A Unified analysis of existentials and psych‐constructions in Korean as pseudo‐transitives

Abstract

This paper compares the transitivity of existential and psych-constructions in Korean to canonical transitives and intransitives. It is shown that these constructions are neither transitives nor intransitives. This paper argues that they can be unified as pseudo-transitives (i.e., somewhere between transitives and intransitives) and provides a structural analysis for pseudo-transitives using Appl. Pseudo-transitives provide support for the theory that transitivity is a continuum, and not categorical (Hopper & Thompson 1980).

Non-aspectual Case and Duration/Frequency Adverbials in Korean

“…Another question that this paper addresses is the role of animacy with respect to accusative case on duration and frequency adverbials. In certain cases where otherwise accusative case is not available, animacy of the subject is recognized as a factor for the realization of accusative case on these adverbials (e.g., Kim andMaling 1993, Maling et al 2001;Lee 2017). However, this paper shows that animacy cannot be the sole factor, but should be considered together with respect to the type of eventuality denoted by the predicate.…”

“…25) Nominative marked adverbials are proposed to merge above the subject (e.g., Kim andMaling 1993, Maling et al 2001). This type of adverbials is treated being similar to floating quantifiers, and nominative case is the result of case agreement with the subject.…”