Ȩ : Ʈ : Ǹ
      ȸ
      ȸ
      ȳ/
      ۼ
      û
      ڷ
      ȸ FAQ
 
 
 
Ȩ > ȸ > ڷ
 
The Why-not Construction in Korean: A Direct Interpretation Approach
Sae-Youn Cho & Han-gyu Lee
/ ȣ 26 / 2ȣ
ó
2018. 6. 30.
ʷ()

Cho, Sae-Youn & Lee, Han-gyu. (2018). The Why-not construction in Korean: A direct interpretation approach. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 26(2), 1-19. The why-not construction in Korean seems to have such patterns as Why NP+SubjCase Negative Copula(NC)+Q. However, a careful examination reveals that the Korean why-not construction exhibits various idiosyncratic properties depending on its subtypes. We argue that the construction in Korean should be divided into two types: Why NP+SubjCase NC+Q (Type I) and Why VP[(NP+SubjCase) NC+Q] (Type II). Then we claim that the two subtypes can be analyzed in the Construction-based HPSG under a Direct Interpretation Approach. To support this claim, we propose a why-not construction rule for Korean, which can enable us to capture the various grammatical and pragmatic properties of the patterns at hand.

ʷ()

Cho, Sae-Youn & Lee, Han-gyu. (2018). The Why-not construction in Korean: A direct interpretation approach. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 26(2), 1-19. The why-not construction in Korean seems to have such patterns as Why NP+SubjCase Negative Copula(NC)+Q. However, a careful examination reveals that the Korean why-not construction exhibits various idiosyncratic properties depending on its subtypes. We argue that the construction in Korean should be divided into two types: Why NP+SubjCase NC+Q (Type I) and Why VP[(NP+SubjCase) NC+Q] (Type II). Then we claim that the two subtypes can be analyzed in the Construction-based HPSG under a Direct Interpretation Approach. To support this claim, we propose a why-not construction rule for Korean, which can enable us to capture the various grammatical and pragmatic properties of the patterns at hand.


÷
  1. ѱ.pdf
  1. ѱ.hwp
 
 
 
 ȣå : ̸Ϲܼź : Ʈ : ̸Ϲϱ