Abstract

Reviewed by: Diversity in Sinitic Languages ed. by Hilary M. Chappell Bit-Chee KwokiD, corresponding author and Yik-Po LaiiD Diversity in Sinitic Languages. Edited by Hilary M. Chappell. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. Pp. xvii, 315. ISBN 9780198723790 1. OVERVIEW OF DIVERSITY OF SINITIC LANGUAGES The difference in grammar, or morphosyntax, among Chinese dialects was once thought to be insignificant, as reflected in Chao's (1968:13) famous claim that "[i]t is in matters of grammar that the greatest degree of uniformity is found among all the dialects of the Chinese language." This idea, however, has been critically challenged since the 1980s when more dialectal data come into light.1 Diversity in Sinitic Languages is the latest milestone in the exploration of the grammatical diversity across Chinese dialects. As the book title suggests, the editor views traditional Chinese dialect groups as related but different languages. The term 'Sinitic languages' will be used throughout this review. The book under review comprises three parts, bringing together ten chapters by eight authors. All the chapters, except Chapter 3 by Peyraube, are products of the project entitled 'The hybrid syntactic typology of Sinitic [End Page 432] languages (SINOTYPE)' funded by the European Research Council from 2009 to 2013. The final product of the project, following this book, will be a series of typological descriptive grammars of lesser-known Sinitic languages such as the Waxiang language spoken in Hunan, Hui'an Southern Min spoken in Fujian, and Nanning Southern Pinghua spoken in Guangxi.2 In Part I of the book, two chapters, following the introduction, are devoted to approaches to the grammatical diversity of Sinitic languages. To highlight the nature and extent of the diversity across the languages, Chappell's chapter applies the notion of linguistic area, which typically describes languages belonging to different families, to analyzing Sinitic languages. She identifies five linguistic areas based on an examination of disposal, passive and comparative constructions. Peyraube's chapter demonstrates with specific examples how typological research on Sinitic languages may benefit from studies of diachronic grammar. In contrast, in the West the influence of typology upon diachronic studies is more significant than that of diachronic studies upon typology. In Part II, extensive data were presented in three typological studies to illustrate important aspects of the grammatical diversity across Sinitic languages. Yujie Chen's study investigates demonstrative systems with a sample of 303 Sinitic languages. Chen shows that on top of the two-term systems, which are the most prevalent type in Sinitic languages as well as in world languages, there also exist one-term, three-term, four-term, and even five-term systems in the Sinitic family. Some languages with a one-term system are found to employ another type of system as well. In systems with three terms or above, a demonstrative member may be derived from another member through various devices, such as syllable lengthening, stressing, reduplication and tone sandhi. While different systems in the languages are mainly based on the distance scale, a small number of them are reported to be also sensitive to visibility. Wang revisits bare classifier phrases ([CL-N]; noun phrases made up of a classifier + noun without a numeral or demonstrative) with a sample of 120 Sinitic languages. Taking [End Page 433] into account the syntactic distribution (the possibility of preverbal use and postverbal use) and the semantic interpretation (the possibility of definite reading and indefinite reading) of the bare classifier phrases, Wang identifies a range of seven behavioral types from the 16 logical types produced by the four variables. Eventually he comes up with three implicational universals: (a) preverbal [CL-N] phrases ⊃ postverbal [CL-N] phrases; (b) preverbal indefinite [CL-N] phrases ⊃ preverbal definite [CL-N] phrases; and (c) postverbal definite [CL-N] phrases ⊃ postverbal indefinite [CL-N] phrases. Chappell and Peyraube co-author the last chapter of Part II, presenting a study of comparative constructions in Sinitic languages. The study focuses on the two main types of comparatives in the languages, the compare type with the marker-standard-predicate configuration and the surpass type with the predicate-marker-standard form. More specifically, the authors disagree with the common belief that the surpass type is...

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call