In this study, I argue that the conventional dichotomy between spoken and written language, also known as orality and literacy, may not be as suitable or useful for describing and explaining grammatical phenomena as the categorization into individual ...
In this study, I argue that the conventional dichotomy between spoken and written language, also known as orality and literacy, may not be as suitable or useful for describing and explaining grammatical phenomena as the categorization into individual registers. I also suggest that analyzing the register features can provide a better understanding of the nature of grammatical phenomena. To support this point, I show that different grammatical aspects, previously shown to be closely related to a certain types register, such as the usage of the hearer-honorific system, the historical present tense, pseudo-clefts, diary subject drop, and the pronoun geunyeo, can be interpreted in depth by analyzing register features such as interactiveness, media characteristics, unplannedness, formality, and communicative purposes or topics. I further demonstrate that the methodology described in this paper is not only useful for explaining grammatical phenomena but also for understanding the register itself, by showing that the analysis based on the register feature can help describe the characteristics of messenger conversations and spontaneous/fictitious conversations.