Corregir la puntuación

The last section (2.4.1.1) has described how previous studies have attempted to define Japanese NCs, and what issues remain unresolved. This section will illustrate the basic characteristics of Japanese NCs: how they can be used as an anaphoric device, their syntactic features, the number of NCs employed in Japanese and their frequency of use, and a current issue regarding the simplification of the NC system in contemporary Japanese. Many of these characteristics are not directly related to the issues that are central to this thesis, and so only a brief summary of key characteristics is given here.

Downing claims that a ‘true’ NC should be able to co-occur with a noun denoting the referent (Downing, 1996, p. 16) (see 2.4.1.1); it is surely a basic pattern of Japanese NCs that they can appear with both a noun and a numeral. However, the noun can actually be omitted in some cases. Downing examined the usage of Japanese NCs and asserts that NCs can play as the role of an anaphoric device (Downing, 1986). If the referent is already obvious from the context, the NC can be used with only a numeral and without the noun denoting the referent.25

25 _{This feature that NCs can be substituted for the antecedent noun is observed in other NC languages} such as Thai (Tai-Kadai language family) as well. In Japanese, this usage is particularly seen with an NC nin (an NC for human beings). Another characteristic of this usage is that this anaphoric usage can be used a long distance after the antecedent while other anaphoric such as ellipses and pronouns are used comparatively close to the original antecedent (Downing, 1986).

50

Furthermore, except for nouns which can be occasionally used as an NC (see 2.4.1.1), Japanese NCs are usually not comprehensible when standing alone. They generally follow numerals and these two elements must be analysed as one combination (Backhouse, 1993, p. 119).

The syntactic features of this numeral–NC combination have been investigated by a considerable number of studies because a range of syntactic positions is possible for the numeral-NC combination (Downing, 1993; Minagawa, 2008; Tsujimura, 1996, p. 193). It is observed that NCs can appear in at least the three different positions in sentences like the following.

(2-3)

a. むかし ある ところ に こぶた さんびき

mukashi aru tokoro ni kobuta san-biki once.upon.a.time a.certain place LOC piglet three-CL

が すんでいました

ga sundeimashita

NOM live-PAST

‘Once upon a time, there lived three little pigs.’

b. むかし ある ところ に こぶた が

mukashi aru tokoro ni kobuta ga once.upon.a.time a.certain place LOC piglet NOM

さんびき すんでいました

san-biki sundeimashita three-CL live-PAST

51

c. むかし ある ところ に さんびきの

mukashi aru tokoro ni san-biki-no once.upon.a.time a.ceratain place LOC three-CL-GEN

こぶたが が すんでいました

kobuta ga sundeimashita piglet NOM live-PAST

‘Once upon a time, there lived three little pigs.’

(from Okutsu, 1969)

Numerous studies in the generative framework have been conducted. These discuss at length which structure is the ‘basic’ form and which structure is a transformation (Kamio, 1977; Okutsu, 1969). The phenomenon in which the numeral- NC combination occurs outside the noun phrase in an adverbial position is often referred to as quantifier floating (the numeral-NC combination itself is called a ‘floating quantifier’) (Kimura, 2005; Tsujimura, 1996, p. 193).26 _{This suggests that,}

for many scholars at least, the NP-internal positions are the more basic. Concerning this phenomenon of quantifier floating, there is a critical difference between English and Japanese. While quantifier floating can occur only from the subject phrase in English, not only subject noun phrases but also object noun phrases can be related to a floating quantifier in Japanese (Shibatani, 1990, p. 286).27

26 _{Floating quantifiers are observed in some other languages, such as Korean (Kang, 2002).}

27 _{E.g., ‘All the children are happy’ can be rephrased as ‘The children are all happy’, but ‘John read all} the books’ can not be rephrased as ‘John read the books all’ (Shibatani, 1990, p. 286) .

52

Other scholars have paid more attention to the question of whether there is a difference in meaning between the various structures. Denny (1979) compares (2-3b) and (2-3c) constructions and claims that in (2-3b) construction, when the numeral-NC combination appears in the adverb position (before the verb and after the subject marker ga) the little pigs are not specific but could be any little pigs. On the other hand, in (2-3c), in which the numeral-NC combination is within the noun phrase, the three little pigs are specific. This issue of the relationship between the constructions and specificity is more deeply discussed in some studies, as shown below.

Downing (1993) investigates two positions of NCs in a sentence: ‘Pre- Nominal’ (inside the NP) and ‘Q-Float’ (outside the NP). In the following sentences, (2-4a) is Pre-Nominal and (2-4b) is Q-Float construction:

(2-4)

a. 三人 の 学生 が 昨日 来た

san-nin no gakusei ga kinoo ki-ta three-NC GEN student NOM yesterday come-PAST

‘Three students came yesterday.’

b. 学生 が 昨日 三人 来た

gakusei ga kinoo san-nin ki-ta student NOM yesterday three-NC come-PAST

‘Three students came yesterday.’

53

Downing claims that the Pre-Nominal construction is used ‘in mention of specific referents important to the ongoing text; it may appear either in introductions or repeat mentions of such individuals (Downing, 1993, p. 91)’. On the other hand, Q- Float is used only when information regarding their number newly appears (Downing, 1993).

Minagawa (2008) also examines the relationship between these syntactically different constructions involving a numeral-NC phrase, and relates them to the independent domains of indefiniteness and specificity. If the speaker can assume that their listener can identify the referent, it is definite, and if not, it is indefinite. If the speaker has a particular entity in mind, the noun (or noun phrase) is specific. Minagawa claims that the NP-external construction expresses indefiniteness and this pattern can take either a specific or a non-specific referent. The pre-nominal construction, on the other hand, is associated with specificity (Minagawa, 2008). Minagawa states that when the referent is specific as well as indefinite, either of the two constructions can be used (Minagawa, 2008).

In regards to the total number of NCs, Downing (1996) reports that Japanese employs more than 150 NCs (Downing, 1996, p. 18). Downing calculated this number from her data, collected by extracting lists of NCs from six studies by other scholars (Downing, 1996, p. 17).28 _{When Iida conducted her study in 1999, she collected}

around 100 NCs from her data obtained by interview, survey, and from newspapers and novels (Iida, 1999).29 _{This is a comparatively large number among NC languages}

(Aikhenvald, 2000, p. 103). However, Downing reports that only around 30 or 40 of

28 _{These are Haguenauer (1951), Hoojoo (1973), Lewin (1959), Oshida (1965), Satow and Ishibashi} (1942), and Yano (1968) (Downing, 1996, p. 269).

29 _{Iida first collected 358 classifiers which can be directly attached to a numeral. Among them, about} 220 are nominal classifiers that can be used alone as a noun, and around 40 are measure words (Iida, 1999, p. 7).

54

all NCs are frequently used (Downing, 1996, p. 18). In order to examine the frequency of usage of NCs, Downing used ‘Studies on the Vocabulary of Modern Newspaper’ published by the Japanese National Language Research Institute.30 _{In addition, she}

also examined oral and written texts, and questionnaires on NCs which she designed. In Downing’s data, nin 人 and tsu つ account for more than half of all uses, followed by a few major NCs such as hiki 匹, hon 本, mai 枚, and mei 名 (Downing, 1996, pp. 55, 57).31 _{On the other hand, Iida reports slightly different results regarding the}

frequency of usage of NCs. In Iida’s data, nin 人and kai 回appeared exceptionally frequently followed by ken 件, bu 部, do 度, and ten 点 (Iida, 1999).32 _{Iida notes}

that the relative proportions of each NC may be influenced by the fact that she collected her data from newspapers. For example, kai and ken are used for events and actions, and she considers that they are both likely to appear in newspapers quite frequently (Iida, 1999).

In connection with the number of NCs, it has been claimed that the Japanese language has seen a simplification of the NC system, which is to say the range of their

30 _{Japanese National Language Research Institute is a forerunner of National Institute for Japanese} Language and Linguistics (Kokuritsu Kokugo Kenkyuujo国立国語研究所).

31 _{Nin 人 is used for human beings (Iida, 2004, p. 374).}

Tsu つis characterised as a general NC for inanimate referents and can be used for both concrete and abstract entities (Iida, 2004, p. 366).

Hiki 匹 is used for comparatively small animate beings such small mammals, fish, and insects (Iida,

2004, p. 380).

Hon 本 is used for long and thin objects such as pencils (Iida, 2004, p. 386).

Mai 枚 is used for flat or two-dimensional things such as paper (Iida, 2004, p. 390).

Mei 名 is an honorific form of nin and used to count patrons, people in a tour or meeting (Iida, 2004,

p. 390).

32 _{Kai 回 is used to count the number of times an action takes place (Iida, 2004, p. 333).} Ken 件 is used to mainly count events, difficulties, enquiries (Iida, 2004, p. 344).

Bu 部 _{is used for a part of something such as music, or documents such as books or booklets (Iida,}

2004, p. 382).

55

usage has declined especially in daily conversation (Hamano & Lee, 2007). This is probably true to some extent. For instance, rabbits are no longer counted by wa 羽

(an NC for birds that has been customarily also used for rabbits) but are now counted by hiki 匹. In another type of simplification, tansu (a chest of drawers) has been traditionally counted by a specific NC sao 棹, but is nowadays counted by dai 台 (an NC for comparatively large furniture such as tables, and also for vehicles and machines) in general, or ten 点 (an NC for products or items) by furniture shops (Iida, 2004, p. 181). Concerning the numbers of NCs, however, if the objects to be counted no longer exist or are no longer frequently seen in contemporary society, NCs for those objects also disappear accordingly. Thus, regarding the disappearance of some classical NCs, they are usually replaced with another NC. However, some NCs are no longer used, not because of the simplification of the NC system, but due to the disappearance of the nouns they formerly accompanied (Iida, 1999).