Article published in:
Periphery – Diachronic and Cross-Linguistic Approaches
Edited by Yuko Higashiizumi, Noriko O. Onodera and Sung-Ock S. Sohn
[Journal of Historical Pragmatics 17:2] 2016
► pp. 231–254

Development of the discourse marker kulentey (‘but, by the way’) in Korean

A diachronic and synchronic perspective

| University of California, Los Angeles
This study examines the diachronic and synchronic development of the discourse marker kulentey (‘but, by the way’). Etymologically, having derived from the sequence of the deictic predicate and the clause-final suffix –nuntey (‘but, in the circumstance that’), kulentey is frequently used as a turn-initiator in spoken discourse. While each source form of kulentey is attested in the earliest text written in Korean (fifteenth century), the form itself is found only in early-twentieth-century texts. The development of kulentey at peripheries shows unique features in terms of discourse functions and prosody. There exists a functional asymmetry between the left and the right peripheral kulentey. Prosodically, LP kulentey forms a salient disjuncture, while the RP kulentey is integrated into the preceding element. Using both written and spoken corpora, this study investigates the emergence and development of kulentey at peripheries, and its interaction with prosody.
Keywords: contrastive, background information, deictic, prosody, discourse marker, social action
Published online: 06 April 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.17.2.04soh
References
An, Cwu-Ho
2000 “‘Kule’ kyeyel cepsoksa-ui hyengseng kwaceng-kwa mwunpephwa” [The formation process and grammaticalization of ‘kule’ connectives]. Kukehak [Korean Language Studies] 351: 113–141.Google Scholar
Beeching, Kate and Ulrich Detges
(eds) 2014 Discourse Functions at the Left and Right Periphery: Crosslinguistic Investigations of Language Use and Language Change. Leiden: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul and David Weenink
2010 Praat 5.2.06. University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. and Elizabeth C. Traugott
2005 Lexicalization and Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cha
2010 Interaction of Prosody and Discourse Function”. Korean Discourse Marker mwe in the Sentence-Final Position”. Language Facts and Perspectives 251: 227–56.Google Scholar
Choi, Jane
2007 A Corpus-based Discourse Analysis of Korean Discourse Markers: An Analysis of Spoken and Written Use. PhD thesis. University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Han, Na-Rae, David Graff and Myeonchul Kim
2003 Korean Telephone Conversations Lexicon. Linguistic Data Consortium: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva
2002 World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
1984 “A Change-of-state Token and Aspects of its Sequential Placement”. In J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage (eds), Structures of Social Action, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1998 “Oh-prefaced Responses to Inquiry”. Language in Society 271: 291–334. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012 “The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge”. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 30–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul
1987 “Emergent Grammar”. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society , 139–157. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
Hopper, Paul and Elizabeth C. Traugott
2003 Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huh, Woong
1991 15–16 Seyki wuli yeysmalpon-uy yeksa [An Overview of Korean Grammar in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Texts]. Seoul, Korea: Thap Press.Google Scholar
Jeon, Young-ok and Killim Nam
2005 “Kwuewa mwuneuy cepsok phyohyen pikyo yenkwu: “Kulentey, -nuntey” lul cwungsimulo” [A Comparative Study of Conjunctions in Spoken and Written Korean: Focusing on “kulentey, –nuntey”]. Hanmalyenkwu [Korean Studies] 171: 169–194.Google Scholar
Jun, Sun-Ah
2007 “The Intermediate Phrase in Korean Intonation: Evidence from Sentence Processing”. In Carlos Gussenhoven and Tomas Riad (eds), Tones and Tunes: Studies in Word and Sentence Prosody, 143–167. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Stephanie Hyeri and Sung-Ock Sohn
2015 “Grammar as an Emergent Response to Interactional Needs: A Study of Final kuntey ‘but’ in Korean Conversation”. Journal of Pragmatics 831: 73–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Uy-Do
1990 Wulimal iumssikkuthuy thongsicek yenkwu [A Diachronic Study of Connective Suffixes in Korean]. Seoul: Emwunkak.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian
1995 Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Lincom Europe.Google Scholar
Mulder, Jean and Sandy A. Thompson
2008 “The Grammaticalization of but as a Final Particle in Conversation”. In Ritva Laury (ed.), Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining: The Multifunctionality of Conjunctions, 179–204. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Onodera, Noriko O
2004 Japanese Discourse Markers: Synchronic and Diachronic Discourse Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Park, Kun-Young
2001 Hankwuke cisi tayyongeuy mwunpephwa [Grammaticalization of Korean Substitutes]. Unpublished PhD thesis. Hankwuk University of Foreign Studies.Google Scholar
Park, Yong-Yae
1998 “A Discourse Analysis of Contrastive Connectives in English, Korean, and Japanese Conversation: with Special Reference to the Context of Dispreferred Responses”. In Andreas H. Jucker and Yael Ziv (eds), Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory, 227–299. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1999 “The Korean Connective nuntey in Conversational Discourse”. Journal of Pragmatics 311: 191–218. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rhee, Seongha
2016 “LP and RP in grammaticalization of discourse markers from ‘what’ in Korean”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 17 (2): 255–281. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-taking for Conversation”. Language 50 (4): 696–735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1988 Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sejong Corpus
2010 21st Century Sejong Project. The National Institute of the Korean Language.Google Scholar
Sohn, Ho-Min
1999 The Korean Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sohn, Sung-Ock and Stephanie Hyeri Kim
2014 “The Interplay of Discourse and Prosody at the Left and Right Periphery in Korean: An Analysis of kuntey ‘but’”. In Kate Beeching and Ulrich Detges (eds), Discourse Functions at the Left and Right Periphery: Crosslinguistic Investigations of Language Use and Language Change, 221–249. Leiden: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sohn, Sung-Ock
2006 “Frequency effects in grammaticalization: from Relative Clause to Clause Connective in Korean”. In Naomi McGloin and Junki Mori (eds), Japanese/Korean Linguistics, Volume 151, 184–195. Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C
2011 “ ‘He withdrew, disconcerted and offended, no doubt; but surely it was not my fault’: On the Function of Adverbs of Certainty at the Left and Right Peripheries of Clause”. Paper presented at IPrA-12 Conference . 3–8 July. Manchester, UK.
2013 “Remark on the Panel of Form–Function Periphery Structure: Focus on Exchange Structure and Action structure”. Paper presented at the IPra-13 . September. New Delhi.
Traugott, Elizabeth C. and Richard B. Dasher
2002 Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Yang, Myonghui
1996 Hyentaykwuke tayyongeey tayhan yenkwu [The Study on Korean Referential Terms in Contemporary Korean]. PhD thesis. Seoul National University.Google Scholar
Yeon, Jaehoon and Lucien Brown
2011 Korean: A Comprehensive Grammar. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Rhee, Seongha
2020. On the many faces of coarseness: The case of the Korean mak ‘coarsely’. Journal of Pragmatics 170 ► pp. 396 ff. Crossref logo
Rhee, Seongha & Hyun Jung Koo
2021.  In Studies at the Grammar-Discourse Interface [Studies in Language Companion Series, 219], ► pp. 78 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.