Debate on the Class Status of Mandarin Chinese Adjectives & Verbs: An Empirically-Based Evaluation + A Comparison of Stacking Behaviors
Date
2022
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Producer
Director
Performer
Choreographer
Costume Designer
Music
Videographer
Lighting Designer
Set Designer
Crew Member
Funder
Rehearsal Director
Concert Coordinator
Advisor
Moderator
Panelist
Alternative Title
Department
Swarthmore College. Dept. of Linguistics
Type
Original Format
Running Time
File Format
Place of Publication
Date Span
Copyright Date
Award
Language
en
Note
Table of Contents
Terms of Use
Full copyright to this work is retained by the student author. It may only be used for non-commercial, research, and educational purposes. All other uses are restricted.
Rights Holder
Access Restrictions
No restrictions
Terms of Use
Tripod URL
Identifier
Abstract
The question of whether Mandarin Chinese adjectives and verbs belong to the same word
class or to separate ones is contested by linguists. I have conducted an empirically-based
evaluation of the theories advanced by proponents of two competing hypotheses: a unified part
of speech account (Hypothesis 1) and a separate part of speech one (Hypothesis 2).
Hypothesis 1 supporter, Chen-Sheng Luther Liu (2010), proposes a theory that I critique
as a theory in general. However, I am most interested in a particular piece of his data that
demonstrates how the pro-form nàgè ‘that-GE’ substitutes for and co-reference gradable
adjectives and verbs alike. This is crucial evidence that strengthens Hypothesis 1, but the usage
of nàgè is limited (e.g., can only replace things with adversely negative meanings).
Hypothesis 2 supporter, Waltraud Paul (2010), proposes that the marker of modification
de is required for a prenominal verb because it forms a relative clause whereas it is optional for a
prenominal adjective. Paul’s theory proves that absolute adjectives cannot form relative clauses
and, unlike verb-noun constructions that ‘always’ form compounds, some adjective-noun
constructions form phrases. However, the test she uses to prove that adjective-noun constructions
form phrases is not reliable, as judged by some native Chinese speakers, and some verb phrase-noun
constructions without de are indeed phrasal.
Hypothesis 2 supporter, Shi-Zhe Huang (2006, 2015, 2017), proposes that simple
adjectives are of semantic type e because anything functioning as an argument in a sentence is of
this type (Chierchia 1998). Huang’s theory proves that, unlike verbs (type <e,t>), simple
adjectives cannot function predicatively in their bare forms and it explains why prenominal verbs
require de, while simple adjectives do not. Although she acknowledges instances where verbs
phrases and adjectives are re-analyzed as type e and <e,t>, respectively, she does not consider
the ramifications of this data to a Hypothesis 2 stance.
Following the evaluation, I have contributed to this debate by comparing adjective and
verb-phrase stacking in Mandarin Chinese. I discovered that the number of differences between
their behaviors in this syntactic construction is greater than their similarities, which supports
Hypothesis 2 (e.g., prenominal adjective ordering without de is restricted (Sproat & Shih
1987:471) whereas ordering of predicate-positioned verb phrases is relatively free (Chao
1968:326)). However, I suggest that the ordering of adjective stacking may be freer in some
cases based on the type of nominal that is modified (e.g., chǒu dà gēshǒu ‘ugly big singer’ & dà
chǒu gēshǒu ‘big ugly singer (approved by native speaker, Carey Zhang)). More importantly, if
prenominal verbs are proven to form verb phrases instead of relative clauses, then C.-T. James
Huang (2016)’s evidence for the existence of an adjunct-complement dichotomy in the nominal
domain identifies shared stacking behaviors among adjectives and verbs (e.g., the complement
must be closest to the head noun in order to combine with it before the relative clause does
(Huang 2016:434)), which supports Hypothesis 1.