Research on Functional Grammar of

Chinese I Information Structure and

Word Ordering Selection Bojiang Zhang
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/research-on-functional-grammar-of-chinese-i-informat
ion-structure-and-word-ordering-selection-bojiang-zhang/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Practical Grammar of Modern Chinese I Overview and

Notional Words 1st Edition Liu Yuehua

https://textbookfull.com/product/practical-grammar-of-modern-
chinese-i-overview-and-notional-words-1st-edition-liu-yuehua/

Network and Communication: Research on the Development

of Electronic Information Engineering Technology in
China Chinese Academy Of Engineering

https://textbookfull.com/product/network-and-communication-
research-on-the-development-of-electronic-information-
engineering-technology-in-china-chinese-academy-of-engineering/

Industrial Internet: Research on the Development of

Electronic Information Engineering Technology in China
Center For Electronics And Information Studies Chinese
Academy Of Engineering
https://textbookfull.com/product/industrial-internet-research-on-
the-development-of-electronic-information-engineering-technology-
in-china-center-for-electronics-and-information-studies-chinese-
academy-of-engineering/

A Confucian Analysis on the Evolution of Chinese Patent

Law System Nan Zhang

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-confucian-analysis-on-the-
evolution-of-chinese-patent-law-system-nan-zhang/
The Development of Deep Learning Technologies: Research
on the Development of Electronic Information
Engineering Technology in China Center For Electronics
And Information Studies Chinese Academy Of Engineering
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-development-of-deep-
learning-technologies-research-on-the-development-of-electronic-
information-engineering-technology-in-china-center-for-
electronics-and-information-studies-chinese-academy-of-e/

The structure of modern standard French : a student

grammar Mosegaard Hansen

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-structure-of-modern-
standard-french-a-student-grammar-mosegaard-hansen/

Topology Optimization in Engineering Structure Design

Weihong Zhang

https://textbookfull.com/product/topology-optimization-in-
engineering-structure-design-weihong-zhang/

Structure and Properties of Cell Membrane Structure and

Properties of Cell Membranes : Volume I First Edition
Benga

https://textbookfull.com/product/structure-and-properties-of-
cell-membrane-structure-and-properties-of-cell-membranes-volume-
i-first-edition-benga/

Investing in China and Chinese Investment Abroad

Xiuping Zhang

https://textbookfull.com/product/investing-in-china-and-chinese-
investment-abroad-xiuping-zhang/
Research on Functional Grammar
of Chinese I

The functional perspective on Chinese syntax has yielded various new

achievements since its introduction to Chinese linguistics in the 1980s.
This two-volume book is one of the earliest and most influential works to study
the Chinese language using functional grammar. With local Beijing vernacular
(Pekingese) as a basis, the information structure and focus structure of the Chinese
language are systematically examined. By using written works and recordings
from Beijingers, the authors discuss topics such as the relationship between word
order and focus, and the distinction between normal focus and contrastive focus.
In addition, the authors also subject the reference and grammatical categories
of the Chinese language to a functional scrutiny while discussion of word classes
and their functions creatively combines modern linguistic theories and traditional
Chinese linguistic theories. This book will be of interest to students and scholars
of Chinese linguistics and linguistics in general.

Bojiang Zhang is a professor from the Institute of Literature, Chinese Academy

of Social Sciences. He is currently the Editor-in-chief of Literary Review（《文
学评论》). He is also a professor at University of Chinese Academy of Social
Sciences, Fudan University and Renmin University of China. He has been working
on syntactic theory, functional grammar and discourse analysis of Chinese.

Mei Fang is a professor from the Institute of Linguistics, Chinese Academy of

Social Sciences. She is currently the Deputy Editor-in-chief of Studies of the
Chinese Language 《中国语文》
( ) and the vice president of Chinese Language
Society. She has been working on Chinese grammar and discourse analysis with
the functional approach, focusing on the emergent nature of grammatical patterns,
pragmaticalization, and grammar in interaction.
China Perspectives

The China Perspectives series focuses on translating and publishing works by

leading Chinese scholars, writing about both global topics and China-related
themes. It covers Humanities and Social Sciences, Education, Media and
Psychology, as well as many interdisciplinary themes.
This is the first time any of these books have been published in English for
international readers. The series aims to put forward a Chinese perspective, give
insights into cutting-edge academic thinking in China, and inspire researchers globally.

Titles in linguistics currently include:

Complementarity between Lexis and Grammar in the System of Person

A Systemic Typological Approach
Pin Wang

Language Policy
A Systemic Functional Linguistic Approach
Bingjun Yang, Rui Wang

Patterns and Meanings of Intensifiers in Chinese Learner Corpora

Chunyan Wang

Assessing Listening for Chinese English Learners

Developing a Communicative Listening Comprehension Test Suite for CET
Zhixin Pan

Research on Functional Grammar of Chinese I

Information Structure and Word Ordering Selection
Bojiang Zhang and Mei Fang

Research on Functional Grammar of Chinese II

Reference and Grammatical Category
Bojiang Zhang and Mei Fang

For more information, please visit https://www.routledge.com/series/CPH

Research on Functional
Grammar of Chinese I
Information Structure and Word
Ordering Selection

Bojiang Zhang and Mei Fang

Translated by Linjun Liu

First published in English 2020
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2020 Bojiang Zhang and Mei Fang
Translated by Linjun Liu
The right of Bojiang Zhang and Mei Fang to be identified as authors of
this work has been asserted by them in accordance with sections 77 and 78
of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
English version by permission of The Commercial Press.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record for this book has been requested
ISBN: 978-0-367-42268-4 (set)
ISBN: 978-0-367-36851-7 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-0-367-37339-9 (ebk)
Typeset in Times New Roman
by Apex CoVantage, LLC
Contents

List of figures vii

List of tables viii
List of abbreviations ix

Introduction: corpus and approach 1

PART I
Information structure 17

1 Thematic structure of spoken Pekingese 19

2 Thematic structure in narration: sentence-middle modal
particles 43
3 Thematic structure in conversation: an analysis of translocation 68

PART II
Focus structure 99

4 Word order: object vs. directional complement 101

5 Word order: object vs. verbal classifier 136
6 Means for contrastive focus representation 166

PART III
Backgrounding constructions 189

7 A transitivity interpretation of serial verb constructions

in Chinese 191
vi Contents
8 Imperfective clause “V着” 203
9 Zero cataphora of clause subject 223

Bibliography 239
Index 254
Figures

0.1 Discoursal units and syntactic units 4

5.1 Referentiality of N 150
6.1 Syntactic means for contrastive focus expression 183
Tables

1.1 Distribution of postpositioned themes 31

4.1 Distribution of referential and non-referential objects 121
4.2 Lexical forms of referential objects in Patterns A, B and D 123
4.3 Distribution of possessive attributives vis-a-vis restrictive
attributives 124
4.4 Length of referential objects in terms of syllable number 131
5.1 Semantic type of object and its relative order with regard to
verbal classifier 138
5.2 Statistics of referential NPs in VNM and VMN 145
5.3 Length of N in VMN and VNM 148
5.4 Realis vs. irrealis in VNM 151
5.5 Distribution of realis VNM without “了／过” 159
5.6 VMN and VNM in Lao She and Wang Shuo’s works 161
5.7 Lexical form of N in VMN and VNM in works of different times 161
7.1 High vs. low transitivity (adapted from Hopper & Thompson,
1980) 192
8.1 Discourse distribution of “single verb +着” construction 215
9.1 Syntactic level in terms of dependency and embedding 224
9.2 Configurations of predicates in cataphoric zero-subject clauses 226
Abbreviations

Abbreviation Term
ASP aspect marker
ASS associative (de 的)
aux. auxiliary
BA bǎ 把
CL classifier
comp. comparative
conj. conjunction
CRS currently relevant state (le)
DUR durative aspect (zhe着/zài 在)
EXP experiential aspect (-guò 过)
GEN genitive (de 的)
interj. interjection
MP modal particle (used in cases of theme postposition, where SFP
does not occur sentence finally)
NOM nominalizer (de 的)
pass. passive (including gěi 给，bèi 被)
PF pause filler
PFV perfective aspect (-le 了)
poss. possessive (de 的)
REDUP reduplication
SFP sentence-final modal particle
SMP sentence-middle modal particle
TM topic marker
voca. vocative
Introduction
Corpus and approach

1. Functional perspective of Chinese syntax

During the past fifteen years,1 the most compelling results of modern Chinese
grammar research have focused on the formal analysis of syntactic structures. In
the late 1980s, functionalism was introduced to the study of Chinese grammar, and
the functional approach has shown strong vitality ever since. The main achieve­
ments include: the decisive effect of the reference of the nominal expression on
the Chinese grammatical structure; study of anaphora, its ellipsis and recovery
in discourse; study of presupposition-related syntactic and semantic phenomena;
etc. These studies have shown the following characteristics: 1) researchers have
gone beyond the introspective approach to language form study by attaching
more importance to the impact of various speech act-related factors on discourse
organization; 2) attention is paid not only to the similarities and differences of
the types (as is the case in formal studies), but also to the tendencies as reflected
by the number of instantiations of each type; 3) the object of study is no longer
taken as static, finished products, but more as dynamic processes; and 4) instead
of examining sentences (or even structures) in isolation as practiced in formal
syntactic study, researchers have come to lay great emphasis on the situational
context in their analysis.
It should be noted that these are preliminary studies only, and the major differ­
ences between the research goals and operation methods and those of traditional
structural analysis have yet to be fully displayed. Sooner or later, scholars of Chi­
nese grammar will be involved in the controversy between formalism and func­
tionalism abroad – extreme formalists emphasize the autonomy and independence
of syntactic structures, whereas extreme functionalists maintain absolute depend­
ence of linguistic structures on functional factors. The reason is twofold. On one
hand, some scholars who lay emphasis on structural forms in studying Chinese
grammar have found that functional factors are interfering with their analysis,
and that a purely formal description has too many difficulties to cope with. On
the other, those who pay attention to functions mainly conduct functional analysis
within the traditional framework of formal grammar, accepting indiscriminately
the research results of formal analysis in their research. These two aspects show
that Chinese grammar study is far from mature, and more attention should be paid
2 Introduction
to the point made by those of insight at home and abroad – we should see to the
complementarity between the two lines of research. Specifically, in the face of one
or one set of linguistic phenomena, is it possible to pinpoint the functional factors
before identifying the autonomous aspect of the syntactic structure, so as to avoid
the difficulties as incurred by approaching the issue from one end only? Unfortu­
nately, previous studies rarely made this distinction, thus resulting in some confu­
sion. Some hot syntactic analysis issues during recent years will be used here to
illustrate how the distinction between functional and syntactic factors can help us
better understand linguistic facts.

1.1 Variety constraints vs. semantic constraints

Data of mixed varieties which lack homogeneity cannot provide us with reliable
grammatical rules, a point that Zhu Dexi and Hu Mingyang have both made very
clear. Zhu and Hu have repeatedly emphasized the importance of distinguishing
the written variety from the spoken variety. More strictly speaking, however, the
distinction between written and spoken varieties is no more than a very basic
one, because language as the finished product is a mixture of different varieties
to different extents. The task of language researchers, therefore, is firstly to dif­
ferentiate all the varieties, and in turn study their respective laws. For instance,
we can begin with the identification of monologues and dialogues. In monologues
we can further distinguish narration, argumentation, exposition and persuasion; in
dialogues, daily conversations and special dialogues can be differentiated. Liao
Qiuzhong’s “Argumentative structure in discourse” (Language Teaching and
Research, 1988, Vol. 1) represents a study of the argumentative style; Xu Jiujiu’s
“A discurse analysis of ta (‘he’) in narratives” (Studies of the Chinese Language,
1990, Vol. 5) is one of the narrative style; Shen Jiaxuan’s “Topics without com­
ments” (Studies of the Chinese Language, 1989, Vol. 5) is a study of the dialogic
style. It is worth noting that Shen’s study also focuses on the relationship between
dialogue and monologue. By contrasting the two, Shen makes manifest the enor­
mous explanatory power of variety distinction.
In previous grammatical studies, however, variety-constrained grammatical
facts are often mistaken as semantically constrained. For example, some research
works that focus on patient subjects have noticed that the difference between
bèi-passives and non-bèi-passives manifests the difference between narrative
and expository sentences. When it comes to the issue why non-bèi-passives
sometimes cannot transform to bèi-passives, however, the reason is attributed
to whether the passive relation needs to be highlighted or whether the thing/
event under discussion is taken as positive. Take for example “信写好了→*信
被写好了” (Xìn xiě hǎo le → *Xìn bèi xiě hǎo le; literally ‘letter write-ready
PFV→*letter bèi write-ready PFV’, meaning ‘The letter is written’). As a mat­
ter of fact, the latter version may not be unacceptable in speech in some dialects.
Even in Pekingese, there is the corresponding version “信给写好了” (where 给
(gěi) is a passive marker). The difference between the two versions preceding and
following the arrow is simply the manifestation of different speech styles, rather
 Introduction 3
than the outcome of semantic constraints. The analysis of this simple example
should arouse close attention because it inspires us to reconsider our description
of the basic sentence patterns in Chinese: how many of our previous contrastive
analyses between active and passive sentences, agent- and non-agent-subject sen­
tences, and bǎ- and bèi-sentences vis-a-vis common declarative sentences were
conducted on the premise that stylistic analysis had been strictly done? Of course,
we do not maintain that stylistic differences are the sole reason for the semantic
and functional differences between all these sentence patterns. However, if we are
not fully aware of the stylistic constraints, confusion may thus arise in our study.
Overseas scholars pay much more attention to stylistic study. They have devel­
oped very strict standards and operable methodology. In China, stylistics used to
be much discussed in composition teaching and rhetoric study. With the rise of
grammatical study, however, no due weight is given to the stylistic influence on
grammar. We should learn from overseas scholars, and with their scientific atti­
tude and systematic thinking, we can systematically study different Chinese vari­
eties based on Chinese language facts, and subsequently come up with research
reports on specific varieties.

1.2 Discourse units vs. syntactic units

Admittedly discourse structure and syntactic structure belong to different sys­
tems. Although a discourse unit may correspond to a syntactic unit from time to
time (e.g., the syntactic subject is sometimes the discourse topic, or the syntactic
object is sometimes the discourse focus), they have different functions in their
respective systems, and thus cannot be equated. Grammatical studies in the past
usually assigned a certain function of a discourse unit to a syntactic unit, which
has resulted in confusions in explanation.
For example, we have found that sentences whose subject is a genitive con­
struction share a striking functional connection with the so-called subject-
predicate (S-P) predicate sentences and verb-copying sentences. But in previous
syntactic analysis, they have often been regarded as totally unrelated. There is a
line from a film named “The Lover”, where the dubbing and the subtitles show
some difference:

a 中国人的婚姻皆由父母做主（subtitle）
Zhōngguórén de hūnyīn jiē yóu fùmǔ zuòzhǔ
Chinese GEN marriage all by parents decide
‘Chinese people’s marriages are all decided by the parents.’
b 中国人哪，婚姻都是由父母做主的（dubbing）
Zhōngguórén na hūnyīn dōushì yóu fùmǔ zuòzhǔ de
Chinese SMP marriage all by parents decide aux.
‘The Chinese, their marriages are all decided by their parents.’

The two sentences are different in syntactic analysis. The subjects on the
first tier are respectively “中国人的婚姻” in (a) and “中国人” in (b). From the
4 Introduction
discourse perspective, however, the topic component is “中国人” in both sen­
tences, because the subsequent part of each sentence is to comment on “中国人”.
Earlier discussions of the topic component always focus on those elements
resulting from syntactic segmentation, such as the subject, the adverbial, or an
element that modifies the whole sentence, more often than not refusing to admit
that such modifiers, when functioning as topics, can govern the whole sentence.
From the perspective of discourse function, the following four sentences are near
equivalents to one another:

a 我这舞跳得也够灰心的
wǒ zhè wǔ tiào de yě gòu huīxīn de
I this dance dance aux. too enough frustrated aux.
‘I feel frustrated by dancing.’
b 我的舞跳得也够灰心的
wǒ de wǔ tiào de yě gòu huīxīn de2
I GEN dance
c 我跳舞跳得也够灰心的
wǒ tiàowǔ tiào de yě gòu huīxīn de
I dance (v.)
d 我舞跳得也够灰心的
wǒ wǔ tiào de yě gòu huīxīn de
I dance (n.)

This phenomenon shows two facts: the discourse unit is inconsistent with
the syntactic unit; neither is the discourse structure consistent with the syntactic
structure.
In the face of one or a set of sentences, it seems that we should do functional
analysis at the discourse level first, and then try to see what calls for syntactic
analysis and what does not. “王冕死了父亲 (Wáng Miǎn sǐ le fùqīn, literally
‘Wang Mian died father’, meaning ‘Wang Mian’s father died’)” has become a
classic example sentence in grammar works, but if the six characters are said to
a person who has learned no grammar at all, he or she will ask, “So what?” Then

T1 C1

T2 C2

Figure 0.1 Discoursal units and syntactic units T1 =我，T2 =舞／这舞／跳舞

 Introduction 5
the sentence status of these six characters is called into question. We may as well
refer to its original source for analysis:

元朝末年，也曾出了一个嵌崎磊落的人。这人姓王名冕，在诸暨县乡村
里住。七岁上死了父亲，他母亲做些针指，供给他到村学堂里去读书。（ 《儒林
外史》第一回）
Yuáncháo mònián, yě céng chū le yī gè qiànqílěiluò de rén. Zhè rén xìng Wáng
míng Miǎn, zài Zhūjìxiàn xiāngcūn lǐ zhù.
qīsuì shàng sǐ le fùqīn,
seven years old at die PFV father
tā mǔqīn zuò xiē zhēnzhǐ, gōngjǐ tā dào cūn xuétáng lǐ qù dúshū.
‘At the end of the Yuan Dynasty, there was an arduous and upright person. His
name was Wang Mian, living at a village of Zhuji County. When he was seven
years old, his father died. His mother did some needlework to support him to
go to the village school.’ (The Scholars 《儒林外史》
( ): Chapter 1)

From the perspective of discourse analysis, a stretch of discourse always gives

the reference point first so that the forthcoming speech can unfold within the
framework. The reference point can be time, space, people or things. “元朝末年
(‘at the end of the Yuan Dynasty’)” is the first reference component, indicating the
time; “这人 (‘this person’)” is a character reference component, governing the
following five tone groups,3 meaning that all five concern this character; “七岁上
(‘at the age of seven’)” is another time reference, governing the following three
clauses, in that the three clauses are all about what happened at that time.
It can be very risky to put a relatively large reference component at the begin­
ning of a stretch of discourse. Take the part after the second period for example.
“母亲供给他到村学堂里去读书 (‘Mother supported him to go to the village
school.’)” also seems an acceptable reading; but if the context is taken into
account, it can be found that the semantic meaning is more than this: the rela­
tionship between “做些针指 (‘do some needlework’)” and “供给 (‘support’)”
has been sacrificed in this reading. Putting “王冕(‘Wang Mian’)” before “死
了父亲(‘father died’)” risks a similar logic fallacy. Syntactic analysis should
study the structural relationship between “死(‘die’)” and “父亲(‘father’)”, not
that between “王冕” and “死” or “死了父亲”, because there is no syntactic rela­
tion whatsoever between them.

1.3 Discourse function vs. syntactic function

Scholars have noticed the connections between syntactic structure and some of
the factors related to speech production, such as pause, stress, sentence-middle
modal particles, etc., and used such connections to identify certain syntactic prop­
erties. A quite influential theory holds that the subject can often be marked off the
predicate in a subject-predicate structure by means of modal particles such as a
(啊), ba (吧), ya (呀), ne (呢), etc. Even after they have observed that this kind of
marking does not correspond completely with subject-predicate segmentation, the
6 Introduction
scholars still consider it a prototypical feature of the subject-predicate structure by
attributing non-correspondence to category fuzziness.4 Through investigation we
find that the elements segmented by sentence-middle modal particles can be more
complex than imagined. See examples (a) and (b):

a 人家呀，说咱们这招牌跌份!
Rénjiā ya, shuō zánmen zhè zhāopái diēfèn!
People SMP say our this sign not considered the thing
人家说呀，咱们这招牌跌份!
Rénjiā shuō ya, zánmen zhè zhāopái diēfèn!
人家说咱们这招牌呀，跌份!
Rénjiā shuō zánmen zhè zhāopái ya, diēfèn!
‘People say that this sign of ours can’t be considered the thing!’
b 我吧，从小就羡慕一种职业. . . . . .
Wǒ ba, cóngxiǎo jiù xiànmù yī zhǒng zhíyè . . . . . .
I SMP since early childhood just admire one CL profession
我从小吧，就羡慕一种职业. . . . . .
Wǒ cóngxiǎo ba, jiù xiànmù yī zhǒng zhíyè . . . . . .
从小吧，我就羡慕一种职业. . . . . .
Cóngxiǎo ba, wǒ jiù xiànmù yī zhǒng zhíyè . . . . . .
从小我吧，就羡慕一种职业. . . . . .
Cóngxiǎo wǒ ba, jiù xiànmù yī zhǒng zhíyè . . . . . .
我从小就啊，羡慕一种职业. . . . . .
Wǒ cóngxiǎo jiù a, xiànmù yī zhǒng zhíyè . . . . . .
‘I have admired one profession since early childhood. . . ’

We approve the introduction of the prototype category theory into cognitive lin­
guistics. As its advocates point out, if the various functions of a category are
unequal in status, the one that is dominant in distribution can be taken as the basis
for validation. According to our investigation, however, it is not the dominant
distribution for a modal particle to occur after the subject. Moreover, the element
that precedes the modal particle is not confined to nominals; it can be adverbial,
conjunctive and verbal as well. Therefore, it is not reasonable enough to distin­
guish the subject-predicate structure from other structures according to this cri­
terion. Conversely, the distribution of modal particles within the sentence is far
from random; they will not occur in information focus. We therefore maintain that
modal particles are in fact the speaker’s means of psychological segmentation
of information structure, which has no bearing on syntactic segmentation. What
modal particles manifest is textual rather than syntactic functions.
Sometimes syntactic analysis cannot reflect textual functions, as in the case
when demonstratives “这／那” (this/that’) immediately precede nominals. Syn­
tactic analysis can only assert that they are appositives to the nominals and would
be satisfied with that. Compare the use of “这” in the three sentences below:
 Introduction 7
a 这老王，嘴简直跟城门似的。
Zhèi Lǎo Wáng, zuǐ jiǎnzhí gēn chéngmén sìde.
this old Wang mouth simply with city gate like
‘Old Wang, his mouth is very much like the city gate.’
b 这人哪，就是不能太善。
Zhe rén na, jiùshì bùnéng tài shàn.
this people SMP just cannot too nice
‘People can’t be too nice.’
c 我这舞跳得也够灰心的。
Wǒ zhei wǔ tiào de yě gòu huīxīn de
I this dance dance aux. too enough frustrated aux.
‘I feel frustrated by dancing.’

As the pinyin transcripts show, “这” in sentence (a) is pronounced as “zhèi”,

taking the stress; in sentence (b), it is produced as “zhe”, taking no stress; in
sentence (c), it is read as “zhei”, again unstressed. In these three sentences, the
demonstrative function of “这” is weak with no exception. What the three occur­
rences share in common is that “这” functions as a topic marker, and the differ­
ences in pronunciation happen to show the nature of each reference: it is definite
in sentence (a), general in sentence (b), and non-referential in sentence (c).
When the functional principle and the syntactic principle are in conflict, a
functional explanation is usually preferred so as to maintain the consistency
of syntactic rules. Examine a specific example. The adverb “分别” (fēnbié,
‘respectively’) requires that the multiple subjects and the multiple objects be the
same in number as well as in order of occurrence. In “老周和老陈分别当了主
任和副主任” (Lǎo Zhōu hé Lǎo Chén fēnbié dāng le zhǔrèn hé fù zhǔrèn, ‘Old
Zhou and Old Chen have respectively taken the office of director and deputy
director.’) can only be understood as “Old Zhou is the director, and Old Chen
the deputy director”, rather than the reverse.5 However, we have observed the
following example:

我和德熙兄是1952年分别从清华大学和燕京大学调到北大中文系工作
时才认识的，那时他正忙于准备去保加利亚讲学，虽然住得很近，但
来往不多。（林焘《哭德熙兄》 ）
Wǒ hé Déxī xiōng shì 1952 nián fēnbié cóng Qīnghuá Dàxué hé Yànjīng
Dàxué diào dào Běidà Zhōngwén Xì gōngzuò shí cái rènshi de, nàshí tā zhèng
mángyú zhǔnbèi qù Bǎojiālìyà jiǎngxué, suīrán zhù de hěn jìn, dàn láiwǎng
bù duō.
‘I and Brother Dexi6 got to know each other when we transferred respec­
tively from Tsinghua University and Yenching University in 1952 to the Chi­
nese Department of Peking University. At that time, he was busy preparing
to lecture in Bulgaria. Although we lived close by, we didn’t see each other
often.’ (Lin Tao, Mourning the Loss of Brother Dexi 《哭德熙兄》
( ))
8 Introduction
Readers familiar with the situation know that Mr. Lin was from Yenching Uni­
versity and Mr. Zhu (i.e., Dexi in the quoted example) was from Tsinghua Univer­
sity; that is, the truth is opposite to what is expressed by “分别”. In this example,
the multiple entities following “分别” do not occur in the same order with the
multiple subjects (“I and Brother Dexi”); instead, they follow the principle of the
main theme taking precedence. In the sentence “那时他正忙于. . . . . .”, “他” still
refers to Zhu, which attests to the same principle.
Another example is bǎ-constructions. Traditional syntactic research attaches
great importance to them, and they are gaining popularity among functionalists
in recent years. Some people think that the instantiation of bǎ-constructions is
restricted by the semantic meaning of contrast; others believe that the occurrence
of bǎ is to indicate that the reference of the preceding object is definite. These find­
ings may or may not be comprehensive; what they amount to is the fact that bǎ­
constructions are licensed more by discourse factors than by syntactic constraints.
We have also noticed that bǎ-constructions rarely occur at the beginning of a
stretch of discourse; instead, they tend to appear in subsequent clauses. Compare:

a 一只足球蹦过草地，滚到我脚下，我停住球，接着飞起一脚把球踢走。
Yī zhī zúqiú bèng guò cǎodì, gǔn dào wǒ jiǎoxià, wǒ tíng zhù qiú, jiēzhe fēi
qǐ yī jiǎo bǎ qiú tī zǒu.
‘A football jumped over the lawn and rolled to my feet. I stopped it, and then
flew up a foot to kick the ball away.’
b 有一天我把这只足球踢出去，穿海魂衫的弟兄们急急忙忙跑起来
追球。
Yǒu yītiān wǒ bǎ zhè zhī zúqiú tī chūqù, chuān hǎihúnshān de dìxiōngmen
jíjímángmáng pǎo qǐlái zhuī qiú.
‘One day, I kicked the football out. My brothers, who were in striped shirts,
hurriedly ran to catch the ball.’
(The underlined is the bǎ introduced object in each case.)

Of course, the issue is far from this simple. Whether a bǎ-construction can
be used discourse initially is also determined by such factors as the referential
property of the object introduced by bǎ, the tense of the verb, and so on. Nonethe­
less, according to our observation, the chances for bǎ-constructions to occur in
discourse initially are very slim, which reflects that bǎ-constructions are good at
taking over what has been addressed in earlier discourse but poor at setting a new
course for later discourse.

1.4 Functional classification vs. semantic classification

Chinese grammarians are now increasingly willing to prove the rationality of their
grammar by the ease with which it can be adapted for computer use. Since the
results from formal analysis are far from enough, more semantic interpretations
are incorporated, which indeed are among the basic requirements for computers to
comprehend and generate Chinese. The point to make here is that some results of
 Introduction 9
functional analysis should also be given due attention, because this is a necessary
condition if computers are to generate reasonable Chinese.
Take the classification of verb-object (VO) combinations for example. Nowa­
days the classification is done mainly based on the semantic relation between the
object and the verb. The object is thus grouped into such semantic components
as agent, patient, dative, instrument, cause, result, location, time and so on. If we
change our point of view and focus on the functional attributes of the nominal
object, we can come up with categories of different referentiality:

a indefinite objects: 开了一个饭馆 (kāi le yī gè fànguǎn, ‘open a restaurant’),

找个替身 (zhǎo gè tìshēn, ‘find a stand-in’), 想起来一个人(xiǎngqǐlái yī gè
rén, ‘think of a person’), 打两场球 (dǎ liǎng chǎng qiú, ‘play a couple of
games’)
b definite objects: 找着她了(zhǎo zhe tā le, ‘found her’), 逛颐和园(guàng
Yíhéyuán, ‘visit the Summer Palace’), 来这儿(lái zhè-er,7 ‘come here’), 碰
见刚才说话那人 (pèngjiàn gāngcái shuōhuà nàrén, ‘ran into the person who
was talking a moment ago’)
c non-referential objects: 说话 (shuōhuà, ‘speak’), 办事儿 (bànshì-er, ‘do
something’), 睡行军床 (shuì xíngjūnchuáng, ‘sleep in the cot’), 教数学 (jiāo
shùxué, ‘teach math’), 当司仪 (dāng sīyí, ‘work as MC’)

These are several representative categories, and should not be taken as exhaus­
tive. If we focus on these three categories only, we can see that they behave very
differently in discourse.
Sentences with indefinite objects (Category A) are strong in introducing sequent
discourse, but no good at taking over previous discourse. Generally speaking, such
sentences are always followed by other clauses, and it would be very unlikely for
such sentences to close up the discourse. See (1) and (2):

(1) 潘佑军的朋友在稻香湖开了一个马场，潘佑军几次提出去那儿玩一
趟，找找绅士的感觉。
Pān Yòujūn de péngyǒu zài Dàoxiānghú kāi le yī gè mǎchǎng,
open PFV one CL horse farm
Pān Yòujūn jǐcì tíchū qù nà-er wán yītàng, zhǎozhǎo shēnshì de gǎnjué.
‘Pan Youjun’s friend opened a horse farm in Daoxiang Lake. Pan Youjun
has proposed several times to make a tour there, looking for the feeling of a
gentleman.’
(2) 我先进去的那间摆着一张大床，摞着几只樟木箱，床头还有一幅梳着
50年代发式的年轻男女的合影，显然这是男女主人的卧室。
Wǒ xiān jìnqù de nàjiān bǎi zhe yī zhāng dà chuáng,
put aux. one CL big bed
luò zhe jǐ zhī zhāngmù xiāng,
stack aux. several CL camphor wood box
chuángtóu hái yǒu yī fú shū zhe wǔshí niándài fàshì de niánqīng nánnǚ de
héyǐng, xiǎnrán zhè shì nánnǚ zhǔrén de wòshì.
10 Introduction
‘In the room I first entered, there were a big bed and a few camphor wood
boxes stacked on end. At the head of the bed there was a photo of a young
man and woman, wearing their hair in styles of the 1950s. Obviously, it was
the masters’ bedroom.’

Sentences in Category B, whose objects are definite in reference, are strong in

referring back to previous discourse, as in the examples below:

(3) 我看到卫宁穿着拖鞋从家门内出来，急忙叫住他。
Wǒ kàndào Wèi Níng chuān zhe tuōxié cóng jiāmén nèi
I see/saw Wei Ning wear aux. slippers from gate inside
chūlái, jímáng jiàozhù tā.
come out hurriedly call him
‘I saw Wei Ning come out of the gate wearing slippers, and hurriedly called
to him.’
(4) 我在院门口等米兰时，朋友们毫不怀疑我是用通常的方式控制住了这
个“圈子” 。
Wǒ zài yuànménkǒu děng Mǐ Lán shí,
I at gate wait Mi Lan when
péngyǒu men háobúhuáiyí wǒ shì yòng
friends doubt not in the least I be use
tōngcháng de fāngshì kòngzhìzhù le zhègè “quānzi”.
usual aux. means take control PFV this chick
‘When I was waiting for Mi Lan at the courtyard gate, my friends had no
doubt whatsoever that I had controlled the chick in the usual way.’

Meanwhile, definite objects may also look ahead to the forthcoming discourse,
as in (5):

(5) 杜梅不答应，我只好带她去，车来了一瞧，潘佑军也带了老婆。
Dù Méi bù dāying, wǒ zhǐhǎo dài tā qù,
Du Mei not agree I have to take her go
chē lái le yīqiáo, Pān Yòujūn yě dài le lǎopó.
car arrive PFV look Pan Youjun too take PFV wife
‘Du Mei didn’t agree, so I had to take her with me. When the car arrived, Pan
Youjun also took his wife along.’

This is because the object tends to be more informative. Less informative enti­
ties are generally placed in the subject position or after bǎ. In (5), “她”(‘she’)
relates to previous discourse by referring back to Du Mei while at the same time
looking forward to the forthcoming discourse by contrasting with Pan Youjun’s
wife. This is a basic function of definite objects.
Category C is different from the former two in that the indefinite element does
not refer to any discourse entity, which renders the state of affairs expressed by
 Introduction 11
the sentence quite vague. Typical non-referential objects are for statement making
rather than narration.

(6) 我是售票员。
Wǒ shì shòupiàoyuán.
I be bus conductor
‘I am a bus conductor.’
(7) 她唱女中音。
Tā chàng nǚzhōngyīn.
she sing mezzo-soprano.
‘She sings mezzo-soprano.’
(8) 马走日字，象走田字。
Mǎ zǒu rìzì， xiàng zǒu tiánzì.
Horse walk character 日 Premier walk character 田
‘The Horse (in Chinese chess) moves with the route as indicated by the Chinese
character 日, and the Premier follows the route as indicated by 田.’

The actual performance of these sentence patterns can be more complicated

than is elaborated here. The general tendency, however, will remain unchanged,
which no doubt will help with the computer’s comprehension and generation of
Chinese discourse.
If we admit that language is a tool for human communication, we have to admit
that communicative needs are of primary importance in shaping language struc­
ture. The language system can be approached by conducting pure formal analysis
of the structure or analyzing the semantic meaning systematically; what cannot be
ignored in so doing are the functional factors underlying the formal /semantic per­
formance. This chapter is not a systematic discussion of the impact of language
function. Instead, we aim merely to illustrate with some specific examples the
functional constraints on syntax. Some of them are no longer fresh topics among
overseas scholars, and Chinese grammarians have also achieved some original
research results not known to outsiders yet. But if we intend to further advance the
study of Chinese grammar, it is time to enhance our theoretical consciousness and
combine the good practice of traditional Chinese studies with the new and better
perspectives of overseas scholars.

2. Research value of spoken Pekingese

2.1 Spoken Pekingese and Chinese grammar study

The study of the grammar of spoken Pekingese, in Zhu Dexi’s view, “is the foun­
dation of the study of modern Chinese grammar”. Zhu lays great emphasis on
the grammar of spoken Pekingese. He produces three reasons: 1) Pekingese is a
basic dialect of modern standard Chinese; 2) Pekingese, a living language spo­
ken by millions of people, is basically stable and homogeneous; 3) to study the
grammar of Pekingese is helpful for us to discover the fundamentals in modern
12 Introduction
Chinese grammar, such as the basic sentence patterns, the important functions of
grammatical components, the relationship between prosody and syntax, etc. Zhu
is very insightful in stressing the stability and homogeneity of spoken Pekingese.
Throughout the history of the study of Chinese grammar, the most influential
monographs, such as Wang Li’s Modern Chinese Grammar 《中国现代语法》 ( ),
Lü Shuxiang’s 800 Words in Modern Chinese 《现代汉语八百词》 ( ), and Zhu
Dexi’s Lectures on Grammar 《语法讲义》( ), are all based on spoken Pekingese
without exception. Chao Yuen Ren’s Mandarin Primer 《北京口语语法》 ( ) and
A Grammar of Spoken Chinese 《中国话的文法》( ), both written in the middle
of the 20th century, make it ever clearer that the grammar of Pekingese should
be the grammar of spoken Chinese. The two monographs by Chao have reached
an unprecedented height in credibility of data and fairness of analysis. Grammar
study over the past forty years in China has basically inherited the predecessors’
good tradition of prudent treatment of data, but at the same time there is also
some chaos. Zhu Dexi (1987) represents a comment on such phenomena, but
unfortunately his reminder has failed to receive enough attention. So far we can
still see articles addressing grammar issues where the reliability of the conclu­
sion is undermined by improper treatment of data. Chao Yuen Ren has a famous
saying: Do not express an opinion before you are ready with “for examples”.
Younger generations of grammarians should keep in mind the elder’s advice, and
only in this way can we refrain from coming up with absurd conclusions due to
inappropriate treatment of data, and in turn benefit from deepened understanding
of language facts.
Zhu’s proposal that grammar study of Pekingese should be helpful for the dis­
covery of the fundamentals in modern Chinese grammar is also extremely enlight­
ening. From the perspective of the general trend of world linguistics development,
gone are the days for the formalist approach to dominate the discipline; instead,
the functional approach, which gives importance to living spoken languages, is
gaining in popularity. Especially since the 1970s both formalists and functional­
ists have begun to consciously abandon the research method of solely analyzing
isolated sentences that are produced introspectively out of context. Conversely,
they have turned to studying actual language use in natural contexts, with a view
to identifying the decisive factors that have been left out of analysis in formal
research, and in turn generalizing authentic linguistic facts. In recent years func­
tionalists abroad, by consciously focusing their analysis on spoken Pekingese
when studying Chinese grammar, have discovered many important facts and come
up with some brand-new understandings of Chinese grammar. From this point of
view, Zhu’s formulation is indeed farsighted. Currently, domestic research still
fails to pay due attention to the grammar of spoken Pekingese; on the other hand,
overseas endeavors are still trapped by the congenital deficiency in accurately
interpreting the linguistic phenomena in spoken Pekingese. The two aspects
lumped together render it urgent to make a comprehensive and systematic study
of spoken Pekingese. We are of the view: a normative grammar of standard Man­
darin should be based on Pekingese, given the fact that the latter is the base dialect
of the former; research on dialect grammars should take spoken Pekingese (not
 Introduction 13
Mandarin) for reference; in comparative studies between Chinese and foreign lan­
guages, a systematic description of spoken Pekingese can test the applicability of
the more general theories of language; and diachronic study of language depends
on the comparison between the oral materials from contemporary Pekingese and
the ancient oral materials. All in all, the grammar of spoken Pekingese constitutes
a fundamental research topic with ontological significance. But there is the say­
ing: a thing cannot exist without its basis. More efforts, therefore, need to be made
to change the weak status quo of grammar research on spoken Pekingese.

2.2 Levels of spoken Pekingese

Many aspects of the research subject put forward by Zhu Dexi deserve our further
exploration. When he says that spoken Pekingese is reliable, Zhu makes the point
in general terms by claiming that spoken Pekingese is relatively stable and homo­
geneous. When a comprehensive and systematic study of spoken Pekingese is
conducted, however, the first challenge is how to view and handle the diachronic
variations and synchronic differences in the language. The authors of this book,
when studying at Peking University, participated in a series of surveys directed by
Lin Tao into the speech sounds and words of Pekingese. From the research results
that Lin Tao has published, Pekingese shows clear internal variation in pronun­
ciation and lexicon. But it is not as easy to determine the parameters related to
grammar as those for pronunciation or lexicon, probably because grammatical
changes are not as clear as those of pronunciation and lexicon, and thus not easy
to track. As living informants, we feel that the synchronic social differences (e.g.,
level of education, social status, gender, etc.) in spoken Pekingese, though observ­
able, are not as significant as the diachronic variations over the past half century.
Lao She’s novels and Hou Baolin’s crosstalk represent Pekingese of about half a
century ago, and would impress a modern Beijing ear as “old flavoured”. When
first taking its shape in the mid-1980s, contemporary spoken Pekingese used to be
ridiculed as flattering and faux fun. In the 1990s, spoken Pekingese represented
by Wang Shuo’s novels, Liang Zuo’s crosstalk and Feng Xiaogang’s movies not
only spread to all social ranks, but appeared openly on the pages of all major
newspapers in the capital city and gradually mixed with other dialects as well. It
is, therefore, safe to say that Pekingese after the 1980s is different from that of
Lao She’s era.
Lin Jinlan, an experienced writer, published an article entitled “Pekingese is not
homogeneous” (“北京语言不共同”) in the journal of Southern Weekend 《南方 (
周末》). In the article, Lin writes, “Lao She writes about Beijing; so does Wang
Shuo. Lao She writes about common Beijing citizens; Wang Shuo also writes
about them. The ‘words’ that they ‘write’ are all excellent Beijing language. Lao
She drives home the very essence of Pekingese; Wang Shuo has also developed
his unique style. Their use of the language, polished as it is, can be poles apart.
They share the same topics, Beijing people, Beijing stories and Pekingese; but
it so happened that they two share no ‘common’ language.” Wang Shuo himself
writes in his autobiography, “I do not quite understand old Pekingese. . . . The
14 Introduction
language I use in my writings is mainly borrowed from the spoken variety. Novels
should use living speech, so that later generations can know how people talk at
the moment.”
If we look farther back at The Legend of Heroes 《儿女英雄传》
( ), a book writ­
ten a century ago by Wen Kang that embodies spoken Pekingese at that time, we
can find that the language is not only very different from today’s Pekingese, but
also different from that in Lao She’s era. Therefore, in studying the development of
spoken Pekingese, it would be very meaningful to regard Wen Kang, Lao She and
Wang Shuo as representatives of three different stages. Oota Tatsuo (1988) main­
tains that modern Pekingese was formed at the end of the 18th century on the basis
of the following seven criteria: 1) distinction between inclusive and exclusive
first-person pronouns by means of “咱们”(zánmen) and “我们”(wǒmen), rather
than “俺”(ǎn), “咱”(zán), etc.; 2) the introduction of preposition “给”(gěi); 3) the
auxiliary use “来着”(láizhe); 4) substituting auxiliary “呢”(ne) for “哩”(li); 5) the
prohibitive use of adverb “别”(bié); 6) degree adverb “很”(hěn) for adverbial use;
and 7) post-adjectival use of “～多了”(duō le) as substitute for “. . . . . .得多”(de
duō) or “. . . . . .得远”(de yuǎn) (meaning ‘much more than . . .’ or ‘much farther
than . . .’)”. It is generally acknowledged that spoken Pekingese in Lao She’s era
has undergone some changes from the end of the Qing Dynasty, but so far we
have seen nobody raise criteria in the same manner as Oota Tatsuo to illustrate the
development over that half century. It would be ideal if backtrack research could
be conducted. We can begin by summarizing the grammatical phenomena in con­
temporary spoken Pekingese and then compare them with Lao She’s works with
a view to establishing some signs as the criteria. Then we can go on to backtrack
from Lao She’s works to have a comprehensive and objective understanding of
the development of spoken Pekingese over the past century.
During the past hundred years Beijing has been the political and cultural center
of China. Social changes constitute the main cause of the changes in spoken
Pekingese. The May 4th New Culture Movement and the “Cultural Revolution”
have left distinctive markings on Pekingese in different periods. The manifesta­
tions in lexicon and rhetoric are obvious but subtle in grammar. Lao She and
Wang Shuo are different in literary orientation and social evaluation, but their
representation of the oral grammar of their respective times is very real. This may
be especially true in Wang Shuo’s case. His works collect both praise and criti­
cism, but his language achievement is recognized by all. His works are the objec­
tive reflection of the natural use of contemporary Pekingese without any tailoring,
which provides great convenience for functional analysis.

2.3 About the examples cited in these two volumes

Most of the examples cited in these two volumes are taken from spoken Peking­
ese. Specifically, there are two sources. One is the written materials, mainly the
literary works of writers from Beijing. The other is the recordings, which can be
further divided into two subcategories: TV recordings and the recordings of natu­
ral speech. Written materials are mostly from Lao She and Wang Shuo’s works.
 Introduction 15
The focus of study is on the dialogues; narrative and descriptive texts are avoided
so as to reduce the impact of the written style on language use. The TV recordings
selected are those that were recorded on location, because this type of material
is closer to natural spoken language. Also, a comparison between the recorded
material and the original script can be very conducive to a deeper understanding
of the features of spoken language. The recordings of natural speech are mainly
from Peking University’s systematic survey into Pekingese under the guidance of
Lin Tao (from 1982 to 1984). This survey, with socio-dialectal significance, is a
comprehensive one involving 449 informants from 25 urban and suburban areas
in Beijing who are different in age, gender, educational level and ethnic group.
As participants of the survey, the coauthors of these two volumes gained a better
understanding of the various aspects of Pekingese from the actual implementation
of the survey. At the same time we recognized further the deep impact of corpus
analysis and screening on research work. The data we have collected here can
reflect spoken Pekingese from different angles and are very beneficial for our
current research.
Throughout the two volumes we will indicate one by one the sources of the
examples that attest to a particular grammatical rule while leaving out the sources
of those illustrating a general grammatical phenomenon.

Notes
1 The Chinese original was first published in 1996. [Translator’s note.]
2 For simplicity no gloss is done for the part that is repeated in b, c and d.
3 For the concept of tone group see Fan Jiyan (1985).
4 See Yuan Yulin (1995).
5 This rule is summarized in Liao Qiuzhong (1992a) as “the principle of correspondence”.
6 Translated literally to maintain the original order of occurrence.
7 Retroflex “儿” is transcribed in pinyin as “-er” throughout the two volumes.
Part I

Information structure
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
what comes o’ steamer trainin’. I’d sooner trust Sue to sail her nor him.
[Waves his arm and shouts.] Come about!
Nat—[Bitterly.] He seems to be heading straight for the open sea. He’s
taking quite a sail, it seems to me.
Bartlett—[As if he couldn’t believe his eyes.] He’s passed the p’int—
and now—headin’ her out to sea—so’east by east. By God, that be the
course I charted for her! [Sue bursts out sobbing. He wheels on her, his
mouth fallen open, his face full of a stupid despair.] They be somethin’
wrong here. What be it, Sue? What be it, Nat? [His voice has begun to
quiver with passion.] That schooner—she’s sailin’ without me—— [He
suddenly springs at Nat and grabs him by the throat—with hoarse fury,
shaking him.] What be it, ye whelp? It’s your doin’—because I wouldn’t let
ye go. Answer me!
Sue—[Rushing to them with a scream.] Pa! [She tugs frantically at his
hands. Bartlett lets them fall to his side, stepping back from Nat who
sinks weakly to the ground, gasping for breath. Bartlett stands looking at
him wildly.]
Sue—Nat didn’t know, Pa. It’s all my fault. I had to do it. There was no
other way——
Bartlett—[Raging.] What d’ye mean, girl? What is it ye’ve done? Tell
me, I say! Tell me or I’ll——
Sue—[Unflinchingly.] You had to be stopped from going someway. You
wouldn’t listen to reason. So I asked Danny if he wouldn’t make the trip in
your place. He’s just got his captain’s papers—and oh, Pa, you can trust
him, you know that! That man Horne said he knows about everything you
wanted done, and he promised to tell Danny, and Danny’ll come back——
Bartlett—[Chokingly.] So—that be it—— [Shaking his clenched fist at
the sky as if visualizing the fate he feels in all of this.] Curse ye! Curse ye!
[He subsides weakly, his strength spent, his hand falls limply at his side.]
Mrs. Bartlett—[Appears in the doorway. Her face is pale with
anguish. She gives a cry of joy when she sees her son.] Nat! [Then with a
start of horror at her eyes fall on her husband.] Isaiah! [He doesn’t seem to
hear.] Then—you ain’t sailed yet?
Sue—[Going to her—gently.] No, Ma, he isn’t going to sail. He’s going
to stay home with you. But the schooner’s gone. See. [She points and her
mother’s eyes turn seaward.]
 Bartlett—[Aloud to himself—in a tone of groping superstitious awe
and bewildered fear.] They be somethin’ queer—somethin’ wrong—they be
a curse in this somewhere——
Mrs. Bartlett—[Turning accusing eyes on him—with a sort of
fanatical triumph.] I’m glad to hear you confess that, Isaiah. Yes, there be a
curse—God’s curse on the wicked sinfulness o’ men—and I thank God
He’s saved you from the evil of that voyage, and I’ll pray Him to visit His
punishment and His curse on them three men on that craft you forced me to
give my name—— [She has raised her hand as if calling down retribution
on the schooner she can dimly see.]
Sue—[Terrified.] Ma!
Bartlett—[Starting toward his wife with an insane yell of fury.] Stop it,
I tell ye! [He towers over her with upraised fist as if to crush her.]
Sue—Pa!
Nat—[Starting to his feet from where he has been sitting on the ground
—hoarsely.] Pa! For God’s sake!
Mrs. Bartlett—[Gives a weak, frightened gasp.] Would you murder
me too, Isaiah? [She closes her eyes and collapses in Sue’s arms.]
Sue—[Tremblingly.] Nat! Help me! Quick! We must carry her to bed.
[They take their mother in their arms, carrying her inside the house.]
Bartlett—[While they are doing this, rushes in his mad frenzy to the
platform over the edge of the cliff. He puts his hands to his mouth,
megaphone-fashion, and yells with despairing rage.] Ahoy! Ahoy! Sarah
Allen! Put back! Put back! [as

[The Curtain Falls]

ACT FOUR
Scene—About nine o’clock of a moonlight night one year later—Captain
Bartlett’s “cabin,” a room erected on the top of his house as a lookout
post. The interior is fitted up like the cabin of a sailing vessel. On the left,
forward, a porthole. Farther back, the stairs of the companionway. Still
farther, two more portholes. In the rear, left, a marble-topped sideboard.
In the rear, center, a door opening on stairs which lead to the lower house.
A cot with a blanket is placed against the wall to the right of door. In the
right wall, five portholes. Directly under them, a wooden bench. In front of
the bench, a long table with two chairs placed, one in front, one to the left
of it. A cheap, dark-colored rug is on the floor. In the ceiling, midway from
front to rear, a skylight extending from opposite the door to above the left
edge of the table. In the right extremity of the skylight is placed a floating
ship’s compass. The light from the binnacle sheds down over this and
seeps into the room, casting a vague globular shadow of the compass on
the floor. Moonlight creeps in through the portholes on the right. A lighted
lantern is on the table.
As the curtain rises, Sue and Doctor Berry are discovered sitting by
the table. The doctor is a man of sixty or so, hale and hearty-looking, his
white hair and mustache setting off his ruddy completion. His blue eyes
have a gentle expression, his smile is kindly and sympathetic. His whole
manner toward Sue is that of the old family doctor and friend, not the least
of whose duties is to play father-confessor to his patients. She is dressed in
deep mourning. She looks much older. Her face is pale and plainly marked
by the ravages of suffering and grief. But there is an excited elation in her
face at present, her eyes are alight with some unexpected joy.
Sue—[Excitedly.] And here is Danny’s letter, Doctor—to prove it’s all
true. [She takes a letter from the bosom of her dress and holds it out to him.]
Doctor—[Takes it with a smile, patting her hand.] I can’t say how glad
I am, Susan. Coming after we’d all given him up for lost—it’s like a
miracle. Eh, well, I can hardly believe——
Sue—[Smiling happily.] Read what he says. Then you won’t doubt.
Doctor—[Hesitating—playfully.] I don’t know that it’s right for me—
love letters at my age!
Sue—Go ahead. I want you to read it. [He reaches in his pocket for his
spectacles. Sue continues gratefully.] As if I could have any secrets from
you after all you’ve done for us since Ma died. You’ve been the only friend
—— [She stops, her lips trembling.]
Doctor—Tut-tut. [He adjusts his spectacles and peers at her over
them.] Who wouldn’t be of all the service he could to a brave girl like you
—and I who’ve known you since you were so high! Eh, well, my dear girl,
this past year—with your mother’s death—the state your father’s in—and
then the news of the schooner being reported lost—one damn thing on top
of another! You’ve borne the whole brunt of it on your shoulders and stood
up like a major. I’ll tell Danny when he comes he ought to get down on his
knees and thank God for getting such a wife!
Sue—[Flushing.] You’re too good. I don’t deserve it. It was just a case
where someone had to carry things on.
Doctor—Not many could have stood it—living in this house with him
the way he is—even if he was their father.
Sue—[Glancing up at the skylight—apprehensively.] Ssshh! He might
hear you.
Doctor—[Listening intently.] Not him. There he goes pacing up and
down up there in the night, looking out to sea for that ship that will never
come back! And your brother Nat is getting just as bad. [Shaking himself.]
Brrr! This house of mad dreams! It’s the crowning wonder to me you
haven’t lost your balance too—spending nearly all of your time in this crazy
cabin—afraid to go out—afraid of what he might do——
Sue—Don’t you think Pa’ll come to realize the schooner is lost as time
goes by and she doesn’t come back?
Doctor—If he was going to realize that, the report of the facts five
months ago would have convinced him. There it was, plain as the nose on
your face. British freighter reports finding derelict schooner. Steams near
enough to read the name on the stern—Sarah Allen, Harborport. Well, who
could get around that evidence except a man with an obsession? No, your
father won’t let himself look the facts in the face. If he did, probably the
shock of it would kill him. That darn dream of his has become his life. No,
Susan, as time goes on he’ll believe in it harder and harder. After observing
him for the past year—and I speak for his own sake, too, as his good friend
for twenty years or more—my final advice is the same: Send him to an
asylum.
Sue—[With a shudder.] No, Doctor.
 Doctor—[Shaking his head.] You’ll have to come to it in time. He’s
getting worse. No one can tell—he might get violent——
Sue—How can you say that? You know how gentle and sane he is with
me—just like he used to be in the old days.
Doctor—You’re his last connecting link with things as they are—but
that can’t last. On the other hand, I think that if we got him away from the
sea, from this house, especially from this crazy cabin and the ship’s deck he
had built up there—[He nods upward.]—that perhaps——
Sue—[With conviction.] No. It would kill him to leave it.
Doctor—Eh, well, my dear, one thing you’ve got to realize: Your father
and Nat must be separated somehow. Nat’s going to pieces. He’s lost his
job, he moons about this house, he takes no interest in anything but this
craziness. I’ll bet he doesn’t believe that schooner is lost any more than
your father does.
Sue—You mean he still hopes it may not be true. That’s only natural.
He’s in San Francisco now tracing down the report again. He saw in the
papers where the British freighter that found the derelict was in port again
and he went to talk with the people on board. I’m hoping he’ll come back
fully convinced, with the whole thing out of his mind.
Doctor—[Shaking his head—gravely.] I’ve watched him and talked
with him—— Why, even your father seems to realize, in his twisted way,
that he has a bad effect on Nat.
Sue—Yes, as I’ve told you before, he hasn’t spoken to Nat alone since
the schooner sailed a year ago. And Nat sneaks about trying to spy on him
—and I have to be always on the watch to keep them apart—— It’s terrible.
Doctor—You’ve got to persuade Nat to go away, Susan.
Sue—He won’t heed me—but I was thinking that now Danny is coming
back, I’d get him——
Doctor—There’s another thing. You can’t continue to play slave to
these two after you’re married.
Sue—[Miserably.] We’ll have to wait a while longer——
Doctor—[Roughly.] Rats! You can’t sacrifice any more of your life and
Danny’s to mad dreams.
Sue—[Helplessly.] I don’t know—— [Then brightening.] That’ll all be
decided when the time comes. Just now it’s enough to know Danny’s alive
and coming back. Read his letter, Doctor. You’ve been holding it in your
hand all this time.
Doctor—Yes, yes, let’s see. [He takes the letter from the envelope.]
Sue—Poor Danny! He’s been through terrible things.
Doctor—Hmm! Rangoon.
Sue—Yes, he’s still in the hospital there. You’ll see.
Doctor—[Reads the letter—grunts with astonishment—angrily.] By
Gad! The damn scoundrels!
Sue—[Shuddering.] Yes, wasn’t it hideous—those awful men stabbing
him and leaving him for dead in that out of the way native settlement! The
natives nursed him back to life, have you got that far yet? And then he was
laid up for four months there waiting for a vessel to touch and take him
back to civilization. And then, think of it, getting the fever on top of all that
and nearly dying in the hospital in Rangoon!
Doctor—A terrible time of it! He’s lucky to be alive. Hmm. I see he
foresaw the wreck of the schooner. Those brutes couldn’t navigate. [Folding
the letter and putting it back.] He doesn’t seem to have found out what the
purpose of that mad trip was. Horne hid it from him to the last, he says.
Well, it’s queer—damn queer. But I’m glad to know those wretches have
gone to their final accounting.
Sue—[With a shudder.] I was always afraid of them. They looked like—
murderers. [At a noise from below they both start. Steps can be heard
climbing the stairs. Sue jumps to her feet frightenedly.] Why—do you hear
—who can that be? [There is a soft rap on the door. The Doctor jumps to
his feet. Sue turns to him with a half-hysterical laugh.] Shall I open? I don’t
know why—but I’m afraid.
Doctor—Tut-tut! I’ll see who it is. [He opens the door and Nat is
discovered on the stairs outside.] Why hello, boy. You gave us a scare.
Susan thought it was a ghost knocking.
Nat—[Comes into the room. He has aged, grown thin, his face gaunt
and drawn from continual mental strain, his eyes moody and preoccupied.
He glances up at the skylight apprehensively, then turns to Sue.] I didn’t
find you downstairs so I—— [Then to the Doctor.] Yes, you do grow to
look for ghosts in this house, don’t you? [Again glancing upward.] He’s up
there as usual, I suppose—looking for a ship that’ll never, never come now!
 Doctor—[With a grunt of approval.] I’m glad to hear you acknowledge
that.
Sue—[Who is just recovering from her fright.] But, Nat, I didn’t expect
you—— Did you find out——?
Nat—Yes, I talked with several of the men who were on board at the
time. They said they steamed in so close to the schooner it was easy to read
the name with the naked eye. All agreed—Sarah Allen, Harborport. They
even remembered how her tafrail was painted. There’s no chance for
mistake. The Sarah Allen is gone. [With great emphasis.] And I’m glad—
damn glad! I feel as if a weight of lead had been taken off my brain. I feel
free again, and I can go back to work—but not here. I’ve got to go away—
start new altogether.
Sue—[Happily, coming and putting her arms around him.] It’s so good
to hear you talk like your old self again.
Doctor—[Earnestly.] Yes, Nat, by Gad, that’s sound sense. Get out of
this.
Nat—[Giving him a queer look.] I suppose you thought I was doomed,
eh?—like him. [He makes a motion upward—then with an uncertain laugh.]
A doctor’s always looking for trouble where there isn’t any. [In a tone of
finality.] Well, it’s all over, anyway.
Sue—[Snatching the letter from the table.] Oh, I was forgetting, Nat.
Read this. I got it yesterday.
Nat—[Turns it over in his hands suspiciously.] Who from?
Sue—Open it and see.
Nat—[Does so and turns over the pages to read the signature—he gives
a start—hoarsely.] Danny! It can’t be! But it’s his writing sure enough! [He
exclaims with a sudden wild exultation.] Then they must have been lying to
me!
Sue—No, the Sarah Allen was wrecked all right, but that was
afterwards. He wasn’t on board then. Read it. You’ll see. [Nat sinks back on
a chair, evidently depressed by this information. He starts to read the letter
with unconcealed indifference, then becomes engrossed, excited, the paper
trembling in his hands. The Doctor shakes his head at Sue indicating his
disapproval of her giving him the letter. Nat finishes and springs to his feet
—angrily.]
 Nat—The stupid fool! He let Horne pull the wool over his eyes in fine
shape. He deserved all he got for being so dumb!
Sue—[Indignantly.] Nat!
Nat—[Unheedingly.] Oh, if I could only have gone in his place! I knew
the kind Horne was. He couldn’t have played that trick on me. I’d have
forced the secret out of him if I had to—— [He raises his clenched fist in a
gesture of threat like his father’s—then lets it fall and sits down again—
disgustedly.] But what’s the use? And what’s the use of this? [Tosses the
letter contemptuously on the table.] He might just as well not have written.
We’re no wiser than we were before.
Sue—[Snatching up the letter—deeply hurt.] Aren’t you even glad to
hear Danny’s alive?
Nat—[Turning to her at once—with remorseful confusion.] Yes—yes—
of course, Sue—I don’t have to say that, do I? What I mean is, he never
found out from Horne—and we’re no wiser.
Doctor—[Briskly—with a significant glance at Sue.] Well, Susan—Nat
—I’ve got to run along—[Meaningly.] I’ll be over again tomorrow, Susan.
Sue—Yes, do come. [Goes with him to the door.] Can you see your way?
Doctor—Yes. Good night.
Sue—Good night. [She closes the door and comes back to Nat. The
Doctor’s footsteps die out.]
Nat—[Savagely.] That damned old fool! What is he doing, sneaking
around here all the time? I’ve grown to hate the sight of him.
Sue—Nat! You can’t mean that. Think of how kind he’s been.
Nat—Yes—kindness with a purpose.
Sue—Don’t be silly. What purpose could he have except wanting to help
us?
Nat—To find out things, of course, you simpleton. To pump Pa when
he’s not responsible for what he’s saying.
Sue—[Indignantly.] Nat!
Nat—Much good it’s done him! I know Pa. Sane or not, he won’t tell
that to anyone—not even you or me, Sue. [With sudden fury.] I’m going
away—but before I go I’m going to make him tell me! He won’t refuse this
time when he knows I’m leaving for good. He’ll be glad then. He’s been so
afraid I’d find out, so scared to speak to me even—locking himself up here.
But I’ll make him tell—yes, I will!
Sue—Careful, Nat. He’ll hear you if you shout like that.
Nat—But we have a right to know—his own children. What if he dies
without ever speaking?
Sue—[Uneasily.] Be sensible, Nat. There’s nothing to tell except in your
imagination. [Taking his arm—persuasively.] Come on downstairs. I’ll get
you something to eat. You must be starved, aren’t you?
Nat—No—I don’t know—I suppose I ought to be. [He gets to his feet
and glances around with a shudder.] What a place for him to build to wait
in—like the cabin of a ship sunk deep under the sea—like the Sarah Allen’s
cabin as it is now, probably. [With a shiver.] There’s a chill comes over you.
No wonder he’s mad. [He listens.] Hear him. A year ago today she sailed. I
wonder if he knows that. Back and forth, always staring out to sea for the
Sarah Allen. Ha-ha! God! It would be funny if it didn’t make your flesh
creep. [Brusquely.] Come on. Let’s leave him and go down where there’s
light and warmth. [They go down the stairs, closing the door behind them.
There is a pause. Then the door of the companionway above is heard being
opened and shut. A gust of wind sweeps down into the room. Bartlett
stamps down the stairs. The madness which has taken almost complete
possession of him in the past year is clearly stamped on his face,
particularly in his eyes which seem to stare through and beyond objects
with a hunted, haunted expression. His movements suggest an automaton
obeying invisible wires. They are quick, jerky, spasmodic. He appears to be
laboring under a state of extraordinary excitement. He stands for a second
at the foot of the stairs, peering about him suspiciously. Then he goes to the
table and sits down on the edge of a chair, his chin supported on his hands.]
Bartlett—[Takes a folded piece of paper from his pocket and spreads it
out on the table in the light of the lantern—pointing with his finger—
mumblingly.] Where the cross be—ye’ll not forget that, Silas Horne. Ye had
a copy o’ this—no chance for a mistake, bullies—the gold’s there, restin’
safe—back to me and we’ll share it fair and square. A year ago today—ye
remember the orders I wrote ye, Horne. [Threateningly.] Ye’ll not be gone
more nor a year or I’ll—and if ye make port to home here at night, hang a
red and a green light at the mainm’st head so I’ll see ye comin.’ A red and a
green—— [He springs up suddenly and goes to a porthole to look out at the
sea—disappointedly.] No light be there—but they’ll come. The year be up
today and ye’ve got to come or I’ll—— [He sinks back on the chair, his
head in his hands. Suddenly he starts and stares straight in front of him as if
he saw something in the air—with angry defiance.] Aye, there ye be again
—the two o’ ye! Makin’ a mock o’ me! Brass and junk, ye say, not worth a
damn! Ye don’t believe, do ye? I’ll show ye! [He springs to his feet and
makes a motion as if grabbing someone by the throat and shaking them—
savagely.] Ye lie! Is it gold or no? Answer me! [With a mocking laugh.]
Aye, ye own up to it now, right enough. Too late, ye swabs! No share for ye!
[He sinks back on the chair again—after a pause, dully.] Jimmy’s gone. Let
them rot. But I spoke no word, Silas Horne, remember! [Then in a tone of
fear.] Be ye dyin’, Sarah? No, ye must live—live to see your ship come
home with the gold—and I’ll buy ye all in the world ye set your heart on.
No, not ambergris, Sarah—gold and diamonds and sech! We’re rich at last!
[Then with great anguish.] What woman’s stubborn talk be this? Confess,
ye say? But I spoke no word, I swear to ye! Why will ye hound me and
think evil o’ what I done? Men’s business, I tell ye. They would have killed
us and stolen the gold, can’t ye see? [Wildly.] Enough o’ talk, Sarah! I’ll sail
out in spite o’ ye! [He gets to his feet and paces up and down the room. The
door in the rear is opened and Nat re-enters. He glances at his father, then
looks down the stairs behind him cautiously to see if he is followed. He
comes in and closes the door behind him carefully.]
Nat—[In a low voice.] Pa! [Then as his father does not appear to notice
his presence—louder.] Pa!
Bartlett—[Stops short and stares at his son as if he were gradually
awakening from a dream—slowly.] Be that ye, Nat?
Nat—[Coming forward.] Yes. I want to talk with you.
Bartlett—[Struggling to bring his thoughts under control.] Talk? Ye
want to talk—to me? Men’s business—no room for a boy in it—keep clear
o’ this.
Nat—[Defiantly.] That’s what you’ve always said. But I won’t be put off
any longer. I won’t, do you hear?
Bartlett—[Angrily.] I’ve ordered ye not to set foot in this cabin o’
mine. Git below where ye belong. Where’s Sue? I told her to keep ye away.
Nat—She can’t prevent me this time. I’ve made up my mind. Listen, Pa.
I’m going away tomorrow.
 Bartlett—[Uncertainly.] Goin’ away?
Nat—Yes, and I’m never coming back. I’m going to start a new life.
That’s why I want a final talk with you—before I go.
Bartlett—[Dully.] I’ve naught to say to ye.
Nat—You will have. Listen. I’ve absolute proof the Sarah Allen is lost.
Bartlett—[Fiercely.] Ye lie!
Nat—[Curiously.] Why do you say that? You know it’s true. It’s just that
you won’t believe.
Bartlett—[Wanderingly—the word heading his mind into another
channel.] Believe? Aye, he wouldn’t believe. Brass and junk, he said, not
worth a damn—but in the end I made him own up ’twas gold.
Nat—[Repeating the word fascinatedly.] Gold?
Bartlett—A year ago today she sailed. Ye lie! Ye don’t believe either,
do ye?—like him. But I’ll show ye! I’ll make ye own up as I made him!
[With mad exultation.] She’s comin’ home tonight as I ordered Horne she
must! I kin feel her makin’ for home, I tell ye! A red an’ a green at the
mainm’sthead if ye make port o’ night, I ordered Horne. Ye’ll see! [He goes
to look out of a porthole. Nat, as if under a spell, goes to another.]
Nat—[Turning away disappointedly—making an effort to throw off his
thoughts—without conviction.] Nonsense. There’s nothing there—no lights
—and I don’t believe there ever will be.
Bartlett—[His wild eyes fixed on his son’s with an intense effort of will
as if he were trying to break down his resistance.] Ye’ll see, I tell ye—a red
and a green! It ain’t time yet, boy, but when it be they’ll be plain in the
night afore your eyes. [He goes and sits down by the table. Nat follows him
and sits down in the other chair. He sees the map and stares at it
fascinatedly.]
Nat—What is this—the map of the island? [He reaches out his hand for
it.]
Bartlett—[Snatching it up—with a momentary return to reason—
frightenedly.] Not for ye, boy. Keep clear o’ this for your own good. [Then
with a crazed triumph.] Aye! Ye’d believe this soon enough, wouldn’t ye?
Nat—[Intensely.] I’ve always believed there was something—and a
moment ago you mentioned gold. [Triumphant in his turn.] So you needn’t
try to hide the secret any longer. I know now. It’s gold—gold you found on
that island—gold you fitted out the Sarah Allen to sail back for—gold you
buried where I saw that cross marked on the map! [Passionately.] Why have
you been afraid to confide in me, your own son? Why didn’t you let me sail
back in your place? Were you afraid I’d give the secret away? Did you think
I wouldn’t believe——?
Bartlett—[With a mad chuckle.] Aye, ye believe now, right enough.
Nat—I always believed, I tell you. [Pleadingly.] And now that I know so
much why can’t you tell me the rest? I must know! I have a right to be heir
to the secret. Why don’t you confess——
Bartlett—[Interrupting—his brain catching at the word.] Confess?
Confess, did ye say, Sarah? To Nat, did ye mean? Aye, Sarah, I’ll tell him
all and leave it to him to say if I did wrong. [His gleaming eyes fixed on his
son’s.] I’ll tell ye, boy, from start to finish o’ it. I been eatin’ my heart to tell
someone—someone who’d believe—someone that’d say I did no wrong.
Listen, boy, ye know o’ our four days in an open boat after the Triton went
down. I told ye o’ that when I come home. But what I didn’t tell ye was
they was six o’ us in that boat, not four.
Nat—Six? There were you and Horne and Cates and Jimmy——
Bartlett—The cook o’ the Triton and the ship’s boy. We’d been on the
island two days—an island barren as hell, mind—without food or drink. We
was roasted by the sun and nigh mad with thirst. Then, on the second day, I
seed a Malay canoe—a proper war canoe such as the pirates use—sunk
down inside the reef. I sent Jimmy down to go over her thinkin’ they might
be some cask o’ water in her the sea’d not got to. [With impressive
emphasis.] He found no water, boy, but he did find—d’ye know what, boy?
Nat—[Exultantly.] The gold, of course!
Bartlett—[Laughing harshly.] Ha-ha! Ye do believe right enough,
don’t ye! Aye, the gold—in a chest. We hauled her up ashore and forced the
lid open. [Gloatingly.] And there it was afore our eyes in the sun—gold
bracelets and rings and ornaments o’ all sorts fixed up fancy with diamonds
and emeralds and rubies and sech—red and green—shinin’ in the sun! [He
stops impressively.]
Nat—[Fascinatedly.] Diamonds and—— But how did they get there?
Bartlett—Looted treasure o’ some Chinese junk, likely. What matter
how it come about? There it was afore our eyes. And then, mind ye, that
thief o’ a cook came runnin’ up from where he’d been shirkin’ to look at
what we’d found. “No share for ye, ye swab,” I yelled at him; and then he
says: “It ain’t gold—brass and junk,” he says and run off for fear o’ me.
Aye, he run off to the boy and told him to jine with his sneakin’ plan to steal
the gold from us!
Nat—[Savagely.] But why didn’t you stop him? Why didn’t you——?
Bartlett—I be comin’ to that, boy, and ye’ll see if I did wrong. We
carried the chest to the shade o’ a palm and there was that thief o’ a cook
an’ the boy waitin’. I collared ’em both and made ’em look at the gold.
“Look and tell me if it’s gold or no,” I says. [Triumphantly.] They was
afeerd to lie. Even that thief o’ a cook owned up ’twas gold. Then when I
turned ’em loose, because he knowed he’d git no share, he shouted again:
“Brass and junk. Not worth a damn.”
Nat—[Furiously.] But why did you allow—— Why didn’t you——
Bartlett—[With mad satisfaction.] Aye, ye be seein’ the way o’ it, boy.
It was just then we sighted the schooner that picked us up after. We made a
map and was burryin’ the gold when we noticed them two thieves sneakin’
about to see where we’d hide it. I saw ’em plain, the scum! That thief o’ a
cook was thinkin’ he’d tell the folks on the schooner and go shares with
them—and leave us on the island to rot; or he was thinkin’ he and the boy’d
be able to come back and dig it up afore I could. We had to do somethin’
quick to spile their plan afore the schooner come. [In a tone of savage
satisfaction.] And so—though I spoke no word to him—Jimmy knifed ’em
both and covered ’em up with sand. But I spoke no word, d’ye hear? Their
deaths be on Jimmy’s head alone.
Nat—[Passionately.] And what if you had? They deserved what they
got.
Bartlett—Then ye think I did no wrong?
Nat—No! Any man—I’d have done the same myself.
Bartlett—[Gripping his son’s hand tensely.] Ye be true son o’ mine,
Nat. I ought to told ye before. [Exultantly.] Ye hear, Sarah? Nat says I done
no wrong.
Nat—The map! Can I see it?
Bartlett—Aye. [He hands it to Nat who spreads it out on the table and
pores over it.]
 Nat—[Excitedly.] Why, with this I—we—can go back—even if the
Sarah Allen is lost.
Bartlett—She ain’t lost, boy—not her. Don’t heed them lies ye been
hearin’. She’s due now. I’ll go up and look. [He goes up the companionway
stairs. Nat does not seem to notice his going, absorbed in the map. Then
there is a loud muffled hail in Bartlett’s voice.] “Sarah Allen, ahoy!”
[Nat starts, transfixed—then rushes to one of the portholes to look. He
turns back, passing his hand over his eyes, frowning bewilderedly. The door
above is flung open and slammed shut and Bartlett stamps down the
stairs.]
Bartlett—[Fixing Nat hypnotically with his eyes—triumphantly.]
What did I tell ye? D’ye believe now she’ll come back? D’ye credit your
own eyes?
Nat—[Vaguely.] Eyes? I looked. I didn’t see——
Bartlett—Ye lie! The Sarah Allen, ye blind fool, come back from the
Southern Seas as I swore she must! Loaded with gold as I swore she would
be!—makin’ port!—droppin’ her anchor just when I hailed her.
Nat—[Feebly, his will crumbling.] But—how do you know?—some
other schooner——
Bartlett—Not know my own ship—and the signal I’d ordered Horne
to make!
Nat—[Mechanically.] I know—a red and a green at the mainm’sthead.
Bartlett—Then look out if ye dare! [He goes to a porthole.] Ye kin see
it plain from here. [Commandingly.] Will ye believe your eyes? Look! [Nat
comes to him slowly—looks through the porthole—and starts back, a
possessed expression coming over his face.]
Nat—[Slowly.] A red and a green—clear as day!
Bartlett—[His face is now transfigured by the ecstasy of a dream
come true.] They’ve lowered a boat—the three—Horne an’ Cates and
Jimmy Kanaka. They’re rowin’ ashore. Listen. I hear the oars in the locks.
Listen!
Nat—[Staring into his father’s eyes—after a pause during which he
appears to be straining his hearing to the breaking point—excitedly.] I hear!
Bartlett—Listen! They’ve landed. They’ll be comin’ up the path now.
[In a crooning, monotonous tone.] They move slowly—slowly. It be heavy,
I know—that chest. [After a pause.] Hark! They’re below at the door in
front.
Nat—I hear!
Bartlett—Ye’ll see it now in a moment, boy—the gold. Up with it,
bullies! Up ye come! Up, bullies! It’s heavy, heavy!
Nat—[Madly.] I hear them! They’re on the floor below! They’re
coming! I’ll open the door. [He springs to the door and flings it open,
shouting.] Welcome home, boys! [Sue is discovered outside just climbing
up the stairs from below. She steps inside, then stops, looking with
amazement and horror from father to brother. Nat pushes her roughly aside
to look behind her down the stairs.]
Sue—Nat!
Nat—[Turning to his father.] I’ll go down to the wharf. They must be
there or—— [The rest of his words are lost as he hurries down the stairs.
Bartlett steps back, shrinking away from his daughter, and sinks on a
chair by the table with a groan, his hands over his eyes.]
Sue—[Comes to him and shakes him by the shoulder—alarmed.] Pa!
What has happened? What is the matter with Nat? What have you told him?
[With bitter despair.] Oh, can’t you see you’re driving him mad, too?
Bartlett—[Letting his hands fall and staring at her haggardly—
falteringly, as if reason were slowly filtering back into his brain.] Sue—ye
said—drivin’ him mad, too! Then ye think I be——? [He staggers to his
feet. Sue breaks down, sobbing. Bartlett falters on.] But I seen her—the
Sarah Allen—the signal lights——
Sue—Oh, Pa, there’s nothing there! You know it! She was lost months
ago.
Bartlett—Lost? [He stumbles over to a porthole and looks out. His
body sags as if he were going to fall. He turns away and cries hopelessly in
a tone of heart-rending grief.] Lost! Aye, they be no Sarah Allen there—no
lights—nothin’!
Sue—[Pleading fiercely.] Pa, you’ve got to save Nat! He won’t heed
anyone else. Can’t you tell him the truth—the whole truth whatever it is—
now when I’m here and you’re yourself again—and set him free from this
crazy dream!
 Bartlett—[With wild grief.] Confess, ye mean? Sue, ye be houndin’
me like your Ma did to her dyin’ hour! Confess—that I spoke the word to
Jimmy—in my mind! Confess—brass and junk—not worth a damn! [In
frenzied protest.] No! Ye lie!
Sue—Oh, Pa, I don’t know what you mean. Tell Nat the truth! Save him!
Bartlett—The truth? It’s a lie! [As Sue tries to bar his way to the
companionway—sternly.] Out o’ my way, girl! [He pulls himself feebly up
the stairs. The door is heard slamming above. Sue sits down in a chair in a
hopeless, exhausted attitude. After a pause Nat re-enters. He is panting
heavily from his exertions. His pale face is set in an expression of despair.]
Nat—[Looking about the room wildly.] Where is he? Sue! [He comes
forward and falls on his knees beside her chair, hiding his face in her lap
like a frightened child. He sobs hoarsely.] Sue! What does it all mean? I
looked. There was nothing there—no schooner—nothing.
Sue—[Soothing him as if he were a little boy.] Of course there wasn’t.
Did you expect there would be, you foolish boy? Come, you know better
than that. Why, Nat, you told the doctor and I that you were absolutely
convinced the Sarah Allen was lost.
Nat—[Dully.] Yes, I know—but I don’t believe—like him——
Sue—Sshhhh! You know the state Pa is in. He doesn’t realize what he’s
saying half the time. You ought to have better sense than to pay any
attention——
Nat—[Excitedly.] But he told me all he’s been hiding from us—all about
the gold!
Sue—[Looking at him with alarm—mystified.] Gold? [Then forcing a
smile.] Don’t be silly, Nat. It doesn’t exist except in his poor, deranged
mind.
Nat—[Fiercely.] That’s a lie, Sue! I saw the map, I tell you—the map of
the island with a cross marked on it where they buried the gold.
Sue—He showed a map to you—a real map? [Gently.] Are you sure
you’re not just imagining that, too?
Nat—I had it in my hands, you fool, you! There—on the table. [He
springs to his feet, sees the map on the table, and snatches it up with an
exclamation of joy—showing it to Sue.] See! Now will you believe me!
[She examines the map perplexedly. Nat paces up and down—excitedly.] I
tell you it’s all true. You can’t deny it now. It’s lucky for us I forced him to
confess. He might have died keeping the secret and then we’d have lost—
I’ll tell you what I’m going to do now, Sue. I’m going to raise the money
somewhere, somehow, and fit out another schooner and this time I’ll sail on
her myself. No trusting to Danny or anyone else! Yes, Sue, we’ll come into
our own yet, even if the Sarah Allen is lost—— [He stops—then in accents
of bewildered fear.] But—she can’t be lost—I saw the lights, Sue—red and
green—as plain as I see you now—— [He goes to one of the portholes
again.]
Sue—[Who has been watching him worriedly, puts the map back on the
table, gets up and, assuming a brisk, matter-of-fact tone, she goes over and
takes him by the arm.] Come downstairs, Nat. Don’t think any more about it
tonight. It’s late and you’re worn out. You need rest and a good sleep.
Nat—[Following her toward the door—confusedly.] But Sue—I saw
them—— [From above in the night comes the muffled hail in Bartlett’s
voice.] Sarah Allen, ahoy! [Nat stops, tortured, his hands instinctively
raised up to cover his ears. Sue gives a startled cry. The door above is
slammed and Bartlett comes down the stairs, his face revealing that the
delusion has again full possession of his mind.]
Bartlett—[Pointing his finger at his son and fixing him with his eyes—
in ringing, triumphant tones.] The Sarah Allen, boy—in the harbor below—
a red and a green plain afore my eyes! What did I tell ye, boy? Come back
from the Southern Seas as I swore she must! Loaded with gold as I swore
she would be! [Nat again seems to crumble—to give way to the stronger
will. He takes a step toward his father, his eyes lighting up. Sue looks at his
face—then rushes to her father.]
Sue—[Putting her hands to her father’s head and forcing him to look
down into her face—intensely.] Pa! Stop, do you hear me! It’s all mad!
You’re driving Nat mad, too! [As she sees her father hesitate, the wild light
dying out of his eyes, she summons all her power to a fierce pleading.] For
my sake, Pa! For Ma’s sake! Think of how she would feel if she were alive
and saw you acting this way with Nat! Tell him! Tell him now—before me
—tell him it’s all a lie!
Bartlett—[Trying in an agony of conflict to get hold of his reason—
incoherently.] Yes, Sue—I hear ye—confess—aye, Sarah, your dyin’ words
—keep Nat clear o’ this—but—red and green—I seen ’em plain—— [Then
suddenly after a tremendous struggle, lifting his tortured face to Nat’s—in
tones of despair.] Nothin’ there, boy! Don’t ye believe! No red and green!
She’ll never come! Derelict and lost, boy, the Sarah Allen. [After another
struggle with himself.] And I lied to ye, boy. I gave the word—in my mind
—to kill them two. I murdered ’em in cold blood.
Sue—[Shrinking from him in horror.] Pa! You don’t know what you’re
saying.
Bartlett—The truth, girl. Ye said—confess——
Nat—[Bewilderedly.] But—it was right. They were trying to steal——
Bartlett—[Overcome by the old obsession for a moment—savagely.]
Aye, that’s it! The thievin’ scum! They was tryin’—— [He stays short,
throwing his head back, his whole body tense and quivering with the effort
he makes to force this sustaining lie out of his brain—then, broken but self-
conquering, he looks again at Nat—gently.] No, Nat. That be the lie I been
tellin’ myself ever since. That cook—he said ’twas brass—— But I’d been
lookin’ for ambergris—gold—the whole o’ my life—and when we found
that chest—I had to believe, I tell ye! I’d been dreamin’ o’ it all my days!
But he said brass and junk, and told the boy—and I give the word to murder
’em both and cover ’em up with sand.
Nat—[Very pale—despairingly.] But he lied, didn’t he? It is gold—real
gold—isn’t it?
Bartlett—[Slowly takes the studded anklet from his pocket and holds it
out to Nat. The latter brings it to the light of the lantern. Bartlett sits on a
chair, covering his face with his hands—in a tone of terrible suffering.]
Ye’ll tell me, boy—if it’s gold or no. I’ve had it by me all this time—but
I’ve been afeerd to show——
Nat—[In a tone of wild scorn.] Why, it’s brass, of course! The cheapest
kind of junk—not worth a damn! [He flings it savagely into a corner of the
room. Bartlett groans and seems to shrink up and turn into a figure of
pitiable feebleness.]
Sue—[Pityingly.] Don’t, Nat. [She puts her arms around her father’s
shoulders protectingly.]
Nat—[In a stifled voice.] What a damned fool I’ve been! [He flings
himself down on the cot, his shoulders heaving.]
 Bartlett—[Uncovers his grey face on which there is now settling an
expression of strange peace—stroking his daughter’s hand.] Sue—don’t
think hard o’ me. [He takes the map.] An end to this! [He slowly tears it
into small pieces, seeming to grow weaker and weaker as he does so.
Finally as he lets the fragments filter through his fingers, his whole frame
suddenly relaxes. He sighs, his eyes shut, and sags back in his chair, his
head bent forward limply on his chest.]
Sue—[Alarmed.] Pa! [She sinks to her knees beside him and looks up
into his face.] Pa! Speak to me! It’s Sue! [Then turning toward her brother
—terrifiedly.] Nat! Run—get the doctor—— [Nat starts to a sitting
position. Sue tries with trembling hands to feel of her father’s pulse, his
heart—then begins to sob hysterically.] Oh, Nat—he’s dead, I think—he’s
dead!

[The Curtain Falls]