1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Language and Linguistics
  4. Volume 25, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 25, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1606-822X
  • E-ISSN: 2309-5067
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

The sentence-final adjunct WHAT has been given much attention for the past few years, mostly on its why-like interpretation and negative force. In this study, evidence will be provided to show that what otherwise seems to be exceptional cases, in effect, constitutes an independent construction, the refutatory WHAT construction. Although such a construction yields a strong negative force, it has the force dwell upon the interlocutor’s attitude or commitment. It is used to refute his/her previous claim in a conversation and can tolerate any utterance form. This is in sharp contrast to the why-like WHAT which is typically used to forbid actions and is restricted to action verbs. As will be revealed later, in syntax, the refutatory WHAT has to employ a component above CP, which not only helps explain the speaker’s refutatory force, but also directs our attention to a new ascending perspective zoned for both the speaker and the hearer/addressee.

© 2024 ILAS
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00152.yan
2024-01-02
2024-10-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/lali.00152.yan
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lali.00152.yan.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00152.yan&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Beck, Sigrid
    1996 Wh-constructions and transparent logical form. Tübingen: University of Tübingen. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  2. 2006 Intervention effects follow from focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics14(1). 1–56. 10.1007/s11050‑005‑4532‑y
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-005-4532-y [Google Scholar]
  3. Beck, Sigrid & Kim, Shin-Sook
    1997 On wh- and operator scope in Korean. Journal of East Asian Linguistics6(4). 339–384. 10.1023/A:1008280026102
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008280026102 [Google Scholar]
  4. Chao, Yuen-Ren
    1968 A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Cheung, Lawrence Yam-Leung
    2008 The negative wh-construction. Los Angeles: UCLA. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  6. 2009 Dislocation focus construction in Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics18(3). 197–232. 10.1007/s10831‑009‑9046‑z
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-009-9046-z [Google Scholar]
  7. Chung, Jui-Yi Zoey & Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan
    2020 On the syntactic cartography and pragmatic effects of non-canonical wh-questions: A comparative study of what in Hakka. Zhongguo Yuwen 2020(2). 201–220.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Emonds, Joseph E.
    1970 Root and structure-preserving transformations. Cambridge: MIT. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  9. 1976 A transformational approach to English syntax: Root, structure-preserving, and local transformations. New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Endo, Yoshio
    2015 Two ReasonPs: What are*(n’t) you coming to the United States for?InShlonsky, Ur (ed.), Beyond functional sequences (Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax, The cartography of syntactic structures 10), 220–231. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210588.003.0012
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210588.003.0012 [Google Scholar]
  11. Haegeman, Liliane
    2006a Argument fronting in English, Romance CLLD, and the left periphery. InZanuttini, Raffaella & den Dikken, Marcel & Campos, Hector & Herburger, Elena & Portner, Paul H. & Phillips, Colin & Haegeman, Liliane & Beninca, Paola & McCloskey, James & Travis, Lisa deMena (eds.), Crosslinguistic research in syntax and semantics: Negation, tense, and clausal architecture, 27–52. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. 2006b Conditionals, factives and the left periphery. Lingua116(10). 1651–1669. 10.1016/j.lingua.2005.03.014
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2005.03.014 [Google Scholar]
  13. 2014 West flemish verb-based discourse markers and the articulation of the speech act layer. Studia Linguistica68(1). 116–139. 10.1111/stul.12023
     https://doi.org/10.1111/stul.12023 [Google Scholar]
  14. Haegeman, Liliane & Hill, Virginia
    2013 The syntacticization of discourse. InFolli, Raffaella & Sevdali, Christina & Truswell, Robert (eds.), Syntax and its limits, 370–390. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199683239.003.0018
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199683239.003.0018 [Google Scholar]
  15. Han, Chung-Hye
    1998 Deriving the interpretation of rhetorical questions. InCurtis, Emily & Lyle, James & Webster, Gabriel (eds.), The proceedings of the 16th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL-16), 237–253. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. 2002 Interpreting interrogatives as rhetorical questions. Lingua112(3). 201–229. 10.1016/S0024‑3841(01)00044‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(01)00044-4 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hill, Virginia
    2007a Romanian adverbs and the pragmatic field. The Linguistic Review24(1). 61–86. 10.1515/TLR.2007.003
     https://doi.org/10.1515/TLR.2007.003 [Google Scholar]
  18. 2007b Vocatives and the pragmatics-syntax interface. Lingua117(12). 2077–2105. 10.1016/j.lingua.2007.01.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.01.002 [Google Scholar]
  19. Jheng, Wei-Cherng Sam
    2017 The syntax-discourse interface in Mandarin. Hsinchu: National Tsing Hua University. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Merchant, Jason
    2001 The syntax of silence: Sluicing, islands, and the theory of ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199243730.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199243730.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  21. Obenauer, Hans-Georg
    2006 Special interrogatives: Left periphery, wh-doubling, and (apparently) optional elements. InDoetjes, Jenny & Gonzalez, Paz (eds.), Romance language and linguistic theory 2004 (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 278), 247–273. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.278.12obe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.278.12obe [Google Scholar]
  22. Ochi, Masao
    2004 How come and other adjunct wh-phrases: A cross-linguistic perspective. Language and Linguistics5(1). 29–57.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Pan, Victor Junnan
    2014 Deriving special questions in Mandarin Chinese: A comparative study. InPark, Jong-Un & Lee, Il-Jae (eds.), Comparative syntax: Proceedings of the 16th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar, 349–368. Seoul: The Korean Generative Grammar Circle.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. 2019 Architecture of the periphery in Chinese: Cartography and minimalism. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315158228
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315158228 [Google Scholar]
  25. Paul, Waltraud
    2005 Low IP area and left periphery in Mandarin Chinese. Linguistiques de Vincennes331. 111–134. 10.4000/rlv.1303
     https://doi.org/10.4000/rlv.1303 [Google Scholar]
  26. Pesetsky, David
    2000 Phrasal movement and its kin. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/5365.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5365.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  27. Rizzi, Luigi
    1997 The fine structure of the left periphery. InHaegeman, Liliane (ed.), Elements of grammar: Handbook in generative syntax, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑5420‑8_7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2004 Locality and left periphery. InBelletti, Adriana (ed.), Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures, volume 3, 223–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780195171976.003.0008
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195171976.003.0008 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2006 On the form of chains: Criterial positions and ECP effects. InCheng, Lisa Lai-Shen & Corver, Norbert (eds.), Wh-movement: Moving on, 97–133. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. 2010 On some properties of criterial freezing. InPanagiotidis, E. Phoevos (ed.), The complementizer phase: Subjects and operators, 17–32. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199584352.003.0002
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199584352.003.0002 [Google Scholar]
  31. Shao, Jingmin & Zhao, Xiufeng
    1989 “Shenme” fei yiwen yongfa yanjiu. Yuyan Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu 1989(1). 26–40.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Shao, Jingmin
    1996 Xiandai Hanyu yiwenju yanjiu. Shanghai: East China Normal University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Speas, Margaret
    2004 Evidentiality, logophoricity and the syntactic representation of pragmatic features. Lingua114 (3). 255–276. 10.1016/S0024‑3841(03)00030‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(03)00030-5 [Google Scholar]
  34. Speas, Margaret (Peggy) & Tenny, Carol L.
    2003 Configurational properties of point of view roles. InDi Sciullo, Anna Maria (ed.), Asymmetry in grammar: Volume 1: Syntax and semantics, 315–344. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.57.15spe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.57.15spe [Google Scholar]
  35. Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan
    2011 On atypical wh-expressions in Chinese. InEditorial Committee of Essays on linguistics (ed.), Essays on linguistics, vol.431, 194–208. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Wang, Changsong
    2017 A study on noncanonical wh-particles from the prosody-syntax interface: A case study of “shenme” in “V ‘shenme’(V)/(NP)” construction. Yunlü Yufa Yanjiu2(1). 73–100.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Wang, Changsong & Chin, Wei
    2019 When focus stress meets nucleus stress: A case study of the negative deontic “V shenme NP” construction. Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies49(4). 721–763.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Wible, David & Chen, Eva
    2000 Linguistic limits on metalinguistic negation. Language and Linguistics1(2). 233–255.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Wiltschko, Martina & Heim, Johannes
    2016 The syntax of confirmationals: A neo-performative analysis. InKaltenböck, Gunther, & Keizer, Evelien & Lohmann, Arne (eds.), Outside the clause: Form and function of extra-clausal constituents, 305–340. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.178.11wil
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.178.11wil [Google Scholar]
  40. Xu, Liejiong
    2004 Manifestation of informational focus. Lingua114(3). 277–299. 10.1016/S0024‑3841(03)00031‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(03)00031-7 [Google Scholar]
  41. Yang, Barry C.-Y.
    2012 Intervention effects and wh-construals. Journal of East Asian Linguistics21(1). 43–87. 10.1007/s10831‑011‑9080‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-011-9080-5 [Google Scholar]
  42. 2014 Deriving the illocutionary force. (Paper presented atGLOW in Asia X, Hsinchu, 24–26 May 2014.)
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 2015 What for and adjunct what. (Paper presented atThe 10th International Workshop on Theoretical East Asian Linguistics (TEAL-10), Tokyo, 13–14 June 2015.)
     [Google Scholar]
  44. 2021 Two types of peripheral adjunct WHATs. Concentric47(1). 61–92. 10.1075/consl.00023.yan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/consl.00023.yan [Google Scholar]
  45. Yang, Yang & Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan
    2019 An experimental study of the prosodic syntax of force shift. Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue 2019(1). 36–46.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00152.yan
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): left periphery; refutatory WHAT; sentence-final adjunct WHAT; speaker projection; syntax-pragmatics/discourse interface

Most Cited

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