Semantic Realization vs. Telicity

As discussed in Chapter 1, in my thesis, an event is [+telic] if ands only if it is fully

accomplished in reality, different from Comrie’s (1976) idea toward [+telic] events since

Comrie’s definition of [+telic] as events with natural ending points may cause the result that

all events are [+telic] due to the fact that every event in reality has a natural ending point.

On the other hand, the realization of an event means that the event has been at least

partially done or experienced rather than that the event is completely accomplished (Liu 1988,

Liao 2004). For example, you only need to read one page of a book to make reading a book

semantically realized. Liao (2004) provides examples for the demonstration of realized events

as in (1a-b), in which for three hours is used as an indicator for realized but [0-telic] events.

29 (1) (Liao 2004)

a. Zhangsan du-le zhe-ben shu san-ge xiaoshi [0-telic]

Zhangsan read-ASP this-CL book three-CL hour

“Zhangsan has been reading this book for three hours.”

(Liao 2004)

b. Zhansan chi-le zhe-ge hanbao san-ge xiaoshi [0-telic]

Zhangsan eat-ASP this-CL hamburger three-CL hour

“Zhangsan has been eating this hamburger for three hours.”

The book in (1a) is not definitely finished, and the hamburger in (1b) is not definitely fully

consumed; as a result, (1a-b) are [0-telic]. Also, based on Vendler (1967)¹

1 Vendler (1967) proposes that for a period of time cannot be combined with [+telic], as exemplified in English in (ia-d).

, (1a-b) cannot be

[+telic] since for three hours can only be combined with events without the absolute [+telic]

reading. As can be indicated in (1a-b), in Chinese, the realization of an action can be

(i) a. Cindy jogged for an hour this morning.

b. *Cindy ate a banana for an hour this morning. [+telic]

c. John studied mathematics for three hours yesterday.

d. *John finished his math homework for three hours yesterday. [+telic]

30

expressed by the aspectual marker le in most cases. Le is analyzed as a realization aspect in

Liu (1988), and Liao (2004) suggests that le is a realization marker which indicates the initial

point instead of the ending point of an action.

Besides, for a deeper investigation of whether Vendler’s (1967) mechanism is fully

suitable in Chinese, I will discuss some Chinese examples appear to allow for a period of

time to be combined with [+telic] events, as shown in (2a-b).

(2) (Liao 2004)

a. Zhangsan chi-wan yi-ge hanbao san-ge xiaoshi le [+telic]

Zhangsan eat-InAsp one-CL hamburger three-CL hour ASP

“Zhangsan finished eating a hamburger for three hours.”

(Lin 2004)

b. Ta si wu nian le [+telic]

He die five year ASP

“It has been five years after he died.”

The acceptability of (2a) is due to the fact that san-ge xiaoshi ‘for three hours’ is actually

combined with the period of time after the hamburger has been fully consumed rather than

the event of eating the hamburger, so (2a) means that it has been three hours after the

31

hamburger has been fully eaten; on the other hand, (2b) is acceptable since wu nian ‘for five

years’ is not combined with the event of dying, so (2b) means the fact that it has been five

years after the person died rather than that the person has been dying for five years. As can be

seen, for a period of time is definitely not allowed to be combined with [+telic] events in

Chinese.

Back to the issue on the Chinese realization aspectual marker le (Liu 1988, Liao 2004,

Lin 2005), since le can only indicate the realization of an event, if the event is in fact [+telic],

supplementary information must be added in order to express the [+telic] reading, as

illustrated in my examples in (3a-c) and (4a-c).

(3) a. Wo jiancha-le Xiaoming de mao [0-telic]

I examine-ASP Xiaoming DE cat

“I examined Xiaoming’s cat.”

b. Wo chi-le yi-wan mian [0-telic]

I eat-ASP one-CL noodles

“I ate one bowl of noodles.”

c. Wo xie-le yi-ben shu [0-telic]

I write-ASP one-CL book

“I wrote a book.”

32

(3a) means that the vet examined the cat belonging to Xiaoming, but the process of the

physical examination of the cat is not necessarily fully accomplished; also, (3b) can be

uttered as long as part of the noodles have been eaten; similarly, (3c) does not definitely mean

that the book is finished. Therefore, the actions of (3a-c) are semantically realized but

[0-telic]. If the speaker intends to express that (3a-c) are [+telic] in reality, s/he must provide

supplementary information, as exemplified in (4a-c).

(4) a. Wo jiancha-le Xiaoming de mao,

I examine-ASP Xiaoming DE cat

“I examined Xiaoming’s cat,”

yijing jiancha-wan-le [+telic]

already examine-InAsp-ASP

“and the examination was finished.”

33 b. Wo chi-le yi-wan mian,

I eat-ASP one-CL noodles

“I ate one bowl of noodles,”

quan dou chi-wan-le [+telic]

all DOU eat-InAsp-ASP

“and I finished eating all the noodles.”

c. Wo xie-le yi-ben shu,

I write-ASP one-CL book

“I wrote a book,”

zheng-ben dou xie-hao-le [+telic]

all-CL DOU write-InAsp-ASP

“ and I finished writing the whole book.”

Different from (3a-c), in (4a-c), the supplementary information provides the [+telic]

reading. As can be observed in (3a-c) and (4a-c), le cannot be the key factor that result in the

[+telic] reading; instead, le only indicates that the action of an event is realized. I will further

propose the key factors that select Chinese [+telic] events in Chapter 3.

Moreover, some Chinese data with le can be [+telic] without any supplementary

information, as shown in (5a-c); however, in these examples, le in fact cannot be the key

34

factor determining [+telic] since the events are still [+telic] when le is removed, as

demonstrated in (6a-c).

(5) a. Wo zhe-xingqi sha-le wu-ge ren [+telic]

I this-week kill-ASP five-CL people

“I killed five people this week.”

b. Wo qu-nian ying-le san-chang bisai [+telic]

I last-year win-ASP three-CL game

“I won three games last year.”

c. Na-chang yiwai si-le ba-ge ren [+telic]

That-CL accident die-ASP eight-CL people

“Eight people died in that accident.”

(6) a. Wo zhe-xingqi sha wu-ge ren [+telic]

I this-week kill five-CL people

“I killed five people this week.”

b. Wo qu-nian ying san-chang bisai [+telic]

I last-year win three-CL game

“I won three games last year.”

35

c. Na-chang yiwai si ba-ge ren [+telic]

That-CL accident die eight-CL people

“Eight people died in that accident.”

The killing action must have been fully accomplished in (5a), the games must have been

won in (5b), and the people must have been dead in (5c); therefore, (5a-c) are definitely

[+telic]. The point is that (6a-c) are without any le but still [+telic]. Consequently, as can be

observed in (5a-c) and (6a-c), le does not select [+telic]; instead, (5a-c) are [+telic] because

the actions of the verbs sha ‘kill’, ying ‘win’, and si ‘die’ must have been accomplished when

the sentences are uttered due to the semantic nature of [+achieve] of the three verbs.

After clarifying the difference between the realization and the [±telic] of events, I will

discuss previous issues on Chinese verbs and [+telic] events in the following section.