The Structure of Chinese Compounds: The Perspective of Predicative Implicitness

Yongzhong Yang

doi:10.4312/ala.14.1.55-86

Authors

YANG Yongzhong Yunnan University of Finance and Economics, School of International Languages and Cultures, China https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0026-5167

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4312/ala.14.1.55-86

Keywords:

compound, predicate implicitness, morphological structure, syntactic structure, theta-role

Abstract

This paper examines Chinese nominal compounds with respect to their internal structure, thematic relations, generation process, and constraint mechanism from the perspective of predicate implicitness. Findings reveal that constituent functions in these compounds vary based on their structural positions, closely aligning morphological and syntactic structures. Predicate implicitness necessitates hierarchical adjunction, disallowing cross-layered adjunction. Corresponding relations exist between theta-roles, semantic relations, syntactic, and morphological structures. The study delineates differences between agentive and non-agentive compounds and explores how syntactic structure influences morphological structure. It also delves into theta-roles, argument structure, and linear order, arguing that constituent word order adheres to the Prominence and Locality Principles, dictated by their syntactic hierarchy positions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Baker, M. C. (1988). Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

Bernstein, J. B. (2001). The DP hypothesis: Identifying clausal properties in the nominal domain. In M. Baltin and C. Collins (Eds.), The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., (pp. 536-561). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756416.ch17

Bresnan, J. (2001). Lexical-Functional Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.

Chao, Y. (1968). A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Cheng, G. (1999). Linguistic Universalism. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

Cheng, G. (2005). “Zhe” synthetic compounds in Chinese and their implications for UG. Modern Foreign Languages 3, 232-238.

Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Dai, M. (2003). Generalized Leftward Merger Theory in the Minimalist Framework. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

Fu, A. (2004). A quantitative survey of noun phrase constructions in Chinese. Studies of the Chinese Language 6, 508-520.

Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press.

Gruber, J. S. (2001). Thematic relations in syntax. In M. Baltin & C. Collins (Eds.), The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., (pp. 257-298). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756416.ch9

Gu, Y., & Shen, Y. (2001). The derivation of synthetic compounds in Chinese. Studies of the Chinese Language 2, 122-133.

He, Y., & Wang, L. (2005). Real and pseudo synthetic compounds in Chinese. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies 5, 11-21.

He, Y. (2004). The loop theory in Chinese morphology. Contemporary Linguistics 3, 223-235.

Hu, J. (2002). Prominence and Locality in Grammar: The Syntax and Semantics of Wh-questions and Reflexives. PhD. dissertation, the City University of Hong Kong.

Hu, J. ( 2010). The distribution and selection of arguments: Prominence and Locality in grammar. Studies in the Chinese Language 1, 3-20.

Huang, B., & Liao, X. (2007). Modern Chinese. Beijing: Higher Education Press.

Huang, C.-T. J. (2005). Syntactic analyticity and the other end of the parameter. Lecture notes, LSA 2005 Summer Institute, MIT and Harvard University.

Jackendoff, R. S. (1972). Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Jackendoff, R. S. (1990). Semantic Structures. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Kayne, R. (1994). The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Kuroda, S. Y. (1988). Whether we agree or not: A comparative syntax of English and Japanese. Lingvisticae Investigatione, 12(1) , 1-47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/li.12.1.02kur

Larson, R. K. (1988). On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19, 335-391.

Larson, R. K. (1990). Double object revisited: A reply to Jackendoff. Linguistic Inquiry 21, 589-632.

Lin, T. (2001). Light verb syntax and the theory of phrase structure. Ph.D. diss., University of California, Irvine.

Liu, D. (2008). Typological features of nominal phrases in Chinese. Studies of the Chinese Language 1, 3-20.

Lu, Z. (1964). The Morphology of Chinese. Beijing: Science Press.

Németh T., E., & Bibok, K. (2010). Interaction between grammar and pragmatics: The case of implicit arguments, implicit predicates and co-composition in Hungarian. Journal of Pragmatics 42, 501-524. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.07.001

Ren, X. (1981). The Morphology of Chinese. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press.

Reeve, M. & Hicks, G. (2017). Adjunct extraposition: Base generation or movement? Syntax 20(3) , 215-248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12136

Selkirk, E. (1984). Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Shi, D. (2003). Chinese attributive V-N compounds. Studies of the Chinese Language 6, 483-495.

Sportiche, D. (1988). A theory of floating quantifiers and its corollaries for constituent structure. Linguistic Inquiry 19, 425-449.

Tai, J. H. (2002). Conceptual structures and non-autonomous syntax: Some conceptualization principles in Chinese grammar. Contemporary Linguistics 1, 1-12.

Tang, S. (2008). On the argument structure of Chinese compounds. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies 4, 10-17.

Tang, S. (2014). Asymmetry in Chinese compound formation. Chinese Linguistics 1, 69-77.

Yang, Y. (2006). Generation of OV inversion. Linguistic Sciences 3, 39-48.

Yang, Y. (2007a). The syntactic status of NP in Vi+NP. Studies in Language and Linguistics 2, 59-64.

Yang, Y. (2007b). The pragmatic motivation of Vi+NP as anomalous syntax. Chinese Linguistics 1, 58-63.

Yang, Y. (2009). A parametric approach to the typology of non-patient objects. Modern Foreign Languages 1, 33-41.

Yang, Y. (2010). A reanalysis of de and de construction. Journal of Foreign Languages 5, 34-44.

Yang, Y. (2011). Non-prototypical patient object sentences in Chinese. Philippine Journal of Linguistics 42, 105-127.

Yang, Y. (2012). Derivation of serial verb constructions. Language Research 3, 665-690.

Yang, Y. (2013). Modal particles and their projections: A minimalist approach. Language Research 1, 95-136.

Yang, Y. (2014a). The syntactic status of de and the internal structure of de constructions in Chinese. Language Research 1, 121-157.

Yang, Y. (2014b). A parametric approach to the typology of serial verb constructions. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies 3, 1-8.

Yang, Y. (2015). VO inversion and the direction of transference of object in compounds. Journal of Zhejiang International Studies University 5, 54-60.

Yang, Y. (2016a). The argument structure of the serial verb construction and its derivation. Journal of Zhejiang International Studies University 3, 1-8.

Yang, Y. (2016b). Derivation of sentences with object-oriented adverbials. Journal of Guangdong Foreign Studies University 5, 45-53.

Yuan, Y. (1995). Predicate implicitness and its syntactic consequences. Studies of the Chinese Language 4, 241-255.

Zhou, R. (2006). A study on Chinese /OVN compounds under typological evidence: University vs. individuality. Studies of the Chinese Language 4, 301-312.

Zhu, D. (1982). Lectures of Grammar. Beijing: The Commercial Press.

Zhuang, H., & Liu, Z. (2011). Morphology of Chinese synthetic compounds and their prosodic constraint. Chinese Teaching in the World 4, 497-506.