First of all, Cheng (1997) observes that verbs which denote ‘disposing’ meaning such as be
‘sell’, chit ‘erase’, or tan ‘throw’ are not compatible with the [V u/bo NP] construction as seen in (35) unless what follows them has the interpretation pertaining to quantity or quality, as in (36).
(35) *Abing chit bo opang.
Abing erase not-have blackboard
Intended: ‘Abing failed to clean any blackboard.’
(36) Abing chit bo leng-te opang.
Abing erase not-have two-CL blackboard
‘Abing failed to clean two blackboards.’
Second, as already mentioned in the previous section yet still repeated here for the reader’s sake, Huang (2003) observes that the verbs preceding u/bo are restricted to accomplishment verbs, or activity verbs which can be turned into accomplishments by the addition of the resultative portion u/bo, as shown in (37-38). Statives are not allowed to occur before u/bo, as seen in (39-40).
(37) Abing be u chai.
Abing buy have vegetable
‘Abing bought vegetables.’
(38) Abing than bo cinn.
Abing make not-have money
‘Abing cannot make any money.’
(39) *Abing ai bo lang.
Abing love not-have person
Intended: ‘He does not love anyone.’
(40) *Abing sin bo kao.
Abing believe not-have religion
Intended: ‘Abing does not believe in any religion.’
Third, we notice that u/bo has not lost its lexical meaning completely and in some cases we still get two clear-cut meanings concerning u/bo. These include ‘obtain’ and
‘understand’, as exemplified by (41) and (42) in the order given.
(41) Abing than bo cinn.
Abing earn not-obtain money
‘Abing attempts to earn money but fails to earn any.’
(42) Abing thak bo che.
Abing study not-understand book
‘Abing cannot study well. (Abing does not understand any book.)’
Fourth, adverbs or other negation markers which indicate irrealis property can occur before u, as indicated by Cheng’s (1997) examples in (43-46).7
7 Cheng regards these elements as infixes and the u/bo a resultative complement, though.
(43) Yi choa tih-be u boo a.
he marry almost have wife SFP
‘He is about to have a wife.’
(44) Yi boo choa ia-be u leh.
he wife marry not-yet have SFP
‘He has not been able to get a wife yet.’
(45) Li an-ne tai-ci co be u.
you this-way thing do cannot have
‘In doing so, you cannot get anything done.’
(46) Li an-ne tai-ci co nae-e u?
you this-way thing do how-can have
‘In doing so, how can you get anything accomplished?’
(Cheng 1997: 213)
Fifth, the morphemes tio and ka, which refer to ‘achieve’, are allowed to occur between u/bo and the object NP. When the postverbal NP is a bare nominal or a definite NP, tio is employed like (47-48); when the postverbal NPs are quantifier NPs, ka is employed as exemplified in (49). Nonetheless, there are cases where neither tio nor ka is allowed, as in (50-51).
(47) Abing pha bo tio mang-a.
Abing hit not-have achieve mosquito
‘Abing failed to hit the mosquito.’
(48) Abing be u tio hit-pun che. respect to different argument positions. In (52-53), we see that a numeral NP cannot occur in subject position; in (54-55), there is no such restriction in the object position.8
(52) *Sann-e lang thak bo che.
three-CL person study not-have book
Intended: ‘Three people cannot study well.’
8 However, as pointed out by Luther Liu (p.c.), under certain circumstances it is possible for a numeral NP to occur in subject position with respect to this construction, as shown in (i).
(i) Sann-e lang pha bo mann-chok.
three-CL person hit NEG mah-jongg
‘Three people are not enough to play mah-jongg.’
We will not attempt to offer an explanation of the relative restrictions on numeral NPs in this thesis. But also see Tsai (2001a,b) for a different story of the numeral NP in Mandarin [V-de/bu-V] sentences.
(53) *Go-e gin-na chue bo Abing.
five-CL child find not-have Abing
Intended: ‘Five children cannot find Abing.’
(54) Abing cai-khi thak bo sann-pun che.
Abing morning study not-have three-CL book
‘This morning Abing read less than three books.’
(55) Abing kam cia u leng-wann peng?
Abing Q eat have two-CL rice
‘Did Abing eat two bowls of rice?’
Moreover, both referential and non-referential interpretations of a bare NP are allowed in object position, as illustrated in (56).
(56) Abing lia bo hi-a.
Abing catch not-have fish
Intended: i) ‘Abing failed to catch the fish.’ (referential) ii) ‘Abing cannot catch any fish.’ (non-referential)
Finally, it is demonstrated by Krifka et al. (1995) that kind-referring NPs (but not objects) render sentences generic. In the [V u/bo NP] construction this argument is born out, too. The kind-referring NPs in subject position render the sentences generic as in (57-58), but kind-referring NPs in object position do not show the characteristic as exemplified in (59-61).
(57) Bai hahau co bo haksing.
bad school get not-have students
‘Bad schools cannot get any student.’
(58) Phua-penn e chiu-a kam senn u kue-cih?
sick POSS tree Q produce have fruit
‘Can sick trees produce any fruit?’
(59) Aying be bo sui sann.
Aying buy not-have beautiful clothes i) ‘Aying failed to buy any beautiful clothes.’
ii) ‘Aying cannot buy any beautiful clothes that fit her.’
(60) Abing kam lia u tua-cia hi-a?
Abing Q catch have big-CL fish i) ‘Did Abing catch any big fish?’
ii) ‘Can Abing catch any big fish?’
(61) Cit-king hahau co bo he hakseng.
this-CL school get not-have good student i) ‘This school failed to get any good student (this year).’
ii) ‘This school (is too bad that it) cannot get any good student.’
To be brief, Section 2.4 has shown us various properties in sentences involving [V u/bo NP] construction. In the following chapters we will come up with a proposal to accommodate the remaining problems and account for these engrossing characteristics.
Chapter 3
________________________________________________________________
Semantic Ambiguity of the Predicate [V u/bo NP]
In this chapter, we will provide a novel analysis of the distinction between a generics and an episode in sentences involving [V u/bo NP] construction. In Section 3.1, we will review the generic/episodic distinction in the literature, and focus especially on Carlson (1977), Kratzer (1995) and Chierchia (1995). In Section 3.2, the analysis of how to distinguish a generic interpretation from an episodic interpretation will be spelled out.