Article published In: Language and Linguistics
Vol. 22:2 (2021) ► pp.243–271
Anaphor reconstruction in Japanese relative clauses
An experimental study
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 17 April 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00082.che
https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00082.che
Abstract
This study conducted two experiments to examine the derivation of the head noun phrase in Japanese relative clauses, with a focus on whether the anaphors jibun ‘self’ and jibun-jishin ‘self-self’ within the head noun phrase can be co-referential with the relative clause subject. It aims to settle a long-standing debate among the previous studies concerning the interpretation of the anaphors inside the head noun phrase: while several studies claimed that the co-reference between the anaphor jibun ‘self’ and the relative clause subject is prohibited, many other studies argued that such co-reference is possible. In addition, it has been claimed that while co-indexing the anaphor jibun with the relative clause subject might be marginally acceptable, it would become fully acceptable if we replace jibun with the morphologically complex anaphor jibun-jishin ‘self-self’, which implies that the morphological make-up of an anaphor may affect its ability to be co-indexed with the relative clause subject.
The results of two carefully controlled truth value judgment experiments show that neither the simplex anaphor jibun nor the complex anaphor jibun-jishin within the head noun phrase of relative clauses can take the relative clause subject as its antecedent, which suggests that the head noun phrase does not reconstruct and therefore lends support to the pro-binding analysis of Japanese relative clauses. Moreover, the findings also suggest that the morphological make-up of an anaphor does not affect its ability to take the relative clause subject as its antecedent, despite the claim that it is more acceptable to co-index the complex anaphor jibun-jishin with the relative clause subject than the simplex anaphor jibun.
Keywords: Japanese, relative clause, head noun phrase, anaphor
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Derivation of the head NP in Japanese RCs
- 3.Simplex and complex anaphors in Japanese
- 4.Research questions
- 5.Experiment 1
- 5.1Participants
- 5.2Task
- 5.3Materials and design of the experiment
- 5.4Procedure
- 5.5Findings
- 6.Experiment 2
- 6.1Participants
- 6.2Task
- 6.3Materials and design of the experiment
- 6.4Procedure
- 6.5Findings
- 7.Discussion
- 8.Conclusion
- Notes
- Abbreviations
References
References (35)
Abe, Jun. 1997. The locality of zibun and logophoricity. In Inoue, Kazuko (ed.), Researching and verifying an advanced theory of human language (COE Research Report 1), 595–626. Chiba: Kanda University of International Studies. ([URL]) (Accessed 2020-09-25.)
Aikawa, Takako. 2002 [1999]. Reflexives. In Tsujimura, Natsuko (ed.), The handbook of Japanese linguistics, 154–190. Malden: Blackwell.
Aoun, Joseph E. & Li, Yen-hui Audrey. 2003. Essays on the representational and derivational nature of grammar: The diversity of wh-constructions. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Bhatt, Rajesh. 2002. The raising analysis of relative clauses: Evidence from adjectival modification. Natural Language Semantics 10(1). 43–90.
Chomsky, Noam. 1993. A Minimalist Program for linguistic theory. In Hale, Kenneth & Keyser, Samuel Jay (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger (Current Studies in Linguistics 24), 1–52. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Clements, George. N. 1975. The logophoric pronoun in Ewe: Its role in discourse. Journal of West African Languages 10(2). 141–77.
Crain, Stephen & Thornton, Rosalind. 1998. Investigations in universal grammar: A guide to experiments on the acquisition of syntax and semantics. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Fukui, Naoki & Takano, Yuji. 2000. Nominal structure: An extension of the symmetry principle. In Svenonius, Peter (ed.), The derivation of VO and OV (Linguistics Today 31), 219–254. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gunji, Takao. 2002. Tango to bun no koozoo [Structures of words and sentences]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
Hara, Takaaki. 2001. Anaphoric expressions in Japanese. Linguistics in the Netherlands 18(1). 113–125. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hasegawa, Nobuko. 1988. Remarks on ‘zero pronominals’: In defense of Hasegawa (1984/85). In Tawa, Wako & Nakayama, Mineharu (eds.), Proceedings of Japanese Syntax Workshop: Issues on empty categories, 50–76. New London: Connecticut College.
Hoji, Hajime. 1985. Logical form constraints and configurational structures in Japanese. Seattle: University of Washington. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Hoshi, Koji. 2004. Remarks on N-final relativization in Japanese. English Language and Literature 441. 113–147. Yokohama: Keio University.
Huang, C.-T. James & Liu, C.-S. Luther. 2001. Logophority, attitude, and ziji at the interface. In Cole, Peter & Hermon, Gabriella & Huang, C.-T. James (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 33: Long distance reflexives, 141–195. Bingley: Emerald.
Ishii, Yasuo. 1991. Operators and empty categories in Japanese. Storrs: University of Connecticut. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Ishizuka, Tomoko. 2010. Restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses in Japanese: Antisymmetric approach. (Manuscript.)
Kameyama, Megumi. 1984. Subjective/logophoric bound anaphor zibun. In Drogo, Joseph & Mishra, Veena & Testen, David (eds.), CLS 20: Papers from the 20th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 228–238. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
. 1985. Zero Anaphora: The case of Japanese. Stanford: Stanford University. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Katada, Fusa. 1988. LF-binding of anaphors. In Borer, Hagit (ed.), WCCFL 7: Proceedings of the 7th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 171–186. Stanford: CSLI.
Kim, Ji-Hye & Yoon, James H. 2009. Local-distance bound local anaphors in Korean – An empirical study of the Korean anaphor caki-casin. Lingua 119(5). 733–755.
Kishida, Maki. 2011. Reflexives in Japanese. College Park: University of Maryland. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Kitao, Yasuyuki. 2009. The nature of relativization: A minimalist perspective. Osaka: Osaka University. (Doctoral dissertation.)
. 2011. The presence of head-raising and resumptive-stranding in Japanese relative clauses. Acta Linguistica Hungaria 58(3). 313–335.
Klein, Udo & Guntsetseg, Dolgor & von Heusinger, Klaus. 2012. Case in conflict: Embedded subjects in Mongolian. In Lamers, Monique & de Swart, Peter (eds.), Case, word order and prominence: Interacting cues in language production and comprehension (Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics 40), 43–64. Dordrecht: Springer.
Kuno, Susumu. 1973. The structure of the Japanese language (Current Studies in Linguistics 3). Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Matsumoto, Yoshiko. 1997. Noun-modifying constructions in Japanese: A frame semantic approach (Studies in Language Companion Series 35). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
McCawley, Noriko Akatsuka. 1976. Reflexivization: A transformational approach. In Shibatani, Masayoshi (ed.), Syntax and Semantics, vol. 5: Japanese Generative Grammar, 51–116. New York: Academic Press.
Morita, Hisashi. 2013. Optional movements derive Japanese relative clauses. US-China Foreign Language 11(9). 645–658.
Murasugi, Keiko. 2000. An antisymmetry analysis of Japanese relative clauses. In Alexiadou, Artemis & Law, Paul & Meinunger, André & Wilder, Chris (eds.), The syntax of relative clauses (Linguistics Today 32), 231–264. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Nakamura, Masaru. 1987. Parameterized extension of binding theory. In Browning, M. A. & Czaykowska-Higgins, Ewa & Ritter, Elizabeth (eds.), MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 9: The 25th anniversary of MIT Linguistics, 193–223. Cambridge: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
Perlmutter, David. 1972. Evidence for shadow pronouns in French relativization. In Peranteau, Paul M. & Levi, Judith N. & Phares, Gloria C. (eds.), The Chicago which hunt: Papers from the Relative Clause Festival, a paravolume to papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 73–105. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
