Revisiting donkey anaphora in Mandarin Chinese
In their article published in this journal,
Pan and Jiang (2015)
challenge the claims and proposals made in
Cheng and Huang (1996) concerning both the
distributional patterns and interpretive strategies for donkey anaphora in Mandarin conditional. They claim that all three types
of conditionals (
rúguǒ-, dōu- and bare conditionals) allow either a
wh-phrase or a pronoun in
the consequent clause, and that both the
wh-phrase and the pronoun may be either unselectively bound or
interpreted by the E-type strategy. We show that, except for an observation already mentioned and accommodated in
Cheng and Huang’s (1996) analysis of
rúguǒ-conditionals, their
distributional claims are incorrect. It is also shown that the interpretative flexibility they propose is untenable, as it leaves
a number of otherwise well-predicted properties unaccounted for.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The distributional patterns
- 2.1
Cheng and Huang (1996)
- 2.2
Pan and Jiang (2015)
- 3.Dissecting P&J’s patterns
- 3.1
Rúguǒ-conditionals
- 3.2
Dōu-conditionals
- 3.3Bare conditionals
- 4.Interpreting wh-phrases and pronouns
- 4.1Interpreting wh-phrases
- 4.2Interpreting pronouns
- 5.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (17)
References
Cheng, L. L.-S. (1991). On the Typology of Wh-Questions. Doctoral dissertation, M.I.T., Cambridge: MA., U.S.A.
Cheng, L. L.-S., & Huang, C.-T. J. (1996). Two types of donkey sentences. Natural Language Semantics 41:121–163.
Evans, G. (1980). Pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 111:337–362.
Han, C.-H. (2002). Interpreting interrogatives as rhetorical questions. Lingua 1121:201–229.
Heim, I. (1982). The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, U.S.A.
Heim, I. (1990). E-type pronouns and donkey anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 131:137–178.
Huang, C.-T. J., & Ochi, M. (2004). Syntax of the hell: two types of dependencies. NELS 34, Proceedings of the 34th Conference of the North Eastern Linguistic Society, pp. 279–294.
Kadmon, N. (1987). On unique and non-unique reference and asymmetric quantification. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, U.S.A.
Kuo, C.-M. (1996). The interaction between daodi and wh-phrases in Mandarin Chinese. Ms., University of Southern California.
Li, Y.-H. A. (1992). Indefinite wh in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 11:125–155.
Lin, J.-W. (1996). Polarity licensing and wh-phrase quantification in Chinese. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, U.S.A.
Lin, J.-W. (1998). On existential polarity wh-phrases in Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 71, 219–255.
Liu, M. (2016). Mandarin wh-conditionals as interrogative conditionals. Proceedings of SALT 261: 814–835, 2016.
Sadock, J. M. (1971). Queclaratives. In Papers from the seventh regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 223–232. Chicago Linguistic Society.
Xiang, Y. (2016). Interpreting questions with non-exhaustive answers. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, U.S.A.
Yu, X. (1965). Yiwen daici de renzhi yongfa [on the “wh-ever” use of interrogative pronouns]. Zhongguo Yuwen 30–35.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Pan, Haihua & Hang Kuang
2023.
Another Look at Chinese Donkey Sentences: A Reply to Cheng and Huang (2020). In
Dynamics in Logic and Language [
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 13524],
► pp. 25 ff.
Li, Yurong, Peng Zhou & Mingming Liu
2021.
Donkey pronouns in child Mandarin: Insights into the ∃/∀ dichotomy.
Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 6:1
Zhang, Niina Ning
2021.
Pairing Degree-WH Clauses in Mandarin.
Studies in Chinese Linguistics 42:2
► pp. 121 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 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.