To explore the multiple senses latent in piong3, we have taken up the notion of frames proposed by Fillmore (1985) and have also referred to the new insights into the formation of constructions as stipulated by Goldberg (1995, 2005, 2006) to account for the verbal polysemy denoted by piong3. We have argued at length that the delicate differences in nuances which can be created by piong3 can only be identified when its verbal usages, constructions, and frames are taken into consideration.
Furthermore, we demonstrate that the extended meanings denoted by piong3 can be linked to its typical use through various metaphors and metonymies such as
CONTAINER, EVENT STRUCTURE, CHANGE OF STATE AS CHANGE OF LOCATION
metaphors and ACTION FOR RESULT metonymy.
Both phrasal and sentential constructions have been examined. At the phrasal
level, the typical use of piong3 describes a change of location, signifying ‘to put’, ‘to put (place) in a location’ and ‘to put (place) something for a prolonged time’ as indicated by the rectangles A, A’, and A’’. Next, strengthened by the causal relation, the use of piong3 comes to denote ‘to add’ as represented in Rectangle B. Next, motivated by metaphor or metonymy, the extended use of piong3 indicates a change of state, signifying ‘to release’ or ‘to relieve’ as shown in Ellipse C. On the other hand, the interplay between piong3 and the various complements (i.e., path and result) enriches the semantics of the basic piong3 in that the path of the motion and the resultant state of certain participants are overtly expressed.
At the sentential level, we have explored canonical and non-canonical constructions denoted by piong3. With regard to the canonical construction, the agent is mapped to the subject; the theme to the object; and the location to an oblique. Two canonical patterns are represented in the piong3 constructions in that they differ in their oblique positions (i.e., constructions with a preverbal or a postverbal locative phrases) and in the choice of locative markers. The construction with a preverbal locative phrase (introduced by dai (待)) typically highlights the starting point of the event, whereas one with a postverbal locative phrase (introduced by du3 (佇) or do3 (到)) emphasizes the very moment at which an action is completed. As for the non-canonical constructions (including TUNG constructions, locative inversion, and the deprofiled object constructions), certain obligatory participants are syntactically unexpressed owing to certain pragmatic factors.
Figure 5 The interrelated senses denoted by piong3
Several issues remain to be resolved with regard to the phenomena in question.
First of all, as demonstrated above, Hakka piong3 in the examples in the caused-motion construction shows a strikingly similar pattern of polysemy. Inherited from the central sense, each of the extensions can be applied to a minimally different construction such as the ditransitive construction as exemplified in (11). The phenomenon captures the semantic relation between the caused-motion construction and the ditransitive construction remains for future study. Furthermore, issues related to the congeners of piong3, their interplay with various constructions, and their degree of lexicalization still remain to be explored. Hence, a detailed analysis of these congeners requires future research. Finally, and most importantly, the establishment of a systematic Hakka database will be a paramount task in the near future as it will be able to provide more authentic linguistic sources to advance Hakka studies.
NOTES
* This study is partially based on the NSC research project 客語近義動詞之詞彙化類型 (NSC-90-2411-H-004-013). An early version of this paper was presented at Chinese Lexical Semantics Workshop 2007. Special thanks extend to Chin-Chuan Cheng and Chinfa Lien for their valuable comments and suggestions.
i The Hakka data set comes from daily use of Dongshi Hakka, Hakka magazine (客家雜 誌), and Hakka Stories from Dongshi (1) to (7) (東勢客語故事集一~七).
ii There are certain dialectal differences among the sub-dialects of Hakka, including Hailu Hakka, Northern Sixian Hakka, Southern Sixian Hakka, and Taipu Hakka (Dongshi). The data presented in this paper are derived chiefly from Taipu Hakka (Dongshi). The pronunciation of the Hakka is rendered according to The Manual of Taiwan Hakka Tongyong Romanization System (台灣客語通用拼音使用手冊), authorized by the Ministry of Education in Taiwan, is used to render the Hakka pronunciation.
iii The following abbreviations are used for their corresponding grammatical functions: PM, a patient marker; LOC, location; CL, a classifier; COMP, a complementizer; CP, a complement; NEG, a negative marker; REFL, reflexive. SFP, a sentence final particle; ASP, an aspect marker; GE, de; TUNG, a patient marker; DET, a determiner; KIN, a durative marker; DU, a marker of the end of location of the motion; and AUX, an auxiliary verb.
iv The fusion of the participant roles of a verb with the argument roles of a construction must conform to two general principles: the Semantic Coherence Principle and the Correspondence Principle. The former guarantees semantic compatibility of the participant roles and argument roles. In other words, the more specific participant roles of a verb must be qualified as an instance of the more general argument roles of a construction. On the other hand, the default principle, the Correspondence Principle, ensures that each obligatory lexically-profiled participant role must be fused with an argument role of the construction.
v There are various types of part-and-part relations such as Action ICM, Perception ICM, Causation ICM, and Containment ICM. In their discussion of Action ICM, Kovecses and Radden (1998) indicate that there are types of metonymic relationships within an Action ICM, including ACTION-FOR-RESULT, INSTRUMENT-FOR-ACTION, AGENT-FOR-ACTION, ACTION-FOR-AGENT, OBJECT-FOR-ACTION, ACTION-FOR-OBJECT,
RESULT-FOR-ACTION, MEANS-FOR-ACTION, MANNER-FOR-ACTION,TIME PERIOD-FOR-ACTION, DESTINATION-FOR-ACTION, and
TIME-OF-MOTION-FOR-ACTION.
vi Lien (2004:403) argues at length that the caused-motion construction in Taiwanese Southern Min has developed into the ditransitive, sometimes called the “benefactive”
construction in that ditransitive expressions are syntactically unique in allowing two noun phrases to occur after the verb: the agent role
must be fused with the subject; the patient role with the indirect object position; and the recipient role, contributed by the construction, is linked to the direct object position.
vii Originally acting as a verb, denoting ‘to get rid of’, the resultative complement phet4 in Hakka has developed into a phase marker, used to indicate situation in time relation as in piong3 phet4 (放 phet4) ‘to let go’ or sit phet4 (吃 phet4) ‘to eat up’. However, a wealth of Hakka data have shown that the phase marker phet4 is starting to evolve into an aspect marker as in soi3 phet (睡 phet4) ‘to fall asleep’. An account of the syntactic and semantic development of phet4 will be left for another context.
viii Wang (2005) discusses the development of wu4 se4 (物色) ‘to search’. He claims that in ancient Chinese texts, the collocation of wu4 se4 as an adverbial was used exclusively to indicate a means as in di4 sih1 ci2 sian2, nai3 wu4 se4 ciou2 jhih1 (帝思其賢，乃物色求之)
‘the Emperor thinks that he (Yan2 Gong1) is a person of high caliber and moral excellence, so the Emperor presented some pure unworked silk to Yan2 Gong1 in recognition of his skills and as an inducement to Yan2 Gong1 to work in his service’. Strengthened by high frequency
in most contexts, the adverbial wu4 se4 is informative in conveying a relation between the action and the means, as in yi4-rih4, wu4 se4 jhih1, guo3 de2 ci2 ren2 (翌日，物色之，果得 其人) ‘Next day, he visited the competent person and managed to recruit the person’. Such a development is an illustration of grammaticalization/lexicalization in that although some facets of a word become dormant, and others come to be activated (Sweetser 1998, Epstein 1994).
ix The ambiguous phrase piong3 ngin5 (放人) takes a different stress. When it is used literally, the stress falls upon the noun, i.e. ngin5 (人). When it takes on the idiomatic reading, in contrast, the stress moves to the verb, i.e. piong3 (放).
x The following abbreviations are used for their corresponding grammatical functions: DU, a marker of the end of location of the motion; KIN, a durative marker; DET, a determiner;
AUX, an auxiliary.
xi The locative marker do3 (到) is widely used in Hakka. The choice of do3 (到)or du3 (佇) is a matter of dialectal variation.
xii Grice’s maxim of quantity refers to one of the cooperative principles in that speakers are assumed to make their contribution as informative as is required.
xiii Goldberg’s (2006) Pragmatic Mapping Generalization indicates that any semantic participants that are irrelevant and recoverable from the context can be deprofiled while the participants that are relevant to the context must be overtly expressed.
xiv According to Chiang (2006), the resumptive pronoun ki2 (佢) with TUNG in a TUNG construction can be used in bipartite ways: referential and non-referential. In its referential use, 佢 refers to its antecedent patient NP1 (i.e., co-referentiality with NP1) except in cases where NP1 denotes a kind of instrument. On the other hand, ki2 (佢) seems to lose its referential property and come to blend with TUNG, together functioning as a patient marker, and allowing another NP to attach to it as shown in an3 ok7 kai3 ngin2 min2, po3 kiam5 oi5 ti2 ki2 kam3 phet7 hi5 (恁惡 ge 人民，寶劍要同佢佢砍掉去) ‘Such a wicked person should be beheaded with a sword’.
REFERENCES
Boas, Hans Christian. 2003. A Constructional Approach to Resultatives. Stanford:
CSLI Publications.
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins and William Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar, 281-302. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Chiang, Min-hua. 2006. Grammatical characteristics of tung and bun in Dongshi Hakka and the relatedness of the two markers. Language and Linguistics 7.2:
339-364.
Croft, William. 1998. The structure of events and the structure of language. The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure, ed. by Michael Tomasello, 67-92. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dong, Siou-fang. 2002. Lexicalization of syntactic structure. Linguistics Study 3:
56-65.
Fillmore, Charles J. 1985. Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica VI. 222-255.
Fillmore, Charles J., and Berl T. S. Atkins. 1992. Toward a frame-based lexicon: The semantics of RISK and its neighbors. Frames, Fields, and Contrasts, ed. by Adrienne Lehrer and Eva Feder Kittay, 75-102. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, Adele E., and Sethuraman, N. 2004. Learning argument structure generalizations. Cognitive Linguistics 14: 289-316.
Goldberg, Adele E. 2005. Argument realization: The role of constructions, lexical semantics and discourse factors. Construction Grammars: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions, eds. by Ostman, Jan-Ola, and Mirjam Fried, 17-43.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Hopper, Paul J., and Elizabeth Closs Traugott 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge:
University of Cambridge Press.
Heine, Bernd, and Ulrike Claudi. 1986. On the Rise of Grammatical Categories:
Some Examples from Maa. Berlin: Reimer.
Heine, Bernd, and Tania Kuteva. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jackendoff, Ray S. 1990. Semantic Structures. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jackendoff, Ray S. 1997. Twistin’ the night away. Language 73:534-559.
Kövecses, Z., and Gunter Radden. 1998. Metonymy: developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics 9.1: 37-77.
Lai, Huei-ling. 2003a. Hakka LAU constructions: A constructional approach.
Language and Linguistics 4.2: 353-378.
Lai, Huei-ling. 2003b. The semantic extension of Hakka LAU. Language and Linguistics 4.3: 533-561.
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lien, Chinfa. 2004. Polyfunctionality of pang3 in Taiwanese Southern Min: An exploration of the relationship between meaning and form. BIBLID 22.1:
391-418.
Luo, Wan-jyun. 2007. Piong3 ‘put’ and its Congeners in Hakka: Frames and Constructions. Taipei: National Chengchi University MA Thesis.
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibañez, Francisco J., and Olga I. Díez Velasco. 2001. High-level metonymy and linguistic structure. Unpublished draft.
< http://sincronia.cucsh.udg.mx/metonymy.htm >.
Sweetser, Eve. E. 1988. Grammaticalization and semantic bleaching. Berkeley
Linguistic Society 14:389-405.
Sweetser, Eve. E. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Talmy, Leonard. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms.
Language typology and syntactic description: Grammatical categories and the lexicon: Vol.3, ed. by Timothy Shopen, 57-149. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Tamly, Leonard. 2000. The windowing of attention in language: Toward a Cognitive Semantics, 261-309. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Taylor, John, R. 2003. Linguistic Categorization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Traugott, Elizabeth C., and Ekkehard Konig. 1991. The semantics-pragmatics of grammaticalization revisited. Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 1, ed. by E. C. Traugott and Bernard Heine, 189-218. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Traugott, Elizabeth C., and Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wang, Can-long. 2005. Lexicalization and grammaticalization: Two Chinese case studies of "henbude" (恨不得) and "wuse" (物色). Contemporary Linguistics 7.3:
225-236.