The Unmarked Preposed Object in Mandarin and its Function in the Low Periphery
- Alison Biggs, University of Cambridge
- Old College Lorimer Room, University of Edinburgh
Mandarin is canonically an SVO language, but direct objects may occur preposed and
unmarked between the subject and verb.
(1) Ta pingguo bu xihuan chi
3SG apples NEG like eat
He doesn’t like apples
This SOV construction is semantically marked, however the function of the preverbal object as
either a topic or focus remains unclear despite extensive examination (Lu 1994; Shyu 1995, 2005;
Ernst and Wang 1995; Paul 2005).
This talk examines the unmarked preposed object (UPO) from the perspective of the
cartographic framework. Particular reference is made to Paul (2005), in which it is proposed that,
based on the cartographic hierarchy, the preverbal object should be in SPEC of an Internal Topic
functional projection.
A review of the semantic and syntactic evidence as to the domain the UPO occupies suggests
it in fact displays properties cross-linguistically identified by the cartographic framework as typical
of focus elements. The semantics of the UPO are distinct: it requires a contrastive reading, and it
must be interpreted as definite or generic. Syntactic evidence relates to compatibility with a
resumptive pronoun, weak crossover effects, and sensitivity to tense nodes.
The classic version of the universal hierarchy of information structure permits a single focus
functional projection and recursive topic projections (Rizzi 1997):
(2) IP (Top*) (Foc) (Top*) vP
However, the Mandarin UPO may occur with another focus construction (lian… ye ‘even’) (both
underlined elements are considered focused):
(3) Ta xiyiji lian yi ci ye mei you yong
He washing machine even one time also NEG have use
He’s never once used the washing machine
This is problematic for analysis of the UPO as a focus element. I therefore suggest adopting
the structural hierarchy as modified by Beninca’ and Poletto (2004: 70). (Following Belletti (2004) I
assume the structure of the low IP area mirrors that of the CP domain).
(4) CP [TopP [TopP… [FocusP…]]] IP --> IP [TopP [TopP… [FocusP…]]] vP
Beninca’ and Poletto’s hierarchy is non-recursive but multiple Focus Projections are permitted.
Critical within this approach is that all functional projections must exhibit distinct semantic and
syntactic properties. I suggest that the distribution and interpretation of the Mandarin UPO already
discussed suggests a systematic variation that supports recognition of these distinct functional
projections.
unmarked between the subject and verb.
(1) Ta pingguo bu xihuan chi
3SG apples NEG like eat
He doesn’t like apples
This SOV construction is semantically marked, however the function of the preverbal object as
either a topic or focus remains unclear despite extensive examination (Lu 1994; Shyu 1995, 2005;
Ernst and Wang 1995; Paul 2005).
This talk examines the unmarked preposed object (UPO) from the perspective of the
cartographic framework. Particular reference is made to Paul (2005), in which it is proposed that,
based on the cartographic hierarchy, the preverbal object should be in SPEC of an Internal Topic
functional projection.
A review of the semantic and syntactic evidence as to the domain the UPO occupies suggests
it in fact displays properties cross-linguistically identified by the cartographic framework as typical
of focus elements. The semantics of the UPO are distinct: it requires a contrastive reading, and it
must be interpreted as definite or generic. Syntactic evidence relates to compatibility with a
resumptive pronoun, weak crossover effects, and sensitivity to tense nodes.
The classic version of the universal hierarchy of information structure permits a single focus
functional projection and recursive topic projections (Rizzi 1997):
(2) IP (Top*) (Foc) (Top*) vP
However, the Mandarin UPO may occur with another focus construction (lian… ye ‘even’) (both
underlined elements are considered focused):
(3) Ta xiyiji lian yi ci ye mei you yong
He washing machine even one time also NEG have use
He’s never once used the washing machine
This is problematic for analysis of the UPO as a focus element. I therefore suggest adopting
the structural hierarchy as modified by Beninca’ and Poletto (2004: 70). (Following Belletti (2004) I
assume the structure of the low IP area mirrors that of the CP domain).
(4) CP [TopP [TopP… [FocusP…]]] IP --> IP [TopP [TopP… [FocusP…]]] vP
Beninca’ and Poletto’s hierarchy is non-recursive but multiple Focus Projections are permitted.
Critical within this approach is that all functional projections must exhibit distinct semantic and
syntactic properties. I suggest that the distribution and interpretation of the Mandarin UPO already
discussed suggests a systematic variation that supports recognition of these distinct functional
projections.