Existential and locative constructions in Mandarin Chinese

Abstract Despite previous studies (cf. among others Huang 1987. Existential sentences in Chinese and (in)definiteness. In Eric J. Reuland & Alice G.B. Ter Meulen (eds.), The representation of (In)definiteness, 226–253. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; Li, Yen-Hui Audrey. 1990. Order and constituency in Mandarin Chinese. Dordrecht: Kluwer; Li, Yen-Hui Audrey. 1998. Two types of existential sentences. Illinois Papers in Linguistics 26. 175–191; Pan, Haihua. 1996. Imperfective aspect zhe, agent deletion, and locative inversion in Mandarin Chinese. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14(2). 409–432), the defining characteristics of existential sentences in Chinese (including potential equivalents of locative inversion in English) have remained controversial. This is shown to be due to the failure to acknowledge the existence of two different constructions, the existential construction (ExC) ‘Ø V DP’ where a sentence-initial phrase indicating location (PlaceP) is not required, on the one hand, and the locative construction (LoC) with an obligatory PlaceP, on the other: ‘PlaceP V DP’. Only the ExC can serve as a diagnostic context for unaccusative verbs, whereas the LoC allows for a wide range of verbs, including a subset of unergative verbs. Furthermore, two types of LoC need to be distinguished, depending on the type of aspect (perfective aspect -le vs imperfective aspect -zhe), giving rise to different semantics. Both have, however, in common that the PlaceP occupies the subject position (SpecTP), not the topic position, and that it is merged in SpecTP, not moved there, as evidenced by the systematic lack of a corresponding source structure with the PlaceP in postverbal position.