학술저널
It has been traditionally assumed among Korean linguists that there is no fundamental distinction between the lexical (or morphological) passive and the syntactic passive constructions in Korean. This paper questions this assumption centering around a typical relational grammar analysis of a particular construction which seemingly involves both passive and possessor ascension. It will be argued that despite the intuitive plausibility of the ‘passive’ analysis, syntactic and phonological evidence points to the conclusion that neither possessor ascension nor passive is involved in the construction under question.
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Arguments
3. Concluding Remarks
References
(0)
(0)