Article In: Language and Linguistics: Online-First Articles
Epistemic indefinites in Cantonese
A case study of m-zi ‘not-know’
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
Abstract
A recent line of research concerns how an existential claim is bundled with a modal component — in particular, one relating to speakers’ ignorance — in the nominal domain. The primary focus of this paper is to discuss a case of epistemic indefinites in Cantonese which takes the form of m-zi-WH ‘not-know-WH’. I argue for two claims in this paper. First, I propose that mzi is an (overt) choice function operator that binds wh-expressions and disjunctive expressions. Second, I suggest that the ignorance component associated with mzi is a conventional implicature, representing a new type of the ignorance component for epistemic indefinites. I also discuss a potential grammaticalization path of m-zi, connecting its syntactic distribution to its semantic properties. The findings in this paper uncover a new breed of epistemic indefinites and contributes to our understanding of both the interpretation of wh-expressions in Cantonese and the study of how natural languages encode an ignorance component in nominal expressions.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.A choice functional analysis of mzi
- 2.1The non-verbal use of mzi
- 2.1.1Differentiating the verbal m-zi from the non-verbal mzi
- 2.1.2Not syntactic amalgams
- 2.2Arguments for a choice-functional analysis of mzi
- 2.2.1Mzi and expressions invoking sets of alternatives for evaluation
- 2.2.2Competitions with other wh-binders
- 2.2.3Indefiniteness and scope behaviors of the mzi+wh string
- 2.1The non-verbal use of mzi
- 3.The ignorance component as a conventional implicature
- 3.1The ignorance component
- 3.2Escaping intensional scope
- 3.3Not a conversational implicature
- 3.4Conventional implicature
- 4.A compositional analysis
- 4.1Assumptions
- 4.2Proposal and implementation
- 4.2.1Mzi as a choice function variable and a CI trigger
- 4.2.2The apparent narrow scope and parameterized choice functions
- 4.3Distributed ignorance
- 4.3.1A complication
- 4.3.2Towards a solution
- 5.Notes on the grammaticalization of mzi
- 5.1Different usages of the string m-zi
- 5.2Morphological fusion of verbs and wh-expressions
- 5.3On the source of the ignorance component
- 6.Conclusions
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- List of abbreviations
References
References (80)
Aloni, Maria. 2001. Quantification under conceptual covers. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Aloni, Maria & Port, Angelika. 2015. Epistemic indefinites and methods of identification. In Alonso-Ovalle, Luis & Menéndez-Benito, Paula (eds.), Epistemic indefinites: Exploring modality beyond the verbal domain, 117–140. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alonso-Ovalle, Luis. 2006. Disjunction in alternative semantics. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Amherst. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Alonso-Ovalle, Luis & Menéndez-Benito, Paula. 2003. Some epistemic indefinites. In Kadowaki, Makoto & Kawahara, Shigeto (eds.), NELS 33: Proceedings of the Thirty-Third Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, 1–12. Amherst: GLSA.
. 2015. Epistemic indefinites: Exploring modality beyond the verbal domain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alonso-Ovalle, Luis & Shimoyama, Junko. 2014. Expressing ignorance in the nominal domain: Japanese Wh-ka. In Santana-LaBarge, Robert E. (ed.), WCCFL 31: Proceedings of the 31st West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 11–20. Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Amaral, Patricia & Roberts, Craige & Smith, E. Allyn. 2007. Review of The logic of conventional implicatures by Chris Potts. Linguistics and Philosophy 30(6). 707–749.
Anderbois, Scott & Brasoveanu, Adrian & Henderson, Robert. 2015. At-issue proposals and appositive impositions in discourse. Journal of Semantics 32(1). 93–138.
Beck, Sigrid. 2006. Intervention effects follow from focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 14(1). 1–56.
Cable, Seth. 2010. The grammar of Q: Q-particles, wh-movement and pied-piping. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Charlow, Simon. 2020. The scope of alternatives: Indefiniteness and islands. Linguistics and Philosophy 43(4). 427–472.
Chen, Sihwei & Hohaus, Vera & Laturnus, Rebecca & Louie, Meagan & Matthewson, Lisa & Rullmann, Hotze & Simchen, Ori & Turner, Claire K. & Vander Klok, Jozina. 2017. Past possibility cross-linguistically: Evidence from twelve languages. In Arregui, Ana & Rivero, María Luisa & Salanova, Andrés (eds.), Modality across syntactic categories, 235–287. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cheung, Lawrence Yam-Leung. 2015. Uttering the unutterable with wh- placeholders. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 24(3). 271–308.
Chierchia, Gennaro. 2004. A semantics for unaccusatives and its syntactic consequences. In Alexiadou, Artemis & Anagnostopoulou, Elena & Everaert, Martin (eds.), The unaccusativity puzzle: Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface, 22–59. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chierchia, Gennaro & Liao, Hsiu-Chen Daphne. 2015. Where do Chinese wh-items fit? In Alonso-Ovalle, Luis & Menéndez-Benito, Paula (eds.), Epistemic indefinites: Exploring modality beyond the verbal domain, 31–59. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dawson, Virginia. 2018. A new kind of epistemic indefinite. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 22(1). 349–366.
Endriss, Cornelia. 2009. Quantificational topics: A scopal treatment of exceptional wide scope phenomena. Dordrecht: Springer.
Erlewine, Michael Yoshitaka. 2017. Why the null complementizer is special in complementizer-trace effects. In Halpert, Claire & Kotek, Hadas & van Urk, Coppe (eds.), A pesky set: Papers for David Pesetsky, 371–380. Cambridge: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
Farkas, Donka F. 1995. Specificity and scope. In Nash, Léa & Tsoulas, Georges (eds.), Actes du Premier Colloque Langues & Grammaire, 119–137. Paris: Université de Paris 8.
Fodor, Janet Dean & Sag, Ivan A. 1982. Referential and quantificational indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy 5(3). 355–398.
Gazdar, Gerald. 1979. Pragmatics: Implicature, presupposition, and logical form. New York: Academic Press.
Geist, Ljudmila. 2008. Specificity as referential anchoring: Evidence from Russian. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 12. 151–164.
Giannakidou, Anastasia & Quer, Josep. 2013. Exhaustive and non-exhaustive variation with free choice and referential vagueness: Evidence from Greek, Catalan, and Spanish. Lingua 126. 120–149.
Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Cole, Peter & Morgan, Jerry L. (eds.), Syntax and semantics, volume 3: Speech arts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.
Hopper, Paul J. 1991. On some principles of grammaticalization. In Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Heine, Bernd (eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization, volume 1: Theoretical and methodological issues, 17–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Horn, Laurence R. 1972. On the semantic properties of logical operators in English. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Huang, C.-T. James. 1987. Existential sentences in Chinese and (in)definiteness. In Reuland, Eric J. & ter Meulen, Alice G. B. (eds.), The representation of (in)definiteness, 226–253. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Huang, Rui-heng Ray. 2010. Disjunction, coordination, and question: A comparative study. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Karttunen, Lauri & Peters, Stanley. 1979. Conventional implicature. In Oh, Choon-Kyu & Dinneen, David A. (eds.), Syntax and semantics, volume 11: Presupposition, 1–56. New York: Academic Press.
Kim, Ji-yung. 2003. “Intermediate scope” in (Mandarin) Chinese. In Young, Robert B. & Zhou, Yuping (eds.), Proceedings of the 13th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference (SALT XIII), 162–179. Ithaca: CLC Publications.
Kishimoto, Hideki. 2005. Wh-in-situ and movement in Sinhala questions. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 23(1). 1–51.
Kratzer, Angelika. 1998. Scope or pseudoscope? Are there wide-scope indefinites? In Rothstein, Susan (ed.), Events and grammar, 163–196. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Kratzer, Angelika & Shimoyama, Junko. 2002. Indeterminate pronouns: The view from Japanese. In Otsu, Yukio (ed.), The Proceedings of the Third Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics, 1–25. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
Lakoff, George. 1974. Syntactic amalgams. In La Galy, Michael W. & Fox, Robert A. & Bruck, Anthony (eds.), CLS 10-1: Papers from the 10th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 321–344. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Lee, Tommy Tsz-Ming & Wong, Hok-Yuen. 2018. Epistemic indefinites and reportative indefinites in Cantonese. In Politzer-Ahles, Stephen & Hsu, Yu-Yin & Huang, Chu-Ren & Yao, Yao (eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation (PACLIC-32), 339–347. Hong Kong: Association for Computational Linguistics.
Lee, Tommy Tsz-Ming & Yip, Ka-Fai. 2021. Raising, phase unlocked. In Soo, Rachel & Chow, Una Y. & Nederveen, Sander (eds.), Proceedings of the 38th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 274–282. Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
. 2024. Hyperraising, evidentiality, and phase deactivation. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 42(4). 1527–1578.
Li, Yen-Hui Audrey. 1992. Indefinite Wh in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 1(2). 125–155.
Lin, Jo-wang. 1998. On existential polarity wh-phrases in Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 7(3). 219–255.
Liu, Mingming. 2021. A pragmatic explanation of the mei-dou co-occurrence in Mandarin. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 30(3). 277–316.
Liu, Mingming & Cui, Yanyan. 2019. Situating Mandarin wh-indefinites in the typology of modal indefinites. Waiguoyu 42(3). 26–37.
Matthewson, Lisa. 1999. On the interpretation of wide-scope indefinites. Natural Language Semantics 7(1). 79–134.
McCawley, James D. 1978. Conversational implicature and the lexicon. In Cole, Peter (ed.), Syntax and semantics, volume 9: Pragmatics, 245–259. New York: Academic Press.
Ott, Dennis. 2016. Ellipsis in appositives. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 1(1). 1–46. (Article 34.)
Ott, Dennis & de Vries, Mark. 2016. Right-dislocation as deletion. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 34(2). 641–690.
Pesetsky, David. 1987. Wh-in-situ: Movement and unselective binding. In Reuland, Eric J. & ter Meulen, Alice G. B. (eds.), The representation of (in)definiteness, 98–129. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Reinhart, Tanya. 1997. Quantifier scope: How labor is divided between QR and choice functions. Linguistics and Philosophy 20(4). 335–397.
. 1998. Wh-in-situ in the framework of the minimalist program. Natural Language Semantics 6(1). 29–56.
Rooth, Mats Edward. 1985. Association with focus. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Amherst. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Ruys, E. G. 1992. The scope of indefinites. Utrecht: Utrecht University. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Sadock, Jerrold M. 1978. On testing for conversational implicature. In Cole, Peter (ed.), Syntax and semantics 9: Pragmatics, 281–297. New York: Academic Press.
Safir, Kenneth. 1982. Syntactic chains and the definiteness effect. Cambridge: MIT. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Schlenker, Philippe. 2010. Supplements within a unidimensional semantics I: Scope. In Aloni, Maria & Bastiaanse, Harald & de Jager, Tikitu & Schulz, Katrin (eds.), Logic, language and meaning: 17th Amsterdam colloquium, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, December 16–18, 2009, revised selected papers, 74–83. Berlin: Springer.
. 2013. Supplements within a unidimensional semantics II: Epistemic status and projection. In Kan, Seda & Moore-Cantwell, Claire & Staubs, Robert (eds.), NELS 40: Proceedings of the Fortieth Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, vol. 2, 167–182. Amherst: GLSA.
Shanon, Benny. 1976. Semantic and syntactic features in the context of dreams. Linguistic Inquiry 7(3). 518–519.
Shimoyama, Junko. 2006. Indeterminate phrase quantification in Japanese. Natural Language Semantics 14(2). 139–173.
Šimík, Radek. 2014. Epistemic indefinites under epistemic modals in Czech. In Zybatow, Gerhild & Biskup, Petr & Guhl, Marcel & Hurtig, Claudia & Mueller-Reichau, Olav & Yastrebova, Maria (eds.), Slavic grammar from a formal perspective: The 10th anniversary FDSL Conference, Leipzig 2013, 425–442. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Simons, Mandy. 2005. Semantics and pragmatics in the interpretation of or. In Georgala, Effi & Howell, Jonathan (eds.), Proceedings of the 15th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference (SALT XV), 205–222. Ithaca: CLC Publications.
Slade, Benjamin. 2015. Sinhala epistemic indefinites with a certain je ne sais quoi. In Alonso-Ovalle, Luis & Menéndez-Benito, Paula (eds.), Epistemic indefinites: Exploring modality beyond the verbal domain, 82–99. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sudo, Yasutada. 2010. Wh-ka pronouns in Japanese and the semantics of indeterminate pronouns. (Handout distributed at the Workshop on Epistemic Indefinites, University of Göttingen, 11 June 2010.)
von Fintel, Kai. 2004. Would you believe it? The King of France is back! (Presuppositions and truth-value intuitions). In Reimer, Marga & Bezuidenhout, Anne (eds.), Descriptions and beyond, 315–341. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Winter, Yoad. 1997. Choice functions and the scopal semantics of indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy 20(4). 399–467.
Wong, Hok Yuen. 2018. Wh-doublets in Cantonese. Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong. (Master’s thesis.)
Yap, Foong Ha & Chor, Winnie. 2014. Epistemic, evidential and attitudinal markers in clause-medial position in Cantonese. In Leiss, Elisabeth & Abraham, Werner (eds.), Modes of modality: Modality, typology, and universal grammar, 219–260. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.