Universal Merge and Chinese Relativization
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13032851 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Caimei Yang (0000-0003-4656-9684, Soochow University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2015 |
| Volume | 1 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 19-39 |
| Publication date | 2015-06-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Language and Semiotic Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2096-031X • E-ISSN: 2751-7160 |
| Publisher | Walter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE) |
| DOI | 10.1515/lass-2015-010202 |
| OpenAlex | W4366708254 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 8 |
Following the movement/internal-merge analysis of English relativization, many linguists argue for a similar approach to Chinese relativization (believing that there is operator movement or head raising in the derivation of the Chinese relative structure). This paper argues for a no-movement/external-merge analysis of Chinese relativization because six syntactic features in the Chinese relative structure point to systematic differences between Chinese and English. The no-movement/external-merge analysis of Chinese relativization shows that, although internal merge and external merge are two universal syntactical operations under the minimalist framework in Chomsky (1995), whether the syntax of a certain structure in a certain language involves internal merge or external merge may be language specific. Therefore, before applying the specific syntax of a certain structure in a certain language to the syntax of a corresponding structure in another language, a systematic study of the syntactic characteristics of the two structures must be done
Information retrieval · Linguistics · Merge (version control · Computer Science · Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction · Corporate Governance and Law · Legal principles and applications · Philosophy
| Highly cited | No |
|---|