Ȩ : »çÀÌÆ®¸Ê : ¹®ÀǸÞÀÏ : ÀüÀÚÀú³Î
      ¿¬±¸À±¸®À§¿øȸ ±ÔÁ¤
      ÆíÁýÀ§¿øȸ ±ÔÁ¤
      ³í¹®Åõ°í¾È³»/±ÔÁ¤
      ³í¹®ÀÛ¼º¾ç½Ä
      ³í¹®Åõ°í½Åû
      ³í¹®ÀÚ·á½Ç
      ÇÐȸÁö°ü·Ã FAQ
 
 
 
Ȩ > ÇÐȸÁö > ³í¹®ÀÚ·á½Ç
 
Á¦¸ñ Classifiers and Plural Marking are Not Mutually Exclusive
ÀúÀÚ Chonghyuck Kim
±Ç / È£ 21±Ç / 1È£
Ãâó
³í¹®°ÔÀçÀÏ 2013. 3. 31
ÃÊ·Ï


Chierchia (1998) develops an influential semantic theory called Nominal Mapping Parameter, which predicts that a language with a generalized classifier system does not have plural marking. He claims that common nouns in classifier languages do not differentiate singular entities from plural entities in the syntax just like English mass nouns and, as such, they are bound to have obligatory classifier systems and no plural marking. In this article, I argue against Chierchia's view and claim that a generalized classifier system in a language should not be taken to show that the language has a mass lexicon. My argument is based on data drawn from Korean in which a generalized classifer system coexists with fairly productive plural marking.



÷ºÎ
  2.±èÁ¾Çõ.pdf
 
 
 
 °³ÀÎÁ¤º¸º¸È£Á¤Ã¥ : À̸ÞÀϹ«´Ü¼öÁý°ÅºÎ : »çÀÌÆ®¸Ê : À̸ÞÀϹ®ÀÇÇϱâ