Does Chinese Need Two Structures for Classifiers? A Case Study

IF 0.2 3区 文学 0 ASIAN STUDIES
Dandan Tan
{"title":"Does Chinese Need Two Structures for Classifiers? A Case Study","authors":"Dandan Tan","doi":"10.1353/jcl.2017.a913624","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The syntactic structure of the classifiers in Chinese has been assumed or argued to be left-branching, right-branching or mixed. This article examines three facts-number-classfier-de, the use of duo ‘extra, more’ and the conditional deletion of number––which are regarded by Xuping Li (2013) as evidence for the mixed structures. It is shown that the purported facts are partial and, when more related facts are taken into consideration, they together are equally compatible with an exclusively left-branching structure and thus cannot serve as support for a mixed structure analysis. Three kinds of arguments are reviewed in the last section which fare favorably with the left-branching structure.</p>","PeriodicalId":44675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Chinese Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2017.a913624","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The syntactic structure of the classifiers in Chinese has been assumed or argued to be left-branching, right-branching or mixed. This article examines three facts-number-classfier-de, the use of duo ‘extra, more’ and the conditional deletion of number––which are regarded by Xuping Li (2013) as evidence for the mixed structures. It is shown that the purported facts are partial and, when more related facts are taken into consideration, they together are equally compatible with an exclusively left-branching structure and thus cannot serve as support for a mixed structure analysis. Three kinds of arguments are reviewed in the last section which fare favorably with the left-branching structure.

汉语是否需要两种结构的分类器?案例研究
汉语分类词的句法结构有左分支、右分支和混合三种形式。本文考察了李旭平(2013)认为混合结构存在的三个事实:number-classfier-de、使用双“extra, more”和有条件地删除number。结果表明,所声称的事实是部分的,当考虑到更多相关的事实时,它们在一起同样与排他的左分支结构相容,因此不能作为混合结构分析的支持。最后一节回顾了三种有利于左分支结构的论证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Journal of Chinese Linguistics (JCL) is an academic journal, which comprises research content from both general linguistics and Chinese linguistics. It is edited by a distinguished editorial board of international expertise. There are two publications: Journal of Chinese Linguistics (JCL) and Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series (JCLMS).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信