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 In early unpublished manuscripts dealing with this system, *x- was classed as velar, while *h- and *-h- were described as laryngeals.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-.
{"title":"GUTTURAL FRICATIVES AND INITIAL *w- IN COMMON MǏN","authors":"W. S. Coblin","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2017.0134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2017.0134","url":null,"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 In early unpublished manuscripts dealing with this system, *x- was classed as velar, while *h- and *-h- were described as laryngeals.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-.","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47055305","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}
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.
本文表明，清韵韵并不一定是不同的VC单位(VC =元音和词尾)，这是由Karlgren在他的著作Études sur la phonologie chinoise(1915-1926)中最初定义的。Karlgren的错误给中古汉语元音系统的重建带来了严重的问题。在目前提出的重建中，需要过多的语音区分。这个问题是公认的，但没有令人信服的解释和解决方案。通过对齐韵之前和同一时期的诗韵资料的分析，我们发现，并非所有的齐韵韵都是不同的韵母，有些齐韵韵是历史范畴的保留。随着对切韵韵性质的新认识，中古汉语所需的主元音可以大大减少。12个带-音的切韵韵只需要6个主元音。并不是所有的切韵韵都是不同的vc，这一观察可以通过最近的切韵韵分布分析得到支持。本文的一个基本观点是，在汉语音韵史研究中，应该重构的是中古汉语的音系，而不是所谓的“谐韵系”。由于《齐韵》所包含的音系范畴既不具有共时系统，也不具有音系一致性，因此《齐韵》并不代表汉语音系史上任何一个历史时期的单一音系。
{"title":"UNDERSTANDING THE QIEYUN RHYMES","authors":"Zhongwei Shen","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2017.0139","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2017.0139","url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43626000","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}
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.
{"title":"WH & SELF: ON CORRELATING WH-CONDITIONALS AND REFLEXIVE DOUBLING","authors":"Wei-tien Dylan Tsai","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2017.0135","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2017.0135","url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43861554","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}
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.
{"title":"THE IDEA OF AN INDIGENOUS CHINESE GRAMMAR","authors":"Hsin-I Hsieh","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2017.0138","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2017.0138","url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47153247","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}
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.
{"title":"CHINESE FINITENESS: CHANGEABILITY, ACTUALITY, DURATIONALITY AND TELICITY","authors":"Chaofen Sun","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2017.0140","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2017.0140","url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47792988","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}
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 inter-communication 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.
{"title":"TRACING VARIATION IN OLD CHINESE: WHAT, IF ANYTHING, WAS “YǍYÁN 雅言”?","authors":"W. Behr","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2017.0137","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2017.0137","url":null,"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 inter-communication 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.","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47360392","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}
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.
{"title":"CHALLENGING ISSUES IN CANTONESE-ENGLISH LEXICOGRAPHY","authors":"Robert S. Bauer","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2017.0136","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2017.0136","url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43370514","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}
ABSTRACT:Wh-question phrases in Mandarin remain in-situ at their base position (e.g., John bought what?). Although theoretical studies show that there is a covert dependency between the in-situ question word/phrase and SpecCP, little is known how this dependency is evidenced in the processing of Mandarin wh-in-situ questions. In addition, bare Mandarin wh-phrases like shéi 'who' are different from complex ones like nǎge tóngxué 'which classmate', as the former are known as wh-indeterminates, on a par with indefinites (Cheng 1991), while the latter are considered on a par with definites (Rullmann and Beck 1998). To uncover the processing mechanism of wh-in-situ questions, we conducted two self-paced reading studies where we compared their processing behavior with that of their declarative counterparts. Specifically, and due to the claims made in the literature regarding the nature of bare and complex wh-questions, we compared bare wh-questions with declarative counterparts that contained indefinites, and complex wh-questions with declarative counterparts that contained definites. Our findings show that, regardless of their bare or complex nature, wh-questions were in general processed with more cost (i.e., reading delay) than their declarative counterparts, providing evidence that a covert-dependency is built in wh-questions. In particular, based on our results we claim that after reading the core whelement, the parser immediately starts the process of resolving the wh-question interpretation by establishing the covert dependency.摘要:汉语普通话的特殊疑问句是在位疑问句，即疑问词的位置和陈述句对应名词的位置相同(例如"约翰买了什么？")，并不移到句首。理论语言学的研究表明，在位的疑问词与句子左缘的 SpecCP 存在隐性的依存关系，但这种依存关系能否从在线句子加工中找到证据，尚不得而知。除此之外，光杆疑问词(例如"谁")与复杂的疑问词(例如"哪个同学")本质不同，因为前者是 wh-不定指，类似于不定代词 (Cheng 1991), 而后者性质与有定代词类似 (Rullmann and Beck, 1998)。为了更好地揭示普通话特殊疑问句的加工机制，文章进行了两个自控步速阅读实验，来对比疑问句和对应陈述句的加工模式。具体说来，根据文献中对光杆疑问词和复杂疑问词的区分，我们分别对比了光杆疑问句和包含了对应不定代词陈述句的加工区别，以及复杂疑问句和包含了对应有定代词陈述句的加工区别。研究结果表明，尽管疑问词的性质有光杆和复杂之分，疑问句整体上都要比对应陈述句加工成本更高 (即需要更多的加工时间) 。这为普通话特殊疑问句中隐性依存关系的建构提供了在线加工上的证据。此外，实验的结果显示，只要阅读到 wh-成分 (例如"哪个"、"谁") ，被试就开始了疑问依存关系的建构，不需要读完整个词组 (例如"哪个同学")。
ABSTRACT: Wh question phrases in Mandarin remain in situ at their base position (e.g., John bought what?) Although theoretical studies show that there is a cover dependency between the in situ question word/phrase and SpecCP, little is known how this dependency is evinced in the processing of Mandarin wh-in-situ questions In addition, bar Mandarin wh phrases like sh é i 'who' are different from complex ones like n ǎ Ge t ó ngxu é 'which classmate', as the former are known as wh indicators, on a par with definitions (Cheng 1991), while the latter are considered on a par with definitions (Rullmann and Beck 1998) To uncover the processing mechanism of wh-in-situ questions, we conducted two self paced reading studies where we compared their processing behavior with that of their declarative counterparts Specifically, and due to the claims made in the quality regulation of the nature of bare and complex wh questions, we compared bare wh questions with declarative counterparts that contained definitions, and complex wh questions with declarative counterparts that contained definitions Our findings show that, regulations of their bare or complex nature, wh questions were in general processed with more cost (i.e., reading delay) than their declarative counterparts, providing evidence that a cover dependency is built in wh questions In particular, based on our results we claim that after reading the core element, the parser immediately starts the process of resolving the wh question interpretation by examining the cover dependency. Abstract: Special questions in Mandarin Chinese are in place questions, where the position of the question word is the same as the position of the corresponding noun in the declarative sentence (such as "What did John buy?") and do not move to the beginning of the sentence. Theoretical linguistics research has shown that there is an implicit dependency relationship between the interrogative words in place and the SpecCP at the left edge of the sentence, but it is not yet known whether this dependency relationship can be found in online sentence processing. In addition, bare rod interrogative words (such as "who") are fundamentally different from complex interrogative words (such as "which classmate") because the former is a wh indefinite referent, similar to an indefinite pronoun (Cheng 1991), while the latter has properties similar to a definite pronoun (Rullmann and Beck, 1998). In order to better reveal the processing mechanism of special interrogative sentences in Mandarin, the article conducted two self paced reading experiments to compare the processing patterns of interrogative sentences and corresponding declarative sentences. Specifically, based on the distinction between bare pole interrogative words and complex interrogative words in the literature, we compared the processing differences between bare pole interrogative sentences and declarative sentences containing corresponding indefinite pronouns, as well as the pr
{"title":"The processing mechanisms of Mandarin wh-questions","authors":"Yang Yang, Leticia Pablos, L. Cheng","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2023.0009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2023.0009","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:Wh-question phrases in Mandarin remain in-situ at their base position (e.g., John bought what?). Although theoretical studies show that there is a covert dependency between the in-situ question word/phrase and SpecCP, little is known how this dependency is evidenced in the processing of Mandarin wh-in-situ questions. In addition, bare Mandarin wh-phrases like shéi 'who' are different from complex ones like nǎge tóngxué 'which classmate', as the former are known as wh-indeterminates, on a par with indefinites (Cheng 1991), while the latter are considered on a par with definites (Rullmann and Beck 1998). To uncover the processing mechanism of wh-in-situ questions, we conducted two self-paced reading studies where we compared their processing behavior with that of their declarative counterparts. Specifically, and due to the claims made in the literature regarding the nature of bare and complex wh-questions, we compared bare wh-questions with declarative counterparts that contained indefinites, and complex wh-questions with declarative counterparts that contained definites. Our findings show that, regardless of their bare or complex nature, wh-questions were in general processed with more cost (i.e., reading delay) than their declarative counterparts, providing evidence that a covert-dependency is built in wh-questions. In particular, based on our results we claim that after reading the core whelement, the parser immediately starts the process of resolving the wh-question interpretation by establishing the covert dependency.摘要:汉语普通话的特殊疑问句是在位疑问句，即疑问词的位置和陈述句对应名词的位置相同(例如\"约翰买了什么？\")，并不移到句首。理论语言学的研究表明，在位的疑问词与句子左缘的 SpecCP 存在隐性的依存关系，但这种依存关系能否从在线句子加工中找到证据，尚不得而知。除此之外，光杆疑问词(例如\"谁\")与复杂的疑问词(例如\"哪个同学\")本质不同，因为前者是 wh-不定指，类似于不定代词 (Cheng 1991), 而后者性质与有定代词类似 (Rullmann and Beck, 1998)。为了更好地揭示普通话特殊疑问句的加工机制，文章进行了两个自控步速阅读实验，来对比疑问句和对应陈述句的加工模式。具体说来，根据文献中对光杆疑问词和复杂疑问词的区分，我们分别对比了光杆疑问句和包含了对应不定代词陈述句的加工区别，以及复杂疑问句和包含了对应有定代词陈述句的加工区别。研究结果表明，尽管疑问词的性质有光杆和复杂之分，疑问句整体上都要比对应陈述句加工成本更高 (即需要更多的加工时间) 。这为普通话特殊疑问句中隐性依存关系的建构提供了在线加工上的证据。此外，实验的结果显示，只要阅读到 wh-成分 (例如\"哪个\"、\"谁\") ，被试就开始了疑问依存关系的建构，不需要读完整个词组 (例如\"哪个同学\")。","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49101675","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}
This paper discusses the property of voicing and releasing in coda stops in Old Chinese, which is of great significance to the phonetic types and historical comparison between Chinese and Tibetan Languages. The nature of Old Chinese is mainly based on the historical comparison between Chinese and Tibetan Languages and Chinese loan words in other languages. For example, in Ancient Tibetan the stop codas were transcribed to voiced letters. The majority of bound function words in Classical Tibetan have two variants based on whether the preceding codas are voiced or not. The /-l(-r)/ coda in the ancient Chinese northern languages and early Sanskrit-Chinese phonetic transcription comes from the /-d/ coda. Old Chinese loan words in Japanese have voiced stop codas. Modern Chinese dialects also have voiced stop codas. In addition, stop codas in Tibetan Xigaze, Balti, Lajiao and other dialects, Xifan yiyu and Qiang languages all have the nature of releasing. The “broken tone” in Chinese is caused by a released glottal stop.
{"title":"The Voiced and Released Stop Codas Of Old Chinese","authors":"Wuyun Pan, Zining Zheng","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2017.0133","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2017.0133","url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses the property of voicing and releasing in coda stops in Old Chinese, which is of great significance to the phonetic types and historical comparison between Chinese and Tibetan Languages. The nature of Old Chinese is mainly based on the historical comparison between Chinese and Tibetan Languages and Chinese loan words in other languages. For example, in Ancient Tibetan the stop codas were transcribed to voiced letters. The majority of bound function words in Classical Tibetan have two variants based on whether the preceding codas are voiced or not. The /-l(-r)/ coda in the ancient Chinese northern languages and early Sanskrit-Chinese phonetic transcription comes from the /-d/ coda. Old Chinese loan words in Japanese have voiced stop codas. Modern Chinese dialects also have voiced stop codas. In addition, stop codas in Tibetan Xigaze, Balti, Lajiao and other dialects, Xifan yiyu and Qiang languages all have the nature of releasing. The “broken tone” in Chinese is caused by a released glottal stop.","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66396441","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}
{"title":"Exploring the Low Applicative","authors":"Yafei Li, Zhe Chen","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2017.0132","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2017.0132","url":null,"abstract":"<span>摘要</span>\u0000<p>Pylkkäne把施用结构分为高低两层，为处理施用论元的跨语言语法行为提供了新的视角和分析方法。然而，其对低层施用词素ApplL的处理方法存在多重根本性问题，其中最显著的问题是在语义上把ApplL 当作VP的论元，但在句法上却当作VP的内部成分。这显然与论元关系所呈现出的句法-语义高度一致性相违背。针对这些问题，本文提出了新的解决方案，设定了ApplL的两个功能：1)引进施用论元，并界定施用论元和受事论元之间的所有者和被所有者关系；2)核查V所指称的事件是否允准所有者关系的转移。这两大功能决定了ApplL和V之间不可能存在论元关系或修饰关系，而只能把两种独立的语法信息直接叠加，共同构成相关句法成分的核心内容。令ApplL类比φ特征，V类比T，两者组合构成V-ApplL。在句法语义规则限制下，组合结果既能解释低层施用论元的语法语义行为，又能避免Pylkkänen理论的弊病。</p>","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138525774","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：