In:Thetics and Categoricals
Edited by Werner Abraham, Elisabeth Leiss and Yasuhiro Fujinawa
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 262] 2020
► pp. 155–178
Strong and weak nominal reference in thetic and categorical sentences
sampling German and Chinese
Published online: 22 July 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.262.06lee
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.262.06lee
Abstract
In this paper, it will be discussed how, in both German and Chinese, strong and weak reference in
thetic and categorical sentences are expressed if held against Carlson’s
(1977) semantic event types of stage-level/SL- and individual-level/IL-predicates. This article will put
emphasis on correspondents of indefinite and bare nouns in German on personal pronouns, the construction
zhè/nà (this/that) (+Num)+CL(assifier)+N or the repetition of DP, which can only express the strong
reference of the subject. The problems arise from the fact that Chinese, in contrast to German, signals reference
strength not by articles as there are no articles in Chinese. In order to come to a comparison, we will use the
Carlsonian reference option as a criterion.
The article is structured as follows: Section 1 introduces
the definition of the strong and weak nominal reference. The second section will discuss thetic and categoric
constructions in German and Chinese. The third section deals with the interplay of SL- and IL-predicates,
thetic/categorical sentences, and the nominal reference of subjects, whereby the SL- and the IL-predicate are each
described in a separate section. Section 4 concludes this paper with a summary
of the results obtained in the previous sections.
Article outline
- 1.Definition: Strong and weak nominal reference
- 2.Thetic and categorical in German and Chinese
- 3.Nominal reference with the stage-level and individual-level predicates in thetic and categorical sentences
- 3.1Nominal reference with the stage-level predicates
- SVO-structure
- OSV construction
- 3.2Nominal reference with the individual-level predicates
- SVO construction
- 3.1Nominal reference with the stage-level predicates
- 4.Conclusion
- 5.Final outlook
Notes Abbreviations References
References (32)
. 2014. Thetic
sentence at the level of modality – An exercise in modal event
quantification. Ms, LMU Munich.
. 2020. Thetics
and categoricals revisited. From judgment to syntax to speech
act. In Thetics and
Categoricals [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 262], Werner Abraham, Elisabeth Leiss & Yasuhiro Fujinawa (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (this volume)
Aguilar-Guevara, Ana & Zwarts, Joost. 2010. Weak
definites and reference to kinds. In Proceedings from
SALT 20, Nan Li & David Lutz (eds), 179–196. Ithaca NY: Cornell University.
Aguilar-Guevara, Ana, Le Bruyn, Bert & Zwarts, Joost. 2014. Advance
in weak referentiality. In Weak
Referentiality [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 219], Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn & Joost Zwarts (eds), 1–16. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Aguilar-Guevara, Ana & Schulpen, Maartje. 2014. Modified
weak definites. In Weak
Referentiality [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 219], Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn & Joost Zwarts (eds), 273–264. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Brentano, Franz 1874/1924. Psychologie
vom empirischen Standpunkt. (English translation: Brentano, Franz 1973. Psychology
from an Empirical Point of View, trans. by Antos C. Rancurello, D. B. Terrell, and Linda L. McAlister).
Carlson, Greg N. 1977. Reference to Kinds
in English. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Carlson, Greg N., Sussmann, Rachel, Klein, Nathalie & Tanenhaus, Michael. 2006. Weak
definite noun phrases. In Proceedings of
NELS 36, Amy Rose Deal, Christopher Davis & Youri Zabbal (eds), 179–196. Amherst MA: GLSA.
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen, Bleam, Tonia & Espinal, M. Teresa. 2006. Bare nouns,
number and types of incorporation. In Non-definiteness
and Plurality. [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 95], Svetlana Vogeleer & Liliane Tasmowski (eds), 51–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hallab, Amina Christine. 2011. Referenziälität,
Prädikation und die Struktur der Nominalphrase. Kontrastierung artikelloser nominaler Prädikate und Indefinita in
Kopulasätzen im Deutschen. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovač.
Hellan, Lars. 1981. On
semantic scope. In Ambiguities in Intensional
Contexts, Frank Heny (ed.), 47–81. Dordrecht: Reidel.
von Heusinger, Klaus 1997. Salienz
und Referenz. Der Epsilonoperator in der Semantik der Nominalphrase und anaphorischer
Pronomen [Studia Grammatica
43]. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Huang, C. -T. James. 1987. Existential
sentences in Chinese and (in)definiteness. In The
Representation of (In)definiteness, Eric Reuland & Alice ter Meulen (eds), 226–253. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Ioup, Georgette. 1977. Specificity
and the interpretation of quantifiers. Linguistics and
Philosophy 1: 233–245.
Jäger, Gerhard. 2001. Topic-comment
structure and the contrast between SL and IL predicates. Journal of
Semantics 18(2): 83–126.
Kuroda, Sige-Yuki. 1972. The
categorial and the thetic judgment. Evidence from Japanese syntax. Foundations of
Language 9(2): 153–185.
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information
Structure and Sentence Form. Topics, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse
Referents. Cambridge: CUP.
Li, Charles N. & Thompson, Sandra A. 1981. Mandarin Chinese. A
Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.
Molnár, Valéria. 1993. Zur
Pragmatik und Grammatik des
TOPIK-Begriffes. In Wortstellung und Informationsstruktur
[Linguistische Arbeit 306], Marga Reis (ed.), 155–202. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Schwarz, Florian. 2009. Two
types of definites in natural language [Open Access Dissertations
122]. <[URL]> (23 March 2020).
Shyu, S. -i. 2011. Aspect
selection and sentence final particle de. Paper presented at
the 19th Annual Meeting of the International Association on Chinese
Linguistics, Nankai University, Tianjin.
Tsao, Feng-fu, 1979. A
Functional Study of Topic in Chinese: The first step towards discourse
analysis. Taipei: Student Book Co.
