Debate persists over whether Mandarin Chinese sentences exhibit a syntactically represented albeit phonologically null Tense projection. In a recent paper, Lin (Syntax 18:320–342, 2015) argues for the positive view. The argument is based on the premise that Mandarin clauses exhibit finite/nonfinite contrasts and that finiteness is a property of Tense. In this paper, I argue that the contrasts identified by Lin can all be adequately accounted for without appealing to Tense. The primary conclusion then is that finiteness contrasts do not constitute evidence for Tense in Mandarin. A secondary conclusion is that Mandarin can nonetheless be said to exhibit a finite/nonfinite distinction, but only if ‘finiteness’ is construed broadly as a cluster of properties that enable a clause to stand alone as a syntactically unembedded assertion. Phenomena considered in making this argument include both those discussed by Lin (object fronting, wide scope of object-position quantifiers, and a scopal interaction between modals and aspect) as well as the syntax of subject position and the grammar of control.

中文翻译：

---

没有时态的有限对比？普通话视角

关于汉语普通话是否表现出句法上的表现，尽管语音上的时态是假的，争论仍在继续。Lin在最近的一篇论文中（语法18：320–342，2015）主张正面观点。该论点是基于这样的前提，即普通话从句表现出有限/非无限的对比，而有限性是时态的一种性质。在本文中，我认为，在不诉诸时态的情况下，可以充分解释林确定的对比。那么主要结论是，有限的对比并不构成普通话时态的证据。第二个结论是，尽管可以说普通话表现出有限/非有限的区别，但前提是“有限性”被广义地解释为一组属性，这些属性使从句可以作为句法上未嵌入的断言而独立存在。