Linking Agentive Objects in Mandarin Chinese

This paper is concerned with the problem of argument-function mismatch observed in the apparent subject-object inversion in Chinese consumption verbs, e.g., chi 'eat' and he 'drink', and accommodation verbs, e.g., zhu 'live' and shui 'sleep'. These verbs seem to allow the linking of [agent-SUBJ theme-OBJ] as well as [agent-OBJ theme-SUBJ], but only when the agent is also the semantic role denoting the measure or extent of the action. The account offered is formulated within LFG's lexical mapping theory. Under the simplest and also the strictest interpretation of the one-to-one argument-function mapping principle (or the theta-criterion), a composite role such as ag-ext receives syntactic assignment via one composing role only. One-to-one linking thus entails the suppression of the other composing role. Apparent subject-object inversion occurs when the more prominent agent role is suppressed and thus allows the less prominent extent role to dictate the linking of the entire ag-ext composite role. This LMT account also potentially facilitates a natural explanation of markedness among the competing syntactic structures.

The impact of interpersonal and intergroup communication accommodation on perceptions of Chinese students in Australia

Using the framework of communication accommodation theory the authors examined convergence and maintenance on evaluations of Chinese and Australian students. In Study 1, Australian students judged interactions between an Anglo-Australian. and another interactant who either maintained his or converged in speech style. Results indicated that participants were aware of convergence but that speaker ethnicity (Anglo-Australian, Chinese Australian or Chinese national) was a stronger influence on evaluations and future intentions to interact with the speaker In Study 2, Australian students judged Chinese speakers who maintained communication style or converged on interpersonal speech markers, intergroup markers, or both types of markers. Results indicated that the more participants defined themselves in intergroup terms, the more positively they judged intergroup convergence relative to interpersonal convergence and maintenance. This points to the importance of distinguishing between, convergence on interpersonal and intergroup speech markers, and underlines the role of individual differences in the evaluation of convergence.