In Lü (1999), cengjing is classified as an adverb, indicating an act/situation in the past, usually not a recent past. The situation involved in (6) is in the past. Lü further suggests that cengjing cannot scope over negation. (7) shows that Lü marks the sentence in which the negation is under the scope of cengjing as ungrammatical.
8
(6) Zhe-wei huajia ceng dao-guo Xizang.
this-CL painter CENG reach-EXP Tibet This painter went to Tibet before.’ (Lü 1999: 110)
(7) *Weile gao shiyan ta cengjing bu chu men.
for do experiment he CENGJING NEG out door
‘In order to do an experiment, he did not go out.’ (Lü 1999: 110)
However, Cao (2002, 2003) provides evidence to argue that cengjing is compatible not only with the time frames of remote past but also with that of the recent past. In Cao (2002), cengjing is understood as a terminative aspect (yirantai), indicating a situation in the past that has come to a halt. (8) shows the situation of planning an activity, i.e. committing suicide, does not hold at the time of speech (henceforth S) because of cengjing. Cao (2003) also finds cengjing is compatible with durative zhe, as in (9).
(8) Ta zi ai zi lian, cengjing dasuan xuan yi-ge hao she self love self pity CENGJING plan select one-CL good rizi si-qu.
day die-AND
‘She felt sorry for her own circumstances and once planned to commit suicide on a selected day.’ (Cao 2002: 44)
(9) Gao ma zai ta zhangfu huo zhe de shihou jiu
Gao Mrs. at she husband live PROG DE time as.early.as cengjing shou zhe zhe-ge zui.
CENGJING suffer DUR this-CL sin
‘Mrs. Gao was suffering when her husband was alive’ (Cao 2003: 143)
9
Cao (2002) also proposes that cengjing sentences can be classified into two kinds, depending on whether or not there is a lexicalized temporal reference. When there is no such a temporal reference, it is set in the past and the act or situation under cengjing’s scope has no extension to S. In contrast, when temporal reference is involved, cengjing is applicable to the context of both recent and remote past, which are displayed in (10) and (11) respectively.
According to Cao (2002), cengjing, generally considered an adverb indicating remote past as in (11), can have a ‘just now’ meaning as well, as in (10). (11) denotes a state of being beautiful in a remote past while (10) talks about an event that just happened, possibly a few minutes ago.
(10) Gangcai ta ceng shuodao-guo ni.
just.now he CENG talk.about -EXP you
‘He just talked about you.’ (Cao 2002: 44)
(11) Dang nian wo ye ceng piaoliang-guo.
that year I also CENG beautiful-EXP
‘I was quite a beauty in those days.’ (Cao 2002: 44)
Similar to Cao (2002), Lu and Ma (1985) have pointed out cengjing’s flexibility of talking about the past. In (12) the event of learning French occurs in a distant past; in contrast, (13) shows the inquiry took place just now.
(12) Ershi nian qian ta cengjing xue-guo fayu.
twenty year before he CENGJING learn -EXP French ‘He studied French twenty years ago.’ (Ma 2003: 26)
(13) Zhe-jian shi gangcai wo cengjing wen-guo ta.
10
This-CL matter just.now I CENGJING ask-EXP him
‘I just asked him of this thing.’ (Ma 2003: 26)
Moreover, Ma (2003) classifies cengjing as a tense adverb (dingshi shijian fuci). It usually refers to an experiential situation in the past. Therefore (14) is anomalous because cengjing is temporally incompatible with xianzai ‘now’.
(14) *Xianzai ta cengjing kan dao 120 ye le.
now she CENGJING see to 120 page PFV
*‘In the present she once read up to page 120.’ (Ma 2003: 25)
Ma (2003) further proposes the semantic features yanxuxing ‘persistence’ and
youxiaoxing ‘validity’ to describe the situation modified by cengjing (and yijing). Yanxuxing means the sustaining quality of a situation whereas youxiaoxing means whether a situation holds at the reference time. Ma argues that these two features are positive if a situation persists in being valid after the reference time. Cengjing, according to Ma’s argument, is negative of both features, so the situation under its scope is neither persistent nor valid at the reference time. For example, the referent of the first person pronoun in (15) is not short of confidence at S because cengjing makes ‘losing confidence’ no longer valid.
(15) Wo cengjing sangshi-guo xinxin.
I CENGJING lose-EXP confidence
‘I used to lose faith (but it is not the case now).’ (Ma 2003: 27)
The two semantic features, yanxuxing and youxiaoxing, are later adopted by Deng (2010), who argues that cenjing’s incompatibility with zai, a progressive marker in Mandarin,
11
and a habitual situation is a result of cengjing’s lack of persistence. Deng argues that in (16) the progressive aspect of processing is in conflict with the non-persistence of cengjing;
similarly the fact that the sun rises from the east is valid from the past through the present into the future, a consistency that cengjing cannot capture, as shown in (17).
(16) *Womende aiqing yu women cengjing zai
our love with we CENGJING PROG
jinxing de shehui fuwu shiye yiyang yong cun.
process DE society service career same forever exist
*‘Our love lasts as long as the social service we were once doing.’ (Deng 2010:
127)
(17) *Taiyang cengjing cong dongfang shengqi-guo.
sun CENGJING from east rise-EXP
*‘The sun once rose up from the east.’ (Deng 2010: 127)
Qu (2009) is almost in the same vein as Ma (2003). Qu agrees that cengjing indicates the termination of a situation. However, considering a lack of reference time, Qu (2009) suggests adding explicit temporal location, such as yesterday, two years ago, so that the reference time of the situation can be more accurate. For example, both of the following sentences are
plausible. A situation of talking about something could occur as recent as yesterday, like (18), or as remote as two years ago, like (19).
(18) Zuotian ta cengjing shuo-guo zhe-jian shi.
yesterday he CENGJING talk-EXP this-CL matter
‘He talked about this thing yesterday.’ (Qu 2009: 172)
(19) Liang nian qian ta cengjing shuo-guo zhe-jian shi.
12
two year ago he CENGJING talk-EXP this-CL matter
‘He talked about this thing two years ago.’ (Qu 2009: 172)
Qu (2012) believes pragmatics is the key to telling apart cengjing and yijing. He argues that, though previous scholars have studied the semantics and syntax of cengjing and yijing, the main distinction is that cengjing does not involve contextual factors while yijing is subject to them. He proposes three functions that concern cengjing. The third function transfers cengjing into an adjective, which is irrelevant to my study. Thus only the first two functions are under my review. First, Qu draws an analogy between physic static state and cengjing.
That is, cengjing indicates a static status of a situation in the past. Given that the meaning is fixed and contextual factors are ruled out, further interpretation is not possible. (20) is a factual statement about the past: a group of people worked at Foxconn for a period of time.
Other pragmatic meanings, for example, speaker’s attitude toward this statement, are not inferable.
(20) Tamen cengjing zai fushikang gongzuo le yi duan shijian.
they CENGJING at Foxconn work PFV one period time
‘They used to work at Foxconn for a while.’ (Qu 2012: 161)
Second, Qu suggests that cengjing is more likely to scope over a realis mood due to its lack of persistence. That cengjing states the termination of a situation means it will remain unchanged thenceforth. In (21), cengjing and the smashing event accommodate each other well because the aviation history is a fact in the past, thus in a realis mood.
(21) Ju hangkong shi jizai kongqi qiangbi cengjing ba
13
by aviation history record air wall CENGJING BA jianyingde feiji zhuang de fensui.
hard plane hit DE smash
‘The aviation history writes that air curtains once smashed a hard plane.’ (Qu 2012:
162)
Hu (2005) proposes a pragmatics-based account in which the grammatical meaning is composed of a basic aspect and a derivative aspect. The basic aspect of meaning is stable, but the derivative is subject to the pragmatics. He uses the terms, zhuanzhe (a turn) and
xiangcheng (pass-on) to distinguish those semantic phenomena. Hu claims that cengjing’s basic meaning, yiwang de yizhong jingli ‘an experience in the past’, corresponds to Ma’s (2003) no persistence and no validity and is a display of zhuanzhe (a turn); i.e. it does not hold at S. (22) shows that the secretary is no longer an employee here at S.
(22) Li shuji cengjing zai zheli gongzuo-guo.
Li secretary CENGJING at here work-EXP
‘Secretary Li worked here before.’ (Hu 2005: 26)
On the contrary, if cengjing takes a derivative meaning, which is pass-on (xiangcheng) for cengjing, it will display persistence so the situation is still valid at S, as in example (23). The activity of reading happens again at S after its first earlier appearance.
(23) Bieren wo bu lun, ruoshi ziji ze cengjing kan-guo xuduo others I not judge if self then CENGJING see-EXP much jiu shu weile jiaoshu zhi jin ye hai zai kan.
old book for teach till today also still PROG see
‘As for me, I used to read many old books, and for teaching, I still do.’ (Hu 2005:
26)
14
Yisheng Zhang (2000) and Yajun Zhang (2002) believe cengjing in a specified context assumes a role of contrasting then with now. In (24), cengjing marks a cutting line of time:
before the line the brother was engaged in a labor-intensive job and after it he gets a presumably better-paid job.
(24) Ni ge cengjing shi gongren xianzai ye gan de you brother CENGJING be worker now also do DE bu cuo.
not wrong
‘Your brother used to be a worker, and now he has got a good job (or even better).’
(Zhang 2002: 224)
The view that the situation under the scope of cengjing does not hold at S is supported by Lu (1988), Hou (1998), Yisheng Zhang (2000), Yajun Zhang (2002), Ma (2003), Qu (2009) and Chang (2009) but not Cao (2002), Liu et al. (2004) and Hu (2005). Liu et al.
argue that whether the situation holds at S is contingent. Though in (25) the experience of having been to China implies, by default, he is not in China at S, his whereabouts can, even at the slightest chance, choose China again at S.
(25) Ta cengjing lai-guo Zhongguo.
He CENGJING come-EXP China
‘He once came to China.’ (Liu et al. 2004: 131)
15