Cover not available

Article published In: International Journal of Chinese Linguistics
Vol. 6:1 (2019) ► pp.76–118

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

On embedded contrastive focus in Mandarin Chinese

 | Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica
Published online: 2 July 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijchl.19003.shu
Abstract
This article investigates the previously undocumented focus-sensitiveness of certain scope-bearing expressions in Mandarin, and argues that the syntactic effects of this property should be accommodated by a structure that involves multiple dependencies and inherited dependencies. At the empirical side, it is shown that in Mandarin, certain quantificational expressions as well as typical focusing adverbs have to occur at positions where they (i) c‑command and (ii) be as close as possible to the contrastive foci that they associate with. The similarity to the typical association-with-focus configurations is captured under a unified Agree analysis that incorporated previous variable-adjunction-site analysis for focusing particles in German, while the additional dependencies in these structures are accounted for by multiple Agree and feature inheritance. This analysis is compared with some alternative approaches, which do not have equal empirical coverage or require more complex theoretical assumptions.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The association-with-focus effects of quantifiers
    • 2.1Truth conditions
    • 2.2Continuation with inferences that involve substituted elements in the focus positions
  • 3.The syntax-semantics correspondence effects in Mandarin Chinese
    • 3.1Mandarin counterparts of Rooth’s and Krifka’s data
    • 3.2Movement of quantified DPs objects in Mandarin
  • 4.The structure of quantificational expressions in Mandarin
    • 4.1Theoretical assumptions
    • 4.2The Agree structure of quantificational constructions
      • 4.2.1Quantificational adverb constructions
      • 4.2.2Quantificational DP constructions
  • 5.Comparisons with alternative approaches
    • 5.1The focus-sensitiveness of QuEs is a purely pragmatic phenomenon
    • 5.2Focus-background partition with across-the-board obligatory defocusing movement
      • 5.2.1Empirical and theoretical issues of the defocusing movement approach
      • 5.2.2How the variable-adjunction-site/landing-site approach can resolve these issues
  • 6.A note on real defocusing movements
  • 7.The focus-sensitiveness of the lian…dou ‘even’ construction
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (75)
References
Aldridge, Edith. 2010. Clause-internal wh-movement in Archaic Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 191.1–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. 1972. How to get even . Language 481: 893–906. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baltin, Mark, and Chris Collins. 2001. The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory. Malden: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bayer, Josef. 1999. Bound focus or how association with focus be achieved without going semantically astray? In The grammar of focus, ed. by Georges Rebuschi and Laurice Tuller, 55–82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beaver, I. David and Brady Z. Clark. 2008. Sense and sensitivity: how focus determines meaning. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beghelli, Filippo, Stowell, Tim. 1997. Distributivity and negation. In Ways of scope taking, ed. by Anna Szabolcsi, 71–107. Dordrecht: Kluwer Publications. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Belletti, Adriana. 2004. Aspects of the low IP area. In The structure of CP and IP, ed. by L. Rizzi, 16–51. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric. 2004. Long-distance agreement in Hindi: theoretical implications. Studia Linguistica 581, 23–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Büring, Daniel and Katharina Hartmann. 2001. The syntax and semantics of focus- sensitive particles in German. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 191: 229–281. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Büring, Daniel. 1996. Interpretation and movement: Towards an economy-theoretic treatment of German ‘Mittelfeld’ word order. Ms., University of Frankfurt.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cheng, Lisa L.-S. 2008. Deconstructing the shi…de construction. The Linguistic Review 251: 235–266. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phrase. In Ken Hale: a life in language, ed. Michael Kenstowicz, 1–52. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In Structure and beyond: the cartography of syntactic structures, vol 31, ed. by Adriana Belletti, 104–131. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. Approaching UG from below. In Interfaces + recursion = language?: Chomsky’s Minimalism and the view from syntax-semantics, ed. by Uli Sauerland and Gans-Martin Gärtner, 1–29. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. On phases. In Foundational issues in linguistic theory: essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, ed. by Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero, and Maria Luisa Zubizarreta, 133–166. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads: a cross-linguistic perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diesing, Molly. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dretske, Fred I. 1972. Contrastive Statements. Philosophical Review 811, 411–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drubig, H. Bernhard. 2003. Toward a typology of focus and focus constructions. Linguistics 411: 1–50. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Engels, Eva. 2004. Adverb placement: An Optimality Theoretical approach. PhD dissertation. University of Potsdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ernst, Thomas. 1994. Functional categories and the Chinese Infl. Linguistics 321: 191–212. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. The syntax of adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ernst, Thomas and Chengchi Wang. 1995. Object preposing in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 41: 235–260. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fox, Danny. 1995. Economy and scope. Natural Language Semantics 31: 283–341. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. Economy and semantic interpretation: A study of scope and variable binding. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fox, Danny & David Pesetsky. 2005. Cyclic linearization of syntactic structure. Theoretical Linguistics 311. 1–45. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grewendorf, Günther. 2005. The discourse configurationality of scrambling. In The free word order phenomenon: its syntactic sources and diversity, ed. by Joachim Sabel and Mamoru Saito, 75–135. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane, and Terje Lohndal. 2010. Negative concord and (Multiple) Agree: A case study of West Flemish. Linguistic Inquiry 411: 181–211. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herburger, Elena. 2000. What counts: focus and quantification. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinterwimmer, Stephan. 2008. Q-adverbs as selective binders: The quantificational variability of free relatives and definite DPs. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. Information structure and truth-conditional semantics. In Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, vol. 21, ed. by Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn, and Paul Portner, 1875–1908. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hiraiwa, Ken. 2000. Multiple Agree and the Defective Intervention Constraint in Japanese. Ms, MIT, Cambridge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. Dimensions of symmetry in syntax: agreement and clausal architecture. PhD dissertation. MIT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoeksema, Jack & Frans Zwarts. 1991. Some remarks on focus adverbs. Journal of semantics 81: 51–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hole, Daniel P. 2004. Focus and background marking in Mandarin Chinese: system and theory behind cái, jiù, dou, and ye . London: Routledge Curzon. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. PhD dissertation. MIT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney D., and Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Irurtzun, Aritz. 2007. The grammar of focus at the interfaces. PhD dissertation. University of the Basque Country.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaeger, Florian and Michael Wagner. 2003. Association with focus and linear order in German. Ms., Stanford University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koopman, Hilda. 1984. The syntax of verbs. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 2004. Interpreting focus: Presupposed or expressive meanings? A comment on Geurts and van de Sandt. Theoretical Linguistics 301: 123–136. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 1990. Four thousand ships passed through the lock: Object-induced measure functions on events. Linguistics and Philosophy 131: 487–520. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Association with focus phrases. In The architecture of focus, ed. by Valéria Molár and Susanne Winkler, 105–136. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. Basic notions of information structure. In Working Papers of the SFB 632, Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure (ISIS) 6 , ed. by Caroline Féry, Gisbert Fanselow, and Manfred Krifka, 13–56. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. Quantification and information structure. In The Oxford handbook of information structure, ed. By Caroline Féry and Shinichiro Ishihara, 251–269. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, Charles and Sandra A. Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, Y.-H. Audrey. 1985. Abstract Case in Mandarin Chinese. PhD dissertation, University of South California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. Quantification and scope. In The Handbook of Chinese Linguistics, ed. by C.-T. James Huang, Y.-H. Audrey Li, and Andrew Simpson, 208–247. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lin, Jo-wang. 1998. Distributivity in Chinese and its implications. Natural Language Semantics 61: 201–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miyagawa, Shigeru. 2010. Why Agree? Why Move? Unifying agreement-based and discourse-configurational languages. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nunes, Jairo. 2001. Sideward movement. Linguistic Inquiry 321: 303–344. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Partee, Barbara. 1991. Topic, focus, and quantifications. In Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory I, ed. by S. Moore and A. Wyner, 257–280. Ithaca: Cornell University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paul, Waltraud, and John Whitman. 2008. Shi…de focus clefts in Mandarin Chinese. The Linguistic Review 251: 413–451. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1989. Verb movement, Universal Grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 201: 365–424.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. 1997. Wh-in-situ in the framework of the Minimalist Program. Natural Language Semantics 61: 29–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reis, Marga. 2005. On the syntax of so-called focus particles in German – a reply to Büring and Hartmann 2001. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 231: 459–483. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Richards, Marc. 2004. Object shift and scrambling in North and West Germanic: A case study in symmetrical syntax. PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Richards, Marc D. 2007. On feature inheritance: An argument from the Phase Impenetrablity Condition. Linguistic Inquiry 381: 563–572. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rooth, Mats. 1985. Association with focus. PhD dissertation. University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saito, Mamoru & Naoki Fukui. 1998. Order in phrase structure and movement. Linguistic Inquiry 291: 439–474. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shu, Chih-hsiang. 2011. Sentence adverbs in the kingdom of Agree. PhD dissertation. State University of New York at Stony Brook.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shyu, Shu-ing. 1995. The syntax of focus and topic in Mandarin Chinese. PhD dissertation. University of Southern California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Soh, Hooi-ling. 1998. Object scrambling in Chinese. PhD dissertation. MIT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 2001. Object shift and scrambling. In Handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, ed. by Mark Baltin and Chris Collins, 148–202. Malden: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Travis, Lisa. 1984. Parameters and effects of word order variation. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2008a. Left periphery and how-why alternations. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 171: 83–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008b. Object specificity in Chinese: a view from the vP periphery. The Linguistic Review 251: 479–502. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vallduví, Enric. 1990. The Informational Component, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wagner, Michael. 2006. Association by movement: evidence from NPI-licensing. Natural Language Semantics. 141: 297–324. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilkinson, Karina. 1996. The scope of even . Natural Language Semantics 41: 193–215. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zeijlstra, Hedde. 2004. Sentential negation and negative concord. Doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. There is only one way to Agree. The Linguistic Review 291: 491–539. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhang, Nina Ning. 1997. Syntactic dependencies in Mandarin Chinese. PhD dissertation. University of Toronto.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue