Reanalysis of contrastive -wa in Japanese
Perspectives from newspaper articles
This paper examines the behavior of contrastive –wa in Japanese written discourse. While supporting its local nature (Clancy and Downing 1987), the paper argues, based on a survey of newspapers, that localness alone is not sufficient to understand the nature of contrast. It proposes that the use of contrastive –wa is motivated by how the writer perceives the world, or what Chafe (1994) calls ‘conscious experience’. We propose literal opposition, evaluation, association, and conflict as its main components. In the final part, the paper relates the results to the recent study on Contrastive Topic (Lee 1999, 2000, 2003), stating that the CT-approach is still unable to account for the entire range of phenomena discovered. The paper suggests that the discrepancies arise because of the fact that natural data integrates the writer’s context-specific intentions, to which priority is not given in formalistic approaches.
References
Caenepeel, Mimo
(
1995)
Aspect and text structure.
Linguistics 331: 213-253.
BoP![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Caffi, Claudia
(
1994)
Metapragmatics. In
R.E. Asher (ed.),
The Enchyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Vol. 41.Oxford: Pergamon Press, pp. 2461-2466.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chafe, Wallace
(
1976)
Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In
C.N. Li (ed.),
Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press, pp. 25-55.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chafe, Wallace
(
1994)
Discourse, consciousness, and time. The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.
BoP![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clancy, Patricia M., and Pamela Downing
Cotter, Collen
(
2001)
Discourse and media. In
D. Schiffirn,
et al.. (eds.),
The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 416-36.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Dijk, Teun A
(
1985)
Structures of news in the press. In
T.A. van Dijk (ed.),
Discourse and communication. New approaches to the analyses of mass media discourse and communication. Berlin/New York: W. de Gruyter, pp. 69-93.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dooley, Robert, and Stephen H. Levinsohn
(
2001)
Analyzing Discourse. A Manual of Basic Concepts. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics International.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Francis, Gill
(
1989)
Thematic selection and distribution in written discourse.
Word 40.1-2: 201-21.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Givón, Talmy
(
1984)
Syntax: A functional typological introduction, vol 11. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gundel, K. Jeanette
(
1985)
‘Shared knowledge’ and topicality.
Journal of Pragmatics 91: 83-107.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hinds, John, Senko K. Maynard, Shoichi Iwasaki
Hobbs, Jerry R
(
1990)
Topic Drift. Conversational Organization and its Development. In
B. Doral (ed.),
Conversational Organization and its Development. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex, pp. 3-22.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hodge, Robert, and Gunther Kress
(
1993)
Language as Ideology [second edition]. London: Routledge.
BoP![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Inoue, Kazuko
(
1979)
Furui jouhou atarasii jouhou [Old information and new information].
Gengo 8.10: 22-34.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Inoue, Kazuko
(
1982)
An interface of syntax, semantics, and discourse structures.
Lingua 571: 259-300.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Iwasaki, Shoichi
(
2002)
Japanese. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kress, Gunther
(
1983)
Linguistic processes and the mediation of ‘reality’: The politics of newspaper language.
International Journal of Sociology of Language 401: 43-57.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kuno, Susumu
(
1973)
The structure of the Japanese language. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kuroda, Shigeyuki
(
1972-73)
The categorical and the thetic judgment.
Foundations of Language 91: 153-85.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kuroda, Shigeyuki
(
1990)
The categorical and the thetic judgment reconsidered. In
Mulligan, Kevin (ed.),
Mind, Meaning and Metaphysics. The Philosophy and Theory of Language of Anton Marty. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 77-88.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lang, Ewald
(
2000)
Adversative connectors on distinct levels of discourse: A re-examination of Eve Sweetser’s three-level approach. In
Couper-Kuhlen, E. and
B. Kortmann (eds.),
Cause Condition Concession Contrast. Cognitive and discourse perspective.Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 235-256.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, Chungmin
(
1999)
Contrastive Topic: A locus of the interface. Evidence from Korean and English. In
K. Turner (ed.),
The Semantics/Pragmatics interface from different points of view, Elsevier, pp. 317-342.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, Chungmin
(
2000a)
Contrastive predicates and conventional scales. In
A. Okrent &
J. Boyle (eds.),
Chicago Linguistic Society 361: 243-257.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, Chungmin
(
2000b)
Topic, Contrastive Topic and Focus: What’s on our minds.
Journal of Cognitive Science 11: 21-38.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Linell, Per, and Natascha Korolija
Longacre, Robert E
(
1996)
The Grammar of discourse [second edition]. New York/London: Plenum Press.
BoP![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lyons, Christopher
(
1999)
Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BoP![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Maynard, Senko
(
2002)
In the name of a vessel: Emotive perspectives in the reporting of the Ehime Maru-Greeneville collision in a Japanese newspaper.
Linguistics 40.5: 1047-1086.
BoP![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mey, Jacob
(
2001)
Pragmatics. An introduction. [second Edition]. Oxford: Blackwell.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nagano, Masaru
(
1972)
Bunshouron sousetsu [
Introduction to the sentence structure]. Tokyo: Asakura Shoten.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Noda, Naofumi
(
1996)
Wa to ga [
Wa and ga]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishers.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nuyts, Jan
(
1992)
Aspects of a cognitive-pragmatic theory of language. On cognition, functionalism, and grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
BoP![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schwenter, Scott. A
(
2000)
Viewpoints and polysemy: linking adversative and causal meanings of discourse markers. In
E. Couper-Kuhlen &
B. Kortmann (eds.),
Cause Condition Concession Contrast. Cognitive and discourse perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 257-281.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sweetser, Eve E
(
1990)
From etymology to pragmatics. Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BoP![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tannen, Deborah
(
1985)
Relative focus on involvement in oral and written discourse. In
D.R. Olson,
N. Torrance,
A. Hildyard (eds.),
Literacy, language, and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 june 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.