Serial verb type compounds

After a brief description of the possible types of sentences which can fall under the label of ‘serial verb construction’, we now try to show the parallels between these syntactic constructions and [V V]V compounds.

Hong (2004), as we have seen (1.3.4.2), points out that the fundamental requirement for a [V V]V compound to be considered a serial verb type compound is that the two constituents must be arranged according to a temporal sequence or a logical sequence. Therefore, according to this definition, serial verb compounds should be considered to be those like 攻占 gōngzhàn ‘attack + occupy = attack and occupy’, 裁缝 cáiféng ‘cut + sew = cut cloth and sew’, 栽培 zāipéi ‘plant + foster = cultivate’, which seem to correspond to what Li & Thompson (1981) term ‘consecutive’ serial verb constructions, where one event occurs after the other (20a). However, Hong (2004) points out that there are other kinds of serial verb compounds as well. For example, this author observes that there are some [V V]V compounds which are ambiguous between being of the modifier-modified type ( 偏 正 式

piānzhèng shì) or of the serial verb type, like those in (24), from Hong (2004:60).

(24) a. 追捕 zhuībǔ ‘pursue + catch = pursue and capture’

b. 走 访 zǒufǎng ‘go/walk + visit/seek by inquiry = interview/have an interview with’

c. 租用 zūyòng ‘rent + use = rent (for use)’

In these compounds, V1 expresses the way in which V2 is performed or an ‘adjunct condition’ (伴随状态 bànsuí zhuàngtài), therefore they should be considered as compounds of the modifier-modified type. However, Hong (2004) considers them as serial verb type compounds; according to this author, these verbs have two characteristics: 1) V1 expresses the way in which V2 is performed; 2) the two verbal roots are arranged in temporal sequence ‘first V1 then V2’. For example, Hong observes that in a verb like 追捕 zhuībǔ ‘pursue and capture’, 追 zhuī ‘pursue’ express the manner of 捕 bǔ ‘catch’; nevertheless, the action expressed by 追 zhuī ‘pursue’ also happens before that of 捕 bǔ ‘catch’, thus is formed following a serial verb construction style. Therefore, a compound like 追捕 zhuībǔ ‘pursue and capture’ is characterized both by having a modificational structure and by having its constituents arranged in a temporal sequence. For this reason, Hong (2004) considers this kind of compounds of the serial verb type.

However, Hong (2004) observes that among this kind of compounds there are some problematic cases. For example, a compound like 游牧 yóumù ‘travel/rove around + herd = live a nomadic life/move around in search of pasture’ does not pose

37 problems for the modificational interpretation. However, the two verbal roots can be also seen either as expressing parallel actions, i.e. ‘travel’ and ‘tend’, or as expressing actions occurring in temporal sequence, first ‘travel’ and then ‘herd’ (cf. Hong 2004:60). According to Hong, modifier-modified [V V]V compounds are characterized only by having a modificational structure; when the constituents are in a modifier-modified relation and are also arranged in temporal sequence, the compound is of the serial verb type. Apparently, [V V]V compounds in which the constituents share a modifier-modified relation can be considered as the parallel of serial verb constructions of the ‘circumstance’ type (20d), where the first verb phrase describes the circumstances under which the event expressed by the second verb phrase or clause occurs, e.g. 骑车上学 qíchē shàngxué ‘ride-bicycle attend-school = to go to school by bicycle’. In this sense, compounds like 蹿升 cuān shēng ‘leap up + rise = climb sharply/rise quickly’, 品读 pǐndú ‘decide with discrimination + read = read carefully; ponder on’, 跃增 yuèzēng ‘leap/jump + increase/add = grow by leaps’ can be considered as parallel to ‘circumstance’ serial verb construction type.

Moreover, Hong (2004) considers compounds where V2 is governed by V1 (thus, the two constituents are in a subordinate relation), e.g. 谋害 móuhài ‘seek + harm/kill = plot to murder’ or 谋杀 móushā ‘seek + kill = kill’; V2 expresses the content of V1 (cf. Hong 2004:60). Hong observes that the constituents of these verbs too share a temporal sequence according to which the action expressed by the first verb happens before the action expressed by the second verb. However, Hong considers these compounds as belonging to the subordinate type (支配式 zhīpèishì) or verbal complement type (动宾式 dòngbīnshì) and not to the serial verb type, because some kinds of verbs (or verbal morphemes) require a verb (or verbal morpheme) complement. Apparently, some V1s can contribute to form both serial verb type compounds and subordinate type compounds. Hong distinguishes between verbs like 签到 qiāndào ‘sign + arrive = sign in/register one’s attending at a meeting or at an office’ and verbs like 签发 qiānfā ‘sign + deliver = sign and issue’; according to the author, only verbs of the latter type are serial verb compounds, while those of the first type are of the subordinate type. However, considering Li & Thompson’s taxonomy of resultative constructions, this kind of compounds can be considered as the parallel of purpose serial verb constructions (20b), where the event expressed by

the first verb (or verb phrase) is performed to achieve the event designated by the second verb.

Moreover, Hong (2004:60) considers the case of compounds of the resultative type, e.g. 打倒 dǎdǎo ‘hit-fall down = overthrow’, 推翻 tuīfān ‘push-turn over/slanting down = overturn’. Hong claims that, despite the fact that the two verb constituents are in a temporal sequence, V1 happens after V2, nevertheless the relation between them is much more complicated than that found in the serial verb compounds type: according to Hong, the V2 of a resultative compound expresses either a result, a direction or a degree. Therefore, Hong sets resultative compounds apart from serial verb type compounds35.

Lastly, Hong (2004) sets apart [V V]V compounds where the two constituents are synonyms (or near-synonyms), i.e. coordinate compounds (cf. 1.3.1), from serial verb type compounds. It seems that in Chinese at least the juxtaposition of two synonymous elements has become a productive pattern of word formation. Examples of verbal compounds built on synonymous constituents in Chinese are: 栽种 zāizhòng ‘plant + plant = plant’; 盗窃 dàoqiè ‘steal + steal = steal’; 选择 xuǎnzé ‘choose + choose = choose’. Wang (1987:304-306) estimates that about 70 to 80 percent of all polysyllabic words in Chinese consist of synonymous elements. Steffen Chung (2006) asserts that the reason for building this kind of compounds is disyllabicity, almost as an end in itself. According to Hong (2004), compounds formed with synonymous (or near synonymous) constituents are not serial verb type compounds, since the constituents do not share a temporal relation.

However, apparently also compounds formed with synonymic constituents can be seen as parallel to serial verb constructions. In fact, synonymic serialization seems to be attested cross-linguistically (cf. Durie 1997): it consists of a sequence of verbs closely related in meaning, usually near-synonyms, but also sometimes antonyms, with identical argument structure; they are neither ordered causally nor temporally (Khmer is a language that has this kind of constructions).

The kinds of serial verb type compounds identified by Hong (2004) reflect subtypes of the first type of serial verbs constructions singled out by Li & Thompson (1981), i.e. two or more separate events (see 1.3.4.2.2 above), in particular the

35 _{Actually resultative compounds too have a corresponding syntactic structure, i.e. the resultative} phrase, marked by means of the morpheme 得 de, which is placed after the first verb (cf. chapter 5, fn. 14). We discuss resultative compounds in chapters 5 and 6.

39 ‘consecutive’, ‘purpose’ and ‘circumstance’ type, even though Hong does not consider those compounds where the constituents share a relation similar to that found in purpose serial verb constructions as instances of serial verb type compounds. However, other types of [V V]V compounds which parallel other types of serial verb constructions illustrated by Li & Thompson (1981) can also be found. For example, as we have seen, some authors recognize the existence of compounds of the ‘double complement’ type (cf. Yi 2007, Chen 2007, among others), such as 劝退 quàntuì ‘advise + quit = persuade somebody to quit’; 请 教 qǐngjiào ‘request/ask + teach/instruct = ask for advice/consult’. This kind of compounds seems to parallel the so-called ‘pivotal constructions’ (cf. Li & Thompson 1981), where a noun phrase is at the same time the external argument of V2 and the internal argument of V1 (22).

Moreover, there is a group of verbal compounds where V2 seems to be subcategorized for by V1, such as: 禁贴 jìntiē ‘forbid the posting of something’; 拒载

jùzài ‘refuse + carry = (of a taxi driver) refuse to take a passenger’; 起飞 qǐfēi

‘rise/begin + fly = (of an aircraft) take off’. These compounds seem to be parallel to those serial verb constructions in which one verb phrase/clause is the direct object of the other (21).

Therefore, if we apply the label ‘serial verb type’ compounds to those [V V]V compounds that are superficially similar and share the same relations as those found in serial verbs constructions, almost any type of [V V]V compound could be seen as a serial verb type compound, the only exception being resultative compounds.

1.3.4.2.4 Is there any real serial verb construction/serial verb type compound? From the description of the serial verb construction in 1.3.4.2.2, it should be clear that in Chinese the label ‘serial verb construction’ refers to a number of different constructions, i.e. any surface string with more than one verb having no overt markers of coordination or subordination. Therefore, ‘serial verb construction’ in Chinese does not indicate a single structure with a predictable set of properties, but different constructions with their specific properties (cf. Paul 2008). This is why there is no clear consensus in the literature on what a serial verb construction is in Chinese: different authors (e.g. Zhu 1982, Li 1986, Chang 1990, Dai 1990, Wang 2007, Paul 2008) seem to hold different views about what kind of verb sequences can be labeled as serial verb constructions, since under this label one can put different kind of

subordinate or coordinate structures, which in Chinese do not require any overt marker, as said above36. Furthermore, due to the lack of markers signalling the relation between sequence of verbs or verb phrases, a sequence of verbs can sometimes generate different interpretations and thus be ambiguous. Consider the example in (25):

(25) 我 种 菜 卖 菜。

wǒ zhǒng cài mài cài

I grow vegetables sell vegetables a. ‘I grow and sell vegetables.’

b. ‘I grow vegetables in order to sell them.’37

As highlighted by Wang (2007), this sentence potentially has two readings. One reading indicates that two events, 种菜 zhǒng cài ‘grow plants’ and 卖菜 mài cài ‘sell plants’, are independent and coordinate, i.e. ‘I grow vegetables and sell vegetables’, and therefore the sentence value does not change if we invert the order of the two events, i.e. ‘I sell vegetables and grow vegetables’ (25a). This reading would be an instance of what Li & Thompson (1981) term consecutive serial verb construction (20a). In the other reading, the two verbs have a subordinate relation; in this case the interpretation is: ‘I grow vegetables in order to sell them’ (25b). The event of 卖菜

mài cài ‘sell plants’ depends on the preceding event of 种菜 zhǒng cài ‘grow plants’,

i.e. the two events cannot be inverted; in this reading the sentence would be an instance of what Li & Thompsom (1981) term purpose serial verb construction (20b).

Li and Thompson (1973) propose that the ambiguity and the different interpretations found in serial verb constructions depend on world’s knowledge rather than on linguistic knowledge. They claim that different kinds of serial verb

36 _{For example, Zhu (1982) does not consider coordinate constructions as serial verb constructions,} but include among serial verb constructions sentences with preverbal adjunct PPs, not considered in Li & Thompson (1981), and subject and object control structures (i.e. pivotal constructions). Li (1986) excludes coordinate constructions and control constructions from serial verb constructions (cf. Paul 2008:383-384).

37 _{Wang (2007) follows the definition of ‘serial verb construction’ provided by Chang (1990):} structures in which verbs in a series hold a temporal dependency relation and share a common noun phrase. Chang’s analysis suggests that Chinese serial verb constructions undergo the deletion of a redundant NP2 following V2 for the sake of economy. Accordingly, Wang (2007) consider only the following type as a real instance of seral verb constructions (example from Wang 2007:3):

我 种 菜 卖 了。

wǒ zhǒng cài mài le

I plant vegetables sell ASP ‘I plant vegetables to sell’

41 constructions are structurally distinct: consecutive and alternating actions have a coordinate structure, while the purpose clause interpretation has a subordinate structure. However, Li & Thompson think that the interpretation depends entirely on inferences that the hearer makes. This is particularly true for the first type of serial verb constructions they describe, i.e. ‘two or more separate events’, which they divide into consecutive, purpose, alternating and circumstance (cf. 20).

According to Paul (2008), the multiple ambiguity highlighted by Li & Thompson does exist but only to a certain extent; sentences characterized by a simple juxtaposition of verbal phrases, without overt marking indicating the relation between the two phrases, do not lead to coordinate structures38, i.e. to an interpretation in term of simultaneous alternative or consecutive actions (cf. Chen 1993 among others). Generally speaking, a sequence of two verbal phrases without any markers would be analysed by default either as a structure involving adjunction, where the first verbal phrase is an adjunct of the second (main) predicate, forming a single event (26a), or as a purposive clause, where the second VP represents a purpose clause whose covert subject is controlled by the matrix subject (26b) (cf. Paul 2008:387-388).

(26) 他 打电话 叫 车。

tā dǎ-diànhuà jiào chē

he hit-phone call car a. ‘He called a taxi by phone’

b. ‘He phoned to call a taxi’

A clue to the understanding of the difference between the two structures is represented, for example, by the distribution of the perfective verb particle 了 le, which must be placed after the main verb. Therefore, the sentence in (27a) must represent an adjunct structure, the main verb being on the right, while that in (27b) represent a purpose clause, the main verb being on the left (examples are adapted from Paul 2008:374).

(27) a. 他 [VP[adjunct PRO1 打电话] [叫 了 车]] 以后 还 等 了 二十 分钟。

tā dǎ-diànhuà jiào le chē yǐhòu hái děng le èrshí fēnzhōng he hit phone call ASP car after still wait ASP twenty minute ‘After she had called a taxi by phone, she still waited for twenty minutes’

38 _{This is only possible when there is a slight pause between the two verbal phrases or in the} presence of explicit marking, such as adverbs (Chao 1968).

b. 他i [[VP打 了 电话 一次] [purpose clause PROi 叫 车]] tāi dǎ le diànhuà yī-cì jiào chē

he hit ASP telephone one-time call car ‘He made a phone call to order a taxi’

According to Paul (2008), the label serial verb construction covers different constructions with completely different properties, and thus this label should be abandoned in Chinese linguistics, at least for the structures which are generally subsumed under it. For example, consider the second group of serial verb constructions singled out by Li & Thompson (1981), i.e. those in which ‘One verb clause is the subject or the direct object of another verb’ (cf. ex. 21); according to Paul (2008), these two subgroups have different structures, one involving a sentential subject and the other a complement clause subcategorized for by the matrix verb (corresponding to subject and verb phrase), so they should not be lumped together. Paul (2008) observes that the distribution and interpretation of negation as well as the possibility of an overt subject indicate that the sentential subject and the complement clause form a propositional domain independent of the matrix predicate, with a subject different from the matrix subject: “Consequently, the structure with a sentential subject and that with a clausal complement do not even satisfy the loosest of all “criteria” for “SVC-hood”, i.e. the uniqueness of the subject within an SVC.” (Paul 2008:378).

Moreover, Paul (2008) observes that the third group of serial verb constructions singled out by Li and Thompson (1981), i.e. the ‘pivotal’ construction (cf. ex. 22), corresponds to the so-called object control constructions, where the matrix object controls the null subject in the embedded nonfinite clause; this type of construction is not typical of Chinese nor of the so-called serializing languages.

The last type of serial verb construction described by Li and Thompson is the ‘descriptive clause construction’ (cf. ex. 23), which has the form ‘S V O XP’; it is seen as involving a (secondary) predication (XP) on the object NP (cf. Huang 1987, Paul 2008).

The discussion above makes clear that it does not make much sense to talk about serial verb constructions. Serial verb construction would be but a superficial label to indicate any sequence of verbs, subsuming a number of different structures (cf. Paul 2008). And this (the presence of different underlying structures) is the reason why in Chinese the so-called serial verb constructions present differences in headedness. In

43 fact, Matthews (2006), analysing serial verb constructions in Cantonese, observes that this Sinitic language has both serial verb constructions headed by V1 and serial verb constructions headed by V239_{, and this does not come as a surprise since Chinese in} general has an unusual typological combination of head-initial and head-final constituents. The same could be said of Mandarin Chinese, if we consider the examples discussed above as serial verb constructions.

Therefore, the term serial verb construction does not provide any indication either about the hierarchical relations between the verbs in the sequence or about their syntactic structure (cf. Paul 2008). Looking at things from this perspective, the great majority of Chinese sentences should be considered as serial verb constructions. However, we have shown that the so-called serial verb construction in Chinese presupposes different underlying structures and, therefore, it is just a label to indicate a sequence of verbs where no overt markers occur to signal the relation holding between the constituents; they are just a means to express relations which in other languages may be expressed by other means.

Given the remarks above, apparently it makes no sense to state that in some Chinese verbal compounds the constituents share a serial verb type relation, since there is not such a thing as a serial verb construction, in the sense of a specific type of construction with its own properties (cf. Paul 2008). Superficially, any [V V]v compound can be regarded as a serial verb compound, since it represents a sequence of juxtaposed verbs; nevertheless this is but a surface label. In fact, as we have seen, a compound formed by two verbal roots may have different underlying structures and interpretations. This is the reason why different authors do not agree on what to subsume under the label ‘serial verb type compounds’. For example, we have seen that Hong (2004) includes among serial verb type compounds only those in which the constituents are arranged in temporal sequence (cf. 1.3.4.2 and 1.3.4.2.3). The same view is held by other authors (e.g. Yi 2007, Chen X.L. 2007), who nevertheless exclude compounds like 劝退 quàntuì ‘advise + quit = persuade somebody to quit’, which are subsumed under the label of ‘double complement’ type compounds (兼语 型 jiānyǔxíng; cf. 1.3.2). Essentially, serial verb type compounds are those corresponding to the first subtype of serial verb constructions identified by Li &

39 _{According to Matthews (2006:76), if V2 is the head of the serial VP, we have a counter-example} to the claim that “all serial constructions are to be analysed as right-adjoined structures, i.e. the second predicate is adjoined to the first predicate” (cf. Veenstra 1996:145).

Thompson (1981). In contrast, judging from the data shown, Ceccagno & Basciano (2007) seem to include among serial verb compounds (which are a subgroup of subordinate compounds, cf. 1.3.1) only those corresponding to the serial verb constructions which Li & Thompson (1981) term purpose (20b) and pivotal (22).

However, if we were to consider serial verb type compounds as those modelled after serial verb constructions, then we should assume that almost all [V V]v compounds, with the exception of resultatives (and possible of those formed with synonymic constituents) are serial verb compounds (cf. 1.3.4.2.3). Nevertheless, as we have seen, this would just be a surface label: [V V]v compounds have different