On the notion of topic (I)

梁東暉 이화여자대학교 한국문화연구원 1974 韓國文化硏究院 論叢 Vol.23 No.-

言語學에 있어서 「主題」(topic)라는 말은 그 使用者에 따라서 3가지 相互關聯되어 있으나 서로 다른 槪念을 指稱해 왔다. (이 3가지 다른 槪念을 이 論文에서는 各各 'topic', 'focus', 'theme'이라고 부르기로 한다.) 이 論文의 目的은 이 3가지 槪念을 明確히 識別o把握하고, 그 言語學的 相互關聯性을 糾明하고, 그 槪念들의 言語學的 意義(linguistic significance)를 考察해 보고, 그리고 마지막으로 生成o變換文法理論의 立場에서 이 3가지 槪念들이 어떻게 다루어져야 할 것이며 그 結果 生成o變換文法理論에 어떠한 貢獻(implications)를 하는가를 考察해 보는데 있다 (마지막 生成o變換文法理論의 立場에서의 考察은 其二(Part 2)에서 다루게 됨.) 그 3가지 槪念中 topic에 대해서는 먼저 英語의 경우 Jespersen(1924), Halliday(1967b), 그리고 Chomsky(1965)의 見解 및 定義를 考察해 보았는데 그 어느것도 一貫性있는 見解 또는 定義가 못됨을 發見하였다. 다음으로 視野를 韓國語와 日本語에 돌려 Kuroda(1965)와 Kuno(1970)의 見解 및 定義를 살펴보았는데 亦是 一貫性 있는 見解 또는 定義로서는 不充分 또는 不適切함을 發見하였다. 結論的으로, 'topic'은 그 根源에 있어서 어떤 名詞的 槪念 (nominal feature)도 아니고 對話的 槪念(discoursal feature)도 아니며 오직 文章的 特性(sentential feature)임을 發見하였다. 卽 'topic'은 總稱性(generic)이라는 文章的 特性(sentential feature)을 지닌 文章에만 올 수 있다는 것을 發見하였다. 나아가 'topic'이라는 槪念과 總稱性(generic)이라는 槪念의 相互關聯性을 考察o分析 함으로서 'topic'이라는 槪念의 보다 깊은 理解o把握을 試圖하였다. 그리고 總稱性(generic)이라는 槪念에 關聯하여 'topic'이라는 槪念의 言語學的 意義를 考察해 보고 'topic'과 'focus'와의 關聯性도 함께 다루었다. 'Focus'에 대해서는 Fillmore(1968), Halliday(1967a, b), Chomsky(1969), Chafe(1970) 그리고 Lakoff(1969)의 見解 및 定義를 比較o檢討하였다. 結論的으로, 'focus'에는 'exclusive focus'와 'contrastive focus'가 있으며, 'exclusive focus'는 다시 그 중에 'identifying focus'와 'indeterminate focus'를 內包함을 알았다. 한편 어떻게 하여 韓國語의 主格토씨 「이」(또는「가) ) 가 'exclusive focus'를 表示하게 되고 主題토씨 「는」이 'contrastive focus'를 表示하게 되는 지에 對한 詳細한 說明을 試圖하였다. 同時에 英語에 있어서도 이 'exclusive focus'와 'contrastive focus'의 차이가 Bolinger91958)의 A accent 와 B accent의 차이로 表示되는 점을 指摘o考察하였다. 'Theme'에 對하여서는 Lyons(1968)와 Chafe(1970)의 見解 및 定義를 檢討하고, 이 槪念을 'Functional Sentence Perspective'라는 理論으로 展開한 Firbas(1964, 1971)의 立場을 상세히 檢討o秕判하였다. 結論的으로 Firbas의 理論은 現狀態로는 一貫性있는 理論으로 볼 수 없으며 아무런 言語學的 意義(linguistic significance)도 없는 것임을 發見하였다. 同時에 'theme'은 'focus'의 附隨的(따라서 剩餘的) 槪念으로서 獨立된 言語學的 意義를 갖는 槪念이 아님을 主張o說明하였다.

장벽이론과 관계화

양동휘 서울대학교 어학연구소 1987 語學硏究 Vol.23 No.1

This paper examines how Chomsky's(1986) theory of barriers is to be refined, parameterized or modified in order to properly account for relativization phenomena in English and Korean. It is proposed that Chomsky's(1986) condition (1) be replaced by (2), an extension of the Minimality Condition. (1) A CP assigned oblique Case by N is an inherent barrier. (2) A projection of N that is a barrier for government due to the Minimality Condition functions as a barrier for the Subjacency Condition. The notion of segment is refined such that one of the two segments of a categroy must immediately dominate a trace. It is argued that Chomsky's(1986) condition (3) should be replaced by (4). (3) Only NP may adjoin to PP. (4) P does not L-mark its complement CP. The following parameters are proposed for Korean. (5) α L-marks β if α θ-marks β in Korean. (6) α properly governs β if αθ-marks β in Korean. It is also shown to be necessary to assume for Korean the configurational structure including VP and the empty operator movement at S-structure.

The Determinism Issue in the Minimalist Theory

Dong-Whee Yang 한국영어학회 2017 영어학 Vol.17 No.3

Chomskys (1995, 2000, 2001, 2008) theory of movement is mainly based on the determinism in the sense that a derivation is determined by feature-checking under the last resort condition along with the notion of crash. An alternative theory of movement would be based on the non-determinism in the sense that a derivation is not determined by feature-checking under the last resort condition along with the notion of crash but accounted for in terms of various interpretive systems along with the notion of merge (Chomsky 2008). In fact, various attempts for the non-determinism have been proposed even within the deterministic frameworks. For example, even if Chomsky (2008) basically maintains the deterministic basis of feature checking for the theory of movement especially for A-movements, he tries to adopt a non-deterministic approach for some A-movements without much success within his interpretive systems along with the proper notion of merge, which would be better motivated than an entirely or partially deterministic theory of movement. Another major claim of this paper is that the notion of edge feature (EF) posited in Chomskys theory of determinism should be eliminated for the theory of non-determinism. It is proposed in this paper that the operation of merge, unmarked or marked, should be the derivational null hypothesis in the sense that it is always free and optional (or costless) not only for the unmarked merge but also for the marked merge, given the usual assumption that all the derived structures undergo interpretation at the interface for the degree or kinds of grammaticality. The postulation of EF for every lexical item (LI) is the basic mechanism of Chomskys theory of determinism. Hence, every merge should be licensed or “determinedˮ by the EF of an LI, which makes his theory inherently deterministic. Since the notion of derivational null hypothesis is proposed in place of the notion of EF for the non-determinism, the notion of EF is unnecessary, given the notion of derivational null hypothesis. Implications of non-determinism beyond movement or a possible theory of global non-determinism are discussed.

The Dual Property of Anaphors

Yang, Dong-Whee 서울대학교 어학연구소 1991 語學硏究 Vol.27 No.3

In this paper we argue that every anaphor has the dual property of a clitic and a quantifier and may in principle be subject to both clitic-climbing as a head at S-Structure or LF and quantifier-raising (QR) as an XP at LF. Clitic-climbing may involve feature-percolation as Kayne (1987) shows. Thus, if we assume that anaphors as clitics only adjoin to functional categories since anaphors belong to the functional category D and that agreement-sensitive anaphors like English himself, which contain the full set of phi-features, induce feature-percolation when they undergo clitic-climbing, whereas agreement-insensitive anaphors like Korean caki, which do not contain the full set of phi-features, do not, then we can account for the language universals on anaphora (1) and (2) : (1) An anaphor is subject-oriented when its antecedent occurs outside of the minimal clause containing the anaphor. (2) An agreement-sensitive anaphor (like English himself) obeys the SSC whereas an agreement-insensitive anaphor (like Korean caki) does not. We can also account for the language universal (3) by our hypothesis of anaphoric clitic-climbing: (3) A reciprocal obeys the SSC. (3) is due to the fact that a reciprocal is semantically agreement-sensitive whether it is morphologically agreement-sensitive or not, in that it requires its antecedent to be plural and in a distributive ( or reciprocal) dependency relation. We also propose to account for variations in the SSC across languages in terms of possible parameterization of the agreement-sensitive element and/or its feature-percolating capacity. By motivating the hypothesis that every anaphor is a quantifier and undergoes QR as an XP, we can account for the language universals on anaphora (4) and (5): (4) An anaphor may disobey the NIC only when the language allows movement from the subject position of a tensed clause. (5) An anaphor is non-subject-oriented just in case it can be adjoined to non-argument XP's under the assumption that it can undergo QR as a quantifier. For example, the English anaphor himself may not disobey the NIC whereas the Korean anaphor caki may, since English does not allow QR (or any movement) from the subject position of a tensed clause due to the ECP whereas Korean does.

A Markedness Theory of Movement

( Dong Whee Yang ) 대한언어학회 2010 언어학 Vol.18 No.2

This paper proposes and motivates a theory of movement based on the notion of unmarked vs. marked internal merge (IM) in place of A-/A`-movement. Unmarked IM is a consequence of the unmarked edge feature (EF) (Chomsky 2008) whereas marked IM is a consequence of the marked EF. The unmarked EF is the default EF for every lexical item (LI), which is optionally deletable (Chomsky pc), whereas the marked EF is the result of blocking the optional deletability of the default unmarked EF. Hence, unmarked IM should be a free optional operation triggered by an unmarked EF whereas marked IM should be an exceptional obligatory operation triggered by a marked EF. To conclude, movements across languages should be characterized as either a free optional unmarked IM or an exceptional obligatory marked IM according to the markedness theory of movement.

The Extended Blnding Theory of Anaphors

Yang, Dong Whee 서울대학교 어학연구소 1983 語學硏究 Vol.19 No.2

Semantic Constraints Ⅱ : Relativization

Yang, Dong-Whee 서울대학교 어학연구소 1976 語學硏究 Vol.12 No.1

On Chomsky-Adjunction

Yang, Dong-Whee 서울대학교 어학연구소 1974 語學硏究 Vol.10 No.1

'Island Constraints' and Pro-Deletion Phenomena in Korean

Yang, Dong-Whee 서울대학교 어학연구소 1973 語學硏究 Vol.9 No.2

On the Notion of Feature Inheritance

Dong-Whee Yang 한국생성문법학회 2011 생성문법연구 Vol.21 No.1

Chomsky (2008) has claimed that according to the phase theory a phase head should be the locus of all the relevant syntactic features so that the feature inheritance has to apply to every phase head. Hence, features that should be checked on a non-phase heat should be inherited from a phase head to the non-phase head for syntactic operations like movement. Recently it is further claimed that not only Agree feature but also all the relevant features including even discourse features like Topic/Focus should be posited in C and then have to be inherited to T(Miyagawa 2010). In this paper, however, it is shown that the operation of canonical feature inheritance should be highly restricted: it may not apply to unmarked IMs or optional movements, it may apply only to checkable features, it may apply only to non-phase heads selected by the phase head, etc. Furthermore, it is shown that the notion of feature inheritance entails many problems including some technical problems like counter-cyclic operation, so that the alternative theory of movement without the notion of feature inheritance or even feature checking itself, I.e., the merge theory of movement, is proposed and disused.