The Dative Agent in the Passivization of the SVC and Morphological Construction

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 강원대학교 인문과학연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 인문과학연구 / 28호 / 91 ~ 113페이지
· 저자명 : 이두원

초록

There are usually three types of dative in Korean: the goal, passive agent, and dative subject. Among them, the passive agent is focused on. The dative marker eykey- or hanthey-marked element can occur as a passive agent, which, here, is called a dative agent. For the present purpose, the passivization of the serial verb construction (SVC) and morphological construction is mainly dealt with. The SVC (i.e., cap-a mek ‘catch-L-eat’) is divided into two kinds in the sense that it may or may not be compatible with the coordinator or postposition se ‘and/after’. That is, while the SVC cap-a mek is compatible with the postposition se ‘after/and’ only when it is formed in the syntax, it is not when it is a morphological compound. Furthermore, when the SVC of the morphological compound undergoes passivization, can only V2 be passivized. In the meanwhile, if the V1 and V2 of the SVC are doubly passivized, the complex would be a syntactic form. This paper also argues against Zubizarreta & Oh's (2007) proposal that Korean SVs are not a morphological compound. In order to testify this, it is shown here that the information markers such as nun/man/to or the plural marker tul cannot appear between the V1 and V2 of the morphological compound. This paper further shows that the pseudo-SVC in J. Lee's (2010) term, which permits split object sharing, is doubly passivized, whereas the morphological compound should be once passivized, as shown in cap-a mek-hi-ta.
The causative and passive suffixes have a distinctive, apparently opposite, function in Korean: The former adds up one argument to the “argument grid” of the root verb, whereas the latter suppresses one from that. Despite this apparent difference, there have been attempts to capture the phonological and morphological similarities of the two sets of affixes. It has been well-known in literature (Park 1978, Ahn 2001, inter alia) that passive and causative suffixes share a core meaning and belong to the same category. The passive and causative suffixes occur in the same syntactic head position. In this vein, they cannot co-occur; hence, the morphological causative and passive expression (*(sangche-ka) ip-hi-eci-ta 'injury-NOM get-CAUSE- PASS-DC) is ruled out. In conclusion, the eykey-marked nominal in the passive form of the SVC and morphological causative construction plays a role of a dative agent.

참고자료

· 없음