MAN Si-cong

Guided by the basic assumptions of cognitive semantics， this paper conducts an analysis on the semantics of Chinese “Lao （old）+N” construction and the semantic relationships between adjective “Lao （old）” and the noun in order to detect noun selection restrictions of this construction. Under the framework of Taylor’s discussions on adjectives in cognitive grammar， it was found that “Lao （old）+N” Construction could partially testify the feasibility of his assumption. The interpretation of “Lao （old）+N” construction is associated with different senses of “Lao（old）”， as well as the different semantic structures of the nominal constituent. And finally， a plausible explanation on semantic constraints of nouns in this construction is found with the aid of categorization.

Keywords： “Lao （old）+N” construction， cognitive construal， semantic constrain， categorization

Introduction

“Lao （old）+N” construction is a productive construction occurring with sufficient frequency in Chinese. In this construction， the polysemous adjective “Lao （old）” is acting as a content word. “Lao （old）+N” construction is open to several interpretations.

a. “N is Advanced in years” （as opposed to “young”）

e.g. “老男人” designates a man who is aged；

“老公雞” designates a rooster which has lived for a relatively long time；

“老槐樹” designates a locust tree that has grown for a long time.

b. “N has outgrown the best tasting time” （only applied to food）

e.g. “老南瓜” designates a pumpkin which is tough and stringy.

c. “N is deep or dark in extent” （only applied to some colors）

e.g. “老綠色” designates the deep green color.

d. “N of long standing” （as opposed to “new”）

e.g. “老朋友” may designate someone who has become one’s friend for a long time and is still one’s friend；

“老習慣” designates someone’s habits of long duration.

e. “former N”

e.g. “老房子” could designate a house where someone once lived at some time previous to R.

f. “N is Experienced in some fields” （only applied to human）

e.g. “老司機” may designate a person of rich experience in driving.

At the meanwhile， some expressions are open to more than one readings， such as “老同學” and “老房子”.“老同學” could refer to someone’s classmate who is advanced in age， or a classmate of someone of long standing， or someone who used to be one’s classmate. Also， “老房子” could be either a house where someone once lived at some time previous to R， or a house of long standing.

Also， there is something about this expression that necessitates a constructional analysis. The nouns which occur in this construction exhibit an idiosyncratic constraint. The following examples show constraints on the nouns：

a. 老桌子/老家具

*老盒子/*老玩具/*老衣服

b. 老朋友

*老女友

c. 老男孩/老孩子/老小孩

*老女孩

These observations on the semantics of “Lao （old）+N” construction and the semantic constrain raise the following questions：

（1） How does the meaning of “Lao （old）+N” construction form？ Based on the six interpretations of this construction， what determines the choice of the interpretation of “Lao （old）+N” construction？

（2） What is the source of the ambiguity of some constructs？ （e.g. “老同事”； “老同學”）

（3） What’s the noun selection constrains of “Lao （old）+N” construction？

Cognitive Account of “Lao （old）+N” construction

In this part， we will discuss the semantic structure of the “Lao （old）+N” construction. The noun elaborates the schematic Tr of the adjective and the adjective specifies some instances of the noun. According to Taylor，“the disposition to combine is a function of the degree of autonomy vs. Dependence” （Taylor， 2002， p. 225）. In this construction， the adjective “Lao （old）” as the relational concept displays a high degree of conceptual dependence， while the nouns are relatively autonomous. The two elements therefore compose a bigger form in a valance relation. The profiled Tr of the adjective is put into correspondence with the profile of the nominal.

First let’s focus on the first three interpretations of “Lao （old）+N” construction as shown in （1a）， （1b）， （1c）. In these interpretations， “Lao （old）” could be regarded as a member of the set of scalar adjectives which designates a relation between its Tr （a thing） and Lm （a region on a scale）. “Lao （old）” in （1a） could represent that the extent of the existing time of its Tr is in excess of some norm； in （1b）， “Lao （old）” denotes the extent of the chewiness or softness of its Tr is in excess of some norm； in （1c）， “Lao （old）” may refer to the extent of the color saturation of its Tr is in excess of some norm. Based on the observation of the nouns， it could be found that this kind of noun only designates a thing.

Next， the examples shown in the （1d）， （1e）， （1f） of “Lao （old）+N” construction exhibit the multiple interpretations， such as “老朋友”， “老房子” ，“老司機”. The differences between these examples and the example like “老槐樹” and “老男人” lie in the nouns. For example， in “老朋友”， “朋友” is a kind of noun which imply a thing （aged person） or a relation between the designate entity and a person （the relationship as friends is of long standing）. In other words， “老朋友” in the sense that someone is of long standing friendship invokes the relational character of the noun. Similarly， “房子” in Chinese is supposed to be identified as a place with rich memories and background information. The noun designates a distinctive role of the thing within a social or intellectual context. When this character of “房子” is invoked， the Tr of the adjective would turns to designate the relation between the thing and its context. Therefore， “房子” could be interpreted as （1） a house of long standing （2） a house where someone once lived at some time previous to R.

In conclusion， the interpretation of “Lao （old）+N” construction is associated with different senses of “Lao（old）”， as well as the different semantic structures of the nominal constituent. The meanings of the construction emerge from a subtle interaction between the meaning of the noun and the meaning of adjective. The ambiguity of “Lao （old）+N” construction also resides in the semantic structures of the nominal constituent. In the construction， the noun is construed as different types of human or things in terms of what character of the noun is invoked as the Tr of adjective. That’s the reason to the ambiguity of the “Lao （old）+N” construction.

Semantic Constrains on Nouns

A comparison between English “old+N” construction and Chinese “Lao （old）+N” construction reveals that there is overlap in nouns in terms of their semantic types. Still， the wider range of nouns in both numbers and semantic types exhibits the differences between the two constructions.

The most salient difference is availability of “box”， “toy”， “clothes” in English “old+N” construction， but the nouns of same semantic features are not available in Chinese “Lao （old）+N” construction. According to Taylor （1992）， “only things that exhibit a characteristic cycle of existence from birth to creation， through uninterrupted existence， to eventually death or destruction qualify for the description as ‘old’” （Taylor， 1992， p. 12）. However， his idea falls to explain the *老盒子/*老玩具/*老衣服 in Chinese. Based on the analysis of the semantic features of nouns occurring in Chinese “Lao （old）+N” construction， it is found that the semantic constrain on nouns as inanimate objects. According to Goldberg （1995）， the elements of a construction should follow the semantic coherence principle， therefore the permission of the nouns requires for the encyclopedic knowledge activated by the compound adjectives. In the past， “Lao （old）” only designated aged human. Gradually， it derived from its canonical reference to designate some inanimate objects which has existed for a relative long time or over the time accumulation and is being used by human for a certain period of time. Therefore， the *老盒子 is unacceptable due to its lack of time accumulation and close relationship with human.

Based on the theory of categorization， semantic features of nouns of inanimate objects occurring in “Lao（old）+N” construction could be generalized as existing for relatively long time of a subordination relations with someone. As the prototype of this category， “房子” exhibits the characteristics of long time existence and belonging to someone. The family resemblance is the criteria to identify whether a noun is qualified in this construction. Therefore， some nouns like “盒子”， “玩具” normally do not occur in “Lao （old）+N” construction for the lack of enough family resemblance with the prototype.

Conclusion

Generally speaking， while Taylor’s assumptions on “old+N” construction could be applied to the analysis of “Lao （old）+N” construction， the construction in Chinese could compensate for the deficiency of his study for the lack of limitation on the productivity of the construction.

References

Evans， V. （2019）. Cognitive linguists， A complete guide （p. 324）. Edinburgh： Edinburgh University press.

Goldberg， A. （1995）. Constructions： A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago： University of Chicago Press.

Taylor， J. R. （1992）. Old problems： Adjectives in cognitive grammar. Cognitive Linguistics， 3（1）， 1-36.

Taylor， J. R. （2012）. The mental corpus： How language is represented in the mind （pp. 220-255）. Oxford： Oxford University Press.