Cover not available
Part of
Non-canonical Control in a Cross-linguistic Perspective
Edited by Anne Mucha, Jutta M. Hartmann and Beata Trawiński
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 270] 2021
► pp. 107–136

On the obligatory versus no control split in Korean

| Universität Leipzig
| Universität Leipzig
In Korean, Obligatory Control may, under certain conditions, fail to obtain. We present non-canonical cases of logophoric object control where (1) movement of the control clause, and (2) an overt infinitival subject give rise to configurations unexpectedly lacking the Obligatory Control signature; complements to logophoric object control verbs thus exhibit an alternation between Obligatory Control and No Control. In the No Control case, however, the embedded subject remains subject to the restriction that it cannot refer to the matrix author. We model the Obligatory versus No Control split derivationally, and show that control complementizers encode information sensitive to attitudinal function.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Data
    • 2.1Control complementizers
    • 2.2Base and inverse order
    • 2.3The orientation of control complementizers towards attitudinal function
      • 2.3.1The anti-AUTHOR restriction
      • 2.3.2The AUTHOR restriction
      • 2.3.3Conditions on the anti-AUTHOR restriction
    • 2.4Overt infinitival subjects
    • 2.5Interim summary
  • 3.Analysis
    • 3.1The control clause in the inverse order has moved
      • 3.1.1The inverse control clause is selected by the control verb
      • 3.1.2Extraction patterns
      • 3.1.3The anti-reconstruction of control clause movement
    • 3.2The OC-NC split
      • 3.2.1PRO as a bound minimal pronoun
      • 3.2.2Derivations
      • 3.2.3The presence vs absence of obligatory de se
  • 4.Open issues
    • 4.1Subject control
    • 4.2Lifting the anti-AUTHOR restriction
    • 4.3Outlook
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 17 September 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.270.04lee
References (49)
References
Ahn, Dorothy. 2015. Condition A, exemption, and logophoricity in Korean. Ms, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Ahn, Dorothy & Charnavel, Isabelle. 2017. Perspective on Korean anaphors: Comparing inanimate cachey vs. animate caki-casin. In Proceedings of the 34th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics(WCCFL 34), Aaron Kaplan, Abby Kaplan, Miranda K. McCarvel & Edward J. Rubin (eds), 16–23. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Barbosa, Pilar. 2009. A case for an Agree-based Theory of Control. In Proceedings of the 11th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar, Sun-Woong Kim (ed.), 101–123. Seoul: Hankuk.Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric. 2001. Scope reconstruction and A-movement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 19(1): 503–548. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 1989. Anaphoric AGR. In The Null Subject Parameter [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15], Osvaldo Jaeggli & Kenneth J. Safir (eds), 69–109. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Castañeda, Hector-Neri. 1966. ‘He’: A study in the logic of self-consciousness. Ratio 8: 130–157.Google Scholar
Cho, Jai-Hyoung. 1994. Scrambling in Korean: Crossover, Reconstruction and Binding Theory. PhD dissertation, The University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Choe, Hyun-Sook. 2006. On (backward) object control in Korean. In Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics XI, Susumu Kuno (ed.), 373–386. Cambridge MA: Harvard University, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Cole, Peter, Hermon, Gabriella & Sung, Li-May. 1990. Principles and parameters of long-distance reflexives. Linguistic Inquiry 21(1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Cormack, Annabel & Smith, Neil. 2004. Backward control in Korean and Japanese. In University College of London Working Papers in Linguistics 16, Ad Neelemn & Mary Pearce (eds), 57–83. London: UCL.Google Scholar
Doliana, Aaron & Sundaresan, Sandhya. 2021. Proxy Control: A new species of control in grammar. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gamerschlag, Thomas. 2007. Semantic and structural aspects of complement control in Korean. In Studies in Complement Control [ZAS Papers in Linguistics 47], Barbara Stiebels (ed.), 61–123. Berlin: Leibniz-Centre General Linguistics (ZAS).Google Scholar
Grewendorf, Günther & Sabel, Joachim. 1999. Scrambling in German and Japanese: Adjunction versus multiple specifiers. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17(1): 1–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ha, Iljoo. 2004. Specificity and intervention effects in Korean. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop in General Linguistics (WIGL 4), Nathan Culwell-Kanarek (ed.), 21–31. Madison WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
Heck, Fabian & Müller, Gereon. 2007. Extremely local optimization. In Proceedings of the 26th Western Conference on Linguistics (WECOL26), Erin Bainbridge & Brian Agbayani (eds), 170–183. Fresno CA: California State University.Google Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert. 1999. Movement and control. Linguistic Inquiry 30(1): 69–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. Move! A Minimalist Theory of Construal. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2003. On control. In Minimalist Syntax [Generative Syntax 7], Randall Hendrick (ed.), 6–81. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kang, Arum. 2015. (In)definiteness, Disjunction and Anti-specificity in Korean: A Study in the Semantics-pragmatics Interface. PhD dissertation, The University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Kim, Ji-Hye & Yoon, James Hye Suk. 2009. Long-distance bound local anaphors in Korean. An empirical study of the Korean anaphor cakicasin. Lingua 119(5): 733–755. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Shin-Sook. 2010. The structures of modality in Korean. In Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Altaic Formal Linguistics, Hiroki Maezawa & Azusa Yokogoshi (eds), 171–180. Cambridge: MITWPL.Google Scholar
Kim, Sun-Hee. 1994. Division of Labor between Grammar and Pragmatics: The Distribution and Interpretation of Anaphora. PhD dissertation, Yale University.Google Scholar
Ko, Heejeong. 2018. Scrambling in Korean syntax. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 2009. Making a pronoun: Fake indexicals as windows into the properties of pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 40(2): 187–237. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kwon, Jongil. 2010. Scrambling of Korean embedded clauses. Studies in Generative Grammar 20(2): 229–249. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kwon, Nayoung, Monahan, Philip & Polinsky, Maria. 2010. Object control in Korean: A backward control impostor. In Movement Theory of Control [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 154], Norbert Hornstein & Maria Polinsky (eds), 299–328. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Landau, Idan. 2013. Control in Generative Grammar: A Research Companion. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. A Two-tiered Theory of Control. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, Kum Young. 2009. Finite Control in Korean. PhD dissertation, University of Iowa. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, Young-Suk. 1993. Scrambling as Case-Driven Obligatory Movement. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Madigan, Sean William. 2008. Control Constructions in Korean. PhD dissertation, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Mensching, Guido. 2000. Infinitive Constructions with Specified Subjects: A Syntactic Analysis of the Romance Languages. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Monahan, Philip. 2005. Backward object control in Korean. Ms, University of Maryland.Google Scholar
Müller, Gereon. 1998. Incomplete Category Cronting: A Derivational Approach to Remnant Movement in German. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mun, Bokyung. 2016. The Interaction of Modality and Tense in Korean. PhD dissertation, Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Park, Jong Un. 2011. Clause Structure and Null Subjects: Referential Dependencies in Korean. PhD dissertation, Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Polinsky, Maria. 2007. Object control in Korean: Obligatory vs nonobligatory control. In Studies in Complement Control [ZAS Papers in Linguistics 47], Barbara Stiebels (ed.), 197–217. Berlin: Leibniz-Centre General Linguistics (ZAS).Google Scholar
Polinsky, Maria & Kwon, Nayoung. 2006. Object control in Korean: Structure and processing. In Proceedings of the 15th Japanese/Korean Linguistics Conference, Naomi McGloin & Junki Mori (eds), 249–262. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Polinsky, Maria, Monahan, Philip & Kwon, Nayoung. 2007. Object control in Korean: How many constructions? Language Research 43(1): 1–33.Google Scholar
Royer, Justin. 2020. Binding and coreference in mayan: Evidence for object raising. Ms, McGill University. Talk given at the 51st Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society at McGill University.
Sells, Peter. 1987. Aspects of logophoricity. Linguistic Inquiry 18(3): 445–479.Google Scholar
Sisovics, Milena. 2018. Embedded Jussives as Instances of Control: The case of Mongolian and Korean. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna. 2009. Overt nominative subjects in infinitival complements cross-linguistically: Data, diagnostics, and preliminary analyses. In Papers in Syntax [NYU Working Papers in Linguistics 2], Patricia Irwin & Violeta Vasquéz Rojas Maldonado (eds). New York NY: New York University, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Uegaki, Wataru. 2011. Controller shift in centered-world semantics. Ms, MIT. Talk given at Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft 33 at the University of Göttingen.
Yang, Dong-Whee. 1982. Control and binding in Korean. Linguistic Journal of Korea 7(2): 257–283.Google Scholar
. 1983. The extended binding theory of anaphors. Language Research 19(2): 195–218.Google Scholar
. 1985. On the integrity of control theory. In Proceedings of the 15th North East Linguistic Society, Stephen Berman, Jae-Woong Choe & Joyce McDonough (eds), 389–408. Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Yoon, Jeong-Me. 1989. Long-distance anaphors in Korean and their crosslinguistic implications. In Proceedings from the General Session of the 25th Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Bradley Music, Randolph Graczyk & Caroline Wiltshire (eds), 479–495. Chicago IL: CLS.Google Scholar
Yoon, Jeong-Mee. 1991. The Syntax of A-chains: A Typological Study of ECM and Scrambling. PhD dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar