러시아어의 비행위주성. 생성문법적 고찰

정하경 ( Ha Kyung Jung ) 서울대학교 러시아연구소 2010 러시아연구 Vol.20 No.2

The concept of ``anti-agentivity`` has frequently been discussed as one of the key features of Russian language and culture. In contrast to western culture, usually characterized as a culture of logic and rationalism, Slavic culture has been described as irrational, receptive, contemplative, and acquiescing to fate. This conception has been actively explored in such fields as literature and history, but has also been developed as a concrete theme in Russian linguistics. This paper examines the structural base of Russian ``anti-agentivity`` from a generative perspective and considers whether this generally accepted idea about the correlation between Russian language and culture/mind can be justified in syntactic terms. In particular, I show that the HAVE/BE syntactic parameter and related syntactic structures such as applicatives result in dative-infinitive, dative-lexical modal, and dative-reflexive constructions, which, Wierzbicka(1992) suggests, reveal the anti-agentive character of Russian language. The HAVE/BE parameter synchronically appears as a result of the presence/lack of a Case feature in the prepositional complementizer in the possessive structure. Historically, different phases of grammaticalization of an applicative-licensing preposition gave rise to this parameter. I show that the dative-infinitive construction arose as an extension of the HAVE/BE parameter and that the dative-lexical modal and dative-reflexive constructions derived from an ongoing grammaticalization process that resulted in the HAVE/BE parameter. Given that all these constructions are the consequence of a feature setting in a functional constituent, I argue that the so-called anti-agentivity based on the use of these constructions is not a specifically Russian phenomenon but is a universal syntactic phenomenon without a functional motivation.

타월용 시판소재의 촉감과 역학적 특성

정하경 ( Ha Kyung Jung ),김선경 ( Sun Kyung Kim ),조효숙 ( Hyo Sook Cho ),김주용 ( Joo Yong Kim ) 대한가정학회 2006 Human Ecology Research(HER) Vol.44 No.10

술어비일치 주격에 대하여: 고대러시아어 및 북부러시아방언의 비일치 주격을 중심으로

정하경 ( Ha Kyung Jung ) 서울대학교 러시아연구소 2013 러시아연구 Vol.23 No.1

This paper investigates licensing of the nominative case without accompanying predicate-agreement with the nominative DP in many languages, including Old Russian and Contemporary North Russian. I have examined morphological approaches, such as Disjunctive Case Hierarchy and Default Case, as well as syntactic analyses, centering on AGREE, to determine which solution more adequately explains the current data and the case system in general. The phenomenon of non-agreeing nominatives is more effectively accounted for in syntactic terms than morphologically. I argue that the non-finite Infl consists of a defective T and an intact AGR, the latter of which contains the nominative case and phi-features. When an AGREE relation is established between a non-finite Infl and a DP, phi-agreement is not morphologically realized on the predicate due to the absence of [+Tense], but the nominative case of the AGR is licensed to the DP. For the double nominative finite construction, the Infl enters the AGREE relation with two DPs (Multiple Agree). The Infl realizes phi-features of only one of the DPs while the nominative case is licensed to the both DPs. This proposal identifies PRO as pro, removing the control theory from the syntax. Given that the PRO is in fact pro, the problem of predicting overt nominatives in non-finite clauses is essentially reduced to an economy principle that balances the need of argument identification and the relative cost of argument realization.

의류에 부착된 상표표시 레이블에 관한 연구 -아동복을 중심으로-

정하경 ( Ha Kyung Jung ),김선경 ( Sun Kyung Kim ) 대한가정학회 2007 Human Ecology Research(HER) Vol.45 No.2

현대러시아어 무인칭 환경에 나타나는 ЭТО와 ОНО의 문법적 기능

정하경(Jung, Hakyung),이수현(Lee, Suhyoun) 한국노어노문학회 2020 노어노문학 Vol.32 No.3

본 논문은 현대러시아어의 구어적 사용에서 무인칭 환경에 나타나는 지시대명사 중성 단수형 эmо와 인칭대명사 중성 단수형 оно의 문법적 기능을 살펴봄으로써 эmо와 оно의 이러한 허사적 사용이 현대러시아어의 문법체계 범주화에 어떤 의미를 갖는지 고찰할 수 있는 경험적 토대를 마련하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 구체적으로 эmо와 оно의 사용이 허용되는 정확한 무인칭 환경 유형을 파악하고 이 형태들이 실제로 문법적 주어의 지위를 가지는지 규명하기 위해, 다양한 유형의 무인칭구문 및 그에 상응하는 эmо, оно 구문에 대해 원어민 피험자들(총35명)을 대상으로 설문을 진행했다. 설문 실험 결과, 자연현상이나 신체적 작용을 나타내는 무인칭 정형동사 구문에서는 эmо/оно가 사용될 수 없었던 반면, 무인칭 재귀동사와 부사적 술어 구문에서는 종속절(원형부정사절 및 정형절)이 있을 경우 эmо/оно의 용인성이 높게 나타났다. 전반적으로 эmо의 용인성이 оно보다 더 높은 것으로 관찰되었다. 무인칭 재귀동사의 경우에는 어휘에 따라 종속절이 없는 경우에도 эmо와 оно의 삽입이 가능했다. 이와 같이 무인칭 환경에 삽입되는 эmо와 оно는 인상술어의 주어로 인상될 수 있고, 재귀사를 결속시키며, 술어일치를 유발할 수 있다는 점에서 제한적인 환경이기는 하지만 문법적 허사 주어로 인정될 수 있다. This paper examines whether Modern Russian features (semi-) expletive subjects, based on the judgement test that was taken by 35 Russian native speakers. The test was designed to compare the acceptability of оно and это in three impersonal environments, in which no thematic subject is allowed: Finite verbs expressing natural phenomena, adverbial predicates, and reflexive verbs deriving from unergative verbs. The test shows that оно and это may be acknowledged as true expletive subjects in limited environments although a clear contrast is seen between это and оно. The acceptability of это is clearly higher than that of оно irrespective of the construction type, which can be ascribed to the strong deictic nature of это. First, finite verb constructions denoting natural phenomena do not allow overt expletives at all: The semantics of a subject is available in this type of constructions although the covert subject cannot be referential. As this invisible argument related to natural phenomena already occupies the subject position, an overt expletive cannot be inserted into this position. This result parallels with the analysis of the weather-it in English as denoting an (quasi-) argument in the literature. Second, in the case of reflexive verbs and adverbial predicates, expletives are allowed if a subordinate clause (infinitival or finite) follows. In a limited case of reflexive verbs, это and оно are allowed even without a subordinate clause. This must be because there is no argument in the subject position in this type of reflexive verb constructions unlike finite verbs expressing natural phenomena. Это and оно in the given impersonal environments can be raised as the subject of a raising verb, can bind subject-oriented reflexives, and trigger agreement on predicates, which indicates that это and оно may be construed as grammatical subjects occupying Spec,TP, a position dedicated to a nominative subject.

형식의 기능적 재해석과 언어 체계의 역할

정하경(Hakyung Jung) 한국슬라브유라시아학회 2009 슬라브학보 Vol.24 No.3

This paper investigates how morphological change is motivated by functional necessities to remove functional/semantic ambiguity from certain forms, which is conditioned, constrained, and triggered by the language-internal system. I address these questions by examining the developmental path of the new perfect construction in ?v?i in the western Russian dialect. Although the dialectal ?v?i perfect construction is considered to be a relatively young phenomenon, the first attestation of which is found in the 16<SUP>th</SUP> century manuscript, its development began on the basis of phonological and syntactic conditions of the 13th-14th century western dialect. The development of the construction is accounted for by general principles of language change. Namely, distinct functions tend to be associated with different forms and this motivates innovations at morphological and syntactic levels in language. The predicative past active participle short form in Old Russian developed into an independent perfect construction in the western dialect, conditioned by the pre-historic language contact with Baltic languages and triggered by the pan-Russian tense system readjustment in the 13th-14th centuries. The phonological system of West Russian, which ranked the feature [+vocalic] higher than [+consonantal] (i.e., vocalic language) and employed the tense-lax opposition, gave rise to potential ambiguity between the past active participle and the l-participle form after the jer shift in the 12th century. A functional motivation to formally differentiate the simple past and the perfect resulted in the reanalysis that assigned the perfect-denoting function to ??i and the past-denoting function to v, thus resulting in the obligatory ??i desinence for the perfect construction.

러시아어의 비행위주성, 생성문법적 고찰

정하경(Jung Ha Kyung) 한국노어노문학회 2010 한국노어노문학회 학술대회 발표집 Vol.2010 No.11

러시아어의 어순과 정보구조

정하경(Jung, Ha Kyung) 한국노어노문학회 2015 노어노문학 Vol.27 No.3

러시아어에서는 정보구조와 문장 내 위치 간에 밀접한 상관관계가 관찰된다. 본 논문에서는, 특정한 정보구조적 해석이 구체적인 통사적 위치에 결부되어 있다는 관점에서, 문미에 오는 새로운([+new]) 정보에 대해 동사구 위에 투사되는 하위초점을 상정하고 문미선행위치에 오는 [-new] 구성소에 대해 하위초점 위에 투사되는 하위화제를 제안한다. 한정성, 특정성, 총칭성, 또는 이들을 아우르는 담화관련성([+D-linked])의 의미자질과 문미선행위치의 상관관계, 그리고 이러한 의미자질과 정보구조자질 [-new] 간의 함축관계를 고찰할 때, 문미선행위치는 의미자질보다 정보구조자질 [-new]로 더 적절하게 정의될 수 있다. 한편, 다양한 정보구조들은 ‘화제-초점’의 이분법보다 정보구조자질의 조합을 통해 더 정교하고 효과적으로 정의된다. 특히, 화용적으로 새롭게 소개되는 정보([+new])는 하위초점으로, 새로운 것으로 제시되지 않고([-new]) 문장의 주제도 초점도 아니며([-about, -focus]) 대조적 맥락을 지니지 않은([-contrast]) 구성소는 하위화제로 이동하게 된다. 하위정보구조는 정보구조를 유표할 뿐 아니라 구성소의 이동을 제한함으로써 어순의 유연성, EPP 만족 방식 등과 같은 통사적 특징과 매개변인적 인과관계를 지닌다. In Russian word order reflects information structure (IS), such as Focus and Topic. This paper posits the Low Focus above the vP and the Low Topic above the Low Focus, as concrete syntactic positions comprising IP-internal information structure. These positions are proposed on the basis of the interpretations of constituents that occupy the final and the penultimate positions in a sentence. Given the correlation between the semantic feature [+D-linked] (which encompasses definiteness, specificity, and genericity) and the penultimate position on one hand, and the implicational relationship between [+D-linked] and the IS-feature [-new] on the other, I propose that sentence-internal positions must be defined as [-new]. I further suggest that diverse information structures be defined by different combinations of IS-features [±new], [±focus], [±about], and [±contrast], which appear in a hierarchical relationship. The Low Focus (new information focus) is defined as the most marked IS-component by [+new] at the top of the hierarchy, while the Low Topic appears to be the most unmarked IS-component, being defined as [-new, -about, -focus, -contrast]. The Low Topic and Low Focus do not only encode information structure but appear in a parametric relationship with EPP-checking strategies, as they constrain constituents’ movements to Spec, IP.

고대러시아어 대명사 축소형의 범주적 지위에 대하여

정하경(Jung Ha kyung) 충북대학교 러시아 알타이지역 연구소 2017 러시아학 Vol.- No.14

This paper is devoted to an examination of the categorical status of reduced pronominal forms in Old Russian. In Old Russian pronouns had a dual morphological system consisting of full and reduced forms, the latter of which has been lost in Modern East Slavic. In the literature, Old Russian reduced pronouns have been analyzed as second position clitics, appearing in the second position of a clause. However, deviating patterns are also observed. This paper argues that the occurrences of reduced pronouns as complements of prepositions may be the first symptom of the weakening of clitichood. Furthermore, increasing occurrences of reduced pronouns in non-second positions, including clause-initial positions, and some conventional uses of reduced forms as fixed expressions in a later period of Old Russian indicate that those reduced forms no more function as clitics. The paper establishes a pronoun hierarchy elaborated from Cardinaletti and Starke’s deficiency hierarchy (1996, 1999), Cetnarwska’s Pronoun Scale (2003, 2004), and Toivonen’s pronoun typology (2001). When viewed based on the refined hierarchy, Old Russian reduced pronouns are more adequately identified as Deficient 1 (formally reduced but syntactically free and prosodically independent) rather than clitics, i.e., Deficient 3 (formally reduced, syntactically restricted, and prosodically dependent). Diachronically, the proposed pronoun hierarchy implies grammaticalization path as a change from a phrase (XP) to a head (X⁰). The transition of Old Russian reduced pronouns from clitics to weak pronouns reverses the pronoun hierarchy, hence instantiates degrammaticalization, the shift of a constitutent from ahead(X⁰) to aphrase(XP). Similar phenomena, in which clitics degrammaticalize into weak pronouns, are observed in some other Slavic languages, notably in Modern Macedonian and Old Polish.

현대 및 고대 북부 러시아어 주격목적어 구문의 통사연구: 발트어 및 핀어 주격목적어 구문과의 비교언어학적 접근

정하경 ( Ha Kyung Jung ) 서울대학교 러시아연구소 2012 러시아연구 Vol.22 No.1

The case system of Old and Modern North Russian is based on a typical nominative-accusative pattern. However, these languages utilize nominative objects in some syntactic constructions. The rigid correlation between nominative object marking and particular syntactic structures shows that nominative object marking is motivated and conditioned by a certain syntactic environment. This paper explores how the nominative object is syntactically licensed by comparing North Russian nominative object constructions to similar constructions in Baltic and Finnic languages. Special attention has been paid to the similarity between nominative object constructions and be-possessive constructions in Baltic, Finnic, and North Russian. Nominative object constructions, like be-possessive constructions, feature a syntactic structure in which a functional head assigns an oblique case to the external argument. The object then may appear in the nominative in an agreement relation with the matrix Tense. The presence of a functional head that licenses oblique subject appears to condition the nominative object phenomenon. I identify this functional head as a prepositional complementizer. This kind of environment typically appears in nominal phrase structures. Possessive Agentive Constructions, one type of the nominative object constructions examined in this paper, feature either verbal nominalization or the extension of the nominal structure. Non-finite Impersonal Constructions, the other nominative object sentence type, do not contain a nominalized structure, but they are historically derived from the be-possessive structure and still provide an environment in which the embedded subject is oblique case-marked, which makes it possible for the object to appear in the nominative. If the accusative-assigning functional head v is specified as [+specific], [+animate], etc., only object nouns with the relevant features may be assigned the accusative by v. Object nouns without the relevant features are licensed by the matrix Tense with the nominative case. The variation of predicate agreement with the nominative object in the given constructions is explained in terms of Multiple Agree: when agreement is established between a Probe and multiple Goals, phi-agreement may be morphologically realized in favor of one of the Goals and case may be realized on another Goal. The case-marking mechanism proposed in this paper is very similar to the case-marking strategy in Tense/Aspect-split ergative languages, in which the nominative object is productive. Baltic, Finnic, and North Russian nominative object constructions as well as ergative constructions may be typologically defined based on the presence of a prepositional complementizer that assigns the oblique case to the external argument, which conditions the licensing of the nominative object. This typology is more general and universal than the be-language vs. have-language and NOM-ACC vs. ERG-ABS dichotomies.