5 Argument Realizations of Chinese Resultative Compounds
5.1 Argument-Function Remapping
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
87
Chapter 5 Argument Realizations of Chinese Resultative Compounds
It has been demonstrated in previous chapters that the derivational accounts of Chinese resultative compounds has insufficiencies in achieving the multiple argument realizations and semantic interpretations of some resultative compounds while the LFG account (Her, 2007) provides a better solution in this respect. It has also been shown that despite the availability of the LFG account to Chinese resultative compounds, it leaves out the explanation for the causative resultative compounds.
With the endeavor to fine-tune the LFG account, a rule of Causative Resultative Compounding has been proposed to capture what has been missing. Given the argument-function mapping mechanisms in LFG, the rules of Resultatve
Compounding and Causativity Assignment in Resultative Compounding proposed by Her (2007), and the rule of Causative Resultative Compounding provided in this thesis, the overall picture of how the arguments of Chinese resultative compounds are syntactically realized and how their multiple interpretations achieved is thus clear.
5.1 Argument-Function Remapping
The argument realization process of Chinese resultative compounds of all categories is shown in this chapter to see whether the account taken in this thesis
‧
works well. For reference convenience, all the tools necessary for solving the issues of resultative compounds are repeated below:
(83) a. Resultative Compounding:
Vcaus ＜x y＞+ Vres ＜z＞→
Vcaus Vres＜α β＞, where ＜α β＞= (i) ＜x y-z＞
(ii) ＜x-z y＞
b. Intrinsic Morphosyntactic Classification of Argument Roles (IC):
θ, θ = pt/th [-r]
c. Default Morphosyntactic Classification of Argument Roles (DC):
θ, θ ≠ Ө^
[+r]
d. The Unified Mapping Principle (UMP):
Map each argument role, from the most prominent to the least, onto the highest compatible function available.
(*A function is available iff it is not linked to a role.) e. Causativity Assignment in Resultative Compounding:
An unsuppressed role from Vres receives [af] iff an unsuppressed role from Vcause exists to receive [caus].
f. Causative Resultative Compounding:
VAcausative ＜x, yi, …＞+ Vunaccusative Vres ＜zi＞→
Vunaccusative-CAUS Vres＜α β＞, where ＜α β＞ = ＜x, yi, ＜___i＞＞
(x=ag, y=pt-th-th)
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
In the case of unergative resultative compounds, the argument realization process looks like example (84):
(84) Zhangsan ku-xia-le (unergative) Zhangsan cry-blind-ASP
Resultative Compounding: Vku ＜x＞+ Vxia ＜y＞→
Vku Vxia＜α＞, where ＜α＞= ＜x-y＞
(i) ‘Zhangsan cried and went blind as a result.’
＜ x-y ＞ (x=ag, y= th) (non-causative) IC
DC
--- CF S/O…
UMP S
(ii) ‘Zhangsan cried and went blind as a result.’
＜ x-y ＞ (x=ag, y=th) (non-causative) IC [-r]
DC
--- CF S/O
UMP S
On the other hand, the argument realization process of unaccusative resultative compounds looks like example (85):
‧
(i) ‘Zhangsan was extremely angry to the point of exploding.’
＜ x-y ＞ (x=th, y=th) (non-causative)
(ii) ‘Zhangsan was extremely angry to the point of exploding.’
＜ x-y ＞ (x=th, y=th) (non-causative)
From the examples above, it is clearly seen that the LFG rules predict that the arguments of unergative and unaccusative resultative compounds should be
syntactically realized in the subject position. And it is exactly how they are realized.
The LFG generalizations provide correct predictions so far. The situations are more complicated in the argument realization of transitive resultative compounds. Various realization possibilities result from how the composite role is formed and suppressed in the compounds:
‧
i. ‘Zhangsan scolded Lisi to the extent of making him (Lisi) annoyed.’
＜x y-z＞ (x=ag, y=pt/th) (non-causative)
ii. ‘Zhangsan scolded Lisi and (Zhangsan) got annoyed.’
＜x-z y＞ (x=ag, y=pt/th) (non-causative)
iii. ‘Lisi scolded Zhangsan and was made annoyed (by Zhangsan).’
＜x-z[af] y[caus]＞ (z=pt/th, y=pt/th) (causative)
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
All of the interpretations of the transitive resultative compounds could be achieved as long as the arguments are legitimate for the interpretations and are not prevented from the syntactic realization by semantic factors. The LFG account eliminates the
insufficiency of the derviational generalizations such as the DOR and FRP, where only certain kinds of predications of the compounds are available and hence lead to limited interpretations.
Finally, the category of causative resultative compounds is to be investigated to see if the LFG account also gives correct predictions in terms of argument realization.
Recall that in the previous chapter the Chinese causative resultative compounds have been devided into two subcategories that incorporate internal causativity and external causativity, respectively. The argument-function mapping processes are different for the subcategories and should be discussed separately. For the internal causative resultative compounds, the result of argument realization conforms to one of the realization patterns of the transitive resultative compounds since the subject is an argument of the compounds and the apparent inversion of Subject and Object comes from the suppression variations of the composite roles:
(87) zhe-chang yanjiang ting-lei-le Zhangsan (internal causative) this-CL speech listen-tired-ASP Zhangsan
‧
i. ‘*The speech listened to Zhangsan to the extent of making him (Zhangsan) tired.’
ii. ‘* The speech listened to Zhangsan and (the speech) got tired.’
＜x-z y＞ (x=ag, y=pt/th) (non-causative)
iii. ‘Zhangsan listened to the speech and was made tired (by the speech).’
＜x-z[af] y[caus]＞ (z=pt/th, y=pt/th) (causative)
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Following the argument-function mapping rules, multiple patterns of argument realizations could be made and multiple interpretations achieved. However, most of the interpretations are ruled out by semantic restrictions, which forbid the argument, yanjiang, realized as Subject, to be the Agent of the resultative compound. Therefore,
the sentence with the internal causative resultative compound has only one meaning, one that has the Agent realized as Object and the Theme, Subject, as in (87iii).
Another rule not utilized in the previous realization processes has to be in effect now when it comes to the argument realization of external causative resultative compounds; that is, Causative Resultative Compounding. Based on the concept of Romance complex predicates, the extra argument representing the source of
causativity in external causative resultative compounds is well accounted for and the process of realization looks as thus:
(88) zhe-kuai guodong ye-si-le Zhangsan (external causative) this-CL jello choke-dead-ASP-CAUS Zhangsan
a. Resultative Compounding: Vye ＜x＞+ Vsi ＜y＞→
Vye Vsi＜α＞, where ＜α＞= ＜x-y＞ (x=th, y=th) b. Causative Resultative Compounding:
VAcausative ＜x, yi, …＞+ Vye Vsi ＜zi＞→
Vye-CAUS Vsi ＜α β＞, where ＜α β＞ = ＜x, yi, ＜___i＞＞
(x=ag, y=pt-th-th)
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
c. ‘This chunk of jello choked Zhangsan to death.’
＜x yi ＜___i＞＞ (x=ag, y= pt-th-th) (causative) IC [-r]
DC
--- CF S/O… S/O
UMP S O
The mission set out in this thesis to explicate the complexitites of Chinese resultative compounds in terms of argument realization has been accomplished. Almost all the realization patterns of the compounds can be correctly predicted by the LFG account with the supporting rules given in (83). Moreover, some newly coined resultative compounds also fit into the realization processes generated in the account, which makes the account even stronger in dealing with the issues of Chinese resultative compounds.