Focus position is the model’s first and broadest determinant. Depending on where focus falls in a sentence, it establishes the main path through which the dōu construction is interpreted: scalar exhaustivity, general exhaustivity or exclusiveness. These are labels for three interpretive branches in the proposed framework rather than separate fixed definitions supplied by dōu. The available study summary does not explain their internal semantic properties in detail, so the account cannot be presented as a fully specified definition of each category.

Within the general-exhaustivity branch, topic nature distinguishes readings involving an overt topic from those involving a covert topic. The framework therefore predicts that different interpretations within the same construction can depend on the relationship between the quantified material and the topic. The supplied evidence does not include the particular sentences or contexts used to illustrate this contrast, but it presents overt-topic and covert-topic readings as a systematic consequence of topic structure.

Speaker intention provides the second distinction within the model. In the exclusiveness branch, it separates scalar exclusiveness from general exclusiveness. As with the three main interpretive paths, the available summary does not define the semantic content of these two forms or specify how speaker intentions were measured. Their role in the article is instead structural: they allow one branch of the model to accommodate two distinct readings when the presence of dōu alone does not establish a unique interpretation.

The study advances a unified account of semantic variation within Mandarin dōu sentences. Its central proposal is that focus selects the main interpretive path, topic nature differentiates readings within the general-exhaustivity path, and speaker intention differentiates readings within the exclusiveness path. The framework further treats variation between different dōu constructions as context-specific manifestations of ambiguity that occurs within a construction. Because the supplied evidence describes a proposed explanatory model and does not report experimental procedures, participant groups, quantified outcomes or individual sentence analyses, its contribution is best understood as a theoretical account of how syntax, semantics and pragmatics may jointly shape interpretation, rather than as a demonstrated behavioral effect.

Subject of Research: Semantic and pragmatic sources of ambiguity in Mandarin dōu sentences

Article Title: Deriving intra-constructional ambiguity in Mandarin dōu sentences: the roles of focus, topic, and speaker intention

Article References: Liu, H., Feng, H., & Hu, B. (2026). Deriving intra-constructional ambiguity in Mandarin dōu sentences: the roles of focus, topic, and speaker intention. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-08846-w

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1057/s41599-026-08846-w

Keywords: Mandarin Chinese, dōu, semantic ambiguity, pragmatics, focus, topic structure, speaker intention, quantification, exhaustivity, exclusiveness, Deriving, intra-constructional