The paper shows that neither monosyllabic localizers nor disyllabic localizers in Mandarin are postpositions. More importantly, it argues that, contra previous uniform treatments of monosyllabic localizers as postpositions, clitics, or deviates of nouns, monosyllabic localizers in Mandarin in fact serve different functions in different contexts or constructions. Specifically, they can be used as a noun in at least a few limited contexts, as a root in a polymorphemic word, and as a clitic when attached to a full-fledged NP. The paper shows that disyllabic localizers serve similar functions though, unlike monosyllabic localizers, they can be used as regular nouns. The paper thus demonstrates that localizers, whether monosyllabic or disyllabic, can all be analyzed with crosslinguistic notions like “noun,” “root,” and “clitic.” When monosyllabic and disyllabic localizers are used as nouns, they function as independent words. When they are a component of a polymorphemic word, they serve as a nominal root. When they function as a clitic, they are also nominal in nature.

中文翻译：

---

在哪里可以找到普通话本地化人员？

论文表明，普通话中的单音节定位器和双音节定位器都不是后置词。更重要的是，它认为，与以前将单音节定位词统一处理为名词后置词、附着词或名词偏离不同，普通话中的单音节定位词实际上在不同的语境或结构中发挥着不同的作用。具体来说，它们可以在至少几个有限的上下文中用作名词，用作多态词中的词根，以及在连接到成熟的 NP 时用作附着词。该论文表明，双音节定位器具有类似的功能，但与单音节定位器不同，它们可以用作常规名词。因此，本文证明了定位词，无论是单音节还是双音节，都可以用跨语言概念（如“名词”、“词根”和“clitic”）进行分析。” 当单音节和双音节定位词用作名词时，它们作为独立词发挥作用。当它们是多态词的一个组成部分时，它们充当名义词根。当他们作为附庸之徒时，他们本质上也是名义上的。