Skip to main content

Young-eun Yoon

Ewha Womans University · Arts and Humanities

About the Lab

Professor Young-eun Yoon's research focuses on the semantics and syntax of aspectual constructions in English and Korean, with a particular emphasis on the present perfect, simple past, and perfective aspect. Her work explores cross-linguistic differences in aspect marking, especially the absence of a perfect aspect in Korean, and investigates the cognitive and formal underpinnings of meaning distinctions such as resultative vs. experiential perfects. She also examines related phenomena like irony, humor, and genericity, often integrating formal semantics with cognitive and discourse-based approaches.

aspectperfective aspectcross-linguistic comparisonsemantics of tensegenericity

Research Overview

Papers
27
Total Citations
17
Papers (5y)
8
Primary Field
Arts and Humanities

Research Output Trend

Figures are computed from collected data and may differ slightly.

Publications per year (5y)
8total
2018
2019
2020
2021
2023
Citations per year (5y)
1total
20182019202020212023

Selected Papers

15
1
Article|4 citations·2012
The English present perfect and simple past tense
YOUNGEUNYOON
SJR Q2Linguistic ResearchOA

Yoon, YoungEun. 2012. The English present perfect and simple past tense. Linguistic Research 29(3), 485-513. As is well known, the English present perfect incorporates temporal anteriority as part of its meaning. However, such conflicting phenomena like the ‘definiteness effect’ and the ‘lifetime effect’ are observed, along with the pastness of the perfect. In this context, a variety of theories utilizing concepts such as ‘indefinite past,’ ‘perfect state,’ and ‘extended now’ have been proposed

Language and LinguisticsArts and Humanities
2
Article|3 citations·2014
영어와 한국어의 비유정성 주어 타동사 구문 재고
윤영은, 이한나

It is generally observed that transitive constructions with inanimate subjects are not usually preferred either in English or Korean. However, Korean exhibits a much stronger nonpreference for those constructions than English. To account for this difference between English and Korean, Kim et al.(2009) resort to ‘animacy,’ whereas Jang(2009) employs ‘agentivity.’ However, since these concepts, ‘animacy’ and ‘agentivity,’ serve as primary factors in determining the subject of a transitive construc

3
Article|2 citations·2011
The English Resultative and Experiential Perfects: A Reply to Mittwoch (2008)
YOUNGEUNYOON
Korean Journal of LinguisticsOA

Yoon, YoungEun. 2011. The English Resultative and Experiential Perfects: A Reply to Mittwoch (2008). Korean Journal of Linguistics, 36-1, 133-155. Mittwoch (2008) analyzes the meanings and distributional restrictions of the English Resultative and Experiential perfects. She proposes that the Resultative perfect derives the so-called and inferences, and that the former is part of the truth conditional meaning of the sentence while the latter is a special type of conventional implicature. She also

Language and LinguisticsArts and Humanities
4
Article|2 citations·2014
Connecting irony and humor with witticism and lightheartedness
YOUNGEUNYOON
SJR Q2Linguistic ResearchOA

Irony and humor have long been studied as two closely related phenomena by numerous researchers. Some, including Hanninen (1989) and Dews et al. (1995), have argued that humor derives from irony, while others, including Hay (2001), have regarded irony as a variety of humor. Recently, Hirsch (2008; 2011a, b) proposes a comparative model that differentiates irony from humor in the literary texts by means of some cues for irony and humor. Reyes et al. (2012) also propose a set of features that repr

Social PsychologyPsychology
5
Article|1 citations·2015
The Perfect Meaning of Korean Revisited
윤영은

It is well accepted that the meaning of English simple past is represented by the suffix ess in Korean. This suffix is also proposed to represent the meaning of English present perfect. By some others, however, the perfect meaning is argued to come from sources other than ess. In this context, the main purpose of this paper is to reinvestigate the meaning of ess and to reconsider the sources of the perfect meaning of Korean. It will be reconfirmed that the perfect meaning is not derived from the

6
Article|1 citations·2021
Perceptions on Generic Exceptions
윤영은

Quite recently, two interesting approaches to generics have been put forth, both of which attempt to account for generics based on the notions of alternative sets of entities and features, and relative generics. They are both argued to have much in common with Leslie’s (2008, 2013) cognition-based approach, but grounded on Cohen’s (1999) analysis of relative generics. However, they differ in that the approach by van Rooij and Schulz (2020) tries to explain various generics with the representativ

7
Article|1 citations·2005
Generic and Existiential Reading of Bare Plurals, and Contextual Factors
윤영은

Cohen and Erteschik-Shir (2002) propose that topic/focus structure determines the generic and existential interpretations of bare plurals. They propose that topic bare plurals are interpreted generically, whereas focused bare plurals are interpreted existentially. They further propose that individual/stage-level predicate distinction plus other predicate type distinctions, argument/adjunct distinction, and presuppositional/non-presuppositional verb distinction play a role in determining the topi

8
Article|1 citations·2013
Korean Present Perfect and “-ess”
YOUNGEUNYOON, 이소영
The Journal of Studies in Language
Language and LinguisticsArts and Humanities
9
Article|1 citations·2012
Indefinite Singular and Bare Plural Generics in English and Korean
YOUNGEUNYOON
The Journal of Studies in LanguageOA
Language and LinguisticsArts and Humanities
10
Article|1 citations·2006
Situational and Verbal Irony, and Paradox Revisited
윤영은
11
Article|0 citations·2008
Trivial and Real Exceptions in Generics
YOUNGEUNYOON
Korean Journal of LinguisticsOA
Computational Theory and MathematicsComputer Science
12
Article|0 citations·2008
Korean NPIs amu-(N)-to and amu-(N)-rato
윤영은

Language and Information 12.2 , 21-47. This paper reviews the analysis of the so-called Korean NPIs, amu-(N)-to and amu-(N)-rato, proposed by An (2007). An proposes that the two so-called polarity items are identical semantically, tantamount to English even, but they are in complementary distribution due to the opposite scope properties of the emphatic particles to and rato contained in the NPIs in question. Resorting to Karttunen and Peters' (1979) and Wilkinson's (1996) scope analysis of even,

13
Article|0 citations·2007
Indefinites and Specificity Revisited
윤영은

The semantic literature on definiteness and specificity shows that the former is relatively an established notion, whereas the latter is still a vague notion that needs to be more clarified and confirmed. Given this, Ionin (2006) argues for the reality of specificity based on the informal use of this. She proposes this in spoken English as a specificity marker which has a semantic feature indicating "peaker intent to refer" and "noteworthiness." She also provides as evidence the results of some

14
Article|0 citations·2006
Generics and Exceptions: A Reply to Cohen (2004)
윤영은

It is well known that exceptions are allowed in generics. Concerning this widely-agreed-upon phenomenon of exceptions in generics, Cohen (2004) argues that exceptions are allowed only if “homogeneity” is not violated. That is, the exceptions should not form a salient “chunk” of the domain of the generic. For this, he proposes two ways of mapping of cognitive mental representations, namely, “tree” and “geometric” representations. It will be argued in this paper, however, that choices between thes

15
Article|0 citations·2016
Wordplay Translation Revisited.
최송하, YOUNGEUNYOON
SJR Q2Korean Journal of English Language and LinguisticsOA
Artificial IntelligenceComputer Science

Research Areas

Language and LinguisticsArtificial IntelligenceSocial PsychologyComputational Theory and Mathematics

Dive deeper into Young-eun Yoon's research on Nubint

Open this lab's papers in the app to read with AI, summarize, and cite in your writing.