论ReasonP的地位

IF 0.1 4区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS International Journal of Chinese Linguistics Pub Date : 2021-12-31 DOI:10.1075/ijchl.20017.yan
B. Yang
{"title":"论ReasonP的地位","authors":"B. Yang","doi":"10.1075/ijchl.20017.yan","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe position of the reason-asking ‘why’ has been under much discussion for the past few years. Although some have suggested that it is situated within the CP domain, its exact position varies depending on different proposals. Meanwhile, a noncanonical why-like ‘what’ has also attracted much attention. Some assume it to be merged to the top of a sentence while some assume it to be merged lower. In this study, new evidence is provided to show that in Chinese the reason-asking ‘why’ should be merged to the Int(errogative)P in the CP zone, confirming Rizzi’s (2001) and Tsai’s (2008) claims, whereas the why-like ‘what’ should be merged as low as in vP but target the topmost of a clause, supposedly ForceP, by covert movement.","PeriodicalId":41020,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the position of ReasonP\",\"authors\":\"B. Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/ijchl.20017.yan\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe position of the reason-asking ‘why’ has been under much discussion for the past few years. Although some have suggested that it is situated within the CP domain, its exact position varies depending on different proposals. Meanwhile, a noncanonical why-like ‘what’ has also attracted much attention. Some assume it to be merged to the top of a sentence while some assume it to be merged lower. In this study, new evidence is provided to show that in Chinese the reason-asking ‘why’ should be merged to the Int(errogative)P in the CP zone, confirming Rizzi’s (2001) and Tsai’s (2008) claims, whereas the why-like ‘what’ should be merged as low as in vP but target the topmost of a clause, supposedly ForceP, by covert movement.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41020,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Chinese Linguistics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Chinese Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/ijchl.20017.yan\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Chinese Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/ijchl.20017.yan","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

问“为什么”的立场在过去的几年里一直在讨论。尽管有些人认为它位于CP域中,但它的确切位置因不同的提议而异。与此同时,一个非规范的“为什么”之类的“什么”也引起了很多关注。有些人认为它被合并到句子的顶部,而有些人认为它被合并到句子的底部。在这项研究中,提供了新的证据表明,在汉语中,询问原因的“为什么”应该合并到CP区域的Int(错误的)P中,证实了Rizzi(2001)和Tsai(2008)的说法,而类似“为什么”的“什么”应该合并到vP中,但通过隐蔽运动针对一个从句的最顶端,据说是ForceP。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
On the position of ReasonP
The position of the reason-asking ‘why’ has been under much discussion for the past few years. Although some have suggested that it is situated within the CP domain, its exact position varies depending on different proposals. Meanwhile, a noncanonical why-like ‘what’ has also attracted much attention. Some assume it to be merged to the top of a sentence while some assume it to be merged lower. In this study, new evidence is provided to show that in Chinese the reason-asking ‘why’ should be merged to the Int(errogative)P in the CP zone, confirming Rizzi’s (2001) and Tsai’s (2008) claims, whereas the why-like ‘what’ should be merged as low as in vP but target the topmost of a clause, supposedly ForceP, by covert movement.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊最新文献
Problems with universal metrics 形容词并列短语对其关联词的选择 The ho-V construction in Taiwanese Southern Min and the degree-introducing morpheme ho and u Review of Cai (2022): Teaching and Researching Chinese Second Language Listening 同源異形漢字考六則
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1