• Language and Information
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.31-58
• /
• 2003

The main goal of this paper is to describe and analyse intensifiers, especially non-head-bound-intensifiers (NHBIs), which can be included in the discussion and analysis of these elements as focus particles. In doing so, NHBIs such as Korean susulo, casin/cache, English x-self and German selbst are dealt with in a rather cross-linguistical perspective. The pure and strict comparison between Korean, English and German is not intended. This paper is mainly concerned with the semantic domain where the respective contributions of the expressions in question overlap, which offers the common base for the discussion regarding Korean, one of the non-European languages and English and German, two European languages. They share the semantic domain ‘intensification’ regarding relevant subject-NP. They introduce an ordering distinguishing center and periphery. In contrast to head-bound-intensifiers (HBIs), however, NHBIs add self-involvement (directness of involvement) of subject-NP to the meaning of the relevant sentence. I adopt the proposals of Konig (1991), Primus (1992) and Siemund (2000) in the treatment of intensifiers as focus particles. However, I reject Konig (1991) that just NHBIs talre scope over a whole clause, Primus (1992) that NHBIs focus VPs, not NPs, and Siemund (2000) that NHBIs can be further devided into two groups, viz. NHBIs with exclusive readings and NHBIs with inclusive readings. Evidence for my position is presented mainly in the course of describing and analysing some syntactic properties and the meaning and use of NHBIs. I come to the conclusion that both the common meaning of intensifiers as focus particles and the common meaning of NHBIs of three languages can be represented by a simple logical formalism.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Language and Information Conference
• /
• 2001.06a
• /
• pp.199-225
• /
• 2001

The main goal of this paper is to investigate and compare English, German and Korean non-head-bound-intensifiers such as English ‘x-self’, German ‘selbst’, and Korean ‘susulo, casin’. That is, this paper is mainly concerned with the semantic domain where the respective contributions of the expressions in question overlap. The phenomenon under discussion with the label “intensifiers” is regarded as universal, which provides the ground of the comparative/contrastive or semi-cross-linguistic study of this paper. Not only the semantic concept of intensification by these expressions but also the combination of grammatical features or syntactic behaviours thereof seem to have highly invariant common denominators among the wide varieties of languages, even if they come from apparently different language families. In comparing English, German and Korean intensifiers, this paper is interested in the more general features of the expressions in question rather than some language-specific idiocyncracies. Intensifiers work similarly not only in English and German, but also in Korean. Each of three languages under investigation provides some sort of a safegard against confusing instances and misleading judgements on the issues under discussion. Morphologically, however, English expressions in question agree with their rele-vant NP in number, gender and person. Whereas German and Korean counterparts do not have such specific morphological properties. Intensifiers in their non-head-bound-use are subject-oriented, just as in their head-bound use. Non-head-bound-intensifiers differ from head-bound-intensifiers mostly in their syntactic behaviours or distributional properties, whereas they share the semantic domain “intensification” regarding relevant subject-NP. They introduce an ordering and distinguish center and periphery, and ‘self-involvement (directness of involvement)’seems a additional possible characterisation of the relevant dimension of these intensifiers in common. An assertion of identity also can be reg