學術產出-Periodical Articles
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 Left is right, right is not: On the constituency of the classifier phrase in Chinese 作者 何萬順
Her, One-Soon
Tsai, Hui-Chin貢獻者 語言所 日期 2018 上傳時間 23-Nov-2018 18:26:17 (UTC+8) 摘要 This paper argues for the left-branching constituency of the Chinese classifier phrase and demonstrates that the right-branching approach assumed by the majority of current syntactic works is not viable. The rejection of the right-branching approach entails the rejection of the ‘split’ approach, where both left- and right-branching structures are required. In this debate, we offer a vital fresh perspective from the syntax and mathematics of complex numerals. We examine the right-branching argumentation in A. Li (2014), which, crucially, extends Ionin & Matushansky’s (2006) non-constituent account of complex numerals, e.g., two hundred, in non-classifier languages like English to Chinese and must rely on ellipsis and a silent element YIDIAR ‘a bit’. Yet, complex numerals in Chinese, e.g., liang bai ‘200’, are in fact constituents (He 2015), and the alleged YIDIAR ‘a bit’ does affect the semantics of the noun phrase and is thus by definition illicit (Her & Tsai 2014; 2015). Other evidence comes from Chinese synchronic and diachronic syntax as well as the typology of classifier word orders. While the overall argumentation centers on Chinese, it has significant cross-linguistic implications. 關聯 Language and Linguistics 資料類型 article dc.contributor 語言所 dc.creator (作者) 何萬順 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Her, One-Soon en_US dc.creator (作者) Tsai, Hui-Chin en_US dc.date (日期) 2018 dc.date.accessioned 23-Nov-2018 18:26:17 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 23-Nov-2018 18:26:17 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 23-Nov-2018 18:26:17 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/121062 - dc.description.abstract (摘要) This paper argues for the left-branching constituency of the Chinese classifier phrase and demonstrates that the right-branching approach assumed by the majority of current syntactic works is not viable. The rejection of the right-branching approach entails the rejection of the ‘split’ approach, where both left- and right-branching structures are required. In this debate, we offer a vital fresh perspective from the syntax and mathematics of complex numerals. We examine the right-branching argumentation in A. Li (2014), which, crucially, extends Ionin & Matushansky’s (2006) non-constituent account of complex numerals, e.g., two hundred, in non-classifier languages like English to Chinese and must rely on ellipsis and a silent element YIDIAR ‘a bit’. Yet, complex numerals in Chinese, e.g., liang bai ‘200’, are in fact constituents (He 2015), and the alleged YIDIAR ‘a bit’ does affect the semantics of the noun phrase and is thus by definition illicit (Her & Tsai 2014; 2015). Other evidence comes from Chinese synchronic and diachronic syntax as well as the typology of classifier word orders. While the overall argumentation centers on Chinese, it has significant cross-linguistic implications. en_US dc.format.extent 148 bytes - dc.format.mimetype text/html - dc.relation (關聯) Language and Linguistics dc.title (題名) Left is right, right is not: On the constituency of the classifier phrase in Chinese en_US dc.type (資料類型) article
