A Test for Argumenthood : Verbal Compounds in Korean

The head of a verbal compound is derived from a verb by affixation and its non-head element is interpreted as an argument of the head or a closely related adjunct. Within the framework of Argument Structure Theory, there has been much discussion on whether the verbal compound can be a test for argumenthood, Grimshaw(1990) has specifically proposed that this construction provides supporting evidence for the hierarchy of fine-grained thematic roles. In this paper, I attempt to figure out which elements can be the non-heads of verbal compounds in Korean by analyzing about 400 compounds in terms of thematic roles. Unlike the previous claims based on English data, the result shows that the fine-grained thematic hierarchy is not observed and that a prominent distinction exists only between the Agent and all the other thematic roles. Furthermore, we cannot find any significant difference between arguments and adjuncts in being incorporated as a non-head. Based on this empirical evidence, I argue that verbal compounds cannot be a test for argumenthood in Korean

Verbal Compounds in English

English compounds are distinguished into two kinds, root compounds and synthetic verbal ones. The second one refers to a compound whose head is derived by affixation from a verb. This verbal head generally takes the form of a stem plus an affix such as -eπ -ed, -ing, and the non-head is interpreted as an argument of the head or a closely related adjunct (ex: truck driver, moth-eaten, fast-acting). In this paper, 1 attempt to figure out which element can be the non-heads of verbal compounds in terms of argument structure theory. My starting point is Grimshaw (1990), which assumes two independent notions of thematic roles and causer/non-causer in order to account for them. First, 1 show her account fails to provide a correct prediction for various cases especially where the head is derived from unaccusatives, psychological causatives, on passives. Rather, 1 provide an account based on two aspectual notions: a determinant and an affected entity. The former is intended to inc1ude a causer, the subject of psychological statives and that of unaccusatives, while the latter picks out the entity marking the aspectual endpoint of an event. 1 argue that the hierarchical order based an these two notions determines the acceptability of the non-heads of these compounds

Subject-to-Object Raising Construction in English and Korean

본고는 영어와 국어의 소위 인상구문을 비교 분석함을 목표로 한다. 인상 구문은 두 언어에서 (1)과 같이 전통적으로 하위절의 주어가 상위절의 목 적어로 인상된 것으로 분석되었던 주어-목적어 인상구문(Subject-to-Object Raising Construction)(Postal 1974)을 가리킨다. This paper attempts a comparison of the so-called Subject -to-Object Raising Construction in English and that in Korean. Unlike the English SOR which seems uncontroversially syntactic, 1 hypothesize that the ap- parent SOR in Korean is part of a broader process which is sensitive to both grammatical functions and discourse functions. 1 claim that, in Korean, the object of the higher clause is the discourse topic of the lower clause predicated by the semantically stative comment clause; the discourse topic is not restricted to grammatical subject, as evidenced by the multiple nominative construction. This paper proposes that the SOR should be a process which interprets the most prominent element of the lower clause as the object of the higher one in both languages, based on the classic claim that English is a subject-prominent language whereas Korean is a topic•prominent one (Li and Thompson 1976)

Idiomatic Expressions in Korean and Argument Structure

본 연구의 목적은 한국어 관용어구(idiomatic expressions)의 의미를 논항구조 이론(Argument Structure Theory) 틀 내에서 살펴보려는 것이다. 관용어구에 대한 연구는 전통문법에서부터 이루어져 왔으나 1980년대 말부터 다양한 통사이론들이 논항구조를 주요 연구과제로 삼기 시작하면서 새로운 관점에서 조명을 받게 되었다. 관용어구의 의미가 논항구조 이론의 가장 중요한 이론적 근거를 제시해 주기 때문이다. This paper deals with idiomatic expressions in Korean within the frame-work of Argument Structure Theory. The theory attempts to figure out what kind of semantic information is relevant to determining the formal characteristic of argument structure. Various studies propose the hierarchy of fine-grained thematic roles as a crucial determining factor, and some of them claim that English idioms provide supporting evidence. In this paper, I analyze the meaning of Korean idioms in terms of thematic roles to see whether it is affected by the hierarchícal order among them. I will show that Korean idioms only support the binary distinction between Patient/ Theme and all the other roles, un1ike the previous claims based on English data. Basing myself on this empirical evidence, I will suggest that aspectual information may be more relevant to the argument structure of Korean idioms rather than the hierarchy of thematic roles

Locomotion Verbs and Place Noun Marking

Locomotion verbs are used with various kinds of place expressions which are marked according to the meaning. For example, a goal is expressed either as an object with accusative case or as a prepositional object in English. In this paper, I propose that there are significant similarities between English and Korean in marking place expressions of locomotion verb constructions. In order to account for them, I argue for a semantic feature called Affectedness, which is defined as the aspectual property of a verb, such that it describes an event that can be measured out and delimited by the direct argument of the verb (Tenny 1987). 1 argue that this feature enables us to capture the generalization that any expression denoting affected entities can be marked with “ lul" in Korean while only a syntactic argument among such expressions allows accusative. case marking in English. This partly explains why accusative marked place expressions in English show a restricted distribution compared to “lul" marked ones in Korean