Chapter 4 Analysis of Mandarin Locative Inversion
4.3 Proposed Analysis
4.3.6 Analysis of the Functional Type
Yang and Pan (2001) observe some special sentences of Mandarin LIC, in which the preverbal locative DP denotes location where an event occurs. They indicate that such sentences like (137) describe a function a location is meant for; thus, they are labeled as the functional type here.
96
(137) The Functional Type
a. Tai-shang chang-zhe daxi.
stage-top perform-DUR opera
Lit. ‘On the stage is performing an opera.’
b. Wu-li kai-zhe hui.
room-inside hold-DUR meeting
Lit. ‘In the room is holding a meeting.’
In the functional type, those preverbal locative DPs are parallel with regular subjects since they can undergo short passivization, as in (138a), or subject raising, as in (138b).
(138) a. Tai-shang bei renwei zheng chang-zhe daxi.
stage-top BEI think right sing-DUR opera
Lit. ‘On the stage is thought to be performing an opera.’
b. Wu-li yinggai zheng kai-zhe hui.
room-inside should right hold-DUR meeting
Lit. ‘In the room should be holding a meeting.’
Moreover, one of the agentive locative subjects in Lin’s (2008) analysis, which denotes the location where the event occurs, also display the subject properties, as shown below.
97
(139) a. Litang-li zheng chang-zhe xiaoge.
auditorium-inside right sing-DUR school anthem
Lit. ‘In the auditorium is singing the school anthem.’
b. Litang-li bei renwei zheng chang-zhe xiaoge.
auditorium-inside BEI think right sing-DUR school anthem
Lit. ‘In the auditorium is thought to be singing the school anthem.’
The examples of the functional type pose some potential problems for our proposal. As we discuss throughout this thesis, the preverbal locative DP in Mandarin LIC must be an argument, which denotes the location of some entity, rather than the location where an event occurs. A locative adjunct is banned from this construction.
However, we find that although in the functional type, the preverbal locative DPs denote the place where the event occurs, rather than the location where some entity exists, they do exhibit subject-like properties.
It is necessary to distinguish the preverbal locative DP of the functional type, though denoting the location where an event occurs, from a regular locative adjunct, which does not display any subject property. As the examples in (140) suggest, a locative adjunct cannot undergo subject raising and short passivization as a preverbal locative DP of the functional type does.
(140) a. *Jiaoshi-li yinggai zheng xie-zhe yi-feng xin.
classroom-inside should right write-DUR one-CL letter
98
Lit. ‘In the room should be writing a letter.’
b. *Keting-li bei renwei he-zhe jiu.
living room-inside BEI think drink-DUR wine
Lit. ‘In the living room was thought to be drinking wine.’
The functional type is not productive because we find that the preverbal locative DP, though denoting the location where an event occurs, has a closely semantic relation with the event expressed by the verb phrase.
(141) a. Tai-shang chang-zhe daxi.
stage-top perform-DUR opera
Lit. ‘On the stage is performing an opera.’
b. *Keting-li chang-zhe daxi.
living room-inside perform-DUR opera
Lit. ‘In the living is performing an opera.’
As shown in (141), a strict semantic restriction is imposed on the selection of the preverbal locative DP in the functional type. We speculate that the particular scenario described such as “singing the school anthem in the auditorium,” “performing an opera on the stage”, and “having a meeting in the room” may become conventionalized and somehow allow the otherwise adjunct PP to enter the regular LIC. In any case, we believe that a genuine account is outside the realm of syntax, and will be left for future studies.
99
4.4 Summary
In this chapter, we have discussed different types of Mandarin LIC. Based on the previous research, we have also addressed the issue on the absence of the agent in Mandarin LIC. Arguing for a lexicalist approach, we agree with HLL (2009) that the lexical root contains enough relevant information to determine its argument structure.
Different from English, Mandarin verbs may take the Lv-less option in allow flexible thematic relations. However, contra HLL (2009), the mapping of participants to the syntax is not as free as it appears. We claim that the semantic relations between the participants in the syntax have to obey a given thematic hierarchy. In Mandarin LIC, with location ranked higher than theme, the locative DP is mapped to the grammatical subject position while the theme DP is mapped to the grammatical object position.
This proposal can provide a unified analysis for the different types of Mandarin LIC.
100
Chapter 5
Concluding Remarks and Theoretical Implications
In this study, we have examined the phenomenon of Mandarin locative inversion.
We have discussed several types of Mandarin LIC, including the canonical type, transitive type and other special types. We have shown that the canonical type of Mandarin LIC can correspond to English locative inversion, in which only unaccusative verbs and passive verbs are possible. Like an English inverted locative PP, the Mandarin locative DP shows many subject properties, suggesting that it sits in the grammatical subject position. We observe that Mandarin locative inversion differs from English counterpart in not having the discourse function of presentational focus.
None of the effects of presentational focus observed by Bresnan and Kanerva (1987) are attested in Mandarin locative inversion.
Although many researchers argue that only a locative nominal can occur preverbally in Mandarin LIC, the PP form is also possible but is distinct from the DP form in the syntactic structure. The construction with a preverbal locative PP is also classified as Mandarin LIC at issue since preverbal locative PPs and DPs parallel in some respects. First, they both denote the location where some entity exists, rather than the location where an event takes place. Second, the construction with a preverbal locative PP or DP is not associated with presentational focus, which is found in English location inversion. Unlike a locative DP, the locative PP does not display subject properties, such as occurring in short passive and ECM construction.
As a result, we follow Coopmans’ (1989) null expletive analysis, arguing that the locative PP can choose either to stay at preverbal VP-adjoined position or to move to the [Spec, CP] position while the null expletive occupies the subject position.
101
Another claimed type is the transitive type, which is impossible in English but very common in Mandarin LIC. The challenge for the transitive type is that the presence of the agent role would prevent the locative DP from being mapped to the grammatical subject position. Thus, much research has been devoted to investigating how the agent role is absent from the transitive type of Mandarin LIC (Pan 1996, Lin 2001, Hsiao-hung Iris Wu p.c. 2012). As Pan (1996) claims, before undergoing locative inversion, the sentence with a transitive verb would undergo the zhe-operation, by which the agent role is deleted. In contrast, Lin (2001) argues that a transitive verb does not have any argument and its arguments are licensed by the light verbs.
Hsiao-hung Iris Wu (p.c. 2012), like Pan (1996), assumes that the presence of aspect markers leads to the suppression of the agent role.
However, we find many examples of Mandarin LIC which do not contain any aspect marker, suggesting that the aspect marker is not obligatory in this construction.
If the aspect marker does not appear in Mandarin LIC, the morphological operation could not apply. Against a movement analysis, we claim that the locative DP can be directly mapped to the subject position in accordance with a thematic hierarchy.
Arguing against Lin’s (2001) light verb analysis, we assume with HLL (2009) that the lexical verb determines the participants, which get involved in the type of the event.
The function of light verbs, not contributing any semantic meaning, is just to spell out the information on the participants. Different from English verbs which necessarily contain both the root and light verbs, Mandarin verbs may take Lv-less option and is thus not subject to the theta criterion. In Mandarin, not having any light verb in the lexical representation, a transitive verb can allow more flexible semantic relation with its participants.
102
Contra HLL (2009), we observe that Mandarin thematic relations are not as flexible as they appear. Even though the transitive verb takes the Lv-less option, its thematic relation is still subject to the thematic hierarchy which may be specific to Mandarin Chinese, as schematized below.
(142) Agent/Experiencer >> Instrument/Location >> Theme >> Goal
By claiming that location is ranked above theme, we claim that the locative DP can be directly mapped to the grammatical subject position and the theme DP to the object position in Mandarin LIC provided that they bear some compatible participant-relations with the type of event encoded in the lexical verb.
We have also discussed the special types of Mandarin LIC, of which the structure resembles canonical and transitive type of Mandarin LIC. One type is the spreading verb type, of which the typical verbs are miman ‘spread’ and chongman ‘fill’. In the spreading type, with the localizer serving as AxPart, the locative DP is understood as a space. When preceded by the proposition zai, the preverbal locative phrase instead expresses a locational meaning. Being involved in the event of spreading of filling, the locative DP can be the participant and be mapped to the grammatical subject position. Another type is the functional type, in which preverbal locative DPs differ from those of canonical and transitive type in denoting the location where the event takes places. However, different from a regular locative adjunct, the locative DPs of the functional type can fit in the grammatical subject position since they are parallel with regular subjects in showing subject properties. In these special types, it is impossible for locative DPs to raise from the predicate-internal position to the subject position. Under our account, these special types can shed some light on the issue about how a locative DP lands in the grammatical subject position in Mandarin LIC.
103
In this thesis, we have emphasized the role of lexicon in argument realization. In recent years, the discussion about the issues of argument structure centers on how much related information on argument structure is encoded in a lexical entry. A lexicalist view argues for the decisive role of lexicon in determining syntactic realization (Levin and Rappaport 1995, Alsina 1996, Levin 1999, Bresnan 2001, HLL 2009). Lexicalist approaches assume that the lexical entry of a given verb encodes enough information to allow argument structure to be projected as syntactic structure.
Under this assumption, the lexical semantics of a given verb determine the theta roles assigned by the verb and that the argument structure, in turn, determine the syntactic realization. In contrast, a neo-constructionlist view argues that the argument structure of a verb is directly determined by the syntax, rather than by the information encoded in the lexical entry (Hale and Keyser 1993, Marantz 1997, Borer 2005, Lin 2001).
There are also a number of approaches that lie between the extremes of the lexicalist and neo-constructionlist approach (Reinhart an Siloni 2005, Ramchand 2008).
Having investigated the different types of Mandarin LIC, we would like to conclude that the present study supports the lexicalist approach to argument structure.
Lexical roots do carry rich information on the participants, which are represented in the syntax. Although the transitive verbs are frequently found in Mandarin LIC, not all transitive verbs are possible in Mandarin LIC, which suggests that the lexical semantics of a given entry determines the theta roles assigned by the verb. In Mandarin, though the thematic relation between a transitive verb and its participants appear to be very liberal, a thematic hierarchy should be obeyed when the thematic roles fit in the syntactic positions.
The thematic hierarchy has been used to account for a wide range of linguistic
104
phenomena involving argument realization (Givon 1990, Grimshaw 1990, Levin and Rappaport 2005). The argument structure has been shown to be associated with thematic hierarchy. Fillmore (1968) has attempted to account for argument realization in syntax in terms of thematic hierarchy. It is proposed that the argument of a verb bearing the highest-ranked semantic role is its subject.
Although there is no single universal ranking of semantic roles which can capture all generalizations, formulations of the thematic hierarchy are argued to be relevant to cognitive factors (Fillmore 1977, Mohanan 1994), which are also reflected in the thematic hierarchy proposed in this study. For instance, a human or animate is taken to be more prominent than an inanimate. The NPs bearing agent and experiencer are typically animate; hence, agent and experiencer are the highest in the thematic hierarchy. A causal element such as agent, instrument and natural force always outranks a non-causal element, suggesting that instrument outranks theme. Other properties such as person and definiteness are also essential in determining the ranking of semantic roles.
Given that the ranking of semantic roles reflects cognitive prominence, it is reasonable to map the participants to the syntax in accordance with thematic hierarchy.
It is shown that the cognitive prominence relation is preserved in the syntax. The most thematically prominent argument is matched with the most prominent syntactic realization. Thus, we would like to conclude that even though Mandarin transitive verbs can choose not to have any light verb in its lexical specification, the thematic hierarchy has been proved to be at work when the participants involved in the event are mapped to the syntax.
105
References
Aissen, Judith. 1975. Presentational-there Insertion: A Cyclic Root Transformation.
Paper presented at the Chicago Linguistic Society.
Alsina i Keith, Alex. 1996. The Role of Argument Structure in Grammar: Evidence from Romance. Standford, CA: CSLI Publications
Baker, Mark. 1985. Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing.
MIT: Doctoral Dissertation.
Baker, Mark. 1996. On the structural positions of themes and goals. Phrase Structure and the Lexicon, ed. by J. Rooryck and L. Zaring, 7-34. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Baker, Mark. 1997. Thematic roles and syntactic structure. Elements of Grammar, ed.
by Liliane Haegeman, 73-137. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Belletti, Adriana, and Luigi Rizzi. 1988. Psych-verbs and θ-theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6(3): 291-352.
Birner, Betty J. 1992. The Discourse Function of Inversion in English. Northwestern University: Doctoral Dissertation.
Borer, Hagit. 2005. Structuring Sense: An Exo-Skeletal Trilogy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bresnan, Joan. 1994. Locative inversion and the architecture of universal grammar.
Language 70(1): 72-131.
Bresnan, Joan. 2001. Lexical-Functional syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.
Bresnan, Joan, and Jonni M. Kanerva. 1987. Locative inversion in Chicheŵa: A case study of factorization in grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 1-50
Burzio, Luigi. 1986. Italian Syntax: A Government-Binding Approach. Dordrecht:
Reidel.
Cheng, Ying, and Feng-fu Tsao. 2012. Duiwai huayuwen jiaoxue yenjiu congshu [Teaching Chinese as a Second Language Series]. New Taipei City: Zhengchong shuju
106
Chirkova, Ekaterina, and Christine Lamarre. 2005. The paradox of the construction [V zai NPLOC] and its meanings in the Beijing dialect of Mandarin. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 34(2): 169-219.
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge: MIT press.
Chomsky, Noam. 2005. On Phases. Ms. MIT.
Collins, Chris. 1997. Local Economy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Coopmans, Peter. 1989. Where stylistic and syntactic processes meet: Locative inversion in English. Language 65: 728-751.
Croft, William. 1991. Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations: The Cognitive Organization of Information. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Culicover, Peter W, and Robert D. Levine. 2001. Stylistic inversion in English: A reconsideration. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19(2): 283-310.
Du, Juliet Wai-hong. 1999. Locative Inversion and Temporal Aspect in Mandarin Chinese. Paper presented at the Chicago Linguistic Society Regional Meeting.
Fernández Soriano, Olga. 1999. Two types of impersonal sentences in Spanish: Twenty-second Annual Round Table Meetings on Languages and Linguistics, ed.
by R. O’Brian, 35-56. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Fillmore, Charles J. 1977. Topics in lexical semantics. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, ed. by R. W. Cole, 76-138. Bloomington: Indiana University
Givón, Talmy. 1984. Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.
107
Gropen, Jess, Steven Pinker, Michelle Hollander, and Richard Goldberg. 1991.
Affectedness and direct objects: the role of lexical semantics in the acquisition of verb argument structure. Cognition 41(1): 153-195.
Gu, Yang. 1991. On the Locative Existential Construction in Chinese. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 10th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics.
Hale, Kenneth, and Samuel Jay Keyser. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. The View from Building 20: 53-109.
Hoekstra, Teun, and René Mulder. 1990. Unergatives as copular verbs: locational and existential predication. The linguistic review 7(1): 1-80.
Huang, C.-T. James. 1984. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns.
Linguistic inquiry 15: 531-574.
Huang, C.-T. James. 1987. Existential sentences in Chinese and (in)definiteness. The Representation of (In)definiteness, ed. by Eric Reuland and Alice ter Meulen,
Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge:
MIT press.
Kiparsky, Paul. 1985. Morphology and Grammatical Relations. Standford University.
Levin, Beth. 1999. Objecthood: An event structure perspective. Proceedings of CLS 35: 223-247.
Levin, Beth, and Malka Rappaport Horvav. 1986. The formation of adjectival passives.
Linguistic inquiry 17: 623-661.
Levin, Beth, and Malka Rappaport Hovav. 1995. Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface. Cambridge: MIT press.
Levin, Beth, and Malka Rappaport Hovav. 2005. Argument Realization. Cambridge:
108 perspective. The Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 66: 53-105.
Lin, Tzong-Hong. 2001. Light Verb Syntax and the Theory of Phase Structure.
University of California: Doctoral Dissertation.
Lin, Tzong-Hong. 2008. Locative subject in Mandarin Chinese. Nanzan Linguistics 4:
69-88.
Lin, Tzong-Hong. 2009. Occurrence of Event and Locative Subjects in Mandarin Chinese. Paper presented at the 6th Formal Syntax and Semantics Workshop (FOSS-6), National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei.
Liu, Feng-his. 2007. Auxiliary selection in Chinese. Split Auxiliary Systems: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, ed. by Raul Aranovich, 181-205. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Marantz, Alec. 1997. No Escape from Syntax: Don’t Try Morphological Analysis in the Privacy of Your Own Lexicon. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 21st annual Penn linguistics colloquium.
Mohanan, Tara. 1994. Argument Structure in Hindi. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Newmeyer, Frederick J. 2002. Generative Linguistics: A Historical Perspective.
London: Routledge.
Nie, Wenlong. 1989. Cunzaiju he cunzaiju de fenlei [the existential sentences and their classification]. Zhongguo Yuwen 2: 95-104.
Pan, Haihua. 1996. Imperfective aspect zhe, agent Deletion, and locative Inversion in Mandarin Chinese. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 14(2): 409-432.
Pan, Wen. 2003. On Existence Constructions in Chinese. Fudan University: Doctoral
109
Reinhart, Tanya, and Tal Siloni. 2005. The lexicon-syntax parameter: Reflexivization and other arity operations. Linguistic Inquiry 36(3): 389-436.
Rizzi, Luigi, and Ur Shlonsky. 2006. Satisfying the subject criterion by a non subject:
English locative inversion and Heavy NP shift. Phases of Interpretation, ed. by Frascarelli, Mara, 341-361. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter
Salzmann, Martin. 2004. Theoretical Approaches to Locative Inversion. University of Zürich: Master’s Thesis.
Salzmann, Martin. 2011. Towards a typology of locative inversion–Bantu, perhaps Chinese and English–But beyond? Language and Linguistics Compass 5(4):
169-189.
Speas, Margaret J. 1990. Phrase Structure in Natural Language. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Stowell, Timothy Angus. 1981. Origins of Phrase Structure. MIT: Doctoral Dissertation.
Svenonius, Peter. 2006. The emergence of axial parts. Nordlyd: Tromsø Working Papers in Linguistics 33(1): 49-77.
Teng, Shou-Hsin. 1978. Modification and the Structure of Existential Sentences.
Paper presented at the Proceedings of Symposium of Chinese Linguistics, LSA.
Ting, Jen. 1998. Deriving the bei-construction in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 7(4): 319-354.
Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan. 2008. Tense anchoring in Chinese. Lingua 118(5): 675-686.
Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan. 2008. Tense anchoring in Chinese. Lingua 118(5): 675-686.