Earticle

In this paper, we state the necessary conditions on a BVA reading of pronouns. For this, we argue that there are four instances of a BVA reading in Korean and English and further argue, following Ueyama’s (1998) insight, that there are configurations in which a BVA reading between a quantifier A and its dependent B does not obtain. More simply put, a BVA reading is not available if A is one of A-type QPs and B is a long NP. B-type QPs, unlike A-type QPs, can in fact yield a BVA reading, irrespective of the lexical choices. This fact thus provides confirming evidence for Ueyama (1998)’s insight that the availability of a BVA reading is affected not only by a quantifier A, but also by its dependent term B. In addition to this observation, we maintain that there is evidence that common reference arising from the speaker’s intention is a necessary condition on a BVA reading. In this paper, we also examine the case of epithets where a BVA reading is available. In fact, anaphoric R-expressions such as epithets are incomplete definite descriptions. They induce common reference only if c-command does not hold. Hence, it seems reasonable to entertain the hypothesis that anaphoric R-expressions cannot be linked in common reference with a c-commanding argument.

This paper is a study of Korean reflexives and their reference. Section 2 has been focused on distinguishing anaphors into three types. We have postulated two types of N-features in the sense of Chomsky (1995), namely, phi-features and U-features. Anaphors with underspecified U-features are local rather than long-distance anaphors, whereas anaphors underspecified for phi-features are subject-oriented in our analysis. Anaphors which are underspecified for two kinds of features are both local and subject-oriented. Section 3 is concerned with the referential difference between caki and caki-casin. The difference between anaphors becomes sharper when a QP or a WH-word occurs as the antecedent. QPs or WH-words excludes the possibility of coreference. In section 4, other differences between anaphors on the basis of the notion of ‘guises’ have been discussed. It supports our hypothesis to the effect that local caki can induce coreference. On the other hand, the hypothesis that non-local caki and caki-casin can be construed as anaphoric reference indicates that non-local caki and caki-casin cannot evoke guises. Finally, we have assumed that if two anaphors act as the same reference and given a choice between them, the two anaphors are in competition and C-anaphors are preferred over B-anaphors.

In this paper, we have examined the binding behavior of two types of anaphoric forms. We have argued that the plural anaphoric forms and pro readily admit a bound variable interpretation, whereas singular anaphoric forms rarely do it. This phenomenon is mostly observed in some languages. The results observed in this paper confirm that there are specialized anaphoric forms corresponding to quantifiers. However, the real picture of the interpretive distinction between singular forms and plural forms is not that simple in light of English. Furthermore, our observation is only limited to some languages. Another observation made in this paper is the problem of complementary distribution, one of the empirical problems raised in the binding theory. We demonstrate that when anaphors and pronominals are not in complementary distribution, they are not identically interpreted. We have argued that it is justified by the requirement of the Semantic Competition Principle. However even so, we know nothing about what the syntactic condition of that phenomenon is. We will leave it for further research.

The main goal of this paper is to provide an agreement-based analysis of scrambling that occurs with quantifiers. This paper argues that the probe-goal agreement analysis has advantages over the traditional Binding Theory. With respect to clause-internal scrambling, after QR, an operator c-commands its bindee at LF and it allows reconstruction. In the case of clause-external scrambling, a QP does not c-command its bindee at PF and after QR, an operator c-commands its bindee at LF. In addition, clause-external scrambling allows reconstruction. With regard to clausal scrambling, a QP does not c-command its bindee at PF and after QR, an operator c-commands its bindee at LF. In addition, clausal scrambling allows reconstruction. In this paper, the possibility of eliminating reconstruction in A’-binding has been explored. In order to eliminate reconstruction, we propose the A’-binding principle that an anaphor A or a pronoun P is licensed by an operator O only if the operator O or its trace c-commands A or P at LF. There are tangible reasons to argue for this claim.

This paper attempts to provide a new perspective on floating quantifiers, which have been studied almost exclusively from a syntactic point of view. This paper proposes that floating quantifiers should be analyzed as pragmatic intensifiers that can occur in different positions in a clause. In other words, floating quantifiers are comparable to emphatic reflexives that induce a contrastive focus on the interpretation of a definite DP. Evidence in favor of this claim comes from the fact that floating quantifiers share a number of idiosyncratic properties with emphatic reflexives, which cannot be accounted for by positing syntactic movement or by treating floating quantifiers as adverbials. In addition, the positions of emphatic reflexives and floating quantifiers are affected by a pragmatically significant prosodic factor. The paper also suggests that floating quantifiers are partitives, claiming that quantifier-floating is not due to a lexical property of a given quantifier.

It has been assumed that a null noun is present when a quantifier occurs by itself or precedes a partitive of-phrase. The claim is that the null noun corresponds to the pronoun one or a phonetically-deleted noun under identity (Hoeksema, 1984; Ionin et al., 2006). I argue that postulating a covert one or a deleted noun faces empirical problems, thereby further supporting the claim that a quantifier has two distinct functions in the lexicon—a nominal function and an adjectival/determiner function (Shin, 2007, 2016). The two functions of a quantifier can be captured in a systematic manner by means of morphological zero-derivation. By adopting a semantic composition approach to affixal morphology, I propose that nominal quantifiers can be derived from adjectival/determiner quantifiers by combining them with a null affix denoting a part-of relation in the quantity dimension.

This paper differentiates the structures of various floated quantifiers, criticizing previous works that place them uniformly in the same structure. Considering that the precise syntactic nature of an expression can be determined only when its semantics is taken into account, the current work articulates the semantic differences found among floated quantifiers along with their distributional discrepancies. The quantifier each, as a distributivity marker, has three uses that are closely associated with three arguments that it is essentially composed of while the quantifiers all and both, as universality markers, are partitioned into two parts, manifesting only two uses. The distinction between the three-part and the two-part structures brings about the distinct syntactic positions of the floated quantifiers. Represented in a flat string, their positions seem identical but, at the hierarchical configurations, their structures must be differentiated. Yet, scrutinizing not only transitive and intransitive constructions but also the ditransitive construction, it is emphasized that the constituent to which the floated quantifier each attaches must be generalized to be the relation-denoting expression of the sentence that is sectioned into three parts. This paper further assumes a movement of the direct object when the floated each occurs in the ditransitive construction and finds that this theory-internally motivated movement is, in fact, empirically justified.

This study examined scope ambiguity interpretation in English double object and to-dative constructions by native English speakers and Korean EFL learners in Experiment 1. Native English speakers showed a significant difference in interpretation between sentence types, supporting a competition-based account. Korean EFL learners, however, preferred the wide-scope reading of the indefinite quantifiers a and two, irrespective of the sentence types. Experiment 2 investigated scope ambiguity resolution of the same sentence types in Korean by Korean participants of Experiment 1. As Experiment 1, the participants displayed the same result favoring wide scope interpretation of indefinite quantifiers. Based on these results, I supported competition-based accounts and proposed revising hierarchy of indefinite quantifier a suggested by Ioup(1975). The difference in scope ambiguity comprehension between Korean EFL learners and native English speakers was analyzed in terms of L1 transfer.

This paper presents a unified compositional analysis for dependent plurals and anti-quantifiers. Choe (1987) has previously put forth a theory of distributivity, acknowledging the parallelism between dependent plurals and anti-quantifiers. Yet, his theory faces some shortcomings. Developing the limitations, I address a number of unanswered questions, arguing that both dependent plurals and anti-quantifiers are pluralization operators. Although dependent plurals and anti-quantifiers are essentially uniform, their functions are not entirely overlapped. Therefore, in capturing their uniformity, I also articulate the slight distinction between them which is the very reason why the two different forms exist in the grammar. My account that spells out not only the essential similarity but also the marginal difference between dependent plurals and anti-quantifiers has not a few advantages compared to Choe (1987). My analysis doesn’t need an i-part operation that is stipulative. I don’t face apparent counter-examples. My account relieves the grammar to high extent by not postulating an independent module of distributivity. Even more, in my account, the fact that dependent plurals produce distributivity is not coincidental but reflects a fundamental linguistic principle. Fifth, my account correctly captures that dependent plurals are more basic than anti-quantifiers in their function. Lastly, my analysis is compositional and thus is fully formalized.

Over the past few decades a number of challenges have been made to the nature and distributions of FNQs in Korean and Japanese. Nonetheless, we find that many crucial questions still remain unanswered. In this paper, we lay down some minimalist assumptions and demonstrate that simply by combining these, all the lingering problems germane to the previous approaches can be eliminated. Additionally, a variety of puzzles that arise under the traditional A- or A’-movement all fall out nicely. The assumptions include Takahashi and Hulsey’s(2009) ‘Late Merger,’ Fox’s(2002) ‘LF-interpretability’ and our own proposal of the Split DP Hypothesis, which is an elaboration of Sportiche's(2005) ‘Split DP.’ Insofar as the current analysis is sustained, it will supply empirical evidence in support of the theoretical assumptions that we posithere, while further clarifying some residual problems in the minimalist analysis of movement .

본 연구는 기존 연구와 다르게 기업의 CRM활동 맥락에서 사용되는 표현방식 중 명확한 표현방식보다 모호한 표현방식이 더 효과적일 수 있음을 제시하고 있으며, 특히 이러한 효과는 기부비율에 따라 달라질 수 있음을 제시하고 있다. 분석결과에 의하면, 먼저 기부비율이 낮은 경우에는 명확한 표현방식보다 모호한 표현방식의 경우 구매의도가 더 높게 나타났으며, 기부비율이 높은 경우에는 명확한 표현방식과 모호한 표현방식 간 통계적 차이는 없는 것으로 나타났다. 특히, 본 연구결과는 낮은 가격의 제품일 때에는 정확한 형태의 표현방식을 사용하는 것이 더욱 효과적이며, 높은 가격의 제품의 경우 계산 가능한 표현방식을 사용하는 것이 더욱 효과적이라는 Chang(2008)의 연구결과와는 다소 배치된다. 궁극적으로 기업의 입장에서는 오히려 낮은 가격의 제품일 경우 모호한 표현방식을 사용하여 기부를 많이 할 듯 소비자의 기대를 높이는 것이 더 효과적이며, 가격이 높을 경우에는 모호한 표현방식이든, 명확한 표현이든 둘 다 효과적일 수 있다는 것이다.

Different from the past studies, in this study we tested that the level of donation plays an essential moderating role in the relationship between the donation quantifiers and purchase intention. Namely, we tested whether the level of donation can impact purchase intention in the two formats stratigies(vague quantifiers vs. definite quantifiers). To examine the impact of donation level, ANOVA was used. The results of data analysis showed that vague quantifiers were positively evaluated in the purchase intention, when the donation level was low. On the other hand, both vague quantifiers and definite quantifiers had no differences in the purchase intention, when the donation level was high. The results of this study will help corporations to understand the relative importance of the two formats toward the donation quantifiers. In addition, this study will allow corporations to understand how important the vague quantifiers and the definite quantifiers are for them to increase consumers' purchase toward the products.

This paper investigates the semantic and pragmatic consequences of the adverbial nature carried by floating quantifiers in Korean. It is assumed in this paper that floating quantifiers in Korean carry the adverbial nature rather than the stranding one which relates the floating quantifiers with their head nouns in syntactic analysis. The adverbial nature of Korean floating quantifiers produces some semantic and pragmatic consequences. In other words, the adverbials in Korean often contribute to the production of semantic ambiguities and pragmatic ‘focus’ and ‘presentative’ function in the sentence information structures. The semantic consequences relate to the semantic ambiguity caused by floating quantifiers. The use of floating quantifiers causes the preferences for the partitive and/or distributive reading rather than exhaustive and/or collective reading, respectively. The pragmatic consequences of Korean floating quantifiers, however, relate to focus and presentative function. The focus function of floating quantifiers in Korean derives from preverbal focus universal hypothesis(Kim, 1985) in that the floating quantifiers stand close to verbs in the sentence-final position. The presentative function of floating quantifiers in turn derives from their usual preverbal positionings and their resultant focus status.

Son, Gwangrak. 2010. Floating Numeral Quantifiers with Scrambling: A Prosodic Account. Korean Journal of Linguistics, 35-3, 659-682. Although a number of challenges have been made to the distribution of FNQs in constructions of scrambling, many crucial questions are still unanswered. Giving special concerns to Miyagawa (1989), Ko (2007), and Miyagawa and Arikawa (2007), this paper fleshes out a new analysis termed as 'Restructuring', which plays a key role in understanding many questions remaining up to now. The process of 'Restructuring', motivated independently of syntactic operations, is important to reanalyze the whole set of data from an entirely novel point of view. It will be shown that various types of problems detected in the literature can best be explained by a conspiracy of the operations referring to the phonological as well as the syntactic properties. (Kyungpook National University)