This paper examines behaviors of floating quantifiers in English and Korean, and provides analyses for them. These two languages have ordinary quantifiers and numeral quantifiers. Their syntactic behaviors are a little different in two languages, and those differences also make differences in their meaning. When they do not float, they can have both cardinal and presuppositional reading. When they float, however, they have only cardinal reading. For their analyses, this paper adopts Heim`s tripartite structure and Diesing`s Mapping Hypothesis. In those analyses, when QPs are mapped into restrictive clause, they have presuppositional reading. But, when they are mapped into nuclear scope, they have cardinal reading. In sum, this paper provides some theoretical accounts for ordinary and numeral quantifiers of English and Korean.

Chang Wook Lee. 2001. Feature Transmission Hypothesis in Syntactic Structures of Korean and English Anaphors. Studies in Modern Grammar 25, 75-90. This paper attempts to analyze the relationship between anaphor and its antecedent by the feature checking theory. In the ambiguous anaphoric constructions, the feature checking theory cannot properly capture the antecedents because there exist no two feature checking processes in the Minimalist Program. To solve this problem, I propose Feature Transmission Hypothesis as an alternative. That is, the ambiguous anaphor moves to AGRo, then AGRo checks the anaphor`s feature. After this process, AGRs attracts AGRo and features of AGRo are transmitted to AGRs. Finally, AGRo lets AGRs trigger the feature checking. This hypothesis is also examined to several kinds of structures such as honorific construction, reciprocal anaphoric construction, multiple anaphoric construction, etc.

Sang Woo Han. 2001. An SIOV Hypothesis for Old English. Studies in Modern Grammar 24, 161-177. Both the single SOVI hypothesis and double-underlying structure hypothesis do not explain various syntactic patterns of Old English. However, we can be derived them from SIOV underlying structure using the optional verb movement rule. By assuming I-initial hypothesis, we don`t need to assume the NP raising rule any more. Therefore, it can be said that this SIOV underlying structure hypothesis is a more economical and desirable hypothesis than the SOVI hypothesis and double-underlying structure hypothesis because it needs just one movement in explaining various word order types which can be found in Old English manuscripts. In spite of its merit, however, the SIOV hypothesis seems to have a critical problem. When INFL is in medial position, the verb has to move to INFL, and the surface order derived from the SIOV underlying structure would not be SOV but SVO order. It contrasts with the predominating theory that Old English is an SOV language. It is very difficult to explain all the syntactic structures with current theoretical methods. As a conclusion, it could be said that it would be more desirable to study syntactic patterns of Old English by analysing Old English manuscripts than by using current theories.