論現代漢語處所倒裝結構之句法分析

全文

(1)國立臺灣師範大學英語學系碩. 士. 論. 文. Master’s Thesis Department of English National Taiwan Normal University. 論現代漢語處所倒裝結構之句法分析. On the Syntax of the Locative Inversion Construction in Mandarin Chinese. 指導教授：丁仁 Advisor: Dr. Jen Ting 研究生：唐婉玲 Student: Wan-Ling Tang. 中華民國一○二年八月 August, 2013.

(2) 摘. 要. 本篇論文主要研究不同類型的現代漢語處所倒裝結構。本研究顯示，在此結構中，前置處所詞可以是名詞片語亦或介系詞片語。當前置處所詞若為名詞片語時，在句法表現上，和一般主詞相似；若為介系詞片語時，在句法表現上，則與一般主詞截然不同。基於處所名詞片語和介系詞片語在句法上表現不同，我們認為它們在句法結構的位置亦不同。處所介系詞片語可以選擇停留在動詞前毗鄰的位置，亦或移至句首邊緣位置; 而處所名詞片語則佔據句法主詞的位置。不同於英文的動詞，漢語的動詞在論旨角色的選擇上更為自由。我們同意 HLL(2009)的理論中所提出漢語的詞彙動詞中可以只選擇詞根，而不選輕動詞，所有在詞根語義中的參與者資訊都有可能進入句法操作，實現為論元。然而，不同於 HLL (2009)的理論，我們認為，論旨角色在句法實現上，仍然必須遵守論元層級。我們主張，在漢語處所倒裝結構中，處所在論元層級中高於客體，因此進入句法操作時，處所詞佔據句法結構中較高的主詞位置，而客體則佔據賓語的位置。本篇論文目的在於提出一個統合的句法分析，探討現代漢語處所倒裝結構。研究結果支持詞彙學派，論元結構是由詞彙動詞的語意，而非由句法來決定的。關鍵詞：處所倒裝、論元實現、論元層級、詞彙語意. i.

(3) ABSTRACT In this thesis, we investigate different types of Mandarin locative inversion construction (LIC). Different from English locative inversion, Mandarin LIC is not associated with discourse function of presentational focus. In Mandarin LIC, the preverbal locative phrase can be represented as either PP or DP. A locative DP displays several subject-like properties whereas a locative PP does not. Given the asymmetry between locative PPs and DPs, we argue that locative DPs and PPs have different syntactic structures. It is proposed that a locative PP can choose either to stay at preverbal VP-adjoined position or to raise to the CP periphery position, with an empty expletive occupying the grammatical subject position. In contrast, being nominal and showing subject properties, a locative DP lands in the grammatical subject position in Mandarin LIC. We argue that Mandarin LIC is derived by the mapping of location and theme to the syntax, subject to a given thematic hierarchy. We assume with HLL (2009) that Mandarin lexical verbs can choose not to have any light verb in the lexical specification, allowing more flexible semantic relations. However, the semantic relations are not as free as expected by HLL’s theory. Contra HLL (2009), we claim that the mapping of participants to the syntax follows thematic hierarchy even when the lexical verb takes a Lv-less option. Given that location is ranked above theme in thematic hierarchy, a locative DP is mapped to the grammatical subject position and a theme DP to the grammatical subject position in Mandarin LIC. This study provides a unified analysis for different types of Mandarin LIC and argues for the lexicalist view that the argument structure of a verb is determined by the lexicon, rather than by the syntax. Key words: locative inversion, argument realization, thematic hierarchy, lexical semantics ii.

(4) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I am indebted to many people when I was studying for a master’s degree at NTNU. Without their support and assistance, it is impossible for me to complete this thesis. First of all, my sincere gratitude goes to my thesis committee members: Prof. Jen Ting, Prof. Miao-Ling Hsieh, and Prof. Rui-heng Ray Huang. Prof. Miao-Ling Hsieh offers many counter-examples, inspiring me to consider how to solve the potential problems in my research. I also thank Prof. Rui-heng Ray Huang for pointing out many fundamental issues in my thesis and offering many constructive comments on my study. The greatest dedication of this thesis goes to my advisor, Prof. Jen Ting. When I attended her comparative study class during my second year of the MA program, her lecture always invoked my desire to explore the mystery of syntax. This class consolidates my determination to work on syntax in my thesis. I am very grateful for her generosity of offering many appointments to discuss my research. Every time I discuss with her, her guidance not only enriches my knowledge of syntax but also inspires me to further pursue the solutions to the remaining problems in my thesis. Besides, she provides many constructive ideas for my study and sharpens the argumentation of my thesis. From her, I have also learned how to develop the ability of logical reasoning and critical thinking. I appreciate her kind guidance and encouragement very much. Next, I would like to express my thanks to all the teachers in Department of English at NTNU: Miao Hsia Chang, Jen-I Li, Chuyin Doris Chen, Hui-shan Lin, and to name a few. I would like to express gratitude to Prof. Hsiao-hung Iris Wu. I thank her for replying to my questions about locative inversion when I was reading her dissertation. My great thanks also go to W.-C. Sam Jhen for offering many suggestions about my research. Furthermore, I would like to thank my lovely classmates at NTNU for their mental support and friendship: Chia-Lin Hsieh, Chung-Yin Tsai, Shu Yi, Yuhan Carol Liao, Joy Hsieh, Debbie Hsu, Julia Wu, and to name a few. I am very glad to have these friends at NTNU. Thanks to them, my life at NTNU has been joyful and colorful. Special thanks to my best friends, Chia-Li Hsieh, Chung-Yin Tsai, Chien Chi Lin, Yuan Wei Wen, Shu Yi, and Yuhan Carol Liao. They always offer kind help and inspiring words without hesitation when I feel depressed or meet some difficulties. I will always remember the days, when we stay together in the research room until midnight and when we work hard together on our study. Last but not least, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my beloved parents and my three older sisters. Their unconditional love always gives me more power to meet the challenges ahead of me. With their economic and spiritual support, I can wholeheartedly pursue what I want. iii.

(5) TABLE OF CONTENTS 中文摘要 ……………………………………………………………….…………….i English Abstract ……………………………………………………………………..ii Acknowledgment ……………………………………………………………………iii Table of Contents …………...……………..………………………………………...iv. Chapter 1 Introduction………………………………………………………………1 Chapter 2 English Locative Inversion…………………………………………..…11 2.1 The Verb Types……………………………………………………...………..11 2.2 Properties………………………………………………………………….….14 2.3 Discourse Function……………………………………………………….…..18 2.4 Review of Previous Analyses………………………………………………...21 2.5 Overall Remarks……………………………………………………….……..25 Chapter 3 Properties of the Canonical Type of Mandarin Locative Inversion…28 3.1 LIC with the Preverbal Locative DP………………………………….….…..29 3.1.1 Structural Properties …………………………………………….….….30 3.1.2 Discourse Function …………………………………………….………38 3.1.3 Summary……………………………………………………….………40 3.2 LIC with the Preverbal Locative PP……………………………….…………40 3.2.1 Properties……………………………………………………….………41 3.2.2 The Structure ………………………………………………….……….44 3.3 Aspect Markers……………………………………………………………….45 3.4 Summary……………………………………………………………………..49 Chapter 4 Analysis of Mandarin Locative Inversion …………………………….51 4.1 Basic Facts……………………………………………………………………51 4.2 Pervious Analyses……………………………………………………………55 iv.

(6) 4.2.1 Pan (1996)……………………………………………………………...55 4.2.2 Lin (2001, 2008)………………………………………………………..58 4.2.3 Wu (2008)………………………………………………………………65 4.2.4 Tsai (2008)……………………………………………………………...68 4.2.5 HLL (2009)………………………………………………………….….70 4.2.6 Overall Remarks………………………………………………………..77 4.3 Proposed Analysis……………………………………………………………78 4.3.1 Argument Structure…………………………………………………….78 4.3.2 Thematic Hierarchy…………………………………………………….80 4.3.3 Analysis of the Canonical and Transitive Type…………………….…..86 4.3.4 Analysis of the Spreading Verb Type…………………………………..91 4.3.5 Analysis of the You ‘have’ Verb Type…………………………………..94 4.3.6 Analysis of the Functional Type………………………………………..95 4.4 Summary……………………………………………………………………..99 Chapter 5 Concluding Remarks and Theoretical Implications………………...100 References …………………………………………………………...…………….105. v.

(7) Chapter 1. Introduction The locative inversion construction (LIC) has received much attention in syntactic research. In English, a locative inversion sentence is characterized by a noncanonical word order, [Locative PP + V + theme DP], which is shown to involve switching the positions of the theme DP and the locative PP in the canonical word order, [Theme DP + V + locative PP]. The example (1b) is a locative inversion sentence, which can be paraphrased by its canonical form (1a).. (1) a. My friend Rose was sitting among the guests.. b. Among the guests was sitting my friend Rose.. A similar situation can be found in Mandarin Chinese. The example (2a) is a canonical sentence and the example (2b) is its inverted counterpart.. (2) a. Wo-de pengyou. my. friend. zuo. zai. tai-shang.. sit. P.. stage-top. ‘My friend is sitting on the stage.’. b. Tai-shang. stage-top. zuo-zhe. sit-DUR. wo-de pengyou.. my. friend. Lit. ‘On the stage is sitting my friend.’. The phenomenon of locative inversion has been much investigated in English and 1.

(8) Bantu languages. What makes the phenomenon of locative inversion appealing and challenging in generative research is its mismatch of semantic roles with grammatical functions. The literature diverges in treating the inverted locative phrase as a topic, a subject, or an adverbial adjunct.. In the literature, locative inversion has been argued to be a diagnostic for the unaccusative syntactic configuration (Bresnan and Kanerva 1987, Coopmans 1989, Collins 1997) since the class of verbs occurring in locative inversion has been found to be prototypical unaccusative verbs, which only subcategorize for one internal argument and cannot assign the external theta role (Burzio 1986). In addition, passive transitive verbs, which have no external argument, can also occur in locative inversion. However, Levin and Rappaport (1995) point out the problems of characterizing locative inversion as an unaccusativity hypothesis since locative inversion is not restricted only to unaccusative verbs. Certain unergative verbs are also attested in this construction.. Locative inversion in English and Bantu languages displays several systematic correspondences (Bresnan and Kanerva 1989, Bresnan 1994, Salzmann 2004). First, locative inversion is only possible with intransitive verbs. Second, the reversal of grammatical functions is closely related to the discourse function of presentational focus. Third, Bresnan (1994) argues that locative inversion can occur just in case the post-verbal theme can be interpreted as the argument of which the locative phrase is predicated. Despite their similarities, English and Bantu languages differ in the syntactic categories of locatives. In Bantu languages, locatives are represented by nominal categories whereas English locatives are represented by non-nominal categories. 2.

(9) Mandarin locative “inversion” has also been extensively investigated in recent years. Li and Thompson (1981) indicate that this construction always signals the existence of the referent of a noun phrase at some location; thus, certain types of verbs are commonly found in Mandarin LIC, as exhibited in the following. (3) a. Existential Verb: you ‘have’. b. Verbs of Appearing or Disappearing fasheng ‘happen’. si. ‘die’. chuxian. ‘appear’. xiaoshi. ‘disappear’. chansheng. ‘occur’. c. Verbs of Posture. zhan. ‘stand’. zuo. ‘sit’. tang. ‘lie’. zhu. ‘live’. gui. ‘kneel’. ting. shui. piao. ‘sto[‘. pa. ‘sleep’ ‘float’ ‘crouch’. d. Verbs of Placement. fang. ‘put’. hua. ‘draw’. tu. ‘expectorate’. zhong. ‘plant’. ke. ‘carve’. xie. ‘write’. yin. ‘print’. ‘hide’. cang. A verb of appearing or disappearing signals the appearance or disappearance of some entity at a location. A verb of posture describes the posture of an entity at some place. A verb of placement describes action that place an entity in a certain location. Due to 3.

(10) their lexical semantics, these three types of verbs require two arguments, one describing the entity that exists and the other describing the location at which this entity exists.. Mandarin LIC shares some common properties with English locative inversion. Unaccusative verbs,1 which lack the external argument, are also frequently found in Mandarin LIC. Moreover, like English inverted locative PPs, Mandarin preverbal locative phrases in this construction must denote the location where the theme NP exists. As shown in (4), the examples of Mandarin LIC, which are near counterparts of English locative inversion, are called the “canonical” type here.. (4) a. (Zai). P.. tai-shang. stage-top. zuo-zhe san-ge. ren.. sit-DUR three-CL person. ‘On the stage are sitting three people.’. b. Jia-li. lai-le. keren.. home-inside come-PER guest ‘To the home came guests.’. However, different from English, one remarkable characteristic of Mandarin locative inversion is that not only intransitive verbs, but also transitive verbs enter this construction (Pan 1996, Lin 2001, Wu 2008), as demonstrated in the following 1. Levin and Rappaport (1989) make a distinction between two types of unaccusativity, “deep” and “surface” unaccusativity. In languages with deep unaccusativity only, that argument only occurs in the surface subject position. In languages with surface unaccusativity, the argument can appear overtly in the surface object position. Mandarin displays surface unaccusativity, as shown below. (i) Lai-le henduo ren. come-PER many person ‘There come many people.” 4.

(11) examples.. (5) The Transitive Type a. Zhuozi-shang. fang-zhe. yi-ben shu.. table-top. put-DUR. one-CL book. ‘On the table is put a book.’. b. heiban-shang. blackboard-top. hua-le. yi-zhi. gou.. draw-PERF one-CL dog. ‘On the blackboard is drawn a dog.’. c. Zai. P.. caodi-shang zhong-zhe. grass-top. san-ke. plant-DUR. shu.. three-CL tree. ‘On the grass is planted three trees.’. d. Zai. P.. panzi-li. qie-le. yixie shuiguo.. plate-inside. cut-PERF some. fruit. ‘On the plate is cut some fruits.’. In Mandarin Chinese, there are also some special types of LIC, which are not so typical but have been discussed in previous studies. One type is called “occurrence locative subject” in Lin’s (2008) classification. As Lin (2008) suggests, an occurrence locative subject typically denotes the location where the event happens, as shown in (6a). However, Lin (2009) indicates that the example (6b) is unusual because the 5.

(12) locative subject refers to the location on which an event has a direct impact, rather than the location where an event occurs. The subject in the sentence (6c) is also labeled as an occurrence locative subject in Lin’s (2009) analysis. (6) “Occurrence” locative subject. a. Hai-shang. sea-top. (Lin 2008). chen-le. henduo-sao. chuan.. sink-PER. many-CL. boat. ‘In the sea sank many boats.’. b. Women. we. cunzi-li. chen-le. yi-sao. chuan.. village-inside sink-PER one-CL boat. Lit. ‘In our village sank a boat.’. c. Wang Mien si-le. Wang Mien. die-PER. fuqin.. father. ‘Wang Mien had his father die.’ Another type is labeled as “agentive locative subject” in Lin’s (2008) analysis. He indicates that many sentences with agentive subjects can be transformed into ones with locative subjects, as shown in (7).. (7) a. Zhangsan. Zhangsan. wo-zhe. yi-ba. qiang.. hold-DUR one-CL gun. 6. (Agentive subject).

(13) ‘Zhangsan is holding a gun in his hand.’. b. Zhangsan. Zhangsan. de. shou-li. wo-zhe. DE. hand-inside hold-DUR. yi-ba. qiang.(Locative subject). one-CL gun. Lit. ‘In Zhangsan’s hand is holding a gun.’. Still another type is discussed in Nie (1989). Certain special verbs such as miman ‘spread’ and chongman ‘fill’ can also occur in Mandarin LIC. This type of verbs is referred to as the spreading verb type here.. (8) The spreading verb type. a. Caoyen-shang miman-zhe. grassland-top. chenwu.. spread-DUR morning fog. Lit. ‘On the grassland spread morning fog.’. b. Jiaoshi-li. classroom-inside. chongman. huanlede qifen.. fill. joyous. atmosphere. Lit. ‘The classroom was filled with joyous atmosphere.’. There is a special type of Mandarin LIC, observed by Yang and Pan (2001). Yang and Pan (2001) indicate that the sentences, as given in (9), describe a function a location is meant for and emphasize the existence of an on-going action. Thus, here we call such sentences as (9) the functional type.. (9) Functional type (Yang and Pan 2001) 7.

(14) a. Tai-shang. stage-top. chang-zhe. daxi.. perform-DUR. opera. Lit. ‘On the stage is performing an opera.’. b. Wu-li. kai-zhe. room-inside hold-DUR. hui.. meeting. Lit. ‘In the room is holding a meeting.’. c. Shichang-shang mai-zhe. market-top. sell-DUR. henduo. pianyi. many. cheap. huo.. commodities. Lit. ‘On the market are selling many cheap commodities.’. Although considerable research has been devoted to Mandarin LIC, there is little agreement about how the preverbal locative phrase is derived. Some propose that the locative phrase raises from the predicate-internal position to the subject position (Li 1990, Wu 2008) whiles others argue for the base-generation approach (Gu 1991, Lin 2001). In Mandarin, the construction in question is also referred to as presentative sentences (Li and Thompson 1981), existential sentences (Huang 1987, Yang and Pan 2001), or locative existential constructions (Gu 1991). Here, adopting the terminology in Bresnan et al (1987), Pan (1996), and Levin et al (1995), we think that these constructions include many subtypes, one of which is the LIC at issue; for the purpose of this study, LIC is defined as a sentence like (3) and (4), of which the word order is [Locative DP/PP V Theme DP]. In this thesis, we will discuss different types of Mandarin LIC, including the canonical type (3), the transitive type (4), and other 8.

(15) special types (6)-(9).. There are some important fundamental issues concerning the Mandarin LIC to be discussed in the following chapters. The first issue is about where preverbal locative phrase originates and whether Mandarin LIC is derivationally related to its corresponding canonical form. The second issue is concerned with the syntactic status of preverbal locative phrase, which in most cases can be represented as either DP or PP in Mandarin Chinese. Third, the agent of a transitive verb seems to be deleted or suppressed in Mandarin LIC. The question is why the agent is absent from the argument structure of transitive verbs in Mandarin LIC.. The purpose of this study is to explore the important issues raised above on locative inversion and to offer a unified syntactic analysis for Mandarin LIC. By looking into the facts of Mandarin LIC, we propose that a lexical verb contains the root and a small number of light verbs encoded in the lexical representations and that Mandarin allows an option of V not having light verbs in its lexical specification. However, we claim, contra Huang, Li, and Li (henceforth HLL) (2009), the mapping of semantic roles to the syntax is not free, and has to obey a thematic hierarchy even when the lexical verb has no light verb in it. This study supports a lexical approach to argument structure, which argues for the decisive role of the lexicon in argument realization.. The remainder of this thesis will be organized into four chapters. In Chapter 2, we will examine the properties of locative inversion and review previous literature on English locative inversion. In Chapter 3, having the literature on English locative inversion as a background, we will discuss the properties of the canonical type of Mandarin LIC, which corresponds to the instances of English locative inversion. In 9.

(16) addition, we will demonstrate that either the DP or PP form can occur preverbally in Mandarin LIC, but that they have different syntactic structure. Chapter 4 moves the transitive type and other distinct types of Mandarin LIC and provides a syntactic analysis of all the types of Mandarin LIC. We will claim that mapping of the theta roles to the syntax is subject to a given thematic hierarchy in Mandarin LIC and other constructions. Chapter 5 is the conclusion.. 10.

(17) Chapter 2. English Locative Inversion Locative inversion does not seem to be a common phenomenon since it is found in few languages including English, Mandarin, and Bantu languages (Salzmann 2011). In English, it is well assumed that an inverted sentence and its canonical form are semantically and derivationally related, but they diverge in discourse function. This chapter is devoted to the previous literature on the syntactic analysis of English locative inversion. In section 2.1, we will discuss those verb types which can occur in English locative inversion. In section 2.2, we will illustrate the constraints on English locative inversion. Furthermore, the inverted locative phrase display mixed subject and non-subject properties, which render its syntactic status hotly debated. In section 2.3, we will demonstrate the effects of presentational focus in English and Chichewa locative inversion, observed by Bresnan and Kanerva (1987). In section 2.4, we will discuss how the theoretical approaches treat the derivation of English locative inversion. Having considered the literature, we will present an account for Mandarin locative inversion in Chapter 3 and Chapter 4.. 2.1 The Verb Types. In English, locative inversion is impossible with transitive verbs, as shown in (10). Only intransitive verbs can occur in locative inversion.. (10) a. *Among the guests of honor seated my mother my friend Rose.. b. *On the table has placed a tarte Tain Susan.. Those verbs most frequently found in locative inversion are unaccusative verbs, such 11.

(18) as come and appear, as shown in (11). Passive transitive verbs, which have no external argument and thus are classified with unaccusative verbs, are also attested in English locative inversion, as exemplified in (12).. (11) a. The tax collector came back to the village.. b. Back to the village came the tax collector.. (12) a. My mother was seated among the guests of honor.. b. Among the guests was seated my mother.. However, not all intransitive verbs can undergo locative inversion. As the examples below suggest, unergative verbs are not allowed in English locative inversion.. (13) a. *In the cafes of Paris talk many artists.. b. *On the stage danced my sister.. Due to the constraints on the classes of verbs occurring in English locative inversion, many researchers argue that locative inversion is an unaccusativity diagnostic (Bresnan and Kanerva 1987, Coopmans 1989, Collins 1997). However, pointing out two problems for the unaccusative hypothesis, Levin and Rappaport (1995) argue against the claim. First, not all unaccusative verbs are found in English LIC. Second, certain unergative verbs can occur in English LIC, which is also observed and discussed by Hoekstra and Mulder (1990). The instances of locative inversion with unergative verbs are as follows.. (14) On the third floor worked two young women called Maryanne and Thomson and Ava Brent, who ran the audio library and print room. 12.

(19) (Levin and Rappaport 1995, Chapter 6, example (19b)) (15) At one end, in crude bunks, slept Jed and Henry…. (Levin and Rappaport 1995, Chapter 6, example (19d)). We do not adopt Levin and Rappaport’s (1995) claim that unergative verbs can occur in English locative inversion. Despite the fact that certain unergative verbs are attested in English locative inversion, Culicover and Levine (2001) argue that locative inversion with unergative verbs derives from the heaviness of the postverbal NP. They find that those unergative verbs which can undergo locative inversion must be followed by heavy NPs, as demonstrated in (16).. (16) a. *In the room slept Robin.. b. In the room slept fitfully the students in the class who had heard about the social psych experiment that we were about to perpetrate.. The contrast between (16a) and (16b) demonstrates that an unergative verb cannot occur in this construction unless the postverbal NP is heavy. In (16b), the postverbal NP appears in [Spec, TP] at some point in the derivation and subsequently postposes to the right of VP due to its heaviness. With the trace left by the subject in [Spec, TP], the locative PP never stays in the [Spec, TP] position, but instead moves to the higher specifier position. As a result, Culicover and Levine (2001) interpret the sentences like (16b) as a case of Heavy NP Shift, rather than as an instance of locative inversion. Therefore, it can be concluded that English locative inversion is only possible with passive verbs and unaccusative verbs. The cases of inversion with unergative verbs, as shown in (14) and (15), should not be regarded as instances of locative inversion 13.

(20) because those unergative verbs must be followed by heavy NPs.. 2.2 Properties In addition to the constraint on the types of the inverting verbs, there are other restrictions on English locative inversion. As Bresnan (1994) argues, locative inversion can occur just in case the postverbal theme can be interpreted as the argument of which the preverbal locative argument is predicated, as schematized in (17).. (17) Verb <theme, location>. As (17) indicates, the inverted locative phrase must be an argument PP subcategorized by the verb, rather than an adjunct PP. In other words, in a locative inversion sentence, the inverted locative phrase has to denote the location where the theme exists, rather than the location where the event takes place. As can be seen in (18), the verbs such as knit and drink cannot undergo locative inversion because the verbs do not subcategorize for a locative argument and the inverted locative PP does not denote the location of the theme.. (18) a. *Among the guests was knitting my friend Rose.. b. *On the corner was drinking a woman.. Another restriction, observed by Coopmans (1989), is that English locative inversion occurs only if the verb is in the simple past or present tense. That is to say, modal auxiliaries are banned from English locative inversion, which is called auxiliary restriction. As the examples (19) taken from Coopmans (1989) demonstrate, the modal auxiliaries make the locative inversion sentences impossible. 14.

(21) (19) a. *Down the hill may roll the baby carriage.. b. *Down the stairs has fallen the baby.. However, we think that auxiliary restriction does not exist in English locative inversion since we still can find many locative inversion instances with modals or auxiliaries in several studies, as illustrated below.. (20) a. On these trials can be found many kinds of mushrooms.. (Bresnan 1994) b. On the house roof has been mounted a copper lightning rod …. (Levin and Rappaport 1995, Chapter 6, example (36a)). As shown in (20), there is no auxiliary restriction for English locative inversion.. In English locative inversion, the inverted locative PP has been argued to be the grammatical subject since it displays several subject-like properties (Hoekstra and Mulder 1990, Bresnan 1994, Levin and Rappaport 1995, Collins 1997). First, an inverted locative PP, like a regular subject, can undergo subject raising, as shown below.. (21) a. On that hill appears to be located a cathedral.. b. In these villages are likely to be found the best examples of this cuisine.. (Bresnan 1994, example (65)). Second, the extraction of the inverted locative PP behaves like the extraction of a 15.

(22) regular subject in displaying that-trace effect.. (22) a. It’s in these villages that we all believe _____ can be found the best examples. of this cuisine. b.*It’s in these villages that we all believe that ______ can be found the best. examples of this cuisine.. (Bresnan 1994, example (81)). Third, Hoekstra and Mulder (1990) indicate that an English locative inversion sentence can be embedded in sentences with wh-complementizers.. (23) a. We all witness how down the hill cam rolling a huge baby carriage.. b. We suddenly saw how into the pond jumped thousands of frogs.. (Hoekstra and Mulder 1990 (example (72)). Hoekstra and Mulder (1990) give another piece of evidence for the subject status of the inverted locative PP that the inverted locative PP patterns with a grammatical subject in being questioned without auxiliary inversion, as shown below.. (24) a. On which wall hung a portrait of the artist?. b. *On which wall did hang a portrait of the artist?. On the other hand, many researchers argue that the inverted locative PP cannot stay at the subject position in the syntactic structure because it is non-nominal and differs from a regular subject in a number of respects (Stowell 1981, Coopmans 1989, 16.

(23) Wu 2008). First, in an English locative inversion sentence, the verb agrees with the postverbal theme, rather than the preverbal locative PP.. (25) a. In the swamp was/*were found a child.. b. In the swamp were/*was found two children.. Second, Coopmans (1989) observes that a locative inversion sentence only occurs in a root clause, as demonstrated below.. (26) a. *He denied that down the hill rolled the baby carriage.. b. *It is possible that out of the house strolled my mother’s best friend.. Third, as Bresnan (1994) and Wu (2008) point out, an Exceptional Case Marking (ECM) verb, which usually selects a non-finite clause, cannot take a locative inversion sentence.. (27) a. I expect John to hang a picture of Leonard Pabbs on this wall.. b. *I expect on this wall to be hung a picture of Leonard Pabbs.. Fourth, in a yes-no question, a regular subject can undergo subject-auxiliary inversion, but the inverted locative PP cannot.. (28) a. Did John hang a Mexican serape on the wall?. b. *Did on the wall hang a Mexican serape?. To summarize, English locative inversion occurs only when the inverted locative PP is an argument subcategorized by the verb and when the inverted locative PP is 17.

(24) predicated of the postverbal theme. In addition, contra Coopmans (1989), we think that modals or auxiliaries are allowed in English locative inversion. In English locative inversion, the inverted locative PP displays both subject-like and non-subject properties, as summarized in Table 1; as a result, there has been a debate as to how the locative PP is mapped to the syntactic structure. In section 2.4, we will discuss how the previous studies account for the derivation of English locative inversion. Table 1. The properties of English locative inversion. English √. <theme, location> Subject properties subject-raising. √. That-trace effect. √. Can be embedded in sentences with wh-complementizers. √. No Subject-auxiliary inversion in wh-question.. √. Non-subject properties No agreement between the locative PP and the verb. √. Only occur in a root clause. √. Cannot be an ECM complement. √. No Subject-auxiliary inversion in yes-no question. √. 2.3 Discourse Function Locative inversion has been argued to be associated with special discourse function of presentational focus, in which the referent expressed by the postverbal NP 18.

(25) is introduced or reintroduced to the scene, which is expressed as a location. To meet the requirements of presentational focus, the syntactic functions of the locative and the subject alternate. Contreras (1978), as cited in Fernández Soriano (1999), proposes a way to test the unmarked status of word order in Spanish. The question “what happened?” can be used to check the unmarked word order. Applying this test to examine whether the word order of English locative inversion is marked or unmarked, we find that an English locative inversion sentence is an odd response to the question. Only an univerted sentence is an appropriate response to the question. As (29) suggests, the inverted locative sentence alter the “neutral” information structure of the sentence, and thus cannot be a natural response to the question.. (29) A: What happened?. B: #On the street happened a car accident.. C: A car accident happened on the street.. Moreover, Bresnan and Kanerva (1987) observe several effects of presentational focus in English and Chichewa locative inversion. One effect is concerned with contrastive focus. Since the inverted theme is introduced to the scene and is focused relative to the preverbal locative in locative inversion, it is difficult to make the preverbal locative phrase a focus of contrast. As Bresnan and Kanerva (1987) indicate, this effect is found in both English and Chichewa locative inversion. As shown in the example (30b), a locative inversion sentence would become less acceptable when the inverted locative phrase is a focus of contrast.. (30) a. On the wall hung canvasses, but not paintings.. 19.

(26) b. ??On the wall hung canvasses, but not on the easels.. Another effect concerns sentential negation. Sentential negation of English locative inversion is ill-formed, given the assertion (Aissen1975) that the scene introducing the postverbal theme does not exist would conflict with the discourse function of locative inversion.. (31) a. *On the wall never hung a picture of U.S. Grant.. b. On the wall hangs not a picture of U.S. Grant but one of Jefferson Davis.. Bresnan (1994) indicates that this effect is not observed in Chichewa locative inversion in that negation in Chichewa is expressed by verbal prefixes whose scope always excludes the subject. Thus, sentential negation would not arise, regardless of the position of the verb.. On the other hand, instead of assuming that the discourse function of English locative inversion involves presentational focus (Bresnan 1994), Levin and Rappaport, following Birner’s (1992) claim, propose that the verb which occurs in English locative inversion must be “informationally light”; that is, such verbs must not contribute information that is newer than the postverbal NP. The condition of informational lightness can not only explain why certain types of verbs are favored, but also rule out transitive verbs and those intransitive verbs, which are not allowed to occur in English locative inversion. In a locative inversion sentence with a transitive verb, both the verb and object convey new information together so that it is unlikely for a transitive verb to be “informationally light”.. In sum, the information structure of a locative inversion sentence is different from 20.

(27) that of its canonical counterpart. As previous studies suggest, the postverbal theme is introduced as new or less familiar information to the scene expressed by the inverted locative phrase in English locative inversion (Bresnan and Kanerva 1989, Bresnan 1994, Levin and Rappaport 1995). Thus, we can make sure that the motivation for English and Chichewa locative inversion has been linked to the discourse function. Although both English and Chichewa locative inversion display a similar discourse function, they diverge in the syntactic category of inverted locative phrases, represented as PPs in English but as DPs in Chichewa. In Chichewa locative inversion, an inverted locative DP, being nominal, can perfectly fit in the grammatical subject position (Bresnan and Kanerva 1987, Bresnan 1994). In contrast, in English locative inversion, due to the mixed properties of the inverted locative PP, the issue regarding its syntactic position is still controversial.. 2.4 Review of Previous Analyses As discussed in section 2.2, we observe that the inverted locative PP displays both subject and non-subject properties. The mixed characteristics of the inverted locative PP have brought conflicting opinions concerning the syntactic derivation of English locative inversion. To account for how English locative inversion is derived, the previous analyses can be roughly divided into two approaches: Bresnan’s mapping approach and the movement approach.. Bresnan (1994) analyzes English locative inversion under the framework of Lexical Functional Grammar. In Lexical Functional Grammar, there are three levels in this model. Each level models a different dimension of grammatical structure: role, function, and category. Roles correspond to the grammatically expressible participants of eventualities, modeled by a-structure. Functions refer to the grammatical relations, 21.

(28) modeled by f-structure. Categories belong to the surface structure, modeled by c-structure. Bresnan (1994) assumes that location is ranked below theme at a-structure. The subject function is assigned by default to the most prominent role in the argument structure. In English locative inversion, due to the presentational focus of the postverbal theme, the positions of the locative and the theme arguments are inverted without changing the semantic role structure of the verb. Proposing a mapping account, Bresnan (1994) argues that the inverted locative PP in English locative inversion is a subject at f-structure, but is a topic at c-structure. Given that the inverted locative PP displays some subject properties, Bresnan (1994) proposes that the locative PP must be a subject at some abstract level of representation. On the other hand, following Stowell’s (1981) Case Resistance Principle,2 Bresnan (1994) argues that the inverted locative PP cannot stay in the subject position where Case is assigned. Instead, it has to be moved to the topicalized position which does not receive Case at surface structure. As a result, in English locative inversion, the inverted locative PP is indirectly related to subject position through topicalization.. On a movement approach, it is assumed that the locative argument in English is base-generated lower than the theme. However, English locative inversion poses a challenge to the Uniformity of Theta Assignment3 (UTAH, Baker 1985) since the argument bearing location role is structurally higher than theme argument in this construction. In order to follow UTAH, Collins (1997) and Rizz et al. (2005), adopting Ura’s (1995) and Chomsky’s (1995) Minimality condition, assume that both. 2. Stowell (1981) proposes the Case Resistance Principle (CRP), which regulates that the categories which assign Case cannot receive Case. The head of a PP is itself a Case assigner; thus, a PP cannot occupy the position where Case is assigned. 3 UTAH states that identical thematic relationships between items are represented by identical structural relationships between these items at the level of D-structure. Baker (1997) proposes the thematic hierarchy: Agent >> Instrument >> Theme/Patient >> Location/Goal. 22.

(29) the postverbal NP and PP are in the minimal domain4 of the verb. When the two elements are within the same minimal domain, they are equidistant to the [Spec, TP] position. Wu (2008) suggests that the equidistant environment is created by V-to-T movement. Under this assumption, English locative inversion could conform to UTAH if the equidistant environment for the postverbal theme and locative phrase are created. Under the framework of Chomsky’s (1995) minimalism, the Case feature of T and the EPP are assumed to be satisfied independently (Collins 1997, Wu 2008). EPP is concerned with checking of a categorial D-feature. Once the [Spec, TP] position is filled by a raised referential subject or by merging an expletive, the checking of D-feature can be met. Assumed within the minimal domain, either postverbal theme or locative complement can raise to satisfy the EPP feature of T. In the case of English locative inversion, the locative PP overtly moves to the [Spec TP] position and enters into a checking relation with the EPP feature of T. The uninterpretable Case feature of T and the ɸ-features of V are checked via the raising of the postverbal DP’s formal feature to T at LF. Collins (1997) proposes that the locative PP stays at [Spec, TP] position whereas Wu (2008) argues that the locative PP further raises to [Spec, CP] position, as demonstrated below.. (32) Collins’s (1997) proposal on the derivation of English LIC. [TP Locative PPi T [TrP Vj [VP theme DP tj ti] (33) Wu’s (2008) proposal on the derivation of English LIC. 4. Closeness in terms of minimal domains (Chomsky 1995, 2005) a. Terms of the same minimal domain are equidistant to the probe. b. The minimal domain of a head H is the set of terms immediately contained in the projection of H. 23.

(30) [CP [Locative PP]i C [TP ti T V [theme DP] ti ]] In contrast, Coopmans (1989) argues that the locative PP never stays at [Spec, TP] position, but directly raises to CP periphery position. Hypothesizing that English exhibits semi-pro-drop in the presence of a topicalized locative phrase, Coopmans (1989) argues that English allows empty expletive subject only if no external theta-role is assigned and if a subcategorized locative argument is topicalized. The derivation is demonstrated below.. (34) Coopmans’ (1989) proposal on the derivation of English LIC. [S’ Locative PPi. [IP proexp. [VP V NP ti ]. Regarding the syntactic position of the postverbal theme, we agree with Levin and Rappaport’s (1995) claim that the postverbal theme is generated at the VP-internal position and subsequently moved to the VP-adjoined position in English locative inversion.. (35) Levin and Rappaport’s (1995) proposal on the derivation of English LIC. [IP PPi [I’ Vj + I [VP [VP[V’ tj tk ti]] NPk]]] A piece of evidence for the position of the postverbal theme is that the postverbal theme cannot be relativized, which is observed by Bresnan and Kanerva (1987). In general, in an English canonical sentence, both the theme and the locative can be relativized, as exemplified below.. (36) a. John is looking at the stage, on which the man is siting.. b. I don’t like the man who is sitting on the stage. 24.

(31) However, in an English locative inversion sentence, only the locative phrase can be relativized. Bresnan and Kanerva (1987) suggest that a presentationally focused NP in English is adjoined to the VP in the focus position, from which any extractions are banned. The restriction against extracting the postverbal theme is illustrated by the examples below.. (37) a. I expect that on these trails can be found many kinds of mushrooms. b. …these trails, on which I expect ___ can be found many kinds of mushrooms.. c. ?*…many kinds of mushrooms, which I expect on these trails can be found ___.. 2.5 Overall Remarks In this chapter, we have reviewed previous important literature on English locative inversion. We have addressed several restrictions on English locative inversion. Only unaccusative verbs and passive verbs are possible in English locative inversion. Moreover, the inverted locative PP must an argument, denoting the location of the referent expressed by the theme. We have also shown that English locative inversion is closely related to discourse function of presentational focus.. Given the mixed properties of the inverted locative PP, a number of approaches have been proposed to analyze the derivation of English locative inversion. Coopmans’ (1989) empty subject hypothesis should be rejected for English locative inversion. One problem with Coopmans’ analysis is that it cannot account for the subject properties of the preverbal locative PP in English locative inversion, such as subject raising, that-trace effect and so forth. Moreover, as Salzmann (2001) points out, 25.

(32) positing an expletive subject exclusively for English locative inversion would be ad hoc since English is not a pro-drop language. Due to the fact that the inverted locative PP shows some subject properties, we think that the inverted locative PP occupies the subject position at least at some point in the derivation.. In previous research, there is a difference of opinion as to whether the inverted locative PP stays at the grammatical subject position or further moves to CP periphery position in English locative inversion. Collins (1997) proposes that the inverted locative PP stays at the [Spec, TP] position. However, his account cannot capture the non-subject properties which the inverted locative PP shows. On the other hand, although Bresnan (1994) and Wu (2008) analyze English locative inversion under different theoretical frameworks, their analyses are similar in nature. It is assumed that theme is higher than location in the thematic hierarchy. They both suggest that the inverted locative PP occupies the subject position at some point in the derivation, but is topicalized at surface syntactic structure. The analysis of the topicalized locative subject can capture the subject-like properties which an inverted locative PP displays, such as subject raising and subject extraction. On the other hand, this analysis can explain the asymmetries between the behavior of regular subjects and inverted locative PP subjects. For instance, as is discussed earlier, unlike a regular subject, an inverted locative PP cannot determine the number of verb. Another discrepancy between regular subjects and topicalized locative PPs is concerned with ECM construction. In English, an ECM verb selects a TP. Hence, an ECM verb like expect cannot take a locative inversion sentence taking a topicalized locative PP, which lands in the [Spec, CP] position.. (38) *I expect on his wall to be hung a portrait of our founder. 26.

(33) Bresnan (1994) and Wu (2008) seem to offer a satisfactory explanation for English locative inversion since they can account for the reason why inverted locative PPs and regular subjects are parallel in some respects but meanwhile are distinct in other respects.. 27.

(34) Chapter 3. Properties of the Canonical Type of Mandarin Locative Inversion Much literature asserts that in the Mandarin LIC, only locative nominals are allowed in this construction (Huang 1987, Pan 1996, Wu 2008) while some claim that the preverbal locative phrase can appear in the form of either a DP or PP (Li and Thompson 1981, Du 1999, Cheng and Tsao 2012).. (39) a. (Zai). P.. wo-de. mianqian. chuxian-le. yi-ge. ren.. my. front. appear-PER. one-CL person. ‘In front of me appeared a man.’. b. (Zai). P.. chuang-shang tang-zhe. bed-top. yi-ge. ren. lie-DUR one-CL person. Lit. ‘On the bed is lying a person.’. (Cheng and Tsao 2012). The instances in (39) are natural counterparts of English locative inversion because they pattern with English locative inversion in occurring with unaccusative verbs and showing the noncanonical word order [Locative DP/PP + V + theme DP]. Here, we call the examples like (39) the “canonical type”. In addition, as the sentences in (39) suggest, the preverbal locative phrase can appear in the form of either DP or PP. We argue that both locative DPs and PPs can occur in Mandarin LIC, but they have different syntactic structures. 28.

(35) In this chapter, we will mainly discuss the canonical type of Mandarin LIC, which corresponds to unaccusative and passive verbs of English locative inversion. In section 3.1, we will focus on those with the preverbal locative DP and examine the properties of preverbal locative DPs in Mandarin LIC. In section 3.2, we will discuss the instances of preverbal locative PPs and demonstrate how they differ from their corresponding DP forms in the syntactic structure. In section 3.3, we turn to discuss the occurrence of the aspect markers like -le and -zhe in Mandarin LIC.. 3.1 LIC with the Preverbal Locative DP Like English locative inversion, we find many natural instances of Mandarin LIC, in which unaccusative verbs and passive verbs are possible, as shown below.. (40) a. Tai-shang. stage-top. zuo-zhe. san-ge. ren.. sit-DUR three-CL person. ‘On the stage are sitting three people.’. b. Zhuo-shang. bei. fang-le. yi-ben. table-top. BEI. put-PER. one-CL. zidian.. dictionary. ‘On the table was put a dictionary.’. Like English, those intransitive verbs that cannot occur in Mandarin LIC are unergative, as exemplified in (41).. (41) a. *Bangongshi-li. office-inside. gongzuo-zhe. henduo. ren.. work-DUR. many. person. 29.

(36) Lit. ‘In the office are working many people.’. b. *Fangjian-li. ku-zhe. yi-ge. ren.. room-inside cry-DUR one-CL. person. Lit. ‘In the room is crying a person.’. 3.1.1 Structural Properties. There are many systematic parallels between English and the Mandarin canonical LIC. First, like English locative inversion, the preverbal locative phrase must be an argument subcategorized by the verb in Mandarin locative inversion. Pan (1996) argues that the locative phrase in Mandarin LIC must denote the location of the theme, rather than the location where the event occurs, as exemplified below.. (42) a. John zai. John. zhuozi-shang. xie-le. yi-feng xin.. table-top. write-PER. one-CL letter.. P.. i. ‘John wrote a letter at the table.’ ii. ‘John wrote a letter on the table.’. b. Zhuozi-shang. table-top. xie-zhe. write-DUR. yi-feng. xin.. one-CL letter. ‘On the table is written a letter.’ (and not ‘….at the table’). (Pan 1996, example (50)). Pan (1996) indicates that example (42a) is ambiguous because the letter can be 30.

(37) interpreted as being written on a sheet of paper or on the table. In contrast, the example (42b) shows that locative inversion is possible only in the second sense, that is, the letter is written on the table. Thus, a locative adjunct is banned from this construction, as given in (43).. (43) a. John. John. zai. jia-li. xie. yi-feng. P.. home-inside. write. xin.. one-CL letter. ‘John is writing a letter at home.’. b. *Jia-li. xie-zhe. home-inside. write-DUR. yi-feng. xin.. one-CL. letter. Lit. ‘There is a letter written at home.’. (Pan 1996, example (51)). In Mandarin LIC, a locative DP patterns with an English locative PP in showing some subject-like properties. First, in a raising construction, the embedded subject can be moved to the matrix subject position. Teng (1978) and Li (1990) propose that the verb kaishi ‘begin’ is a raising verb, taking a clausal complement. The modal yinggai ‘should’, as argued by Lin and Tang (1995), is also a raising verb. The preverbal locative DP, like a regular subject, can undergo subject raising in Mandarin LIC.. (44) a. Tiankong kaishi. sky. begain. piao-zhe. yu.. float-DUR rain. Lit. ‘In the sky starts raining.’ 31.

(38) b. Tai-shang. yinggai. zuo. san-ge. ren.. stage-top. should. sit. three-CL person. Lit. ‘On the stage should be sitting three people.’. Second, as Ting (1998) and Huang (1999) argue, short passives involve A movement. In Mandarin LIC, parallel with a regular subject, the preverbal locative DP can undergo short passivization.. (45) Hu-li. lake-inside. bei. renwei. you-zhe. yi-zhi. da. BEI. think. swim-DUR. one-CL big. shuiguai.. water monster. Lit. ‘In the lake was thought to be swimming a big water monster.’ Third, in Mandarin, the verb yao ‘want’ is argued by Li (1990) to be an ECM verb, which selects a TP. The ECM verb yao ‘want’ can take a locative inversion sentence as its complement, as given below.. (46) Laoshi. yao. tai-shang. zuo. teacher want. stage-top. sit. yixie ren.. some people. Lit. ‘The teacher want the stage to be seated some people.’. Given the properties discussed above, we find that the locative DP behaves like a typical grammatical subject in several respects. Thus, we conclude that a Mandarin preverbal locative DP, like an English inverted locative PP, must be a subject at some point in the derivation.. 32.

(39) However, different from English inverted locative PPs, Mandarin preverbal locative DPs do not display any non-subject properties in this construction. For instance, English locative inversion only occurs in root clause while a Mandarin locative inversion sentence can serve as a clausal complement, as demonstrated below.. (47) Zhangsan renwei. Zhangsan think. hu-li. you-zhe. lake-inside swim-DUR. yi-zhi. da shuiguai.. one-CL. big. water monster. Lit. ‘Zhangsan thinks that in the lake is swimming a big water monster.”. Furthermore, a Mandarin locative inversion sentence can be an ECM complement while an English locative inversion cannot. Other properties such as agreement, that-trace effect, and subject-auxiliary inversion, are inapplicable in Mandarin. Table 2 summarizes the properties of English and Mandarin locative inversion.. 33.

(40) Table 2. The properties of English and Mandarin LIC. English. Mandarin. √. √. subject-raising. √. √. That-trace effect. √. N/A. Can be embedded in sentences with. √. N/A. √. N/A. N/A. √. No agreement between the locative PP and the verb. √. N/A. Only occur in root clause. √. X. Cannot be ECM complement. √. X. No Subject-auxiliary inversion in yes-no question. √. N/A. <theme, location> Subject properties. wh-complementizers No Subject-auxiliary inversion in wh-question Short passive Non-subject properties. As Table 2 suggests, we find that the locative DP in Mandarin only displays subject properties. A locative DP composed of NP and a localizer is argued to be of a nominal category, which is referred to as a localizer phrase (LP) by HLL (2009). They provide some evidence for the resemblance between localizers and nouns. First, just as N is the head of a noun phrase, the localizer, being the last word of a LP, is the head of the LP. Second, a locative phrase, like a regular DP, can serve as the subject or object in a sentence, as shown in (48).. (48) a. Cheng-wai. hen. meili. 34.

(41) city-outside. very. beautiful. ‘The outside of the city is beautiful.’. b. Wo qu-guo. I. go-EXP. cheng-wai.. city-outside. ‘I have been to the outside of the city.’. Third, as HLL (2009) point out, LPs, like nominal expressions, need a preposition when they do not serve as the subject or the object, as illustrated by the examples in (49).. (49) a. Ta *(zai). he. P.. nage chengshi. juban-guo. yi-ge. that. hold-EXP. one-CL exhibition. city. zhanlanhui.. ‘He held an exhibition *(in) that city.’. b. Ta *(zai) cheng-li. he. P.. juban-guo. city-inside hold-EXP. yi-ge. zhanlanhui.. one-CL exhibition. ‘He held an exhibition inside the city.’. Being of a nominal category and showing subject properties, the preverbal locative DP in the Mandarin LIC, as in (40), we claim, occupies the grammatical subject position.. Turning to the syntactic position of the postverbal theme in Mandarin LIC, we claim that the theme DP is generated and stays at the object position. In English 35.

(42) locative inversion, the postverbal theme is argued to be generated at the object position and subsequently moved to the VP-adjoined focus position (see the discussion in section 2.4). Bresnan and Kanerva (1987) observe that a theme DP cannot be relativized in English locative inversion because any extraction is banned from the focus position. In the case of Mandarin LIC, the following examples in (50) demonstrate that the relativization of a post-verbal theme DP is allowed, which signals that the theme DP stays at the VP-internal position, rather than at the VP-adjoined focus position.. (50) a. Tai-shang. zuo-zhe. de. na-ge. stage-top. sit-DUR. DE. ren. shi. that-CL person. wo baba.. be my father. Lit. ‘That person who is sitting on the stage is my father.’. b. Zhuozi-shang fang. table-top. put. de. DE. na-ben. shu. shi. Zhangshan mai. that-CL book be Zhangshan buy. de.. DE. Lit. ‘The book which is put on the table is what Zhangshan bought.’. From the discussion above, we can conclude that the locative DP lands in the grammatical subject position and the theme DP in the grammatical object position in Mandarin LIC.. Finally, we would like to discuss one type of Lin’s (2008, 2009) occurrence locative subjects, which we claim falls into the canonical type of Mandarin LIC under discussion. Under Lin’s (2008) analysis, the occurrence locative subject, which is licensed by the light verb OCCUR, typically denotes the location where an event 36.

(43) occurs. Consider the following examples.. (51) a. Hai-shang chen-le. sea-top. sink-PER. henduo-sao. chuan.. many-CL. boat. (Lin 2009, example (47)). Lit. ‘On the sea sank many boats.’. b. Wu-li. house-inside. po-le. yi-shan. chuangzi.. break-PER one-CL. (Lin 2009, example (50)). window. Lit. ‘In the room was broken a window.’. As the sentences in (51) demonstrate, the main verbs are unaccusative verbs. Contra Lin (2008), we claim that the preverbal locative DPs in (51) denote the location of the theme, rather the location where the event occurs. The locative DPs behave like a regular subject since they can undergo short passivization and subject raising, as shown in (52).. (52) a. Hai-shang. sea-top. bei. renwei. chen-le. BEI. think. sink-PER. henduo-shao. chuan.. many-CL. boat. Lit. ‘On the sea was thought to sink many boats.’. b. Wu-li. yinggai. house-inside should. po-le. henduo-shan. break-PER. many-CL. Lit. ‘In the house should break many windows.’. 37. chuangzi.. window.

(44) Therefore, Lin’s (2009) examples like (51) are of the canonical type under our analysis because those verbs taking Lin’s (2009) occurrence locative subjects are unaccusative. Furthermore, the occurrence locative subjects under Lin’s (2009) analysis are parallel with preverbal locative DPs of the canonical type under our analysis in showing subject-like properties and in denoting the location of the postverbal theme.. 3.1.2 Discourse Function. As Bresnan (1994) and Levin and Rappaport (1995) indicate, the motivation for locative inversion is usually associated with the discourse function. Bresnan (1994) suggests that the syntactic functions of a locative and postverbal theme alternate to meet the requirement for the discourse function of presentational focus. Bresnan and Kanerva (1987) observe that English and Chichewa display several effects of presentational focus, such as the restrictions on contrastive focus and sentential negation. In contrast, Mandarin does not show any effect of presentational focus. To begin with, the word order of Mandarin LIC seems to be unmarked. The question “what happened?” can be used to check the unmarked word order (Contreras 1978). As discussed earlier, an English locative inversion sentence would be an odd response to the question since its information structure is altered. However, as (53) suggests, a Mandarin locative inversion sentence seems to be a natural response to the question.. (53) A: Fasheng-le. sheme shi?. happen-PERF what. thing. ‘What happened?’. 38.

(45) B: Jie-shang fasheng-le. street-top. chehuo.. happen-PER car accident. ‘On the street happened a car accident.’. Second, unlike English inverted locative PPs, Mandarin preverbal locative DPs can be contrastive focus, as exemplified in the following sentences.. (54) Shi. zhuo-shang fang lian-ben shu,. be. table-top. put. two-CL. er. book, but. bushi. guezi-shang. not. cupboard-top. Lit. ‘On the table were put two books, not on the cupboard.’. Third, Mandarin LIC allows sentential negation, as shown in (55).. (55) Na-ge. that-CL. shujia-shang. meiyou fang-guo. bookshelf-top. never. shu. put-EXP book. Lit. ‘On that bookshelf are never put books.’. Table 3 below demonstrates that Mandarin LIC differs from English locative inversion in not exhibiting any effect of presentational focus. Mandarin LIC, like a canonical sentence, is shown to convey neutral information structure of the sentence, suggesting no association with the discourse function.. 39.

(46) Table 3. The effects of presentational focus in locative inversion. English. Mandarin. 1. Odd response to the question ‘what happened’.. √. X. 2. Locatives cannot convey contrastive focus.. √. X. 3. Sentential negation is disallowed.. √. X. 3.1.3 Summary In section 3.1, we have demonstrated that there are several similarities between English and Mandarin LIC. Only a locative argument can be allowed in this construction. What is more, the locative phrase must denote the place of the theme, rather than the place where the event occurs. We have also given the evidence for the subject status of Manadrin preverbal locative DP, such as subject raising, short passive, and ECM construction. Subsequently, we assume that with the locative DP landing in the grammatical subject position, the sentences of the canonical type can be regarded as the near-counterparts of English locative inversion. However, Mandarin LIC differs from English LIC in not showing any association with the discourse function of presentational focus. With the locative DP generated at the grammatical subject position and the theme at the grammatical object position, Mandarin LIC patterns like an unmarked construction in not showing discourse function.. 3.2 LIC with the Preverbal Locative PP. Admittedly, in Mandarin LIC, the sentences with a preverbal locative nominal are 40.

(47) more natural, but we can find natural examples starting with a locative PP, which are obtained from Google search. Consider the following examples.. (56) a. Zai. P.. bilishi. Belgium. LongLong. de. LongLong. DE. de. DE. xiaocunzi-li. small village-inside. zhu-zhe. yi-wei. jiao. live-DUR. one-CL. call. shaonian.5. youth. ‘In a Belgium’s small village lives a youth called LongLong.’. b. Zai. P.. yi-ge. fuwong. de. one-CL. rich man DE. zhuo-shang bai-zhe. yi-kuai.. table-top. one-CL. zhuanshi, guangcaiduomude. shanshuo-zhe.6. diamond,. glitter-DUR. shining. put-DUR. ‘On a rich man’s table was put a diamond, glittering brightly.’. 3.2.1 Properties. The locative PP in this construction shares many common properties with the locative DP, but it differs from the locative DP in not sitting in the grammatical subject position. One similarity is that the locative PP, like a locative nominal, can occur with unaccusative verbs in Mandarin LIC. As the example (56a) above 5. 6. The sentence comes from Google Search. https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%BE%8D%E9%BE%8D%E8%88%87%E5%BF%A0%E7%8B% 97 The sentence comes from Google Search. http://blog.cnyes.com/My/praetor/Article261751 41.

(48) demonstrates, the verb following the locative PP is unaccusative. Another similarity is that the locative PP patterns with locative DP in denoting the location of the theme. As shown in the example (56b), the preverbal locative PP subcategorized by the verb bai ‘put’ must denote the location of the diamond, rather the place where the event occurs. Therefore, it can be anticipated that when a locative adjunct is substituted for the locative argument, the sentence would become less acceptable. The contrast can be illustrated by the following sentences.. (57) a. Zai. P.. zhuozi-shang. ke-zhe. yi-ge. zi.. table-top. carve-DUR. one-CL. character. ‘On the table is carved a character.’. b. *Zai. P.. jiali-li. ke-zhe. yi-ge. home-inside. carve-DUR. three-CL. zi.. character. Lit. ‘There is a character carved at home.’. Still another similarity is that the construction with a preverbal locative PP is not associated with the presentational focus. The evidence comes from the fact that the sentence with a preverbal locative PP can allow sentential negation, as demonstrated in the following example.. (58) Zai. P.. wo-de duimian. my. opposite. meiyou. zuo. renhe. sit. any. not. Lit. ‘There is no one sitting opposite to me.’ 42. ren.. person.

(49) Given the similarities between the preverbal locative PP and DP, the sentences starting with a locative PP can be classified as Mandarin LIC as well.. Despite these similarities between preverbal locative DPs and PPs, we argue that the preverbal locative PP cannot land in the grammatical subject position because it does not show any of subject properties in this construction. First, a preverbal locative PP cannot undergo short passivization, which involves A movement, as exhibited below.. (59) a. Hu-li. bei. renwei. lake-inside BEI think. you-zhe. yi-zhi. swim-DUR. da. shuiguai.. one-CL big. water monster. Lit. ‘In the lake was thought to be swimming a big water sprite.’. b. *Zai. hu-li. bei. renwei. P. lake-inside. BEI. think. you-zhe. swim-DUR. yi-zhi. da. one-CL big. shuiguai.. watersprite. Lit. ‘In the lake was thought to be swimming a big water sprite.’ Second, as the example (60b) suggests, an ECM verb yao ‘want’ cannot take as the complement a locative inversion sentence starting with a locative PP.. (60) a. Laoshi. 7. yao. tai-shang. zuo. teacher want. stage-top. sit. 7. yixie ren.. some person. Notice that the subjecthood test based on raising modals (see the discussion in section 3.1.1) may not work here because the subject position may be occupied by an empty expletive in the sentence starting with a locative PP (see the upcoming discussion in section 3.2.2). Therefore, we do not use this test for discussing the subjecthood of the locative PP. (i) ?Zai tai-shang yinggai zuo san-ge ren. P. stage-top should sit three-CL person Lit. “On the stage should be sitting three people.” 43.

(50) Lit. ‘The teacher wants the stage to be seated some people.’. b. *Laoshi. yao. zai. tai-shang. zuo. yixie. ren.. teacher. want. at. stage-top. sit. some. person. Lit. “The teacher wants the stage to be seated some people.”. In summary, in Mandarin LIC, preverbal locative PPs, like preverbal locative DPs, must indicate the location where some entity exists, suggesting that the preverbal locative PP must be an argument as well. However, as given in (59) and (60), the preverbal locative PPs differ from preverbal locative DPs in not showing any subject property in Mandarin LIC.. 3.2.2 The Structure. We argue that the locative PP can choose either to stay at preverbal VP-adjoined position or to be topicalized to the CP periphery position in Mandarin LIC, as illustrated in (61).. (61) a. [TP proexp [VP Locative PP [VP V DP ]]] b. [CP Locative PPi [TP proexp [VP ti [VP V DP ]]]] In English locative inversion, the inverted locative PP, displaying both subject and non-subject properties, is argued to undergo two-step movement, from the VP-internal position to [Spec, TP], from [Spec, TP] to [Spec, CP] (Wu 2008, see the discussion in section 2.4). In contrast, in Mandarin LIC, the preverbal locative PP, as discussed in section 3.2.1, does not show any of subject properties, suggesting that the locative PP never stays at the [Spec, TP] position. In addition, according to Stowell (1981), PPs 44.

(51) only can occupy the periphery or topicalized position where Case is not assigned (see the note 3 in p.24). Consequently, if the preverbal locative PP cannot occupy the grammatical subject position in Mandarin LIC, there are two possibilities for its syntactic position, staying at the preverbal VP-adjoined position or being topicalized to the [Spec, CP] position. Under Coopmans’ (1989) null expletive analysis, the subcategorized locative PP moves to the CP periphery position and licenses the existence of an empty expletive at the subject position. Although Coopmans’ (1989) null expletive analysis is rejected for English locative inversion, it can be adopted for Mandarin LIC starting with a locative PP for two reasons. First, empirically, Mandarin locative PP does not show any subject properties. Furthermore, Mandarin Chinese is argued to be a pro-drop language (Huang 1984); thus, there is no need to stipulate the subject pro as Coopmans (1989) does. In Mandarin LIC, with an empty expletive occupying the subject position, the subcategorized locative PP is generated in the preverbal VP-adjoined position and can choose either to stay at the VP-adjoined position or to raise to the [Spec, CP] position.. 3.3 Aspect Markers The occurrences of aspect markers in Mandarin LIC have been much investigated in previous literature (Pan 1996, Du 1999, Zhang 2008). Much research claims that the aspect markers are obligatory in Mandarin LIC (Pan 1996, Lin 2001, Wu 2008). Some propose that only certain aspect markers like -zhe can occur in this construction while others suggest that all aspect markers are possible. Pan (1996) proposes that Mandarin locative inversion with transitive verbs must depend on morphological operation involving the aspect marker -zhe. Once the morphological operation is applied, the agent role of the transitive verb would be eliminated in 45.