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
- 주제어 : causative light verb (v) (검색결과 3 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Let’s Talk about Let+Us: English Hortative and Causative Constructions
Sung shim Hong,Jae keun Lee 현대문법학회 2017 현대문법연구 Vol.96 No.-
This paper deals with the two seemingly alike constructions in the English language, LET’S construction and LET+US construction. The foci of the current research include (i) whether or not LET’S is a mere phonological contraction of LET+US, (ii) how they are different in their distribution, as well as their interactions with negation/Tag questions, and (iii) why they are different; their asymmetries are attributed to the internal structures of the two. That is, in this paper, their internal structures are distinctively proposed within the Minimalist syntax (Chomsky 1995, 2004, 2005, 2007). On the basis of a garden variety of the already known asymmetries between the two (Seppänen 1977, Fries 1964, Davies 1986, Palmer 1988, Potsdam 1998, Huddleston and Pullum 2002, Quirk et al 1972, 1985), we support the idea that in spite of some of their superficial similarities and looks, the two constructions, both of which contain an identical lexeme LET, need to be analyzed independently from each other. Following the insight of Alcazar and Saltarelli (2014), the light verb, v, is poised for Hortative LET’S in a mono-clausal configuration. The occurrence of Causative LET+US may contract into the isomorphic LET’S, the Hortative LET’S as well. Nonetheless, the Causative LET+US occurs in a bi-clausal configuration with a Tdef intervening, whose Spec is US or any other DP. This paper presents the internal structures of the Hortatives and Causatives differently so that their morpho-syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic disparities can be easily accounted for. It is suggested that the Hortative LET’S underwent syncretism (Radford 2004, Gelderen 2004, 2008), whereas the lexical LET survives as a main verb.
-
A Principled Explanation on Double Object and Dative Constructions
Hui tae Kim 한국영미어문학회 2018 영미어문학 Vol.- No.130
The purpose of this study is to suggest a principled explanatory mechanism for the puzzling interaction of the complements DP1 and DP2 within VP in the Double Object Construction (DOC) and Dative Construction (DC). For this, the multiple Spec-VP and the multiple Theta (θ)-Agree of V inherited from v such as V1CAUSE and V2Have in DOC are posited with respect to Aoun and Li’s (1989) DOC to DC Transformation (T) approach. To support this postulation, Distributed Morphology (DM)– based Harley’s (2002) double object verb decomposition is adopted and slightly changed in the vein of the causative light verb v . And Kayne’s (1984) binary branching as well as Larson’s (1988) and Aoun and Li’s (1989) passivization are adopted and Aoun and Li’s (1989) Hybrid Analysis is a bit revised. As a result, the semantic relation and the structural (asymmetric) c-command relation between DP1 and DP2 in DOC and DC are solved. Also the inaccessibility of wh-extraction on DP2 in DOC and the accessibility of wh-extraction on DP1 in DC are explained.
-
A Principled Explanation on Double Object and Dative Constructions
김희태 한국영미어문학회 2018 영미어문학 Vol.- No.130
The purpose of this study is to suggest a principled explanatory mechanism for the puzzling interaction of the complements DP1 and DP2 within VP in the Double Object Construction (DOC) and Dative Construction (DC). For this, the multiple Spec-VP and the multiple Theta (θ)-Agree of V inherited from v such as V1CAUSE and V2Have in DOC are posited with respect to Aoun and Li’s (1989) DOC to DC Transformation (T) approach. To support this postulation, Distributed Morphology (DM)– based Harley’s (2002) double object verb decomposition is adopted and slightly changed in the vein of the causative light verb v . And Kayne’s (1984) binary branching as well as Larson’s (1988) and Aoun and Li’s (1989) passivization are adopted and Aoun and Li’s (1989) Hybrid Analysis is a bit revised. As a result, the semantic relation and the structural (asymmetric) c-command relation between DP1 and DP2 in DOC and DC are solved. Also the inaccessibility of wh-extraction on DP2 in DOC and the accessibility of wh-extraction on DP1 in DC are explained.
스콜라연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
