• Language and Information
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.62-70
• /
• 2000

• 중국학논총
• /
• no.68
• /
• pp.55-73
• /
• 2020

本文诣在信息结构的观点研究'NP来VP'构式, 探讨了'来'语用层面的功能。本文指出把'来'看作对比焦点的先前研究的片面观点, 在以具体语境为基础, 对'NP来VP'构式进行了信息结构分析。结果发现'来'在不同语境下可以表示对比话题标记, 信息焦点标记, 对比焦点标记等。第一, 在一个语境中某个指示语已经作为话题出现, 然后在后续的语境中'来'附着于这个话题后, 那么此时的'来'有对比话题标记的功能。第二, 整个句子作焦点的, 如'我来介绍一下'中'来'是句子的信息焦点标记。第三, 表示确认焦点的句子里'来'出现在施事成分后, 与句子焦点域中的对比项构成对比, 因此此时的'来'有对比焦点标记功能。

• Speech Sciences
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.87-105
• /
• 2006

Many researchers have studied the relationship between the information structure and intonation. Arguments about the relations between the information structure and intonation researched so far can be summarized as follows: the intonation of topic and focus in English information structure is represented as i) a pitch accent, ii) a tune (a pitch accent + an edge tone), or iii) a boundary tone. The purpose of this paper is to study various informational patterns of the topic in English information structure, using real TV discussion data. In this paper, the topic is classified as contrastive topics and non-contrastive topics, based on contrastiveness. The results show that the intonation of the topic in English information structure is implemented as a pitch accent, neither a tune nor a boundary tone. Of the non-contrastive topics, while anaphoric determinative NP topics (Lnc, Lncd) are mainly represented as a H* pitch accent, the pronoun topic(Lp) does not have a pitch accent. Of contrastive topics, while the semantically focused topic(Lci) is mainly represented as a H* pitch accent, the contrastively focused topic(Lcc) is represented as both H* and L+H* pitch accents. It shows that it is not always true that the topic or focus to have the meaning of contrast is represented as a L+H* pitch accent as argued in the previous researches.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.47-70
• /
• 2010

This study investigates the semantic and prosodic properties of the so-called contrastive topic. We posit two informational primitives, namely, topical feature [+-T] and focal feature [+-F], from which four different informational categories, i.e., [+T, +F], [+T, -F], [-T, +F], and [-T, -F], are yielded. It is proposed that the informational category of contrastive topic has focal property [+F] as well as topical property [+T]. Based on the semantic approach that regards the function of [+F] as identificational predication and that of [+T] as forming a semantic conditional clause, it is shown that the semantic function of contrastive topic, which is specified as [+T, +F], is the combination of these two functions, i.e., identificational predication in a semantic conditional clause. This is supported by a scrutinized exploration of the prosodic pattern of English contrastive topic.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.27-52
• /
• 2004

This paper attempts to define various notions involving focus and topic found in Korean and also employs phonetic measures to verify the plausibility of those notions that are theoretically argued for. This paper crucially relies on Prince (1981) for the notion of familiarity and its pragmatic significance, and adopts Rooth's (1985) notion of alternative set and utilizes it in the light of pragmatic interpretation. The basic idea of this paper is to decompose the notion alternative set into finer-grained components and to assign various levels of familiarity to those finer components, thereby helping define different kinds of focus and topic according to the properties of those sub-components.

• Phonetics and Speech Sciences
• /
• v.4 no.4
• /
• pp.53-68
• /
• 2012

This study investigated the speech intelligibility of Korean-accented and native English focus speech for Korean and native English listeners. Three different types of focus in English, broad, narrow and contrastive, were naturally induced in semantically optimal dialogues. Seven high and seven low proficiency Korean speakers and seven native speakers participated in recording the stimuli with another native speaker. Fifteen listeners from each of Korean high & low proficiency and native groups judged audio signals of focus sentences. Results showed that Korean listeners were more accurate at identifying the focal prominence for Korean speakers' narrow focus speech than that of native speakers, and this suggests that the interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit-talker (ISIB-T) held true for narrow focus regardless of Korean speakers' and listeners' proficiency. However, Korean listeners did not outperform native listeners for Korean speakers' production of narrow focus, which did not support for the ISIB-listener (L). Broad and contrastive focus speech did not provide evidence for either the ISIB-T or ISIB-L. These findings are explained by the interlanguage shared by Korean speakers and listeners where they have established more L1-like common phonetic features and phonological representations. Once semantically and syntactically interpreted in a higher level processing in Korean narrow focus speech, the narrow focus was phonetically realized in a more intelligible way to Korean listeners due to the interlanguage. This may elicit ISIB. However, Korean speakers did not appear to make complete semantic/syntactic access to either broad or contrastive focus, which might lead to detrimental effects on lower level phonetic outputs in top-down processing. This is, therefore, attributed to the fact that Korean listeners did not take advantage over native listeners for Korean talkers and vice versa.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.1-27
• /
• 2009

This paper examines the (a)symmetries in the realization of focused subjects and objects in Korean. Through rating experiments, we demonstrate that native speakers' judgments of acceptability of sentences containing case-marked or case-ellipsed subjects and objects are sensitive to the contrastiveness strength and the discourse accessibility of focused arguments. However, our experiments also show that focused subjects exhibit stronger preference for explicit case marking over case ellipsis and that contrastiveness strength and discourse accessibility have weaker influence on the case marking and ellipsis of focused subjects compared to focused objects. We propose an account of variable case marking that is capable of subsuming both the similarities and differences between focused subjects and objects under the universal theory of markedness. In particular, it is shown that the similarities between focused subjects and objects are predicted by the proposed account based on the contrastiveness strength and the discourse accessibility of focused arguments and that the differences between focused subjects and objects follow naturally from the relative markedness of focus as subjects.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Language and Information Conference
• /
• 1996.02a
• /
• pp.307-316
• /
• 1996

• English Language & Literature Teaching
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.109-127
• /
• 2007

As an attempt to investigate the use of common verbs by a small group of Korean college students at the advanced level, the present study describes the students' speech production data collected from picture description tasks. The primary focus of the data description was how the students used high-frequency verbs in describing everyday activities. Out of total 442 units, 149 verbs were erroneously used. All erroneous utterances were classified into four categories according to their characteristics. The most prominent error type was overgeneralization due to incomplete knowledge of lexical items. Results showed that verbs used in everyday life were not easy even for the advanced level students. Although in some cases, L1 influence was discerned, the students' problems are more fundamental. In particular, the data revealed lack of knowledge of collocational possibilities and restrictions, and confusion about semantic boundaries between verbs which have similar semantic areas. The findings suggest that teaching at the advanced level should take contrastive approaches intralingually as well as interlingually to the high-frequency verbs.

• Speech Sciences
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.41-55
• /
• 2003

This paper investigates the tonal patterns of English information structure composed of topic and focus. It has been argued in previous theories that there is a significant relationship between English topic-focus structure and intonation. The English topic is marked with L+H* pitch accent and focus is marked with H* pitch accent. These theories, however, are oversimplified ones since they do not consider the contextual differences of topic and focus. To examine more concrete tonal patterns of English topic and focus, we classified topic into two subcategories of reminding topic and old-information topic. Focus was categorized into three: information focus, contrastive focus, and reference focus. The overall results show that native English speakers are inclined to use both the L+H* and H* pitch accent for the topic and focus of an utterance. We also observe a tendency to deaccentuate the topics given as old information and to mark the topics given as noun phrase with H* pitch accent. As for the intonation of focus, H* pitch accent is the most frequent type of accent, but L+H* also shows a high percentage of implementation especially in the context of correction or contrast.