Cantonese & Mandarin datives

[Gordon, Peter]

We have a study that looked at this question for Mandarin double object constructions and tested whether there was a correlation either within or between semantic subclasses of verbs (basically there was a strong correlation within the semantic subclasses that allow DO constructions but not between classes or within classes that do not allow DO construction).  The paper is reported in Chung and Gordon -- 2003 I believe.   There is a copy of the paper on my website listed below if you click on the tab that says "Documents and Papers"
 
Peter Gordon
 
Peter Gordon, Associate Professor
525 W 120th St. Box 180
Biobehavioral Sciences Department
Teachers College, Columbia University
New York, NY 10027
Office Phone: (212) 678-8162
FAX: (212) 678-8233
Web Page: www.tc.edu/faculty/index.htm?facid=pg328

________________________________

From: info-childes at mail.talkbank.org on behalf of Henrietta Lempert
Sent: Tue 10/16/2007 11:42 AM
To: info-childes at mail.talkbank.org
Subject: Cantonese & Mandarin datives



 I have three students who hope to do a project on L2 acquisition
>of English datives and passives by L1 Cantonese and Mandarin speakers.
> They have received conflicting information from Chinese first
>language informants as to which sub-classes of English alternating
>datives can also alternate in Cantonese and Mandarin; which ones can
>only occur as prepositional datives (PDs), and which ones can only
>occur as double object datives (DO).  They would be grateful for any
>information regarding the following:
>
>1.  Punctual action involving unaccompanied transfer of an object from
>agent to recipient such as throw, toss, and kick (the subclasses are
>based on Pinker, 1989),
>
>Cantonese:   PD?                         DO?
>Mandarin:    PD?                          DO?
>
>2.  Verbs of future possession (e.g.,  offer, promise, bequeath, award)
>
>Cantonese:   PD?                         DO?
>Mandarin:    PD?                          DO?
>
>3.  Verbs of communication such as tell, write, e-mail, fax, telephone.
>
>Cantonese:  PD?                          DO?
>Mandarin:   PD?                           DO?
>
>
>4.  With respect to agentive passives (i.e., passives with a by-phrase
>in English),  are there are salient differences between Cantonese and
>Mandarin?  Chinese versus English?
>
>Many thanks,
>
>Henrietta lempert



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/info-childes/attachments/20071018/031faa6d/attachment.htm>