The Non‐uniformity of Wh‐indeterminates with Polarity and Free Choice in Chinese

AbstractWh‐elements in Chinese (as in Japanese and Korean) can have non‐interrogative interpretations, i.e. they are the so‐called ‘wh‐indeterminates’ la Kuroda 1965. While the existential (non‐interrogative) and universal readings of wh‐indeterminates have received a lot of attention the free choice interpretation of wh‐elements, however, has been discussed only recently (Giannakidou and Cheng 2006). On the surface, there are three types of Free Choice Items (FCIs) in Mandarin Chinese, all of which involve a wh‐related element. Though all three types appear to express free choice, they are not equal in terms of distribution and interpretation. The contrasts that we observe do not follow from recent accounts of wh‐indeterminates as Hamblin indefinites that are routinely closed by sentential quantifiers at the top level (Kratzer and Shimoyama 2002; Kratzer 2006), since in these accounts the wh‐phrase merely forms the basis for creation of a Hamblin set of propositions, and polarity behaviour is not predicted. In this chapter, we discuss the non‐uniform distribution of Chinese wh‐indeterminates in their use as FCIs, and propose that the key to understanding the contrasts is intensionality: the three paradigms of wh‐indeterminates as FCIs vary depending on whether or not they contain a world variable that needs to be bound. In addition, we show that Chinese FCIs provide further evidence for Giannakidou and Cheng (2006), who propose that there are both definite and indefinite FCIs. Definite FCIs in Chinese will be shown to have the same composition as the Greek definite FCIs: maximality, core wh, and the intensional world variable.