Polarity licensing in the context of Korean modal CAN, i.e. V-(u)l swu iss/eps and V-(u)l li eps, is affected by the modal interpretation (root vs. epistemic). Ha (2007) tries to account for the constrained NPI distribution by analyzing root CAN as a possessive existential construction with a control structure, while epistemic CAN as an absolute existential construction with a raising structure. He crucially assumes that the adnominal clause in root CAN is an aspectual phrase, while that in epistemic CAN is a full-fledged CP, hence affecting the clause-mate condition. This paper shows that Ha"s (2007) generalization and his account in terms of the structural assimilation and of the projectional size are to be rectified, although his control vs. non-control dichotomy is basically correct. This paper argues for an alternative structural analysis, which also relies on a control vs. non-control dichotomy, but is simpler and free of the problems that Ha"s (2007) analysis faces. NPIs are claimed to be licensed at Neg-SPEC even in the modal context, with the help of the "surprising constituent" formation and the clause-crossing scrambling.
1. Introduction<BR>2. Modal CAN, Negation, and Negative Polarity<BR>3. Ha (2007): Absolute EC with and AspP vs. Possessive EC with a CP<BR>4. Problems with the EC Analysis of MC<BR>5. Towards an Explanation<BR>6. Summary<BR>References<BR>