1.Introduction

The n(o) da structure is one of the most frequently used expressions in Japanese, and the construction has been explored by various studies in the field of Japanese linguistics and discourse studies (e.g., Jorden 1963Jorden, Eleanor Harz 1963 Beginning Japanese. New Haven: Yale University Press.; Alfonso 1966Alfonso, Anthony 1966 Japanese Language Patterns: A Structural Approach, Vol. 2. Tokyo: Sophia University LL Center of Applied Linguistics.; McGloin 1980McGloin, Naomi Hanaoka 1980 “Some Observations Concerning no desu Expressions.” The Journal of the Association of Teachers of Japanese, 15 (2), 117–149. , 1989McGloin, Naomi Hanaoka 1989 A Students’ Guide to Japanese Grammar. Tokyo: Taishukan Publishing Company.; Kuno 1983Kuno, Susumu 1983 Shin Nihon Bunpoo Kenkyuu [New Japan Grammar Research]. Tokyo: Taishukan.; Aoki 1986Aoki, Haruo 1986 “Evidentials in Japanese.” In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology, ed. by Wallace Chafe, and Johanna Nichols, 223–238. Norwood: Ablex.; Takatsu 1991Takatsu, Tamie 1991 “A Unified Semantic Analysis of the NO DA Construction in Japanese.” The Journal of the Association of Teachers of Japanese 25 (2): 167–176. ; Maynard 1992Maynard, Senko. K. 1992 “Cognitive and Pragmatic Messages of a Syntactic Choice: The Case of the Japanese Commentary Predicate n(o) da.” TEXT 12: 563–563.; Noda 1992Noda, Harumi 1992 “Fukubun ni okeru ‘no(da)’ no Kinoo: ‘no de wa naku(te),’ ‘no de wa,’ to ‘no daga’ [Functions of ‘no(da)’ in complex sentences: ‘no de wa naku(te)’ ‘no de wa’ and ‘no da kara’].” Handai Nihongo Kenkyuu 4: 73–90., 1999Noda, Harumi 1999 No da no Kinoo [Functions of no da]. Tokyo: Kuroshio.; Iori 2000Iori, Isao 2000 “Kyooiku bunpoo ni kansuru oboegaki: ‘Sukoopu no no da’ o ree to shite [Remarks on pedagogical grammar: With special reference to sukoopu-no noda’].” Hitotsubashi Daigaku Ryuugakusee Sentaa Kiyoo 3: 33–41.; Ijima 2010Ijima, Masahiro 2010 “Noda bun no kinoo to koozoo [Functions and structures of noda sentences].” Nihongogaku Ronshū 6: 75–117.; Miyazawa 2018Miyazawa, Takaaki 2018 “JCK sakubun koopasu ni okeru noda no tookatsu kinoo ni yoru bunmyaku tenkai no tokuchoo [Characteristics of text developments by the integrating function of noda in JCK essay corpus].” Chukyo Daigaku Bungakukai Ronso 4: 228–246.). The following example demonstrates a typical sentence that includes the n(o) da structure in Japanese.11.In the present study, “n(o) da structure” is used as a general cover term that refers to structures such as n da, no da, n desu, no desu, and no de aru, etc. N is a contracted form of the nominalizer no and is generally used in colloquial Japanese. For more details, see Section 1.1. The n(o) da structure is used as a predicate-final expression that creates various communicative effects in discourse. The following sentence demonstrates a typical usage of the n(o) da structure in Japanese.

In written Japanese, no da, which is one of the variations of the n(o) da structure, is frequently used in its past-tense form, no datta. However, the past-tense no datta has not been the primary focus in the past studies and its properties in discourse remain unexplored. In addition, no de aru, which is a formal variant of the n(o) da structure, is also commonly used in its past form no de atta, but no de atta also remains unexplored. The present study explores the cases of no datta and no de atta in written text and discusses what the writer signals by the use of no datta and no de atta in written discourse in Japanese.

1.1 N(o) da and no de aru in Japanese

The n(o) da structure, which is one of the most frequently used expressions in Japanese, typically consists of the nominalizer n or no and the copula da or desu, and the structure is used as a predicate-final expression that creates various communicative effects in discourse. The most standard type of the n(o) da structure in colloquial Japanese consists of the nominalizer n and the copula da or desu. Compare the a sentences with the b sentences in (2) and (3).

(2)

1. Takashi wa hirugohan o taberu.

   ‘Takashi eats lunch.’

2. Takashi wa hirugohan o taberu n da .

   ‘(It is that) Takashi eats lunch.’

(3)

1. Nedan ga takai desu.

   ‘The price is high.’

2. Nedan ga takai n desu .

   ‘(It is that) the price is high.’

(2a) and (3a) are merely about the semantic information expressed by the sentences. On the other hand, (2b) includes the n da, which is a non-polite variant of n(o) da, and (3b) includes n desu, an addressee-honorific variant of n(o) da. The n(o) da structure in Japanese is typically translated as ‘it is that’ in English (e.g., McGloin 1980McGloin, Naomi Hanaoka 1980 “Some Observations Concerning no desu Expressions.” The Journal of the Association of Teachers of Japanese, 15 (2), 117–149. , 1989McGloin, Naomi Hanaoka 1989 A Students’ Guide to Japanese Grammar. Tokyo: Taishukan Publishing Company.; Makino and Tsutsui 1986Makino, Seiichi, and Michio Tsutsui 1986 A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar. Tokyo: The Japan Times.; Jorden and Noda 1987Jorden, Eleanor Harz, and Mari Noda 1987 Japanese: The Spoken Language. New Haven: Yale University Press.; McGloin et al. 2013McGloin, Naomi Hanaoka, Mutsuko Endo Hudson, Fumiko Nazikian, and Tomomi Kakegawa 2013 Modern Japanese Grammar: A Practical Guide. London/New York: Routledge.) and the structure does not add any propositional meaning to the preceding statement. However, n(o) da is known to create a wide range of communicative effects in interactive situations and those communicative effects have been examined in many studies. For example, McGloin (1989McGloin, Naomi Hanaoka 1989 A Students’ Guide to Japanese Grammar. Tokyo: Taishukan Publishing Company., 89) argues that by using the n(o) da, the speaker can “present information which is known only to the speaker or the hearer as if it were shared information,” and communicative effects such as explanation, rapport building, and providing background information are created by the use of n(o) da. Makino and Tsutsui (1986Makino, Seiichi, and Michio Tsutsui 1986 A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar. Tokyo: The Japan Times., 325) explain n(o) da as “a sentence ending which indicates that the speaker is explaining or asking for an explanation about some information shared with the hearer, or is talking about something emotively, as if it were common interest to the speaker and the hearer.” On the other hand, some discuss the n(o) da structure from the perspective of evidentiality for the stated propositional information. Aoki (1986Aoki, Haruo 1986 “Evidentials in Japanese.” In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology, ed. by Wallace Chafe, and Johanna Nichols, 223–238. Norwood: Ablex., 223) argues that n(o) da serves as a marker of “nonspecific evidential statements.” According to Aoki, n(o) da as an evidential marker does not explicitly indicate how the speaker obtained the stated propositional information, but the information is still presented as factual information by the speaker. It should be noted that even though n(o) da is very frequently used in discourse, it is also known to be one of the most obscure and perplexing linguistic expressions in Japanese, and a universally applicable theory that accounts for the versatile usages of n(o) da has yet to be established.

In the written form of Japanese, no da, which is considered more formal than n da, is also frequently used, especially in formal writings, scholarly texts, and the main body of narrative texts such as novels. Example (4) shows an example of the use of no da in written Japanese.

(4)

Ashita taisetsu na kaigi ga aru no da .

‘(It is that) we are having an important meeting tomorrow.’

In addition, no de aru, which is another variant of the n(o) da structure, is also frequently used in written Japanese. De aru is a copula phrase that corresponds with da and desu, and no de aru as a whole is considered to be a variant of the n(o) da structure. Example (5) shows the use of no de aru.

(5)

Kare wa kotoshi kankoku ni iku no de aru .

‘(It is that) he is going to Korea this year.’

When the n(o) da structure is used for statements about the matters in the past, n(o) da itself is usually not converted into the past tense, but the component that precedes n(o) da is conjugated into the past-tense form. The following sentences include n(o) da and its variants used for information about the past.

(6)

Ken ga heya o sooji shita n da .

‘(It is that) Ken cleaned the room.’

(7)

Heya wa atsukatta n desu .

‘(It is that) the room was hot.’

(8)

Sensoo wa owatta no da .

‘(It is that) the war ended.’

(9)

Yamada wa kaisha o tsukutta no de aru .

‘(It is that) Yamada made a company.

As shown in Examples (6) through (9), n(o) da and its variants are not converted into the past-tense forms, even though the statements are about the past. For example, in (6), shita ‘did’ before n da is in the past tense, but the copula da in n da remains as its present-tense form da. Examples (7) through (9) also follow the same pattern, and n desu, no da, and no de aru are not converted into their past-tense forms.

1.2 No datta and no de atta: Past-tense forms of no da and no de aru

When n(o) da is used in statements about past events and situations, the structure itself typically remains in the present tense. However, n(o) da can be used in its past-tense form such as n(o) datta and n(o) deshita in some specific situations. As far as the author of the present study is aware, there are several studies that touch on the past-tense form of n(o) da, and Mikami (1953)Mikami, Aakira 1953/1972 Gendai Gohoo Josetsu [Introduction to modern grammar]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan., Ono (2016)Ono, Hitomi 2016 “Nanki hoogen ni okeru ‘no da’ sootoo keeshiki to ‘ta’ no kyooki [Co-occurrence of ‘no da’ in Nanki dialect and ‘ta’].” Language and Civilization 14: 85–90., and Nishi (2017)Nishi, Hironori 2017 “Japanese n deshita in Discourse: Past Form of n desu.” Acta Linguistica Asiatica 7 (1): 41–56. are some of those studies.

Mikami (1953)Mikami, Aakira 1953/1972 Gendai Gohoo Josetsu [Introduction to modern grammar]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan. classifies no da/no de aru as hansee genzai ‘reflection present’ and no datta/no de atta as hansee kako ‘reflection past,’ and compares the following two examples.

(10)

Naninani shita no de aru .

‘(It is that) I did something.’

(11)

Naninani shita no de atta .

‘(It was that) I did something.’ (Mikami 1953Mikami, Aakira 1953/1972 Gendai Gohoo Josetsu [Introduction to modern grammar]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan., 246)

Mikami argues that (10) and (11) both refer to completed actions and are mostly identical, but (10) has an explanatory tone, but (11) is purely describing a completed action, and as a result, (10) is more likely to be interpreted as a subjective statement, while (11) is considered more objective.

Mikami also compares the following two examples to demonstrate the difference between using the present tense and the past tense morphemes before the past-tense no datta.

(12)

Iku no datta .

‘(It was that) I am going (somewhere).’

(13)

Itta no datta .

‘(It was that) I went (somewhere).’ (Mikami 1953Mikami, Aakira 1953/1972 Gendai Gohoo Josetsu [Introduction to modern grammar]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan., 247)

Mikami explains that the pattern in (12) is used for expressing regret for not doing something, and (13) is used for expressing disappointment towards what is being stated. However, Mikami does not provide further explanations for Examples (12) and (13).

Nishi (2017)Nishi, Hironori 2017 “Japanese n deshita in Discourse: Past Form of n desu.” Acta Linguistica Asiatica 7 (1): 41–56. reports that n datta and n deshita, which are the past-tense forms of n(o) da’s variants, are used following past-tense morphemes when the speaker expresses his or her recollection of previously-held knowledge, or when a statement is a confirmation-seeking utterance about the speaker’s previously-held knowledge. What Nishi (2017)Nishi, Hironori 2017 “Japanese n deshita in Discourse: Past Form of n desu.” Acta Linguistica Asiatica 7 (1): 41–56. argues also aligns with Ono (2016)Ono, Hitomi 2016 “Nanki hoogen ni okeru ‘no da’ sootoo keeshiki to ‘ta’ no kyooki [Co-occurrence of ‘no da’ in Nanki dialect and ‘ta’].” Language and Civilization 14: 85–90. regarding how the past-tense form of the n(o) da structure functions in interactive situations. The following examples are from Nishi (2017)Nishi, Hironori 2017 “Japanese n deshita in Discourse: Past Form of n desu.” Acta Linguistica Asiatica 7 (1): 41–56. .

(14)

Aa, soo da. Anmari ni hannoo ga warui node, guuguru ado waazu o teeshi ni shite oita n datta .

‘Oh, yes. (Now I recall that) I turned off Google AdWords because the response was very bad.’

(15)

Tsuaa jitai wa Hiroshima kara hajimatta n deshita yone?

‘The concert tour itself started in Hiroshima, right?’

In (14), the past-tense n datta is used at the end of an utterance that is about the speaker’s recollection of information that was previously held. In (15), n deshita, which is also past tense, is used in a confirmation-seeking question about the information that was previously held by the speaker. Nishi’s analysis shows how the past-tense n datta and n deshita are used when the speaker’s previously-held knowledge is involved in the utterance, but his analysis is limited to the cases where those expressions are used in conversational situations.

In addition, no datta and no de atta, which are the past-tense forms of no da and no de aru, are also used in the written form of Japanese. The following examples are from written texts in Japanese that include no datta and no de atta, respectively. The examples are from the Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese (Maekawa 2008Maekawa, Kikuo 2008 Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese. IJCNLP 2008: 101.).22.The present study primarily examines examples from the Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese. The details of the data selection process are discussed in detail in Section 2.

(16)

Sono hidari kata ni kono otoko wa shokuryoo no baggu o kake, migite o sore ni tsukkonde, zerii joo no shokuryoo o toridashi, ushi tachi ni sore o ataeru no datta .

‘The man hangs a bag for food on his left shoulder, and puts his right hand into it, and takes out jelly-like food from it, and gives it to the cows.’

[BCCWJ ID: PB13_00132, published books, Minkan Denshoo to Soosaku Bungaku (2001), Masashi Takagi (translator), Max Lüthi (original author)]

(17)

Watashi wa kono ban, ima made mattaku miete inakatta moo hitotsu no amerika ni deatta no de atta .

‘That night, I encountered another America that I absolutely could not see until that moment.’

[BCCWJ ID: LBo3_00067, library books, Yuutopia no Shoometsu (2000), Takashi Tsujii (author)]

The usages of no datta and no de atta similar to (16) and (17) are very common in written Japanese, but they remain unexplored in linguistic studies in Japanese. Nishi’s (2017)Nishi, Hironori 2017 “Japanese n deshita in Discourse: Past Form of n desu.” Acta Linguistica Asiatica 7 (1): 41–56. study shows that n datta and n deshita are used when recollection of previously-held knowledge involved in conversational discourse, but based on the observation of (16) and (17), which are examples from written texts, it seems that the usage of no datta and no de atta are not limited to the situations where the writer recollects his or her previously-held knowledge. More precisely, Nishi’s analysis shows that n datta and n deshita are used in conversation when the speaker regains his or her previously-held knowledge that was once lost, but (16) and (17) from written texts are not necessarily about the regained previously-held knowledge. In addition, Mikami (1953)Mikami, Aakira 1953/1972 Gendai Gohoo Josetsu [Introduction to modern grammar]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan. provides some explanations on the past-tense no datta and no de atta, but his examples are limited to constructed examples and do not consider the influence from the surrounding discourse.

The present study will explore the cases of no datta and no de atta in written discourse in Japanese, and examine the temporal and meta-propositional information being indicated by the past-tense no datta and no de atta in written discourse.

2.The present study

In order to explore how no datta and no de atta are used in written discourse in Japanese, the present study examines the cases of no datta and no de atta in written texts. The example sentences for the analysis of the present study are selected from the Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese (BCCWJ), which is a balanced language database for written Japanese, created by the National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics (Maekawa 2008Maekawa, Kikuo 2008 Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese. IJCNLP 2008: 101.). Mori (2011)Mori, Atsushi 2011 “Nihongo kakikotoba kinkoo koopasu koa deeta ni okeru shokyuu bunpoo koomoku no shutsugen hindo [The frequency of elementary-level grammar items in the core data in the Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese].” In Nihongo Kyooiku Bunpoo no Tame no Tayoo na Apuroochi [Multiple approaches to Japanese pedagogy grammar], ed. by Atsushi Mori, and Isao Iori, 57–78. Tokyo: Hitsuji Shobo. reports that the frequency of no da in BCCWJ Core Data is higher than all complex sentences and modality forms except the te-form, the dictionary-form, and yoo da, and this indicates that the no da construction is a very common expression in written Japanese.33.“Core Data” in the BCCWJ refers to the component in the BCCWJ in which lexical items are manually categorized, with which the accuracy of categorization is enhanced. The search for individual examples in the BCCWJ was conducted through the Chunagon search portal,44.The Chunagon search portal can be accessed at https://​chunagon​.ninjal​.ac​.jp​/bccwj​-nt​/search. which has a similar user interface to an internet search engine. The version of the BCCWJ database used for the present study was the Chunagon 2.4.5 data version 2020.02.

In order to look up individual examples of the cases, no datta and no de atta in hiragana followed by the sentence-stop punctuation symbol were input into the search portal.55.The sequence “(の)(だっ)(た)(。)” and “(の)(で)(あっ)(た)(。)” were input into the “short unit search” (tantan’i kensaku) option on the Chunagon portal for the present study. The reason that “のだった。” and “のであった。” were not input into the “character sequence search” (mojiretsu kensaku) option was to prevent other expressions that include the same character sequences, such as “ものだった” and “ ものであった,” from being included in the search results. In the present study, only the cases of no datta and no de atta in the sentence-final position were examined. All sub-corpora in the BCCWJ were included when the search was performed. After the search, 5,110 cases of no datta, and 2,726 cases of no de atta in the BCCWJ were identified. In addition, even though the present-tense no da and no de aru are not the primary focus of the present study, the number of cases of no da and no de aru in the sentence-final position were also examined. The results showed that 37,959 cases of no da and 43,396 of no de aru were identified in the sentence-final position, which indicated that the ratio between the present-tense no da and the past-tense no datta was 7.4:1, and for the present-tense no de aru and the past-tense no de atta, the ratio was 15.9:1.

The present study utilizes the linguistic data in the BCCWJ, but the focus is placed on the detailed qualitative analysis of individual examples, using the methodologies of discourse analysis. First, examples of no datta and no de atta that follow present-tense morphemes are examined. As mentioned in the introduction section, the n(o) da structure is not typically converted into its past-tense form even when the statement is about past events or situations, but many sentences in the examined database include the past-tense no datta and no de atta immediately following present-tense morphemes. In the BCCWJ, 2,204 out of the 5,110 cases of no datta, followed present-tense morphemes, and for no de atta, 1,181 out of 2,726 cases followed present-tense morphemes. In addition, many examples in the database also include the cases of no datta and no de atta that follow past-tense morphemes. Of the 5,110 cases of no datta, 2,906 followed the past-tense marking morpheme -ta. For no de atta, 1,545 cases out of 2,726 cases found in the corpus followed the past-tense morpheme -ta. Selected examples from those cases are also examined qualitatively in the analysis section.66. No datta and no de atta following the past-tense morpheme (goiso in the BCCWJ) -ta as a jodooshi ‘auxiliary verb’ are categorized as the cases that follow past-tense morphemes. The cases of -ta realized as -da are also included. No datta and no de atta that do not follow the past-tense morpheme -ta are categorized as cases that follow present-tense morphemes. In the analysis on the acceptability of the choice between the present-tense no da/no dearu and the past-tense no datta/no de atta, the examples will be analyzed with the notion of “mode of discourse” (Scholes 1980Scholes, Robert 1980 “Language, Narrative, and Anti-Narrative.” Critical Inquiry 7 (1): 204–212. ; Genette 1982Genette, Gérard 1982 “Frontiers of Narrative.” In Figures of Literary Discourse, trans. by Alan Sheridan, 127–144. New York: Columbia University Press.; Smith 2001Smith, Carlota. S. 2001 “Discourse Modes: Aspectual Entities and Tense Interpretation.” Cahiers de Grammaire 26, 183–206., 2003Smith, Carlota. S. 2003 Modes of Discourse: The Local Structure of Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. , 2005Smith, Carlota. S. 2005 “Aspectual Entities and Tense in Discourse.” Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 62 (2): 223–237. Rudrum 2005Rudrum, David 2005 “From Narrative Representation to Narrative Use: Towards the Limits of Definition.” Narrative 13 (2), 195–204. , etc.).

3.Data analysis

3.1Present-tense morpheme + no datta/no de atta

The present study first discusses cases of no datta and no de atta that are used following present-tense morphemes, with a focus on the temporal interpretation of those cases. As mentioned in the previous section, it was found that approximately half of the cases of no datta and no de atta follow present-tense morphemes. The following excerpt includes a case of no datta that follows a present-tense morpheme. One pattern that was observed regarding the use of no datta and no de atta following present-tense morphemes was that they are used when the sentence is about an event or situation that would be described in the present tense at a certain point of time in the past. The following examples further demonstrate this type of usage of no datta and no de atta in detail. In (18), the author writes about his father.

(18)

Soreni chichi wa, yoru wa kimatte akumu ni unasareta ageku, nagaku o o hiku tooboe ni mo nita, amari ni muzan na sakebigoe o ageru no datta .

‘Furthermore, my father always suffered from nightmares at night and made a shocking screaming voice that was similar to long-lasting howling.’

[BCCWJ ID: LBq1_00039, library books, Mirai wa nagaku tsuzuku (2002), Kan Miyabayashi (translator), Louis Pierre Althusser (original author)]

In (18), sakebigoe o ageru ‘to scream,’ which is in the present tense, precedes a case of no datta. In Japanese, the so-called present tense is also called ‘imperfective’ or ‘non-past’ tense (Jorden and Noda 1987Jorden, Eleanor Harz, and Mari Noda 1987 Japanese: The Spoken Language. New Haven: Yale University Press.; Tsujimura 2007Tsujimura, Natsuko 2007 An Introduction to Japanese Linguistics. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.; Hasegawa 2015Hasegawa, Yoko 2015 Japanese: A Linguistic Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.). When an action verb is used in its present-tense form, it indicates that either the action will occur in the future or it is a habitual action that occurs on a regular basis. In the case of sakebigoe o ageru ‘to scream’ in (18), as shown by the adverbial expression kimatte ‘always,’ the author’s father screaming was an event that happened on a regular basis in the past, and the statement is followed by no datta, which is the past-tense form of no da.

A similar pattern was also observed in the sentences in which no de atta was used. In Example (19), the author writes about his experience of a medical training he had in the past.

(19)

Shitai ni taishite, dono yoo na riyuu ka wa hanmee shinakatta ga, isshu no kyozetsu hannoo o okosu hito mo ita. Kare wa, jisshuu ga kaishi sareru to mainichi no yoo ni jinmashin o okoshi, kinodoku na hodo kurushimu no de atta .

‘I didn’t know the reason, but there were some people who had rejection reactions to dead bodies. When the training began, he had hives daily, and he suffered to the extent that I felt sorry for him.’

[BCCWJ ID: PB59_00686, published books, Kumo no miyako (2005),
Otohiko Kaga (author)]

In (19), no de atta, which is the past-tense form of no de aru is used following the verb kurushimu ‘to suffer.’ Similar to the previous example, mainichi no yoo ni ‘daily’ used in (19) indicates that the author observed another medical student suffering from hives on a regular basis in the training, and no de atta is used at the end of the statement.

In (18) and (19), the past-tense no datta and no de atta are used following present-tense morphemes, even though the n(o) da structure itself is typically recognized to stay in the present-tense form. If the present-tense form was used for the n(o) da structure in (18), it would be as shown in (18′).77.It should be noted that the combination of a past-tense morpheme and no datta or no de atta, such as sakebigoe o ageta no datta and kurushinda no datta, are also possible. Those cases are explored in Section 3.2 of this paper.

(18′)

Soreni chichi wa, yoru wa kimatte akumu ni unasareta ageku, nagaku o o hiku tooboe ni mo nita, amari ni muzan na sakebigoe o ageru no da .

‘Furthermore, my father always suffers from nightmares at night and makes a shocking screaming voice that is similar to long-lasting howling.’

In (18′), no datta in (18) is modified to the present-tense no da. The original Example (18) with the past-tense no datta was about what the author’s father did repeatedly in the past, but in (18′) with the present-tense no da, the example has changed into a sentence about what the author’s father does on a regular basis as of now. Similarly, if the present-tense no de aru was used in (19), the student going through suffering would be interpreted as an ongoing situation. These comparisons demonstrate that by using the past-tense no datta and no de atta following present-tense morphemes, the author can frame the stated information as something that was the case at a certain point of time in the past. This can be further demonstrated by examining the examples in which no datta or no de atta follows non-action stative expressions. Example (20) includes a case of no datta that follows a present-tense morpheme.

(20)

Terasu ni wa cheaa ga yooi sarete ita ga, tatamareta mama datta. Ooberuzarutsuburugu wa sudeni mafuyu na no datta .

‘There were chairs on the terrace, but they were still folded. In Obersalzberg, it was already mid-winter.’88.Obersalzberg is a town in Austria.

[BCCWJ ID: PB19_00217, published books, Jikuu senkan yamato (2001), Keiichiro Kusanagi (author)]

In (20), no datta is used as in sudeni mafuyu na no datta ‘it was already mid-winter.’ The morpheme immediately preceding no datta is na, which is the present-tense connective form of the copula da when it is connected to n(o) da or any of its variants. Similar to what we observed in Examples (18) and (19), no datta follows a present-tense morpheme, and it indicates that Obersalzberg was in the state of being in mid-winter at a certain point of time in the past. When an expression about stative situations such as mafuyu ‘mid-winter’ is in the present tense in Japanese, it indicates that the situation is presently pertinent. In the case of mafuyu ‘mid-winter’ followed by no datta in (20), it indicates that the season in Obersalzberg was mid-winter at a reference point of time in the past in the discourse.

It should be noted that the past-tense no datta and no de atta following present-tense morphemes are also used for one-time events that happened in the past. Observe the following example.

(21)

Dogimo o nukarete iru nakai buchoo to mutoo keeri kachoo ni, “doozo tashikamete kudasai” to matsuura wa itta. Masaka sono ba de sanju-ppasento no san oku en o tewatasareru to omotte inakatta nakai buchoo wa dogimagi shite, “uketotte mo ii n deshoo ka” to osoru osoru kiku no datta . “Mochiron desu. Yakusoku no sanju ppasento desu.” Matsuura wa kotomonage ni itta.

‘Matsuura said “please check this” to Department Head Nakai and Accounting Head Muto, who were extremely surprised. Department Head Nakai, who never thought that they could receive that 300 million yen at that place, was startled, and cautiously asked “is it okay to receive this?” Matsuura casually said “Of course, 30 percent as I promised.”’

[BCCWJ ID: PB49_00314, published books, Ura to omote (2004),
Yang Sok-il (author)]

In (21), the present-tense kiku ‘to ask’ is followed by no datta, and the event referring to the present-tense kiku is a one-time action in the past. This type of use of a present-tense verb for a one-time action appears to be resulting from a phenomenon Ikegami (2008Ikegami, Yoshihiko 2008 “Subjective Construal as a ‘Fashion of Speaking’ in Japanese.” In Current Trends in Contrastive Linguistics: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives, ed. by Maria de los Angeles Gomez Gonzalez, J. Lachlan Mackenzie, and Elsa M. Gonzalez Alvarez, 227–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. , 241) labels as “tense alteration,” or the use of what some other scholars call Historical Present. As Ikegami points out, the use of present-tense forms for past events occurs quite frequently in Japanese narrative texts. Regarding this phenomenon, Ikegami (2008Ikegami, Yoshihiko 2008 “Subjective Construal as a ‘Fashion of Speaking’ in Japanese.” In Current Trends in Contrastive Linguistics: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives, ed. by Maria de los Angeles Gomez Gonzalez, J. Lachlan Mackenzie, and Elsa M. Gonzalez Alvarez, 227–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. , 243) argues that “the Japanese narrator is quite ready to displace her-/himself onto the scene of the past he is describing and construes it subjectively as if s/he her/himself were actually on the scene, being directly involved in what is taking place there.” As for the use of present-tense forms for past events in Japanese, some scholars use the term Historical Present, and they claim that Historical Present is used manipulatively to create various literary effects in Japanese discourse. For example, Soga (1983)Soga, Matsuo 1983 Tense and Aspect in Modern Colloquial Japanese. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. argues that background information in Japanese narrative is frequently expressed with Historical Present. Nara (2011Nara, Hiroshi 2011 “Aspect and Discourse in Tense-Switching: A Case Study of Natsume Sōseki’s Botchan.” Japanese Language and Literature 45 (1): 273–305., 293) also uses the term Historical Present to refer to the use of present-tense forms for past events, and his study demonstrates that “[Historical Present is] felt as the slowing down of the speed of story progression. The reader seems to feel that the author dwells on a scene for dramatic effect.” The literary effects created by the use of present-tense forms for past events is outside the scope of the present study and will not be discussed in detail here, but Example (21) shows that the use of the past-tense no datta involves a point of time in the past, similar to what we observed in (18) and (19). More precisely, in (21), the verb kiku ‘to ask’ is in the present tense, and the present tense for a one-time action in Japanese indicates that the action is not completed or is going to happen in the future. However, no datta in the past tense still explicitly signals that the whole action of asking a question happened in the past. In (21), whatever the literary effect created by the use of the present tense is, such as making the scene more dramatic, the past-tense no datta following the present-tense kiku is enabling the author to make use of the literary effect from the use of present tense without being prevented from explicitly stating that the whole action happened in the past.

3.2Past-tense morpheme + no datta/no de atta

The present study will examine the cases of no datta and no de atta following past-tense morphemes in this section. The following excerpts, (22) and (23), include no datta and no de atta following past-tense morphemes, respectively.

(22)

Mochiron sobo wa miboojin ni natte kara wa, ooyake no ba de hooseki o tsukeru no o yameta. Soshite ato ni natte, boku no ryooshin ga kekkon suru to, mada urazu ni ita hooseki o subete haha ni watashita no datta .

‘Of course, my grandmother stopped wearing jewelry in public after becoming a widow. And later, when my parents got married, she gave all of her unsold jewelry to my mother.’

[BCCWJ ID: PB49_00128, published books, Shadou rainzu (2004),
Riho Isaka (translator), Amitav Ghosh (original author)]

(23)

Aruhi, Mutsuroo ga dendoo kurumaisu no panfuretto o motte kaette kita. Dooryoo ni onaji yoo na tachiba no hito ga ite, “Chihoo no hahaoya o kurumaisu ni nosete, soto o sanpo shitara totemo ureshi soo na kao o shite ita.” to iu kotoba ni mune o utare, sassoku, yakuba no fukushika o tsuujite moratte kita no de atta .

‘One day, Mutsuro came home with a brochure for electric wheelchairs. He had a colleague who was in a similar situation, and he was moved by his colleague saying “when I put my mother in a wheelchair and took her outside, her face looked so happy,” and right after that, he obtained the brochure through the welfare department in the city office and came home.’

[BCCWJ ID: PM11_00660, published magazines, Hikari no ie (2001),
Yoko Mure (author)]

In both (22) and (23), the interpretation of the tense information is relatively straightforward. In (22), the watashita ‘gave,’ which is the past-tense form of watasu ‘to give’ is followed by the past tense no datta, and the action referred to by the verb is depicted as a one-time action in the past. Similarly, in (23), kita ‘came,’ which is the past-tense form of kuru ‘to come’ is followed by no de atta, and this example is also about a one-time action that happened in the past.

In the comparisons in Section 3.1 earlier in this paper, it was demonstrated that the tense of the n(o) da structure influences the interpretation of the tense information of the sentence. The previous comparison showed that when an event or a situation described in the present tense is followed by the present-tense no da or no de aru, the interpretation of the whole sentence remains present, but when an event or a situation described in the present tense is followed by the past-tense no datta or no de atta, it indicates the event or the situation happened in the past. In contrast, when a past-tense morpheme is followed by the n(o) da structure, the tense of the n(o) da structure does not affect the tense interpretation of the event or situation described. This can be further demonstrated by comparing (22) and (22′).

(22′)

Mochiron sobo wa miboojin ni natte kara wa, ooyake no ba de hooseki o tsukeru no o yameta. Soshite ato ni natte, boku no ryooshin ga kekkon suru to, mada urazu ni ita hooseki o subete haha ni watashita no da .

‘Of course, my grandmother stopped wearing jewelry in public after becoming a widow. And later, when my parents got married, she gave all of her unsold jewelry to my mother.’

In (22), watashita ‘gave’ was connected to the past-tense no datta, and the action of giving was depicted as a one-time event in the past. In (22′), no datta is modified to the present-tense no da, but the tense interpretation of the action of giving remains unchanged. Similarly, if the past-tense no de atta in (23) is modified to the present-tense no de aru, the usage of the present-tense no de aru does not affect the interpretation of timing of the action referred to by kita ‘came,’ which is an event that happened in the past.

It should be noted that not all instances of the combination of a past-tense morpheme and no datta or no de atta refer to one-time events in the past. Past-tense forms of Japanese verbs can also be used to refer to repeated events in the past, especially with adverbs that explicitly indicate repetition such as itsumo ‘always,’ yoku ‘often,’ and maichini ‘everyday,’ and this property remains the same when a verb in the past tense is followed by no datta or no de atta. The following excerpt includes an example of a past-tense morpheme followed by no datta for habitual actions in the past.99.The ratio between repeated past events and one-time past events preceding no datta/no de atta was not examined for the present study, since the present study’s primary focus is on qualitative analysis, and a verb in the past-tense form used for repeated events in the past is also an observed phenomenon when the verb is not followed by no datta or no de atta.

(24)

Chichi wa sori ni Kikumaru (name of a horse) o tsunaide ita. Sori ni tsunda mizunara no miki no ue ni chichi wa moofu o shiki, Rumi no seki o tsukutte kureta. “Soko ni notte ittara ii.” Itsumo chichi wa soo shite kureta no datta .

‘Her father was tying Kikumaru (name of a horse) to the sled. Her father put a blanket on the trunks of Mongolian oak on the sled, and made a seat for Rumi. “You can ride there.” Her father always did so.’

[BCCWJ ID: LBnn_00033, library books, Yuki yori shiroi tori (1999),
Wahei Tatematsu and Ake Ueda (authors)]

In (24), the adverb itsumo ‘always’ is used for soo shite kureta ‘always did so (for her),’ and this indicates that the combination of a past-tense morpheme and no datta can also be used referring to a habitual action in the past. In addition, modifying the past-tense no datta to the present-tense no da does not affect the interpretation of the propositional information. Also, if the past-tense no datta in (24) is modified into the present-tense no da, no propositional differences are observed.

In this section, the tense interpretation of events and situations followed by the present tense no da/no de aru and the past-tense no datta/node atta was discussed. Table 1 summarizes the findings in this section.

Table 1.Tense interpretation of events and situations followed by no da/no de aru and no datta/no de atta

	Followed by no da/no de aru (present-tense form)	Followed by no datta/no de atta (past-tense form)
Events and situations in present-tense forms	presently pertinent	happened in the past
Events and situations in past-tense forms	happened in the past	happened in the past

As shown in Table 1, when present-tense morphemes are followed by the present tense no da/no de aru, the events and situations referred to by the morpheme is interpreted as something that is presently pertinent, meaning that information is presented as a matter that is typically expressed in the present tense in Japanese, such as the present state, current habits, future actions, etc. When events and situations in the present tense are followed by the past-tense no datta/no de atta, the interpretation is that those events and situations happened in the past. On the other hand, when past-tense morphemes are followed by the present-tense no da/no de aru or the past-tense no datta/no de atta, the temporal interpretation of the propositional information is not affected by the tense of the n(o) da structure component.

In addition, it should also be noted that in terms of the temporal interpretation of the events and situations accompanied by the n(o) da structure, the component preceding n(o) da is responsible for indicating the aspectual information relating to the stated matter, and the n(o) da structure is responsible for the tense information. More precisely, the tense morpheme of the component preceding n(o) da indicates the completion status of the event/situation in relation to a certain point of time, and the tense of the n(o) da structure component indicates where the point of time is. For example, when the component that precedes n(o) da is in the past tense and followed by the present-tense no da/no de aru, the stated matter is framed as something that has already been completed as of the present moment, such as the moment of writing. Also, when an event or a situation in the present tense is followed by the past-tense no datta/no de atta, the stated matter is depicted as something that was ongoing or expected at a certain point in the past. The properties of the past-tense no datta and no de atta are discussed in detail in the next section.

4.Mode of discourse and the past-tense no datta/no de atta

The present study has examined the tense and the temporal properties of the statements that are accompanied by the past-tense no datta and no de atta so far. One remaining question is the overarching properties of no datta/no de atta as opposed to the more standard present-tense no da/no de aru, especially when the statements are about past events and situations. As discussed earlier, a clear difference was observed when they follow present-tense morphemes in terms of the temporal information about the stated matter, but when they follow past-tense morphemes, no clear propositional differences were observed. However, a close examination in the present study has also revealed that the past-tense no datta/no de atta is not always an available choice when they are used following past events and situations. This section of the present paper will discuss the mode of discourse and its influence on the choice between the present-tense no da/no de aru and the past-tense no datta/no de atta, in a discourse sequence in which no da/no de aru and no datta/no de atta are not interchangeable.

Example (25) is from Shirakawa et al. (2001)Shirakawa, Hiroyuki, Isao Iori, Shino Takanashi, Kumiko Nakanishi, and Toshihiro Yamada 2001 Chuujookyuu o Oshieru Hito no Tame no Nihongo Bunpoo Handobukku [Grammar handbook for mid to upper-level Japanese language teachers]. Tokyo: 3A Network., and they use this example to demonstrate that the n(o) da structure can be used in a statement that is directed toward the speaker himself/herself.

Example (25) by Shirakawa et al. shows that the component followed by the n(o) da structure, which is konna ni benkyoo shita ‘studied this much,’ is used as the basis for arguing that the speaker will pass the exam. In (25), the present-tense n(o) da structure follows a past-tense benkyoo shita ‘studied’ and this is not problematic.

Shirakawa et al. only discuss the case with the present-tense n(o) da with Example (25), but when the n(o) da structure is converted into the past tense, the sentence sounds unnatural. The past-tense no datta is used in (25′).

In (25′), the past-tense no datta follows the past-tense benkyoo shita ‘studied.’ Regarding the grammatical acceptability of (25′), five native speakers of Japanese were interviewed by the author of the present study and all of them reported that (25′) exhibits an unnatural impression.

One of the n(o) da structure’s functions is marking the statement as the reasoning for relevant statements, and with the present tense n(o) da in (25), the fact the speaker studied hard is presented as the reason for his belief that he will pass the exam in the future. However, in (25′), the reason component, which is the speaker studying hard, is followed by the past-tense n(o) datta, and this creates an effect of marking the reasoning as a matter that was relevant to something in the past. As a result, (25′) exhibits an unnatural impression, because the exam is scheduled in the future and marking the reasoning for passing the exam with the past-tense no datta is not congruent with the timeline. The contrast between (25) and (25′) demonstrates that the past-tense no datta is not always an available option when it follows statements about past events and situations.

Furthermore, what also distinguishes (25) and (25′) from Examples (22) through (24), where the no da/no dearu and no datta/no deatta are both available choices, is the influence from the mode of discourse. More precisely, no da/no dearu and no datta/no de atta are both acceptable choices when the discourse is in the mode of narrative, but otherwise no datta/no de atta is not an available option. When the term “narrative” is involved in linguistic analysis, what can become debatable is the definition of narrative. The definition of narrative has been a long-debated topic, and numerous definitions have been proposed by various scholars. For example, Scholes (1980Scholes, Robert 1980 “Language, Narrative, and Anti-Narrative.” Critical Inquiry 7 (1): 204–212. , 205) defines narrative as “the symbolic presentation of a sequence of events,” and Genette (1982Genette, Gérard 1982 “Frontiers of Narrative.” In Figures of Literary Discourse, trans. by Alan Sheridan, 127–144. New York: Columbia University Press., 127) states: “one will define narrative without difficulty as the representation of an event or sequence of events.” In addition, Smith (2005Smith, Carlota. S. 2005 “Aspectual Entities and Tense in Discourse.” Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 62 (2): 223–237. , 11) argues that “[n]arrative presents a sequence of consequentially related events and states, and the order in which they occur is crucial for understanding. The essence of a narrative is dynamism: narratives consist of events that occur one after the other in time.”

While it may not be difficult to broadly agree on the definition of narrative, one remaining issue is establishing a criterion for determining whether a given passage is in the mode of narrative or not. Smith (2005Smith, Carlota. S. 2005 “Aspectual Entities and Tense in Discourse.” Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 62 (2): 223–237. , 3) states that “texts of almost all genre categories are not monolithic, but rather have passages of different modes.” Smith (2005Smith, Carlota. S. 2005 “Aspectual Entities and Tense in Discourse.” Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 62 (2): 223–237. , 1) also claims that genre categories, such as novels and newspapers, are the “wrong level for close linguistic study of discourse.” The present study follows Smith’s argument, and the local mode of discourse is used for determining whether or not a given passage is in the mode of narrative. Another remaining issue is the treatment of the type of discourse that does not belong to the mode of narrative. As represented by Georgakopoulou and Goutsos’ (2000Georgakopoulou, Alexandra, and Dionysis Goutsos 2000 “Revisiting Discourse Boundaries: The Narrative and Non-Narrative Modes.” TEXT 20 (1): 63–82., 65) statement that “agreement is lacking as to what – if anything – narrative stands in contrast,” what is not narrative is a relatively unexplored notion. However, one common characteristic in the discourse modes that is not narrative is the lack of temporal advancement with the advancement of the text or discourse. Georgakopoulou and Goutsos (2000Georgakopoulou, Alexandra, and Dionysis Goutsos 2000 “Revisiting Discourse Boundaries: The Narrative and Non-Narrative Modes.” TEXT 20 (1): 63–82., 71) argue that “non-narrative texts do not have an internal time sequence, even though, obviously, they take time to read or listen to. Their underlying structures are static or atemporal, whether synchronic or diachronic.” For the present study, the mode that is not narrative is simply handled as non-narrative.

As for the unacceptability of Example (25′), the example is a self-directed statement and is not considered to be part of a narrative discourse, and the present study argues that the past-tense no datta/no de atta cannot be used in place of the present-tense no da/no de aru following a past-tense morpheme in a non-narrative discourse. On the other hand, Examples (22) through (24) are all from narrative discourse in which events are mostly listed in the temporal order, and no da/no dearu and no datta/no de atta are both available options.

As Kudo (1995)Kudo, Mayumi 1995 Asupekuto, Tensu Taikee to Tekusuto [Aspect, tense system and text]. Tokyo: Hitsuji Shobo. argues, Japanese narrative passages mainly consist of past-tense sentences, and time progression in the narrative world occurs when events are listed in the order they happened. This is analogous to Smith’s (2003Smith, Carlota. S. 2003 Modes of Discourse: The Local Structure of Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. , 93) argument on narratives in English, which is “narrative time advances with perfective event sentences and fails to advance otherwise.” When the discourse is in the mode of narrative, the passage of time in the narrative world is considered to be separate from the moment of speech or writing, and the progression of time in the narrative world is also detached from the time progression of time in the moment of speech or writing. Therefore, regardless of the tense of the n(o) da component, events and situations listed in a narrative text are presented as part of the narrative world, which is a temporally separate world from the moment of speech or writing. On the other hand, in a non-narrative discourse, the discourse does not presume the existence of a separate narrative world. For this reason, with the possibility of something from the past still being influential to the speaker or the writer’s real-life situation in the present moment, the past-tense no datta/no de atta cannot follow the description for what happened in the past.

The following excerpt also demonstrates the effect from the mode of discourse on the use of no da/no de aru and no datta/no de atta following a past morpheme. Example (26) is a description for a new product from a golf magazine. (26) is also considered to be in the mode of non-narrative.

In (26), the past tense kanoo ni natta ‘became possible’ is followed by the present-tense no da. Since (26) is about a new product, the information will be used by the magazine’s readers for their future purchasing decisions. Also, since (26) is not listing events in the temporal order, the mode of discourse is not narrative in (26). Similar to what we observed in (25) and (25′), if no datta was used instead of no da in (26), the statement would sound unnatural since the usage of no datta is not suitable when the mode of discourse is not narrative. Also for (26), five native speakers of Japanese were interviewed for the acceptability of using the past-tense no datta, and they all responded that using no datta in (26) would result in an unnatural impression. However, the use of the past-tense no datta in (26) may exhibit less unnaturalness compared to the contrast between (25) and (25′). The reason for this difference may be because Example (25) is clearly a non-narrative statement about a test that is going to take place in the future, but in (26), even though the whole discourse is a buyer’s guide for golf balls, as demonstrated by hassen yonhyaku en ‘8,400 yen’ at the end of the excerpt, the development process of the product mentioned in the excerpt may be somewhat narrative like. However, the information stated preceding no da in (26) can still be influential to what the readers would do in the future, and the information is not framed as part of a completed narrative story from the past. Therefore, the present-tense no da is considered to be more appropriate than the past-tense no datta in (26).

5. No da/no de aru no vs. no datta/no de atta in narrative discourse

Another remaining question is the difference between using the present-tense no da/no dearu and the past-tense no datta/no de atta when both are available choices in the mode of narrative without affecting the propositional information of the sentence. The present study attempts to explore the meta-propositional information indicated by the distinction between no da/no de aru and no datta/no de atta in this subsection.

The following excerpt is from the author’s personal recollection of his visit to the former Soviet Union, and the discourse appears to be a narrative text.

As discussed earlier, Examples (25) through (26) demonstrated that the past-tense no datta/no de atta is not usable when something that happened in the past is still influential and relevant to the present moment in the mode of non-narrative. In (27), the mode of discourse appears to be in the mode of narrative and the past-tense no datta is used after the past-tense motte kite kureta ‘brought.’ In (27), changing no datta to the present-tense no da would not create an unnatural impression. However, there is a possibility that some degree of meta-propositional differentiation is made when no da/no dearu and no datta/no de atta are interchangeable without interfering with the propositional information.

Mikami (1953)Mikami, Aakira 1953/1972 Gendai Gohoo Josetsu [Introduction to modern grammar]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan. claims that when following a past-tense morpheme, the present-tense no da/no de aru indicates a more subjective attitude compared to the past-tense no datta/no de atta, and his observation seems to be a valid argument. However, Mikami’s analysis is solely based on constructed examples, and those examples are independent sentences that do not consider the influence from the surrounding discourse. In addition, simply applying a binary distinction of subjective/objective may not be sufficient to discuss individual cases of no datta/no de atta in actual discourse.

As mentioned earlier in this paper, it has been recognized that present-tense forms are often used to refer to past events and situations in narratives in Japanese, and it has been suggested that the phenomenon creates discourse effects such as presenting the information as if the narrator were at the scene and directly involved with what is taking place (Ikegami 2008Ikegami, Yoshihiko 2008 “Subjective Construal as a ‘Fashion of Speaking’ in Japanese.” In Current Trends in Contrastive Linguistics: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives, ed. by Maria de los Angeles Gomez Gonzalez, J. Lachlan Mackenzie, and Elsa M. Gonzalez Alvarez, 227–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ), and slowing down the time and creating a dramatic effect for the scene (Nara 2011Nara, Hiroshi 2011 “Aspect and Discourse in Tense-Switching: A Case Study of Natsume Sōseki’s Botchan.” Japanese Language and Literature 45 (1): 273–305.). Even though past studies on tense alteration have not explored the tense of the n(o) da structure component, the choice between the present tense and the past tense for the n(o) da structure in narrative may fall into the same type of spectrum. More precisely, when both the present-tense no da/no dearu and the past tense no datta/no de atta are usable following a past-tense morpheme, if the past-tense no datta/no de atta is selected, the information is presented as something less impactful, less dramatic, and more temporally distant compared to choosing to use the present-tense no da/no de aru. On the other hand, if the present-tense no da/no de aru is selected, which is considered to be the more standard unmarked choice, the information is presented as something more impactful, dramatic, and more psychologically relevant to the moment of narration compared to choosing to use the past-tense no datta/no de atta.

For example, in (27), it appears that the use of the past-tense no datta is amplifying the sense of temporal distance from what happened and the moment of writing/narration, which also contributes to creating the sense of reminiscence by the author, as opposed to choosing the present-tense no da in the same position in the discourse. If the present-tense no da was selected instead of the past-tense no datta in (27), even though it would not create an unnatural impression, the sense of reminiscence would have been expressed to a lesser degree. It should also be noted that this analysis does not contradict with what Mikami (1953)Mikami, Aakira 1953/1972 Gendai Gohoo Josetsu [Introduction to modern grammar]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan. argues, because when the author presents the information as something less impactful and temporally distant from the author, the information is inherently presented in a less personally relevant and objective manner. Similarly, when the information is presented in a more impactful manner in discourse, what is being stated tends to be more personal and subjective for the author.

In addition, even when the text is not a personal memoir or the main body of a novel, when events are listed in the temporal order as a narrative text, and when no da/no de aru and no datta/no de atta are both available options, information such as impactfulness and the author’s perceived temporal distance can also be expressed by the choice between the two. The following excerpt is about international political relations in the 1970s.

In (28), the past-tense soren ga nihon ni sekkin shita ‘the Soviet Union approached Japan’ is followed by the present-tense no da. For this particular example, even if no da is converted into the past-tense no datta, the sentence does not exhibit an unnatural impression and the propositional information of the sentence does not change, which indicates that no da and no datta are both available choices in (28). However, if no da in (28) was changed to the past-tense no datta, it might give an impression that the stated information is less significant, as if the author is being somewhat indifferent to what is being stated. Needless to say, the difference between choosing to use no da and no datta in (28) may not affect the interpretation of the discourse significantly, but it is worth noting that the choice is an available tool for the author to express meta-propositional information.

6.Conclusion

The present study has examined how the past-tense no datta and no de atta are used in written text in Japanese. The present study first discussed the temporal and meta-propositional properties of sentences followed by the present-tense no da/no de aru and the past-tense no datta/no de atta. The analysis has demonstrated that when a present-tense morpheme is followed by the present-tense no da/no de aru, the temporal interpretation of the sentence is not affected by no da/no de aru. When events and situations in the present tense are followed by the past-tense no datta/no de atta, the interpretation is that those events and situations happened in the past. In addition, the present study also demonstrated that when past-tense morphemes are followed by the present-tense no da/no de aru or the past-tense no datta/no de atta, the tense information of the morpheme preceding no da/no de aru or no datta/no de atta remains unaffected.

However, a close examination of data has also revealed that no da/no de aru and no datta/no de atta are not always available options when they follow past-tense morphemes. That is, the past-tense no datta/no de atta cannot be used after a past-tense morpheme when the ongoing mode of discourse is non-narrative. This is because a non-narrative discourse does not presume the existence of a separate narrative world, and the resulting effects from what is being stated in a non-narrative discourse may still affect our lives in the present moment or the future. On the other hand, no da/no dearu and no datta/no de atta are both available options after a past-tense morpheme when the ongoing mode of discourse is narrative, because the information in a narrative text is framed as a sequence of completed events separated from the present moment, and the tense of the n(o) da structure does not influence the interpretation of the temporal information in the discourse.

In addition, the present study has examined the meta-propositional difference between using the present-tense no da/no dearu and the past-tense no datta/no de atta when they are both available options. The present study argued that the past-tense no datta/no de atta indicates the stated information is less impactful, less dramatic, and more temporally distant, compared to cases where the present-tense no da/no de aru is used.

Despite its frequent use in discourse, the no da/no de aru structure in Japanese is known to be overtly perplexing and its communicative and pragmatic functions have yet to be fully decoded. The author of the present study hopes that this study has shed light on previously unexplored properties of the no da/no de aru structure. Similar to Ono (2016)Ono, Hitomi 2016 “Nanki hoogen ni okeru ‘no da’ sootoo keeshiki to ‘ta’ no kyooki [Co-occurrence of ‘no da’ in Nanki dialect and ‘ta’].” Language and Civilization 14: 85–90. and Nishi (2017)Nishi, Hironori 2017 “Japanese n deshita in Discourse: Past Form of n desu.” Acta Linguistica Asiatica 7 (1): 41–56. , which have examined the past-tense no datta/no de atta in constructed examples and written text, the linguistic data used for the present study was entirely from written discourse. For future studies, examining linguistic data from more active and interactive situations, such as audio recordings of naturally occurring conversations, may further reveal the communicative properties of the past-tense no datta/no de atta.