본 연구는 자연주의적 결정론적 특징이 오거스트 스트린드베리의 『미스 줄리』와 버나드 쇼의 『상심의 집』의 중심 인물들을 통해 어떻게 나타나는지를 비교, 고찰한다. 사회적 환경에서의 심리적 갈등의 결과로 자연주의적 결정론을 강조하는 스트린드베리의 희곡은 비극적 파멸을 통한 개인의 고통과 욕망의 결과를 보여준다. 스트린드베리는 『미스 줄리』에서 생존을 위한 남녀의 무자비한 성적 투쟁을 중심으로 인간 본성의 도덕적 타락과 죄를 묘사한다. 반면, 쇼의 『상심의 집』은 주인공 개인의 욕망이나 환상에 의한 파괴보다는 사회다윈주의적 관점에서 희망적인 절망을 역설적으로 강조한다. 쇼는 『상심의 집』을 통해 인류를 절망에 빠뜨린 환상이 야기한 전쟁에서 생존을 위한 불가피한 선택과 결과에 대한 자연주의적 시각을 보여준다. 스트린드베리와 쇼의 극에 등장하는 여주인공들의 교차된 욕망과 사랑은 결정론적 운명이라는 종교적, 사회적 딜레마를 상징한다.

Chomsky’s (1995) theory of movement is mainly based on the determinism in the sense that a derivation is determined by featurechecking under the last resort condition. An alternative theory of movement would be based on the non-determinism in the sense that a derivation is not determined by feature-checking under the last resort condition but accounted for in terms of various interpretive systems. In fact, various attempts for the non-determinism have been proposed even within the deterministic frameworks. For example, even if Chomsky (2008) basically maintains the deterministic basis of feature checking for the theory of movement especially for A-movements, he tries to adopt a non-deterministic approach for some A'-movements without much success within his deterministic framework. On the other hand, recently Chomsky (2008) has proposed the notion of “free merge”, which I claim crucially supports the non-determinism even if he does not specifically claim so, probably due to his current deterministic position. This paper shows that the non-determinism based on the theory of unmarked vs. marked internal merge (IM) is more explanatory than the determinism along with the probe-goal feature checking (Chomsky 2000, 2001). The non-determinism based on the theory of unmarked vs. marked internal merge naturally captures the fact that a most significant distinction in movement is the one between unmarked vs. marked internal merge. That is, the unmarked internal merge (IM) is predominant over the marked internal merge across languages. It will be argued that along with the notion of merge the non-determinism is better motivated than the determinism not only for phase-internal optional movements like clause-internal Scrambling in Korean but also for phase-internal obligatory movements like Subject-Raising in English. In fact, it will be claimed that every operation of merge is to induce some new interpretive effects so that the interpretive effects induced by every merge should “justify” the merge itself (EM and IM) (Barbiers 1995). Furthermore, the interpretive effects like topic and focus are not determined by certain head positions (Rizzi 2006) but by the operation of merge itself within the non-determinism. Indeed, the canonical interpretive effect like the scope effect is never dependent on any head. This paper will present a theory of movement in the broader context of the theory of merge, which would contribute to the theory of movement that would conform with the theory of language design (Chomsky 2005). In other words, I will try to answer the question why movement works the way it does through investigation of why merge works the way it does.