대한언어학회 전자저널

Kim, So-Jee & Cho, Sae-Youn. (2019). Positive Stripping Construction in English and Korean: A Direct Interpretation Approach. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 27(2). 149-169. The positive stripping construction (PSC) in English and Korean is comprised of several fragments (and) NP too/(kuliko) NP[-to] but delivers a full sentential meaning. To account for such a form-meaning mismatch, we examine the similarities and differences in the properties of the PSC between the two languages. Based on the properties we observed, we argue that our Construction-Grammar based analysis under the Direct Interpretation Approach can sufficiently explain the properties of the stripping in the two languages, showing the problems of the Focus Phrase-based analysis under the Movement-and-Ellipsis Approach. Moreover, it is argued that our analysis will lead to a simpler explanation for further stripping data.

# Positive Stripping Construction # Construction Grammar # Direct Interpretation Approach # FP-based Analysis # Movement-and-Ellipsis Approach

• Boas, H., & Sag, I. (2012). Sign-based construction grammar. CSLI Publications/Center for the Study of Language and Information.
• Cho, S.-Y., & Lee, H.-G. (2017). Properties of why construction in Korean: A direct interpretation approach. Inmoonkwahakyeonku, 55, 97-120.
• Chomsky, N. (1971). Deep structure, surface structure, and semantic interpretation. In D. Steinberg & L. Jakobovits (Eds.), Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Depiante, M. (2000). The syntax of deep and surface anaphora: A study of null complement anaphora and stripping/bare argument ellipsis. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut.
• Ginzburg, J. (2012). The interactive stance: Meaning for conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Ginzburg, J., & Sag, I. (2000). Interrogative investigations. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
• Kim, J.-B. (2015). Fragments in Korean: A direct interpretation approach. Studies in Generative Grammar, 25(3). 703-733.
• Kim, S.-J. (2018). English stripping construction: A construction­grammar based account. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Kangwon National University.
• Kim, S.-J., & Cho, S.-Y. (2018a). Positive stripping construction in English: A direct interpretation approach. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 26(1), 75-96.
• Kim, S.-J., & Cho, S.-Y. (2018b). Resolving the ambiguities of negative stripping construction in English: A direct interpretation approach. Center for Cross Culture Studies, 52. 393~416.
• Kim, S.-J., & Cho, S.-Y. (2016). VP-ellipsis, stripping, and the functions of the delimiter –to in Korean. Language and Information, 20(1), 93-110.
• Lobeck, A. (1995). Ellipsis: Functional heads, licensing, and identification. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Merchant, J. (2003). Remarks on stripping: Section excised from submitted version of fragments and ellipsis. Manuscript, University of Chicago.
• Potter, D. (2017). The island (in)sensitivity of stripping. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Northwestern University.
• Ross, J. (I967). Constraints on variables in syntax. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, MIT.
• Selkirk, E. (1995). Sentence prosody: Intonation, stress, and phrasing. In J. Goldsmith (Ed.), The handbook of phonological theory (pp. 550-569). Cambridge: Blackwell.
• Turk, A., & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (2007). Multiple targets of phrase-final lengthening in American English words. Journal of Phonetics, 35(4), 445-72.