Discourse Analysis of Chinese Referring Expressions: An Application of Gundel, Hedberg and Zacharski's Givenness Hierarchy(v. 26 Chinese Studies S.)

In this scholarly work Dr. Shi tested the universality of Gundel et al's Givenness Hierarchy model by applying it to the study of Chinese referring expressions. With analysis of both written and conversational texts in Chinese, Dr. Shi has concluded the model is "inadequate for describing the use of Chinese referring expressions," because it fails to predict or count for "choice of form when two forms meet the sufficient cognitive requirements for use." The conclusions she arrives at make two important points, both significant to the areas of linguistic studies and discourse analysis. Referring expressions have occupied a unique position in the study of language. They have been one of the most fertile grounds for language philosophers; they have been an area of stimulating scholarly exchange in syntax; they have captured an equally high amount of attention from students of pragmatics and discourse analysis. All for a good reason: the understanding of referring expressions offers students of language a key to unlock the mysteries of how language enables its speakers to represent reality and thought (semantics); how it organizes various constituents into sentences (syntax); and how it strings sentences together into texts (discourse). Professor Shi's book, A Study of Referring Expressions in Chinese Discourse, makes a unique contribution to our understanding of referring expressions. She applies Gundel et al.'s Givenness Hierarchy (See Gundel, Hedberg and Zacharski 1993, page 275) to an admirable corpus of data from Mandarin Chinese (with 9629 tokens). She finds that this particular theoretical apparatus seems to work at the most general level but appears inadequate at a more specific level. For instance, when two different referring expressions meet the cognitive requirement of a particular category, Gundel et al.'s framework cannot explain why one is chosen over the other. To account for such a choice, one needs a more fine-tuned approach and Professor Shi does just that, in the bulk of her work. Using discourse salience as a central concept, Professor Shi treats the use of all types of referring expressions as a discourse phenomenon, looking at it always in relation with contextual factors such as speaker intent and discourse topic. The results are both revealing and convincing. For example, while both the yi 'one'-NP form and the bare-NP form are type-identifiable, they actually contrast: the former is used to highlight the referential importance of its referent in terms of topic continuity while the latter is not. With its rich source of data, its careful analysis, and its revealing insights, Professor Shi's Referring Expressions in Chinese is a useful addition to the body of literature in what is undoubtedly a time-honored line of research.