2017, Vol.58, No.

Korean Semantics 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 1.11

pISSN : 1226-7198 / eISSN : 2734-0171
https://journal.kci.go.kr/semantics

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the non-syntactic anaphora represented by 'exempt anaphor' and to find out the relationship between this exempt anaphor construction and the attributes of anaphora by using the analysis of non–syntactic factors such as discourse context or information structure analysis. Through this approach we examine how to expand of coverage of anaphoric phenomena and diversify semantic analysis methodologies. And we try to find out how to maintain the referential identity between the anaphor and its antecedent in the non-syntactic anaphor expression, and also examine how the coherence of the text persists. This article differs from the existing studies in terms of research subjects and application methods. First, we will extend the scope of the discussion from the exempt anaphor to the definite noun phrase which reveals the anaphoric property. At this time, we want to examine the ontological validity of some noun phrases that have been treated as associative anaphor. Second, we try to expand the methodology as a method of describing anaphoric phenomenon, by analyzing context and information status and pointing out speaker’s point of view. In this paper, we have found that there are four types of the definite noun phrase([NP adn+NP]) and they are similar to anaphora functionally. Based on the differences in the information status of these noun phrases, we have shown the semantic and pragmatic differences between these types. For some noun phrases that are specially categorized as associative anaphor, we suggest that the givenness of information should be distinguished from other categories because it has the givenness feature indirectly unlike other categories. Finally, the type that can function as a pronoun in Korean is limited to the single pronoun, and the complex pronoun as 'Adnominals+Dependent Noun'. And we suggest that the 'Adnominals+Common Noun' and 'Ø+Common Noun' should be excluded from pronominal category and treated as definite NP.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the motivation of sign language in Korean and Chinese based on the construal theory of cognitive linguistics and reveal their common points and different points. In sign language the expression would be different according to the different cognitive subject, that is to say, because of the different construal way in different language the expression would be different. The cognitive discussion for sign language hasn’t done much and there were little contrastive analysis between Korean and Chinese for vocabularies of sign language. In this paper, the vocabularies related to ‘Animals’, ‘Fruits·Vegetables’, ‘Sports’ were selected to study the construction, forms and motivations among meanings and investigate how the users of the sign language construe them. The results showed that similarly with the articulatory phonetics there was motivation between the forms and the motivations in sign language. However, the process of formation in different language was obviously different. According to the research of this paper, Korean sign language tended to dynamic construal but static construal for Chinese sign language.

58. This study aims to examine prosodic realization, declination of pitch, of focuses which are marked by un/nun and i/ka and to find correlation between focus markers with prosody, which are major means of focus expression. Discussion of this article is summarized as follows. First, when focuses are marked by focus marker, focuses always involve prosodic prominence regardless of focus type. This result demonstrates that prosodic prominence can distinguish different type of focuses by cooperation of focus markers which co-occur with it. Second, but prosodic prominence has distinctive function when different type of focuses which can not be expressed by paradigmatic focus marker un/nun or syntagmatic focus marker i/ka appear. Thus, prosodic prominence has expressive function and distinctive function. Third, context which be able to differentiate type of focus has no effect on prosodic realization of focuses. In other words, prosodic prominence obligatorily appears when focuses are marked. Finally, prosodic realization of focuses can usually be characterized by absolute pitch level. However, occasionally readjustment of relative pitch level and length are important to observe prosodic realization of focuses. So, we need to develop various method of observing prosodic realization of focuses.