Where Centering Meets Mandarin...
Transcript of Where Centering Meets Mandarin...
WHERE CENTERING MEETS
MANDARIN MINI-DISCOURSE
WUYUN SAINA
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG
SEPTEMBER 2013
CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG
香港城市大學
WHERE CENTERING MEETS
MANDARIN MINI-DISCOURSE
基於向心理論的漢語微篇章分析
Submitted to
Department of Chinese, Translation and Linguistics
中文、翻譯及語言學系
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
哲學博士學位
by
Wuyun Saina
烏雲賽娜
September 2013
二零一三年九月
i
ABSTRACT
Previous studies argue that there are two types of passives, namely long and
short passives for Mandarin bei passive sentences, and it is suggested that they
have different structures, namely that long passives have the Agent present at
the syntactic structure, with the Agent completely missing from the syntactic
structure in short passives (Huang, 1999; Tang, 2004, 2006; and Xiong, 2003),
which is called the structure separation approach in this dissertation. The other
view on the relation between the two types of passives is the ellipsis/deletion
approach, namely that short passives are derived from the result of omitting the
Agent from long passives in syntax (Lü, 1980; Li, 1994). Which approach is more
appropriate and correct is one of the questions that this dissertation tries to
answer.
Unlike previous studies which are conducted at the sentential level, this
dissertation investigates the bei passive sentences from a discourse perspective.
Specifically, this dissertation takes a Centering perspective which examines the
transition states from one utterance to next and investigates the roles of
Mandarin bei passives in discourse. A total of more than 100 three-utterance
mini-discourse segments with the bei utterance in the middle is examined on
the basis of 11 novels and the data analysis suggests that the function of both
types of bei passives is to preserve the backward-looking center (Cb) from its
preceding utterance and pass it to its following utterance, though the roles of
the bei-object in these two types of passives are different: while the overt
bei-object helps prepare the introduction of a new Cb for the following
utterance, the covert bei-object can only help retain the original Cb from the
previous utterance. The data analysis also reveals that both types of bei-objects
ii
can function as the Cb for the bei passive sentence, linking the bei utterance with
its previous utterance, and they can also be the antecedents of the pronouns in
the following utterance, which suggests that the bei-object must be realized in
syntax, namely occupying a syntactic position, unlike what is suggested by the
structure separation approach. This finding argues for the ellipsis approach to
the relation between the two types of bei passives in Mandarin Chinese. To
further support this proposal, Mandarin ba-construction is incorporated into
this study, and a similar inter-sentential function is also observed.
Furthermore, this dissertation makes a series of additional comparisons. It
compares the division of labor between the pre-bei/ba topic and the
bei/ba-object, the different behaviors of bei/ba-sentences in Narrative and
Report modes, the different properties of the Centering framework and Givón’s
tradition, and so forth. These comparisons have led to the following
conclusions:
a. From a Centering perspective, different center transition states witness
distinct constructional patterns with a strong homogeneous nature
within each pattern. Considering these patterns, an inter-sentential
function for ba/bei-utterances is thus proposed, as pointed out earlier.
Similar to the bei case, the pre-ba topic also preserves the Cb from its
preceding utterance; while the ba-object, competing with the post-verbal
Recipient, functions to introduce a new Cb for the following utterance or
retain the original Cb from the previous utterance;
b. From a discourse mode viewpoint, it is shown that the bei passives in the
Narrative mode perform differently from those in the Report mode in
aspects such as referential choice, transition states, and possible
violations of the Zero-anaphora Rule. These differences are attributed to
their distinct interpretation patterns of tense, i.e. continuity vs. deixis in
this dissertation, and it is pointed out that the bei passives in different
modes bear distinct discourse functions;
c. By comparing the covert bei-object with the semantically inferable entity
iii
as well as the logical subject in the Middle Construction, it is shown that
only the covert bei-object could act as a center. This result further
vindicates that a covert bei-object also occupies a syntactic position, as
argued earlier. Hence a uniform syntactic structure is proposed for both
long and short passives, though the long and short passives differ in their
discourse functions—the former is adopted to introduce a new center so
as to prepare for a possible Cb Shift, whereas the latter is to avoid the
introduction of unnecessary centers so as to keep the information flow in
a more fluent manner, as pointed out earlier; and
d. Last by not least, by comparing the Centering approach with Givón’s
tradition towards discourse analysis, we think that Centering Theory is
the true analytical tool of calculating the degree of discourse coherence,
while Givón’s tradition is better treated as a measurement for discourse
relatedness, not directly the discourse coherence.
Unlike the previous studies, which follow Givón’s (1983) tradition, such as Xing
(1990), Myhill & Xing (1994), and Liu (2011), which scrutinize the contribution
of Mandarin bei passives related to topic continuity, the theoretical perspective
of Centering Theory, as adopted in this dissertation, explores in-depth the
unnoticed linguistic facts about Mandarin ba and bei-constructions, and thus
helps provide a more comprehensive portrait concerning the discourse
functions and syntactic properties of these two constructions in Mandarin
Chinese.
vi
Table of Contents
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1 SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................... 1
1.2 MAIN PROPOSALS ...................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 AN OVERVIEW OF THE DISSERTATION .......................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER TWO: ON CENTERING THEORY ............................................................................................ 7
2.1 A BRIEF INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 7
2.2 CANONICAL CENTERING THEORY ................................................................................................ 9
2.2.1 Centers, utterance, and discourse segment ....................................................................... 9
2.2.2 Basic Constraints and Rules of CCT ................................................................................. 19
2.2.3 Hu and Pan (2002) .......................................................................................................... 27
2.3 VARIANTS OF CT ..................................................................................................................... 35
2.3.1 Meta-Informative Centering Theory ............................................................................... 35
2.3.2 Dynamic CT ...................................................................................................................... 41
2.3.3 Centering on OT ............................................................................................................... 50
2.3.4 Parametric CT .................................................................................................................. 56
2.4 ESSENTIAL NOTIONS OF CT AND SOME NOTORIOUS PROBLEMS ..................................................... 61
2.4.1 A unique Cb vs. center branching .................................................................................... 61
2.4.2 Realization ....................................................................................................................... 68
2.4.3 Constraint 3’ role ............................................................................................................. 73
2.4.4 Coherence vs. Salience ..................................................................................................... 75
2.4.5 Cf-ranking ........................................................................................................................ 78
2.4.6 Anaphoric resolution ....................................................................................................... 86
2.5 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................... 93
CHAPTER THREE: MODES OF DISCOURSE ......................................................................................... 96
3.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 96
3.2 A DRT FORMALIZATION ........................................................................................................... 98
3.3 SITUATION TYPE .................................................................................................................... 102
3.4 FROM TEMPORAL AND ASPECTUAL INFORMATION TO THE TEXT PROGRESSION ............................. 108
3.4.1 Text progression—temporal vs. atemporal .................................................................. 108
3.4.2 Aspectual information ................................................................................................... 112
vii
3.4.3 Interaction of tense interpretation with aspectual information within DRT frame ... 114
3.5 REFERRING EXPRESSIONS ....................................................................................................... 120
3.5.1 Proximate-Obviative pronoun system ........................................................................... 121
3.5.2 Familiarity status of referring expressions ................................................................... 123
3.6 SURFACE PRESENTATION ........................................................................................................ 127
3.6.1 The topic-comment partition ........................................................................................ 130
3.6.2 The focus-background partition ................................................................................... 132
3.6.3 Non-canonical constructions—take passive in English for instance ........................... 133
3.7 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 134
3.7.1 A summarization of five discourse modes ..................................................................... 134
3.7.2 The classification of discourse ....................................................................................... 136
3.8 INTERACTION BETWEEN CENTERING THEORY AND DISCOURSE MODES ....................................... 138
CHAPTER FOUR: A DATA ANALYSIS OF BEI-UTTERANCE ................................................................. 142
4.1 DATA ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................... 142
4.1.1 A general data presentation.......................................................................................... 144
4.1.2 The contribution of bei-utterance to discourse coherence ........................................... 168
4.1.3 A comparison between Narrative mode and Report mode .......................................... 200
4.2 COMPARING CENTERING APPROACH WITH GIVÓN’S TRADITION ........................................................ 208
4.2.1 The discourse function of bei-utterance ....................................................................... 208
4.2.2 Comparing with Givón’s tradition ................................................................................. 213
4.3 LONG VS. SHORT PASSIVE ....................................................................................................... 219
4.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 219
4.3.2 A two-way comparison .................................................................................................. 220
4.3.3 Implications for the syntactic structure of passive ....................................................... 223
4.3.4 Extension to two atypical passive in Mandarin ............................................................ 228
4.3.5 Interim summary ........................................................................................................... 255
4.4 REVISITING CENTERING THEORY ............................................................................................. 256
4.4.1 Definition verification ................................................................................................... 257
4.4.2 Cf-template ranking of bei-utterance ........................................................................... 260
4.5 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 262
CHAPTER FIVE: A DATA ANALYSIS OF BA-UTTERANCE—SOME FURTHER SUPPORT ........................ 268
5.1 DATA ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................... 268
5.1.1 A general data presentation.......................................................................................... 269
5.1.2 The contribution of ba-utterance to discourse coherence ........................................... 278
5.1.3 A comparison with bei-utterance .................................................................................. 295
5.2 IS BA-CONSTRUCTION ANTIPASSIVE? ....................................................................................... 296
5.2.1 Antipassive in ergative languages ................................................................................ 296
viii
5.2.2 Antipassive in accusative languages ............................................................................. 309
5.2.3 Antipassive vs. passive ................................................................................................... 315
5.2.4 Is ba-construction antipassive? ..................................................................................... 316
5.3 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 328
5.3.1 Cf-template ranking of ba ............................................................................................. 328
5.3.2 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 332
CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 335
6.1 REFINEMENTS TO CENTERING THEORY .................................................................................... 335
6.2 MAIN FINDINGS AND CONTRIBUTIONS ...................................................................................... 336
6.3 FURTHER ISSUES .................................................................................................................... 338
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................... 341
APPENDIX I:.................................................................................................................................... 356
APPENDIX II: .................................................................................................................................. 362