Syntax of Applicatives and Their Kin: The Case of cwu- in Korean

Abstract

An applicative is a functional head which introduces a non-core argument into the verbs argument structure (Pylkkänen 2002

2008). This thesis investigates the syntax of applicatives in Korean, with a special attention to the verb cwu- to give. In Korean, cwu- can be used for both low and high applicative constructions. Not focused only on the dichotomy, however, I distinguish four other different types of applicatives in Korean, based on close examination of the data. I further argue that the different kinds of applicatives are derived because cwu- can be merged at different positions in the cartography of syntax. Specifically, when cwu- is merged at the lowest lexical level (i.e. V), it makes a compound verb construction. If cwu- is merged at vP by adjunction, then it will be a Serial Verb Construction (Ko and Sohn, to appear). Also, I refer cwu-, which is merged under TP as TP-benefactive, and cwu- at CP, as CP-benefactive. I show that these constructions show different behaviors from each other on syntax. My argument can be supported by work on other languages, which clearly show that applicatives can be merged above Voice (cf. Buell 2003

McGinnis and Gerdts 2003

Tsai 2009

Bosse et al 2012, etc). In particular, my analysis attests Tsais (2009) idea that high applicatives can take the entire CP on event structure, if the high-applied argument is speaker-oriented. Furthermore, I elaborate the cartography of low applicatives as well as high applicatives, extending the event semantics in Tsai (2009). By doing so, this thesis, compared to previous literatures, gives a more complete view for understanding the syntax of applicatives marked by cwu- in Korean. The current proposal can open up a new way of analyzing cross-linguistic data. Theoretically, different types of applicatives should be able to appear at the same time, because they are all merged at different sites. In general, however, at most two applicatives can occur together. I do not think that this happens accidently, but is related with the semantics of applicatives.