论“为什么”的(非)运动——对宫川的回答(2017)

Yong-ha Kim
{"title":"论“为什么”的(非)运动——对宫川的回答(2017)","authors":"Yong-ha Kim","doi":"10.14342/SMOG.2021.109.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, we try to show that Miyagawa’s (2017) analysis is only partially on the right track. We believe that Miyagawa’s (2017) observation that WHY can be externally merged under TP is not completely wrong. The difference of our position from Miyagawa’s lies in our proposal that WHY be externally merged as a CP-modifier (Ko 2005) or as a VP-modifier (Tsai 2008). We will see that there are two types of WHY in Korean, and we will also encounter novel data concerning wh-less whquestions. Defending Ko’s (2005) CP-modifier hypothesis, we make a criticism of Miyagawa’s (2017) approach, and then try to come up with a (very tentative) alternative account which can explain the counterexamples to Ko’s CMH.","PeriodicalId":257842,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Modern Grammar","volume":"137 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the (Non-)Movement of WHY: A Reply to Miyagawa (2017)\",\"authors\":\"Yong-ha Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.14342/SMOG.2021.109.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper, we try to show that Miyagawa’s (2017) analysis is only partially on the right track. We believe that Miyagawa’s (2017) observation that WHY can be externally merged under TP is not completely wrong. The difference of our position from Miyagawa’s lies in our proposal that WHY be externally merged as a CP-modifier (Ko 2005) or as a VP-modifier (Tsai 2008). We will see that there are two types of WHY in Korean, and we will also encounter novel data concerning wh-less whquestions. Defending Ko’s (2005) CP-modifier hypothesis, we make a criticism of Miyagawa’s (2017) approach, and then try to come up with a (very tentative) alternative account which can explain the counterexamples to Ko’s CMH.\",\"PeriodicalId\":257842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Modern Grammar\",\"volume\":\"137 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Modern Grammar\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14342/SMOG.2021.109.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Modern Grammar","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14342/SMOG.2021.109.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,我们试图证明Miyagawa(2017)的分析只是部分正确。我们认为Miyagawa(2017)关于WHY可以外部合并到TP下的观察并不是完全错误的。我们的立场与宫川的不同之处在于,我们的建议是WHY在外部合并为cp修饰语(Ko 2005)或vp修饰语(Tsai 2008)。我们将看到韩语中有两种类型的WHY,并且我们还将遇到关于wh-less whquestions的新数据。为了捍卫Ko(2005)的cp -修饰语假设,我们对Miyagawa(2017)的方法进行了批评,然后试图提出一个(非常试探性的)替代解释,可以解释Ko的CMH的反例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
On the (Non-)Movement of WHY: A Reply to Miyagawa (2017)
In this paper, we try to show that Miyagawa’s (2017) analysis is only partially on the right track. We believe that Miyagawa’s (2017) observation that WHY can be externally merged under TP is not completely wrong. The difference of our position from Miyagawa’s lies in our proposal that WHY be externally merged as a CP-modifier (Ko 2005) or as a VP-modifier (Tsai 2008). We will see that there are two types of WHY in Korean, and we will also encounter novel data concerning wh-less whquestions. Defending Ko’s (2005) CP-modifier hypothesis, we make a criticism of Miyagawa’s (2017) approach, and then try to come up with a (very tentative) alternative account which can explain the counterexamples to Ko’s CMH.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
On the Relationship between Performance Level of Argumentative Essays and Text Network Characteristics Mwe-l: Its Grammatical Development and Interpretation as “Surprisal/Disapproval” Disguised Imperatives in Korean Perception and Production of English Liquids /l/ and /r/ before and after Learning by Korean English Leaners A Study on the Acceptability of Homomorphic Causative/Passive Verbs in Korean
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1