2.4 Affinity between VP-mo questions and A-not-A questions
2.4.4 Productivity
In Mandarin Chinese, in forming A-not-A questions, almost every syntactic category can fit into the slot in the A-not-A formulation. I show that Hakka mo can attach to the end of any declarative despite the syntactic category of the main predicate.
(38)Verb
a. ni he bu he jiu?
you drink not drink wine
‘Do you drink?’
b. ngi siid jiu mo?
you drink wine NEG
‘Do you drink?’
(39)Adjective
a. zhe ge nu-sheng piao-liang bu piao-liang ? this CL girl beautiful not beautiful ‘Is this girl beautiful?’
b. ia ge sia-moi-e jiang mo?
this CL girl beautiful NEG ‘Is this girl beautiful?’
(40)Modal
a. ta neng bu neng he jiu?
he can not can drink wine?
‘Can he drink wine?’
b. gi zoded siid jiu mo?
he can drink wine NEG?
‘Can he drink wine?’
(41)Adverb
a. ta chang bu chang mai yifu?
she often not often buy clothes?
‘Does she often buy new clothes?’
b. gi jiab mai sam-fu mo?
she often buy clothes NEG
‘Does she often buy new clothes?’
(42)Preposition
a. ta jin-tian zai bu zai jia?
he today at not at home ‘Is he at home today?’
b. gi jin-pu-ngid ti vug-ga mo?
he today at home NEG
‘Is he at home today?’
2.4.5 Neural questions
Last, I show that like A-not-A questions, VP-mo questions are used in neutral contexts where the speaker has no presupposition about the answer. Consider the following situation:
Judy’s brother brings his new girlfriend named Karen home. He introduces
Karen to his grandmother. Judy observes the interaction between Karen
and her grandmother secretly. When she hears her grandmother laughs loudly,
she thinks that her grandmother must really like Karen. With this
assumption in mind, all she wants to do is to confirm this assumption
with her brother.
In this given context, only (43b) is felicitous. Example (43a) is not felicitous because it is a neutral questions indicating that the positive answer and the negative answer are equally unknown to the speaker.
(43) a. # apo zhong-i ya-ge se-moi-e mo?
grandma like this-CL girl NEG?
‘Does grandmother like this girl?’
b. apo zhong-i ya-ge se-moi-e ho?
grandma like this-CL girl particle?
‘Does grandmother like this girl?’
Intended meaning: ‘I have already known that grandmother really liked the girl because I heard they chatted happily in the living room.’
2.5 Proposal
After providing five pieces of evidence to show the affinity between VP-mo questions in Hakka and the A-not-A questions in Mandarin Chinese, I would like to review Huang’s (1991) work on analyzing A-not-A questions for the purpose of being a preface to my main claim. In addition to that, I adopt Li’s (1971) assumption on treating negation markers as a synthetic word. This assumption is essential for serving as a motivation for NEG-to-I movement proposed in this study. More details of this assumption will be presented in section 2.5.2.
2.5.1 Interrogative INFL: Huang (1991)
Wang (1967) analyzes A-not-A questions and Alternative questions in a unified way.
As opposed to this one-rule approach, Huang(1991) argued that A-not-A questions differ from disjunctive questions because these two types of questions behave differently with respect to lexical integrity, preposition stranding and island constraints. Moreover, he further stated that A-not-A questions should be separated into two subtypes and suggested that each of them is derived in different ways.
In Huang’s analysis, a question like example (44) is regarded as AB-not-A questions.
This AB-not-A form is derived through Anaphoric Ellipsis from the base-generated coordinate form. The second occurrence na-ben shu ‘that book’ will be deleted via anaphoric ellipsis.
(44) ta xihuan naben shu bu xihuan naben shu?
He like that-CL book not like that-CL book
‘Does he like that book (or) doesn’t he like that book?’
Moreover, it is mentioned by Huang that the anaphoric ellipsis has to meet the following two requirements. First of all, the process of anaphoric ellipsis can not destroy lexical integrity. Definition of lexical integrity hypothesis is given below.
(45) Lexical Integrity Hypothesis (Huang, 1991:310)
Phrase-level rules belonging to the syntactic component cannot affect a proper sub-part of a lexical category (word).
Example (46b) is ungrammatical because it violates Lexical Integrity Hypothesis, according to which the lexical verb xihuan ’like’ is broken by the process of anaphoric ellipsis.
Another requirement is that anaphoric ellipsis should not be in conflict with preposition stranding. Ungrammatical cases that violate preposition stranding is illustrate in (47b).
(46) a. ta xihuan zhe-ben shu bu xihuan?
he like this-CL book not like
‘Does he like this book (or) doesn’t he like this book’
b. *ta xihuan zhe-ben shu bu xi-?’
(47) a. ni cong zheli chu-qu bu cong zheli chu-qu?
you from here go-out not from here go-out
‘Will you from here go out (or) not form here go out?’
b. *ni cong zheli chu-qu bu [PP cong [e] ]?
you from here go-out not from
‘Will you form here go out(or) not form (here go out)?’
Differing from AB-not-A questions, A-not-AB questions are derived through reduplication from a simplex sentence with a abstract Q under INFL, as represented below.
(48)
(Huang, 1991:316)
In Mandarin Chinese, this abstract Q is realized by a process of reduplication.
Meanwhile, negation will be inserted into between the original and the copy element. The reduplicants length can range from a syllable (or morpheme) to the entire VP which immediately follows the interrogative functional head. Therefore, the result will be xi-bu-xi
‘li-not-like’ (49a), xihuan-bu-xihuan ‘like-not-like’ (49b), xihuan zheben shu bu xihuan zheben shu’ like this book not like this book (49c).
(49) a. Ni xi-bu xihuan zhe-ben shu?
b. Ni xihuan bu xihuan zhe-ben shu?
c. Ni xihuan zhe-ben shu bu xihuan zhe-ben shu?
‘Do you like this book (or) not like this book?
Another statement worth mentioning is that the reduplicant should be a “phonological unit”. Since Huang (1991) did not give a clear definition of what he calls a “phonological unit’, we agree with R. Huang ‘s (2010) idea in which the phonological unit is syntactic constituent. Therefore, as evidenced below, since xihuan zhe ‘like this’ can not be viewed as a syntactic constituent which results in an ungrammatical sentence.
(50) *ni xihuan zhe bu xihuan zhe shu?
you like this not like this book
“Do you like this (or) not like this book?’
In order to lend support to the existence of an abstract Q, Huang (1991) argues that Taiwanese kam-question is a variant of A-not-A questions. It is stated that the abstract Q can not only be phonologically realized by reduplication but also can be lexically realized in other Chinese dialects. Examples (51) to (53) show the realization of the abstract Q in Early Mandarin (ke), Taiwanese (kam i) and in Shaghainese (e) respectively.
(51) li kam beh lai?
you Q want come?
‘Do you want to come?’
(52) nong a le va?
you Q come Particle?
‘Will you come?’
(53) ni ke you kong?
you Q have time?
‘Do you have time?’
2.5.2 Negation as a synthetic character
Li (1971:207) distinguishes four negative markers in Southern Min: bo ’not have’,
be ’unable’, volitional m1 ‘not want, will not’ and non-volitional m2
6 ’not’. According to him, he argues that m2 is a pure negation marker and all the other negative markers are verbs derived from their corresponding affirmatives.(54) a. NEG + u’have’ bo ’not-have’
6 There has long been discussion on whether there is only one m or two different m’s, volitional m and simple m, in Taiwanese. Readers interested in this issues can refer to Lin, 1974; Cheng, 1997; Teng, 1992, Tang, 1994;
b. NEG + e’able’ be ‘not-able’
c. NEG + beh m1 ‘not-want’
d. NEG + Ø m2 ‘not’
Linguists (Teng, 1992; Lin, 2004; Yang, 2012) who devoted to the research of negation in Taiwanese Southern Min (TSM) agree with Li’s viewpoint that TSM negative markers are a phonetic fusion of m/NEG with another morpheme.
Here, in dealing with Hakka negation, I mainly follow Li’s viewpoint on assuming that the mono-syllabic negation is comprised of two morphemes in its underlying structure. Here, I assume that Hakka mo consists of a pure negation and its affirmative counterpart you, whereas mang is comprised of a pure negation and an aspect morpheme e.
(55) a. m+ aspect you mo b. m+ aspect e7 mang c. m+ Ø m (pure negation)
(56) a. ni chi bao le mei? (Mandarin)
b. *ngi siid bao e mang? (Hakka)
c. ngi siid bao mang? (Hakka) You eat full aspect NEG?
7 Yeh (2001) argues that Mandarin –le and the Hakka ∅ marker are corresponding forms. Our assumption
also supports her viewpoint in whish she claimed that Hakka aspect marker -le is not lexically realized.
‘Have you eaten yet?’
Example (56) demonstrates that mang cannot co-exist with aspect e. Given that, the negation mang has already contained an aspect maker e in its underlying structure. Thus, the same aspect makers in one single statement renders a sentence ungrammatical. Another piece of evidence comes from the comparison between (a) and (c). It is quite clearly that Mandarin le mei corresponds to one single word in Hakka which is phonetically realized as
mang.
2.5.3 Main Claim: NEG-I-C Movement
Along the line of showing the affinity between the VP-mo questions and real A-not-A questions in section 2.4, I argue that Hakka sentence-final mo is the overt realization of the A-not-A morpheme embedded under the interrogative INFL in the spirit of Huang’s (1991) Modularity approach. Note that mo is not base-generated under this interrogative INFL.
When it serves as a sentence negation, it is base-generated under the head of NEG, while it moves from Negto Iand to C in forming questions. The following tree diagram illustrates how (57) is derived. Negation mo first undergoes head-to-head movement. Then the remaining IP will move to the specifier of C in forming a question.
(57) ngi siid jiu mo?
(59) Step two: Move the remaining IP to spec of C
CP
Next, I will demonstrate the way to derive a VP-NEG question with a particle attached to it. Mo still undergoes NEG-I-C movement. During the process of movement, mo brings
gi siid jiu
the particle no located in the head of CP1 up to the head of CP2. Then, the remaining IP will move to the specifier of CP1 and then to CP2.
(60) Step one: NEG-I-C1 movement
(61) Step two: move the remaining IP to spec of C1 and then to C2
CP2
2.5.4 Mo
8preferred over Kam
In conformity with Huang(1991), our analysis supports his proposal of interrogative INFL in analyzing Mandarin A-not-A questions. Contrary to Huang who argues that interrogative INFL can be lexically realized in Taiwanese kam, we would like to show that it is more convincing to argue that this abstract element is incarnated by mo in Hakka for two reasons.
Theoretically, an overt or covet element should yield the same semantic meaning.
Chinese A-not-A questions are a type of question without any presupposition. The speaker does not have the answer in mind in advance and the listener will answer the question based on his/her world knowledge but not according to some hints, such as intonation change from the speaker. Note that in Taiwanese, statements with kam are not a neural question.
When the speaker uses kam-question, he/she has already presented the presuppositions in his/her mind. Take (62) for example, the speaker expresses his attitude toward the topic of whether the man likes this woman. By using kam-questions, he/she has already shown that he does not believe the man will like the woman.
(62) i kam ga-i i? (Taiwanese) he Q like her
8 Readers interested in kam-construction can refer to Lau (2010).
‘Is it true that he like this girl?’
In addition, I have provide five pieces of evidence in section 2.4 to demonstrate the affinity between Hakka VP-mo questions and A-not-A questions. These similarities lead us to draw a conclusion that interrogative INFL is lexically realized in Hakka mo.
2.6 Negation mang
As mentioned in the beginning of this chapter, mang generally shares the same syntactic distribution with mo. Though VP-mang is not a type of A-not-A questions, I would like to demonstrate that its derivation can still be accounted for by the NEG-to-I movement analysis. This indicates that our NEG-to-I movement is not restricted to VP-mo questions solely. In the following section, I demonstrate the syntactic distribution and semantic properties of mang first. Then the previous analysis of VP-mang will be introduced before I move to illustrate the derivation of VP-mang questions.
2.6.1 Syntactic distribution and Semantic properties
Like Hakka mo, mang can appear immediately before the verb or at the end of the
sentence. It can either serve as a sentential negation or a question marker9. Example (4a)
In terms of mang, it is hard to find a word-to-word correspondence in other Chinese dialects, such as Mandarin or Taiwanese Southern Min.
9 Aside from preceding the verb and adding to the sentence final position so as to form a question, the negator mang can be inserted into a compound word. Example (1b) illustrates that mang appears in the middle of the
compound word siid ded ‘eat DED’. Interestingly, (1a) and (1b) share the same semantic meaning though the negation mang is located in different sentence positions. I leave this issue for further research
(1) a. ya-tiau giung-zeu mang siid ded.
this-CL banana NEG-yet eat DED
‘This banana is not ripe enough that we can not eat.’
b. ya-tiau giung-zeu siid mang ded.
this-CL banana eat NEG-yet DED
‘This banana is not ripe enough that we can not eat.’
c. ya-tiau giung-zeu sidd ded mang?
this-CL banana eat DED NEG
‘Is this banana ripe enough?’
(65) ta hai-mei chi fan.
he yet-not eat rice
‘He hasn’t eaten yet’
(66) ta chi fan le-mei?
he eat rich Pref-NEG
‘Has he eaten yet?’
Additional evidence comes from a comparison between Taiwanese Southern Min and Hakka. It is shown in (67) and (68) that Hakka mang matches iau beu ‘not yet’ in Taiwanese Southern Min.
(67) a. li hit pun tsa khaoN-liao
iau bue?
you that CL book read-finish yet NEG?
‘Have you finished reading that book?’
b. ngi ge bun shu kung-ted
mang?
you that CL book read-finish yet-NEG
‘Have you finished reading that book?’
(68) a. i iau bue se sing-ku.
he yet-NEG wash body He hasn’t taken a bath.
b. gi mang se sinn?
he yet-NEG wash body
‘He hasn’t taken a bath.’
2.6.2 Previous analysis on VP-mang
In dealing with VP-mang questions, Lai (2005) argued that the underlying structure of VP-mang is formed by an affirmative sentence and a negative sentence. These two sentences are connected by coordinator yahe ‘or’. VP-mang is derived by deleting various constituents within the affirmative and the negative sentence. I demonstrate the derivation of gi sii fang mang ‘ has he eaten yet’ step by step here.
(69) a. Subject +you +VP(or NP)+e b. Subject +mang you +VP (or NP).
gi you siid fan e gi mang you siid fan
c. Subject +you +VP (or NP)+ e+ yahe+ Subject +mang you+ VP(or NP)?
gi you siid fan e yahe gi mang you siid fan delete the second Subject
d. Subject +you +VP (or NP)+ e+ yahe+ Subject +mang you+ VP(or NP)?
gi you siid fan e yahe gi mang you siid fan delete the second word of the coordinator
and the repeated VP e. Subject +you +VP (or NP) +ya+ +mang you+?
gi you siid fan ya mang you
delete the coordinator ‘ya’ and ‘you’
f. Subject VP (or NP) mang?
gi siid fan mang ?
(adapted from Lai, 2005:181)
I concur part of Lai’s analysis, but some problems make her analysis unattractive. It is possible to assume that the underlying structure of VP-mang is formed by an affirmative sentence and a negative sentence, but it is not reasonable to delete any part of the sentence without any theoretical basis. She does not elucidate the reason why some constitutes are deleted after another. Moreover, though she has mentioned that the negator mang in example (69f) moves directly from the pre-verbal position to the end of the sentence, she also does not clearly specify the intermediate or the final landing site of the negator mang. I attempt to provide a more elaborative derivation of VP-mang in my study.
2.6.3 Deriving VP-mang questions
Since Hakka negation mang has the similar syntactic distribution with Hakka mo, I am
going to illustrate that our NEG-I-C movement can not only account for VP-mo questions
(71) Step two: move the remaining IP to spec of C
CP
2.6 Summary
To sum up, in this chapter, I have dealt with two kinds of VP-NEG questions. For VP-mo questions, I argue that VP-mo questions are a type of A-not-A questions. Judging from its surface form, this argument seems not so convincing because there is no A-not-A form within VP-mo questions. However, I have shown that VP-mo questions behave like A-not-A questions in various ways. First, I demonstrated that VP-mo questions can not be answered by “Yes” or “No”; instead, the answer to the VP-mo questions needs to be the positive or negative form of the predicate. Secondly, VP-mo questions are not compatible with nandao’actually’ but daodi ‘truly’, which is one of the prominent characteristics of A-not-A questions. Third, like A-not-A questions, VP-mo questions are compatible with particles, such as ne and no in Mandarin Chinese and Hakka respectively. The last piece of evident is that VP-mo and A-not-A questions are both neutral questions. Speakers have no presupposition about the answer. Granted these similarities between VP-mo questions and A-not-A questions, I argue that mo is the overt realization of the Interrogative INFL. As for VP-mang questions, since the syntactic distribution of mang is similar to mo, I demonstrate that our NEG-I-C analysis can also apply to VP-mang questions as well.
Chapter Three
Classification of Hakka interrogatives
3.1 Overview
Few studies, to the best of my knowledge, have been done on Hakka interrogatives (Luo,1985; Chung,2000; Wang,2008).Our analysis on VP-NEG questions has important implications for the classification of Hakka interrogatives. In particular, I argue that previous analyses on Hakka A-not-A questions and particle questions need to be modified.
This chapter will be organized as follows: I begin by reviewing Chung’s work on the general overview of Hakka interrogatives. Then, differing from the previous classification, I will show that mo-interrogatives should not be viewed as particle questions in section 4.3.
Moreover, I provide evidence to support my view that the apparent Hakka A-not-A questions as claimed in the literature actually belong to alternative questions in section 4.4.
Besides, I discuss the inherent reason why [you...mo] construction noted in the previous literature can be treated as A-not-A questions. An interesting phenomenon will be demonstrated in section 4.5 as one piece of evidence for the existence of trace due to the application of ellipsis in various alternative questions. Finally I will conclude this chapter in section 4.6.
3.2 Previous Classification of Hakka interrogatives
Like other Chinese dialects, Hakka has several types of interrogative sentences, including particle questions, alternative questions and wh-questions. Luo’s (1984) book on Hakka Grammar identified six types of interrogatives. Later in Chung’s (2000) work, he refines Luo’s classification and points out that there are four types of interrogatives in Hakka. I will discuss each type in turn. As displayed in (1) to (6), basically, Hakka
wh-questions have the same syntactic property with Mandarin Chinese, in which they are
formed by leaving a wh-word or wh-phrase in-situ rather than moving such an interrogative constituent to a clause-initial position as in English.
(1) ng hi si-cong mai
ma-ge?
you go traditional market buy
what
‘What did you buy in the traditional market?’
(2) ng hi si-cong du-do
ma-ngin?
you go traditional market meet who
‘Who did you meet in the traditional market?’
(3) nai -kiu oi hi kuan a-gong?
when
will go see grandpa‘When do we go to visit grandpa?’
(4) iong-e zhong zo-ted da koi?
how adv can bite open
‘How can I open this?’
(5) gi zuo-ma-ge oi gio-zhi?
he why want cry
‘Why does he cry?’
(6) ng he-do
nai-vi?
he live where
‘Where does he live?’
The second type of Hakka interrogatives is called particle questions. It is constructed by simply adding a particle to the sentence-final position of the declarative sentences.
Compared with Mandarin Chinese, Hakka has more than twenty kinds of sentence final particles (Li, 2006; Cheng, 2007). In Chung’s work, he briefly mentioned that different
Compared with Mandarin Chinese, Hakka has more than twenty kinds of sentence final particles (Li, 2006; Cheng, 2007). In Chung’s work, he briefly mentioned that different