Earticle

Park, So-Young. 2016. Arguments for NP-ellipsis in Korean. Korean Journal of Linguistics, 41-2, 289-311. NP-ellipsis in Korean has often been refuted in the previous literature. This paper, however, presents two pieces of evidence in support of the existence of NP-ellipsis in Korean: evidence from numeral classifier constructions, and one from comparatives capitalizing on complex event and mass nouns. It turns out that NP-ellipsis can take place in Korean licensed by a numeral classifier. Potential alternatives like pronominalization, argument-ellipsis, or stranding are all falsified by the scrutiny of numeral classifier constructions with genitive-marked possessor arguments. Also, null NPs in comparatives, built on complex event and mass nouns, can be properly accounted for only under an NP-ellipsis analysis. (Pusan National University)

Lee, Doo-Won. 2013. Milestone for Null Pronominalization in the Ciman-Construction: A Reply to An (2013). Korean Journal of Linguistics, 38-3, 705-726. The marker nun attached to the relevant nominal in the subsequent clause of the ciman construction is not a plain topic one, but rather a contrastive topic one (Lee 2013a). This induces its contrastive counterpart to be retrieved out of the preceding clause. If the counterpart is identified and may be syntactically independent of its following nominal, the next step is that the nun-marked remnant allows null pronominalization. Beyond the multiple case marking construction (i.e., MCM) context, this may even be extended to the non-MCM context. The nominative- or accusative-marked genuine possessor or the adjunct, which can be replaced by the genitive-marked element, acts separately from its immediately following nominal in the sentence-level context, which induces the nun-marked remnant in the second clause to allow null pronominalization. This is also what the nun-marked goal in the subsequent clause of the ciman construction allowing the double accusative construction shows. As a result, the null pronominalization of the Minor Argument (i.e., null pronominalization of sonkalak-ul 'finger-ACC' in Tom-uy sonkalak-ul 'Tom-GEN finger-ACC' which is Minor Argument Pronominalization (i.e., MAP) in An's (2012a) term) in the MCM context and the other null pronominalization in the non-MCM context are both the same null argument phenomenon even though the former is involved in the nun-marked remnant's ownership of the Minor Argument. (Korea National University of Transportation)

An, Duk-Ho. 2012. NP-Ellipsis, Its Impostors, and Minor Argument Pronominalization in Korean. Korean Journal of Linguistics, 37-2, 345-356. The goal of this paper is to examine the nature of a newly discovered construction in Korean which on the surface resembles “NP-ellipsis” (a.k.a. “N’-Ellipsis”; henceforth, “NPE”). I argue however that this similarity is only apparent and that the construction in question is totally different from NPE. Rather, I show that the construction in question does not involve any kind of ellipsis and is actually derived from the multiple Case-marking construction. (Konkuk University)

The marker nun attached to the relevant nominal in the subsequent clause of the ciman construction is not a plain topic one, but rather a contrastive topic one (Lee 2013a). This induces its contrastive counterpart to be retrieved out of the preceding clause. If the counterpart is identified and may be syntactically independent of its following nominal, the next step is that the nun-marked remnant allows null pronominalization. Beyond the multiple case marking construction (i.e., MCM) context, this may even be extended to the non-MCM context. The nominative- or accusative-marked genuine possessor or the adjunct, which can be replaced by the genitive-marked element, acts separately from its immediately following nominal in the sentence-level context, which induces the nun-marked remnant in the second clause to allow null pronominalization. This is also what the nun-marked goal in the subsequent clause of the ciman construction allowing the double accusative construction shows. As a result, the null pronominalization of the Minor Argument (i.e., null pronominalization of sonkalak-ul 'finger-ACC' in Tom-uy sonkalak-ul 'Tom-GEN finger-ACC' which is Minor Argument Pronominalization (i.e., MAP) in An's (2012a) term) in the MCM context and the other null pronominalization in the non-MCM context are both the same null argument phenomenon even though the former is involved in the nun-marked remnant's ownership of the Minor Argument.

The so-called ciman construction requires the obligatory introduction of the contrastive (topic) marker nun to the relevant element in the subsequent clause when its Minor Argument (i.e., sonkalak ‘finger’ in Tom-uy sonkalak ‘Tom-GEN finger’) undergoes null pronominalization (i.e.,pro). The contrastive marker nun attached to the relevant nominal in the subsequent clause induces its contrastive counterpart to be retrieved from the preceding clause. If it is identified, the next step is that the contrastive nun-marked remnant allows null pronominalization of the Minor Argument (i.e., Minor Argument Pronominalization (MAP) in An's (2012a) term). Though the preceding genitive phrase allows a multiple case marking construction (i.e., MCM), the nun-marked remnant in the subsequent clause doesn't always allow MAP. It permits MAP only when it has ownership of the Minor Argument. This is in accordance with the observation that the nun-marked goal in the subsequent clause of the ciman construction allows MAP only when its counterpart is marked by the accusative case in the sense that the accusative-marked goal, for example, Chelswu-lul ‘Chelswu-ACC’, is also a prospective possessor of the referent of the direct object (i.e., Minor Argument here).

본 연구는 영어와 한국어 문장에서 전/후치사구의 영역이 목적어를 DP 내에서 제한할 경우 그 목적어는 이동이나 생략이 불가능하지만, 전/후치사구의 영역이 목적어가 쓰이는 DP를 벗어나 VP에 부가될 경우, 그 전/후치사구가 동사술어와 의미적으로 양립할 수 있다면, 그 목적어는 이동할 수 있거나 생략될 수 있다. 이것은 영어와 한국어에서 목적어가 이동할 경우 동사의 술어위치로부터 전/후치사구의 영역이 확장(expanded)된다는 Park (2014)의 주장의 반박이다. 동사구부사와의 쓰임과 수량사의 영역은 전/후치사구가 타동사와의 자매(sister)위치에서 항상 생성될 수 없다는 것을 보여준다. 목적어 이동과 생략을 허용하는 문장의 전/후치사구는 VP 또는 그 이상의 위치에 병합된다. 이 고찰은 한국어의 소유격 표시자 ‘의’와 함께 쓰이는 요소의 영역이 피소유자(possessum)에 해당하는 요소를 제한하여 이동과 생략을 불가능하게 한다는 사실에도 적용된다. 이것은 신체 일부가 다중격 요소로 나타날 경우 피소유자에 해당하는 요소가 ‘-지만’ 구문에서 ‘는’-잔여 표현(nun-marked remnant)으로 나타날 수 있다는 An (2012)의 주장과 후치사구로부터 소유격 표시자 ‘의’를 생략하거나 ‘-관한’을 ‘관하여’의 후치사구로 치환하면 피소유자에 해당하는 요소는 통사적 독립성을 갖게되어 ‘는’-잔여 표현을 허용한다는 Lee (2013a, b)의 주장을 다음과 같이 수정하게 한다: 영어와 한국어에서 DP 내의 어떤 요소의 영역에 제한된다면 그 요소는 이동하거나 생략될 수 없고 DP 내의 어떤 요소의 영역에 제한되지 않으면 그 요소는 이동하거나 생략될 수 있다.

The goal of this paper is to examine the nature of a newly discovered construction in Korean which on the surface resembles “NP-ellipsis” (a.k.a. “N’-Ellipsis”; henceforth, “NPE”). I argue however that this similarity is only apparent and that the construction in question is totally different from NPE. Rather, I show that the construction in question does not involve any kind of ellipsis and is actually derived from the multiple Case-marking construction.

It is a well-known fact that the English gender system marginally remains in personal pronouns such as he, she, and their declension. The gender distinction of these personal pronouns is based on the natural gender system such as he for males and she for females. One of the interesting phenomena about English pronominalization is the use of the feminine personal pronoun she for some special nouns such as ships, countries, airplanes, etc. when they are singular and pronominalized. The present study will introduce such exceptional nouns (optional figure of speech) and their use in pronominalization. To argue that this phenomenon is not a simple option, but an initiation of another shift of the English gender system, this paper presents three approaches to the argument: the exceptional nouns in history of English, semantic approach to the feminine pronoun use of the special nouns, and a possible explanation, a shift theory of the gender system in the English pronouns.