Abstract
This paper investigates the distinct functions associated with the copula morpheme and their distribution across Sinitic languages. Based on fieldwork on five Sinitic languages, an empirical generalization will be presented regarding the scope and variation of copular multifunctionality. Specifically, language-specific variation is witnessed in topic and conditional marking as well as verum marking. Conversely, it is found that Sinitic languages converge on employing the copula in constructions expressing phrasal and clausal level focus. The paper further explores whether these copular constructions should receive a uniform syntax, or should be conceived of as having a set of underlaid heterogeneous structures.
Acknowledgements
I am indebted to the two anonymous reviewers of Folia Linguistica as well as the editors Olga Fischer and Sune Gregersen for helping to improve my paper. During the various stages of the preparation of this manuscript, I have received valuable input and help from Jun Chen, Zhenyu Chen, Marcel den Dikken, Chengru Dong, Yimin Sheng, Liyong Wang, Jianfeng Wu, Lihua Xu and Ryan Zhang, as well as audiences at the 2017 NACCL conference at Rutgers University and the 2017 IACL conference at Eötvös Loránd University Budapest. Significant assistance has been provided during my fieldwork by Yuanhang Xiong, for whom I am deeply grateful. This research is supported by the grant of Shanghai Pujiang Program (17PJC060). Needless to say, all the remaining errors are my own.
Abbreviations
- adv
-
= adverbial
- clf
-
= classifier
- cond
-
= conditional marker
- cop
-
= copula
- de
-
= nominalizing/adnominal particle
- decl
-
= declarative
- dem
-
= demonstrative
- hen
-
= generalized intensifier
- loc
-
= locative
- mod
-
= modal
- neg
-
= negation morpheme
- poss
-
= possessive
- prf
-
= perfective aspect marker
- prt
-
= particle
- pst
-
= past tense
- q
-
= question particle
- rel
-
= relativizer
- res
-
= resultative
- top
-
= topic
Appendix: Information on consultants
The following table provides information about the age, locality, occupation and gender of the consultants for each of the dialect spot surveyed.
Language (dialect spot) | No. of consultants | Age | Residence | Occupation | Gender |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hong Kong Cantonese | 5 | 23–33 | Shum1 Shui2 Po6 District | Student | male (3) female (2) |
Fǔzhōu Gan | 3 | 23–24 | Línchuān District | Student | male (2) female (1) |
Wùyuán Hui | 3 | 33–66 | Jiāngwān Town | Tea shop owner and shop assistant | male (1) female (2) |
Bīnyáng Pinghua | 2 | 36–46 | Dàqiáo Town | Hotelier | female (2) |
References
Adger, David & Gillian Ramchand. 2003. Predication and equation. Linguistic Inquiry 34. 325–359.10.1162/002438903322247515Suche in Google Scholar
Augustin, Maryanne. 2007. Topic and Focus in Swahili. GIALens: Electronic Notes Series 1. 1–12.Suche in Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1966 [1960]. ‘Etre’ et ‘avoir’ dans leurs fonctions linguistiques. In Émile Benveniste (ed.), Problèmes de linguistique générale, 187–207. Paris: Gallimard.Suche in Google Scholar
Biloa, Gaston & Francine Fotso. 2017. The conditional mood in Ghomala. Studies in African Linguistics 46(1–2). 143–156.10.32473/sal.v46i1.107247Suche in Google Scholar
Bittner, Maria. 2001. Topical referents for individuals and possibilities. Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 11. 36–55.10.3765/salt.v11i0.2854Suche in Google Scholar
Bonami, Olivier & Daniele Godard. 2008. Lexical semantics and pragmatics of evaluative adverbs. In Louise McNally & Chris Kennedy (eds.), Adverbs and adjectives: Syntax, semantics and discourse, 274–304. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199211616.003.0011Suche in Google Scholar
Bowers, John. 1993. The syntax of predication. Linguistic Inquiry 24. 591–656.Suche in Google Scholar
Büring, Daniel & Katharina Hartmann. 1995. All right!. In Uli Lutz & Jürgen Pafel (eds.), On extraction and extraposition in German, 179–211. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.11.07burSuche in Google Scholar
Büring, Daniel. 2016. (Contrastive) Topic. In Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford handbook of information structure, 64–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.002Suche in Google Scholar
Cao, Zhiyun. 2008. Hanyu fangyan dituji [Linguistic atlas of Chinese dialects]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary (ed.). 2001. Sinitic grammar: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198299776.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary. 2015. Diversity in Sinitic languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198723790.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Chen, Jun. 2017. Towards a copular approach to clefts: Evidence from diachronic syntax. European Summer School in Logic, Language & Information (ESSLLI) 2017. 84–95.Suche in Google Scholar
Chen, Jun. 2019. Locus of the exhaustiveness reading in Chinese cleft sentences. Paper presented at the “Exhaustivity in questions and answers – experimental and theoretical approaches” workshop, University of Tübingen.Suche in Google Scholar
Cheng, Lisa. 2008. Deconstructing the shi … de construction. The Linguistic Review 25(3–4). 235–266.10.1515/TLIR.2008.007Suche in Google Scholar
Cheng, Lisa & Luis Vicente. 2013. Verb doubling in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian linguistics 22. 1–37.10.1007/s10831-012-9095-6Suche in Google Scholar
Constant, Noah. 2014. Contrastive topic: Meanings and realizations. Amherst: University of Massachusetts dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Declerck, Renaat. 1988. Studies on copular sentences, clefts and pseudo-clefts. Brussels: Leuven University Press.10.1515/9783110869330Suche in Google Scholar
Den Dikken, Marcel. 2006. Relators and linkers: The syntax of predication, predicate inversion, and copulas. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/5873.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Den Dikken, Marcel. 2013. Predication and specification in the syntax of cleft sentences. In Katharina Hartmann & Tonjes Veenstra (eds.), Cleft structures, 35–70. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.208.02dikSuche in Google Scholar
Djamouri, Redouane. 2001. Markers of predication in Shang bone inscriptions. In Hilary Chappell (ed.), Sinitic grammar, 143–171. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198299776.003.0006Suche in Google Scholar
É. Kiss, Katalin. 1998. Identificational focus versus information focus. Language 74. 245–273.10.1353/lan.1998.0211Suche in Google Scholar
Ebert, Christian, Cornelia Ebert & Stefan Hinterwimmer. 2014. A unified analysis of conditionals as topics. Linguistics and philosophy 37(5). 353–408.10.1007/s10988-014-9158-4Suche in Google Scholar
Eide, Kristin & Tor Afarli. 1999. The syntactic disguises of the predication operator. Studia Linguistica 53. 155–181.10.1111/1467-9582.00043Suche in Google Scholar
Erlewine, Michael. 2016. The semantics of the Mandarin focus marker shi. Paper presented at the European Association for Chinese Linguistics 9, University of Stuttgart.Suche in Google Scholar
Escure, Genevieve. 1993. Focus, topic particles and discourse markers in the Belizean Creole continuum.In Francis Byrne &Donald Winford (eds.), Focus and grammatical relations in Creole languages, 233–248. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cll.12.17escSuche in Google Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje & Volker Gast. 2006. From deixis to discourse: The development of focus marking in dialects of Chiapas Zoque. Paper presented at Syntax of the World’s Languages, Lancaster University.Suche in Google Scholar
Gao, Mingkai. 1948. Hanyu yufalun [Thesis on Chinese grammar]. Beijing: Commercial Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Geist Ljudmilla. 2007. Predication and equation in copular sentences: Russian vs. English. In: Comorovski Illeana & Klaus von Heusinger (eds.), Existence: Semantics and syntax, 79–105. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-6197-4_3Suche in Google Scholar
Geist, Ljudmila. 2011. Indefiniteness and specificity: Lexical marking and information-structural conditions. PhD diss., Habilitationsschrift. Stuttgart: University of Stuttgart.Suche in Google Scholar
Grano, Thomas. 2012. Mandarin hen and universal markedness in gradable adjectives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 30. 513–565.10.1007/s11049-011-9161-1Suche in Google Scholar
Gu, Yang. 2008. Shitai, shizhi lilun yu hanyu shijian canzhao [Studies of tense, aspect and Chinese time reference]. In YangShen & Shengli Feng (eds.), Dangdai yuyanxue lilun he hanyu yanjiu [Contemporary linguistic theories and related studies of Chinese], 97–119. Beijing: Commercial Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos. 1984. On the grammar and semantics of sentence accents. Dordrecht: Foris.10.1515/9783110859263Suche in Google Scholar
Gutzmann, Daniel. 2015. Use-conditional meaning: Studies in multidimensional semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198723820.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Gutzmann, Daniel, Katharina Hartmann & Lisa Matthewson. 2017. Verum focus is verum, not focus: Cross-linguistic evidence. Manuscript, University of Cologne.Suche in Google Scholar
Gutzmann, Daniel & Elena Castroviejo Miro. 2011. The dimensions of verum. In Olivier Bonami & Patricia Cabredo-Hofherr (eds.), Empirical issues in syntax and semantics 8, 143–165. Paris: Colloque de Syntaxe et Sémantique à Paris.Suche in Google Scholar
Haiman, John. 1978. Conditionals are topics. Language 54. 565–589.10.1353/lan.1978.0009Suche in Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael. 1967. Notes on theme and transitivity in English. Journal of linguistics 3(1). 37–81.10.1017/S0022226700012949Suche in Google Scholar
Hara, Yurie. 2006. Japanese discourse items at interfaces. Newark, DE: University of Delaware dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Hedberg, Nancy. 2000. The referential status of clefts. Language 76(4). 891–920.10.2307/417203Suche in Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees. 1992. Non-verbal predication: Theory, typology, diachrony. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110883282Suche in Google Scholar
Higgins, Richard. 1979. The pseudo-cleft construction in English. New York: Garland.Suche in Google Scholar
Hiraiwa, Ken & Shinichiro Ishihara. 2012. Syntactic metamorphosis: Clefts, sluicing, and in-situ focus in Japanese. Syntax 15(2). 142–180.10.1111/j.1467-9612.2011.00164.xSuche in Google Scholar
Höhle, Tilman. 1992. Über Verum-Fokus im Deutschen. In Joachim Jacobs (ed.), Informationsstrucktur und Grammatik, 112–142. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.10.1007/978-3-663-12176-3_5Suche in Google Scholar
Hole, Daniel. 2011. The deconstruction of Chinese shi … de clefts revisited. Lingua 121(11). 1707–1733.10.1016/j.lingua.2011.07.004Suche in Google Scholar
Hole, Daniel & Malte Zimmermann. 2013. Cleft partitionings in Japanese, Burmese and Chinese. In Katharina Hartmann & Tonjes Veenstra (eds.), Cleft structures, 285–317. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.208.11holSuche in Google Scholar
Hu, Songbai. 2013. Ganwenhua Tongdian: Fangyan Juan [An encyclopedia of Gan culture: The dialect volume]. Nanchang: Jiangxi Renmin Chubanshe.Suche in Google Scholar
Huang, James. 1998. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. New York: Garland.Suche in Google Scholar
Huang, Shi-Zhe. 2006. Property theory, adjectives, and modification in Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 15. 343–369.10.1007/s10831-006-9002-0Suche in Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1927. A Modern English grammar on historical principles, vol. 3: Syntax. Winter: Heidelberg.Suche in Google Scholar
Jin, Dawei. 2019. Xi in Sinitic languages: the reinstatement of a new copula. Proceedings of the North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL) 29, vol. 2, 344–362.Suche in Google Scholar
Johanson, Lars. 1998. The structure of Turkic. In Lars Johanson & Éva Ágnes Csató Johanson (eds.), The Turkic languages, 30–66. London: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar
Kornfilt, Jaklin. 1997. Turkish. New York: Psychology Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Koster, Jan. 2000. Extraposition as parallel construal. Ms, University of Groningen.Suche in Google Scholar
Kuteva, Tania, Bernd Heine, Bo Hong, Haiping Long, Seongha Rhee & Heiko Narrog. 2019. World lexicon of grammaticalization. 2nd edn Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316479704Suche in Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy. 2015. Sino-Tibetan syntax. In William Wang & Chaofen Sun (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics, 45–57. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Law, Ann. 2001. A-not-A questions in Cantonese. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 13. 295–318.Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, Chungmin. 2003. Contrastive topic and proposition structure. In Anna di Sciullo (ed.), Asymmetry in grammar, 345–372. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.57.16leeSuche in Google Scholar
Lee, Hui-Chi. 2005. On Chinese focus and cleft constructions. Hsin-Chu: National Tsing Hua University dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Leslau, Wolf. 1995. Reference grammar of Amharic. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.10.1515/9783110114263.1.8.875Suche in Google Scholar
Li, Charles & Sandra Thompson. 1977. Subject and topic: A new typology. In Li Charles (ed.), Subject and topic, 457–489. New York: Academic Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Li, Charles & Sandra Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520352858Suche in Google Scholar
Liu, Chen-Sheng Luther. 2010.The positive morpheme in Chinese and the adjectival structure. Lingua 120. 1010–1056.10.1016/j.lingua.2009.06.001Suche in Google Scholar
Liu, Danqing. 2004. Where does topic marker come from? In Shi Feng & Zhongwei Shen (eds.), A festschrift in honor of Professor William S.Y. Wang on his seventieth birthday, 6–15. Tianjin: Nankai University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Liu, Ying & Yang Yu’an. 2016. To exhaust, or not to exhaust: An experimental study on Mandarin shi-clefts. GLOW in Asia 11, vol. 2, 103–117.Suche in Google Scholar
Lohndal, Terje. 2009. The copula cycle. In Elly van Gelderen (ed.), Cyclical change, 209–242. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.146.13lohSuche in Google Scholar
Lohnstein, Horst. 2016. Verum focus. In Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford handbook of information structure, 290–313. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.33Suche in Google Scholar
Long, Haiping & Pengfei Kuang. 2017. Modern Chinese confirmative shi: Auxiliary or adverb? Functions of Language 24(3). 294–318.10.1075/fol.15018.lonSuche in Google Scholar
Lu, Wen. 2012. The syntax of the ti construction in Tunxi Hui. Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong MPhil thesis.Suche in Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Ma, Beijia & Rong Cai. 2006. Wenzhou fangyan cunzai dongci shi de laiyuan [The origin of the existential verb shi in Wenzhou Dialect]. Fangyan 6(3). 222–227.Suche in Google Scholar
Maisak, Timur. 2012. The functions of a borrowed marker=sa in Nizh Udi. Paper presented at “Typology, Theory: Caucasus”, Boğaziçi University, Istanbul.Suche in Google Scholar
Meisterernst, Barbara. 2010. Object preposing in Classical and Pre-Medieval Chinese. Journal of East Asian linguistics 19(1). 75–102.10.1007/s10831-010-9056-xSuche in Google Scholar
Mikkelsen, Line. 2005. Copular clauses: Specification, predication and equation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.85Suche in Google Scholar
Mikkelsen, Line. 2011. Copular clauses. In Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger & Paul Portner (eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, 1805–1829. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Suche in Google Scholar
Moro, Andrea. 1997. The raising of predicates: Predicate noun phrases and the theory of clause structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511519956Suche in Google Scholar
Nicolle, Steve. 2017. Conditional constructions in African languages. Studies in African Linguistics 46(1–2). 1–15.10.32473/sal.v46i1.107239Suche in Google Scholar
Partee, Barbara. 1987. Ambiguous pseudo-clefts with unambiguous be. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 16. 354–366.10.1016/0091-7435(87)90034-XSuche in Google Scholar
Patten, Amanda. 2010. Grammaticalization and the it-cleft construction. In Elizabeth Traugott & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization, 221–243. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.90.12patSuche in Google Scholar
Paul, Waltraud & John Whitman. 2008. Shi … de focus clefts in Mandarin Chinese. The Linguistic Review 25(3–4). 413–451.10.1515/TLIR.2008.012Suche in Google Scholar
Percus, Orin. 1997. Prying open the cleft. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 27. 337–351.10.1515/iabi.1997.27.3.198Suche in Google Scholar
Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2008. Copular sentences in Russian. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/1-4020-5793-8Suche in Google Scholar
Pollard, Carl & Ivan Sag. 1994. Head-Driven Phrase-Structure Grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Portner, Paul & Katsuhiko Yabushita. 1998. The semantics and pragmatics of topic phrases. Linguistics & Philosophy 21(2). 117–157.10.1023/A:1005311504497Suche in Google Scholar
Potts, Christopher. 2005. The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199273829.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Pustet, Regina. 2003. Copulas: Universals in the categorization of the lexicon. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199258505.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Rapoport, Tova. 1985. Copular constructions in Hebrew. In William H. Eilfort, et al. (eds.), CLS 21, 354–370. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Suche in Google Scholar
Reeve, Matthew. 2012. Clefts and their relatives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.185Suche in Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. 1982. Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics in pragmatics and philosophy. Studia Philosophica Gandensia 27(1). 53–94.10.21825/philosophica.82606Suche in Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan. 2010. English filler-gap constructions. Language 86(3). 486–545.10.1353/lan.2010.0002Suche in Google Scholar
Schaffar, Wolfram & Lansun Chen. 2001. Yes-no questions in Mandarin and the theory of focus. Linguistics 39(5). 837–870.10.1515/ling.2001.036Suche in Google Scholar
Schuessler, Axel. 1987. A dictionary of Early Zhou Chinese. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Schwarz, Anne. 2009. Focus markers that link topic and comment. Paper presented at the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenshaft (DGfS), University of Osnabrück.Suche in Google Scholar
Shi, Dingxu & Weifeng Han. 2013. Xici de yufahuaguocheng yu qushi [Grammaticalization of copula: Process and tendency]. Hanyu Xuexi 5. 1–12.Suche in Google Scholar
Shi, Yuzhi & Jie Xu. 2001. Hanyushi shang yiwen xingshi de leixingxue zhuan bian jiqi jizhi [The process and mechanism of the typological change of the question form in the history of Chinese]. Zhongguo Yuwen 284. 454–479.Suche in Google Scholar
Siegel, Muffy. 2006. Biscuit conditionals: Quantification over potential literal acts. Linguistics & Philosophy 29. 167–203.10.1007/s10988-006-0003-2Suche in Google Scholar
Simpson, Andrew & Zoe Wu. 2002. From D to T-determiner incorporation and the creation of tense. Journal of East Asian linguistics 11(2). 169–209.10.1023/A:1014934915836Suche in Google Scholar
Stassen, Leon. 1997. Intransitive predication. Oxford: Clarendon Press.10.1093/oso/9780198236931.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Sun, Pinjian. 2018. Mingqing gongwen yuti de yufa tezheng yanjiu [A study of the grammar characteristics of administrative language styles in Ming and Qing China]. Beijing: Beijing Language University dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Tang, Yuming. 2009. Jindai hanyu de panduan dongci xi jiqi liubian [The copula verb xi in Early Modern Chinese and its development]. Zhongshan Daxue Xuebao 6(3). 55–59.Suche in Google Scholar
Teng, Shou-Hsin. 1979. Remarks on cleft sentences in Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 7. 101–112.Suche in Google Scholar
Tomioka, Satoshi. 2007. Pragmatics of LF intervention effects. Journal of pragmatics 39(9). 1570–1590.10.1016/j.pragma.2007.03.002Suche in Google Scholar
Tomioka, Satoshi. 2009. Why questions, presuppositions, and intervention effects. Journal of East Asian linguistics 18(4). 253–271.10.1007/s10831-009-9053-0Suche in Google Scholar
Tomioka, Satoshi. 2010. Contrastive topics operate on speech acts. In Malte Zimmermann & Caroline Féry (eds.), Information structure: Theoretical, typological and experimental perspectives, 115–138. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199570959.003.0006Suche in Google Scholar
Traugott, Elisabeth Closs. 1985. Conditional markers. In John Haiman (ed.), Iconicity in syntax, 289–307. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.6.14cloSuche in Google Scholar
Velleman, Dan, David Beaver, Emilie Destruel, Dylan Bumford, Edgar Onea & Liz Coppock. 2012. It-clefts are IT (inquiry terminating) constructions. Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 22. 441–460.10.3765/salt.v22i0.2640Suche in Google Scholar
von Fintel, Kai. 1994. Restrictions on quantifier domains. University of Massachusetts dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Wang, Xu. 2011. A syntactic analysis of the Chinese cleft construction. Changsha: Hunan University MA thesis.Suche in Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1983. Semantic vs. syntactic categories. Linguistics and philosophy 6. 423–446.10.1007/BF00627484Suche in Google Scholar
Wu, Wei. 2000. Yixian fangyan de jieci [The adpositions in Yixian Dialect]. In Rulong Li & Shuangqing Zhang (eds.), A comparative study of Southeastern Chinese dialects, 96–103. Guangzhou: Jinan University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Xie, Qiyong. 2015. Hanyu fangyan zhong de shi-ziju [The shi-sentences in Chinese dialects]. Zhongguo Fangyan Xuebao 15(1). 101–109.Suche in Google Scholar
Xu, Liejiong. 2000. Topicalization in Asian languages. In Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax, 283–322. Oxford: Blackwell.Suche in Google Scholar
Xu, Liejiong & Danqing Liu. 2007. Huati de Jiegou yu Gongneng [The structure and function of topic]. Shanghai: Shanghai Education Publishing House.Suche in Google Scholar
Zhan, Fangqiong & Chaofen Sun. 2013. A copular analysis of shi in the Chinese cleft construction. Language and Linguistics 14(4). 755–789.Suche in Google Scholar
Zhan, Fangqiong & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2015. The constructionalization of the Chinese cleft construction. Studies in Language 39(2). 459–491.10.1075/sl.39.2.06zhaSuche in Google Scholar
Zhu, Dexi. 1981. Hanyu fangyan li de liangzhong fanfu wenju [Two types of alternative questions in Chinese dialects]. Zhongguo Yuwen 85(1). 1–8.Suche in Google Scholar
Zhu, Yao. 1996. The focus-marking function of shi in Mandarin Chinese. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Articles
- Contact-induced change in Surgut Khanty relative clauses
- From constructions to functions and back: Contrastive negation in English and Finnish
- Copula functions in a cross-Sinitic perspective
- Reported speech in Kakabe: Loose syntax with flexible indexicality
- Demonstratives as spatial deictics or something more? Evidence from Common Estonian and Võro
- The syntax and semantics of Modern Standard Arabic resumptive tough-constructions
- Book Reviews
- Anja Šarić, Nominalizations, double genitives and possessives
- Geoff Thompson, Wendy L. Bowcher, Lise Fontaine & David Schönthal (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics
- Fernando Zúñiga & Seppo Kittilä, Grammatical voice
- Abdelkader Fassi Fehri, Constructing feminine to mean: Gender, number, numeral, and quantifier extensions in Arabic
- Bodo Winter, Sensory linguistics: Language, perception and metaphor
- Hussein Abdul-Raof, Text linguistics of Qur’anic discourse: An analysis,
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Articles
- Contact-induced change in Surgut Khanty relative clauses
- From constructions to functions and back: Contrastive negation in English and Finnish
- Copula functions in a cross-Sinitic perspective
- Reported speech in Kakabe: Loose syntax with flexible indexicality
- Demonstratives as spatial deictics or something more? Evidence from Common Estonian and Võro
- The syntax and semantics of Modern Standard Arabic resumptive tough-constructions
- Book Reviews
- Anja Šarić, Nominalizations, double genitives and possessives
- Geoff Thompson, Wendy L. Bowcher, Lise Fontaine & David Schönthal (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics
- Fernando Zúñiga & Seppo Kittilä, Grammatical voice
- Abdelkader Fassi Fehri, Constructing feminine to mean: Gender, number, numeral, and quantifier extensions in Arabic
- Bodo Winter, Sensory linguistics: Language, perception and metaphor
- Hussein Abdul-Raof, Text linguistics of Qur’anic discourse: An analysis,