Chapter 4 Analysis
4.2 The comparison between the Chinese and TSM overt comparative morpheme…
In this section, I’ll discuss the comparison between the MC overt comparative
morpheme and TSM counterpart. The overt comparative morpheme geng ‘even-more’ in MC, according to its meaning, has a stronger voice than khah ‘more’ in TSM and has similar status
to koh-khah ‘even-more’ which is composed of the intensifier koh ‘again’ with khah ‘more’.
In other words, the meaning of geng ‘even-more’ is similar to that of koh-khah ‘even-more’
so geng ‘even-more’ and koh-khah ‘even-more’ should pattern together. Their similarity can be seen in (10) and (11) below.
Mandarin Chinese geng ‘even-more’ and TSM koh-khah ‘even-more’
(10) 張三 比 李四 更 高
Zhangsan bi Lisi
geng
gaoZhangsan than Lisi even-more tall
‘Zhangsan is even taller than Lisi.’ (C.-S. Liu 2011)
(11) 阿榮 比 阿狗 擱較 懸
A-ing pi A-kao
koh-khah
kuanA-ing than A-kao even-more tall
‘A-ing is even taller than A-kao.’
This shows the meaning and function of geng ‘even-more’ in MC are more complicated than khah ‘more’ in TSM. This is because geng ‘even-more’ bears the intensifying function that can’t be found in khah ‘more’. The TSM speakers should use the intensifier koh ‘again’
to modify khah ‘more’ to express the intensifying function that is similar to geng ‘even-more’
in MC. Moreover, I suggest that Chinese has no overt word that has the similar function to
khah ‘more’. As shown in the above examples, geng ‘even-more’ and koh-khah ‘even-more’
in (10) and (11) can pattern together.
Similarly, the covert comparative morphemes in MC and that in TSM can also pattern together, which can be seen in the following paradigms.
The covert comparative morphemes in both MC and TSM
(12) 張三 比 李四 高
Zhangsan bi Lisi gao
Zhangsan than Lisi tall
‘Zhangsan is taller than Lisi.’ (C.-S. Liu 2011)
(13) 阿榮 比 阿狗 懸
A-ing pi A-kao kuan
A-ing than A-kao tall
‘A-ing is taller than A-kao.’
However, while (10) patterns with (11) and (12) & (13) are patterned together, khah
‘more’ in (14) can’t pattern with any constituent in MC. In other words, we can’t find an
overt word identical to the function and meaning of khah ‘more’ in Chinese.
The overt comparative morpheme khah ‘more’
(14) 阿榮 比 阿狗 較 懸
A-ing pi A-kao
khah
kuanA-ing than A-kao more tall
‘A-ing is taller than A-kao.’
The discussion about the presupposition provided by geng ‘even-more’ can provide further evidence to support the claim that there’s no word in Chinese similar to khah ‘more’
in TSM. This phenomenon can be seen in the following examples.
(15) 張三 比 李四 更 高
Zhangsan bi Lisi
geng
gaoZhangsan than Lisi even-more tall
‘Zhangsan is even taller than Lisi, and both of them are tall.’ (C.-S. Liu 2010b)
(16) 阿榮 比 阿狗 較 懸
A-ing pi A-kao
khah
kuanA-ing than A-kao more tall
‘A-ing is taller than A-kao.’
According to C.-S. Liu (2010b), geng ‘even more’ in (15) not only has the
presupposition that Zhangsan is taller than Lisi, but also presupposes that both the compared individuals Zhangsan and Lisi are tall, namely, both of them can’t be short people. In other
words, only when Zhangsan and Lisi are tall to some extent can we use the morpheme geng
‘even more’ in the comparative sentence. If the overt comparative morpheme geng ‘even
more’ is not present, the sentence does not presuppose that both of them are tall.
Unlike geng ‘even more’, I suggest that khah ‘more’ in (16) does not presuppose both
A-ing and A-kao are tall, although khah ‘more’ still asserts that A-ing is taller than A-kao.
Since only geng ‘even-more’ but not khah ‘more’ has the presupposition that the two compared individual are tall, geng ‘even-more’ must be different from khah ‘more’.3
3 As mentioned earlier, geng ‘even-more’ patterns with koh-khah ‘even-more’ according to their meanings. As the following sentences demonstrsted, the compared individuals in both (i) and (ii) are tall. Namely, both Zhangsan and Lisi are tall in (i) and both A-ing and A-kao are tall in (ii).
(i) 張三 比 李四 更 高
Zhangsan bi Lisi geng gao Zhangsan than Lisi even-more tall
‘Zhangsan is even taller than Lisi, and both of them are tall.’ (C.-S. Liu 2011)
(ii) 阿榮 比 阿狗 擱較 懸
A-ing pi A-kao koh-khah kuan A-ing than A-kao even-more tall
‘A-ing is even taller than A-kao and both of them are tall.’
Now that the comparative morpheme khah ‘more’ can’t presuppose the two compared objects are tall in (ii), I suggest the intensifier koh ‘again’ in (ii) might be responsible for the presupposition that the two compared objects A-ing and A-kao are tall.
Another example that supports the claim that koh ‘again’ is responsible for such presupposition is that replacing koh ‘again’ with another intensifier ke ‘add’ will make this presupposition disappear in the sentence.
(iii) 阿榮 比 阿狗 加較 懸
A-ing pi A-kao ke-khah kuan A-ing than A-kao even-more tall
‘A-ing is even taller than A-kao.’
Therefore, the above reasoning supports our suggestion that no Chinese word can be found to have similar function to khah ‘more’ in TSM.
However, some may argue that even though geng ‘even-more’ has the presupposition that both Zhangsan and Lisi are tall in the above discussion, geng ‘even-more’ may not presuppose that both the compared individuals are true in the absolute sense in some
conditions. As (17) and (18) suggest, geng ‘even-more’ in (17) can not presuppose that both his ruler and my ruler are long. Both geng ‘even-more’ and its covert counterpart only express the comparative meaning that the ruler he bought is longer than the one I bought.
This phenomenon can also be found in the TSM examples like (19) and (20). In (19) and (20),
khah ‘more’ and its covert counterpart can only provide the comparative meaning without
bearing other presuppositions. Thus, geng ‘even-more’ and khah ‘more’ can pattern together.
(17) 他 買了 一 把 比 我 更 長 的 尺
ta mai-le i ba bi wo
geng
chang de chihe buy-PERF one CL than I even-more long DE ruler
‘He bought a ruler that is longer than the one I bought.’
(18) 他 買了 一 把 比 我 長 的 尺
ta mai-le i ba bi wo chang de chi
he buy-PERF one CL than I even-more long DE ruler
‘He bought a ruler that is longer than the one I bought.’
(19) 伊 買 一 支 比 我 較 長 的 尺
i bue tsit ki pi gua
khah
tng --e tshiohhe buy one CL than I more long GEN ruler
‘He bought a ruler that is longer than the one I bought.’
(20) 伊 買 一 支 比 我 長 的 尺
i bue tsit ki pi gua tng --e tshioh
he buy one CL than I more long GEN ruler
‘He bought a ruler that is longer than the one I bought.’
Nevertheless, the fact that geng ‘even-more’ does not presuppose that both his ruler and my ruler are long can not be used to argue against my suggestion that geng ‘even-more’ and
khah ‘more’ are different. After all, geng ‘even-more’ in (15) is different from khah ‘more’ in
(16). One possible reason why geng ‘even-more’ and khah ‘more’ have similar function in (17) and (18) is that the comparative morphemes in these two sentences are placed in a relative clause. The bi-comparative with the relative clause is different from the
bi-comparative without relative clause. The relative clause may be the reason why geng
‘even-more’ has no presupposition that both the compared individuals are true in the absolute
sense in (17) and (18).
Moreover, we find the distribution of geng ‘even-more’ is much restricted than koh-khah
‘even-more’. The major difference lies in the incompatibility of geng ‘even-more’ and the
differential measure phrase. On the contrary, koh-khah ‘even-more’ is compatible with the differential measure phrase.
In general, the expression with a strong voice such as geng ‘even-more’ and koh-khah
‘even-more’ have the narrower distribution than the word like khah ‘more’, which has weaker
voice. Nevertheless, the distribution of koh-khah ‘even-more’ is much wider than geng
‘even-more’ though their syntactic functions and meanings are similar. (Please refer to the
appendix)
The possible explanation about this matter is that geng ‘even-more’ in the
bi-comparative can only modify adjectives such as gao ‘tall’ but not predicates like gao san
gongfen ‘three centimeters taller’. In contrast, koh-khah ‘even-more’ can modify not only the
adjective kuan ‘tall’ but also the predicate kuan snn kongfun ‘three centimeters taller’. Thus
koh-khah ‘even-more’ is more productive.
(21) 張三 比 李四 更 高 (*三 公分)
Zhangsan bi Lisi
geng
gao (*san gongfen)Zhangsan than Lisi even-more tall three centimeters
‘Zhangsan is (*three centimeters) even taller than Lisi.’
(22) 阿榮 比 阿狗 擱較 懸 (三 公分)
A-ing pi A-kao
koh-khah
kuan (sann kongfun)A-ing than A-kao even-more tall three centimeters
‘A-ing is even three centimeters taller than A-kao.’
Another alternative proposed by Grano and Kennedy (2012) supports sentences like (21) is ungrammatical because Chinese geng ‘even-more’ is incompatible with the differential
measure phrase in semantics or pragmatics. However, semantically speaking, koh-khah
‘even-more’, which has similar meaning to geng ‘even-more’ can co-occur with the
differential measure phrase as (22) suggests. Thus, it is plausible to say that geng ‘even-more’
is incompatible with the differential measure phrase not simply because of its meaning. Some other factors may be involved in this matter. Otherwise, koh-khah ‘even-more’ shouldn’t have been compatible with the differential measure phrase due to its semantics.
In addition to the bi-comparative, the fact that the distribution of geng ‘even more’ is much narrower than that of koh-khah ‘even more’ can also be seen in the transitive
comparative and the guo-comparative below.
The transitive comparative
(23) *張三 更 高 李四 (三 公分)
*Zhangsan
geng
gao Lisi (san kongfen)Zhangsan even-more tall Lisi three centimeters
‘Zhangsan is (three centimeters) even taller than Lisi.’
(24) 阿榮 擱較 懸 阿狗 (三 公分)
A-ing
koh-khah
kuan A-kao (sann konghun) A-ing even-more tall A-kao three centimeters A-ing is (three centimeters) even taller than A-kao.’The guo-comparative
(25) *張三 更 高過 李四 (三 公分)
*Zhangsan
geng
gao-guo Lisi(san kongfen)
Zhangsan even-more tall-guo Lisi three centimeters‘Zhangsan is (three centimeters) even taller than Lisi.’
(26) 阿榮 擱較 懸過 阿狗 *(三 公分)
A-ing
koh-khah
kuan-kue A-kao *(sannkonghun)
A-ing even-more tall-kue A-kao three centimeters
‘A-ing is three centimeters even taller than A-kao.
According to the above contrast, geng ‘even more’ is incompatible with both the
transitive comparative and the guo-comparative, whereas koh-khah ‘even more’ is allowed in these two comparative constructions.
A possible explanation of this phenomenon can rely on Xiang’s (2005) DegP-shell analysis. In Xiang (2005), the position occupied by bi ‘than’ in the bi-comparative is empty in the transitive comparative. Therefore, the movement of adjectives such as gao ‘tall’ to the empty bi ‘than’ position can generate the correct word order of transitive comparative. The comparative morpheme geng ‘even more’, however, has no place to move in when the empty preposition head position is already occupied by gao ‘tall’. Therefore, geng ‘even more’ can’t be seen in the transitive comparative. Similarly, the empty bi ‘than’ position in the
guo-comparative is placed with the agglutinated form gao-guo ‘tall-exceed’. Hence, there’s
no room for geng ‘even more’ to be put in the guo-comparative.
The above account seems reasonable in the Mandarin Chinese. Nevertheless, koh-khah
‘even more’ also has no position to be placed in the transitive comparative and
guo-comparative in TSM. Surprisingly, koh-khah ‘even more’ is permitted in these two
comparative constructions. Thus, the reason why geng ‘even more’ has a narrower distribution should be further discussed in the future studies.