http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
홍기선 한국언어학회 2017 언어 Vol.42 No.4
Hong, Ki-Sun. 2017. A Semantic Analysis of ‘ka’ and ‘lul’ in Korean: Case and Meaning. Korean Journal of Linguistics, 42-4, 961-988. This paper aims to provide a unified semantic theory on ‘ka/lul’ in Korean, which has remained as a conundrum of case theory. It hypothesizes that ‘ka/lul’ shows a maximum distribution of semantic case markers when they are not subject to syntactic constraints and are morphologically more independent than inflectional suffixes. It proposes that ‘ka/lul’ denote two kinds of meaning--(i) the situation meaning related to thematic role information and aspectual features of a clause, and (ii) the discourse meaning related to the way a speaker presents the constituents of a clause—and that they can be used as grammatical case markers due to the former. This paper shows that the semantic analysis provides a consistent and comprehensive account of (i) ‘ka/lul’ alternation observed in adverbial constituents of a specific class of verbs, (ii) the contrast between NPs with ‘ka/lul’ and bare NPs, and (iii) ‘cita’ construction and lexical passives. (Seoul National University)
홍기선 한국영어영문학회 2003 영어 영문학 Vol.49 No.2
This paper attempts to account for three kinds of periphrastic causative constructions in English in terms of two semantic factors. One is whether the causer exerts an influence directly on the causee or on the event which the causee participates in. The other is whether the causer gets directly or physically involved in the execution of the caused event or indirectly instigates the causee to execute the caused event. This notion of directness / indirectness has been mainly adopted to distinguish between lexical causatives and periphrastic causatives. Recently Shibatani and Pardeshi have proposed that there is an intermediate category between direct and indirect causations and that these different categories from a continuous semantic space. In this paper, adopting Shibatani and Pardeshi's account. I propose that the semantic continuum of directness can account for subtle meaning differences among various forms of periphrastic causatives in English. Although there is no definite answer, we speculate on what kind of constituent structure would appropriately represent the semantic differences of causative constructions. We also observe that the notion can shed light on the diachronic development of English causatives. These accounts attempt to provide a comprehensive view of English causative constructions from both synchronic and diachronic perspectives.