우전위 구문 공백의 분포와 성질

This paper examines Park and Oh s (2017) head-final bi-clausal approach to right-dislocated constructions (RDCs) in Korean which is offered to capture properties of the gaps that appear in various contexts of RDCs. Park and Oh propose that the gaps are pros/bare arguments, indefinite default pros, or arise from Argument Ellipsis. Under the head-initial mono-clausal approach, I propose independent contextual conditions that obviate the need for postulating those gaps, namely, the strict identity condition between the antecedent VP and the following VP in the context of direct wh-question and answer, the indirect identity condition involving entailment between them in the additive context, the contrastiveness condition between them in the contrasting context. Without having these conditions, Park and Oh s analyses remain only descriptive, containing some non-trivial problems. I claim that Park and Oh s putative gaps in fact do not exist and are mere artificial by-products resulting from the bi-clausal analysis. I argue that the proposed contextual conditions under the head-initial mono-clausal analysis can better account for the various instances of the RDCs in Korean.