TL;DR: It is argued that syntactic misparsing is not a significant factor in syntactic change, contrary to many earlier claims, and the mis parsing analysis is rejected in the most current research, or at best subject to alternative explanations.
Abstract: This paper argues that syntactic misparsing is not a significant factor in syntactic change, contrary to many earlier claims. It examines the best known examples in the literature of syntactic change resulting from alleged misparsing, and shows that the misparsing analysis is rejected in the most current research, or at best subject to alternative explanations. Cases discussed include SVO word order in Niger-Congo, the Chinese bǎ construction, and English for NP to VP infinitives. The paper concludes with a brief comparison of the roles of misparsing, broadly construed, in syntactic and phonological change.
TL;DR: The meaning structure of the bǎ-construction is a compound propositional style with distinct gradation, the outer layer of which is a subjective qualitative proposition to cause-issue bounded variation, the middle layer a compound proposition expressing 'cause-issue-bounded variation', and the inner layer a simple proposition expressing objective issues as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: This paper discusses the grammatical meaning of the bǎ-construction from the aspect of cognitive typology,and we think that the bǎ-constructions is an analyticity indicative mood of 'issue bounded variation'.More specifically,the meaning structure of the bǎ-construction is a compound propositional style with distinct gradation,the outer layer of which is a subjective qualitative proposition to 'cause-issue bounded variation',the middle layer a compound proposition expressing 'cause-issue bounded variation',and the inner layer a simple proposition expressing objective issues.Seen from the constructional meaning,the bǎ-construction is an analyticity indicative sentence,which subjectivity is mainly a qualification combined in an indicative sentence and to cause of issue bounded variation from the speaker.The bǎ-construction is a special sentence-pattern in Chinese.The study of it has important value on cognitive typology.
TL;DR: Examination of how French learners of Chinese L2 at two proficiency levels encode caused motion events in comparison to native speakers of Chinese and of French shows that even at a high level of proficiency, learners encode Path in verbs rather than in directional verb resultatives.
Abstract: Space is an important domain of our cognitive system, which develops in children from an early age on and is often considered to be universal. However, languages vary greatly in the way they encode static and dynamic space. Much research conducted within the framework proposed by Talmy (1985, 2000) analyzed the expression of Path in voluntary motion. However, few studies have examined caused motion, especially in languages that are sometimes considered to be “equipollent” such as Chinese (Slobin 2004). Typological differences between languages also raise questions about the process of second language acquisition: do the typological properties of the source language influence motion expression in the target language? What developments can we expect in this area during the acquisition of a foreign language? To answer these questions, the present study examines how French learners of Chinese L2 at two proficiency levels (24 intermediate, 12 advanced) encode caused motion events in comparison to native speakers of Chinese (Ji 2009; Ji et al. 2011a, 2011b) and of French (Hickmann & Hendriks 2010; Harr 2012; Demagny 2015). It is based on an oral corpus consisting of descriptions of 32 animated clips showing an agent moving objects in various ways and according to four different Paths. Responses were analyzed according to the linguistic means used by speakers when encoding motion components, particularly Cause and Path, as well as the syntactic structures in which they occurred (simple, complex, distributed). Several hypotheses were tested: (a) French and Chinese native speakers should show different response patterns given the typological properties of their languages; (b) intermediate learners should have difficulties encoding Cause and Path components in a single clause because of the necessary grammatical devices (directional verb resultative, bǎ construction, zhe durative construction); (c) responses should show greater syntactic complexity and a more typical Chinese lexicalization pattern in the expression of caused motion among advanced learners than among intermediate learners. The results show first that (a) French native speakers mainly use complex syntactic structures in which they encode either Path or Cause in the main verb and use subordinate clauses with a gerund to express the simultaneity of Sub-events. In addition, this variability depends on the type of Path described (Demagny 2015). (b) Second, Chinese native speakers use a simple syntactic structure with Cause in the verb and Path in the satellite (the “directional verb resultative”, but also unexpected complex syntactic structures with Cause outside of the verb in a subordinate clause. (c) Intermediate learners have difficulties selecting linguistic means of encoding Cause and Path. They produce mainly simple structures, but also complex structures as well as an idiosyncratic structure that is similar to a serial verbal construction, involving two verbs used in concatenation (VC + NPFig + VP + NPGr). This atypical structure has already been observed in English learners of Chinese L2 (Ji & Hohenstein 2014). (d) Advanced learners mainly use complex structures, even more frequently than Chinese native speakers. In conclusion, even at a high level of proficiency, learners encode Path in verbs rather than in directional verb resultatives. This lexicalization pattern invites them to choose a complex syntactic structure that is closer to their L1 and allows them to avoid the use of a satellite to encode Path. It would be interesting to carry out future research to test the cognitive implications of these results on speakers’ representations of motion events.
TL;DR: In this paper, the grammatical meanings of the bǫ-construction and other relevant constructions by means of the interactive-derivative approach model were discussed by using a new concept of "construction group", which explores the deriving process of some related constructions in the specific causative construction group.
Abstract: This article discusses the grammatical meanings of the bǎ(把)-construction and other relevant constructions by means of the interactive-derivative approach modelIt first points out that the meaning of any one of these constructions is a kind of relational meaning to other constructions in the specific constructional systemSo general property and specific property of constructional meanings should be distinguishedBased on a new concept of 'construction group',the article explores the deriving process of some related constructions in the specific causative construction group,and generalizes the grammatical meaning of the bǎ-construction,ie,to give prominence to the causative result the causee receives from the causer via a certain mannerMoreover,it deduces the grammatical meanings of other relevant constructions,such as the ordinary bei-construction(long passive),the patient-subject sentence,the bei(被)-construction without causer(short passive)and the causative agent-patient sentenceFinally,it probes into the methodology to study the relationship between form and meaning of specific constructions