中文疑問詞沒有固有之量化功效，句法表現類似無定名詞組。而中文疑問詞有雙 極詞性質，所以需要觸發語及約束語來引發以及授予適當之語意。本篇以鄭 (1994) 論文為 基礎，探討中文疑問雙極詞之觸發語和約束語。以及疑問雙極詞語境之特質。本文主張，疑 問詞全稱語意是由成對詞 ` 無論‥都 ' 中的顯性或隱性的 ` 無論 '，來授予， 而不是由 ` 都 '，來授予。這種分析的優點是，句法上與中文一般約束原則相吻合，符合約束語與被 約束語間 C- 統制和局部性之限制; 語意上 ` 無論 '，也比 ` 都 '，更貼近全稱的語意。 疑問詞的偏稱語境，除了是非問句及否定句以外，應還包含: 非特指疑問句 (即是非問句及 A-not-A 問句 )、條件句修辭句 (如感嘆句及反諷句 )、 以及空語意量詞組的修飾範域等; 而偏稱語意則全由動詞組偏稱封閉來授予。本文進一步分析，中文疑問詞三種語意之主要觸 發語是存在於決定句子基本類型的 C 上，此種分析模式既精簡且符合我們對句子之直覺。

　　　　　Chinese wh-phrases behave like indefinite NPs and do not have inherent quantificational force. They are polarity items and need a trigger and a binder so as to be triggered and licensed the proper reading. Cheng (1994) proposes that the interrogative reading is triggered by a wh-particle ne (呢 ) or its null counterpart; the universal reading, by the universal quantifier dou (都 ); and the existential reading, by either a yes/no particle or a negation. Following Cheng (1994), I discuss in this paper other possible polarity contexts and binders for wh-phrases in Mandarin Chinese. I propose that the binder for wh-phrase universal meaning is the overt or covert wulun 無論 ), instead of the dou, in the (wulun)...dou pair. With this analysis, syntactically the c-command and locality requirements in the binder-bindee relation are reserved, on par with the general binding principle in Mandarin. Semantically, wulun is more congruent with the universal meaning than dou. For existential wh-phrases, I propose that the polarity contexts be extended to include not only yes/no questions and negative sentences but also non-specific questions, conditionals, rhetoricals, and empty QP domain. These contexts can be generalized as contexts where the truth value of the proposition is not positively fixed in a definite manner, as suggested in Li (1992). Or these contexts may be concluded as nonassertives; whereas assertives are contexts for universal reading, and specific questions are contexts for interrogative reading. Based on this analysis, the feature complex in Comp, a functional node that determines the type of a sentence, can be generalized as the major trigger for the three different readings of wh-phrases. The model is simpler and matches well with our intuition in regard to sentence types and wh-phrase interpretations.