Introduction
Russell's seminal work On Denoting has played a central role in philosophical debates for over 100 years; asserting that English phrases beginning with the are included in the same semantic classification as "a man, some man, any man, [and] every man". On Denoting was a response to the problem of empty names; where certain negative existentials, such as fictional names, were false through the use of a proper name that does not have an existing referent (e.g., Sherlock Holmes, Clark Kent, and the present King of France). Russell deemed ordinary names were not just proper names but abbreviated definite descriptions. In Russell's view, definitive descriptions (understood in the form of 'the F') and indefinite descriptions (understood in the form of 'an F') are devices of quantification, not reference.
Motivated by metaphysical, semantical, and epistemological concerns, Russell's application of theory was targeted toward the English world, but his celebrity as a founder of modern, analytic, philosophy was global. It is perhaps this global pervasiveness that leads to a surprising application of Russell's Theory of Descriptions–it is not so easily applied to cross-linguistic comparisons in languages that lack definite and indefinite articles. For example, Mandarin Chinese utilizes distinctive morphological and syntactic methodology to indicate the relationship of definiteness or indefiniteness with noun phrases (NP). The dichotomy accounts for flaws in the translations between the two most spoken languages in the world concerning plurality and uniqueness. In this essay, I'll argue that while attempts at definiteness are possible in Mandarin Chinese, it is not identical to similar-looking English definite translations in its application to Russell's Theory of Descriptions.
Languages of Distinction
Chinese is not a language, but there are languages in China; specifically, over 300 recognized living languages, with regional dialects whose distinction adds linguistic diversity while making each language mutually unintelligible. Mandarin Chinese (Beijing dialect) is the official language of China, spoken by almost 1B people. Due to its unique word order and global distribution, Mandarin Chinese is the language of choice for this discussion. Where appropriate, the standardized phonetic system Pinyin (the official system for mainland China since the middle of the 20th Century and Taiwan since 2009) will be used to associate pronunciation using the Roman alphabet. For writing, simplified Chinese script (recognized as China's official writing system) will be used to represent Mandarin Chinese.
Applications on Mandarin Chinese
Russell's approach to definiteness notes that the use of definite determiners signals there is a single entity that satisfies the content in a description that has been provided by a noun phrase, separating them from indefinites that do not signal uniqueness. The utterance that contains a definite description is true if there is one and only one entity that satisfies the detailed descriptive content of the noun phrase in the actual world; designating existence and uniqueness. For example, in Russell's famous sentence:
The present King of France is bald.
Russell indicates all propositions must be true, noting an existential commitment, and a uniqueness requirement:
- There is a present King of France;
- There is one and only one present King of France;
- …and he is bald.
The sentence 'The King of France is bald' forms 'The F is G' as true if and only if there is one and only one thing which 'is F' and that thing 'is G.' In contrast to English, Mandarin Chinese differs in sentence structure by the absence of 'the' as definite descriptions with the noun phrases they associate.
Mandarin Chinese translations using simplified Chinese offer two possible renditions. Bare nominals as article-less noun structures (more common usage in natural Mandarin Chinese conversation) which can be definite in context to English translations where a definitive article is obligatory (present is implied as incumbent):
Demonstrative phrases indicate the spatial distinction in reference to the relationship of speaker and object (more grammatically accurate usage in Mandarin Chinese, offering clarity in noun and designation), which can be definite in anaphoric environments across interlocutors:
- Simplified Chinese: 法国的哪位国王是秃头。
- Pinyin: Fàguó de nǎ wèi guówáng shì tūtóu.
- Literal translation: France CL that position/part King is bald.
Both offer the capability for Russellian quantification but are contingent on presuppositions on the part of the speaker and the hearer.
On Bare Nominals
Bare nominals in Mandarin Chinese apply definiteness in two situations: larger definites (i.e., general associated with world understanding) and immediate definites (i.e., interlocutor context-specific understanding). For example:
- Simplified Chinese: 月亮很大。
- Pinyin: Yuè liàng hěn dà.
- Literal translation: Moon is big.
- English translation: The moon is big.
Knowing there is one and one only moon a priori licenses a definite through an understanding of general world knowledge. In an immediate situation, understanding an utterance in context may also serve as a definite–here, we describe a specific cat's action as observation:
- Simplified Chinese: 猫跳到床上。
- Pinyin: Māo tiào dào chuángshàng.
- Literal translation: Cat jump up bed.
- English translation: The cat jumped up on the bed.
Both hold the potential to be determiner and quantifier but are situational in relation to the hearer's knowledge or the speaker's presence to provide an interlocutor's bearings.
On Demonstrative Phrases
Whereas bare nominals may be interpreted as definite through a casual, generic, state of interpretation, demonstrative phrases trade verbosity for precision. Demonstrative phrases add anaphoric context to utterance while also indicating the speaker's motivation. Instead of simply a spatial designation in our examples, the importance of the referent is designated through a high or low deixis, an instrument used to instruct the hearer through force where to find the referent in context to the speaker's dynamic relationship with the hearer (i.e., origo):
"[T]he speaker wants the hearer to attend to a referent, either because the hearer has not differentiated the referent from all other possible ones of the noun in question, or because the referent needs highlighting, whereas low deixis would be the opposite, that is, when there is less or no special attention needed on the part of the hearer at the moment of the talk."
Our prior example in relation to that king of France applies:
- Simplified Chinese: 法国的哪位国王是秃头。
- Pinyin: Fàguó de nǎ wèi guówáng shì tūtóu.
- Literal translation: France CL that position/part King is bald.
The above demonstrative phrase offers better clues to the nature of the king. However, it still presupposes a familiarity with the referent (in addition to supposition regarding the speaker's intent and context). The resulting Mandarin Chinese phrase has difficulty standing on its own; where that king could be this king we're discussing, but in isolation, lacks association with the king of concern. In contrast, definite articles in English may signal familiarity but survive without carrying presuppositions, even in questions of uniqueness.
Placement in Moon Worship
One way to approach the topic is to demonstrate the contemporary usage of Mandarin Chinese with a real-world use-case instead of an abstraction: Min 敏 is a three-year-old child at their first annual Mid-Autumn (Moon) Festival 中秋节–an important celebration practicing Moon 月 worship. The character 月 is a noun that may mean Earth's only natural satellite, a month, or in reference to a common surname. Min's parents may comment during the festival:
- Simplified Chinese: 今晚月亮很大。
- Pinyin: Jīn wǎn yuè liàng hěn dà.
- Literal translation: Tonight moon is big.
- English translation: The moon is big tonight.
Min may not recognize the use of bare nominal to describe the moon serves as a Russellian abbreviated definitive description. Min may ask which moon, where are the other moons, and the moon's relationship to time (i.e., as a measurement of the moon's orbital period). The ambiguity surrounding the lack of definite descriptions concerning a singular, unique moon, which exists, requires a familiar account of the topic of discussion. It may also require a demonstrative phrase identifying the moon's place in dialogue for what the moon means in relation to the Mid-Autumn festival, signaling necessary contextual elements in the conversation through clues and deduction. The results offer a similar-looking definite translation to On Denoting. Nevertheless, Russell's solution for empty names is heavily tied to the structure of languages with articles (such as German and English). In contrast, articleless languages, such as Mandarin Chinese, require a covert interpretation to signal definiteness in correlation to conversation.
Quantification and Closing
Both bare nominals and demonstrative phrases offer similarities to definite English articles but fail to reach an in-kind designation independent of conjecture. Bare nouns may refer to general world knowledge or immediate situational knowledge but may otherwise fail to quantify in isolation. Demonstrative phrases offer the ability to provide more specific referent but still presuppose the hearer's familiarity with the subject. Nevertheless, the underlying belief is the definite is quantificational; although the descriptive phrases "have no meaning in isolation," they are complex and derive meaning from associated being incomplete, or constituent, symbols.
Mandarin Chinese contains an existence claim, whether bare nominal in both large or immediate extent or demonstrative phrase, there is an assumption of presupposed existence. Uniqueness is more difficult to associate, whereas a demonstrative phrase applies a typical pronoun uniqueness (i.e., 'that king'), bare nominals do not provide a uniqueness without presupposed context. Maximality differs in Mandarin Chinese–there are no singular or plural common nouns (it is not obligatory in the semantic structure), and neither bare nouns nor demonstrative phrases indicate 'one and only one' unless identified numerically. Three cats may jump:
- Simplified Chinese: 三只猫跳。
- Pinyin: Sān zhī māo tiào.
- Literal translation: Three CL cat jump.
A (indefinite) cat may jump, or one cat may jump:
- Simplified Chinese: 一只猫跳。
- Pinyin: Yī zhǐ māo tiào.
- Literal translation: One CL cat jump.
Or the aforementioned 'this cat,' 'that cat,' or 'cat' may jump in context to their dialectic relationship. Prior sentences of empty names go a step further: they do not have ordinary references and do not immediately signal the contents of sentences without contextual relationships that provide informative contributions. It may be that bare nominals and demonstrative phrases capture much of the spirit in On Denoting without lexical articles, but their distinction invites further scrutiny when applying the theory of descriptions too closely to the structure of specific languages.