http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
An Event Semantics Approach to Sluicing vs. VP Ellipsis
Hae-Kyung Wee 한국언어학회 2015 언어 Vol.40 No.2
Wee, Hae-Kyung. 2015. An Event Semantics Approach to Sluicing vs. VP Ellipsis. This study proposes an account on contrasting grammaticality of sluicing and VP ellipsis based on davidsonian event semantics by arguing for a fundamental semantic difference between them. It is claimed that the elided event in sluicing is an old event, which is anaphorically referring back to the event denoted by the antecedent event, just like a pronoun, whereas the event of a VP ellipsis introduces a novel event. This can explain why sluicing usually occurs with an indefinite antecedent, whereas VPE cannot. (Dankook University)
Voice Mismatch Meets Neurolinguistics
Gui-Sun Moon,Sun-Woong Kim,Jeong-Ah Shin,Hae-Kyung Wee,Jong Un Park,Myung-Kwan Park,Wonil Chung 현대문법학회 2018 현대문법연구 Vol.99 No.-
Gui-Sun Moon, Sun-Woong Kim, Jeong-Ah Shin, Hae-Kyung Wee, Jong Un Park, Myung-Kwan Park, and Wonil Chung. 2018. Voice Mismatch Meets Neurolinguistics. Studies in Modern Grammar 99, 85-115. This paper aims to investigate Korean advanced L2 English learners’ strategies for ellipsis resolution during sentence processing. Ellipsis resolution is known to involve several stages of information processing from the initial step of detecting an ellipsis-licensing element by the parser to the final stage of integrating the ellipsis site with the information retrieved from the antecedent of the ellipsis site. In examining these steps, we have manipulated three factors: (i) TP vs. VP-ellipsis; (ii) two types of discourse coherence relations (resemblance(-contrast) vs. cause-effect relations); (iii) voice match vs. mismatch. We found through the ERP recordings that voice mismatch in TP ellipsis elicited N400, followed by P600, irrespective of discourse coherence relations. In contrast, voice mismatch in VP-ellipsis registered N400 only in resemblance(-contrast) relation, but not in cause-effect relation. These findings lead us to conclude that Korean advanced L2 learners of English seem to undergo the full sequence of processing stages required for ellipsis resolution.
An Event-based Approach to Fragments as TP Ellipsis
Hae-Kyung Wee 한국생성문법학회 2017 생성문법연구 Vol.27 No.1
Based on dichotomy of elaborative fragment and contrastive fragment proposed by Griffiths & Liptak(2014), i.e., that the former is island insensitive and the latter repairs island, this study attempts to provide a supplementary semantic and discourse oriented analysis for fragmentary expressions by extending a discourse semantic account on sluicing proposed in Wee(2015), which argues that the elided event of sluicing is anaphorically bound to the antecedent event. This study argues that fragmentary expressions, which are also instances of TP ellipsis, should be explainable in the same way as sluicing, by showing that TP ellipsis is possible if the same event as the elided event is available in the prior discourse, either as an entailment or a presupposition of the immediate antecedent. By scrutinizing the discourse context where the antecedent occurs as well as the fragment, and based on the observation that even a fragment answer which should be judged grammatically as the worst can constitute a possible kind of conversation in Korean with a proper intonation pattern, i.e., with the unfocused part deaccentuated, as an indicator for existential presupposition for TP ellipsis, it is claimed that island violation may be repaired not only by ellipsis but also by deaccenting, considering that island constraint is a PF-theory as claimed by Merchant (2004).
A Semantic function of Korean Response Particles as Anaphors
Hae-Kyung Wee 한국언어학회 2019 언어 Vol.44 No.4
This study explores the meaning of Korean responsive particles (RP), ney and aniyo, in comparison to English yes and no, and shows that Korean RPs are anaphoric expressions that refer back to the antecedent proposition available from the preceding question or sentence. Korean RPs are explained based on the combination of Krifka’s (2013) anaphoric approach and Farkas&Roelofseon’s (2012) notion of ‘relative’ function of English RPs. The positive and negative RPs are analyzed as serving anaphoric functions that take the antecedent proposition p and ASSERT(p) and ASSERT(not(p)), respectively. Additionally, it is shown that there is another version of positive RP, namely kiyo, which is structurally and morphologically parallel to the negative aniyo, whose existence can be regarded as evidence for the anaphoric nature of the RPs in Korean. Finally, it is shown that Korean RPs as anaphors can take only one antecedent, introduced by the outermost phrase of the preceding utterance, which explains why they are not ambiguous, whereas English RPs, which can take multiple antecedents, are ambiguous.