http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 염재일 ( Jae Il Yeom ) (검색결과 13 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Structures and Semantics of Equatives in Korean
Jae-Il Yeom(염재일) 한국언어학회 2018 언어 Vol.43 No.2
In this paper, I discuss equative constructions with mankhum. They are different from comparatives in three ways. First, in a clausal comparison construction, pota is always preceded by a kes-phrase, while mankhum is preceded by an adnominal clause. Second, pota can be used with a differential degree, while mankhum cannot. Third, mankhum can be used with a clause without a gradable verb, still denoting a degree, but pota cannot. These properties are related to the observation that in Korean, when an adnominal clause denotes a property of degrees, a Deg(ree )P(hrase) shows the property of a syntactic movement of an adjunct to the Spec of a CP. This motivates the idea that a degree is related to a situation. I also deal with quantificational DegP. An adnominal clause that denotes a degree with no gradable verb is a case of a coerced relative clause. A coerced relative clause is normally analyzed by inserting a contextually given relation between a situation described by the clause and the denotation of the head noun. This further motivates the adjunct analysis of a DegP.
-
-
염재일 ( Jae-Il Yeom ) 한국언어정보학회 2005 언어와 정보 Vol.9 No.2
In this paper I propose the semantics of two modality markers in Korean, keyss and (u)l kes. I compare the two modality markers with respect to some properties. First, keyss is used to express logical necessity while (u)l kes can be used to express a simple prediction as well. Second, keyss expresses some logical conclusion from the speaker`s own information state without claiming it is true. On the other hand, (u)l kes expresses the claim that the speaker`s prediction will be true. Third, the prediction of keyss is non-monotonic: it can be reversed without being inconsistent. However, that of (u)l kes cannot. Fourth, (u)l kes can be used freely in epistemic conditionals, but keyss cannot. Finally, when keyss is used, the prediction cannot be repeated. The prediction from the use of (u)l kes can be repeated. To account for these differences, I propose that keyss is used when the speaker makes a purely logical presumption based on his/her own information state, and that (u)l kes is used to make a prediction which is asserted to be true. This proposal accounts for all the differences of the two modality markers. (Hongik University)
-
-
-
염재일 ( Jae Il Yeom ) 한국언어정보학회 2014 언어와 정보 Vol.18 No.2
In a so-called cleft (or, pseudocleft), the kes-phrase seems to refer to a person, even though kes is generally incompatible with human beings. In this paper, I claim that in a cleft, the kes-phrase can refer to a concept, and that a concept of human beings is not a person. I give some pieces of evidence for this claim. In a cleft, the kes-phrase cannot be pluralized only when it is supposed to denote a human being. Moreover, in such a case, the NP before the copula cannot be interpreted as the meaning of a predicate. Furthermore, in a cleft two kes-phrases are not conjoined with (k)wa only when they seem to denote human beings. All the observations can be explained by the claim that the kes-phrase denotes a concept in such cases. A concept cannot be used as a predicate, pluralized, or conjoined to refer to objects that are subsumed under a concept. When the kes-phrase denotes a concept, the cleft sentence is an identity statement. (Hongik University)
-
-
염재일(Jae-Il Yeom) 사단법인 한국언어학회 2010 언어학 Vol.0 No.58
In this study I claim that -ess in Korean is ambiguous between a past tense marker and a perfect marker. This is against the general directions of studies about the morpheme. Most studies assume one of them as semantic meaning and try to explain the other pragmatically. In this paper, I support the ambiguity view on the basis of some semantic and syntactic evidence. First, the two have different truth-conditions. Second, when the morpheme has perfect meaning, the past event is a presupposition, which is not pragmatically inferred but inherent to the semantic meaning itself. Some perfect uses of the morpheme give rise to individual-level predicates, which is a semantic process, not a pragmatic process of inferring from a past event. And the existence of the expression -ess-ess in Korean shows that there are two positions for -ess. Finally, tense and aspect take two different syntactic positions, which is motivated for appropriate semantic interpretation. This leads to different interpretations of time expressions, depending on their syntactic positions.
-
염재일(Yeom, Jae-Il) 한국언어학회 2021 언어 Vol.46 No.4
In Korean, if “-(i)na” is used in the form of XP-(i)na, it has two different meanings. In general, it has been considered a single morpheme that is interpreted pragmatically differently, depending on the linguistic and contextual environments it is used in. One reason is that the two meanings involve a scalar meaning. However, the two meanings are robust and independent of each other. In one meaning, “-(i)na” means that the sentence with a higher alternative of X is not true. In the other, it adds the conventional implicature that XP is a higher alternative than the expected one. One meaning or the other is allowed or not in a sentence, depending on the sentence type and the type and force of modality involved in the sentence. From this we conclude there are two lexemes of “-(i)na”s used in the form of XP-(i)na.
-
염재일 ( Jae-il Yeom ) 한국언어정보학회 2001 언어와 정보 Vol.5 No.2
In this paper, I propose syntactic, semantic and pragmatic restrictions on the distribution of the contrastive topic marker ‘-(n)un’ in Korean. A contrastive topic is associated with another focus. The association with focus in subject to syntactic islands. On the other hand, there is no syntactic restriction between a phrase attached with ‘-(n)un’ and a focused expression within the ‘-(n)un’. Phrase itself. In this area there is a semantic requirement that the alternatives generated by a focused expression be maintained up to the phrase attached with ‘-(n)un’. Finally, when ‘-(n)un’ is used in an embedded clause, the whole sentence becomes natural when the contrastive topic introduced by ‘-(n)un’ and its alternative contrastive topic, which is presupposed by the contrastive topic marker, jointly constitute a more complex topic which is related to the whole context. And exclusiveness facilitates the formation of the whole complex context. (Hongik University)
KISS연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
