본 연구는 국면확대이론에 기초하여 영어 및 한국어 (와 기타 외국어)의 좌초현상에 대해 통일적인 설명을 시도하는데 목적이 있다. 특히, 전치사와 보분자의 유사성과 차이점을 좌초현상에 초점을 두고 연구하였다. 구체적으로 이동의 방향성과 좌초의 가능성에 있어서 ...

본 연구는 국면확대이론에 기초하여 영어 및 한국어 (와 기타 외국어)의 좌초현상에 대해 통일적인 설명을 시도하는데 목적이 있다. 특히, 전치사와 보분자의 유사성과 차이점을 좌초현상에 초점을 두고 연구하였다. 구체적으로 이동의 방향성과 좌초의 가능성에 있어서 두 범주는 차이를 보였는데, 이 차이는 국면확대이론의 입장에서 분석하면 D to P 이동의 적용 여부에 관련된 것임이 밝혀졌으며, 이것이 사실이라면 두 범주는 사소한 차이만을 가진 공통범주일 가능성이 밝혀졌다. 또한 부가어에서의 전치사좌초는 영어의 경우에도 허락이 되지 않는데 이점 또한 D to P 이동의 적용 결과임이 밝혀졌다. 나아가 본 연구는 좌초된 전치사와 보문자를 생략에 의해 복원할 수 있는 경우와 복원할 수 없는 경우가 있음을 발견하고 본원할 수 없는 경우는 도출상의 제약인 국면불침투조건을 위반한 반면, 복원할 수 있는 경우는 도출상의 제약을 위반하지는 않음을 밝혀냈다. 이러한 발견들은 사실상 또 다른 후속 연구의 진행을 촉발하게 되는데, 왜 도출상의 제약은 복원이 되지 않는가 등은 아주 중요한 연구과제가 될 것이다.

This paper attempts to give a new analysis of (preposition) stranding in terms of phase extension which has been originally proposed by den Dikken in his series of recent papers (2006, 2007, and 2008). In doing so, this paper tries to explore a hidden ...

This paper attempts to give a new analysis of (preposition) stranding in terms of phase extension which has been originally proposed by den Dikken in his series of recent papers (2006, 2007, and 2008). In doing so, this paper tries to explore a hidden link between P(repostion) and C(omplementizer) with respect to stranding. In particular, this paper is focused on the asymmetry between leftward movement and rightward movement with respect to stranding. To be more specific, this paper attempts to answer the following questions. Why is P-stranding allowed with leftward movement but not with rightward movement in English Why is C-stranding not allowed in both leftward and rightward movement like Extraposition in English And why are P- and C-stranding not allowed both in rightward and leftward movement in Korean and Japanese
It is widely known that English allows P-stranding in general. In this regard, canonical sentences are out of question in allowing stranded prepositions in elliptical contexts. Discrepancy, however, arises with PPs in adjunct function. In those examples, P-stranding is salvaged by deleting the illicit part. Some English sluicing data in fact show that P-stranding is in fact forced: some examples show that pied-piping is not allowed in English ellipsis contexts. Regarding C-stranding, it looks like the complementizer that is different from prepositions with respect to stranding. That cannot be stranded by the movement of TP to either direction. In principle, the whole that-clause (CP) can move to the front by leftward movement such as passivization and topicalization. However, TP alone cannot move leaving that behind. The fact is that that cannot be stranded by rightward movement like extraposition, either.
P-stranding is disallowed in Korean at all. Ungrammatical strings, however, can be repaired by ellipsis if their ungrammaticality is due to stranded Ps. In ellipsis contexts, if stranded Ps are deleted along with the containing TP, the whole derivation (or representation) is repaired and becomes a licit one. Canonically, C-stranding is disallowed, whether the stranding is due to leftward movement or rightward movement. Even if stranded Cs are deleted, however, a deviant representation (or derivation) is not repaired.
For these findings, one and the same answer turns out to be possible on the basis of phase extension under the assumption that D to P incorporation or T to C raising occurs inside PP and CP, respectively. If D incorporates with P, then PP becomes a phase, the extraction of DP out of which would violate the PIC. In the same way, if T raises to C, then CP becomes a phase, then the extraction out TP over CP boundary would also result in the violation of the PIC. The present paper also deals with the reason why some instances of stranding are repaired but others cannot. In addition, a special requirement of the second wh in multiple sluicing in English that it must be a PP is explained in the same way as a result of D to P incorporation and subsequent phase extension to PP.

This paper attempts to give a new analysis of (preposition) stranding in terms of phase extension which has been originally proposed by den Dikken in his series of recent papers (2006, 2007, and 2008). In doing so, this paper tries to explore a hidden ...

This paper attempts to give a new analysis of (preposition) stranding in terms of phase extension which has been originally proposed by den Dikken in his series of recent papers (2006, 2007, and 2008). In doing so, this paper tries to explore a hidden link between P(repostion) and C(omplementizer) with respect to stranding. In particular, this paper is focused on the asymmetry between leftward movement and rightward movement with respect to stranding. To be more specific, this paper attempts to answer the following questions. Why is P-stranding allowed with leftward movement but not with rightward movement in English? Why is C-stranding not allowed in both leftward and rightward movement like Extraposition in English? And why are P- and C-stranding not allowed both in rightward and leftward movement in Korean and Japanese?
It is widely known that English allows P-stranding in general. In this regard, canonical sentences are out of question in allowing stranded prepositions in elliptical contexts. Discrepancy, however, arises with PPs in adjunct function. In those examples, P-stranding is salvaged by deleting the illicit part. Some English sluicing data in fact show that P-stranding is in fact forced: some examples show that pied-piping is not allowed in English ellipsis contexts. Regarding C-stranding, it looks like the complementizer that is different from prepositions with respect to stranding. That cannot be stranded by the movement of TP to either direction. In principle, the whole that-clause (CP) can move to the front by leftward movement such as passivization and topicalization. However, TP alone cannot move leaving that behind. The fact is that that cannot be stranded by rightward movement like extraposition, either.
P-stranding is disallowed in Korean at all. Ungrammatical strings, however, can be repaired by ellipsis if their ungrammaticality is due to stranded Ps. In ellipsis contexts, if stranded Ps are deleted along with the containing TP, the whole derivation (or representation) is repaired and becomes a licit one. Canonically, C-stranding is disallowed, whether the stranding is due to leftward movement or rightward movement. Even if stranded Cs are deleted, however, a deviant representation (or derivation) is not repaired.
For these findings, one and the same answer turns out to be possible on the basis of phase extension under the assumption that D to P incorporation or T to C raising occurs inside PP and CP, respectively. If D incorporates with P, then PP becomes a phase, the extraction of DP out of which would violate the PIC. In the same way, if T raises to C, then CP becomes a phase, then the extraction out TP over CP boundary would also result in the violation of the PIC. The present paper also deals with the reason why some instances of stranding are repaired but others cannot. In addition, a special requirement of the second wh in multiple sluicing in English that it must be a PP is explained in the same way as a result of D to P incorporation and subsequent phase extension to PP.

본 연구는 집약적으로 요약하자면 궁극적으로 다음의 질문에 대한 답을 구하려는 시도로 진행되었다.

가. 국면 개념의 기본은 무엇인가
나. 국면의 확장이 가능하다면 왜, 어떠한 기제를 통하여 이루어 지는가
다. (수정)국면확장이론은 다음의 언어현상들에 대해 ...

본 연구는 집약적으로 요약하자면 궁극적으로 다음의 질문에 대한 답을 구하려는 시도로 진행되었다.

가. 국면 개념의 기본은 무엇인가
나. 국면의 확장이 가능하다면 왜, 어떠한 기제를 통하여 이루어 지는가
다. (수정)국면확장이론은 다음의 언어현상들에 대해 설명적 타당성을 갖는가
● 전치사좌초의 범어적 다양성
● 이동의 방향성에 따른 전치사좌초의 양상 차이
● 보문자좌초와 전치사좌초의 통일
● that-t 효과 및 전치사-t 효과의 통일
● 전치사좌초의 복구 가능성
● sluicing과 동사구생략에서 보이는 전치사좌초의 범어적 차이
● 논항이동과 전치사좌초
● 선형화이론 대비 우월성

위와 같이 본 연구는 국면확장이론을 수정한 수정국면확장이론을 통하여 좌초현상을 중심으로 서로 연관이 없어보이는 다양한 자료들에 대해 원리있는 통일적 설명을 시도함으로써 이들이 서로 독립적인 현상들이 아니라 숨겨진 연결고리로 묶인 하나의 현상임을 밝혔다.

이러한 질문에 대한 답은 영어나 불어, 독일어, 화란어, 일본어, 한국어 같은 개별 언어에 대한 이해의 깊이를 심화시키는데 도움을 줄 뿐 아니라, 궁극적으로 보편문법의 구현에 이바지 할 것이다. 이 연구는 숨겨진 유사성을 찾아내는 과학적 발견 절차를 통하여 최소주의 통사론의 발전에 기여하게 될 뿐 아니라, 궁극적으로 인간의 언어능력의 규명에 한걸음 나아가는 중요한 이론적 기여가 될 것이다.