A Comparative Study Of English And Chinese Raising Constructions

This thesis aims to make a comparative study of English and Chinese raising constructions within the framework of Government and Binding Theory. English raising construction is formed by raising the subject of the complement clause, which has no case, to the subject position of the main clause, to which no theta-role is assigned. However, Chinese raising construction appears to be a little more complicated.Although a lot of studies have been conducted to account for these two constructions, there is controversy over the classification and syntactic position of Chinese raising predicates and comparative studies of these two constructions are lacking. This thesis holds that Chinese raising predicates are located in the head position of VP and can be classified into three categories: epistemic, aspectual, and tough raising predicates. Based on Tsao's Topic Raising Rule (1996), we have found that, under the interplay of syntactic, pragmatic, and semantic factors, the NP movement in Chinese raising constructions consists of two steps: topicalization and topic raising. Thus, the derivation of Chinese raising constructions can be explained.Then the thesis mainly centers on a comparative study of the differences and similarities between these two constructions. Their differences are generally as follows. First, the raising motivation is different. In English, raising is motivated because of syntactic factors; in Chinese, it is affected by the combination of syntactic, pragmatic, and semantic factors. Furthermore, these factors obey an expression order: pragmatic factors > syntactic factors > semantic factors. Second, the nature of the raised NP is different. In English, it is subject raising; in Chinese, it is topic raising. Third, the formation process is different. In English raising constructions, raising is realized by A-movement and only one NP is moved. The moved NP raises from a lower [Spec, IP] to a higher [Spec, IP]. And such syntactic principles as Theta Criterion, Case Filter, and EPP are obeyed; NP raising is obligatory. In Chinese raising constructions, raising is realized by CP-adjunction; more than one NP is moved; the moved NP raises from [Spec, IP] or the complement of a VP to [Spec, CP]; NP raising is optional. Fourth, the constrained conditions are different. In English, the NP movement is constrained by Tensed Sentence Condition and Specified Subject Condition. In Chinese, it is not necessarily bound by such restrictions. Their similarities are as follows: raising predicates of the two languages are one-place predicates; such common principles as Trace Theory, C-command Condition on Binding, and the Shortest Movement Principle are obeyed; they both allow multiple occurrences of the raising predicates in the syntactic representation.The comparative study of English and Chinese raising constructions in this thesis testifies the universality of Universal Grammar and provides some evidence for the development of generative grammar.