Focus and Old Chinese Word Order1

Edith Aldridge, University of Washington

1. Introduction

This paper has two main goals. The primary goal is to addresses the controversy over whether
pre-Old Chinese had VO or OV basic word order. I show in this paper that purported vestiges of
OV order in the attested records cannot be used as evidence for base-generated OV word order
and must instead be analyzed as derived through movement. Secondarily, I propose that the three
types of object fronting I examine here were motivated by focus.
Though the oldest surviving Chinese texts show the language to have predominately SVO
word order, there are some contexts in which the object can appear in preverbal position. One
such case was when the object was a wh-phrase. Non-interrogative objects generally remained in
their post-verbal base positions, as can be seen in the second clause in (1b). These examples are
taken from Warring States Period (5th-3rd centuries BCE) texts. Most of the data cited in this
paper date from this period.

(1) a. 天下 之 父 歸 之，
Tianxia zhi fu gui zhi
world Gen father settle here
其 子 焉 往？ (Mencius 7)
qi zi yan [VP wang tyan ]?
3.Gen son where go
‘If the fathers of the world settled here, where would their sons go?’
b. 吾 誰 欺? 欺 天 乎？
Wu shei [VP qi tshei ]? Qi tian hu?
I who deceive deceive Heaven Q
‘Who do I deceive? Do I deceive Heaven?’ (Analects 9)

Another context in which OV order can be observed is the fronting of pronominal objects in the
context of negation. (2a) shows that pronominal objects remain in their base positions when
negation is not present. (2b) shows fronting of the object to a position following the negative
quantifier mo.

(2) a. 夫 人 幼 而 學 之， 壯 而 欲 行 之。
Fu ren you er xue zhi, zhuang er yu xing zhi.
Dem person young Conj study 3.Obj mature Conj want do 3.Obj
‘When a person is young, he studies this. When he matures, he wants to put it to
practice.’ (Mencius 2)

1
This paper was presented at the 18th meeting of the International Association of Chinese Linguistics (IACL), in
conjunction with the 22nd meeting of the North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL), at Harvard
University on May 20, 2010. I thank fellow conference participants for comments on the presentation, especially FU
Jingqu, Barabara Meisterernst, Waltraud Paul, Ken Takashima, XU Dan, and XU Zheng.

1
 b. 吾 先 君 亦 莫 之 行 也。 (Mencius 5)
Wu xian jun yi mo zhi xing ye.
1 former lord also none 3.Obj do Decl
‘None of our former lords did this either.’

Cases like (1) and (2) have prompted Wang (1958), Feng (1996), Xu (2006), and many others to
suggest that the unmarked position for pronominal objects in Old or pre-Old Chinese may have
been preverbal, while full NP objects remained post-verbal. However, other than pronoun
fronting to negation, there is no evidence of general object cliticization to the verb in Old
Chinese. Furthermore, object fronting was not limited to pronouns. (3) shows full NPs occurring
in post-verbal (3a) and pre-verbal (3b) position. This alternation is relatively rare in the case of
full NPs, but can be observed with somewhat greater frequency in the case of the light verb YI2
than with other verbs.

(3) a. 所 謂 大 臣 者， 以 道 事 君。 (Analects 11)

Suo wei da chen zhe, yi dao shi jun.
Rel call great minister Det use Way serve lord
‘One who is referred to as a great minister serves his lord according to the Way.’
b. 弓 以 招 士， 皮 冠 以 招 虞人。
gong yi zhao shi, pi guan yi zhao yuren.
bow use call gentleman leather cap use call gamekeeper
‘(He) summoned a gentleman in his employ by use of a bow, and the gamekeeper by use
of a leather cap.’ (Zuozhuan, Zhao 20)

Returning to the debate regarding basic word order in Old Chinese, Li & Thompson (1974),
Wang (1958), La Polla (1994), Feng (1996), Xu (2006), and others view pre-verbal objects in
(1)-(3) as vestiges of basic OV order in pre-Old Chinese, while Djamouri (2005), Peyraube
(1986), Shen (1992), Djamouri & Paul (2009), and others argue that VO has been the basic order
throughout the attested history of Chinese and that there is no attested evidence for earlier OV
basic order. In this paper, I contribute evidence for the VO analysis by showing that OV orders
must be analyzed as derived.

2. OV as Derived, not Base-generated

In this section, I examine each of the cases of object fronting introduced in the previous section
and show that none of them should be analyzed as base-generated OV order. Specifically, I show
that the pre-verbal object appears in a position which could not be analyzed as the verb’s
complement. I also point out that wh-fronting and NP-fronting to the left of YI are instances of
focus movement. Pronoun fronting to negation cannot be analyzed as focus movement in the
Warring States Period. However, in section 3, I will suggest that this movement may have
historically originated in a type of focus fronting.

2
In this paper, I tentatively treat YI as a light verb located on the clausal spine. Detailed analysis of the position and
function of YI is the object of future research. See Zou (1993), Sybesma (1999), Whitman (2000), Whitman & Paul
(2005), and others for similar analyses of modern Mandarin BA, whose functions overlap in significant ways with
Old Chinese YI.

2
2.1. Wh-Movement

In this subsection, I examine the case of wh-fronting. First, note that the landing site for wh-
movement was not immediate pre-verbal position. (4) shows that wh-phrases had to precede
negation. Since the wh-phrase is not adjacent to verb which selects it, this position cannot be
analyzed as the base position for the object.

(4) a. 何 城 不 克? (Zuozhuan, Xi 4)
He cheng bu ke?
what city Neg conquer
‘What city would (you) not conquer?’
b. 然則 我 何 為 乎 何 不 為 乎?
Ranze wo he wei hu? He bu wei hu?
then I what do Q what Neg do Q
‘Then what should I do? What should I not do?’ (Zhuangzi 2.10)

Similar evidence comes from long distance wh-fronting. The wh-phrase appears in a position to
the left of the matrix verb and is separated from the verb which selects it, i.e. the embedded verb.
Hence, these wh-phrases also cannot be analyzed as base-generated in their surface positions.

(5) a. 公 誰 欲 與? (Zhuangzi 3.2)

Gong shei yu [yu e ]?
you who want give
‘Who do you want to give (it) to?’
b. 吾 誰 敢 怨? (Zuozhuan, Zhao 27)
Wu shei gan [yuan e ]?
I who dare resent
‘Who do I dare to resent?’

The next set of examples shows wh-fronting from subject position in an embedded clause.
Aldridge (2009) argues that the causative verb shi is an ECM verb and not an object control verb.
Therefore, the NP following shi is not selected by shi but is rather the subject in the embedded
clausal complement. If we accept this analysis, then a wh-phrase preceding shi also cannot be
analyzed as a base-generated pre-verbal object of shi, since this NP is not selected by shi in the
first place.

(6) a. 若 子 死， 將 誰 使 代 子？
Ruo zi si, jiang shei shi [ e dai zi]?
if you die Mod who make replace you
‘If you die, who shall I have replace you?’ (Hanfeizi 22)
b. 吾 誰 使 正 之？ (Zhuangzi 2)
Wu shei shi [ e zheng zhi]?
I who make correct 3.Obj
‘Who shall I have correct it?’

3
Aldridge (2010) analyzes wh-movement in Old Chinese as short fronting to a clause-medial
focus position. Specifically, she proposes that Old Chinese had positions in the edge of vP for
topic and focus, following similar proposals for Italian by Belletti (2004) and for modern
Chinese by Paul (2005).

(7) CP

OP C’

C TP

DPSubj T’

T vP

XP[Foc, Wh] v’

tSubj v’

v[Foc*] VP

… tXP …

Aldridge (2010) additionally argues that wh-fronting was not cliticization, contra Feng (1996).
Feng (1996) proposes that pronoun fronting to negation and wh-movement were both instances
of cliticization. Pronoun fronting in negative contexts is fairly straightforward. The pronoun
raises out of VP and right-adjoins to the negator.

(8) a. 不 患 人 之 不 己 知。
Bu huan ren zhi bu ji zhi ___.
not worry others Gen not self understand
‘Do not worry that others do not understand you.’ (Analects 1)

b. NegP (Feng 1996:343)

Neg VP

Neg Cli V ti

For wh-movement, Feng claims that the wh-word first moves to the edge of VP, where it receives
focus interpretation. Subsequently, the wh-word is left-adjoined to the verb.

4
(9) a. S (modified from Feng 1996:346)

NP VP

FocusP V’
|
NPwh V NP
|
twh

b. S

NP VP

FocusP V’
|
twh V NP
|
NPwh V twh

Aldridge (2010) offers the following arguments that wh-fronting cannot be cliticization. First,
Feng claims that wh-words must be immediately adjacent to the verb. But we have seen that this
is not the case. (4) shows that wh-fronting targets a position above negation. Secondly, we have
seen that wh-fronting is not limited to posodically light elements. (4a) shows movement of a
phrasal wh-constituent. Furthermore, (10) shows that a prosodically heavy mono-syllabic wh-
word like yan ‘where’ also underwent fronting.

(10) 天下 之 父 歸 之，
Tianxia zhi fu gui zhi
world Gen father settle here
其 子 焉 往？ (Mencius 7)
qi zi yan [VP wang tyan ]?
3.Gen son where go
‘If the fathers of the world settled here, where would their sons go?’

The non-interrogative counterpart yan ‘there’ did not front in the context of negation. The
interrogative ‘where’ and non-interrogative ‘there’, both pronounced yan in modern Mandarin,
are reconstructed in Old Chinese as a heavy syllable with a coda consonant (Wang 1958)3.

3
Thanks to Zev Handel for first pointing out to me that the reconstruction of the two pronouns should be similar, if
not the same.

5
(11) a. 出 妻 屏 子， 終身 不 養 焉。
Chu qi bing zi, zhongxhen bu yang yan.
dispatch wife discard child lifelong not care.for 3.Dat
‘(He) sent his wife away and abandoned his children and did not care for them for the
rest of his life.’ (Mencius 8)
b. 晉 國 天下 莫 強 焉。 (Mencius 1)
Jin Guo Tianxia mo qiang yan.
Jin nation world none strong 3.Dat
‘The Jin nation, in the world, noone is stronger than them.’

Since Feng analyzes both wh-movement and pronoun fronting to negation as cliticization, we
expect parallel behavior in both cases. This makes the asymmetry between (10) and (11)
surprising. Likewise, the asymmetry seen in (12) and (13) is also unexpected. In addition to
objects in verbal projections, objects of prepositions also underwent wh-fronting.

(12) a. 王 誰 與 為 善？ (Mencius 6)
Wang [shei [yu e ]] wei shan?
king who with be good
‘With whom will the king be good?’
b. 如 伋 去， 君 誰 與 守？ (Mencius 8)
Ru Ji qu, jun [shei [yu e ]] shou?
if Ji leave you who with serve
‘If I (Ji) left, with whom would you serve?’

The situation is different with negation, however. As I will discuss in section 3.1, pronoun
fronting could be observed in the context shown in (12) prior to the Warring States Period.
However, from the 4th century BCE, negation was no longer able to attract a pronoun from inside
a PP.

(13) a. 齊 人 莫 如 我 敬 王。 (Mencius 4)
Qi ren mo [ru wo] jing wang.
Qi person none like me respect king
‘Of the people of Qi, none respect the king as I do.’
b. 不 與 之 爭 能。 (Xunzi 12)
Bu [yu zhi] zheng neng.
not with 3.Obj dispute ability
‘(He) does not dispute ability with them.’

In the above discussion, I have established the following two points. Wh-fronting could not have
been base-generation of the object in pre-verbal position, since the position for pre-verbal wh-
phrases is not the complement of the verb selecting this constituent. Wh-fronting was also not
cliticization, since wh-fronting was not limited to prosodically weak elements and was not
associated with a host such as the verb. I therefore conclude that preverbal wh-phrases achieved
their position via syntactic focus movement.

6
2.2. Pronoun Fronting to Negation

Pronoun fronting to negation is an extremely complex phenomenon. By the 4th century BCE, this
fronting was undoubtedly a process of cliticization which right-adjoined the pronoun to the
negator triggering the movement. I thus accept the basic import of Feng’s (1996) analysis for
pronoun fronting to negation during the Warring States Period. However, as I will discuss briefly
in section 3.1, pronoun fronting may have its origin in a type of syntactic movement. Therefore,
what we see in the Warring States Period is the result of a reanalysis. Another complicating
factor is that, even from the 4th century BCE, pronoun fronting was subject to different
constraints, depending on the negator which triggered the movement. In this subsection, I will
simply offer some evidence that pronoun fronting cannot be analyzed as base-generation of the
object in pre-verbal position. I concentrate here on the negative quantifier mo ‘none’ and the
aspectual negator wei ‘not yet’, which were more conservative than the clausal negator bu ‘not’,
and retained the ability to attract a pronoun across a clause boundary throughout the Warring
States Period.
The key evidence against base generation which I offer here is the possibility of long
distance movement, which can be found in the case of both mo ‘none’ and wei ‘not yet’
throughout the Warring States Period.

(14) a. 虎 負 嵎， 莫 之 敢 攖。 (Mencius 14)

Hu fu yu, mo zhi gan [ying ___].
tiger back crevice none 3.Obj dare approach
‘The tiger backed into a crevice and no one dared to approach it.’
b.. 日 夜 思 之， 猶 未 之 能 得。
Ri ye si zhi, you wei zhi neng [de ___ ].
day night think 3.Obj still not.yet 3.Obj can obtain
‘(They) think about this day and night and still are not able to obtain it.’
(Lüshi Chunqiu 12.3)

Prior to the 4th century BCE, long distance fronting can also be found with bu ‘not’. However, as
I discuss in section 3.1, fronting to bu ‘not’ became extremely local after the 4th century BCE.

(15) a. 余 不 女 忍 殺。 (Zuozhuan, Zhao 1)

Yu bu ru ren [sha ___].
I BU you endure kill
‘I cannot bear to kill you.’
b. 楚 君 之 惠， 未 之 敢 忘。
Chu jun zhi hui, wei zhi gan [wang ___ ].
Chu lord Gen generosity not.yet 3.Obj dare forget
‘(He) has not dared to forget the generosity of the lord of Chu.’
(Zuozhuan Xi 28)

Because the pronoun could front to a position in the higher clause, the pre-verbal pronoun cannot
be analyzed as base-generated in this position. Pronoun fronting in this period is
uncontroversially not associated with focus. However, in section 3.1, I will present evidence that
in Pre-Old Chinese pronoun fronting may have originated in a focus movement construction.

7
2.3. V NP/NP V

The final case of pre-verbal objects which I examine in this paper is the fronting of full NPs to
the left of the light verb YI. Basic examples are repeated below. (16a) shows the NP following
YI. (16b) shows NPs preceding YI. Let me point out in passing here that (16b) shows parallel
clauses. Nearly all cases of NP fronting to the left of YI are cases of this type, which I suggest
below is related to focus.

(16) a. 所 謂 大 臣 者， 以 道 事 君。 (Analects 11)

Suo wei da chen zhe, yi dao shi jun.
Rel call great minister Det use Way serve lord
‘One who is referred to as a great minister serves his lord according to the Way.’
b. 弓 以 招 士， 皮 冠 以 招 虞人。
gong yi zhao shi, pi guan yi zhao yuren.
bow use call gentleman leather cap use call gamekeeper
‘(He) summoned a gentleman in his employ by use of a bow, and the gamekeeper by
use of a leather cap.’ (Zuozhuan, Zhao 20)

The table in (17) summarizes the occurrences of YI with post- and pre-verbal NPs in the first few
chapters of the 5th century BCE text Zuozhuan. Post-verbal NPs make up the overwhelming
majority.

(17) YI NP: 278 (73%) NP YI: 104 (27%)

Zuozhuan YI NP VP V (NP) YI NP NP YI VP SHI YI VP WH YI VP

Yin: 22 6 5 6 2
Huan: 30 8 7 7 0
Zhuang-Min: 38 13 3 4 1
Xi: 83 22 12 9 19
Wen: 45 11 7 14 8
Total: 218 (57%) 60 (16%) 34 (9%) 40 (10%) 30 (8%)

Of the pre-verbal NPs, a significant number of them are wh-words. Given that the language had
wh-movement, these examples pose no problem for the current proposal that pre-verbal objects
achieved their position through movement.

(18) a. 失 忠 與 敬， 何 以 事 君？ (Zuozhuan, Xi 5)
Shi zhong yu jing, he yi shi jun?
lose loyalty and respect what YI serve lord
‘Having lost loyalty and respect, what does one serve his lord with?’
b. 吾 何 以 堪 之？ (Zuozhuan, Xi 30)
Wu he yi kan zhi?
1 what YI rate 3.Obj
‘How do I rate such treatment?’

8
The largest number of fronting cases involves the demonstrative pronoun shi. Shi is fronted in all
but one of the examples I have found in the Zuozhuan involving shi and YI.

(19) a. 夫 名 以 制 義， 義 以 出 禮，
Fu ming yi zhi yi, yi yi chu li,
Dem name YI set right right YI emerge rites
禮 以 體 政， 政 以 正 民。
li yi ti zheng, zheng yi zheng min,
rites YI embody government government YI correct people
是 以 政 成 而 民 聽。
shi yi zheng cheng er min ting.
SHI YI government mature Conj people obey
‘With a name, (a ruler) determines the codes of righteousness; from righteousness the
rites of proper conduct emerge; the rites determine the form of good government;
with good government, the people are led into correct conduct. It is in this way that
the government matures and the people become obedient.’ (Zuozhuan, Huan 2)
b. 既 無 德 政， 又 無 威 刑，
Conj wu de zheng, you wu wei xing,
since not.have virtuous govt. Conj not.have imposing penalty
是 以 及 邪。
shi yi ji xie.
SHI YI reach evil
‘Lacking in both virtuous government and an imposing penal code, this is what leads
to evil.’
c. 君子 是 以 知 桓 王 之 失 鄭 也。
Junzi shi yi zhi Huan Wang zhi shi Zheng ye.
gentleman SHI YI know Huan king Gen lose Zheng Decl
‘It was in this way that the learned men of the realm learned that King Huan had lost
Zheng.’ (Zuozhuan, Yin 11))

Recall that Wang (1958), Feng (1996), Xu (2006), and others have noted that pre-verbal objects
in Old Chinese tend to be pronominal. If there truly is a correlation to be grasped here, it may be
related to the semantic nature of pronouns themselves. As anaphoric elements, they take
antecedents in the preceding discourse. Note that this is true for all of the cases involving fronted
shi in (19). In (19b), for example, shi refers to the lack of good government and a strong penal
code introduced in the immediately preceding context. Note also that shi is focused. The point
made in this sentence is that precisely these factors are what account for the resulting evil.
The case of full NP fronting is likewise related to information structure. In (20a), for example,
the fronted NPs in the second line have been introduced in the first line. Note further the
parallelism, specifically that multiple NPs are fronted and contrasted with each other. Hence, we
have examples of contrastive topics.

(20) a. 君子 謂 鄭 莊 公 失 政 刑 矣。
Junzi wei Zheng Zhuang gong shi zheng xing yi.
gentleman say Zheng Zhuang lord lose govt. penalty Asp

9
 政 以 治 民， 刑 以 正 邪。
Zheng yi zhi min, xing yi zheng xie.
govt. YI govern people penalty YI correct evil
‘Learned men say that Lord Zhuang of Zheng has misplaced the concept of good
government and a penal code. Government is used to govern the people; a penal code
is used to correct evil.’ (Zuozhuan, Yin 11)
b. 楚 國 方城 以 為 城，
Chu guo Fangcheng yi wei cheng,
Chu state Fangcheng YI be wall
漢 水 以 為 池。 (Zuozhuan, Xi 4)
Han Shui yi wei chi.
Han river YI be moat
‘The Chu will use Mt. Fangcheng as their castle wall and the River Han as their
moat.’

Let me turn briefly to the one example I have found in the Zuozhuang in which shi follows YI.
Significantly, YI and shi appear in an embedded clause, specifically a conditional clause. If we
assume that focalization and topicalization are root clause phenomena, then (21) gives indirect
support to the proposal that object fronting involves information structure related movement. In
other words, this movement would not be expected in embedded contexts.

(21) 以 是 始 賞， 天 啟 之 矣。 (Zuozhuan, Min 1)

[Yi shi shi shang] tian qi zhi yi.
YI SHI begin award Heaven aid 3.Obj Asp
‘If this is how the award begins, then Heaven has aided him.’

From the discussion in this section, we can conclude that pre-verbal objects were not base-
generated in their surface positions. Wh-movement and NP-fronting also show that movement
was associated with either a syntactic or information structure-related trigger, specifically some
type of focus. In the next section, I speculate that pronoun fronting to negation may also have
originated as a type of focus movement.

3. Reanalysis of Syntactic Movement as Cliticization

This section discusses historical changes in pronoun fronting to negation and wh-movement. I
suggest that both were reanalyzed from syntactic movement to cliticization.

3.1. Pronoun-fronting to Negation

It is uncontroversial that pronoun fronting to negation in the Warring States Period was not
directly related to information structure and is probably best analyzed as a type of cliticization.
However, there is reason to believe that this cliticization was formerly syntactic movement for
focus. Djamouri (2000) argues that examples like those in (22) from Shang bone inscriptions
(14th – 11th C. BCE) involve a type of cleft construction in which the focused constituent – fu yi
‘father Yi’ in both cases – is preceded by a copular. In negative contexts, the copula is the clausal
negator bu ‘not’.

10
(22) a. 唯 父 乙 咎 婦 好 (Heji 6032 recto)
Wei fu yi jiu fu hao.
only father Yi overwhelm Lady Hao
‘It is (the ancestral) father Yi who overwhelms Lady Hao.’
b. 不 父 乙 咎 婦 好 (Heji 6032 recto)
Bu fu yi jiu fu hao.
not father Yi overwhelm Lady Hao
‘It is not (the ancestral) father Yi who overwhelms Lady Hao.’

Djamouri hypothesizes that fronting to negation possibly originates in a cleft construction of this
type. He notes that there is evidence even in the Warring States Period for residual focus effects.
Fronting did not take place, for example, when a wh-word appeared in the same clause, as shown
in (23a). On the assumption that one clause typically has only one focused constituent, the lack
of pronoun fronting is accounted for, since fronting would introduce a second focus in the clause.
Fronting was also much less common in embedded clauses, particularly those which were
topicalized, as in (23b). The lack of pronoun fronting here can be explained since the focus
interpretation induced by fronting might introduce an incompatibility with the presuppositional
nature of the clause.

(23) a. 夫子 何 不 譚 我 于 王？ (Zhuangzi, Zeyang)

Fuzi he bu tan wo yu wang?
you why NEG praise me to king
‘Why don’t you speak in my favor to the king?’
b. 無為謂 不 應 我， 非 不 我 應，
[Wuweiwei bu ying wo], fei bu wo ying,
Not:acting:discourse NEG reply me be:not NEG me reply
不 知 應 我 也。 (Zhuangzi, Zhibeiyou)
bu zhi ying wo ye.
not know reply me DECL
‘(The fact that) Not-acting-discourse did not reply to me is not because he (does not
want to) reply to me, but because he does not know how to reply to me.’

In addition to Djamouri’s (2000) information structure evidence, I offer a syntactic argument.

We saw in section 2.1 that pronoun fronting from a PP had been lost by the 4th century BCE.
However, in the 5th century BCE, this fronting was possible. What I suggest here is that this
movement was feature-driven focus fronting. The pronoun is focused. However, since it is
contained within the PP adjunct, it cannot move out of this constituent without violating the
Condition on Extraction Domain (CED). Therefore, the entire PP appears in pre-verbal focus
position and the pronoun fronts to the edge (specifier) of the PP.

(24) 八 世 之 後 莫 之 與 京。
Ba shi zhi hou, mo [PP zhi [P’ yu tprn]] jing.
8 generation Gen after none 3.Obj than great
‘Eight generations from now, there will be noone greater than him.’
(Zuozhuan, Zhuang 22)

11
There is a precedent for this analysis in Aissen’s (1996) proposal of wh-pied-piping in Tzotzil.
(25a) shows that PPs are head-initial in Tzotzil. However, when a PP contains a wh-word, the
wh-word must precede the preposition. Aissen analyzes this as movement of the wh-word to the
specifier of the PP, followed by pied-piping of the entire PP to [Spec, CP].

(25) a. I-kom [PP ta s-na]. (Tzotzil; Aissen 1996:468)

CP-remain P A3-house
‘He remained in his house.’
b. [CP [PP Buch’u [P’ ta [DP s-na twh ]]] [C’ C[+WH] [IP ch-a-bat tPP ]]]?
who P A3-house ICP-B2-go
‘To whose house did you go?’ (Tzotzil; Aissen 1996:470-1)

The same analysis applies in the case of wh-fronting within a PP in Old Chinese, which I
mentioned briefly in section 2.1.

(26) 吾 又 誰 與 爭？
Wu you [PP shei [P’ yu tshei ]] zheng]?
I then who with compete
‘Then who would we compete with?’ (Zuozhuan, Zhao 4)

The proposal that fronting in PPs is syntactic focus movement allows us to account for the loss
of this movement in a straightforward way. Since the PP must appear in pre-verbal focus position,
we can assume that a [Foc] feature appears on the P head itself. Fronting of the pronoun to [Spec,
PP] can also be assumed to be driven by this [Foc] feature on P. When the association with focus
is lost, i.e. the [Foc] feature on P is lost, fronting of the object of a preposition is also lost. This is
due to the fact that the sole trigger for movement is now the negator, which cannot probe inside
of the adjunct PP (which is an island) to attract the pronoun.
Interestingly, long distance fronting across a clause boundary remains possible for mo ‘none’
and wei ‘not yet’ until the end of the Warring States Period, as mentioned in section 2.2. This is
possible, because the pronoun originates as the complement of the embedded verb and can
therefore serve as the goal for a probe on c-commanding negation without invoking island
constraints.
For reasons which are still mysterious, however, fronting to the clausal negator 不 bu ‘not’
became very local from the 4th century BCE. Fronting to bu ‘not’ from this time was only
possible when the pronoun was base-generated as the sole complement of a verb with clause-
mate negation.

(27) 我 饑 而 不 我 食。 (Lü Shi Chunqiu 12.5)

Wo ji er bu wo si ___ .
1 starve Conj BU 1 feed
‘When I was starving, (they) did not feed me.’

Not only was fronting disallowed from PPs, but also from embedded clauses, regardless of
whether the pronoun is base merged as the embedded object or the subject.

12
(28) a. 為 人 臣 者， 不 敢 去 之。 (Zhuangzi 20)
Wei ren chen zhe bu gan [qu zhi].
be person minister Det BU dare leave 3.Obj
‘One who serves as someone’s minister does not dare to leave him.’
b. 而 子 不 欲 我 見 伊尹。 (Mozi 47)
Er zi bu yu [wo jian Yiyin].
Conj you BU want 1 see Yiyin
‘But you don’t want me to see Yiyin.’

Fronting was also lost from the specifier of VP or a small clause.

(29) a. 今 女 不 求 之 於 本，
Jin ru bu [qiu zhi yu ben],
now you BU seek 3.Obj in root
而 索 之 於 末。 (Xunzi 15)
er suo zhi yu mo.
Conj seek 3.Obj in branch
‘Now, you do not seek it in the root, but rather look for it in the branches.’
b. 不 謂 之 道諛 之 人 也。 (Zhuangzi 2.5)
Bu wei [zhi daoyu zhi ren] ye.
BU call 3.Obj flatter Gen person Decl
‘(One) does not call him a flatterer.’

Interestingly, fronting from the specifier of VP was possible in the 5th century BCE. Recall from
section 2.2 that long distance fronting to bu ‘not’ across a clause boundary was also possible
prior to the 5th century BCE.

(30) 無 適 小 國 將 不 女 容 焉。
Wu shi xiao gou, jiang bu ru [rong ___ yan].
not go small country will BU you accept there
‘Do not go to a small country, because (they) will not accept you there.’
(Zuozhuan, Xi 7)

The reason for the greater locality restriction on fronting to bu ‘not’ is not presently known.
What is clear, however, is that movement was lost in certain structural contexts. In particular,
movement within PPs was lost for all negators during the Warring States Period. We can account
for the loss of movement as the loss of association with focus. C-commanding negation was then
reanalyzed as the trigger for movement – and hence the host for cliticization. However, the
Agree relation licensing clitic movement was blocked by a PP island barrier.

3.2. Wh-movement

In this subsection, I argue that wh-movement was also reanalyzed as a type of cliticization. The
reanalysis took place later than the reanalysis of pronoun fronting, not beginning until the Han
period (2nd century BCE).

13
 Wh-fronting was retained for monosyllabic wh-words but not for phrasal wh-constituents,
suggesting a prosodic basis for the fronting.

(31) a. 子 將 何 欲？ (Shiji 86)

Zi jiang he [VP yu the ]?
You Mod what want
“What do you want?”
b. 此 固 其 理 也， 有 何 怨 乎？ (Shiji 81)
Ci gu qi li ye, [VP you he yuan ] hu?
this Adv Dem way Decl have what complaint Q
“This is the way things are; what complaint could you have?”

Unsurprisingly, wh-fronting was lost in PPs.

(32) 陛下 與 誰 取 天下 乎？ (Shiji 55)

Bixia [yu shei] qu tianxia hu?
sire with who conquer world Q
‘Sire, with whom will you conquer the world?’

Long distance fronting was also lost. What is observed instead is movement within the
embedded clause. This movement suggests that wh-cliticization takes the verb as its host. If
Feng’s (1996) analysis of wh-movement in the Warring States Period were correct, this is what
we would expect to see in that period. Rather, this pattern does not emerge until centuries later.

(33) a. 諸 君 欲 誰 立？ (Shiji 43)

Zhu jun yu [shei li ___]?
all gentleman want who stand
‘Gentlemen, who do you want to place (on the throne)?’
b. 吾 敢 誰 怨 乎？ (Shiji 31)
Wu gan [shei yuan ___] hu?
I dare who resent Q
‘Who do I dare to resent?’

In this section, I have provided evidence that pronoun fronting to negation may have been
syntactic focus movement in pre-Old Chinese. This movement was later reanalyzed as
cliticization after the loss of the [Foc] feature driving the syntactic movement. Indirect support
for the reanalysis of syntactic movement to cliticization is offered by the case of wh-fronting,
which clearly shows a change from relatively unbounded syntactic movement in the Warring
States Period to very local movement in the Han Period. We can account for this change by
proposing that syntactic movement was reanalyzed as cliticization.

4. Conclusion

The main purpose of this paper has been to show that OV word order in Old Chinese does not
reflect base-generated OV word order but must rather be analyzed as transformationally derived.

14
Secondarily, I have argued that all three types of movement examined here were (historically) a
type of focus movement.

References
Aldridge, Edith. 2009. ECM Analysis of Archaic Chinese 使 Shi. Paper presented at the 6th
meeting of the European Association of Chinese Linguistics (EACL), Adam Mickiewicz
University, Poznan, Poland.
Aldridge, Edith. 2010. Clause-internal Wh-movement in Archaic Chinese. Journal of East Asian
Linguistics 19.1:1-36.
Aissen, Judith. 1996. Pied-piping, Abstract Agreement, and Functional Projections in Tzotzil.
Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14.3:447-491.
Belletti, Adriana. 2004. Aspects of the Low IP Area. In The Structure of CP and IP, ed. by L.
Rizzi, 16-51. Oxford University Press.
Boodberg, Peter. 1934. Notes on Chinese Morphology and Syntax. Reprinted in A. Cohen, ed.
(1979), Selected Works of Peter A. Boodberg, 430-435. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press.
Djamouri, Redouane. 2000. Preverbal Position of the Pronominal Object in Archaic Chinese.
Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Chinese Linguistics, The National
University of Singapore.
Djamouri, Redouane. 2005. Typological Change and Word Order Patterns in Shang Inscriptions.
Paper presented at the International Association of Chinese Linguistics (IACL) 13, Leiden.
Djamouri, Redouane & Waltraud Paul. 2009. Verb-to-preposition reanalysis in Chinese. In
Historical Syntax and Linguistic Theory, P. Crisma & G. Longoardi (eds), 194-211. Oxford
University Press.
Djamouri, Redouane, Waltraud Paul and John Whitman. 2007. Reconstructing VO Constituent
Order for Proto-Sino-Tibetan. Paper presented at the 18th International Conference on
Historical Linguistics.
Feng, Shengli. 1996. Prosodically constrained syntactic changes in early archaic Chinese.
Journal of East Asian Linguistics 5.323-371.
La Polla, R. 2004. On the change to verb-medial order in Proto-Chinese: Evidence from Tibeto-
Burman. In Current Issues in Sino-Tibetan Linguistics, H. Kitamura, T. Nishida & Y.
Nagano (eds), 98-104. Osaka: Organizing Committee of the 26th International Conferences
on Sino-Tibetan Linguistics.
Li, Charles and Sandra Thompson. 1974. An Explanation of Word Order Change SVO => SOV.
Foundations of Language 12: 201-214.
Paul, Waltraud. 2005. Low IP and Left Periphery in Mandarin Chinese. Recherches
Linguistiques de Vincennes vol. 33:111-134.
Peyraube, Alain. 1996. Recent Issues in Chinese Historical Syntax. In New Horizons in Chinese
Linguistics, C.-T. Huang & Y.-H. Li (eds), 161-213. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Shen, Pei. 1992. Jiagu Buci Yuxi Yanjiu [Research on the Word Order in Oracle Bone
Inscriptions]. Taipei: Wenjin.
Sybesma, Rint. 1999. The Mandarin VP. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Wang, Li. 1958. Hanyu Shigao. Reprinted 2004. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju.
Whitman, John. 2000. Relabelling. In S. Pintzuk, G. Tsoulas, A. Warner (eds.), Diachronic
Syntax: Models and Mechanisms, 220-238. Oxford University Press.

15
Whitman, John and Waltraud Paul. 2005. Reanalysis and Conservancy of Structure in Chinese.
In M. Batllori, M. Hernanz, C. Picallo & F. Roca (eds), Grammaticalization and Parametric
Variation, 82-94. Oxford University Press.
Xu, Dan. 2006. Typological Change in Chinese Syntax. Oxford University Press.
Zou, Ke. 1993. The Syntax of the Chinese BA Construction. Linguistics 31: 715-736.

16