Try, experience expression means theory

Author: Wu Hezhong
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2005-08-01
Features: This book is rich in theoretical speculation. The research also strives to compare linguistic phenomena of ancient Chinese with Chinese dialects and other languages in the Sino-Tibetan language family, which is commendable. — Dong Zhiqiao, Nanjing Normal University
This book uses diachronic Chinese literature as its primary corpus, dividing it into three periods: Ancient, Middle, and Modern, to systematically organize and study the means of expressing "attempt" and "experience" in Chinese. The topic breaks away from conventional models, holds pioneering significance, and has high academic value. The author pays attention to adopting a combined synchronic and diachronic research method, comparing and verifying Chinese with dialects, minority languages, and foreign languages. Based on extensive surveys of ancient to modern linguistic materials, combined with modern dialects and minority languages, the research offers novelty in both methodology and materials. — Fang Yixin, Zhejiang University
This book has made great efforts in historical interpretation. In addition to Chinese literature and dialects, it frequentlys Sino-Tibetan language materials, demonstrating the author's broad perspective. — Li Kaizhi, Nanjing University
This book comprehensively and deeply explores the diachronic evolution of Chinese expressions for "attempt" and "experience," to some extent compensating for the weakness in diachronic research of the Chinese "aspect" category. The book is rich in materials and meticulous in analysis, reflecting the author's rigorous thinking. — Liu Shizhen, Nanjing University
This book comprehensively and deeply explores the diachronic evolution of Chinese expressions for "attempt" and "experience." The author has a broad vision and skillfully applies contemporary linguistic theories, fully absorbing new and academically concerned theoretical issues as well as the latest research findings in the field of Chinese historical linguistics. It adopts a combined synchronic and diachronic approach, comparing and verifying Chinese with dialects, minority languages, and foreign languages. Based on extensive surveys of ancient to modern linguistic materials, combined with modern dialects and minority languages, the research offers novelty in both methodology and materials, to some extent compensating for the weakness in diachronic research of the Chinese "aspect" category. "Attempt" and "experience" are at different levels within the Chinese "aspect" category, and their expressions in each period of Ancient, Middle, and Modern Chinese have undergone significant changes. These changes reveal some clues and patterns in the development and evolution of Chinese grammar. Exploring the diachronic evolution of expressions for "attempt" and "experience" holds great significance in the study of historical Chinese grammar.
In ancient Chinese, the primary forms for expressing "attempt" were " + VP" and " + VP," which represent a lexical-syntactic means. The syntactic positions of "" and "" are relatively strict: they only appear in the predicate position (non-predicate center) and are followed by verbal components. In contrast, verbs like "" and "" that do not express "attempt" have different distributions, occupying the predicate center position and being followed by nominal components. Thus, their forms can be distinguished. In later periods of ancient Chinese, the form " + VP" gradually became dominant, seemingly replacing " + VP." Semantically, the "attempt" meaning expressed by lexical-syntactic means in ancient Chinese is neither purely lexical nor purely grammatical; it is a complex meaning that blends word meaning and sentence meaning, or the fusion of two different levels of meaning. This "attempt" meaning should not be referred to as "attempt aspect" or "attempt mood."
Ancient Chinese primarily used two syntactic forms to express "experience": one is "/ + VP," with the negative form being " + / + VP," where "" and "" are adverbs indicating past time, and "" was rarely used in ancient Chinese; the other is the specific syntactic structure " + , O," both of which are. The meanings expressed by these forms belong to syntactic meaning. The " + , O" structure also has certain textual functions. Due to its inherent limitations, the " + , O" form declined after the Middle Ages.
Middle Chinese largely continued the syntactic structures of ancient Chinese for expressing "attempt," such as " + VP" and " + VP," with the phenomenon of "" declining and "" rising observed in later periods of ancient Chinese continuing in this period. The dominant form for expressing "attempt" in the Middle Ages was the old elements and forms from ancient Chinese, particularly " + VP" (including " + VP + ," where "VP + " can also be considered as "VP"). This highly vibrant expression form further developed during this period, with the range of "VP" examples expanding and the constituent materials becoming diverse. The "V/VP + " form began to emerge, and examples of "" usage appeared. The reduplicated form "VV" had more instances, generally indicating repeated actions or prolonged durations.
The Middle Ages continued to widely use the " + VP" form for expressing "experience," but instances of " + VP" increased and developed to some extent. The changes in the expressions for "attempt" and "experience" during this period reflect the pivotal role of Middle Chinese grammar.
Modern Chinese was a period of significant changes and development in the means of expressing "attempt." In addition to continuing the frequently used " + VP," the actual usage of the old form " + V/VP + " increased and expanded its scope. The use of "VP + " also gradually became more common. The "" in this structure, influenced by "," acquired some functions of expressing "attempt," which was a key reason why the "VP + " structure could represent "attempt" meaning. However, the actual meaning of "" did not completely disappear; it remained a verb in a process of devoicing and was not appropriate to be considered an adverb. As for the reduplicated form "VV," it generally indicated short durations or small quantities and did not inherently possess the function of expressing "attempt."
The expression of "experience" in Modern Chinese, in terms of form and means, was similar to that of "attempt"—a mix of old and new. The old form was represented by " + VP." After "" evolved from a complement in Middle Chinese to an adverb, the new form was represented by "V," and "/ + V/VP" was a hybrid of old and new, showing the penetration of old elements into new forms and serving as an intensifying means for expressing "experience." The "" meaning expressed by "V" is generally referred to as "experience aspect."
The forms and means of expressing "experience" in Chinese dialects and other Sino-Tibetan languages share many similarities with those of the common language. The special forms found in Chinese dialects are traces of the historical evolution of Chinese, from which one can observe the developmental process of related phenomena in Chinese. The cognate languages use markers similar to "," either through borrowing or through common origin.
After a long period of evolution, the forms of expressing "attempt" and "experience" in Modern and Contemporary Chinese have undergone qualitative changes, primarily reflected in the forms of expressing "experience." The dominant structure shifted from "/ + VP" to the combination of marker components "" with "V," forming the main expressions "V/（）＋V." The different natures of the expressions for "attempt" and "experience" reflect the different levels of the subcategories within the Chinese "aspect" category, with "attempt" at the outer level and "experience" at the upper level. From the diachronic evolution of the expressions for "attempt" and "experience," we can observe some characteristics of the Chinese "aspect" category and find corresponding positions for its categorization (it belongs to the syntactic category). The Chinese "aspect" differs in hierarchy from the Indo-European "aspect," and the means of expressing "aspect" are of different natures. As of now, there is no need to distinguish "aspect" and "mood" in Chinese. Chinese has a syntactic-level "aspect" category but lacks a "tense" (tense) category.