On the syntax of negative wh-constructions in Korean

On the syntax of negative wh-constructions in Korean Okgi Kim University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Department of Linguistics P.O. Box 413 Milwaukee, WI 53201-0413 okgikim@uwm.edu Abstract This paper investigates the syntax of Negative WH-Constructions (NWHCs) in Korean and argues, under Coniglio and Zegrean’s (2012) split-ForceP framework, that NWH-phrases like mwe-ka and ettehkey, which are base- generated above or at the edge of IP, undergo covert movement to the split-Force domain to reflect their sensitivity to clause type and turn the original information-seeking force into the speaker-oriented rhetorical force. 1 Introduction This paper examines so-called Negative WH- Constructions (henceforth, NWHCs) in Korean, which are exemplified by (1) (Cheung, 2008; 2009) (throughout the paper, small capital letters are used in glossing NWH-items to distinguish them from or- dinary wh-items).12 (1) a. pi-ka mwe-ka o-ni?! rain-NOM WHAT-NOM come-QUE ‘No way is it raining. (It isn’t raining.)’ 1The abbreviations used for glossing Korean data include NOM: nominative, ACC: accusative, QUE: question, DECL: declarative, COP: copular, TOP: topic, CONN: connective, PST: past, IMP: imperative, EXCL: exclamative, MOD: modifier, FUT: future, and PROG: progressive. 2Cheung (2008) notes that there are only three NWH-items in Korean: ettehkey ‘HOW’, encey ‘WHEN’ and eti ‘WHERE’. But, as given in (1a), the wh-phrase mwe-ka ‘WHAT-NOM’, where mwe is the contracted form of mwues, can also be used as an NWH-item. See Saruwatari (2015) for Japanese NWHCs using nani-ga ‘WHAT-NOM and doko-ga ‘WHERE-NOM’. b. ku-ka ettehkey i pangpep-ulo he-NOM HOW this way-in sihem-ul thongkwaha-l exam-ACC pass-CONN swu.iss-keyss-ni?! can-FUT-QUE ‘No way could he pass the exam in this way. (He couldn’t pass the exam in this way.)’ c. Mary-ka eti Seoul-ul Mary-NOM WHERE Seoul-ACC ttena-l swu.iss-keyss-ni?! leave-CONN can-FUT-QUE ‘No way would Mary be able to leave Seoul. (Mary wouldn’t be able to leave Seoul.)’ d. ku-ka encey sip-nyen ceney chayk-ul he-NOM WHEN 10-year ago book-ACC ss-ess-ni?! write-PST-QUE ‘No way did he write the book ten years ago. (He didn’t write the book ten years ago.)’ As seen from the English translations, NWHCs are used to express the speaker-oriented rhetori- cal/refutatory force and not the information-seeking force typically conveyed by ordinary wh or yes/no- questions (Cheung, 2008; 2009; Saruwatari, 2015; Yang, 2015). That is, positive NWHCs have the il- locutionary force of a negative assertion, as in (1), and negative NWHCs have the illocutionary force of a positive assertion, as in (2). (2) {ettehkey/mwe-ka} John-i HOW/WHAT-NOM John-NOM tayhakwensayng-i ani-ni?! graduate.student-NOM not-QUE ‘No way is John not a graduate student. (He is a graduate student.)’ 1.1 Differences from information-seeking and rhetorical wh-questions NWHCs behave differently from both information- seeking and rhetorical wh-questions in some re- spects. First, while an ordinary wh-adjunct cannot cooccur with another adjunct of the same kind in the same clause, as in (3), such adjunct doubling is allowed in NWHCs, as in (1b-d) (Cheung, 2008; 2009). (3) a. *Mary-ka eti Seoul-ey ka-ss-ni? Mary-NOM where Seoul-to go-PST-QUE ‘Where did Mary go to Seoul?’ b. *Mary-ka encey ocen hansi-ey Seoul-ey Mary-NOM when a.m. 1-at Seoul-to ka-ss-ni? go-PST-QUE ‘When did Mary go to Seoul at …

Content truncated to 500 words