Final Modals, Adverbs and Antisymmetry in Vietnamese

40 Pages·2002·3.36 MB·English

Article

"Final Modals, Adverbs and Antisymmetry in Vietnamese"

Nigel Duffield
Revue québécoise de linguistique, vol. 27, n° 2, 1999, p. 91-129.

Pour citer cet article, utiliser l'information suivante :

URI: http://id.erudit.org/iderudit/603177ar
DOI: 10.7202/603177ar
Note : les règles d'écriture des références bibliographiques peuvent varier selon les différents domaines du savoir.
Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique
d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter à l'URI https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/
Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l'Université de Montréal, l'Université Laval et l'Université du Québec à
Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche. Érudit offre des services d'édition numérique de documents
scientifiques depuis 1998.
Pour communiquer avec les responsables d'Érudit : [email protected]
Document téléchargé le 12 février 2017 04:27
Revue québécoise de linguistique, vol. 27, n° 2,1999, © RQL (UQAM), Montréal
Reproduction interdite sans autorisation de l'éditeur
FINAL MODALS, ADVERBS AND ANTISYMMETRY
INVIETNAMESE*
Nigel Duffield
McGiII University
1. Introduction
T
his paper is concerned with certain issues raised by the existence of
Vietnamese sentences having the form in (1) below, in which a modal
element, diroc. appears to the right of the main verb, often in clause-final posi
tion.1 This 'final modal' phenomenon is not exclusive to Vietnamese: as Simp
son 1997, 1998 discusses, in a number of areally and typologically related
languages, elements corresponding to English can are also placed to the right
of the main predicate complex.
(1) a. Ông Quang mua cái nhà duçfc.
PRN Quang buy CLS house can
"Quang can buy a house."
b. Co yêu long chap nô'i vdi Thuc duçc.
PRN weak heart get-married again with Thuc CAN
"She was again scarcely able to resist marrying Thuc."
* Acknowledgement. This research - part of the McGiIl Vietnamese Grammar Project - was
supported by an FCAR Nouveau Chercheur Award (NC-1759) from the Government of Quebec.
I am extremely grateful to the following consultants: Le Tarn Hang, Julie Nguyen, Nguyen
Phuong Hong, and especially Tieu Thi 1 nanh Xuân and Nhuy Truong; as well as to Hironobu
Hosoi and Ingrid Leung for invaluable research assistance. I am also grateful to Claire Lefebvre,
Ayumi Matsuo, Lisa Travis, and an anonymous reviewer, whose comments and suggestions
helped to improve this paper.
1 One of the goals of the Vietnamese Grammar Project is to compile a bibliography of accessible
books and articles on Vietnamese grammar. For a current list or to add relevant articles to the
archive, the reader is referred to http://ngd.lin^uistics.mcgill.caA^ietnamese.
92 HNAL MODALS, ADVERBS AND ANTISYMMETRY IN VIETNAMESE
Sentences of this type attract more than local interest because they seem to run
counter to two recent theoretical claims about Universal Grammar. Specifically,
these data appear to challenge Kayne's 1995 proposal that heads must always
precede their complements underlyingly, as well as recent claims by Cinque
1998 for a universally fixed hierarchy of markers of tense, aspect and modality.
Both of these general proposals are outlined in more detail in the next section.
The attractiveness of the larger theoretical claims has led researchers to
quite complex derivations for the Vietnamese sentences in (1) (or for their
structural equivalents in Thai and Cantonese). In order to reconcile the surface
data with universal templates, analyses have been put forward in which syntactic
material that is base-generated to the right of the modal is moved leftward,
resulting in a derived rightward position for the modal element. This is
represented in (2). Since what is raised is a phrasal constituent containing a
theta-role-assigning predicate, these analyses have been referred to as predicate
(-phrase) raising analyses.2 As will be discussed here, the details of these
predicate raising analyses differ in important respects, crucially, in whether
one or more phrasal constituents are raised around the modal element. Therefore,
the derivation in (2) simply schematizes the common feature of these accounts.
(2) XP
YP X'
Ông Quang mua cai nhà Xo YP
dirac
t
J
Given this type of derivational analysis, both theoretical problems are
apparently simultaneously resolved: Kaynian Antisymmetry is satisfied, since
the modal element now appears to the left of its presumed complement
underlyingly; and Cinque's hierarchy is respected, since all modal elements
correctly c-command thematic material (the maximal VP), again underlyingly.
The purpose of this paper is to re-examine the evidence for this type of
approach to final modals. I review two recent analyses, that of Simpson 1997,
1998 and my own (Duffield 1998). The claim will be that, in the general case,
the empirical evidence fails to support any type of predicate-raising analysis
2 This is to distinguish them from cases of simple verb-movement, in which only the head o fthe
verb-phrase is moved leftward. The available evidence suggests that Vietnamese does not have
overt verb-movement out of the maximal VP, though there is some evidence for VP-internal
movement; see Duffield (in prep, a) for details.
NIGELDUFFIELD 93
for sentences of this type, albeit a raising analysis is supported in certain
restricted contexts. If this is the correct conclusion, a different account is
required. The alternative proposed here seeks to reconcile the Vietnamese data
with universal hierarchies, but without recourse to syntactic movement: I ar­
gue that the apparently anomalous position of the modal is better explained by
the interaction of both formal (syntactic and phonological) and functional
(parsing) principles. This analysis is then shown to extend to a range of other
right-peripheral elements in South East Asian languages (cf. Cheng 1997).
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 provides an overview of
basic clause structure and of the final modal phenomenon in Vietnamese. This
is followed in section 3 by a discussion of the two Universalist claims, those of
Kayne 1995 and Cinque 1998, for which the phenomenon poses an apparent
difficulty. Section 4 presents the two previous treatments of final modals, and
examines the strength of the evidence for either account. In the fifth section, an
alternative proposal is presented. In the conclusion, I briefly consider a number
of broader theoretical and methodological implications of this analysis.
2. Vietnamese Clause Structure
In this section, the main distributional properties of Vietnamese clauses
are presented, to illustrate the contrast between the modal element diroc and
other grammatical elements, including other modals.
With the exception of the phenomenon under discussion here, Vietnamese
is a paradigm example of a strictly head-initial SVO language, displaying what
Hawkins 1990, 1995 refers to as strong 'cross-categorial harmony'. This is of
course the central background fact of the paper: if Vietnamese were generally
head-final, like Japanese for example, the appearance of modals following the
verb-phrase would be completely unremarkable.
Independently of any particular framework, the observations listed in (3)
below provide clear indication that Vietnamese is head-initial.
(3) a. Vietnamese has prepositions, rather than postpositions ([P NP]);
b. Objects, both direct and indirect, follow the verb unless topicalized,
in which case they appear clause-initially (VO);
с Noun classifiers and quantifiers precede the noun they modify
([DNP]);
d. Possessor noun-phrases and attributive adjectives follow the noun
they modify (N GEN, [NAP]);
94 HNAL MODALS, ADVERBS AND ANTISYMMETRY IN VIETNAMESE
e. Relative clauses follow the noun they modify (N REL);
f. (Most) Degree Modifiers follow the Adverb/Adjective they modify
(ADEG);
g. Native (i.e., non-Sino-Vietnamese) compounds (NN, NA, VN) are
consistently left-headed.
In addition to these properties, other, more theory-dependent, facts are
indicative of the strict head-initiality of Vietnamese. In Duffield (1998, in prep,
b.), I present an analysis of Vietnamese clause structure as sketched in (5)
below. In this analysis, the fixed distribution of tense, negation and topic
markers, relative to subject NPs and adverbials, is used in support of the
theoretical claims given in (4):
(4) a. Vietnamese matrix clauses involve at least three functional categories
above VP (CP (Topic Phrase), TP, AssertionP (NegP));
b. Vietnamese subject arguments raise overtly to [Spec, TP];
с Vietnamese main verbs do not raise overtly out of the maximal VR
(5) TopP
së/dâ (không)
NEG/ASP° VPl
CO
Since the analysis proposed in this paper here appeals directly to this type
of representation, it is worth briefly rehearsing some of the evidence for the
claims in (4) above.
2.1 Preverbal Functional Categories
Consider first the evidence for the three functional categories enumerated
in (4a): TopP, TenseP and AssertionP, respectively. The most direct kind of
NIGELDUFFIELD 95
evidence for these projections comes from the distribution of Topic, tense and
assertion morphemes, respectively. The task of finding such evidence is slightly
complicated by the fact that most of these markers -tense markers, in particular-
are optional in declarative clauses; however, the crucial point to observe is that
these elements exhibit a rigid ordering whenever they are phonetically realized
in the same clause.
The examples in (6) illustrate the distribution of topic marker thi- This
type of topicalization structure is extremely common in Vietnamese, especially
where there is a contrast, either implied or explicit as in (6c). As examples (6a)
and (6b) indicate, thi is generally omitted in non-contrastive contexts. Almost
any type of constituent may be topicalized, including dependent clauses. The
examples in (6d) and (6e) illustrate the conditional function of thi, while the
passage in (6f) shows its use in more neutral 'topic...comment' contexts. In
each case, exactly one topicalized constituent—underlined in (6)—precedes thi.
(6) a. (Con) toi (thi) (toi) hoàn-toàn tan-thành.
(as for) I TOP I completely approve
"As for me, I fully approve of it."
b. Ngucri do (thi) toi không biét (anh áy).
person TOP I NEG knOW PRN DEM
"I don't know that person."
c. Co nói dirçrc tiéng Anh không?
you speak CAN language English NEG
"Can you speak English?"
— ít thôi. Tiéng Pháp thi toi nói tôt làm, nhirng tiêng Anh
little only. lge. Fr. TOP I speak good very, but lge. Engl.
thi khó lâm.
TOP hard very
"Just a little. I speak French very well, but English is very difficult."
d. (Nêu) со áy di Toronto thi toi không à Montreal.
(If) PRN DEMgo Toronto TOP I NEG Ье-at Montreal
"If she goes to Toronto, I won't stay in Montreal."
e. Nhirvâv thi toi không rành lâm.
as such TOP I NEG available very
"In that case, I'm not available."
96 HNAL MODALS, ADVERBS AND ANTISYMMETRY IN VIETNAMESE
f. Rung thi ram, dufrng di thi khó-khan.
forest TOP dense, routes-of-communication TOP difficult.
Chim rung, thuda thi nhfèu, con bóng nguói thi that là
bird forest TOP many, as-for shadow men TOP real COP
hiém.
rare.
"The forest was dense, the routes of communication difficult. Forest
birds and wild animals were abundant, while the shadows of human beings
were truly rare." (Thompson 1987 : 244)
As will become important presently, topicalized constituents—[XP+thi]
phrases—are subject to two structural constraints: Io they always appear in
initial position preceding the subject; 2° they are limited to one occurrence per
clause.3
With respect to TP, Vietnamese has at least three morphemes that mark
temporal (or aspectual) distinctions: the future morpheme se, the past-tense/
completive marker da, and the continuous morpheme dang. AU three items are
free morphemes and are generally in complementary distribution (se and dá
never co-occur).4
The contrasts in (7) and (8) below show that these three tense morphemes
share a fixed position in matrix clauses: they directly follow the subject NP
(which, as just noted, itself follows any topicalized constituent); they precede
modal elements other than dugç, sentential negation and (subject-oriented and
manner) adverbials, which themselves all precede the lexical verb.
(7) a. *Toi tiéng Pháp thi se nói tot lâm (cf. 6c)
I language French TOP FUT speak good very
"I will speak French very well."
b. *Tiêng Pháp thi se toi nói tot lâm.
lge. French TOP FUT I speak very well
"I will speak French very well."
3 In this respect, tłu exhibits the same rigid * second position effect' as the finite verb in verb-
second languages.
4 More detailed discussion of the semantics of these morphemes is provided in Duffield (in
prep. b). What is important for present purposes is that these are 'INFL-related elements', in the
sense that they always appear in a functional position higher than the maximal VP (and than the
proposed Assertion Phrase).
NIGELDUEFIELD 97
(8) a. Toi (se) cân than (*se) viet láthd này.
I FUT carefully FUT write letter DEM
"I will write this letter carefully."
b. Anh ay (da) can than (*da) doc quyén sách.
PRN DEM PAST carefully PAST read CLS book
"He read the book carefully."
с Toi cho là ngày may trôi (se) không (*së) mua.
I think COP tomorrow sky FUT NEG FUT rain
"I think that it won't rain tomorrow."
d. Anh ay (dâ) không (*dâ) vê Viêt Nam.
PRN DEM PAST NEG PAST return Vietnam
"He has not returned to Vietnam."
(9) a. Co áy se không gap em duąc.
PRN DEM FUT NEG meet PRN can
"She will not be able to meet with me."
b. Co áy se không phâi gap em.
PRN DEM FUT NEG MUST meet PRN
"She will not have to meet with you."
c. Co áy se phâi không gap em.
PRN DEM FUT MOD NEG meet PRN
"She will have to not meet with you."
d. *Co áy không se gap em.
PRN DEM NEG FUT meet PRN
"She will not meet you."
The sentences in (8a-c), for example, show that tense must precede manner
adverbials, as well as the negation morpheme không: those in (9) illustrate the
positioning of tense and negation morphemes relative to pre-verbal modal
elements other than diroc: here, the modal phai (must). Notice here, in (9b) and
(9c), that the negation morpheme may either precede or follow modal elements;
negation directly precedes whatever lexical constituent it negates. However,
negation always follows any tense element.
The next functional projection, immediately subjacent to TP in (5), here
labeled AssertionP (AsrP), is the one most relevant to the present analysis. In
98 HNAL MODALS, ADVERBS AND ANTISYMMETRY IN VIETNAMESE
Duffield 1998, I propose that this functional projection is headed by the
Vietnamese morpheme со; the precise status of this element will prove crucial
in the alternative analysis of dime proposed here. Co appears in several different
types of Vietnamese sentences: in interrogative and emphatic contexts, and
also in ellipsis contexts. In fact, in many respects, со functions very similarly
to English ¿fo-support.5
(10) a. Horn qua anh không (có) den nhà chi.
yesterday PRN NEG ASR go house PRN
"He didn't go to your house yesterday."
b. Horn qua anh (со) dên nhà chi không?
yesterday PRN ASR go house PRN Q
"Did he go to your house yesterday?"
с Anh (có) di vê Viêt Nam không?
PRN ASR go return Vietnam Q
"Did he return to Vietnam already?"
d. Anh áy da di vê Viêt Nam, (со) phâi không?
PRN DEM PAST go return Vietnam ASR right Q
"He already returned to Vietnam didn't he?"
e. Co phâi anh áy dive Viet Nam không?
ASR right PRN go return Vietnam Q
"Did he return to Vietnam already?"
The examples in (10b) and (10c) illustrate typical Yes-No questions in
Vietnamese, signalled by placing the negation element không sentence-finally,
with the assertion/interrogative marker со appearing in medial position. These
should be compared with the negative sentence in (10a). There are two points
to observe about these examples. First, with the exception of copular construc­
tions, the со morpheme itself is always optional in Yes-No questions; the
presence of khôngis sufficient to signal the question. Second, there is nothing
inherently or implicitly negative about such expressions: in sentence-final, as
opposed to pre-verbal position, không functions as a pure question-marker (or
Q-marker, as indicated in the gloss). In what follows, I will argue that this is
because sentence-final không is licensed through c-command by the [±wh]
5 ££ may also function as a lexical verb corresponding to English 'have' indicating possession.
It is probably not coincidental that both of these unrelated languages should employ a functional
auxiliary element as a lexical verb meaning 'have/own'; see, for example, Kayne 1993.
NIGELDUFFIELD 99
features of AsrP. The examples in (lOd-e) show that со also appears in
Vietnamese tag-questions and clefts. Co also appears in non-interrogative
emphatic contexts, as illustrated in (11), and in elliptical responsive contexts in
(12), used in place of the lexical verb.6 Notice that in every case in (11), со
appears as the lowest functional element preceding the lexical verb: the crucial
contrast here is in (lib), which shows that the sentential negation morpheme
must precede со, rather than vice versa. The contrasts in (llc-d) show further
that со also invariably follows the tense morphemes (se, da).
(11) a. Co X. со ànhô'i-lô.
PRN X. ASR eat-bribes
"Miss X. did take bribes."
b. Co X. (*co) không (со) anhô'i-lô.
PRN X. ASR NEG ASR eat-bribes
"Miss X. did not take bribes."
c. Co X. (*có) da (có) anhô'i-lô.
PRN X. ASR PAST ASR eat-bribes
dl Co X. (*co) se (со) an hô'i-lô.
PRN X. ASR FUT ASR eat-bribes
(12) a. Chi со viét th- không?
PRN ASR write letter Q
"Did you write/Will you write the letter?"
b. Anh со mua quyën sách này không?
PRN ASR buy CLS book DEM NEG
"Did you buy/Will you buy this book?"
с Co /không (со)!
"Idid!/Ididn't!"
The examples in (10-12) thus provide distributional as well as interpretive
evidence that со heads a functional projection immediately above VP. That
6 For some speakers, ç& can only be used to respond to [+telic] verbs; for states and activities the
predicate itself is required. Thus, s¿ is less than fully acceptable in contexts such as (a) below.
(a) Chi (có) bân không?
PRN ASR busy Q
"Are you busy?"