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. 173–196

Chapter 7
From subjectivity to intersubjectivity

A discourse-pragmatic study of the Japanese epistemic marker kamo (shirenai)

| Carthage College
This study investigates the discourse-pragmatic functions of the Japanese sentence-final expression kamo (shirenai) ‘maybe’ in natural conversations. By investigating 72 cases of kamo (shirenai) in sequential contexts, my study demonstrates that showing epistemic uncertainty is not the only function that kamo (shirenai) carries in conversational discourse; rather, it mainly serves for intersubjective purposes to downplay the assertiveness of statements, or to present non-full approval in a noncommittal manner. Further, I suggest that kamo (shirenai) shows a new tendency of usage in contexts when the speaker attempts to express personal emotions in a less ego-focused manner.
Keywords: epistemic, mitigator, intersubjectivity, emotion, Japanese, pragmatics
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous studies
  • 3.Semantic meanings of kamo (shrienai)
  • 4.Data
  • 5.The functions of kamo (shirenai)
    • 5.1 To mitigate propositional certainty
    • 5.2 To mitigate assertiveness of statements
      • 5.2.1Confirmation or disconfirmation
      • 5.2.2 Weak agreement or compromise
      • 5.2.3 Pre-disagreement
    • 5.3 To present an assessment in a noncommittal fashion
    • 5.4 To express personal emotion in a less ego-focused manner
  • 6.Potential grammaticalization of kamo (shrenai)
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Appendix
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 16 April 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.285.07wan
References (36)
References
Aaker, Jennifer, and Patti Williams. 1998 “Empathy versus Pride: The Influence of Emotional Appeals across Cultures.” Journal of Consumer Research 25: 241–261. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fukada-Karlin, Atsuko. 2003. “Functions of the Attitudinal Discourse Maker ‘Maa’ in Japanese Conversation.” In Japanese/Korean Linguistics 11, ed. by Patricia Clancy, 53–66. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Harima, Keiko. 1998. “‘Kamo shirenai’ no naritachi nitsuite. [About the origin of ‘kamoshirenai’].” Nihon Bungaku Kenkyuu 33: 191–207.Google Scholar
Hirata, Mami. 2001. “Kamoshirenai no imi: Modariti to goyooron no setten o saguru [The meaning of kamoshirenai: Searching for points of contact between modality and pragmatics]. Nihongo Kyooiku 108: 60–68.Google Scholar
Huang, Gyokukan. 2006. “Kamoshirenai no enkyoku hyoogen toshite no kinoo bunrui nitsuite [On the functional classification of the hedge expressions of kamoshirenai ].” Nihon Kyooiku Kenkyuu 51: 59–67.Google Scholar
Hur, Yoonsun. 2011. “Shizen kaiwa ni okeru ‘kamoshirenai,’ ‘kamo’ no kinoo nitsuite: Kotowari no bamen wo chuushin ni [On the function of kamoshirenai and kamo in natural conversations: Focusing on the situations of rejection]” Nihon Comunikeeshon Kenkyuu Ronshuu 1: 29–38.Google Scholar
Johnson, Yuki. 1999. “Modarity riron no meikakuka o motomete [A plea for clarification in modality theory].” In Gengogaku to Nihongo kyooiku [Linguistics and Japanese language learning], ed. by Aramu Sasaki Yukiko, 145–60. Tokyo: Kurosio Syuppan.Google Scholar
Kamio, Akio. 1997. Territory of Information. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kärkkäinen, Elise. 2006. “Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity.” Text and Talk 26(6): 699–731. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kawaguchi, Sachiko. 2003. “Kamoshirenai no ‘kanoosei meiji’: ‘Imi,’ ‘bunnmyaku,’ ‘kinoo’ no kijutsu [The ‘expression of possibility’ in kamoshirenai: A description of ‘meaning’, ‘context’ and ‘function’].” The Journal of Seigakuin University 15(2): 69–99.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Markus, Hazel Rose, and Shinobu Kitayama. 1991. “Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.” Psychological Review 98: 224–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Masuoka, Takashi. 1991. Modality no bunpoo [Grammar of modality]. Tokyo: Kurosio Syuppan.Google Scholar
. 2002. “Handan no modarity: Genjitsu to higenjitsu no tairitsu [Modality of judgment: The realis/irrealis opposition].” Nihongogaku 21: 6–16.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, Yoshiko. 1985. “A sort of speech act qualification in Japanese: Chotto .” Journal of Asian Culture 9:143–159.Google Scholar
Maynard, Senko. 1997. Japanese Communication: Language and Thought in Context. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
. 2005. Expressive Japanese: A Reference Guide for Sharing Emotion and Empathy. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (Japan). 2015. Heesee 26-nen joohoo tsuushin media no riyoo jikan to joohoo koodoo ni kansuru choosa hookokusho [Survey report on the usage and behavior of social media in 2014]. Retrieved on July 14, 2015, from the website: [URL]
Mitaku, Tomohiro. 1995. “Kamoshirenai to daroo [ Kamoshirenai and daroo ].” In Nihongo ruigi hyoogen no bunpoo I [Grammar of Japanese synonyms I], ed. by Miyajima Tatsuo and Yoshio Nitta, 197–200. Tokyo: Kurosio Syuppan.Google Scholar
Moriyama, Takuro. 2002. “Kanoosei to sono shuuhen: ‘Kanenai,’ ‘ariuru,’ ‘kanoosee ga aru’ nado no ugenteki hyoogen to ‘kamoshirenai’ [Possibility and its surroundings: kamoshirani and the circumlocutions ‘kanenai,’ ‘ariuru,’ ‘kanoosei ga aru’].” Nihongogaku 2: 17–27. Google Scholar
Nitta, Yoshio. 1991. Nihongo no modarity to ninshoo [Japanese modality and person]. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Google Scholar
Noda, Hisashi. 1984. “Ni chigainai, kamo shirenai, hazu da.” Nihongogaku 3 (10): 111–119.Google Scholar
Nuyts, Jan. 2001. Epistemic Modality, Language, and Conceptualization: A Cognitive-pragmatic Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pizziconi, Barbara. 2009. “The interactional Consequences of Epistemic Intedexicality – Some Thoughts on the Epistemic Marker Kamoshirenai .” In Japanese Modality: Exploring its Scope and Interpretation, ed. by Barbara Pizziconi and Mika Kizu, 259–286. Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Satake, Hideo. 1997. “Wakamono kotoba to retorikku [Youth language and rhetoric].” Nihongogaku 16: 55–64.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suga Kazuyoshi. 1995. “Kamoshirenai no imi to gaizensei [On the meaning and probability of kamoshirenai ].” Bulletin of the Yamagata University. Cultural Science 13(2): 79–88.Google Scholar
Suzuki, Satoko. 2006. “Emotive Communication in Japanese: An Introduction” In Emotive Communication in Japanese, ed. by Satoko Suzuki, 1–13. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teramura, Hideo. 1984. Nihongo no shintakusu to imi II [Syntax and semantics of Japanese II]. Tokyo: Kurosio Syuppan.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth. 1982. “From Propositional to Textual and Expressive Meanings: Some Semantic-Pragmatic Aspects of Grammaticalization.” In Perspectives on Historical Linguistics, ed. by Winfred Philipp Lehmann and Yakov Malkiel, 245–271. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1989. “On the Rise of Epistemic Meanings in English: An Example of Subjectification in Semantic Change.” Language 65 (1): 31–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “From Subjectification to Intersubjectification.” In Motives for Language Change, ed. by Raymond Hickey, 124–139. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yamaguchi, Yoshiya. 1998. “‘Kamoshirenai’ to sono shuuhen [On kamoshirenai and other expressions].” Jumonji Kokubun 4: 1–11.Google Scholar
Yoon, Aimi. 1998. “‘Kamoshirenai, n ichigainai’ ni kansuru ichi koosatsu. [A study of kamoshirenai and ni chigainai ].” Kokugokokubun Kenkyuu 109: 45–57.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Wang, Yan
2022. A discourse-pragmatic functional study of Chinese epistemic markers haoxiang “seem” and keneng “probably”. International Journal of Chinese Linguistics 9:2 ► pp. 304 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 july 2024. 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.