Why Chinese SFPs are neither optional nor disjunctors - HAL Accéder directement au contenu
Article dans une revue Lingua Année : 2016

Why Chinese SFPs are neither optional nor disjunctors

Résumé

In a recent paper, Biberauer, Holmberg and Roberts (2014) claim that the Chinese sentence-final particles (SFPs) ne and ma only “double” the information encoded elsewhere in the sentence and are to be analysed as “acategorial” conjunctions. This contrasts with the current analysis of e.g. ma as an interrogative force head. The present article provides evidence in favour of the SFPs ma and ne as C-elements and challenges some of the preconceived ideas commonly encountered in the literature. Within the head-final split CP proposed for Chinese ‘Low C < Force < Attitude’, ma instantiates a Force head, whereas ne realizes the discourse-related AttitudeP, not a wh-question typing particle (pace Lisa L.-S. Cheng’s 1991). Furthermore, evidence is provided to show that the surface sentence-final position of SFPs in Chinese must be taken at face value.
Fichier principal
Vignette du fichier
SFPs final version for ling.auf.net.pdf ( 239.24 Ko ) Télécharger
Origine : Fichiers produits par l'(les) auteur(s)
Loading...

Dates et versions

halshs-01428327, version 1 (06-01-2017)

Identifiants

Citer

Victor Junnan Pan, Waltraud Paul. Why Chinese SFPs are neither optional nor disjunctors. Lingua, 2016, 170, pp.23-34. ⟨10.1016/j.lingua.2015.10.005⟩. ⟨halshs-01428327⟩
137 Consultations
371 Téléchargements
Dernière date de mise à jour le 28/04/2024
comment ces indicateurs sont-ils produits

Altmetric

Partager

Gmail Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Plus