MANDARIN CLAUSE LINKAGE^223This use of nòng with a stative V 2 is identical to the function of causative
morphemes in languages that mark causatives morphologically, that is, it
expresses the agent that caused the state to come about without explicitly
stating how it was achieved. In the majority of valence-increasing CCs,
however, the transitive V1 by virtue of its inherent meaning gives added
information as to how V 2 was brought about:
(48) a. Wo de xiézi huài le.
me GEN shoe bad ASP
"My shoes are ruined."
b. Göu bä wo de xiézi yäo huài le.
dog PRETRANS me GEN shoe bite bad ASP
"The dog chewed up ("ruined by biting") my shoes."
These examples show cases where the subject of the intransitive V 2 is an
undergoer identical to the undergoer of the transitive Wv As discussed
above, there are also cases where the single argument of the intransitive V 2
is the same as the subject of the transitive V\:
(49) a. Wo fán le.
I irritated ASP
"I'm irritated/fed up."
b. Wo tîngfân le zheì shöugê.
I listen-irritated ASP this CLF song
"I'm tired of hearing/fed up with this song."
How then to explain the difference in assignment of arguments in (47)-(48)
vs. (49)? No general rule covering CCs will do; however the concept of CCs
as nuclear junctures of predicates sharing arguments can explain how such
structures are produced. (48b) is produced by the linkage of [bite' (dog,
shoes)] and [BECOME bad' (shoes)].^4 Since these predicates share all rele
vant arguments (that is, all the arguments of the intransitive are arguments of
the transitive, the fact that "dog" is not an argument of "bad" is irrelevant
as long as there is no argument of "bad" that it conflicts with), they can be
joined at the nuclear level. (49b) is formed the same way, by a linking of
[listen' (I, song)] and [BECOME irritated' (I)].
The difference between (48b) and (49b) is not in how they are created,
but how they are interpreted. How can a listener know that in (48b) it is
the shoes that were ruined and not the dog, while in (49b) knowing that it
is the speaker and not the song that is irritated? An explanation can be