| VP-ellipsis is a typical phenomenon in natural language, which has attracted preferences of lots of linguists. Different linguists contribute different views: Sag (1976), Williams (1977), Lopez (2000), Winkler (2000), and Lobeck (1995) analyze VP-ellipsis from syntactic aspect, while others like Lappin (1996), Hardt (1993) analyze VP-ellipsis from semantic perspective. The main points linguists focus on are, as I conclude:ⅰ. The licensing condition of VP-ellipsis (Lopez, 2000; Johnson, 1997;Kehler, 2000).ⅱ. The interpretation of elided elements (Lappin, 1996; Hardt, 1993; Hestvik, 1995). Many linguists also refer to the differences between VP-ellipsis in Chinese and other languages, especially English. It has been shown that an auxiliary element in Infl may license VP-ellipsis (Chao, 1987; Lobeck, 1995; Lopez, 2000). In Mandarin, Chinese shi"be", negative marker meiyou"not", and modal verbs like ken"be willing to", keneng"can/be possible", keyi"can/may"are considered to be the legal licensing heads of VP-ellipsis.(Wu, 2002; Wei Tingji, 2008). For example:(1) a. Zhangsan xihuan changge, Lisi ye shi.Zhangsan like sing, Lisi also SHI."Zhangsan likes singing, and Lisi does too."b. Zhangsan hui shuo fayu, Lisi ye hui.Zhangsan can speak French, Lisi also can."Zhangsan can speak French, and Lisi also can."c. Zhangsan kanjian le tade mama, er Lisi meiyou.Zhangsan see-ASP his mother, but Lisi not."Zhangsan saw his mother, but Lisi didn't."However, most of the linguists take these different kinds of VPE licensers as having the same position in VP-ellipsis structure. Shown in the tree diagram, they are always put under the Infl node (Huang, 1988a; Li Huiju, 2002):(2)Few linguists have noticed the different structural positions of these licensers. Soh (2007) is the first attempt trying to propose a hierarchical structure of different licensing heads in VP-ellipsis. She addresses the question that the dummy shi and auxiliaries like neng do not occupy the same structural position. She argues that the dummy shi occupies a position above negation, while auxiliaries like neng appear below negation. she proposes a structure as follows:(3)Soh's proposal is often ignored in the investigation of VP-ellipsis, but it is significant. The above figure is persuasive, and it can help to explain many language facts, but it is not without problems. There exist at least the following inadequacies:ⅰ. Soh assumes that the headΣmay be a negative marker or a zero affirmative marker. She ignores the difference in polarity between the two conjuncts in VPE.ⅱ. Some Chinese evidences show that except the main verb shi, there still exists another type of shi, which can occur below the negation.ⅲ. The positions of different kind of modal verbs are not at random.The purpose of the present thesis is to mainly approve of Soh's proposal, and give a further modification of her configuration by raising three points:ⅰ. Shi should be analyzed into 3 types: dummy shi, emphatic shi, and main verb shi.ⅱ. Chinese negative marker bu is an adverbial element, staying in the Spec of AuxP, or Spec of VP and is incapable of licensing VPE. The allomorph of bu--mei can lie in the Spec of AspP. Thus, mei-you (negative marker mei plus an Aspect head you) can license VPE.ⅲ. We employ the theory of polarity focus (Winlker, 2000; Wei Tingji, 2008), arguing that dummy shi is a conspicuous marker of positive polarity focus. Dummy shi lies in the highest position of all the auxiliaries---higher than sentential negation meiyou. The emphatic shi is a raising verb, which has the same position with raising modal. Compared with these former two shis, main verb shi is in the lowest position, lower than the modal verbs.ⅳ. Modal verbs can also be further classified into two types: raising modal and control modal. The position of raising modal is hierarchically higher than that of the control modal.
|
PDF Full Text Request