Taiwan Journal of Linguistics Vol. 9.1, 1-50, 2011 THE CONSTITUENCY OF CLASSIFIER CONSTRUCTIONS IN MANDARIN CHINESE* Niina Ning Zhang ABSTRACT This paper examines the constituency of the construction that contains three elements: a numeral, a word that encodes a counting unit, such as a classifier or measure word, and a noun in Mandarin Chinese. It identifies three structures: a left-branching structure for container measures, standard measures, partitive classifiers, and collective classifiers; a right-branching structure for individual and individuating classifiers; and a structure in which no two of the three elements form a constituent, for kind classifiers. The identification is based on the investigation of four issues: <i> the scope of a left-peripheral modifier; <ii> the dependency between the modifier of unit word and that of a noun; <iii> the complement and predicate status of the combination of a numeral and a unit word; <iv> the semantic selection relation between a unit word and a noun. The paper also shows that the co-occurrence of a numeral and a unit word and the position of certain partitive markers are not reliable in identifying syntactic constituents. It also argues against quantity-individual semantic mappings with different syntactic structures. Finally, the paper presents a comparative deletion analysis of the constructions in which the functional word de follows a unit word. Key words: classifier, measure, constituent, left-branching, right-branching, Chinese * The main arguments of this paper were presented at the 7th Workshop on Formal Syntax & Semantics (FOSS-7), Taipei, April 23-25, 2010. I am grateful to the audience of the workshop. I also thank the reviewers and the editors of Journal of Taiwan Linguistics for their comments. I am responsible for remaining errors. This research is supported by grants from the National Science Council, Taiwan. 1 Niina Ning Zhang 1. INTRODUCTION This paper studies one of the most fundamental issues in the study of the syntactic structures of classifier and measure word constructions in Mandarin Chinese: their constituency. Such constructions contain three basic elements, i.e., a numeral, such as san „three‟ in (1), a noun, such as putao „grape‟ in (1), and a unit word between them, such as the classifier (CL) ke in (1a), the standard measure gongjin „kilo‟ in (1b), or the container measure wan „bowl‟ in (1c). I call such a construction a counting construction. (1) a. san ke putao three CL grape „three grapes‟ b. san gongjin putao three kilo grape „three kilos of grapes‟ c. san wan putao three bowl grape „three bowls of grapes‟ The occurrence of a unit word is licensed by the occurrence of the other two elements. One basic question is, among the three elements, whether any two of them form a constituent. In other words, is the structure of a counting construction left-branching or right-branching? Greenberg (1990 [1975]: 227) states: “There are many indications that in the tripartite construction consisting of quantifier (Q) [= numeral], classifier (Cl), and head noun (N), Q is in direct construction with Cl and this complex construction, which will be called the classifier phrase, is in turn in construction with N.” Similarly, Li & Thompson (1981: 105), Paris (1981: 105-117), Tang (1990a), Croft (1994: 151), Lin (1997: 419), and Hsieh (2008) have all proposed a unified left-branching structure, in which the numeral and the unit word form a constituent, excluding the noun, as in (2a). In contrast, Tang (1990b: 413, 2005) and Cheng & Sybesma (1998, 1999), among others, have proposed a unified right-branching structure, in which a unit 2 The Constituency of Classifier Constructions word and the noun form a constituent first, excluding the numeral, as in (2b). (2) a . b. numeral unit word NP numeral unit word NP san ke putao san ke putao three CL grape three CL grape In contrast to both schools, X. P. Li (2010) proposes that both a left- and a right-branching structure are possible, and that the former is mapped to a quantity or measure reading, and the latter is mapped to an individual or counting reading. For instance, liang ping jiu „two bottle wine‟ has a pure quantity reading in (3a), but an individual reading in (3b). It is claimed that (3a) has a structure like (2a), and that (3b) has a structure like (2b). (3) a. ta-de wei neng zhuangxia liang ping jiu. his stomach can contain two bottle wine „His stomach can contain two bottles of wine.‟ b. Ta ling-le liang ping jiu, zuo-shou yi ping, he lift-PRF two bottle wine left-hand one bottle you-shou yi ping. right-hand one bottle „He carried two bottles of wine, one in the left hand and the other in the right hand.‟ Although not many arguments have been proposed for any of the above three approaches, I will examine all of those that I have found. In order to investigate whether different types of unit words show different patterns of constituency, we need to check all types of such words. I list the types in my study in (4). I list the terms that appear in Chao (1968) in the last column.1 1 I put aside other types of “measures” in Chao (1968) as they are not unit words of nominals. 3 Niina Ning Zhang (4) My Term Example Description Chao‟s Term Unit of the a. shi gongjin luobo Standard Standard dimensions such as ten kilo carrot measure measure2 length, area, „ten kilos of carrots‟ (p. 604) volume, weight b. shi xiang luobo Unit of capacity Container Container ten box carrot dimension, in the measure measure „ten boxes of carrots‟ form of a container (p. 601) c. shi gen luobo Unit that represents Individual Individual ten CL carrot the natural unit of measure CL „ten carrots‟ non-mass elements (p. 503) Unit that occurs d. shi dui tu Partitive Individuati with a mass ten CL earth measure ng CL noun(e.g., Croft „ten piles of earth‟ (p. 599) 1994: 162) e. shi dui luobo Unit for counting Group Collective ten CL carrot groups of non-mass measure CL „ten piles of carrots‟ elements (p. 595) f. shi pian luobo Unit for counting Partitive Partitive CL3 ten CL carrot parts of a non-mass measure „ten slices of carrot‟ element (p. 600) g. shi zhong luobo Group Unit for counting Kind CL ten CL carrot measure types of elements „ten types of carrot‟ (p. 597) In this table, the term “mass element” means stuff or matter, which shows no natural atomicity, and is encoded as a mass noun. The term “non-mass element” means an element that shows natural atomicity. Such an element is encoded as a non-mass noun. For an extensive discussion of the defining properties of countability and their realization 2 Other than the well-recognized standard measures such as gongjin „kilo‟, the words nian „year‟, yue „month‟, and ri „day‟ may be ambiguous between unit words and regular nouns (J. Tang 2005: 457). See S. Tang (2010) for a recent research on this issue. 3 Partitive CL is a different term from partitive construction (e.g. Fodor & Sag 1982, Jackendoff 1977). The latter denotes a part-whole relation within a definite domain (e.g., three kilos of the tea), whereas pseudo-partitive constructions denote the quantity of entities (e.g., three kilos of tea). The counting constructions discussed here, including those contain a partitive CL, are all pseudo-partitive constructions. 4 The Constituency of Classifier Constructions in Mandarin Chinese, see Zhang (2010b), among others. Following Chao (1968), I separate individual CLs from other types of unit words. This type of CL represents the natural unit of non-mass elements, as in (4c). They do not divide or individualize anything. However, individuating CLs, as in (4d), on the other hand, are associated with the idea that “the noun refers to some kind of mass and the classifier gives a unit of this mass” (Denny 1986: 298, cited in Aikhenvald 2003: 318). Keeping the difference between mass and non-mass nouns in mind, I separate partitive CLs, as in (4f), from individuating CLs, as in (4d), although both are called “partitive measures” in Chao (1968). The former occur with non-mass nouns, whereas the latter occur with mass nouns. I also divide kind CLs, as in (4g), from collective CLs, as in (4e), although both are called “group measures” in Chao (1968). The former denotes kind units, and is blind to the distinction between mass and non-mass nouns, whereas the latter does not denote kind units and is used for non-mass nouns only. In my study, the same form of a word can belong to different types of unit word, depending on the type of the associated noun, and the semantic function of the unit. In (4d), the CL dui occurs with the mass noun tu „earth‟, and it is thus an individuating CL. However, in (4e), dui occurs with the non-mass noun luobo „carrot‟, and it is thus a collective CL. Similarly, when the CL pian occurs with luobo „carrot‟, it denotes a part of a carrot and thus it is a partitive CL, as seen in (4f). But when it occurs with shuye „leaf‟, as in (5a) below, it represents the natural unit of a leaf, and therefore it is an individual CL. Moreover, if the CL pian occurs with the mass noun mutou „wood‟, as in (5b), it apportions the mass of wood, therefore it is an individuating CL. The two examples of the CL duo in (6) show the same point. (5) a. san pian shuye [Individual CL] three CL leaf „three leafs‟ b. san pian mutou [Individuating CL] three CL wood „three pieces of wood‟ 5 Niina Ning Zhang (6) a. san duo hua [Individual CL] three CL flower „three flowers‟ b. san duo yun [Individuating CL] three CL cloud „three pieces of cloud‟ In my study, I do not consider words that may not be preceded by any numeral other than yi „one‟, such as those in (7) (Chao 1968: 603, Li & Thompson 1981: 111). In such constructions, the word yi is probably not a numeral, since it can be replaced by the adjective man „full‟, whereas no real numeral can be replaced by man. The element following such use of yi is analyzed as a noun in B. Li (2009). (7) a. {yi/*san} shen nitu one/three body mud „a body (covered all over in) mud‟ b. {yi/*san} lian you one/three face oil „a face (covered all over in) oil‟ I will make a proposal that the seven types of unit words exhibit three patterns of constituency. First, constructions of container measures, standard measures, partitive CLs, and collective CLs have a left-branching structure, as in (2a). Second, constructions of individual and individuating CLs have a right-branching structure, as in (2b). Third, in constructions of kind CLs, there is no evidence to show that any two of the three elements form a constituent. I will present several arguments to support my proposal. In addition to this introduction section and the final summary section (Section 6), the organization of the paper is the following. Section 2 presents four arguments for a non-unified analysis of the constituency of counting constructions, and makes the proposal that there are three possible structures. Section 3 discusses three invalid arguments in the constituency study. Section 4 discusses the semantic mappings of the syntactic structures. Finally, Section 5 discusses the occurrence of the functional word de with a counting construction, with respect to the proposed constituency. 6 The Constituency of Classifier Constructions 2. FOUR ARGUMENTS FOR THE NON-UNIFIED ANALYSIS Unit words do not behave the same syntactically. In this section, I present some differences, and link the differences to the different structures of the various counting constructions. 2.1 The Scope of a Left-peripheral Modifier Two incompatible modifiers may co-occur if they scope over different constituents. In each of the examples in (8) and (9), two incompatible modifiers co-occur: (8) a. dada de yi wan xiao yingtao big DE one bowl small cherry „a big bowl of small cherries‟ b. fangfangzhengzheng de yi bao sanjiao binggan square DE one package triangle cookie „a square package of triangle cookies‟ c. yuanyuan de yi guan fang-tang round DE one can square-sugar „a round can of sugar cubes‟ d. hen da de yi zhuo xiao keren very big DE one table small guest „a very big table with small guests sitting at it‟ (9) a. dada de yi dui xiao yingtao big DE one pile small cherry „a big pile of small cherries‟ b. hen chang de yi pai chao-duan de xiao qiche very long DE one row super-short DE small car „a very long row of super-short small cars‟ The acceptability of this type of data indicates that the scope of the left-peripheral modifier excludes the NP, which has its own modifier. This fact shows that the two modification domains belong to two different constituents, and that the first constituent is composed of a numeral and a unit word. Putting categorial labels of the constituent nodes aside, among the three structures in (10) (Mod = modifier), only (10a) can capture the fact that the left modifier does not scope over the 7 Niina Ning Zhang NP. This left-branching structure is the only possible structure for (8) and (9). (10) a. b. c. NP Mod Mod Mod NP numeral numeral unit Mod N numeral unit unit NP Mod N Mod N In (8), the unit words are all container measures, including the so-called temporary CL zhuo „table‟ in (8d), which can be understood as a contextually-defined container measure. In (9), the unit words are collective CLs. Other types of unit words may not have modifiers that are not compatible with the modifiers of the associated nouns, as seen in (11). The unit word is the individual CL li in (11a), the individuating CL di in (11b), the partitive CL pian in (11c), the standard measure gongjin „kilo‟ in (11d), and the kind CL zhong „kind‟ in (11e). (11) a. *[dada de] yi li xiao yingtao [Individual CL] big DE one CL small cherry b. *hen da de yi di xiao shui [Individuating CL] very big DE one CL small water c. *hen da de yi pian xiao {xiangjiao/juzi} [Partitive CL] very big DE one CL small banana/orange d. *hen zhong de yi gongjin qing muliao very heavy DE one kilo light wood [Standard measure] e. *hen da de yi zhong xiao yu [Kind CL] very big DE one kind small fish Therefore, the left-peripheral modifier test cannot be used to tell the structure of the constructions that have these types of unit words.4 4 Note that although constructions of collective CLs allow incompatible modifiers, as shown in (9), the example in (i), which looks like a collective CL construction, does not. In such a CL copying construction, the first CL can be replaced by the individual CL ge, and thus it is not a real collective CL. 8 The Constituency of Classifier Constructions It is necessary to clarify that the occurrence of the left-peripheral modifier cannot be the result of movement from a position between the numeral and the unit word. This is because the modifier must be followed by de, which means that it must be phrasal (e.g., C. R. Huang 1989, Tang 1990b: 420), however, no unit word may be modified by a phrase in Mandarin Chinese (Tang 1990b: 418). If a phrase moves from a non-phrase position, the movement will violate the Structure-Preserving Constraint (Emonds 1970). (12) * yi [ dada de] wan xiao yingtao one big DE bowl small cherry My conclusion to this subsection is that container measure and collective CL constructions have a left-branching structure, in which the numeral and the unit word form a constituent, excluding the noun. 2.2 Syntactic Dependency of Modifiers A shape modifier of a noun can occur as a modifier of an individual CL (Zhu 1982: 52). In (13a), the adjective chang „long‟ occurs to the left of the CL tiao, and the noun is xianglian „necklace‟. The same adjective may occur to the left of xianglian in (13a‟). The meaning of the two counting constructions is the same, regardless of the position of the adjective. Other examples in (13) show the same pattern.5 (13) a. yi chang tiao xianglian = a‟. yi tiao chang xianglian One long CL necklace one CL long necklace Both: „one long necklace‟ b. yi bo pian shuye = b‟. yi pian bo shuye one thin CL leaf one CL thin leaf Both: „one thin leaf‟ (i) a. san qun yang-qun b. *dada de san qun xiao yang-qun three CL sheep-CL big DE three CL small sheep-CL „three groups of sheep‟ 5 Examples in (13) and other examples in Tang (2005: 446) are counter-examples to the claim that individual CLs may not be modified by adjectives (Cheng & Sybesma 1998: 390, 1999: 516) and also to the claim that if a unit word is modified, the associated noun must denote mass (Cheng 2009: 3). 9 Niina Ning Zhang c. yi hou ben jiaoke-shu = c‟. yi ben hou jiaoke-shu one thick CL text-book one CL thick text-book Both: „one thick text-book‟ d. yi yuan ding maozi = d‟. yi ding yuan maozi one round CL hat one CL round hat Both: „one round hat‟ e. yi xiao fang zhang zhuanpian = one small square CL photo e‟. yi zhang xiao fang zhuanpian one CL small square photo Both: „one small square photo‟ However, such an alternation is not seen in the construction of a container measure or collective CL, as shown in (14). (14) a. yi chang xiang xianglian  b‟. yi xiang chang xianglian one long box necklace one box long necklace „one long box of necklaces‟ „one box of long necklaces‟ [Container meas.] b. yi da dui maozi  b‟. yi dui da maozi one big CL hat one CL big hat „one big pile of hats‟ „one pile of big hats‟ [Collective CL] The possible displacement of the modifier in (13) indicates that the unit word c-commands the noun, so that the modifier of the former can be semantically related to the modifier of the latter. The c-command relation can be represented by the right-branching structure. In (14), however, the readings of the left examples are different from those of the right ones. If the structure of all of the examples in (14) is left-branching, the unit word does not c-command the noun. This proposal captures the fact that the modifier of the former does not hold a dependency relation with the modifier of the latter. For other types of unit words, the test does not apply, since no acceptable minimal pair can be found. For instance, a mass noun may not be modified by any shape or dimension adjective (Bunt 1985: 199), and thus (15b) is not acceptable for an independent reason. 10