초록 열기/닫기 버튼
The ultimate goal of this article is to capture the binding behavior of the universally attested local anaphors and long-distance anaphors. To achieve this goal, to begin with, we consider whether or not Richards’ (1997) theory may hold for three types of Korean anaphors. We demonstrate that the A-type anaphor ku-casin ‘he-self’, the B-type anaphor caki ‘self’, and the C-type anaphor caki-casin ‘self-self’ do not back up Richards’ (1997) theory. We also maintain that the B-type anaphor caki ‘self’ is interpreted as joining by common reference, but the A-type anaphor ku-casin and the C-type anaphor caki-casin ‘self’, unlike caki ‘self’, are interpreted as anaphoric reference. Also, we examine whether or not Safir’s (2014) theory works for Korean anaphors and pronouns, and argue that only one true anaphor (D-bound) which is universally available in Korean is not caki ‘self’ but caki-casin ‘self-self’. Additionally, we point out that caki-casin ‘self-self’ is a reflexivizer and a true anaphor, whereas caki ‘self’ is neither a reflexivizer nor a true anaphor. Finally, we contend that the Coargument-Based Condition A (Charnavel and Sportiche (2016)) is plausible even in Korean.
