{"title":"汉语附加疑问句与英语附加疑问句的跨语言对比分析","authors":"Ai-li C. Hsin","doi":"10.6519/TJL.2016.14(1).3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study analyzes Chinese tag questions in contrast to English tag questions. Whereas English tags are syntax-based, Chinese tags are more discourse-based and the choice of tag verbs is decided mainly according to the speaker's discourse intentions, such as asking for an agreement of the host proposition, seeking consent of an invitation, making a refutation, etc. The Chinese tag question comprises a tag verb in the interrogative form, namely V-not-V, V-particle, or Neg-V-particle, and a null "pro" of CP, which is identical with the host sentence. The various interrogative forms of the tag verb display varied degrees of presupposition from the speaker. Tag verbs include mostly the declarative tags of "dui", "shi", "you", etc. and imperative tags of "hao", "xing", "keyi". Some epistemic modals such as "yinggai", "keneng" and some discourse commentary verbs such as "guai", "zan", "ku", "sheng", etc. can also be tag verbs, though in relatively low frequency. From the cross-linguistic comparison, it is concluded that English tags might be harder for Chinese EFL learners to acquire than Chinese tags for English CFL learners due to the syntactic complexity of canonical tags and irregularity in formation in non-canonical tags.","PeriodicalId":41000,"journal":{"name":"Taiwan Journal of Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Analysis of Chinese Tag Questions with a Cross-Linguistic Comparison to English Tags\",\"authors\":\"Ai-li C. Hsin\",\"doi\":\"10.6519/TJL.2016.14(1).3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study analyzes Chinese tag questions in contrast to English tag questions. Whereas English tags are syntax-based, Chinese tags are more discourse-based and the choice of tag verbs is decided mainly according to the speaker's discourse intentions, such as asking for an agreement of the host proposition, seeking consent of an invitation, making a refutation, etc. The Chinese tag question comprises a tag verb in the interrogative form, namely V-not-V, V-particle, or Neg-V-particle, and a null "pro" of CP, which is identical with the host sentence. The various interrogative forms of the tag verb display varied degrees of presupposition from the speaker. Tag verbs include mostly the declarative tags of "dui", "shi", "you", etc. and imperative tags of "hao", "xing", "keyi". Some epistemic modals such as "yinggai", "keneng" and some discourse commentary verbs such as "guai", "zan", "ku", "sheng", etc. can also be tag verbs, though in relatively low frequency. From the cross-linguistic comparison, it is concluded that English tags might be harder for Chinese EFL learners to acquire than Chinese tags for English CFL learners due to the syntactic complexity of canonical tags and irregularity in formation in non-canonical tags.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Taiwan Journal of Linguistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Taiwan Journal of Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6519/TJL.2016.14(1).3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Taiwan Journal of Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6519/TJL.2016.14(1).3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
An Analysis of Chinese Tag Questions with a Cross-Linguistic Comparison to English Tags
This study analyzes Chinese tag questions in contrast to English tag questions. Whereas English tags are syntax-based, Chinese tags are more discourse-based and the choice of tag verbs is decided mainly according to the speaker's discourse intentions, such as asking for an agreement of the host proposition, seeking consent of an invitation, making a refutation, etc. The Chinese tag question comprises a tag verb in the interrogative form, namely V-not-V, V-particle, or Neg-V-particle, and a null "pro" of CP, which is identical with the host sentence. The various interrogative forms of the tag verb display varied degrees of presupposition from the speaker. Tag verbs include mostly the declarative tags of "dui", "shi", "you", etc. and imperative tags of "hao", "xing", "keyi". Some epistemic modals such as "yinggai", "keneng" and some discourse commentary verbs such as "guai", "zan", "ku", "sheng", etc. can also be tag verbs, though in relatively low frequency. From the cross-linguistic comparison, it is concluded that English tags might be harder for Chinese EFL learners to acquire than Chinese tags for English CFL learners due to the syntactic complexity of canonical tags and irregularity in formation in non-canonical tags.
期刊介绍:
Taiwan Journal of Linguistics is an international journal dedicated to the publication of research papers in linguistics and welcomes contributions in all areas of the scientific study of language. Contributions may be submitted from all countries and are accepted all year round. The language of publication is English. There are no restrictions on regular submission; however, manuscripts simultaneously submitted to other publications cannot be accepted. TJL adheres to a strict standard of double-blind reviews to minimize biases that might be caused by knowledge of the author’s gender, culture, or standing within the professional community. Once a manuscript is determined as potentially suitable for the journal after an initial screening by the editor, all information that may identify the author is removed, and copies are sent to at least two qualified reviewers. The selection of reviewers is based purely on professional considerations and their identity will be kept strictly confidential by TJL. All feedback from the reviewers, except such comments as may be specifically referred to the attention of the editor, is faithfully relayed to the authors to assist them in improving their work, regardless of whether the paper is to be accepted, accepted upon minor revision, revised and resubmitted, or rejected.