A Study On The Appraisal Meaning Of Modern Chinese Quantifier "Ge" In Its Non-typical Structure

A quantifier, as its name indicates, expresses quantity or amount of things by means of single words or some sets of phrases which usually occur after numerals and before nouns. Numerals and quantifiers together can be seen as answers of the questions"how many?"or"how much". Different languages possess different quantifier systems, such as Chinese and English, with the former having a rich number of quantifiers while the latter only a few. Nevertheless, all human beings have a common sense that the number and quantity of something will, despite what kind of languages they are expressed in and despite the subjective assumption of the speaker, remain the same. A table, though in Chinese expressed with pronunciation as"yi zhang zhuo zi"(一张桌子), is still one table, not becoming into two or three tables whether it is in China or other countries. Therefore, it seems the usage of quantifiers is rather simple, and it seems properly correct that many linguists thus consider quantifiers as language category which mainly or only has the information function, or in terms of systemic functional grammar, ideational function. As a matter of fact, many linguists do not notice that there are a limited number of quantifiers which can express interpersonal meaning by themselves. For example, different attitudinal meanings are conveyed by the quantifier"wei"(位) and"huo"(伙). When used to modify people with positive social honor, people prefer to say"yi wei jiao shou"(一位教授) for instance, while for those with negative social judgement people prefer to say"yi huo qiang dao"(一伙强盗) , etc.. But such quantifiers are rather limited in number and their usages are therefore rather simple.However, things go different when the Chinese quantifier"ge"(个) comes under discussion."Ge"is the most common-used quantifier in modern Chinese which is of extraordinary capability to modify not only nouns but also verbs. Not like other quantifiers in modern Chinese which often have fixed usages and only modify fixed nouns or verbs, it has the ability to be used as a generalized quantifier modifying various nouns or verbs, such as people, animals, plants, ideas, actions, motions and so on. In modern Chinese, there are basically two types of"ge"structure. The typical structure is"Numeral +'ge'+ Noun", which is so widely used in modern Chinese that many linguists are confused by the syntactic and semantic environments in which"ge"can appear. The non-typical structure is"Verb +'ge'+ Noun", which is the focus of this study.It is hypothesized in this thesis that the"ge"non-typical structure is mainly motivated by interpersonal meaning, or appraisal meaning for specific, instead of ideational meaning."Ge"is no longer the common quantifier to express information related with quantity or amount, but with a kind of attitude implied in the structure, a kind of attitude from the speaker or writer, flowing towards nouns and verbs"ge"modifies. And this attitudinal meaning will not emerge unless"ge"appears in this structure, that is to say, it is the whole syntactic structure together that expresses the appraisal meaning instead any individual component within it. Therefore, not from the traditional research views of ideational meaning, this study analyzes the interpersonal function of"ge"non-typical structure based on James Martin's Appraisal Theory. Appraisal Theory, as a new development and supplement to systemic functional grammar, is concerned with how interpersonal meaning is construed by the speaker or writer, and how and what attitude is engaged into interpersonal meanings. With AppraisalTheory applied in this analysis of quantifier"ge", the appraisal meaning of"ge"non-typical structure can be well analyzed and explained. It is concluded that the non-typical usage of"ge"actually expresses the speaker or writer's interpersonal ideological meaning. It introduces the functions of"engaging pivot"and"attitude orientation"with the former one as the basis of the latter. People use"ge"non-typical structure to convey subjective appraisal meaning, which is latent under the whole structure. And finally there are three attitudes the"ge"non-typical structure may express:(1) There may be the negative appreciation to things denoted by the noun within"ge"non-typical structure. (2) There may be the negative judgement to actions or behaviors denoted by the verb within"ge"non-typical structure. (3) There may be the negative affect to persons or things denoted by the pronoun or noun outside"ge"non-typical structure.The thesis is composed of five chapters.The first chapter is introduction, which briefly introduces the motivations, significance and objectives of this research, and in which some basic preliminary concepts are put forward as well as the arrangement of this thesis.The second chapter is literature review which gives a detailed survey on previous studies. There are some researches around Chinese quantifier, especially around"ge"for its mystery and complicated appearance. But hardly any research is orientated to its interpersonal meaning, let alone the appraisal meaning and the attitude its structure can carry. Thus based on the ignored corner that is not lighted by previous studies, the questions of present research arise.The third chapter is theoretical frame, in which the appraisal theory is in full description and explanation. The key basis and some important concepts are stated in detail including the three key regions of appraisal system: attitude, engagement and graduation.The fourth chapter is analysis of appraisal meaning of"Verb +'ge'+Noun". The interpersonal function of"ge"is analyzed in three aspects: what kind of attitude it carries, how the speaker or writer engages into this attitude, and what degree this attitude could be.The fifth chapter is conclusion.Chinese quantifier is an important language category, making Chinese more vivid and colorful. It plays a very useful role for people to express meaning in a more facilitating way. "Ge", as a widely used generalized quantifier, can convey not only ideational meaning, but also interpersonal meaning. This paper provides a new perspective for people to understand the nature of quantifiers, whose name does not always match the reality.