아랍어 문장의 주어-동사 일치현상에 대한 통사적 연구

최진영 ( Jin Young Choi ) 한국외국어대학교 중동연구소 2013 중동연구 Vol.31 No.3

The puzzle of agreement in Arabic sentence lies in its apparent dependence on the surface order of the subject and the verb. If the subject precedes the verb, the verb shows full agreement with the subject in the features of person, number, and gender. If, on the other hand, the subject follows the verb, the verb shows some kind of impoverished agreement: it has the features of third person singular, and shows agreement with the subject only in the features of gender. The phenomenon of agreement was the main criterion to distinguish the nominal sentence from the verbal sentence, and is closely linked to the syntactic characteristics of Arabic sentence. So, this study aims to analyzing the full agreement in the nominal sentence and the impoverished agreement in the verbal sentence as well as investigating the syntactic properties of Arabic sentence. In Chapter 2, I`m going to look at how to classify Arabic sentence by the word order in the traditional grammar, and investigate the notion of government (al-□amal) to make the difference of the word order. In Chapter 3, I will explain subject-verb full agreement in the nominal sentence through analyzing the grammatical function of the subject(al-mubtada?). In Chapter 4, I will analyze impoverished agreement in the verbal sentence by setting two subjects, lexical subject and expletive subject in the deep structure.

How Should We Teach Subject in Secondary Schools?

Kang, Seung-Man 한국중앙영어영문학회 2006 영어영문학연구 Vol.48 No.2

This paper delves into the properties of the subject and accordingly suggests teaching implications. The subject seemingly appears to be explained in connection with Case theories and Ɵ-roles. This causes much ado in teaching the subject to EFL students. In this paper, I examine some major properties of the subject. First, the subject does not necessarily carry nominative Case; sometimes it takes some other Case when there is no Case assigner available within a clause that it belongs to. Second, agent is not a sole Ɵ-role assigned to the subject.; the subject is not always the doer of an action. Finally, the subject position can be filled by either expletives without any meaningful content or PRO, an empty category. Conclusively I argue that the subject is purely a syntactic concept and should be determined by its structural position. Case and Ɵ-roles are simply peripheral to its syntactic account and accordingly suggest teaching implications appropriate to secondary school students.

현대러시아어 무인칭 환경에 나타나는 ЭТО와 ОНО의 문법적 기능

정하경(Jung, Hakyung),이수현(Lee, Suhyoun) 한국노어노문학회 2020 노어노문학 Vol.32 No.3

본 논문은 현대러시아어의 구어적 사용에서 무인칭 환경에 나타나는 지시대명사 중성 단수형 эmо와 인칭대명사 중성 단수형 оно의 문법적 기능을 살펴봄으로써 эmо와 оно의 이러한 허사적 사용이 현대러시아어의 문법체계 범주화에 어떤 의미를 갖는지 고찰할 수 있는 경험적 토대를 마련하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 구체적으로 эmо와 оно의 사용이 허용되는 정확한 무인칭 환경 유형을 파악하고 이 형태들이 실제로 문법적 주어의 지위를 가지는지 규명하기 위해, 다양한 유형의 무인칭구문 및 그에 상응하는 эmо, оно 구문에 대해 원어민 피험자들(총35명)을 대상으로 설문을 진행했다. 설문 실험 결과, 자연현상이나 신체적 작용을 나타내는 무인칭 정형동사 구문에서는 эmо/оно가 사용될 수 없었던 반면, 무인칭 재귀동사와 부사적 술어 구문에서는 종속절(원형부정사절 및 정형절)이 있을 경우 эmо/оно의 용인성이 높게 나타났다. 전반적으로 эmо의 용인성이 оно보다 더 높은 것으로 관찰되었다. 무인칭 재귀동사의 경우에는 어휘에 따라 종속절이 없는 경우에도 эmо와 оно의 삽입이 가능했다. 이와 같이 무인칭 환경에 삽입되는 эmо와 оно는 인상술어의 주어로 인상될 수 있고, 재귀사를 결속시키며, 술어일치를 유발할 수 있다는 점에서 제한적인 환경이기는 하지만 문법적 허사 주어로 인정될 수 있다. This paper examines whether Modern Russian features (semi-) expletive subjects, based on the judgement test that was taken by 35 Russian native speakers. The test was designed to compare the acceptability of оно and это in three impersonal environments, in which no thematic subject is allowed: Finite verbs expressing natural phenomena, adverbial predicates, and reflexive verbs deriving from unergative verbs. The test shows that оно and это may be acknowledged as true expletive subjects in limited environments although a clear contrast is seen between это and оно. The acceptability of это is clearly higher than that of оно irrespective of the construction type, which can be ascribed to the strong deictic nature of это. First, finite verb constructions denoting natural phenomena do not allow overt expletives at all: The semantics of a subject is available in this type of constructions although the covert subject cannot be referential. As this invisible argument related to natural phenomena already occupies the subject position, an overt expletive cannot be inserted into this position. This result parallels with the analysis of the weather-it in English as denoting an (quasi-) argument in the literature. Second, in the case of reflexive verbs and adverbial predicates, expletives are allowed if a subordinate clause (infinitival or finite) follows. In a limited case of reflexive verbs, это and оно are allowed even without a subordinate clause. This must be because there is no argument in the subject position in this type of reflexive verb constructions unlike finite verbs expressing natural phenomena. Это and оно in the given impersonal environments can be raised as the subject of a raising verb, can bind subject-oriented reflexives, and trigger agreement on predicates, which indicates that это and оно may be construed as grammatical subjects occupying Spec,TP, a position dedicated to a nominative subject.

Subject in Locative Inversion Constructions

김동석 신영어영문학회 2009 신영어영문학 Vol.44 No.-

This paper reviews Bruening (2008a,b) and Rizzi & Shlonsky (2006a,b) with special reference to the subject in locative inversion constructions, and proposes an alternative account. On the observation of the parallels between locative inversion and presentational there constructions, Bruening suggests that the subject in locative inversion constructions is a null expletive, a variant of expletive there. This account, however, needs explanation for the failure of a [+SP] Infl to license the null expletive. Furthermore, the null expletive hypothesis is dubious considering that English does not usually allow null subject. Rizzi & Shlonsky’s account in terms of Subject Criterion introduces Fin head with phi-features to satisfy Subject Criterion in an interpretively vacuous manner, which, they argue, can capture the apparently mixed subject and non-subject properties of inverted locatives. Their analysis, however, involves non-uniform chains which result from movement via [Spec,Fin] to [Spec,C]. To cope with the problems that might arise in the analyses reviewed, this paper proposes to capture the properties of inverted locatives in terms of parallel movement proposed in Chomsky (2005)

Subject in Locative Inversion Constructions

Dong-Seok Kim 신영어영문학회 2009 신영어영문학 Vol.44 No.-

This paper reviews Bruening (2008a,b) and Rizzi & Shlonsky (2006a,b) with special reference to the subject in locative inversion constructions, and proposes an alternative account. On the observation of the parallels between locative inversion and presentational there constructions, Bruening suggests that the subject in locative inversion constructions is a null expletive, a variant of expletive there. This account, however, needs explanation for the failure of a [+SP] Infl to license the null expletive. Furthermore, the null expletive hypothesis is dubious considering that English does not usually allow null subject. Rizzi & Shlonsky’s account in terms of Subject Criterion introduces Fin head with phi-features to satisfy Subject Criterion in an interpretively vacuous manner, which, they argue, can capture the apparently mixed subject and non-subject properties of inverted locatives. Their analysis, however, involves non-uniform chains which result from movement via [Spec,Fin] to [Spec,C]. To cope with the problems that might arise in the analyses reviewed, this paper proposes to capture the properties of inverted locatives in terms of parallel movement proposed in Chomsky (2005).

A Null Expletive Analysis of the Locative Inversion Construction in English

Sun-Woong Kim(김선웅) 한국생성문법학회 2006 생성문법연구 Vol.16 No.3

  This paper is an attempt to answer what the subject of LIC (locative inversion construction) is and to propose a derivational analysis of clausal architecture of LIC with reference to the dual properties of the fronted PP and the null expletive. What is meant by the dual properties is that they have both subject (A-property) and non-subject (A" property) at the same time. It will be claimed in this paper that the properties can be derivationally captured under the proposed clausal structure. This paper discusses the similarity between LIC and PTC (presentational there construction) and concludes that they belong to the same type construction, that is, the MSC, in that both LIC and PTC (with its locative PP fronted) go in tandem with PEC (passive expletive construction), if its locative PP fronted, which is analyzed as an example of MSC (multiple subject construction, Lyle and Gamon 1997). Furthermore, this paper also argues that the fronted PP and the (null) expletive are both subject and non-subject at the same time, and proposes that a structure that can derivationally incorporate their dual nature. Through the discussion, the null expletive will be justified in LIC and its A" property will be more discussed.

일치에 의한 There의 의미속성과 격

김성헌 ( Sung Hun Kim ) 한국현대언어학회 2015 언어연구 Vol.31 No.3

This study proposes an analysis for expletive there from the view of a Minimalist framework. In this paper, we argue that the expletive there is a raising element in the subject position ‘Spec-υP’. Firstly, we review the relevant study of expletive there structures and examine features of there in Chomsky (2000) that formulated the Probe-Goal approach to Case assignment, Ф-feature matching and Merge over Move. Secondly, we present evidence against Chomsky`s assumption and instead suggest that there is internally generated in υP. We follow Hazout`s (2004) assertion that expletive there is the subject of the small clause because the post-verbal NP serves as the predicate of the small clause. Finally we propose that there is merged in Spec-υP to make a subject-predicate relationship with the complement NP to check C-T edge feature and definiteness effects. (Dankook University)

“Extended” Projection Principle for Licensing Spec-V and Spec-T

김양순 한국현대언어학회 2011 언어연구 Vol.27 No.3

Kim, Yangsoon. 2011. “Extended” Projection Principle for Licensing Spec-V and Spec-T. The Journal of Studies in Language 27.3, 401-421. The purpose of this paper is to redefine the "extended" part of the EPP and propose the phase head driven EPP for both C-T and v*-V, following Chomsky's (2007, 2008) general feature-inheritance view that phase heads v*, C are the engine of the derivation and the locus of edge features. Regarding the EPP feature, Chomsky includes only C-T relation, but not v*-V relation. However, I argue that all and only phase heads, C and v* can check the EPP features via feature inheritance, thus the EPP feature is checked at Spec-V as well as Spec-T. The asymmetry between C-T and v*-V is explained by the lexical constraint of the v*-V category since V is a lexical category unlike a functional category T. Utilizing the phase head driven EPP system, the controversial ECM and tough-movement are considered as raising to A-positions licensed by phase heads: ECM belongs to subject-to-object raising, the typical seem-type raising is subject-to-subject raising, and passive raising and another controversial tough-raising belong to object-to-subject raising. It is argued that the motivations for all raising constructions are uniformly to check the EPP feature of the phase head, v* or C. A general rationale for feature inheritance that necessarily holds of all phases alike allows for a uniform syntactic definition of the EPP based on the phase heads. Then, the stipulated properties of the EPP can be resolved in a more natural and minimalist way by the phase head driven EPP system. (Hanbat National University)

A Comparative Analysis of English and Chinese Raising Constructions

장웨이징,강승만 현대영미어문학회 2020 현대영미어문학 Vol.38 No.2

This paper aims at illustrating some properties of raising constructions in English and Chinese and examining how Chinese EFL learners perceive them from the perspective of their native language. For our discussion, we have conducted a survey among 60 Chinese college students, who were asked to translate 3 English raising constructions into Chinese and turn 6 Chinese ones into English. The subjects in the survey are seen to translate English raising constructions into a variety of Chinese constructions such as empty expletive, subject-to-topic raising, passive object-to-topic raising, and active object-to-topic raising constructions. It is also shown that the students turn Chinese raising constructions into English ones, in which the embedded subject and/or object are/is extracted out of the finite embedded clause and raise(s) into the matrix subject position, which is illegitimate in English but well-formed in Chinese. It turns out that this constitutes an instance of negative transfer between the two languages, giving rise to a host of errors in their use of English raising constructions.

"Extended" Projection Principle for Licensing Spec-V and Spec-T

( Yang Soon Kim ) 한국현대언어학회 2011 언어연구 Vol.27 No.3

The purpose of this paper is to redefine the "extended" part of the EPP and propose the phase head driven EPP for both C-T and v*-V, following Chomsky`s (2007, 2008) general feature-inheritance view that phase heads v*, C are the engine of the derivation and the locus of edge features. Regarding the EPP feature, Chomsky includes only C-T relation, but not v*-V relation. However, I argue that all and only phase heads, C and v* can check the EPP features via feature inheritance, thus the EPP feature is checked at Spec-V as well as Spec-T. The asymmetry between C-T and v*-V is explained by the lexical constraint of the v*-V category since V is a lexical category unlike a functional category T. Utilizing the phase head driven EPP system, the controversial ECM and tough-movement are considered as raising to A-positions licensed by phase heads: ECM belongs to subject-to-object raising, the typical seem-type raising is subject-to-subject raising, and passive raising and another controversial tough-raising belong to object-to-subject raising. It is argued that the motivations for all raising constructions are uniformly to check the EPP feature of the phase head, v* or C. A general rationale for feature inheritance that necessarily holds of all phases alike allows for a uniform syntactic definition of the EPP based on the phase heads. Then, the stipulated properties of the EPP can be resolved in a more natural and minimalist way by the phase head driven EPP system. (Hanbat National University)