On the Ambiguity of Obligatory Control with the Tolok-clause in Korean

• Published in: 언어와 정보 사회 Vol. 41; pp. 179 - 209
• Main Author: Jong Un Park
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: Korean
• Published: 서강대학교 언어정보연구소 30.11.2020
• Subjects: A-trace; backward control; forward control; movement theory of control; non-obligatory control; obligatory control; PRO; tolok-clause
• ISSN: 1598-1886

Language and Information Society 41. This paper accounts for why diverse interpretive patterns appear to be available from obligatory object control constructions subordinating the tolok-clause in Korean. As observed by a few studies in the literature, the range of readings that arises in the constructions includes not only obligatory control (OC) interpretations but also non-obligatory control (NOC) interpretations (Polinsky et al. 2007 among others), but other types of referential dependency between a controller and a controllee than mandatory coreference should not be allowed under the PRO Theory of Control (Chomsky 1981 among others). To capture those interpretive patterns, this paper claims, under the Movement Theory of Control, that not all tolok-clauses are born equal, proposing to distinguish tolok-clauses as a complement from those as an adjunct. Building on Hornstein’s (2001) insight into the interpretation of anaphors and pronouns, I further suggest that in the former context, where A-movement is allowed, referentially dependent DPs are interpreted as anaphors like reflexives orA-traces, while in the latter, where A-movement is prohibited, they are interpreted as pronouns.