Cover not available

In:New Insights into Theoretical Syntax from Asian Languages: Studies in honor of C.-T. James Huang
Edited by Andrew Simpson
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 290] 2026
► pp. 281–302

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

On the modifying negative WHAT in Chinese

 | The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Published online: 15 January 2026
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.290.11tan
Abstract
This chapter explores the grammatical properties and functions of the modifying negative WHAT in Chinese, proposing an adjunction approach. It argues that the modifying negative WHAT acts as a modifier adjoined to nominal phrases, which should be distinguished from the postverbal negative WHAT, with the former functioning through syntactic adjunction and the latter as a morphological suffix. It also emphasizes the necessity of a negative force head at the sentence periphery and illustrates the multifunctionality of Chinese wh-words as polarity items, licensed by this force projection.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction: Yang (2021, 2024)
  • 2.Problems of Yang (2021, 2024)
  • 3.Modifying negative WHAT: An adjunction approach
  • 4.Two consequences
    • 4.1Differences between the two types of negative WHAT
    • 4.2The syntax of negative force
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
References (38)
References
Cheng, L.-S. Lisa. 1991. On the typology of wh-questions. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.
. 1994. Wh-words as polarity items. In Chinese Languages and Linguistics II, ed. by Ren-kui Li, 615–640. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cheung, Lawrence Yam-Leung. 2008. The negative wh-construction. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Las Angeles.
Chung, Jui-Yi Zoey, and Dylan Wei-tien Tsai. 2020. Fēidiǎnxíng yíwèncí de jùfǎ céngjí hé yǔyòng xiàoyìng: cóng bǐjiào yǔfǎ kàn Kèjiāhuà de “mege” [On the syntactic cartography and pragmatic effects of non-canonical wh-questions: a comparative study of what in Hakka]. Zhōngguó Yǔwén [Studies of the Chinese Language] 2: 201–220.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coniglio, Marco, and Iulia Zegrean. 2012. Splitting up Force: evidence from discourse particles. In Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons, ed. by Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman, and Rachel Nye, 229–255. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2014. West Flemish verb-based discourse markers and the articulation of the speech act layer. Studia Linguistica 68 (1): 116–139. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth, and Samuel Jay Keyser. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical representation of syntactic relations. In The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. by Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, 53–109. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hill, Virginia. 2007. Vocatives and the pragmatics-syntax interface. Lingua 117 (12): 2077–2105. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Doctoral dissertation. MIT.
Kayne, Richard S. 2005. Movement and Silence. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lü, Shuxiang, et al. 1980. Xiàndài Hànyǔ Bābǎi Cí [800 words of Modern Chinese]. Beijing: Commercial Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matthews, Stephen, and Virginia Yip. 1994. Cantonese: A Comprehensive Grammar. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miyagawa, Shigeru. 2017. Agreement Beyond Phi. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2022. Syntax in the Treetops. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nakashima, Takanori. 2018a. Mismatches between forms and interpretations in minimalist syntax. Doctoral dissertation, Tohoku University.
. 2018b. Some syntactic character of rhetorical questions. Explorations in English Linguistics 32: 67–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pan, Victor Junnan. 2014. Deriving special questions in Mandarin Chinese: a comparative study. In 2014 Comparative Syntax: Proceedings of the 16th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar, ed. by Jong- Un Park and Il- Jae Lee, 349–368. Seoul: The Korean Generative Grammar Circle.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. Mandarin peripheral construals at syntax-discourse interface. The Linguistic Review 32(4), 819–868. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. Architecture of the Periphery in Chinese: Cartography and Minimalism. London and New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paul, Waltraud. 2014. Why particles are not particular: sentence-final particles in Chinese as heads of a split CP. Studia Linguistica 68 (1): 77–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. New Perspectives on Chinese Syntax. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar, ed. by Liliane Haegeman, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. On the position of “Int(errogative)” in the left periphery of the clause. In Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi, ed. by Guglielmo Cinque and Giampaolo Salvi, 287–296. New York: Elsevier. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Locality and left periphery. In Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 3, ed. by Adriana Belletti, 223–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Speas, Margaret. 2004. Evidentiality, logophoricity and the syntactic representation of pragmatic features. Lingua 144 (3): 255–276. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Speas, Peggy, and Carol Tenny. 2003. Configurational properties of point of view roles. In Asymmetry in Grammar, ed. by Anna Maria DiSciullo, 315–344. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tang, Sze-Wing. 1998. Parametrization of features in syntax. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Irvine.
. 2010. Xíngshì Hànyǔ Jùfǎxué [Formal Chinese Syntax]. Shanghai: Shanghai Educational Publishing House.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020. Cartographic syntax of performative projections: evidence from Cantonese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 29 (1): 1–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2022a. Fǒudìngyì “shénme” de yǔfǎ wèntí [On the grammar of the negative expression shenme in Chinese]. Yǔyánxué Lùncóng [Essays in Linguistics] 1: 31–57.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2022b. On the syntax of rhetorical questions: evidence from Cantonese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 31 (3): 305–349. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tenny, Carol L. 2006. Evidentiality, experiencers, and the syntax of sentience in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 15: 245–288. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsai, Wei-Tien. 1994. On economizing the theory of A-bar dependencies. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.
Tsai, Wei-tien Dylan. 2011. Cóng “zhè huà cóng hé shuō qǐ?” shuō qǐ [Speaking from Where should I begin?]. Yǔyánxué Lùncóng [Essays on Linguistics] 43, 194–208.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wang, Changsong. 2017. Yùnlǜ jùfǎ jiāohù zuòyòng xià de Hànyǔ fēidiǎnxíng yíwèn cí yánjiū: yǐ “V shénme (V)/(NP)” zhōng de “shénme” wéi lì [A study on the non-canonical wh-word in Chinese under the interaction between prosody and syntax: an example of “V shenme (V)/(NP)”]. Yùnlǜ Yǔfǎ Yánjiū [Studies in Prosodic Grammar] 2(1), 73–100.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yang, Barry Chung-Yu. 2021. Two types of peripheral adjunct WHATs. Concentric 47 (1): 61–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2024. Revisiting sentence-final adjunct WHAT. Language and Linguistics 25 (1): 162–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue