Article published In: Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 14:3 (2023) ► pp.484–508
Evidential meanings in native and learner Japanese and English
Implications for the assessment of speaker certainty
Published online: 30 May 2023
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.20089.fil
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.20089.fil
Abstract
Evidentiality is a linguistic category that comprises forms and meanings related to the source of information in utterances, the use of which may impact judgments about the degree of certainty expressed by a speaker. The main dichotomy is first-hand (direct) vs. second-hand (indirect) evidence. This distinction is grammaticalised in Japanese only, though certain related meanings can be expressed in English lexically or constructionally. The relevant forms in both languages also function as indirectness-for-politeness markers. We used a judgments elicitation task and found that statements with Japanese evidentials (both first- and second-hand) and with English markers of uncertainty lead to judgments of lower certainty than the statements without the evidential forms and meanings for the majority, but not for all speakers. In addition, monolingual and bilingual usage in both languages has parallels such that these two typologically distinct languages appear closer and certainty judgments by their speakers similar.
Keywords: certainty, English, evidentiality, indirectness, Japanese, judgments; L1, L2, translation
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Evidential meanings in Japanese and English
- 2.1Evidential forms and meanings in the two languages
- 2.2L1 vs. L2 usage patterns: Similarities and differences
- 3.Effects of language(s) on judgments
- 4.Current study
- 4.1Hypotheses
- 4.2Design
- 4.3Participants
- 4.4Procedure
- 4.5Results
- 4.6Data analysis
- 5.Implications for social contexts of language use
- 6.Caveats, conclusions and future directions
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (55)
Arslan, Seckin, Roelien Bastiaanse, and Claudia Felser. 2015. “Looking at the evidence in visual world: Eye-movements reveal how bilingual and monolingual Turkish speakers process grammatical evidentiality.” Frontiers in Psychology 61: 1387.
Berk-Seligson, Susan. 1990. The Bilingual Courtroom: Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. 1987. Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or different? Journal of Pragmatics 11(2): 131–146.
Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cenoz, Jasone. 1995. “American vs. European requests: Do speakers use the same strategies?” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Conference on Pragmatics and Language Learning (Urbana, IL, March 1995).
Csató, Eva A. 2009. “Rendering evidential meanings in Turkish and Swedish.” In Turcological Letters to Bernt Brendemoen, ed. by Eva A. Csató, Gunvald Ims, Joakim Parslow, Finn Thiesen and Emel Türker, 77–86. Oslo: Novus Press.
Fausey, Caitlin and Lera Boroditsky. 2010. “Subtle linguistic cues influence perceived blame and financial liability.” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 171: 644–650.
. 2011. “Who dunnit? Cross-linguistic differences in eye-witness memory.” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 181: 150–157.
Filipović, Luna. 2011. “Speaking and remembering in one or two languages: Bilingual vs. monolingual lexicalization and memory for motion events.” International Journal of Bilingualism 15 (4): 466–485.
. 2013a. “The role of language in legal contexts: A forensic cross-linguistic viewpoint.” In Law and Language: Current Legal Issues (15), ed. by Michael Freeman and Fiona Smith, 328–343. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
. 2013b. “Constructing causation in language and memory: Implications for access to justice in multilingual interactions.” International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 20 (1): 1–19.
. 2016. “May vs. Might in the judgement on certainty: The difference between L1 and L2 English speakers.” Applied Linguistic Review 7 (2): 181–201.
. 2017a. “Applied Language Typology: Applying typological insights in practice.” Languages in Contrast 17 (2): 255–278.
Filipović, L. 2017b. “Applying language typology: Practical applications of research on typological contrasts between languages.” In Motion and Space across Languages and Applications [Human Cognitive Processing Series], ed. by Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano, 399–418. Amsterdam. John Benjamins.
Filipović, Luna. 2018. “Speaking in L2 but thinking in L1: Language-specific effects on memory for causation events in English and Spanish.” International Journal of Bilingualism 22 (2): 180–198.
Filipović, Luna and John A. Hawkins. 2013. “Multiple factors in second language acquisition: The CASP model.” Linguistics 51 (1): 145–176.
Filipović, Luna. 2019. Bilingualism in Action: Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. 2022. “First language versus second language effect on memory for motion events: The role of language type and proficiency.” International Journal of Bilingualism 26(1): 65–81.
Filipović, Luna and John A. Hawkins. 2019. “The Complex Adaptive System Principles model for bilingualism: Language interactions within and across bilingual minds.” International Journal of Bilingualism 23(6): 1223–1248.
Fukushima, Saeko. 1990. Offers and requests: Performance by Japanese learners of English. World Englishes 9 (3): 317–325.
Grainger, Karen and Sara Mills. 2016. Directness and Indirectness across Cultures. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva. 2005. Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hijazo-Gascón, Alberto. 2019. “Translating accurately or sounding natural? The interpreters’ challenges due to semantic typology and the interpreting process.” Pragmatics and Society 10(1): 73–96.
Ishida, Kazutoh. 2006. “How can you be so certain? Do use of hearsay evidentials by English-speaking learners of Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 381: 1281–1304.
Johanson, L. 2003. ‘Evidentiality in Turkic.’ In Studies in Evidentiality, ed. by Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald and Robert M. W. Dixon, 273–290. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Koster, Dietha and Teresa Cadierno. 2018. “Is perception of placement universal? A mixed methods perspective on linguistic relativity.” Lingua 2071: 23–37.
Kamada, Osamu. 1990. “Reporting messages in Japanese as a second language.” In On Japanese and How to Teach It, ed. by Osamu Kamada and Wesley M. Jacobsen (eds.), 224–245. Tokyo: The Japan Times.
Kamio, Akio. 1994. “The theory of territory of information: The case of Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 211: 67–100.
. 1995. “Territory of information in English and Japanese and psychological utterances.” Journal of Pragmatics 24(3): 235–264.
. 1997. Territory of Information. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kikuchi, Yasuto. 2000. “Yoo-da to rashi-i – sooda, darō to no hikaku o fukumete [Yoo-da and rashi-i – including comparison with sooda and darō].” Kokugogaku 51(1): 46–60.
Makino, Seiichi and Michio Tsutsui. 1989. A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar. Tokyo: The Japan Times.
Matsumura, Tomomi. 2017. “The use of evidentials in hearsay contexts in Japanese and English.” MA dissertation, Portland State University. [URL]
Mushin, Ilana. 2001. Evidentiality and Epistemological Stance: Narrative Retelling. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Narrog, Heiko. 2009. Modality in Japanese: The Layered Structure of the Clause and Hierarchies of Functional Categories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Narrog, Heiko and Wenjiang Yang. 2018. “Evidentiality in Japanese.” In Oxford Handbook of Evidentiality, ed. by Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald, 709–724. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ohta, Amy S. 1991. “Evidentiality and politeness in Japanese.” Issues in Applied Linguistics 2(2): 211–238.
Ogiermann, Eva. 2009. “Politeness and in-directness across cultures: A comparison of English, German, Polish and Russian requests.” Journal of Politeness Research-Language Behaviour Culture 51: 189–216.
Rose, Kenneth R. 1996. “American English, Japanese, and directness: More than stereotypes.” JALT Journal 18 (1): 67–80.
Slobin, Dan I. 2016. ‘Thinking for speaking and the construction of evidentiality in language contact.” In Exploring the Turkish Linguistic Landscape: Essays in Honor of Eser Erguvanlı-Taylan [Studies in Language Companion Series], ed. by Mine Güven, Didar Akar, Balkiz Öztürk, and Meltem Kelepir, 105–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tosun, Sumeyra, Jyotsna Vaid and L. Geraci. 2013. “Does obligatory linguistic marking of source of evidence affect source memory? A Turkish/English investigation.” Journal of Memory and Language 69 (2): 121–134.
Tosun, Sumeyra and Luna Filipović. 2022. “Lost in translation, apparently: Bilingual language processing of evidentiality in a Turkish–English translation and judgment task.” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1–16.
Trent, Nobuko. 1997. “Linguistic coding of evidentiality in Japanese spoken discourse and Japanese politeness.” PhD Dissertation, University of Austin Texas. [URL]
. 1998. “Cross-cultural discourse pragmatics: Speaking about hearsay in English and Japanese.” Texas Papers in Foreign Language Education 3(2): 1–31.
Trujillo, Jenny. 2003. The difference in resulting judgments when descriptions use high-manner versus neutral-manner verbs,’ Senior Dissertation, University of California Berkeley.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Ayoun, Dalila
Filipović, Luna
Filipović, Luna & John A. Hawkins
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
