Abstract
Korean displays an interesting construction (so-called possessor agreement construction), where a possessor nominal and its possessum nominal are marked with the same case as shown in the example Mary-ka John-ul tali-lul cha-ss-ta ‘Mary kicked John''s leg’ More interestingly, not all possessors in possessive construction are marked the same case with its possessum as shorn in the ungrammatical sentence <sup>*</sup>Mary-ka John-ul cha-lul cha-ss-ta ‘Mary kicked John''s car’. Hence, a simple but non-trivial question arises: In what situation are both possessors and possessums marked with the same case? In this paper, we advance three claims: (i) Possessor agreement appears in the situation where entailment is satisfied as follows: If Mary kicked John''s leg, it entails that Mary kicked John, (ii) entailment in possessor agreement results from theta-feature sharing; specifically, the whole DP and the possessor DP share the same theta role, and (iii) Possessor nominals are marked with accusative (or nominative) case when they are assigned internal theta role from the predicate directly. (Sogang University)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.