초록
"-nun" and "-un", two of the relative clause markers used in Korean, exhibit some interesting peculiarities yet to be investigated. They cannot combine with the past tense marker "-ess". This is why many researchers consider that they are relative clause markers which express tense; "-nun" is a relative clause marker expressing [-Past] tense, and "-un" is a relative clause marker expressing [-Past] tense or [+Past] tense according to the semantic type of the predicate with which it combines: "-un" expresses [+Past] tense when it combines with an event predicate while it expresses [-Past] tense when it combines with a state predicate. However, the view that they are relative clause markers which express tense cannot account for the fact that the morpheme "-un" can express not only [-Past] tense but also [+Past] tense. This paper proposes a new approach which presupposes the existence of a unique pure relative clause marker in Korean. We argue that this is "-un", and that tense interpretation in relative clauses containing "-nun" or "-un" is due to the [-Past] zero morpheme or the elided [+Past] morpheme "-ess". More concretely, "-nun" is considered through analysis to be a complex composed of the [-Past] zero morpheme + the progressive morpheme "-nun" + the pure relative clause marker "-un", where "-nun" and "-un" are contracted to "-nun". "-un" when combined with state predicates is considered through analysis to be a complex composed of the [-Past] zero morpheme + the pure relative clause marker "-un". As for "-un" when combined with event predicates, it is considered through analysis to be a complex composed of the elided [+Past] morpheme "-ess" + the pure relative clause marker "-un". Note that one of the important assumptions in this paper is that the [+Past] morpheme "-ess" is elided before the pure relative clause marker "-un" for a morpho-phonological reason. Given this assumption, the question arises as to why the "-ess" ellipsis does not occur when "-ess" comes before the "-un" which combines with a state predicate. If the "-ess" ellipsis did occur, this would allow for a [+Past] interpretation, contrary to fact. To resolve this problem, we propose an ambiguity elimination strategy: when a form allows for more than two interpretations, only one should be taken and the others are eliminated. The situation where "-un" combines with state predicates should be applicable to this ambiguity elimination strategy since the same form of "-un" can be derived from the complex [[-Past] zero morpheme + "-un"], which would produce a [-Past] tense interpretation, or from the complex [elided "-ess" + "-un"], which would produce a [+Past] tense interpretation. Which one should be settled upon and which should be eliminated? Note that in relative clauses containing a state predicate, "-un" is the only means to express a [-Past] tense interpretation while there are other means for expressing a [+Past] tense, such as "-ten", which is the complex [retrospective morpheme "-te" + pure relative clause marker "-un"]. Therefore, a [-Past] tense interpretation should be taken to the detriment of a [+Past] tense interpretation. That is why, when "-un" combines with a state predicate, there is only a [-Past] tense interpretation. On the other hand, when "-un" combines with an event predicate, for which there is only a [+Past] tense interpretation, a different question arises: why can it not have a [-Past] tense interpretation even though it can be derived from the complex [[-Past] zero morpheme + "-un"]? Note that in relative clauses containing event predicates, there is another means for a [-Past] tense interpretation, which is "-nun". This is why, when "-un" combines with an event predicate, a [+Past] tense interpretation should be settled upon rather than a [-Past] tense interpretation.
키워드
relative clause markers, "-ess" ellipsis, ambiguity elimination strategy, tense interpretation in relative clauses
참고문헌(19)
-
[학술지] 권재일 / 1983 / 복합문 구성에서의 시상법 / 한글 182 : 173 ~ 194
-
[학술지] 김석득 / 1974 / 한국어의 시간과 시상 / 한불연구 1 : 97 ~ 145
-
[학술지] 남기심 / 1972 / 현대국어 시제에 관한 문제 / 국어국문학 : 55 ~ 57
-
[학술지] 남기심 / 1976 / 관계관형절의 상과 법 / 한국어문논총
-
[단행본] 남기심 / 1978 / 국어문법의 시제 문제에 관한 연구 / 탑출판사
-
[학술지] 서정수 / 1976 / 국어 시상 형태의 의미 분석 연구 / 문법연구 3 : 83 ~ 158
-
[학술지] 심재기 / 1979 / 관형화의 의미기능 / 어학연구 15 (2) : 109 ~ 121
-
[학술지] 양정석 / 2008 / 한국어 시간요소들의 형태통사론 / 언어 33 (4) : 693 ~ 722
-
[단행본] 김태엽 / 2005 / 한국어 문법의 양상 / 대구대학교 출판부
-
[단행본] 이익섭 / 1983 / 국어문법론 / 학연사
-
[단행본] 이익섭 / 2009 / 국어문법론강의 / 학연사
-
[학술지] 장보웅 / 1998 / “관형절 시제”는 과연 종결형 시제와 다른 표시 체계를 가지고 있는가? / 인문과학논집 18 : 547 ~ 560
-
[학술지] 홍용철 / 2010 / 한국어 명사 외곽 수식어들의 어순과 명사구 구조 / 생성문법연구 20 (1) : 27 ~ 50
-
[학술대회] Kang, Jungmin / 2012 / TP-less Temporal Interpretation / Proceedings of the 14th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar : 174 ~ 193
-
[학술지] 조미정 / 2002 / The Structure of Relative Clauses in Korean / 생성문법연구 12 (1) : 107 ~ 138
-
[학술지] 조미정 / 2011 / The Morphosyntax of Prenominal Relative Clauses in Korean / 생성문법연구 21 (4) : 563 ~ 585
-
[학술지] Lee, Hyo-Sang / 1993 / The temporal system of noun-modifying (attributive) clauses in Korean from a typological perspective / Studies in Korean 17 : 75 ~ 110
-
[단행본] Martin, S.E. / 1954 / Korean Morphophonemics / Baltimore
-
[학위논문] Yoon, J.-Y. / 1990 / Korean syntax and generalized X-bar theory