CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE Re-Visiting the DP
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE Re-Visiting the DP Hypothesis: An Exploration Through English/Korean Codeswitching A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Master of Arts in Linguistics By Sarah Phillips May 2017 Copyright by Sarah Phillips 2017 ii The thesis of Sarah Phillips is approved: _________________________________________ ______________ Dr. Joseph Galasso Date _________________________________________ ______________ Dr. Sharon Klein Date _________________________________________ ______________ Dr. David Medeiros, Chair Date California State University, Northridge iii Acknowledgements While watching an episode of “Abstact,” I was able to see into the mind of Platon, an amazing photographer who has captured passionate portraits. He says the following, “great design simplifies a very complicated world.” I believe that is the essence of theory. To see through noise and find what lays underneath, causing both form and noise, is incredibly difficult, however. My mentors, David Medeiros and Sharon Klein, helped keep my focus lens clear. This is true in both this writing process as well as my development into becoming an academic of merit and ability. Joseph Galasso, an important reader in this process, reminded me to remember the basics and question often. I appreciate these people for grounding me, keeping form in mind. Baring contrast, my friends and family kept my mind and hands active. They have challenged me, loved me, and motivated me. A few of whom I’d like to name (in random order) are: my mother Jahye, Maya W. C., Lu L., my cousin Paula, my sister Erica, Melissa M.-S., Cristina N., Bianca M., Ashleigh G., and Jacquelyn N. Without these people (and a few others whom I failed to mention—my apologies!), the noise would have become unbearable. iv Table of Contents Copyright Page ii Signature Page iii Acknowledgements iv Abstract vii Introduction 1 Codeswitching 1 The Problem with Nominals 2 A Possible Solution 8 A Review of the Syntactic Approaches to Codeswitching 9 Government and Binding 9 Limitations of Formal Syntax on Codeswitching 12 The Functional Head Constraint 13 Woolford’s Model 14 Mixed Language Frame Model 15 Minimalist Program and Codeswitching 17 Data Analysis 20 Evidence of “Missing” Articles in English/Korean CS 21 Evidence of Overt Articles in English/Korean CS 22 The Semantic Argument for “keu” as the Korean Article 24 The Pluralization Problem 27 An Alternative Theoretical Model for Codeswitching 30 “ify” versus “inc” in English/Telugu CS 30 Re-addressing the Pluratization Problem 32 The Relevance of Pluralization and Articles 33 Conclusion 34 References 35 v Appendix A: Korean Transcription System 39 Appendix B: Leipzig Glossing Abbreviations 40 vi Abstract Re-Visiting the DP Hypothesis: An Exploration Through English/Korean Codeswitching By Sarah Phillips Master of Arts in Linguistics The structure of nominals has been a focal point within the theory of syntax since the 1960s. Abney (1987) proposes the DP Hypothesis to account for the internal structure of various nominal types, which his argument is noted for its empirical strength. However, Bošković (2008) challenges the notion of DP structures being universal across various language types because he argues that not all languages have articles which instantiate D0. This typological difference seems to correlate with an extensive list of syntactic generalizations. The main purpose of this thesis is to determine how well the DP Hypothesis fits for codeswitched utterances produced by bilinguals who speak a language that has articles and a language that does not, English and Korean respectively, such that the DP Hypothesis readily extends to what may be considered an ‘articleless’ language. The results of this exploration support the DP Hypothesis as well as give reason for the important role codeswitched data has in developing linguistic theory, suggesting potential research opportunities towards the end. vii Introduction Much of the literature dedicated to understanding linguistic competence through syntax involves examining monolingual utterances, particularly analyzing phenomena from English. The problem with pursuing descriptive adequacy in syntactic theory by analyzing monolingual utterances is that doing so fails to include a large population of language users even within the context of examining English. Crystal (2009) estimates that approximately 41% of the world’s English speakers are plurilingual1, such that they employ English as well as at least one other language. A theory of syntax which seeks to understand linguistic competence and adequately explain a variety of language phenomena should be more inclusive of data types. One method of accomplishing this task is by examining codeswitched utterances. Codeswitching Understood as a behavior specific to bilinguals2, codeswitching (henceforth “CS”) is defined in this thesis as the surface realization of alternation between two (or potentially more) languages. This definition avoids the process of distinguishing lexical borrowing from CS as both should be predictable with the appropriate analysis. A few examples of CS are as follows: 1. El old man está enojado [English/Spanish] “The old man is mad” (Gingrás, 1974 [in Woolford, 1983, p.527(10)]) 2. Players-ka cichjeoss-ta [English/Korean] players-NOM be tired.PST-DECL “[The] players were tired” (Park, 1990, p.125[120]) 1 Meaning to frequently use two or more languages 2 Adopting Grosjean’s definition as one “who use[s] two or more languages in [his/her/]their everyday life” (2010, p.xiii) 1 3. One su moje cousins [English/Serbo-Croatian] they.FEM be.3PL.PRS my.PL.FEM cousins “They are my cousins” (Savić, 1995, p.483[3]) The italicized portions in the first line of each example are lexical items from a language which is not English whereas the non-italicized portions in the first line of each example are lexical items from English. Example (1) is from English/Spanish CS, a CS pair that has been more heavily investigated; and examples (2) and (3) are from Korean/English CS and English/Serbo-Croatian CS respectively, which both have received significantly less attention in the CS literature. All three utterances are considered grammatically acceptable, and this demonstrates competence of both languages in each CS pair when an acceptable CS utterance is produced. Some of the CS literature seem to suggest that alternation concerned with noun phrases is the most common (cf. Pfaff 1979 [English/Spanish], Park 1990 [English/Korean], Nishimura 1985 [English/Japanese], Berk-Seligson 1986 [Spanish/Hebrew]). The high frequency of this CS form suggests a particular sensitivity to the structure of nominals, potentially alluding to the universality of nominal structure. This thesis seeks to further syntactic theory with respect to nominal structure using CS data from a variety of CS language pairs, particularly those that appear more typologically dissimilar (e.g. English/Korean) than those more typologically similar (e.g. English/Spanish). The Problem with Nominals Following Lees (1960), generative grammar must sufficiently account for the various ways in which nouns can be modified through recursive rules. Such that a noun refers to a signified object or concept, nominalization is then a process through which a signified object or concept is expressed through a composition of “simpler components” (p.xviii): 2 4. a. Nom à NP + N0 (p.14[21]) b. NP à T + N (p.15[22]) 5. a. [John] pleases Maya. b. [John’s being eager to please] pleases Maya. (based on Chomsky, 1970, p.187[3a]) c. [John’s eagerness to please] pleases Maya. (based on Chomsky, 1970, p.187[4a]) d. [John’s building a spaceship] pleases Maya. (based on Abney, 1987, p. 13[1]) Lees proposed that nominals, “Nom,” are composed of a noun phrase, “NP,” and its appropriate affix (e.g. plural marker); and the NP is composed of a determiner, “T,” and a single noun “N” which can be either concrete or abstract. Where (5a) exemplifies a simple nominal in the brackets, the proposed structures in (4) do not seem to account for the bracketed expressions (5b), (5c), and (5d). Chomsky (1970) discusses how, in English, the internal distribution of gerundive nominals, like the bracketed portion in (5b), and derived nominals, like the bracketed portion in (5c), are different though they share the same external distribution. He argues gerundive nominals seem to have undergone a transformation whereas derived nominals do not: 6. a. *[The being eager to please] pleases Maya. b. [The eagerness to please] pleases Maya. c. *[The building a spaceship] pleases Maya. By replacing “John’s” with “the” in (5b), (5c), and (5d), the acceptability of (6b), relative to (5c), suggests that “John’s” has a similar external distribution to T in (4b) but not so in (6a) and (6c). Where Determiner is T, T is redefined as follows: 3 7. a. Det[erminer] à (prearticle of) Article (postarticle) b. Article à {±definiteness, possessive} (p.200[29]) This analysis can be referred to as the foundation of the lexicalist hypothesis, such that certain syntactic features are associated with lexical items which negotiate syntactic structure. Determiners are then constituted of articles which mark definiteness or possession, drawing a parallel between “the” and “John’s” as exhibited between (5c) and (6b). In English, “the” and “a(n)” are the articles which express definiteness and “’s” indicates possession. To account for the transformation that occurs in gerundive nominals like (5b) and POSS-ing gerundive