‘만’과 ‘도’의 이차 의미 - 전제인가 고정함축인가

• Published in: 언어학 연구, 0(41) pp. 135 - 155
• Main Author: 김정민
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: Korean
• Published: 한국중원언어학회 01.10.2016
• Subjects: 언어학
• ISSN: 1975-8251; 2508-4259
• DOI: 10.17002/sil..41.201610.135

The meaning of the English adverbs only and too/also has been the subject of intense debate; in particular, regarding the statuses of their prejacent and existential implicatum respectively. It has been argued that it is a presupposition or a conventional implicature. Presupposition and conventional implicature are defined as secondary meanings by their collective opposition to the primary semantic content. Some authors like Karttunen and Zaenen (2005) see the difference between conventional implicatures and presuppositions relatively small compared to their similarities. Bach (1999) judges conventional implicature a ‘myth’ on the grounds that the meanings involved are indistinguishable from at-issue entailments. However, the defining feature of conventional implicature is that it is logically independent of the central at-issue content. And this is relevant to the question of how we distinguish conventional implicatures from presuppositions. This paper aims to argue that the prejacent of Korean man ‘only’ sentences and the existential implicatum of to ‘too/also’ sentences are closer to a conventional implicature than to a presupposition in that they are independent of the at-issue content. KCI Citation Count: 4