The meanings of Mandarin Kan can be divided into ten different frames which represent different senses in FrameNet (Cf. Table 9). Besides, by adding suffixes or
Monitor
Opinion Face
Attention
Scrutinize
Depend on
Becoming_
aware
Coming_to_believe
Cure
Visiting
Perception _active
Appearance
resultative makers, the meaning of kan can be extended to other semantic frames as listed in Table 10.
Table 9: Semantic Frames of Polysemous Kan (based on Lu 1999, Chang 2004 and Lien 2005)
Sense10 Frame11 Semantic Roles &
Syntactic Category
Example
1 look, watch
Perception_active a. Perceiver_agentive[NP] <
(Aspect marker) * (Aspect marker)
< Phenomenon_entity[NP]/
Phenomenon_event[CL]
b. Perceiver_agentive[NP] <
(Aspect marker) * (Aspect marker)
< Medium [NP]
3 guard Monitor Monitor[NP] < * < Ground[NP]<以免/
防止/別 Prevented_event[CL]
你看著他，別讓他跑 了！
4 read Reading Reader[NP] < (Aspect marker) * (Aspect marker) < Text[NP]
他正在看報紙。
5 visit Visiting Agent[NP] < * < Entity[NP] 我去看他的父母。
6 cure, see the doctor
Cure Patient [NP] < * < Healer[NP]
Healer [NP] < * < Affilication[NP]
他去看醫生。
醫生看他的病。
7 face FACE12 Entity [NP] < * < Direction [NP] 這房子背山看海。
8 observe Scrutinize Perceiver [NP] <*<
Phenomenon_entity [NP]
10 The senses of P-C-U verbs discussed in this paper are marked by gray bottom color.
11 The frames belong to different level relatively. For instance, comparing to Perception_active frame, Attention Frame and Monitor Frame occupy the lower level. However, since the relative four-layered hierarchy proposed by Liu and Chiang (2008) is for frames under the same archi-frame, the hierarchy of frames is not applicable in the frames for the polysemous frames due to the fact that they may originate from different archi-frames.
12 The frame is capitalized because it is peculiar to Chinese rather than commonly shared between both Chinese and English.
Since the focus of this paper is on the extensions from perception to modaity and manipulation, this paper explores merely on three extended path of kan:
Perception_active FrameÆ Attention FrameÆ Monitor Frame, Perception_active FrameÆ Appearance Frame, and Perception_active FrameÆ Opinion Frame and Coming_to_believe Frame.
Among the various frames, Sense 1 of kan ‘to look, watch’ represents the generic use of kan in Mandarin. It can be extended to Sense 2 ‘to look after’ and Sense 3 ‘to guard’ by ‘focusing’ or ‘imposing’ the attention through visual perception towards the Phenomenon. With different degree of perceiving the Phenomenon, the semantic role of the agent transits from Perceiver, Cognizer to Monitor. The Monitor Frame can be viewed as fairly weak manipulation to prevent from certain event to occur.
The inheritance relations from Sense 1 to Sense 2 and Sense 2 to Sense 3 are oberserved and illustrated below.
Figure 12: Inheritance and Gradation of Semantic Roles in Kan ‘to look, look after and guard’
Perception_active Frame Æ Attention Frame Æ Monitor Kan ‘Look’ Æ Look after Æ Guard
Sense 9 and 10 of Kan, however, demonstrate a metaphorical linking (cf.
Sweetser 1990) by mapping of the frame elements from concrete to abstract rather Perceiver [NP]
Phenemeon_entity [NP]
Cognizer [NP]
Ground [NP]
Monitor [NP]
Phenemeon_to_prevent [NP]
than inheritance from one to the other (cf. Figure 13). The evidence is indicated by the syntactic constraint of cognitive kan. Giving rise to the meaning of ‘to suppose’ and
‘to guess,’ kan functions as a homogeneous state verb which is incompatible with the aspect markers, such as le, zhe, guo and progressive maker zai, zhengzai given the fact that the concrete and durative kan ‘to see’ is an activity verb which takes the physical phenomenon or ground as its complement. This extension explains how kan is able to encode epistemic meaning, as well.
Figure 13: Metaphorical Extension from Kan1 ‘to look’ to Kan9 ‘to suppose’ and Kan10 ‘to guess’
Source Domain Target Domain
Besides, by adding suffixes or VR-compounding, the meaning of kan can be extended to other semantics frames as listed in Table 10.
The extended Sense 2 of kan suggests a conceptual blending from the input 1 kan
‘look’ and input 2 qilai to create a new blend kanqilai ‘look, seem’. Based on Liu. and Gu (1996), the root meaning of qilai refers to making the object moving from lower position to higher position by certain action but then extended its meaning to indicate the evaluation or judgment of the speaker upon certain aspect of an object or an event.
Perceiver [NP]
Phenomenon [NP,CL]
Cognizer [NP]
Opinion [CL]
Content [CL]
As attaching by qilai13, kanqilai functions as a modal adverb in the sentence-initial position (cf. Gao 2007) and thus accounts for the link between perception and modality verbs. The operation of the blending is shown below.
Table 10: Semantic Frames Extended from Kan (based on Lu 1999, Chang 2004 and Lien 2005)
Sense Frame Semantic Roles &
Syntactic Category
Example
1 see Perception_passive Perceiver[NP] < * <
Phenomenon_entity[NP]
昨天我看到你騎著腳踏車。
2
look, seem
Appearance Phenomenon[NP] < * <
Judgement[AP]
4 classified CLASSIFICATION Cognizer < 把 Item[NP] < *
< Category[NP, CL]
13 Morphemes, such as –la in Haviland 1987, 1996, can serve as space-builders which set up a mental spac, i.e. a frame. Qilai here corresponds to the activity_start Frame in FrameNet.
Figure 14: Conceptual Blending of Kan and Qilai
The new blend inherits the features from the both inputs. From Perception_active kan, it inherits the frame element Phenomenon as its subject while from qilai, the evaluation or judgment of the speaker is realized as the frame elements: Judgement [AP], Characterization [VP] and Interrence [CL]. The generic space which makes the blending of Perception_active kan and qiali possible is the connection between activity verb and the potentiality to be changed of state. Other perception verbs, such as ting ‘listen’, wen ‘smell’ can blend with qilai for the same reason.
The status of the extended Sense 5 of kan as a verbal suffix in the form of VV-kan (suffix of VV) or V-kan kan (duplicated suffix of V) is quite controversial in the literature. Basically, the consensus is that kan serves as an aspect marker in the verbal suffix position which indicates the meaning of ‘attempt’ (Tsao 2001, Lien 2005). However, two different perspectives are held toward the forming of the suffix kan:
1) VV-kan is formed by a duplicable activity verb which is likely to suggest the attempting meaning itself and the suffix kan as the intensifier. (Chang 2004)
Appearance Kan-qilai Perception_active
kan
qilai activity verb Æ
Change of state Generic Space
Input I Input II
Conceptual Blend
2) VV-kan is the real construction giving rise to the attempting meaning. The form VV which has similar function is the deletion of VV-kan in the historical perspective. (Lu 1959, Chang 2000, and Yao 2002)
To support the second perspective, Lu (1959) illustrated the deletion by the following synchronic examples:
(39) a. 他還沒想通，你再跟他談談，看怎麼樣。
ta hai mei xiang-tong，ni zai gen ta tantan，kan zenmeyang he still NEG think-clear, you again with he talk, see how
‘He has not realized yet. (You) Talk to him and see how it’s going.’
b. 他還沒想通，你再跟他談談看。
ta hai mei xiang tong，ni zai gen ta tantan-kan he still NEG think-clear, you again with he talk-see ‘He has not realized yet. (You) Try to talk to him.’
(40) a. 我不騙你，這很好吃，不信你嘗一下，看味道如何。
wo bu pian ni，zhe hen haochi，bu xin ni chang yixia，kan weidao ruhe I NEG cheat you, this very delicious, NEG believe you taste a while, see flavor how
‘I didn’t lie to you. This is very delicious. If you don’t trust me, taste it to see how the flavor is.’
b. 我不騙你，這很好吃，不信你嘗一下看。
wo bu pian ni，zhe hen haochi，bu xin ni chang yixia kan
I NEG cheat you, this very delicious, NEG believe you taste a while see
‘I didn’t lie to you. This is very delicious. If you don’t trust me, try to taste it.’
In Lu’s view, example (39 b) and (40 b) is the form deletion from example (39 a) and (40 a). In (39 a) and (40 a), the meaning of kan resembles that the Sense 5 ‘see as
condition’ which takes a clausal complement as the judgment of the speaker. As for diachronic evidences, according to Li (2007), the earliest usage of kan as a suffix expressing ‘attempting’ was found before Tang Dynasty. However, no forms of VV-kan were found then. Not unitl Yuan and Ming Dynasty were the reduplicated verbs attaching by the suffix kan available, e.g. ni zai qu xunxun-kan ‘You go and try to look for it again’ (Xiyouji ‘The Journey to the West’). Furthermore, few examples of V-kankan were discovered in Tang, Song, Yuan and Ming Dynasty, e.g. yi shi xiang wo shuoshuokan ‘Try to tell me the truth’ (Dunhuang Bianwen Ji ‘Anthology of Dunhuang Bianwen’).
To account for the semantic extension, Chang (2000) considers the meaning of verbal suffix kan is extended from perception look to cognition estimate. Since estimation requires the extension and repetition of activity, it confirms to the function of verbal duplication. That explains why kan tends to duplicate more frequently than other verbs, especially when they are in the position of suffix. In addition, kankan also exhibits the meaning of gradually functioning as a time adverb from the diachronic point of view (Chang 2000, Li 2007).
The author adopts the later viewpoint which regards the verbal suffix kan as extending from other sense of kan and thus later undergoing the grammaticalization and deleting process. Despite of the controversies held concerining the attempting meaning of VV-kan and V-kankan, Chang (2004) terms this useage as speaker’s answer-seeking intention (cf. 41). The point in this paper, however, is that, when the agent of VV-kan or V-kan kan is a speaker, it indicates the intention and volition of the speaker . The intention use is then included into part of the deontic modality. On the contrary, in the speaker-hear interacting scenario, it induces the precative and advisory perspective of the speaker to suggest the hearer to perform certain action (c.42). This use yields the weak manipulation meaning of the construction.
(41) 我 拿起 字典， 隨便 翻翻看/ 翻看看。
Wo naqi zidian， suibian fanfan-kan/ fan-kan-kan I take-Qi dictionary casually turn over-turn over-look/ turn-look-look
‘I take out the dictionary and turn it over casually.’ (Google)
(42) 你 吃吃看/吃吃看 嘛！
ni chichi-kan/chi-kan-kan ma you eateat-see/eat-see-see SFP
‘You can/may/should/shall try to eat it!’ (Google)
Evidences from other languages, such as Yaqui (43 a-d), show that elements expressing modality can be attached to verb as suffix as well.
(43) Yaqui: modality in suffixes and sentence-final position a. aapo yi’i-taite
he dance-start ‘He is starting to dance’
b. bempo bwik-su-k
they sing-finish-PERF ‘They have finished singing’
c. itepo yooko aman kat-vae we tomorrow there go-intend ‘We plan to go there tomorrow ’
d. inepo siim-pea I leave-wish
‘I want to leave’ (Givón 1990b:539-41)
In (43 a, b), the modal verbs ‘start’ and ‘finish’ are lexicalized with the main verb to form its modality while in (43 c, d), similarly, the modal meaning of ‘intend and wish’ is suffixed to the main verb.
To sum up, the grammaticalization path of kan is illustrated below.14
Figure 15: Grammaticalization Path of Kan
Among the three semantic-pragmatic tendencies Tragott proposes, the third one, which demonstrates the development of epistemic modality by the grammaticalization of may, is found adequate for explaining the semantic extension of Kan.
Along the first Path, kan functions as a perception verb which means ‘to look’ (a) and ‘to look like (perceptually)’ (b) in stage I. Then, kan becomes an evidential introducer ‘it looks (according to a certain evidence)’ (c-d) in stage II since the absence of the Perceiver ‘I’ reveals the fact that the inference or judgment is made
14 The senses of Kan discussed in Figure 15 correspond to the sense 1, 9 and 10 in Table 9 and the sense 2 and 6 in Table 10.
Propositional Level Textual Level Expressive Level
from other sources rather than the speaker’s perception in order to evade responsibility; while in stage III, it turns out to be a counter-expectation marker in sentence-initial position (e).
Along the second Path, kan functions as a cognition verb which means ‘to suppose’ (f) and ‘to infer’ (g) in stage I. Then, kan occupies the sentence-medial position and serves as a complementizer conveying epistemic meaning and euphemistic disagreement (h). Finally, in stage III, it turns out to be a verbal suffix which codes ‘attempt’ (i-j). It is found that other languages, such as Ute (Givón 1990b:539-41), adopt the same strategy of coding modality by verbal suffix as well.
According to the third tendency proposed by Traugott, the two grammaticalization paths of kan which goes from the process of propositional and textual, to interpersonal (expressive) conform to Traugott’s predication that meanings tend to become increasingly situated in the speaker’s subjective belief state/ attitude towards the situation.
Another perception verb, juede 覺得, shows a similar grammaticalization path.
According to the analysis of Liu and Chiang (2006), wo juede ‘I feel’ serving its expressive function in discourse (to avoid oppositional confrontation and present euphemistic disagreement) by coding subjectivity as well as intersubjectivity. The study of Liu and Chiang sheds light on the interaction between pragmatics and semantics by probing into the perception verb juede. It’s noticeable that both kan and juede extend their root meanings ‘to look perceptually’ and ‘to feel perceptually’ to ‘to suppose’ and ‘to feel mentally’ by metaphorical extensions. This conforms to the study of Sweetser (1990) that perception is often viewed as cognition within and across languages.
4.1.2 The Polysemous Xiang
By observing the data in the corpora and referring to the analysis of xiang
‘to think’ in Mandarin by Liu and Wu (2001) and Liu and Hu (2007), xiang is divided into seven different frames which represent different senses in FrameNet listed in the Table 11 below.
Table 11: Semantic Frames of Polysemous Xiang (based on Liu & Wu 2001, Liu and Hu 2007)
Sense Frame Semantic Roles & Syntactic Category
Example
1 ponder Cogitation Cognizer[NP] < * < Topic [NP]
Cognizer[NP] < * < Issue [CL]
他一直在想這件事情。
我想著該如何處置這些垃 圾。
2 conceive
Invention Cognizer[NP] < * < Creation[NP] 他想了一個好辦法。
3 suppose Opinion Cognizer [NP] < * < Opinion[CL] 我想她是對的。
4 guess Coming_to_believe Cognizer [NP] < * < Content[NP] 我想，明天應該會下雨。
5 wish, hope
Preference Experiencer [NP] < * <
Focal_Event [VP]
Since the focus of this paper is on the extension from perception to modaity and manipulation, this paper explores merely on three frames of the polysemous xiang:
Opinion Frame (sense 3), Coming_to_believe Frame (sense 4) and Preference Frame (sense 5). The frames of polysemous xiang are illustrated under the three different domain, i.e. emotion, cognition and modality, in Figure 16. In Figure 16, the two
frames, Opinion and Coming_to_believe, overlap with the epistemic modality whereas the Preference Frame overlap with the deontic modality (or so-called desiderative or dynamic modality). Discussions will follow the two veins of modality later.
Figure 16: Semantic Frames of Polysemous Xiang under Emotion, Cognition and Modality Domain (based on Liu & Wu 2001, Liu and Hu 2007)
On the one hand, the Sense 3 and 4 of xiang are in fact verbs overlapping with epistemic modality as well as what Noonan (1985) termed ‘propositional attitude predicates’. As the name suggests, those predicate expresses the experiencer’s attitudes with respect to the truth condition of the proposition in the complement position. Therefore, the verbs, such as cai 猜 ‘to guess’、caixiang 猜想 ‘to guess’、
liaoxiang 料想 ‘to suppose’、duanding 斷定 ‘to make a judgment’、 tuiduanchu 推 斷出 ‘to infer’、tuilun(chu) 推論出 ‘to infer’ 、xiang 想 ‘to think’、renwei 認為
‘to consider’、yiwei 以為 ‘to consider’、juede 覺得 ‘to feel’、kan 看 ‘to see’、
Cogitation
Emotion Cognition Modality
Opinion Invention
我很想她
我想這件事 想了很久
我想不起來
我想出一個辦法 我想她是對的 我想回家
我想他牽我的手