Complex Deadjectival Verbs Based on Open Scale Adjectives in Mandarin Chinese: A Comparison Between Jiā 加 +Adj. and Nòng 弄+Adj. Verbs

This paper focuses on Mandarin Chinese complex deadjectival verbs formed with 弄nòng ‘make’ or 加jiā ‘increase’ as V1. Both 弄nòng and 加 jiā ‘have been analyzed as causative light verbs (see Basciano 2013, 2019). In particular, 弄 nòng ‘make’ is a causative light verb combining with different change of state verbs, including adjectives, while 加 jiā is the spell-out both of the causative component and of the increasing event in the logical representation of the complex verb, which is a degree achievement. Basciano (2019) observes that 弄 nòng ‘make’ may seemingly combine quite freely with adjectives, while 加 jiā only combines with open scale adjectives. In cases like the one in (1), 弄 nòng and 加 jiā combine with the same adjective, apparently with the same meaning. Following Rothstein (2008), Basciano speculates that 加 jiā specifies the direction of change, meaning ‘cause an increase in a certain property’, without specifying a value, while verbs formed with 弄 nòng specify a value in the property range, without specifying the direction, meaning ‘cause to have the value X in the property range’: 加热 jiā-rè ‘increase-hot, heat, warm up’ (‘cause an increase in temperature’) vs. 弄热 nòng-rè ‘make hot’ (‘cause to have a temperature value in the (contextually determined) hot range’). This paper aims at answering the following research questions: 1) are 弄 nòng and 加 jiā interchangeable in this kind of verbs? May 弄 nòng be freely attached to open scale adjectives? 2) Are 弄 nòng and 加 jiā used for different telic senses of degree achievements? In order to answer these questions, I will explore this issue through a corpus investigation based on the BCC corpus of Modern Chinese (Beijing Language and Culture University, 15 billion characters). Through this investigation I will show that: 1) aspectually, 弄 nòng and 加 jiā display different properties: differently from 加 jiā, 弄 nòng cannot be found with the durative aspect marker, with ‘for X time’ expressions, and with resultative 到 dào ‘up to’. 2) 弄 nòng is allowed only with open scale adjectives which have both the comparative endstate and a standard endstate and not with those which only have a comparative endstate. Based on Kearns’ (2007) account of degree achievements, I argue that when 弄 nòng and 加 jiā attach to the same (open scale) adjective, 弄 nòng always marks the telic (accomplishment) sense, i.e. ‘cause to become X’ (the interpretation of the implicature is given by the standard value of the property). In contrast, complex verbs formed with 加 jiā are basically atelic, but also have the telic achievement sense ‘cause to become X-er’ (comparative endstate).