Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics
Vol. 34:4 (2024) ► pp.588–614

Notes on word order variation in Korean

ORCID logo | University of Minnesota Duluth
 | SOAS University of London, The Academy of Korean Studies
This article aims to develop an analysis of scrambling or word order variation in Korean from a pragmatic/cognitive perspective. Although extensive research has been carried out on this issue, most extant research attempts to provide analyses of the phenomenon by identifying grammatical features posited for syntactic operations. Unlike the previous research, we demonstrate that word order variation needs to be understood with respect to its communicative function; it is motivated by the speaker’s intention to convey information more effectively. It is emphasized that understanding the association between information structure and word order variation should be an essential task for the analysis of the latter phenomenon. We further discuss five conversational strategies that motivate non-canonical word orders, which include juxtaposition, backmasking, right dislocation, add-on, and floated quantifier strategies.
Keywords: add-on, backmasking, floated quantifiers, juxtaposition, reference point, right-dislocation
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Topic in Korean
    • 2.1Defining topic
    • 2.2Reference point
  • 3.Focus in Korean
  • 4.The juxtaposition strategy
  • 5.Postposed topic
    • 5.1The backmasking strategy
    • 5.2The right dislocation strategy
  • 6.The add-on strategy
  • 7.Floated quantifiers
    • 7.1Issues with FQs
    • 7.2Why do quantifiers float?
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • The abbreviations used in the glosses are as follows
  • References
Published online: 20 July 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.22023.par
References (64)
References
Ahn, Dorothy, and Heejeong Ko. 2022. “On Non-conservativity of Korean Floating Quantifiers.” Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 7 (1): 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ahn, Hee-Don, and Sungeun Cho. 2016. “A Uniform Analysis of Right-Dislocation: A Reply to Ko (2016).” Language Research 52 (5): 213–245Google Scholar
Ahn, Dorothy, and Uli Sauerland. 2017. “Measure Constructions with Relative Measures: Towards a Syntax of Non-conservative Construals.” The Linguistic Review 34 (2): 215-248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Büring, Daniel. 2016. Intonation and Meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Choi, Hye-Won. 1999. Optimizing Structure in Context: Scrambling and Information Structure. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Choi, Kiyong. 2001. “hankwuke swulyangsa kwuseng-uy kwuco-wa uymi: pisokkyekhyeng-ul cwungsim-ulo [The Structure and Interpretation of Non-genitive Numeral Classifier Constructions in Korean].” Language Research 37 (3): 445–480.Google Scholar
Choi, Yoonji. 2016. “hankwuke cengpokwuco yenkwu [A Study on the Information Structure in Korean Language].” Ph.D. dissertation. Seoul National University.
Chomsky, Noam. 1971. “Deep Structure, Surface Structure and Semantic Interpretation.” In Semantics: An Interdisciplinary Reader in Philosophy, Linguistics and Psychology, ed. by Danny D. Steinberg, and Leon A. Jakobovits, 183–216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chung, Hi-Ja. 1996. “yenge tamhwaeyse chocemhyengkwa eswunpyenhyeng [Focal Mode and Word Order Variations in English Discourse].” Journal of Language Science 31: 227–257.Google Scholar
Erteschik-Shir, Nomi. 1997. The Dynamics of Focus Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2007. Information Structure: The Syntax-Discourse Interface. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., Barbara A. Fox, and Sandra A. Thompson. 1996. “Practices in the Construction of Turns: The “TCU” Revisited.” Pragmatics 6 (3): 427–454.Google Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., and Sandra A. Thompson. 1996. “Interactional Units in Conversation: Syntactic, Intonational and Pragmatic Resources for the Projection of Turn Completion.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson, 134–184. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fukushima, Kazuhiko. 1991. “Phrase Structure Grammar, Montague Semantics, and Floating Quantifiers in Japanese.” Linguistic and Philosophy 141: 581–628. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Furuya, Kaori. 2018. “A Reconsideration of the (Non-)uniform Syntax of Korean Right-Dislocation Description.” Linguistic Research 35(2): 275–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gundel, Jeannette K. 1974. “The Role of Topic and Comment in Linguistic Theory.” Ph.D. dissertation. University of Texas.
Gundel, Jeannette K., and Thorstein Fretheim. 2004. “Topic and Focus.” In The Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Laurence R. Horn, and Gregory Ward, 175–196. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing,Google Scholar
Gunji, Takao, and Koiti Hasida. 1989. “Measurement and Quantification.” In Topics in Constraint-Based Grammar of Japanese, ed. by Takao Gunji, and Kôiti Hashida, 39–79. Dordrecth: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Han, Jeong-han. 2000. “swulyangsa yutongkwumwun-uy cengpokwuco [Information Structure of Korean Quantifier Float Constructions].” Korean Semantics 61: 233–247.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K., and Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London, UK: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jun, Youngchul. 2019. “hankwuke cengpokwuphyoci un/nun-uy uymi [A Semantics for (n)un as an Information Structure Marker: With a Focus on the Meaning of Contrast].” Eoneohag: Journal of the Linguistics Society of Korea 851: 99–137.Google Scholar
Kang, Beom-Mo. 2002. “Categories and Meanings of Korean Floating Quantifiers: With Some Reference to Japanese.” Journal of East Asian Linguistics 111: 375–398. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kang, Soyoung. 2008. “eswuntochikwumwun-uy tamhwakinung pwunsek [A Discourse Function of Inversion].” Korean Semantics 261, 1–20.Google Scholar
. 2014. “hankwuke kwuetamhwaeyse chwukaeuy tamhwakinung yenkwu [A Study on Discourse Functions of Add-on in Korean Spoken Discourses].” Textlinguistics 371: 13–39.Google Scholar
Kim, Alan Hyun-Oak. 1998. “Preverbal Focusing and Type XXIII Languages.” In Studies in Syntactic Typology, ed. by Michael Hammond, Edith A. Moravcsik, and Jessica Wirth, 145–169. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Christina. 2005. “Order and Meaning: Numeral Classifiers and Specificity in Korean.” In Proceedings of the 24th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. by John Alderete, 218–226. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Kim, Dae-Bin. 1995. “Non-specificity and Scrambling.” Studies in Generative Grammar 51: 199–238.Google Scholar
Kim, Haeyeon. 2004. “tayhwasang-eyse eswunpyenihyeng-kwa chemkaekwumwun-ey tayhan sanghocakyongcek cepkun [An Interactional Approach to Word Order Variability and Turn Increments in Conversation].” Journal of Humanities 371: 97–113.Google Scholar
Kim, Jong-Bok. 2013. “Floated Numeral Classifiers in Korean: A Non-derivational, Functional Account.” Lingua 1331: 189–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Jong-Bok, and Jaehyung Yang. 2007. “Syntax and Semantics of Korean Numeral Classifier Constructions.” In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, ed. by Stefan Müller, 136–172. Stanford: CSLI Online Publications. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Kyu-hyun. 2008. “hankwuke tayhwakwuco-wa mwunpep: tayhwapwunsekuy sikak [Conversational Structures and Grammar in Korean: A Conversation-analytic Perspective].” Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics 23 (3): 31–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Min-Sun. 2007. “hankwuke-uy mokceke cenchi-wa cosa-ey ttalun cengpokwuco [Object-Preposing in Korean and Information Structure].” Korean Semantics 231: 23–47.Google Scholar
Kim, Yu-jin. 2008. “tayhwa-uy tochikwumwun-ey nathananun kangcophyohyen-ey tayhan yenkwu [A Study on an Emphasis Expression Seen in Inversion Sentences in Conversation].” Korean Language and Culture 371: 89–109.Google Scholar
Ko, Heejeong. 2007. “Asymmetries in Scrambling and Cyclic Linearization.” Linguistic Inquiry 381: 49–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Edges in Syntax: Scrambling and Cyclic Linearization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Two Ways to the Right: A Hybrid Approach to Right Dislocation in Korean.” Language Research 51 (1): 3-40.Google Scholar
. 2016. “Gapless Right-Dislocation: The Role of Overt Correlates.” Language Research 52 (1): 3-32.Google Scholar
. 2018. “Scrambling in Korean Syntax.” Oxford Research Encyclopedias, 1–43 [online version]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kumashiro, Toshiyuki. 2016. A Cognitive Grammar of Japanese Clause Structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kumashiro, Toshiyuki, and Ronald W. Langacker. 2003. “Double-Subject and Complex Predicate Constructions.” Cognitive Linguistics 141: 1–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuno, Susumu. 1978. “Theoretical Perspectives on Japanese Linguistics.” In Problems in Japanese Syntax and Semantics, ed. by John Hinds, and Irwin Howard, 213–285. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
. 1995. “Null Elements and Parallel Structures in Japanese.” In Japanese Sentence Processing, ed. by Reiko Mazuka, and Noriko Nagai, 209–233. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumu, and Ken-ichi Takami. 2003. “Remarks on Uaccusativity and Unergativity in Japanese and Korean.” In Japanese/Korean Linguistics, vol. 121, ed. by William McClure, 280–294. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1993. “Reference Point Constructions.” Cognitive Linguistics 41, 1–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001. “Topic, Subject, and Possessor.” In A Cognitive Approach to the Verb, ed. by Hanne Gram Simonsen, and Rolf Theil Endresen, 11–48. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
2008. Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009. Investigations in Cognitive Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, Ki Gap. 1996. “hankwuke chemka kwumwun-uy tamhwalon-cek haysek [A Discourse Analysis of Add-on Constructions in Korean].” Journal of Korean Linguistics 271: 1–27.Google Scholar
Lee, Wonbin, and Sungeun Cho. 2003. “Argument Scrambling and Object Shift.” Studies in Generative Grammar 131: 39–59.Google Scholar
Lee, Young-Suk. 1993. “Scrambling as Case-driven Obligatory Movement.” Ph.D dissertation. University of Pennsylvania.
Miyagawa, Shigeru. 1989. Structure and Case Marking in Japanese. NY: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miyagawa, Shigeru, and Koji Arikawa. 2007. “Locality in Syntax and Floated Quantifiers.” Linguistic Inquiry 38 (4): 645–670. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Park, Chongwon, and Jaehoon Yeon. 2022. “Why Quantifiers Float: A Response to Kim (2013).” Lingua 2771: 103403. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2023. “Information Structure in Korean: What’s New and What’s Old.” Journal of Pragmatics [Published online]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Park, Chulwoo. 2007. “kwuke pwunli kwusenguy hyengsikkwa kinung [The Form and Function of Dislocation Donstructions in Korean].” Eoneohag: Journal of the Linguistics Society of Korea 491: 203–225.Google Scholar
Park, Myung-Kwan, and Keun-Won Sohn. 1993. “Floating Quantifiers, Scrambling, and the ECP.” In Japanese/Korean Linguistics, vol 31. ed. by Soonja Choi, 187–203. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel. 1996. “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shimojo, Mitsuaki. 2004. “Quantifier Float and Information Processing: A Case Study from Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 361: 375–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shin, Seo-in. 2007. “hankwukeuy eswun pyeni kyenghyangkwa ku yoiney tayhan yenkwu [A Study on Word Order Variation and its Motivation].” Journal of Korean Linguistics 501: 213–239.Google Scholar
. 2009. “eswun pyeni-wa mwuncang uymi haysek [Word Order Variation and Analyzing Sentence Meaning].” Korean Semantics 281: 105–125.Google Scholar
Son, Gwangrak. 2001. “Scrambling, Reconstruction, and the Checking Principle.” Ph.D. dissertation. University of Wisconsin.
Strawson, Peter F. 1964. “Identifying Reference and Truth-values.” Theoria 301: 86–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vallduví, Enric, and Elisabet Engdahl. 1996. “The Linguistic Realization of Information Packaging.” Linguistics 341: 459–519. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Park, Chongwon, Jaehoon Yeon & Jong-Bok Kim
2024. Setting subject and the inferential cleft construction in Korean. Review of Cognitive Linguistics DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 september 2024. 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.