Scalarity, degree reading and maximality in a Mandarin numeral construction
This paper investigates the semantics of an understudied Mandarin numeral construction type, here dubbed
da-NumPs (i.e. number word < da ‘big’ < noun). Drawing primarily upon evidence from
online Mandarin corpora, we argue for a taxonomy of this construction that comprises two distinct interpretations, based on the
scalarity of the morpheme da and its composition with the other constituents within the construction.
Specifically, one reading of da-NumPs is a degree superlative reading, in which da relates a
domain of comparison, denoted by the nominal argument, to a plural group of entities ranked along the upper bound of a
contextually determined scale. Second, da-NumPs have a definite description reading, in which da
behaves on a par with a maximality-denoting iota operator, such that the construction refers to the maximal group individual that
satisfies the property denoted by the nominal argument. We further show that at the discourse level, both readings encode the way
the speaker subjectively construes the situation being described, indicating the speaker’s evaluative attitude towards the
significance of said situation. This pragmatic condition distinguishes the use of da-NumPs against that of
alternative, truth-conditionally identical numeral construction types. We further propose that in cases where the nominal
component includes a degree argument, a process of degree intensification enables the definite description reading to verify the
same situation as is licensed under a superlative semantics. We show that this process provides a way to make sense of the
systematic ambiguity available to da-NumPs, and allows us to capture its polysemy.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.A taxonomy of meanings
- 2.1Plural degree superlatives
- 2.2Definite description
- 3.Interpreting the meanings
- 3.1Formalization
- 3.2Superlativeness and invited superlative inference
- 3.3Comparison class restriction and domain shift
- 4.Conclusion
-
Acknowledgements
- Notes
- Abbreviations
-
References
References (50)
References
Aihara, Masahiko. 2009. The scope of -est: Evidence from Japanese. Natural Language Semantics 171. 341–367.
Brinton, Laurel & Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2005. Lexicalization and language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Canavan, Alexandra & Zipperlen, George. 1996. CALLFRIEND Mandarin Chinese-Mainland Dialect LDC96S55. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium. ([URL]) (Accessed 2018-11-22)
Carlson, Greg. 2015. Naming, noncompositionality and etymology. (Talk presented at the 27th European Summer School in Logic, Language and Information (ESSLLI 2015), Barcelona, 3–14 August, 2015.)
Chen, Jun. 2016. Discourse prominence induces semantic change: Evidence from Chinese. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 22(1). 71–80.
Cheng, Lisa & Heycock, Caroline & Zamparelli, Roberto. 2017. Two levels of definiteness. In Erlewine, Michael Yoshitaka (ed.), Proceedings of GLOW in Asia 111, 79–93. Singapore: The National University of Singapore.
Coppock, Elizabeth & Josefson, Christian. 2015. Completely bare Swedish superlatives. In Eva Csipak & Hedde Zeijlstra (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 191, 179–196. Göttingen: Universität Göttingen.
Dayal, Veneeta. 1997. Free choice and ever: Identity and free choice readings. In Lawson, Aaron (ed.), Proceedings of SALT 71, 99–116. Stanford: Stanford University.
Farkas, Donka & Bruce, Kim. 2010. On reacting to assertions and polar questions. Journal of Semantics 271. 81–118.
Farkas, Donka & Kiss, Katalin E. 2000. On the comparative and absolute readings of superlatives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 181. 417–455.
Fitzgibbons, Natalia & Sharvit, Yael & Gajewski, Jon. 2008. Plural superlatives and distributivity. In Friedman, Tova & Ito, Satoshi (eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory 181. 302–318. [URL]
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2001. The meaning of free choice. Linguistics and Philosophy 241. 659–735.
Heim, Irene. 1995. Superlatives: A case study on the division of labor of syntax and semantics. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (Manuscript.)
Heim, Irene. 2015. Definiteness and indefiniteness. In Von Heusinger Klaus & Maienborn, Claudia & Portner, Paul (eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, vol. 21, 996–1025. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tanya. 2002. World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jin, Dawei & Chen, Jun. 2018. Meaning change in Chinese: A numeral phrase construction from adjectives to superlatives to definite descriptions. Linguistics 56(3). 599–651.
Kadmon, Nirit & Landman, Fred. 1993. Any. Linguistics and Philosophy 16(4). 353–422.
Kennedy, Christopher & McNally, Louise. 2005. Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language 81(2). 345–381.
Klein, Ewan. 1980. A semantics for positive and comparative adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 4(1). 1–45.
Kneale, William. 1962. Modality de dicto and de re. In Nagel, Ernest & Suppes, Patrick & Tarski, Alfred (eds.), Logic, methodology and philosophy of science, 622–633. San Francisco: Stanford University Press.
Krasikova, Sveta. 2012. Definiteness in superlatives. In Aloni, M. & Kimmelman, V. & Roelofsen, F. & Sassoon, G. & Schulz, K. & Westera, M. (eds.), Logic, language and meaning (Proceedings of the 18th Amsterdam Colloquium), 411–420. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam. [URL].
Kripke, Saul. 1980. Naming and necessity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Langacker, Ronald. 2007. Cognitive grammar. In Geeraerts, Dirk & Cuyckens, Hubert (eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, 421–462. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Li, Shengmei. 2003. The usage of “da” in the “ten da popular songs” structure. Xiuci Xuexi [Rhetoric Learning] 13(5). 14–15.
Li, Xiaoyun. 2004. Characteristics of the nouns in “num + da + noun” phrases. Journal of Qinghai Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition) 61. 112–114.
Link, Godehard. 1983. The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: A lattice-theoretic approach. In Bäuerle, Rainer & Schwarze, Christoph & Von Stechow, Arnim (eds.), Meaning, use and interpretation of language, 302–323. Berlin: de Gruyter.
McEnery, Tony & Xiao, Richard. 2004. The Lancaster corpus of Mandarin Chinese: A corpus for monolingual and contrastive language study. [URL] (Accessed 2018-11-29.)
McNabb, Yaron. 2012. The syntax and semantics of degree modification. Chicago: University of Chicago. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Partee, Barbara. 1995. Lexical semantics and compositionality. In Gleitman, Lila & Liberman, Mark (eds.), An invitation to cognitive science: Language, vol. 11, 311–360. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Rett, Jessica. 2014. The semantics of evaluativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sharvit, Yael & Stateva, Penka. 2000. Against ‘long’ movement of the superlative operator. Proceedings of SALT 101, 185–202. Ithaca: Cornell University.
Sharvy, Richard. 1980. A more general theory of definite descriptions. The Philosophical Review 89(4). 607–624.
Stateva, Penka. 2002. How different are different degree constructions. Storrs: University of Connecticut. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Su, Danjie. 2017. Significance as a lens: Understanding the Mandarin ba construction through discourse adjacent alternation. Journal of Pragmatics 1171. 204–230.
Szabolcsi, Anna. 1986. Comparative superlatives. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 81. 245–266.
Tai, James. 1982. Relevant categorical distinctions in Chinese. Papers from the Regional Meeting of Chicago Linguistic Society 181. 495–506.
Tai, James. 1994. Chinese classifier systems and human categorization. In Chen, Matthew & Tzeng, Ovid, In honor of William S.-Y. Wang: Interdisciplinary studies on language and language change, 479–494. Taipei: Pyramid.
Tao, Hongyin & Xiao, Richard. 2012. The UCLA Chinese Corpus (2nd edn). Lancaster: UCREL. [URL] (Accessed 2018-11-30.)
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Trousdale, Graeme. 2013. Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [URL].
Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Verhagen, Arie. 2007. Construal and perspectivization. In Geeraerts, Dirk & Cuyckens, Hubert (eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, 48–81. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Von Fintel, Kai. 1994. Restrictions on quantifier domains. Amherst: University of Massachusetts at Amherst. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Von Fintel, Kai & Fox, Danny & Iatridou, Sabine. 2014. Definiteness as maximal informativeness. In Crnič, Luka & Sauerland, Uli (eds.), The art and craft of semantics: A festschrift for Irene Heim, 165–174. Cambridge: The MIT Press. [URL]
Von Stechow, Arnim. 1984. Comparing semantic theories of comparison. Journal of Semantics 3(1). 1–77.
Xu, Guangcan. 2005. “Da” in “ten da popular songs” should not be viewed as a classifier: A reply to Li (2003). Xiuci Xuexi [Rhetoric Learning] 15(1). 64–65.
Yang, Jilin. 2013. Taipingjing Yizhu [Translations and Annotations of Taipingjing]. Beijing: Zhonghua Publishing House.
Yang, Lu. 1999. Shi shuo “shu+da+ming” geshi [A preliminary analysis of the “number+da+noun” format]. Yuwen Jianshe [Language Planning] 11. 18–21.
Yu, Baocheng. 1999. Baihua ershisi shi-Jinshu [The twenty-four histories in Modern Chinese-Book of Jin]. Beijing: The Chinese Overseas Publishing House.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Su, Danjie
2022.
Factuality lens.
Chinese Language and Discourse. An International and Interdisciplinary Journal 13:2
► pp. 242 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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.