Chapter 4 Analysis
4.3 The comparison between jiao ‘more’ in MC and khah ‘more’ in TSM
From the above discussions, no constituent in MC can have the same function and distribution that TSM khah ‘more’ has. However, the word jiao ‘more’ seems to simply express the comparative meaning so its function may be similar to TSM khah ‘more’.
Therefore, some may argue that both the Mandarin jiao ‘more’ and TSM khah ‘more’ are comparative morphemes based on the following intransitive comparative examples.
(27) 張三 較 高
Zhangsan
jiao
gao Zhangsan more tall‘Zhangsan is taller (than someone known from the context).’
(28) 阿榮 較 懸
A-ing
khah
kuanA-ing more tall
‘A-ing is taller (than someone known from the context).’
However, as Ma (1988) suggests, the comparative type degree adverb jiao ‘more’ can’t be used in the bi-comparative even though it is compatible with the comparative construction.
The following sentences demonstrate this contrast.
(29) 張三 比 李四 (*較) 高 (三 公分)
Zhangsan bi Lisi jiao gao (san gongfen)
Zhangsan than Lisi more tall three centimeter
Zhangsan is (three centimeters) taller than Lisi.’ (C.-S. Liu 2011)
(30) 跟 別的 同學 相比， 他 *(較) 高
gen biede tongxue xiangbi, ta jiao gao
with other classmates compare he more tall
‘Compared with other classmates, he is taller.’ (Ma 1988)
Moreover, Mandarin jiao ‘more’ is not only incompatible with the bi-comparative but
also incompatible with the transitive comparative and guo-comparative. Nevertheless, TSM
khah ‘more’ can be used in these three comparatives, as can be seen in the following
sentences.
The bi-comparative
(31) 張三 比 李四 (*較) 高 (三 公分)
Zhangsan bi Lisi
jiao
gao (san gongfen)Zhangsan than Lisi more tall three centimeter Zhangsan is (three centimeters) taller than Lisi.’
(32) 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 transitive comparative
(33) 張三 (*較) 高 李四 三 公分
Zhangsan
jiao
gao Lisi san kongfen Zhangsan more tall Lisi three centimeters‘Zhangsan is three centimeters taller than Lisi.’
(34) 阿榮 (較) 懸 阿狗 三 公分
A-ing
khah
kuan A-kao sann konghunA-ing more tall A-kao three centimeters
‘A-ing is (three centimeters) taller than A-kao.’
The guo-comparative
(35) 張三 (*較) 高過 李四 (三 公分)
Zhangsan
jiao
gao-guo1 Lisi (sangongfen)
Zhangsan more tall-guo1 Lisi three centimeters
‘Zhangsan is three centimeters taller than Lisi.’
(36) 阿榮 (較) 懸過 阿狗 (三 公分)
A-ing
khah
kuan-kue A-kao (sannkonghun)
A-ing more tall-kue A-kao three centimeters
‘A-ing is three centimeters taller than A-kao.’
From the above paradigms, I suggest that Mandarin jiao ‘more’ may be a comparative morpheme. One possible reason why jiao ‘more’ can’t be compatible with the bi-comparative, transitive comparative or guo-comparative is that a covert comparative morpheme exists in these comparatives. Therefore, the overt comparative morpheme jiao ‘more’ could not be used or the sentence would contain two comparative morphemes. In general, two constituents
with the same functions can’t co-occur in a sentence. In contrast, no covert comparative morpheme exists in the intransitive comparative. Therefore, the overt comparative morpheme
jiao ‘more’ is compatible with the intransitive comparative.
Another possible account for this phenomenon is that the MC comparative morphemes in the bi-comparative, the transitive comparative and the guo-comparative can only be covert so as to merely express the comparative meaning. On the contrary, the comparative
morpheme can be overtly realized as geng ‘even-more’ only when the speaker needs to convery some specific reading4. That is to say, the comparative morpheme can have overt realization geng ‘even-more’ only when the speaker wants to express the presupposition that the compared objects’ properties are true in the absolute sense. For example, the two
compared constituents such as Zhangsan and Lisi are tall in the comparatives.
If the speaker only intends to express the comparative meaning, he or she will simply use the covert comparative morpheme instead. Since the fuction of the overt comparative morpheme jiao ‘more’ is identical to that of the covert comparative morpheme, the speaker has no motivation to use the overt form jiao ‘more’ to merely express the comparative meaning. Using the overt element should require some specific need such as the presupposition provided by geng ‘even-more’.
As for the comparative morpheme in the intransitive comparative, jiao ‘more’ can be
4 Note that the distribution of geng ‘even-more’ is also restricted. For example, geng ‘even-more’ can’t be used
overtly realized because the sentence such as Zhangsan gao ‘Zhangsan is tall’ can be interpreted as the comparative sentence only with the help of the context. In order to
interprete the sentence as a comparative sentence without the help of context, speakers tend
to use the overt comparative morphemes such as jiao ‘more’, bijiao ‘more’ or geng
‘even-more’ in the intransitive comparative, as presented below.
(37) 張三 比較/較 高
Zhangsan
bijiao/jiao
gaoZhangsan more tall
‘Zhangsan is taller than someone.’
(38) 張三 更 高
Zhangsan
geng
gaoZhangsan even-more tall
‘Zhangsan is even taller than someone.’
In contrast, the comparative morpheme khah ‘more’ simply conveys the comparative meaning without presupposing the two compared individual’s properties are true in the
absolute sense. Futhermore, khah ‘more’ is compatible in all the four types of comparatives.
Even though the covert comparative morpheme can be used in TSM comparative
constructions, the overt form seems to be preferred. For instance, as mentioned earlier, the overt realization of the comparative morpheme khah ‘more’ is obligatory in the intransitive comparative and the phing-comparative. This phenomenon is different from the distribution of the overt comparative morpheme jiao ‘more’ in MC. This contrast may be due to the language evolution which is not the focus of the current.