Article published In:
Pragmatics
Vol. 20:1 (2010) ► pp.109128
References
Akatsuka, Noriko
(1979) Epistemology, Japanese syntax, and linguistic theory. Papers in Japanese Linguistics 61: 7-28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aoki, H., Y. Matsugu, M. Miyashita, T. Ono, and M. Sadler
To appear) Japanese corpus. University of Arizona: Department of East Asian Studies.
Barlow, Michael, and Suzanne Kemmer
(eds.) (1999) Usage-based models of language. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Emile
(1971) Problems in general linguistics. Trans. by M.E. Meek. Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L
(2006) From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language 82.4: 711-733. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Östen
(1997) Egocentricity in discourse and syntax. Functions of Language 7.1: 37-77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, J., S. Schuetze-Coburn, S. Cumming, and D. Paolino
(1993) Outline of discourse transcription. In J. Edwards & M. Lampert (eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 45-89.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Iwasaki, Shoich
Kamio, Akio
(1979) On the notion speaker’s territory of information: A functional analysis of certain sentence-final forms in Japanese. In G. Bedell, E. Kobayashi, M. Muraki (eds.), Explorations in linguistics: Papers in honor of Kazuko Inoue. Tokyo: Kenkyusha, pp. 213-231.Google Scholar
(1990) Joohoo no nawabari-riron: Gengo no kinooteki bunseki [The territory of information theory: A functional analysis of language]. Tokyo: Taishukan.Google Scholar
(1997) Territory of information. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
(2002) Zoku joohoo no nawabari-riron: Gengo no kinooteki bunseki [New territory of information theory: A functional analysis of language]. Tokyo: Taishukan.Google Scholar
Kato, Yukiko
(2002) “Chigai-ga wakaru otoko” wa donna otoko ka [What kind of person is someone who is called “chigai-ga wakaru otoko”]. Bulletin of the International Student Center Gifu University, pp. 97-109.Google Scholar
Koyama-Murakami, Nobuko
(2001) Grounding and deixis: A study of Japanese first-person narrative. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of Hawaii.
Lee, Kiri
(2006) Territory of information theory and emotive expressions in Japanese: A case observed in shiranai and wakaranai . In S. Suzuki (ed.), Emotive communication in Japanese. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 191-207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyons, John
(1982) Deixis and subjectivity: Loquor, ergo sum? In R.J. Jarvella & W. Klein (eds.), Speech, place, and action: Studies in deixis and related topics.New York: Wiley, pp. 101-124.Google Scholar
(1994) Subjecthood and subjectivity. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Maynard, Senko K
(1993) Discourse modality: Subjectivity, emotion, and voice in the Japanese language. Philadelphia and Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
(2005) Expressive Japanese: A Reference Guide for sharing emotion and empathy. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miura, Akira
(1983) Japanese words & their uses. Rutland, Vermont: Charles E. Tuttle Company.Google Scholar
Quinn, Charles J
(1994)  Uchi/soto: Tip of a semiotic iceberg? ‘Inside’ and ‘outside’ knowledge in the grammar of Japanese. In J.M. Bachnik & C.J. Quinn (eds.), Situated meaning. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 247-294.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Scheibman, Joanne
(2000)  I dunno ... A usage-based account of the phonological reduction of don't in American English conversation . Journal of Pragmatics 321: 105-124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001) Local patterns of subjectivity in person and verb type in American English conversation. In J. Bybee and P.J. Hopper (eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 61-89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Point of view and grammar: Structural patterns of subjectivity in American English conversation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Shinzato, Rumiko
(2003) Experiencing self versus observing self: The semantics of stative extensions in Japanese. Language Sciences 251: 211-238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Satoko
(ed.) (2006) Emotive communication in Japanese. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A., and Anthony Mulac
(1991) A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization of epistemic parentheticals in English. In E.C. Traugott & B. Heine (eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization vol. II: Focus on types of grammatical markers.Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 313-329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tien, C., S. Izuhara, and S. Kim
(eds.) (2007) Ruigigo tsukaiwake jiten [Synonym “How to chose” Dictionary]. Tokyo: Kenkyusha.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 6 other publications

Endo, Tomoko
2023. Sequential positions and interactional functions of negative epistemic constructions in Japanese conversation. Journal of Japanese Linguistics 39:1  pp. 37 ff. DOI logo
Farese, Gian Marco
2018. Is know a semantic universal? Shiru , wakaru and Japanese ethno-epistemology 1 1A shorter version of this paper was presented at the International Ethno-Epistemology Conference in Kanazawa, Japan, June 4th 2016.. Language Sciences 66  pp. 135 ff. DOI logo
Hosoda, Yuri & David Aline
2022. Deployment of I don’t know and wakannai in second language classroom peer discussions. Text & Talk 42:1  pp. 27 ff. DOI logo
Mizumoto, Masaharu
2021. The plurality of KNOW: a response to Farese. Language Sciences 85  pp. 101369 ff. DOI logo
Robles, Jessica S.
2022. Misunderstanding as a resource in interaction. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA)  pp. 57 ff. DOI logo
Sadler, Misumi
2020. Japanese negative suffix nai in conversation: Its formulaicity and intersubjectivity. Discourse Studies 22:4  pp. 460 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 april 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.