Cover not available
Part of
Information-Structural Perspectives on Discourse Particles
Edited by Pierre-Yves Modicom and Olivier Duplâtre
[Studies in Language Companion Series 213] 2020
► pp. 223–250

Chapter 9
Information structure, null case particle and sentence final discourse particle

 | Kanda University of International Studies
This paper discusses the nature of sentence final particles (SFPs) in Japanese from the perspective of the Theory of Mind (ToM). After presenting some properties of SFPs in Japanese by making reference to familiar languages like German, I will discuss a syntactic mechanism of creating non-standard questions with SFPs by making use of Abraham’s (2012) idea of moving MPs in German into ForceP to fix illocutionary force. I will next show that SFPs trigger the deletion of Case particles in Japanese to create a new discourse-related semantic effect of eliminating focus. Some implications of my approach are also touched upon, where a new functional head is suggested to explain some interesting behaviors of how come questions involving the semantic interpretation of surprise and curiosity.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1The cartography of syntactic structures
    • 2.2Some properties of SFPs and MPs
    • 2.3Some instance of SFPs
    • 2.4Non-standard questions
  • 3.Null Case particle
  • 4.Implications: how come questions
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 4 March 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.213.09end
References (70)
References
Abraham, Werner. 2012. Illocutionary force is speaker and information source concern. In Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages, Werner Abraham & Elizabeth Leiss (eds), 67–108. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Abraham, Werner & Leiss, Elizabeth. 2008. Modality-aspect Interfaces: Implications and Typological Solutions [Typological Studies in Language 79]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Modalität [Studies zur deutschen Grammatik 71]. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner. 2018. Andreas Trozke: The grammar of emphasis: From information structure to expressive dimension. Folia Linguistica 53(2): 535–542. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arai, Sayaka & Nakamura, Mari. 2016. Ziheisyoo supekutoramuzi nikakawaru ryooikusya no hatuwa bunseki (Utterance of the adults training children with autism spectrum disorder). Tokyo Syukutoku Daigaku Rinsyoosinrigaku Kenkyuu 16: 45–63.Google Scholar
Bayer, Josef & Obenauer, Hans-Georg. 2011. Discourse particles, clause structure, and question types. The Linguistic Review 28: 449–491. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belletti, Adriana. 2019. Ways of marking direct arguments: The case of a-marking in Italian, paper presented at Comparative Syntax and Language Acquisition #10, Nanzan University.
. Forthcoming. On a-marking topics in the Italian left periphery. In Beyond the Veil of Maya, Roberto Petrosino, Pietro Carlo Cerrone & Harry van der Hulst (eds). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logo
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), 1–52. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Coniglio, Marco. 2014. The fine structure of force: On the interaction of modal particles with illocutionary force and clause type. In On Peripheries: Exploring Clause Initial and Clause Final Positions, Anna Cardinaletti, Guglielmo Cinque & Yoshio Endo (eds), 103–140. Tokyo: Hituzi.Google Scholar
Coniglio, Marco & Zegrean, Iulia. 2012. Splitting up force. Evidence from discourse particles. In Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 190], Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman & Rachael Nye (eds), 229–255. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 2001. Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective, translated by Joachim Schulte. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, Christopher. 2009. Decisions, dynamics, and the Japanese particle yo. Journal of Semantics 26: 329–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Endo, Yoshio. 2007. Locality and Information Structure [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 116]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Illocutionary force and discourse particles in the syntax of Japanese. In Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages, Werner Abraham & Elizabeth Leiss (eds), 405–424. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Two ReasonPs, In Beyond Functional Sequence: The cartography of syntactic structure Vol. 10, Ur Shlonsky (ed.), 220–231, Oxford University Press: Oxford/New York. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. Variation in wh-expressions asking for a reason. Linguistic Variation 18(2), 299–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Exploring right/left peripheries: Expressive meanings in questions. To appear in Online Proceedings of Clause Typing and the Syntax-to-Discourse Relation in Head-final Languages.Google Scholar
Endo, Yoshio & Haegeman, Liliane. 2019. Adverbial clauses and adverbial concord. Glossa 4(1) 48: 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fitzpatrick, Justin. 2005. The whys and how comes of presupposition and NPI licensing in questions. In Proceedings of the 24th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, John Alderete, Chung-hye Han & Alexi Kochetov (eds), 138–145. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Fujitani, Naruaki. 1977. Ayuisyoo, annotation by Masao Takeoka. Tokyo: Bensei-sya.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane & Hill, Virginia. 2014. Vocatives and speech act projections: A case study in West Flemish. In On Peripheries, Anna Cardinaletti, Gugliemo Cinque & Yoshio Endo (eds), 209–236. Tokyo: Hituzi.Google Scholar
Hasegawa, Machiko. 1994. Sazae-san (1). Tokyo: Asahi Shinbun Syuppan.Google Scholar
Hashimoto, Osamu. 1993. Gimonkei+syuuzyosi no arawasu imino ruikei. (Semantic typology of question form+sentence final particle). Komatsu Hideo Taikan Kinen Ronbunsyuu (Festschrift for Hideo Komatsu), 700–712. Tokyo: Sanseido.Google Scholar
Hasunuma, Akiko. 2015. Syuuzyosi sa no honsituteki kinoo (Main functions of the sentence final particle sa). Nihongo Nihonbungaku 25: 1–27.Google Scholar
Hirayama, Shiho. 2015. Sizen kaiwa niokeru kana no yoohoo (The use of kana in natural discourse). Nihongo kyooiku zissen kenkyuu (Study of Practical Japanese Education) 2: 68–79.Google Scholar
Izuhara, Hideko. 2003. Ne to yo saikoo-Ne to yo no communication kinoo no Koosatukara (Ne and yo reconsidered – from the viewpoint of communication function). Nihongo Kyooiku 80: 103–114.Google Scholar
Kamio, Akio. 1994. The theory of territory of information: The case of Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics 21: 67–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. Joohoo no Nawabari Riron (Theory of territory of information), 2nd Ed. Tokyo: Taisyuukan.Google Scholar
Kinsui, Satoshi. 2014. Yakuwarigo syoojiten (Dictionary of role language). Tokyo: Kenkyusya.Google Scholar
Kinsui, Satoshi & Takubo, Yukinori. 1998. Danwa kanri riron ni motozuku ‘yo’ ‘ne’ ‘yone’ no kenkyuu (A study of yo, ne, and yone in the discourse management theory). In Onsei ni yoru Ningen to Kikai no Taiwa (Conversation between machine and humans through sound), Shuji Doshita, Riichiro Mizonoguchi, Yasuhisa Niimi, Katsuhiko Shirai & Hozumi Tanaka (eds), 257–271. Tokyo: Ohmsha.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Joachim. 1986. Abtönungsmittel als Illokutionstypmodifikatoren. Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik 27: 100–111.Google Scholar
. 1991. On the semantics of modal particles. In Discourse Particles: Descriptive and Theoretical Investigations on the Logical, Syntactical, and Pragmatic Properties of Discourse Particles in German [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 12], Werner Abraham (ed.), 141–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuno, Susumu. 1973. The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Leiss, Elizabeth. 2012. Epistemicity, evidentiality and theory of mind. In Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages, Werner Abraham & Elizabeth Leiss (eds), 37–66. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lightfoot, David. 2018. Nothing in syntax makes sense except in the light of change. In Language, Syntax, and the Natural Sciences, Ángel J. Gallego & Roger Martin (eds), 224–240. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Masunaga, Kiyoko. 1988. Case deletion and discourse context. In Papers from the Second International Workshop on Japanese Syntax, William Poser (ed.), 145–156. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Makihara, Isao. 1995. Gimonhyoogen niokeru no no itisokumen (An aspect of no in interrogative sentences). Nihongo to Nihonbungaku 21: 22–30.Google Scholar
Miyagawa, Shigeru. 1989. Structure and Case Marking in Japanese. New York NY: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nakata, Iwao & Takeoka, Masao. 1960. Ayuisyo Sin-tyuu. Tokyo: Kazama syobo.Google Scholar
Nakahara, Aya. 2004. Love☆com (1) (Love Complex). Tokyo: Shueisha.Google Scholar
Nuyts, Jan. 2000. Epistemic Modality, Language, and Conceptualization [Human Cognitive processing 5]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Obenauer, Hans-Georg. 2004. Nonstandard wh-questions and alternative checkers in Pagotto. In The Syntax and Semantics of the Left Periphery, Horst Lohnstein & Susanne Trissler (eds), 343–383. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Special interrogatives – left periphery, wh-doubling, and (apparently) optional elements. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2004 – Selected Papers from ‘Going Romance 2004’, Jenny Doetjes & Paz Gonzalves (eds), 247–273. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, Anna. 2002. Modality and theory of mind: Perspectives from language development and autism. In Modality and its Interaction with the Verbal System [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 47], Sjef Barbiers, Frits Beukema & Wim van Wurff (eds), 185–204. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, Anna, Li, Peggy, Choi, Youngon & Han, Chang-hye. 2007. Evidentiality in language and cognition. Cognition 103: 253–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Popper, Karl R. 1959 [1935]. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Radford, Andrew. 2018. Colloquial English. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of grammar, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Locality and left periphery. In Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures 3, Adriana Belletti (ed.), 223–252. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
. 2014. On the study of language as a cognitive capacity: Results and perspectives. In On Peripheries, Anna Cardinaletti, Guglielmo Cinque & Yoshio Endo (eds), 61–99. Tokyo: Hituzi.Google Scholar
Satake, Shinji & Kobayashi, Shigeo. 1987. Ziheisyoozi niokeru goyooronteki dentatu no kenkyuu. (A study of pragmatic communicative functions). Tokusyukyooikugaku Kenkyuu 25(3): 19–30.Google Scholar
Sato, Takeyoshi. 2000. Tenbo: Gendai no Nihongo (Prospect: The Japanese language of today). Tokyo: Hakuteisha.Google Scholar
Schultz, Charlies. 2008. Snoopy comic selection 1970–1990, translated by Shuntaro Tanigawa. Tokyo: Iwanami.Google Scholar
Searle, John R. 1985. Expression and meaning. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Shiina, Karuho. 2006. Kimini Todoke (1). Tokyo: Syueisya.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur & Soare, Gabriela. 2011. Where’s ‘why’? Linguistic Inquiry 42(4): 651–669. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Starke, Michael. 2001. Move Dissolves into Merge: A Theory of Locality. PhD dissertation, University of Geneva.Google Scholar
Suzuki, Hideo. 1998. Gendai nihongo niokeru josei no bunmatusi no kenkyuu (The female sentence final particle in Modern Japanese). In Nihongo Bunmatusi no Rekisiteki kenkyuu (The Diachronic Study of Sentence Final Particles in Modern Japanese), Yoichi Fujiwara (ed.), 139–162. Tokyo: Miyai syoten.Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Takiyoshi, Michika & Tanaka, Mari. 2011. Ziheisyoo supekutoramu syoogaisya no ziko nikansuru kenkyuudookoo to kadai (Trends and issues of the concept of the self in people with autistic spectrum disorder). Toohoku Daigaku Daigakuin Kyooikugakukenkyuuka Nenpoo 60(1): 497–521.Google Scholar
Takiura, Masato. 2008. Politeness Nyuumon (An introduction to politeness theory). Tokyo: Kenkyusha.Google Scholar
Tanaka, Hiroko. 2000. The particle ne as a turn-management device in Japanese conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 32: 1135–1176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tokieda, Motoki. 1951. Taizin kankei o koosei suru josi, zyodoosi (Particles and auxiliary verbs that construct interpersonal relationship). Kokugo Kokubun no Kenkyuu 29(9): 1–10.Google Scholar
Trotzke, Andreas. 2017. The Grammar of Emphasis: From Information Structure to the Expressive Dimension. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan. 2008. Left periphery and how-why alternations. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 17: 83–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uyeno, Tazuko. 1971. A Study of Japanese Modality: A Performance Analysis of Sentence Particles. PhD dissertation, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Watamaki, Toru. 1997. Jiheisyozi niokeru kyookan hyoogen ne no ketuzyo (Lack of the particle ‒ne in conversation by a child with autism: A case study). Japanese Journal of Developmental Disabilities 19: 146–157.Google Scholar
Yamamoto, Mami & Asano, Midori. 2012. Ziheisyoo supekutoramu syoogai no kodomo to hahaoya no komyunikeesyo nikansuru kokunai bunken rebyuu (Review of communication between mothers and children with autism spectrum disorder literature review in Japan). Kazoku Kangogaku Kenkyuu 17(2): 75–85.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Endo, Yoshio
2021. Chapter 6. Subject drop in how come questions in English. In Current Issues in Syntactic Cartography [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 267], ► pp. 128 ff. DOI logo
Endo, Yoshio
2022. Non-standard questions in English, German, and Japanese. Linguistics Vanguard 8:s2 ► pp. 251 ff. DOI logo
Endo, Yoshio
2023. Chapter 9. Three ReasonPs. In Micro- and Macro-variation of Causal Clauses [Studies in Language Companion Series, 231], ► pp. 250 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 november 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.