Sentence-final particles in multiple phases? Some evidence from language contact

Main Article Content

Tsan Tsai Chan


Cinque’s (1999) cartographic theory associates one meaning with one functional head. As such, if applied to sentence-final particles (SFPs), cartographic assumptions ought to group semantically similar SFPs onto the same functional head cross-linguistically (cf. Pan 2019; Sybesma & Li 2007). However, I show that aspectual and restrictive focus SFPs in Cantonese and Mandarin (Sinitic, Sino-Tibetan) seemingly contradict Cinque by occupying different structural positions despite their semantic closeness. To shed light on the problem, I adduce novel data from Guangzhou Cantonese and Singapore Cantonese, demonstrating that SFPs borrowed into these varieties are treated differently according to their structural height. Likewise citing scopal and other facts, I ultimately make a case for placing SFPs in multiple phases (Chomsky 2000 etc.), following Erlewine (2017) and Biberauer (2017), but contra Pan (2019), a.o. To accommodate Cinque (1999), I ultimately submit that different-phase SFPs constitute distinct lexical classes, which each cluster separately, but in the same semantically determined sequence compatible with cartographic assumptions.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Chan, T. T. (2021). Sentence-final particles in multiple phases? Some evidence from language contact. Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting, 7(1), 1-41.


  1. Biberauer, T. & M. Sheehan. 2011. “Introduction: Particles through a modern syn-tactic lens.” The Linguistic Review, 28(4). 387-410.
  2. Biberauer, T. 2017. “The Final-over-Final Condition and Particles.” In: Sheehan, Michelle et al. (eds.) The Final-Over-Final Condition: A Syntactic Universal, pp.76-187. MIT Press.
  3. Bidese, E. et al. 2013. Bilingual competence, complementizer selection and mood in Cimbrian. In Abraham, W. & E. Leiss (eds.) Dialektologie in neuem Gewand. Zu Mikro-/Varietätenlinguistik, Sprachenvergleich und Universalgrammatik, 47–58. Hamburg: Buske.
  4. Cardinaletti, A. 2011. German and Italian modal particles and clause structure. The Linguistic Review, 28(4). 493-511. Mouton de Gruyter.
  5. Chan, T. T. 2020. The Cartography of Sentence-Final Particles in Yue Chinese – Evidence from Comparative Analysis and Language Contact. Master’s thesis, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.
  6. Cheong, P. S. E. 2016. Sentence-final already and only in Singapore English. Hon-ours thesis, National University of Singapore.
  7. Chomsky, N. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Martin, R. et al. (eds.) Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, 89-155. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
  8. Cinque, G. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  9. Erlewine, M. Y. 2010. Sentence-final only and the interpretation of focus in Manda-rin Chinese. In The Proceedings of the 22nd North American Conference of Chi-nese Linguistics (NACCL 22) and the 18th Annual Meeting of the International Association of Chinese Linguistics (IACL 18), 18– 35.
  10. Erlewine, M. Y. 2017. Low sentence-final particles in Mandarin Chinese and the Final-over-Final Constraint. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 26. 37-75.
  11. Fung, R. S. 2000. Final particles in Standard Cantonese: Semantic extension and pragmatic inference. Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University.
  12. Gast, V. & J. van der Auwera. 2012. What is 'contact-induced grammaticalization?' Evidence from Mayan and Mixe-Zoquean languages. In Wiemer, B. et al. (eds.) Grammatical Replication and Borrowability in Language Contact, 381-426. De Gruyter Mouton.
  13. Jackendoff, R. 1972. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge: MIT.
  14. Kayne, R. .1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge: MIT.
  15. Kwok, H. 1984. Sentence Particles in Cantonese. University of Hong Kong.
  16. Lai, Y. Y. 2014. Temporal modification in Cantonese: The semantic study of the sentence-final particle lei4 in simplex and bi-clausal sentences. Doctoral disserta-tion, City University of Hong Kong.
  17. Law, A. 2002. Cantonese sentence-final particles and the CP domain. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 14. 375-98.
  18. Lee, H. T. & C. Yiu. 1998. Final ‘de’ and ‘ge3’: A nominalization analysis for cleft sentences in Mandarin and Cantonese. Paper presented at the LSHK Annual Research Forum, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
  19. Leimgruber, J. R. E. 2013. Singapore English: Structure, Variation, and Usage. Cambridge University Press.
  20. Li, B. 2006. Chinese final particles and the syntax of the periphery. PhD dissertation, Universiteit Leiden.
  21. Li, I. C. 1999. Utterance-Final Particles in Taiwanese: A Discourse-pragmatic Anal-ysis. Taipei: The Crane.
  22. Matthews, S. & V. Yip. 2011. Cantonese: A Comprehensive Grammar. Routledge.
  23. Pan, V. J. 2019. Architecture of the Periphery in Chinese: Cartography and Minimal-ism. London and New York: Routledge.
  24. Pan, V. J. 2019b. Derivation of the Apparent Narrow Scope of Sentence-Final Parti-cles in Chinese: A Reply to Erlewine (2017). Studies in Chinese Linguistics, 39(2). 99-126.
  25. Paul, W. 2014. Why particles are not particular: Sentence-final particles in Chinese as heads of a split CP. Studia Linguistica, 68(1). 77-115.
  26. Radford, A. 2006. Minimalist Syntax Revisited. Retrieved on 21-10-2019 from URL:
  27. Rizzi, L. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Haegeman, L. (ed.) Ele-ments of Grammar, 281-337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  28. Rooth, M. 1985. Association with focus. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massa-chusetts, Amherst.
  29. Sybesma, R. & Li, B. 2007. The dissection and structural mapping of Cantonese sentence final particles. Lingua, 117. 1739-89.
  30. Tang, S. 1998. Parametrization of Features in Syntax. Doctoral dissertation, Univer-sity of California, Irvine.
  31. Tang, S. 2015. Yueyu yufa jiangyi (Lectures on Cantonese Grammar). Hong Kong: The Commercial Press.
  32. Wong, J. O. 2014. The culture of Singapore English. Cambridge University Press.
  33. Yiu, C. Y. 2001. Cantonese final particles ‘‘lei’’, ‘‘zyu’’ and ‘‘laa’’: an aspectual study. M.Phil. thesis, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.
  34. Åfarli, T.A. 2015. “A syntactic model for the analysis of language mixing phenome-na: American Norwegian and beyond”. In Page, B. R. & M. T. Putnam (eds.), Moribund Germanic heritage languages in North America, pp. 12–33. Leiden: Brill.