Psych-Predicates: How They Are Different

Copyright 2012 by Chungmin Lee 26th Pacific Asia Conference on Language,Information and Computation pages 626–631 Psych-Predicates: How They Are Different Chungmin Lee Seoul Nat’l U 1 Gwanak-ro, Seoul 151-742, Korea clee@snu.ac.kr Abstract This paper is concerned with characterizing psych-predicates in Korean and possibly in Japanese in the GL spirit. We focus on the the status of the Experiencer (or ‘judge’) in relation to other arguments and examine the first- person subjectivity data (constraint). The relevant cause and effect relation and consequent coerced event function is postulated for coherent interpretation. Keywords: psych-predicates, experiencer, first-person (subjectivity) data, causation. 1 Introduction We will characterize psych-predicates = experiencer-predicates and predicates of personal taste in Korean, focusing on the status of the Experiencer in relation to arguments and examining the first-person subjectivity data (constraint). The relevant cause and effect relation and consequent coerced event function is postulated for coherent interpretation. 2 will show data and raise issues; 3 will discuss issues in the GL spirit; and 4 will conclude the discussion. 2 Data and Issues Consider (1) (Lee 2010), where description of psych state in the present tense by the first- person but not by the third or second person is acceptable. Here the ‘judge’ is the speaker. This first-person subjectivity constraint is observed in Korean and Japanese. (1) na/?*ku/?*ne -nun ecirep-ta I/he/you -TOP dizzy-DEC ‘I am/?*he is/?*you are dizzy.’ (2) watashi-wa/?*kare-wa/?*anata-wa sabishi �lonely� desu ‘I am/?*he is/?*you are lonely.’ However, even in the present, if the psych- adjective takes a verbalizer –e hay ‘show signs of being psych-Adj,’ a third-person with it becomes quite acceptable, as in (2). (3) ku-ka ecirep –e hay he -NOM dizzy-E do ‘He shows signs of being dizzy.’ Because the speaker sees his act of, say, turning in circles as evidence to utter (2), Tenny (2006) calls the Japanese counterpart –garu an evidential, which also lifts the person restriction as in Korean. In English, ‘He is dizzy’ may be 626 26th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation pages 626-631 Copyright 2012 by Chungmin Lee uttered on the basis of the speaker’s seeing him turn in circles or hearing from him or someone else1 and is not distinct from ‘I am dizzy.’ The past form of (1) is fine with the 3rd-person subject (Ku-nun ecirew-ess-ta ‘He was dizzy’); it may be assumed that there could have been conveyance of information from him to the speaker). With a modal (conjecture) or future marker attached to the psych-adjective, the 1st- person constraint is waived. Korean has a clearer reportative evidential, as in (4), which also lifts the first-person restriction. (4) ku-ka ecirep -tay [-tay: reportative] he-NOM dizzy-REPORT -DEC ‘He says he is dizzy’ or ‘He is said to be dizzy.’ On the other hand, in an interrogative sentence in the present tense, the second person subject, not the first person subject, is acceptable, asking the hearer = the speaker-to-be about her/his psychological state. The perspective is shifted from the current speaker to the next speaker, who is the hearer, who …

Content truncated to 500 words