Cover not available

In:Pragmatics of Japanese: Perspectives on grammar, interaction and culture
Edited by Mutsuko Endo Hudson, Yoshiko Matsumoto and Junko Mori
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 285] 2018
► pp. 17–48

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Chapter 1
Reason-coding in Japanese

A Multiple Grammar perspective

 | University of California, Los Angeles
 | University of California, Los Angeles
Published online: 16 April 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.285.01kaw
Abstract
This chapter examines how reasons are expressed in Japanese discourse, employing the Multiple Grammar (MG) Model proposed by Iwasaki (2015) as a theoretical foundation. It shows how the model can explain different ways in which reasons are expressed in conversation and newspaper editorials. This research is different from most previous works in that it starts with the function of reason coding rather than forms such as kara and node. In conversations, reasons are coded flexibly by employing mechanisms suited for on-line production while in editorials they are expressed using complex structures such as embedding with complement and relative clauses, made possible because there is almost no time constraint.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Multiple Grammar model
  • 3.Grammatical resources for reason-coding
  • 4.Data
  • 5.Grammatical resources for reason-coding in conversation and editorials
    • 5.1Conversation
      • 5.1.1 Kara
      • 5.1.2 Shi
      • 5.1.3 Tame and node/nde
      • 5.1.4 Dakara
    • 5.2Editorials
      • 5.2.1 Kara
      • 5.2.2 Shi
      • 5.2.3 Tame and node
      • 5.2.4 Dakara
      • 5.2.5 Relative clause
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Appendix
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
References (60)
References
Bender, Emily, and Andreas Kathol. 2001. “Constructional Effects of Just Because… Doesn’t Mean .” Berkeley Linguistic Society 27: 13–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989. “A Typology of English Text.” Linguistics 27: 3–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. Dimensions of Register Variation: A Cross-Linguistic Comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, and Susan Conrad. 2009. Register, Genre, and Style Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2006. “From Usage to Grammar: The Mind’s Response to Repetition.” Language 82 (4): 711–733. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan, and Paul Hopper. 2001. Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Canavan, Alexandra, and George Zipperlen. 1996. CALLHOME Japanese Speech LDC96S37. DVD. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1982. “Integration and Involvement in Speaking, Writing, and Oral Literature.” In Spoken and Written Language: Exploring Orality and Literacy, ed. by Deborah Tannen, 34–53. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace, and Deborah Tannen. 1987. “The Relation between Written and Spoken Language.” Annual Review of Anthropology 16: 383–407. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clancy, Patricia. 1982. “Written and Spoken Style in Japanese Narratives.” In Spoken and Written Language: Exploring Orality and Literacy, ed. by Deborah Tannen, 55–75. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2014. “Recycling Utterances: A Speaker’s Guide to Sentence Processing.” Cognitive Linguistics 25 (4): 617–653. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger, and Michael Tomasello. 2001. “The Acquisition of Finite Complement Clauses in English: A Corpus-based Analysis.” Cognitive Linguistics 12 (2): 97–141 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 1985. “Competing motivations.” In Iconicity in Syntax: Proceedings of a Symposium on Iconicity in Syntax, ed. by John Haiman, 343–365. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1987. “Discourse Basis of Ergativity.” Language 63 (4): 805–855. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., and Junko Mori. “Causal markers in Japanese and English conversations: A cross-linguistic study of interactional grammar.” Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 4.1 (1994): 31–61.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2004. The Language of Science: Collected Works of M. A. J. Halliday Vol5, ed. by Jonathan J. Webster. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul. 1987. “Emergent Grammar.” In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. by J. Aske, N. Beery, L. Michaelis and H. Filip: 139–155.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1988. “Emergent Grammar and the A Priori Grammar.” In Linguistics in Context: Connecting Observation and Understanding, ed. by Deborah Tannen, 117–134. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998. “Emergent Grammar.” In The New Psychology of Language, ed. by Michael Tomasello, 155–175. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. 2001. “Grammatical constructions and their discourse origins: prototype or family resemblance.” In Applied cognitive linguistics I: Theory and language acquisition, ed. by Martin Pütz, Susanne Niemeier, and René Dirven, 109–29. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul. 2004. “The Openness of Grammatical Constructions.” InProceedings from the Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, Vol. 40, 153–175. Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horiike, Naoaki. 1999. “‘Shi’ o mochiita gen’in/riyuu hyoogen ni tsuite [On the use of shi to indicate reason/cause].” Tsukuba Nihongo Kenkyuu 4: 71–90Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Imao, Yukiko. 1991. “Kara, node, tame.” Nihongogaku 10 (12): 78–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Iwasaki, Shoichi. 2013. Japanese. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “A Multiple-Grammar Model of Speaker’s Linguistic Knowledge.” Cognitive Linguistics 26. 161–210. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Iwasaki, Shoichi, and Tsuyoshi Ono. 2002. “‘Sentence’ in Spontaneous Spoken Japanese Discourse.” In Complex Sentences in Grammar and Discourse, ed. by Joan Bybee, and Michael Noonan, 175–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaneyasu, Michiko, and Iwasaki Shoichi. 2017a. Indexing ‘Entrustment’: An Analysis of the Japanese Formulaic Construction [N da yo N]. Discourse Studies. 1–20.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017b. “Tajuu-bunpoo: Koto no bunseki o tooshite [Multiple grammars: An analysis of koto ].” In Hanashi kotoba e no apuroochi [An approach to spoken language] ed. by Ryoko Suzuki, Kaori Hata and Daisuke Yokomori. Tokyo: Hituji Syobo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karatsu, Mariko. 1995. “A Functional Analysis of DEWA, DAKARA and SHIKASHI in Conversation.” Japanese Discourse 1: 107–130.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kobayashi, Sachie. 1994. Setsuzokujoshi shi no bunronteki koosatsu [A discourse study of the connective particle shi ]. In Tookyoo Gaikokugo Daigaku Ryuugakusee Nihongo Kyooiku Sentaa Ronshuu 20. 15–27.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kroll, Barbara. 1977. Combining Ideas in Written and Spoken English. In Discourse Across Time and Space: Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics 5, ed. by Elinor O. Keenan & Tina. L. Bennett, 69–108. Los Angeles, CA: Department of Linguistics, University of Southern California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kurumada, Chigusa, and Shoichi Iwasaki. 2011. “Negotiating Desirability: The Acquisition of the Uses of Ii ‘Good’ in Mother-Child Interactions in Japanese.” In Japanese/Korean Linguistics Vol. 19, ed. by Ho-ming Sohn, Haruko Minegishi Cook, William O’Grady, Leon Serafim, and Sang Yee Cheon, 511–525. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol.1 Theoretical Preliminaries. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1991. Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2000. “A Dynamic Usage-based Model.” In Usage-Based Models of Language, ed. by Michael Barlow and Suzzanne Kemmer, 1–63. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Linell, Per. 2004. The Written Language Bias in Linguistics: Its Nature, Origins and Transformations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Makino, Seiichi, and Michio Tsutsui. 1986. A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar. Tokyo: The Japan Times.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McGloin, Naomi, and Yumiko Konishi. 2010. “From Connective Particle to Sentence-final Particle: A Usage-based Analysis of shi ‘and’ in Japanese.” Language Sciences 32: 563–578. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, Jim, and Regina Weinert. 1998. Spontaneous Spoken Language: Syntax and Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miyagawa, Shigeru, and Mari Nakamura. 1991. “The Logic of Kara and Node in Japanese.” In Interdisciplinary Approaches to Language, ed. by Carol Georgopoulos, and Roberta Ishihara, 435–448. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nagano, Masaru. 1970. Dentatsuron ni motozuku Nihongo bumpoo no kenkyuu. Tokyo: Tokyodo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ochs, Elinor. 1979. “Planned and Unplanned Discourse.” In Discourse and Syntax (Syntax and Semantics, Vol 12), ed. by Talmy Givon, 51–79. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ohori, Toshio. 1995. “Remarks on Suspended Clauses: A Contribution to Japanese Phraseology.” In Essays in Semantics and Pragmatics, ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani, and Sandra A. Thompson, 201–218. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ono, Tsuyoshi and Shoichi Iwasaki. 2002. “Toward an Understanding ‘Sentence’ in Spoken Japanese Discourse: Clause Combining and On-line Mechanisms.” In Culture, Interaction, and Language, ed. by Kuniyoshi Kataoka, and Sachiko Ide, 103–131. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ono, Tsuyoshi, and Sandra A. Thompson. 1994. “Unattached NPs in English Conversation.” Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, vol. 20, 402–419. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yasuhiro Shirai. 2007. “The Consequences of Variation in the Acquisition of Relative Clauses: An Analysis of Longitudinal Production Data from Five Japanese Children.” In Diversity in Language Perspectives and Implications, ed. by Yoshiko Matsumoto, David Oshima, Robison Orrin, and Petter Sells, 243–270. Stanford: CSLIGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew, and Frances H. Syder. 1983a. “Natural Selection in Syntax: Notes on Adaptive Variation and Change in Vernacular and Literary Grammar.” Journal of Pragmatics 7 (5): 551–579. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1983b. “Two Puzzles for Linguistic Theory: Nativelike Selection and Nativelike Fluency.” In Language and communication, ed. by Jack C. Richards and Richard W. Schmidt. 191–225. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Purcell-Gates, Victoria. 2001. “Emergent Literacy Is Emerging Knowledge of Written, Not Oral Language.” In The Role of Family Literacy Environments in Promoting Young Children’s Emerging Literacy Skills, ed. by Pia Rebello Britto, and Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, 7–22. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sulzby, Elizabeth. 1985. “Children’s Emergent Abilities to Read Favorite Storybooks: A Developmental Study.” Reading Research Quarterly 20: 458–481. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah (ed.). 1982. Spoken and Written Language: Exploring Orality and Literacy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A., and Paul J. Hopper. 2001. “Transitivity, Clause Structure, and Argument Structure: Evidence from Conversation.” In Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure, ed. by Joan L. Bybee, and Paul J. Hopper, 27–59. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wray, Alison, and George W. Grace. 2007. “The Consequences of Talking to Strangers: Evolutionary Corollaries of Socio-cultural Influences on Linguistic Form.” Lingua 117: 543–578. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue