Cover not available
Article published In:
Language and Linguistics
Vol. 21:1 (2020) ► pp.33–53

The use of the Korean first person possessive pronoun nay vis-à-vis wuli

| Ajou University

This paper takes a corpus-driven approach to the Korean first person possessive pronoun nay with reference to its plural counterpart wuli. The examination of the frequent noun collocates of the two pronouns in Sejong Corpus reveals the close connection between nay and inalienable entities as well as persons lower than the speaker. Meanwhile, wuli is strongly coupled with places or organizations alongside persons higher than the speaker. Pragmatic principles account for the difference between the kinship term collocates of the two pronouns, such as Horn’s (1984; 1989) R-principle or Levinson’s (2000) M-principle. The non-prototypical singular use of wuli triggers a pragmatic effect of expressing, for example, affection. The frequent collocation of nay with foreign/loan nouns is a reflection of the tendency that people more interested in social mobility (younger generation and women) are more ready to employ nay rather than the singular wuli and to accept foreign/loan words. The meaning of nay emerging from its interaction with noun collocates is that it is closely connected with being inalienable, private, or unshared. Meanwhile, the singular meaning of wuli is pragmatically derived, which is construed as being grouped, deferent, or general.

Keywords: possessives, first person pronouns, non-prototypical, corpus-based approach, nay
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Possession and possessive constructions
    • 2.2Possessive constructions and first person possessive pronouns in Korean
  • 3.Data collection and methods
  • 4.Analysis and discussion
    • 4.1Top collocates of wuli and nay
    • 4.2Abstract and concrete nouns
    • 4.3Kinship terms and social relation nouns
    • 4.4Body part nouns
    • 4.5Place and organization (PO) nouns
  • 5.Summary and conclusions
  • Sources
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

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

Published online: 2 January 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00056.hye
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
2012 Possession and ownership: A cross-linguistic perspective. In Aikhenvald, Alexandra & Dixon, R. M. W. (eds.), Possession and ownership: A cross-linguistic typology, 1–64. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chambers, J. K.
1992 Linguistic correlates of gender and sex. English World-Wide 13(2). 173–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Choi, Hyun-Bae
1961 Wulimalpon [Grammar of our language]. Seoul: Cengummwunhwasa.Google Scholar
Choi, In Ji
2012 Ilinching pokswu taymyengsauy celchacek uymiwa kwanleynseng [The procedural meaning of first person plural pronouns and relevance]. Enehak [The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal] 20(2). 171–197.Google Scholar
Christofaki, Rodanthi
2018 Expressing the self in Japanese: Indexical expressions in the service of indexical thoughts. In Huang, Minyao & Jaszczolt, Kasia M. (eds.), Expressing the self: Cultural diversity and cognitive universals, 72–87. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W.
2010 Basic linguistic theory volume 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Durieux, Frank
1990 The meanings of the specifying genitive in English: A cognitive analysis (Antwerp Papers in Linguistics 66). Antwerp: Department of Linguistics, University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul
1989 Studies in the way of words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd
2006 Possession: Cognitive sources, forces, and grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Helmbrecht, Johannes
2015 A typology of non-prototypical uses of personal pronouns: Synchrony and diachrony. Journal of Pragmatics 881. 176–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Janet
1992 An introduction to sociolinguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Horn, Lawrence
1984 Towards a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. In Schiffrin, Deborah (ed.), Meaning, form, and use in context: Linguistic applications (Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1984), 11–42. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
1989 A natural history of negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jaszczolt, Kasia M.
2013 First-person reference in discourse: Aims and strategies. Journal of Pragmatics 48(1). 57–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Meaning in linguistic interaction: Semantics, metasemantics, philosophy of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kempson, Ruth
1977 Semantic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kim, Cheon-Hak
2012 Soyu kwankyeywa soyu kwuseng [Possessive relations and possessive constructions]. Hankwuke uymihak [Korean Semantics] 391. 125–148.Google Scholar
Kim, Jung-Nam
2003 Hankwuke taymyengsa wuli uy uymiwa yongpep [The meaning and usage of the Korean pronoun wuli ]. Hankwuke uymihak [Korean Semantics] 131. 257–274.Google Scholar
Kim, Myung-Hee
1987 {Uy}uy uymi kinung. [The semantic function of {uy}]. Ene [Korean Journal of Linguistics] 12(2). 248–260.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Johnson, Mark
1980 Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lee, Han-Gyu
2007 Hankwuke taymyengsa wuli [A pragmatic and sociocultural approach to the so-called 1st person pronoun wuli in Korean]. Tamhwawa inci [Discourse and Cognition] 14(3). 155–178.Google Scholar
Lee, Hong-Sik
2007 Oylaye/oykwuke sayong mich swunhwae swuyong silthay cosa [A study on the use of foreign/ loan words and the acceptance of refined words]. Seoul: National Institute of the Korean Language. (Project report 11-1370252-000097-01.)Google Scholar
Lee, Hye-Kyung
2015 The corpus-pragmatic analysis of wuli . Tamhwawa inci [Discourse and Cognition] 22(3). 59–78.Google Scholar
2018 Self-referring in Korean with reference to Korean first-person markers. In Huang, Minyao & Jaszczolt, Kasia M. (eds.), Expressing the self: Cultural diversity and cognitive universals, 58–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, Iksop & Ramsey, Robert
2001 The Korean language. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephan
2000 Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, George & Johnson-Laird, Philip
1976 Language and perception. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mok, Jung-Su
2007 Hankwuke cosa {uy}uy mwunpepcek ciwiwa uymi kinungey tayhaye [On the grammatical status and the semantic function of the Korean particle {uy}]. Kwukekyoyuk [The Education of Korean Language] 1231. 437–470.Google Scholar
Nikiforidou, Kiki
1991 The meanings of the genitive: A case study in semantic structure and semantic change. Cognitive Linguistics 2(2). 149–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poutsma, Hendrik
1916 A grammar of late modern English: For the use of continental, especially Dutch, students. Part 2: The parts of speech. Groningen: P. Nordhoff.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph & Greenbaum, Sidney & Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
1985 A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Shin, Ki-Hyun
2000 Grammaticalisation of social relationship. (Paper presented at 2000 Summer Conference of the Society of Modern Grammar, Daegu, 27 May 2000.)
Siewierska, Anna
2004 Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, Melinda & Winckler, Walter
1991 Relevance theory: Explaining verbal communication. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics Plus 181. 1–97.Google Scholar
Sohn, Ho-Min
1999 The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2013 Korean. Seoul: Korea University Press.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre
1986 Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tanaka, Hiroaki
2012 Scalar implicature in Japanese: Contrastive wa and intersubjectivity. (Paper presented at the 1st International Conference of the American Pragmatics Association (AMPRA), Charlotte, 19–21 October 2012.)
Tayler, John R.
1989 Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in linguistic theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
1996 Possessives in English: An exploration in cognitive grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Van der Vegt, Wouter
2014 Attitudes towards English loanwords in Dutch news broadcasts: The influence of gender and age. Leiden: Leiden University. (Master’s thesis.)Google Scholar
Yoon, Jae-Hak
2003 Tanswucek yongpepuy wuli [Singular wuli we ]. Enewa cengpo [Language and Information] 7(2). 1–30.Google Scholar
2009 Soyuuy uymiyuheng: Hanyeng soyukwumwun uymichai. [Types of possessive meanings: Semantic differences between Korean and English possessives]. Enewa cengpo [Language and Information] 13(1). 93–125.Google Scholar