CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.5 De’s Function in Chinese Cleft
The Chinese word de in cleft structure has a great number of definitions from different linguists. It could be treated as a past tense marker (Teng 1979, Simpson &
Wu 1999), a nominalization particle (Paris 1978), a sentence-final marker for certainty or speaker’s attitude of assertion (Tang 1983, Lee 2005), or an evidentiality marker (Shyu 2008).
It is noted by Paris (1978) that ‘shi...de’ construction should be treated as a matrix verb shi and a nominalization particle de. Paris distinguishes two types of
shi...de construction: NP *(shi) Adj *(de), as in (38), and NP shi...de in which shi...de
are compulsory when the NP is the generic or non-generic reading, as in (39a) and (39b), respectively.(38) 那個人很聰明。
‘That person is intelligent.’ (Paris 1978:54, ex 87) (39) a. The subject NP is not generic
那頂帽子是手做的。
‘That hat is hand-made.’ (Paris 1978:64, ex 123) b. The subject NP is generic
飛機是飛的。(Definition)
‘Planes fly/planes are for flying.’ (Paris 1978:65, ex 135)
The obligatory occurrence of de can also be seen in Lee’s (2005) shi...*(de) structure with non-focus meaning, as in (40). Lee (2005) suggests that the Chinese word shi in cleft sentences has two meanings: copula shi and emphatic marker shi.
The sentence final de is either regarded as a modifier marker when it appears with copula shi in the shi...*(de) structure, or as a final particle when it appears with emphatic marker shi in the shi...(de) structure. She asserts that the possibility of de omission distinguishes focus structures from non-focus structures. In non-focus
structures, de occurs obligatorily in shi...*(de) structure, and should be associated with headless relative clauses, rather than cleft sentences, as shown in (40).
(40) ta shi chi su *(de) he SHI eat vegetable DE
‘He is a vegetarian.’ (Lee 2005:132)
On the contrary, for her, the occurrence of de is optional in shi...(de) focusstructure. Lee also asserts that the possibility of de omission could be categorized into two subgroups: subject/adjunct-focus and predicate-focus structures.
The postverbal de can appear in the subject/adjunct-focus structure, but not in the predicate-focus structure, as illustrated in (41), (42), and (43), respectively.
(41) Subject-focus ‘shi..de’
shi Zhangsan zuotian qu taibei (de) SHI Zhangsan yesterday go Taipei DE
‘It was Zhangsan that went to Taipei yesterday.’
(42) Adjunct-focus ‘shi...(de)’
Zhangsan shi zuotian qu taibei (de) Zhangsan SHI yesterday go Taipei DE ‘It was yesterday that I went to Taipei.’
(43) Predicate-focus ‘shi...(de)’
* Zhangsan zuotian shi qu taibei de Zhangsan yesterday SHI go Taipei DE
‘*It was going to Taipei that Zhangsan did yesterday.’ (Lee 2005:135)
In addition, it is claimed by Lee that predicate-focus structure can be divided into two subtypes according to the acceptance of occurrence of de: stative-predicate and dynamic-predicate focus structures. De occurs obligatorily in a stative-predicate focus structure but it cannot occur in a dynamic-predicate-focus sentence, shown as (44) and (45). Therefore, Lee (2005) asserts that de plays a dominant role in the
shi..de structure, and it cannot be treated as merely an optional element.
(44) Stative-predicate
Zhangsan shi xihuan Lisi de Zhangsan SHI like Lisi DE
‘It is the case that Zhangsan likes Lisi.’
(45) Dynamic-predicate
Zhangsan shi da-le Lisi *de Zhangsan SHI bet-Asp. Lisi DE
Zhangsan did beat Lisi.’ (Lee 2005:163, ex59a,b)
Likewise, the appearance or disappearance of de can be seen in both cleft and noncleft structures suggested by Paul and Whitman (2001, 2004). As for cleft constructions, in the first pattern, when both shi and de are both present, the focused constituent is the immediate constituent following shi, resulting in the subject and adjunct focus reading, as in (41) and (42) above. In the second pattern, sentence initial bare shi without de results in the entire proposition reading, as in (46) or the subject focus reading with phonological stress, as in (47).
(46) Shi xia yu le, bu pian ni. (Lu et al. 2000:500) SHI fall rain PERF NEG trick 2SG
‘It really is that it’s raining, I kid you not.’
(47) Shi Aku he Xiao-D he – le hongjiu (Tsai Wei-Tian 2004:00-100) SHI Akiu and Xiao-D drink-PERF red wine
‘It’s Akiu and Xiao-D who drank red wine.’
There are two types of noncleft structures suggested by Whitman and Paul.
The first pattern is “propositional assertion” with both shi and de but no focused element after shi, as in (48). The second pattern is “sentence-medial bare shi” without
de resulting in focus association reading, as in (49a, b). Any constituent following shi
can be focused.(48) Ta shi gen ni kai wanxiao de 3SF SHI with 2SF open joke DE
‘It is the case that) he was joking with you.’
‘He was just joking with you that was what he was doing.’
(Chao’s translation 1968:296) (49) a. Ta shi zai Beijin xue yuyanxue Ø,
3SG SHI at Beijing learn linguistics bu shi zai Shanghai xue (yuyanxue)
NEG SHI at Shanghai learn linguistics
‘He studies linguistics in Beijin, not in Shanghai.’
b. Ta shi zai Beijing xue yuyanxue Ø, 2SG SHI at Beijing learn linguistics
bu shi zai Beijing xue fawen NEG SHI at Beijing teach French
‘He studies linguistics, not French, in Beijing.’ (Whitman and Paul 2007)
The above discussion shows that the Chinese shi...(de) structure can be regarded as either cleft constructions or non-cleft constructions in terms of the possibility of de. However, contrary to the traditional view that the final marker de can be an optional element in shi...(de) structure as claimed by Lee (2005) and Whitman and Paul (2007), Shyu (2008:2) suggests that de should be an obligatory element for “attributing property to and predicating with the verbal nominal and the clause, respectively,” and serve as an “evidentiality marker” connected with the speaker’s asserted utterance, inference, or belief. For Shyu, the concept of evidentiality marker is in accordance with the “situational de” of Chao (1968),
“affirmation mood” of Zheng et al. (1992), and the “propositional assertion” of Paul&
Whitman (2007), as in (50).
(50) Zhangsan shi han ni kai-wan-xiao de Zhangsan SHI with you open-joke DE
‘He was just joking with you that-was-what-he-was-doing.’
(Chao’s translation 1968: 296)
Based on Declerck’s (1984) distinction of specificational reading of it-clefts from the predicational it-clefts, Shyu (2008) considers that Chinese shi...de, in addition to the identification function of focus, strongly prefers predication reading of it-clefts. For her, Chinese shi...de (with de) can express three meanings:
property-denoting sentences, as in (58), predicate focus, as in (59), and subject or adjunct focus, as in (62i)-(62iii). As for Chinese shi....(*de) (without de), similar to Whitman and Paul’s (2001, 2004) focus association type, any constituent, including the cases of subject, adjunct, or verb, following shi can be focused. For this, Shyu (2008) casts doubts on the previous claims that Chinese has it-cleft made up with
shi...(de) structure, and contends that Chinese shi...(de) cleft construction can not be
parallel to English it-cleft, but is regarded as a predicational sentence (Lambrecht 2008). The way to express the specificational cleft is by the means of Chinese pseudo cleft with de shi structure, as in (21b) below. Therefore, she questions the existence of Chinese it-cleft with the following problems, and then resorts to Lambrecht’s (1994, 2001) three focus types: Predicate Focus (PF), Sentence Focus (SF), and Argument Focus (AF) to account for the shi...(de) structure, which should be considered as a predicational sentence with an optional emphatic marker shi.First, Shyu raises a question regarding Lee’s (2005) observation that the obligatory appearance of de can turn a dynamic predicate into a stative predicate, as in (17). According to Shyu, (52) has the property of cultivating land which is predicated with the subject ta ‘he,’ meaning He is a farmer. But for Shyu, why the active verb 來 ‘lai’ in (51) can occur with an adjunct 從中國 ‘cong Zhonggo’ in Chinese
shi...(de) structure, whereas cannot change into a stative verb and stay alone in
Chinese shi...(de) structure, as in the ungrammatical sentence (53a). In addition, Shyu further points out why the verb phrase喜歡看電影 ‘xihuan kan dianying’ can change into a stative verb with (53b-i) reading in Chinese shi...(de) structure, rather than withthe it-cleft reading in English, as in (53b-ii).
(51) Ta shi cong Zhongguo lai de. (Chao 1968:719; Paris 1979:112) He SHI from China come DE
‘It is from China that he has come.’
(52) Ta shi zhongtian de.
he SHI cultivate-paddy field DE
‘Lit: (What he does) is cultivating land./ He is a farmer.’
(53) a. *Ta shi lai de.
he SHI come DE
‘*It is coming that he did.’
b. Zhangsan shi xihuan kan dianying de.
Zhangsan SHI like see movie DE
(i) ‘It is true that Zhangsan likes to see movies.’ Lee (2005: 203) (ii) ‘*It is loving to see movies that John does.’
Second, for Shyu, the longstanding problem why the object cannot be cleaved in Chinese shi...de pattern, as in the ungrammaticality of (54a), but can only be cleaved in Chinese de shi pattern, as in (54b) still remains unanswered. It is noted by Shyu that the identification cleft is manifested by Chinese pseudo cleft.
(54) a. *Zhangsan he shi putaojiu de.
Zhangsan drink SHI wine DE
‘It was wine that Zhangsan drank.
b. Zhangsan he de shi putaojiu.
Zhangsan drink DE SHI grape-wine
‘What John drank is wine.’ (Shyu 2008)
Shyu further elaborates that English it-clefts like (55) should be viewed as Chinese de shi pattern with VP focus reading, as in (56), instead of shi...de pattern with adjunct focus reading, as in (57i) or proposition assertion reading, as in (57ii).
(55) It was writing a book that John did during the break.
(56) Zhangsan fangjia zuo de shi [xie yiben shu]
Zhangsan have-holiday do DE SHI write one-CL book
‘What Zhangsan did during the break was writing a book.’
(57) Zhangsan shi [[fangjia de shihou] xie le yi-ben shu] de.
Zhangsan SHI have-holiday Gen time write Asp one-CL book DE (i): ‘It is during the break that Zhangsan wrote a book.’
(ii): ‘It is the case that Zhangsan wrote a book during the break.’
(Shyu 2008)
So far, Shyu asserts that de as an evidentiality marker is an obligatory element in the shi...(de) structure, and contends that Chinese shi...(de) structure is not equivalent to English it-cleft, since it is considered as a predicational sentence (Lamrecht 2008) similar to Lambrecht’s three focus types: SF, PF, and AF.
In the light of Lambrecht’s three focus types, it is denoted by Shyu that shi...(de) pattern denotes “speaker’s presupposition relevant to the assertive proposition via the demonstrative/deitic grammatical function and the speech act evaluative/evidential function of de” (Shyu 2008:8). As regards the predicate focus, Shyu distinguishes two types of predicate focus: “property-denoting” predicate focus and “proposition assertion.” In the property-denoting predicate focus, as in (58), Shyu suggests that
Zhong-tian-de should be equated with predicative nominals, with individual-level or
generic reading, attributing the property of cultivating land, contrary to Lee’s (2005) headless relative analysis of predicate meaning He is a farmer.(58) Zhangsan shi zhong tian de.
Zhangsan SHI cultivate land DE
‘Zhangsan is a famer.’
On the other hand, the proposition assertion has two functions. First, according to Shyu, the emphatic marker shi “affirms and asserts the proposition.” Second, the evidentiality marking de can not only predicates with the pre-shi subject but also
relates to previous inference or event. That is, the speaker’s utterance or belief can be traced back to his personal experience or to a familiar context known to the hearer.
Consider (59) where (50) is repeated here:
(59) Zhangsan shi han ni kai-wan-xiao de Zhangsan SHI with you open-joke DE
‘He was just joking with you that-was-what-he-was-doing.’
(Chao’s translation 1968: 296)
With regard to the sentence focus (SF) sentence, cited from Lambrechet (2002), Shyu considers that the sentence-focus (SF) sentence is used to bring new entities or new situation into a discourse. Therefore, for her, both the subject and predication are placed with accents in (60c,d) repeated here to convey a new proposition.
(60) The sentence-focus (SF) sentence Context: Why are you walking so slowly?
a. English: SV
MY FOOT hurts.
b. German: SV / OVS
Mein FUSS tut weh. / Mir tut ein FUSS weh.
c. Italy : VS / HAVE cleft
Mi fa male un PIEDE. / Ho un PIEDE che mi fa MALE.
d. French: HAVE cleft
J’ai mon PIED qui me ait MAL.
A similar case can be seen in Chinese, as in (61). Shyu indicates that (61B) is a sentence focus (broad focus), since it is changed from a non-shi...(de) event predicate focus (narrow focus). This explains that sentence focus in shi...(de) structure do carry a new proposition, rather than a presupposed information, as suggested by Shyu.
(61) A: Ni zai ban-gong-shi-li gan-shenme? 你在辦公室裡幹什麼?...
You at office-in do-what
"What were you doing at the office?"
B:Laozhang ba wo suo zai wu-li de…老張把我鎖在屋裡的--Yuan (2003)
Old Zhang BA me lock at room-in DE
"Old Zhang locked me in the room."
As for the Argument focus (AF), Shyu asserts that the emphatic shi can either occur before the subject or the adjunct at random, as in (62i) with subject reading, (62ii) with temporal adjunct, and (62iii) with the source adjunct, taken from Shyu (2008: 20). However, she points out that sentence (62) is not equivalent to English argument focus, since it is ungrammatical in the specification reading, as in (63b)
(62) (shi) Zhangsan (shi) zuotian (shi) cong Meiguo zuo feiji lai Taiwan de.
Zhangsan SHI yesterday SHI from U.S.A. take plane come Taiwan DE.
‘(The case is that…
(i) ZHANGSAN came from the USA to Taiwan by plane yesterday.
(ii) Zhangsan came from the USA to Taiwan by plane YESTERDAY.
(iii) Zhangsan came FROM the USA to Taiwan by plane yesterday.’
(63) a. Zhangsan shi zuotian cong Meiguo zuo feiji lai Taiwan de.
Zhangsan SHI yesterday from USA take place come Taiwan DE
= (The case related to Zhangsan is that) Zhangsan came back ….’
b. *It is yesterday, from the USA, by plane that Zhangsan came back to Taiwan. (Shyu) In addition, Shyu raises a question that when the emphatic marker shi occurs before the subject, the subject focus and the sentence focus are easily confused, as illustrated in (64), taken from Li et al. (1998) and Yuan (2003:8), and (65), taken from Lambrecht (2001: 470). For Shyu, (64) is considered as a sentence focus, whereas (65) a subject focus. In (65), the preceding marker ‘it was’ marks the subject focus in a canonical sentence Your husband paid for that.
(64) A:馬林生在外屋把夏青叫住,問她:"馬銳在學校到底表現怎樣?"…馬銳 紅腫著眼滿臉是淚地衝出來,…衝夏青嚷:"去!去!誰用你在這兒多嘴!"
B: “Shi wo jiaozhu ta wen ta yi-xie qingkuang de. Ni yao gan shenme?”
SHI I call-stop her ask her some situation DE. You want do what?
‘(The case is that) I called her and asked her some questions. What do you want?’ 是我叫住她問她一些情況的,你要幹甚麼?"
(65) It was your husband paid for that (Delahunty 1982: 52).
According to previous discussion, the surface shi...(de) structure can be summarized as in Table 2. Generally speaking, Chinese shi...(de) structure could be treated as cleft construction or noncleft construction depending on the possibility of
de, as noted by Lee 2005, Whitman & Paul 2007, But for Shyu (2008), Chinese shi...de, unequaled with English it-cleft, is merely a predicational sentence in which
the evidentiality de can not be omitted, since shi...de can manifest Lambrecht’s (1994, 2001) three focus types: Sentence Focus (SF), Predicate Focus (PF), and Argument Focus (AF). It is noted by Shyu that it-cleft constructions can only be represented by Chinese pseudo cleft in ‘de shi’ structure.Table2. Surface structure of it-cleft and noncleft sentence Lee (2005) Whitman & Paul
(2001, 2004)
Shyu (2008)
Shi...(de) Shi....de —
Cleft
Shi... —
Shi...*(de) Shi...(de) Shi...de Noncleft
Shi... (Shi)...de