1887
Volume 22, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1606-822X
  • E-ISSN: 2309-5067
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study of Chinese adverbial investigates why cross-linguistically adverbial intensifiers often develop two different uses, namely the exclusive use and the inclusive use. Arguing against the polysemous account proposed in previous works like Siemund (2000), and assuming the mechanism suggested in Liao (2018) for exclusive , the paper presents a new analysis revised from Gast’s (2006) account for intensifiers. In the analysis, there is only one for all its adverbial uses. By adjoining to different X’ positions in the structure, adverbial may get different surface meanings. Despite the surface differences, adverbial always has the following semantics: it works as an identity function, evokes alternatives for consideration, and receives an exclusive meaning after the application of the covert exhaustivity operator O. Based on the evidence presented, the analysis crucially assumes that adverbial may adjoin to Topic’, and this adjunction leads to the effect that the subsequent exhaustification is done over a set of alternative propositions that vary in topics. In such a case, alternative individuals evoked by do not have to be excluded from having the property described by the VP in question. This makes the assertion of a -sentence in inclusive context possible, and accounts for why intensifier has a disguised inclusive function. By proposing such a unified account of , the paper explains why cross-linguistically intensifiers often develop the various uses observed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00090.lia
2021-09-29
2021-12-05
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amsili, Pascal & Beyssade, Claire
    2010 Obligatory presuppositions in discourse. InKühnlein, Peter & Benz, Anton & Sidner, Candace L. (eds.), Constraints in discourse 2 (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 194), 105–124. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.194.06ams
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.194.06ams [Google Scholar]
  2. Amsili, Pascal & Ellsiepen, Emilia & Winterstein, Grégoire A.
    2016 Optionality in the use of too: The role of reduction and similarity. Revista da Abralin15(1). 229–252. 10.5380/rabl.v15i1.46144
    https://doi.org/10.5380/rabl.v15i1.46144 [Google Scholar]
  3. Aoun, Joseph & Li, Yen-hui Audrey
    1989 Scope and constituency. Linguistic Inquiry20(2). 141–172.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 1993Syntax of scope. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Aravind, Athulya & Hackl, Martin
    2017 Against a unified treatment of obligatory presupposition trigger effects. InBurgdorf, Dan & Collard, Jacob & Maspong, Sireemas & Stefánsdóttir, Brynhildur (eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference (SALT), 173–190. College Park: University of Maryland. 10.3765/salt.v27i0.4141
    https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v27i0.4141 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bade, Nadine
    2016Obligatory presupposition triggers in discourse – Empirical investigations of the theories Maximize Presupposition and Obligatory Implicatures. Tübingen: Universität Tübingen. (Doctoral dissertation.)
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bybee, Joan L. & Perkins, Revere & Pagliuca, William
    1994The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Chierchia, Gennaro
    2004 Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatics interface. InBelletti, Adriana (ed.), Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures, vol.3, 39–103. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2006 Broaden your views: Implicatures of domain widening and the “logicality” of language. Linguistic Inquiry37(4). 535–590. 10.1162/ling.2006.37.4.535
    https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2006.37.4.535 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2013Logic in grammar: Polarity, free choice, and intervention (Oxford Studies in Semantics and Pragmatics 2). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199697977.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199697977.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chierchia, Gennaro & Fox, Danny & Spector, Benjamin
    2012 Scalar implicature as a grammatical phenomenon. InMaienborn, Claudia & von Heusinger, Klaus & Portner, Paul (eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, vol.3, 2297–2331. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Cinque, Guglielmo
    1999Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Comrie, Bernard
    1976Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Constantinou, Harris
    2014Intensifiers: Meaning and distribution. London: University College London. (Doctoral dissertation.)
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Davies, Mark
    2010 (ongoing). The corpus of historical American English (COHA): 400 million words, 1810–2009. (https://www.english-corpora.org/coha/) (Accessed2020-12-03.)
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Ebert, Cornelia
    2009Quantificational topics: A scopal treatment of exceptional wide scope phenomena (Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 86). Berlin: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Ebert, Cornelia & Hinterwimmer, Stefan
    2010 The interpretation of topical indefinites as direct and indirect aboutness topics. InFéry, Caroline & Zimmermann, Malte (eds.), Information structure: Theoretical, typological, and experimental perspectives, 89–114. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Eckardt, Regine
    2001 Reanalysing selbst. Natural Language Semantics9(4). 371–412. 10.1023/A:1014875209883
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014875209883 [Google Scholar]
  19. Ernst, Thomas
    2001The syntax of adjuncts (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486258
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486258 [Google Scholar]
  20. Frey, Werner
    2003 Syntactic conditions on adjunct classes. InLang, Ewald & Maienborn, Claudia & Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine (eds.), Modifying adjuncts, 163–210. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110894646.163
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110894646.163 [Google Scholar]
  21. Gast, Volker
    2006The grammar of identity: Intensifiers and reflexives in Germanic languages. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Green, Georgia M.
    1968 On too and either, and not just too and either, either. InDarden, Bill J. & Bailey, Charles-James N. & Davison, Alice (eds.), CLS 4: Papers from the Fourth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 22–39. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Gundel, Jeanette K.
    1988 Universals of topic-comment structure. InHammond, Michael & Moravcsik, Edith A. & Wirth, Jessica R. (eds.), Studies in syntactic typology (Typological Studies in Language 17), 209–239. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.17.16gun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.17.16gun [Google Scholar]
  24. Haider, Hubert
    2004 Pre- and postverbal adverbials in OV and VO. Lingua114(6). 779–807. 10.1016/S0024‑3841(03)00051‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(03)00051-2 [Google Scholar]
  25. Heim, Irene
    1991 Artikel und definitheit [Articles and definiteness]. Invon Stechow, Arnim & Wunderlich, Dieter (eds.), Semantik: Ein internationales handbuch der zeitgenössischen forschung [Semantics: An international handbook of contemporary research], 487–535. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110126969.7.487
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110126969.7.487 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hockett, Charles Francis
    1958A course in modern linguistics. New York: MacMillan. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1958.tb00870.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1958.tb00870.x [Google Scholar]
  27. Hole, Daniel
    2002 Agentive selbst in German. InKatz, Graham & Reinhard, Sabine & Reuter, Philip (eds.), Sinn und Bedeutung VI: Proceedings of the 6th Annual Meeting of the Gesellschaft für Semantik, 133–150. Osnabrück: Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 2008 Focus on identity – the dark side of zìjĭ. The Linguistic Review25(3–4). 267–295. 10.1515/TLIR.2008.008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TLIR.2008.008 [Google Scholar]
  29. Huang, C.-T. James
    1982Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Cambridge: MIT. (Doctoral dissertation.)
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Huang, Shuan-Fan
    1981 On the scope phenomena of Chinese quantifiers. Journal of Chinese Linguistics9(2). 226–243.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Jacobs, Joachim
    1984 Funktionale Satzperspektive und Illokutionssemantik [Functional sentence perspective and illocution semantics]. Linguistische Berichte [Linguistics Reports] 91. 25–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kaplan, Jeff
    1984 Obligatory too in English. Language60(3). 510–518. 10.2307/413989
    https://doi.org/10.2307/413989 [Google Scholar]
  33. König, Ekkehard
    1991The meaning of focus particles: A comparative perspective. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 2001 Intensifiers and reflexive pronouns. InHaspelmath, Martin & König, Ekkehard & Oesterreicher, Wulf & Raible, Wolfgang (eds.), Language typology and language universals: An international handbook, vol.1, 747–759. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. König, Ekkehard & Siemund, Peter
    1996 Emphatische Reflexiva und Fokusstruktur: Zur Syntax und Bedeutung von selbst [Emphatic reflexives and focus structure: On the syntax and meaning of self]. InRosengren, Inger (ed.), Sprache und Pragmatik [Language and Pragmatics] 40, 1–42. Lund: Lunds Universitet.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 2000a Intensifiers and reflexives: A typological perspective. InFrajzyngier, Zygmunt & Walker, Traci (eds.), Reflexives: Forms and functions (Typological Studies in Language 40), vol.1, 41–74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.40.03kon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.40.03kon [Google Scholar]
  37. 2000b Locally free self-forms, logophoricity, and intensification in English. English Language and Linguistics4(2). 183–204. 10.1017/S1360674300000228
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674300000228 [Google Scholar]
  38. Krifka, Manfred
    1999 Additive particles under stress. InStrolovitch, Devon & Lawson, Aaron (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference (SALT), 111–128. Ithaca: CLC Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Kuno, Susumu
    1972 Functional sentence perspective: A case study from Japanese and English. Linguistic Inquiry3(3). 269–320.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Lakoff, George & Johnson, Mark
    1980Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Lee, Thomas Hun-Tak
    1986Studies on quantification in Chinese. Los Angeles: UCLA. (Doctoral dissertation.)
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Liao, Fang-Chun
    2017The semantics of adverbial ziji in Mandarin. Hsinchu: National Chiao Tung University. (Master’s thesis.)
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Liao, Hsiu-Chen Daphne
    2018 Domains and CauseP in a unified semantics of Chinese adverb ziji ‘self’. Acta Linguistica Academica65(4). 597–650. 10.1556/2062.2018.65.4.3
    https://doi.org/10.1556/2062.2018.65.4.3 [Google Scholar]
  44. Liu, Feng-Hsi
    1997Scope and specificity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.16
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.16 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lyons, John
    1977Semantics, vol.2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Nilsen, Øystein
    2004 Domains for adverbs. Lingua114(6). 809–847. 10.1016/S0024‑3841(03)00052‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(03)00052-4 [Google Scholar]
  47. Percus, Orin
    2006 Antipresuppositions. InUeyama, Ayumi (ed.), Theoretical and empirical studies of reference and anaphora: Toward the establishment of generative grammar as an empirical science, 52–73. Tokyo: Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Plank, Frans
    1979 Zur Affinität von selbst und auch [On the affinity of selbst and auch]. InWeydt, Harald (ed.), Die Partikeln der Deutschen Sprache [The particles of the German language], 269–284. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110863574.269
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110863574.269 [Google Scholar]
  49. Portner, Paul & Yabushita, Katsuhiko
    1998 The semantics and pragmatics of topic phrases. Linguistics and Philosophy21(2). 117–157. 10.1023/A:1005311504497
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005311504497 [Google Scholar]
  50. Reinhart, Tanya
    1981 Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica27. 53–94.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Rizzi, Luigi
    1997 The fine structure of the left periphery. InHaegeman, Liliane (ed.), Elements in grammar: Handbook in generative syntax (Kluwer International Handbooks of Linguistics 1), 281–337. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑5420‑8_7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7 [Google Scholar]
  52. Rooth, Mats Edward
    1985Association with focus (montague grammar, semantics, only, even). Amherst: University of Massachusetts at Amherst. (Doctoral dissertation.)
  53. 1992 A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics1(1). 75–116. 10.1007/BF02342617
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02342617 [Google Scholar]
  54. Sæbø, Kjell Johan
    2004 Conversational contrast and conventional parallel: Topic implicatures and additive presuppositions. Journal of Semantics21(2). 199–217. 10.1093/jos/21.2.199
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/21.2.199 [Google Scholar]
  55. Searle, John R.
    1969Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139173438
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438 [Google Scholar]
  56. Siemund, Peter
    2000Intensifiers in English and German: A comparison. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203279540
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203279540 [Google Scholar]
  57. Soh, Hooi Ling & Kuo, Jenny Yi-Chun
    2005 Perfective aspect and accomplishment situations in Mandarin Chinese. InVerkuyl, Henk J. & de Swart, Henriëtte & van Hout, Angeliek (eds.), Perspectives on aspect (Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics 32), 199–216. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/1‑4020‑3232‑3_11
    https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3232-3_11 [Google Scholar]
  58. Storoshenko, Dennis Ryan
    2011 Distribution and analysis of adverbial emphatic reflexives in English. InArmstrong, Lisa (ed.), Actes du congrès annuel de l’Association canadienne de linguistique 2011 [Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association]. Fredericton: University of New Brunswick. (homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~cla-acl/actes2011/Storoshenko_2011.pdf) (Accessed2021-02-19.)
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Strawson, P. F.
    1964 Identifying reference and truth-values. Theoria30(2). 96–118. (Reprinted inStrawson, P. F. 1971 Identifying reference and truth-values. InSteinberg, Danny D. & Jakobovits, Leon A. (eds.), Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology, 86–99. New York: Cambridge University Press.)
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan
    2015 A tale of two peripheries: Evidence from Chinese adverbials, light verbs, applicatives and object fronting. InTsai, Wei-Tien Dylan (ed.), The cartography of Chinese syntax (The Cartography of Syntactic Structures 11), 1–32. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 2019 Causality, comitativity, contrastivity, and selfhood: A view from the left periphery and the vP periphery. InHu, Jianhua & Pan, Haihua (eds.), Interfaces in grammar (Language Faculty and Beyond 15), 101–132. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lfab.15.05tsa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.15.05tsa [Google Scholar]
  62. Waltereit, Richard
    2016 J’ai lu ce livre moi-même: On the synchrony and diachrony of French intensifiers. Philologie im Netz75. 49–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Williams, Adina
    2016 The syntax of the Mandarin Chinese adpositional imperfective. InBellamy, Kate & Karvovskaya, Elena & Saad, George (eds.), ConSOLE XXIV: Proceedings of the 24th Conference of the Student Organization of Linguistics in Europe, 213–236. Leiden: Leiden University Centre for Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Winterstein, Grégoire
    2011 The meaning of the additive too: Presupposition and discourse similarity. InBezhanishvili, Nick & Löbner, Sebastian & Schwabe, Kerstin & Spada, Luca (eds.), Logic, language, and computation: 8th International Tbilisi Symposium on Logic, Language, and Computation, TbiLLC 2009, 322–341. Heidelberg: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑642‑22303‑7_21
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22303-7_21 [Google Scholar]
  65. Winterstein, Grégoire & Zeevat, Henk
    2012 Empirical constraints on accounts of too. Lingua122(15). 1787–1800. 10.1016/j.lingua.2012.08.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  66. Zimmermann, Malte & Onea, Edgar
    2011 Focus marking and focus interpretation. Lingua121(11). 1651–1670. 10.1016/j.lingua.2011.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.06.002 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00090.lia
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): additive particle; exclusive intensifier; inclusive intensifier; intensifier; topic
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error