In this paper, I will argue that the noun of Numeral Classifier constructions in Korean can be interpreted as definite or indefinite, by showing that Numeral Classifier constructions (henceforth, NC constructions) are subject to the so-called ‘definiteness effect’.
Since Milsark (1977), it is known that there are two kinds of determiners. As we see in (1), ‘weak’ determiners can appear in the existential constructions, whereas ‘strong’ determiners cannot.
.
(1) a. There is/are {a/some/two/…} fox(es) in the henhouse.
b. *There is/are {every/most/both/…} fox(es) in the henhouse.
.
This classification is reflected in the meaning of the determiners (Barwise and Cooper 1981; Heim 1982; Diesing 1992): The strong determiners presuppose in the previous discourse the restricting set identified by the noun. Therefore it is assumed that the audience can identify the set. By contrast, the weak determiners introduce new entities into a discourse and denote semantically the cardinality of the intersection of the restricting set and the set identified by the predicate.
However, quantifiers do not always have to be interpreted in a dichotomous way. It has been known that some weak NPs are interpreted ambiguously. For example, the weak NP in (2a) simply asserts the existence of mistakes. Yet the same weak NP in (2b), like a strong NP, presupposes the existence of mistakes in the manuscript and asserts that some of these are major. Following Diesing (1992), we call the former a ‘cardinal’ reading and the latter a ‘presuppositional’ reading.
.
(2) a. There are
b.
.
It is said that Numeral Classifier Constructions show similar behavior to that of weak NPs in various aspects. In this paper, I would like to explore whether the NC constructions display semantic ambiguity as found in weak NPs. In section one, I will first explain the NC constructions and then review some previous works that investigate the meanings of these constructions. In section two, I will re-examine the meaning of NC constructions from the viewpoint of ‘definiteness effects’ as proposed in Kiss (1995). Lastly I will summarize our discussion.
NC constructions are relatively frequent in languages of Southeast Asia or in Japanese, Chinese, Turkish, and Korean (Allan 1977; Aikhenvald 2006).
.
(3)
Zhangsan eat two-Cl orange
'Zhangsan has eaten two oranges'
.
(4) a. John-wa
John-Top book 3-Cl-Acc bought
b. John-wa
John-Top 3-Cl-Gen book-Acc bought
‘John bought three books.’
.
In comparison to Chinese, Japanese has two types of NC constructions. Korean, like Japanese, has two types of NC constructions. In the first type, a noun precedes a numeral classifier consisting of a numeral expression and a classifier as in (5a).
.
(5) a. [
student 3 Cl-Nom come-Past-Decl
b. [[
3 Cl-Gen student-Nom come-Past-Decl
‘Three students came.’
.
In this paper, we call the first type ‘Post NC’, and the second ‘Pre NC’, according to the position of a numeral classifier. As for the distribution, it is revealed from the corpus that the Post NC type appears more frequently than does the Pre NC type.
There have been some works that try to explain the semantic differences between the two NC constructions. Most of these have insisted that the two kinds of Korean NC constructions correspond to the two readings of weak NPs.
First, the default construction, i.e. the post NC type, is considered to be related with the cardinal reading, because this type appears in constructions which represent focus information (Lee 2001). We see this type in question-answer pairs (6), or at the beginning of a story (7).
.
(6) a. muess-ul sa-ass-ni?
what-Acc buy-Past-Q
‘what did you buy?’
b. {chyaksang twu kay/??twu kay-uy chyaksang}-ul sa- ass-ta.
{desk 2 Cl / 2 Cl-Gen desk}-Acc buy-Past-Decl ‘(I) bought two desks.’
.
(7) {kom sye mari/??sye mari-uy kom}-i han cip-ye iss-e. appa kom, emma kom, aki kom. …
{bear 3 Cl/3 Cl-Gen bear}-Nom a house-Loc be-Decl. papa bear, mammy bear, baby bear. …
‘There are three bears in a house: a papa bear, a mammy bear, a baby bear, …’
.
Beyond this, Kang (2000) insisted that the noun of a post NC type is not definite, based on the following observation:
.
(8) a. haksyang sye meyng-i tochakha-ess-ta.
student 3 Cl-Nom arrive-Past-Decl
b. haksyang-i sye meyng tochakha-ess-ta.
student-Nom 3 Cl arrive-Past-Decl
‘Three students arrived.’
c. *ku haksyang-(tul)-i sye meyng tochakha-ess-ta.
the student-Pl-Nom 3 Cl arrive-Past-Decl
.
It is known that the quantifier floating construction (8b) is formed from the Post NC type (8a). So if we accept the general view that the meanings of the two constructions are the same, we can conclude that the noun of post NC type is not definite. The reason for this is that the floating construction does not allow a definite noun to appear as we see in (8c).
As for the other type, i.e. the pre NC type, some works assume that this type is related with the presuppositional reading, where the referent of a noun is presupposed in the previous discourse (Chae 1983; Im 1991). In example (9), the noun
(9) Indo-yese khokkili sye mari-ka tul-e tongmulwen- ye (ku) sye mali khokkili-ka iss-ta.
India-from elephant 3 Cl-Nom enter-Con o-ass-ta. c o m e -
Past- Decl zoo-Loc the 3 Cl elephant-Nom be-Decl
‘Three elephants arrived from India. Those three elephants are in the zoo.’
.
In addition, Lee (1989) observed that an indefinite noun
.
(10) a. ??sye meyng-uy nwukwuinka-ka o-ass-ta.
3 Cl-Gen someone-Nom come-Past-Decl
b. nwukwuinka sye meyng-i o-ass-ta.
someone 3 Cl-Nom come-Past-Decl ‘Three persons came.’
.
Based on these works, Lee (2001) concluded that the post NC type is related with a cardinal reading, and the pre NC type with a presuppositional reading. Yet such a conclusion seems hasty. Especially regarding the post NC type, we can find in a corpus many examples that go against the conclusion. Therefore we need to reexamine the constructions involved.
Now we will reexamine the meanings of NC constructions from the viewpoint of definiteness effects. According to Reuland and ter Meulen (1987), there are “linguistic environments in which either a definite or an indefinite expression is exclusively acceptable.” Kiss (1995) divides definiteness effects into two kinds of effects, i.e. the Non-Specificity Effect and Specificity Effect.
.
Firstly consider the Non-Specificity Effect, where “a predicate asserting the existence of an argument does not allow the given argument to be realized by an NP carrying an existential presupposition” (Kiss 1995). That is, a definite noun cannot appear in a sentence whose predicate means a kind of ‘EXIST’, as we see in the following Hungarian examples (Kiss 1995).
.
(11) a.
Baby was born
b.
The baby was born
(12) a. Janos
John company-Acc founded
b. *Janos ‘alapitotta
John founded the company-Acc
.
This effect can be neutralized if a constituent is focused, in what called ‘Neutralization of Effect’ (Szabolcsi 1986; Kiss 1995). In (13), a definite noun appears, although the predicate means a kind of ‘EXIST’. The reason for this is that one element within the sentence is focused (‘on time’ in (13a), ‘John’ in (13b)).
.
(13) a.
‘The child was born on time.’
b.
‘As for the choir, it was John who established it.’
.
Now let us see the application of this effect into Korean NC constructions. It has been observed that Korean has some constructions which are subject to the Non-Specificity Effect.
.
Hungarian.
(14)
b. ku ai-ka [ecye]F thyaena-ass-ta.
‘It was yesterday that the baby was born.’
.
According to Jun (2002), only indefinite nouns are allowed in sentences whose predicates mean ‘EXIST’. But a definite noun is accepted in the same context, only if an element is focused. We will see below how to identify the definiteness of nouns in NC constructions by using the contexts of Jun (2002).
Let us begin with the Non-Specificity Effect. Consider the following examples.
.
(15) a. {syakki sye mali/??sye mali-uy syakki}-ka thyaena-ass- ta.
‘Three piglings were born.’
b. apeci-ka {cip sye chya/??sye chya-uy cip}-ul cis- ess-ta.
‘Father built three houses.’
.
The post NC type is allowed in the sentences containing the predicate meaning ‘EXIST’ such as
Next, let us test the ‘Neutralization of Effect’. The following shows the application of the Effect into Korean NC constructions:
.
(16) a. {syakki sye mali/sye mali-uy syakki}-ka [ecye]F thyaena-ass-ta.
‘It was yesterday tha the three piglings were born.’
b. apeci-ka [cakneyn-ye]F {cip sye chya/sye chya-uy cip}- ul cis-ess-ta.
‘It was last year that father built the three houses.’
.
According to the Neutralization of Effect, the existence of a focused element allows a definite noun to appear in the same sentence. Therefore it is expected that only the pre NC type appears in this ‘neutralized’ context, because the noun of the pre NC type is assumed to be definite. However, the post NC type is also allowed in the same context, as we see in (16). That goes against our expectation, so we need to revise the conclusion of the previous works. We assume tentatively that the noun of a post NC type can refer to a definite referent as well as to an indefinite referent.
Kiss (1995) proposed the so-called ‘Specificity Effect’, in addition to the ‘Non-Specificity Effect’. According to this work, “the Specificity Effect is triggered by predicates which presuppose the existence of their argument(s). The existential presupposition that must accompany the argument(s) of Specificity Effect predicates can be provided by realizing the given argument as a specific NP.” She presented the following Hungarian examples, where the predicate expressing mental states in (12) or perfectivity in (18) requires a definite noun.
.
(17) a. *A matematikat tudjak
b.
(18) a. *Meg-szuletett
b.
Based on Kiss (1995), Jun (2002) presents a list of Korean words which require a definite argument when he tests the definiteness of Korean bare nouns against the Specificity Effect: an aspectual adverb
.
(19) a. {ai twu meyng/twu meyng-uy ai}-ka wulum- ul memchwu-ess-ta.
‘the two babies stopped crying.’
b. {haksyang twu meyng/twu meyng-uy haksyang}- i acik ca-ko iss-ta.
‘the two students are still sleeping.’
c. {haksyang twu meyng/twu meyng-uy haksyang}- i taci ca-ko iss-ta.
‘the two students sleep again.’
.
As we see above, the two kinds of NC constructions are allowed in the context of the ‘Specificity Effect’, i.e. in the context of an aspectual verb
In addition, Lee (2000) observes that the two types of NC constructions are allowed in contexts related to perfectivity, e.g. in the sentence containing an auxiliary verb
.
(20)
a. con-i {sakwa sye kya/sye kya-uy sakwa}-lul ta mek-e peli-ess-ta.
‘John ate up the three apples.’
b. con-i sam-pun manye{sakwa sye kya/sye kya-uy sakwa}-lul mek-ess-ta.
‘John ate the three apples in three minutes.’
.
From this observation, we can say that the noun of a post NC type is definite in certain contexts. That view falls into line with the assumption of the last section. Therefore we conclude finally that the noun of a post NC type can be definite or indefinite.
In this paper, we examined the meaning of Korean NC constructions. We started by examining the previous researches that have insisted that a noun of the post NC type refers to an indefinite referent and a noun of the pre NC type to a definite referent. We re-examined this conclusion from the viewpoint of the definiteness effect, especially the Non-Specificity Effect and Specificity Effect in the sense of Kiss (1995). As a result, we came to the following conclusion, which revises previous observations: A noun of the post NC type can be definite or indefinite, while a noun of the pre NC type is definite.
The ‘presuppositional’ reading is also called ‘proportional’ reading in other works.
According to Allan (1977), there are four types of classifier languages. The type discussed in this paper corresponds to ‘numeral classifier languages’. In addition, there are ‘concordial classifier languages’, ‘predicate classifier languages’, and ‘intra-locative classifier languages’.
Abbreviations used in glosses: Cl ‘classifier’, Top ‘topic’, Acc ‘accusative case’, Gen ‘genitive case’, Nom ‘nominative case’, Past ‘past tense’, Decl ‘declarative’, Q ‘question’, Pl ‘plural’, Con ‘connective’, Loc ‘locative’, Prog ‘progressive’, Perf ‘perfective’.
In this type, we can form another construction, so-called ‘quantifier floating’, where a numeral classifier is moved from the whole NP as below.
(i) haksyang-i sye meyng-(i) o-ass-ta.
student-Nom 3 Cl-(Nom) come-Past-Decl
According to Yang (1995), the post NC type is used more frequently in written text (78%) than is the pre NC type (22%).
Definiteness and specificity are not the same concept (Enç 1991; von Heusinger 2002), but we will not differentiate between the two concepts in this paper. That is, the discourse referents of definite or specific NP are linked to previously established discourse referents, while the discourse referents of indefinite or nonspecific NP are not.
In Hungarian, information structural concepts such as topic or focus are marked by word order. A focused element occupies the second position within a sentence.
For example, existential constructions, predicate nominals, and inalienable possession constructions are mentioned in the previous works.
Jun (2002) used the definiteness effect for the test of definiteness in Korean bare nouns. A Korean noun has no determiner, and therefore their definiteness is unspecified. According to him, we can determine the definiteness of a noun, if we apply Non-Specificity Effect into the bare nouns.
In general, a Korean focused element is identified by phonological information like accents. The phrase marked by a subscript F in (14) indicates a focused element.