여 영어전치사 of와 about의 원형의미와 확장의미를 연구·분석해보고 전치사 of와 about의 의미를 세 가지로 분류하여 참조점 모형을 이용하여 비교분석해본다. 첫째, 지표 Y의 탄도체 X가 명사인 경우, 전치사 of는 참조점(지표)의 관련 영역 속에 있는 여러 개체 중 하나의 개체만이 목표(탄도체)가 되어 현저성이 부여되고 있는 반면에, 전치사 about의 경우에는 참조점의 영역 속의 여러 개체들이 탄도체에 함축되어 현저성이 부여되고 있다. 둘째, 지표 Y의 탄도체 X가 형용사인 경우, 전치사 of에서 주어는 지표 그 자체에 대한 사항만을 탄도체와 결부시키며, 전치사 about에서 주어는 활 성화 되지 못한 채 참조점 주변에서 산재되어 있는 여러 속성들과 탄도체를 결부 시키고 있다. 셋째, 지표 Y의 탄도체 X가 비어있는 경우에 전치사 of는 참조점의 영역속에 있는 개체들은 목표로 설정되지 못하고 참조점에 내재되어있기 때문에 주어는 참조점에 대한 구체적인 사항이 아니라 참조점 그 자체에 대해 관심을 두 고 있다. 전치사 about는 참조점 영향하에 있는 탄도체는 구체성을 띠지 않아도 관 찰자는 인식할 수 있기 때문에 활성화되지 않고 참조점 주변에 내재되어 있는 상 태이다. 그래서 주어는 참조점과 관련된 여러 속성에 관심을 두고 있다. 따라서 전 치사 of와 about은 그 기본의미와 일관성을 유지하여 X of Y의 구조에서주어는 지 표Y 그 자체를 그리고 X about Y의 구조에서 주어는 지표Y의 주변에 관한 사항 을 언급한다.

In structural linguistics, unlike content words which have self-contained meanings such as nouns, adjectives, verbs and adverbs, English preposition were regarded as function words which have no meanings and also in transformational generative grammar, they were treated as syntactic rules for the grammatical purpose of filling a gap in sentence structure. However, Langacker(1987) known as the founding father of cognitive grammar, by insisting that the meaning of a word is a semantic network that several individual meanings that the word has become closely intertwined, accelerated a cognitive linguistics study. I have studied and analyzed the prototypical sense and the extension sense of the preposition of and about based on cognitive grammar and have classified the meanings of the preposition of and about as three forms according to a reference point model. First, in case of trajector, X of landmark, Y being a noun, in the preposition of, only one entity of several entities involved in the domain of a reference point is given salience while, in the preposition about, several entities involved in the domain of a reference point are given salience, being connoted in trajector. Second, in case of trajector, X of landmark, Y being an adjective, in the preposition of, the subject connects the information of landmark itself with trajector but in the preposition about, the subject connects several entities scattered around a reference point, not being activated with trajector. Third, in case of trajector, X of landmark, Y being empty, in the preposition of, because several entities involved in the domain of a reference point, not being established as the object, are inherent in a reference point, the subject shows an interest not specific information of a reference point but a reference point itself. In the preposition about, because several entities involved in the domain of a reference point, though having no concreteness, are cognized by an observer, they, being not activated, are inherent around a reference point. Therefore the subject shows an interest several entities which are relevant to a reference point. Thus, as the preposition of and about maintain consistency in the basic meanings, in ‘X of Y structure,’ the subject refers to landmark, Y itself and in ‘X about Y structure,’ the subject refers to circumferential information of landmark, Y.

본 논문의 목적은 한국어 부사격 조사 ‘-에’와 중국어 개사 간의 대응관계를 의미지도를 통하여 파악하는 데에 있다. 한국어의 부사격 조사와 중국어의 개사는 의미와 기능에 유사점 을 지니고 있는데 기존 연구를 살펴보면 의미적인 다양한 대응관계를 위주로 연구해왔다. 기 존의 연구들에서 논의된 바와 같이‘-에’와 서술어, 체언 간의 관계로 인해 많은 의미가 파생 된 것은 부정할 수 없으나 본 논문은 ‘-에’를 기본의미와 파생의미로 나누었고, 기본의미는 [처소], 파생의미는 [시간], [대상], [기준], [도구], [원인] 5가지로 나누어 ‘-에’의 의미를 분 석하였다. 이 논문에서는 ‘-에’의 각 의미 간의 친소관계를 파악하고 그것을 바탕으로 의미지 도를 작성하였다. 의미지도는 여러 기능이 하나의 언어 형식에 내재되어 서로 어떻게 연결되 어 있는지를 관찰하는 일종의 언어 분석 방법이다. 이 분석 방법을 바탕으로 의미지도 위에서 ‘-에’가 가지고 있는 여러 가지 의미와 중국어 개사와의 대응관계를 대조해 보았고, 단순한 의미적 대응이 아닌 부사격 조사‘-에’와 중국어 개사 간에 어떤 연관성과 보편성이 존재하는 것을 확인할 수 있었다.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the correspondence between Korean postposition ‘-e’ and Chinese preposition through semantic map. Although postpositions in Korean and prepositions in Chinese have similarities in meaning and function, existing studies have focused on various semantic correspondences. This paper analyzes the meaning of ‘-e’ by dividing it into five basic meanings [location] and derived meanings [time], [object], [standard], [tool], and [cause]. In this paper, through the metaphor of the meaning of ‘-e’, the relationship between each meaning was identified and a semantic map was drawn up based on it. Semantic mapping is a kind of language analysis method that observes how various functions are inherent in a single language form and are connected to each other. Based on this analysis method, the various meanings of ‘-eh’ were contrasted with Chinese verbs on the semantic map, and there is a certain connection and universality between postposition ‘-eh’ and Chinese prepositions, which are not simple semantic correspondences.

본 연구는 한국어 부사격조사 중에서 가장 많은 의미기능을 가지고 있는 {로}와 관련된 중국어 개사를 대조 분석하고자 하는 데에 목적을 두고 있다. 분석 방법은 선행연구와 사전 자료 등 이론적 배경을 검토하여 {로}의 의미기능을 재설정하고, 이를 기초로 말뭉치자료를 이용하여 {로}와 의미상 대응 가능한 중국어 개사 표현을 정리하였다. 또한 {로}와 관련된 중국어 개사의 통사정보를 체계적으로 대조 분석하였다. 분석 결과, 표현 대조 측면에서 {로}는 의미기능에 따라 관련 중국어 개사 표현들과 대부분 대응할 수 있었다. 하지만 개별 문맥에 따라 ‘로’는 중국어에서 다른 형태로도 인식되었다. 통사적 측면에서 먼저 결합 형태에 있어 {로}와 관련개사의 결합 형태를 3가지 유형으로 나누어 각 유형이 대조 가능한 부분과 대조 불가능한 부분을 분석하였다. 위치와 문장성분의대조 결과에서 {로}와 관련 개사는 공통된 점도 있었지만, 문맥에 따라 차이점도 보인다. 마지막으로, {로}는 한국어 조사로만 사용되는 한계점을 가지고 있는 반면에 중국어 개사는 문맥에 따라 다양한 구조 형식으로 실현되는 성질에서 {로}와 구별된다. 이 연구에서 분석된 연구 결과를 활용하여 두 언어에서 관련 어휘를 가르치는 교원에게 도움이 되기는 희망하며, 또한 두 언어 간 관련 어휘 대조의 기초 자료가 되었으면 한다.

The purpose of this study is contrastive analysis of Korean adverbial auxiliary ‘로’ and its corresponding Chinese prepositions. For thisstudy, we selected some semantics of ‘로’, then we searched its corresponding Chinese prepositions. Also, we analyzed and compared the syntactic information of the Chinese preposition is related with Korean auxiliary ‘로’. As a result, In terms of the contrastive expression, ‘로’ could match with the most of the Chinese preposition. It just depends on about the function of the ‘로’. ‘로’ also can correspond to other morphology besides preposition in Chinese context. In the aspect of syntactic comparison, Fist, three combination forms of ‘로’ and preposition were compared systematiclly. Second, as the result of location and sentence constituent comparison, there are different points as well as same points. The last point, there is a limitation that ‘로’ is only used as korean auxiliary. But, Chinese preposition is used in various forms of the structure. This research, as the one of important data of Chinese and Korean vocabulary comparison, will give a help for teachers in the Korean auxiliary and Chinese preposition.

The preposition ‘Zai’ and ‘Yu’ is the most commonly used in modern Chinese typical prepositions. Our students are North Korea and applied when mixed, many kinds of mistakes. The reason is Chinese including the mother tongue interference, but the difference of the two prepositions that entity will never abuse the main reason. Therefore, these two prepositions to analyze the significance of the gap between the quality of the problem is very important. The sense of quality is differences in usage also can know. This, in the legal quality of component analysis method and the comparative significance of the two official accusation prepositional description. This difference quickly identify qualities of two prepositions.

스페인어에는 두 유형의 절대절이 존재한다. 하나는 ‘XP-DP(술어-주어)’ 어순의 절대절 이고 다른 하나는 ‘con-DP-XP’ 어순의 절대절이다. 본 연구의 목표는 ‘con-DP-XP’ 절대절에 서 con의 통사 범주가 무엇인지를 규명하는 것이다. 그동안 절대절에 대한 연구는 주로 ‘XP-DP’ 절대절의 내부 구조가 어떻게 되는지에 관심이 주로 집중되었다. 따라서 ‘con-DP-XP’ 어순의 절대절과 이 절대절을 이끄는 con의 통사 범주가 무엇인지에 대한 관심은 매우 적었다. 대다수 의 학자들은 con을 전치사로 간주하였다. 본고에서는 ‘con-DP-XP’ 절대절의 con은 전형적인 전치사 con이 지닌 ‘수반’, ‘결부’ 또는 ‘도구’의 의미를 지니고 있지 않다는 사실에 주목하여 con 이 전치사가 아닌 다른 범주에 속할 가능성을 연구하고자 하였다. 본고에서는 여러 가지 논의를 통해 con을 전치사로 보는 것보다는 ‘전치사적 보문소(prepositional complementizer)’로 보는 것 이 더 적절하다고 주장하였다. 끝으로 con을 보문소로 분석할 때 제기될 수 있는 문제점에 대해 답변을 제시하고자 하였다. ‘con-DP-XP’ 절대절 밖으로 주어가 qu-이동하게 되면 소위 ‘보문 소-흔적 효과’가 나타나게 되는데 본고에서는 그 이유가 동사의 보충어로 기능하는 소절(small clause)과는 달리 ‘con-DP-XP’ 절대절에서는 소절의 주어가 술어에 선행하는 어순만이 가능하 다는 사실과 깊은 관련이 있다고 주장한다. 따라서 소절 밖으로의 주어 이동은 보문소 con 바로 뒤 위치에서 일어날 수밖에 없고 그 결과 ‘보문소-흔적 여과’를 위반하게 됨으로써 비문법성이 초래된다고 설명한다.

There are two types of absolute clauses in Spanish. One has the form [XP-DP], in which DP functions as the subject of the predicate XP, and the other one has the form [con-DP-XP]. The main purpose of this paper is to identify the syntactic category of ‘con’ of the second form. In the literature most previous studies on absolute clauses have focused mainly on the internal structure of the form [XP-DP] and have paid little attention to the issue of what the syntactic category of ‘con’ of the second form is. Most researchers have just treated it as a preposition. However, the fact that ‘con’ of the second form does not show the typical meanings of the preposition ‘con’ such as ‘comitative’, ‘associative’ or ‘instrumental’ makes us wonder if it is a preposition. Thus, I attempt to study the possibility that it belongs to a syntactic category other than prepositions. I claim that it is better to analyze it as a prepositional complementizer and provide some discussions to support my argument. Finally, I try to answer a problem that may be raised when we analyze ‘con’ as a complementizer. The qu-movement of the subject out of the ‘con’-absolute clauses triggers the so called ‘comp-trace’ effect. I claim that this effect is closely related to the fact that only the order in which the subject precedes the predicate is allowed in ‘con’-absolute clauses. Therefore, the movement of the subject out of the ‘con’-absolute clauses has to take place immediately behind the complementizer ‘con’ and, as a result, violates the ‘comptrace filter’.

This study has as its aim to investigate the process of acquisition of the prepositions in Portuguese as a second language by Korean speakers. The preposition, among other grammatical factors, is one of the factors that cause difficulty for Koreans because there are no prepositions in the Korean language. In order to do that, we have searched for theoretical support in the concepts of language transfer and interlanguage. The data were generated by means of interviews with 2 Korean speakers learning Portuguese as a second language in Brazil. The results show a transfer from the native language system or avoidance due to the difference between the Korean and Portuguese languages and to the complexity of the prepositional system. They may also suggest that the participants were still in the initial stage of language acquisition. This research offers some considerations for the tuition of Portuguese as a second language, specifically, for Korean students.

Shin, Eun Young, Yoon, Junghyoe, & Chung, Taegoo. 2016. Acquisition of Preposition Stranding and Pied-piping in Relative Clauses and Wh-questions by Korean EFL Learners. Korean Journal of Linguistics, 41-1, 67-93. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the acquisition of preposition stranding (PS) and preposition pied-piping (PP) in relative clauses and wh-questions by Korean middle school and college students. This study examined linguistic factors affecting the grammaticality judgment of learners at different proficiency levels such as position of preposition (PS/PP), semantic dependency between a verb and a preposition (bound/free), and construction type (wh-question/relative clause). We also inspected language-external factors such as input and instruction through textbook analysis and a teacher survey. The findings of the present study showed that input saliency conditioned the overall acquisition of the PS, which is prevalent in input. On the other hand, the infrequent PP was affected by construction type and V-PP semantic dependency to a greater degree than was the PS. (Korea University)