Chapter 2 Literature Review
2.3 Previous analyses of the Chinese facts
2.3.1 Shin (2008)
the context, as shown in (60). I also observe that the Chinese FQ at issue also shares a
similar property.
2.3 Previous analyses of the Chinese facts
The PNQ and the FQ in Chinese have not received much attention in the
literature. In this section, I will review the previous studies of them. The first study is
Shin (2008), in which the numeral FQ is considered as an argument; secondly, in Paul
and Whitman (2010), the non-numeral FQ is deemed as an adverb in DOC; lastly,
Kuo (2016) discusses the non-numeral FQ together with the non-numeral PNQ.
Following Sportiche (1988), Kuo (2016) claims that the sentence with post-nominal
quantifier and the sentence with an FQ have a derivational relationship. In this section,
I will discuss Shinss (2008), Paul and Whitmanss (2010) and Kuoss (2016) studies in
order.
2.3.1 Shin (2008)
Shin (2008) discusses the phenomenon that the numeral phrase and its
associated nominal phrase are not adjacent in Chinese. Based on the position where the
numeral phrase is placed and the reading of the numeral phrase (exhaustive or
partitive), Shin categorizes the phenomenon into four types, as shown in table 1, and
56
the examples of each type are shown in (62)-(67). He notes that type D must have a
modal ycu. Of the four types, only some sentences of type A are relevant to the FQs at
issue.
Table 1. The four types of numeral phrase in Shin (2008)
Type Numeral phrase Reading Example
A preverbal exhaustive (62)-(64)
B postverbal exhaustive (65)
C postverbal partitive (66)
D preverbal partitive- including ycu ‘exists (67)
(62) Zhangsan song lai de shu, san-ben dou hen youqu.
Zhangsan send come DE book three-CL all very interesting
‘The three books sent by Zhangsan are interesting.s
(6c) Tamen keneng san-ge
ren dou qu Taibei
le.they likely three-CL person all go Taipei ASP
‘The three people might all go to Taipei.s
57
(64) Cong tushuguan jie lai de shu, wo san-ben
from library borrow come DE book I three-CL
dou kan wan-le.
all read finish-ASP
‘I have read all the three books borrowed from the library.s
(65) Pingguo, Zhangsan mai-le san-ge.
apple Zhangsan buy-ASP three-CL
‘Zhangsan bought three apples.s
(66) Na-xie shu, Zhangsan kan-le san-ben.
that-CL book Zhangsan read-ASP three-CL
‘Zhangsan read three of those books.s
(67) Na-xie shu you san-ben wo kan-le.
that-CL book YOU three-CL I read-ASP
‘I read three of those books.s
According to Shin (2008), the difference between type B and type C is their
readings, that is, the former only yield an exhaustive reading and the latter yield only
a partitive reading. Besides, the difference among type A, B and C is that type A
should precede verbs but type B and C should follow verbs.
58
Even though in the above examples, the numeral phrases and their associated
nominal phrases are not adjacent, there exists a quantifying relationship between them.
To deal with the phenomenon, Shin (2008) proposes Argument Analysis to account
for all the four types above. Under Shinss analysis, the associated nominal phrase and
the numeral phrase are all base-generated and the numeral phrase form a constituent
with an empty category, as shown in (68).
(68) Zhangsan jie lai de shu san-ben dou hen youqu.
Zhangsan borrow come DE book three-CL DOU very interesting
‘The three books borrowed by Zhangsan are very ineresting.s
(Shin 2008:54)
To illustrate, in (68), the associated nominal phrase Zhangsan in the sentence
occupies the topic position, called the dangling topic. Moreover, the position the
59
numeral phrase sanhben ‘three CLs occupies is an argument position.12 Then, Shin
further claims that since the numeral phrase, placed in the argument position, contains
an empty category, the quantifying relationship between the numeral phrase and its
associated nominal phrase can be established via the empty category.
Shin (2008) claims that Stranding Analysis cannot account for why the
associated nominal phrase can be moved out of a complex NP island, as shown in (69),
but his Argument Analysis can.
(69) a. Wo haimei peng dao [san-ben cong tushuguan jie
I yet.not encounter arrive three-CL from library borrow
lai de shu dou kan wan de ren].
come DE book DOU read finish DE person
12 In Shin (2008), he does not specifically discuss the position of the numeral phrase in the type C.
Nevertheless, according to his claim, ‘he will consider all the numeral phrase of this phenomenon as the real argument of the sentences, it seems that the numeral phrase in type C is placed in the object position.
60
b. Cong tushuguan jie lai de shui, wo haimei peng
from library borrow come DE book I not.yet encounter
dao [[san-ben ti] dou kan wan de ren ].
arrive three-CL DOU read finish DE person
Lit:‘I have not encountered anyone who has already read the three books
borrowed from the library.s
(Shin 2008:52)
In (69a), the bracketed phrase is a complex NP island. Any element moves out
of the island would give rise to island effects. Under Stranding Analysis, the numeral
phrase sanhben ‘three CLs and the associated nominal phrase ccng tushuguan jiehlai
de shu ‘the books borrowed from the librarys would be underlingly base-generated in
the more inclusive bracketed phrase in (69b), as a constituent, so the movement of the
associated nominal phrase ccng tushuguan jiehlai de shu ‘the books borrowed from
the librarys, as shown in (69b) should be impossible. However, this prediction is not
borne out. Therefore, Shin (2008) claims that this is a significant challenge for
Stranding Analysis. According to him, on the contrary, under Argument Analysis,
(69b) can be easily explained. The numeral phrase and the associated nominal phrase
61
are base-generated in their surface positions, and no element is moved out of the
complex NP island. Thus, no island effect would arise.
However, a notable problem for Argument Analysis is that in some sentences,
the numeral phrase cannot find its position, as shown in (70).
(70) Wo rang tamen mingtian san-ge ren dou qu Taibei.
I let they tomorrow three-CL person DOU go Taipei
‘I let three of them all to go to Taipei tomorrow.s
Recall the essence of Argument Analysis: the associated nominal phrase
preceding the numeral phrase is positioned in the topic position, and the numeral phrase
itself occupies the subject position, as shown in (68). However, example (70)
challenges this analysis. Precisely, in (70), tamen ‘theys cannot be located in the topic
position because there is no topic position in an embedded infinitive sentence. Then, a
problem arises in Shin (2008); that is, tamen ‘theys definitely occupies an argument
position but sanhge ren ‘three peoples has no place to stay in (70). The grammaticality
of (70) is unexpected under Argument Analysis.
Before I end the discussion of Shin (2008), some points are in order. Firstly and
most importantly, only sentences (62) and (64) of type A in this thesis, called FQ, are
62
the sentence pattern that this study is interested in; secondly, Argument Analysis itself
cannot account for the grammaticality of (70), which would pose a strong challenge
for Argument Analysis.