This paper investigates a particular type of non-canonical construction in Mandarin Chinese displaying an apparent semantics-syntax mismatch. We conducted an acceptability judgment experiment on native Mandarin speakers to evaluate whether such sequences could stand out of context as acceptable fragments. Analyses on experimental results revealed that: both semantic and syntactic acceptability of these sequences were significantly lower than those of canonical nominal classifier phrases; whereas if contextualized, the syntactic acceptability of those sequences became similar to that of canonical nominal phrases. This suggests that the non-canonical sequences are grammatically not on the same footing as canonical expressions; and it is the sentential context that makes these sequences appear structurally well-formed. These findings contribute to general discussions on relationship between constituency and grammaticality by demonstrating the gradient nature of grammaticality, and advocate a dynamic perspective in linguistic analysis that looks at a sequence of words in interaction with other elements in a sentence.