|
The elements used to express spatial orientation in Mandarin are usually called "localizers". However, in the literature Mandarin localizers have not been clearly defined. When it comes to their syntactic category and morphological status, Chinese grammarians have quite different views. Liu (2003: 129-137), for example, suggests that the meanings of localizers have gradually become more general in diachronic evolution, and their grammatical nature is now closer to postpositional words. Yet, Cheung (2016) defines localizers as a subcategory of nouns based on their grammatical characteristics. There is also disagreement regarding the morphological status of localizers. Liu (1998) advocates that localizers are clitics, while Nie & Liu (2020) argue that localizers are phrasal bound forms. In short, regarding the morphological status and syntactic category of localizers, scholars do not seem to have a common view. This thesis thus aims to first define Mandarin localizers and then sets out to justify their syntactic category and morphological status. This thesis uses the Mandarin preposition “zài 在” to formulate a definition of localizers from the perspectives of both semantics and syntax. Specifically, the preposition zài 在 must take a place noun as its argument, i.e., [zài 在 + place noun/*place noun]], e.g., [zài xué xiào學校/* zài zhuō zi 在桌子]. A localizer can be used as an argument of zài 在; localizers thus have the properties of place nouns. However, localizers are slightly different from place nouns. In order to get the complete meaning, the interpretation of the localizer must rely on a noun phrase before it. Based on the analysis, localizers are seen as a subcategory of place nouns, which can serve as an argument of zài 在 but they need to find a antecedent to complete their reference. After defining localizers, we then propose a method to test localizers, i.e., locative inversion. That is, a localizer and the noun phrase before it can be moved from the position of prepositional complement to the subject position. If it passes the test, it is a localizer. We then discuss the morphological status and syntactic category of localizers. This thesis uses three methods to test whether the morphological status of localizers is words: (1) Conjunction test: two localizers can be connected by conjunction, (2) Short answer test: when answering questions, the localizer can appear independently as a short answer, (3) “de 的” test: “de 的” can be inserted between the localizers and the preceding noun phrase. If a localizer passes one of the three test, its morphological status is word. If not, then we will further discuss whether this localizer is a clitic or not. If it does not comply with the nature of clitic, then we will discuss whether the localizer in question is an affix. Based on the tests and arguments put forward by Li (2019), we demonstrate that the morphological status of disyllabic localizers and multisyllabic localizers are all words. While monosyllable localizers are words in some limited environments, elsewhere they are clitics. According to the analysis of Cheung (2016), localizers can appear in the position where most nouns can appear; for example, they can be used as the subject or object, and they can be combined with noun phrases by conjunction, etc. Therefore, this study argues that regardless of their morphological status, all localizers have the characteristics of nouns. This thesis also discusses the shortcomings of the postposition account and the advantages of nominal account. Finally, the thesis offers an inventory of Mandarin localizers that comply with the definition. Based on this inventory, we then build a list of localizers specific in Taiwan Mandarin and offers some observations on their usage in the Sinica Corpus.
|