Search

In their article published in this journal, Pan and Jiang (2015) challenge the claims and proposals made in Cheng and Huang (1996) concerning both the distributional patterns and interpretive strategies for donkey anaphora in Mandarin conditional. They claim that all three types of conditionals (rúguǒ-, dōu- and bare conditionals) allow either a wh-phrase or a pronoun in the consequent clause, and that both the wh-phrase and the pronoun may be either unselectively bound or interpreted by the E-type strategy. We show that, except for an observation already mentioned and accommodated in Cheng and Huang’s (1996) analysis of rúguǒ-conditionals, their distributional claims are incorrect. It is also shown that the interpretative flexibility they propose is untenable, as it leaves a number of otherwise well-predicted properties unaccounted for.

Word order variation is one area of parametric syntax that has been treated with most significant results. On the biological view of grammar, the observed facts of a given language are in part attributed to nature and in part to nurture. The most interesting problem centers around a class of postverbal structures whose distribution complicates an otherwise straightforward description of Chinese word order and phrase structure within the standard X' theory. The structure of verbal complementation constitutes an exception to the otherwise general requirement that Chinese is head-final at every level of phrasal expansion. L. Travis therefore proposed that the default word order of Chinese is head-final, except as required by theta theory, and that theta role assignment is from left to right. Travis's theory accounts for the postverbal complements in quite nicely, because these complements are indeed those that are theta-marked whether or not, according to standard assumptions, they need Case.

The Principles-and-Parameters Theory marked an important milestone in formal linguistic theoryby offering a plausible solution to the logical problem of language acquisition, leading to a productive field of inquiry that uncovered important universal properties and macro-patterns of parametric variation among an unprecedented number of languages. Recent advances in parametric theory have capitalized on microparametric variation, raising certain questions about the status of macro-parameters. In this chapter, developing recent work and using the facts of Chinese as a paradigm case, we show that (a) both macro- and microparameters are needed in linguistic theory, (b) macroparameters are simply aggregates of microparameters acting in concert with a conservative learning strategy, and (c) the (micro)parameters themselves are hierarchically organized. Assuming a ‘three factors’ model, we take parameters to be emergent properties that result from the interaction of a radically unspecified UG, experience, and third-factor principles like Feature Economy and Input Generalization.

This paper capitalizes on two peculiar properties of Mandarin Chinese resultative constructions that pose problems for a general theory of argument structure and parametric theory: (a) the widespread existence of unergative objectless resultatives, and (b) the possibility for both unaccusatives and unergatives to be causativized. It is proposed that these properties are reduced to the single possibility in Chinese (but not in English) for an unergative verb to merge as a manner modifier of an inchoative eventuality predicate BECOME in event structure. This parametric property is in turn reduced to a property of Chinese as a language of high analyticity. In opposition to certain recent models, the paper argues for the existence of a syntax-lexicon macro-parameter.

Long-distance reflexives (LDRs) are those that have their antecedents outside their governing categories. This chapter focuses on important evidence exists for treating the LDR as a logophor subject to pragmatic conditions, thus that the pure syntactic account is incorrect. It examines a clustering of properties which presented difficulties for the pure syntactic account and show that they lend themselves to a natural explanation we shall provide in logophoric terms. The chapter then shows that a pure pragmatic account is also incorrect, as there exists evidence that certain occurrences of the reflexive must be treated as syntactic anaphors subject to formal binding requirements. It then takes up the syntax and semantics of logophoricity, adopting an LF syntax involving IF-adjunction as originally proposed in Huang and Tang, and a semantics of de se attitudes a la Chierchia, and provide a brief comparison with Pan. Keywords: attitudes; logophoricity; long-distance reflexives (LDRs); semantics; syntax; ziji

Unlike some sub-fields of Chinese linguistics, the study of Chinese grammar, in particular of Chinese syntax, is quite young. The first step was taken only about a century ago, in 1898 during the Ching Dynasty, with the publication of Jianzhong Ma’s first comprehensive Chinese grammar. Although it only has a short history, Chinese syntax is nevertheless now regarded as one of the most active and accomplished areas of Chinese linguistics.

One of the most important results of early research in generative grammar is the discovery that superficially very similar constructions should be distinguished on the basis of whether they involve a construal rule of Control, or a movement rule of Raising. Thus, although the sentences in (1) are respectively very similar to those in (2) in their unanalyzed surface forms, it is generally agreed that they should be analyzed in different ways, as indicated below: (1)(a) John i tried [PRO i to be honest]. (b) John persuaded Bill i [PRO i to be honest]. (c) Bill was persuaded t i [PRO i to be honest]. (d) Who did you persuade t i [PRO i to be honest]? (2)(a) John i seemed [t i to be honest]. (b) John believed [Bill to be honest]. (c) Bill i was believed [t i to be honest]. (d) Who i did you believe [t i to be honest]?

In theoretical linguistics, a common type of explanation takes the form of a proposal that ties together observed similar phenomena whose related-ness would otherwise be obscured. The generative treatment of passive sentences and their active counterparts is a simple example, according to which the observed similarities between such constructions (with respect to their ‘argument structure’, etc.) are explained given the idea that they have a common or similar D-structure source. Chomsky’s Subjacency is another example, as it ties together a number of Ross’ island constraints, thus providing an explanation for their clustering in a way that the individual constraints do not.

In recent years considerable attention has been devoted to the study of control and pro-drop, the former referring to the occurrence of a null pronominal in the subject position of a non-finite clause and the latter to that of a null pronominal in other positions. The most important questions that surround these null elements include the following: (a) what is their distribution across languages?; (b) what are their referential properties?; and (c) how may their distribution and reference be properly accounted for within an optimal theory of grammar?

Metaphorical or allegorical in nature and deeply embedded in Chinese culture, yànyǔ 諺語 ‘proverbs’ are fundamentally a colloquial form of idiomatic expressions. Yànyǔ consist of complete sentences with different types of predicate; some yànyǔ have structural or lexical variants and stylistic synonyms.