Abstract
This paper proposes an analysis of subject case in Late Archaic Chinese (LAC). By examining the distribution of first person pronominal subjects, I conclude that there were two distinct morphological cases for subjects in LAC. One of these pronouns, 我 wǒ, valued structural nominative case, while the other one, 吾 wú, was marked with a different case. The occurrence of 吾 wú as the external argument of experiencer and modal predicates clearly suggests that this case was at least sometimes inherent case assigned to the external argument in [Spec, vP]. 吾 wú also functioned as the subject of relative clauses, embedded subjunctive clauses, and irrealis matrix clauses. Since the case valued in these clause types was not sensitive to predicate types, I propose that the source of the case valued by the subject in these environments was T. Working within Chomsky’s (2008) C-T Inheritance framework, I propose that Inheritance did not take place in indicative clauses, so the subject moved to [Spec, CP] to value nominative case. A first person pronoun with nominative case was spelled out as 我 wǒ. But Inheritance was forced if another constituent needed to occupy [Spec, CP]. I propose that relative clauses and irrealis/subjunctive clauses are all derived through operator movement. Because the operator must occupy [Spec, CP], C-T Inheritance must also take place, forcing the subject to move to [Spec, TP] to value its case. The case valued in this position was also the non-nominative form exemplified by the first person pronoun 吾 wú.
Highlights
This paper proposes that Late Archaic Chinese (LAC; 5th to the 3rd centuries BCE) had both nominative and non-nominative subjects
I argue on the basis of the distribution of first person pronominal subjects that subjects in LAC valued a case other than nominative in a variety of contexts, including embedded nominalized clauses, experiencer constructions, as well as modal and other irrealis environments
I propose that both clause types are operator movement contexts, and operator movement prevents the subject from moving to the nominative case position, because this position functions as the landing site for the operator
Summary
This paper proposes that Late Archaic Chinese (LAC; 5th to the 3rd centuries BCE) had both nominative and non-nominative subjects. Though first and third person pronouns behave identically when functioning as possessors and embedded subjects, as I show, non-nominative third person subjects are not found in matrix clauses. I assume this to be a retention from Pre-Archaic Chinese (14th – 11th century BCE), where WO was principally employed as a plural form He 1992, Zhang 2001), while another pronoun expressed first person singular. 1.GEN fear 3.GEN PASS world laugh ‘I fear that he will be laughed at by the whole world.’ This is not surprising, given that it is common across languages for subjects of psych predicates to appear with non-nominative case, as in the Icelandic examples in (16). Xí wú xù yú Zhào shì, Mèng Jī zhī chán past 1 support by Zhao clan Meng Ji GEN slander wú néng wéi bīng. WU occurs with the modal qí, which He (2004) classifies as expressing future probability, necessity, or volition
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
