本論文旨在探討台灣華語的非典型疑問詞：「哪裡」、「怎麼」、「什麼」。這三個疑問詞在經歷語法化後，語意上已不再只是一般疑問詞或無定代詞，而是在語用上表現語者對談話對象所說的話的負面態度，用以表達反駁及否定的含義。
儘管在過去的研究中，對這類非典型疑問詞的討論不少，但多數集中在其中單一詞的個案研究或是綜合探討非典型疑問詞所呈現的現象，鮮少針對非典疑問詞「哪裡」、「怎麼」、「什麼」之間的差異展開深入研究。因此，本研究著重於比較分析，探索這三個詞在句法及語用上的不同之處。
本研究主要採取製圖理論 (Cartographic Approach) 分析方法，認為這三個非典型疑問詞在句法上有著不同的分佈及句法機制，導致它們在語意及語用上呈現出不同的特徵。透過與左緣結構 (left periphery) 中各種功能詞組的互動分析(interaction test)，我們將表反駁的「什麼」定位在念力詞組 (ForceP) 指示語的位置，緊隨其後的是一個隱性的引述標記「說」，這使得「什麼」只能重複對談者一部分的話否定的特質。針對非典型的「怎麼」，我們的分析支持Tsai (2023) 的結論，認為需要將其更細分成表反預期的「怎麼」與表反駁的「怎麼」，它們分別位於評價詞詞組 (EvaP) 和念力詞組。而非典型的「哪裡」，我們發現它生成在示證詞詞組 (EviP)，且受到來自念力詞組的算子約束，使其具有反駁的功能。
最後，我們探討了這三個非典型疑問詞在語用上的否定，是否等同於語意上對命題的否定。透過負極項詞 (Negative polarity item)允准測試，我們認為只有非典型的「哪裡」能夠否定一個命題。表反駁的「怎麼」所傳達的負面態度及引發的否定功能源自於規約隱涵 (conventional implicature)，而其本身在語意上並不影響命題的真值。至於表反駁的「什麼」，我們同意Yang (2021) 的看法，將其視為一種元語言否定(metalinguistic negation)標記，因此只能影響命題真值以外的層面 (cf. Horn 1989)，而無法像非典型的「哪裡」一樣允准負極項詞。

Non-canonical wh-phrases refer to wh-words that deviate from their typical functions as constituent questions or indefinite pronouns. Generally, they undergo grammaticalization, losing their lexical contents and their interrogative nature. They are endowed with a speaker’s attitude, serving to convey a specific speech act (e.g., denial, disapproval). This study examines three non-canonical wh-phrases: shenme ‘what’, nali ‘where’, and zenme ‘how’. These three non-canonical wh-items are common in their ability to be used in a refutatory context, expressing a disagreement with an interlocutor. Previous literature has often treated them as interchangeable. Nevertheless, we observe that they still reveal subtle differences, suggesting they are not similar in every aspect. Consequently, we conduct a comparative analysis of these three non-canonical wh-items. We point out their contrasts, arguing for their derivations from distinct syntactic mechanisms.

Adopting the cartographic approach (Rizzi 1997), we examine their interaction with functional projections in the left periphery and pinpoint their respective syntactic positions. The refutatory use of shenme is considered to be located in ForceP; since it is accompanied by a covert quotative complementizer, it is restricted in selecting a quotative chunk while negating the not-at-issue content.

Regarding non-canonical zenme, we concur with Tsai (2023) in distinguishing it into two sub-types: mirative zenme and refutatory zenme. By examining their interaction with evidential and evaluative adverbs, in line with Tsai’s (2023) analysis, we propose that the mirative zenme is situated at EvaP, while the refutatory zenme is located in ForceP.
Concerning the syntactic derivation of non-canonical nali, we suggest it occupies a position in EviP; its refutatory force is derived from the unselective binding of an operator in ForceP.

In terms of negativity, the NPI (i.e., negative polarity item) licensing test shows that only non-canonical nali is capable of negating a proposition. On the contrary, the negative sense of refutatory zenme is derived from its conventional implicature; As for refutatory shenme, it functions as a metalinguistic negation marker (cf. Yang 2021) and is non-truth functional (cf. Horn 1989), thereby explaining its inability to license NPIs.

摘要 i
Abstract ii
致謝辭 iv
Table of Contents viii
List of Abbreviations x
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Overview 1
1.2 Research Questions 3
1.2.1 Are these three non-canonical wh-phrases interchangeable? 4
1.2.2 What are the syntactic derivations of these non-canonical wh-phrases? 6
1.2.3 Do the three non-canonical wh-items apply the negation to a proposition? 6
1.3 Outline 7
2 Literature Review 7
2.1 Non-canonical Nali 7
2.1.1 Hsieh (2001) 8
2.1.2 Cheung (2008, 2009) 11
2.1.3 Liu (2022) 17
2.2 Refutatory Shenme 20
2.2.1 The Quotative Property of Refutatory Shenme: Li (1996), Zhang (2011), Saruwatari (2016), Yang (2021) 21
2.3 Non-canonical Zenme 24
2.3.1 From How to Why: Tsai (2008) 24
2.3.2 The Mirative and Denial Readings of How Come Questions 27
2.4 An Overall Comparison of Non-canonical Wh-phrases 31
2.4.1 The Main Clause Phenomenon 31
2.4.2 The Intervention Effect 33
3 The Contrasts between the Non-canonical Wh-phrases: Nali, Zenme, and Shenme 35
3.1 NPI Licensing 35
3.2 The Echoic Use 38
3.3 Metalinguistic Negation 43
3.4 Embeddability 45
3.5 The Compatibility with SFPs 52
3.6 Summary of the Contrasts 57
4 Map the Non-canonical Wh-items onto the Clausal Spine 58
4.1 The Interaction with Functional Projections 58
4.1.1 Modal Interaction Test 58
4.1.2 The Interaction with Topic and Focus 64
4.1.2.1 Focus Construction Test 64
4.1.2.2 Topic Test 69
4.1.2.3 Summary of Focus Construction and Topic Test 74
4.1.3 The Interaction with Evidentials and Evaluatives 75
4.1.3.1 Evidential Test 75
4.1.3.2 Evaluative Test 78
4.1.3.3 Summary of Evidential and Evaluative Test 81
4.2 Analysis 83
4.2.1 Analysis of N-WHERE 83
4.2.1.1 A Comparative Analysis with Zuihao (Jheng 2022) 83
4.2.1.2 N-WHERE and its Refutatory Force 87
4.2.2 Analysis of N-HOW 89
4.2.2.1 M-HOW at EvaP 89
4.2.2.2 R-HOW at ForceP 90
4.2.2.3 The NPI Issue (M-HOW and R-HOW) 91
4.2.3 Analysis of R-WHAT 94
4.2.3.1 How is R-WHAT associated with the quotative property? 94
4.2.3.2 The NPI Issue (R-WHAT) 96
5 Conclusion 97
References 99

Badan, L. (2008). The even-construction in Mandarin Chinese. In Chinese linguistics in Leipzig. EHESS-CRLAO.
Badan, L., & Del Gobbo, F. (2015). The even-construction and the low periphery in Mandarin Chinese. The cartography of Chinese syntax, 11.
Beck, S. (2006). Intervention effects follow from focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 14(1), 1-56.
Bellert, I. (1977). On semantic and distributional properties of sentential adverbs. Linguistic Inquiry, 8(2), 337-351.
Bonami, O., & Godard, D. (2008). Lexical semantics and pragmatics of evaluative adverbs. In: Citeseer.
Burton-Roberts, N. (1989). On Horn's dilemma: presupposition and negation1. Journal of Linguistics, 25(1), 95-125.
Carston, R. (1996). Metalinguistic negation and echoic use. Journal of pragmatics, 25(3), 309-330.
Chen, H. (2013). The Classification and Non-interrogative Function of Interrogative Pronouns “Nali” Bohai University ].
Cheng, L. L.-S. (1994). Wh-words as polarity items.
Cheung, C. C.-H. (2013). On the distribution of topics and foci in Mandarin: A cartographic solution. Xiandai Waiyu [Modern Foreign Languages], 36(1), 10-17.
Cheung, L. Y.-L. (2006). Negative wh-words (NWHs) in Cantonese. Proceedings of the 18th North America Conference on Chinese Linguistics,
Cheung, L. Y.-L. (2009). Negative wh-construction and its semantic properties. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 297-321.
Cheung, Y.-L. (2008). The negative wh-construction. University of California, Los Angeles.
Chou, C. T. T. (2012). Syntax‐Pragmatics Interface: Mandarin Chinese Wh‐the‐hell and Point‐of‐View Operator. Syntax, 15(1), 1-24.
Cinque, G. (1999). Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford University Press.
Collins, C. (1991). Why and How Come.
De Haan, F. (1999). Evidentiality and epistemic modality: Setting boundaries. Southwest journal of linguistics, 18(1), 83-101.
Demonte, V., & Fernández-Soriano, O. (2014). Evidentiality and illocutionary force: Spanish matrix que at the syntax-pragmatics interface. Left sentence peripheries in Spanish: Diachronic, variationist, and typological perspectives, 217-252.
Den Dikken, M., & Giannakidou, A. (2002). From hell to polarity:“Aggressively non-D-linked” wh-phrases as polarity items. Linguistic Inquiry, 33(1), 31-61.
Ernst, T. (2009). Speaker-oriented adverbs. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 27, 497-544.
Fitzpatrick, J. (2005). The whys and how comes of presupposition and NPI licensing in questions. Proceedings of the 24th west coast conference on formal linguistics,
Giannakidou, A. (1999). Affective dependencies. Linguistics and Philosophy, 367-421.
Han, C.-h. (2002). Interpreting interrogatives as rhetorical questions. Lingua, 112(3), 201-229.
He, L. (2018). A syntactic study on Chinese focus constructions. (Beijing: Zhongguo Shehui Kexue Chu Ban She)
Horn, L. R. (1985). Metalinguistic negation and pragmatic ambiguity. Language, 121-174.
Horn, L. R. (1989). A natural history of negation.
Hsieh, M.-L. (2001). Form and meaning: Negation and question in Chinese. University of Southern California.
Huang, C.-T. J. (1984). On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry, 531-574.
Jheng, W.-C. S. (2022). A cartographic view on mood prominence and force in Mandarin: A case of the speaker-oriented adverb zuìhǎo. International Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 9(1), 1-48.
Kiss, A. (2017). Meta-conversational since when-questions and the common ground. Proceedings of the 21st Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (SaarDial). Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken,
Krifka, M. (2014). Embedding illocutionary acts. Recursion: Complexity in cognition, 59-87.
Li, Y. P. (1996). “Shenme” Biao Fouding He Bianchi De Yongfa. Journal of Henan University (Social Science), 36(3). https://doi.org/10.15991/j.cnki.411028.1996.03.024
Lin, J.-W. (1998). On existential polarity wh-phrases in Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 219-255.
Lin, T.-H. J. (2008). Locative subject in Mandarin Chinese. Nanzan Linguistics, 4, 69-88.
Liu, B. Y., Yulin. (2019). On the Formation Construal Mechanism of the Negative Meaning of Where-Rhetorical Question. Journal of Central China Normal University (Humanities and Social Sciences), 58(1).
Liu, C.-M. L. (2022). Refutatory na-sentences in Mandarin Chinese. International Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 9(2), 266-303.
Liu, M. (2012). Multidimensional semantics of evaluative adverbs (Vol. 26). Brill.
Lu, S. X. (1985). Jin Dai Han Yu Zhi Dai Ci. Xuelin Chu Ban She.
Martins, A. M. (2021). SYNTACTIC ASPECTS OF METALINGUISTIC NEGATION. REVUE ROUMAINE DE LINGUISTIQUE-ROMANIAN REVIEW OF LINGUISTICS, 66(2-3), 175-+.
Nilsen, Ø. (2004). Domains for adverbs. Lingua, 114(6), 809-847.
Obenauer, H. (2006). Special interrogatives-Left Periphery, Wh-Doubling, and (apparently) optional elements. AMSTERDAM STUDIES IN THE THEORY AND HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC SCIENCE SERIES 4, 278, 247.
Ochi, M. (2018). On Aggressively Non-D-Linking and Causal Wh- adjuncts. 言語文化共同研究プロジェクト, 21~30. https://doi.org/10.18910/72705
Pan, V. J. (2014). Deriving special questions in Mandarin Chinese: A comparative study. Jong-Un Park & Il-Jae Lee (eds.), 349-368.
Pan, V. J. (2015). Mandarin peripheral construals at the syntax-discourse interface. The Linguistic Review, 32(4), 819-868.
Pan, V. J. (2019). Architecture of the periphery in Chinese: Cartography and minimalism. Routledge.
Paul, W. (2005). Low IP area and left periphery in Mandarin Chinese. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes(33), 111-134.
Paul, W. (2014). Why particles are not particular: sentence-final particles in Chinese as heads of a split CP. Studia linguistica: A journal of general linguistics, 68(1), 77-115.
Phan, T., & Tsai, W.-T. D. (2022). Surprise-denial/disapproval what-questions in Vietnamese: a comparative perspective. perspective, 9, 168-191.
Poletto, C. (2008). The syntax of focus negation. Working papers in linguistics, 18, 179.
Potts, C. (2004). The logic of conventional implicatures (Vol. 7). OUP Oxford.
Progovac, L. (1988). A binding approach to polarity sensitivity University of Southern California].
Rizzi, L. (1990). Relativized minimality. The MIT Press.
Rizzi, L., & Haegeman, L. (1997). The fine structure of the left periphery. In: Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
Saruwatari, A. (2016). Wh-NP rhetorical questions in Japanese and Chinese. 言語文化共同研究プロジェクト, 2015, 21-30.
Shi, Y. Z. (2010). Han Yu Yu Fa [CHINESE GRAMMAR]. Shang Wu Ying Shu Guan.
Tsai, W.-T. D. (1994). OneconomizingthetheoryofA-bardependencies Ph. D. diss., MIT, Cambridge, MA].
Tsai, W.-T. D. (2008). Left periphery and how-why alternations. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 17, 83-115.
Tsai, W.-T. D. (2011). Cong ‘zhejuhua cong he shuo qi’shuo qi [On Atypical Wh-expressions in Chinese]. Yuwenxue luncong, 194-208.
Tsai, W.-T. D. (2015a). On the topography of Chinese modals. Beyond functional sequence, 275-294.
Tsai, W.-T. D. (2015b). A Tale of Two Peripheries. The Cartography of Chinese Syntax: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 11.
Tsai, W.-T. D. (2023). On Embedding Force and Attitude: Evidence from Chinese and Vietnamese non-canonical wh-expressions.
Tsai, W.-T. D., & Yang, C.-Y. H. (2022). On the syntax of mirativity. New Explorations in Chinese Theoretical Syntax: Studies in honor of Yen-Hui Audrey Li, 272, 431.
Wang, L. (1989). Han Yu Yu Fa Shi. Shang Wu Ying Shu Guan.
Yang, B. C.-Y. (2015). Locating wh-intervention effects at CP. The cartography of Chinese syntax, 11.
Yang, B. C.-Y. (2021). Two types of peripheral adjunct WHATs. Concentric, 47(1), 61-92.
Zhang, X. T. (2011). The Relativity and Constructional Integration between the Categories of Negation and Question of the Contemporary Chinese. Zhongguo Shehui Kexue Chu Ban She.
Zhu, D. (1982). Yufa jiangyi [On grammar]. (Beijing: Shangwu yinshuguan)