Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
The Synonymy vs. Nonsynonymy Hypothesis for Causatives in Korean
|Title:||The Synonymy vs. Nonsynonymy Hypothesis for Causatives in Korean|
|Date Issued:||01 Sep 2003|
|Publisher:||University of Hawai'i at Mānoa Department of Linguistics|
|Citation:||Kim, Jae. 2003. Yeon. The Synonymy vs. Nonsynonymy Hypothesis for Causatives in Korean. University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa Working Papers in Linguistics 34(1).|
|Series:||University of Hawai‘I at Mānoa Working Papers in Linguistics|
|Abstract:||It is well known that there are two types of causatives in Korean, i.e., morphological and syntactic causatives. For quite a while linguists have debated whether these two types of causatives are semantically the same or different. On one front, there is a minority, represented by Yang among others, who argue that morphological and syntactic causatives in Korean are synonymous. On the other front, however, there are those, such as Shibatani, who believe that these two types of causatives are different, i.e., they are nonsynonymous. Despite continuous research on this issue, unfortunately it is still unclear as to what extent they resemble and/or differ from each other. This paper examines Haiman’s Iconicity Principle, according to which conceptual unity/independence is reflected by linguistic closeness/separateness. The present paper argues that although Haiman’s Iconicity Principle cannot account for Korean causatives as such, the general view of the semantic difference between morphological and syntactic causatives in Korean should remain intact, i.e., the former causatives are related to direct causation and the latter to indirect causation.|
|Rights:||Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike License|
|Appears in Collections:||
Working Papers in Linguistics - 2003|
Please email email@example.com if you need this content in ADA-compliant format.
Items in ScholarSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.