This study introduces an enigmatic construction in Japanese called chūshakuteki nibun-renchi
‘annotative dual-clause juxtaposition’ (ADCJ), exemplified below:
Hiro
wa,
top
dare
who
ni
dat
au
meet
no
nmlz
ka,
int
resutoran
restaurant
o
acc
yoyakushita.
reserved
Lit. ‘Hiro, (I wonder) who (he) will meet, reserved a restaurant.’
This construction is ubiquitous and yet little known even in Japanese linguistics circles. Because the matrix
predicate of ADCJ cannot semantically accommodate such a component as dare ni au no ka ‘who (he) will meet’
above, this paper argues that ADCJ is parenthetical, a construct that should be recognized as an essential element of verbal
communication and, in turn, a determining factor in how utterances are to be formed and interpreted. This construction is
dissimilar to any other type of parentheticals hitherto reported in the literature. What is so special about it is its merger of
portraying two situations through abduction and expressing the entire circumstance in a single communicative unit. For example, in
the above example, the parenthetical element explains why the speaker wishes to convey the matrix statement. From an interactional
perspective, the primary function of ADCJ is to highlight the speaker’s intellectual and communicative involvement in the depicted
scene. This style of communication, when compared with an ‘objective’ and apathetic description, is likely to induce more earnest
reactions from the hearer or reader and, consequently, promote a more favorable continuation of the conversation or reading. This
paper advocates a wide-ranging examination of thetical grammar (Kaltenböck
et al. 2011), for which detailed analyses of constructions such as ADCJ that traditional syntactic/semantic theories
cannot capture are indispensable.
Akatsuka, Noriko. 1985. Conditionals
and the epistemic
scale. Language 611. 625–639.
AnderBois, Scott. 2016. Semantics
and pragmatics of (not-)at-issueness in Yucatec Maya attitude reports. Semantics &
Pragmatics 91. 1–55.
Andersen, Henning. 1973. Abductive
and deductive
change. Language 491. 765–793.
Aoki, Hirofumi. 2016. Nihongo rekishi tōgoron josetsu [An introduction to historical
syntax in Japanese]. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
Berlin, Brent. 1974. Principles
of Tzeltal plant classification: An introduction of the botanical ethnography of a Mayan speaking people of Highland
Chiapas. New York: Academic Press.
Berlin, Brent & Paul Kay. 1969. Basic
color terms: Their universality and
evolution. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman
grammar of spoken and written
English. London: Longman.
Blakemore, Diane. 2006. Divisions
of labour: The analysis of
parentheticals. Lingua 1161. 1670–1687.
Burton-Roberts, Noel. 2005. Parentheticals. In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopaedia
of language and
linguistics, 179–182. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Chafe, Wallace. 1986. Evidentiality
in English conversation and academic writing. In Wallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality:
The linguistic coding of
epistemology, 261–272. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
Cook, Haruko. 1992. Meanings
of non-referential indexes: A case study of Japanese sentence-final particle
ne. Text 121. 507–539.
Dehé, Nicole & Yordanka Kavalova. 2007. Parentheticals:
An introduction. In Nicole Dehé & Yordanka Kavalova (eds.), Parentheticals, 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Deutscher, Guy. 2002. On
the misuse of the notion of ‘abduction’ in linguistics. Journal of
Linguistics 381. 469–485.
Emonds, Joseph. 1979. Appositive
relatives have no properties. Linguistic
Inquiry 101. 211–243.
Espinal, Teresa. 1991. The
representation of disjunct
constituents. Language 671. 726–762.
Filchenko, Andrey. 2011. Parenthetical
agent-demoting constructions in Eastern Khanty: Discourse salience vis-à-vis referring
expressions. In Christian Chiarcos, Berry Claus & Michael Grabski (eds.), Salience:
Multidisciplinary perspectives on its function in
discourse, 57–79. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Frellesvig, Bjarke. 2010. A
history of the Japanese language. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Güneş, Güliz. 2014. Constraints
on syntax-prosody correspondence: The case of clausal and subclausal parentheticals in
Turkish. Lingua 1501. 278–314.
Halliday, M. A. K.1978. Language
as a social
semiotic. London: Arnold.
Hand, Michael. 1993. Parataxis
and parentheticals. Linguistics and
Philosophy 161. 495–507.
Hattori, Tadasu. 1992. Gendaigo ni okeru -ka no aru shu no yōhō ni tsuite [On the usage of -ka in Modern Japanese]. Tokushima Daigaku Kokugo
Kokubungaku 51. 57–65.
Hirose, Yukio. 1995. Direct
and indirect speech as quotations of public and private
expression. Lingua 951. 223–238.
Hobbs, Jerry, Mark Stickel, Douglas Appelt & Paul Martin. 1993. Interpretation
as abduction. Artificial
Intelligence 631. 69–142.
Hymes, Dell. 1971. On
communicative competence. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.
Kaltenböck, Gunther, Bernd Heine & Tania Kuteva. 2011. On
thetical grammar. Studies in
Language 351. 852–897.
Kamio, Akio. 1995. Territory
of information in English and Japanese and psychological utterances. Journal of
Pragmatics 241. 235–264.
Karttunen, Lauri. 1977. Syntax
and semantics of questions. Linguistics and
Philosophy 11. 3–44.
Kinsui, Satoshi. 2015. Nihongo gimonbun no tsūjiteki, taishōgengogakuteki kenkyū [A
diachronic and contrastive-linguistic study of Japanese interrogative sentences]. NINJAL Project
Review 5(3). 108–121.
Kinuhata, Tomohide. 2012. Historical
development from subjective to objective meaning: Evidence from the Japanese question particle
ka. Journal of
Pragmatics 441. 798–814.
Kiparsky, Paul & Carol Kiparsky. 1970. Fact. In Manfred Bierwisch & Karl Heidolph (eds.), Progress
in linguistics: A collection of
papers, 143–156. Hague: Mouton.
Kuroda, S.-Y.1972. The
categorical and the thetic judgment: Evidence from Japanese syntax. Foundations of
Language 91. 153–185.
Lagana, Domenico. 1975. Nihongo to watashi [The Japanese language and
myself]. Tokyo: Bungei Shunju.
Leino, Jaakko. 2010. A
cognitive approach to parenthetical speech. In Elzbieta Tabakowska, Michal Choinski & Lukasz Wiraszka (eds.), Cognitive
linguistics in action: From theory to application and
back, 273–289. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Long, Haiping, Bernd Heine & Francesco-Alessio Ursini. 2020. Prosody
and formation of Modern Chinese parenthetical CTMP ni xiang ‘you think’: A conjoining pathway
account. Australian Journal of
Linguistics 401. 369–386.
Lounsbury, Floyd. 1956. A
semantic analysis of Pawnee kinship
usage. Language 321. 158–194.
Nomura, Takashi. 1995. Ka ni yoru kakari-musubi shiron [Toward a
theory of kakari-musubi with the particle ka
]. Kokugo
kokubun 64 (9). 1–27.
Ochs, Elinor & Bambi Schieffelin. 1989. Language
has a
heart. TEXT 91. 7–25.
Peirce, Charles. 1934. Collected
papers of Charles Sanders
Peirce (vol. 51). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Potts, Christopher. 2002. The
syntax and semantics of as-parentheticals. Natural Language and Linguistic
Theory 201. 623–689.
Prevost, Sophie. 2011. A
propos from verbal complement to discourse marker: A case of
grammaticalization?Linguistics 491. 391–413.
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A
comprehensive grammar of the English
language. London: Longman.
Ross, John Robert. 1973. Slifting. In Maurice Gross, Morris Halle & Marcel-Paul Schützenberger (eds.), The
formal analysis of natural languages, 133–169. The Hague: Mouton.
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen. 1987. The
thetic/categorical distinction
revisited. Linguistics 251. 511–580.
Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1990. The
languages of Japan. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Shinzato, Rumiko. 2020. Focus-predicate
concord (Kakari Musubi) constructions in Japanese/Okinawan. Oxford
research encyclopedia of linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available online at: [URL]
Stowell, Tim. 2005. Appositive
and parenthetical relative clauses. In Hans Broekhuis, Norbert Corver, Jan Koster, Riny Huybregts & Ursula Kleinhenz (eds.), Organizing
grammar: Linguistic studies in honor of Henk van
Riemsdijk, 608–617. Berin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Takamiya, Yukino. 2003. Gendai nihongo no kansetsu-gimonbun to sono shūhen [The
Indirect question and related constructions in Modern Japanese]. Mie Daigaku Nihongogaku
Bungaku 141. 104–116.
Takamiya, Yukino. 2004. Yara(u) ni yoru kansetsu-gimonbun no seiritsu: Futeishi gimon o chūshin
ni [Origins of the indirect question construction with
yara(u): Focusing on wh-questions]. Mie Daigaku Nihongogaku
Bungaku 151. 124–111.
Tansman, Alan. 1993. The
writings of Koda Aya: A Japanese literary daughter. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Van Valin, Robert. 2005. Exploring
the syntax-semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Vovin, Alexander. 2018. Man’yōshū.
book
17. Leiden: Brill.
Zauner, Adolf. 1902/2018. Die
Romanischen Namender Körperteile: Eine Onomasiologische
Studie. London: Forgotten Books.