• Speech Sciences
• /
• v.8 no.4
• /
• pp.259-273
• /
• 2001

This study investigates the accentual realization of negation denying the presupposition of a previous utterance compared with that of a general negation. Specifically we study what types and positions of accent are realized in the speech of Korean speakers using English as a second language as well as English native speakers. Gussenhoven (1983) and Bolinger (1985, 1986) suggested that when presupposition of previous utterances is denied through negation, focal accent is assigned to empty (functional) words, rather than negative morphemes. The results of this study, however, show that negation sentences denying presupposition have accents not only on empty (functional) words but also on content words. Almost every English native speaker places an H* accent on the negative morphemes themselves (not, no, nothing, etc.) in general negation, as well as on the other lexical items-verbs and prepositions in our data-in negations denying presuppositions. On the other hand, Korean speakers hardly distinguish between the two kinds of negation sentences, unlike native speakers through accentual differences. Rather, they give accent an every content word, including the negative morphemes in both general negations and negations denying presuppositions. Therefore, the results of this study do not absolutely support the previous studies on the denial of presupposition.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Language and Information Conference
• /
• 1991.02a
• /
• pp.230-242
• /
• 1991

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.27-59
• /
• 2010

After the unexpected death of the late professor Young-Jung Kim on July 28th last year, 4 pieces of paper unpublished were discovered. Those papers reveal that he had a grand program. In particular, we found that he had his own ideas and theory which he called "Presupposition Logic" and "Field Logic". In this paper, I will call his program "Presupposition Logic Program". He explored a new logic system, Presupposition Logic, in order to realize necessity and possibility of the closer relationship between logic and critical thinking. In this paper, I will expound what his "presupposition" and "Presupposition Logic" are and why he thought Presupposition Logic is necessary from a perspective of logic. And I will critically elucidate what was the problem that troubled him.

• Lingua Humanitatis
• /
• v.6
• /
• pp.321-357
• /
• 2004

In this article the structure of modern Russian humor is analyzed on the basis of some theories: bi-sociation theory (Koestler 1964), semantic script theory of verbal humor, using the concept of semantic presupposition, pragmatic felicity condition (Searle 1969; Levinson 1983) and grammatical rules (Chomsky 1965). Up to now the listed former theories were not examined and less analyzed by the semantic structure in the study of the structure of Russian humor(HcaeBa 1969; 3 $a_{OPHOB}$ 1991; 1992). Kreps (1981), who analyzed the works of Zoschenko, presented 21 types of humor, using the term 'humoreme'(Kpenc 1981, 36-37). These types are the list of the available means of humor that work not in the base of semantic criteria, but in the base of means of literary rhetoric. Kreps presented types of humor means, such as contradiction, antonymic substitution, macaronic speech and correlation of humoremes in the various types of humor. Apart from Kreps, Manakov (MaHaKOB 1986, 61-79) also studied these problems. He also set the system of the basic types of humor. Manakov introduced the linguistic means of humor of some Russian writers: Gogol, Tchechov. The means that Manakov showed with detailed examples, are trope, epithet, comic comparison, comic metaphor, comic periphrasis, euphemism, pun, zeugma, comic toponym, comic onomatopoeia, mania of foreign vocabulary, folk etymology, dialect etc. But these studies don't explain why these means make the works humorous. An, B.p tried to answer this question (안병팔 1997 a; b). An B.p. explains contexts of humor through the Release theory, the Superiority theory and the Incongruity theory. An, B.p. explained the process of deviation from the grammatical norms through morpho-syntactic and lexical means. But in these studies the humor was not analyzed by the semantic criteria. In order to linguistically evaluate various means of humor formation, it is necessary to elicit its deep structure, which makes it possible to research the formation and interpretation of humor. For this purpose this article, being based on the Incongruity theory, defined the structure of humor as negation of presupposition. Of course the former traditional studies also well shared the concept of 'contradiction' and 'contrast' of humor structure, but they didn't explain the structure by semantic differential features. This study, analyzing the works of' Zadornov, M., tried to note that through the negation of semantic presupposition the structure of contradiction is formed with semantic differential features on the semantic, syntactic or lexical dimensions.