學術產出-期刊論文

文章檢視/開啟

書目匯出

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

引文資訊

TAIR相關學術產出

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 23-十一月-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-Soonen_US
dc.creator (作者) Tsai, Hui-Chinen_US
dc.date (日期) 2018
dc.date.accessioned 23-十一月-2018 18:26:17 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 23-十一月-2018 18:26:17 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 23-十一月-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 Chineseen_US
dc.type (資料類型) article