Language and Linguistics - Volume 25, Issue 1, 2024

One major difference between Chinese-type and German-type languages is that the former allows extensive types of argument drop, while the latter is quite limited beyond the existence of a null topic. This study argues (a) that it is necessary to distinguish among phenomena that have sometimes been referred to with the undifferentiating term “radical pro drop”; (b) that the null topic is restricted to root clauses (CP edge) based on its locality properties; (c) that the Chinese-type null topic requires licensing at the CP edge by Internal Merge; and (d) that the CP edge requirement may be lifted only under conditions of last resort. Evidence comes from our new observation of locality effects showing a contrast between overt and null topics. Specifically, while the pro option is available with an overt topic, null topics must be brought to the CP edge via Internal Merge.

This paper examines right-node-raising (RNR) with idiom chunks. RNR sentences allow idiomatic interpretation when they contain the whole idiom chunk within the pivot (i.e., the shared element) (e.g., Jessica believed, but Zac doubted, that Justin popped the question.), but those containing only a part of the idiom within the pivot do not (e.g., #John kicked, and Mary filled, the bucket.). Given this, Woo (2015) argues for a multidominance approach (cf. Wilder 1999) to RNR in that the multiply dominated pivot must not be partially shared for idiomatic interpretation. However, we report that even if the pivot contains the whole idiom part, the issue of missing idiomatic interpretation in RNR still lingers (e.g., #We played a party game, and they used an ice hammer, to break the ice.). In order to deal with this problem, multidominance, movement, or PF deletion analyses must resort to an extra interpretive parallelism according to which a pivot cannot be used in two different senses simultaneously. From this perspective, we argue that an LF copying approach can explain the idiomaticity in RNR without extra proviso since under this analysis, it is not necessary to postulate a separate LF constraint of interpretive symmetry. We extend our analysis to Korean (and Japanese) data pertaining to RNR with idiomatic or polysemous expressions. We thus conclude that lexical mismatches and interpretive mismatches in English and Korean RNR are solid evidence of interpretive identity in RNR.

In an eye-tracking study, we used Chinese double-subject construction [NPa NPb PREDICATE] (e.g., [nage jiezhi]NPa [sheji]NPb [hen tebie]PREDICATE ‘that ring design very special’) in a concessive construction like suiran…dan… ‘although…but…’ to investigate how the syntactic position of the topic NP (i.e., that ring) affects the comprehension of topic transition in the subsequent clause. We contrasted topics located at a higher pre-connective topic position (e.g., that ring although) and those located at a post-connective subject position (e.g., although that ring). Topic transition was manipulated as either using a subtopic (e.g., workmanship of that ring) or a new topic (e.g., the wedding dress) in the second clause of concession. We found a main effect of topic transition in a batch of eye-movement measures showing that subtopic transition was preferred over new-topic transition. More importantly, we found interactions on total reading time and total fixations at the topic-suiran region and on total fixations at the post-critical region, with post hoc tests revealing a larger cost of topic transition in the high-topic condition than in the low-topic condition. The results suggest that when a topic NP is located at a higher topic position (i.e., above the connective), it binds the topics of both clauses and induces greater cost when the topics do not form a consistent chain. When the topic NP is located at a local (i.e., post-connective) position, the processing of topic shift or resolution of topic conflict in the second clause is less costly because the second topic is not syntactically bound by the higher topic. Together, the results support a prominent status of the before-connective position in Chinese discourse. Furthermore, they indicate that syntactically induced topicality constrains the processing of topic transition in the subsequent discourse.

From the perspective of Baxter’s (1992) Old Chinese (OC, which is generally followed by Schuessler 2009), the fate of a putative Sino-Tibetan (ST) *w in Tibetan and Old Chinese is quite straight-forward: In Tibetan *w was deleted everywhere in all environments; in word-initial position loss of *w‑ resulted in (smooth) vocalic onset, it is argued here that this feature is represented by the letter ’a-chung, e.g. ’oŋ ‘come’ from *waŋ; some such words have developed a new, or alternative, y-initial (e.g. yoŋ beside ’oŋ). Vocalic onset (with ’a-chung) is also the outcome of loss of other initial consonants (e.g. suffix ’u from bu). In Old Chinese *w survived only as part of labiovelars, in absolute word initial position (later Middle Chinese initial jwi̯-), and in configurations *hw‑ (voiceless *w), *ʔw‑ and *sw‑ (s-prefix). Drawn into the discussions are side-issues, like the elimination of *ɦ‑ from the Old Chinese phonemic inventory; OC final *-r metathesis, monophthongization in closed syllables, ST labiovelars, as well as a number of new etymologies. This paper confirms by and large the conclusions of Handel (2009) and Jacques (2013), but with some adjustments and elaborations.

This study examines the different variants of causative alternation in Zuo Tradition (左傳), an archaic Chinese narrative history from the Pre-Qin period. It is found that denominal verbs, unergative verbs, and “pure” unaccusative verbs participate actively in the alternation, and that the causative variant bears a complex relation with the agentive and putative variants; this causes problems for previous analyses. This paper proposes a two-step build-up of eventuality for causative alternation in archaic Chinese. Specifically, I propose that verbs in archaic Chinese are monadic and select only one argument. The merger of the verb with this argument is the realization of its eventuality conceptualized in the Lexicon; any further merger is determined by the eventuality composed by different light verbs in syntax. The uninitiated light verb is a placeholder with an empty argument. A specific light verb value is determined by the eventuality that is sent to the syntactic structure. Thus, the difference between all variants in causative alternation witnessed in Zuo Tradition lies in the different eventualities which they introduce into the syntactic configuration.

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.