Case Alternation in Korean: Case Minimality

J.-S. Lee, 1992

for $29.95 x

Abstract (Summary):

This thesis discusses the Case alternation phenomena in several different types of constructions in Korean within the theoretical framework of principles and parameters approach, explicated in Chomsky (1981, 1982, 1986a,b, elsewhere), together with the proposed locality principle, Case Minimality. This thesis also explores the consequences of Case Minimality across various syntactic domains. Case Minimality to be developed capitalizes the role of Case in the theory of (antecedent) government and bounding as well.

Chapter 2 discusses the Case alternation phenomena in mit- 'believe' type ECM construction. If the embedded predicate of this construction is a Case-assigner, ECM is not possible, and thus, the embedded subject can take only Nominative Case.

Chapter 4 discusses the Case alternation phenomenon in negative auxiliary verb aniha- 'not.do' construction, where the complement of this verb can take either Nominative or Accusative Case in a certain environment.

Chapter 5 discusses the alternation between postpositions and Accusative Case on postpositional phrases, especially locative phrases of motion verbs. It is argued that Accusative Case is available by null P-incorporation (cf. Baker (1985)). It is also shown that Case Minimality captures the basic insight of the Government Transparency Corollary (Baker (1985)).

Chapter 6 discusses the Case alternation between Nominative and Accusative Case on the body-part NP in inalienable possession passive construction. It is proposed that the body-part NP, but not the possessor NP, can receive partitive Case based on the semantic partitivity that the body-part NP has (cf. Belletti (1988)). Thus, the apparent Accusative Case on the body-part NP in the passive is treated as partitive Case.

Chapter 7 discusses some more empirical domains of Case Minimality--long distance Case assignment, NP-movement, and island phenomena, showing that Case Minimality can reasonably define a local domain, a barrier, for both government and bounding. It is also shown that Case Minimality simplifies the theory by rendering some previous conditions unnecessary, e.g., the Chain Condition (Chomsky (1986a)), conditions proposed for NP-movement, and accounts for the apparent lack of Subjacency effect at LF in terms of LF verb raising. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

Table of Contents:

Introduction..........................................................................................................................................1

Case Alternation in Exceptional Case Marking Constructions........................................................8

2.1      Introduction ..............................................................................................................................8

2.2.     Facts...........................................................................................................................................9

2.3      Questions...................................................................................................................................12

2.4      Raising to SPEC of CP................................................................................................................14

2.5      ECM.............................................................................................................................................26

2.6      Generalization Revised.............................................................................................................29

2.7      Minimality Principles................................................................................................................32

           2.7.1   Chomsky (1986) ...........................................................................................................33

           2.7.2   Sirgutðsson (1989) .......................................................................................................36

           2.7.3   Rizzi (1990) .....................................................................................................................39

2.8       Case Minimality..........................................................................................................................42

           2.8.1   Case and Local Domain..................................................................................................42

           2.8.2   The Definition of Government.....................................................................................50

           2.8.3   The Contrast in ECM: Case Minimality .......................................................................52

           2.8.4   Intransitives in the Embedded Clauses.......................................................................60

2.9      Related Issues..............................................................................................................................64

           2.9.1   Comp-Trace Effect in English.......................................................................................65

           2.9.2   Comp-Trace Effect in Korean.......................................................................................66

           2.9.3   Passivization...................................................................................................................78

2.10     Summary.....................................................................................................................................84

Case Alternation in the Periphrastic -Key ha Causative Constructions.....................................86

3.1      Introduction.................................................................................................................................86

3.2      Facts..............................................................................................................................................87

3.3      Questions.....................................................................................................................................90

3.4      Raising to SPEC of CP..................................................................................................................91

3.5      Case Minimality.........................................................................................................................102

3.6      INFL in the Periphrastic Causative Constructions.................................................................110

3.7      VP-Internal Subject Hypothesis...............................................................................................118

3.8      Summary....................................................................................................................................122

Case Alternation in the Aniha- (not.do) Constructions

4.1      Introduction..............................................................................................................................123   

4.2      Facts...........................................................................................................................................123

4.3      Questions...................................................................................................................................124

4.4      Structures of Aniha-(not.do) Constructions....................................................................129

4.5      Case on the Complement of a Stative Verb..........................................................................147

           4.5.1   Default Hypothesis.......................................................................................................149

           4.5.2   INFL Lowering...............................................................................................................150

           4.5.3   Stative Verb Raising to INFL........................................................................................153

           4.5.4   INFL Hypothesis: Movement Approach....................................................................154

4.6      Case on the Complement of Aniha-(not.do)...................................................................160

           4.6.1   Case-Assigning Property Inheritence (M.-Y. Kang (1988)).....................................161

           4.6.2   Case Feature Transfer.................................................................................................167

4.7       Summary...................................................................................................................................176

Case Alternation on Postpositional Phrase........................................................................................178

5.1      Introduction...............................................................................................................................178

5.2      Facts............................................................................................................................................179

5.3      Questions....................................................................................................................................187

5.4      P-Incorporation.........................................................................................................................187

           5.4.1   Initial Plausibility..........................................................................................................188

           5.4.2   Baker (1985) ................................................................................................................190

           5.4.3   Government Transparency Corollary and Case Minimality.................................196

5.5      Does P-Incorporation Apply in Korean?.........................................................................197

5.6.     Evidences for P-Incorporation Analysis..................................................................................202

5.7      Null P-Incorporation.................................................................................................................207

5.8      Argument/Adjunct Assymetry................................................................................................226

5.9      P-Incorporation to Case-assigners..........................................................................................231

5.10    More Examples..........................................................................................................................234

           5.10.1 Dative Applicatives......................................................................................................234

           5.10.2 Small Clauses................................................................................................................236

           5.10.3 Instrumental Applicatives...........................................................................................243

5.11     Summary...................................................................................................................................245

Case Alternation in Partitive Constructions.......................................................................................246

6.1      Introduction...............................................................................................................................246

6.2      Facts............................................................................................................................................247

6.3      Questions...................................................................................................................................252

6.4      The Structure of the IAP Constructions.................................................................................266

           6.4.1   The Base-Generation of PS NP and BP NP................................................................272

           6.4.2   The Structure of the IAP Constructions....................................................................278

6.5      Accusative Case on the BP NP in the Passives......................................................................288

           6.5.1   Failure of the Structural Approaches........................................................................289

           6.5.2   Partitive Case on the BP NP........................................................................................293

           6.5.3   Partitive Case Assignement to the BP NP.................................................................296

6.6      More on the Partitive Case Assignment.................................................................................311
           6.6.1   Animacy Requirement on the Partitive Case...........................................................311

           6.6.2   More on Paritivity........................................................................................................312

           6.6.3   Extraction of the BP NP...............................................................................................315

6.7      Summary....................................................................................................................................320