Multiple accusative constructions in Korean and the Stratal Uniqueness Law

The Stratal Uniqueness Law in RG specifies that across languages no simplex clause can contain more than one nominal bearing the same term relation such as subject or direct object. However, Korean frequently allows what seem to be multiply case-marked simplex clauses. If Korean really does allow multiple case-marking within simplex clauses, it casts a doubt on the universal validity of the Stratal Uniqueness Law. This thesis primarily concerns the validity of the Stratal Uniqueness Law in connection with apparent double object constructions in Korean.;Of the apparent double object constructions, the one formed by the conspiracy of the so-called Sino-Korean action noun with the verb ha has been least readily explicated. It has been analyzed as a simplex clause under the assumption that the Sino-Korean words appearing in the construction are nouns. However, this thesis takes the view that those Sino-Korean words are verbs and claims that this construction has a biclausal structure resulting from the interaction of ha's clausal complementation feature with the morphological characteristic of Chinese verbs. Consequently, this thesis argues that the so-called double object construction does not violate the Stratal Uniqueness Law, though it includes two accusative constituents within an apparent simplex clause.;Chapter 1 discusses the pretheoretical assumption in linguistic analysis and delivers a theoretical background of RG.;Chapter 2 proposes a Biclausal Analysis and argues against the mono-clausal analyses of the construction.;Chapters 3 and 4 argue that syntactic causative constructions and the psychological predicate construction are also biclausal due to the clausal complementation feature of ha, demonstrating that they share identical phenomena with the so-called double object construction in terms of morphological and syntactic facts.;Chapter 5 argues that other seeming double object constructions that are attributable to dative advancement, lexical causation, or possessor ascension are mono-clausal and shows that the two accusative constituents in those constructions exhibit different syntactic behavior from the second accusative constituent of the so-called double object construction, which is an embedded verb.;Chapter 6 discusses the theoretical implications and residual problems of the proposed analysis.