LEADER 03938nam  22006255  450 
001 9911035156603321
005 20251031120421.0
010   $a981-9774-86-1
024 7 $a10.1007/978-981-97-7486-9
035   $a(CKB)41986982800041
035   $a(MiAaPQ)EBC32384101
035   $a(Au-PeEL)EBL32384101
035   $a(DE-He213)978-981-97-7486-9
035   $a(EXLCZ)9941986982800041
100   $a20251031d2025      u|         0
101 0 $aeng
135   $aur|||||||||||
181   $ctxt$2rdacontent
182   $cc$2rdamedia
183   $acr$2rdacarrier
200 10$aChinese Ergative-like Construction $esentences like ?Wangmian Si-le Fuqin" /$fby Tanzhou Liu
205   $a1st ed. 2025.
210  1$aSingapore :$cSpringer Nature Singapore :$cImprint: Springer,$d2025.
215   $a1 online resource (526 pages)
225 1 $aNew Advances in Chinese Grammar,$x3005-057X ;$v1
311 08$a981-9774-85-3 
327   $aThe Major Debate on Chinese sentential subject and object in the 1950s -- The possessor-subject and possessum-object (PSPO) sentence and the splitting analysis of the possessive phrase -- An analytic approach based on movement -- Unaccusative Theory and related theories -- A synthetic approach based on construction and speaker empathy -- A constructional view of the Wangmian sentence and its discourse functions -- Conceptual blending and speaker empathy.
330   $aStudies on ergativity have provided valuable insights into understanding Chinese, but as research deepens, scholars have discovered areas where ergative theory is difficult to apply to Chinese. This book focuses on Chinese ergative-like sentences, exploring their distinctions from typical ergative structures and evaluating whether they truly fit the ergative classification. The authors focus on the following questions: 1) Why and how has the Wangmian sentence, a simple six-character sentence in Chinese, roughly equivalent to ?Wangmian?s father died? in English, sparked long-lasting, intense discussions in Chinese linguistics since the 1950s? 2) Is there a derivational relationship between the Wangmian sentence and other similar sentence structures? 3) How is the concept of ergativity applied to Chinese langauge, esp. in the generation of the Wangmian sentence, and what is its effect? 4) Are ?die?, considered a Chinese ergative verb like ?open? in English, and unergative verbs like ?laugh? and ?cry? truly distinct categories? 5) What valuable insights can we gain from examining the Wangmian sentence from a cognitive perspective? 6) How can we better understand the complexities between the diachronic evolution and synchronic analysis of the Wangmian sentence? Finally, the author compare the explanatory power of constructions and movements?two representative methods of synthetic and analytic approaches?discussing which better reveals the essence of Chinese grammar.
410  0$aNew Advances in Chinese Grammar,$x3005-057X ;$v1
606   $aLinguistics
606   $aLinguistics$xMethodology
606   $aGrammar, Comparative and general$xSyntax
606   $aAsia$xLanguages
606   $aTheoretical Linguistics / Grammar
606   $aResearch Methods in Language and Linguistics
606   $aSyntax
606   $aAsian Languages
615  0$aLinguistics.
615  0$aLinguistics$xMethodology.
615  0$aGrammar, Comparative and general$xSyntax.
615  0$aAsia$xLanguages.
615 14$aTheoretical Linguistics / Grammar.
615 24$aResearch Methods in Language and Linguistics.
615 24$aSyntax.
615 24$aAsian Languages.
676   $a495.15
700   $aLiu$b Tanzhou$01853711
701   $aWang$b Tingting$01721705
801  0$bMiAaPQ
801  1$bMiAaPQ
801  2$bMiAaPQ
906   $aBOOK
912   $a9911035156603321
996   $aChinese Ergative-like Construction$94450340
997   $aUNINA