It has been noted (in Chapter 5) that when the sentential semantics are such that they describe some permanent (within the loose recogni tion of human cognitive capacity and not in any strict logical sense) state of the subject as in some attributive or equative sentences like (1) and (2) below, the subject must be introduced by WA; and that when GA is used the interpretation can only be that of Exhaustive Listing.4
(l)a. Yumebatake WA Nagoya de yuuki—yasai dake in organically— grown vegetables only o uru mezurashii yaoya dearu.
ACC sell unusual greengrocery COP
'Yumebatake is an unusual greengrocery in Nagoya that sells only organically grown vegetables.'
(1) b. Yumebatake GA Nagoya de yuuki—yasai dake o uru mezurashii yaoya dearu.
'Yumebatake (and it alone) is the unusual greengrocery in Nagoya that sells only organically grown vegetables.' (2) a. Tongareba WA Nyuujiirand-ryoo no shima de Hawai
New Zealand territory GEN island and kara yaku 3,000km minami ni ichisuru.
from about south at is situated
'Tongareva is a New Zealand island and is situated approx imately 3,000km south of Hawaii.'
(2)b. Tongareba GA Nyuujiirand-ryoo no shima de Hawai kara yaku 3,000km minami ni ichisuru.
'Tongareva (and it alone) is a New Zealand island and is situated approximately 3,000km south of Hawaii.'
What would happen then, when Yumebatake or Tongareba are first introduced into a discourse in the form of above sentences? One may well wonder whether GA must be used from the continuity point of view. The fact is that (l)a and (2)a make perfectly acceptable opening
4 Such a GA marked NP that only renders an EL reading was dealt with in Section 6.3.3.
sentences in discourse. It would of course also be natural that a discourse begins with such existential sentences as (3) and (4) preceding (l)a or (2)a.
(3) Yumebatake to iu yaoya GA aru. COM call greengrocer exist 'There is a greengrocer called Yumebatake.' (4) Tongareba to iu shima GA aru.
COM call island exist 'There is an island called Tongareva.'
In this case there would be no conflicting factors of continuity and sentential semantics. However a discourse may dispense with these existential sentences and start with (l)a or (2)a.
This seems to indicate that the semantics of attributive or equative sentences override the principle of referent continuity; even when the referent is appearing for the first time in discourse and thus is of discontinuous nature, it is marked by WA if it is the subject of an attributive or equative sentence that describes the permanent state of the subject.
In the text studied there were 18 instances of such usage of WA out of the total of 78. Referential Distance and Persistence values change as shown below when these instances of WA are excluded from counting.
TABLE 8
MODIFIED ANALYSIS OF REFERENT CONTINUITY AND NP WA Referential Distance Persistence
NP WA 3.38 (5.49) 1.84 (1.54)
N.B. The figures in brackets show the original result.
There is a rather definite trend for NP WA to show a stronger con tinuous nature.
By the same token, even a continuous referent subject may be marked by GA when it is in an existential sentence or in a sentence that expresses an emergence of the referent on a scene. This is especially true when a change of time or place occurs in the story line. Also GA would be employed when the context requires for a certain sentence to
assume an Exhaustive Listing interpretation.
There are two cases of GA marking for a continuous referent in existential sentences (snt #43 and 63) but no cases of GA yielding an EL reading were found in the text studied.
Lastly it must be noted that there were a number of instances of GA in the text which marked an obviously continuous referent, but of which the reason why is not known at this stage. Such GA markings neither mark the subject in an existential sentence nor yield an EL interpreta tion. These mysterious GA markings specifically refer to those that mark otoko'the man' and "Te" * "Hands" ' in the dialogue scene between snt #75 and 96. Obviously both 'the man' and '"Hands"' are considered to be quite continuous but some occurrences take GA markings. The motiva tion for such GA markings here will be discussed and clarified in the next chapter.
10.6 Summary
The following points were discovered to add to Hinds' analysis in the relationship between referent continuity and GA and WA markings in Japanese text:
i) GA marks a referent first introduced into a text (i.e., high Referential Distance value) and its low Persistence value
indicates that it mainly functions to introduce pr o p s .
ii) Ellipsis is used for a most continuous subject but it occurs only when there is no confusion as to which referent the
ellipted refers to. Otherwise a WA marked overt subject is employed.
iii) WA marked objects, unlike WA marked subjects, are very rare and at the same time discontinuous.
iv) The sentential semantics of attributive/equative sentences override referent continuity. When such sentences express some permanent state of the subject, the subject is marked by WA even for its first appearance in the text,
v) Even a continuous referent is marked by GA when the context requires an Exhaustive Listing reading, or it is very likely to be marked by GA when it is the subject of an existential sentence, and particularly if the sentence involves a change of scene in the story.
Finally some GA markings whose motivation could not be clarified were observed. Such GA markings will be dealt with next.