Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-28T03:12:18.952Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

19 - SVO as the Canonical Word Order in Modern Chinese

from Part Four - Syntax-semantics, Pragmatics, and Discourse Issues

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2022

By
Feng-hsi Liu
Edited by
Chu-Ren Huang ,
Yen-Hwei Lin ,
I-Hsuan Chen  and
Yu-Yin Hsu
Chu-Ren Huang
Affiliation:
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Yen-Hwei Lin
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
I-Hsuan Chen
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
Yu-Yin Hsu
Affiliation:
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Get access

Summary

The question of what canonical word order Chinese has is not a controversial issue at the present time; most of the studies within the last 30 years assume that the canonical word order of Modern Chinese is SVO. However, during the 1970s and 80s there was a lively debate on Chinese word order concerning its historical development as well as its status in Modern Chinese. This chapter reviews the arguments for and against SVO as the canonical word order in Chinese. Arguments for SVO originated as reactions against two claims: Chinese is in the process of becoming an SOV language, and Modern Chinese is an SOV language. A wide range of arguments have been brought forth to argue against the two claims, including historical development, grammar internal considerations, typological features, and discourse analysis.

Keywords

canonical word orderSVOhistorical developmenttypology
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Chinese Linguistics , pp. 407 - 427
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Djamouri, Redouane, Paul, Waltraud, and Whitman, John. 2013. Postpositions vs. prepositions in Mandarin Chinese: The articulation of disharmony. In Theoretical approaches to disharmonic word order, ed. Biberauer, Theresa and Sheehan, Michelle, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dong, Sicong, and Jie, Xu. 2022. SOV as the canonical word order in Modern Chinese. In The Cambridge handbook of Chinese linguistics, ed. Huang, Chu-Ren, Lin, Yen-Hwei, Chen, I-Hsuan, and Hsu, Yu-Yin, 428–443. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew. 2005. Order of subject, object, and verb. In The world atlas of language structures, ed. Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew S., Gil, David, and Comrie, Bernard, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fenn, Henry, and Tewksbury, Gardner. 1967. Speak Mandarin. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fox, Andrew. 1983. Topic continuity in Biblical Hebrew narrative. In Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study, ed. Givón, Talmy, 215–254. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. (ed.). 1983. Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Universals of language, ed. Greenberg, Joseph H., 73–113. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hashimoto, Mantaro. 1976. Language diffusion on the Asian continent. Computational Analysis of Asian and African Languages 3:49–65.Google Scholar
Huang, James C-T., Li, Audrey Yen-hui, and Li, Yafei. 2009. The syntax of Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Huang, Shuan-Fan. 1978. Historical change of prepositions and the emergence of order. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 6:212–242.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward. 1975. Some universals in passives in relational grammar. Papers from the Eleventh Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 11:340–352.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N., and Thompson, Sandra A.. 1974a. An explanation of word order change SVO→SOV. Foundations of Language 12:201–214. www.jstor.org/stable/25000832.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N., and Thompson, Sandra A.. 1974b. Historical change of word order: A case study of Chinese and its implications. In Historical linguistics I: Syntax, morphology, internal and comparative reconstruction, ed. Anderson, John M. and Jones, Charles, 199–218. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N., and Thompson, Sandra A.. 1975. The semantic function of word order: A case study of Mandarin. In Word order and word order change, ed. Li, Charles N., 163–197. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Light, Timothy. 1979. Word order and word order change. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 7: 149–180. www.jstor.org/stable/23752920.Google Scholar
Mei, Kuang. 1980. Is modern Chinese really a SOV language? Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 7:23–45. doi:10.3406/clao.1980.1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peyraube, Alain. 1994. On word order and word order change in Pre-Archaic Chinese. In China languages and linguistics IV 中国境内语言暨语言学, 第四辑, ed. Tseng, Chiu-yu 郑秋豫, 105–124. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Shen, Pei 沈培.1992. A study of word order in oracle bones 甲骨卜辞语序研究. Taipei: Wenjin Publishers.Google Scholar
Sun, Chao-Fen and Talmy, Givón. 1985. On the so-called SOV word order in Mandarin Chinese: A quantified text study and its implications. Language 61:329–351. www.jstor.org/stable/414148.Google Scholar
Tai, James. 1973. Chinese as a SOV language. Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 659–671.Google Scholar
Tai, James. 1976. On the change from SVO to SOV in Chinese. Papers from the Parasession on Diachronic Syntax, Chicago Linguistic Society, 291–304.Google Scholar
Teng, Shou-hsin. 1975. A semantic study of transitivity relations in Chinese. Berkeley, CA: University of California Publications in Linguistics.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×