This paper examines two different approaches to resolving a theoretical problem which the bottom-up approach version of Discourse Representation Theory of Kamp et al. (2003) faces in dealing with anaphoric relations between pronouns and their potential antecedents in conditional sentences where consequent clauses precede their corresponding conditional clauses. In one of the approaches, every element is processed in the order of occurrence and conditional operators in a non-sentence-initial position cause the ongoing DR to split in two with the same index. The definition of accessibility is accordingly modified so that the right DR can be accessible from the left DR. In the other approach, a different type of discourse representation structure, K ${\Leftarrow}$ K, is introduced, which allows us to resolve the target problem without modifying accessibility proposed in Kamp et al. (2003). Compatibility of these two approaches with the bottom-up version of DRT is evaluated by examining their applicability to the analysis of quantified sentences where pronominal expressions precede generalized quantifiers.

We examine semantic properties of Korean plural expressions and how they are related to genericity and definiteness. First of all, Korean plural expressions provide a strong evidence for the plurality theory which discerns between the two sorts of plural individuals such as sum and group. Sum and group are clearly distinguished by morphological markers in Korean i.e., 'tul-plurals and ${\phi}$-plurals correspond to sum and group interpretations respectively. Second, the treatment of Korean bare singulars(=${\phi}$-plurals) as group accounts for why Korean generic NPs prefer bare singulars to bare plurals. Generic NPs refer to kind, and kind is a special group derived from supremum, therefore both generic NPs and bare singulars refer to group, and generic NPs are realized as bare singulars rather than bare plurals in Korean. Finally, in Korean, plurality and definiteness have little effect on each other although some connection between them has often been reported in the literature.

In general, it is assumed that a pronoun refers to the same individual as the referent of its antecedent. However, when a pronoun and its antecedent are in different information or belief states, the two may not refer to the same individual. Then a question arises what a pronoun refers to. In this paper, two cases are considered. When a pronoun occurs in an attitude context, one case is where its antecedent occurs in a belief context, and the other is where the antecedent occurs in the main context. I propose that a pronoun refers to an individual concept which links two different subjects in two different contexts, and that the selection of a proper individual concept is restricted by the discourse. So a pronoun can be used felicitously only when there is a unique individual concept supported by the individual concept introduced by the discourse and which can link two subjects in two different contexts.

The nominative and accusative postpositions in Korean may intervene between the negative auxiliary verb ANH and its complement verb phrase. As Korean is an OV language, this means that 'verb + {nom, acc} + ANH' as well as the simpler concatenation 'verb + ANH' is possible. This fact, together with an overwhelming regularity of these postpositions' optionality in virtually all constructions, poses a problem for formal approaches to the syntax of the language. Working in a constraint-based grammatical framework shaped by such works as Sag and Wasow (1999) and Copestake (2002), we put forth type hierarchies for major_class, which represents verb inflection, and for pos, which has two immediate subtypes, i.e., htrp_pos and ord_pos. What we call the 'half transparency' of the case postpositions separates them from all the other lexical items in the language. The type htrp_pos is used to constrain one of the two newly proposed head_comp_rules, where a newly proposed feature HEAD2 of a phrase inherits its value from the HEAD feature of the head word. The COMPS list of the negative auxiliary ANH is seen as containing a single phrase whose HEAD is a kind of nominal clause and whose HEAD2 is something that is one of the three maximal types: acc, nom, and null.

This paper discloses a striking similarity between Korean/Japanese wh-NPs and Italian QPs: both categories are disallowed from LD-movement out of weak islands. This leads us to a substantial claim that wh-phrases in the former languages possibly belong to a non-D-linked category, parallel to the Italian QPs. This claim is also supported by semantic evidence: that is, in-situ wh-NPs in these languages lack covert partitivity (Kyungnam University)

In a prevailing view of meaning and reference (cf. Frege 1892), words pick out entities in the physical world by virtue of meaning. Linguists and philosophers have argued whether the meaning of a word is inside or out-side language users' mind; but, in general, they have taken it for granted that words refer to entities in the physical world. Hilary Putnam (1975), based on his famous twin-earth thought experiment, argued that the meaning of a word could not be inside language users' head. In this paper, I point out that Putnam's argument makes sense only if words refer to entities in the physical world. That is, Putnam did not provide any argument against mentalistic semantics, since he erroneously assumed that meaning, but not reference, was inside our mind in mentalistic semantics. Mentalistic semanticist, however, assume that words pick out their references inside our head (instead of a possible outside world). A number of arguments for the mentalistic position come from psychology: studies on emotion and visual perception provide numerous cases where words cannot pick out entities from the physical world, but inside our head. The mentalistic theory has desirable consequences for the philosophy of language in that some classical puzzles of language (e.g. Russell's (1919) well-known puzzle of excluded middle) are explained well in the proposed theory.

the two Korean causal conjunctive suffixes, -nula(ko) and -nun palamey, based on corpus linguistic analysis. Many of the linguistic accounts available, both in pedagogical reference and in the literature on linguistics, provide incomplete analyses of these suffixes, based on fabricated linguistic data. Using naturally occurring, real linguistic data, this paper examines the syntactic and semantic structures of the two causal suffixes through a consideration of three areas of corpus linguistic analysis: token frequencies, collocations, and semantic prosody. An analysis based on concordance data reveals that the two causal connectives, -nula(ko) and -nun palamey, have more differences than similarities in terms of syntactic and semantic constraints. The idiosyncratic structures of the two suffixes are discussed in terms of same subject condition, verb selection, same agent condition, synchronicity condition, and negative semantic prosody.