Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen
linguistlist.org>
Hi, I have some questions concerning Chinese reflexive ziji: Tang (1989) claims that _ziji_ has to be interpreted as an intensifier if it is (apparently) realized in subject position, as illustrated in (1). (1) Ziji mai cai. self buy food So if Zhangsan says (1), this apparently cannot mean that Zhangsan will buy food. (Tang assumes that ziji does not occupy the subject position but is adjoined to the empty (dropped) subject of the clause.) I was not able to find further discussion on ziji in subject position and would be happy to an answer to the following question: can ziji be logophorically used in subject position (similar, e.g. to Portuguese ele prĂ³prio)? A related question: It is well-known that ziji can be related to an experiencer object if it is contained in a theme-subject, as illustrated in (2). (2) [Ziji de xiaohai mei de jiang de xiaoxi] shi Lisi hen nanguo. self DE child not get price DE news make L. very sad 'The news that his child will not get the price makes Lisi very sad.' Three questions: 1) Is it also possible to discourse-relate ziji in (2) instead of coindexing it with Lisi, or do we have to use 'ta' instead? 2) Can ziji in general be realized inside subject position in Chinese, e.g. in a translation of 'His wife is nice.'? 3) Huang/Tang (1991) claim that ziji contained in theme-subjects can even be coindexed with the experiencer object if it is a-commanded inside the theme, as in (3). (3) [Zhangsan taoyan ziji de xiaoxi] shi Lisi hen nanguo. Zhangsan dislike self/him DE news make Lisi very sad. Is (3) actually grammatical with a coindexing of ziji and Lisi? Thanks for your answers. TiborMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
I am working on the biblical story of the Tower of Babel and its later Jewish interpretations. I'm looking for studies on various ancient myths/views (other than the Sumerian material) regarding the origins of language and languages. Thanks very much.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue