Earticle

This study explores how Korean-to-English machine translation systems (KEMSs) (e.g., Google Translate and NAVER Papago) deal with Korean relative clauses (RCs). Previous works have supported the claim that case markers in Korean take critical roles in planning Korean RCs. Cross-linguistically, Korean and English RCs are different in terms of the positions of the head nouns and gap positions in unfolding clauses. Because of the transparent case marking differences among types of Korean RCs, this study performed the translation processing of various Korean RCs from reliable publications in the fields of language and linguistics. The findings show that differences between the two languages are not fully reflected in KEMS. In particular, when KEMSs translate Korean direct and indirect object RCs, many errors are generated because of their insensitivity to the Korean case marking system.

본 연구는 중국인 한국어 학습자의 한국어 양태성 이동동사 구문에 나타나는 ‘에서’와 ‘을/를’의 조사 교체 습득을 살펴보는 데 목적을 둔다. 이와 같은 현상은 형태와 기능 간의 일대일 대응에 어긋나는 조사 교체 현상으로 중국인 한국어 학습자들에게는 습득의 어려움을 예상할수 있다. 따라서 중국인 한국어 중 ․ 고급 학습자들을 대상으로 조사 교체 현상의 습득 양상을 살펴보고자 한다. 이를 위해 수용성 판단 과제 (acceptability judgment task)를 통해 문법성 인식에 대해 살펴본 후 조사 교체에 대한 지식을 실시간(online)으로 처리할 수 있는지 여부를 살펴보기 위해 자기조절읽기 과제(self-paced reading task)를 실시해습득 양상을 고찰하였다. 그 결과, 중국인 학습자 상, 하 집단 모두 양태성 이동동사 구문에서 ‘을/를’보다 ‘에서’를 수용하였으며 상 집단의 경우 역시 한국인 모어화자와 달리 조사 교체에 대한 지식이 부족 했다. 실시간 처리에서도 중국인 학습자들은 한국인 모어화자들과 달리 조사 교체에 대한 민감성을 보이지 않았다. 이와 같은 결과는 조사에 대한 교수가 개별 조사에 그칠 것이 아니라 조사 교체가 일어나는 구문들에 대한 명시적 교수로 확대되어야 함을 시사한다.

This study investigated whether L1 Chinese learners of Korean can acquire case particle alternation in motion verb constructions. An acceptability judgment and self-paced reading task were conducted with L2 advanced learners of Korean in tandem with native Korean speakers. The result of the acceptability judgment task demonstrated that the L1 group accepted the sentences in both case-marking conditions, whereas the L2 groups (both higher and lower proficiency learners) only accepted the sentences in the ‘ul/lul’ condition, while rejecting the sentences in the ‘eseo’ condition. From the results of the self-paced reading task, L2 participants did not show any reading time differences between the two case-marking conditions. However, given that the L2 learners failed to demonstrate target-like knowledge of ‘in manner of motion’ verb construction in the acceptability judgment task, their reading-time patterns in the self-paced reading task may not be interpreted as their acceptance of both conditions. These findings suggest that the L1 Chinese-speaking learners of Korean have a persistent difficulty acquiring the case alternation regarding motion verb construction. (Ewha Womans University)

This article investigates the time-related morphological units, such as tense, mood, and aspect, in Korean embedded clauses, and their morpho-syntactic relations. We claim that modality is dependent on tense within TP by sharing temporal features (e.g., [+anterior] and [+posterior]) with the tense marker (e.g. -ess), and modality also shares the same position in a predicate with the tense marker, whe18reas mood is projected to MP (Mood Phrase) headed by clause-final morphemes (e.g., ta, ca, or la). Adopting Vendler’s (1967) predicate types, Chomsky’s (1999, 2001) Probe-Goal approach, and Ura’s (2006) analysis of the aspect-related feature, we suggest that lexical aspect manifests the projection of the two types of Aspectual Phrases (e.g., AspP with [u Stative] or [Dynamic]) between vP and TP. This study demonstrates specified temporal properties in the Korean language by exhibiting semantically, morphologically, and syntactically motivated multi-layered Functional Categories such as [CP[MP[TP[AspP]]]] in overt syntax.

This study aims at exploring the grammaticality recognition of the L2 learners of Korean on the transitive locative structures. Argument alignment and locative alternation have been postulated as two linguistic contexts to design 12 locative verb sentences. 20 Korean native speakers(NKs) and 40 L1 Chinese learners of Korean(CKs) participated in the study. Research questions of the study are as below: RQ 1. Do CKs show different grammaticality judgments on locative structures compared to NKs do in terms of argument alignment and locative alternation? RQ 2. Is there L2 variation of language proficiency in the grammaticality judgments of the CK high group and that of CK low group? The results regarding RQ 1 showed that CKs exhibited significantly lower grammaticality judgment than NKs did regardless of the linguistic contexts. This implies that further attention on teaching of locative structures needs to be provided to the L2 learners. For RQ 2, CK low group showed significantly low grammaticality judgment on the sentences in unmarked contexts such as typical argument alignment structures and alternation structures. However, the grammaticality judgment of CK low and high groups were not consistant in non-alternation structures when they were compared to that in the other marked context, non-typical argument alignment structures. It implies that markedness hypothesis regarding typicalness of argument alignment in L2 acquisition is valid but not with locative alternation.

In the so-called inalienable possession (IAP) constructions both the possessor NP (PS NP) and the body-part NP (BP NP) can take Accusative Case. In their passive counterparts the BP NP can take either Nominative or Accusative Case, whereas the PS NP can take only Nominative Case. I suggest how to account for these Case marking phenomena in terms of Agree in the framework of Chomsky's (2000, 20001) recent Minimalist Approach. I argue that the Case marking phenomena can be straightforwardly accounted for in terms of the theory of Agree and the basic syntactic relation and principle such as c-command and MLC without the stipulations employed in the previous accounts.

The purpose of this paper is to show the difference in the grammatical encoding of the cross-categorial semantic distinction ‘bounded/unbounded’, a distinction that concerns the dimension of quantity of objects and events. Czech encodes it on the verb with V0-modifiers, whereas Finnish in the NP with case suffixes. In Finnish, the accusative/partitive case alternation that expresses the ‘bounded/unbounded’ distinction in the domain of individuals is systematically exploited to indicate the aspectual distinction, a distinction in the domain of events. In Czech, the encoding system of V0-modifiers that expresses the ‘bounded/unbounded’ distinction in the domain of events is exploited for conveying certain meanings that are related to those of articles within NPs in such languages as English, for example. Czech and Finnish clearly differ in the language-specific schematizations that are associated with their respective linguistic representations. However, the interaction between verbal and nominal predicates in Finnish and Czech is based on the same general principles that can be best accounted for within the lattice-theoretic analysis.

本稿では、日本語の時の表現に見られる「に」格表示のパターンについて、次の２点に注目し考察した。一つは「時を表す「に」がつく時の表現とつかない時の表現との違いは何か」であり、もう一つは「「は」「でも」などのとりたて助詞が後続すると、普段は「に」がつかない時の表現にも「に」がつくのはなぜなのか。さらに同じ条件の下でも「昨日」「先週」など発話時以前を表す時の表現には「に」がつかないが、それはなぜなのか」ということである。考察の結果は次のようである。まず、一つ目の問題については、時間軸上で時の表現が表す時点を特定しやすいか否かという性質を、時の表現の持つ＜特定性＞と規定し、この＜特定性＞が「に」格表示に関与しており、<特定性＞の弱い時の表現は「に」格表示が難しいということを明らかにした。二つ目の問題については、仮定の状況や選択肢・可能性を表す状況において一回的な行為・出来事にかかわる時を表す際には、たとえ普通「に」格がつかない＜発話時を基準にする時の表現＞にも「に」格表示が許されるということを明らかにした。また、＜発話時以前を表す時の表現＞に「～には」「～にでも」などの表現が許容されないのは、仮定条件を表す「は」や＜ぼかしのとりたて＞を表す「でも」が単純過去を表す文には用いられないという特性のためであることを明らかにした。

The present study builds up a language dataset involving multiple case-marking constructions in Korean. Exploiting the Sejong Spoken Corpus, we extracted 1,021 sentences in which the nominative marker ‘-i/ka’ or the accusative marker ‘-ul/lul’ occur twice or more. These sentences were annotated with respect to 47 linguistic parameters, which the previous studies assume to interact with multiple case-marking constructions. These parameters are divided into five subgroups: namely, (i) distribution, (ii) semantic relation, (iii) nominal category, (iv) predication, and (iv) discourse. The constructed data are numerically analyzed, and the content characteristics are also examined. The numerical analysis looks into proportion of each parameter and correlation between two parameters. The content analysis focuses on how multiple case-marking constructions are realized in naturally occurring conversations. The whole dataset constructed in this study will be readily distributed in order for other linguists to use it for their own research purposes.

韓國語と日本語において構文的特徵そ決めるのは格助詞であリ.その中でも 對格助詞の役割は大きい.－つの文の中でニつの名詞句が同じように對格助詞によって標示される二重對格表示は.韓國語では大きな構文約特徵として捉えられているのに對して.日本語では主に「二重對格制約」の觀点で捉えられている.兩語におけるこのようを相違には.對格助詞「를」と「ヲ」の振る舞いの相違が反映されている.同じく對格助詞と稱されても.「를」は「ヲ」と違って與格標示機能も備えていて.しかも格標示においてヲ格より制約が緩い.韓國語に「對格標示交替型」と「對格標示實現型」の二重對格標示が成り立つのはこのためである.

The aim of the study is to investigate the causee case marking by Japanese L1 learners of Korean. Twenty Korean native speakers (NK) and 54 Japanese L1 learners participated (24 high level learners, HL and 30 low level learners, LL). The task was acceptability judgment task composed of 48 causative sentences. Linguistic contexts of sentences were divided by verb transitivity (transitive causation and intransitive) and type of causation (syntactic and morphological). The types of case marking were nominative, accusative, and dative. The result showed proficiency variability among LL and HL. LL showed different acceptability judgment from NK by taking permissive attitude in ungrammatical nominative and dative case marking contexts. Their L2 responses were not fully reflecting their L1 norm nor exhibiting target language-like norm. This indicates that L1 is not the fundamental resources of lower level L2ers when they face poverty of stimuli. They continue to test interlanguage hypothesis by keeping themselves open to L1 and L2 phenomenon. HL's acceptability judgment was not significantly different from both of NK and LL which indicated that they were in the middle of acquiring Korean causee marking even when they had arrived at the advanced level of Korean proficiency. This implies that explicit instruction on causee marking needs to be provided in L2 Korean classroom.

The purpose of the study is to investigate the case marking by Thai L1 learners of Korean. Thirty native speakers (NK) and 60 Thai L1 learners participated in the study(30 Intermediate level learners, HL and 30 Beginning level learners, LL). The task was a multiple choice task which was composed of 18 movement verb sentences. The items were divided by case marker alternation (9 alternation constructions and 9 non-alternation constructions). Alternation construction allows replacing ‘ey’ or ‘eyse’ with ‘ul/lul’. Non-alternation construction allows only ‘ul/lul’. The result showed no proficiency variability among the learners. The Learners showed different acceptability judgment from NK by choosing ungrammatical markers in most of the constructions. In non-alternation constructions, NK chose ‘ul/lul’ correctly but the learners failed to choose ‘ul/lul’ and rather chose ‘ey’ or ‘eyse’ erroneously. This observation implicates that more attention and instruction on movement verb construction and case marking alternations should be provided.

Park, Sun Hee. 2013. A Study on the L2 Acquisition of Korean Case Marking. Korean Journal of Linguistics, 38-3, 629-655. The study has investigated the acquisition of Korean case marking of L2 learners. Case attachment, case alteration and case stacking in verb complements and adjuncts, were sub-categorized into 6 types which provided the linguistic context to examine these interlanguage phenomena. 30 native speakers of Korean(NK), 30 L1 Chinese speakers of Korean(CK), and 30 L1 Japanese speakers of Korean(JK) were asked to indicate their grammatical judgment on diverse case marking. A series of independent t-tests on the grammatical judgment of the participants were conducted to examine whether there existed differences between ‘Native speakers vs. Learners’(RQ 1), and to examine whether there existed differences upon L2 learners’ L1(RQ 2). The results can be summarized as follows: (1) In most case marking types, there were significant differences between the grammatical judgment of L2 learners and that of their NK counterparts, except in the Adjunct type. And (2) there were not significant differences between the grammatical judgment of JK and that of CK except Case select type. Additional frequency analyses were conducted to investigate which case markings made major differences in the grammatical judgement of Korean native speakers and L2 learners. (Ewha Womans University)

Lee, Doo-Won. 2012. Multiple Case Marking and Null Argument Phenomena. Korean Journal of Linguistics, 37-3, 659-678. This paper deals critically with An's (2012) argument that the second clause (i.e. target clause) of a sentence is derived from the multiple case marking (MCM) construction via null pronominalization (i.e. pro) of the second nominative phrase with the optional introduction of a relevant discourse particle such as the topic marker -nun. This paper identifies the following by examining some empirical phenomena involved in this argument. First, though the genitive construction in the first clause allows MCM counterparts, the target clause does not always permit null pronominalization. Second, only when the genuine grammatical subject or object in the target clause is selected by its predicate, it can undergo null pronominalization. At this point, body-part or kinship expressions are a typical example which can be represented as pro. Third, the target clause may or may not be equivalent to the MCM counterpart when it involves pro. Finally, the genuine grammatical subject or object in question necessarily shows up as a null argument when the target clause involves null pronominalization, regardless of whether one or more genitive elements appear in the genitive construction in the antecedent clause. (Korea National University of Transportation)