pISSN: 1598-3293

영어영문학연구, Vol.58 no.4 (2016)
pp.327~346

Idiomatic Fragment Answers in Negation

Lee, Doo-Won

(Korea National University of Transportation)

Clause ellipsis can be defined as a subspecies of ellipsis whereby an entire clause is missing. One of such typical examples is a fragment answer. The idiomatic fragment may be derived from a fully clausal source via ellipsis. The repair-by-ellipsis for island effects is not involved in the head blocking (i.e., Neg blocking, here) within the idiomatic domain. The idiomatic fragment answer undergoes focus movement to [Spec, FP] (i.e., [Spec, CP]) at PF. This is in accordance with the fact that the idiomatic themes may undergo focus movement when they are contrasted to be focused. While the fragment answer to the plain echo question is ambiguous between literal and idiomatic meanings, the fragment answer to the negative echo question has only a literal meaning. This is because the idiomatic domain of the fragment answer cannot be extended to FP (i.e., CP, here) beyond the NegP between VP (or vP) and TP since the head [Neg] blocks the head C through T from merging with the head [V] (i.e., verb root) at PF. Hence, the fragment answer to the negative echo question cannot have an idiomatic meaning. In addition, while the plain fragments may be extracted out of the embedded clause, the idiomatic fragments aren’t. That is, the idiomatic fragment answers are only derived from a simplex clausal source via ellipsis.
  초점,숙어조각구문,숙어목적어,부정,보통숙어조각구문

Download PDF list





(우)24328 강원특별자치도 춘천시 공지로 126 춘천교육대학교 영어교육과     [개인정보보호정책]
농협 352-2001-3534-63 (예금주: 이해련)
Copyright © The Jungang English Language and Literature Association of Korea. All rights reserved.