语段理论下汉语关系结构的生成研究
摘要
文献中对汉语关系结构的分类,特征描写颇有争议,对其句法生成机制的刻画更是分歧重大。本文以Chomsky(2000,2001,2005,2007,2008)的语段理论为理论框架,在充分探讨汉语关系结构的分类与特征的基础上,重新审视了现有的相关研究,分析其中存在的问题,并为汉语关系结构的生成提出了一种新的分析。
本文首先简要概述了语段理论框架,介绍了其发展的历史进程,语言机制模式和句法运算系统。接着对汉语关系结构的特征及分类进行了更为全面细致的概括。汉语关系结构有六个基本特征：无关系代词,关系中心语可省略,复指代词能滞留,关系从句能独立使用,允许多项内嵌以及关系从句顺序自由化。汉语关系结构在句法上的分类主要根据三种特点：有无空缺,有无中心语以及有无标记词“的”。语义上可分为限制性、非限制性和扩大性关系结构(包括自由、关联和程度关系结构)。在回顾有关汉语关系结构的生成和标记词“的”的文献时,本文指出现有的移位分析不仅使部分语言事实如汉语无空缺和并列关系结构得不到合理解释,而且对诸如经济原则、空语类原则、孤岛限制以及领属条件等一些普遍语法理论原则构成严重挑战。非移位分析的问题主要体现在对关系从句中空语类的处理。关系从句中的空主语并不是必须遵守普遍控制原则的空代词,而空宾语也不是在生成中能改变身份的变项。标记词“的”虽然已得到广泛的研究,但对其句法范畴问题,至今仍未取得一致的认识,已有的C、D和De分析等都存在一定的问题。
鉴于前人研究成果,本文对汉语关系结构的句法生成和“的”进行了重新分析。本文认为汉语关系从句中的空缺为特殊空语类,为满足关系从句中谓词的论元要求而基础生成,不属于Chomsky (1981,1982)归纳的四种空语类中的任何一种。这种特殊空语类的存在具有理论和经验上的支撑证据,其特点是只存在于论元空缺关系结构中,有语类和(?)特征,可被赋予题元角色和格,其指称可在句中或语境中得到识别。通过探讨“的”的语法化历程,本文认为“的”实则为一种语法化的修饰标志词,其为汉语所独有,只能标记为De。“的”与其前的关系从句构成中心语—补语关系,两者合并成DeP。因为DeP为修饰语,所以我们认为DeP左向附加于关系名词中心语,主要起语义限制作用而不参与主句的任何句法操作。关系名词中心语与关系从句中的论元空缺在(?)特征上存在一致关系,整个汉语关系化过程中不存在空算子和名词中心语的提升移位。至此,我们为汉语关系结构提出的新句法机制已勾画完成。这种机制主要采用经济的合并操作,而限制其生成能力的是我们为汉语关系结构归纳的语义允准条件。先前分析中某些句子的不合法也可在该条件下获得解释。为了检验新假设的合法性,本文以语段理论为框架,运用该假设对各种汉语关系结构如限制性、非限制性、自由、多项内嵌、并列、以及带“被”、“把”、双宾结构的关系结构一一进行了分析。为了进一步佐证该假设和深化对汉语关系结构的认识,文章最后对汉语关系结构的话题化,焦点化以及外置化现象进行了分析。鉴于汉语关系从句的独立使用特征和内部论元结构的完整性,本文认为汉语关系从句与一般句有相同的句法地位,可以有自己的话题和焦点。汉语关系从句可以先进行内部话题和焦点化,然后再来修饰中心语。汉语关系结构的外置化现象文献中鲜有讨论,我们认为这种现象确实存在,并且可以在我们的假设和Vries(2002)的合并省略分析下得到合理的解释。
本文在合理解决各种争议问题的基础上,为汉语关系结构的句法生成提出了新的生成机制。与之前的分析相比,该研究具有理论与经验上的双层优势。从理论上讲,本文放弃移位而采用代价小的合并操作分析,既不违反孤岛和领属条件等生成语法普遍原则,又完全符合Chomsky (1995a)提出的合并高于移位的经济原则。确认汉语论元空缺关系结构中特殊空语类的存在,可以为汉语空语类的理论研究提供启示。从经验上讲,我们提出的新假设不仅可以合理解释汉语关系结构所表现的独特句法特征,如关系从句的独立使用和顺序自由化特征等,而且可以统一各类汉语关系结构的生成分析,弥补先前局限于限制性带中心语关系结构研究的缺陷。本文对汉语关系结构的话题化、焦点化和外置化现象的探讨能合理解释一些违反移位限制但又合法的话题和焦点化结构,可为今后这几类结构的研究提供诸多借鉴。本文属于新语段理论框架下汉语相关事实的实证研究,在检验语段理论有效性和解释力的同时,可加深对汉语事实的认识,为汉语生成语法研究的发展做出了一定的贡献。
There have been great controversies over the general properties, classification and syntactic derivational mechanism of Chinese relative constructions (RCs). Within the framework of Phase Theory (Chomsky2000,2001,2005,2007,2008), this dissertation presents a detailed discussion on the properties and classification of Chinese RCs, and puts forth an alternative proposal on the basis of the critical review of the previous analyses.
This dissertation begins with a brief outline of the theoretical framework of Phase Theory, introducing its historical development, language mechanism model and syntactic computational system. What follows is an explicit generalization of the properties and classification of Chinese RCs. It is assumed that Chinese RCs are characterized by the following basic properties:no relative pronoun, omissible noun heads, possible retention of resumptive pronouns, independent use of relative clauses, recursive and linear multiple embedding and free ordering of relative clauses. The syntactic classification of Chinese RCs is based on three criteria:presence or absence of a gap, a nominal head and the marker de. Semantically, Chinese RCs fall into three types:restrictive, nonrestrictive and maximalizing (including free, correlative and degree). In the literature review of the analyses on the derivation of Chinese RCs and marker de, this dissertation points out that the movement analysis not only leaves some linguistic facts, namely, Chinese gapless and coordinated RCs unexplained, but also poses serious challenges to the principles and theories of Universal Grammar, such as Economy Principle, Empty Category Principle, island constraints and Subjacency Condition. The major problem of the non-movement analysis lies in the treatment of empty categories in Chinese relative clauses. The null subject cannot be an empty pronominal that must observe Generalized Control Rule and the null object cannot be a variable which may change its status of identity in the process of syntactic derivation. Although the element de in Chinese has been thoroughly discussed in the literature, little consensus has been reached on its syntactic categorial status. The existing analyses such as C, D and De approaches are still problematic.
Based on the previous research, the dissertation gives a reanalysis of the syntactic derivation of Chinese RCs and the marker de. We regard the gap in the relative clause as a special kind of empty category, which is generated to satisfy the argument requirement of the predicate in the clause and does not belong to any kind of the four types of empty categories specified by Chomsky (1981,1982). The existence of the special empty category can be proved on both theoretical and empirical grounds. Its properties may include:it only exists in the argument gapped RCs; it has category and φ features and can be assigned theta-role and Case; its reference may be identified in the sentence or in the context. Given the discussion on the grammaticalization process of the element de, it is proposed that de is a grammaticalized modifier-marker, which only exists in Chinese and can be marked as De. The marker de acts as a head to select the preceding relative clause as its complement, forming the phrase DeP. Due to the modifier status of DeP, we argue that it left adjoins to the relative nominal head. The adjunct DeP merely plays the role of a semantic restriction and does not participate in any computational operation of the matrix clause. The argument gap in the relative clause may agree with the relative nominal head in (p features. There are no movements of null operators and nominal heads in Chinese relativization. So far, our new syntactic mechanism proposed for Chinese RCs has been sketched. This mechanism mainly employs the economical merge operation and its derivational power may be restricted by the semantic licensing conditions we specified for Chinese RCs. The ungrammaticality of those examples in previous analyses can also be accounted for under the conditions. In order to testify our new proposal, we adopt it to analyze the syntactic derivation of different types of Chinese RCs under Phase Theory, including restrictive, nonrestrictive, free, multiple-embedded, coordinated RCs and those complicated RCs involved bei-, ba-and double-object constructions. With the purpose to further verify our new proposal and get a better understanding of Chinese RCs, the dissertation finally explores the topicalization, focalization and extraposition phenomena in Chinese RCs. Given the independent use property and complete internal argument structure of the Chinese relative clause, we postulate that a relative clause can have the same syntactic status as a normal sentence with topic and focus positions. The internal topicalization and focalization can be firstly allowed in the relative clause, and then the whole topicalized and focalized relative clause modifies the relative nominal head. There is little discussion on extraposition phenomena in Chinese RCs. However, we maintain that Chinese RCs indeed have extraposition constructions, which can be given a good account under our proposal and Vries's (2002) specifying coordination plus ellipsis analysis.
On the basis of a critical analysis of previous accounts, the dissertation puts forward an alternative account of the derivation of Chinese RCs. It can be shown that the proposed analysis has both theoretical and empirical merits. From a theoretical point of view, the analysis enables us to arrive at a more unitary theory of Phase building. In the dissertation we adopt the Merge operation approach rather than the movement analysis, which may not violate the universal principles in Generative Grammar such as island constraint and Subjacency Condition. Moreover, our analysis is more accordant with Chomsky's (1995a) Economy Principle of Merge over Move. The finding of a special kind of empty category in Chinese argument gapped RCs gives insight into the theoretical research of Chinese empty categories. From an empirical point of view, the new analysis proposed in the dissertation not only can give a reasonable account for the distinctive syntactic properties of Chinese RCs, for instance, the independent use and free ordering properties of relative clauses, but also can provide a unified derivational account for different kinds of Chinese RCs, remedying the defect in previous research which confines the discussion to headed restrictive RCs. Our exploration on the topicalization, focalization and extraposition phenomena in Chinese RCs not only can give a feasible account for those grammatical topicalized and focalized constructions which seem to violate movement constraints, but also can provide some reference for the further research of these constructions. In analyzing relevant Chinese data under the recent framework of Phase Theory, we can test the validity and explanationatory power of Phase Theory, and at the same time, we can better understand the Chinese data and contribute to the development of generative research on Chinese grammar.
本文首先简要概述了语段理论框架,介绍了其发展的历史进程,语言机制模式和句法运算系统。接着对汉语关系结构的特征及分类进行了更为全面细致的概括。汉语关系结构有六个基本特征：无关系代词,关系中心语可省略,复指代词能滞留,关系从句能独立使用,允许多项内嵌以及关系从句顺序自由化。汉语关系结构在句法上的分类主要根据三种特点：有无空缺,有无中心语以及有无标记词“的”。语义上可分为限制性、非限制性和扩大性关系结构(包括自由、关联和程度关系结构)。在回顾有关汉语关系结构的生成和标记词“的”的文献时,本文指出现有的移位分析不仅使部分语言事实如汉语无空缺和并列关系结构得不到合理解释,而且对诸如经济原则、空语类原则、孤岛限制以及领属条件等一些普遍语法理论原则构成严重挑战。非移位分析的问题主要体现在对关系从句中空语类的处理。关系从句中的空主语并不是必须遵守普遍控制原则的空代词,而空宾语也不是在生成中能改变身份的变项。标记词“的”虽然已得到广泛的研究,但对其句法范畴问题,至今仍未取得一致的认识,已有的C、D和De分析等都存在一定的问题。
鉴于前人研究成果,本文对汉语关系结构的句法生成和“的”进行了重新分析。本文认为汉语关系从句中的空缺为特殊空语类,为满足关系从句中谓词的论元要求而基础生成,不属于Chomsky (1981,1982)归纳的四种空语类中的任何一种。这种特殊空语类的存在具有理论和经验上的支撑证据,其特点是只存在于论元空缺关系结构中,有语类和(?)特征,可被赋予题元角色和格,其指称可在句中或语境中得到识别。通过探讨“的”的语法化历程,本文认为“的”实则为一种语法化的修饰标志词,其为汉语所独有,只能标记为De。“的”与其前的关系从句构成中心语—补语关系,两者合并成DeP。因为DeP为修饰语,所以我们认为DeP左向附加于关系名词中心语,主要起语义限制作用而不参与主句的任何句法操作。关系名词中心语与关系从句中的论元空缺在(?)特征上存在一致关系,整个汉语关系化过程中不存在空算子和名词中心语的提升移位。至此,我们为汉语关系结构提出的新句法机制已勾画完成。这种机制主要采用经济的合并操作,而限制其生成能力的是我们为汉语关系结构归纳的语义允准条件。先前分析中某些句子的不合法也可在该条件下获得解释。为了检验新假设的合法性,本文以语段理论为框架,运用该假设对各种汉语关系结构如限制性、非限制性、自由、多项内嵌、并列、以及带“被”、“把”、双宾结构的关系结构一一进行了分析。为了进一步佐证该假设和深化对汉语关系结构的认识,文章最后对汉语关系结构的话题化,焦点化以及外置化现象进行了分析。鉴于汉语关系从句的独立使用特征和内部论元结构的完整性,本文认为汉语关系从句与一般句有相同的句法地位,可以有自己的话题和焦点。汉语关系从句可以先进行内部话题和焦点化,然后再来修饰中心语。汉语关系结构的外置化现象文献中鲜有讨论,我们认为这种现象确实存在,并且可以在我们的假设和Vries(2002)的合并省略分析下得到合理的解释。
本文在合理解决各种争议问题的基础上,为汉语关系结构的句法生成提出了新的生成机制。与之前的分析相比,该研究具有理论与经验上的双层优势。从理论上讲,本文放弃移位而采用代价小的合并操作分析,既不违反孤岛和领属条件等生成语法普遍原则,又完全符合Chomsky (1995a)提出的合并高于移位的经济原则。确认汉语论元空缺关系结构中特殊空语类的存在,可以为汉语空语类的理论研究提供启示。从经验上讲,我们提出的新假设不仅可以合理解释汉语关系结构所表现的独特句法特征,如关系从句的独立使用和顺序自由化特征等,而且可以统一各类汉语关系结构的生成分析,弥补先前局限于限制性带中心语关系结构研究的缺陷。本文对汉语关系结构的话题化、焦点化和外置化现象的探讨能合理解释一些违反移位限制但又合法的话题和焦点化结构,可为今后这几类结构的研究提供诸多借鉴。本文属于新语段理论框架下汉语相关事实的实证研究,在检验语段理论有效性和解释力的同时,可加深对汉语事实的认识,为汉语生成语法研究的发展做出了一定的贡献。
There have been great controversies over the general properties, classification and syntactic derivational mechanism of Chinese relative constructions (RCs). Within the framework of Phase Theory (Chomsky2000,2001,2005,2007,2008), this dissertation presents a detailed discussion on the properties and classification of Chinese RCs, and puts forth an alternative proposal on the basis of the critical review of the previous analyses.
This dissertation begins with a brief outline of the theoretical framework of Phase Theory, introducing its historical development, language mechanism model and syntactic computational system. What follows is an explicit generalization of the properties and classification of Chinese RCs. It is assumed that Chinese RCs are characterized by the following basic properties:no relative pronoun, omissible noun heads, possible retention of resumptive pronouns, independent use of relative clauses, recursive and linear multiple embedding and free ordering of relative clauses. The syntactic classification of Chinese RCs is based on three criteria:presence or absence of a gap, a nominal head and the marker de. Semantically, Chinese RCs fall into three types:restrictive, nonrestrictive and maximalizing (including free, correlative and degree). In the literature review of the analyses on the derivation of Chinese RCs and marker de, this dissertation points out that the movement analysis not only leaves some linguistic facts, namely, Chinese gapless and coordinated RCs unexplained, but also poses serious challenges to the principles and theories of Universal Grammar, such as Economy Principle, Empty Category Principle, island constraints and Subjacency Condition. The major problem of the non-movement analysis lies in the treatment of empty categories in Chinese relative clauses. The null subject cannot be an empty pronominal that must observe Generalized Control Rule and the null object cannot be a variable which may change its status of identity in the process of syntactic derivation. Although the element de in Chinese has been thoroughly discussed in the literature, little consensus has been reached on its syntactic categorial status. The existing analyses such as C, D and De approaches are still problematic.
Based on the previous research, the dissertation gives a reanalysis of the syntactic derivation of Chinese RCs and the marker de. We regard the gap in the relative clause as a special kind of empty category, which is generated to satisfy the argument requirement of the predicate in the clause and does not belong to any kind of the four types of empty categories specified by Chomsky (1981,1982). The existence of the special empty category can be proved on both theoretical and empirical grounds. Its properties may include:it only exists in the argument gapped RCs; it has category and φ features and can be assigned theta-role and Case; its reference may be identified in the sentence or in the context. Given the discussion on the grammaticalization process of the element de, it is proposed that de is a grammaticalized modifier-marker, which only exists in Chinese and can be marked as De. The marker de acts as a head to select the preceding relative clause as its complement, forming the phrase DeP. Due to the modifier status of DeP, we argue that it left adjoins to the relative nominal head. The adjunct DeP merely plays the role of a semantic restriction and does not participate in any computational operation of the matrix clause. The argument gap in the relative clause may agree with the relative nominal head in (p features. There are no movements of null operators and nominal heads in Chinese relativization. So far, our new syntactic mechanism proposed for Chinese RCs has been sketched. This mechanism mainly employs the economical merge operation and its derivational power may be restricted by the semantic licensing conditions we specified for Chinese RCs. The ungrammaticality of those examples in previous analyses can also be accounted for under the conditions. In order to testify our new proposal, we adopt it to analyze the syntactic derivation of different types of Chinese RCs under Phase Theory, including restrictive, nonrestrictive, free, multiple-embedded, coordinated RCs and those complicated RCs involved bei-, ba-and double-object constructions. With the purpose to further verify our new proposal and get a better understanding of Chinese RCs, the dissertation finally explores the topicalization, focalization and extraposition phenomena in Chinese RCs. Given the independent use property and complete internal argument structure of the Chinese relative clause, we postulate that a relative clause can have the same syntactic status as a normal sentence with topic and focus positions. The internal topicalization and focalization can be firstly allowed in the relative clause, and then the whole topicalized and focalized relative clause modifies the relative nominal head. There is little discussion on extraposition phenomena in Chinese RCs. However, we maintain that Chinese RCs indeed have extraposition constructions, which can be given a good account under our proposal and Vries's (2002) specifying coordination plus ellipsis analysis.
On the basis of a critical analysis of previous accounts, the dissertation puts forward an alternative account of the derivation of Chinese RCs. It can be shown that the proposed analysis has both theoretical and empirical merits. From a theoretical point of view, the analysis enables us to arrive at a more unitary theory of Phase building. In the dissertation we adopt the Merge operation approach rather than the movement analysis, which may not violate the universal principles in Generative Grammar such as island constraint and Subjacency Condition. Moreover, our analysis is more accordant with Chomsky's (1995a) Economy Principle of Merge over Move. The finding of a special kind of empty category in Chinese argument gapped RCs gives insight into the theoretical research of Chinese empty categories. From an empirical point of view, the new analysis proposed in the dissertation not only can give a reasonable account for the distinctive syntactic properties of Chinese RCs, for instance, the independent use and free ordering properties of relative clauses, but also can provide a unified derivational account for different kinds of Chinese RCs, remedying the defect in previous research which confines the discussion to headed restrictive RCs. Our exploration on the topicalization, focalization and extraposition phenomena in Chinese RCs not only can give a feasible account for those grammatical topicalized and focalized constructions which seem to violate movement constraints, but also can provide some reference for the further research of these constructions. In analyzing relevant Chinese data under the recent framework of Phase Theory, we can test the validity and explanationatory power of Phase Theory, and at the same time, we can better understand the Chinese data and contribute to the development of generative research on Chinese grammar.
引文
Abney, S. P.1987. The English Noun Phrase in its Sentential Aspect. Ph. D. Dissertation, MIT.
Alexiadou, A., P. Law, A. Meinunger & C. Wilder.2000. The Syntax of Relative Clauses. Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Aoun, J & Y.-H. Audrey Li.2003. Essays on the Representational and Derivational Nature of Grammar:The Diversity of Wh-Constructions. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Baltin, M.1984. Extraposition rules and discontinuous constituent. Linguistic Inquiry 15:157-163.
Barss, A.2001. Syntactic reconstruction effects. In M. Baltin & C. Collins (eds.) The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory. Oxford:Blackwell.
Bianchi, V.1999. Consequences of Antisymmetry:Headed Relative Clauses. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Boeckx, C.2004. Long distance agreement in Hindi:Some theoretical implications. Studia Linguistica 58:1-14.
Borseley, R. D.2005. Against ConjP. Lingua 115:461-482.
Bresnan, J.2001. Lexical-Functional Syntax. Oxford:Blackwell.
Carlson, G.1977. Amount relatives. Language 53:520-542.
Cha, Jong-Yul.1998. Relative clause or noun complement clause:some diagnoses. In zin B. S. Park & J. H.-S. Yoon, (eds.) The Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Korean Linguistics,6-9. International Circle of Korean Linguistics, Seoul.
Chao, Y.-R.1968. A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California.
Cheng, L. L.-S.1986. De in mandarin. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 31:313-26.
Cheng, L. L.-S.& Huang C.-T. J.1996. Two types of donkey sentences. Natural Language Semantics 4:121-163.
Cheng, L. L.-S.& Rint Sybesma.2005. A Chinese relative. In H. Broekhuis, N. Corver, R. Huybregts, U. Kleinhenz & J. Koster (eds.) Organizing Grammar: Linguistic Studies in Honor of Henk Van Riemsdijk,69-76. Berlin:Mouton.
Cheng, L. L.-S.& Rint Sybesma.2009. De as an underspecified classifier:first explorations, http://semantics.uchicago.edu/kennedy/classes/f11/na/docs/che-ngsybesma09.pdf
Chiu, B.1993. The Inflectional Structure of Mandarin Chinese. Ph. D.Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
Chomsky, N.1957. Syntactic Structures. The Hague:Mouton.
Chomsky, N.1977. On wh-movement. In P. Culicover, T. Wasow & A. Akmajian (eds.) Formal Syntax,71-123. New York:Academic Press.
Chomsky, N.1980. Rules and Representations. New York:Columbia University Press.
Chomsky, N.1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht:Foris.
Chomsky, N.1982. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.1986a. Knowledge of Language:Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York:Praeger.
Chomsky, N.1986b. Barriers. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.1993. A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In Hale, K.& Keyser, S. (eds.) The View from Building 20:Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger,1-52. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.1995a. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.1995b. Bare phrase structure. In G. Webelhuth (ed.) Government and Binding Theory and the Minimalist Program,383-439. Oxford:Blackwell.
Chomsky, N.2000. Minimalist inquiries:the framework. In R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka (eds.) Step by Step:Essays in Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik,89-155. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.2001. Derivation by phase. In Hale, K. (ed.) A Life in Language,1-52. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.2004. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In A. Belletti (ed.) Structures and Beyond:The Cartography of Syntactic Structures,104-131. Oxford:OUP.
Chomsky, N.2005. Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36:1-22.
Chomsky, N.2007. Approaching UG from below. In U. Sauerland & H-M. Gartner (eds.) Interfaces+Recursion=Language? Chomsky's Minimalism and the View from Syntax-semantics,1-30. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Chomsky, N.2008. On phases. In R. Freidin, C. Otero & M. Zubizarreta (eds.) Essays in Honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud,134-166. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Del Gobbo, F.2001. Appositives schmappositives in Chinese. In Maki Irie, Hajime Ono (eds.) UCI Working Papers in Linguistics 7,1-25. University of California, Irvine.
Del Gobbo, F.2005. Chinese relative clauses:restrictive, descriptive or appositive? In Bruge, Laura, Giuliana Giusti, Nicola Munaro, Walter Schweikert, and Giuseppina Turano (eds.) Contributions to the Thirtieth Incontro di Grammatica Generativa,287-305. Venezia:Libreria Editrice Cafoscarina.
Del Gobbo, F.2007. A comparison between Japanese and Chinese relative clauses. University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics 17:177-197.
Del Gobbo, F.2010. On Chinese appositive relative clauses. Journal of East Asian Linguistics:1-33.
Downing, Bruce T.1978. Some universals of relative clause structure. In Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed.) Universals of Human Language, vol.4 (Syntax),375-418. Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.
Duanmu, S.1998. Wordhood in Chinese. In Jerome L. Packard (ed.) New Approaches to Chinese Word Formation:Morphology, Phonology and the Lexicon in Modern and Ancient Chinese,135-196. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Duanmu, S.2005. The tone-syntax interface in Chinese:some recent controversies. In Shigeki Kaji (ed.) Proceedings of the Symposium Cross-linguistic Studies of Tonal Phenomena, Historical Development, Tone-syntax Interface, and Descriptive Studies,221-254. Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.
Epstein, S.1984. A note on functional determination and strong crossover. Linguistic Review 3:299-305.
Fukui, Naoki & Yuji Takano.2000. Nominal structure:An extension of the Symmetry Principle. In Peter Svenonius (ed.) The derivation of VO and OV, 219-254. Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Gall ego, A.2010. Phase Theory. Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Grosu, A.& Landman, F.1998. Strange relatives of the third kind. Natural Language Semantics 6:125-170.
Hiraiwa, K.2001. Multiple Agree and the defective intervention constraint in Japanese. In O. Matushansky, A. Costa, J. Martin-Gonzalez, L. Nathan & A. Szczegielniak (eds.) Proceedings of the HUMIT 2000,67-80. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 40. MITWPL, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Hiraiwa, K.2005. Dimensions of Symmetry in Syntax:Agreement and Clausal Architecture. Ph. D. Dissertation, MIT.
Hsu, C.-C. N.2008. Revisit relative clause islands in Chinese. Language and Linguistics 9.1:23-48.
Hu, Jianhua & Haihua Pan.2000. Deriving the subject-object asymmetry in topicalization. International Symposium on Topic and Focus in Chinese, Linguistic Society of Hong Kong & the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong,21-23 June 2000.
Hu, Jianhua & Haihua Pan.2009. Decomposing the aboutness condition for Chinese topic constructions. The Linguistic Review 26:371-384.
Huang, C.-T. J.1982. Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar. Ph. D. dissertation, MIT.
Huang, C.-T. J.1984. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 15:531-574.
Huang, C.-T. J.1987. Remarks on empty categories in Chinese. Linguistic Inquiry 18: 321-337.
Johannessen, J. B.1998. Coordination. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Kayne, R.1984. Unambiguous paths. In R. Kayne (ed.) Connectedness and Binary Branching,129-164. Dordrecht:Foris.
Kayne, R.1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Koster, J.2000. Extraposition as Parallel Construal. Manuscript, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
Kubo, Y., F. Mohri, T. Usuki & R. Tei.2006. Category and case mismatches in coordination. The Bulletin of Central Research Institute Fukuoka University Vol.6.5:19-57.
Kuno, Susumu.1973. The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Lakoff, R.1968. Abstract Syntax and Latin Complementation. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Lambrecht, K.1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form. Topic, Focus and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Lebeaux, D.1988. Language Acquisition and the Form of the Grammar. Ph. D. Dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Li, C. N.& Shi, Y.1998. An investigation of the grammaticalization of the demonstrative pronouns zhe/na from the fifteenth century to now. Presented at the International Chinese Linguistics Conference, Standford.
Li, Y.-H. A.1985. Abstract Case in Chinese. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Southern California.
Li, Y.-H. A.2002. Word order, structure and relativization. In S.-W. Tang & C.-S. L. Liu (eds.) On the Formal Way to Chinese Languages,45-73. Stanford, CSLI Publications.
Lin, Jo-wang.2003/2004. On restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses in Mandarin Chinese. Tsinghua Journal of Chinese Studies, New Series,33: 199-240.
Lin, Jo-wang.2006. Time in a language without tense:the case of Chinese. Journal of Semantics 23:1-53.
Lin, Jo-wang.2010. A tenseless analysis of Mandarin Chinese revisited:a response to Sybesma 2007. Linguistic Inquiry 41:305-329.
Mccawley, J. D.1988. Parentheticals and discontinuous constituent structure. Linguistic Inquiry 13:91-106.
Munn, A.1993. Topics in the Syntax and Semantics of Coordinate Structures. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Maryland, College Park.
Ning, C.1993. The Overt Syntax of Relativization and Topicalization in Chinese. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Irvine.
Ning, C.1996. De as a functional head in Chinese. In B. Agbayani, K. Takeda & Sze-Wing Tang (eds.) UCI Working Papers in Linguistics 1,63-79. University of California, Irvine.
Oga, K., Hu, X.L.,& Ayano, S.1999. The Mandarin Chinese ba construction revisited:a minimalist approach. Newcastle and Durham Working Papters in Linguistics 5:193-210.
Pan, Haihua & Jianhua Hu.2008. A semantic-pragmatic interface account of (dangling) topics in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics 40: 1966-1981.
Paul, W.2005. Low IP area and left periphery in Mandarin Chinese. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes 33:111-134.
Progovac, L.1998. Structure for coordination. GLOT International 3:7-8.
Pulleyblank, E.1995. Outline of Classical Chinese Grammar. Vancouver:University of British Columbia Press.
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech & J. Svartvik.1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London:Longman.
Radford, A.1988. Transformational Grammar. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Rijkhoek, P. D.1996. Result clauses and conjunction. In R. Jonkers, E. Kaan & J. Wiegel (eds.) Language and Cognition 5. University of Groningen.
Rizzi, L.1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Lilian Haegeman (ed.) Elements of Grammar:Handbook in Generative Syntax,281-337. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Rizzi, L.2001. On the position int(errogative) in the left periphery of the clause. In G. Cinque & G. Salvi (eds.) Current Issues in Italian Syntax,287-296. Amsterdam:Elsevier.
Rizzi, L.2004. Locality and left periphery. In A. Belletti (ed.) Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. Ⅲ,223-251. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Ross, J. R.1967. Constraints on Variables in Syntax. Ph. D. Dissertation, MIT.
Rubin, E.2003. Determining pair-merge. Linguistic Inquiry 34:660-668.
Safir, K.1986. Relative clauses in a theory of binding and levels. Linguistic Inquiry 17:663-689.
Safir, K.2004. The Syntax of Anaphora. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Schachter, P.1973. Focus and relativization. Language 49:19-46.
Shi, D.2000. Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language 76,383-408.
Shi, Yuzhi & Charles N. Li.2002. The establishment of the classifier system and the grammaticalization of the morphosyntactic particle de in Chinese. Language Sciences 24:1-15.
Shyu, Shu-ing.1995. The Syntax of Focus and Topic in Mandarin Chinese. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Simpson, A.2001. Definiteness agreement and the Chinese DP. Language and Linguistics 2:125-156.
Simpson, A.2002. On the status of modifying DE and the structure of the Chinese DP. In S.-W.Tang & C.-S.Liu (eds.) On the Formal Way to Chinese Languages,74-101. Stanford:CSLI Publications.
Sio, Joanna Ut-seong.2006. Modification and Reference in the Chinese Nominal. LOT, the Netherlands.
Sybesma, R.2007. Whether we tense-agree overtly or not. Linguistic Inquiry 38: 580-587.
Tang, C.-C. J.2007. Modifier licensing and Chinese DP:a feature analysis. Language and Linguistics 8.4:967-1024.
Tsai, W-T. D.1994. On Economizing the Theory of A-Bar Dependencies. Ph. D. Dissertation, MIT.
Tsai, W.-T. D.1997. On the absence of island effects. Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies 27:125-149.
Tsao, Fengfu.1979. A Functional Study of Topic in Chinese:The First Step towards Discourse Analysis. Taipei:Student Book Co.
Tsao, Fengfu.1990. Sentence and Clause Structure in Chinese:A Functional Perspective. Taipei:Student Book Co.
Vries, de M.1999. Extraposition of relative clauses as specifying coordination. In T. Cambier-Langeveld et al. (eds.) Proceedings of ConSole VII,293-309. SOLE, Leiden.
Vries, de M.2002. The Syntax of Relativization. LOT Dissertation Series. LOT.
Wen, B.-L.1996. The Syntax of Chinese and English Free Relatives. Ph. D. Dissertation, GDUFS.
Wilder, C.1995. Rightward movement as leftward delation. In U. Lutz & J. Pafel (eds.) Extraction and Extraposition in German,273-309. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,
Wu Tong.2009. Relative clause without complementizer in Mandarin, with reference to Cantonese. The Fifth International Conference on Contemporary Chinese Grammar (ICCCG 5), Hong Kong,28-29 November 2009.
Wu, X-Z.2004. Grammaticalization and Language Change in Chinese. London; New York:Routledge.
Xu, Ding.1997. Functional Categories in Mandarin Chinese. Leiden:Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics.
Xu, Jie.2006. The Nature of null objects in Chinese. Journal of Chinese Language and Computing 16 (1):1-15.
Xu, Liejiong.1986. Free empty category. Linguistic Inquiry 17:75-93.
Xu, Liejiong.2004. Manifestation of informational focus. Lingua 114:277-299.
Xu, Liejiong & D. Terence Langendoen.1985. Topic structures in Chinese. Language 61:1-27.
Yiu, Yuk Man, et al.1997. On the extractability of adjuncts in Chinese relative clauses. In Proceedings of the LSA Linguistics Workshop:Interface Strategies in Chinese:Syntax and Semantics of Noun Phrases,84-101. Cornell University.
Zhang, N.2001. Sell non-restrictive relatives. http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/ealc/ch-inling/.
Zou, Ke.1995. The Syntax of the Chinese Ba-Constructions and Verb Compounds:A Morpho-Syntactic Analysis. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
陈宗利,2005,限定性关系结构的句法研究。广州：广东外语外贸大学博士论文。
陈宗利,2007,汉语关系结构生成句法研究,《现代外语》第4期,331-340页。
陈宗利、温宾利,2004,论现代汉语关系分句的限定性,《四川外语学院学报》第3期,76-80页。
郭锐,2000,表述功能的转化和“的”字的作用,《当代语言学》第1期,37-52页。
韩景泉,1997,空语类理论与汉语空位宾语,《国外语言学》第4期,1-14页。
李艳惠,2007,空语类理论和汉语空语类的辨识与指称研究,《语言科学》第2期,37-47页。
李艳惠,2008,短语结构与语类标记：“的”是中心词?,《当代语言学》第2期,97-108页。
刘礼进,2009,再谈中心词理论与“的”字结构,《现代外语》第4期,351-359页。
刘礼进,2010,关系结构的提升分析,《华文教学与研究》第1期,62-68页。
潘海华、韩景泉,2005,显性非宾格结构的句法研究,《语言研究》第3期,1-13页。
石定栩,2008,“的”和“的”字结构,《当代语言学》第4期,298-307页。
石毓智、李呐,1998,汉语发展史上结构助词的兴替—论“的”的语法化历程,《中国社会科学》第6期,165-179页。
苏政杰,2010,结构助词“的’’的语法化历程,《汉语学报》第1期,23-35页。
汤廷池,1979,《国语语法研究论集》。台北：台湾学生书局。
王力,1985,《中国现代语法》。北京：商务印书馆。
王琼,2006,最简方案框架下汉语关系从句的推导生成,《解放军外语学院学报》第6期,13-17页。
温宾利,2001,自然语言中的关系结构,《外语教学与研究》第4期,276-283页。
杨彩梅,2008,英汉语中的关系化都是移动的结果吗?,《外语教学与研究》第1期,20-28页。
Alexiadou, A., P. Law, A. Meinunger & C. Wilder.2000. The Syntax of Relative Clauses. Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Aoun, J & Y.-H. Audrey Li.2003. Essays on the Representational and Derivational Nature of Grammar:The Diversity of Wh-Constructions. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Baltin, M.1984. Extraposition rules and discontinuous constituent. Linguistic Inquiry 15:157-163.
Barss, A.2001. Syntactic reconstruction effects. In M. Baltin & C. Collins (eds.) The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory. Oxford:Blackwell.
Bianchi, V.1999. Consequences of Antisymmetry:Headed Relative Clauses. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Boeckx, C.2004. Long distance agreement in Hindi:Some theoretical implications. Studia Linguistica 58:1-14.
Borseley, R. D.2005. Against ConjP. Lingua 115:461-482.
Bresnan, J.2001. Lexical-Functional Syntax. Oxford:Blackwell.
Carlson, G.1977. Amount relatives. Language 53:520-542.
Cha, Jong-Yul.1998. Relative clause or noun complement clause:some diagnoses. In zin B. S. Park & J. H.-S. Yoon, (eds.) The Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Korean Linguistics,6-9. International Circle of Korean Linguistics, Seoul.
Chao, Y.-R.1968. A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California.
Cheng, L. L.-S.1986. De in mandarin. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 31:313-26.
Cheng, L. L.-S.& Huang C.-T. J.1996. Two types of donkey sentences. Natural Language Semantics 4:121-163.
Cheng, L. L.-S.& Rint Sybesma.2005. A Chinese relative. In H. Broekhuis, N. Corver, R. Huybregts, U. Kleinhenz & J. Koster (eds.) Organizing Grammar: Linguistic Studies in Honor of Henk Van Riemsdijk,69-76. Berlin:Mouton.
Cheng, L. L.-S.& Rint Sybesma.2009. De as an underspecified classifier:first explorations, http://semantics.uchicago.edu/kennedy/classes/f11/na/docs/che-ngsybesma09.pdf
Chiu, B.1993. The Inflectional Structure of Mandarin Chinese. Ph. D.Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
Chomsky, N.1957. Syntactic Structures. The Hague:Mouton.
Chomsky, N.1977. On wh-movement. In P. Culicover, T. Wasow & A. Akmajian (eds.) Formal Syntax,71-123. New York:Academic Press.
Chomsky, N.1980. Rules and Representations. New York:Columbia University Press.
Chomsky, N.1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht:Foris.
Chomsky, N.1982. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.1986a. Knowledge of Language:Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York:Praeger.
Chomsky, N.1986b. Barriers. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.1993. A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In Hale, K.& Keyser, S. (eds.) The View from Building 20:Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger,1-52. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.1995a. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.1995b. Bare phrase structure. In G. Webelhuth (ed.) Government and Binding Theory and the Minimalist Program,383-439. Oxford:Blackwell.
Chomsky, N.2000. Minimalist inquiries:the framework. In R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka (eds.) Step by Step:Essays in Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik,89-155. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.2001. Derivation by phase. In Hale, K. (ed.) A Life in Language,1-52. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.2004. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In A. Belletti (ed.) Structures and Beyond:The Cartography of Syntactic Structures,104-131. Oxford:OUP.
Chomsky, N.2005. Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36:1-22.
Chomsky, N.2007. Approaching UG from below. In U. Sauerland & H-M. Gartner (eds.) Interfaces+Recursion=Language? Chomsky's Minimalism and the View from Syntax-semantics,1-30. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Chomsky, N.2008. On phases. In R. Freidin, C. Otero & M. Zubizarreta (eds.) Essays in Honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud,134-166. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Del Gobbo, F.2001. Appositives schmappositives in Chinese. In Maki Irie, Hajime Ono (eds.) UCI Working Papers in Linguistics 7,1-25. University of California, Irvine.
Del Gobbo, F.2005. Chinese relative clauses:restrictive, descriptive or appositive? In Bruge, Laura, Giuliana Giusti, Nicola Munaro, Walter Schweikert, and Giuseppina Turano (eds.) Contributions to the Thirtieth Incontro di Grammatica Generativa,287-305. Venezia:Libreria Editrice Cafoscarina.
Del Gobbo, F.2007. A comparison between Japanese and Chinese relative clauses. University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics 17:177-197.
Del Gobbo, F.2010. On Chinese appositive relative clauses. Journal of East Asian Linguistics:1-33.
Downing, Bruce T.1978. Some universals of relative clause structure. In Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed.) Universals of Human Language, vol.4 (Syntax),375-418. Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.
Duanmu, S.1998. Wordhood in Chinese. In Jerome L. Packard (ed.) New Approaches to Chinese Word Formation:Morphology, Phonology and the Lexicon in Modern and Ancient Chinese,135-196. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Duanmu, S.2005. The tone-syntax interface in Chinese:some recent controversies. In Shigeki Kaji (ed.) Proceedings of the Symposium Cross-linguistic Studies of Tonal Phenomena, Historical Development, Tone-syntax Interface, and Descriptive Studies,221-254. Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.
Epstein, S.1984. A note on functional determination and strong crossover. Linguistic Review 3:299-305.
Fukui, Naoki & Yuji Takano.2000. Nominal structure:An extension of the Symmetry Principle. In Peter Svenonius (ed.) The derivation of VO and OV, 219-254. Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Gall ego, A.2010. Phase Theory. Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Grosu, A.& Landman, F.1998. Strange relatives of the third kind. Natural Language Semantics 6:125-170.
Hiraiwa, K.2001. Multiple Agree and the defective intervention constraint in Japanese. In O. Matushansky, A. Costa, J. Martin-Gonzalez, L. Nathan & A. Szczegielniak (eds.) Proceedings of the HUMIT 2000,67-80. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 40. MITWPL, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Hiraiwa, K.2005. Dimensions of Symmetry in Syntax:Agreement and Clausal Architecture. Ph. D. Dissertation, MIT.
Hsu, C.-C. N.2008. Revisit relative clause islands in Chinese. Language and Linguistics 9.1:23-48.
Hu, Jianhua & Haihua Pan.2000. Deriving the subject-object asymmetry in topicalization. International Symposium on Topic and Focus in Chinese, Linguistic Society of Hong Kong & the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong,21-23 June 2000.
Hu, Jianhua & Haihua Pan.2009. Decomposing the aboutness condition for Chinese topic constructions. The Linguistic Review 26:371-384.
Huang, C.-T. J.1982. Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar. Ph. D. dissertation, MIT.
Huang, C.-T. J.1984. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 15:531-574.
Huang, C.-T. J.1987. Remarks on empty categories in Chinese. Linguistic Inquiry 18: 321-337.
Johannessen, J. B.1998. Coordination. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Kayne, R.1984. Unambiguous paths. In R. Kayne (ed.) Connectedness and Binary Branching,129-164. Dordrecht:Foris.
Kayne, R.1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Koster, J.2000. Extraposition as Parallel Construal. Manuscript, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
Kubo, Y., F. Mohri, T. Usuki & R. Tei.2006. Category and case mismatches in coordination. The Bulletin of Central Research Institute Fukuoka University Vol.6.5:19-57.
Kuno, Susumu.1973. The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Lakoff, R.1968. Abstract Syntax and Latin Complementation. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Lambrecht, K.1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form. Topic, Focus and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Lebeaux, D.1988. Language Acquisition and the Form of the Grammar. Ph. D. Dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Li, C. N.& Shi, Y.1998. An investigation of the grammaticalization of the demonstrative pronouns zhe/na from the fifteenth century to now. Presented at the International Chinese Linguistics Conference, Standford.
Li, Y.-H. A.1985. Abstract Case in Chinese. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Southern California.
Li, Y.-H. A.2002. Word order, structure and relativization. In S.-W. Tang & C.-S. L. Liu (eds.) On the Formal Way to Chinese Languages,45-73. Stanford, CSLI Publications.
Lin, Jo-wang.2003/2004. On restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses in Mandarin Chinese. Tsinghua Journal of Chinese Studies, New Series,33: 199-240.
Lin, Jo-wang.2006. Time in a language without tense:the case of Chinese. Journal of Semantics 23:1-53.
Lin, Jo-wang.2010. A tenseless analysis of Mandarin Chinese revisited:a response to Sybesma 2007. Linguistic Inquiry 41:305-329.
Mccawley, J. D.1988. Parentheticals and discontinuous constituent structure. Linguistic Inquiry 13:91-106.
Munn, A.1993. Topics in the Syntax and Semantics of Coordinate Structures. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Maryland, College Park.
Ning, C.1993. The Overt Syntax of Relativization and Topicalization in Chinese. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Irvine.
Ning, C.1996. De as a functional head in Chinese. In B. Agbayani, K. Takeda & Sze-Wing Tang (eds.) UCI Working Papers in Linguistics 1,63-79. University of California, Irvine.
Oga, K., Hu, X.L.,& Ayano, S.1999. The Mandarin Chinese ba construction revisited:a minimalist approach. Newcastle and Durham Working Papters in Linguistics 5:193-210.
Pan, Haihua & Jianhua Hu.2008. A semantic-pragmatic interface account of (dangling) topics in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics 40: 1966-1981.
Paul, W.2005. Low IP area and left periphery in Mandarin Chinese. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes 33:111-134.
Progovac, L.1998. Structure for coordination. GLOT International 3:7-8.
Pulleyblank, E.1995. Outline of Classical Chinese Grammar. Vancouver:University of British Columbia Press.
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech & J. Svartvik.1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London:Longman.
Radford, A.1988. Transformational Grammar. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Rijkhoek, P. D.1996. Result clauses and conjunction. In R. Jonkers, E. Kaan & J. Wiegel (eds.) Language and Cognition 5. University of Groningen.
Rizzi, L.1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Lilian Haegeman (ed.) Elements of Grammar:Handbook in Generative Syntax,281-337. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Rizzi, L.2001. On the position int(errogative) in the left periphery of the clause. In G. Cinque & G. Salvi (eds.) Current Issues in Italian Syntax,287-296. Amsterdam:Elsevier.
Rizzi, L.2004. Locality and left periphery. In A. Belletti (ed.) Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. Ⅲ,223-251. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Ross, J. R.1967. Constraints on Variables in Syntax. Ph. D. Dissertation, MIT.
Rubin, E.2003. Determining pair-merge. Linguistic Inquiry 34:660-668.
Safir, K.1986. Relative clauses in a theory of binding and levels. Linguistic Inquiry 17:663-689.
Safir, K.2004. The Syntax of Anaphora. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Schachter, P.1973. Focus and relativization. Language 49:19-46.
Shi, D.2000. Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language 76,383-408.
Shi, Yuzhi & Charles N. Li.2002. The establishment of the classifier system and the grammaticalization of the morphosyntactic particle de in Chinese. Language Sciences 24:1-15.
Shyu, Shu-ing.1995. The Syntax of Focus and Topic in Mandarin Chinese. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Simpson, A.2001. Definiteness agreement and the Chinese DP. Language and Linguistics 2:125-156.
Simpson, A.2002. On the status of modifying DE and the structure of the Chinese DP. In S.-W.Tang & C.-S.Liu (eds.) On the Formal Way to Chinese Languages,74-101. Stanford:CSLI Publications.
Sio, Joanna Ut-seong.2006. Modification and Reference in the Chinese Nominal. LOT, the Netherlands.
Sybesma, R.2007. Whether we tense-agree overtly or not. Linguistic Inquiry 38: 580-587.
Tang, C.-C. J.2007. Modifier licensing and Chinese DP:a feature analysis. Language and Linguistics 8.4:967-1024.
Tsai, W-T. D.1994. On Economizing the Theory of A-Bar Dependencies. Ph. D. Dissertation, MIT.
Tsai, W.-T. D.1997. On the absence of island effects. Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies 27:125-149.
Tsao, Fengfu.1979. A Functional Study of Topic in Chinese:The First Step towards Discourse Analysis. Taipei:Student Book Co.
Tsao, Fengfu.1990. Sentence and Clause Structure in Chinese:A Functional Perspective. Taipei:Student Book Co.
Vries, de M.1999. Extraposition of relative clauses as specifying coordination. In T. Cambier-Langeveld et al. (eds.) Proceedings of ConSole VII,293-309. SOLE, Leiden.
Vries, de M.2002. The Syntax of Relativization. LOT Dissertation Series. LOT.
Wen, B.-L.1996. The Syntax of Chinese and English Free Relatives. Ph. D. Dissertation, GDUFS.
Wilder, C.1995. Rightward movement as leftward delation. In U. Lutz & J. Pafel (eds.) Extraction and Extraposition in German,273-309. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,
Wu Tong.2009. Relative clause without complementizer in Mandarin, with reference to Cantonese. The Fifth International Conference on Contemporary Chinese Grammar (ICCCG 5), Hong Kong,28-29 November 2009.
Wu, X-Z.2004. Grammaticalization and Language Change in Chinese. London; New York:Routledge.
Xu, Ding.1997. Functional Categories in Mandarin Chinese. Leiden:Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics.
Xu, Jie.2006. The Nature of null objects in Chinese. Journal of Chinese Language and Computing 16 (1):1-15.
Xu, Liejiong.1986. Free empty category. Linguistic Inquiry 17:75-93.
Xu, Liejiong.2004. Manifestation of informational focus. Lingua 114:277-299.
Xu, Liejiong & D. Terence Langendoen.1985. Topic structures in Chinese. Language 61:1-27.
Yiu, Yuk Man, et al.1997. On the extractability of adjuncts in Chinese relative clauses. In Proceedings of the LSA Linguistics Workshop:Interface Strategies in Chinese:Syntax and Semantics of Noun Phrases,84-101. Cornell University.
Zhang, N.2001. Sell non-restrictive relatives. http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/ealc/ch-inling/.
Zou, Ke.1995. The Syntax of the Chinese Ba-Constructions and Verb Compounds:A Morpho-Syntactic Analysis. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
陈宗利,2005,限定性关系结构的句法研究。广州：广东外语外贸大学博士论文。
陈宗利,2007,汉语关系结构生成句法研究,《现代外语》第4期,331-340页。
陈宗利、温宾利,2004,论现代汉语关系分句的限定性,《四川外语学院学报》第3期,76-80页。
郭锐,2000,表述功能的转化和“的”字的作用,《当代语言学》第1期,37-52页。
韩景泉,1997,空语类理论与汉语空位宾语,《国外语言学》第4期,1-14页。
李艳惠,2007,空语类理论和汉语空语类的辨识与指称研究,《语言科学》第2期,37-47页。
李艳惠,2008,短语结构与语类标记：“的”是中心词?,《当代语言学》第2期,97-108页。
刘礼进,2009,再谈中心词理论与“的”字结构,《现代外语》第4期,351-359页。
刘礼进,2010,关系结构的提升分析,《华文教学与研究》第1期,62-68页。
潘海华、韩景泉,2005,显性非宾格结构的句法研究,《语言研究》第3期,1-13页。
石定栩,2008,“的”和“的”字结构,《当代语言学》第4期,298-307页。
石毓智、李呐,1998,汉语发展史上结构助词的兴替—论“的”的语法化历程,《中国社会科学》第6期,165-179页。
苏政杰,2010,结构助词“的’’的语法化历程,《汉语学报》第1期,23-35页。
汤廷池,1979,《国语语法研究论集》。台北：台湾学生书局。
王力,1985,《中国现代语法》。北京：商务印书馆。
王琼,2006,最简方案框架下汉语关系从句的推导生成,《解放军外语学院学报》第6期,13-17页。
温宾利,2001,自然语言中的关系结构,《外语教学与研究》第4期,276-283页。
杨彩梅,2008,英汉语中的关系化都是移动的结果吗?,《外语教学与研究》第1期,20-28页。