Chapter 3 Literature Review
3.5 Liu (2007)
(Ai+ Øbi)j vP
target of v’
comparison
v v’
Ai+ Øbi j v VP
voice Ai measure phrase
Erlewine (2007) notes that in the transitive comparative the measure phrase is obligatorily required. However, Erlewine (2007) does not give any explanation with regard to this property of the transitive comparative. In addition, Erlewine (2007) does not state explicitly the motivations for the movement involved in the bi-comparative and the transitive comparative.
3.5 Liu (2007)
Liu (2007) proposes that the comparative construction such as (43a) (henceforth the X A (Y) D comparative) contains the weak covert verbal suffix –guo2, which is grammaticalized from the verbal suffix –guo1, meaning ‘exceed’, in the X A-guo1 Y (D) comparative like (43b). Liu (2007) underlines the affinity between these two types of comparatives in syntax and semantics.
(43) a. Zhangsan gao (Lisi) san gongfen.
Zhangsan tall Lisi three centimeter
‘Zhangsan’s height exceeds Lisi’s by three centimeters.’
b. Zhangsan gao-guo1 Lisi (san gongfen).
Zhangsan tall-guo1 Lisi three centimeter
‘Zhangsan’s height exceeds Lisi’s by three centimeters.’
First of all, in the X A-guo1 Y (D) comparative, the verbal suffix –guo1
‘exceed’, being a three-place predicate syntactically, denotes a four-place relation semantically: A relation between two comparison items (i.e. X and Y of the X A-guo1 Y (D) comparative), a dimension and a measure phrase; therefore, the two comparison items and the measure phrase can be considered the arguments of –guo1 ‘exceed’.
Although no verbal suffix –guo1 ‘exceed’ is found in the X A (Y) D comparative, semantically this type of comparative also expresses the meaning of ‘X exceeds/surpasses Y by D in the dimension denoted by A’.
Second, the adjective in the X A-guo1 Y (D) comparative must be a [+pole]
dimensional adjective or a positive value adjective since the exceeding or surpassing meaning of –guo1 ‘exceed’ implies the “upward ordering” along the scale, as the contrast below illustrates (cf. Bierwisch 1989).
(44) a. Zhe-tiao shengzi chang-guo1 na-tiao liang yingchi.
this-CL rope long-guo1 that-CL two inch
‘The length of this rope exceeds that of that rope by two inches.’
b. *Zhe-tiao shengzi duan-guo1 na-tiao liang yingchi.
this-CL rope short-guo1 that-CL two inch
Nevertheless, the adjective in the X A (Y) D comparative must be a dimensional adjective, either [+pole] or [-pole], with a dimension measurable by a standardized measure unit fixed as a gauge for measuring the scale, as examples in (45) illustrate (cf. Bierwisch 1989).
(45) a. Zhe-ben shu gui/pianyi na-ben yi-bai-kui qian.
this-CL book expensive/cheap that-CL one-hundred-CL dollar
‘This book is one hundred dollars more expensive/cheaper than that one.’
b. *Zhe-ge nuhai piaoliang na-ge nuhai san du.
this-CL girl beautiful that-CL girl three degree ‘This girl is three more degrees beautiful than that one.’
Third, in the X A-guo1 Y (D) comparative, the internal comparison item must be a definite/specific (or referential) noun phrase whereas the measure phrase must be non-referential, as the contrast in (46) illustrates. Furthermore, the internal referential comparison item must precede the non-referential measure phrase in the linear order.
(46) a. Zhangsan gao-guo1 Lisi shi gongfen.
Zhangsan tall-guo1 Lisi ten centimeter ‘Zhangsan is ten centimeters taller than Lisi.’
b. *Zhangsan gao-guo1 liang mi shi gongfen.
Zhangsan tall-guo1 two meter ten centimeter c. *Zhangsan gao-guo1 shi gengfen Lisi.
Zhangsan tall ten centimeter Lisi
Fourth, in the X A-guo1 Y (D) comparative, the presence of the internal comparison item is obligatory while the presence of the measure phrase is optional;
however, the occurrence of the internal comparison item is optional while the occurrence of the measure phrase is obligatory in the X A (Y) D comparative, as shown by the contrast below.
(47) a. Zhangsan gao-guo1 Lisi (shi gongfen).
Zhangsan tall-guo1 Lisi ten centimeter
‘Zhangsan’s height exceeds Lisi’s by ten centimeters.’
b. Zhangsan gao-guo1 *(Lisi) shi gongfen.
Zhangsan tall-guo1 Lisi ten centimeter ‘Zhangsan’s height exceeds Lisi’s by ten centimeters.’
(48) a. Zhangsan gao (Lisi) shi gongfen.
Zhangsan tall Lisi ten centimeter
‘Zhangsan’s height exceeds Lisi’s by ten centimeters.’
b. Zhangsan gao Lisi *(shi gongfen).
Zhangsan tall Lisi ten centimeter
‘Zhangsan’s height exceeds Lisi’s by ten centimeters.’
Fifth, in the X A-guo1 Y (D) comparative, the adjective cannot be modified by a degree adverb, and the same obtains in the X A (Y) D comparative.
(49) a. *Zhangsan hen/geng gao-guo1 Lisi san gongfen.
Zhangsan very/even.more tall-guo1 Lisi three centimeter b. *Zhangsan hen/geng gao Lisi san gongfen.
Zhangsan very/even.more tall Lisi three centimeter
Sixth, quantifiers (or plural NPs) are not allowed to serve as internal comparison items in the X A-guo1 Y (D) comparative and the X A (Y) D comparative, unless in some specific context where all elements denoted by the quantifier (or the plural NP) share the same degree value, as (50) illustrates.
(50) a. *Zhangsan gao-guo1 qita/zhexie ren san gongfen.
Zhangsan tall-guo1 other/these person three centimeter
‘??Zhangsan is three centimeters taller than everyone else/these persons.’
b. *Zhangsan gao qita/zhexie ren san gongfen.
Zhangsan tall other/these person three centimeter
‘??Zhangsan is three centimeters taller than everyone else/these persons.’
Liu (2007) suggests that –guo1 ‘exceed’ projects as Guo1P, in which the adjectival head, triggered by the affixal feature of –guo1 ‘exceed’, overtly moves to the guo head (i.e. –guo1) position, as (51a) shows. With a full-fledged lexical meaning, -guo1 ‘exceed’ requires that the referential NP serving as the target of comparison should be present. Besides, since -guo1 ‘exceed’ functions as a predicate
“strong” enough to restrict the interval argument of the adjective (cf. Schwarzchild and Wilkinson 2002), the measure phrase, which indirectly restricts the interval argument of the adjective, is optionally required.
(51) a. Zhangsan [Guo1P [Guo1’ [Guo1 gaoi-guo1] [AP Lisi [A’ [A ti] [san gongfen]]]]].
Zhangsan tall-guo1 Lisi three centimeter ‘Zhangsan is three centimeters taller than Lisi.’
b. ∃I∃K [gao’(Zhangsan, I) & gao’(Lisi, K) & san gongfen’ ([I－K])].
‘There is an interval I on the height scale such that Zhangsan is I-tall, there is another interval K such that Lisi is K-tall, and I differs from K by three centimeters.’
Based on the syntactic and semantic affinity between the X A-guo1 Y (D)
comparative and the X A (Y) D comparative, Liu (2007) suggests that the X A (Y) D comparative such as (52) has a syntactic structure like (53a), in which the covert verbal suffix –guo2 is derived from -guo1 ‘exceed’ through grammaticalization. As (53a) indicates, the covert verbal suffix –guo2 projects as GuoP2, in which gao ‘tall’, triggered by the affixal feature of –guo2, overtly moves to –guo2.
(52) Zhangsan gao Lisi san gongfen.
Zhangsan tall Lisi three centimeter
‘Zhangsan‘s height exceeds Lisi’s by three centimeters.’
(53) a. Zhangsan [Guo2P [Guo2’ [Guo2 gaoi-guo2] [AP Lisi [A’ [A ti] [san gongfen]]]]].
Zhangsan tall-guo2 Lisi three centimeter ‘Zhangsan is three centimeters taller than Lisi.’
b. ∃I∃K [gao’(Zhangsan, I) & gao’(Lisi, K) & san gongfen’ ([I－K])].
Grammaticalization bleaches the “semantic content” of -guo2 (i.e. the exceeding meaning) to such an extent that –guo2 places a less strict restriction on the selection of the adjective than –guo1 ‘exceed’ does and cannot function as a predicate strong enough to restrict the interval argument of the adjective. Since the measure phrase is the only possible candidate to restrict the interval argument of the adjective, it is obligatorily required in the X A (Y) D comparative. Besides, the “semantic content” of -guo2 is so bleached that the “transitivity” force of –guo2 becomes weaker than that of –guo1. This makes the referential NP functioning as the target of comparison not necessary to be overtly realized in the X A (Y) D comparative.
Liu’s (2007) analysis of the X A (Y) D comparative has two empirical and theoretical consequences. First, the relative order between the internal referential NP and the measure phrase can be regarded as a reflection of the more general
hierarchical relationship between the referential theme and the non-referential theme object.
Second, the agglutinated form deriving from the overt movement of the adjective to –guo1 or –guo2 is a variant form of the dynamic verb exceed. A degree adverb like hen ‘very’ or geng ’even more’ cannot modify a dynamic verb; therefore, (54a-b) are ungrammatical.
(54) a. *Zhangsan hen/geng gao-guo1 Lisi san gongfen.
Zhangsan very/even.more tall- guo1 Lisi three centimeter b. *Zhangsan hen/geng gao-guo2 Lisi san gongfen.
Zhangsan very/even.more tall-guo2 Lisi three centimeter
While Liu (2007) has provided a fairly complete analysis of the X A (Y) D comparative, there exists a problem that may weaken Liu’s (2007) analysis. Under Liu’s (2007) analysis, the incompatibility of the adjective in the X A (Y) D comparative with a degree adverb follows from the claim that a degree adverb cannot modify the dynamic verb composed of the adjective and –guo2. However, Liu’s (2007) analysis does not capture the fact that the adjective in the X A (Y) D comparative is compatible with the degree adverb showei ‘slightly’, as shown in (55).
(55) Zhangsan shaowei gao-guo2 Lisi yi-dianer/yi-xie.
Zhangsan slightly tall-guo2 Lisi a-little/a-little ‘Zhangsan is a little bit taller than Lisi.’
Chapter 4 Proposal
4.1 Introduction
This chapter is composed of the syntactic and semantic analyses of the X shaowei A Y yi-dianer/yi-xie comparative. In section 4.2, Bhatt and Pancheva’s (2004) proposal that degree clauses can be merged late is first introduced as preliminaries.
Then we propose that shaowei ‘slightly’ is merged countercyclically as the complement of the covert quantificational operator binding yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’, which is treated as a variable, after the covert quantificational operator adjoins in a scope position. In section 4.3, we first introduce the semantics of gradable adjectives and comparatives as preliminaries. Then the obligatory occurrence of yi-dianer/yi-xie
‘a little’ and the optional occurrence of the referential NP functioning as the target of comparison in the X shaowei A Y yi-dianer/yi-xie comparative are accounted for.
4.2 The syntactic analysis of the X shaowei A Y yi-dianer/yi-xie comparative Before proceeding to the syntactic issues regarding the X shaowei A Y yi-dianer/yi-xie comparative, we briefly introduce Bhatt and Pancheva’s (2004) analysis of English comparatives as preliminaries.
4.2.1 Preliminary: Late merger of degree clauses
English comparatives manifest characteristics that cannot be easily accommodated in a single structure. Syntactically, the degree head -er cooccurs with the degree clause introduced by than, as shown in (56). In other words, there are selectional restrictions between –er and than. Since selectional restrictions are the hallmark of head-argument relationships, it is reasonable to conclude that the degree
clause is the syntactic argument of the degree head. Semantically, -er and the degree clause form a degree phrase that is interpreted as a degree quantifier argument of the matrix gradable predicate, as in (57b) (see Cresswell 1976, von Stechow 1984, Heim 1985, 2000). The degree quantifier [-er + degree clause] may be analyzed as moving to a scope position within the clause from where it binds the degree variable in argument position, as in (57c). In a nutshell, it is reasonable to posit that the degree head and the degree clause form a constituent to the exclusion of the gradable predicate.
(56) Simon drank fewer beers than/*as/*that Alex did.
(57) a. John is taller than 6 feet.
b. John is [AP [DegP –er than 6 feet] tall]
c. [DegP –er than 6 feet]1 John is [AP [ t1 tall]
Despite the convincing syntactic and semantic evidence that the degree clause is the complement of –er, there is morphological evidence that –er forms a constituent with the gradable predicate to the exclusion of the degree clause. One reason for positing that –er and the gradable predicate form a constituent has been the existence of fully and partially suppletive forms, as in (58) and (59).
(58) a. [-er good] → better b. [-er bad] → worse (59) [-er tall] → taller
Moreover, not only are –er and the degree clause nonadjacent in the majority of cases, more often than not they may not even appear together as a constituent that excludes
the gradable predicate.
(60) *Ralf is [more than Flora is] tall.
cf. Ralf is taller than Flora is.
(61) *Ralf is [more than her] tall.
cf. Ralf is taller than her.
(62) *Ralf is [more than he is fit] tall.
cf. Ralf is more tall than he is fit.
(63) *Ralf is [more than fit] tall.
cf. Ralf is more tall than fit.
In order to reconcile the conflicting evidence regarding constituency in degree constructions, Bhatt and Pancheva (2004) propose that the degree head and the degree clause form a constituent not at the point where the degree head is merged, but after QR of the degree head and countercyclic merger of the degree clause. The selectional restrictions between –er and the degree clause obtain because the degree clause is merged as an argument to the QR-ed and right-adjoined –er. The lack of adjacency effects between the degree clause and the degree head follows from the fact that only the tail of the –er-chain is pronounced.
In its essentials, Bhatt and Pancheva’s proposal follows Fox and Nissenbaum’s (1999) analysis of relative clause extraposition. Developing Lebeaux’s (1990) proposal that relative clauses can be merged countercyclically, Fox and Nissenbaum (1999) propose that relative clause extraposition involves countercyclic merger of the relative clause to an unpronounced copy of a QP that has undergone QR. Bhatt and Pancheva’s (2004) analysis not only extends the idea of countercyclic merger to the domain of comparatives, it also shows that not only adjuncts but complements as well
can be merged late (cf. Ishii 1997).
The architecture of English comparatives is illustrated in some more detail as follows. As shown in (64), -er is the head of a DegP which is the specifier of the gradable predicate. Being a quantificational expression, the DegP headed by –er undergoes QR to right-adjoin to a node of type〈t〉(indicated as XP in the trees in (65) and (66)), leaving behind a copy. The degree clause is then merged as an argument to the QR-ed -er (see (65) and (66) for an illustration). The degree head –er is interpreted in its scope position, but is pronounced in its base position (cf. Bobaljik 2002).
(64) AP
DegP A
Deg tall
-er
(65) XP
…XP DegPi
… Deg
AP… -er
DegPi A
Deg tall
-er
(66) XP
…XP DegPi
… Deg’
AP… Deg
degree clause DegPi A -er
Deg tall
-er
The interaction of extraposition with the scope of the comparison provides evidence that degree clauses are merged late, following QR of the degree head –er.
Fox (2002: 19) has articulated the extraposition-scope correlation as in (67).
(67) William’s Generalization
When an adjunct β is extraposed from a “source DP” α, the scope of α is at least as high as the attachment site of β (the extraposition site).
The contrast between (68) and (69) illustrates the generalization as articulated in (67), that is, it shows that the scope of the degree head is at least as high as the surface position of the degree clause.
(68) John read more books than Mary published in her life before you did.
a. Reading 1: before > -er…d-many books
i. John [VP read [[ti many books] [-er [than Mary published in her life]]i]]
[before you did [VP △]]
ii. John PAST [VP read [[ti many books] [-er [than Mary published in her life]]i]] [before you did [VP read [[ti many books] [-er [than Mary published in her life]]i]]]
John read more books than Mary published in her life before you read more books than Mary published in her life.
b. Reading 2: -er…d-many books > before
i. John [[VP read ti] [before you did [VP △]]] [[tj many books] [-er [than Mary published in her life]]j]i
ii. John [[VP read ti] [before you did [VP read ti]]] [[tj many books] [-er [than Mary published in her life]]j]i
The number of books that John read before you read them exceeds the number of books that Mary published in her life.
c. *Reading 3: -er > before > d-many books, the Heim-Kennedy Constraint (69) John read more books before you did than Mary published in her life.
a. *Reading 1: before > -er…d-many books b. Reading 2: -er…d-many books > before
i. John [[VP read ti] [before you did [VP △]]] [[tj many books] [-er [than Mary published in her life]]j]i
ii. John [[VP read ti] [before you did [VP read ti]]] [[tj many books] [-er [than Mary published in her life]]j]i
The number of books that John read before you read them exceeds the number of books that Mary published in her life.
c. *Reading 3: -er > before > d-many books, the Heim-Kennedy Constraint (70) The Heim-Kennedy Constraint
If the scope of a quantificational DP contains the trace of a DegP, it also contains
that DegP itself. (Heim 2000: (27))
(68) and (69) contain the weak DP more books than Mary published in her life. In contrast to (68), (69) is unambiguous. In Bhatt and Pancheva’s (2004) account of the contrast, in (68) the degree clause is merged low within the source DP that contains the degree head it is associated with. The whole DP can take scope either below or over the before-clause, as shown in (68a) and (68b). However, the degree clause in (69) is merged late at a position higher than the before-clause. By Bhatt and Pancheva’s (2004) assumptions, this indicates that –er is in a position above before.
Yet, given the Heim-Kennedy Constraint in (70), the before-clause cannot intervene between the degree quantifier (the degree head and the degree clause) and the degree predicate (d-many books). Therefore, the whole DP must have scope higher than the before-clause. Consequently, the reading available is the one given in (69b).
Bhatt and Pancheva (2004) further argue for a stronger version of the correlation between extraposition and scope than the one expressed in (67), at least as far as degree expressions are concerned.
(71) The Extraposition-Scope Generalization (for degree expressions)
When a degree clause β is extraposed from a degree head α, the scope of α is exactly as high as the merger site of β.
The following examples illustrate the generalization as articulated in (71), that is, they show that the scope of the degree head is exactly as high as the surface position of the degree clause.
(72) a. Degree clause inside the embedded clause
John is required [to publish fewer papers this year [than that number] in a major journal] [to get tenure].
Simplified LF structure: required > [fewer [than n]]
required [fewer [than n] λd [PRO publish d-many papers]]
b. Degree clause outside the matrix clause
John is required [to publish fewer papers this year in a major journal] [to get tenure] [than that number].
Simplified LF structure: [fewer [than n]] > required
fewer [than n] λd [required [PRO publish d-many papers]]
The availability of the –er > required reading in (72b) shows that the structure involving a degree abstraction that crosses required is semantically well formed. The absence of this reading in (72a) indicates that the scope of -er is marked exactly by the surface position of the degree clause; in other words, the degree quantifier in (72a) cannot move further.
In a word, the interaction of extraposition with the scope of comparison provides strong support for the proposal that degree clauses are overt indicators of the scope of the comparison and that they are merged late, after QR of the degree head.
4.2.2 Late merger of shaowei ‘slightly’
4.2.2.1 Selectional restrictions despite nonadjacency
One of the clearest syntactic pieces of evidence that shaowei ‘slightly’ forms a constituent with yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’ is the selectional restrictions between the two. As shown in (73), yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’ cooccurs with shaowei ‘slightly’.
(73) a. Wangwu shaowei gao Zhaoying yi-dianer.
Wangwu slightly tall Zhaoying a-little ‘Wangwu is a little bit taller than Zhaoying.’
b. Wangwu shaowei pan Zhaoying yi-xie.
Wangwu slightly fat Zhaoying a-little ‘Wangwu is a little bit taller than Zhaoying.’
c. *Wangwu hen/zui/geng/youdianer/bijiao gao Zhaoying Wangwu very/the.most/even.more/a.bit/comparatively tall Zhaoying yi-dianer.
a-little
d. *Wangwu hen/zui/geng/youdianer/bijiao pan Zhaoying Wangwu very/the.most/even.more/a.bit/comparatively fat Zhaoying yi-xie.
a-little
In other words, there are selectional restrictions between yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’ and shaowei ‘slightly’. Since selectional restrictions are the hallmark of head-argument relationships, it is reasonable to conclude that shaowei ‘slightly’ is the syntactic argument of yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’.
4.2.2.2 Obligatory nonadjacency between shaowei ‘slightly’ and yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’
One piece of evidence against the constituency of yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’ and shaowei ‘slightly’ comes from the fact that it is not possible for the two to appear together, as the following examples illustrate.
(74) a. Wangwu shaowei gao Zhaoying yi-dianer.
Wangwu slightly tall Zhaoying a-little ‘Wangwu is a little bit taller than Zhaoying.’
b. *Wangwu gao Zhaoying [yi-dianer shaowei].
Wangwu tall Zhaoying a-little slightly (75) a. Wangwu shaowei pan Zhaoying yi-xie.
Wangwu slightly fat Zhaoying a-little ‘Wangwu is a little bit fatter than Zhaoying.’
b. *Wangwu pan Zhaoying [yi-xie shaowei].
Wangwu fat Zhaoying a-little slightly
It appears that yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’ and shaowei ‘slightly’ can never form a constituent at the position in which yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’ is initially merged.
4.2.2.3 Late merger of shaowei ‘slightly’ resolves the conflict
The X shaowei A Y yi-dianer/yi-xie comparative exhibits properties that can not be easily accommodated in a single structure. In particular, there is convincing syntactic evidence that shaowei ‘slightly’ is the complement of yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’. However, there is also strong evidence that shaowei ‘slightly’ and yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’ never appear together as a constituent.
Before we illustrate the architecture of the shaowei A Y yi-dianer/yi-xie comparative in some more detail, one point deserves particular clarification in connection with yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’. The measure phrase yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’
Before we illustrate the architecture of the shaowei A Y yi-dianer/yi-xie comparative in some more detail, one point deserves particular clarification in connection with yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’. The measure phrase yi-dianer/yi-xie ‘a little’