영어 부정사구문의 주어와 목적어

조남호 한국교통대학교 2017 한국교통대학교 논문집 Vol.52 No.-

The infinitive in English is a non-finite verb, so it does not have to have a grammatical subject or object (To see is to believe). However, since it is a kind of verbal, it can have a sense subject and object. This study is chiefly concerned with several ways in which the subject and object of the infinitive can be expressed. The sense subject of the English infinitive can be omitted or expressed overtly. When the subject of the infinitive is an indefinite general person or is the same as that of the main sentence, it is not expressed overtly. There are several cases where a verb or preposition takes, as its object, the phrase ‘noun+infinitive’, which is called as ‘the accusative with the infinitive.’ In those cases, the noun is the sense subject of the infinitive. When the verb of the infinitive is a transitive, it needs an object. In this study, we paid a special attention to Jespersen’s ‘retroactive infinitive.’ In general, the object of a verb follows the verb. However, the object of the retroactive infinitive precedes it. It is an active infinitive which is said to have a passive meaning, but Jespersen(1940) looks upon the infinitive as active and as governing a preceding item as its (implicit) object. Finally, I have gone deep into the predicate type ‘be+adjective+infinitive.’ In this predicate, the subject or object of the infinitive is determined differently according to the ‘adjective’ type. In the ‘easy’ type (Tom is easy to please), the grammatical subject of the main sentence is the object of the infinitive, but in the ‘eager’ type (Tom is eager to please), the grammatical subject is also the sense subject of the infinitive.

영문법에서 ‘be + to-infinitive’구조의 to-부정사 분석에서 품사 문제에 관한 연구

양희익 韓國交通大學校 2013 한국교통대학교 논문집 Vol.48 No.-

In analyzing to-infinitive, most of Korean English grammarians explain that there are three uses of to- infinitive - nominal use, adjectival use and adverbial use. It seems that there is no problem in analyzing the nominal use and the adverbial use of to-infinitive structure. But there are some problems in analyzing 'adjectival use of to-infinitive in analyzing 'be + to-infinitive' structure. Most of the English grammar books printed in Korea deal with 'be + infinitive' structure as the adjectival use of to-infinitive. But, in view of the fact that 'be + to infinitive' structure is equivalent to 'be + nominal use of to-infinitive' structure', I think that we should deal with 'to-infinitive' as the nominal use of to-infinitive in 'be + to-infinitive' structure. According to native speaker's language intuition and Hornby(1975: 20)'s explanation of 'be + to-infinitive' structure, we should accept that 'to-infinitive' be the subjective nominal compliment as the nominal part of the predicate in 'be + to-infinitive' structure. Therefore I assert that to-infinitive be amended and explained not as the adjectival use but as the nominal use of to-infinitive in analyzing 'be + to infinitive' structure in English grammar books printed in Korea.

Three Types of the Infinitive: Diachronic Change and Synchronic Variation

( Yangsoon Kim ) 한국현대언어학회 2015 언어연구 Vol.31 No.2

The purpose of this paper is to present a diachronic study for the synchronic variation of the infinitive in English. The rise of the to-infinitive is mainly due to the diachronic shift from the synthetic to the analytic language in Old and Middle English. By discussing the rise of the to-infinitive marker from the perspective of diachronic change, I argue for the emergence of three different types of the infinitive in the analytic Middle English: the root infinitive, the raising infinitive and the control infinitive. The syntactic variation found in current English infinitives can be explained well in a diachronic study since the current synchronic variation reflects the diachronic change in Old English and Middle English. I propose that the structures of the infinitive have been expanded from a light verb phrase vP (of the root infinitive) to a defective TP (of the raising Infinitive) and then finally to a full phrase CP (of the control Infinitive). In this paper, the affix analysis of the to-infinitive marker in Old English explains the lack of split infinitives, the lack of P-stranding and the lack of the ECM structures in Old English more explicitly. The diachronic analysis for the synchronic variation found in the infinitive in Modern English provides a quite simple and economical explanation with the proposed three types of vP, TP and CP structures. (Hanbat National University)

Three Types of the Infinitive: Diachronic Change and Synchronic Variation

김양순 한국현대언어학회 2015 언어연구 Vol.31 No.2

Kim, Yangsoon. 2015. Three Types of the Infinitive: Diachronic Change and Synchronic Variation. The Journal of Studies in Language 31.2, 275-294. The purpose of this paper is to present a diachronic study for the synchronic variation of the infinitive in English. The rise of the to-infinitive is mainly due to the diachronic shift from the synthetic to the analytic language in Old and Middle English. By discussing the rise of the to-infinitive marker from the perspective of diachronic change, I argue for the emergence of three different types of the infinitive in the analytic Middle English: the root infinitive, the raising infinitive and the control infinitive. The syntactic variation found in current English infinitives can be explained well in a diachronic study since the current synchronic variation reflects the diachronic change in Old English and Middle English. I propose that the structures of the infinitive have been expanded from a light verb phrase vP (of the root infinitive) to a defective TP (of the raising Infinitive) and then finally to a full phrase CP (of the control Infinitive). In this paper, the affix analysis of the to-infinitive marker in Old English explains the lack of split infinitives, the lack of P-stranding and the lack of the ECM structures in Old English more explicitly. The diachronic analysis for the synchronic variation found in the infinitive in Modern English provides a quite simple and economical explanation with the proposed three types of vP, TP and CP structures. (Hanbat National University)

동명사와 부정사의 이해 정도에 관한 연구

양용준 미래영어영문학회 2010 영어영문학 Vol.15 No.2

The purpose of this paper is to observe and analyze the understanding degree between gerund and infinitive. There are many differences between gerund and infinitive basically. Many linguists present the differences between them. First, gerund means the past action & infinitive means the future action. Second, gerund represents the general statement and infinitive represents the special statement. Third, gerund means the theoretical statement and infinitive means factual statement. Fourth, gerund stands for progressive action and infinitive stands for repeated action. Many students can distinguish their basic forms and usages but they don’t know the usage of infinitive well. Although their forms are simple, many students don’t understand the usage of infinitive clearly. The usages of infinitive are not easy to them. So, many teachers have to teach the usages as well as the form well. As a consequence, this paper shows that gerund means realized action of the past experience and infinitive means hypothetical and future oriented action. Many people have to know and use the correct forms and usages exactly.

5형식의 보문 연구

조남호 한국교통대학교 2020 한국교통대학교 논문집 Vol.55 No.-

Onions (1904) classified English predicates into five forms according to their structural patterns. The fifth form of the predicate consists of a verb, an object and a predicate adjective or noun. Many verbs take to clauses beginning with infinitives as complements. These nonfinite clauses may or may not have an overt subject. We can identify four types, each of which follows a particular group of verbs. Complements of the four types differ in whether they have an overt subject and, if not, what the subject is understood as being. More specifically they differ with regard to three questions: Is there an NP following the main clause verb? If so, is this NP the object of the main clause verb? What is the subject of the infinitive complement? The first type of infinitive complements is that of persuade verbs. A large number of verbs, such as advise, cause, compel, order, persuade, and tell belong to this type. These verbs are transitive, and, therefore, must have an NP object. The second type of infinitive complements is that of want verbs. This group includes arrange, expect, hope, need, plan, promise, want, and wish. In this type of complement, the NP after the verb want is not the object, but is instead the subject of the infinitive complement. The NP after promise is the object of promise, and the subject to the complement is missing but is understood as identical to the main clause subject. The third type of infinitive complements is that of believe verbs. A number of verbs, including acknowledge, believe, consider, and judge, have an infinitival complement that contains be plus an NP or an adjective. The NP after the verb is the subject of the complement, not the object of the verb. The fourth type of infinitive complements is that of make verbs. A few verbs, such as have, let, and make, take a complement with a bare infinitive. The NP after the verb is the subject of the complement. These verbs only permit passivization of the complement. The verb make is an exception since its only possible passive is closer to that of persuade. A group of perception verbs, including feel, hear, listen to, notice, observe, overhear, see, and watch, can be followed by bare infinitive or present participle complements. When the main clause has a perception verb, there are differences in interpretation between bare infinitive and present participle complements. The present participle complement expresses in-progress action. The activity is already in progress when it is perceived. However, in the bare infinitive complement its action is complete. The sentence with the bare infinitive complement is interpreted as simply a report of an action that took place. If the verb in the complement of perception verbs is a punctual achievement verb (i.e., a verb whose action ends as soon as it begins – bat, blink, hit, kick, shoot, slap, snap, strike, etc.) in a present participle complement its action will be interpreted as happening repeatedly, whereas in a bare infinitive complement, its action is understood as a single occurrence.

영어의 원형부정사와 to-부정사의 의미 차이 분석

육준철(Yuk, Jun-Cheol) 신영어영문학회 2013 신영어영문학 Vol.55 No.-

To-infinitives in modern English represent a futuristic, indirect potential event while bare infinitives represent a direct one with the subject-predicate relationship in the construction of ‘verb+object+bare infinitives.’ This comes from the development process of grammatical properties of infinitives from OE to ME; to-infinitives and bare infinitives all had syntactic properties of verbal nouns. Generative linguists have long insisted that this results from structural properties; the to-infinitive has the clausal IP or CP with the inflectional element inside, while the bare infinitive has the small clause structure such as VP, as a meaningless functional category. In this paper, however, it is shown that, based on cognitive grammar, bare infinitive has a direct meaning relation of ‘subject-predicate’ with ‘object’ in the construction of ‘verb+object+bare infinitive,’ while to-infinitive has an indirect meaning relation in the construction of ‘verb+object+to-infinitive’ because of to. In short, the meaning difference between to-infinitives and bare infinitives in modern English comes from the morpheme to.

헝가리어 부정사구 InfP의 통사구조:PRO와 pro

박수영 ( Soo Young Park ) 한국외국어대학교 언어연구소 2021 언어와 언어학 Vol.- No.92

This paper aims to analyze the syntactic structure of infinitive construction and the word-order of sentences with infinitives in Hungarian within the frame of the X' theory by Alberti Gábor and Medve Anna(2005). Hungarian infinitive has a non-finite verbform, V-ni, which can be inflected in certain constructions by the conjugation of the personal suffix of its agent. Thus according to its morphological form, the Hungarian infinitive construction has covert arguments PRO, PROarb, and pro. The infinitive phrase has its own argument-structure, and functions as a specifier of VP, which forms a semantic unity with its verb. The word-order of infinitive sentences shows grammatical characters in Hungarian, such as the dis-continuity of the infinitive construction from the compound verb-form, and the scope of argument-move by the non-lexical categories, such as topic, focus in inflected infinitive-sentences.

대격과 같이 사용된 부정사 구문의 변천에 관한 연구

박세곤(Park Sae-Gon) 경성대학교 인문과학연구소 2011 인문학논총 Vol.26 No.-

본 논문에서는 대격과 같이 사용된 부정사 구문이 고대영어 시기에서부터 중세영어시기에 이르기까지 어떻게 변천해 왔는가를 살펴 보기위해서 고대 영어시기와 중세영어시기의 대표적인 문학작품인 Beowulf와 Canterbury Tales에서 나타난 대격과 같이 사용된 부정사 구문을 모두 추출하여 주동사와 부정사의 관계를 중심으로 부정사의 용법, 어형, 위치의 측면에서 각 시기별로 그 특징을 구명(究明)하고 양 시기를 대조, 분석하였다. 작품 분석의 결과 이 구문에 사용된 주동사는 OE에서 지각, 사역, 명령, 권유의 의미를 갖는 소수의 낱말로 한정되어 있었으나 ME에 이르러서는 사역, 요구 허가, 소망, 지각, 상담, 금지, 원인, 결심, 희망, 행동, 도움 등으로 그 의미가 매우 다양해졌다는 사실을 알 수 있었고, 부정사의 형태를 주동사 별로 분류, 분석해본 결과 그 형태 또한 주동사에 따라 결정되었는데 OE에서 사용된 주동사가 ME에서 부정사의 형태결정에 직접, 간접으로 영향을 미치고 있다는 사실을 발견 할 수 있었다. 즉, ME에 이르러서는 OE의 대격과 같이 사용된 부정사구문의 주동사가 그대로 사용되고 있는 곳에서는 (for) to부정사가 침범하지 못하고 단순 부정사만 사용되고 있으며, OE의 주동사의 영향이 약화된 곳에서는 (for) to부정사와 단순 부정사가 혼용되어 (for) to부정사가 단순부정사의 영역을 잠식하고 있는 것으로 나타나고, OE의 주동사의 영향이 미치지 못하는 새로 도입된 동사에서는 모두 (for) to부정사가 사용되었다. 이 구문은 OE의 68개의 예문 중 26%에 달하는 18개가 비정상 어순(Verb+accusative+infinitive의 어순이 아닌 것)이었는데 비해 ME에서는 91개의 예문 중 8%에 해당되는 7개만 비정상 어순으로 나타나는 사실은 OE시기에서 ME시기에 이르면서 굴절수평화에 따른 어순 고정화의 과정의 일면인 것으로 보인다. Jespersen(1924: 117-120)은 대격과 같이 사용된 부정사구문을 주술관계(nexus)이론으로 설명하고 있는데 비해 본 논문에서는 이 구문을 주동사의 의미특질에 따라 A, B, C의 3가지 문법적 구조로 세분하여 그 관계를 도표로 제시하였다. The purpose of this study is to trace the transition of ‘accusative with infinitive’ structure in terms of its form, use, and position on the basis of the relationship between the main verb and the infinitive from Old English(OE) to Middle English(ME) by means of analyzing Beowulf and Canterbury Tales, masterpieces from the OE and ME periods. Jespersen(1924: 117-120) explains the structure of ‘accusative with infinitive’ with his nexus relationship, but this study shows that the structure is composed of 3 distinct grammatical structures. This study finds that the main verbs in the structure were limited to the verbs of perception, command, and exhortation in the OE period. However, many other verbs of requirement, permission, hope, perception, consultation, prohibition, cause, decision, thought, desire, behavior, and help were added to the structure in the ME period. Additionally, this study shows that the force of main verbs used in the structure in the OE period influenced the selection of infinitive markers in the ME period directly or indirectly; In the ME period, the main verbs used in the OE period had only simple infinitives without the invasion of (for)to, and both (for)to and simple infinitives were used interchangeably with the weakness of OE main verb force, but newly introduced main verbs in ME had (for)to infinitives without any OE main verb force. The word order of the structure in OE changed, more or less, today’s English order within ME text(Germanic : Modern English word order = 74 : 92). This change is mostly attributed to the simplification of inflectional endings.

타동사적 조동사와 결합하는 부정사 구문에 관한 연구

박세곤(Park Sae-Gon) 경성대학교 인문과학연구소 2010 인문학논총 Vol.15 No.3

본 논문에서는 영어의 타동사적 조동사와 결합하는 부정사 구문이 고대영어에서 중세영어에 이르기까지 어떠한 경로를 통해서 변천하여 왔는가를 살펴보기 위해, 고대영어, 중세영어 각각의 대표적 작품으로 간주되는 Beowulf와 Canterbury Tales에서 사용된 ‘타동사적 조동사 +부정사’구문을 모두 추출하여 그 구문의 용법, 어형, 어순 등을 비교, 분석하였고, 그 결과 다음과 같은 결론을 얻었다: 첫째, 고대영어의 타동사적 조동사가 중세영어에 이르면서 그 의미상, 사용빈도상 확대되어가는 양상과 경로를 파악할 수 있었다. 둘째, 고대영어의 타동사적 조동사가 중세영어에서 부정사와 거리상 얼마나 가까워졌나를 살펴보기 위해 현대영어에 있어서 ‘조동사 +본동사’구문의 비분리적 성격을 근거로 하여 한정동사와 부정사의 거리상의 측면에서 한정동사와 부정사의 결합력정도를 시험하였다. 그 결과 고대영어에서 중세영어에 이르기까지 결합력의 정도가 더욱 더 강해지고 있다는 사실을 알 수 있었다. 이러한 것은 한정동사와 부정사의 거리가 가까워져서 그 한정동사가 고대 영어시대의 타동사적인 성격을 잃고 더욱 더 조동사의 힘을 확보해가고 있다는 사실을 보여주는 것이다. 셋째, 이러한 구문에서 사용된 부정사의 형태도 고대영어에서는 모두 비굴절부정사를 사용했으며 중세영어에서도 거의 모두 단순부정사를 사용하였다. 이것은 부정사가 동사적 성격을 가질 때 비굴절 또는 단순부정사가 된다는 사실을 보여주는 것이며, 또한 부정사가 동사적 성격을 갖는다는 것은 그때 그 부정사와 결합된 한정동사의 조동사적 성격을 엿볼 수 있는 것이다. 넷째, 이러한 구문에서 고대영어에서의 부정사가 타동사적 조동사를 선행하는 어순 등은 중세영어에서 거의 사라졌는데 이런 결과는 중세영어시기에 이르면서 SVO로의 어순 고정화와 더불어 한정동사 바로 뒤에 부정사를 둘려는 경향이 강해졌다는데 기인한 것으로 보인다. The purpose of this study is to trace the development of English infinitives used in the?transitive verbal auxiliary + infinitive structure. I will focus on their use, forms, and positional relationships with transitive verbal auxiliaries from the Old English period to the Middle English period based on the data from Beowulf and Canterbury Tales, the masterpieces of the Old and Middle English periods. I will show that uninflected infinitives and bare infinitives were used in the?transitive verbal auxiliary + infinitive?structure in Old and Middle English periods. This fact indicates that when infinitives get verbal character, uninflected infinitives are used, and this shows an auxiliary character of finite verbs with infinitives. In order to investigate how close the distance between the transitive verbal auxiliaries and infinitives of the Old English period was to that of the Middle English period, I tested the degree of cohesiveness of the auxiliary and the infinitive from the distance between the infinitive and the finite verbs on the basis of nonseparation within the?auxiliary verb + main verb?structure in the Modern English period. As a result, the fact that transitive verbal auxiliaries in Old English weakened their transitive force and strengthened the auxiliary force in Middle English is verified in terms of the cohesion of auxiliaries and infinitives. The special word orders in Old English are?S + transitive verbal auxiliary‥‥+ infinitive?in the main clause and?S‥‥+ infinitive + transitive verbal auxiliary ?in the subordinate clause (Germanic word order). Those word orders in Old English, however, changed to the modern English word order in the Middle English period with auxiliary force on the finite verb.