Differential Function Marking, Case, and Information Structure: Evidence from Korean

The central goal of this article is to propose a systematic description of <small class="caps">differental function marking</small> (DM) in Korean, a language in which both subject and object markers may fail to be spelled out. Taking Aissen’s theory of DM (Aissen 2003) as a starting point, we show that although its predictions seem mostly consistent with the statistical results of corpus-based research on Korean (and Japanese), this model does not accurately account for the Korean data. We argue that subject and object bareness (the lack of a functional particle) regularly correlates with interpretive effects that should be captured in terms of information structure (focus structure). Adapting Erteschik-Shir’s (1997, 2007) framework to represent f(ocus)-structure, we argue that bare subjects and objects in Korean fail to be visible at this level. Consequently, they may be construed neither as active topics nor as foci, and thus must either be left out of f-structure or incorporated within larger f-structure constituents in order to be interpreted. We show that bare objects are never construed as topics or foci and always exhibit a form of semantic incorporation, while <small class="caps">leul</small>-marked objects always stand as f-structure constituents construed as focused at some level. Bare subjects, unlike <small class="caps">neun</small>-marked topical subjects and <small class="caps">ga</small>-marked subjects, can be construed neither as active topics nor as foci, and always occur in tense-deficient clauses construed as thetic and anchored to speech time. We argue that our assumptions correctly predict the results of corpus studies, and we suggest that as regards nominal arguments, <small class="caps">f</small>-<small class="caps">structure visibility</small> might ultimately stand as the crucial interpretive correlate of <small class="caps">functional</small> positions in syntax.

[1]  M. Fukuda.  Head governement and case marker drop in Japanese , 1993 .

[2]  G. J. Ramstedt.  A Korean grammar , 1939 .

[3]  Enric Vallduví,et al.  The Informational Component , 1990 .

[4]  L. Haegeman.  Elements of Grammar , 1997 .

[5]  Le marquage différentiel de l'objet , 2001 .

[6]  Hans Reichenbach,et al.  Elements of symbolic logic , 1948 .

[7]  D. Massam.  Pseudo Noun Incorporation In Niuean , 2001 .

[8]  K. Hale,et al.  Ken Hale: A Life in Language , 2001 .

[9]  Nomi Erteschik-Shir,et al.  Information Structure: The Syntax-Discourse Interface , 2007 .

[10]  Judith Aissen,et al.  Differential Object Marking: Iconicity vs. Economy , 2003 .

[11]  Caroline Heycock,et al.  Syntactic predication in Japanese , 1993 .

[12]  E. Battistella.  Markedness: The Evaluative Superstructure of Language , 1990 .

[14]  D. Farkas,et al.  The Semantics of Incorporation: From Argument Structure to Discourse Transparency , 2003 .

[15]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Lectures on Government and Binding , 1981 .

[16]  Yasuko Watanabe.  Two Kinds of Ellipsis in Japanes Discourse: A Quantitative Text Study , 1986 .

[17]  S. Kuroda,et al.  Japanese Syntax and Semantics , 1992 .

[18]  William A. Ladusaw,et al.  Restriction and Saturation , 2003 .

[19]  Hiroshi Minashima.  On the deletion of accusative case markers in Japanese , 2001 .

[20]  S. Kuroda,et al.  Focusing On The Matter of Topic: A Study of Wa and Ga in Japanese , 2005 .

[21]  Nomi Erteschik-Shir,et al.  The dynamics of focus structure , 1997 .

[22]  Hanjung Lee,et al.  Parallel Optimization in Case Systems: Evidence from Case Ellipsis in Korean* , 2006 .

[23]  W. Bruce Croft.  Typology and Universals , 1990 .

[24]  M. Saito.  Some asymmetries in Japanese and their theoretical implications , 1985 .

[25]  Duck-Young Lee,et al.  The function of the zero particle with special reference to spoken Japanese , 2002 .

[26]  L. Rizzi.  The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery , 1997 .

[27]  P. Burkhardt.  The syntax-discourse interface , 2005 .

[28]  Tsuyoshi Ono,et al.  The Occurrence and Non-Occurrence of the Japanese Direct Object Marker "o" in Conversation , 2000 .

[29]  Robert Dixon,et al.  Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages , 1980 .

[30]  W. Poser.  Papers from the Second International Workshop on Japanese Syntax , 1992 .

[31]  Georg Bossong.  Empirische Universalienforschung : differentielle Objektmarkierung in den neuiranischen Sprachen , 1985 .

[32]  東京大学大学院総合文化研究科言語情報科学専攻.  Language, information, text , 1994 .

[33]  S.-Y. Kuroda,et al.  The categorical and the thetic judgment , 1979 .

[34]  Kenjiro Matsuda,et al.  Variable zero-marking of (o) in Tôkyô Japanese , 1995 .

[35]  Koichi Tateishi.  The Syntax of Subjects , 1991 .

[36]  Noam Chomsky.  Derivation by phase , 1999 .

[37]  Irene Heim,et al.  The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases : a dissertation , 1982 .

[38]  Jeffrey Lidz,et al.  The Grammar of Accusative Case in Kannada , 2006 .

[39]  Michael Silverstein,et al.  Case marking and the nature of language , 1981 .

[40]  Carson T. Schütze.  On Korean Case Stacking: The varied functions of the particles ka and lul , 2001 .

[41]  T. Vance,et al.  Japanese/Korean linguistics , 1999 .

[42]  Lim Donghoon.  The Study on the Classification of Korean ‘Josa’s and their combination patterns , 2004 .

[43]  S. Thompson,et al.  Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse , 1980 .

[44]  Anthony Alfonso.  Japanese language patterns , 1968 .

[45]  M. Mithun.  The evolution of noun incorporation , 1984 .

[46]  Tara Mohanan,et al.  Wordhood and lexicality: Noun incorporation in Hindi , 1995 .

[47]  Nomi Erteschik-Shir.  Wh-questions and focus , 1986 .

[48]  K. Sakuma.  The structure of the Japanese language , 1951 .

[49]  T. Reinhart.  Pragmatics and Linguistics: an analysis of Sentence Topics , 1981, Philosophica.

[50]  Liliane Haegeman,et al.  Elements of Grammar: Handbook In Generative Syntax , 1998 .

[51]  N. A. Mccawley,et al.  The structure of the Japanese language , 1973 .

[52]  Maria Bittner,et al.  Case, scope, and binding , 1993 .

[53]  Z. Harris,et al.  Foundations of language , 1941 .