For Korean, subjacency duplex analysis can be comparably extended to a wide range of circumstantial relations. Accompaniment is illustrated in (36) below (marked by gwa).
.png)
As in Tagalog there is no need to distinguish nominal groups from prepositional phrases for circumstances and in the following instance of this kind.
[1] To be clear, no argument has been proffered in support of applying a subjacency duplex analysis to this type of instance. From an SFL perspective, this is simply an Accompaniment realised by a postpositional phrase. That is, the authors have simply rebranded a postpositional phrase as a subjacency duplex.
Moreover, the interpretation of the phrase as a subjacency duplex misrepresents a unit with no logical structure as one with a logical structure. Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 425):
But note that prepositional phrases are phrases, not groups; they have no logical structure as Head and Modifier, and cannot be reduced to a single element.
And again, as adpositions are not structure markers, they are irrelevant to the aims of the paper: a subjacency duplex analysis of structure markers.
[2] To be clear, what distinguishes nominal groups from phrases is the additional presence of a postposition in phrases.
No comments:
Post a Comment