The positioning of Chinese focus marker shi and pied-piping in logical form
漢語中焦點標記“是”的位置安排與邏輯式中的跟隨移位
Jie Xu 徐傑

Abstract 摘要
Two groups of Chinese sentences involve LF wh-movement in the same fashion but contrast sharply in grammaticality. We demonstrate in this article that this systematic contrast constitutes a significant puzzle for the well-known claim that LF movement of adjuncts is constrained by the applicable locality conditions whereas that of arguments need not obey those conditions in the wh-in-situ languages like Chinese. We argue that this contrast can be accounted for naturally by appealing to a general condition on the positioning of the Chinese focus marker shi, which has nothing to do with the locality conditions on movement in any form. Furthermore, a reasonable solution of the problem argues for a Pied-Piping approach to deal with the language facts that have been under consideration by many authors but have not received a satisfactory treatment. That is, what is being LF-extracted in those superficially island-violating sentences in fact is the whole island that contains the questioned or focused element rather than the questioned or focused element alone. The LF movement of arguments is subject to the locality conditions very much in the very same fashion as that of adjuncts in the Chinese language.

本文首先展示了兩組句子，這兩組句子本應同樣涉及邏輯式中的（暗）移位，但是一組句子非常自然貼切，另一組卻完全不能接受，兩組句子對比鮮明。我們認為，漢語中有關疑問代詞暗移位的這一系統對立對黃正德先生重要論文(Huang, 1982a/b) 發表後二十多年來語法學界有關漢語類語言中附加詞語（Adjuncts）暗移位受區位條件限制(locality conditions)而論元詞語（Arguments）暗移位不受這種限制的論斷構成了一個很大的問題。本文要說明的是，上述兩組句子之間的系統對立跟任何形式的區位條件都沒有關係，而是因為漢語焦點標記“是”在位置安排上的一般限制條件發揮作用所造成的結果。更為重要的是，本文對上述問題的處理方案還對“邏輯式中的跟隨移位”理論提供了有力的支持。我們認為，邏輯式中被暗中移位的其實不是那些被嵌入孤島的疑問代詞本身，而是包含這些疑問代詞的那些個孤島。漢語類語言中附加詞語暗移位所受的區位條件限制跟論元詞語暗移位所受的區位條件限制完全一樣。

Subject Keywords 關鍵詞

Focus construction焦點結構 Position of focus marker焦點標記的位置 LF movement邏輯式中的跟隨移位

Article 文章

<< Back 返回

Readers 读者