Pub Date : 2023-08-01DOI: 10.1353/jcl.2023.a911854
Chin-fa Lien
ABSTRACT:The paper explores the role of the copula 是 si7 in the interpretation of the focus structure in early Southern Min playscripts. I examine the configuration of 是 si7 with respect to a range of functional/lexical categories such as kinds of adverbs, types of modals, voice (featuring causativity and passitivity), aspect, and negation as well as verb and noun phrases. I also put forward tree structures showing how focus vis-à-vis topic in cleft and pseudo-cleft clauses with 是 si7 as the pivot are derived. In a nutshell, the syntactic position of 是 si7 is versatile and yet constrained. There is an asymmetry of the distribution of subject and object focusing with respect to the position of the copula 是 si7. I posit with Rizzi (2013) that the focus feature in the FocP triggers merging the focus constituent to the head Foc in FocP in CP. Apart from bearing the assertive force in the clause typing, the copula 是 si7 plays a supporting role of scoping over the focus constituent. I capture the syntactic behavior of the copula 是 si7 by construing it as an indispensable pivot in the derivation of focus structure. o put forward tree structures showing how focus vis摘要:本文探讨早期闽南戏文中系词"是" 在焦点结构中所扮演的角色。从和各类状语、情态词、语式(表被动或致使)、体貌、否定和动词、名词组成的相对位置可以确定"是"的结构特性。文中呈现分裂句及准分裂句中焦点相对于话题的树形图，其中"是"为轴心，约言之，"是"的句法位置多元而有限制。以系词"是"的位置为参照，可以看出主语焦点和宾语焦点在结构分布上有不对称的现象。以 Rizzi (2013)为依据本文假设焦点词组中的焦点征性触发焦点成分并入 CP 中的焦点中心语中，除了表示句式的论断语势外系词"是"还发挥辅助焦点成分的作用。总之，本文主张系词"是"是焦点结构中不可或缺的轴心，如此可以捕捉到"是"的句法行为。
{"title":"The role of the copula 是 si7 in the construal of focus structure in early Southern Min","authors":"Chin-fa Lien","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2023.a911854","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2023.a911854","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:The paper explores the role of the copula 是 si7 in the interpretation of the focus structure in early Southern Min playscripts. I examine the configuration of 是 si7 with respect to a range of functional/lexical categories such as kinds of adverbs, types of modals, voice (featuring causativity and passitivity), aspect, and negation as well as verb and noun phrases. I also put forward tree structures showing how focus vis-à-vis topic in cleft and pseudo-cleft clauses with 是 si7 as the pivot are derived. In a nutshell, the syntactic position of 是 si7 is versatile and yet constrained. There is an asymmetry of the distribution of subject and object focusing with respect to the position of the copula 是 si7. I posit with Rizzi (2013) that the focus feature in the FocP triggers merging the focus constituent to the head Foc in FocP in CP. Apart from bearing the assertive force in the clause typing, the copula 是 si7 plays a supporting role of scoping over the focus constituent. I capture the syntactic behavior of the copula 是 si7 by construing it as an indispensable pivot in the derivation of focus structure. o put forward tree structures showing how focus vis摘要:本文探讨早期闽南戏文中系词\"是\" 在焦点结构中所扮演的角色。从和各类状语、情态词、语式(表被动或致使)、体貌、否定和动词、名词组成的相对位置可以确定\"是\"的结构特性。文中呈现分裂句及准分裂句中焦点相对于话题的树形图，其中\"是\"为轴心，约言之，\"是\"的句法位置多元而有限制。以系词\"是\"的位置为参照，可以看出主语焦点和宾语焦点在结构分布上有不对称的现象。以 Rizzi (2013)为依据本文假设焦点词组中的焦点征性触发焦点成分并入 CP 中的焦点中心语中，除了表示句式的论断语势外系词\"是\"还发挥辅助焦点成分的作用。总之，本文主张系词\"是\"是焦点结构中不可或缺的轴心，如此可以捕捉到\"是\"的句法行为。","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139352417","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-26DOI: 10.1353/jcl.2023.a902791
Robert S. Bauer
ABSTRACT:At the outset of writing a bilingual Cantonese-English dictionary that is comprehensive in scope, the lexicographer confronts a series of challenging issues that are fundamental to the successful creation of such an ambitious dictionary. Among the crucial questions to be satisfactorily resolved are at least the following eight: 1) What are the principal criteria that guide the lexicographer's selection of the Cantonese lexical items that form the contents of the bilingual dictionary? Further, what is the scope of the lexical contents? Broad, by encompassing all lexical items that occur in the speech of Hong Kong Cantonese speakers, even those items that overlap with standard Chinese? Or, narrow, by focusing only on the uniquely Hong Kong Cantonese lexicon? 2) What categories of information about the lexical items should form the structural contents of lexical entries? These could include parts of speech, speech registers, cross-referencing of related lexical items, synonyms, alternative pronunciations and variant written forms, example sentences, etc. 3) How detailed should the equivalent English translations of the Cantonese lexical items be? 4) Should lexical entries include information on their social, cultural, historical, and political associations, usage, etymology (origin and historical development), etc.? 5) What is the organizing principle by which the Cantonese lexical entries are listed in the dictionary, as there are at least four? 6) As for Cantonese pronunciation, which register of the language should be romanized? The conservative, literary, standard pronunciation? The colloquial, informal, commonly-used 懶 音 laan5 jam1 "lazy" pronunciation? Or both of these? 7) Several Cantonese romanization systems are currently in use, so which one is best for representing Hong Kong's contemporary Cantonese pronunciation? 8) Given that the written form of the Cantonese language has never been formally or officially standardized, so that some lexical items are typically written in two or more different ways, what criteria should guide the lexicographer in deciding how Cantonese words are graphically transcribed in a Cantonese-English dictionary? In writing his ABC Cantonese-English Comprehensive Dictionary 粵語英語大詞典 (Bauer 2020) over the past decade and a half, the author had to face and then answer appropriately each of these important questions. This article has described how he addressed and practically resolved these and other related problems.摘要:编写范围广泛的粤英双语词典之初，词典编撰者面临一系列甚具挑战 性的问题，这些问题对于成功创构这样一部耗时费力的词典至关重要。 要圆满解决的关键问题至少有以下八个：1)主要以什么标准指导词典 编撰者选择构成双语词典内容的粤语词项？此外，词汇内容的范围是 什么？是广泛的，包括所有除现在说香港粤语人士口语的词项，甚至 那些与标准汉语重叠的词项？或者，狭义的，只关注独特的香港粤语 词汇？2)关于词项的哪些类别的信息应该构成词条的结构内容？这些 可能包括词性、语域、相关词项的相互参照、同义词、替代或变异发 音和书面形式、例句等。3)粤语词项对应的英译应该有多详细？4)词 条应否包括有关其社会、文化、历史和政治关联、用法、词源（起源 和历史发展）等方面的信息？5)在词典中列出粤语词条的组织原则至 少有四个，而那些组织原则是什么？6)关于粤语发音，哪个语域发音 应该用拼音？保守的、文学的、标准的发音？还是口语化的、非正式 的、常用的懒音？或者这两种发音都应该用拼音？7)目前使用粤语的 拼音系统有好几种，那么哪一种最能代表当代香港粤语发音？8)鉴于 粤语的书面形式从未正式或官式标准化，因此一些词项通
ABSTRACT: At the output of writing a bilingual Cantonese English dictionary that is comprehensive in scope, the lexicographer fronts a series of challenging issues that are fundamental to the successful creation of such an acute dictionary Amongst the critical questions to be satisfactorily resolved are at least the following height:? Further, what is the scope of the legal content? Broad, by encompassing all legal items that occur in the speech of Hong Kong Cantonese speakers, even those items that overlap with standard Chinese? Or, narrow, by focusing only on the unique Hong Kong Cantonese Lexicon? 2) What categories of information about the legal items should form the structural contents of legal entries? These could include parts of speech, speech registers, cross referencing of related legal items, synonyms, alternative negotiations and variant written forms, example sentences, etc. 3) How detailed should the equivalent English translations of the Cantonese legal items be? 4) Should legal entries include information on their social, cultural, historical, and political associations, usage, physiology (origin and historical development), etc? 5) What is the organizing principle by which the Cantonese legal entries are listed in the dictionary, as there are at least four? 6) As for Cantonese promotion, which register of the language should be romanized? The conservative, literal, standard promotion? The colloquial, informational, commonly used lazy laan5 jam1 "lazy" pronunciation? Or both of these? 7) Sequential Cantonese organization systems are currently in use, so which one is best for representing Hong Kong's contemporary Cantonese promotion? 8) Given that the written form of the Cantonese language has never been formally or officially standardized, so that some practical items are typically written in two or more different ways, what criteria should guide the lexicographer in determining how Cantonese words are graphically allocated in a Cantonese English dictionary? In writing his ABC Cantonese-English Comprehensive Dictionary (Bauer 2020) over the past facade and a half, the author had to face and then answer appropriately each of these important questions This article has described how he addressed and effectively resolved these and other related problems. There are at least eight key issues that need to be successfully addressed: 1) What standards should be used to guide dictionary compilers in selecting Cantonese vocabulary items that make up the content of bilingual dictionaries? Furthermore, what is the scope of vocabulary content? Is it extensive, including all vocabulary items spoken by Cantonese speakers in Hong Kong, and even those that overlap with standard Chinese? Or, in a narrow sense, only focusing on unique Hong Kong Cantonese vocabulary? 2) What categories of information about a term should form the structural content of the term? These may include part of speech, register, cross referencing of related word items, synonym
{"title":"Challenging issues in Cantonese-English lexicography","authors":"Robert S. Bauer","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2023.a902791","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2023.a902791","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:At the outset of writing a bilingual Cantonese-English dictionary that is comprehensive in scope, the lexicographer confronts a series of challenging issues that are fundamental to the successful creation of such an ambitious dictionary. Among the crucial questions to be satisfactorily resolved are at least the following eight: 1) What are the principal criteria that guide the lexicographer's selection of the Cantonese lexical items that form the contents of the bilingual dictionary? Further, what is the scope of the lexical contents? Broad, by encompassing all lexical items that occur in the speech of Hong Kong Cantonese speakers, even those items that overlap with standard Chinese? Or, narrow, by focusing only on the uniquely Hong Kong Cantonese lexicon? 2) What categories of information about the lexical items should form the structural contents of lexical entries? These could include parts of speech, speech registers, cross-referencing of related lexical items, synonyms, alternative pronunciations and variant written forms, example sentences, etc. 3) How detailed should the equivalent English translations of the Cantonese lexical items be? 4) Should lexical entries include information on their social, cultural, historical, and political associations, usage, etymology (origin and historical development), etc.? 5) What is the organizing principle by which the Cantonese lexical entries are listed in the dictionary, as there are at least four? 6) As for Cantonese pronunciation, which register of the language should be romanized? The conservative, literary, standard pronunciation? The colloquial, informal, commonly-used 懶 音 laan5 jam1 \"lazy\" pronunciation? Or both of these? 7) Several Cantonese romanization systems are currently in use, so which one is best for representing Hong Kong's contemporary Cantonese pronunciation? 8) Given that the written form of the Cantonese language has never been formally or officially standardized, so that some lexical items are typically written in two or more different ways, what criteria should guide the lexicographer in deciding how Cantonese words are graphically transcribed in a Cantonese-English dictionary? In writing his ABC Cantonese-English Comprehensive Dictionary 粵語英語大詞典 (Bauer 2020) over the past decade and a half, the author had to face and then answer appropriately each of these important questions. This article has described how he addressed and practically resolved these and other related problems.摘要:编写范围广泛的粤英双语词典之初，词典编撰者面临一系列甚具挑战 性的问题，这些问题对于成功创构这样一部耗时费力的词典至关重要。 要圆满解决的关键问题至少有以下八个：1)主要以什么标准指导词典 编撰者选择构成双语词典内容的粤语词项？此外，词汇内容的范围是 什么？是广泛的，包括所有除现在说香港粤语人士口语的词项，甚至 那些与标准汉语重叠的词项？或者，狭义的，只关注独特的香港粤语 词汇？2)关于词项的哪些类别的信息应该构成词条的结构内容？这些 可能包括词性、语域、相关词项的相互参照、同义词、替代或变异发 音和书面形式、例句等。3)粤语词项对应的英译应该有多详细？4)词 条应否包括有关其社会、文化、历史和政治关联、用法、词源（起源 和历史发展）等方面的信息？5)在词典中列出粤语词条的组织原则至 少有四个，而那些组织原则是什么？6)关于粤语发音，哪个语域发音 应该用拼音？保守的、文学的、标准的发音？还是口语化的、非正式 的、常用的懒音？或者这两种发音都应该用拼音？7)目前使用粤语的 拼音系统有好几种，那么哪一种最能代表当代香港粤语发音？8)鉴于 粤语的书面形式从未正式或官式标准化，因此一些词项通","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42497081","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-26DOI: 10.1353/jcl.2023.a902795
Zhongwei Shen
ABSTRACT:This article shows that the Qieyun rhymes are not necessarily different VC units (VC = vowel and ending), as initially defined by Karlgren in his work Études sur la phonologie chinoise (1915–1926). Karlgren's mistake creates a serious problem in the reconstruction of the vowel system of Middle Chinese. In the proposed reconstructions so far, excessive vocalic distinctions are required. This problem is well acknowledged but no explanations and solutions have been convincingly provided. Based on the information from the poetry rhyming before and at the same time of the Qieyun, our analyses of the Qieyun rhymes with the -ŋ ending indicate that 1) not all the Qieyun rhymes are different VCs, and 2) some Qieyun rhymes are the preservation of historical categories. With the new understanding of the nature of the Qieyun rhymes, the required main vowels of Middle Chinese can be significantly reduced. The twelve Qieyun rhymes with -ŋ require only six main vowels. The observation that not all the Qieyun rhymes are different VCs can be supported by the recent distribution analyses of the Qieyun rhymes. A fundamental viewpoint of this article is that in the study of the phonological history of Chinese, what should be reconstructed is the phonological system of Middle Chinese instead of the so-called "Qieyun system". Because the phonological categories contained in the Qieyun are neither synchronically systematic nor phonologically consistent, the Qieyun does not represent a single phonological system of any historical period in the phonological history of Chinese.摘要:本文指出高本汉把《切韵》中的"韵"定义为诗歌押韵中的"韵"是 个错误。汉字"韵"可以是韵书中称作为"韵"的分类单位，也可以 是诗歌押韵单位的"韵"。但是这两个概念从语言学上来说，并不等 同。由于高本汉的定义为学界广泛接受，韵类的语音构拟出现难以克 服的麻烦。主要问题是构拟的主要元音过多，形成了不合理的元音系 统。以带舌根鼻音韵尾-ŋ 的韵类为例，本文说明《切韵》中的不同韵 类并不都是韵基不同。通过对齐梁陈隋诗歌的押韵进行分析，结果显 示：《切韵》的韵类，1)有存古韵类，2)有韵基相同但是介音有别的 韵母。对比近年来对《切韵》韵类的分布分析，诗歌押韵和韵类分布 这两个互相独立的分析有倾向一致的结果，都显示了韵基大大少于 《切韵》中的韵类。因此，《切韵》中的韵类区别不应该是高本汉所 定义的区别，即韵基的不同。本文的基本观点是汉语音韵史研究中需 要构拟的是中古音系，而不是所谓的"切韵音系"。作为韵书，《切 韵》所包含的音类信息并不具有共时系统性，也不具有语音一致性， 因此不代表汉语语音史上任何时期的一个单一语音系统。
ABSTRACT: This article shows that the Qieyun rhymes are not necessarily different VC units (VC=vowel and ending), as initially defined by Karlgren in his work Å tubes sur la phonology chinoise (1915-1926) Karlgren's take creates a series problem in the reconstruction of the vowel system of Middle Chinese In the proposed constructions so far, exceptional vocal distinctions are required This problem is well acknowledged but no explanations and solutions have been convincingly provided Based on the information from the poetry rhyming before and at the same time of the Qieyun, our analyses of the Qieyun rhymes with the- ŋ Ending indicate that 1) not all the Qieyun rhymes are different VCs, and 2) some Qieyun rhymes are the preservation of historical categories With the new understanding of the nature of the Qieyun rhymes, the required main votes of Middle Chinese can be significantly reduced The twin Qieyun rhymes with- ŋ Require only six main votes The observation that not all the Qieyun rhymes are different VCs can be supported by the recent distribution analyses of the Qieyun rhymes A fundamental viewpoint of this article is that in the study of the physiological history of Chinese, what should be reconstructed is the physiological system of Middle Chinese install of the so called "Qieyun system" Because the physiological categories contained in the Qieyun are both synchronously systematic nor phonologically consistent, the Qieyun does not represent a single physiological system of any historical period in the physiological history of Chinese. Abstract: This article points out that Gao Benhan's definition of "rhyme" in "Qieyun" as "rhyme" in poetic rhyme is an error. The Chinese character "rhyme" can be a classification unit referred to as "rhyme" in rhyme books, or it can be a "rhyme" in poetic rhyme units. However, from a linguistic perspective, these two concepts are not equivalent. Due to the widely accepted definition of Gao Benhan in the academic community, the phonetic construction of rhymes has encountered difficulties that are difficult to overcome. The main problem is that there are too many main vowels constructed, forming an unreasonable vowel system. With a nasal rhyme with a tongue base- ŋ Taking the rhyme category as an example, this article explains that different rhyme categories in "Qieyun" are not all based on different rhyme bases. Through the analysis of the rhyme in the poetry of Qi, Liang, Chen, and Sui dynasties, the results show that the rhyme categories in "Qieyun" are: 1) there are ancient rhyme categories, and 2) there are vowels with the same rhyme base but different prepositions. Comparing the distribution analysis of rhyme categories in "Qieyun" in recent years, the two independent analyses of poetry rhyme and rhyme category distribution tend to have consistent results, both showing that the rhyme base is significantly less than the rhyme categories in "Qieyun". Therefore, the difference in rhyme categories in "Qi
{"title":"Understanding the Qieyun rhymes","authors":"Zhongwei Shen","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2023.a902795","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2023.a902795","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:This article shows that the Qieyun rhymes are not necessarily different VC units (VC = vowel and ending), as initially defined by Karlgren in his work Études sur la phonologie chinoise (1915–1926). Karlgren's mistake creates a serious problem in the reconstruction of the vowel system of Middle Chinese. In the proposed reconstructions so far, excessive vocalic distinctions are required. This problem is well acknowledged but no explanations and solutions have been convincingly provided. Based on the information from the poetry rhyming before and at the same time of the Qieyun, our analyses of the Qieyun rhymes with the -ŋ ending indicate that 1) not all the Qieyun rhymes are different VCs, and 2) some Qieyun rhymes are the preservation of historical categories. With the new understanding of the nature of the Qieyun rhymes, the required main vowels of Middle Chinese can be significantly reduced. The twelve Qieyun rhymes with -ŋ require only six main vowels. The observation that not all the Qieyun rhymes are different VCs can be supported by the recent distribution analyses of the Qieyun rhymes. A fundamental viewpoint of this article is that in the study of the phonological history of Chinese, what should be reconstructed is the phonological system of Middle Chinese instead of the so-called \"Qieyun system\". Because the phonological categories contained in the Qieyun are neither synchronically systematic nor phonologically consistent, the Qieyun does not represent a single phonological system of any historical period in the phonological history of Chinese.摘要:本文指出高本汉把《切韵》中的\"韵\"定义为诗歌押韵中的\"韵\"是 个错误。汉字\"韵\"可以是韵书中称作为\"韵\"的分类单位，也可以 是诗歌押韵单位的\"韵\"。但是这两个概念从语言学上来说，并不等 同。由于高本汉的定义为学界广泛接受，韵类的语音构拟出现难以克 服的麻烦。主要问题是构拟的主要元音过多，形成了不合理的元音系 统。以带舌根鼻音韵尾-ŋ 的韵类为例，本文说明《切韵》中的不同韵 类并不都是韵基不同。通过对齐梁陈隋诗歌的押韵进行分析，结果显 示：《切韵》的韵类，1)有存古韵类，2)有韵基相同但是介音有别的 韵母。对比近年来对《切韵》韵类的分布分析，诗歌押韵和韵类分布 这两个互相独立的分析有倾向一致的结果，都显示了韵基大大少于 《切韵》中的韵类。因此，《切韵》中的韵类区别不应该是高本汉所 定义的区别，即韵基的不同。本文的基本观点是汉语音韵史研究中需 要构拟的是中古音系，而不是所谓的\"切韵音系\"。作为韵书，《切 韵》所包含的音类信息并不具有共时系统性，也不具有语音一致性， 因此不代表汉语语音史上任何时期的一个单一语音系统。","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41844522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-26DOI: 10.1353/jcl.2023.a902792
W. Behr
ABSTRACT:Based on the single pre-Qin attestation of the compound yǎyán 雅言 in the Confucian Analects (Lúnyǔ 論語 7.18) the idea of a normative spoken standard language is often projected back by early modern and modern authors into remote pre-imperial antiquity. An overview of the conceptual history of the term and of the competing etymologies of yǎ in early Chinese texts is offered in order to problematize this "invented tradition" and its ideological baggage. Four types of evidence (uniformity of phonology and syntax in excavated texts, ode citation practices, phonophoric repair by double phonophoric characters, lexical variation) are then presented and their usefulness to support an early written standard of elite intercommunication is discussed. Straightforward creolization and mixed language accounting for the emergence of Old Chinese are rejected. Instead, a scenario of interrupted language transmission in a highly diverse linguistic Sprachbund area is sketched and argued to best account for the observed asymmetries between a high degree of early lexical and orthographical variation (including substrate influences) on the one hand, and phonological and syntactic uniformity of texts from geographically diverse areas on the other.摘要:有鑑於《論語》中「雅言」一詞僅見於先秦文獻記載中，現當代學者 往往將規範性標準語言此一觀念投射至上古時期。本文從「雅言」一 詞的概念史切入，綜述中國古代文獻中「雅」字的競爭性詞義，進而 對此「被發明的傳統」及其意識形態背景提出質疑。文中列舉了四種 證據類型，即各地出土文獻音系和句法的一致性、賦詩和引詩現象、 重聲字所反映的修復過程、詞彙的層次性，並探討了其對早期貴族之 間交流通用語所發揮的正面作用。筆者認為古漢語之形成無法與「克 里奧爾」或「混合語言」相提並論，將之視為語言聯盟中語言傳播中 斷下的產物，從而有效地解釋古漢語中所見的不對稱現象，例如：早 期詞彙（包括地層語）和文字系統之間存在明顯的地域性差異，但各 地出土文獻的語法和音位系統卻具有穩定的一致性。
ABSTRACT:Based on the single pre-Qin attestation of the compound yǎyán雅言in the Confucian Analects（Lúnyǔ 论语7.18）the idea of a normative spoken standard language is often projected back by early modern and modern authors into remote pre-imperial antiquity.An overview of the conceptual history of the term and of the competing etymologies of yǎ in early Chinese texts is offered in order to problematize this“invented tradition”and its ideological baggage.Four types of evidence（uniformity of phonology and syntax in excavated texts，ode citation practices，phonophoric repair by double phonophoric characters，lexical variation）are then presented and their usefulness to support an early written standard of elite intercommunication is discussed.Straightforward creolization and mixed language accounting for the emergence of Old Chinese are rejected.Instead，a scenario of interrupted language transmission in a highly diverse linguistic Sprachbund area is sketched and argued to best account for the observed asymmetries between a high degree of early lexical and orthographical variation（including substrate influences）on the one hand，and phonological and syntactic uniformity of texts from geographically diverse areas on the other.摘要：有鉴于《论语》中「雅言」一词仅见于先秦文献记载中，现当代学者往往将规范性标准语言此一观念投射至上古时期。本文从「雅言」一词的概念史切入，综述中国古代文献中「雅」字的竞争性词义，进而对此「被发明的传统」及其意识形态背景提出质疑。文中列举了四种证据类型，即各地出土文献音系和句法的一致性、赋诗和引诗现象、重声字所反映的修复过程、词汇的层次性，并探讨了其对早期贵族之间交流通用语所发挥的正面作用。笔者认为古汉语之形成无法与「克里奥尔」或「混合语言」相提并论，将之视为语言联盟中语言传播中断下的产物，从而有效地解释古汉语中所见的不对称现象，例如：早期词汇（包括地层语）和文字系统之间存在明显的地域性差异，但各地出土文献的语法和音位系统却具有稳定的一致性。
{"title":"Tracing variation in Old Chinese: What, if anything, was \"yǎyán 雅言\"?","authors":"W. Behr","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2023.a902792","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2023.a902792","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:Based on the single pre-Qin attestation of the compound yǎyán 雅言 in the Confucian Analects (Lúnyǔ 論語 7.18) the idea of a normative spoken standard language is often projected back by early modern and modern authors into remote pre-imperial antiquity. An overview of the conceptual history of the term and of the competing etymologies of yǎ in early Chinese texts is offered in order to problematize this \"invented tradition\" and its ideological baggage. Four types of evidence (uniformity of phonology and syntax in excavated texts, ode citation practices, phonophoric repair by double phonophoric characters, lexical variation) are then presented and their usefulness to support an early written standard of elite intercommunication is discussed. Straightforward creolization and mixed language accounting for the emergence of Old Chinese are rejected. Instead, a scenario of interrupted language transmission in a highly diverse linguistic Sprachbund area is sketched and argued to best account for the observed asymmetries between a high degree of early lexical and orthographical variation (including substrate influences) on the one hand, and phonological and syntactic uniformity of texts from geographically diverse areas on the other.摘要:有鑑於《論語》中「雅言」一詞僅見於先秦文獻記載中，現當代學者 往往將規範性標準語言此一觀念投射至上古時期。本文從「雅言」一 詞的概念史切入，綜述中國古代文獻中「雅」字的競爭性詞義，進而 對此「被發明的傳統」及其意識形態背景提出質疑。文中列舉了四種 證據類型，即各地出土文獻音系和句法的一致性、賦詩和引詩現象、 重聲字所反映的修復過程、詞彙的層次性，並探討了其對早期貴族之 間交流通用語所發揮的正面作用。筆者認為古漢語之形成無法與「克 里奧爾」或「混合語言」相提並論，將之視為語言聯盟中語言傳播中 斷下的產物，從而有效地解釋古漢語中所見的不對稱現象，例如：早 期詞彙（包括地層語）和文字系統之間存在明顯的地域性差異，但各 地出土文獻的語法和音位系統卻具有穩定的一致性。","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44263040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-26DOI: 10.1353/jcl.2023.a902793
W. S. Coblin
ABSTRACT:In his earlier Proto-Mǐn reconstructed phonological system the late Professor Jerry Norman posited three guttural fricative initials, i.e., *x-,*h-, and *-h-. In early unpublished manuscripts dealing with this system, *x- was classed as velar, while *h- and *-h- were described as laryngeals. Initial *x- was characterized as voiceless and *h- and *-h- as voiced. In Norman (1974), however, *h- was transcribed as phonetic [ɣ], a voiced velar (rather than laryngeal) fricative, while *-h- was interpreted as [ɦ], a voiced laryngeal. In his much more recent Common Mǐn system, as represented in certain of his final dialectological publications and posthumous papers, Norman posited one voiceless velar fricative, *x-, and two laryngeals, *h-, and *ɦ-, the former voiceless and the latter voiced. Additionally, he reconstructed a rounded semivowel, Common Mǐn *w-, which had not been explicitly mentioned in his published presentations of Proto-Mǐn but was posited without comment in manuscript materials in a single word, i.e., huáng 黃 "yellow". In the Common Mǐn system, on the other hand, this *w- plays a more prominent role and is also associated with the guttural fricatives in certain ways. The purpose of the present paper is to exemplify and compare Norman's new Common Mǐn *x-, *h-, *ɦ-, and *w-.摘要:上個世紀七八十年代之間，羅杰瑞先生構擬了眾所週知的"原始閩音" 系統。此系統含有三個口腔後的擦音聲母，即是*x-、*h-、*-h-。*x- 是清舌根音，而 *h- 與 *-h- 是濁喉音。在其 1974 年的一篇文章中， *h- 則轉寫為[ɣ]，濁舌根擦音，*-h- 為濁喉擦音 [ɦ]。到了九十年代晚 年，羅先生又進一步重建了一種新的閩音系統，稱之為"共同閩音"。 從那時起，共同閩音在羅先生的著作裡完全取代了之前的原始閩音。 共同閩音系統含有一個清舌根擦音*x-，以及兩個濁喉擦音：*h- 與 *ɦ-。 不過，除此之外還有一個半元音*w-，與*x-、*h-、*ɦ- 三個口腔後擦 音有非常密切的關係。這四個聲母之間的互相作用和影響都相當複雜， 與原始閩音系統裡的口腔後聲母的對應模式迥異。本文的目的即是探 討這四個共同閩音的聲母及其互相之間的關係。
{"title":"Guttural fricatives and initial *w- in common Mǐn","authors":"W. S. Coblin","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2023.a902793","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2023.a902793","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:In his earlier Proto-Mǐn reconstructed phonological system the late Professor Jerry Norman posited three guttural fricative initials, i.e., *x-,*h-, and *-h-. In early unpublished manuscripts dealing with this system, *x- was classed as velar, while *h- and *-h- were described as laryngeals. Initial *x- was characterized as voiceless and *h- and *-h- as voiced. In Norman (1974), however, *h- was transcribed as phonetic [ɣ], a voiced velar (rather than laryngeal) fricative, while *-h- was interpreted as [ɦ], a voiced laryngeal. In his much more recent Common Mǐn system, as represented in certain of his final dialectological publications and posthumous papers, Norman posited one voiceless velar fricative, *x-, and two laryngeals, *h-, and *ɦ-, the former voiceless and the latter voiced. Additionally, he reconstructed a rounded semivowel, Common Mǐn *w-, which had not been explicitly mentioned in his published presentations of Proto-Mǐn but was posited without comment in manuscript materials in a single word, i.e., huáng 黃 \"yellow\". In the Common Mǐn system, on the other hand, this *w- plays a more prominent role and is also associated with the guttural fricatives in certain ways. The purpose of the present paper is to exemplify and compare Norman's new Common Mǐn *x-, *h-, *ɦ-, and *w-.摘要:上個世紀七八十年代之間，羅杰瑞先生構擬了眾所週知的\"原始閩音\" 系統。此系統含有三個口腔後的擦音聲母，即是*x-、*h-、*-h-。*x- 是清舌根音，而 *h- 與 *-h- 是濁喉音。在其 1974 年的一篇文章中， *h- 則轉寫為[ɣ]，濁舌根擦音，*-h- 為濁喉擦音 [ɦ]。到了九十年代晚 年，羅先生又進一步重建了一種新的閩音系統，稱之為\"共同閩音\"。 從那時起，共同閩音在羅先生的著作裡完全取代了之前的原始閩音。 共同閩音系統含有一個清舌根擦音*x-，以及兩個濁喉擦音：*h- 與 *ɦ-。 不過，除此之外還有一個半元音*w-，與*x-、*h-、*ɦ- 三個口腔後擦 音有非常密切的關係。這四個聲母之間的互相作用和影響都相當複雜， 與原始閩音系統裡的口腔後聲母的對應模式迥異。本文的目的即是探 討這四個共同閩音的聲母及其互相之間的關係。","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46797414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-26DOI: 10.1353/jcl.2023.a902794
Hsin-I Hsieh
ABSTRACT:As Chinese linguistics encounters a more developed general linguistics, two opposite reactions emerged. One is to learn and imitate, while the other is to learn and innovate. As a visionary, William S-Y. Wang (1999) innovates. He rejected purely formal theories such as the Generative Grammar and envisioned an Indigenous Chinese Grammar (ICG) that takes culture into consideration. Echoing Wang's seminal vision, we offer a possible ICG. We focus on the perplexing pair of cai2 才 ('necessary') and jiu4 就 ('sufficient'). Both cai2 and jiu4 have divergent meanings that may be closely related, well related, remotely related, or even dubiously related. (See for example, you3qian2 cai2 jia4 ta1 'Marry him only if he is rich', ta1 cai2 lai2 'He has just come', wo3 cai2 you3qian2 'I am the one that has money', wo3 cai2 bu2 pao4 ne0 'I contrary to anybody's expectation am not afraid'.) Traditional formal theories seem unable to explain this wide range of divergence. But an Emergent Grammar (EG) can. Given a composition, EG enables its two elements to 'interact' into a largely unpredictable result. Free interactions in a specific context produce flexible results, making the derived meanings often unpredictable, as one would expect from a Complex system as opposed to a Complicated system. Realized as a complex-systematic approach to Chinese grammar, Wang's brilliant insight of ICG could well inspire and help launch a fresh advancement path in Chinese linguistics.摘要:当中国语言学面临比较先进的一般语言学挑战时，两个对立的反应出 现了。一个是学习与模仿，而另一个是学习与创新。作为一个有远见 的学者，王士元决定要创新。他拒绝了纯粹形式理论，例如生成语法， 而想象一个本土中文语法，能忠实展现底层中国文化特色。响应王的 创新视野，我们提出涌现语法理论，勾画一个可能的本土中文语法。 我们聚焦于令人困惑的"才"与"就"一对词。"才"与"就"都有 广泛的不同的意义。这些意义可能具有密切的，相当的，远程的，甚 或可疑的相互关联。例如，"有钱才嫁他啊""他才来""我才有钱" "我才不怕呢"。传统的形式理论看来无法解释这种广泛的分歧。但 是涌现语法能做到。针对一个复杂表达式，涌现语法使其中的两个成 分进行"互动"，来产生一个基本上不可预测的结果。具体语境中的 自由互动产生灵活的结果，导致派生的词义经常无法预测。 这就如新 的 复 合 系 统 (Complex System) 有 别 于 旧 的 复 杂 系 统 (Complicated System)所期望的一样。一旦实现为一个复合系统路径之后，王有关 本土中文语的真知灼见，很可能激发而促成一个前所未有的中国语言 学前进的新方向。
{"title":"The idea of an indigenous Chinese grammar","authors":"Hsin-I Hsieh","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2023.a902794","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2023.a902794","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:As Chinese linguistics encounters a more developed general linguistics, two opposite reactions emerged. One is to learn and imitate, while the other is to learn and innovate. As a visionary, William S-Y. Wang (1999) innovates. He rejected purely formal theories such as the Generative Grammar and envisioned an Indigenous Chinese Grammar (ICG) that takes culture into consideration. Echoing Wang's seminal vision, we offer a possible ICG. We focus on the perplexing pair of cai2 才 ('necessary') and jiu4 就 ('sufficient'). Both cai2 and jiu4 have divergent meanings that may be closely related, well related, remotely related, or even dubiously related. (See for example, you3qian2 cai2 jia4 ta1 'Marry him only if he is rich', ta1 cai2 lai2 'He has just come', wo3 cai2 you3qian2 'I am the one that has money', wo3 cai2 bu2 pao4 ne0 'I contrary to anybody's expectation am not afraid'.) Traditional formal theories seem unable to explain this wide range of divergence. But an Emergent Grammar (EG) can. Given a composition, EG enables its two elements to 'interact' into a largely unpredictable result. Free interactions in a specific context produce flexible results, making the derived meanings often unpredictable, as one would expect from a Complex system as opposed to a Complicated system. Realized as a complex-systematic approach to Chinese grammar, Wang's brilliant insight of ICG could well inspire and help launch a fresh advancement path in Chinese linguistics.摘要:当中国语言学面临比较先进的一般语言学挑战时，两个对立的反应出 现了。一个是学习与模仿，而另一个是学习与创新。作为一个有远见 的学者，王士元决定要创新。他拒绝了纯粹形式理论，例如生成语法， 而想象一个本土中文语法，能忠实展现底层中国文化特色。响应王的 创新视野，我们提出涌现语法理论，勾画一个可能的本土中文语法。 我们聚焦于令人困惑的\"才\"与\"就\"一对词。\"才\"与\"就\"都有 广泛的不同的意义。这些意义可能具有密切的，相当的，远程的，甚 或可疑的相互关联。例如，\"有钱才嫁他啊\"\"他才来\"\"我才有钱\" \"我才不怕呢\"。传统的形式理论看来无法解释这种广泛的分歧。但 是涌现语法能做到。针对一个复杂表达式，涌现语法使其中的两个成 分进行\"互动\"，来产生一个基本上不可预测的结果。具体语境中的 自由互动产生灵活的结果，导致派生的词义经常无法预测。 这就如新 的 复 合 系 统 (Complex System) 有 别 于 旧 的 复 杂 系 统 (Complicated System)所期望的一样。一旦实现为一个复合系统路径之后，王有关 本土中文语的真知灼见，很可能激发而促成一个前所未有的中国语言 学前进的新方向。","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42484599","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-26DOI: 10.1353/jcl.2023.a902796
Chaofen Sun
ABSTRACT:This paper focuses on declarative sentences to demonstrate how four major concepts: changeability, actuality, durationality and telicity, work together in shaping Chinese finite clauses. In the Chinese lexicon there are changeable and unchangeable verbs distinguished by the latter's inability to co-occur with aspect particles in a finite clause. The changeable declaratives are further divided into two kinds: durational and nondurational, as the latter cannot occur alone without either the perfective le1 in realis, or a modal auxiliary. Moreover, the durational declaratives can occur in either irrealis modality negated by bù or realis modality negated by měi(yǒu). The declarative sentences for durational events are linguistically distinct in terms of telicity: the progressive zài and imperfective zhe are atelic, and the perfective le1 and experiential guo are telic. Just like other world languages as was noted by Givón (1995, 2001), Chinese finiteness is also characteristically gradient, with the least finite forms functioning like a noun and the most finite forms functioning as a declarative sentence with an obligatory aspect particle.摘要:汉语定式句为陈述句，有四个特征：可变、实现、持续和终结。作为 陈述句，可变类受词汇限制，不可变动词可直接完句，但不可带体 词。可变类分持续和不可持续两类。不可持续的动词无情态助词或完 成体标记时不能单独完句。持续类又可分为现实和非现实两类，非现 实类否定用"不"，现实类否定用"没(有)"。现实类的标志为四个 体标记：非终结性的进行体"在"和非完成体"着"以及终结性的经 验体"过"和完成体"了1"。根据Givón (1995, 2001)的理论，具有上 述特征的汉语定式系统是一个连续统，一端为作名词用的不定式通用 动词，中间为非现实定式陈述句，另一端为动词带有体标记的定式 陈述句。
{"title":"Chinese finiteness: Changeability, actuality, durationality and telicity","authors":"Chaofen Sun","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2023.a902796","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2023.a902796","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:This paper focuses on declarative sentences to demonstrate how four major concepts: changeability, actuality, durationality and telicity, work together in shaping Chinese finite clauses. In the Chinese lexicon there are changeable and unchangeable verbs distinguished by the latter's inability to co-occur with aspect particles in a finite clause. The changeable declaratives are further divided into two kinds: durational and nondurational, as the latter cannot occur alone without either the perfective le1 in realis, or a modal auxiliary. Moreover, the durational declaratives can occur in either irrealis modality negated by bù or realis modality negated by měi(yǒu). The declarative sentences for durational events are linguistically distinct in terms of telicity: the progressive zài and imperfective zhe are atelic, and the perfective le1 and experiential guo are telic. Just like other world languages as was noted by Givón (1995, 2001), Chinese finiteness is also characteristically gradient, with the least finite forms functioning like a noun and the most finite forms functioning as a declarative sentence with an obligatory aspect particle.摘要:汉语定式句为陈述句，有四个特征：可变、实现、持续和终结。作为 陈述句，可变类受词汇限制，不可变动词可直接完句，但不可带体 词。可变类分持续和不可持续两类。不可持续的动词无情态助词或完 成体标记时不能单独完句。持续类又可分为现实和非现实两类，非现 实类否定用\"不\"，现实类否定用\"没(有)\"。现实类的标志为四个 体标记：非终结性的进行体\"在\"和非完成体\"着\"以及终结性的经 验体\"过\"和完成体\"了1\"。根据Givón (1995, 2001)的理论，具有上 述特征的汉语定式系统是一个连续统，一端为作名词用的不定式通用 动词，中间为非现实定式陈述句，另一端为动词带有体标记的定式 陈述句。","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47632915","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-26DOI: 10.1353/jcl.2023.a902797
Wei-tien Dylan Tsai
ABSTRACT:Chinese wh-conditionals hold a very special status in linguistic typology. Cheng and Huang (1996) argues that the construction can be properly analyzed by treating a pair of identical wh-expressions as syntactic variables unselectively bound by an implicit necessity operator. Over the years, this line of thinking has been challenged by various proposals based on the comparison with indefinites, correlatives, E-type pronouns and questions. This Insight article argues for the unselective binding approach to this particular type of donkey sentences by alluding to quantificational reflexive doubling. Our findings not only lend support to the idea that an operator-variable pair is built on a sentential scale in Chinese, but also call for a fine-grained syntax and semantics of the typological correlations between reflexives and wh-in-situ.摘要:汉语的疑问词条件句在语言类型学中有其特殊的地位：Cheng & Huang (1996) 认为，将一对相同的疑问词分析为句法变量，并藉由隐性必要 算子进行无择约束，即可正确分析这类结构。基于无定名词组、对接 关系句、E 型代词和疑问结构的比较，多年来此一思路受到了来自各 方的挑战。本文鉴于量化性反身重复的平行用法，指出无择约束仍是 这类特殊驴子句的最佳分析。此一发现不仅支持汉语以语句规模来建 构「算子─变项」配对的观点，更敦促学界对反身词和在位疑问词的 类型关联进行更为细致的句法和语义研究。
ABSTRACT: Chinese wh conditions hold a very special status in linguistic typology Cheng and Huang (1996) argue that the construction can be properly analyzed by treating a pair of identical wh expressions as syntactic variables unselectively bound by an implicit necessity operator Over the years, this line of thinking has been challenged by various proposals based on the comparison with definitions, correlations, E-type pronouns and questions This Insight article arguments for the unselective binding approach to this specific type of donkey sentiments by allowing to quantify reflex doubling Our findings not only lend support to the idea that an operator variable pair is built on a essential scale in Chinese, but also calls for a fine-grained syntax and semantics of the typological correlations between reflexes and wh-in-situ, And by using implicit necessary operators for non selective constraints, such structures can be correctly analyzed. Over the years, this approach has been challenged by various parties based on the comparison of indefinite noun groups, connected relative sentences, E-type pronouns, and interrogative structures. Given the parallel usage of quantitative reflexive repetition, this article points out that non selective constraints are still the best analysis for this type of special donkey sentence. This discovery not only supports the view that Chinese constructs "operator variable" pairs based on sentence size, but also urges the academic community to conduct more detailed syntactic and semantic research on the type associations between reflexives and in place interrogative words.
{"title":"Wh & self: On correlating wh-conditionals and reflexive doubling","authors":"Wei-tien Dylan Tsai","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2023.a902797","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2023.a902797","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:Chinese wh-conditionals hold a very special status in linguistic typology. Cheng and Huang (1996) argues that the construction can be properly analyzed by treating a pair of identical wh-expressions as syntactic variables unselectively bound by an implicit necessity operator. Over the years, this line of thinking has been challenged by various proposals based on the comparison with indefinites, correlatives, E-type pronouns and questions. This Insight article argues for the unselective binding approach to this particular type of donkey sentences by alluding to quantificational reflexive doubling. Our findings not only lend support to the idea that an operator-variable pair is built on a sentential scale in Chinese, but also call for a fine-grained syntax and semantics of the typological correlations between reflexives and wh-in-situ.摘要:汉语的疑问词条件句在语言类型学中有其特殊的地位：Cheng & Huang (1996) 认为，将一对相同的疑问词分析为句法变量，并藉由隐性必要 算子进行无择约束，即可正确分析这类结构。基于无定名词组、对接 关系句、E 型代词和疑问结构的比较，多年来此一思路受到了来自各 方的挑战。本文鉴于量化性反身重复的平行用法，指出无择约束仍是 这类特殊驴子句的最佳分析。此一发现不仅支持汉语以语句规模来建 构「算子─变项」配对的观点，更敦促学界对反身词和在位疑问词的 类型关联进行更为细致的句法和语义研究。","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42829132","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1353/jcl.2023.a902789
Wilhelm Wang
{"title":"A half-century of JCL","authors":"Wilhelm Wang","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2023.a902789","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2023.a902789","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43727683","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1353/jcl.2023.a902790
Shengli Feng, Jie Xu, Virginia Yip
{"title":"JCL, 50 years on","authors":"Shengli Feng, Jie Xu, Virginia Yip","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2023.a902790","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2023.a902790","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47358800","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：