Abstract
This thesis aims to investigate the phenomena of negative polarity sensitivity in Chinese. Mandarin Chinese and H?l? Taiwanese (Southern Min) are studied and compared, with occasional reference to English, Mongolian and Hakka. This study focuses on the following two issues from a syntactic perspective. First, what are possible licensers in Chinese and their sharing properties, if any? Second, what are the licensing condition(s)? We adopt a non-unified analysis to the licensing conditions of Chinese negative polarity items. The distributions of polarity sensitive items are subject to more than one conditions. All NPIs are required to be be in the scope of a polarity operator at LF, where the scope relation is defined in terms of m-command rather than c-command. However, for those polarity sensitive expressions that are also indefinite NPs, they are subject to a more restrictive c-command requirement. Following Li (1992) and Cheng (1994), we treat Chinese indefinite wh-phrases as variables without quantificational force. They need to be bound by an operator in C or a default existential closure. On the other hand, negative sensitive adverbs are not indefinites. They are not variables and thus not subject to the c-command requirement of binding. They are subject to an adjunct licensing condition just as other adverbs are. Chapter 1 of this thesis gives a general introdution to issues. Chapter 2 gives a sketch of Chinese clausal structure and a brief survey to syntax of negation. Chapter 3 investigates the licensing of indefinite wh-phrases and 偤ny in Mandarin Chinese and H?l? Taiwanese. We argue that in licensing contexts without an overt negator or other licensers, it is the modality, not a covert negator, that licenses the negative sensitive items. Epistemic modality can license 偳xistential wh-phrases but not 偤ny in Chinese, whereas root modality license Chinese 偤ny but not existential wh-phrases. Chapter 4 deals with indefinite how掇. A comparison of indefinite how's in Mandarin and Taiwanese reveals that although they have similar distributions, there are some interesting differences. Both Mandarin zenme and Taiwanese an choann can denote degree or frequency. However, the use of an choann 'how' denoting degree is restricted to stage-level predicates in Holo Taiwanese. More than often, bo siann, literally ' have no what', rather than bo an anchoann is used to denote low degree or frequency in Holo Taiwanese. On the other hand, Mandarin mei sha or mei shenme 'have no what' do not have similar degree or frequency usages. We have shown that the asymmetries between Mandarin and Holo Taiwanese is correlated to the (un)acceptablity of Mandarin you 'have' and Taiwanese u 'have' taking stative predicate complements. And we argue that in Holo Taiwanese, and in other dialects which emphatical 'have' is permitted, the stative predicate which 'have' emphatically asserts has sort of "nominal" feature to some extent so that 'what', a pre-nominal element, can occur. Chapter 5 tackles the licensing of negative polarity sensitive adverbs. Negative sensitive adverbs in Chinese are licensed at the Spec or adjunct position of their licensing head, while their English counterparts such as 偳ver are licensed by c-command. Chapter 6 gives a general introduction to the semantic properties of polarity sensitivity, and Chapter 7 is the concluding remarks.