On Extractability Out of a Null Clausal Complement in Korean

doi:10.18627/jslg.39.4.202402.447

All Issue

2024 Vol.39, Issue 4 Preview Page Next Page

Research Article

On Extractability Out of a Null Clausal Complement in Korean: Park, Myung-Kwan^1*; ¹Dongguk University

29 February 2024. pp. 447-463

PDF

Abstract

Extractability out of a null clausal complement has recently been investigated intensively to assess whether a null argument, NP/DP or clause, has internal syntactic structure in such languages as Korean and Japanese. As a starting point, I critically review Takahashi’s (2020; 2023) and Park’s (2023) recent study of this issue in cleft constructions. In addition to them, I also discuss the two more constructions involving right dislocation and relativization, showing that apparent extraction out of a null clausal complement in all of the constructions involve alleged chain heads at the (not left but) right periphery of the clauses that they are interpretively associated with. I move on to show using several diagnostics that the constructions at issue do not involve leftward movement, arguing against Takahashi’s (2020; 2023) and Park’s (2023) advocation of the extraction out of a null clausal complement inside these constructions. All in all, the extraction out of a null clausal complement is not allowed in Korean and Japanese.

Keywords

null clausal complement

extractability

cleft

right dislocation

ellipsis

References

An, D.-H. 2016. Extra Deletion in Fragment Answers and its Implications. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 25.4, 313-350. 10.1007/s10831-016-9144-7
Ahn, H.-D. and Cho, S. 2009. On the Absence of CP Ellipsis in English and Korean. Korean Journal of Linguistics 34.2, 267-281. 10.18855/lisoko.2009.34.2.003
Bhatts, R. 2002. The Raising Analysis of Relative Clauses: Evidence from Adjectival Modification. Natural Language Semantics 10, 43-90.
Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist program. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
Chung, D.-H. 2008. Agree but Not Necessarily at the Same Time. Studies in Generative Grammar 18, 509-524. 10.15860/sigg.18.3.200808.509
Chung, D.-H. 2009. Do Not Target a Predicate: It is Not a Constituent. A paper/handout presented to The 6th Altaic Formal Linguistics.
Chung, D.-H. 2013. On the nature of Null WH-phrases in Korea. Linguistic Research 30.3, 473-487. 10.17250/khisli.30.3.201312.004
Chung, D.-H. 2016. On What Determines the Modification Relation in Korean Adnominal Adjunct RDCs. Linguistic Research 33.3, 351-370. 10.17250/khisli.33.3.201612.001
Cresti, D. 1995. Extraction and Reconstruction. Natural Language Semantics 3, 79-122. 10.1007/BF01252885
di Sciullo, A.-M. and Williams, E. 1987. On the definition of word. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Fox, D. and Lasnik, H. 2003. Successive-cyclic Movement and Island Repair: The Difference between Sluicing and VP Ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 34, 143-154. 10.1162/002438903763255959
Hankamer, J. and Sag, I. A. 1976. Deep and Surface Anaphora. Linguistic Inquiry 7, 391-428.
Kang, M.-Y. 1988. Topics in Korean Syntax: Phrase Structure, variable binding, and movement. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
Ko, H. 2015. Two Ways to the Right: A Hybrid Approach to Right-dislocation in Korean. Language Research 51.1, 3-40.
Kwon, N.-Y. 2008. Processing of syntactic and anaphoric gap-filler dependencies in Korean: Evidence from self-paced Reading Time, ERP and eye-tracking experiments. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of California: San Diego.
Kwon, N.-Y. Polinsky, M. and Kluender, R. 2006. Subject Preference in Korean. In D. Baumer, D. Montero, and M. Scanlon (ed.), Proceedings of the 25th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 1-14.
Lasnik, H. 2001. When Can You Save a Structure by Destroying it? In Proceedings of North East Linguistics Society: Vol. 31.2, article 5. Available at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/nels/vol31/iss2/5.
Lechner, W. 1998. Two Kinds of Reconstruction. Studia Linguistica 52.3, 276-310. 10.1111/1467-9582.00037
Lee, E.-J. 2012. A Raising Analysis of the Relative Head in Korean. Studies in Generative Grammar 22.2, 323-357. 10.15860/sigg.22.2.201205.323
Park, D. 2023. Korean Specificational Pseudoclefts and Argument Ellipsis. A poster presented at Mayfest 2023.
Park, M.-K. 2009. An (Impossible) Excursion into Matrix [Spec, vP] out of an Elided Complement Clause in Korean. Korean Journal of Linguistics 34.4, 895-917. 10.18855/lisoko.2009.34.4.006
Park, M.-K. 2016. The Syntax of Multiple Fragments in Korean: Overt Absorption, Max-Elide, and Scrambling. Language Research 52.3, 421-450.
Rullmann, H. 1995. Maximality in the semantics of Wh-construction. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts/Amherst.
Saito, M. 2007. Notes on East Asian Argument Ellipsis. Language Research 43, 203-227.
Sohn, K.-W. 2011. A Constituent Deletion Approach to the Fragment Answers in Pseudoclefts. Studies in Generative Grammar 21.4, 671-684. 10.15860/sigg.21.4.201112.671
Takahashi, D. 2008. Quantificational Null Objects and Argument Ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 39, 307-326. 10.1162/ling.2008.39.2.307
Takahashi, D. 2020. Derivational Argument Ellipsis. The Linguistic Review 37, 47-74. 10.1515/tlr-2019-2034
Takahashi, D. 2023. Grammatical Function Mismatch in Argument Ellipsis. A handout read at the Hybrid Workshop, Current Issues in Comparative Syntax 2: Boundaries of Ellipsis Mismatch, Tsuda University September 1-3, 2023.
Yoon, J.-M. 2011. Double Relativization in Korean: An Explanation Based on the Processing Approach to Island Effects. Korean Journal of Linguistics 36,157-193. 10.18855/lisoko.2011.36.1.008

Information

Publisher :The Modern Linguistic Society of Korea
Publisher(Ko) :한국현대언어학회
Journal Title :The Journal of Studies in Language
Journal Title(Ko) :언어연구
Volume : 39
No :4
Pages :447-463
DOI :https://doi.org/10.18627/jslg.39.4.202402.447

[1] An, D.-H. 2016. Extra Deletion in Fragment Answers and its Implications. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 25.4, 313-350. 10.1007/s10831-016-9144-7

[2] Ahn, H.-D. and Cho, S. 2009. On the Absence of CP Ellipsis in English and Korean. Korean Journal of Linguistics 34.2, 267-281. 10.18855/lisoko.2009.34.2.003

[3] Bhatts, R. 2002. The Raising Analysis of Relative Clauses: Evidence from Adjectival Modification. Natural Language Semantics 10, 43-90.

[4] Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist program. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.

[5] Chung, D.-H. 2008. Agree but Not Necessarily at the Same Time. Studies in Generative Grammar 18, 509-524. 10.15860/sigg.18.3.200808.509

[6] Chung, D.-H. 2009. Do Not Target a Predicate: It is Not a Constituent. A paper/handout presented to The 6th Altaic Formal Linguistics.

[7] Chung, D.-H. 2013. On the nature of Null WH-phrases in Korea. Linguistic Research 30.3, 473-487. 10.17250/khisli.30.3.201312.004

[8] Chung, D.-H. 2016. On What Determines the Modification Relation in Korean Adnominal Adjunct RDCs. Linguistic Research 33.3, 351-370. 10.17250/khisli.33.3.201612.001

[9] Cresti, D. 1995. Extraction and Reconstruction. Natural Language Semantics 3, 79-122. 10.1007/BF01252885

[10] di Sciullo, A.-M. and Williams, E. 1987. On the definition of word. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

[11] Fox, D. and Lasnik, H. 2003. Successive-cyclic Movement and Island Repair: The Difference between Sluicing and VP Ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 34, 143-154. 10.1162/002438903763255959

[12] Hankamer, J. and Sag, I. A. 1976. Deep and Surface Anaphora. Linguistic Inquiry 7, 391-428.

[13] Kang, M.-Y. 1988. Topics in Korean Syntax: Phrase Structure, variable binding, and movement. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.

[14] Ko, H. 2015. Two Ways to the Right: A Hybrid Approach to Right-dislocation in Korean. Language Research 51.1, 3-40.

[15] Kwon, N.-Y. 2008. Processing of syntactic and anaphoric gap-filler dependencies in Korean: Evidence from self-paced Reading Time, ERP and eye-tracking experiments. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of California: San Diego.

[16] Kwon, N.-Y. Polinsky, M. and Kluender, R. 2006. Subject Preference in Korean. In D. Baumer, D. Montero, and M. Scanlon (ed.), Proceedings of the 25th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 1-14.

[17] Lasnik, H. 2001. When Can You Save a Structure by Destroying it? In Proceedings of North East Linguistics Society: Vol. 31.2, article 5. Available at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/nels/vol31/iss2/5.

[18] Lechner, W. 1998. Two Kinds of Reconstruction. Studia Linguistica 52.3, 276-310. 10.1111/1467-9582.00037

[19] Lee, E.-J. 2012. A Raising Analysis of the Relative Head in Korean. Studies in Generative Grammar 22.2, 323-357. 10.15860/sigg.22.2.201205.323

[20] Park, D. 2023. Korean Specificational Pseudoclefts and Argument Ellipsis. A poster presented at Mayfest 2023.

[21] Park, M.-K. 2009. An (Impossible) Excursion into Matrix [Spec, vP] out of an Elided Complement Clause in Korean. Korean Journal of Linguistics 34.4, 895-917. 10.18855/lisoko.2009.34.4.006

[22] Park, M.-K. 2016. The Syntax of Multiple Fragments in Korean: Overt Absorption, Max-Elide, and Scrambling. Language Research 52.3, 421-450.

[23] Rullmann, H. 1995. Maximality in the semantics of Wh-construction. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts/Amherst.

[24] Saito, M. 2007. Notes on East Asian Argument Ellipsis. Language Research 43, 203-227.

[25] Sohn, K.-W. 2011. A Constituent Deletion Approach to the Fragment Answers in Pseudoclefts. Studies in Generative Grammar 21.4, 671-684. 10.15860/sigg.21.4.201112.671

[26] Takahashi, D. 2008. Quantificational Null Objects and Argument Ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 39, 307-326. 10.1162/ling.2008.39.2.307

[27] Takahashi, D. 2020. Derivational Argument Ellipsis. The Linguistic Review 37, 47-74. 10.1515/tlr-2019-2034

[28] Takahashi, D. 2023. Grammatical Function Mismatch in Argument Ellipsis. A handout read at the Hybrid Workshop, Current Issues in Comparative Syntax 2: Boundaries of Ellipsis Mismatch, Tsuda University September 1-3, 2023.

[29] Yoon, J.-M. 2011. Double Relativization in Korean: An Explanation Based on the Processing Approach to Island Effects. Korean Journal of Linguistics 36,157-193. 10.18855/lisoko.2011.36.1.008

The Journal of Studies in Language ISSN:1225-4770(Print) 2671-6151(Online) 언어연구

All Issue