The semantic interpretation of determiner quantifiers and the relationship between syntactic structure and semantic structure of sentences with determiner quantifiers

根据Herburger(1997,2000),在阶段性谓词的语境中,处在限定量词内部论元位置的焦点对弱量化词而不是强量化词的语义解读有影响,而处在VP中的焦点对强量化词和弱量化词的语义解读都有影响。本文在此基础之上,进一步详细考察处在VP中的焦点对限定量词语义解读的影响;同时考察限定量词句的句法结构与语义结构的关系及其原因。本文认为,当焦点处在VP中时,全称限定量词实际难以对焦点敏感,其他限定量词对焦点敏感,但由于其比例解读和焦点解读的真值存在不同的蕴涵关系,使得其体现出的对VP内焦点的敏感性的强弱程度不同;限定量词句的语义结构在阶段性谓词的语境中受焦点影响而跟句法结构产生不一致关系,且这种不一致关系强弱量化词有别,原因在于阶段性谓词表示的具体场景中的具体事件,更容易成为参与者成分的标志而起到帮助辨识参与者的作用;弱量化词的强述谓性和强量化词的话题性,使得其内部论元位置的焦点成分在是否能移到LF层的VP中有别。Hcrburger （ 1997, 2000） observed that in contexts with stage-level predicates, focus in internal argument position of DQs has a truth-conditional effect on the interpretation of weak but not strong DQs, while focus in VP affects the interpretation of both weak and strong DQs. On the basis of Herburger （ 1997, 2000）, this paper aims to give a full picture of the way focus in VP influences the interpretation of weak and strong DQs, and based on the observations of the way focus in VP works, the paper tries to find out how and why syntactic structure and semantic structure are mismatched in sentences with DQs. It is pointed out that while universal quantifiers are insensitive to focus in VP, non- universal quantifiers are sensitive to it; the degree of focus-sensitivity of non-universal quantifiers varies from quantifier to quantifier, which is due to different entailing relation between the truth condition of their proportional reading （ where the restriction is provided by the internal NP） and that of their focus-affected reading （ where the restriction is provided by the non-focused part of the sentence）. The reason why focus has a structuring effect on semantic structure of DQ-sentences with stage-level predicates but not on that of DQ~sente~ce~ w~t~ ~,~dua~-~e,~e~ predicates ~,~e~ ~ t~e fact t~at t~e ~en~tati~n~ ~f stage~ level predicates are quite different from those of individual-level ones. What stage-level predicates denote are concrete events taking place in some specific temporal and spacial domain, while the denotations of individual-level ones are characteristics or properties that are relatively stable over time. As for why sentences with weak DQs allow for more mismatch between their syntactic structure and semantic structure than those with strong DQs, it is argued that weak DQ are of strong predicative properties and strong DQs are of strong topical properties and it is such a contrast that is responsible for whether the movement of a focused element in internal NP of the DQs to VP国家社科基金重大招标项目(项目批准号:12&ZD175)；国家社科基金一般项目(项目批准号:16BYY135)；教育部人文社科基金青年项目(项目批准号:13YJC740032)的资助

Evolution of zong(总)'s quantificational function and the relationship between quantification over individuals and quantification over events in Chinese

本文通过分析"总"量化功能的历时演变,探讨汉语中彼此独立而又紧密关联的个体量化与事件量化的关系。首先详细考察"总"量化功能的历时演变,指出在"总"由个体量化词演变为事件量化词的过程中,量化历时反复发生事件所涉的对象是其变化的关键。然后分析个体与事件的事理关联,指出"总"从量化个体到量化事件的语义过渡以及这一演变的逻辑顺序,从个体与事件的事理关联可以得到解释;并进一步指出汉语中个体量化与事件量化的关系:二者不是泾渭分明,而是既存在同一表达手段的功能交替,又有不同功能共享同一表达手段,在量化领域充分显示了个体与事件之间独立而又共存的关系。Based on observations of the diachronic changes of zong(总) 's quantificational function, this paper explores the relationship between quantification over individuals and quantification over events in Chinese. As an individual quantifier, zong can quantify over plural individuals which are participants of recurring events over time, and then quantify over recurring events themselves but focusing on their similarities in space while ignoring their differences in time until it finally became a pure event quantifier. The evolution of zong' s function reflects an intimate relationship between quantifications over individuals and events in Chinese. Such an intimacy is based on an intimacy between individuals and events, which, as the specific forms of space and time, are two ontologies of the world. Several phenomena in Chinese quantification illustrate the close relationship between individuals and events.国家社科基金重大招标项目(项目编号:12&ZD175);; 教育部人文社科基金青年项目(项目编号:13YJC740032)的资

A comparative analysis of dou (都) and zong(总) in event quantification

“总“和“都“都具有全称量化事件的功能,在一定的条件下可以互换而不影响句子逻辑语义的表达。对两者的事件量化功能,以往文献或仅指出相同之处,或虽对不同之处做出比较,但语料的观察却欠全面。本文在全面观察语言事实的基础上,提出“总“和“都“在事件量化上最大的不同在于两者量化方向的不同:“都“是左向量化,而“总“是全局量化。通过两者量化方向的不同,可以对两者分布环境的不同、语用差异以及共现时的语序特征等一系列现象作出解释。Both dou ( 都) and zong ( 总) function in the universal quantification of events.And under certain conditions a mutual substitution is allowed without altering the logic and semantic content of a sentence.This article argues that the essential difference between zong and dou lies in the direction of quantification, and specifically, dou serves a leftward quantification and zong a whole-set quantification.Realization of this difference facilitates explanations for a bunch of phenomena such as syntactic distribution,pragmatic functions, and the ordering when the two co-occur.国家社科基金(项目名称:“现代汉语事件量化系统的研究”;项目编号:06CYY013)的资

Functions of le_2 as Existential Quantifier over Event Variables and as Marker of Event Foci

本文讨论"了_2"对事件的存在量化功能及标记事件焦点的功能。首先,区分"了_2"和"了_1"在是否能存在量化事件上的不同,指出"了_2"具有存在量化事件的功能,而"了_1"只是完成体标记,其作用是给事件变量提供限制,所表达的存在事件义只是一种语用推导;然后,分析"了_2"标记事件焦点的功能,并比较"了_2"句和"了_1"句焦点结构的异同,指出"了_2"的存在量化事件功能与其事件焦点标记功能之间的语义关联;最后,将"了_2"句与同样指涉存在事件的表结果或状态的动补结构以及"的"字事态结构进行比较,指出"了_2"句和这些结构在存在事件表达上的异同,通过"了_2"与这些结构的不相容现象进一步证实"了_2"的事件焦点标记功能。This paper discusses the functions of le_2 as an existential quantifier over event variables and as a marker of event foci.The first part of the paper elaborates on the differences between le_2 and le_1 with respect to whether they can quantify over event variables or not.It is pointed out that le_2 can serve as an existential quantifier over event variables while le_1 is merely aperfective marker constraining event variables and thus conveying an existential event through pragmatic mechanism.The paper then discusses the function of le_2 as a marker of event foci,arguing that there exist obvious differences between the focus structure of le_2-sentences and that of le_1-sentences,which can be ascribed to whether they are able to function as an event quantifier or not.The paper ends with a comparison of le_2-sentences with verb-resultative constructions and de-constructions of state of affairs,arguing that unlike le_2-sentences,the existential property of events in the other two constructions is presupposed but not asserted,which is the main reason why le_2 is incapable of occurring in such constructions.国家社科基金重大招标项目(项目编号:12&ZD175);; 教育部人文社科青年项目(项目编号:13YJC740032);; 中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(项目编号:T2013221025)的资

On the wide-scope interpretation of the head NP in dou relativized constructions and some related issues

对于“都“字关系结构中中心语的宽域解读现象,以往文献或只是描述现象,或仅从成分统制结构关系角度做出简单解释。本文充分讨论了“都“字关系结构中中心语总是作宽域解读这一语言事实,并对这一现象重新做出了解释。本文坚持话题化是关系化的先导这一观点,认为“都“字关系结构都是对相应的“都“字话题结构中话题成分的关系化,因而中心语继承了后者话题成分作宽域解读的辖域特点;而对于看似不能被这一解释覆盖的“每……的……“结构,本文认为可以看作是领属结构而非关系结构,而“每“的全称量化功能在领属结构中得以传递,因而使得整个结构具有跟“每+Cl+nP“同样的分布要求。This paper offers an alternative explanation for the fact that the head NP in dou(都) relativized constructions like Mei ge xuesheng dou xuanzhong de wenzhang(每个学生都选中的文章) obligatorily takes a wide scope over other Q-NPs in the relative clause.Based on the derivation relation between topicalization and relativization,the paper argues that the obligatory wide-scope reading of the head NP in dou relativized constructions comes from the wide-scope reading of the topic in corresponding topicalized constructions.The wide-scope reading of the head NP of dou relativized constructions is a preservation of the wide-scope reading of the topic of the corresponding topicalized construction,since the head NP is the result of relativizing the topic.For mei(每)-constructions without dou like Mei ge xuesheng xuanzhong de wenzhang(每个学生选中的文章),which seemingly constitutes an exception for our claim,the paper argues that they can be viewed as possessive constructions rather than relativized ones.国家社科基金项目“现代汉语事件量化系统的研究”(项目编号:06CYY013);香港理工大学科研基金项目“AdverbQuantificationinMandarinChineseanditsDiachronicDevelopment”(现代汉语副词量化及其历时发展;项目编号:G-YX73)的资

Event-quantifying Mei-constructions

本文分析量化事件的“每“结构,提出:在量化事件的“每“结构中,事件分类词“次“后的事件表达成分是指称事件类别而不是具体事件,因而量化事件的“每“结构和量化个体的“每“结构可以作平行的语义分析。This paper analyzes the event-quantifying měi-construction.It is argued that in event-quantifying měi-constructions what follows the event classifier cì designates event kinds but not concrete existential events,thus semantically the event-quantifying měi-construction is similar to the individual-quantifying měi-construction in structure and can be analyzed accordingly.国家社科基金项目“现代汉语事件量化系统的研究”(06CYY013); 香港理工大学博士后科研基金项目“AdverbQuantificationinMandarinChineseanditsDiachronicDevelopment”(现代汉语副词量化及其历时发展;项目编号:GYX73)的资