Utterance Meanings Yielded by Kan, Xiang and Shuo

b. [我/Cognizer][覺得/Opinion][徐淑媛好可憐/Opinion][說/Epistemic marker] (Wang, Katz and Chen 2000) c. 我以為他 25、6 歲[說/Epistemic marker] 。

d.如果/比方/就是/只是/或者][說/Epistemic marker] …

4.2 Utterance Meanings Yielded by Kan, Xiang and Shuo

To compare the similarities among kan, xiang and shuo, the examples mentioned in Chapter 1 are illustrated here and replaced as (55)-(58) for convenience.

(55) P-C-U + Weak manipulation: imperative complement

a. 我看你還是找別人吧！ (Sinica) wo kan ni haishi zhao bieren ba

I see you had better look for others SFP ‘I suggest you had better look for others!’

b. 我想你馬上到我身邊來，可你做不到， (Google)

wo xiang ni mashang dao wo shen bian lai ，ke ni zuobudao

I think you right away reach I body side come ， but you do-NEG-achieve

‘I want you come to my side right away, but you can’t make it.’

c. 我說你阿~老了就別跑那麼快咩~ (Google)

wo shuo ni a~lao le jiu bie pao name kuai mie I say you SFP~old ASP JIU NEG run so fast SFP

‘I suggest that since you are so old, don’t run so fast.’

(56) P-C-U + Weak manipulation: subjunctive complement

a. 我看借給他們點兒吧，大八月節的。 (Liu 1986)

wo kan jie gei tamen dianer ba， dabayuejie de I see lend give they a little SFP， moon festival DE

‘I suggest that (we) lend them some (money) since it’s moon festival.’

b. 甲：我決定報考北大了。

乙：你的成績不大突出，我想還是報低一點的學校吧。(Liu 1986) jia：wo jueding baokao beida le

yi：ni de chengji bu da tuchu ，wo xiang haishi bao di yidiande xuexiao ba

A: I decide register for an exam PKU PERF

B: your grades Neg too outstanding，I think had better register lower a little DE school SFP

‘A: I decided to register for the entrance exam of PKU.’

‘B: Your grades are not good enough. I suggest that you had better register for an entrance exam of a lower level school.’

c. 我說咱們明天就走，好嗎？ (Liu 1986) wo shuo zanmen mingtian jiu zou， hao ma?

I say we tomorrow JIU leave， good INTR

‘I suggest that we leave tomorrow. Is that okay?’

(57) P-C-U + Deontic modality: modal complement

a. 我想/看/說你也該回旅館了。 (Liu 1986) wo xiang/kan/shuo ni ye gai hui luguan le I think/see/say you also should return hotel ASP

‘I consider that you should return to the hotel as well.’

b. 我想/看/說一個人要有點良心。 (Liu 1986) wo xiang/kan/shuo yigeren yao you dian liangxin I think/see/say one should have a little conscience

‘I consider that one should be consionable.’

(58) P-C-U + Epistemic modality: modal complement

a. 我想/看/說，這一定是謠言。 (Liu 1986) wo xiang/kan/shuo， zhe yiding shi yaoyan

I think/see/say， this must COP rumor ‘I consider that this must be a rumor.’

(59) P-C-U: indirect quote

a. 我在想你說的有道理。 (Google) wo zai xiang ni shuo de youdaoli

I ASP think you say DE reasonable

‘I am thinking that what you said was reasonable.’

b. 昨天我看到你騎著腳踏車， (Sinica) zuotian wo kan-dao ni qi-zhe jiaotache yesterday I see-achieve you ride-ASP bicycle

‘Yesterday I saw you riding a bike.’

c. 他對我說他和他女朋友分手了， (Sinica) ta dui wo shuo ta he ta nupengyou fenshou le he DUI I say he and he girlfriend break up ASP

‘He told me that he broke up with his girlfriend.’

Syntactically, in the advisory use, kan/xiang/shuo behave like a verb of homogenous state and thus can not be redulplicated (e.g. wo

*Kankan/*xiangxiang/*shuo shuo/xiangxiangkan/shuoshoukan ni haishi zhao bieren ba! ‘*I suggest suggest you go find somebody else!’), be repeated (e.g. wo

*Kan-le-you-kan/*xiangn-le-you-xiang/*shuo n-le-you-shuo ni haishi zhao bieren ba!

‘*I suggest and suggest you go find somebody else!’) nor collocate with progressive aspect markers such as 在 zai and 著 zhe, aspect verbs 開始 kaishi ‘begin to do something’, 繼續 jixu ‘continue doing something’ and 停止 tingzhi ‘stop doing something’, the verb 一直 yizhi ‘keep (doing something),’ durational phrases such as 一個小時 yi-ge-xiaoshi ‘an hour’ and the perfective aspect markers such as 了 le.

(Those are criteria for the distinction of lexical aspects given in Tang T.-C 2000:15 and Chang et al. 2000.)

Semantically, as Liu (1986) suggest, they all express the opinion or suggestion of the speaker which is restrict to be construed as the first or second person pronoun.

To compare the differences among kan, xiang and shou, we may compare the following sentences.

(60) 你*看/*想/說，這身衣服我穿著不錯吧？(Liu 1986) ni *kan/*xiang/shuo，zheshen yifu wo chuanzhe bucuo ba you *see/*think/say, this-CL clothes I wear-ASP nice INTR

‘What do you *see/*think/say, doesn’t this dress look nice on me?

(hinting others to praise and admire)’

Semantically, the meaning of ni shuo ‘you say’ can be interpreted at the level of perlocution whereas that of ni kan ‘you see’ and ni xiang ‘you think’ can be only interpreted at the level of illocution or locution only. Locution concerns the actual words uttered whereas illocution refers to the force or intention behind the words.

Hence, ni kan ‘you see’ and ni xiang ‘you think’ can be interpreted as the meaning that the speaker asks the hearer to think and to look about whether the clothes are good-looking on the speaker by imposing the illocution force. However, as fore ni shuo ‘you say’, the speaker doesn’t really want the hearer to answer whether the clothes are good-looking on the speaker but trying to prove that the perspective of the speaker is correct and expect to reach the agreement with the hearer by showing the perlouction (the effect of the illocution on the hearer).

As for sentence (57 b), Liu (1986) indicates that it would be more appropriate to replace the verb yao ‘must’ in the complement clause by modal auxiliary yingai

‘should’ to collocate with xiang and kan since the force of suggestion of wo xiang and wo kan is much weaker than wo shuo. Thus kan and xiang can be replaced by renwei

‘to consider’ in this use but shuo probably could not. The manipulative force of wo kan, wo xiang, and wo shuo display a gradation: wo kan < wo xiang < and wo shuo. In other words, wo shuo demonstrate the strongest force of suggestion while wo kan shows the weakest. That explains why wo shuo ni ‘I blame on you’ can be interpreted as scolding but not wo kan and wo xiang. It is also said that ‘wo kan’ and ‘ni kan’ is grammaticalized as an idiomaticized expression to function as an attention-getting device (Chang 2001). Anyhow, it supports the different status between wo kan, ni kan and wo shuo and ni shuo. This is also in line with the argument of Liu (1986) that in the use of first person pronoun, to arrange the tone of the speaker, the order would be put: kan < xiang < shou. In another word, the use of kan is the most euphemistic where as that of shou is the toughest. Similarly, comparing their collocation with hui

‘will’ coding lower epistemic certainty and yiding yao ‘certainly must’ expressing higher epistemic certainty, it’s obvious that the degree of epistemic certainty of shuo

‘to say’ is higher than xiang ‘to think’ and kan ‘to see’ and that of xiang ‘to think’ is higher than kan ‘to see.’

(61) a. 我看你會/*一定要來求我(的)

wo kan ni hui/*yiding yao lai qiu wo (de) I see you will/*certainly must come beg I DE

‘I suppose you will/*definitely must come to beg me.’

b. 我想你會/?一定要來求我(的)

wo xiang ni hui/?yiding yao lai qiu wo (de) I think you will/?certainly must come beg I DE ‘I think you will/?definitely must come to beg me.’

c. 我說你會/一定要來求我(的)

wo shuo ni hui/yiding yao lai qiu wo (de) I say you will/certainly must come beg I DE

‘I say you will/*definitely must come to beg me.’

Syntactically, as Liu (1986) suggest, in the use of second person pronoun, to show that the perspective of the speaker is correct, ni shou ‘you say’ usually takes a interrogative sentential complement while ni xiang ‘you think’ and ni kan ‘you look’

can take either interrogative or non-interrogative ones (62 a, b).

(62) a. 你想/看/想想看/說/想說/說說看，我(wa)不認真一點替他拉票，…，

這樣可以嗎？ (NTU) ni xiang/kan/xiangxiangkan/shuo/xiangshuo/shuoshuokan，wo (wa)bu renzhen yidian ti ta lapiao，…，zheyang keyi ma

‘You thnk/see/try to think/say/think/say, could I solicit advocate and resources for him playfully?’

b. 你想/看/想想看/*說/*想說/*說說看，在銀行當個小職員，一天累 到死， … (Liu 1986) ni xiang/kan/xiangxiangkan/*shuo/*xiangshuo/*shuoshuokan，zai yinxing dang ge xiaozhiyuan，yitian leidao si，…

‘You thnk/see/try to think/*say/*think/*say, to be an insignificant office employee and tired to death all day long…’

Futhermore, by observing the coocurrennce of kan, xiang and shuo found in the corpus (63), it is of interest that the syntactic status and relatedness among the three lemmas are distinct.

(63) a...我想說看你還要不要再修補,_ (NTU) wo xiang shuo kan ni hai yao-bu-yao zai xiubu

I think say see you still want-NEG-want again mend ‘I am thinking whether you still want to mend it again.’

b. ?我想看你還要不要再修補說

?wo xiang kan ni hai yao-bu-yao zai xiubu shuo

c. ?我想(要)看說你還要不要再修補

?wo xiang (yao)kan shuo ni hai yao-bu-yao zai xiu bu d. 我說(：)想(要)看你還要不要再修補

wo shuo(：)xiang(yao)kan ni hai yao-bu-yao zai xiubu

e. 我*說看想你還要不要再修補

wo *shuo kan xiang ni hai yao- bu-yao zai xiubu

f. 我*看想說你還要不要再修補

wo *kan xiang shuo ni hai yao-bu-yao zai xiubu

g. 我*看說想你還要不要再修補

wo *kan shuo xiang ni hai yao-bu-yao zai xiubu

In (63 a), the meaning of kan, xiang and shuo are all epistemic in nature. In (63 b-c), the meaning of xiang has been changed to preference xiang ‘to want’. In (63 c),

shuo is an utterance verb ‘to say’ whereas xiang is a preference verb. Sentences (63 d-g) are ungrammatical. Sentence (63 a) shows that, as used in expressing epistemic, the order of the occurrence of the three verbs is: xiang = kan < shuo. Shuo can be attached to the metal verb (xiang and kan) or stays in the sentence-final position, which is the freest comparing to the other two. It indicates the distinct syntactic constraints held by the three verbs and confirms to the claim of Hopper and Traugott (1993) that the degree of the grammaticalization of individual lemma is different.

Furthermore, it implies that the distance in semantic properties of kan and xiang are closer in comparison to the two with shuo.

The discussions above exaimine the similarities and differeneces among kan, xiang and shuo semantically and syntactically, the motivations which cause the similarities and differences have not been clear yet. One may wonder what P-C-U verbs form a group. The study of Liu and Hu (2007) offers a possible account for this question. According to Liu and Hu (2007), there are semantic motivations underlying the grammatical symmetry among the three types of verbs. By postulating a domain-specific conceptual schema which serves as a semantic link to bind the three classes of verbs, the correlation among the three verb classes is manifested in the collocational sequences of cause-effect relations found in the corpora (cf. Figure 19):

As shown in Figure 19, after perceiving the external objective Phenomenon, the Perceiver yields a Percept. Then, the Percept serves as a stimulus which leads to the mental process of certain mental content of the Cognizer. The content in turn brings about the internal motivations of the Speaker’s utterance. The three different semantic roles, Perceiver, Cognizer and Speaker, refer to the same agent. They are interrelated since one perceives the world via his or her perception and conveys their mental content (including opinion, volition, and intention, etc.) by means of language. The study also indicates that 1) among the three, perception is most primary in human

conceptualization and thus serves as the prerequisite for the other two domains, but not vice versa; 2) Cognition and Utterance may have a mutual feeding relation, since they may serve as the prerequisite for each other.

Figure 19: Conceptual Correlation among P-C-U Verbs (Hu 2007)

4.3 Interaction between Modality and Manipulation: the combination of xiang