I 4.1 r. . ..v . V. ,..2. _ . n K. . THESlS TEUB LIBRARY llllljlllljflllfllllllllljlfllfljlllll Michigan State University This is to certify that the thesis entitled AGRANIMATIC PRODUCTION IN KOREAN presented by John F. Halliwell has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M. A. degree in LlngQISLIQS 64 {5% Major professor Date_DecemheL8._1228_ 0.7639 MS U i: an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINE retum on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 1/” MM“ AGRAMMATIC PRODUCTION IN KOREAN By John F. Halliwell A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Linguistics and Germanic, Slavic, Asian, and African Languages I998 product“ ,Wifllf kxnbfl pamnm. asouaw and d}5l laden} pmmnm s samcnc Th: ummah lntdmam sponed 1 pmmmUOI mahded ABSTRACT AGRAMMATIC PRODUCTION IN KOREAN By John F. Halliwell This thesis examines the general characteristics of agrammatic production in Korean. Using the methodology found in Menn and Obler (1990) for collecting, analyzing, and presenting data, the thesis provides a describes the patterns of sparing and loss based on the narratives of two patients. The Korean patients were seen to display the general properties associated with clinical descriptions of agrammatism: nonfluent, effortful, and dysprosodic. They spoke in very short phrases, and there was a tendency to omit or substitute functional elements. Additionally, the patients showed a preference for content over function elements, for simple syntactic constructions, and for canonical word order. The findings are also considered in light of Menn and Obler's (1990) summary findings and current linguistic accounts (Grodzinsky 1990, 1997; Friedmann and Grodzinsky 1997). It is concluded that, like characteristics reported for other languages, Korean agrammatism involves similar basic production parameters as well as language-specific characteristics. It is also concluded that current accounts for these patterns are insufficient. To Boseung and Christopher iii As I people to: gatitudc Scbmm. a comments. thank all o In: and e bclp of 53 Stungllq llUnderful man) 1mm Kl’lnghec Center 10 alilrlend. “ho 56mg lacllltaton meant “CI Oh and K; paFinis Ja licomager in: and Li ACKNOWLEDGMENTS As with any major project, this was not an individual effort. Many people contributed, all in significant ways. I would like to express my gratitude to my committee: Professor Alan Beretta, Professor Cristina Schmitt, and Professor Barbara Abbott. Their expertise, guidance, critical comments, and patience along the way have been invaluable. I also wish to thank all of the participants for their generosity in giving us so much of their time and effort. I would never have met any of them had it not been for the help of Sang-Hoon Park and Mr. Jong-Kwan Park, who introduced us to Dr. Seung-Hyun Kim and Dr. Ju-Han Kim at Hanyang University hospital. These wonderful doctors not only helped us with patients but also introduced us to many important people in the field. Two of these people are Su-Jung Kim at Kyunghee University hospital and Dr. Hyang-Hee Kim at Samsung Medical Center, to whom I am very much indebted for their help, advice, generosity, and friendship. My deepest gratitude, though, goes out to my wife Boseung, who selflessly devoted her whole summer setting up meetings and acting as facilitator, experimenter, and transcriber. Her support all these years has meant everything. Thanks also to Jin-Young Jung for her help and Jung-Ac Oh and Ki-Sung Jung for their love and support. Finally, thanks to my parents Jack and Darlene Halliwell for their never-ending love and encouragement. This study was funded in part by grants from the College of Arts and Letters and The Graduate School, Michigan State University. iv ROSU 37Rl CHAP BACK (Hip METH TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................. vii LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................ ix LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................. x ROMANIZATION GUIDE ................................................................. xi INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. 1 CHAPTER 1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................ 4 1.1 Review of Literature ...................................................... 4 1.1.1 Aphasia and Agrammatism .................................... 4 1.1.2 Dissociation of Production and Comprehension ...... 5 1.1.3 Linguistic Descriptions of Agrammatic Production. 6 1.1.4 Linguistic Accounts of Agrammatic Production ...... 9 1.2 Korean Agrammatic Production ...................................... 17 1.2.1 Need .................................................................... 17 1.2.2 Syntactic Framework ............................................ 18 1.2.3 Korean Grammatical Sketch .................................. 20 1.2.4 Predictions for Korean Agrammatic Production ...... 28 CHAPTER 2 METHODS AND MATERIALS .......................................................... 31 2.1 Subjects ........................................................................ 31 2.1.1 General Background ............................................. 31 2.1.2 Neurological Status .............................................. 32 2.2 Methods and Materials ................................................... 33 2.2.1 Tasks ................................................................... 33 2.2.2 Analyses .............................................................. 34 CHAPTER 3 RESULTS ......................................................................................... 35 3.1 Production Parameters .................................................... 36 3.2 Morpheme Errors and Omission ...................................... 38 3.3 Distribution of Grammatical Categories in the Texts ........ 49 3.4 Syntactic Complexity ..................................................... 59 3.5 Discourse Patterns: Level of Politeness ........................... 60 4.. P I T'- tHAP I CCNC Ll APPEVC A B C D 04 ‘ .,. R3 . CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION ................................................................................... 62 4.1 Symptom Patterns in Korean ........................................... 62 4.2 Comparison of Korean and Cross-Linguistic Findings ....... 70 4.3 Theoretical Implications ................................................. 74 4.3.1 Underspecification of Functional Elements ............ 74 4.3.2 The Tree-Pruning Hypothesis ................................ 77 4.4 Limitations and Further Research .................................... 82 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION .................................................................................. 84 APPENDICES ................................................................................... 88 A Korean Folktale Narrative .............................................. 88 B Action Picture ............................................................... 89 C Picture Sequence ........................................................... 90 D1 CYS: Primary Transcription and Interlinear Morphemic Translations ....................... 91 D2: KKM: Primary Transcription and Interlinear Morphemic Translations ....................... 104 D3: Control JYK: Primary Transcription and Interlinear Morphemic Translations ....................... l 15 D4: Control CKY: Primary Transcription and Interlinear Morphemic Translations ....................... 127 E1: CYS: Production Parameters ........................................... 142 E2: KKM: Production Parameters .......................................... 143 E3: Control JYK: Production Parameters ............................... 144 E4: Control CKY: Production Parameters .............................. 145 F1: CYS: Morpheme Errors and Distributions ........................ 146 F2: KKM: Morpheme Errors and Distributions ....................... 148 F3: Control JYK: Morpheme Errors and Distributions ............ 150 F4: Control CKY: Morpheme Errors and Distributions ........... 152 G]: CYS: Distribution of Grammatical Categories in the Texts .......................................................... 154 02: KKM: Distribution of Grammatical Categories in the Texts .......................................................... 155 G3: Control JYK: Distribution of Grammatical Categories in the Texts .......................................................... 156 G4: Control CKY: Distribution of Grammatical Categories in the Texts .......................................................... 157 H: Major Class Lexical Items (Token/Type) ......................... 158 REFERENCES .................................................................................. 16] vi AM rife] "I .y I an Table 1.3.1 Table 2.1.1 Table 2.1.2 Table 3.2.1 Table 3.2.2 Table 3.3.1 Table 3.3.2 Appendix E1 Appendix E2 Appendix E3 Appendix E4 Appendix F] Appendix F2 Appendix F3 Appendix F4 Appendix G] Appendix 62 Appendix G3 LIST OF TABLES Levels of Politeness and Sentence Type ........................... 22 Background Information Summary .................................. 31 Neurological Status ........................................................ 32 CYS: Verbal Morpheme Errors and Distributions ............. 41 KKM: Verbal Morpheme Errors and Distributions ............ 46 CYS: Nominal Grammatical Function Errors .................. 50 KKM: Nominal Grammatical Function Errors .................. 55 CYS: Production Parameters ................................. 142 KKM: Production Parameters ................................ 143 Control JYK: Production Parameters ...................... 144 Control CKY: Production Parameters ..................... 145 CYS: Morpheme Errors and Distributions .............. 146 KKM: Morpheme Errors and Distributions ............. 148 Control JYK: Morpheme Errors and Distributions...150 Control CKY: Morpheme Errors and Distributions..152 CYS: Distribution of Grammatical Categories in the Texts ......................................... 154 KKM: Distribution of Grammatical Categories in the Texts ......................................... 155 Control JYK: Distribution of Grammatical Categories in the Texts ......................................... 156 vii Appendix G4 Control CKY: Distribution of Grammatical Categories in the Texts ......................................... 157 Appendix H Major Class Lexical Items (Token/Type) ................ 158 viii llgire 4. irgure 4 figure 4. Figure 4. Figure 4. lzgure 4 Figure 4. Figure 4 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.2.1 The Minimalist Model .................................................... 19 Figure 4.1.1 Summary of Rate of Production ...................................... 63 Figure 4.1.2 Summary of Phrase Length ............................................. 63 Figure 4.1.3 Summary of Verbal Morpheme Errors ............................. 64 Figure 4.1.4 Summary of Direction of Tense Errors ............................ 65 Figure 4.1.5 Summary of Particle Errors and Omissions ...................... 66 Figure 4.1.6 Summary of Token/Type Ratios ...................................... 67 Figure 4.1.7 Summary of Content/Function Ratios .............................. 68 Figure 4.1.8 Summary of Level of Politeness Errors ............................ 69 ix FRED PAST DEC GER NEG QUOT AUX ADVZ VFE INTER SUPP PROM EMPH PTL NOM CON LOC GL SRC POSS CLASS ADV Adv ptl [ ] Predicate Past Tense Declarative Gerund Negative Quotative Auxiliary Adverbalizer Verb-Final Element Interrogative Suppositive Promisory Emphatic Particle Nominative Contrastive Locative Goal Source Possessive Classifier Adverb Noun 'Empty' Verb Adverb Particle Omission PRES HON MOD PASS CONJ COMP ADNZ INT PLA POL FOR TOP ACC LOCd ABL TEMP PL COM OPTL aux Adj LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS Present Tense Honorific Modal Passive Conjunction Complementizer Adnominalizer :: Intimate Level 4 Plain Level Polite Level ' Formal Level Topic Accusative Locative Dynamic Ablative Temporal Plural Comitative Optional Lexical Verb Auxiliary Adjective The roma I-lowex er. :Inbersc :1: m :3 7'7" :1er ofi$=>ahxcxstztaznmrtd£4 ROMANIZATION GUIDE The romanization system used in this study is primarily the Yale system. However, a few changes have been made in order to make it less cumbersome. Hangul Phonetic Romanization NlflEF-lflii'ljllJ artifacts)!» Con sonants k, g k kh kh k‘ kk t t t" t" t' tt P P p“ p" p' pp c, I j 0' ii c'1 c s s 5' 55 h h '0 “8 n n l, r l m m xi 3: m :3 “E. R¥££e3a$paanaeem+pae Vowels Phonetic Romanization 8 O u —n *- Ctr-’00 Ho CY we ya ye yo yae Yc)’ WC ui ui The msanuate mdependel Indgcncn mtlangua IoschIfic deuates f finguage I Par: '16. Ml} lUlpaIIed l II alli S}! 1nd only Thu; [he firuCtuIe ’“f‘llman thuebl n hléuage INTRODUCTION The goal of neurolinguistics is to build a picture of how language is instantiated in the brain. It is generally believed that language is an independent module separate from other modules (e.g., visual perception) and general cognition. One source of data source useful for investigating the language module is aphasia, impairment of language caused by damage to specific areas of the brain. That is, studying speakers whose language deviates from the norm provides a window through which the structure of language may be viewed. Paradis (Menn et. a1. 1995) draws on a corollary of Murphy's Law (i.e., only that which can go wrong will go wrong) to illustrate how an impaired language system can provide us with this unique view of language. In any system, only that which is susceptible to breakdown can break down and only in ways that are compatible with the constraints of that system. Thus, the types of speech error in a given language are constrained by the structure of that language. Aphasic errors, then, can provide much information about various language systems and their structural constraints, thereby moving us closer to the ultimate goal of understanding the human language faculty. Not only do linguistic studies of aphasia provide information on the language module and the structure of the various languages but also on the representation of language in the brain. Caplan (1987) points out that sxntactic ln I:Lral re and com; conducts syntacuc tunque aphana 11 Gr. ititing :h 15 therefi ‘Phasm p cOllecnn! 0‘ follne neuiflllng descrlpllc pmllde a 3' .4. O‘UHIO deficit analysis helps to build theories of language representation by linking damage to specific brain structures with impairment of specific aspects of language. Thus, linguistic aphasiology holds the promise of linking syntactic representation and neural representation. In order to build better theories of language representation and link neural representation with syntactic representation, it is necessary to look at and compare aphasia in many languages. Linguistic aphasia studies have indeed been conducted in many languages; however, only one has been conducted on Korean. Yet, Korean has several theoretically interesting syntactic properties, and an investigation of these properties will provide us a unique view of aphasia. Thus, this thesis is concerned with agrammatic aphasia in Korean. Grodzinsky (1990) points out that the first step in constructing and testing theories is to collect, examine and describe a set of data. This thesis is therefore based on Menn and Obler's (1990) compilation of agrammatic aphasia production studies. Menn and Obler provide a consistent format for collecting, analyzing and presenting data. Although this series contains data on fourteen languages, it does not include Korean. Thus, the first step in neurolinguistic studies in Korean is to begin to create a linguistic description of Korean agrammatism. The goal of this thesis, then, is to provide a description of the general characteristics of Korean agrammatic production based on two case studies, source data for future cross-linguistic compartson compartson The lrtefl) dts tgrammatis production present pre. the method: toes of an presents the results .‘lf lfoductton for Korean .llso.Chap1 itcoumfor “Ummart l comparisons, and a test of predictions based on previous cross-linguistic comparisons. The thesis is organized in the following manner. In Chapter 1, I briefly discuss the generally accepted characteristics of aphasia and agrammatism. I then review modern linguistic accounts for these patterns in production. Based on this review and the structure of the Korean language, I present predictions for Korean agrammatic production. Chapter 2 discusses the methods and materials used for testing the predictions. In addition, the types of analyses that were performed on the data is discussed. Chapter 3 presents the results of these analyses. Chapter 4 provides a discussion of the results yielding the general characteristics of Korean agrammatic production. Additionally, Chapter 4 compares the results to the predictions for Korean and to those of Menn and Obler‘s (1990) summary findings. Also, Chapter 4 discusses how the data bear on the most current linguistic account for aphasic production patterns. Chapter 5 concludes the thesis with a summary of findings. This cl. 11 discusses zphasic produ thepredtction 1.1 Review 1.1.] Aphasi Aphasu of the brain aphasia. conc global aphasr :ripairment 01 area Broca’s tooiolution ft fissure. Tht cerehrovascul: cerebrot‘ascula Asubse ”honed by D. used the infini CHAPTER 1 BACKGROUND This chapter provides the general background for the thesis. Section 1.1 discusses aphasia in general, as well as modern linguistic accounts for aphasic production. Section 1.2 provides the need of the thesis and sets out the predictions to be tested. 1.] Review of Literature 1.1.1 Aphasia and Agrammatism Aphasia is impairment of language caused by damage to specific areas of the brain. There are several types of aphasia: Broca's aphasia, Wernicke's aphasia, conduction aphasia, anomic aphasia, transcortical aphasia, and global aphasia. This study deals with patients who suffer from an impairment of language as a result of focal damage to some part of Broca's area. Broca's area is in the left hemisphere in the opercular part of the third convolution forward from the Rolandic fissure and adjacent to the Sylvian fissure. The etiologies of Broca's aphasia include stroke (ischemic cerebrovascular accident), intracranial hemorrhage (hemorrhagic cerebrovascular accident), trauma, and tumor. A subset of Broca's aphasia is agrammatism. Agrammatism was first rePorted by Deleuze (1819, cited in Kean 1985) in an aphasic patient who used the infinitive form of verbs and never used pronouns. Kussmaul (1876, Cited in Grodzinsky 1990) later reported on brain-damaged patients who could nor for Part (1913. I production in specrfic in his syntactic imp. sparing and l though these I grammatical s Ahhoug Broca's aphas agrammatism is ohsersed in mi global ap aphasia. agrar Characteristics dI’SPIOSOd)‘; ; functional elei ind lllllection complex Same 1990, Fremkm 1.1.2 Dissocia IladmoI could not form words or arrange phrases grammatically. However, it was Pick (1913, cited in Grodzinsky 1990) who noted that the patterns of production in some Broca's aphasics were ungrammatical. Although not specific in his description, Pick was the first to note that there was selective syntactic impairment. That is, he was the first to note that the pattern of sparing and loss was to the system of grammar. He concluded that even though these patients knew what they wanted to say, they could not construct grammatical sentences. Pick thus termed this phenomenon agrammatism. Although agrammatism is commonly found in patients suffering from Broca's aphasia, not all Broca's aphasics present the characteristics of agrammatism. In fact, Kirshner (1995a) points out that agrammatic speech is observed in not only Broca's aphasia but also transcortical motor aphasia and global aphasia. Thus, rather than corresponding to a certain type of aphasia, agrammatism has been defined by its own characteristics. These characteristics include nonfluent, effortful speech at a slow rate; dysprosody; and telegraphic speech style characterized by a lack of functional elements such as auxiliaries, pronouns, determiners, prepositions and inflectional affixes, a preference for content words, and a lack of complex sentence structure (Goodglass 1968, Tissot et. a1 1973, Grodzinsky l990, Fromkin 1995). 1.1.2 Dissociation of Production and Comprehension Traditionally, agrammatism was seen as a production deficit in which grammatical morphemes (bound and free) were impaired and in which :ontprehensio superintental They found passises “as that the Ulldi syntax that af Most It results contin tlinebarger et Obler 1990. 1997. etc). 1 impaired \h'hi ptoduetion 31 sentences gra: then, that Mr 1.1.1 Linguis Menn a Given 1: Production an pIOdUCIIOn. A Mum and Obj This comllt’latt comprehension was thought to be normal. Caramazza and Zurif‘s (1976) experimental study on comprehension in agrammatics changed this view. They found that agrammatic comprehension of semantically reversible passives was at chance level (i.e., random guessing). This led to the view that the underlying deficit in agrammatism was a central deficit of the syntax that affects both production and comprehension. Most researchers currently reject this Overarching Hypothesis, for results continue to point to a dissociation in many (though not all) cases (Linebarger et. al. 1983, Miceli et. al. 1983, Schwartz et. a1. 1985, Menn and Obler 1990, Grodzinsky 1990, Friedmann and Grodzinsky 1997, Rispens 1997, etc.). That is, results have shown that it is possible that production is impaired while comprehension remains relatively intact or that both production and comprehension are impaired while the ability to judge sentences grammatically remains intact (Miceli et. al. 1983). It appears, then, that production and comprehension must be separated. 1.1.3 Linguistic Descriptions of Agrammatic Production Menn and Obler's Cross-Linguistic Description Given the above description of agrammatism and the dissociation of production and comprehension, this thesis will focus only on agrammatic Production. A major contribution to the agrammatic production literature is Menn and Obler's (1990) cross-language study of agrammatic production. This compilation presents studies of fourteen languages. It is the first attcnlpt to look at several languages and compare linguistic characteristics. Etch stud) us produced a c teross languz tgrammatism morphemes, I tomentfunctt studies incluc tanscrtpts. a database is in tgrammatism analyses or fo lnthen Obler report 1 Ibo” Phrase “tinned 5,, flammatical l omitted even substituted 1 'addnne- co" Stllltnce,fina] Mnud i6) ltllh malll‘elt» Each study used the same format for data collection and presentation, which produced a consistency that allowed for a survey of the characteristics across languages. Each study thus presented the basic properties of agrammatism in several areas: behavior of free and bound grammatical morphemes, use of syntactic structures, choice of verb tense, ratios of content/function word, rate of speech, and phrase length. In addition, these studies include transcripts of the narratives, morphemic translations of the transcripts, and analyses of morphological and syntactic errors. This database is important in that not only does it provide the basic properties of agrammatism in many languages but it also provides data for further analyses or for testing accounts of agrammatic patterns. In their comparison of data from the fourteen languages, Menn and Obler report the following summary results. (1) The clinical definition of short phrase length, slow speech rate, reduced syntactic variety, and simplified syntax occurred in all of the languages studied. (2) Most free grammatical morphemes were omitted. (3) Bound morphemes were rarely omitted even in languages where omission was possible but were instead substituted. (4) Certain free grammatical morphemes, mostly clause-initial ”additive” conjunctions (e.g., "and,” ”and then,” "and so") and, in Japanese, sentence-final particles were used heavily. (5) Modifiers of nouns were omitted. (6) There was a reliance on canonical word order; in languages With relatively free word order, patients adopted a favorite word order. r:- i 3 Ir Case .1! Of cou presented in t hos'eter. ther production. agrammatic pi Korean Caser ot' narratives i he, frll in the In the nominative m2 Ittmsofsubst 11% of accu: Percentage of omissions are mOIS lll lhe St In the s 0Cturred; nor Howey", ther “William: ma and adJCCtiu'e F Case Markers in Korean Agrammatic Production Of course there have been studies in languages that were not presented in the Menn and Obler volumes. Korean is one such language; however, there has been only one linguistic study of Korean agrammatic production. Kim, SH. (1997) conducted two experiments with four agrammatic patients in order to examine the patterns of sparing and loss in Korean Case markers. She obtained spontaneous speech data from two types of narratives in the first experiment and experimental data from a cloze task (i.e., fill in the correct Case marker) in the second experiment. In the first experiment, she found across patients that 11% of nominative markers were omitted and 15% of accusatives were omitted. In terms of substitution, she found that 2% of nominatives were incorrect and 11% of accusatives were incorrect. Although she did not report the percentage of omissions in the normal controls, she pointed out that omissions are possible in normal speech. Thus, she focused on substitution errors in the second experiment. In the second experiment she found that both types of substitutions occurred: nominative for accusative and accusative for nominative. However, there was a tendency for patients to substitute accusative for nominative markers more often in certain verb types: unaccusative, passive and adjective predicate. She con loss in Case m iiefault Case 1.1.4 Linguis' The abo stud) of aphas of characterist explain it’ll“ sc are not. Gror scteral steps. describing it, a to use the ties loss and to sta reference to a . Spellfic Ways. u‘llhout refere "milalcd and l theories of 5151 to funhfl ref ir lhtorp Accounts chaotic Pattern accounts can be She concluded that Korean patients do show a pattern of sparing and loss in Case morphology. Additionally, these patients appear not to rely on a default Case morpheme but rather substitute incorrectly. 1.1.4 Linguistic Accounts of Agrammatic Production The above descriptions are important contributions to the linguistic study of aphasia. However, although descriptions do allow for comparison of characteristics and possibly for classification of patients, they do not explain why some properties of the language system are impaired and some are not. Grodzinsky (1990) points out that understanding why involves several steps. The first step involves collecting and examining a data set, describing it, and stating generalizations over the data. The second step is to use the description to derive predictions for the pattern of sparing and loss and to state these predictions within a theoretical framework (i.e., with reference to a normal language system). By modifying the normal system in specific ways, an explanation of the impaired system can be derived. Without reference to a normal system, a description would simply be an unrelated and unnecessary theory of deficits, as there is no need to develop theories of systems that are broken. The third step is to test the predictions to further refine the description and to motivate further constraints on the theory. Accounts of agrammatism, then, are attempts to explain the seemingly Chaotic pattern of variation across patients and across languages. These accounts can be grouped into two general areas: psycholinguistic processing ucount teens ucoun aererat lraneu shooet these ; eten tl contai: senten tgram tracsf. llllaCl. hodu Wont ihhn ltrcti midi igram accounts and linguistic accounts. As this study deals with the structural aspects of Korean agrammatic production, I will discuss only the linguistic accounts and, more specifically, only those accounts based on modern (i.e., generative) linguistic theory. Goodglass and Hunt's Transformational Account Goodglass and Hunt (1958) used Chomsky's (1957) theoretical framework of generative syntax to account for agrammatics in English who showed a dissociation of plural and possessive morphemes. They found that these patients omitted fewer plural morphemes than possessive morphemes, even though the two morphemes sound alike. They proposed that sentences containing possessive morphemes were derived by transformations, whereas sentences containing plural morphemes were not. Thus, the pattern of agrammatic production in English depends on transformations: transformationally derived -s is omitted, while base-generated -s remains intact. Although the theory did not consider other patterns of agrammatic production, this was an important contribution because it was an attempt to provide a linguistic account of an observed pattern of sparing and loss within a theoretical framework. Kean 's Phonological Account Kean (1977) was one of the first to account for the omission of function words as a class. She proposed that an account for agrammatism ShOUId be made at the phonological level. According to her theory, agrammatics reduce sentence structure to minimal strings of elements which 10 reconsider is a "string assignment word 'defrn assignment. nress asst phonologica There totproside That is. phi omissions. do not assrg like Korean stress, A5 Incorrectly data shout Elites are ltcountcdf Lapo Lapo; ThedlStinCI 0” morpho Similar 10 l are considered phonological words in their language. A phonological word is a "string of segments, marked by boundaries, which function in the assignment of stress to a word" (p. 22). For example, in 'defim‘teness' the word 'defr‘m'te' is a phonological word as it is important for stress assignment, but '-ness' is not a phonological word, as it plays no part in stress assignment. Thus, phonological words are spared, while phonologically dependent words are omitted. There are three problems with this account. First, Kean's theory does not provide an explanation for why function words are not always omitted. That is, phonological theory cannot account for the inconsistent pattern of omissions. Second, the theory cannot account for patterns in languages that do not assign stress in the same manner as English. For example, languages like Korean are syllable-timed, in which each syllable receives the same stress. As each syllable plays a part in stress assignment, the theory incorrectly predicts that production would be normal. Third, cross-linguistic data show that in many languages (e.g., Hebrew and Turkish) inflectional affixes are substituted rather than omitted. This substitution cannot be accounted for by Kean's phonological theory. Lapointe's Morphological Account Lapointe (1983) applied Kean's analysis at the morphological level. The distinction between function and content words was seen as dependent on morphological construction rather than phonological construction. Similar to Kean, Lapointe claimed that functional elements were omitted, 11 shit CC is made onessior 6 kid of productr nderspe itg. lE represen as long- loo-Wop syntactic This dif Tammai ll'htch d lgiflun; limit 1': llhcrn . Piobiem IL Ha Omission while content elements were spared. However, the morphological account is inadequate because it cannot account for the inconsistent pattern of omissions and substitutions of bound morphemes. Grodzinsky 's Underspecification Account Grodzinsky (1990, 1997) sought to place the agrammatic deficit at the level of syntactic representation. He proposed that errors in agrammatic production occur because nonlexical (functional) elements are underspecified. Specifically, the terminal features of nonlexical categories (e.g., inflections, complementizers, auxiliaries, determiners) are not represented, and thus are empty and not pronounced. This omission occurs as long as it does not lead to a non-word. If omission would lead to a non-word, the element is substituted. In this account, then, agrammatic syntactic representation is not as constrained as a normal representation. This difference in representation yields the consequence of the agrammatic grammar allowing as grammatical the omission/substitution of morphemes which the normal representation would not allow as grammatical. Thus, agrammatic grammar can be seen as larger than the normal. Although this theory is generalizable and testable, it cannot account for the inconsistent pattern of omission of certain elements, such as prepositions. This is a Problem that has plagued all of the above accounts. Hagiwara 's Accessibility Hypothesis Hagiwara (1995) attempted to account for the inconsistent pattern of 0mission of morphemes. Like Grodzinsky (1990), she suggests that patterns 12 of ag She h proie pop and l onta 116i, Into] lama does of agrammatic production are due to deficits in syntactic representation. She looked at sensitivity to grammatical violations involving the functional projection of IP compared to that of CP and DP. She reports that morphological elements in IP are relatively spared, while elements in CF and DP are lost. This difference is due to the height of an element within a syntactic structure. That is, the lower the position of a functional head in a tree, the more accessible it is to an agrammatic patient. Thus, since CP is the highest node in the tree, it is more likely to be impaired than IP, which is lower in the tree. Although not specific in her analysis, DP is considered separate from IP and is seen to have the same accessibility hierarchy. Hagiwara's proposal, then, was an important contribution because it was an attempt to account for not only the dissociation of functional morphemes in agrammatic speech but also to account for the variation in severity seen across patients by reference to hierarchical structure. However, there are at least two problems with her hypothesis. First, Hagiwara bases her results on a small number of observations, one of which involves a crossed-aphasic, in which language impairment is caused by damage to the right hemisphere rather than the left. Second, her hypothesis does not account for cross-linguistic data. Reznik (1995) points out that Hagiwara cannot account for verbal morphological and clitic pronoun errors in Spanish. Both of these elements are functional categories in IP and are 11his incorrectly predicted to be spared. Similarly, Friedmann and Gl‘odzinsky (1997) provide data of a patient who shows impairment of tense l3 ll be“ the is a nod con ller but not agreement, both functional categories within IP. Thus, Hagiwara's account is inadequate. The Tree-Pruning Hypothesis The most recent account proposed is the Tree-Pruning Hypothesis (Friedmann and Grodzinsky 1997). Like Hagiwara (1995), Friedmann and Grodzinsky attempt to account for the selective impairment of verbal inflections in agrammatic production by reference to hierarchical structure. In their one Hebrew patient they report a dissociation of tense and agreement morphology. Specifically, the ability to produce tense inflections was impaired, while the ability to produce agreement was intact. Friedmann and Grodzinsky assume, as Grodzinsky has all along, that the underlying deficit lies within syntactic representation. That is, they assume that the tense (T) node is impaired, whereas the agreement (Agr) node is preserved. They define "impaired" in two ways. The first assumes incorporation, in which lexical items move to functional nodes for affixation (Pollock 1989). Friedmann and Grodzinsky claim that this process of affixation is what is impaired in agrammatic speech, and how much affixation is impaired is a function of the level of impairment in the tree. That is, "whenever a node is impaired, the tree cannot be constructed any higher..." (p.420), and consequently all functional nodes above it will be impaired. Thus, lexical items will not be able to move to the appropriate nodes to obtain their affixes. They state the Tree-Pruning Hypothesis more formally in (1). l4 .5351 it: uh- fl 0 a II I ItLiPt. _ (1) a) C, T, or Agr is underspecified in agrammatism. b) An underspecified node cannot project any higher. (p.420) This is represented structurally in (2). (2) Only C impaired C and T impaired egP Neg AgrP Agr’ C, T, Agr impaired The second definition of impairment is based on minimalist checking theory (Chomsky 1992). Within this approach, lexical items enter the phrase marker fully inflected. Thus, movement is not motivated by affixation but by the checking requirements of lexical items. Friedmann and Grodzinsky 15 a . nine :50. .tetul lnpar tee i the: node lmpa claim that items need to check their features in the appropriate nodes. Therefore, inflectional nodes serve as check points in which features of the verb are required to match features of the affix. If there are no mismatches between the constituent and the features, then the derivation converges (i.e., is grammatical). An impaired node, then, is the inability to check proper affixation. Thus, if a verb comes into the phrase marker incorrectly inflected and moves to an impaired tense node to check its features, the features cannot be checked and the verb will pass through as grammatical. Impairment in this approach was not stated more formally. Additionally, Friedmann and Grodzinsky point out that this hypothesis also accounts for the variation of impairment across patients. The severity of impairment is based on the level of impairment in the syntactic tree. The tree is pruned from the top down to the level of the lowest impaired node, affecting all functional categories in between. Thus, the lower the impaired node, the more severe the impairment is. Conversely, the higher the impaired node is, the less severe the impairment is. This account is an important contribution to linguistic aphasia studies because it provides an account of the pattern of sparing and loss in bound inflectional morphemes that is based on current syntactic theory. In addition, it provides a clear hypothesis upon which predictions can be made and easily tested. 16 Ole? lhlff o’ rldfll for l 1.2.1 gene cros 1.2 Korean Agrammatic Production This section presents the need for the current study. It also provides a brief discussion of the syntactic framework assumed in the discussion, as well as an overview of some basic aspects of the Korean language. This overview is intended to provide a general background and reference for interpretation of the transcripts, as well as to provide the descriptive framework within which the results will be discussed. Finally, predictions for Korean agrammatic production are presented. 1.2.1 Need As noted above, the first step in accounting for the patterns in agrammatism involves collecting and examining a data set, describing the data, and stating generalizations over these data. There has been only one linguistic investigation of Korean agrammatism; and, although significant, its focus was quite narrow. Additionally, neither Menn and Obler (1990) nor any other study has provided a broad linguistic description of Korean agrammatism. Thus, the goal of this thesis is to provide a description of general agrammatic characteristics in Korean and source data for cross-linguistic comparisons. As Menn and Obler (1990) provide a consistent format for collecting, analyzing and presenting data, the Menu and Obler methodology will be used in this thesis. In addition to the description, the thesis will compare findings in Korean with the summary findings in Menn and Obler. 17 Furthermore, there is a need to look at how data from various languages bear on current accounts of agrammatic patterns. Thus, although this study is primarily descriptive in nature, a secondary goal of this thesis is to consider the accounts proposed by Grodzinsky (1997) and Friedmann and Grodzinsky (1997) in light of the Korean data. 1.2.2 Syntactic Framework Although the goal of the present study is to provide basic characteristics of Korean agrammatism and is thus descriptive in nature, data will be discussed in terms of the most current account of agrammatism. Therefore, the data will need to considered within a particular syntactic framework. This section will briefly discuss the syntactic framework that is assumed in the discussion: the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1993). The Minimalist Program attempts to reduce the grammar to a minimum, assuming only those things that must necessarily be assumed. One of these necessary elements is the lexicon, from which lexical items are selected. Since these lexical items have both meaning and sound, it is also necessary to assume that there are at least two places or levels that act as interfaces: Logical Form (LF) for the semantic/conceptual (meaning) interface and Phonetic Form (PF) for the pronunciation/production (sound) interface. In addition, since we do not speak in disjointed lexical items, there must be some syntactic mechanism that constructs the structures that end up at the interface levels: a computational system. This Minimalist l8 CO.‘ flvn_ ab purl 16H ,Sl 0M [0? 30 03' model, then, can represented as the following (with the lines taken to be the computational system): Lexicon PF J LF Figure 1.2.1. The Minimalist model. In this model, the grammar begins by selecting a set of lexical elements. This set is called the Numeration, and the structural description (SD) will only be well-formed if each element from the Numeration is used the appropriate number of times. In other words, no lexical items can be left over. In addition, all lexical items placed into the Numeration are completely formed morphologically (e.g., verbs with their inflections and nouns with their Case markings). The computational system then builds structures by selecting items from the Numeration and combining them. The process consists of two operations: Merge and Move. Merge is a process that creates partial trees from elements in the Numeration and subsequently combines these trees into one SD. Move is an operation which moves lexical items and creates landing sites in trees, if necessary. Elements are merged and moved as needed until the Numeration has used up all the lexical items and has f‘Ol’med one tree. 19 202 531' ill Ptc be so it As lexical items merge and move they also check their specifier-features and complement-features against head-features of the specifiers and complements. Once checked, uninterpretable features are erased and interpretable features remain for interpretation at LP or PF. At this point, the derivation splits into two representations: one containing phonetically relevant information and one containing semantically relevant information. These two representations will then be interpreted at the two interface levels. A derivation is marked as grammatical (i.e., converges) at each of the interface levels if the appropriate (interpretable) information is present and inappropriate (uninterpretable) information does not appear. Thus, the Minimalist Program provides a constraint-based model in which many conditions must be met in order for a derivation to converge. 1.2.3 Korean Grammatical Sketch This section serves primarily as background for the predictions of the study and analyses of the data. It should be noted that this not an exhaustive summary but is simply a way to enable the reader who is unfamiliar with Korean to read the transcripts and better appreciate the patients' deficiencies. That is, although there are a number of aspects that could be discussed in much greater detail, the aspects and elements within those aspects presented here are only representative of those that will be addressed in the thesis. Thus, this section provides the general descriptive framework Within which the data will be described. 20 Orthography Korean has a mixed system of writing that contains Hangul and Hanja. Hangul is the native Korean phonemic alphabet developed in the 14th century, and Hanja is the Sino-Korean set of ideographs (characters) borrowed from classical Chinese and Sino-Japanese. More than half of all Korean words are borrowings from Chinese and represented by Hanja (Chang 1 9 96). Verb Morphology Korean is an agglutinating language with rich verbal inflections. The affixes attach to a verbal stem in a fixed order: honorification, tense, aspect, verb-final element. (4) ka-si-ess-keyss-ta go-HON-PAST-MODAL-DEC/PL "(He) might have gone" Verb stems are bound morphemes and, thus, cannot stand alone. The stems must be bound by a verb-final element such as a declarative, interrogative, propositive, or imperative morpheme. Levels of politeness are also indicated in the verb-final element. These are provided in Table 1.3.1. 21 lice Table 1.3.1 Levels of PolitenesLand Sentence Type Sentence Type Declarative Interrogative Imperative Propositive Formal -supnita -supnika -sipsio —upsita Level Polite -eyo -eyo -eyo -eyo of Blunt -so -so -so -so Politeness Familiar -ney -na -key -sey Intimate -e -e -e -e Plain -ta -ni/nya -la -ja Chang (1996:191) However, verbs may or may not have the other elements. Absence of honorification, tense or aspect results in a present tense verb. Syntactically, however, it will be assumed that tense cannot omitted but is a zero (null) morpheme. The verb-final element is used in tensed clauses, as opposed to attributive particles which are used with tenseless clauses to create attributive adjectives. In other words, the verb-final element selects tense as its complement, and as a tense must thus exist, a zero-morpheme (null) tense is assumed to exist. Word Order Korean is an SOV language. Subjects normally come at the beginning of the sentence and are marked with the nominative Case markers -r’/-ka (depending on the preceding phoneme). Objects normally follow the Subject and are marked with the accusative markers -uI./-lul (depending on the preceding phoneme). Verbs come at the end of a sentence or clause. 22 . - .1. is 'h: lu.‘ The 5111 IOS Son (5) jelsu-ka ceyk-ul ilk-ess-ta Chelsu-NOM book-ACC read-PAST-DEC/PL "Chelsu read a book." In general, preverbal constituents can be moved around (scrambled) as long as the verb is in final position (Sohn 1994). (6) ceyk-ul jelsu-ka ilk-ess-ta book-ACC Chelsu-NOM read-PAST-DEC/PL "Chelsu read a book" Attributive adjectives, adverbs, and relative clauses precede the element they modify. (7) [jelsu-ka yelsimi ilk-nun] ceyk-i iss-ta Chelsu-NOM diligently read-ADNZ book-NOM be-DEC/PL "(There) is a book Chelsu that reads a lot." Question words appear in the position of the questioned constituent (i.e., in situ). (8) jelsu-ka mues-ul ilk-ess-ni? Chelsu-NOM what-ACC read-PAST-Q ”What did Chelsu read?" Case Markers As seen in (5) through (8) above, Case markers appear at the end of their respective phrases. Choice of Nominative marker -ka or -r‘ depends on the preceding phoneme: -Ira following a vowel, -i in all other environments. The Accusative markers are Jul following a vowel and -ul in all other environments. Postpositions Another group of markers that affix to nominals are postpositions. Postpositions function in much the same way that English prepositions do. Some examples are: -ey ("in" or ”to" a place), -eys' ("at" or ”from” a place), -hant"ey (”to" a person), and -hant"eyse ("from" a person). 23 Th" 5 l (9) (10) jelsu-ka jip-ey ka-ess-ta. Chelsu-NOM home-to go-PAST-DEC/PL "Chelsu went home." jelsu-ka yenghi-hanthey ceyk-ul ju-ess-ta. Chelsu-NOM Yonghee-to book-ACC Give-PAST-DEC/PL "Chelsu gave a book to Yonghee." There are also postnominal or postclausal "adverbial particles" that are placed in this group. These consist of such markers as -man "only" and -to "also." (11) jelsu-man ceyk-ul ilk-ess-ta Chelsu-only book-ACC read-PAST-DEC/PL "Only Chelsu read a book." (12) jelsu-to ceyk-el ilk-ess-ta Chelsu-also book-ACC read-PAST-DEC/PL "Chelsu also read a book." Negation There are two types of negative constructions in Korean. They are referred to by different names but will be called short and long negation in this study. Examples of these two types are (13) and (14). (13) (14) jelsu-ka an ka-ess-ta. Chelsu-NOM not go-PAST-DEC/PL "Chelsu did not go." jelsu—ka ka-ji an ha-ess-ta. Chelsu-NOM go-NEG do-PAST-DEC/PL "Chelsu did not go." In the short version (13), the negative element precedes the verb; in the long version, the negative element plus a particle affix to the verb and require "do-support." There is a difference in meaning in these examples due to the difference in scope of the negative operator. That is, the negative element 24 in long negation has scope over the entire clause, whereas the short version has scope only over the verb to which it is attached. Attributive Adjectives Most adjectives in Korean are derived from adjectival-verbs. Modification is achieved by affixing adnominalizer particles (ADNZ) to the verb and placing the verb before the noun it modifies. (15) jelsu-ka kippu—ta. Chelsu-NOM happy-DEC/PL "Chelsu is happy." (16) kippe—n jelsu-ka ka-ess-ta. happy-ADNZ Chelsu-NOM go-PAST-DEC/PL lit: "Happy Chelsu went." Subordination Like attributive adjectives, other verbs may become modifiers. These subordinate clauses are also constructed by affixing subordinate particles to verbs. Some examples of these particles are the adnominalizer (ADNZ) man/4m, adverbializer (ADVZ) -key, and the complementizers (COMP) mun/4m ji and Jet. (17) [[jip-ey ka-nan] salam-i] jelsu i-ta. home-to go-ADNZ person-NOM Chelsu be-DEC/PL "Chelsu is [the person [who is going home]]." (18) [jip-ey ka-key] haksaeng-i home-to go-ADNZ student-NOM sukjae-lul ha-ess-ta homework-ACC do-PAST-DEC/PL "(In order to go home,) the student did the homework." 25 h 3 b rb. (19) [jelsu-ka jip-ey ka-ess-nan ji] Chelsu-NOM home-to go-PAST-COMP al-ess-ta know-PAST-DEC/PL ”I knew that Chelsu went home." (20) [jelsu-lea jip-ey ka-ki] ha-ess-ta. Chelsu-NOM home-to go-COMP do-PAST-DEC/PL "It was go home that Chelsu did." Coordination Sentences may be conjoined by affixing a coordinating particle to a verb, such as 4:0 "and" and -jiman "but." (21) (22) jelsu-ka jip-ey ka-ess-ko Chelsu-NOM home-to go-PAST-CONJ yenghi-ka hakyo-ey ka-ess-ta. Yonghi-NOM school-to go-PAST-DEC/PL "Chelsu went home and Yonghi went to school." jelsu-ka jip-ey ka-ess-jiman Chelsu-NOM home-to go-PAST-CONJ yenghi-nun hakyo-ey ka-ess-ta. Yonghi-CON school-to go-PAST-DEC/PL "Chelsu went home but Yonghi went to school." Discourse-based Elements Korean is often called a discourse-oriented language. An illustration of this is that elements understood from the context are often left unexpressed (Sohn 1994). This can be seen in (23) and (24), both of which lack subjects and objects. (23) (24) cal mek-ess-supnita. well eat-PAST-DEC/FOR "I had a wonderful dinner." cal mek-ess-e. well eat-PAST-DEC/INT ”I had a wonderful dinner." 26 (25) Alsc tech-final he conte: Honorifica and the to Ian The thesis is th (26) (25) cal ha-si-ess-eyo? well do-PAST-INTER/POL "Did you do well?" Also apparent in (23) and (24) is the level of politeness. Which verb-final element is chosen (i.e., formal or intimate) depends very much on the context. Another example of context-dependence is honorification. Honorification is reflected in the choice of verb, as in (25), pronouns, nouns, and the verbal infix -sr‘. Korean Clause Structure The standardly assumed structure for Korean that is assumed in this thesis is the following (Cho 1994). (26) O '17 J >3>§>e>i>°> < ”D Z 0 ac ><»> 27 1.2.4 PH As lll agrami and Men analyzing r'or Kore discussed Obler. Pro As patients a Bo Bo languages omission unsolved Oftense, morphem canpm be Set Me: I, 1 he"! vanl 1.2.4 Predictions for Korean Agrammatic Production As noted earlier, the first step in properly accounting for the patterns in agrammatism involves describing and stating generalizations over data, and Menn and Obler (1990) provide a consistent format for collecting, analyzing and presenting data. Thus, this section presents the predictions for Korean agrammatic production based on the structure of Korean discussed in the grammatical sketch and the summary findings of Menu and Obler. Production As in all fourteen languages presented in Menu and Obler, Korean patients are predicted to produce short phrases at slow speech rates. Bound Grammatical Morphemes Bound grammatical morphemes were rarely omitted in the fourteen languages; substitution was most common, even in languages where omission was possible. In addition, the substitution was not random but involved a consistent misselection of morphemes. Thus, although omission of tense, Case and postposition morphemes is possible in Korean, these morphemes are predicted to be substituted. Similarly, as verb-final elements cannot be omitted, these too are predicted to be substituted. Sentence Conjunctions and Particles Menu and Obler report that clause-initial conjunctions ('and,’ 'and then,’ 'and so'), and, in Japanese, sentence-final particles were used quite 28 beastly. ll agrammati Lexi I! is prone it is omitted mic that nouns Korean it among the omitted the Fun. Cros “this than orSpeechr Synt Rcdt ianElltttges. 110duced lliduced j lttstr’tucm Simple SITUI heavily. It is thus predicted that these items will be used heavily in Korean agrammatic speech. Lexical Omission It was also reported that the less contentful a lexical item is, the more prone it is to omission. Thus, 'empty' verbs (i.e., copula, auxiliary) were omitted more often than content verbs. In addition, more verbs were omitted than nouns, except in languages with heavy nominal inflections. Thus, for Korean it is predicted that more verbs than nouns will be omitted and that among the verbs, identification, existential, and auxiliary verbs will be omitted the most. Function and Content Words Cross-linguistically patients tended to rely more heavily on content words than their controls. For Korean, then, it is predicted that a majority of speech will consist of content words. Syntactic Complexity Reduced variety and simplification of syntax is reported across languages. At the sentence-level, relative clauses were almost never produced and other subordinate clauses were either not produced or produced incorrectly. Within the clause, there was simplification of all constituents. It is predicted that Korean agrammatic patients will rely on simple structures that do not employ modification. 29 ll'c Pa‘. oord ord object in order. Th predictio the)‘ relat Word Order Patients in the cross-linguistic studies relied heavily on canonical word order. Thus, although it is possible to scramble the subject and the object in Korean, the prediction is that patients will rely heavily on the SOV order. The following chapters present the procedures used to test these predictions in Korean, as well as describe the results of the tests and how they relate to the predictions and the linguistic current accounts. 30 Th too cont materials oere use 2.1 Su 2.1.1 Ge Tv matched present I hacigrou CHAPTER 2 METHODS AND MATERIALS This chapter provides background information on the two patients and two controls used in the study. It also provides the specific methods and materials used to test the patients and controls, as well as the analyses that were used to interpret the data. 2.1 Subjects 2.1.1 General Background Two aphasic patients (one female and one male) and two controls matched in age, education, job level, and sex served as subjects for the present study. All live in Seoul, Korea and speak the Seoul dialect. A background information summary for all subjects is presented in Table 2.1.1. Table 2.1.1 Background Information Summa_ry Patients Controls CYS KKM JYK CKY Age 35 56 34 58 Occupation fashion sales manager cosmetologist manager Literacy adequate adequate adequate adequate Years of Education 12 16 12 16 Language Korean Korean Korean Korean (monolingual) (monolingual) (monolingual) (monolingual) andedness Subject right right right right Family right right right right 31 2J.2 pesen convol ahhou hsanl sufiere iuhnct hmpOi Scilure 2.1.2 Neurological Status Both patients were diagnosed as aphasic by clinical standards. Both presented unilateral, left-sided, cortical lesions that involved the third convolution (Broca's area) anterior to the Rolandic fissure. Additionally, although both patients had severe right hemiplegia, neither had severe dysarthria (articulatory impairment). Case I: CYS Due to complications following eye surgery in March 1996, CYS suffered an ischemic cerebral vascular accident (i.e., stroke) resulting in an infarction. The CT-scan revealed an area of hypodensity in the left temporofrontal lobe. She was diagnosed as having Broca's aphasia. Table 2.1.2 summarizes the major findings from the neurological examination. Table 2.1.2 Neurological Status CYS KKM Etiology ischemic stroke ischemic stroke Onset date March 1996 August 1989 (post-onset/months) (27 pom) (105 pom) phasia Type Broca's Transcortical Motor otor Deficit severe severe Sensory Deficit mild mild Visual Deficit corrected corrected Case 2: KKM KKM had diabetes for 20 years. This is believed to have led to a seizure and ischemic cerebral vascular accident in August 1989. The 32 meth lll Kl 2.2.] 3mm CT-scan revealed a large, low attenuation in the left parietal and posterior frontal region. Although this area does include part of Broca's area, he was diagnosed as Transcortical Motor Aphasia due to an intact repetition ability. 2.2 Methods and Materials In order to properly describe agrammatic aphasia in Korean, it is necessary to obtain data. Therefore, specific methods and materials are needed to elicit, describe, and analyze the data. The methods and materials used in this study come directly from "Methodology: Data Collection, Presentation and Guide to Interpretation" (Menn and Obler 1990). This methodology provides a consistent format to describe agrammatic production in Korean, and will facilitate future cross-linguistic comparison. 2.2.1 Tasks The data for each subject were obtained in a single recording session. These data are in the form of narratives elicited by a native speaker through four tasks: (1) description of history of illness; (2) telling of a popular folktale (Appendix A); (3) description of a complex action picture (Appendix B); and (4) description of a sequence of pictures (Appendix C). These four types of narratives differ in such aspects as personal relevance, amount of visual support, amount of formulaic support, and amount of temporal structure. If subjects could not produce a particular narrative, the experimenter suggested a different yet equivalent one. The recordings were then transcribed by a native speaker according to the guidelines in Menu and Obler. Primary transcriptions for each narrative 33 focus on phonemic syntax. at 2.2.2 An A 1 Three typ comparin grammati and riii) . 12 coordina' tohen tip (4 focusing Mldanc (S “Aminet but disc Elapsed These an focus on production aspects: rate, fluency, self-corrections, retracings and phonemic errors. Interlinear Morphemic Translations focus on morphology, syntax, and errors of lexical choice. 2.2.2 Analyses A set of five analyses were conducted. (1) Morphological Patterns. Three types of morphological analyses were performed and tabulated, each comparing the results to those of the controls: (i) errors of omission of grammatical morphemes in obligatory contexts; (ii) errors of substitution; and (iii) distribution patterns. (2) Syntactic Complexity. Patterns of word-order, subordination and coordination, and modification were tabulated. (3) Lexical Resources. Lexical choices were examined, looking at tokenztype ratios for nouns, verbs, and adjectives. (4) Discourse Parameters. Analysis of the discourse were conducted focusing on the choice of politeness levels and patterns of reliance on or avoidance of certain structures. (5) Production Parameters. Two aspects of production were examined: (i) distribution of phrase lengths were tabulated for each of the four discourse types and (ii) speaking rates were tabulated based on the time elapsed for each narrative in terms of (orthographic) words per minute. These analyses are presented in Chapter 3 and discussed in Chapter 4. 34 Th! Korean 3 database towards I data. Us the rcsul‘ The nan; Note Ihal phonemic amount 0 ll morph hoe 1) m llmorph hoe 5) r loomed CHAPTER 3 RESULTS The goal of this thesis is to describe the general characteristics of Korean agrammatic production, while at the same time contributing to the database of information on aphasia in different languages. The first step towards this goal involves collecting, examining, and describing a set of data. Using the methodology provided in Chapter 2, this chapter presents the results of the five types of analyses of Korean agrammatic narratives. The narratives of the patients and controls are provided in Appendix D. Note that the primary transcription provides the primary production data: phonemic errors and corrections, number of words, number of phrases, and amount of time; the Interlinear Morphemic Translation provides a morpheme by morpheme translation consisting of five lines: (from the top to bottom) line 1) morpheme error corrections. line 2) what was actually produced, line 3) morpheme by morpheme parse, line 4) colloquial English translation, and line 5) major lexical category parse. The analysis for each patient is presented separately so as to provide a detailed picture of that individual's language production. Section 3.] discusses the general production parameters of the narratives. Section 3.2 provides the distribution of morpheme errors. Section 3.3 gives the distribution of major lexical categories in the texts. 35 Secti pron 3.1 qt!" ride pros 3.l.l “OTC CYS 0511 PCI phra Section 3.4 presents the analysis of syntactic complexity. Section 3.5 provides an analysis of the levels of politeness. 3.1 Production Parameters This section discusses the central tendencies in the production patterns of the two patients. The production data for these analyses is provided in Appendix E. Case I: CYS 3.1.1 Rate of Production CYS produced 196 words in 16:57. Her control JYK produced 241 words in 2:28. This resulted in a speaking rate of 11.6 words per minute for CYS and 97.7 for JYK. Thus, CYS produced fewer words in a longer period of time and was nearly 12 times slower than her control. CYS produced 121 'syntactic‘ phrases, with an average of 7.1 phrases per minute. JYK produced 17 'syntactic' phrases, with an average of 6.9 phrases per minute. Note that ‘syntactic phrase' is not the normal use of the phrase but is a convention used in Menn and Obler (1990) for comparability. A syntactic phrase boundary is marked by a pause of two seconds or more, falling intonation or the end of a sentence, the beginning and end of a parenthetical remark, omission of a major class (lexical) word, or a retracing of two or more words. Both rates of production (words and phrases) are variable across the different narrative tasks for both CYS and JYK. In both rates, CYS was slowest in the history and work description tasks, slightly faster in the 36 picture description tasks, and fastest in daily life description and the story. JYK was fastest in the picture and work description tasks and slowest in the story. 3.1.2 Phrase Length In terms of phrase length, CYS produced a mean of 1.6 words per phrase. The longest phrases were produced in the story (1.8) and history (2) description tasks, and the shortest phrases were in the work description (1.4). There was very little difference between work and the picture description tasks; all were around 1.5 words per phrase. For JYK, the mean was 14.2 words per phrase, with the phrases in the story being the longest and the work and picture descriptions being the shortest. Thus, CYS shows a severe decrease in the rate of production. Not only did she speak much more slowly than her control, she also used much shorter phrases. Case 2: KKM 3.1.1 Rate of Production KKM produced 171 words in 10:12, with a rate of 16.8 words per minute. His control produced 304 words in 3:25, with a rate of 89 words per minute. KKM produced a smaller number of words in a much longer time. The rate of production for KKM was more than 5 times slower than that of CKY. KKM produced 67 phrases, with a mean of 6.6 phrases per minute. CKY supplied 30 phrases, with a mean of 8.8 phrases per minute. The rate 37 of production is variable across the different tasks. Both KKM and CKY were slowest in the picture descriptions and faster in the personal narratives. 3.1.2 Phrase Length KKM produced 2.6 words per phrase, with the longest phrases produced in the family and action picture description tasks. The other tasks were only slightly slower. CKY produced a mean of 10.1 words per phrase, with the phrases in the action picture description being the longest and the picture sequence and work description tasks being the shortest. Thus, KKM is clearly slower in his rate of production. Not only did he speak much more slowly than his control, but he also used much shorter phrases. 3.2 Morpheme Errors and Omissions Appendix F provides the morpheme error and distribution data for the two patients and their controls. This section presents results only for bound morphemes. Free morphemes are discussed in Section 3.3. Although control data is provided, as there are very few errors and omissions and as these errors are not the focus of the study, they will not be analyzed or discussed in detail. Thus, control data will only be referred to when relevant to certain aspects of patient data. 38 3.2.1 oossi omit: the 1 Case I: CYS 3.2.1 Verbs Lexical Verbs CYS supplied 42 verbs but should have produced 53 verbs in context. That is, she produced 42 (79%) possible lexical verbs and omitted 6 (11%). Of those 42, she produced 5 (9%) inapprOpriate verbs. These errors in selection will be discussed section 3.3.3. In terms of tense morphology, CYS correctly supplied 35 of 47 (74%) possible tense morphemes. Note that tense errors were not recorded for omitted verbs and reflect only errors in those verbs actually produced. Of the 12 (26%) incorrect tense substitutions, 3 of 12 (25%) were present tense (zero) morpheme substitutions for the past morpheme and 9 (75%) past morphemes substituted for the present (zero) morpheme. Her control, JYK, made no errors in 38 lexical verbs produced. Note that it is difficult to discern errors in verbs with present (zero) morphology. That is, it is impossible to tell whether patients are using a zero morpheme or missing tense altogether. As stated in the Korean grammatical sketch, 1 will assume that no tense morpheme in a verb is a present (zero) morpheme. That is, because a verb-final element is used in a tensed clause, it selects a tense as its complement. Therefore, some sort of tense must exist; and the present tense must then be a zero morpheme. Fortunately, this problem does not apply to past tense morpheme errors, as a 39 u 3:0 mm tseerneb' In construct hi: she :eganse hefore tl :onsnnct C h sentence hon-final hn both Tbut she zero morpheme/no morpheme substitution for a past or vice versa is easily discernible. In addition to tense morphology, CYS correctly supplied 5 negative constructions. In these, she made no errors or omissions. It is interesting that she only produced the short form of negation. In other words, all 5 negative constructions involved correctly placing the free morpheme 'an' before the matrix verb. In contrast, her control supplied 3 negative constructions: 2 long and 1 short. CYS correctly supplied 96% of the verb-final elements required in sentence final environments and correctly omitted the morpheme in all non—final environments. She did omit 2 (4%) of these in obligatory contexts, but both were due to stopping production in order to retrace or self-correct. Thus, she made no errors in verb-final elements. Auxiliary Verbs Of the 15 auxiliary verbs required in her text, CYS omitted 11 (73%), supplied 3 (20%) correctly, and supplied 1 (7%) incorrectly. Further analysis of the omissions reveals that 8 were of the 'do/AUX' type used in noun or adjective predication and 2 of the 'gbe/AUX' type used in the progressive aspect. It is important to note that the nouns and adjectives used in combination with the ‘do/AUX' verbs were correctly supplied; only the auxiliary verb was omitted. Her control supplied 34 auxiliary verbs: 9 'be/AUX', 14 'do/AUX', and 11 other (e.g., passive). 4O As with lexical verbs, CYS is impaired in auxiliary tense morphology. In the 4 auxiliary verbs she produced, 2 (50%) tense morphemes were supplied correctly and 2 (50%) incorrectly. Of the 2 correct morphemes, 1 was a present (zero) morpheme and l was a past morpheme. Both of the incorrect were past morphemes substituted for present (zero) morphemes. Her control supplied 34 correct tense morphemes and made no errors. Verb-final elements were intact. CYS correctly supplied 4 (100%) of the required elements and avoided use of the morpheme elsewhere. Total Verbs A summary of verbal morphology is provided in Table 3.2.1. Overall, CYS' text required 78 verbs; she produced 59 (76%) and omitted 19 (24%). Of the verbs that she actually produced, 53 of 59 (90%) were correct and 6 of 59 (10%) were incorrect. Table 3.2.1 CYS: Verbgl Morpheme Errors gnd Distribulions Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % TOTAL Verbs 53 68 6 8 19 24 78 TOTAL Tense 45 76 14 24 0 0 59 TOTAL VFE 59 97 0 0 2 3 61 45 of 59 (76%) tense morphemes were correct and 14 (24%) incorrect. Her control, as is normal, made no errors or omissions. Tense morphology for CYS, then, is clearly impaired. 41 gs? mOY Ell” rs {on ties of n» 3.2 lie 5111 An analysis of the direction of tense errors indicates that 11 of 14 (79%) errors consist of a past morpheme substituted for a present (zero) morpheme. 3 of 14 (21%) errors consist of a present (zero) morpheme substituted for a past. These errors in morphology are important because they reveal the extent to which CYS is impaired, for the control correctly supplied tense 100% of the time. It is interesting to note that not only was the direction of error not toward the zero morpheme but also that the tense errors in the picture description tasks were not random. That is, the errors in these tasks (9 of 15 or 60%) were consistently past for present (zero) substitutions. CYS correctly supplied 59 of 61 (97%) verb-final elements. Again, the 2 (3%) errors were sudden stops in production and not really errors. 3.2.2 'Particles' A common feature prone to omission in agglutinating languages is the particle. 'Particle' is the term often used in traditional grammar for bound morphemes that serve a particular grammatical function. This term is misleading, however, as particles often behave differently and have different grammatical functions. I will divide them into two major classes: Case (i.e., Nominative, Accusative, and Genitive) and Postposition (i.e., elements similar to English prepositions). Case 'Particles' CYS omitted 11 of 12 (92%) Nominative Case particles and correctly supplied 1 (8%). In her text, though, 4 of the 12 were optional. Thus, 7 of 42 11. 0311 PROS so; dyn not (4.! 'J.) 12 (58%) required Nominative particles were omitted. Her control JYK omitted only 1 (8%) Nominative particle overall. In terms of Accusative Case particles, CYS supplied none and omitted 33. Whether this omission is appropriate or not is difficult to judge because most, if not all, Accusative particles are optional. However, the rate of omission for CYS is much higher than for her control, who supplied 28 (93%) Accusative particles and omitted only 2 (7%). In fact, it seems that in formal situations the tendency is to supply optional material. CYS supplied no Topic/Contrast particles and omitted 1. She also supplied no Genitive particles. Her control supplied a total of 13 Topic/Contrast and 6 Genitive particles. Postposition 'Particles' CYS supplied 1 of 8 (13%) possible postpositions and omitted 7 (88%). She supplied only 1 dynamic locative and omitted 3 locatives, 1 dynamic locative 1 goal and 2 ablative postpositions. Her control, however, not only supplied more postpositions (25) but also a wider range. Overall 'Particles' Overall, CYS produced 5 of 57 (9%) particles, omitted 52 of 57 (91%) and incorrectly substituted none. Comparing Case and postposition particles, CYS supplied 1 of 46 (2%) Case particles and omitted 45 of 46 (98%); for postpositions, she produced 1 of 8 (13%) and omitted 7 (88%). Again her control produced 84 (97%) total particles and omitted only 3 (3%). 59 of 62 (95%) Case particles were produced and 3 of 62 (5%) were 43 an [0 C0 (J) omitted. For postpositions, 100% were supplied and none were omitted. Thus, although Case particles can be optionally omitted, the rate of omission is higher for CYS than the control. 3.2.3 Subordinate 'Particles' CYS is clearly impaired in her ability to use subordinate particles. She produced no attributive adjectives (adnominalizer particles) or attributive adverbs (adverbializer particles). In addition, she supplied no complementizers, coordinate conjunctions or subordinate particles. Her control, of course, did supply these morphemes: 7 attributive adjectives, 2 attributive adverbs, 4 complementizers, 24 coordinate conjunctions and 16 subordinate particles. Case 2: KKM 3.2.1 Verbs Lexical Verbs KKM supplied 30 of 31 (97%) possible lexical verbs and omitted only 1 (3%). Of those 30, he produced 4 (13%) inappropriate verbs. In terms of tense morphology, he correctly supplied 23 of 30 (77%) possible tense morphemes. Again, note that tense errors were not recorded for omitted verbs. Of the 7 (23%) incorrect tense substitutions, 4 of 7 (57%) were present tense (zero) morpheme substitutions for the past morpheme and 3 of 7 (43%) were past morphemes substituted for present (zero) morphemes. His control CKY made no errors in tense morphology in 57 lexical verbs. 44 In addition to tense morphology, KKM correctly supplied 2 negative constructions, making no errors or omissions. Like CYS, both negatives involved the short and not the long form. His control also supplied 2 negative constructions, both short. In terms of verb-final elements, he correctly supplied 100% of the morphemes required in sentence-final environments and correctly omitted the morpheme in all non-final environments. Auxiliary Verbs KKM supplied 15 of 21 (71%) auxiliary verbs correctly, supplied none incorrectly, and omitted 6 (29%). Of the omissions, 5 were of the 'do/AUX' type and 1 was a passive. Again, while the nouns and adjectives were supplied, in all cases it was the auxiliary verb that was omitted. His control supplied 36 auxiliary verbs: 12 'be/AUX' and 24 'do/AUX‘. In terms of auxiliary tense morphology, KKM is also impaired. He supplied 10 of 15 (67%) correctly and 5 of 15 (33%) incorrectly. 3 of the 5 (60%) errors involved substitution of a past morpheme for a present (zero) morpheme, 1 error (20%) involved a present (zero) morpheme for a past, and 1 error (20%) consisted of a past perfect morpheme for a past. Again, his control supplied 36 correct tense morphemes and made no errors. Verb-final elements were intact. He correctly supplied 14 (93%) of the required elements and incorrectly supplied the morpheme once (7%) in a non-final environment (i.e., before a coordinate conjunction, which requires a zero morpheme). 45 Total Verbs A summary of verbal morphology is provided in Table 3.2.2. Overall, KKM's text required 61 verbs. He produced 52 of 61 (85%) and omitted 9 of 61 (15%). Of the verbs actually produced, 48 of 52 (92%) were correct and 4 of 52 (8%) incorrect. Table 3.2.2 KKM: Verbatl Morpheme Errors and Distributions Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % TOTAL Verbs 48 79 4 7 9 15 61 TOTAL Tense 39 75 13 25 0 0 52 TOTAL VFE 51 98 1 2 0 0 52 Overall, 39 of 52 (75%) tense morphemes were correct and 13 (25%) incorrect. His control made no errors or omissions. Tense morphology, like that for CYS, is definitely impaired. These errors in morphology are quite pronounced, as the control CKY correctly supplied tense morphemes 100% of the time. An analysis of the direction of tense errors indicates that 7 of 13 (54%) errors involved a past morpheme substituted for a present (zero) morpheme. 5 of 13 (38%) errors involved a present (zero) morpheme substituted for a past. 1 of 13 (8%) errors involved a past perfect morpheme substituted for a past. Overall, then, non-zero morphemes substituting for 46 Z? 0! 0 .5 pr 0F. zero morphemes comprised 62% of the errors, and zero morphemes substituting for non-zero morphemes comprised 38% of the errors. It is interesting to note that 5 of 13 (38%) tense errors occurred in the picture description tasks and were all past for present morphemes. Thus, not only was the direction of error not toward the zero morpheme but also the tense errors in the picture description tasks were not random; they were consistent. In terms of overall verb-final elements, KKM supplied 51 of 52 (98%) correctly. Of course, his control correctly supplied it 100% of the time. 3.2.2 'Particles' Case 'Particles' KKM omitted 6 of 14 (43%) Nominative Case particles, correctly supplied 7 (50%), and incorrectly used 1 (7%). His control CKY correctly produced 18 and omitted none. In terms of Accusative Case particles, KKM correctly supplied 18 (86%), incorrectly supplied 3 (14%), and omitted 9 (30%). Again, Accusative particles may be omitted. However, the rate of omission for KKM is higher than for his control, who supplied 31 (89%) particles and omitted only 4 (11%). KKM correctly supplied 6 (67%) Topic/Contrast particles and omitted 3 (33%). He supplied no Genitive particles. His control supplied a total of 23 Topic/Contrast and 4 Genitive particles. 47 p; Postpositional 'Particles' KKM supplied all 21 (100%) possible postpositions. 5 (24%) of those produced were incorrect while 16 (76%) were correct. Of the correct postpositions, 6 were locative, l temporal, 6 conjunctions, and 3 adverbial. Of the incorrect, 2 were locative, 1 dynamic locative, 1 plural, and l honorific. His control, however, not only supplied more postpositions (37) but also a wider range. Overall 'Particles' Overall KKM produced 48 of 76 (63%) particles, omitted 19 (25%) and incorrectly substituted 9 (12%). Comparing Case and postposition particles, KKM correctly supplied 31 of 53 (58%) Case particles, incorrectly supplied 4 of 53 (8%) and omitted 18 of 53 (34%); for postpositions, he correctly produced 16 of 21 (76%), incorrectly produced 5 of 21 (24%). Again his control produced 113 (93%) total particles and omitted 8 (7%). 76 of 82 (93%) Case particles were supplied and 6 of 82 (7%) were omitted. For postpositions, 37 of 39 (95%) were supplied and 2 of 39 (5%) were omitted. Thus, although Case particles can be optionally omitted, the rate of omission is higher for KKM than the control. 3.2.3 Subordinate 'Particles' KKM correctly produced 1 attributive adjective (adnominalizer particle) and 1 attributive adverb (adverbializer particle). In addition, he supplied 2 complementizers, 15 coordinate conjunctions and no subordinate particles. In contrast, his control supplied 15 attributive adjectives and 5 48 attributive adverbs, as well as 15 complementizers, 30 coordinate conjunctions and 8 subordinate particles. Thus, as with CYS, KKM is impaired in terms of subordination. 3.3 Distribution of Grammatical Categories in the Texts Appendix G provides the distribution of lexical items produced. Note that the 'actual' column reflects the elements actually produced, along with that element's percentage of total speech. The 'context' column is what the subject should have produced in the context of the narrative, along with the percentage of that element in relation to the total text. A comparison of the two controls reveals that the distribution of grammatical categories actually produced and categories which should have been produced (i.e., context) are almost identical, as would be expected. Thus, they will not be analyzed in detail. On the other hand, there are important differences between actual and context in the patients, as well as differences between the patients and their respective controls. The results of these analyses are presented here. Case I: CYS 3.3.1 Part of Speech Distribution Major Class Lexical Items The morpheme error distribution (Appendix G) revealed that CYS actually produced a total of 43 of 59 (73%) nouns and omitted 16 (27%). Of the 43 nouns, 41 of 59 (68%) were appropriate and 2 (5%) inappropriate. Table 3.3.1 provides the grammatical function distribution of these nouns. In terms of the ratio of nouns supplied, CYS supplied more nouns 49 sh (x) l E: _ l5? IQI 0): 301‘: when they were the object of a postposition ('other') than when the nouns were in subject or object position. In addition, she supplied more nouns when they were subjects (75%) than objects (61%). Table 3.3.1 CYS: Nominal Grammatical Function Errors and Distribguftions Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % Subject 9 75 0 0 3 25 12 pbjece 20 61 1 3 12 36 33 [Other 12 86 1 7 1 7 14 Conversely, she omitted more objects (36%) than subjects (25%) and, overall, more nouns in subject/object position (33%) than in other positions (7%). But this may simply be a reflection of the fact that it is easier to see omissions in grammatical function than in other positions because those others are adjunct positions. That is, as the postposition nouns are not required elements in the sentence (i.e., null elements), they may be omitted without syntactic consequence. JYK, on the other hand, produced a total of 84 nouns: 31 subject, 29 object and 22 other. She omitted none. She did, however, inappropriately substitute 2 objects. Thus, although CYS omits many nouns in subject and object position, she made only 2 substitution errors. As noted, it is common to omit optional nouns, but the rate of omission is much higher for CYS than for JYK. The 50 findin; llOUllS her to have propol produe tended relatic total 1 percer. 0i phr long 5 inerea Contra lVere 3 mill findings here, together with those in Section 3.2, suggest that CYS' use of nouns is relatively unimpaired but that omission is much higher than normal. In relation to other categories in her speech, nouns comprised 33% of her total text. In what she should have produced (context), nouns would have comprised 27%. Thus, although she omitted many nouns, the proportion of what she actually produced is similar to what she should have produced. JYK's nouns comprised 21% of her total speech. Thus, CYS tended to rely more on nouns in her speech (33% vs. 21%). As for the distribution of verbs, CYS produced a total of 59 verbs. In relation to other categories in her text, the 59 verbs made up 45% of her total text. In context, she should have produced 78 verbs (36%). The high percentage of verbs actually produced is a function of the number and length of phrases, as discussed in Section 3.1. That is, rather than produce one long sentence to express an idea, CYS produced many short phrases, thereby increasing the number of verbs in relation to other categories in her text. In contrast, her control produced 84 verbs comprising 21% of her total text. Further analysis shows that for CYS lexical verbs actually produced were 36%; for JYK it was 10%. Identification verbs were 2% and existential 4% for CYS compared to 2% and 1% for JYK. Auxiliary verbs for CYS were 3% while 9% for JYK. Overall, then, CYS relied more heavily on lexical verbs than JYK. CYS produced only 2 adjectives in her texts, and she did so without error. As noted in the grammatical sketch, Korean has two types of 51 adjectives: lexical adjectives, which combine with auxiliary verbs, and attributive adjectives, which are derived from verbs by adding an adnominalizer. CYS supplied 2 lexical and no derived adjectives. This is understandable because derived adjectives involve subordination, and, as discussed in Section 3.2, these subordinate particles are impaired. Her control produced 8 lexical and 7 derived adjectives. In terms of overall distribution, adjectives for CYS accounted for 2% of her text. For JYK, adjectives accounted for 2% and derived adjectives 2%. Interestingly, although the number of adjectives produced is different, the relative percentage of production is quite similar. Like the adjectives, adverbs are either lexical or attributive. CYS supplied 8 lexical adverbs (6%) and no derived ones. JYK supplied 34 lexical adverbs (9%) and 2 attributive adverbs (1%). Again, the difference is in the actual number of adverbs produced and not in the percentage of text. Overall, there is not much difference in actual/context or patient/control in terms of free morphemes. Although there is a difference in the number of attributive adjectives and adverbs, this can be attributed to the impairment of the subordination particles. The main difference, then, is not the extent to which the patient relies on a particular category but rather the actual numbers produced. 52 funet come fnnet tsym lent omis are 1 incl 3.3.2 seen these holes; indie c01111 Content vs. Functional Elements Content 'words' comprised 79% of CYS' total production while functional 'words' were 21%. In context, CYS should have produced 58% content and 42% functional. JYK produced 42% content and 58% functional. CYS relied more heavily on content 'words.‘ Overall, the distribution of grammatical categories revealed an asymmetrical pattern of sparing and loss. This section has shown that lexical items are relatively intact, with very few errors and mostly omissions. Section 3.2 showed that bound (functional) morphological items are impaired. These two results are corroborated by the content versus functional analysis. 3.3.2 Token/Type Analysis Appendix H provides the token/type data for the two patients and their controls. Note that there is a different convention in Menn and Obler (1990) for stating ratios. A token/type ratio of 1:1 is represented as 1.0, and 2:1 as 2.0. As noted in both the morpheme error and grammatical distribution sections, CYS produced 43 nouns, which comprised 33% of her speech. Of these 43, she produced 31 different nouns. In other words, there were 43 tokens of 31 types of nouns, yielding a token/type ratio of 1.4. This indicates that for every type of noun produced, she used it 1.4 times. Her control JYK was about the same with a ratio of 1.7. 53 In terms of verbs, CYS produced 59 tokens of 26 types. This is a ratio of 2.3. Although JYK produced a larger number of verbs, the ratio was about the same. The adjective ratio for CYS was 1, with 2 tokens of 2 types. JYK had slightly higher ratio of 1.6. Overall, this token/type analysis corroborates the findings in the grammatical distribution section. Free morphemes were fairly well preserved, and, although the number of total words produced is different in each lexical category, the ratios are very similar. This also holds across task types, as the analysis does not reveal any consistent difference among tasks. 3.3.3 Lexical Selection CYS made only 6 errors in lexical selection. 1 of 43 (2%) nouns and 5 of 59 (8%) verbs were inappropriate. The noun error was produced in response to the picture in which a woman is knitting. In Appendix D1 item (57), CYS provided the noun 'string, ' which, although very similar semantically to the correct noun 'yarn,’ does not satisfy the coocurrence restriction of the verb. The 4 verb errors are as follows. In (57) CYS supplied 'hang' for 'Imit. ' In (4) she used a verb with the appropriate meaning, 'wear, ' but used the wrong verb. That is, she supplied the verb for 'wear' as in ’wear a ring' instead of 'wear glasses. ' In (51) she used the auxiliary verb 'do' instead of 'call out.’ Although this is a common substitution, it is inappropriate here. Finally, in (61) and (66) she incorrectly uses 'come' for 'smoke' and 'sit.’ 54 no.1: no: 33. hang Her control also makes errors (2%), both substitutions of the wrong noun for the same object: 'plant' for 'stalk.‘ Overall, then, CYS is not impaired in terms of lexical selection. Case 2: KKM 3.3.1 Part of Speech Distribution Major Class Lexical Items The morpheme error distribution (Appendix F) revealed that KKM supplied a total of 87 of 89 (98%) nouns and omitted 2 (2%). Of the 87, 84 (94%) were appropriate and 3 (3%) inappropriate. Table 3.3.2 provides the distribution of these nouns in terms of grammatical function. Table 3.3.2 KKM: Nominal Grammatical Function Errors and Distributions Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % Subject 30 100 0 0 0 0 30 Object 30 86 3 9 2 6 35 r 24 100 0 0 0 0 24 30 of 89 (34%) nouns supplied were subjects, 30 of 89 (34%) were objects, and 24 of 89 (27%) were objects of postpositions. He omitted only 2 of 35 (6%) objects and no subjects or other nouns. He incorrectly substituted only 3 nouns, and these were all objects. CKY, on the other hand, produced a total of 140 nouns: 43 (31%) subject, 35 (25%) object and 55 62 (44%) other. Thus, KKM is normal in the distribution of nouns in terms of grammatical function. In the distribution of nouns in relation to other categories in his speech (Appendix G), he is also relatively unimpaired. Nouns comprised 37% of his total text. In what he should have produced (i.e., context), nouns would have comprised 34%. Thus, the percentage of what he actually produced is similar to what he should have produced. His control's nouns comprised 28% of his total speech. Like the other patient CYS, then, KKM showed little difference between what he produced and what he should have produced, indicating little if any impairment. Also, like CYS, KKM tended to rely more heavily on the nouns in his speech (KKM 37%, control 27%). As for the distribution of verbs, KKM produced a total of 52 verbs. In relation to other categories in his text, the 52 verbs made up 22% of his actual text. In context, he should have produced 61 verbs (23%). His control CKY supplied 108 verbs (21%). Further analysis shows that lexical verbs actually produced were 13% for KKM and 11% for CKY. Identification verbs for KKM were 1% and existential were 2% compared to 2% and 1% for CKY. Finally, auxiliary verbs for KKM were 6% and for CKY 7%. Overall, then, there is very little difference between what KKM actually produced and what he should have produced. Additionally, there seems to be little difference between KKM and his control in the distribution of verbs. 56 KKM produced 6 adjectives in his texts, and he did so without error. He supplied 3 lexical adjectives and 1 attributive adjective. As with the other patient CYS, this low occurrence of attributive adjectives is understandable because this construction involves subordinate particles, which were seen to be impaired in Section 3.1. His control produced 15 lexical adjectives and 8 attributive adjectives. In terms of distribution, lexical adjectives for KKM comprised 1% of his text and attributive adjectives .4%. For CKY, adjectives comprised 3% and derived adjectives 2%. Interestingly, although the number of adjectives produced is different, the relative percentage of production is about the same. KKM supplied 6 lexical adverbs (3%) and l attributive one (1%). CKY supplied 39 lexical adverbs (8%) and 5 attributive adverbs (1%). Again, the difference is in the actual number of adverbs produced and not in the percentage of text. As with the other patient CYS, overall there is not much difference in the free morphemes. That is, the differences in lexical items is the actual numbers produced and not the extent to which the patient relies on a particular category. Content vs. Functional Elements Content 'words' comprised 56% of KKM's total production and functional 'words' 44%. In context, KKM should have produced 50% content and 50% functional. CKY produced 52% content and 48% functional. Thus, 57 in terms of the content versus functional, KKM is not much different from his control, except in number of items produced. That is, unlike CYS, KKM does not rely more heavily on content words. Thus, free morphemes are relatively spared, and bound morphemes are relatively impaired. However, the distribution of both free and bound morphemes is normal. That is, KKM is not relying on one category more than another. This does not suggest that he is not impaired but that he is less severe in his impairment than CYS. 3.3.2 Token/Type Analysis Appendix H provides the token/type data for KKM and his control. As noted in both the morpheme error and grammatical distribution sections, KKM produced 87 nouns, which comprised 37% of his speech. He produced 87 tokens of 66 types, yielding a token/type ratio of 1.3. His control CKY was about the same with a ratio of 1.5. In terms of verbs, KKM produced 53 tokens of 27 types. This is a ratio of 2. His control was a bit higher with a ratio of 2.9. In adjectives, KKM's ratio was 1, with 4 tokens of 4 types. His control had a slightly higher ratio of 1.4. Overall, this token/type analysis corroborates the findings in the grammatical distribution section that free morphemes are fairly well preserved, and although the number of total words produced is different in each lexical category, the ratios are very similar. This also holds across task types, as the analysis does not reveal any consistent difference among tasks. 58 3.3.3 Lexical Selection Overall, KKM made only 6 errors in lexical selection. 2 of 87 (2%) nouns and 4 of 53 (8%) verbs were inappropriate. In terms of nouns, the two errors occurred in (40f) and (42a). In (40f), he uses 'telephone receiver' rather than 'telephone,’ which is required for the noun+AUX combination. In (42a), he incorrectly uses 'plant‘ for 'stalk,‘ which is an error that the other control JYK made as well. In terms of verbs, the first error was in (26b). He used 'walk' for the auxiliary 'do, ' which is used in constructing the verb 'driving. ' In (29c), the intended verb was 'went' (to the in-law's house) but be supplied the verb 'bring,’ which has the same base verb ('go'). The last 2 errors occurred in (37) and (40d) where he substituted 'eat' for 'drink. ' Overall, KKM is not impaired in terms of lexical selection. In fact, he makes mistakes that even the controls made. This finding confirms that of other sections: lexical items are relatively spared. 3.4 Syntactic Complexity Case I: CYS As noted in earlier sections, CYS used no subordinate or coordinate particles. She, thus, produced no complex syntactic constructions. An analysis of sentence complexity reveals that she used, maximally, SOV constructions. Of 70 her 'sentences,’ 2 (3%) were SOV, 11 (16%) were SV, 27 (39%) were single verbs, 13 (19%) only single nouns, and 4 (11%) were other constructions (such as a combination of nouns). It is interesting to 59 note that when she produced an SOV construction, she used no particles. This analysis also reveals that she did not deviate from the canonical SOV word order (e. g., scramble, topicalize, contrast). Case 2: KKM Like CYS, KKM produced no subordinate particles, though he did supply 15 sentential coordinate constructions. Yet, looking at the complexity of these constructions, he also tended to use simple SOV constructions. Of 58 'syntactic' phrases, 4 (7%) were SOV, 27 (47%) were SV or 0V, 6 (10%) were single verbs, 4 (7%) were single nouns, and 4 (29%) were other constructions. This also shows that KKM also did not deviate from the canonical SOV word order. 3.5 Discourse Patterns: Level of Politeness As noted in the grammatical sketch, Korean is often referred to as a discourse-oriented language. As such, there are a number of parameters that could be analyzed in this section. However, the reduced language capacity of the patients combined with the relatively simple tasks tend to result in quite simple texts that are not characteristic of Korean discourse. Thus, the following is a presentation of only one element that was evident in the texts: levels of politeness. Case I: CYS CYS produced 15 of 55 (27%) levels correctly, 2 (4%) incorrectly, and omitted 38 (69%). 14 of the 15 correct levels occurred with past tense verbs. Note that the number of omissions may be misleading. CYS used the 60 intimate level on 38% of her verbs, omitting the polite '-yo.' This omission could also be analyzed as an incorrect substitution of intimate for polite. That is, by leaving the '-yo' off the end of the verb, the patient constructs the intimate form; and this may actually be a wrong substitution of the intimate for the polite level form. Regardless of how it is analyzed, though, CYS correctly supplied only 27% of the levels. The use of the intimate level form is very unusual given the formality of the situation, for this was the first time we had met; and in any formal situation meeting for the first time, the polite or formal level is required. In contrast, her control correctly supplied 12 of 13 (92%) and omitted only 1 (8%). Thus, CYS seems to be impaired in her ability to use levels of politeness. Case 2: KKM KKM supplied 25 of 32 (78%) levels correctly and omitted 7 (22%). His control supplied 10 of 25 (40%) and omitted 15 (60%). This is a high rate of omission for the control, but it is appropriate given that the control is much older than and familiar with the experimenter. Compared to the other control JYK, however, KKM seems relatively unimpaired. 61 CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION As noted above, the goal of this thesis is to describe the general characteristics of Korean agrammatic production and that the first step towards this goal involves collecting, describing, and stating generalizations over a set of data. Chapter 2 described the methods and materials used to collect the data, and Chapter 3 described these data. This chapter summarizes the patterns that emerge from the data. These patterns are then compared to the predictions made for Korean (Section 1.2.4) and to the summary findings of the fourteen languages in Menn and Obler (1990). In addition, this chapter discusses the theoretical implications of the data for the most current linguistic account (Grodzinsky 1990, 1997; Friedmann and Grodzinsky 1997). 4.1 Symptom Patterns in Korean 4.1.1 Production Both patients produced short phrases and had very slow rates of speech. In fact, although CYS appears to be more impaired than KKM in most areas, the rates and lengths for both patients were about the same (Figures 4.1.1 and 4.1.2). In addition, both patients lacked normal intonation patterns, speaking only in a very monotone manner. 62 97.7 1004 89 80— 3 a E 50. 2 T. E 40- ‘3’ 204 Ibfl 11.6 o T T fir I CYS KKM JYK CKY Figure 4.1.1. Summary of Rate of Production. 20. $151 142 2 .C 10.1 ‘1' 1o. .3 E o 3 5 . 2.6 1.6 0 j T 1 I CYS KKM JYK CKY Figure 4.1.2. Summary of Phrase Length. 4.1.2 Morphemes First, morphemes that were most liable to substitution were verb tenses. Approximately a quarter of each patient's speech contained tense substitution errors (Figure 4.1.3). The controls, of course, produced tenses without error. Further analysis revealed that for both patients there was a 63 Fun; high tense error rate for lexical verbs in relation to other verbs; however, this may be a function of the number of lexical verbs produced in relation to other verbs. 100- ao- 76 so- lTense DVFE 4o. % Correct 20-1 0.1 CYS Figure 4.1.3. Summary of Verbal Morpheme Errors. In terms of the direction of these tense errors, neither patient consistently omitted the tense morpheme. From another perspective, if a zero morpheme can be considered as a substitutable morpheme, neither patient relied on a default zero morpheme (Figure 4.1.4). In fact, the majority of errors were consistently in the opposite direction: a past morpheme substituted for a zero morpheme. Not only were the errors more often substitution errors, they were also not random. That is, neither patient was randomly selecting tense morphemes from a set of available tense morphemes. Both patients consistently used the past morpheme when present or present progressive was required in the picture description tasks and consistently used the present (zero) morpheme for past in the personal narratives. 100' IPast for Present 79 DPresent for Past 80 « IPast Port for Fast BOJ 4o. 91 01 Errors 204 CYS KKM Figure 4.1.4. Summary of Direction of Tense Errors. Second, morphemes that were most liable to omission were particles. Although KKM produced more particles and had a slightly lower omission rate than CYS, both patients omitted at least a third of their particles (Figure 4-1-5). In addition, the omissions involved more Case particles than POStpositions. Again, the controls omitted very few of either. 65 1001 so . 50 - IOmit 39 DCorrect 40 - Ilncortect 20 - Figure 4.1.5. Summary of Particle Errors and Omissions. Third, morphemes that were better-preserved included verb-final elements (Figure 4.1.3) and negatives. In both patients, verb-final elements were intact, with the only errors being a sudden stop in production. Negatives were also preserved in both patients. It is interesting to note, though, that neither patient produced the long form of the negative, in which the negative morpheme is a bound rather than free. 4.1.3 Lexical Distribution In contrast to bound morphemes, lexical items in general were well Preserved (Figure 4.1.6). In nouns, the error rate was very low for both Patients. The rate of omission was also relatively low, though higher than the controls. This finding is corroborated by the token/type analyses, in which the ratios for patients and controls were very similar. 66 a . lNouns DVerbs o 6 - IAdjectives a n: 4 ‘ figure 4.1.6. Summary of Token/Type Ratios. For verbs, neither patient made many errors. Again, for both patients the rate of omission was high. Both patients omitted more auxiliary verbs than other types of verb. Again, the verbs are relatively intact, and this is supported by the similar token/type ratios. In addition, the rate of omission for verbs was higher than that for nouns. Thus, except for the variation in omission of verbs, in terms of lexical items, there was not much difference between the patients and the controls. There was a difference between patients in the ratio of content to function words (Figure 4.1.7). CYS relied more heavily on content words than KKM, and, in fact, KKM was very similar to the controls. Although both patients are impaired in bound morphemes, KKM does not seem to be “5 impaired as CYS in lexical items. 67 100- 79 IContent 80- . DFunction CYS KKM JYK CKY Figure 4.1.7. Summary of Content/Function Ratios. In terms of modifiers, neither patient produced a great number of adjectives or adverbs. In fact, only KKM produced these items, and in very small numbers. In addition, only KKM produced an attributive adjective or adverb, with only one token of each. As noted, the ability to construct attributives is dependent upon the use of the adnominalizer and adverbializer particles, and these were impaired in both patients. 4.1.4 Syntactic Complexity Syntactic structures produced by both patients were very simple. Neither patient produced embedded clauses. In addition to simplification, there Was a severe reduction in the variety of syntactic constructions used. This is also reflected in both patients' reliance on canonical word order. 4.1.5 Discourse The morphemes most closely related to discourse, levels of politeness, were misused often by both patients (Figure 4.1.8). However, it is difficult 68 to judge whether they are omissions or substitutions. That is, the polite I form is -eyo’ whereas the intimate is '-e' (i.e., drop the 'yo'). Errors in this area could be analyzed as either omissions of the '-yo’ or substitutions of ’-e’ for '-eyo.' Regardless, both patients used these morphemes inappropriately. 1001 92 80+ DOmlt 60 604 20. CYS KKM JYK CKY Figure 4.1.8. Summary of Level of Politeness Errors. 4.1.6 Summary Overall, the Korean patients did display the general properties associated with clinical descriptions of agrammatism. There was a tendency t0 Omit or substitute grammatical elements (e.g., auxiliaries, postpositions, iUnectional affixes), a preference for content over function words, P'Oduction of simplified syntax, and production of nonfluent, effortful, dysprosodic speech. Thus, as in the fourteen languages reported in Menn and Obler, Korean agrammatic production involves selective impairment. The lmpaired items sometimes involve omission and sometimes substitution, 69 and like other languages, there is a pattern to these omissions and substitutions. In the next section the Korean results will be compared to the findings reported in Menn and Obler and the predictions for Korean. 4.2 Comparison of Korean Data and Cross-Linguistic Findings 4.2.1 Production Menn and Obler report that in all fourteen languages studied, patients produced short phrases at slow speech rates, and this was also predicted for Korean. As expected, both patients produced speech that was considerably shorter and slower than the controls. 4.2.2 Bound Grammatical Morphemes Bound grammatical morphemes were rarely omitted in the fourteen languages; substitution was most common, even in languages when omission was possible. In addition, the substitution was not random but involved a consistent misselection of morphemes. Omission, in contrast, occurred only in free grammatical morphemes. Korean tense morphemes were thus Predicted to be substituted, even though omission of a tense morpheme is Possible, yielding a zero morpheme (present tense). As noted earlier, present tense can be analyzed as either having a zero morpheme or having no tenM3; thus, it is impossible to tell whether a patient is using present tense (zero morpheme) or has omitted the tense marker. Regardless, the prediction obtained, as substitution occurred more often than inappropriate use of the present (zero morpheme) tense. 7O As bound grammatical morphemes were rarely omitted in the fourteen languages but were substituted (even in languages where omission was possible), Korean particles were also predicted to be substituted. However, patients very rarely inappropriately substituted particles, instead omitting them. A final prediction for bound morphemes in Korean was that verb-final elements would be incorrectly substituted. This morpheme was intact. In fact, there was only one instance of error. 4.2.3 Sentence Conjunctions and Particles Menn and Obler reported that clause-initial conjunctions ('and,’ 'and then, ' 'and so') and, in Japanese, sentence-final particles were used quite heavily. It was thus predicted that Korean patients would produce these items as well. However, neither patient used sentence-final particles. Also contrary to the predictions, there was no overuse of sentence initial conjunctions, although KKM did seem to rely on these coordinate conjunctions in the picture description tasks. 4.2.4 Lexical Omission It was also reported that the less contentful a lexical item is, the more prone it is to omission. Thus, 'empty' verbs (i.e., copula, auxiliary) were °mitted more often than content verbs. In addition, more verbs were omitted than nouns, except in languages with heavy nominal inflections. Thus, for Korean it was predicted that more verbs than nouns would be omitted and 71 that among the verbs, identification, existential, and auxiliary verbs would be omitted the most. In general the results match these predictions. 4.2.5 Function and Content Words Cross-linguistically patients tended to rely more heavily on content words than their controls. For Korean, then, it was predicted that the majority of speech would consist of content words. This prediction held for CYS but not KKM. This seems to be an indication of the severity of impairment. That is, KKM seems to be less impaired in his ability to employ both grammatical and content words and, thus, relies less on content words than CYS. 4.2.6 Syntactic Complexity Reduced variety and simplification of syntax is reported across languages. At the sentence-level, relative clauses were almost never Produced, and other subordinate clauses were either not produced or PTOduced incorrectly. Within the clause, there was simplification of all constituents. In VPs, for example, mood and modality were absent, as were auxiliary verbs. NP modifiers were nearly always absent. The prediction for Korean, then, was that patients would rely on simple structures that do “01 employ modification. These predictions held, as syntactic structures produced by both patients were very simple and drew on only a small set of syntactic Constructions. VPs were as empty as possible, with little or no modification. The NPs also had little or no modification. 72 4.2.7 Word Order In addition to simplified syntax, and related to reduced variety, patients in the cross-linguistic studies also relied heavily on canonical word order. Although it is possible to scramble the subject and the object in Korean, the prediction was that patients would rely heavily on the SOV order. As predicted, neither Korean patient deviated from the canonical word order. In addition, SOV constructions were very few; both patients tended to produce constructions such as SV, OV, N or V. 4.2.8 Summary Overall, the results from Korean seem to pattern well with the summary findings reported in Menn and Obler. In addition, the Korean results match the predictions based on the summary findings and the structure of Korean. However, there is one finding that does not fit the pattern: bound morphemes. It was predicted that all bound morphemes would be substituted, yet it was found that the verbal inflections were substituted while particles were omitted. This dissociation does not fit their pattern. The next section will discuss how this data fits in with linguistic accounts for agrammatic patterns such as the ones described here. 73 4.3 Theoretical Implications Although descriptions of patterns are a necessary first step, they do not explain why some properties of the language system are impaired and some are not. The next step is to account for the pattern of sparing and loss within a theoretical framework (i.e., with reference to a normal language system). This account can then be used to derive and test further predictions. Accounts of agrammatism, then, are attempts to explain the pattern of variation across patients and across languages. Although the primary goal of this study was not to test the linguistic accounts reviewed in Section 1.1.4, it is appropriate to look at how these preliminary data from Korean bear on the most current accounts. This section discusses the theoretical implications of the data for the underspecification of functional elements (Grodzinsky 1990, 1997) and the Tree-Pruning Hypothesis (Fri edmann and Grodzinsky 1997). 4.3- l Underspecification of Functional Elements As noted in Section 1.1.4, Grodzinsky (1990, 1997) attempts to a¢<=Ount for patterns in agrammatic omission and substitution in functional elements by referring to parametric variation. He posits underspecification in representation for nonlexical items, and the consequences of this under-specification depend on the inflectional morphology of the language. He Claims that for +zero-morphology languages (i.e., languages in which 0“fission of an inflectional morpheme will not result in a non-word), underspecified features will lead to the omission of morphemes. For 74 -zero-morphology languages (i.e., languages in which omission of an inflectional morpheme will result in a non-word), underspecified features will lead to substitution. Two examples of +zero-morphology languages he provides are the following. (27a) English: ...my mother pass away. (27b) Japanese: inorimasu (correct: inorimasushita) 'I pray.‘ ('I prayed. ") In English, the inflection may be omitted and the result, as in (27a), is still a word (i.e., infinitive). Similarly, he claims, in Japanese the omission of the past tense morpheme still results in a word (i.e., a present tense verb). Thus, as both languages are +zero-morphology languages, they both display om i ssion in agrammatic aphasia. The Korean data pose several problems for this account. The first is that the account predicts that Korean patients Will omit inflectional morphemes, and this is not consistent with the Korean data described in Chapter 3. Like in Japanese, in Korean the omission of the past tense morpheme still results in a word (i.e., zero-morpheme present tense). Grodzinsky's account thus predicts that impaired tense nodes will be underSpecified leading to omission of tense morphemes. In other words, the" e will be a preference for patients to rely on a default zero morpheme. HOW"aver, this prediction does not hold for the Korean data. Patients do not rely on the zero morpheme. In fact, both patients substituted a past morpheme for a zero morpheme substantially more often than a zero mo"Dheme for a past. Thus, underspecification cannot account for the 75 substitution of inflectional morphemes in a language where omission is possible. The second problem that arises is that even if substitution were predicted for Korean, the account predicts that the substitution will be random. An underspecified node in a system that requires a morpheme to form a word will force patients to substitute by "guessing." That is, patients will choose a morpheme from a set of possible tense morphemes. In the substitution that occurs in Korean, there is no guessing. The Korean patients show a clear preference for one morpheme or another, depending on the task. Finally, the underspecification account is not consistent with the relative percentage of errors. It is obvious by looking at the controls that errors in inflectional morphology are rare and that an error rate of 10% or more is clearly abnormal. However, as noted, if a category is impaired and if omission of the morpheme still results in a legitimate word, the morpheme Should never be produced. Conversely, if omission of the morpheme results in a non-word and substitution occurs, random substitution should always °°°ur- Grodzinsky's account then predicts that an impaired category should either not exist in production or should be entirely random. For example, if ““50 is impaired, it should either never show up on a verb or show up randOanly on all verbs. Given this characterization, the underspecification account cannot explain why errors in Korean inflectional morphology amo\lnt to only approximately 25%. That is, tense in Korean should either 76 never show up (i.e., omission) or should show up randomly (i.e., substitution) and yield a 50% error rate. Thus, regardless of how Korean is classified, the pattern of omission and substitution that emerge from the data poses serious problems for the underspecification account of agrammatic production. 4.3.2 The Tree-Pruning Hypothesis The Tree-Pruning Hypothesis (Friedmann and Grodzinsky 1997) attempts explain why the breakdown is not the same across all grammatical morphemes. As noted in Section 1.1.4, Friedmann and Grodzinsky claim that impairment in agrammatic speech is a function of the level of impairment in the patient's syntactic representation. That is, ”whenever a node is impaired, the tree cannot be constructed any higher..." (p.420), and consequently all functional nodes above it will be impaired. This was represented graphically in (2), repeated here as (28) . 77 (23) /\ Only C impaired C and T impaired N38 A8rp C T and A r impaired /\ g The predictions that this hypothesis makes are very clear. The tree is pruned from the top down to the level of the lowest impaired node, affecting all functional categories in between. Thus, regardless of where the "line of impairment" is, all functional elements above that line will be impaired and all elements below will be spared. Assuming the Minimalist syntax discussed briefly in section 1.3.1, the verb enters the computational system fully inflected and raises to check functional features. According to FriSidlnann and Grodzinsky, in agrammatism an impaired category is seen to inVOIVe the inability to check features, thereby incorrectly allowing an otherWISC ungrammatical construction to converge. The data in Korean do support the idea that the impairment is at the syntactic level and not the phonological or morphological level of 78 we representation. Patients did not randomly choose affixes and place them in any order. They chose appropriate morphemes from the set of possible morphemes and placed them in appropriate positions. For example, although the past morpheme was an incorrect choice for tense, it was a selection from the set of tense morphemes and it showed up in the correct position in the verb (i.e., between the root and the verb-final element). This indicates that the morphology or the lexical phonology is intact, but the syntax is somehow impaired. However, the Korean data pose two problems for the syntactic explanation offered by Friedmann and Grodzinsky. The first is carried over from Grodzinsky's underspecification account, for the Tree-Pruning Hypothesis is an extension proposed to account for not only omission and substitution but also for the dissociation of elements in a hierarchical structure. Friedmann and Grodzinsky argue that verbs come into the phrase marker fully inflected and raise to various nodes in order to check features and that impaired nodes cannot check features, allowing an otherwise ungrammatical string to converge. Tense errors are thus predicted to be ran(:lom. Although it does appear that TP is impaired in both patients, as they consistently made errors in tense, the errors were not random. Thus, Friecinnann and Grodzinsky thus have the same problems as those mentioned in the previous section: they cannot account for substitution in a language that allows omission, for substitution that is not random, and for the r - e1 atavely low error rate. 79 The second problem is that the hypothesis predicts C to be impaired. According to the Tree-Pruning Hypothesis, it can be assumed that as T is impaired, all functional categories above are predicted to be impaired. Given the clause structure assumed for Korean, presented in Section 1.2.3, C must also be impaired (29). Note that placement of elements in the tree is only illustrative of where items/features move for checking purposes. (29) CP /\ -ey0 This prediction holds for complementizers and attributive particles, as “either patient produced embedded clauses or attributive adjectives. However, it is widely argued in the Korean syntax literature that the vet‘befinal element is in C position (Kang 1988, Ahn 1990, Yoon 1990, Cho 1994 ). Yet, if elements in C are impaired, verb-final elements should also be itl'lpaired. In fact, the prediction for Korean would be that verb-final 80 ‘17-... __ L. morphemes would be incorrectly substituted, for omission would result in a non-word. This is clearly not the case. Both patients were perfect in their production of these elements. Again, the data in Korean do not support the hypothesis. One counter-argument may be that these verb-final morphemes are not in C (or rather that they are not checked in C). In fact, this issue has been raised by Cho (1994), who argues that the verb-final element is a functional category that heads its own projection, called Mood and MoodP, respectively. He also argues that MoodP is above TP but lower than CP. Regardless of what the verb-final element is called (i.e., C or M), it is clear that it is a functional morpheme affixed to the final verb (i.e., an inf] ectional morpheme), that it is higher in the structure than tense, and that it is either in the same position as or in the node immediately below C. Therefore, this element is either above an impaired node or between two impaired nodes. If an unimpaired node exists above and impaired node or betvveen two impaired nodes, the hierarchical model cannot be an adequate description. Thus, the Korean data do support the claim that the pattern of breakdown in inflectional morphemes is not the same across the board. I'1""“'ever, although Friedmann and Grodzinsky have made an important contl‘ibution by proposing an account of this pattern of breakdown, their Tree~Pruning Hypothesis is inconsistent with the Korean data. Even in the uncot'itrolled environment of spontaneous speech, where patients are 81 provided the opportunity for avoidance, errors and intact elements that are inconsistent with the hypothesis emerge. This is the strongest type of evidence against an hypothesis, for spontaneous speech errors are more difficult to elicit than experimental manipulations, which are designed to force production errors that may otherwise be avoided. 4.4 Limitations and Further Research Although the data and the patterns that emerge from those data presented in this thesis are significant and provide much information about Korean agrammatism, the major limitation of the study is that it is based on only two patients; more patients are needed in order to get a fuller picture. Thus, further research is needed to refine the description of impairment in Korean. As stated previously, descriptions alone are not sufficient, for they are on] y a first step toward understanding. It was seen that the current linguistic accounts are inconsistent with the data presented in this study. Although this is an important finding, more important is the need to find an explanation. Further research will need to not only collect more data and conduct experimental manipulations in order to tease apart subtle patterns in agrammatic speech, but also construct a more plausible account for the Patterns. Finally, as agrammatic speech inevitably involves production, further investigations and accounts will need to take into consideration how the 82 various components of language processing interact in a normal system and relate that interaction to the impaired system. 83 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION The goal of this thesis was to describe the general characteristics of Korean agrammatic production, while at the same time contributing source data for cross-linguistic comparisons. It was noted that no other study has provided a broad linguistic description of Korean agrammatism and that to begin neurolinguistic studies in Korean, such a description is required. Using the methodology found in Menn and Obler (1990) for collecting, analyzing, and presenting data, the thesis provided a description of the patterns of sparing and loss through the narratives of two patients. The Korean patients were seen to display the general properties associated with clinical descriptions of agrammatism. Their speech was nonfluent, effortful, and dysprosodic. They spoke in very short phrases, and there was a tendency to omit or substitute grammatical elements (e.g., auxiliaries, postpositions, inflectional affixes). Additionally, the patients showed a preference for content over function words, for simple syntactic constructions, and for canonical word order. It was also seen that the impairment is grammatical and not lexical, as lexical selection and token/type analyses revealed little difference between patients and controls. In relation to the general patterns of agrammatism reported for the fourteen languages in Menn and Obler (1990), Korean patients generally pattern the same. However, it was noted that there were some 84 language-specific differences. One important difference was that impaired bound morphemes sometimes involved omission and sometimes substitution. For example, based on Menn and Obler, it was predicted that all bound morphemes would be substituted; however, it was found that verbal inflections were substituted, while particles (i.e., Case markers and postpositions) were omitted. Overall, the findings in this study are compatible with those of other studies in that agrammatic aphasia in Korean involves some similar production characteristics (e.g., slow, effortful speech with no production of non-words) and some different language-specific characteristics (substitution or omission of elements). Although descriptions of patterns are a necessary first step, they do not explain why some properties of the language system are impaired and some are not. The next step is to account for the pattern of sparing and loss within a theoretical framework. A secondary goal of this thesis, then, was to consider the findings in light of the linguistic accounts proposed by Grodzinsky (1990, 1997) and Friedmann and Grodzinsky (1997). In terms of Grodzinsky (1990, 1997), it was argued that the underspecification account of omission and substitution results in predictions for Korean that were not consistent with the data. For example, the theory predicted that impaired tense nodes would result in the omission of tense morphemes, and yet substitution occurred. It was concluded that underspecification cannot account for the substitution of inflectional morphemes in a language where omission is possible. It was also argued that even if substitution could be 85 accounted for, the substitution is predicted to be random. Again, this is inconsistent with the Korean data, for the direction of error was found to be consistent. Finally, it was argued that the underspecification account is not consistent with the relative percentage of errors in the data. That is, it is not obvious why the error rate in impaired categories should be 25% rather than random. In terms of Friedmann and Grodzinsky's (1997) Tree-Pruning Hypothesis, it was argued that, like the underspecification account, it cannot account for substitution in a language that allows omission, for substitution that is not random, and for the relatively low error rate. Additionally, it was argued that their hypothesis cannot account for the presence of an intact node (i.e., C) higher than an impaired node (i.e., T), for all functional categories above an impaired node are predicted to be impaired as well. The data clearly show that both patients were impaired in tense but not in verb-final elements. It was thus concluded that the Tree-Pruning Hypothesis is inconsistent with the Korean data. Overall, the findings of this study are consistent with the findings of other studies in that they confirm that not all functional categories are equally impaired and that error types vary from language to language, but in very systematic and highly constrained ways. Further research is required to investigate this range of this variation and to refine explanations for that variation. 86 APPENDICES 87 APPENDIX A KOREAN FOLKTALE NARRATIVE A long, long time ago, there were two brothers: Nolbu and Hungbu. Nolbu was mean, greedy, and selfish. Hungbu was nice, generous, and caring. After their parents passed away, both brothers inherited the family property, but Nolbu took all of it and kicked Hungbu out. One day, Hungbu found a bird with a broken leg inside his house. He took good care of the bird, and the next year the bird brought Hungbu a gourd seed in appreciation. Hungbu planted the seed and took good care of it. Many gourds grew from that seed. When Hungbu opened each of the gourds, he was surprised to find all kinds ofjewelry, silk and gold. As a result, Hungbu became a very rich man. Nolbu, however, heard the news of his brother's fortune and wanted to become richer than him. So, Nolbu found a bird, broke one of the bird‘s legs, and the next year made the bird bring him a gourd seed. Nolbu planted the seed and waited. The next year Nolbu was very excited about opening the new gourds. When he opened the gourds, however, he didn't find anything like what Hungbu found. In fact, he found all kinds of monsters that came out and punished him. 88 APPENDIX B ACTION PICTURE a Menn and Obler (1990), p.34 APPENDD{ C PICTURE SEQUENCE Menn and Obler (1990), p.35 CYS: Histo. 11111111 Da kh >~ APPENDD( DI CYS: PRIMARY TRANSCRIPTIONS AND INTERLINEAR MORPHEMIC TRANSLATIONS CY S: Primary Transcription History e e nun ttaemtmey um......uhum...an poye. um...mn...um...um...y/o/Id-y/o/ki ttokkat -- um - nun nun ttaemuney -- nun ttaemuney an poye. um ankyeng kkiesse. um CY susel haesse. um um...pyengwen/ney/se um seypen haesseyo~sepen haesseyo. um l n um seu/n/.taehak um um um . sepe//haesseyo. um um um um phali apasse um ah . um um um um unh . whew ...um . taape. 4 minutes 1 second 30 words 15 'syntactic' phrases Work jangsa whew p‘aesyon whew um um aniya (sighs) ani um . um an .i .i 5 J “8 5 j s uh. ls/angsa-Is/ang/k/a-Is/a/n/lj/a-/s/angsa-jang/j/a—jangsa p"alasse um um phalasse. 1 minute 44 seconds 13 words 8 'syntactic' phrases Dally p“ k untong ...tollye. (laughs) tali . /t/al . untong . p"al tollye. ku - /j/iku. um um um um uh untong . um pal um kiku -kiku whew isse. tto isse. k‘ong - k‘ong —k"ong phal ape. um (shows rolling motion) um khong khong unh 91 Pong ur unh . an 1 um um (looks f< (shown ...yeng . um u e yo 1.; kkenae P rn‘ate E Pap me The” nalye. ~hens pumn two Hang} e e khong unh khong . khong (laughs) y/o/ki - y/o/ki unh (shows rolling again) unh . an toi uh . uh. unh . uh . um . epse. [E] aniya. isse. untong whew um um ...jeki.. um um tollye. (laughs) um um um um ani. ttukewe. seypen - seypen eng. eng ike . um (looks for something) um... ju-juphasu . jupha-su whew um juphasu . um (showing action) tali eng son . ta-ttu-sse eng -— ta halsuisse . tali . pwa . um ...yeng . um an poye ankyeng sse-sseye ...ankyeng . an poye um um ankyeng um um ankyeng ani . ah eng .jipene.jjije. um um ani. um e y/o/ki . ankyeng pes whew taptap. kkenae . um . um . um kkenae . um. t kkenae-nenkkenaene. ssu-sulkkeya. ankyeng . kkenae-ne. J insuni . /p/a P In/ate eng. ta pate whew (laughs) eng. yangci eng untong um pap meke . um epse eng (laughs). 5 minutes 30 seconds 86 words 58 'syntactic' phrases The Hare and the Tortoise t" n t" t” nulye. /tt/okki . jam jasse. su--/t/alye. /tt/okki . jam jasse. /tt/okki whew hek tek -henseng silye hek-hekuhek-heksi hellek hellek whew (laughs) uh . (makes th puffing noises). hellek hellek (laughs) whew . kepuki . /tt/okki kepuki ah . J J tho-thokki—thokki . um /s/am jasse -/s/am jasse. mansey (raises her arms) . mansey (laughs). 1 minute 32 seconds 29 words 16 'syntactic' phrases 92 Acfionlp jenhss‘a l um he phi—hat: ...koyan Picture jjallass CYS Histo (2) Action Picture jenhwa haesseyo. uh ani . um tasi .um patassenpatasseyo-haesseyo—patasseyo. um ...kuli um jul--jul-—jullek ...talasseyo. kassta wasseyo. tampae 0 t m p t m pae t p phi—haess/jj/e. /p/a/n//t/ae p"iu--p"i--p"i /p/a/n//ta/ wasseyo--/p/am/t/ae phi ...koyang—koyangi . yaku senp‘ungki epseyo emma—emma wasseyo. 2 minutes 43 seconds 29 words 18 'syntactic' phrases Picture Sequence um pye . jjallasseyo. (laughs) um pye eng jjallassupnita. pye . jjallassupnita an ah molla uh . uh . uh . phalassapnita. 1 minute 27 seconds 9 words 6 'syntactic' phrases CYS: Interlinear Morphemic Translation History -ess (l) nun ttaemuney an poy *-_e_ [yo] . eyes because not be seen:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] I can't see because of my eyes. " correct tense is PAST N Adv neg V (2) yeki ttokkat [i-eyo] here same [be/id:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] [It is the] same here. dem Adj [v] -ess (3) nun ttaemuney on pay ‘-_e_ [yo] eyes because not be seen:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] I can't see because of my eyes. " correct form is PAST N Adv neg V 93 1.41 07 151 s 1611 r (7; (8) (4) (5) (6) (7) (3) (9) Work (10) sse ankymg {—ul I ‘k_ki-ess-e bro] / glasses [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] put in:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] I put on glasses. "' semantic error; the appropriate verb is 'use wear. ' N [ptl] V susel {—ul] ha-ess-e [yo] operation [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] do:AUX-PAST-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] I had an operation. N [ptl] aux pyengwen-eyse soy—pen ha-ess-cyo hospital-PTLzLOCd 3-PTL2CLS do:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL I did it three times at the hospital N ptl N V seul tachak / pyengwen-eyse] sey-pcn Seoul university [hospital-PTLzLOCd] 3-PTL2CLS I did it three times [at] N N [N ptl] N ha-css-eyo , do:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL Seoul University [hospital]. V phal-i ap-ass-e / yo ] arm-PTLINOM hurt:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] amt hurt. N ptl V -ass to ap *-_-e [yo] 1’ all hurt:PRED:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] all hurts. " correct tense is PAST Adv V jangsa [Jul] [ha-ess-syo] / sales [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] [dozAUX-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL] [I worked in] sales. N [ptl] [aux] 94 111') I” fas II‘ (12) [0 Daily (13‘) w (15) ll (17) (ll) (12) (13) ' (14) (15) (16) (17) (13) p"aesyon [il-lul] [ha-ess—eyo] -' fashion [work-PTL:ACC:OPTL] [dozAUX-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL] [I worked in] fashion. N [N ptl] [aux] [os-trl] p"al—ass-e [yo] " [clothes-PTLtACCzOPTL] sell:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] sold [clothes]. [N ptl] V untong {—ul/ lha-eyo] *1 exercise [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] [do:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] [I do] exercise. N [ptl] [aux] [mom-u! I lolly-e [yo] " [body-PTL:ACC:OPTL] turn:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] turn [my body]. [N ptl] V tali untong {-ul] [ha-eyo] leg exercise [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] [dozAUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] [I do] leg exercises. N N [ptl] [aux] p"al l-ul I tolly-e [yo] arm [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] turn:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):TNT[:POL] I turn my arms. N [ptl] V kiku l-ka] exercise machine [-PTL:NOM:OPTL] have N [ptl] iss-e [yo] /’ be/existzPRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] exercise machine. v tto iss-e [yo] Ir‘ong another be/exist:PRED:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] bean I have another - beans. Adv v N 95 ('19) (201 Ill) ('11 -.) (:4 (2i I _ fi v (3 s1 (19) (20) (2|) (22) (23) (24) (25) (26) P” 0/ I -i] 0.0-6 [ya] arm [-PTL:NOM:OPTL] hurt:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] armhurts. N [ptl] V yekil-ka] an toi/yo] / here [PTLtNOM:OPTL] not become:PRED:(PRES)-(VFE:DEC):INT[:POL] This does not work. dem [ptl] neg V cps-81w] 1’ not be/existzPRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] nothing else. v -yo ani Km. not be:PRED:(PRES)—(VFE:DEC):PLA No. ’ correct level is (VFE-DIX ):I’( )1. v iss-c [yo] /' be/existzPRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] There is. v untong /-ul] [ha-eyo] exercise [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] [do:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] [I do] exercise. N [Pill {aux} jeki [Jul] tally-e [yo] ’ there [PTLzACCzOPTL] turn:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] turn that. dem [ptl] V ttsrkew-e [yo] .' hot:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] It is hot. V sey-pen [ ha-eyo I 1’ 3-PTL2CLS [do:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] [I do it] three times. N [aux] (I7) (38.) (29) A. (’J O (27) ikesl-i] jufl'asu this[PTL:NOM:OPTL] electric stimulator This - dem [ptl] N li-eyo} ' [be/id:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] [is an] electric stimulator. [V] (28) tali/eyta] son [eyta] leg [PTLzLOC:OPTL] hand [PTLzLOC:OPTL] Iuse it on N [ptl] N 1th ta sse [yo] ’ all use:PRED:(PRES)-(VFE:DEC):INT[:POL] my legs, hands, everything. Adv V (29) to ha-lsu -iss-e [yo] all dozPRED-MOOD be:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] Ican do it all over. Adv V-aux (30) tali/eyta] [sse-yo] / leg [PTLzLOC :OPTL] [usezPRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] [I useit on my] leg N [ptl] [V] (3 1) [TV-M] PM! {yo} [TV-PTL:ACC:OPTL] watch:PRED:(PRES)~VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] Iwatch [TV]. [N ptl] v (32a) yeng[hwa-lul] [po—jiman] mov[ie-PTL:ACC:OPTL] [watcthRED:(PRES)-CONJ] [I watch] mov [ies but] N [ptl] [V-adv] (32b) an poy-e [yo] / not beseen:PRED:(PRES)~VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] I cannot see. neg V 97 5H” 5 11‘. 4) (36,1 37) 5‘. (33) (34) (35) (36) (37) (38) ankyeng {—ul] sse-ya glasses [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] usezPRED-MOOD Ihave [to] N [ptl] V [ha-cw] ’ [-do:AUX:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):FOR] wear glasses. [—aux] ankyeng [epsi] an poy-e [yo] / glasses [without] not be seen:PRED:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] I can‘t see [without] my glasses. N [ptl] neg V [ankyengal] ‘jipenc [yo] / [glasses-PTLzACCzOPTL] put in:PRED:(PRES)«(VFE:DEC):INT[:POL] I put [the glasses] in. ‘ semantic error? IT“I P"] V’ [ankyeng-ail] wife [yo] / [glasses-PTLzACCzOPTL] riszRED:(PRES)-(VFE:DEC):INT[:POL] [The glasses] rip. ‘ semantic error? [1‘1 PH] V’ ant/yo} yeki {-ey] not be/id:PRED:(PRES)-(VFE:DEC):INT[:POL] here [PTLzABL:OPTL] No. I to take v dem [ptl] ankyeng {-ul] *pesl-eyo] / glasses [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] take off:PRED:(PRES)-[(VFE:DEC):POL] glasses off here. “ she does not produce verb that is a nonword; she stops in the middle of production N [ptl] V taptap [ha-eyo] / frustrated [do:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] [I am] frustrated. Adj [aux] 98 (39) (40) (41) (42) (43) (44) [ankyeng-1d] kkenae [yo] / [glasses-PTLzACCzOPTL] take out:PRED:(PRES)-(VFE:DEC ):INT[:POL] I take [the glasses] out. [N ptl] V [ankyeng-all kkenae- [glasses-PTLzACC20PTL] take out:PRED:(PRES)- I take [the glasses] out [N ptl] V- ne [yo] / put:AUX:(PRESHVFEzDEC):INT[:POL] and put them somewhere. aux eyo [ankyeng-«1] su-llrke- fig / [glasses-PTLzACC20PTL] use:PRED-MOOD—(VFE:DEC):PLA I will use [the glasses]. " correct is VFE:(DEC):P()I. [N ptl] V ankyeng {-ul] glasses [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] I take the glasses out N [ptl] kkenae- ne [yo] / take out:PRED:(PRES)- put:AUX (PRES)-(VFE:DEC):INT[:POL] and put them somewhere. V-aux Jinsuni l-hanf'eyj [jenhwa-lid] Jinsuni [PTL2SRC] [telephone-PTL:ACC:OPTL] I receive N [Pill [N Pill pat-e [yo] / receive:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] (phone calls from) Jinsuni. " not a natural way to express this V to pat-e [yo] / all receive:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] I receive all.. Adv V 99 1451 (46) (47) (48.1 (45) (46) yangci [lal] [ha-eyo] / toothbrushing [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] [do:AUX:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):POL] brushing teeth. N [ptl] [aux] pap melt-e [yo] / rice eat:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] Ieat N V The Hare and the Tortoise (47) (48) (49) (50) (51) [kepuki-ka] nuly-e [yo] / [turtle-PTLINOM] slow:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] [The turtle] is slow. [N P“) V f'okki {-ka] rabbit[-PTL:NOM:OPTL] The rabbit N [ptl] jam {-ul] ja-ss-e [yo] / sleep [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] sleep:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] slept. N [ptl] V han-sum sui-e ‘hensengsilyc meaningless string ‘ maybe attempt to say '(the rabbit) is out of breath. ' one-breath, breathe:PRED:(PRES)-VFE: (DEC) :IN T helleypelttek-kely-e ‘hellelr hellek (makes pifling noises) / ‘ maybe attempt to say pant and pref-PREDJPRES) :VFE:(DE C) :IN T kepuki {-ka] mansey [Jul] turtle [-PTL:NOM:OPTL] cheers [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] The turtle N [Pill N [P11] pul ‘hg-ess-eyo / do:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL did a cheer. "' correct verb is call out aux 100 Attic (521 (541 (55 Action Picture (52) (53) (54) (55) (56) (57) (53) -k0 iss jenhwa [Jul] ha figs; -eyo / telephone [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] do:AUX-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL She telephoned. ‘ the correct form is do:PRED-GER be:A UX:(PRES)= is doing N [ptl] aux " ani [yo] tasi not be/id:PRED:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):PLA [POL] again No. Again. v Adv -ko iss pat ‘5ng -e [.130] / receive:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] She received (a phone call). "' the correct tesne is receive:PRED-GER be:A UX.‘(PRES) = is receiving V -ko iss pat Egg -cyo receive:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL She received (a phone call). ‘ the correct tense is receive:PRED-GER be.°A UX : (PRES) = is receiving V -ko iss ha ”a: -eyo do:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL She did it. ‘ the correct tense is do:PRED-GER be:A UX .° (PRES) = is doing V sil ttakaejil-ul ha -ko iss 5.134., a: "£1 45% -eyo / string hang:PRED—PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL (The mother) hung the string. " semantic error; may be sil=yarn, knit-PTL:ACC, do:PRED—GER be:A UX:(PRES) = is knitting yarn N V [atul-un] [eti-ey] kasstawa-ss-eyo / [son-PTLzNOM] where-PTLzLOC retum:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL [The son] came back [from somewhere]. [N ptl] [N ptl] V 101 1,59) 160) (61) (63) (65) ll (59) (60) (61) (62) (63) (64) (65) tampae [Jul] cigarette [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] He N [ptl] p"i[Jro iss-eyo] / smokezPRED-[GER bezAUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] smo... V [~aux] ha-ess-eyo / do:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL He did (it). V phiu Jto iss tampae [Jul] ‘wa fig; -eyo / cigarette [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] cr-i-r—nezPRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL He smoked a cigarette. r correct verb is smoke:PRED-GER be:A UX:(PRES)=is smoking N [ptl] V koyangi [Jra] [[a-lro iss-eyo] / cat [~PTL2NOM] [sleep:PRED-GER be:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] The cat [is sleeping] N [ptl] [V-aux] yaku [Jul] baseball [PTLzACCzOPTL] [He is N [ptl] [pa-Ito iss-eyo] / [watcthRED-GER be:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] watching] baseball. [V-aux] senp‘unglri [Jra] [toralra-yo] fan [-PTL:NOM] [tumzPREDz(PRES)-(VFE:DEC):POL] fan [turns]. N [Pill [V] eps-eyo / not be/exist:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL There is nothing (else). v 102 1661 Picti (67.) (68; (69 ?? O (66) emma [ Jra I ‘w- *-;s_' -eyo / mom [-PTL:NOM:OPTL] come:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL Mom came. "' semantic error; mom is sitting in a chair knitting. N [ptl] V Picture Sequence -ko iss (67) pye [Jul] jjalla fig -eyo / rice stalk [~PTL1ACC20PTL] cut:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL He cut down the rice. " correct tense is GER be:A (IX-(PRES) =is cutting N [ptl] V -ko iss (68) pye [Jul] jjalla ”fl ~upni-ta , rice stalk [~PTL:ACC:OPTL] cut:PRED-PAST-VFE:FOR-DEC He cut down the rice. " correct tense is GER be:AUX:(PR15S)—— is cutting N [ptl] V (69) molla [-yo] / not know:PRED:(PRESHVFE:DEC):INT[:POL] I don't know. V (70) [pye Jul] p”al—ass~upni-ta / [rice stalk-PTL:ACC:OPTL] sellzPRED-PAST-VFEzFOR-DEC He sold [the stalk]. [N ptl] V 103 Hist eh .. sala its ”'1 b. iss IC APPENDIX D2 KKM: PRIMARY TRANSCRIPTIONS AND INTERLINEAR MORPHEMIC TRANSLATIONS KKM: Primary Transcription History m ss ss eh.../p/okjangey.eh ka/s/esseyo. eh. juil ila. mokjangey ka/s/esseyo. eh jipey 0 ss salamhakoyo. suy/e/ngjang issketenyo. hanseng mokjangey ka/s/esseyo. eh pulul i ke n p"yeko eh um eh kapjak/ey/ . kim hotu solika tullye . eh . ku/o/si pu/l/ myeng hanhayo. kahulonun um kieki an nayo. 1 minute 21 seconds 28 words 11 'syntactic' phrases Work I /k/ikjangey ku—kumantuko mokjangey sensoujejsolul kiwesseyo. eh tangyoka issketenyo. mokjang. eh . um . mokjang saep . eh . eh tungsan phala pelyesseyo. tungsan nauna hollo tangsanul cinku hanmyengto epse. tungsanhako h teymosan kuliko eh nannam etiey kyeysintey? munan/n/ae eh calul thako eh ...tto taniko cencelul tu—taniko unjen myeng hejie eh unjen si-sihem eh (laughs P and waves hand 'no') jangaeja sihem pol ...ha/k/kyek toisse. kuntey ui unye—ul—w/u/yemhaese mos kele. 2 minutes 44 seconds 50 words 23 'syntactic' phrases 104 Family k" k“ t tt k ey tt tt key . sey salam . eh /k/un--/k/un atul. /j/u /t/al . ma/n/nae atul i/ya/yo. eh.. /t/al--/t/al p'”I u 0 . eh taehakkyo taniko ji . eh . /p/alangs/u/ anhaeng/k/ey ipsahako . ah . hy jae j 0a 0 /j/en/cae/-nun--si/k/ip/pu/l kakko isseyo. ah eh . s/e/nnye ttali isseyo. taum . maknae a 0 yaeki h/ae/Ikkeyyo. man . yey--yensey . taehakkyo . kumnyeney...jolephaesseyo. 0 i o cuijik/k/un. eh um . eh . whew taeu . samseng. whew . tae/h/u samseng kul/u/k/u/ . i o ui hyentae taeu samseng . kul/u/k/u/ (experimenter guesses Lucky Goldstar) c/i/jikal u k/u/leh-key haessesseyo. ...na . ilekal phyengsaengul . tungsaneyman yelj ung haeyo. c l /j/inkupuntul mannasseyo. su/p/ mekki. 3 minutes 3 seconds 55 words 18 'syntactic' phrases Action Picture ey mu ae a u enu kajeng/hae/se eh . ah pang/pe/nul h/aye/ssupnita. eh k/o/jip/u/n eh jajen . eh uh appaka eh eh ...theyleypilul . poko issessupnita. a e wa m emmanun ttuleeykilul h/ae/ko . s/o/nphungkilul thulko k/a/ilul . pananalul /p/ekko jyusuto e ye tt wa m/o/kko . eh aitulal sinmunjilal poukaj/u/oko . /t/alun jenh/a/kilal kelko issessupnita. 2 minutes 1 seconds 27 words 10 'syntactic' phrases Picarre Sequence 0 sap mo simkilul hako . uh /si/sim/ Inita. mo um cusulul hako . su—sa—sal . eh u nongpuka iessko ta—talkujilul k/u/lesupnita. 1 minute 3 seconds 11 words 5 'syntactic‘ phrases 105 K10 Him. (1) (4) KKM: Interlinear Morphemic Translation History (I) mokjang-ey ka-ss-ess-eyo / farm-PTLILOC gozPRED-PAST-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL I had gone to the farm. N ptl V (2) juil i-la [seyo] / weekend be/id:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):PLA [POL] It is the weekend. N v (3) mokjang-ey ka-ss-ess-eyo / farm-PTLzLOC gozPRED-PAST-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL I had gone to the farm. N ptl V 0 (4) jip fig}; salam-hako-yo / home-PTLzLOC person-CONJ—POL With a person to the house. "‘ intended form is jib-salam = home person = wife N ptl N ptl m mmMmM swimming-pool [-PTL:NOM:OPTL] There is a swimming NW] iss-keten-yo / be/existzPRED:(PRES)-VFE:SUPP:(DEC)—POL pool there, you know. V (6) hanseng mokjang-ey ka-ss-esseyo / Hansung farm-PTLzLOC gozPRED-PAST-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL I had gone to Hansung swimming pool. Nva (7a) pul-ul phye-ko [iss-ess-nuntey] fire-PTLzACC StaflIPREDi(PRES)-CONJ [be:AUX-PAST-CONJ] [I was] started a fire and " by adding the AUX,-lro becomes a gerund and the construction progressive N ptl V-aux-conj 106 (7b) (3) (9) Work ha-nun kapjaki khung 5% soli-ka suddenly boom walnut sound-PTLzNOM suddenly a boom walnut sound ‘ correct is do:AUX-ADNZ + sound-PTL:NOM -‘ a booming sound Adv N N N ptl -ess I'd/y *2 [ya] / be heard:PRED:(PRES)-(DEC):INT [:POL] is heard. a correct tense is PAST V -ess kulres-i punmyeng ha *-_yo / that-PTLzNOM certain do:AUX:(PRES)-(DEC):POL That is certain. "' correct form of the verb is ha-ayo. Missing the VFE that goes with yo; also, correct tense is PAST. dem ptl Adj aux ku—hu-lo-nun kick-i that-afier-PTL:TEMP-PTL:CON memory-PTLzNOM After that, Adv ptl N ptl an na-yo ~ not occur:PRED:(PRES)—(VFE:DEC):POL I don't remember. neg V -ul (10a) j ikjang ”gig kumantu-lro (10b) job-PTLzLOC quit:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ I quit at my job and ‘ correct form is PTL:ACC = 'quit my job' N ptl V-conj -eyse mokjang fig jejso-lul kiwe-ss—eyo / farm-PTLzLOC milk cow-PTLzACC raise:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL raised milk cows at the farm. "‘ correct PTL is LOC (dynamic) N ptl N ptl V 107 (II (I (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (13) tangyo—ka iss-keten-yo / diabetes-PTLzNOM be/existzPRED:(PRES)-VFE:SUPP:(DEC)—POL I have diabetes, you know. N ptl v mokjang saep {—ul] [ha-ess-eyo] / farm business [~PTL:ACC:OPTL] [do:AUX-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL] [I ran] a farm business. N N [ptl] [aux] tungsan [-ul] [ha-eyo] / hiking [-PTL:ACC] [do:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] I [go] hiking. N [ptl] [aux] p”al-a- pely-ess-eyo / sell:PRED:(PRES)-AUX throw out:AUX-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL I sold everything otT. V-aux tungsan [ ~ul I [ha-eyo] / hiking [-PTL:ACC] [do:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] I [go] hiking. N [ptl] [aux] na hollo tungsan-ul [ha-eyo] / I alone hiking-PTLzACC [do:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] I [go] hiking alone. N Adv N ptl [aux] cinku [Jra] han-myeng-to friend [-PTL:NOM:OPTL] one-PTL:CLS-PTL:ADV Idon't have N [ptl] N cps-eyo I” not be/exist:PRED:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):POL even one friend. v tungsan-hako teymosan kuliko / hiking-CONJ Mt. Taemo CONJ hiking and Mt. Taemo as well as N ptl N conj 108 (21 (211 (33} (24) (19) (20) (21a) (21b) (21c) (22) (23) (24) eti-ey kyey-si-n-tey? ” where-PTLzLOC livezPRED-HON-PRES-(INTERyVFE:EXCL Where (do they) live? Adv ptl V munan ha-e [yo] / smooth do:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT [:POL] (The trail is) smooth. Adj aux ca-lul {'a-ko car-PTLzACC ride:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ We drive N ptl V-conj tto [ Jo] tani-ko also [ -PTL:ACC] take-PRED:(PRES)—CONJ also we take [something] and Adv [N ptl] V-conj -lo cencel ‘53] tani-ko [yo] / subway-PTLzACC take-PRED:(PRES)—CONJ [POL] we take the subway and ‘ correct particle with this verb is via:PT L:INST R N ptl V-conj unjen myenghejung [- i] [iss-eyo] / driving license [-PTL:NOM:OPTL] [be/exist:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] [I have] a driver's license. N N ptl v unjen sihem [~ul] [pwa-ss-eyo] / driving test [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] [see:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL] [I took] the driver's test N N ptl V -ess -eyo jangaeja sihem [~ul] po *J / handicap test [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] seezPRED-ADNZ To take the handicap test... "‘ intended tense is PAST -VFE:(DEC)POL N N [ptl] V-adj 109 (35) (26a) (26b (IE (25) hapkyck [—i] toi—ss-el yo ] / pass {-PTLINOMzOPTL] become:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):TNT[:POL] Iwas passed. N [ptl] V (263) kuntey wiyem ha-ese however danger do:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ However, it is dangerous so Adv Adj aux-conj ha (26b) mos Weld-yo] not walk:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):INT[:POL] Idon't walk. ‘correct verb is do:A UX .' (PRES)-VFE: (DEC) :POL neg V Family (27) sey salam [~i] [iss-eyo] / three person [PTLzNOMIOPTL] [be/exist:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL] There are 3 people. Num N [ptl] [v] tul-jjae-nun (28) khu-n atul-hako *t_u ttaI-hako bigzPRED-ADNZ son-PTLzCONJ two daughter-PTL:CONJ The oldest is a son and the second is a daughter and ‘ correct form is two-0RD-PTL:CON = second V-adj N ptl Num N conj maknae [-nun] atul i-eyyo youngest {-PTLzCON] son be/id:PRED:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):POL the youngest is a son. N [ptl] N v (29a) ttal {-i] taehakkyo [ Jul ] daughter [-PTL:NOM:OPTL] university [PTLzACC:OPTL] My daughter attends N [Pill N [Pill -ess tani "_ Jro attend:PRED:(PRES) -CONJ university and " correct tense is PAST V-conj 110 (39b) 1 (29c) (29b) p"ulangsu unhaeng-ey ipsa ha-ko (29c) (30) (31) (32) (33) France bank-PTLzLOC enter do:AUX:PRED:(PRES)—CONJ enters a French bank and N N ptl N aux-conj hyenjae-nun sijip-ul now-PTLzCON inlaw house-PTLzACC now she is Adv ptl N ptl ka -ess ‘k_a1 l"Jro iss -eyo / holdzPRED-GER be:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL holding marriage. ‘intended is she has gone to the in-laws house: she got married. V-aux sonnyettal-i iss-eyo / granddaughter-PTLzNOM be/exist:PRED:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):POL I have a granddaughter. N ptl v taum maknae yaeki ha-lklt-cyyo / next youngest child talk do:AUX-MOOD-VFE:(DEC):POL Next I will talk about the youngest child. Adv N N V yensey taehakkyo [Jul] kumnyen-ey Yonsei University [PTLzACCzOPTL] this year-PTLzTEMP He graduated this year N N [ptl] Adv jolep ha-ess-eyo / graduate do:AUX-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL [from] Yonsei University. N aux cutjilr-un taeu samseng kuliko hyentae / job-PTL2CON Daewoo Samsung CONJ Hyundai His job, Daewoo Samsung and Hyundai (experimenter correctly guesses Lucky Goldstar) N ptl N N conj N 111 -0 (34) cuijik—ul kule-key ha-ess tfl-eyo / job-PTLzACC like that-ADVZ do:AUX-PAST-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL He has done that kind of job. N ptl V-adv aux ilsaeng (35) na -nun] ‘iflelg —ul p"yengsaeng-ul I [PTLzCONzOPTL] ?-PTL:ACC life-PTLzACC My life focuses ‘ correct form is life; the participant does self-correct with a synonym. N [ptl] N ptl N ptl tungsan-ey-man yeljung ha-eyo / hiking-PTLzLOC-PTLzADV focus do:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL only on hiking. N ptl ptl N aux .0 (36) cinku ‘-p_u_n_-tul manna-ss-eyo / friend-HON-PL meet:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL I met my friends. ‘cannot use honorific to refer to one's own friends. N ptl ptl V masi (37) sul *mck Jri alcohol eat:PRED:(PRES)-COMP drinking alcohol. ‘although acceptable colloquially, more appropriate to say drink:PRED:(PRES) N V-comp Action Picatre -ey (38) enu kajeng l"-_eyse some family-PTLzLOCd We visited ’correct PTL is PT L:LOC (static) and not (dynamic) det N ptl -k0 is pangmun—ul ha- tgss «upni-ta / visit-PTLzACC do:AUX-PAST-VFEzFOR-DEC at some family (in the picture). ‘correct form is GER be:A LIX-(PRES) N ptl aux 112 (39) (40a) (40b) (40c) (40d) (40c) kubjip-un appa-ka teyleypi—Iul that-house-PTL2TOP dad-PTLzNOM TV-PTLzACC As for that family, dad N ptl N ptl N ptl .o pon iss figs «upni-ta / watcthRED~GER be:AUX-PAST-VFEzFOR-DEC was watching TV. V-aux .o emma-nun ttukeyjil-ul ha ’1 Jro / mom-PTLzCON knit-PTL:ACC do:AUX:(PRESHDEC)-CONJ Mom knit and " correct form should not have VFE with a conjunction N ptl N ptl aux-conj senfl'ungki-lul t"ulJro fan-PTLzACC turn on:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ (Someone) turned on the fan and N ptl V-conj kwail-ul panana-lul melt-k0 fruit-PTLzACC banana-PTLzACC eat:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ He eats fruit—bananas and N ptl N ptl V-conj masi jyusu-to *flelr-ko juice-PTL:ADV eat:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ eats juice also and ‘ correct verb is drink:PRED:(PRES) N ptl V-conj -0 -ka ai ’-t_u_l fill sinmunji-lul kajyeo-ko child-PTL:PL-PTL:ACC newspaper-PTLzACC bring:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ (someone) brings in the children the newspaper and " correct form is the child PT L:NOM=The child brings in the newspaper. N ptl N ptl V-conj 113 jenhwa (401) ttal-un *[cnhwaki-lul daughter-PTL2CON telephone receiver-PTLzACC The daughter was calling I'Correct is telephone N ptl N ptl .o kel-lro iss ”fig -upni—ta / callzPRED-GER be:AUX-PAST-VFEFOR-DEC the telephone receiver. V-aux Picture Sequence (41a) mo sim-lri-lul haJro stalk plantzPRED2COMP-PTL2ACC do:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ It's planting stalks he does and N V-comp aux-conj (41b) [mo-Jul] sim-supni-ta [stalk-PTLzACC] plant:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:FOR-DEC he plants [stalks]. [N M V pye -0 (42a) *m cusu *ng haJro stalk cut-PTLzACC do:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ He cuts the stalks and “ stalks is appropriate only for planting; a grown plant is pye; N N ptl aux-conj .0 (42b) nongpu-ka i "-g._ss Jro farmer-PTLzNOM be/idzPRED-PAST-CONJ he was a farmer and N ptl v—conj -0 (42c) talkuji-Iul kul figs; —upni-ta / cart-PTLzACC pull:PRED-PAST-VFE:FOR-DEC he pulled the cart. N ptl V 114 APPENDIX D3 CONTROL J YK: PRIMARY TRANSCRIPTIONS AND INTERLINEAR MORPHEMIC TRANSLATIONS .IY K: Primary Transcription Work meyikhep hakueney tanyessesski ttaemuneyyo. salamtului elkulul meyikhep hae junantey neycyulel meyikhepul haesseyo. maenceumey injey kicohwajangul iltan . ilehkey . um salamtului phipulul peliji anhkey haki uihae kicohwajangul hae juntaumey kekiey saekcohwajangel te-te-tes ssuiununkejiyo. 16 seconds 30 words 3 'syntactic' phrases Hungbu and Nolbu enu hyengjeyka issessnuntey kulenikkanun hansalami yoksimi nemu nemu manhko hansalamun nemu nemu cakhan salam iessnantey yoksim manhun hyengan nemu nemu jal salko tto kupanmyeney yoksimi epsnan kulenikkanun cakhan kutongsaengun nemu nemu kananhaese . ilekey saltaka . ku jeypilul mannase kulenikkanun uhyenhi ettehkey jeypiui talilal kocye jukey toissnnntey kn cakhan kn hangpunnn talilul kocye juessnuntey kutalilul kocye jun ku-potapulo k"etalan kulenikkanan jeymulul etkey toissko. kakesul sikihan hyengin nolbunun ah kutaliey jeypiui ta—jeypiui talika pulejiji anhassnunteyto ilpule pulettalyese ku-jeypilo puthe keki kajeypilo put"e pakssilal patassjiman kupakssieynan nolbulal uhm nolbulul ...saengkaki jal an nayo. malui phhyohyen etehkey haeya toilji molukeyssjiman nolpuai kalen motun ku-ka—po jeymulkwa kalen 115 jeymul kat'un kesul ta hesalo tollyepelinun kulen pakssilul patassjiman najungey hungpuka tasi kanolpu hyengul towa jumulosse ilehkey selo hyengpuhyengjeysaika tasi uae isskey tointanun sutholi ipnita. 1 minute 21 seconds 119 words 5 'syntactic' phrases Action Picture sain kajok ikoyo. uh kekise tanlanhan sain kajokjungeyse apejinan injey ku theylleypilul pomyense tampaelul phiuko kyeysiko tto emmanan tto uh ttukeyjilul hako issapnita. kuliko tto uh ueynka nuna inkes kathunteyyo. nunanun cinkutulwa jenhwalal hako issko tongsaengan macim sinmunul kajiko jikam ungepsillo tuleoko issnan sajin ikunyo. 22 seconds 41 words 4 'syntactic' phrases Picture Sequence molul simko issnunteyyo. ah molul jikum simko issnunkesi anila molul jikum suhwak hako issnan sajin inkes kat"aeyo. cespenjjae sajinun molal jikum peyko issko tto kekiey jaki ka janyepuntuli nawase-janyeka nawase kasuhwakhan pyelal kasstaka jikum cakok cakok caengkiko issko kn caengkinuseypenjjae kuliman ku cakok cakok caengkin pyelul ku tupupuka uh silko kanun kulim ipnita. 29 seconds 49 words 5 'syntactic' phrases JY K: Interlinear Morphemic Translation Work (1) meyik”ep hakuen-ey tany-ess-ess-ki ttaemuney-yo / makeup institute-PTLzLOC attend:PRED—PAST—PAST-ADVZ-POL Because I had attended a makeup institute (I work at a beauty shop). N N ptl V-adv 116 (28) (2b) (3a) (3b) (30) salam—tul-ui elkul-ul meyik"ep person-PTL:PL-PTL:POSS face-PTLzACC makeup Ido people's N ptl pth ptl N ha-e ju—nuntey do:AUX-PTL:AUX givezPRED-PRES-CONJ face makeup for them and aux-ptl aux-conj neycyulel meyik‘ep-ul ha-ess-eyo / natural makeup-PTLzACC do:AUX-PAST-VFE:(DEC):POL I did natural makeup. N N ptl aux maen-ceum-ey kicohwajang—ul very-first-PTLzTEMP basic makeup-PTLzACC At the very first, Adv N ptl iltan salam-tul—ui p":pu-lul first of all person-PTLzPL-PTLzPOSS skin-PTLzACC you do first of all basic makeup so that Adv N ptl ptl N ptl peli-ji anh-key throw out:PRED-NEG:PRED:(PRES)—ADVZ you don't ruin V-neg-adv ha Jri uihae {-se] do:AUX:(PRES) -ADVZ {-CONJ :OPTL] your skin and aux-adv kicohwajang-ul ha-e ju-ntaum-ey basic-makeup-PTLzACC dozPRED-PTLzAUX give:PRED-ADVZ-PTL:TEMP after basic makeup you N ptl aux-ptl aux-adv keki-ey saekcohwajang—ul there-PTL:LOC color makeup-PTL2ACC put on more dem ptl N ptl 117 te ssuiu-n-un ke-jiyo / more put onzPRED-COMP —(be:PRED):VFE:(DEC):SUPP:POL there with color makeup, I suppose. Adv V-comp v Hungbu and Nolbu (4a) (4b) (40) (4d) (46) enu hyeng/ey-ka iss-ess-nuntey some brother-PTLzNOM be/existzPRED-PAST-CONJ There were some brothers and det N ptl v-conj han-salam—un yoksim-i nemu nemu manh-Iro one-person-PTLzCON greed-PTLzNOM too much too much manszRED-CONJ one person had far too much greed and N ptl N ptl Adv Adv V-conj han-salam~un nemu nemu cak ha-n one-person-PTLzCON too much too much good heart do:AUX-ADNZ one person was a very N ptl Adv Adv Adj aux-adj salam i-ess-nunic person be/idzPRED-PAST-CONJ very good-hearted person and N v—conj yoksim /-i] manh-un hyeng~un greed [PTLzNOM:OPTL] many:PRED-ADNZ brother-PTLzTOP the greedy brother N [ptl] V-adj N ptl nemu nemu jal sal-ko too much too much well-ADV live:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ lived very, very well and Adv Adv Adv V-conj tto kupanmyen-ey yoksim-i also on the other hand-PTLzLOC greed-PTLzNOM not also, on the other hand, Adv Adv N ptl eps-n-un be/existzPRED-PRES-ADNZ the good-hearted brother v—adj 118 (41) (4g) (4h) (41) (41') cal: ha-n ku-tongsaengan goodheart doAUX-ADNZ that-brother-PTLzTOP who was not greedy Adj aux-adj N ptl -key nemu nemu kanan ha *-_e_s_e_ too much too much poor do:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ was very, very poor and I"more appropriate is ADVZ = poorly Adv Adv Adj aux-conj sal-taka live:PRED:(PRES)-ADVZ while (he lived that way he) V-adv jeypi-lul manna-se swallow-PTL1ACC meet:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ met a swallow and N ptl V-conj uhyenhi etteh-kcj' jeypi-ui tali-lul by chance hoszRED-ADVZ swallow-PTLzPOSS leg-PTLzACC it happened that he Adv V-adv N ptl N ptl Irocy-e ju-key toi-ss-nuntey fiszRED-AUX givezAUX-PASS become:AUX-PAST-CONJ somehow by chance fixed the swallow's leg. V-aux-pass aux-conj calr ha-n hungpu-nun tali-[u] good~heart do:AUX-ADNZ Hungbu-PTLzTOP leg-PTLzACC That good-hearted Hungbu Adj aux-adj N ptl N ptl kocy-e j u-ess-nuntey fiszRED-AUX givezAUX—PAST-CONJ fixed the leg for (the bird) and V-aux-conj tali-lul lrocy-e j u-n leg-PTL:ACC fiszRED-AUX givezAUX-ADNZ it happended that the reward for N ptl V-aux-adj 119 (5a) (5b) (50) potap-ulo reward-PTL:SRC fixing the leg N ptl lt"etala-n jeymul-u! large-ADNZ sacrifice-PTLzACC was a V-adj N ptl et-key toi-ss-ko [yo] / getzPRED-PASS become:AUX-PAST-CONJ [POL] large wealth. V-pass-aux-conj kthes-ul siki ha-n that-thing-PTLzACC jealous do:AUX-ADNZ the jealous brother (saw) that... N ptl Adj aux-adj N nolbu-nun tali-cy Nolbu-PTLzTOP leg-PTLzLOC Nolbu on the leg N ptl N ptl jeypi-ui tali-Ira swallow-PTLPOSS legzPTLNOM even though the swallow’s leg N ptl N ptl pule -ji anh-ass-nuntey—to be brokenzPRED -NEG-PAST-CONJ-PTL:ADV was not broken, V-neg-conj-ptl ilpule pulettulye-se on purpose break:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ he broke it and Adv V-conj jeypi—loput”e pakssi-lul pat-ass-jiman swallow-PTL:SRC seed-PTLzACC receive:PRED-PAST-CONJ he received a seed from the swallow but N ptl N ptl V-conj 120 hyengin brother (5d) (6) (7a) (7b) kubpakssi-ey-nun nolbu-lul that-seed-PTLzLOC-PTLzCON Nolbu-PTLzACC in that seed Nolbu N ptl ptl N ptl saengkak-i jal an na-yo / thought-PTLzNOM well not occur:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL I can't remember very well. N ptl Adv neg V mal—ui etch-key p‘hyohyen word-PTLzPOSS hoszRED-ADVZ express I don't know how N ptl V-adv N ha-eya toi-l-ji do:AUX-MOOD become:AUX-ADNZ-COMP I should aux-comp molu-keyss-jiman not knoszRED-MOOD-CONJ express it but V-conj nolpu-ui [rule-n motunjeymul Nolbu-PTLzPOSS like thatzPRED-ADNZ every reward Nolbu received a seed N ptl V-adj Adj N kath—un lres-ul ta likezPRED-ADNZ thing-PTL2ACC all that turned all his wealth V-adj N ptl Adv hesalo tollyepcli-n-un palrssi-lul empty turn around:PRED-PRES-ADNZ seed-PTLzACC and things completely Adj V-adj N ptl pat-ass-jiman receive:PRED—PAST-CONJ around (i.e., reversed) but V-conj 121 (7c) najung-ey hungpu-ka tasi later-PTL:LOC Hungbu-PTLzNOM again later Hungbu again Adv N ptl Adv (8a) nolpu hyeng-ul towa ju-mulo-sse Nolbu brother-PTLzACC helszREDzAUX give2AUX-CAUSE-CONJ helped his brother Nolbu and N N ptl V-aux-conj (8b) selo hyengjey-sai-ka each other brother-between-PTLzNOM again this is a story Adv N ptl tasi uaey iss-key toi-n-ta-nun again good relation be/exist:(PRES)—PASS become:AUX-DEC-PTLzTOP about making good Adv N v-pass-aux-adj sut"oli i-pni-ta story be/idzPRED-VFEzFOR-DEC relations between brothers. N v Action Picture (9) sa-in kajok i-ko-yo four-PTL:CLS family be/id:PRED:(PRES)~CONJ-(DEC):POL This is a four-person family and N N v-conj (10a) keki-se tanlan ha-n there-PTLzLOCd harmony do:AUX-ADNZ among the happy dem Adj aux-adj sa-in kajok-jung-eyse four-CLS family-among-PTL:LOCd four-person family there, N N ptl apeji-nun injey deylleypi-lul po-myense father-PTLzCON now TV-PTLzACC see:PRED:(PRES)-ADVZ while the father now watches TV, N ptl Adv N ptl V-adv 122 (10b) (10c) (11) (123) (12b) tampae-lul p‘iu-ko kyeysi-ko cigarette-PTLzACC smokezPRED-GER be:HON:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ he is smoking a cigarette and N ptl V-aux-aux-conj tto emma-nun tto ttukeyji-lul also mom-PTL2CON also knit-PTL:ACC also the mom Adv N ptl Adv N ptl ha-ko iss~upni-ta / do:AUX-GER be:AUX:(PRES)~VFE:FOR-DEC is knitting. aux-aux kulilro u-ey-ka nuna CONJ top—PTL:LOC-PTL:NOM older sister and in the top (picture)(she) is an older sister Conj N ptl N i-n Ices kat"~untey-yo / be/id:PRED-COMP seem:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:EMP-POL it seems like. v-comp V nuna-nun cinku-tul--wa jenhwa-[u] older sister-PTLzTOP friend-PTLzPL-PTL2COM telephone-PTLzACC This is a picture where N ptl N ptl ptl N ptl ha-ko iss-Ito do:AUX-GER be:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ The older sister is talking aux-aux-conj tongsaeng—un macim sinmun-ul younger brother-PTLzTOP at that time newspaper-PTLzACC with her friend N ptl Adv N ptl kaji-ko carrszRED-CONJ on the phone and V-conj 123 (15a) (15b) (15c) (15d) ces-pen-jjac sajin-un first-PTLzCLS-ORD picture-PTLzTOP The first picture is (a man) N N ptl pye ’mo-lul jikum pey-ko iss-Ito stalk-PTLzACC now cutzPRED-GER be:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ now cutting stalks and N ptl Adv V-aux-conj tto keki-ey jaki janye-pun-tul-i also there-PTLzLOC himself child-HON-PTLzPOSS-PTLzNOM also (his) children there adv dem ptl N N ptl janye-ka nawa-se children-PTLzNOM come out:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ his children came out and N ptl V-conj suhwak {-ul] ha-n pye-lul harvest [PTLzACCzOPTL] do:AUX-ADNZ stalk-PTLzACC are gathering those harvested stalks N [ptl] aux-adj N ptl cakokcakok caengki-lto iss-Ito neat fashion gatherzPRED-GER be:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ in a neat fashion and Adj V-aux-conj sey-pen-jjae kulim—un three-PTL:CLS-ORD picture-PTLzNOM the third picture is a picture of N N ptl cakokcakok caengki-n pye-lul neat fashion gatherzPRED-ADNZ stalk-PTLzACC a couple loading Adj V-adj N ptl tu-pupu-ka sil-lro two-couple-PTLzNOM load:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ the neatly gathered stalks N ptl V-conj 124 (15a) (15b) (15c) (15d) ces-pen-jjae sajin-un first-PTL2CLS-ORD picture-PTLzTOP The first picture is (a man) N N ptl pye ‘mo-lul j ileum pey-ko iss-k0 stalk-PTLzACC now cutzPRED-GER be:AUX:(PRESVCONJ now cutting stalks and N ptl Adv V-aux-conj tto keki-ey jaki janye-pun-tul—i also there-PTLzLOC himself child-HON-PTLzPOSS-PTLzNOM also (his) children there adv dem ptl N N ptl janye—ka nawa-se children-PTL:NOM come out:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ his children came out and N ptl V-conj suhwak {-uI] ha-n pye-lul harvest [PTLzACC :OPTL] do:AUX-ADNZ stalk-PTL:ACC are gathering those harvested stalks N [ptl] aux-adj N ptl cakokcakok caengkiJro iss-k0 neat fashion gatherzPRED-GER be:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ in a neat fashion and Adj V-aux-conj sey-pen-jjae kulim-un three-PTL2CLS-ORD picture-PTLzNOM the third picture is a picture of N N ptl cakokcakok caengki-n pye-lul neat fashion gatherzPRED-ADNZ stalk-PTLzACC a couple loading Adj V-adj N ptl tu-pupu-ka sil-ko two-coupIe-PTLzNOM load:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ the neatly gathered stalks N ptl V-conj 125 ka-n-un kulim i—pni-ta / gozPRED-PRES-ADNZ picture be/id:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:FOR—DEC and leaving. V-adj N v 126 APPENDD( D4 CONTROL CKY: PRIMARY TRANSCRIPTIONS AND INTERLINEAR MORPHEMIC TRANSLATIONS CKY: Primary Transcription Work jikam hako issnun kenun . takaku juthaekul kensel jisko issji. jutbaek kensel epjaji. hankukeynun jikam jibi kunbonjekulo jom pujok haeyo. kulaese . ulika hako issnun kenun pothong eh . phalsip phengeytaka han yesesnaeji ilkop kakuui jenyong myenjek han yelyeses phyengeyse sumulneys phyengjjali kalehan juthaekal ban yeses kakussik juthaekul jisko isseyo. injey mullon seulto issjiman sutokuenjiyek indey ansanjipangeyta jikum manhi jisko issjiyo. kongkika cohko kuliko ikonguen josengyuli ama jenkukeyse tubenjjaelo manhayo. ansani kalaeyse sangtanghi kongkika kkaekkus haji. seuley pikyo hamyen. kuliko seulhako kyothongkento sasipopuneyse hansikan keliki ttaemuney koingjanghi yuthongto cohko kuken jangjem isseyo. culkun haekajiko ansanse injey kencukul hako to injey seullo toikun hako 59 seconds 98 words 11 'syntactic' phrases Hungbu and Nolbu hungbu nolbu jen. kake ulinala kojen iji. ama . eh nuka ssunken jal molakeyssnundey. hekyuni ssessna jal molukeysse kakenan. kulendey hangbuka . ku ani nolbuka sangtanghi kn . yoksimi manhji. kuliko hungbunun . yoksimi pyello epsko kulendey 127 isang hakey yoksimi manhi epsnnn salamtnli atnlnl manhi nahji. knlaekajiko ikey hangsang mekko sannnkes ttaemuney kekjengi toini eti nithak halttaennn epsko kn kn muenya kn nolbumithey kase jakku puthaknl hannntey nolbunnn knlenkestnlnl jenpu ihaelnl mos hako kyeysok cukjekman hallyeko knlehji. knlehkey pomyennn uli nala ijositaeni yangpanhako uh semin sangnomhako kn kwankyeylnl aju haehakjeknlo jal myosalnl haesstako ilehkey taecung ulinnn ihaelnl hako issji. 58 seconds 89 words 8 'syntactic' phrases Action Picture yokennn . ilpanjekin uli kajokkujolnl iyaeki hannnkes hako nngepseysthneyse emenihako apejihako mue kantanhan taehwalnl hannnkes kathko kntaumey emeninnn ttnkeyjilnl hako issney. apejinnn tampaelnl phiuko khollalnl mekna nmlyosulnl tnsiko issko. kntaumey senphungkika tolakannnkes kathnnikka ikey yelnmpamnl ettehke iyaeki hannnkes kathko. kntaumey apejinnn sangtanghi suphcnlnl coha hannnkuman. iyakuto jiknm posiko kyeysiko macim ttalnn jenhwalnl patko issko atnli jiknm eti hakkyolnl kasstaonnnji an knrehmyen apeji sinmunnl kajiko onnnji jiknm tuleonnn knlehan kesilni phkyengnl aju nathanaeko isskuman. jenhyengekin kesilni phungkyeng. 55 seconds 76 words 6 'syntactic' phrases Picture Sequence iknlimnn jwacukeyseputbe pomyennn jwacukeynnn pyelnl simnnn kekuman jiknm. nongpuka pyelnl simko issko. uh kaundeynnn pyelnl suhwaknl hannnji an knlemyennn suhwaknl hannnkes katbae. suhwaknl hannnkesiko kntaumey ucnknn knkey yeysnaley 128 kanguento pomyennn susjangsatnli issessketnn. susnl ilen thongeytaka eh . mantnlekajiko inj ey tosilo phallekannn knlehan jangmyen kathnntey. 33 seconds 41 words 5 'syntactic' phrases CKY: Interlinear Morphemic Translation Work (I) jiltum ha-ko iss-nun Ire-nun takaku now dozPREDoGER be:AUX-COMP-PTLzTOP family house The thing I do now is Adv V-comp N j u/‘aek—ul kensel residence-PTLzACC construction building - construction N ptl N jis-ko iss-ji [-yo] / buildzPRED-GER be:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):SUPleNT [POL] - residential homes, I suppose. V-aux-aux (2) jut"aek kensel epja-ji -yo] / residence construction trade-(be/id:PRED)VFE:(DEC):SUPleNT [POL] (My) trade (is) residential construction, I suppose. N N N v (3) hankuk-ey-nun j ikum j ib-i Korea-PTL:LOC-PTL:TOP now house-PTL:NOM Now in Korea housing N ptl ptl Adv N ptl ktatbonjek-ulo jom pujok ha-eyo / basic-PTLzADV a little not sufficient do:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL is basically a bit insufficient. Adv Adv Adj aux (4) kulaese uli-lra ha-ko iss-nun Ire-nun therefore we-PTLzNOM dozPRED-GER be:AUX-COMP-PTL:TOP So, what we are doing is Adv N ptl V-aux-comp 129 (5a) (5b) (50) pof'ong phalsip fl'yeng-eytaka usually 80 pyung-PTLzABL building residential homes in an area of usually 80 pyung *one pyung is 3.59 square yards Adv Num N ptl han yeses-naeji ilkop kaku-ui jenyong myenjek about 6-PTL2ABL 7 family-PTLzPOSS private area that hold about 6 to 7 adj Num ptl Num N ptl N N han yelyeses fl'yeng—eyse sumulney p”yeng-jjali about 16 pyung-PTLzABL 24 pyung-PTLzADV private residences and Adj Num N ptl Num Nptl kuleha-n jut‘aek-ul han yeses kaku-ssik like thatzPRED-ADNZ residence-PTLzACC about 6 family-PTLzADV (are) about 16 to 24 pyung each and V-adj N ptl Adj Num N ptl j ut‘aek—ul j is-ko iss-eyo / residence-PTLzACC buildzPRED-GER be:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL each building holds about 6 family residences each. N ptl V-aux injey mullon seul-to iss-jiman now of course Seoul-PTLzADV be/exist:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ Now, of course there are these homes in Seoul also but Adv Adv N ptl v-conj sutokuenjiyek i-ndey major-area be/id:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ it is a major area but N v-conj ansan-jipang-eyta jikum manhi Ansan-area-PTLzLOC now many there is much building now N N ptl Adv Adv jis-Iro iss-jiyo / buildzPRED-GER be:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):SUPP:POL in the Ansan area, I suppose. V-aux 130 (6a) (6b) (7) (3) (9a) (9b) kongki-ka coh-ko air-PTLzNOM good:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ The air is good and N ptl V-conj kuliko iJronguen josengyul-i ama jenkuk-eyse also this-space percentage-PTLzNOM probably this country-PTLzLOC also in this country it is probably the second best Adv N ptl Adv N ptl tu-pen-jjae-lo manh-ayo / 2-PTL2CLS-ORDPTLzLOC many:PRED:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):POL percentage of space division Adv V ansan-i kulaese sangtanghi kongki-ka AnsanzPTLzNOM therefore extremely airzPTLzNOM Therefore, the air in Ansan N ptl Adv Adv N ptl kkaekkus ha-ji [-yo] / clean do:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):SUPP:INT [POL] is extrrnemly clean, I suppose. Adj aux seul-ey pikyo [lul] ha-myen / Seoul-PTLzLOC compare [PTLzACC:OPTL] do:AUX-COMP Compared to Seoul. N ptl N [ptl] aux-comp kuliko seal-hako kyof'ongkento sasipo-pun-eyse han-sikan CONJ Seoul:PTL:GL transfer 45-minutes-PTL:SRC one-hour And because the transfer to Seoul coanpthNpth keli-ki ttaemuney take:PRED:(PRES)-ADVZ takes from 45 minutes to 1 hour V-adv koingianghi yuf'ong-to coh-ko extremely circulation-PTLzADV good:PRED:(PRES)—CONJ the trip is extremely good and Adv N ptl V-conj 131 (9C) (103) (10b) (10c) kale-n jang/em iss-eyo / like thatzPRED-ADNZ good point be/exist:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):POL that thing is a good point. V-adj N v culkun ha-ekajiko go to work do:AUX:(PRES)—CONJ I go to work and N aux-conj ansan-se inje kmcuk-ul haJro Ansan-PTLzLOCd now construction-PTL:ACC do:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ do construction in Ansan and N ptl adv N ptl aux-conj to injey seal-lo toikun ha-ko [-yo] / also now Seoul-PTLzGL return from work do:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ [POL] also now come back to Seoul from work. adv adv N ptl N aux Hungbu and Nolbu (11) (12) (13a) hungbu nolbu jen / Hungbu Nolbu tale The Hungbu Nolbu tale. N N N ku-ke uli-nala {-ui] kojen that-thing we-country [-PTL:POSS:OPTL] folktale That is our dem N N [ptl] N ioji [-yo] / be/id:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):SUPP:INT [POL] country's foltale, I suppose v ama ncha ssu-n ken probably who-PTLzNOM write:PRED-ADNZ thing I don't really know Adv N ptl V-adj N 132 (13b) (14) (15a) (15b) (16a) (16b) jal molu-keyss-nundey well not knowrPRED-MOOD-CONJ who probably wrote that thing but... Adv V-conj hekyun-i sse-ss-na / Huh Kyun-PTL2NOM write:PRED-PAST-VFE:INTER I'm not really sure but N ptl V jal molu—keyss-e [-yo] ku—ke-nun / welleDV not knoszRED-MOOD-VFE(DEC):INT [POL] that-thing-PTLzTOP was it Huh Kyun who wrote that thing ? Adv V dem ptl kulendey hungb u-ka ani anyway Hungbu-PTLzNOM not be/id:PRED:(PRES)-(VFE:DEC):INT Anway, Hungbu no... Adv N ptl V nolbu-Ira sangtanghi yoksim-i Nolbu-PTLzNOM extremely greed-PTLzNOM Nolbu is N ptl Adv N ptl manh-ji [-yo] / a lot:PRED:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):SUPP:INT [POL] extremely greedy, I suppose. V kuliko hungbu-nun yoksim-i CONJ Hungbu-PTLCON greed-PTLzNOM And Hungbu doesn't conj N ptl N ptl pyello estro not much be/existzPRED:(PRES)-CONJ have much greed and Adv v-conj kulendey isang ha-key {-to] however strange do:AUX-ADVZ-[PTLzADVzOPTL] however, strangely Adv Adj aux-adv 133 (16c) yoksim-i manhi ebs-nun salam-tul-i (17a) (17b) (17c) (17d) (l7e) greed-PTLzNOM many not be/existzPRED-ADNZ person-PTLzPL-PTLzNOM people who are not greedy N ptl Adv v-adj N ptl atul—ul manhi nah-ji [—yo] / son-PTLzACC many give birth:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):SUPP:INT [POL] have many sons. N ptl Adv V kulae-kajiko i-key hangsang like thatzPRED-CONJ like this-PRED-ADVZ always Anyway, because he V-conj V—adv Adv melt-Ito sa-nun kes ttaemuney eat:PRED-CONJ live:PRED-PRES-COMP because always lives like this, V-conj V-comp-adv kekjeng-i toi-ni worry-PTLzNOM become:PRED-ADVZ he has many worries, and N ptl V-adv eti uit‘ak [~ul] ha-lttae-nun somewhere ask for help [PTLzACCzOPTL] do:AUX-ADVZ-PTLzCON he has nowhere N N ptl aux-adv ptl ebs—ko not be/existzPRED:(PRES)—CONJ to ask for help and v-conj mue-nya what-(be:PRED:PRES):INTER:INT (Filler) what is that? filler nolbu-mit"ey ka-se Nolbu-PTLzGL go:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ he goes to Nolbu and N ptl V-conj 134 (170 (173) (1711) (171') (18a) (18b) (18c) jakku put‘ak—ul ha-nuntey often favor-PTLzACC do:AUX:(PRES)«CONJ often asks favors but Adv N ptl aux-conj nolb u-nun kule-n kes-tul—ul Nolbu-PTL2TOP like thatzPRED-ADNZ thing-PTLzPL-PTLzACC Nolbu can't understand N ptl V-adj N ptl jenpu ihae-lul mos ha-ko all understandzPTLACC not do:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ any of that kind of thing and Adv N ptl neg aux-conj kyeysok ulg‘ek-man ha-llye-ko contiunuously accumulate-PTLzADV dozPRED-MOOD-CONJ he continuously keeps on only accumulating (money) and adv N ptl aux-conj kuleh-ji l-yo] / like that:PRED:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):SUPP:INT [POL] (things) like that. V [rule-key po-myen-un like thattPRED-ADVZ see:PRED:(PRES)-COMP-PTL:TOP If you look at it that way, V-adv V-comp ptl uli-nala ijo-sitaedri yangpan-hako we-country Chosun-era-PTLzPOSS upper class-CONJ through the good, humorous expression (of this story), N N N ptl N ptl semin {-hako] sangnom-hako {—ui] middle class [-PTL:CONJ:OPTL] lower class-CONJ [~PTL:POSS:OPTL] people them our country mostly N [ptl] N Ptl [Pill ku-kwankyey-lul aju haehakjek—ulo that-relationship-PTLzACC very humor-PTLzADV understand this way N ptl Adv Adv 135 jal myosa-lul ha-ess-ta—ko well expressionzPTLzACC do:AUX-PAST-VFEzDEC-QUOT the relations among the upper, middle and lower classes Adv N ptl aux-quot (18d) ileh-lrey taecung uli—nun like this:PRED-ADVZ mostly we-PTL:CON in the Chosun era, V-adv Adv N ptl ihae-lul ha-lro understand:PTLACC do:AUX-GER Isuppose. N ptl aux iss—jil-yo] be:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):SUPP:INT[POL] -aux Action Picture (19a) ythe-nun ilpanjelr i-n this-thing-PTL:TOP general be/idzPRED-ADNZ (It) is a general dem ptl Adj v-adj uli kajok-kujo-lul we family-structure-PTLzACC family structure N N N ptl iyaeki [lul] ha-nun kes ha-ko talk [~PTL:ACC:OPTL] do:AUX-COMP do:AUX:(PRES)—CONJ that this seems to show and N ptl aux-comp aux-conj (19b) ungjepseystflrbeyse emeni-hako apeji-hako livingroom set-PTLzLOCd mother-CONJ father-COM in the living room, it is a what ...simple conversation N ptl N conj N conj kantan ha-n taehwa-lul simple do:AUX:(PRES)-ADNZ conversation-PTLzACC that the mother and father adj aux-adj N ptl 136 (19c) (20a) (20b) (2la) (21b) (21c) ha-nun kes kat"-ko do:AUX-COMP seem:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ seem to be having and aux-comp V-conj ku-taum-ey emeni-nun ttukeyji-lul that-next-PTLzTEMP mother-CON knitting-PTLzACC next, the mother Adv N ptl N ptl ha-ko iss-ney [-yo] / do:AUX-GER be:AUX:(PRES)—VFE:(DEC):EXCL:INT [POL] is knitting! aux-aux apeji-nun tampae-[u] phiu-ko father-PTLzTOP cigarette-PTLzACC smoke:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ The father smokes a cigarette and N ptl N ptl V-conj masi- kholla-Iul *melt-na / cola-PTL:ACC eat:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:INTER:INT eats a cola? " drink is a more appropriate verb, which he corrects in the next clause N ptl V umlyosu-lul tusi-ko iss-k0 soft drink-PTLzACC drinszONrPRED-GER be:AUX:(PRES)»CONJ He is drinking a sofi drink and N ptl V-aux-conj ku-taum-ey senphungki-ka tolaka-nun kes that-next-PTLzTEMP fan-PTLzNOM tum:PRED-COMP Next, because it seems Adv N ptl V-comp kad—unikka seem:PRED:(PRES)-ADVZ that the fan is turning, V-adv ikey yelum—pam—ul etteh-key this summer-night-PTLzACC how:PRED-ADVZ somehow it seems to be showing dem N ptl V-adv 137 (21d) (22a) (22b) (22c) iyaeki [Jul] ha-nun kes kat"-Iro talk [-PTL:ACC:OPTL] do:AUX-COMP seem:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ something like a summer night. N ptl aux-comp V-conj ku-taum-ey apeji-nun sangtanghi suphcu-lul that-next-PTL:TEMP father-PTLzTOP extremely sports-PTLzACC next, the father likes adv N ptl Adv N ptl coha ha-nunkuman / like do:AUX-VFEzEXCLleT sports an awful lot! V-aux yaku-to jikum baseball-PTL:ADV now He is watching N ptl Adv po-si-ko kyeysi-ko see:PRED-HON-GER be:AUX:HON:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ baseball now too and V-aux-conj macim ttal—un jenhwa-lul at that time daughter-PTLzTOP telephone-PTLzACC at the same time the daughter adv N ptl N ptl pat-k0 iss-k0 receive:PRED—GER be:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ is taking a call and V-aux-conj atul-i jikum 1i hakkyo-lul son-PTLzNOM now somewhere school-PTLzACC the son now comes back N ptl Adv N N ptl kasstao-nunji retum:PRED:(PRES)«CONJ from somwhere...school or V-conj ' 138 (22d) (22e) (220 (23) an kuleh-myen not like that:PRED:(PRES)-COMP if not that then neg V-comp apej i sinmun-ul kajikoo-nunj i father newspaper-PTLzACC bring in:PRED:(PRES)~CONJ he brings in his father's newspaper and N N ptl V-conj jikum tuleo-n-un kuleha-n kesil—ui now come in-PRES-ADNZ like that:PRED:ADNZ living room-PTLzACC him coming into this type of living room Adv V-adj V-adj N ptl p‘ungkyeng-ul aj u na/anae-ko view-PTLzACC very come about2PREDoGER is what . N ptl Adv V iss-kuman / be:AUX:(PRES)-VFE:EXCL:INT this view is showing -aux jenhyeng/‘ek i-n kesil—ui common be/idzPRED-ADNZ living room-PTL:POSS This is a view of Adj v-adj N ptl N [i-eyo] / [be:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC)POL] a typical living room. v Picarre Sequence (24a) i-kulim~un jwa-cuk-eyse-puthe this-picture-PTL:TOP lefi-side-PTLzLOC-PTLzABL If you look starting N ptl N ptl po-myen-un see:PRED:(PREsyCOMP-PTLCON from the left side of this picture, V-comp ptl 139 dungkyeng view (24b) jwa-cuk-ey-nun pye-lul (25a) (25b) (25c) (25d) (26a) (26b) left-side-PTLzLOC-PTLzTOP stalk-PTL:ACC On the left side it is N ptl N ptl sim-nun ke kuman jilrum / plantzPRED-COMP EXCLerT now planting stalks that he does now. V-comp v aux nongpu-ka pye-lul sim-ko iss-Ito farmer-PTLzNOM stalk-PTLzACC plantzPRED-GER be:AUX:(PRES)-CONJ The farmer is planting stalks and N ptl N ptl V-aux-conj kaundey-nun pye-lul suhwak—ul middle:(PTL:LOC)-PTL:TOP stalk-PTLzACC harvest-PTLzACC In the middle, he harvests Adv ptl N ptl N ptl ha-nunji do:AUX-PRES-CONJ stalks or aux-conj an kule-myen-un not like that:PRED:(PRES)-COMP-PTL:CON if not, neg V-comp ptl suhwak-u] ha-nun kes lead-e [-yo] / harvest-PTL:ACC do:AUX-COMP seem:PRED:(PRES)«VFE:(DEC):INT[POL] it seems like harvesting stalks is what he is doing. N ptl aux-comp V suhwak-ul ha-nun kes i-ko harvest-PTLzACC do:AUX-COMP be/id:PRED:(PRES)-CONJ It is harvesting that he is doing and N ptl aux-comp v-conj ku-taum-ey u-cuk—un that-next-PTLzLOC right-side-PTLzTOP in the next, on the right side, adv N ptl 140 (26c) (27a) (27b) ku-key yeysnal-ey kanguento that-thing old days-PTLzTEMP Kangwon province that...if you look at the old days dem Adv N po-myen-un see:PRED:(PRES)-COMP in Kangwon Province V-comp ptl sus-jangsa-tuI-i charcoal-trade-PlePL-PTLNOM there were charcoal N ptl iss-ess-ketun [-yo] / be/exist:PRED-PAST-VFE:(DEC):SUPP:INT [POL] businesses, you know v sus-ul ile-n fong-eytaka charcoal-PTLzACC like thiszPRED-ADNZ container-PTLzLOC It seems like a view that N ptl V-adj N ptl mantul-ekajiko make:PRED:(PRES)—CONJ he makes a charcoal-like V-conj injey tosi-lo p"all-e ka-n-un now city-PTL:GL sellzPRED-AUX go:PRED-PRES-ADNZ container and now adv N ptl V-aux-V-adj kuleha-n jangmyen like thatzPRED-ADNZ view goes to V—adj N kaf-untey [-yo] / seem:PRED:(PRES)-VFE:(DEC):EMP:INT [POL] the city to sell it. V 141 APPENDD( El C YS: PRODUCTION PARAMETERS Rate of Production: Narrative Total Total Speaking Rate Rate Words Phrases Time Words/Min Phrases/Min (minzsec) History 30 15 4:01 7.5 3.7 Work 13 8 1:44 7.5 4.6 Daily Life 86 58 5:30 15.6 10.5 Story 29 16 1:32 18.9 10.4 Livingroom 29 l 8 2:43 10.7 6.6 Rice Planting 9 6 1:27 6.2 4.1 TOTAL 196 121 16:57 11.6 7.1 Distribution of Phrase Length: Narrative Total Total Mean Median Words Phrases Words/Phrase Words/Phrase History 30 15 2 2 Work 13 8 1.6 1 Daily Life 86 58 1.5 1 Story 29 16 1.8 2 Livingroom 29 18 1.6 1.5 Rice Planting 9 6 1.5 1.5 TOTAL 196 121 1.6 1 142 APPENDIX E2 KKM: PRODUCTION PARAMETERS Rate of Production: arrative Total Total Speaking Rate Rate Words Phrases Time Words/Min Phrases/Min (minzsec) istory 28 11 1:21 20.7 8.1 Work 50 23 2:44 18.3 8.4 Family 55 18 3:03 18 5.9 Livingroom 27 10 2:01 13.4 5 Rice Planting ll 5 1:03 10.5 4.8 TOTAL 171 67 10:12 16.8 6.6 Distribution of Phrase Length: arrative Total Total Mean Median Words Phrases Words/Phrase Words/Phrase History 28 11 2.5 2 Work 50 23 2.2 2 Family 55 18 3.1 3 Livingroom 27 10 2.7 2.5 Rice Planting ll 5 2.2 2 TOTAL 171 67 2.6 2 143 APPENDIX E3 CONTROL J YK: PRODUCTION PARAMETERS Rate of Production: lNarrative Total Total Speaking Rate Rate Words Phrases Time Words/Min Phrases/Min (minzsec) Work 30 3 :16 112.5 11.3 Story 119 5 1:21 88.1 3.7 Livingroom 42 4 :22 1 14.5 10.9 Rice Planting 50 5 :29 103.4 10.3 TOTAL 241 17 2:28 97.7 6.9 Distribution of Phrase Length: Narrative Total Total Mean Median Words Phrases Words/Phrase Words/Phrase Work 30 3 10 8 Story 119 5 23.8 13 Livingroom 42 4 10.5 10.5 Rice Planting 50 5 10 11 TOTAL 241 17 14.2 11 144 APPENDIX E4 CONTROL CKY: PRODUCTION PARAMETERS Rate of Production: Narrative Total Total Speaking Rate Rate Words Phrases Time Words/Min Phrases/Min (minzsec) Work 98 l 1 :59 99.7 11.2 Story 89 8 :58 92. 1 8.3 Livingroom 76 :55 82.9 6.5 Rice Planting 4l 5 :33 74.5 9.1 TOTAL 304 30 3:25 89 8.8 Distribution of Phrase Length: Narrative Total Total Mean Median Words Phrases Words/Phrase Words/Phrase Work 98 11 8.9 7 Story 89 8 11.1 7 Livingroom 76 12.7 9 Rice Planting 41 5 8.2 9 TOTAL 304 30 10.1 8 145 APPENDIX Fl CYS: MORPHEME ERRORS AND DISTRIBUTIONS II III I+II+III Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % ouns 41 69 2 3 16 27 59 Adjectives 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 Adnominalizer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1Adverbs 8 100 0 0 0 0 8 Adverbalizers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Demonstr. 5 100 0 0 0 0 5 Numerals 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 rchical Verbs 42 79 5 9 6 ll 53 Tense 35 74 12 26 0 0 47 Mood 2 50 0 0 2 50 4 Honorific 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Neg 5 100 0 0 0 0 5 Passive 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gerund 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VFE 47 96 0 0 2 4 49 Aux Verbs 3 20 1 7 11 73 15 Tense 2 50 2 50 0 0 4 Gerund 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Passive 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VFE 4 100 0 0 0 0 4 II) Verbs 3 60 0 0 2 40 5 Tense 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 VFE 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 146 II III l+II+III Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % EXIST Verbs 5 100 0 0 0 0 Tense 5 100 0 0 0 0 VFE 5 100 0 0 0 0 Level 15 27 2 4 38 69 55 EZOMP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [Coordinate o o o o o o o Subordinate 0 0 0 0 l 100 l NOM l 8 0 0 ll 92 12 TOP/ 0 0 0 0 1 100 1 CON ACC 0 0 0 0 33 100 33 P088 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LOC 0 0 0 0 3 100 3 LOCd l 50 0 0 l 50 2 SRC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GL 0 0 0 0 1 100 l ABL 0 0 0 0 2 100 2 TEMP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CLS 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 CONJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ADV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL PTL 9 0 0 52 91 57 147 KKM: MORPHEME ERRORS AND DISTRIBUTIONS APPENDD( F2 I II III I+II+III Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % Nouns 84 94 3 3 2 2 89 Adjectives 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 Adnominalizer l 100 0 0 0 0 1 Adverbs 6 100 0 0 0 0 6 Adverbalizers l 100 0 0 0 0 l Demonstr. 4 100 0 0 0 4 Numerals 2 100 0 0 O 0 2 Lexical Verbs 26 84 4 l3 1 3 3 l Tense 23 77 7 23 0 0 30 Mood 1 100 0 0 0 0 l Honorific l 100 0 0 0 0 l Neg 2 100 0 0 0 O 2 Passive 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gerund 2 67 l 33 0 0 3 VFE 30 100 0 0 0 0 30 Aux Verbs 15 71 0 0 6 29 21 Tense 10 67 5 33 0 0 15 Gerund 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Passive 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VFE 14 93 1 7 0 0 15 ID Verbs 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 Tense 2 67 l 33 0 0 3 VFE 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 I48 I 11 HI I+II+III Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % EXIST Verbs 4 67 0 0 2 33 6 Tense 4 100 0 0 0 0 4 VFE 4 100 0 0 0 0 4 Level 25 78 0 0 7 22 32 FOMP 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 Eoordinaie 15 100 o o o o 15 Subordinate 0 0 0 0 l 100 l NOM 7 50 1 7 6 43 14 TOP/ 6 67 0 0 3 33 9 CON ACC 18 60 3 10 9 30 30 POSS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LOC 6 75 2 25 0 0 8 LOCd 0 0 l 100 0 0 l SRC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ABL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TEMP 1 100 0 0 0 0 1 PL 0 0 1 100 0 0 1 CLS 1 50 0 0 1 50 2 CONJ 6 100 0 0 0 0 6 COM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ADV 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL PTL 48 63 9 12 19 25 76 149 APPENDD( F3 CONTROL J YK: MORPI-IEME ERRORS AND DISTRIBUTIONS I II III I+II+III Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % Nouns 82 98 2 2 0 0 84 Adjectives 8 100 0 0 0 0 8 Adnominalizer 7 100 0 0 0 0 7 Adverbs 34 100 0 0 0 0 34 Adverbalizers 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 Demonstr. 7 100 0 0 0 0 7 Numerals 4 100 0 0 0 0 4 (Lexical Verbs 38 100 0 0 0 0 38 Tense 38 100 0 0 0 0 38 Mood 1 100 0 0 0 0 l Honorific 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Neg 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 Passive l 100 0 0 0 0 l Gerund 8 100 0 0 0 0 8 VFE 38 100 0 0 0 0 38 Aux Verbs 34 100 0 0 0 0 34 Tense 34 100 0 0 0 0 34 Gerund 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Passive l 100 0 0 0 0 1 VFE 34 100 0 0 0 0 34 ID Verbs 9 100 0 0 0 0 9 Tense 9 100 0 0 0 0 9 VFE 9 100 0 0 0 0 9 150 I II III I+II+III Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % EXIST Verbs 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 Tense 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 VFE 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 Level 12 92 0 0 l 8 13 EIOMP 4 100 0 0 0 0 4 Eoordinate 24 100 o o o o 24 Subordinate 16 94 1 6 0 0 l7 NOM 12 92 0 0 l 8 13 TOP/ 13 100 0 0 0 0 13 CON ACC 28 93 0 0 2 7 30 POSS 6 100 0 0 0 0 6 LOC 8 100 0 0 0 0 8 LOCd 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 SRC 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 GL 1 100 0 0 0 0 l ABL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TEMP 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 PL 4 100 0 0 0 0 4 CLS 4 100 0 0 0 0 4 CONJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COM 1 100 0 0 0 0 1 ADV 1 100 0 0 0 0 l E’TL 97 0 0 3 87 151 CONTROL CKY: MORPHEME ERRORS AND DISTRIBUTIONS APPENDIX F4 I II III I+II+III Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % Nouns 140 100 0 0 0 0 140 Adjectives 15 100 O 0 0 0 15 Adnominalizer 8 100 0 0 0 0 8 Adverbs 39 100 0 0 0 0 39 Adverbalizers 5 100 0 0 0 0 5 Demonstr. 12 100 0 0 0 0 12 Numerals 8 100 0 0 0 0 8 Lexical Verbs 57 98 l 2 0 0 58 Tense 58 100 0 0 0 0 58 Mood 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 Honorific 1 100 0 0 0 0 1 Neg 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 Passive 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gerund 10 100 0 0 0 0 10 VFE 58 100 0 0 0 0 58 Aux Verbs 36 100 0 0 0 0 36 Tense 36 100 0 0 0 0 36 Gerund 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 Passive 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VFE 36 100 0 0 0 0 36 ID Verbs 8 89 0 0 l 11 9 Tense 8 100 0 0 0 0 8 VFE 8 100 0 0 0 0 8 152 I II III I+II+III Correctly Incorrect Omissions Total Supplied % (Substitutions) % % EXIST Verbs 6 100 0 0 0 0 6 Tense 6 100 0 0 0 0 6 VFE 6 100 0 0 0 0 6 Level 10 40 0 0 15 60 25 COMP 15 100 0 0 0 0 15 iCoordinate 30 100 o o o 0 3o Subordinate 8 100 0 0 0 0 8 NOM 18 100 0 0 0 0 18 TOP/ 23 100 0 0 0 0 23 CON ACC 31 89 0 0 4 ll 35 POSS 4 67 0 0 2 33 6 LOC 8 100 0 0 0 0 8 LOCd 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 SRC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GL 4 100 0 0 0 0 4 ABL 4 100 0 0 0 0 4 TEMP 4 100 0 0 0 0 4 PL 3 100 0 0 0 0 3 CLS 1 100 0 0 0 0 1 CONJ 2 67 0 0 1 33 3 COM 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 ADV 7 88 0 0 l 13 8 TOTAL PTL 113 93 0 0 7 121 153 APPENDD( GI C YS: DISTRIBUTION OF GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES IN THE TEXTS Actual Context N % N % Free: Lexical Nouns 43 33 59 27 Lexical Adjectives 2 2 2 l Lexical Adverbs 8 6 8 4 Lexical Verbs 47 36 53 24 Identification Verbs 3 2 5 2 Existential Verbs 5 4 5 2 Aux Verbs 4 3 15 7 Neg 5 4 2 Numerals 3 2 1 Bound: ADNZ 0 0 0 0 ADVZ 0 0 0 0 Suboordinate 0 0 0 0 Coordinate 0 0 0 0 COMP 0 0 0 0 Demonstratives 5 4 5 2 PTLzCase 1 0.7 46 21 PTL:Postpositions 4 3 11 5 TOTAL 130 217 TOTAL Content 103 79 125 58 TOTAL Functional 27 21 92 42 154 APPENDD( GZ KKM: DISTRIBUTION OF GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES IN THE TEXTS Actual Context N % N % ree: Lexical Nouns 87 37 89 34 Lexical Adjectives 3 l 3 Lexical Adverbs 8 3 8 3 Lexical Verbs 30 13 31 12 Identification Verbs 3 l 3 l Existential Verbs 4 2 6 2 Aux Verbs 15 6 21 8 Neg 2 l 2 l Numerals 2 l 2 1 Bound: ADNZ l 0.4 l 0.4 ADVZ 1 0.4 l 0.4 Suboordinate 0 0 1 0.4 Coordinate 15 6 15 6 COMP 2 1 2 1 Demonstratives 4 2 4 2 PTL2Case 35 15 53 20 PTL:Postpositions 21 9 ' 22 8 TOTAL 233 264 TOTAL Content 130 56 133 50 TOTAL Functional 103 44 131 50 155 APPENDD( G3 CONTROL J YK: DISTRIBUTION OF GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES IN THE TEXTS Actual Context N % N % ree: Lexical Nouns 84 21 84 21 Lexical Adjectives 8 2 8 2 Lexical Adverbs 34 9 34 8 Lexical Verbs 38 10 38 9 Identification Verbs 9 2 9 2 Existential Verbs 3 l 3 l Aux Verbs 34 9 34 8 Neg 3 1 3 l Numerals 4 l 4 1 Bound: ADNZ 7 2 7 2 ADVZ 2 l 2 0.5 Suboordinate l7 4 l7 4 Coordinate 24 6 24 6 COMP 5 l 5 l Demonstratives 7 2 7 2 PTL:Case 59 15 62 15 PTL:Postpositions 61 15 61 15 TOTAL 399 402 TOTAL Content 168 42 168 42 TOTAL Functional 231 58 234 58 156 APPENDIX G4 CONTROL CKY: DISTRIBUTION OF GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES IN THE TEXTS Actual Context N % N % ree: Lexical Nouns 140 28 140 27 Lexical Adjectives 15 3 l 5 3 Lexical Adverbs 41 8 41 8 Lexical Verbs 58 1 1 58 l 1 Identification Verbs 8 2 9 2 Existential Verbs 6 l 6 1 Aux Verbs 36 7 36 7 Neg 2 0.4 2 0.3 Numerals 8 2 8 2 Bound: ADNZ 2 8 2 ADVZ 1 5 1 Suboordinate 2 8 2 Coordinate 30 6 30 6 COMP 15 3 15 3 Demonstratives 12 2 12 2 PTL:Case 76 15 82 16 PTL:Postpositions 37 7 ' 37 7 (TOTAL 505 512 TOTAL Content 262 52 262 51 TOTAL Functional 243 48 250 49 157 APPENDIX H MAJOR CLASS LEXICAL ITEMS (TOKEN/TYPE) CYS: Nouns Verbs Adjectives Narrative Token/lype Ratio Token/lype Ratio Token/type Ratio History 8/7 I . 1 8/4 2 l/ 1 1 Work 2/2 1 1/1 1 0 0 Daily Life 19/12 1.6 29/17 1.7 1/1 1 Story 4/4 1 3/3 I 0 0 Livingroom 8/7 1. 1 14/8 1.8 O 0 Rice Planting 2/1 2 4/3 1.3 0 0 TOTAL 43/31 1 .4 59/26 2.3 2/2 1 Control JYK: Nouns Verbs Adjectives Narrative T oken/lype Ratio Token/lype Ratio T oken/Iype Ratio Work 13/9 1 .4 9/5 1.8 0 0 Story 39/21 1.9 41/22 1.9 6/4 1.5 Livingroom 16/14 1. 1 15/9 1.7 0 0 Rice Planting 16/9 1.8 l9/11 1.7 2/1 2 TOTAL 84/50 1.7 84/36 2.3 8/5 1.6 158 Nouns Verbs Adjectives Narrative Tokenflfvpe Ratio Token/Type Ratio Token/Type Ratio History 13/11 1.2 9/7 1.3 1/1 1 Work 22/16 1.4 15/13 1.2 3/3 1 Family 32/27 1.2 13/9 1.4 0 0 Livingroom 15/15 1 10/7 1.4 0 0 Rice Planting 5/4 1.3 6/4 1.5 0 0 TOTAL 87/66 1 .3 53/27 2 4/4 1 Control CKY: Nouns Verbs Adjectives Narrative Token/type Ratio Token/Iype Ratio Token/0pc Ratio Work 42/29 1.4 28/10 2.8 6/4 1.5 Story 39/25 1.6 30/16 1.9 4/3 1.3 Livingroom 37/28 1.3 32/19 1.7 2/2 1 Rice Planting 22/15 1.5 18/ 12 1.5 3/2 1.5 TOTAL 140/91 1.5 108/37 2.9 15/11 1.4 159 REFERENCES 160 REFERENCES Ahn, 8.1-I. (1990). Korean quantification and universal grammar. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut. Caplan, D. (1987). Neurolinguistics and linguistic aphasiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Caramazza, A. and EB. Zurif (1976). Dissociation of algorithmic and heuristic processes in sentence comprehension: evidence from aphasia. Brain and Language 3, 572-582 Chang, SJ. (1996). Korean. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Cho, D1. (1994). Functional Projections and Verb Movement. in Y-K. Kim-Renaud , ed, Theoretical Issues in Korean Linguistics. Stanford: CSLI Publications. Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton Publishers. Chomsky, N. (1992). A minimalist program for linguistic theory. M T Occasional Papers in linguistics 1. Cambridge: MIT Press. Chomsky, N. (1993). A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In Hale and Keyser, eds, The view from building 20. Cambridge: MIT Press. Friedmann, N. and Y. Grodzinsky (1997). Tense and agreement in agrammatic production: Pruning the syntactic tree. Brain and Language 56, 397-425. Fromkin, V. (1995). Introduction. Brain andLanguage 50, 1-9. Goodglass, H. (1968). Studies in the grammar of aphasics. In S. Rosenberg and J. Koplin, eds., Developments in applied psycholinguistics research. New York: Macmillan. Goodglass, H. and S. Hunt (1958). Grammatical complexity and aphasic speech. Word, 14, 197-207. Grodzinsky, Y. (1990). Theoretical perspectives on language deficits. Cambridge: MIT Press. Hagiwara, H. (1995). The breakdown of functional categories and the economy of derivation. Brain and Language 50, 92-116. 161 Kang, M.Y. (1988). Topics in Korean Syntax: phrase structure, variable binding and movement. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. Kean, M-L. (1977). The linguistic interpretation of aphasic syndromes. Cognition 5, 9-46. Kean, M-L. (ed.) (1985). Agrammatism. New York: Academic Press. Kim, SH. (1997). Case-marking errors in Korean agrammatic speech. Master's Thesis, Hong-Ik University, Seoul, Korea. Kirshner, H. (1995a). Classical aphasia syndromes. In H. Kirshner, ed, Handbook of neurological speech and language disorders. NY: Marcel Dekker, Inc. Lapointe, SG. (1983). Some issues in the linguistic description of agrammatism. Cognition 14, 1-41. Linebarger, M., M. Schwartz, and E. Saffran (1983). Sensitivity to grammatical structure in so-called agrammatic aphasics. Cognition 13, 361-393. Menn, L. and L. Obler (1990). Cross-language data and theories of agrammatism. In L. Menn and L. Obler, eds, Agrammatic aphasia: A cross-language narrative sourcebook. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Menn, L. and L. Obler (1990). Methodology: Data collection, presentation, and guide to interpretation. In L. Menn and L. Obler, eds, Agrammatic aphasia: A cross-language narrative sourcebook. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Menn, L., M. O'Connor, L. Obler, and A. Holland (1995). Non-fluent aphasia in a multilingual world. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Miceli, G., A. Mazzucchi, L. Menn, and H. Goodglass (1983). Contrasting cases of English and Italian agrammatic aphasics. Brain and Language 19, 65-97 Pick, A. (1913). Aphasia. Trans. Jason Brown. IL: Charles C. Thomas. Pollock, J-Y (1989). Verb movement, universal grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20, 365-424. Reznik, M. (1995). Functional categories in agrammatism. Brain and Language 50, 117-133. Rispens, J. (1997). Negation in agrammatic aphasia: a cross-linguistic comparison. Master's thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. 162 Sohn, HM. (1994). Korean. New York: Routledge. Schwartz, M., M. Linebarger, and E. Saffran (1985). The status of the syntactic deficit theory of agrammatism. In M-L. Kean (ed.) Agrammatism. New York: Academic Press. Tissot, R.G., G. Mounin, and F. Lhermitte (1973). L'Agrammatisme. Brussels: Dessart. 163 HICHIGRN STRTE UN IV. LIBRQRIES IIIIlllllHlllllhllllllllllllhllllhhlllhll 3129301 743984 7