http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
김기용(Ki-Yong Kim),김상대(Sang-Dae Kim),고소향(So-Hyang Koh),류연승(Yeonseung Ryu),최승훈(Seung-Hoon Choi),박우창(Uh-Chang Park) 한국멀티미디어학회 2006 한국멀티미디어학회 학술발표논문집 Vol.2006 No.2
데이터베이스 통합 시스템에서 전역 스키마 편집기는 분산되고 이질적인 여리 데이터베이스로부터 각 테이블의 스키마를 구하고 이것들을 통합하여 하나의 데이터베이스 스키마처럼 view를 제공하기 위한 전역 스키마를 편집하는 프로그램이다. 본 논문에서는 전역 스키마 편집기에서 생성되는 전역 스키마를 설계한 사례를 소개한다.
김연승 ( Yeon Seung Kim ) 한국현대언어학회 2010 언어연구 Vol.26 No.3
The purpose of this paper is to show if a feature moves by itself, and if it does, what drives this movement. On the basis of conceptual and empirical evidence in English, we propose that all the feature movements are instances where an uninterpretable feature moves in accordance with general principles of phase and transfer: the Simultaneous Value and Transfer Condition and the Phase Impenetrability Condition. This proposal implies that an interpretable feature does not move by itself. Hence we have tried to illustrate that some examples involving movement of interpretable features like a φ-feature can be reanalyzed without a feature movement as long as we accept Chomsky`s (2005) proposal about feature inheritance and parallel movement. This study is incomplete, however, in that there still remains a task of dealing with some examples concerning binding and reconstruction without resorting to movement of an interpretable feature.
김연승 ( Kim Yeon-seung ) 한국현대언어학회 2016 언어연구 Vol.32 No.3
The Journal of Studies in Language 32.3, 407-427. In this paper we propose that how come is not a head C, but a maximal projection (MP) occupying CP-Spec and that differences of why and how come result from the difference in the base-generated position of the two wh-phrases. Under the framework of the articulated CP structure, it is suggested that why is base-generated in RP-Spec and moves to IntP-Spec, while how come is based-generated in IntP-Spec without any movement. This paper has shown that all the syntactic differences of why and how come are naturally accounted for by the difference in merge position of the two wh-phrases even though both of them are MPs occupying IntP-Spec. Finally, we propose that the lack of SAI in how come questions can be accounted for by considering how how come was generated. Since, how come is derived by verb movement into C in the early modern English period, the generation of how come already includes the process of SAI, making it not necessary any more. (Kongju National University)
김연승 ( Yeon Seung Kim ) 한국현대언어학회 2015 언어연구 Vol.30 No.4
The purpose of this paper is to illustrate that major properties(constituent independency, impossibility of preceding-element ellipsis, and agreement feature matching unrelatedness) of gapping constructions can be uniformly accounted for from the proposal that gapping is a post-syntactic operation unlike PF operations such as VP-deletion and sluicing. I propose that post-syntactic operations abide by the PPIC(post-syntactic phase impenetrability condition), which is somewhat different from the PIC operating on narrow syntax. I have also shown that the super-strict locality condition in gapping as well as the mismatch between the movement domain and the gapping domain derives from the PPIC. (Kongju National University)
김연승 ( Yeon-seung Kim ) 한국현대언어학회 2016 언어연구 Vol.31 No.4
The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how multiple sluicing constractions in English are derived. There are two major previous analyses: multiple wh-movements and repair by ellipsis, and one wh-movement and one rightward focus movement. Pointing out problems of each analysis, I Propose a new analysis: multiple sluicing constractions are derived by a wh-movement and a gapping. I have tried to illustrate that all the problems of the previous analyses can be solved out uniformly and systematically by the analysis based on gapping. However, there remain two residual problems to be clarified in further research. (Kongju National University)