QUD, Focus, and Adjunct Ellipsis

The goal of this paper is to argue, building on Park (2022), that the deletion of an adjunct is restrictively allowed in Korean only when an elliptical clause is congruent with Questions Under Discussion (QUDs). However, since Park’s analysis faces a couple of issues to be reconsidered, I elaborate...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in언어학 Vol. 31; no. 4; pp. 153 - 179
Main Author Jong Un Park
Format Journal Article
LanguageKorean
Published 대한언어학회 30.12.2023
Subjects
adjunct ellipsis
contrastive topic
focus
QUD
verb-echo answers
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The goal of this paper is to argue, building on Park (2022), that the deletion of an adjunct is restrictively allowed in Korean only when an elliptical clause is congruent with Questions Under Discussion (QUDs). However, since Park’s analysis faces a couple of issues to be reconsidered, I elaborate his QUD-based approach, especially by incorporating Kobayashi et al.‘s (2023) claim that depending on the context, different types of focus, such as verum focus, contrastive focus, and negation of predicate focus, may play a role in evoking QUDs required for adjunct ellipsis licensing. Then, it is shown that the amended QUD approach can successfully explain not only the data of adjunct ellipsis previously dealt with by Park but also novel data inspired by Kobayashi et al. Finally, it is briefly discussed what the so-called ’verb-echo answers’ in Korean suggests to the proposed QUD approach.
Bibliography:The Linguistic Association of Korea
ISSN:1225-7141