| Peer-Reviewed

On the Grammatical Status of Le in Mandarin

Received: 31 July 2018     Accepted: 19 September 2018     Published: 10 October 2018
Views:       Downloads:
Abstract

Le is a functional morpheme in Mandarin, which can appear in two places, immediately after the verb (verb-le) or in a sentence-final position (sentence-le). Traditionally, verb-le is often referred to as a perfective aspect marker denoting completion, while sentence-le is generally considered as a sentence final particle which signals a change-of-state meaning. Based on Smith’s aspect theory, which calls the grammatical aspect the viewpoint aspect and the lexical aspect the situation aspect, this paper argues that both les are perfective aspect markers derived from one super-le. Besides, it also compares le with guo, which is another post-verbal perfective aspect marker whose aspectual status has been well-established in the literature, and points out that guo differs from verb-le in that it always denotes the completion of event. It is further argued that the reason why le conveys distinct meanings lies in its position in the sentence. And thus, the conclusion is drawn as: although verb-le and sentence-le denote different meanings, they are essentially the same in terms of the three following aspects: (1) Both of them are perfective aspect viewpoint markers. (2) They have the same temporal interpretations. (3) They show the same variance from guo. Therefore, there is just one le which is a perfective aspect marker. If it is placed after the verb, it will have the terminative reading. If it is in the sentence-final position, it will form a Perfect and have a change-of-state reading. Given such difference, a syntactic representation of le in the clausal structure is proposed, in which verb-le is generated in the AspP lower within vP while sentence-le resides in the AspP adjoined to TP. The reason why guo cannot occur with verb-le is the different aspectual meanings they convey. Guo is concerned with the experience the subject has while sentence-le is about the state change.

Published in International Journal of Language and Linguistics (Volume 6, Issue 5)
DOI 10.11648/j.ijll.20180605.12
Page(s) 148-153
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2018. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Chinese Le, Functional Morpheme, Mandarin

References
[1] Chao, Y.-R. (1968). A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
[2] Ching, E. & Ching, N. (2007). 201 Mandarin Chinese Verbs. New York: Barron's Educational Series.
[3] Chu, C.-H. C. (1998). A Discourse Grammar of Mandarin Chinese. New York: Peter Lang.
[4] Hu, Y. & Fan, X. (1996). Dongci Yanjiu Zongshu (An Overview on the Research of Verbs in Chinese). Shanxi, China: Shanxi Higher Institution Unified Press.
[5] Leech, G. N. (2013). Meaning and the English Verb. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge.
[6] Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. (1981). Mandarin Chinese. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
[7] Li, P. (1998). The Acquisition of Lexical and Grammatical Aspect in Chinese. First Language, 18, 311-350.
[8] Liu, Feng-his. (2012). Side by Side Chinese and English Grammar. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
[9] Palmer, F. R. (1979). Modality and English Modals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[10] Palmer, F. R. (1974). The English Verb. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[11] Smith, C. (1997). The Parameter of Aspect. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[12] Sybesma, R. (1999). The Mandarin VP. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[13] Wheatley, K. J. (2014). Chinese Verbs & Essentials of Grammar. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
[14] Wu, X.-Z. & Liu, Feng-his. Practice Makes Perfect Basic Chinese. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
[15] Zhu, D. (1982). Yufa Jiangyi (Lectures on Grammar). Beijing: Commercial Press.
Cite This Article
  • APA Style

    Man Yuan. (2018). On the Grammatical Status of Le in Mandarin. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 6(5), 148-153. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20180605.12

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Man Yuan. On the Grammatical Status of Le in Mandarin. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 2018, 6(5), 148-153. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20180605.12

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Man Yuan. On the Grammatical Status of Le in Mandarin. Int J Lang Linguist. 2018;6(5):148-153. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20180605.12

    Copy | Download

  • @article{10.11648/j.ijll.20180605.12,
      author = {Man Yuan},
      title = {On the Grammatical Status of Le in Mandarin},
      journal = {International Journal of Language and Linguistics},
      volume = {6},
      number = {5},
      pages = {148-153},
      doi = {10.11648/j.ijll.20180605.12},
      url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20180605.12},
      eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijll.20180605.12},
      abstract = {Le is a functional morpheme in Mandarin, which can appear in two places, immediately after the verb (verb-le) or in a sentence-final position (sentence-le). Traditionally, verb-le is often referred to as a perfective aspect marker denoting completion, while sentence-le is generally considered as a sentence final particle which signals a change-of-state meaning. Based on Smith’s aspect theory, which calls the grammatical aspect the viewpoint aspect and the lexical aspect the situation aspect, this paper argues that both les are perfective aspect markers derived from one super-le. Besides, it also compares le with guo, which is another post-verbal perfective aspect marker whose aspectual status has been well-established in the literature, and points out that guo differs from verb-le in that it always denotes the completion of event. It is further argued that the reason why le conveys distinct meanings lies in its position in the sentence. And thus, the conclusion is drawn as: although verb-le and sentence-le denote different meanings, they are essentially the same in terms of the three following aspects: (1) Both of them are perfective aspect viewpoint markers. (2) They have the same temporal interpretations. (3) They show the same variance from guo. Therefore, there is just one le which is a perfective aspect marker. If it is placed after the verb, it will have the terminative reading. If it is in the sentence-final position, it will form a Perfect and have a change-of-state reading. Given such difference, a syntactic representation of le in the clausal structure is proposed, in which verb-le is generated in the AspP lower within vP while sentence-le resides in the AspP adjoined to TP. The reason why guo cannot occur with verb-le is the different aspectual meanings they convey. Guo is concerned with the experience the subject has while sentence-le is about the state change.},
     year = {2018}
    }
    

    Copy | Download

  • TY  - JOUR
    T1  - On the Grammatical Status of Le in Mandarin
    AU  - Man Yuan
    Y1  - 2018/10/10
    PY  - 2018
    N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20180605.12
    DO  - 10.11648/j.ijll.20180605.12
    T2  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
    JF  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
    JO  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
    SP  - 148
    EP  - 153
    PB  - Science Publishing Group
    SN  - 2330-0221
    UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20180605.12
    AB  - Le is a functional morpheme in Mandarin, which can appear in two places, immediately after the verb (verb-le) or in a sentence-final position (sentence-le). Traditionally, verb-le is often referred to as a perfective aspect marker denoting completion, while sentence-le is generally considered as a sentence final particle which signals a change-of-state meaning. Based on Smith’s aspect theory, which calls the grammatical aspect the viewpoint aspect and the lexical aspect the situation aspect, this paper argues that both les are perfective aspect markers derived from one super-le. Besides, it also compares le with guo, which is another post-verbal perfective aspect marker whose aspectual status has been well-established in the literature, and points out that guo differs from verb-le in that it always denotes the completion of event. It is further argued that the reason why le conveys distinct meanings lies in its position in the sentence. And thus, the conclusion is drawn as: although verb-le and sentence-le denote different meanings, they are essentially the same in terms of the three following aspects: (1) Both of them are perfective aspect viewpoint markers. (2) They have the same temporal interpretations. (3) They show the same variance from guo. Therefore, there is just one le which is a perfective aspect marker. If it is placed after the verb, it will have the terminative reading. If it is in the sentence-final position, it will form a Perfect and have a change-of-state reading. Given such difference, a syntactic representation of le in the clausal structure is proposed, in which verb-le is generated in the AspP lower within vP while sentence-le resides in the AspP adjoined to TP. The reason why guo cannot occur with verb-le is the different aspectual meanings they convey. Guo is concerned with the experience the subject has while sentence-le is about the state change.
    VL  - 6
    IS  - 5
    ER  - 

    Copy | Download

Author Information
  • Department of Foreign Languages, Yinxing Hospitality Management College, Chengdu University of Information Technology, Chengdu, China

  • Sections