Chang (2012)

In Chang (2012), she suggests that khah ‘more’ in TSM is a special constituent that can not be found in Mandarin Chinese. Therefore, Chang claims that TSM has a peculiar

comparative construction that differs from MC, namely, the khah-comparative. Besides, she

further classifies the khah-comparative as three subtypes – the khah-comparative with bi

‘than’, the khah-comparative without bi ‘than’ and the khah-comparative without the

comparison standard.¹¹

The khah-comparative with bi ‘than’

As long as the bi-comparative contains khah ‘more’, it is called the khah-comparative

11 These three subtypes of the khah-comparatives are respectively considered to be the bi-comparative, transitive comparative, and the intransitive comparative in our study. We do not use the term khah-comparative

with bi ‘than’ in Chang (2012). For instance, the following sentence with bi ‘than’ is referred to as the khah-comparative instead of the bi-comparative.

(83) 阿榮 比 阿狗 較 懸 (三 公分)

A-ing pi A-kao

khah

kuan (sann kongfun)

A-ing than A-kao more tall three centimeter

‘A-ing is (three centimeters) taller than A-kao.’

The khah-comparative without bi ‘than’

The transitive comparative with khah ‘more’ is defined as the khah-comparative without

bi ‘than’. As the following sentence suggests, the adjective kuan ‘tall’ is preceded by khah

‘more’ in the sentence. This is a typical example of the khah-comparative without bi ‘than’.

(84) 阿榮 *(較) 懸 阿狗

A-ing *(khah) kuan A-kao

A-ing more tall A-kao

‘A-ing is taller than A-kao.’

The khah-comparative without the comparison standard

The khah-comparative without the comparison standard is equivalent to the intransitive comparative defined in this thesis. The typical instance of the khah-comparative without the comparison standard is introduced below.

(85) 阿榮 *(較) 懸

A-ing *(khah) kuan

A-ing more tall

‘A-ing is taller (than someone known from the context).’

In Chang (2012), she provides insightful views that khah ‘more’ is a peculiar constituent in TSM and can not be found in Mandarin Chinese. Nevertheless, her analysis is not without problem.

In Chang (2012), she mentions that the comparative marker khah ‘more’ can only be found in TSM but not in Mandarin. In contrast, the marker bi ‘than’ exists in both Mandarin and TSM. Therefore, khah ‘more’ is considered a marked comparative marker, whereas the Mandarin Chinese comparative marker bi ‘than’ is viewed as an unmarked comparative marker. The following sentences can reflect the fact provided in the above discussion.

(86) 張三 比 李四 高

Zhangsan

bi

Lisi gao

Zhangsan than Lisi tall

‘Zhangsan is taller than Lisi.’

(87) 阿榮 比 阿狗 較 懸

A-ing

pi

A-kao

khah

kuan

A-ing than A-kao more tall

‘A-ing is taller than A-kao.’

In addition, Chang (2012) discusses the differences between the two comparative

markers, the TSM khah ‘more’ and the Mandarin bi ‘than’. On the one hand, the marker bi

‘than’ can introduce the comparison standard such as Lisi in (86), while khah ‘more’ can

introduce the comparative predicate like kuan ‘tall’ in (87). The phenomenon that these two comparative markers respectively have different functions can explain why both of them can co-occur in a TSM comparative sentence. Sentence (87) demonstrates this fact.

Nevertheless, the comparative predicate such as kuan ‘tall’ is not necessarily introduced by khah ‘more’ since the comparative construction without khah ‘more’ is also grammatical as the following sentences suggest.

(88) 阿榮 比 阿狗 較 懸

Unlike the sentence in (88), khah ‘more’ does not overtly appear in (89). Hence, kuan

‘tall’ does not need to be introduced by khah ‘more’.

The other crucial point mentioned in Chang is that the comparative marker khah ‘more’

is optional in the comparative with bi ‘than’. The meaning of a sentence won’t be changed even khah ‘more’ is omitted. Besides, Chang further adds that the comparative sentences with

khah ‘more’ sound more ancient-like than those without khah ‘more’. The optionality of khah

12 The covert comparative morpheme in (90) is acceptable. However, the comparative morpheme in the following sentences should not be covert. In other words, the comparative morpheme must be overt. Replacing kuan ‘tall’ in (90) with tua ‘old’ will make the sentence be ungrammatical as (ii) suggests. This phenomenon reveals that the speakers’ grammatical judgement may be influenced by the lexicon.

(i) 阿榮 比 阿狗 較 大

‘more’ can be seen in (88) and (89) above.

However, the statement that the comparative marker khah ‘more’ is optional can not explain why the comparative meaning is also found in (89). I suggest that the comparative meaning in the TSM comparatives is provided by the comparative morpheme which can be expressed either in an overt or covert form. In other words, the comparative morpheme is required to express the comparative meaning in the comparative constructions.

In (88), khah ‘more’ is an overt comparative morpheme providing the comparative meaning for the sentence. In contrast, the comparative semantics in (89) is given by a covert comparative morpheme which is placed in the same position that is occupied by khah ‘more’.

Namely, the overt comparative morpheme khah ‘more’ in (88) can be replaced by a covert

counterpart in (89) to express the comparative meaning. This analysis can capture why khah

‘more’ can be omitted in (89).

Moreover, Chang also gives an account for the following sentences. As shown in (90), the comparative marker bi ‘than’ can introduce the comparison standard Lisi. Besides, as revealed in (91) and (92), if the comparison standard is not introduced, the sentence will be ungrammatical unless the degree adverb jiao ‘more’ is inserted to modify the comparative predicate such as gao ‘tall’ in (92).

(90) 張三 比 李四 高

Zhangsan

bi

Lisi gao

Zhangsan than Lisi tall

‘Zhangsan is taller than Lisi.’

(91) *張三 比 高

*Zhangsan

bi

gao

Zhangsan than tall

Lit: ‘Zhangsan is taller than someone in the context.’

(92) 張三 比 較 高

Zhangsan bi

jiao

gao

Zhangsan than more tall

‘Zhangsan is taller than someone in the context.’

According to Chang, the degree adverb jiao ‘more’ can express the degree difference that the marker bi ‘than’ fails to bring to the sentence. Therefore, the insertion of jiao ‘more’

can improve (91) and make it become the grammatical sentence (92).

However, if we assume Chang’s analysis, then we wll encounter the difficulty in accounting for why the marker bi ‘than’ fails to introduce the comparison standard.

According to Chang, if the comparison standard is not introduced, the sentence will be

ungrammatical unless the degree adverb jiao ‘more’ is inserted to modify the comparative predicate. In other word, the appearance of jiao ‘more’ in (92) allows the comparison standard not to be introduced by the preposition bi ‘than’.

Nevertheless, the preposition bi ‘than’ can assign the accusative case to its NP complement. According to the Case Theory, the case-marked NP should be visible. The comparison standard, as a case-valued NP complement of the preposition bi ‘than’, should be visible rather than invisible. Nonetheless, the appearance of both the comparison standard and

jiao ‘than’ will be problematic. We can see this fact in (93).

(93) *張三 比 李四 較 高

*Zhangsan bi

Lisi jiao

gao Zhangsan than Lisi more tall Lit: ‘Zhangsan is taller than Lisi.’

In order to solve this problem, I suggest that we analyze bijiao ‘more’ as a constituent since bi ‘than’ and jiao ‘more’ is unseparable. The constituent bijiao ‘more’ can be used in the intransitive comparative as is displayed below.

(94) 張三 比較 高

Zhangsan

bijiao

gao

Zhangsan more tall

‘Zhangsan is taller than someone in the context.’

(95) 張三 較 高

Zhangsan

jiao

gao

Zhangsan more tall

‘Zhangsan is taller than someone in the context.’

(96) 張三 高

Zhangsan gao

Zhangsan tall

‘Zhangsan is taller than someone in the context.’

I propose that the intransitive comparative bears comparative meaning provided by either the overt comparative morpheme such as bijiao ‘more’ in (94) and jiao ‘more’ in (95) or the covert comparative morpheme in (96). In other words, the comparative morpheme can be either phonologically realized as bijiao ‘more’ or jiao ‘more’ or has no phonological realization. Regardless of being overt or covert, comparative morphemes can express comparative meaning.

在文檔中 漢語與臺灣閩南語比較詞素之對比分析 (頁 82-91)