Cover not available
Part of
Competition in Word-Formation
Edited by Alexandra Bagasheva, Akiko Nagano and Vincent Renner
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 284] 2024
► pp. 275–296

Chapter 9
Competition of lexicon vs. pragmatics in word formation

Japanese lexical V-V compounds and argument synthesis

| Kansai Gaidai University

Pragmatic information (motivating an onomasiological perspective) interacts and competes with formal grammar (embodying a semasiological inclination), namely, the lexicon and its formal word-formation mechanisms to give rise to intricate patterns of argument structures of Japanese lexical V-V compounds. The compound formation process involves argument synthesis (argument matching) displaying intricacies inexplicable without appealing to speaker intentions regarding reference choices, argument designation preferences, perspective adjustment, etc. Downplaying or denying interaction and competition between the two domains above would undermine generalization, analytical precision, efficiency, and creativity within morphology.

Keywords: grammar-pragmatics interface, semasiology-onomasiology interaction, V-V compounds, argument structures, argument synthesis, Japanese
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Lexicon/morphology and pragmatics
  • 3.Japanese lexical V-V compounds and pragmatics
    • 3.1V-V compounds and argument synthesis: A prolegomenon
    • 3.2Simple cases of argument synthesis
    • 3.3Complex cases of argument synthesis 1: Speaker-oriented reference choice
    • 3.4Complex cases of argument synthesis 2: Speaker-intended discourse prominence and differential object marking
    • 3.5Complex cases of argument synthesis 3: Speaker-oriented anomaly avoidance
    • 3.6Summary
  • 4.Unattractive alternatives
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 8 May 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.284.09fuk
References (41)
Bates, Elizabeth & MacWhinney, Brian
1982 Functionalist approaches to grammar. In Language Acquisition: The State of the Art, Eric Wanner & Lira R. Gleitman (eds), 173–218. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blutner, Reinhard
2004 Pragmatics and the lexicon. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds), 488–514. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David
1991 Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67(3): 547–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Merlini Barbaresi, Lavinia
1994 Morphopragmatics: Diminutives and Intensifiers in Italian, German and Other Languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 Pragmatics and morphology: Morphopragmatics. In The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, Yan Huang (ed), 491–510. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fukushima, Kazuhiko
2002 Competence and performance revisited: the implications of social role terms in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics 34: 939–968.Google Scholar
2005 Lexical V-V compounds in Japanese: Lexicon vs. syntax. Language 81(3): 568–612. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Conspiracy of form and context for proper semantic interpretation: The implications of lonesome numeral classifiers in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics 39: 960–989.Google Scholar
2008 On the type-wise productivity of lexical V-V compounds in Japanese: A thematic proto-role approach. Gengo Kenkyu 134: 119–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Telicity makes or breaks verb serialization. Quo vadis morphology? On-line Proceedings of Mediterranean Morphology Meeting 10, Jenny Audring, Francesca Masini & Wendy Sandler (eds), 55–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 Negation as an empirical/conceptual tool: A case study with V-V compounds. Jezikoslovlje 18: 5–23.Google Scholar
2021 Getting a head with Japanese lexical V-V compounds. In Japanese and Korean Linguistics, Volume 28, Hae-Sung Jeon, Peter Sells, Zixi You, Sotaro Kita & Jaehoon Yeon (eds), 229–243. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Gärtner, Hans-Martin & Steinbach, Markus
2006 A skeptical note on the syntax of speech acts and point of view. In Form, Structure, Grammar, Patrick Brandt & Eric Fuß (eds), 313–322. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E.
2004 Pragmatics and argument structure. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds), 427–441. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, Georgia M.
2004 Some interactions of pragmatics and grammar. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds), 407–426. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harada, Shinichi
1973 Counter equi NP deletion. Annual Bulletin 7 (Research Institute of Logopedics and Phoniatrics, University of Tokyo): 113–147.Google Scholar
Himeno, Masako
1999 Hukugoodooshi-no Kozo-to Imiyoohoo (Structure and semantic usage of compound verbs). Tokyo: Hitsuzi.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence
1984 Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. In Meaning, Form, and Use in Context: Linguistic Application, Deborah Schiffrin (ed), 11–42. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
2017 Pragmatics and the lexicon. In The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, Yan Huang (ed), 511–531. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kabatek, Johannes, Obrist, Philipp & Wall, Albert
2021 The third wave of studies on DOM in Romance: An introduction to this volume. In Differential Object Marking in Romance (3rd ed.): The Third Wave, Johannes Kabatek, Philipp Obrist, & Albert Wall (eds), 3–19. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kageyama, Taro
1982 Word formation in Japanese. Lingua 57: 215–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1993 Bunpoo-to Gokeisei (Grammar and word-formation). Tokyo: Hitsuzi.Google Scholar
Katz, Jerrold & Fodor, Jerry
1963 The structure of a semantic theory. Language 39(2): 170–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc
2001 Morphology and pragmatics. In The Handbook of Morphology, Andrew Spencer & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds), 272–279. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Yafei
1993 Structural head and aspectuality. Language 69(3): 480–504. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lieber, Rochelle
2004 Morphology and Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian, Malchukov, Andrej & Moravcsik, Edith
2014 Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, Yo
1996 Complex Predicates in Japanese: A Syntactic and Semantic Study of the Notion ‘Word’. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Merlini Barbaresi, Lavinia
2015 The pragmatics of word-formation. In Word-Formation: An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe, Vol. 2, Peter O. Müller, Ingeborg Ohnheiser, Susan Olsen & Franz Rainer (eds), 1128–1142. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miyagawa, Shigeru
2022 Syntax in the Treetops. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Edith
2014 Introduction. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, MacWhinney, Brian, Malchukov, Andrej & Moravcsik, Edith (eds), 1–14. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nishiyama, Kunio
1998 V-V compounds as serialization. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 7: 175–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rainer, Francesco, Gardani, Franz, Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Luschützky, Hans Christian
2019 Competition in Inflection and Word-Formation. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Renner, Vincent
2020 An ecosystem view of English word-formation. The Mental Lexicon 15(1): 4–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sag, Ivan, Wasow, Thomas & Bender, Emily
2003 Syntactic Theory: A Formal Introduction (2nd ed.). Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Santana-Lario, Juan & Valera, Salvador
2017 Competing Patterns in English Affixation. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Speas, Margaret & Tenny, Carol
2003 Configurational properties of point of view roles. In Asymmetry in Grammar, Anna Maria Di Sciullo (ed), 315–344. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Štekauer, Pavol
2005 Onomasiological approach to word-formation. In Handbook of Word-Formation, Pavol Štekauer & Rochelle Lieber (eds), 207–232. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
2017 Competition in natural languages. In Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Juan Santana-Lario & Salvador Valera (eds), 1–65. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Tenny, Carol L.
2006 Evidentiality, experiencers, and the syntax of sentience in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 15: 245–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yumoto, Yoko
2005 Hukugoodooshi/Haseidooshi-no Imi-to Toogo: Mojuuru Keitairon-kara Mita Nichieigo-no Dooshi Keisei (The semantics and syntax of compound verbs/derived verbs: verb-formation in Japanese and English viewed from a modular morphological perspective). Tokyo: Hitsuzi.Google Scholar