Natural Language & Linguistic Theory

, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp 339–358

Aspectual and focus adverbs in English and Korean

Original Paper

Abstract

This article presents a comparative semantic analysis of the aspectual and focus adverbs already, still and STILL in English and imi/pelsse ‘already’ and acik/yothay ‘still’ in Korean based on their presuppositions and their focus interpretation. I argue that the two contrasting views of aspectual adverbs as logical duals (Löbner 1989, 1999) and as scalar (focus) particles (Michaelis 1993, 1996; Israel 1995) are both necessary in order to explain the English and Korean data. Aspect concerns the internal structure of events, relating a current state with the onset or the end of the state. These transitions are available for focusing, which triggers an explicit contrast between the asserted state and an alternative state with an opposite polarity. Korean is shown to lexicalize aspectual and focus adverbs differently from what is expressed in English by a single adverb with focus marked prosody. The meaning of aspectual and focus adverbs in both English and Korean is representated in Discourse Representation Theory (Kamp and Reyle 1993; van Eijck and Kamp 1997).

Keywords

Aspectual adverbs Korean and English Logical duals Scalar particles Focus Discourse representation theory 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barwise, J., & Cooper, R. (1981). Generalized quantifiers and natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy, 4, 159–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chung, D., Lee, C., & Nam, S. (2002). The semantics of particles -ina and -to with a classifier phrase in Korean. Ohak-Yonku /Language Research, 38.1, 319–337.Google Scholar
  3. Hoepelman, J., & Rohrer, C. (1981). Remarks on noch and schon in German. In P. Tedeschi & A. Zaenen (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, Tense and aspect (Vol. 14, pp. 103–126). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  4. Israel, M. (1995). The scalar model of polarity sensitivity: The case of aspectual operators. In D. Forget, P. Hirschbüler, F. Martineau, & M.-L. (Eds.), Negation and polarity (pp. 209–229). Riverto: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
  5. Kamp, H., & Reyle, U. (1993). From discourse to logic. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. Keenan, E., & Moss, L. (1984). Generalized quantifiers and expressive power of natural language. In J. van Benthem & A. ter Meulen (Eds.), Generalized quantifiers in natural language (pp. 73–124). Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
  7. Löbner, S. (1989). German schon-erst-noch: An integrated analysis. Linguistics and Philosophy, 12, 167–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Löbner, S. (1999). Why German schon and noch are still duals. Linguistics and Philosophy, 22, 45–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Michaelis, L. (1993). Continuity within three scalar models: the polysemy of adverbial still. Journal of Semantics, 10, 193–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Michaelis, L. (1996). On the meaning and use of already. Linguistics and Philosophy, 19, 477–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mittwoch, A. (1993). The relationship between schon/already and noch/still: A reply to Löbner. Natural Language Semantics, 10, 193–237.Google Scholar
  12. Rooth, M. (1987). Association with focus. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  13. Rooth, M. (1992). A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 1, 75–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Smessaert, H., & ter Meulen, A. G. B. (2004). Temporal reasoning with aspectual adverbs. Linguistics and Philosophy, 27, 209–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. ter Meulen, A. G. B. (1990). English aspectual verbs as generalized quantifiers. NELS, 20, 378–390.Google Scholar
  16. ter Meulen, A. G. B. (1995). Representing time in natural languge. Cambridge, Massachusettes: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. ter Meulen, A. G. B., & Smessaert, H. (1994). Aspectual focus in English and Dutch. In P. Bosch & A. van der Sandt (Eds.), Focus and natural language processing (Vol. 2): Semantics (pp. 353–362). Proceedings of the Interdisciplinary Conference in Celebration of the 10th Anniversary of the Journal of Semantics, August 12–15, 1994, Schloss Wolfsbrunnen (Kassel, Germany). Working Papers of the IBM Institute for Logic and Linguistics.Google Scholar
  18. van der Auwera, J. (1993). Already and still: Beyond duality. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16, 613–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. van der Auwera, J. (1998). Phrasal adverbials in the languages of Europe. In J. van der Auwera & D. P. Ó. Baoill (Eds.), Adverbial Constructions in the Languages of Europe (pp. 25–145). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  20. van Eijck, J., & Kamp, H. (1997). Representing discourse in context. In J. van Benthem & A. ter Meulen (Eds.), Handbook of logic and language> (pp. 179–237). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsUniversity at Buffalo, The State University of New YorkBuffaloUSA

Personalised recommendations