As an exception to Krifka’s (in: Bartsch, Benthem, Emde Boas,Semantics and contextual expression, CSLI Publications, Stanford, 1989) famous generalization that a quantized incremental theme always induces an event-homomorphic completive reading, Singh (Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 17(1): 469–479, 1991, Journal of East Asian Linguistics 3(2): 107–146, 1998) observes that in Hindi only quantized mass noun phrases entail a completive reading, but unexpectedly quantized count noun phrases can give rise to an incompletive reading. She proposes that count nouns can introduce a partial-affectedness thematic relation, whereas mass nouns introduce a total-affectedness thematic relation. With new data in Mandarin, instead of the count/mass distinction, I argue that referentiality of the direct object is a crucial factor, because incompletive readings are only felicitous with direct objects interpreted referentially for consumption verbs in Mandarin.

中文翻译：

---

参考性，个性化和不称职的阅读

作为Krifka的例外（在Bartsch，Benthem，Emde Boas，语义学和语境表达中，CSLI Publications，斯坦福，1989年），著名的概括是量化的增量主题总是引起事件同态的完全阅读，Singh（伯克利年度会议）语言学学会17（1）：469–479，1991，东亚语言学杂志3（2）：107–146，1998）观察到，在印地语中，仅量化的质量名词短语需要完整阅读，而出乎意料的量化计数名词短语可以引起阅读不足。她提出计数名词可以引入部分影响主题关系，而质量名词可以引入整体影响主题关系。我用普通话的新数据代替计数/质量区分，而是认为直接对象的参照性是一个关键因素，