Introducing arguments beyond the thematic domain

Abstract

Extensive research has focused on how VoiceP (Kratzer 1996), ApplP (Pylkkänen 2008), and i* (Wood & Marantz 2017), an overarching term for Voice and Appl, establish argument structure inside the thematic domain (below TP). A question arises as to whether argument structure can be established outside the thematic domain (above TP). This work provides empirical evidence from Korean in suggesting that an argument can be introduced by Voice/Appl (i*) in the left periphery. Specifically, it lends support to the claim that the discourse participant ‘addressee’ is represented in syntax (Haegeman & Hill 2013; Miyagawa 2017; 2022; Portner et al. 2019 among others). In this regard, this work draws parallels between the thematic domain and the speech act domain, which have been considered to be two separate domains.

Analyzing English and Thai Case Markers in Sentence Construction

“…A case system in English syntax has been investigated in different languages and in various contexts. Some of the studies have focused on how external and applied argument are introduced (Kratzer, 1996;Lee, 2023), or how case markers are overtly realized (Otwinowska et al, 2022).…”

“…The most prominent cases in English include nominative (NOM), accusative (ACC), dative (DAT), ablative (ABL), perlative (PERL), and genitive (GEN) cases. There are other case markers worth investigating; however, only six of these markers were analyzed because they are commonly found in several languages, such as Korean (Lee, 2023), Polish (Otwinowska et al, 2022), or Thai (Takahashi, 2009).…”

“…According to Lee (2023), the Korean language uses case markers that demonstrate overt realizations of nominative (NOM), dative (DAT), accusative (ACC), and vocative (VOC) cases.…”