An Enthymematic Account of the Deduction of the Negative Meaning of the Chinese Shenme-based Rhetorical Question Construction

Open access

Abstract

One controversy in the study of the Chinese shenme ‘what’-based rhetorical question (shenme-RQ for short) is how it takes on a negative interpretation. This paper attempts to apply enthymeme or rhetorical syllogism to the deduction of negative meaning of the shenme-RQ. Triggered by the shenme-RQ, or one of its words or phrases, the hearer extracts the explicit premise, fills in the premise that is implicit either in the context or in her or his encyclopedic knowledge, and deduces the conclusion, the negative meaning of the shenme-RQ. According to what premises are left out, the paper also explores the deduction patterns of the negative meaning of shenme-RQs and proposes a procedure for obtaining the negative interpretation. That said, the negative meaning of the shenme-RQ will be entrenched in the mind of its users and conventionalized in the Mandarin Chinese community via repeated use.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Caponigro Ivano & Jon Sprouse. 2007. Rhetorical questions as questions. In Estella Puig-Waldmüller (ed.) Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 11 121–133. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.

  • Chao Yuen Ren. 2004[1968]. A grammar of spoken Chinese. Vol. 3 of The complete works of Yuen Ren Chao. Beijing: The Commercial Press.

  • Cheung Yam-Leung. 2009. Negative wh-construction and its semantic properties. Journal of Eastern Asian Linguistics 18. 297–321.

  • Goldberg Adele. 1995. Constructions: A constructional approach to argument structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

  • Goldberg Adele. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Grice Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry Morgan (eds.) Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts 41–58. New York: Academic Press.

  • Han Chung-Hye. 2002. Interpreting interrogatives as rhetorical questions. Lingua 112. 201–229.

  • Ilie Cornelia. 1999. Question-response argumentation in talk shows. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 975–999.

  • Ilie Cornelia. 2009. Rhetorical questions. In Louise Cummings (ed.) The Routledge pragmatics encyclopedia 435–438. London: Routledge.

  • Jackendoff Ray. 2002. Foundations of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Jiang Wei & Yuzhi Shi. 2008. Shenme de fouding gongyong [The function of the negative marker of shenme]. Linguistic Sciences 34. 270–277.

  • Kay Paul. 1997. Constructional modus tollens and the level of conventionality. In Paul Kay (ed) Words and the grammar of context 175–188. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

  • Kelley David. 1990. The art of reasoning with symbolic logic. New York & London: W.W Norton & Company.

  • Koshik Irene. 2003. Wh-questions used as challenges. Discourse Studies 5. 51–77.

  • Kurafuji Takeo. 1996. Unambiguous checking. In Masatoshi Koizumi Masayuki Oishi & Uli Sauerland (eds.) Proceedings of the Second Conference on Formal Approaches to Japanese Linguistics (MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 29) 81–96. Cambridge: MIT.

  • Ladusaw William. 1980. Polarity sensitivity as inherent scope relations. New York: Garland.

  • Langacker Ronald. 1990. Concept image and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Langacker Ronald. 2001. Discourse in cognitive grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 12: 143–188.

  • Langacker Ronald. 2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic reader. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Langacker Ronald. 2016. Working toward a synthesis. Cognitive Linguistics 27(4). 465–477.

  • Lee-Goldman Russell. 2006. Rhetorical questions and scales: Just what do you think constructions are for? Paper presented at the International Conference on Construction Grammar 4 Tokyo University 1–3 September.

  • Li Yuming. 1990. Fanwenju de goucheng jiqi lijie [The formation and understanding of rhetorical questions]. Yindu Journal 3. 91–99.

  • Lü Shuxiang. 1985. Jindai hanyu zhidaici [Demonstratives and pronouns of modern Mandarin Chinese]. Shanghai: Xuelin Press.

  • Lü Shuxiang. 2005[1980]. Xiangdai hanyu babai ci [Eight hundred words of contemporary Chinese]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.

  • Michaelis Laura & Hanbing Feng. 2015. What is this Sarcastic Syntax? Constructions and Frames 7. 148–180.

  • Ochi Masao. 2004. How come and other adjunct Wh-phrases: A cross-linguistic perspective. Language and Linguistics 5. 29–57.

  • Paglieri Fabio & John Woods. 2011. Enthymemes: From reconstruction to understanding. Argumentation 25. 127–139.

  • Pan Victor Junnan. 2014. Deriving special questions in Mandarin Chinese: A comparative study. In Jong-Un Park & ll-Jae Lee (eds.) Comparative Syntax: Proceedings of the 16th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar 349–368. Seoul: The Korean Generative Grammar Circle.

  • Progovac Ljiljana. 1993. Negativity polarity: Entailment and binding. Linguistics and Philosophy 16. 149–180.

  • Rohde Hannah. 2006. Rhetorical questions as redundant interrogatives. In Henry Beecher Shin Fukuda & Hannah Rohde (eds.) San Diego Linguistics Papers 2 134–168. San Diego CA: Department of Linguistics University of California San Diego.

  • Sadock Jerrold. 1971. Queclaratives. In Papers from the Seventh Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 223–232. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.

  • Sadock Jerrold. 1974. Towards a linguistic theory of speech acts. New York: Academic Press.

  • Shao Jingmin. 1996. Xiandai hanyu yiwenju yanjiu [A study of modern Chinese rhetorical questions]. Shanghai: East China Normal University Press.

  • Shao Jingmin. 2013. Yiwenju de jiegou leixing yu fanwenju de zhuanhua guanxi yanjiu [The conversion relationship between the structure types of interrogative sentences and rhetorical questions]. Hanyu Xuexi [Chinese language learning] 2. 3–10.

  • Shao Jingmin & Xiufeng Zhao. 1989. “Shenme” fei yiwen yongfa yanjiu [A study on the non-interroative usages of “what”]. Yuyan Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu [Language teaching and linguistic studies] 1. 26–40.

  • Shou Yongming. 2002. Yiwen daici de fouding yongfa [The negative usage of the interrogative pronouns]. Journal of Shanghai Teachers University 31. 113–117.

  • Sperber Dan & Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and cognition 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Sprouse Jon. 2007. Rhetorical questions and wh-word movement. Linguistic Inquiry 38. 572–580.

  • Tsai Wei-tien Dylan. 2011. Cong “zhe hua cong he shuo qi” [Speaking from “where should I begin?”]. Yuyanxue Luncong [Essays on linguistics] 43. 194–208.

  • Walton Douglas. 2001. Enthymeme common knowledge and plausible inference. Philosophy and Rhetoric 34. 93–112.

  • Walton Douglas. 2008. The three bases for the enthymeme: A dialogical theory. Journal of Applied Logic 6. 361–379.

  • Wang Haifeng. 2003. “A shenme B” jiegoushi chutan [On the construction “A shenme B”]. Journal of Sichuan University 126. 89–92.

  • Wang Changsong. 2017. A study on noncanonical wh-particles from the prosody-syntax interface: A case study of shenme in “V shenme (V)/(NP)” construction. In Shengli Feng (ed.). Studies in prosodic grammar vol. 2 73–100. Beijing: Beijing Language and Culture University Press.

  • Wu Danhua. 2011. “X shenme X” de jiegou xingzhi xintan [A new exploration of the structure “X shenme X”]. Journal of Central South University 17. 180–184.

  • Xu Shenghuan. 1999. Yiwenju tanxun gongneng de qianyi [The transfer of probing functions of interrogative constructions]. Zhongguo Yuwen [Studies of the Chinese language] 268. 3–11.

  • Yang Barry Chung-Yu. 2014. Shenme gen shenme ‘what and what’. Paper presented at the 10th Workshop on Formal Syntax & Semantics (FOSS-10) National Quemoy University Kinmen November 22–23.

  • Yang Yang & Wei-Tian Dylan Tsai. 2019. Nianli yizhuan de yunlü yufa ji shiyan yanjiu [An experimental study of the prosodic syntax of force shift]. Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue [Chinese teaching in the world] 1 20-30.

  • Yin Shuling. 2009. Xiandai hanyu fanwenju yanjiu [A study of modern Chinese rhetorical questions]. Ha’er’bin: Heilongjiang University Press.

  • Yuan Ying & Yan Jiang. 2010. Xiuci sanduanlun yu yuyi de yuyong tuidao [Rhetorical syllogism and implicature-drawing in pragmatic inference]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research 42. 97–103.

  • Yuan Yulin & Bin Liu. 2016. “Shenme”ju fouding yiyi de xingcheng yu shijie jizhi [On the formation and construal mechanism of the negative meaning of shenme-sentences]. Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue [Chinese teaching in the world] 3. 303–317.

  • Zhu Jun. 2013. Fanwen goushi “you shenme X” de fouding moshi yu fouding dengji: Hudong jiaoji moshi zhong de yuyong fouding ge’an fenxi [The negation model and hierarchy of the rhetorical question “you shenme X”: A case study of pragmatic negation in interactive modes]. Zhongguo Yuwen [Studies of the Chinese language] 357. 505–517.

  • Zhu Jun. 2014. Fanwen goushi “X shenme X” de lichang biaoda gongneng kaocha [Expressive function of rhetorical question format “X +shenme + X” in negative position]. Hanyu Xuexi [Chinese language learning] 3. 20–27.

Search
Journal information
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 284 285 9
PDF Downloads 220 220 3