Cover not available
Article published In:
International Journal of Chinese Linguistics
Vol. 1:2 (2014) ► pp.293–324

Diachronic extension of Linguistic Inventory Mightiness

Evolution of directional resultative-verb-compounds in Chinese

 | Center for the Study of the History of Chinese Language and Center for the Study of Language and Cognition, Zhejiang University
It is widely believed that the order of morphosyntactic elements in Modern Chinese is to a large extent constrained by the Principle of Temporal Sequence (PTS) proposed by Tai (1985, 2002, 2007). However, there are indeed some constructions in this language apparently deviating from PTS, e.g. 蹲到 dūn-dào ‘squat-to; go to squat’, with the two elements reverse-chronological. In the present paper I provide instead a new diachronic perspective, in the framework of Linguistic Inventory Mightiness (LIM) developed recently by Liu (2011, 2012), to account for constructions of this kind. I argue that it is the diachronic extension of the directional resultative-verb-compound (DRVC) pattern, since it shows the property of LIM that motivates the emergence of reverse-chronological constructions. It is argued that the LIM approach can also explain other related diachronic changes in the history of Chinese, e.g. 摸进 mō-jìn ‘touch-enter; enter accompanied by action of touching’, with the first verb being an static action verb originally but now having a manner-of-motion meaning in the construction, as well as the constructions of 回到 huí-dào ‘return-to’ and 进来 jìn-lái ‘enter-come’ which do not exist before Pre-Modern Chinese but emerge to be in use thereafter. The approach proposed in the present paper favors a two-fold standpoint, i.e. the organization of linguistic structure on the one hand follows cognitive principles, but on the other impact and constrain related conceptual organization in discourse as well.
Keywords: Linguistic Inventory Mightiness, motion event, Principle of Temporal Sequence, directional resultative verb compound, conceptual structure, linguistic structure, discourse
Published online: 22 December 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijchl.1.2.05shi
References (38)
陈昌来 [Chen, Changlai]. (1994). 论动后趋向动词的性质——兼谈趋向动词研究的方法，《烟台师范学院学报》第4期1：64–70。Google Scholar
陈年福 [Chen, Nianfu]. (2001). 《甲骨文动词词汇研究》，成都：巴蜀书社。Google Scholar
戴浩一 [Dai, Haoyi]. (2002). 概念结构与非自主语性语法：汉语语法概念系统初探，《当代语言学》第1期1：1–12。Google Scholar
戴浩一 [Tai, H-Y.J.]. (2007). 中文构词与句法的概念结构，《华语文教学研究》4(1), 1–30。Google Scholar
胡敕瑞 [Hu, Chirui]. (2008). 从隐含到呈现(下)——词汇变化影响语法变化，《语言学论丛》第38辑1：99–127。Google Scholar
蒋绍愚 [Jiang, Shaoyu]. (1999). 抽象原则和临摹原则在汉语语法史中的体现，《古汉语研究》第4期1：2–5。Google Scholar
刘丹青 [Liu, Danqing]. (2011). 语言库藏类型学构想，《当代语言学》第4期1：289–303。Google Scholar
刘丹青 [Liu, Danqing]. (2012). 汉语的若干显赫范畴：语言库藏类型学视角，《世界汉语教学》第3期1：291–305。Google Scholar
刘丹青 [Liu, Danqing]. (2013). 显赫范畴的典型范例：普米语的趋向范畴，《民族语文》第3期1：5–17。Google Scholar
刘月华, 潘文娱, 故韡 [Liu, Yuehua, Pan, Wenyu & Gu, Wei ]. (2001). 《实用现代汉语语法》(增订本)，北京：商务印书馆。Google Scholar
吕叔湘 [Lü, Shuxiang]. (1999). 《现代汉语八百词》(增订本)，北京：商务印书馆。Google Scholar
史文磊 [Shi, Wenlei]. (2011). 汉语运动事件词化类型的历时转移，《中国语文》第6期1：483–498。Google Scholar
史文磊 [Shi, Wenlei]. (2012). 汉语运动事件词化类型研究综观，《当代语言学》第1期1：49–65。Google Scholar
史文磊 [Shi, Wenlei]. (2013). 汉语运动事件指向表达的历时演变及相关问题，Presentation at LFK Society Young Scholars Symposium, University of Washington in Seattle, August 11–13, 2013。将刊于《中国语言学集刊》(Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics) 2014 Vol 8 (special issue)。
史文磊 [Shi, Wenlei]. (2014). 《汉语运动事件词化类型的历时考察》，北京：商务印书馆。Google Scholar
孙良明,金敬华 [Sun, Liangming & Jin, Jinghua ]. (2002). 正确对待外来理论——谈对“时间顺序原则”的评价及运用，《语言教学与研究》第4期1：17–19。Google Scholar
汪维辉 [Wang, Weihui]. (2000). 《东汉—隋常用词演变研究》，南京：南京大学出版社。Google Scholar
汪维辉, 秋谷裕幸 [Wang, Weihui & Akitani, Hiroyuki ]. (2010). 汉语“站立”义词的现状与历史，《中国语文》第4期1：299–310。Google Scholar
张丽丽 [Zhang, Lili]. (2003).动词复合与象似性，Language and Linguistics4.1:1–27.Google Scholar
Beavers, John, & Koontz-Garboden, Andrew. (2012). Manner and result in the roots of verbal meaning. Linguistic Inquiry, 431, 331–369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, L., & Guo, J. (2009). Motion events in Chinese novels: Evidence for an Equipollently-framed language. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(9), 1749–1766. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles. (1997). Mappings in thought and language. NY: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haiman, John. (1985). Natural syntax: Iconicity and erosion. NY: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, Shuanfan, & Tanangkingsing, Michael. (2005). Reference to motion events in six Western Austronesian languages: Toward a semantic typology. Oceanic Linguistic, 44(2), 307–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical Prerequisites. Volume I1. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N., & Thompson, Sandra A. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Li, Fengxiang. (1993). A diachronic study of V-V compound in Chinese. Ph.D. dissertation, SUNY at Buffalo, NY.
Peyraube, A. (2006). Motion events in Chinese: A diachronic study of directional complements. In M. Hickmann & S. Robert (Eds.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories (pp. 121–138). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Özçalışkan, Ş., & Slobin, Dan I. (2003). Codability effects of the expressions of manner of motion in Turkish and English. In A.S. Özsoy, D. Akar, M. Nakipoğlu-Demiralp, E.E. Taylan & A. Aksu-Koç (Eds.), Studies in Turkish linguistics (pp. 259–270). Istanbul: Bogaziçi University Press.Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (2010). Reflections on Manner/Result Complementarity. In M. Rappaport Hovav, E. Doron & I. Sichel (Eds.), Lexical Semantics, Syntax, and Event Structure (pp. 21–38). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shi, Wenlei, & Wu, Yicheng. (2014). Which way to move: The evolution of motion expressions in the history of Chinese, to appear in Linguistics, 52(5), 1237–1292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, Dan I. (1996). Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In M. Shibatani & S.A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning (pp. 195–219). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
. (1997). Mind, code, and text. In J. Haiman, & S.A. Thompson (Eds.), Essays of language function and language type (pp. 437–467). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219–257). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Tai, H-Y.J. (1985). Teporal sequence and Chinese word order. In J. Haiman (Ed.), Iconicity in syntax (pp. 49–72). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (中译版：《时间顺序和汉语的语序》，《国外语言学》(黄河译)1988年第1期：10–19。) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Vol. 3: Grammatical categories and the lexicon (pp. 57–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. (1991). Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. In L.A. Sutton, C. Johnson & R. Shields (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 480–519). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics. Volume 21. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Shi, Wenlei, Wanglong Yang & Henghua Su
2018. The typological change of motion expressions in Chinese revisited. Studies in Language 42:4 ► pp. 847 ff. DOI logo
Shi, Wenlei
2015. 漢語運動事件指向表達的歷時演變及相關問題. Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics 8:2 ► pp. 226 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.