{"title":"On Korean progressive/perfect constructions","authors":"Kwang-sup Kim","doi":"10.1016/j.lingua.2025.103903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>It is well-known that the <em>−ko iss-</em> form in Korean is ambiguous, being interpreted as either a progressive reading or a resultant state reading. The primary claim of this article is that <em>−ko iss-</em> is, in fact, six-way ambiguous. This ambiguity arises from the interplay of three factors: the ambiguity of <em>−ko</em>, the ambiguity of <em>iss-</em>, and the optional presence of the light verb <em>v*</em>. The morpheme <em>−ko</em> is ambiguous between ‘simultaneous’ (<em>+Simul</em>) and ‘non-simultaneous’ (<em>−Simul</em>) readings. When used as an aspect marker, <em>−ko<sub>[+Simul]</sub></em> denotes the in-progress state of an event, while <em>−ko<sub>[−Simul]</sub></em> indicates either a resultant state or a continuative state of the event or state. Meanwhile, <em>iss-</em> can be interpreted either as a raising predicate or as a control predicate. Furthermore, the <em>−ko iss-</em> form can optionally co-occur with the light verb <em>v*</em>. Given these ambiguities, there are theoretically eight possible <em>−ko iss-</em> constructions. However, this article shows that only six of these are attested, as some combinations result in pragmatic anomaly. In accounting for the −<em>ko iss</em>- form, this article demonstrates that Korean progressive and perfect constructions share a striking similarity with their English counterparts, as both rely on the same underlying mechanism.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47955,"journal":{"name":"Lingua","volume":"318 ","pages":"Article 103903"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lingua","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0024384125000282","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
It is well-known that the −ko iss- form in Korean is ambiguous, being interpreted as either a progressive reading or a resultant state reading. The primary claim of this article is that −ko iss- is, in fact, six-way ambiguous. This ambiguity arises from the interplay of three factors: the ambiguity of −ko, the ambiguity of iss-, and the optional presence of the light verb v*. The morpheme −ko is ambiguous between ‘simultaneous’ (+Simul) and ‘non-simultaneous’ (−Simul) readings. When used as an aspect marker, −ko[+Simul] denotes the in-progress state of an event, while −ko[−Simul] indicates either a resultant state or a continuative state of the event or state. Meanwhile, iss- can be interpreted either as a raising predicate or as a control predicate. Furthermore, the −ko iss- form can optionally co-occur with the light verb v*. Given these ambiguities, there are theoretically eight possible −ko iss- constructions. However, this article shows that only six of these are attested, as some combinations result in pragmatic anomaly. In accounting for the −ko iss- form, this article demonstrates that Korean progressive and perfect constructions share a striking similarity with their English counterparts, as both rely on the same underlying mechanism.
期刊介绍:
Lingua publishes papers of any length, if justified, as well as review articles surveying developments in the various fields of linguistics, and occasional discussions. A considerable number of pages in each issue are devoted to critical book reviews. Lingua also publishes Lingua Franca articles consisting of provocative exchanges expressing strong opinions on central topics in linguistics; The Decade In articles which are educational articles offering the nonspecialist linguist an overview of a given area of study; and Taking up the Gauntlet special issues composed of a set number of papers examining one set of data and exploring whose theory offers the most insight with a minimal set of assumptions and a maximum of arguments.