수동문에 관한 연구
(A) Study on Passives in English
수동문 전통문법 기능주의 능동주어 영어문법;
- 원문 URL
The purpose of this study is to analyze passives in English, focusing on its functional as well as semantic properties. In this study, I discuss various proposals about passives, ranging from the approaches based on the traditional grammar to some recent analyses dealing with functional aspects of the passive construction. After critically reviewing all these approaches, I propose an alternative that hopefully encompasses, and complement, all the previous analyses. I start by examining the proposals made within the framework of traditional grammar, focusing on the works of Jespersen(1909-1949, 1927, 1933) and Quirk et al.(1985). I show that their analyses, despite the fact that they are interested in the uses of passive constructions, are primarily a semantic approach, in which the main interest lies in explaining the semantic relation between passives and actives. I point out, therefore, that their approaches fail to notice the importance of the functional aspects of the passive. Then I go on to discuss Givo′n(1993, 1995) and Shibatani(1985), the two most typical functional analyses of the passive construction. In discussing Givo′n's analysis, I show that his idea about passives relies on the two major concepts: transitivity and topicality. He argues that the passive construction is one of de-transitivized constructions in which a non-agentive argument with high topicality is realized as the syntactic subject. As for Shibatani, he argues that the primary function of passives is agent defocusing, which he supports by presenting a series of evidence. First, only clauses with an agent allow passives. Second, not only is it true that passives in many languages occur in intransitive clauses, buy it is also possible that passives are possible without promoting object to the subject position. Third, passives do not generally express an agent overtly. In sum, although the two approaches differ on some specifics, they share a common idea that most of the mechanics of passives are fundamentally explained by considering their functional aspects. Finally, I propose that previous approaches to passives, which include traditional as well as functional analyses, should be complemented in such a way that they include some extra-grammatical considerations. Among the points that I come up with are: first, the emphasis on the agent in passives is based on the principle of end-focus; second, passives are used when the agent wants to avoid admitting responsibility; third, the use of passives can be explained by the notion of 'affectedness'. By mentioning these aspects, which have not been fully explained in either Givo′n or Shibatani's analyses, I suggest that passives can be wholly explained only when we consider the discourse-pragmatic aspects, as well as functional-grammatical aspects.