臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：海圖新繪：從句法—語用介面看台灣閩南語的製圖分析
作者：劉承賢
作者(外文)：Lau, Seng-hian
校院名稱：國立清華大學
系所名稱：語言學研究所
指導教授：蔡維天
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2017
主題關鍵詞：台語；台灣話；台灣閩南語；句法語用界面；製圖理論；語用助詞；發語詞；焦點；示證性；言語行為殼結構；Taiwanese；Syntax-pragmatics interface；Cartographic Approach；discourse particles；introductory element；focus；evidentiality；speech-act shell
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(2) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:8
隨著製圖理論（Rizzi 1997；Cinque 1999）的出現，句法學家得以另闢蹊徑，向句法—語用界面展開新一輪的探索。而華語因著在範域關係上呈現高度分析性，具有「句法上的詮釋高度」與「句法—語意對應」之間相對嚴謹的關係，始終於描繪句法分佈上扮演著重要角色；然而，同樣身為東亞語言，分析性更強的台灣閩南語，則未受到同等的關注。
事實上正因其分析性有過之而無不及，台灣閩南語有著許多與語境相關連的顯性功能詞，而這些功能詞在華語中不見得能找到對應詞，由此，台灣閩南語乃為進一步探索句法—語用界面所處的句法左緣結構開了一扇方便之門。
藉由對四個詞項、六個用法的探究，我們得以看見台灣閩南語如何鮮活地將說話者與聽話者、非核心語意與命題層次、共知背景與新訊息、話題與示證性之間的互動在詞項中具體呈現。
以句法階層位置上最高的「咧1」與「咧2」來說，這兩個詞項將代表說話者與聽話者之間互動的言語行為殼結構的兩個主要語顯性化（Speas & Tenny 2003），不同於前人對於此一功能投射之下詞項的觀察（Hill 2007; Haegeman & Hill 2011, 2013; Haegeman 2014），「咧1」與「咧2」與句法結構上較低的呼格無關，甚且，這兩個詞項體現了說話者與聽話者同命題的攸關性，是目前所知在實證上最具說服力的言語行為殼結構的顯性成份，就此，我們可說台灣閩南語是貨真價實的Speas-Tennian語言。除了提供「咧1」與「咧2」的句法及語意分析，本論文並指出另一個位置較低，需與言明焦點共現，且只用於帶說話者特殊態度反詰問句的另一用法：「咧3」；經由這些觀察，我們得見功能詞「咧」因著語法化所衍生由低到高的不同用法，再次驗證透明原則在自然語言不具普遍性（Lightfoot 1979；參見Tsai 2015a）。
早在漢藏語言研究發軔之初，關於華語「是」的研究就如雨後春筍般相繼問世，但本論文所提出「是」的兩個用法，或因對台灣閩南語的相對忽視，又或因此二用法的口語性質，在文獻中未見討論。除了前人所指出各種「是」的用法之外，本論文點出台灣閩南語且將「是」用做言明焦點標記與評論肯定焦點標記；而說話者可藉由「是」來強調非核心語意的用法，則對主張「是」應一律視為繫詞以達成一致性分析的陣營帶來挑戰（如 Cheng 2008）。
同樣常見於日常口語，句首的「啊」在本文中也得到了詳細的檢視及說明，尤其重要的是，本論文主張台灣閩南語句首的「啊」，並非一般所謂單純的「發語詞」，事實上，這個成份的使用是有其語境與句法條件的。在階層位置上，句首的「啊」僅只低於言語行為殼結構，一旦使用，便或是將前句，或是將語境當中的內容，與後句相互接合，與此同時，並要求兩方的內容具備對比性質。一如前面所提到的其他詞項與用法，句首的「啊」再次例示了句法與語用如何相輔相成，並將其交互作用於詞項中具現。
論文的最後一章探討了示證性「無」的分佈與運作，這個功能詞不只常見於句末，更能在句首及句中使用，如果我們對相關現象的歸納無誤，則這個示證性的「無」將是首個於東亞語言當中發掘的共有知識示證詞（Hintz & Hintz 2017）。功能之外，在句法上，由於此一詞項在句中的位置，取決於說話者對命題各部份內容，在語篇話題（亦即QUD）的觀念上，基於語境中該內容是否為聽話者所注意到而做出的判斷，所進行部份或全部內容的話題化移位；換言之，其移位動機，在於建立或確認當前的語篇目標，而語篇目標所決定的，正是命題中各部份內容的相關性高低。至此，我們藉由以上各個功能詞，標定了左緣結構上的一些位置，可做為日後進一步研究的參考點。
With the introduction of the Cartographic Approach (Rizzi 1997; Cinque 1999), syntacticians now have a new perspective in exploring the syntax–pragmatics interface. Well-known by its more analytic strategy to represent the scope relation, since then, Mandarin Chinese (MC) has played a crucial role in depicting the syntactic topography for its strict syntax–semantics correspondence encoded by the notion “the height of interpretation.” Nonetheless, Taiwanese Southern Min (TSM), an even more analytic member in the East Asian languages, has drawn much less attention so far.
Thanks to its strong analyticity, TSM furnishes overt function words, which are discourse-oriented and have no counterparts in MC; therefore, this provides convenient access to extend our research into the far left periphery, the uncharted seas seating the syntax–pragmatics interface.
By looking into the four elements with six usages in total, I demonstrate how vividly the language incarnates the interactions between speaker and hearer, not-at-issue and at-issue content, common ground and new information, and topics and evidentiality.
At the uppermost positions, leh1 (咧) and leh2 (咧) realize the heads of SA shell, and the projection embodies the interplay between the speaker and the addressee (Speas & Tenny 2003). Unlike previous studies that claim the discovery of a lexical item under this projection (Hill 2007; Haegeman & Hill 2011, 2013; Haegeman 2014), leh1 (咧) and leh2 (咧) have nothing to do with vocative, which is supposed hierarchically lower; instead, these two elements are intertwined with the speaker’s and the hearer’s concern with respect to the proposition. With these two best candidates that illustrate the existence of the SA shell, TSM, to my knowledge, is a real Speas-Tennian language. In addition to the syntax and semantics of leh1 (咧) and leh2 (咧), I also point out another usage of leh (leh3), which is lower and interacts with the dictum focus marker in a rhetorical question conveying the speaker’s attitude. The particle leh (咧), with a series of usages from low to high, derived from a process of grammaticalization exemplifies the nullification of Transparency Principle (Lightfoot 1979; cf, Tsai 2015a).
Albeit shì (是) ‘be’ in MC has been rather investigated since the early days of Sino-Tibetan linguistics—probably due to neglect of the language in question and its colloquial register—the two usages of sī (是) ‘be’ focused on in this thesis have never been mentioned in the literature. As another instance of violating the Transparency Principle, the word is now employed as a dictum focus and a commenting verum focus marker in TSM, in addition to its well-known copular usage and the disputed focus marking cognates. With the fact that it functions to emphasize the not-at-issue comment from the speaker, the data constitutes a challenge against the camp, which suggests the analysis of all its occurrences as copulas in a unified fashion (e.g., Cheng 2008).
Also frequently found in daily conversation, the sentence-initial ah (啊) is carefully examined herein. Unlike other introductory elements, this element is conditioned both discoursally and syntactically. Only second to the speech act (SA) shell, it bridges the antecedent sentence or the context and the following sentence. Additionally, it requires a contrast between the two bridged by itself. This element, once again, illustrates how syntax and pragmatics collaborate and actualize this collaboration in lexical items.
Last, a chapter is devoted to the enquiry into the distribution and derivation of the evidential bô (無), a particle whose occurrences found not only at the sentence-final position but across the sentence. Empirically, if the generalizations are correct, we have found a counterpart of mutual knowledge evidentials in an East Asian language (Hintz & Hintz 2017). Even more interestingly, this particle may trigger the topicalization of part of or the whole sentence based on the speaker’s judgment regarding which part of the proposition is noticeable by the addressee in the context, under the notion of discourse topic (cf. QUD; question under discussion). Because the main motivation of this preposing is more about establishing or confirming the current discourse goal that determines what is relevant, unsurprisingly, the element is also pinpointed in the far left periphery as the last piece of the jigsaw is worked out in the thesis.
Abusch, Dorit. 1997. Sequence of tense and temporal de re. Linguistics and Philosophy 20. 1:1-50.
Ambar, Manuela. 1999. Aspects of the Syntax of Focus in Portuguese. In Georges Rebuschi and Laurice Tuller (eds) The Grammar of Focus [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistic Today 24]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 23-54.
Ambar, Manuela. 2002. Wh-questions and Wh-exclamatives: Unifying mirror effects. In Claire Beyssade, Reineke Bok-Bennema, Frank Drijkoningen and Paola Monachesi (eds) Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2000 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 232]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 15-40.
Aoun, Josheph & Li, Yen-hui Audrey. 1993. Wh-lements in situ: syntax or LF? Linguistic Inquiry 24: 199-238.
Ariel, Mira. 1999. Mapping So-called “Pragmatic” Phenomena According to a “Linguistic-Extralinguistic” Distinction. The case of propositions marked “accessible”. In Michael Darnell, Edith Moravcsik, Frederick Newmeyer, Michael Noonan, Kathleen Wheatley (eds) Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics Volume II: Case Studies. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 11-38.
Arita, Setsuko. 2005. Taiwa niokeru buntoono wa no kinoo nituite [On functions of the sentence-initial wa in dialogues]. Proceedings of the Pragmatics Society of Japan 1:1-8.
Arita, Setsuko. 2009. Hadakano wa nituiteno oboegaki [A note on bare wa]. Reports of the Osaka Shoin Women’s University Japanese Language Research Center 16:95-107.
Austin, John Langshaw. 1962. How to do Things with Words: The William James Lectures Delivered at Harvard University in 1955. Oxford: Clarendon.
Bastos-Gee, Ana Claudia. 2011. Information Structure within the Traditional Nominal Phrase: The Case of Brazilian Portuguese. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Connecticut
Beck, Sigrid. 2006. Intervention effects follow from focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 14:1-56.
Bellert, Irena, 1977. On semantic and distributional properties of sentential adverbs. Linguistic Inquiry 8:337-351.
Benincà, P. & Poletto, C. 2004. Topic, focus and V2: Defining the CP sublayers. In L. Rizzi (ed.) The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures. Volume 2. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 52-75.
Bergqvist, Henrik. 2017. The role of ‘perspective’ in epistemic marking. Lingua 186-187:5-20.
Bhatt, Rajesh. 1998. Argument-Adjunct Asymmetries in Rhetorical Questions. NELS 29. At the University of Delaware, October 18, 1998.
Bhatt, Rajesh. 1999. Covert Modality in Non-finite Contexts. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Pennsylvania.
Birner, Betty J., Kaplan Jeffery P. and Ward, Gregory. 2001. Open propositions and epistemic would. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Washington, D. C., January.
Bolinger, D. 1961. Contrastive accent and contrastive stress. Language 37.1:83-96.
Bonami, Olivier & Godard, Dianièle. 2008. Lexical semantics and pragmatics of evaluative adverbs. In L. McNally & C. Kennedy (eds.) Adjectives and Adverbs in Semantics and Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 274-304.
Bošković, Željko. 2016. Tone sandhi in Taiwanese and phasal spell-out. Manuscript. lingbuzz/003263. Downloaded from http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/003263/current.pdf?_s=EUqwyWXhsqHph7md
Brüening, Daniel. 2002. Syntax II, Lecture 14 Notes: Pro-Drop.
Brunetti, Lisa. 2004. A Unification of Focus. Padava: Unipress.
Bybee, J. & Fleischman, S., 1995. Modality in grammar and discourse: An introductory essay. In Bybee, J. and Fleischman, S. (eds.) Modality in Grammar and Discourse. Benjamins, Amsterdam, 1-14.
Canac-Marquis, Réjean. 2003. Asymmetry, syntactic objects and the Mirror Generalization. In A.-M. Di Sciullo (ed.) Asymmetry in Grammar, Vol. 2: Morphology, Phonology, Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Carston, R. 1998. Syntax and pragmatics. In Mey J. L. (ed.) Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 978-986.
Chafe, Wallace L. 1976. Givens, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics, and Point of View. In Charles Li (ed), Subject and Topic. New York: Academic Press, 25-55.
Chafe, Wallace L. 1987. Congnitive constraints and information flow. In R. Tomlin (ed.) Coherence and Grounding in Discourse: Outcome of a Symposium. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 21-51.
Chang, Miao-Hsia. 1997. Discourse functions of negatives bo and m in Taiwanese. Ph.D. dissertation. National Taiwan Normal University.
Chang, Miao-Hsia. 1998. The discourse functions of Taiwanese kong in relation to its grammaticalization. In Shuangfan Huang (ed.) Selected Papers from the Second International Symposium on Languages in Taiwan. Taipei: Crane Publishing co, 111-127.
Chang, Miao-Hsia. 2002. A revisit to the polyfunctionality of Taiwanese M and question tags. In Lily I-wen Su, Chinfa Lien, Kawai Chui (eds.) Form and Function: Linguistic Studies in Honor of Shuanfan Huang. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Chao, Chingya Anne. 2008. Mǐnnányǔ zhǐshìcí gǎntànjù chūtàn [An introduction to the exclamative sentences composed of demonstratives in Southern Min]. USTWPL 4:27-42.
Chao, Chingya Anne. 2009. Mǐnnányǔ Gǎntànjú Yánjiù: Xíngshì yǔ Gōngnéng zhī Huìjù [Exclamatives in Southern Min: Integrating Form and Function]. Ph.D. dissertation. National Tsing Hua University.
Chao, Yuen Ren. 1968. A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Chen, Chiou-mei. 1993. Taiwanese Sentence-Final Question Particles. In Papers from the First International Symposium on Languages in Taiwan. Taipei: Crane Book Company, 321-344.
Chen, Chiou-mei. 1989. A Study on Taiwanese Sentence-final Particles. M. A. Thesis. Taiwan Normal University.
Chen, Fajin. 1987. Mǐnnánhuà “yǒu”, “wú” zì jùshì [Sentences featuring “yǒu” and “wú” in Southern Min]. Journal of Huaqiao University (Philosophy and Social Sciences) 1987.2:113-120.
Chen, Manjun. 2015. The Etymology and Grammaticalization of the Continuative Aspect Marker leh: A Survey from the Historical Documents. Manuscript.
Chen, Yu-dai. 2013. Táiyǔ ‘le’ yǔ Huáyǔ ‘ne’, ‘le’ yǔqìcí zhī yǔyòng yánjiù [A pragmatic study on ‘le’ in Taiwanese and ‘ne’ and ‘le’ in Mandarin Chinese]. Master thesis. National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Cheng, Lisa L.-S., Huang, C.-T. James, & Tang, C.-C. Jane. 1996. Negative Particle Questions: A Dialectal Comparison. In James R. Black and Virginia Motapanyane (eds.) Microparametric Syntax and Dialect Variation, pp. 41-78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cheng, Lisa Lai-shen & Rooryck, J. 2002. Types of wh-in-situ, ms. Leiden University.
Cheng, Lisa Lai-shen. 2008. Deconstructing the shì...de construction. The Linguistic Review 25:235-266.
Cheng, Robert L. 1978. Tense interpretation of four Taiwanese modal verbs. In R. Cheng, Y.-C. Li & T.-C. Tang (eds.) Proceedings of Symposium on Chinese Linguistics, 1977 Linguistic Institute of the Linguistic Society of America, 243-266.
Cheng, Robert L. 1979. Taiwanese u and Mandarin you. Yǎtài Dìqū Yǔyán Jiāoxué Yántǎohuì Lùnwénjí, 141-180.
Cheng, Robert L. 1985. A comparison of Taiwanese, Taiwan Mandarin, and Peking Mandarin. Language 61.2:352-377.
Cheng, Robert L. 1997a. Táiyǔ yǔ Táiwān Guóyǔ Lǐ de Zǐjù Jiégòu Biāozhì ‘jiǎng’ yǔ ‘kán’ [The Complementation Markers ‘Say’ and ‘See’ as Complementizers in Taiwanese and Taiwan Mandarin]. In Robert L. Cheng (Ed.), Taiwanese and Mandarin Structures and Their Development Trends in Taiwan Vol. II. Taipei: Yuan-Liou Publishing Co., Ltd., 105-132.
Cheng, Robert L. 1997b. Tái, Huáyǔ de Shíkōng, Yíwèn yǔ Foǔdìng [The Tense, Locus, Interrogation and Negative in Taiwanese and Mandarin]. Taipei: Yuan-Liou Publishing Co., Ltd.
Chierchia, G. 2004. Scalar implicature, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatics interface. In Adriana Belletti (ed.) Structures and Beyond. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 3. New York: Oxford University Press, 39-103.
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of Language: its nature, origin, and use. New York: Praeger.
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by Phase. In Michael Kenstowicz & Ken Hale (eds.) A Life in Language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1-52.
Chou, Chao-Ting Tim. 2012. Syntax-pragmatics interface: Mandarin Chinese wh-the-hell and point-of-view operator. Syntax 15.1:1-24.
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads. A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Clark, Herbert H. 1977. Bridging. In Philip N. Johnson-Laird & Peter C. Wason (eds) Thinking, Reading in Cognitive Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 411-420.
Coniglio, Marco and Zegrean, Iulia. 2012. Splitting up force. Evidence from discourse particles. In Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman, and Rechel Nye (eds) Main Clause Phenomena. New Horizons. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 229-255.
Creswell, Cassandre. 1999. The discourse function of verum focus in wh-questions. NELS 30/1, 1999(2000), 165-179.
Dalrymple, M., Shieber, S. and Perreira, F. 1991. Ellipsis and higher order unification. Linguistics and Philosophy 14:399-452.
Davis, Christopher, Potts, Christopher & Speas, Margaret. 2007. The pragmatic values of evidential sentences. In T. Friedman and M. Gibson (eds.) Proceedings of SALT 17 (SALT XVII). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 71-88.
Depraetere, Ilse. 1995. On the Necessity of Distinguishing between (Un)boundedness and (A)telicity. Linguistics and Philosophy 18:1-19.
Donati, C. & Nespor, M. 2003. From focus to syntax. Lingua 113.11:1119-1142.
Douglas, Carstairs. 1873. Chinese-English Dictionary of the Vernacular or Spoken Language of Amoy. London: Trübner.
Drubig, H. B. 2001. On the syntactic form of epistemic modality. Unpublished manuscript, University of Tuebingen.
É Kiss, K. 1998. Identificational focus versus information focus. Langauge 74:245-273.
Endo, Yoshio. 2015. Two ReasonPs: What are*(n’t) you coming to the United States for? In Ur Shlongsky (ed.) Beyond functional sequences, The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, volume 10, Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 220-231.
Ernst, Thomas. 2008. Adverbs and Positive Polarity in Mandarin Chinese. In Marjorie K.M. Chan and Hana Kang (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL-20). 2008. Vol. 1. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio University, 69-85.
Ernst, Thomas. 2009. Speaker-oriented adverbs. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27:497-544.
Ernst, Thomas. 2014. Adverbial Adjuncts in Mandarin Chinese. In eds. C.-T. James Huang, Y.-H. Audrey Li, and Andrew Simpson. The Handbook of Chinese Linguistics. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Erteschik-Shir, N. 2007. Information Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Faller, Martina. 2002. Semantics and Pragmatics of Evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University.
Fodor, Jerry. 1983. The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Fourquet, Jean. 1970. Prolegomena zu Einer Deutschen Grammatik. Pädagogischer Verlag Schwann Düsseldorf.
Fox, D. 2002. Antecedent contained deletion and the copy theory of movement. Linguistic Inquiry 33.1:63-96.
Frascarelli, M. 2000. The Syntax-phonology Interface in Focus and Topic Constructions in Italian. Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 50. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Fraser, Bruce. 1990. An approach to discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics 14:383-395.
Fukushima, Kazuhiko. 2003. Verb-raising and numeral classifier in Japanese: Incompatible bedfellows. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 12:313-347.
Fukushima, Kazuhiko. 2006. The Overview of Syntax-Pragmatics Interface. In Keith Brown (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd edition), Elsevier Ltd.
Gao Ming-kai. 1970. Guóyǔ Yǔ fǎ. [Mandarin Grammar]. Lètiān Publishing.
Gazdar, G and Klein, E. 1977. Context-sensitive transformational constraints and conventional implicature. In Proceedings of the 13th Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society, 137-184.
Gazdar, G. 1980. Pragmatic constraints on linguistic production. In Butterworth B (ed.) Speech and Talk. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 49-68.
Ghosh, Sanjukta. 1998. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Overt Object Marker: Comparative Study of Bangla, Marathi and Esperanto. M.Phil Dissertation. University of Hyderabad.
Ghosh, Sanjukta. 2002. The Syntax-Pragmatics Interface of Bangla. Doctorate thesis. University of Hyderabad.
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2009. The dependency of the subjunctive revisited: Temporal semantics and polarity. Lingua 119:1883-1908.
Ginzburg J., Sag I., Purver M. 2003. Integrating Conversational Move Types in the Grammar of Conversation. In Kühnlein P., Rieser H., Zeevat H. (eds.), Perspectives on Dialogue in the New Millennium, Vol. 114 of Pragmatics and Beyond New Series. John Benjamins, 25–42.
Ginzburg, J. and Sag, I. 2000. Interrogative Investigations. Standford, CA: CSLI.
Giorgi, Alessandra. 2008. The theory of syntax and the representation of indexicality. In Laura Brugé, Anna Cardinaletti, Giuliana Giusti, Nicola Munaro, and Cecilia Poletto (eds.) Functional Heads: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 7. Oxford University Press, 42-54.
Giorgi, Alessandra. 2009a. A grammar of Italian sequence of tense. Venice Working Papers in Linguistics 19:111-156.
Giorgi, Alessandra. 2009b. About the Speaker: Towards a Syntax of Indexicality. Oxford University Press.
Giorgi, Alessandra. 2010. About the Speaker: Towards a Syntax of Indexicality. New York: Oxford University Press.
Giorgi, Alessandra. 2012. The Theory of Syntax and the Representation of Indexicality. In Laura Brugé, Anna Cardinaletti, Giuliana Giusti, Nicola Munaro and Cecilia Poletto (eds.) Functional Heads: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 7. Oxford University Press, 42-54.
Givón, T. 1979. From discourse to syntax: grammar as a processing strategy. In Givón, T (ed.) Syntax and Semantics 12: Discourse and Syntax. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 81-112.
Gordon, D and Lakoff, G. 1971. Conversational postulates. In Proceedings of the 7th Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society, 63-84.
Green, G. 2000. The nature of pragmatic information. In Cann, R, Grover, C and Miller, P (eds.) Grammatical Interface in HPSG. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 113-135.
Grice, Paul. 1967. Logic and Conversation. William James Lectures, Repr. In Grice (1989: 1-143).
Grice, Paul. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Groenendijk, Jeroen, and Stokhof, Martin. 1984. Studies on the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam.
Guerrero. Lilián. 2008. Alternative expressions of “want” complements. In Van Valin, Jr (ed). Investigations of the Syntax-Semantics-Pragmatics interface. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 321-336.
Gussenhoven, Carlos. 2007. Types of focus in English. In Chungmin Lee, Matthew Gordon, Daniel Brüring (eds.) Topic and Focus Cross-Linguistic Perspectives on Meaning and Intonation. Springer, 83-100.
Hacquard, Valentine. 2006. Aspects of Modality. Ph.D. dissertation. MIT.
Hacquard, Valentine. 2007. Speaker-oriented vs. subject-oriented modals: a split in implicative behavior. In E. Puig-Waldmüller (ed.) Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 11. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra, 305-319.
Haegeman, Liliane and Hill, Virginia. 2011. The syntacticization of discourse. Ms, Ghent University and University of New Brunswick-SJ.
Haegeman, Liliane and Hill, Virginia. 2013. The syntacticization of discourse. In Raffaella Folli, Christina Sevdali, and Robert Truswell (eds.) Syntax and Its Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 370–390.
Haegeman, Liliane. 2012. Adverbial Clauses, Main Clause Phenomena, and the Composition of the Left Periphery: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 8. Oxford University Press.
Haegeman, Liliane. 2014. West Flemish verb-based discourse markers and the articulation of the speech act layer. Studia Linguistica 68.1:116-139.
Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, Samuel Jay. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.) The view from Building 20. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 53-109.
Halliday, M., 1970. Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English. Foundations of Language 6:322–361.
Hamblin, C. L. 1958. Questions. The Australasian Journal of Philosophy 36:159-168.
Hamblin, C. L. 1973. Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language 10:41-53.
Han, Chung-hye. 2002. Interpreting interrogatives as rhetorical questions. Lingua 112: 201-229.
Hardman, M. J. 1986. Data-source marking in the Jaqi languages. In Chafe, N. (ed.) Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. Ablex Pub. Corp., Norwood, NJ, 113-136.
Heim, Irene. 1983. File Change Semantics and the Familiarity Theory of Definiteness. In Rainer Bäuerle, et al. (eds) Meaning, Use, and Interpretation of Language. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 164-189.
Hill, Virginia. 2007. Vocatives and the pragmatics-syntax interface. Lingua 117:2077-2105.
Hintz, Daniel J. & Hintz, Diane M. 2017. The evidential category of mutual knowledge in Quechua. Lingua 186-187:88-109.
Hiraiwa, Ken. 2001. Multiple Agree and the Defective Intervention Constraint in Japanese. In Ora Matsushansky et. al. (eds.), The Proceedings of the MIT-Harvard Joint Conference (HUMIT 2000) MITWPL #40. Cambridge, MA.: MITWPL, 67-80.
Höhle, Tilman N. 1992. Über verum-fokus im deutschen. In Jacobs, Joachim (ed.), Informationsstruktur und Grammatik. Westdeutscher Verlag, 112–141.
Hopper, P. 1987. Emergent grammar. In Proceedings of the 13th Meeting of Berkeley Linguistic Society. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistic Society, 139-157.
Hsieh, Feng-fan & Sybesma, Rint. 2008. Shēngchéng Yǔfa Lǐlùn hé Hànyǔ Yǔqìcí Yánjiù [Generative syntax and sentence-final particles in Chinese]. In Shen, Yang. & Feng, Shengli. (eds.) Dāngdài Yǔyánxué Lǐlùn hé Hànyǔ Yánjiù [Contemporary Linguistic Theories and Related Studies on Chinese]. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 364-374.
Hsieh, Feng-fan & Sybesma, Rint. 2011. On the Linearization of Chinese Sentence-final Particles: Max Spell Out and Why CP Moves. Korea Journal of Chinese Language and Literature. Vol. 1: 53-90.
Hsu, Shi-ying. 1973. Zhōngguó Wénfǎ Jiǎnghuà. [Remarks on Chinese Grammar] Táiwān Kāimíng Shūdiàn.
Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar. Ph.D Thesis. MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
Huang, C.-T. James. 1984. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 15:531-574.
Huang, C.-T. James. 1988[1990]. Shuō “shì” hàn “yǒu” (Say “shi” and “you”) Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology Academia Sinica 59.1:43-64.
Huang, C.-T. James & Ochi, Masao. 2004. Syntax of the Hell: Two Types of Dependencies. In Keir, Moulton and Matthew Wolf (eds.), Proceedings of the 34th Conference of the North Eastern Linguistic Society (NELS), 279-293.
Huang, Dinghua. 1958. Mǐnnán Fāngyán de Xūzìyǎn 在, 著, 裡. Zhōngguó Yǔwén. 2:81-84.
Huang, Shuanfan. 2000. The story of heads and tails - On a sequentially sensitive lexicon. Language and Linguistics 1.2:79-107.
Hӧhle, Tilman. 1992. Über Verum-Fokus im Deutschen. In J. Jacobs (ed.), Informationsstruktur und Grammatik, 112-141. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Iatridou, S. 1990. The Past, the Possible and the Evident. Linguistic Inquiry 21.1:123-129.
Inglis, Stephanie. 2003. The deferential evidential in Mi’kmaq. In H.C. Wolfart (ed.) Papers of the 34th Algonquian Conference, 193-200.
Izvorski, Roumyana. 1997. The present perfect as an epistemic modal. Proceedings of SALT VII, Stanford University, 222-239.
Jackendoff, R. 2002. The Architecture of the Language Faculty. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Jespersen, Otto. 1927. A Modern English Grammar: On Historical Principles. Copenhagen: Heidelberg.
Kaiser, Lizanne. 1999. Representing the Structure-Discourse Iconicity of the Japanese Post-Verbal Construction. In Michael Darnell, Edith Moravcsik, Frederick Newmeyer, Michael Noonan, Kathleen Wheatley (eds) Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics Volume II: Case Studies. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 107-129.
Kalsang, Jay Garfiled, Speas, Margaret, & de Villiers, Jill. 2013. Direct Evidentials, Case, Tense and Aspect in Tibetan: Evidence for a General Theory of the Semantics of Evidential. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 31:517-561.
Kamp, H. 1981. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In T. Janssen and M. Stokhof (eds) Truch, Interpretation, and Information. Dordrecht: Foris, 1-34.
Kamp, H. and Reyle, U. 1993. From Discourse to Logic: Introduction to Modeltheoretic Semantics of Natural Language, Formal Logic and Discourse Representation Theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Kaplan, D. 1989. Demonstratives. In J. Almog, J, Perry and H. K. Wettstein (eds) Themes from Kaplan. Oxford University Press, 481-563.
Karttunen, Lauri. 1973. Presuppositions and Compound Sentences. Linguistic Inquiry 4:169–193.
Karttunen, Lauri. 1974. Presupposition and Linguistic Context. Theoretical Linguistics 1:181-93.
Karttunen, Lauri. 1977. Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1:3-44.
Kempson, Ruth M. 2001. Dynamic Syntax: The Flow of Language Understanding. Oxford: Blackwell.
Kempson, Ruth M. 2012. The syntax/pragmatics interface. In Keith Allan and Kasia M. Jaszczolt (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics. Cambridge: Campbridge University Press, 529-548.
Kim, S.-S. 2002. Intervention effects are focus effects. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 10:615-628.
Kim, S.-S. 2005. Focus intervention effects in questions. Paper presented at TEAL Workshop 3, Harvard University.
Krifka, Manfred. 1998. Additive Particles under Stress. In Devon Strolovitch and Aaron (eds.) Proceedings of the 8th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference, held May 8-10, 1998 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Larson, Richard. 1988. On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19:335-391.
Lau, Seng-hian. 2010. Excising Tags: Distinguishing between Interrogative SFPs and Tag Questions in Taiwanese. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics 8.1:1-28.
Lau, Seng-hian. 2013. On non-verbal kongs in Taiwanese. Monumenta Taiwanica 7:57-87.
Lee, Hui-chi. 2005. On Chinese Focus and Cleft Constructions. Ph.D. dissertation. National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.
Lewis, D. 1970. General semantics. Synthese 22:18-67.
Li, Boya. 2006. Chinese Final Particles and the Syntax of the Periphery. Ph.D. dissertation. Universiteit Leiden.
Li, Charles N. & Thompson, Sandra A. 1981. Mandarin Chinese - A Functional Reference Grammar. University of California Press.
Li, Charles N. & Thompson, Sandra. 1976. Subject and topic: A new typology of language. In C. Li (ed.) Subject and Topic. New York: Academic Press, 457-489.
Li, Cherry Ing. 1999. Táiwānhuà de Yǔwěi Zhùcí: Yántán Yǔyòng de Fēnxī [Sentence-final particles in Taiwanese: An analysis in discourse and pragmatics]. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co.
Li, Guangming. 1997. Shuō “阿” [On阿]. Tiānshuǐ Shīzhuān Xuébáo 2.17:34-37.
Li, Hsien-Chang. 1950. Fujian Yufa Xushuo [An introduction to Hokkien grammar]. Taipei: Nan Fong Shu-ju.
Li, Jinxi. 1925. Xin Zhù Guóyǔ Wénfǎ. [New Mandarin Grammar]. The Commercial Press Ltd.
Li, Paul Jen-kuei. 1971. Two Negative Markers in Taiwanese. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 43:210-220.
Li, Rulong. 1986. Mǐnnánhuà de “yǒu” hé “wú” [“Yǒu” and “wú” in Southern Min]. Journal of Fujian Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition) 1986.2:76–83.
Li, Rulong. 2007. Mǐnnán Fāngyán Yǔfǎ Yánjiù [A study on Southern Min grammar]. Fuzhou: Fujian Rénmín Chūbǎnshè.
Li, Yen-hui Audrey. 1992. Indefinite wh in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 1:125-155.
Li, Ying-che. 1986. Historical significance of certain distinct grammatical features in Taiwanese. In John F. McCoy & Timothy Light (eds.) Contributions to Sino-Tibetan Studies. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 393-414.
Lien, Chinfa. 1988. Taiwanese sentence-final particles. In Robert L. Cheng and Shuanfan Huang (eds.) The Structure of Taiwanese: A Modern Synthesis. Taipei: The Crane Publishing, 209-240.
Lien, Chinfa. 2010. Táiwān Mǐnnányǔ yùqiú qíngtài hàn fǒudìng de dòngtài fēngxī [Desiderative modals and negative words in Taiwanese Southern Min: a dynamic account of competition and change] Journal of Chinese Linguistics. Monograph Series No. 24 Diachronic Change and Language Contact - Dialects in South East China, 68-88.
Lien, Chinfa. 2015a. Zǎoqí Mǐnnányǔ-zhōng duōchóng gōngnéngcí ‘處’ de tànsuǒ: Cóng fāngwèi dào tǐmáo [Exploring the versatile function words 處 in Early Southern Min: From location to aspect]. Dōnghǎi Zhōngwén Xuébào 29:251-268.
Lien, Chinfa. 2015b. Xiàndài Mǐnnányǔ “Bô” (wú) de Duōchóng Gōngnéng: Cóng Jiēchéng Jiégòu Rùshǒu [The multiple functions of ‘bô’ in Modern Southern Min: from the hierarchical structure]. Language and Linguistics 16.2:169-186.
Lightfoot, David. 1979. Principles of Diachronic Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lin, Jo-Wang. 2003. Temporal Reference in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 12:259-311.
Lin, T.-H. Jonah. 2001. Light Verb Syntax and the Theory of Phrase Structure. Ph.D. dissertation. UC Irvine.
Liu, Chi-Ming Louis. 2014. A Modular Theory of Radical Pro Drop. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.
Liu, Hsiuying & Chinfa, Lien. 2006. Mǐnnányǔ gǎntàn jùshì chūtàn [Introduction to the exclamatory sentences in Southern Min]. Zhōngguó Yǔxué 253:92-116.
Lonzi, L. 2006. Intonazione contrastive e strutture di base. Annali Online di Ferrara Lettere, vol. 1:53-74.
Lu, Guang-cheng. 1999. Táiwān Mǐnnányǔ Cíhuì Yánjiù [A Study on Taiwanese Morphology]. SMC Publishing Inc.
Lu, Guang-cheng. 2003. Táiwān Mǐnnányǔ Gàiyào [An Brief Introduction to Taiwanese Southern Min]. SMC Publishing Inc.
Lü, Zhen-yu. 2007. Shījīng “維” zì yòngfǎ yǔ cíyì yánjiù [On the usages and meanings of 維 in Shījīng]. Journal of Humanities College of Liberal Arts National Chung Hsing University 38:33-72.
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Madden, B. 1960. An Introduction to Mendi Grammar. Ms.
Marten, Lutz. 2002 At the Syntax-Pragmatics Interface: Verbal Underspecification and Concept Formation in Dynamic Syntax. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
Matthewson, Lisa, Henry Davis and Hotze Rullmann. 2007. Evidentials as epistemic modals: Evidence from Sťáťimcets. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 7:201-254.
Mei, Guang. 2015. Shànggǔ Hànyǔ Yǔfǎ Gāngyào [An outline of Old Chinese grammar]. Taipei: San Min Book co., Ltd.
Miyagawa, Shigeru. Agreement that occur mainly in the main clause. In Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman, and Rechel Nye (eds) Main Clause Phenomena. New Horizons. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 79-112.
Morgan, J. 1975. Some interactions of syntax and pragmatics. In Cole P & Morgan J (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech acts. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 289-304.
Müller, Simone. 2005. Discourse Markers in Native and Non-native English Discourse. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Nakajima, Motoki. 1971. Fukkengo ni okeru ‘u7’ ‘bo5’ no gohō no hanchū ni tsuite [On the grammatical category of u7’ ‘bo5’ in the Fujian dialect]. Journal of Asian and African Studies 4:75-85.
Nasu, Norio. 2012. Topic particle stranding and the structure of CP. In Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman, and Rechel Nye (eds) Main Clause Phenomena. New Horizons. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 205-227.
Ndwiga, Silvano Nurithi. 2014. The Syntax and Pragmatics of the Gichuka Sentence: A Challenge to the Minimalist Program Analysis. Ph.D dissertation. University of Nairobi.
Nespor, M. & Guasti, M. T. 2002 . Focus to stress alignment and its consequences for acquisition. Lingue e Linguaggio 1:79-106.
O’Connor, Rob. 2008. A prosodic projection for Role and Reference Grammar. In Van Valin, Jr (ed). Investigations of the Syntax-Semantics-Pragmatics interface. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 227-244.
Obenauer, Hans. 2006. Special interrogatives. In Jenny Doetjes & Paz Gonzalez (eds.), Romance Language and Linguistic Theory 2004 (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 278). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 247-273.
Ochi, Masao. 2004. How come and other adjunct wh-phrases: a cross-linguistic perspective. Language and Linguistics 5.1:29-57.
Ogawa, Naoyoshi et al. (eds.) 1931-32. Tai-Nichi Dai Jiten [A Comprehensive Taiwanese-Japanese Dictionary], Vol. 2. Taihoku: Taiwan Sotokufu.
Palmer, F., 1986. Mood and Modality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Pan, Victor Junnan. 2014. Deriving special questions in Mandarin Chinese: A comparative study. Presented in The 16th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar, The Korean Generative Grammar Circle, Dongguk University, Seoul, Korea. Dongguk University, Seoul, Korea.
Pan, Victor Junnan. 2015. Mandarin peripheral construals at the syntax-discourse interface. The Linguistic Review 32.4:819-868.
Pan, Victor Junnan & Paul, Waltraud. 2016. Why Chinese SFPs are neither optional nor disjunctors. Lingua 170:23-34.
Paoli, Sandra. 2009. Contrastiveness and New Information. A New View on Focus. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 34:137-161.
Papafragou, Anna. 2006. Epistemic modality and truth conditions. Lingua 116:1688-1702.
Paul, W. 2014. Why particles are not particular: sentence-final particles in Chinese as heads of a split CP. Studia Linguistica 68.1:77-115.
Paul, W. 2015. New Perspectives on Chinese Syntax. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Pesetsky, David and Torrego, Esther. 2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In Simin Karimi, Vida Samiian and Wendy Wilkins (eds) Phrasal and Clausal Architecture: Syntactic Derivation and Interpretation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 262-294.
Poletto, Cecilia. 2008. The syntax of focus negation. University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics 18:179-202.
Portner, Paul. 2006. Comments on Faller’s paper. Paper presented at the Workshop on Philosophy and Linguistics at the University of Michigan.
Potts, Christopher. 2005. The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Premack, D. G. & Woodruff, G. 1978. Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1.4:515–526.
Prince, Ellen F. 1986. On the Syntactic Marking of Presupposed Open Propositions. In Anne M. Farley, Peter T. Farley & Karl-Erik McCullough (eds) Papers from the Parasession on Pragmatics and Grammatical Theory at the 22nd Regional Meeting. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago [Chicago Linguistic Society], 208-222.
Pūsandō Shujin. 1899. Dogo gakushūjō no go nankan [Five barriers to the learning of indigenous languages]. Taiwan Dogo Sō shi [Taiwan Indigenous Langauges] 1:9-18. Taihoku [Taipei]: Hakubundō.
Reinhart, Tanya. 2006. Interface strategies: Optimal and costly computations. (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 45). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Liliane Haegeman (ed) Elements of Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 281-337.
Rizzi, Luigi. 2004. On the Form of Chains: Criterial Positions and ECP Effects. Manuscript. University of Siena.
Roberts, Craige. 2011. Topics. In Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn and Paul Portner (eds.) Semantics. An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning. De Gruyter Mouton, 1908-1934.
Romero, Maribel and Chung-hye Han. 2004. On Negative Yes/No Questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 27:609-658.
Rooryck, Johan. 2001. Evidentiality, Part I. GLOT International 5.4:125-133.
Rooth, Mats. 1985. Association with Focus. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Rooth, Mats. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1:75-116.
Ross, J. R. 1970. On declarative sentences. In Jacobs R. A. and Rosenbaum P. S. (eds.) Readings in English Transformational Grammar. Waltham, MA: Ginn, 222-272.
Saillard, Claire. 1992. Negation in Taiwanese: Syntactic and Semantic Aspects. M.A. thesis. National Tsing Hua University.
Samko, Bern. 2016. Verum focus in alternative semantics. Paper presented in 90th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America. Washington DC. 9 Jan. 2016.
San Roque, L. 2008. An Introduction to Duna Grammar. Ph.D. dissertation. Australian National University, Canberra.
Schaffar, W. & L. Chen. 2001. Yes-no questions in Mandarin and the theory of focus. Linguistics 39:837-870.
Schiffrin, Deborah. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge University Press.
Searle, John R. 1975a. A taxonomy of illocutionary acts. Language, Mind, and Knowledge 7:344-369.
Searle, John. 1975b. Indirect speech acts. In Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan (es) Syntax and Semantics, 3: Speech Acts, New York NY: Academic Press, 59-82.
Shao, Jingmin. 1996. Xiandai Hanyu Yiwenju Yanjiu [Studies on Chinese Interrogative Constructions]. Shanghai: Huadong Normal University Publisher.
Shao, Jingmin & Zhao, Xiufeng. 1989. “Shwme” fei yiwen yongfa yanjiu [A study on the non-interrogative usages of “what”], Yuyan Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu [Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies] 1:26-40.
Shimojo, Mitsuaki. 2008. How missing is the missing verb? In Van Valin, Jr (ed). Investigations of the Syntax-Semantics-Pragmatics interface. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 285-304.
Simon, Mutsuko Endo. 1989. An Analysis of the Postposing Construction in Japanese. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Michigan.
Simpson, Andrew & Wu, Xiu-zhi Zoe. 2002. IP-Raising, Tone Sandhi and the Creation of Particles: Evidence for PF Movement/cyclic Spell-Out. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 11.1:67-99.
Smith, Carlota. 1994. Aspectual viewpoint and situation type in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 3:107-146.
Soh, Hooi Ling & Gao, Mei Jia. 2007. It’s over. Verbal -le in Mandarin Chinese. In The Grammar-Pragmatics Interface. Essays in honor of Jeanette K. Gundel. Nancy Hedberg and Ron Zacharski (eds.). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 91-109.
Soh, Hooi Ling. 2005. WH-in-situ in Mandarin Chinese. Linguistic Inquiry 36:143-155.
Song, Jinlan. 1994. Tán tán “阿” hé “寧” de yǔfǎ xìngzhí [On the characteristics of “阿” and “寧”]. Zhōngxué Yǔwén Jiāoxué 7:34.
Speas, Peggy & Tenny, Carol. 2003. Configurational properties of point of view roles. In Anna Maria Di Sciullo (ed) Asymmetry in Grammar [Linguistik Aktuel / Linguisitcs today 57-58]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 315-344.
Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre. 1986. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre. 1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stainton, R. J. 2006. Words and Thoughts: Subsentences, Ellipsis, and the Philosophy of Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Stalnaker, Robert. 1974. Pragmatic presuppositions. In Milton Munitz and Peter Unger (eds.) Semantics and Philosophy. New York: New York University Press, 197-213.
Stowell, Tim. 2007. The Syntactic Expression of Tense. Lingua 117:437-463.
Stoyanova, M. 2008. Unique Focus: Languages without multiple wh-questions. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Strauss, Susan & Xiang, Xuehua. 2009. Discourse particles: where cognition and interaction intersect - The case of final particle ey in Shishan dialect (Hainan Island, P.R. China). Journal of Pragmatics 41:1287-1312.
Tang, Ting-chi. 1979. Guóyǔ de ‘shì’-zì jù. [Shi sentences in Mandarin Chinese]. Guóyǔ Yǔfǎ Yánjiù Lùnjí [Papers on Mandarin Grammar]. Taiwan Student Books Ltd, 133-142.
Tang, Ting-chi. 1994. Hànyǔ Cífǎ Jùfǎ [Studies on Chinese Morphology and Syntax], Vol. 5. Taipei: Student Book.
Teng, Shou-hsin. 1992. Diversification and unification of negation in Taiwanese. Chinese Languages and Linguistics, Vol. 1. Taipei: Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica, 609-629.
Tenny, Carol. 2006. Evidentiality, experience and the syntax of sentience. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 15:245-288.
Tin, Kiryu. 1934. Taiwan Goho Zen [A complete grammar of Taiwanese]. Taipei: Taiwan Gohosya.
Tsai, Wan-Ling. 2012. Perfect and Progressive in Mandarin Chinese. Master thesis. National Tsing Hua University.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 1994. On nominal islands and LF extraction in Chinese. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 12:121-175.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 1999. On Lexical Courtesy. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 8:39-73.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2008. Left periphery and how-why alternations. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 17:83-117.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2010. Tán Hànyǔ muótàicí qí fēnbù yǔ quánshì de duìyìng guānxi [On the distribution of Chinese modals and the correspondence of their interpretations]. Zhōngguó Yǔwén 3.336:208-221.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2011. Cóng ‘zhè huà cóng hé shū qǐ’ shuō qǐ [Speaking from ‘where should I begin?’]. Yǔyánxué Lùncóng 43:194-208.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2012. Lùn Jùdiào Zhòngyīn tuì Yǔfǎ Quánshì Jīzhì de Yǐngxiǎng. [On the Influences from Intonation and Stress on the Syntactic Interpretation] Ms. National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2015a. On the topography of Chinese modals. In Ur Shlonsky (ed.), Beyond Functional Sequence. Oxford University Press, 275-294.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2015b. A Case of V2 in Chinese. Studies in Chinese Linguistics. 36:81-108.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2016. Mood, modals & subjecthood. Ms. National Tsing Hua University.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2017. On split affectivity in Chinese. Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies, New Series 47.2:409-434.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan & Yang, Barry Chung-yu. 2008. On the fine structure of applicatives and their licensing conditions. Manuscript.
Tsao, Feng-fu & Ying Cheng. 1995. Tán Mǐnnányǔ “u7” de wǔ zhǒng yòngfǎ jí qíjiān de guānxi [Five uses of “u7” and their interrelationship in Southern Min]. Studies in Chinese Linguistics 11:155-167.
Tsao, Feng-fu. 1977. A Functional Study of Topic in Chinese: The First Step toward Discourse Analysis. Doctoral dissertation. USC, Los Angeles, California.
Vallduví, Enric. 1992. The Informational Component. New York: Garland.
Van Valin, Jr, Robert D. 2005. Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Valin, Jr, Robert D. (ed). 2008. Investigations of the Syntax-Semantics-Pragmatics interface. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Van Valin, Jr, Robert D. and LaPolla, Randy J. 1997. Syntax: Structure, Meaning, and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
von Colbe, Valeriano Bellosta. 2008. Is Role and Reference Grammar an adequate grammatical theory for punctuation? In Van Valin, Jr (ed). Investigations of the Syntax-Semantics-Pragmatics interface. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 245-262.
von Fintel, Kai and Anthony S. Gillies. 2010. Must...stay...strong! Natural Language Semantics 18:351-383.
von Prince, Kilu. 2012. Predication and information structure in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 21.4:329-366.
Wang, Changsong. 2016. Yunlü jufa jiaohu zuoyong xia de Hanyu fei dianxing yiwenci yanjiu - Yi “V sheme (V)/(NP)” zhong de “sheme” wei li [A study on the non-canonical wh-word in Mandarin under the interaction between prosody and syntax - An example from “V sheme (V)/(NP)”], manuscript.
Wang, Li. 1937. Zhōngguó wénfǎ zhōng de xìcí [The copula in Chinese Grammar]. Qīnghuá Xuébáo (清華學報) 12:1.
Wang, Li. 1954. Zhōngguó Yǔfǎ Lǐlùn. [The Theories of Chinese Grammar] Chung Hwa Book Co.
Wang, William S-Y. 1967. Conjoining and deletion in Mandarin syntax. Monumenta Serica 26:224-236.
Ward, Gregory, Birner, Betty J., and Kaplan, Jefferey P. 2003. A pragmatic analysis of the epistemic would construction in English. In Modality in Contemporary English, R. Facchinetti, M. Krug and F. Palmer (eds). [Topics in English Linguistics 44, General Editors: B. Kortmann and E. Closs Traugott] Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 270-279.
Ward, Gregory, Kaplan, Jefferey, and Birner, Betty J. 2007. Epistemic would, open propositions, and truncated clefts. In The Grammar-Pragmatics Interface. Essays in honor of Jeanette K. Gundel. Nancy Hedberg and Ron Zacharski (eds). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 77-90.
Willett, T.L. 1991. A Reference Grammar of Southeastern Tepehuan. SIL Publications in Linguistics, vol. 100. Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Wu, Zhongping. 1958. Xiàménhuà de yǔfǎ tèdiǎn [On the grammatical features of Amoy]. Mǐn Guǎng Fāngyán yǔ Pǔtōnghuà [Min Dialects, Yue Dialects and Mandarin]. Beijing: Language Reform Press, 84-102.
Yang, Barry C.-Y. 2008. Intervention Effects and the Component of Grammar. Ph.D. dissertation. National Tsing Hua University.
Yang, Barry C.-Y. 2016. Two types of sentence-final adjunct what. Presented in the 7th International Conference on Formal Linguistics (ICFL-7). December 2-4, 2016. Nankai University, Tianjin, China.
Yang, Che-Hsi. 2014. Táiwān Mǐnnányǔ Jùwěi Zhùcí de Yǔyì Shǔxìng hàn Jùfǎ Fēnxī [Sentence-final Particles in Taiwanese Southern Min: Their semantic properties, pragmatic functions and syntactic analysis]. Master thesis. National Tsing Hua University.
Yang, Hsiu-fang. 1991. Táiwān Mǐnnányǔ Yǔfǎ Gǎo [A Draft for a Grammar of Taiwanese Southern Min]. Taipei: Daan Press.
Yang, Hsiu-fang. 1992. Cóng Lìshǐ Yǔfǎ de Guāndiǎn lùn Mǐnnányǔ 著 jí cíxùmào [discussing著 in Southern Min and the durative aspect from a historical grammar perspective]. Hànxuè Yánjiù. 10.1:349-394.
Yang, Hui-Ling. 2012. The Grammaticalization of Hakka, Mandarin and Southern Min: The Interaction of Negatives with Modality, Aspect, and Interrogatives. Ph.D. dissertation. Arizona State University.
Yang, Hui-ling. 2014 Taiwanese Southern Min V2 negation. A historical perspective. In Maj-Britt Mosegaard Hansen and Jacqueline Visconti (eds.) The Diachrony of Negation, 131-166. John Bejamins Publishing Company.
Yang, Yu-ju. 2015. Mǐnnányǔ Dìngyû cìzhǔ “hit-hō” de yǔfǎ zhuǎnbiàn jí qí zhǐshìxìng de diūshī [On the grammatical change of the DP “彼號” as well as dropping of its referentiality in Taiwanese Southern Min]. Paper presented at the 65th Annual Meeting of the Chinese Linguistic Society of Japan, October 30-November 1, 2015. Tokyo: Tokyo University.
Yoon, Suwon. 2011. ‘Not’ in the mood: The Syntax, Semantics, and Pragmatics of Evaluative Negation. Ph.D. dissertation. The University of Chicago.
Yoshida, Tomoyuki. 2004. Syudai no syooryaku gensyoo: Hikaku toogoron teki koosatu [Topic ellipsis phenomena: A comparative syntactic analysis]. In Ronsyuu Hensyuu Iinkai (ed) Nihongo Kyookugaku no Siten [Japanese Language Education and Beyond]. Tokyo: Tokyodo Shuppan, 291-305.
Yuan, Bin. 1984. Jìndài Hànyǔ “hǎobù” kǎo [On haobu in Early Mandarin Chinese] Zhōngguó Yǔwén 180.3:207.
Yuan, Bin. 1987. “Hǎobù” xùkǎo [On haobu again]. Zhōngguó Yǔwén 197.2:197.
Zeng, Pingdong. 1994. Yě tán “阿” hé “寧” de yǔfǎ xìngzhí [Also on the characteritics of “阿” and “寧”]. Zhōngxué Yǔwén Jiāoxué 12:38-39.
Zhou, Changji. 1991. Mǐnnánhuà yǔ Pǔtōnghuà [Southern Min and Mandarin]. Beijing: Language and Culture Press.
Zhou, Chenlei. 2012. Cóng yǔpiān dào rénjì - “huàshōu” de yìyì hé gōngnéng yǎnbiàn. Linguistic Sciences 11.5:499-508
Zimmermann, M. 2007. Contrastive focus. In C. Féry, G. Fanselow & M. Krifka (eds.) The Notions of Information Structure [Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure 6]. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag, 147-159.
Zubizarreta, M. L. 1998. Prosody, Focus, and Word Order. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：251（臺灣：247，外國：4） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1473665 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67285576
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上