Cover not available
Part of
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. 49–74

Chapter 2
Amari/anmari/anma and totemo/tottemo in history and discourse

Interaction of negative polarity and positive polarity

| Georgia Institute of Technology
This chapter first presents the distributional patterns of totemo and amari as positive polarity items (PPIs) and negative polarity items (NPIs) in a present-day spoken corpus, by paying due attention to their morphophonological variants, tottemo and anmari/anma. It also analyzes ‘prefabs’ (Bybee 2006) they form as PPI and NPI. Second, it delineates the diachronic development of totemo from NPI to PPI and that of amari from PPI to NPI, and offers an explanatory account incorporating three concepts: counter-expectation (Traugott 1999), structural reanalysis and bifurcation/divergence (Bolinger 1968). In a theoretical context of polarity studies, the paper supports Hoeksema’s (2012) stance that comprehensive accounts need both a syntagmatic relationship (licenser-licensee) as well as a paradigmatic relationship with other similar items in competition.
Keywords: totemo , amari , positive polarity item (PPI), negative polarity item (NPI), corpus-analysis, diachronic change, counter-expectation, bifurcation, Hoeksema, Japanese, pragmatics
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2. Corpus-based studies of totemo/tottemo and amari/anmari/anma
    • 2.1 Totemo/tottemo
      • 2.1.1Distributional patterns: PPI vs. NPI
      • 2.1.2 Collocations/prefabs
      • 2.1.3 Summary
    • 2.2 Amari/anmari/anma
      • 2.2.1Distributional patterns: PPI vs. NPI
      • 2.2.2Collocations and syntactic environment
      • 2.2.3 Summary
  • 3.Diachronic development of totemo/tottemo
    • 3.1Outline of the diachronic development with examples
    • 3.2An explanatory account
      • 3.2.1Counter-expectation factor
      • 3.2.2Structural reanalysis of scope
      • 3.2.3Bifurcation / divergence
  • 4.Diachronic development of amari /anmari/anma
    • 4.1Outline of development with examples
    • 4.2An explanatory account
      • 4.2.1Counter-expectation factor and mitigating effect
      • 4.2.2Structural reanalysis of scope
      • 4.2.3 Bifurcation / divergence
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgement
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 16 April 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.285.02shi
References
Bolinger, Dwight
1968 Aspects of Language. New York: Harcourt Brace and World.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan
2006 “From Usage to Grammar.” Language 82 (4): 711–733. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giannakidou, Anastasia
2002 “Licensing and Sensitivity in Polarity Items: From Downward Entailment to Nonveridicality.” Chicago Linguistics Society 38: 29–53.Google Scholar
Gendai Nihongo Kenkyuukai
1997 Josee no kotoba: Shokuba hen [Female corpus: In the workplace]. Tokyo: Hituzi Syoboo.Google Scholar
2002 Dansee no kotoba: Shokuba hen [Female corpus: In the workplace]. Tokyo: Hituzi Syoboo.Google Scholar
Hamada, Atsushi
1986 Kokugo-shi no shomondai [Various issues concerning the history of Japanese]. Tokyo: Izumi Shoin.Google Scholar
Harima, Keiko
1993 “ ‘Totemo’ ‘zenzen’ nado ni mirareru fukushi no yoohoo hensen no ichi ruikei [One pathway of change in adverbial usages seen in ‘totemo,’ ‘zenzen,’ etc.].” Gobun Kenkyuu 75: 11–22.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1997 Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hirosaka, Naoko
1996 “ ‘Amari’ ni tsuite no ichi koosatsu [A thought concerning ‘amari’].” Nihongo, Nihon Bungaku 8: 48–66.Google Scholar
Hoeksema, Jack
1997 “Corpus Study of Negative Polarity Items.” html version of a paper which appeared in the IV-V Jornades de corpus linguistics 1996–1997 , Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabre.
2010 “Negative and Polarity Items: An Investigation of the Interplay of Lexical Meaning and Global Conditions on Expression.” In The Expression of Negation, ed. by Laurence R. Horn, 187–224. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2012 “On the Natural History of Negative Polarity Items.” Linguistic Analysis 38 (1–2): 3–34.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul
1987 “Emergent Grammar.” Berkeley Linguistic Society 13: 139–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul, and Elizabeth Closs Traugott
2003 Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence
1989 A History of Negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Imanishi, Toshiyuki
2001 “Hitei keeshiki to kyooki shiteinai fukushi ‘anmari’ o megutte: Hyookateki na imi ni tsuite kangaeru [Concerning the usage of the adverb ‘anmari’ not co-occurring with negatives: From the perspective of evaluative meanings].” Kumamoto Daigaku Ryuugakusei Sentaa Kiyoo 5: 1–17.Google Scholar
Israel, Michael
1996 “Polarity Sensitivity as Lexical Semantics.” Linguistics and Philosophy. 19 (6): 619–666. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 “Minimizers, Miximizers and the Rhetoric of Scalar Reasoning.” Journal of Semantics 18 (4): 297–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iwabuchi, Etsutaro
1968 Shinpan akubun . Tokyo: Nihon Hyoronsha.Google Scholar
Kawase, Tadasu
2008 “Jaku-hitei to kado o arawasu fukushi no shi-teki koosatsu .” Paper presented at the 9th Nihongo Bunpoo Gakkai.
Lee, Ji Won
2011 “Much Ado about a Lot: A Corpus Study of Much as a Negative Polarity Item.” Paper presented at the 20th International Conference on Historical Linguistics in Osaka, Japan. July 26th, 2011.
Ludusaw, William
1997 “Negation and Polarity Items.” In The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, ed. by Shalom Lappin, and Chris Fox, 321–341. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Lyons, John
1977 Semantics, Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Martins, Ana Maria
2012 “Nominal Negative Inversion with Algum/Alguno .” Paper presented at Going Romance 2012, December 7, 2012.
Matsui, Ai
2013 “Revisiting the Licensing Problem Through Understating NPIs – The Case of Japanese Anmari ‘(Not) Very/Much’.” In Beyond ‘Any’ and ‘Ever’; New Explorations in Negative Polarity Sensitivity, ed. by Eva Csipak, Regine Eckardt, Mingya Liu, and Manfred Sailer, 299–322. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsui, Eiichi
2004 ‘Noppera boo’ to ‘teruteruboozu’ – Gendai nihongo no igai na jijitsu [Surprising facts about the present-day Japanese: ‘Noppera boo’ (< ‘noppera poo’) and ‘teruteruboozu’ (< teriteriboozu)]. Tokyo: Shogakukan.Google Scholar
McGloin, Naomi Hanaoka
1986 Negation in Japanese. Alberta, Canada: Boreal Scholary Publishers and Distributors.Google Scholar
Nakao, Hisako
2005 “Fukushi ‘totemo’ ni tsuite: chinjutsu fukushi kara teedo fukushi e no hensen [On the adverb ‘totemo’: From a modal adverb to a degree adverb].” In Zasshi Taiyoo ni yoru kakuritsu-ki gendaigo no kenkyuu: Taiyoo koopasu kenkyuu ronbunshuu (Kokuritsu Kokugo Kenkyuujo Hookoku 122), ed. by Kokuritsu Kokugo Kenkyuujo, 213–226. Tokyo: Hakubunkanshinsha.Google Scholar
Nihon Dai-jiten Kankookai
1972, 1984 Nihon kokugo dai-jiten [Comprehensive dictionary of the Japanese Language]. Tokyo: Shoogakukan.Google Scholar
Ohno, Susumu
1992 “Sengo hiromatta ‘totemo janai ga’ [On the post-war expression ‘totemo janai ga’ ]” In Nihongo soodan 5, ed. by Ohno, Susumu, Makoto Ohoka, Saiichi Maruya, and Hisashi Inoue, 79–82. Tokyo: Asahi Shinbunsha.Google Scholar
Ohso, Mieko
2001 2002 2003 Meidai Corpus. [URL]
Park, Sooyun
2010 “Hitei tomo kootei tomo kyooki-suru fukushi ‘totemo’ ni tsuite: Hitei yoohoo ni mirareru ‘jooken-zuke’ o chuushin ni [On the Japanese adverb ‘totemo’: Focusing on the structural properties of its negative usage].” Handai Nihongo Kenkyuu 22: 43–63.Google Scholar
Shinmura, Izuru
1940 Nihon no kotoba [ The Japanese language ]. Tokyo: Sogensha.Google Scholar
Shinzato, Rumiko
2011 “From a Manner Adverb to a Discourse Particle: The Case of Yahari, Yappari and Yappa .” Journal of Japanese Linguistics 27: 17–44.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 “From Degree/Manner Adverbs to Pragmatic Particles in Japanese: A Corpus-based Approach to the Parallel Diachronic Development of Amari, Bakari , and Yahari . In Diachronic Corpus Pragmatics, ed. by Irma Taavitsainen, and Andreas H. Jucker, 77–105. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shinzato, Rumiko and Leon A. Serafim
2013 Synchrony and Diachrony of Okinawan Kakari Musubi in Comparative Perspective with Premodern Japanese. Kent, UK: Global Oriental/Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suga, Kazuyoshi
1992 “Fukushi amari no imisuru teedo hyooka [On the evaluative degrees of the adverb amari ].” Yamagata Daigaku Kiyoo Jinbun Kagaku 12: 35–46.Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna
2004 “Positive Polarity – Negative Polarity.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22.2: 409–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
1999 “The Rhetoric of Counter-expectation in Semantic Change: A Study in Subjectification.” In Historical Semantics and Cognition, ed. by Andreas Blank, and Peter Koch, 177–196. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 “(Inter)subjectivity, (Inter)subjectification: A Reassessment.” In Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization, ed. by Kristin Davidse, Leiven Vandelanotte, and Hubert Cuyckens, 29–74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Richard Dasher
2002 Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Usami, Mayumi
2005 BTSJ ni yoru nihongo hanashi kotoba koopasu 1 [ Japanese conversation corpus by BTSJ ]. Tokyo: Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.Google Scholar
van der Wouden, Ton
1994 Negative Contexts. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Yoshii, Ken
2003 “ ‘Totemo’ no go-shi .” In Kokugo fukushi no shi-teki kenkyuu , ed. by Atsushi Hamada, Itaru Ide, and Tetsuo Tukahara, 313–340. Tokyo: Shintensha.Google Scholar
Yumeno, Kyuusaku
1926 “Ayakashi no tsuzumi [Mysterious hand drum].” ." (e-text: [URL])Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Kaneyasu, Michiko & Minako Kuhara
2020. Regularity and variation in Japanese recipes. Register Studies 2:1 ► pp. 37 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 november 2023. 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.