1 Two Focus Constructions in Old Japanese Kakari

Two Focus Constructions in Old Japanese Kakari-musubi
Edith Aldridge, University of Washington
1. Introduction
Old Japanese (8th C., Nara Period) kakari-musubi (KM) construction:
=> Focused phrase (FP) marked by a focus particle in clause-initial or clause-medial position.
=> Nominalizing inflection on the main verb
OJ conclusive (shuushi 終止) marking on the verb in non-KM contexts (finite declarative
clauses):
(1)
烏梅能波奈伊麻佐可利奈理
(MYS 820)
梅の花
今盛りなり
ume=no pana ima
sakari-na-ri
plum=GEN flower now open-BE-SS
‘The plums are now in bloom.’
Kakari-musubi: Nominal inflection in the verb
PART = ka, ya, so, namu … V-INFL = adnominal (rentai 連体形)
PART = koso … V-INFL = realis (izen 已然形)
FP+SO … V-RT
(2) 吾戀君曽
伎賊乃夜
夢所見鶴
(MYS 150)
吾が戀ふる君ぞ昨夜の夜夢に見えつる
a=ga
kwofu-ru kimi=so kiso=no yo
ime=ni
1SG=GEN love-RT lord=SO last=GEN night dream=DAT
‘My beloved appeared in my dream last night.’
FP+KA … V-RT
(3) 吾待君乎
誰留流
(MYS 2617)
我が待つ君を誰れか留むる
wa=ga
mat-u
kimi=wo tare=ka todomu-ru
1SG=GEN wait-RT lover=ACC who=KA stop-RT
‘Who is it who detains the lover I await?’
FP+KOSO … V-IZ
(4) 人社不知松者知良武
(MYS 145)
人こそ知らね松は知るらむ
pito=koso
sira-ne,
matu=pa siru
ramu.
person=KOSO
know-NEG.IZ pine=TOP know SUPP
‘Though people do not understand, the pine may know.’
Goals: 1. Propose structures for each type
2. Show that KM is not a type of agreement
Two structures:
1. FP+KA, FP+KOSO are TP-internal.
2. FP+SO is in the CP layer.
1
mi-ye-tu-ru
see-PASS-PRV-RT
Not agreement:
1. No one-to-one mapping between particle and inflection
2. RT versus IZ is structurally or semantically based (not morphologically).
3. No unique focus position
2. Agreement-Based Approaches to KM
This relationship between particle and inflection is often treated as a form of agreement
between a moved focus constituent and the head of the focus projection it moves to.1
Nomura’s (1993) word order generalization: Old Japanese wh-phrases follow topics but
precede genitive subjects.
(5) Nomura (1993)
XP+PA > FP+KA > DPGEN > VRT
Watanabe (2002, 2005):
=> FP+KA moves to a focus position outside TP.
(6) a. 何処従鹿妹之入来而夢所見鶴
(MYS 3117)
いづくゆか妹が入り来て夢に見えつる
iduku=yu=ka
imwo=ga iri-ki-te
ime=ni
where=through=KA dear=GEN enter-come-CONJ dream=DAT
‘From where did my dearest come and appear in my dream?’
b.
mi-ye-tu-ru
see-PASS-PRV-RT
TopP
Top‘
FocP
FP+KA
Top
Foc’
TP
DP+GA
Foc
T’
vP
T
…tFP+KA…
Problem: GA is genitive case (7a) in OJ, not nominative. Nominative (7b) is bare in OJ
(Yanagida 2012, and Whitman and Yanagida 2012).
(7) a. 和何世古
我が背子
wa=ga
sekwo
1SG=GEN lover
‘my lover’
1
(MYS 812)
See Ikawa (1998) for a third agreement-based approach in the generative framework.
2
b. 我期大王
國所知良之
(MYS 933)
我ご大君国知らすらし
[wa-ga
opo-kimi] kuni
sirasu
rasi.
seem
1SG-GEN great-lord country rule
‘My great lord rules seems to rule the country.’
Kuroda (2007):
=> FP+KA moves to [Spec, TP] focus position. GEN subject remains in [Spec, vP].
(8)
TopP
Top‘
TP
FP+KA
Top
T’
T
vP
DPGEN
v’
VP
v
…tFP+KA…
Key differences
Watanabe: TP-external focus position
Kuroda: [Spec, TP] focus position
Agreement
1. FP moves to specifier position
2. FP agrees with the head of this projection => RT/IZ inflection.
3. Clause-Medial Focus with KA and KOSO
Intuitive problems with the agreement approach:
1. No one-to-one correspondence between KM particle and verbal inflection
2. RT vs. SS and RT vs. IZ has a structural (and/or semantic/pragmatic) basis and is not
purely morphological.
Empirical problems:
1. FP+KA/KOSO surfaces below [Spec, TP].
2. There is no single FP+KA/KOSO position.
Proposal: FP+KA and FP+KOSO occupy a position between T and VP, but this is not a
single designated position.
3
3.1. Position of FP+KA
Aldridge (2009), (2015):
=> Argument KA-phrases (DP+KA) move to a focus position in the edge of vP.
=> Adjunct KA-phrases (XP+KA) are adjoined (generally in situ) in the TP layer.
(9)
CP
C‘
TP
T’
DPNOM
DP+KA
C
XP+KA
T
vP
DPGEN
v’
VP
v
…tDP+KA…
Extension of Nomura’s (1993) word order generalization:
(10)
(DP+WO) > DPSUBJ > XP+KA > (DP+WO) > DP+KA > DPGEN > VRT
Scrambled objects always precede DP+KA (arguments):
(11)
吾待君乎誰留流
(MYS 2617)
我が待つ君を誰れか留むる
wa=ga
mat-u
kimi=wo tare=ka todomu-ru?
1SG=GEN wait-RT lover=ACC who=KA stop-RT
‘Who is it who detains the lover I await?’
But adjunct XP+KA can either precede or follow a scrambled object.
(12)
a. 何尓可
君之三船乎吾待将居
(MYS 2082)
いづくにか君がみ舟を我が待ち居らむ
iduku=ni=ka
kimi=ga mi-pune=wo
wa=ga
mati-ora-mu
where=DAT=KA lord=GEN HON-boat=ACC
1SG=GEN wait-be-SUPP
‘Where shall I be waiting for your boat?’
b. 多都多能山乎伊都可
故延伊加武
(MYS 3722)
龍田の山をいつか越え行かむ
tatuta=no yama=wo itu=ka
kwoe-ika-mu
Tatuta=GEN mountain=ACC
when=KA cross-go-SUPP
‘When shall I cross Mt. Tatuta?’
4
Point: There is no single position for KA-marked wh-phrases. (If both DP+KA and XP+KA
moved to the same position, then DP+KA should be able to precede a scrambled
object.)
Position of WO-marked objects:
=> DP+WO is specific, must move to the edge of vP. (Yanagida 2006)
(13)
a. 佐欲比賣能故何
比列布利斯夜麻
(Manyoshu 868)
佐用姫の子が領巾振りし山
[vP Sayopimye=no kwo=ga [VP pire puri]]-si
yama
Sayohime=GEN child=GEN
scarf wave-PAST.RT
hill
‘the hill where the girl Sayohime waved her scarf’
b. 蜻野叫
人之懸者
(Manyoshu 1405)
秋津野を人の懸くれば
kakure-ba]]]
[vP Akidu nwo=wo [v’ pito=no [VP tObj
man=GEN
speak.of-COND
Akizu field=ACC
‘When a man speaks of the moorland of Akizu…’
Following Yanagida (2006), I assume that DP+WO must move out of VP, but the landing site
can be the outer edge of vP or another adjunction site above vP. (See also Kuroda 2007 on the
relatively free position of DP+WO.)
(14)
[TopP DP+PA … [TP DPNOM … [vP DP+KA [v’ NPGEN [VP DP+WO V ]]]]]]
Since DP+WO is presupposed, it should occupy a higher position than DP+KA in the vP
edge.
=> DP+WO will always precede DP+KA.
(15)
[TP… [vP DP+WO [v’ DP+KA [v’ DPGEN [VP
__ V ]]]]]]
But free adjunction of DP+WO above vP allows DP+WO to appear either preceding or
following XP+KA.
(16)
[TP … XP+KA … [vP [v’ DPGEN [VP DP+WO V ]]]]
Point so far: No unique position for FP+KA (adjunct > argument)
Evidence that all FP+KA must be lower than T:
=> XP+KA follows a nominative subject.
(17)
保等登藝須奈尓加伎奈可奴
霍公鳥何か来鳴かぬ
pototogisu
nani=ka ki-naka-nu
cuckoo
what=KA come-cry-NEG
‘Why does the cuckoo not come and sing?’
5
(MYS 4053)
=> Non-presupposed material can precede FP+KA. (Focus position in CP layer must be
available.)
(18)
a. 吾思君者
何処辺
今夜誰与可
雖待不来
(MYS 3277)
我が思ふ君はいづくへに今夜誰れとか待てど来まさぬ
a=ga
omopu
kimi=pa [CP idukupye=ni [TP koyopi
tare=to=ka ...]]
where=DAT
tonight
who=with=KA
1SG=GEN long.for lord=TOP
mat-edo ki-masa-nu
wait-CONCESS come-HON-NEG
‘I long for you, but though I wait you do not come. (I wonder) where you are
tonight and who you are with.’
b. 霍公鳥
伊頭敝能山乎
鳴可
将超
(MYS 4195)
pototogisu
idupye=no
yama=wo
naki=ka kwoyu-ramu
cuckoo
which=GEN mountain=ACC
cry=KA cross-SUPP
‘Which mountain is the cuckoo crossing as he sings?’
Summary:
1. There is no single position for FP+KA.
2. FP+KA surfaces below [Spec, TP].
=> Problem for the agreement approach
3.2. FP+KOSO as Clause-medial (=FP+KA position)
The position for FP+KOSO is the same as for FP+KA:
=> Between T and VP with the argument/adjunct asymmetry
(19)
(DP+WO) > DPEA.SUBJ > XP+KOSO > (DP+WO) > DP+KOSO >
DPGEN > DPIA.SUBJ > VRT
As with FP+KA, there is an argument/adjunct asymmetry.
=> DP+KOSO never precedes DP+WO, XP+PA, or NOM subject:
(20)
等富都比等末都良能加波尓和可由都流伊毛我多毛等乎和礼許曽末加米
遠つ人松浦の川に若鮎釣る妹が手本を我れこそ卷かめ
(MYS 857)
topo=tu pito matu ura=no
kapa=ni wakayu turu
far=GEN person pine bay=GEN river=DAT sweetfish fish
imwo=ga tamoto=wo ware=koso
maka-me
dear=GEN sleeve=ACC 1SG=KOSO roll-SUPP.IZ
‘I will roll up the sleeve of my beloved, who is fishing for sweetfish in the river at the
bay where one waits for people gone afar.’
=> Like XP+KA, XP+KOSO can precede or follow DP+WO:
(21)
a. 後将相跡思許増
己命乎長欲為礼
(MYS 2868)
後も逢はむと思へこそおのが命を長く欲りすれ
noti=mo apa-mu
to omop-e=koso
after=FOC meet-SUPP C think-IZ=KOSO
6
ono=ga inoti=wo nagaku
horisu-re
want-IZ
self=GEN life=ACC long
‘It is because I want to see you again that I desire my life to be long.’
b. 五月之花橘乎為君珠尓社貫
(MYS 1502)
五月の花橘を君がため玉にこそ貫け
satukwi=no pana tatibana=wo kimi=ga tame
flower orange=ACC lord=GEN for
May=GEN
tama=ni=koso
nuk-e
thread-IZ
bead=DAT=KOSO
‘I thread the orange blossoms of May for you even through beads.’
Point so far: There is no single position for FP+KOSO.
And: Even XP+KOSO must be internal to TP.
=> XP+KOSO can precede or follow DP+PA, but a following DP+PA must be an internal
argument.
(22)
a. 秋野尓波伊麻己曽由可米 (MYS 4317)
秋野には今こそ行かめ
aki
nwo=ni=pa
ima=koso
yuka-me
fall
field=DAT=TOP now=KOSO go-SUPP.IZ
‘Now I will go to the autumn field.’
b. 吾背子尓直相者社名者立米 (MYS 2524)
我が背子に直に逢はばこそ名は立ため
wa=ga
sekwo=ni tadani apa-ba=koso
na=pa
tata-me
1SG=GEN lover=DAT soon meet-COND=KOSO name=TOP stand-SUPP.IZ
‘If I were to meet my lover straight away, my reputation would fly.’
=> XP+KOSO can precede the bare subject of an unaccusative verb but must follow the
subject of an unergative verb.
(23)
a. 木道尓社
妹山在云
(MYS 1098)
紀道にこそ妹山ありといへ
ki-di=ni=koso
imwo yama ari to ipu
Ki-road=DAT=KOSO Imwo Mt.
be C say
‘They say that there is a “Mt. Imwo” on the road to Ki.’
b. 我屋<戸>前乃花橘尓霍公鳥今社鳴米 (MYS 1481)
我が宿の花橘に霍公鳥今こそ鳴かめ
wa=ga
yadwo=no
pana tatipana=ni
1SG=GEN house=GEN flower orange=DAT
pototogisu
ima=koso
ki-naka-me
cuckoo
now=KOSO come-cry-SUPP.IZ
‘The cuckoo will now come to sing at the flowering orange blossoms at my home.’
Point: XP+KOSO must follow a subject in [Spec, TP].
=> Landing site must be TP-internal
7
(24)
CP
C‘
TP
DPNOM
DP+KOSO
C
T’
XP+KOSO
T
vP
DPGEN
v’
VP
v
…tDP+KOSO…
Summary:
1. No single position for FP+KOSO
2. FP+KOSO must be below [Spec, TP].
3.3. RT versus IZ: Structural, not morphological
Back to the question of agreement:
=> Since FP+KA and FP+KOSO have the same distribution, one could argue that the RT and
IZ inflection are agreement with a c-commanding head (most likely C).
But this is extremely unlikely. RT and IZ differ in more ways than just morphological form.
=> IZ is an embedded form, often forming a conditional clause (Ishida 1939, Ohno 1993,
Quinn 1997, Whitman 1997, Sasaki 2003 and others).
(25)
大雪乃乱而来礼
不奉仕
(MYS 199; from Ohno 1993:101)
大雪の乱れて来れまつろはず
opo yuki=no
midare-te
ki-ta-re
maturwopa-zu
great snow=GEN
flurry-CONJ come-PRV-IZ
surrender-NEG
‘Though the snow is flying around me, I do not give in.’
When used in the KOSO KM construction, the IZ clause is frequently followed by another
clause. IZ does not seem to be a finite inflection which projects a root clause. See also Saji
(1974), Ohno (1993), Ishida (1939), Tsuta (2011), Hando (1993, 2003), Morino (2002) for
the contrastive sense of KOSO.
(26)
昔者社
難波居中跡所言奚米今者京引都備仁鷄里
(MYS 312)
昔こそ難波田舎と言はれけめ今は都引き都びにけり
mukasi
koso nanipa
winaka
to
ipa-re-kye-me.
past
FOC
Nanipa
country COMP say-PASS-PAST-SUPP.IZ
ima=pa miyakwo-pik-i
miyakwo-pi ni-kye-ri.
now=TOP capital-move-CONJ capital-near become-PAST-SS
‘In the past, Nanipa was said to be in the countryside, but now that the capital has
been relocated, it has become close.’
8
IZ inflection is trumped by RT if RT inflection is required for other grammatical reasons (e.g.
to form a relative clause.
(27)
蓮葉者如是許曽有物
(MYS 3826)
蓮葉はかくこそあるもの
patisuba=pa
kaku=koso
a-ru mono
thus=KOSO be-RT thing
lotus.leaf=TOP
‘A lotus leaf is something like this.’
Point: Appearance of IZ or RT inflection depends on the structural position of the clause and
not the morphological properties of a constituent inside the clause.
=> IZ versus RT is not a reflection of morphological agreement.
4. Clause-initial SO
Two types of KM construction
FP+KA, FP+KOSO is TP-internal
FP+SO in CP layer
There are a few examples of SO following topics, high adjuncts, or DP+WO, but SO tends to
be in clause initial position.
(28)
ADJ(+PA)…(DP+WO)…XP+SO… XPPA…(DP+WO)…DPGEN…VADNOM
XP+SO can be followed by internal and external argument topics.
(29)
a. 戀尓毛曽人者死為
(MYS 598)
恋にもぞ人は死にする
kopi=ni=mo=so
pito=pa
sini
su-ru
love=DAT-FOC-SO
person=TOP die
do-RT
‘People also die from longing.’
b. 時自久曽人者飲云
(MYS 3260)
時じくぞ人は飲むといふ
toki-ji-ku=so
pito=pa
nomu to ipu
time-NEG-CONJ=SO person=TOP drink C say
‘(They) say that people drink at the wrong times.’
DP+SO can also precede topics.
(30)
a. 伊毛曽
等保久波
和可礼伎尓家流
(MYS 3698)
妹ぞ遠くは別れ来にける
imwo=so topoku=pa
wakare-ki-ni-kye-ru
dear=SO far=TOP
part-come-PRV-PAST-RT
‘My dearest has left me and gone afar.’
b. 吾耳曽
君尓者戀流
(MYS 656)
我れのみぞ君には恋ふる
are
nomi=so kimi=ni=pa
kofu-ru
1SG only=SO lord=DAT=TOP
love-RT
‘I am the only one who longs for you.’
9
Point so far: 1. FP+SO most often occupies clause-initial position.
2. FP+SO can precede topics and subjects (including external arguments).
=> FP+SO occupies a higher position than FP+KA and FP+KOSO.
FP+SO precedes a genitive subject. But I found no examples of bare (NOM) subjects.
(31)
由布佐礼婆比具良之伎奈久伊故麻山古延弖曽安我久流
夕さればひぐらし来鳴く生駒山越えてぞ我が来る
(MYS 3589)
yupu
sar-e-ba
pigurasi ki-naku ikomayama
evening go-IZ-COND
cicada
come-cry Mt. Ikoma
kwoe-te=so
a=ga
ku-ru
cross-CONJ=SO I=GEN
come-RT
‘I climb over Mt. Ikoma, where the cicadas come to sing in the evening.’
Summary: FP+SO tends to be clause-initial.2
FP+SO can precede an external argument subject.
=> FP+SO must be higher than FP+KA and FP+KOSO.
No nominative subject:
=> No TP layer; subjects in low topic position (Split-CP of Rizzi 1997.
TopHP
(32)
TopH‘
TopH
FocP
FP+SO
Foc’
TopLP
Foc
TopL’
DPTOP
TopL
vP
DPGEN
v’
VP
v
…tDP+KOSO…
Another problem for the agreement approach:
=> FP+KA and FP+SO both co-occur with adnominal inflection on the verb, but these
focused constituents occupy different positions.
2
This conclusions differs from Katsumata (2009, 2012) who proposes that FP+SO appears as close to the verb
as possible. What is important to determining the syntactic position is the TYPE of constituents which precede
or follow FP+SO. The fact that FP+SO precedes external argument subjects clearly shows that it does not
occupy a TP-internal position.
10
5. Conclusion and Future Research Questions
5.1. Conclusions
FP+KA, FP+KOSO:
=> In TP-internal position (specifically below [Spec, TP]).
=> But no single position: Arguments in vP edge, adjuncts adjoin to vP or in the TP layer.
FP+SO:
=> In the CP layer
Problems for agreement approaches:
=> No unique position
=> No one-to-one correspondence between particle and inflection
=> Inflection is syntactically relevant, not just a morphological flag
5.2. Ponderings for future research: Origins of the different structures
Why are there two different structures, one for SO and one for KA/KOSO?
KM constructions possibly derive historically from clefts (Quinn 1997, Whitman 1997,
Shinzato 1998, Serafim & Shinzato 2005).
One possibility is that SO KM derives from a pseudocleft, while KA/KOSO derives from an
“it” cleft.
Pseudocleft characteristics:
1. Focus as subject
2. Reversible
(33)
(Heggie 1988, Moro 1997, den Dikken 2006, and others)
a. Bill’s tie is what Mary hates.
b.
IP
DP
Bill’s tie
(Focus as subject)
I’
I
VP
CP2
be
tDP
CP1
C’
what
C
IP
Mary hates
(34)
a. What Mary hates is Bill’s tie.
(Inverse)
11
b. CP3
CP1
(Inverse pseudocleft)
C’
IP
is
DP
I’
Bill’s tie tV+I
VP
CP2
tV
tCP1
tDP
SO KM as a pseudocleft:
1. Clause-peripheral position
2. Possibly reversible (Morino 1989; Takeuchi 1983; Ohno 1984, 1985a-d, 1993; and others):
=> Clause-final SO marking a nominal predicate
3. FP+SO as subject
=> SO tends to attach to nominal constituents (Morino 1989; cf. Prince 1978 on categorical
constraints on English pseudocleft pivots).
IT clefts (Chomsky 1977, Heggie (1988):
=> Focus is not the subject and is less restricted categorically (Prince 1978).
=> Not reversible
(35)
a. It’s Bill’s tie that Mary hates.
b.
IP
I’
it
I
VP
CP2
be
DP
CP1
Bill’s tie OP
C’
that
IP
Mary hates
KOSO/KA KM as an IT cleft:
=> Clause-medial position
=> Focus less restricted categorially
=> Not reversible
12
References
Aldridge, Edith. 2009. Short Wh-movement in Old Japanese. In S. Iwasaki, H. Hoji, P.
Clancy, S. Sohn (eds.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics, Volume 17, 549-563. Stanford:
Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Aldridge, Edith. 2015. 「上代日本語における疑問詞の位置について」 (Wh-word
positions in Old Japanese). NINJAL Project Review 5.3:122-134.
Chomsky, Noam. 1977. On wh-movement. In Peter W. Culicover, Thomas Wasow, Adrian
Akmajian, eds., Formal Syntax, 71-132. New York: Academic Press.
Declerck, Renaat. 1984. The pragmatics of IT-clefts and WH-clefts. Lingua 64:251-289.
Den Dikken, Marcel. 2006. Relators and Linkers: The syntax of predication, predicate
inversion, and copulas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hando, Hideaki. 1993. Kotengo koso no hataraki: Toritate no kanten kara [The function of
Classical Japanese koso: From the perspective of focus]. Kokugakuin Zasshi 95.6:30-39.
Hando, Hideaki. 2003. Kakari Joshi no Rekishi to Kakari-musubi no Honshitsu [On the
history of kakari particles and the nature of kakari-musubi]. Shintensha.
Heggie, Lorie. 1988. The Syntax of Copular Structures. Doctoral dissertation, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles.
Ikawa, Hajime (1998) On kakarimusubi in Old Japanese. Journal of Japanese Linguistics 16:
1-38.
Ishida, Haruaki. 1939a. Koso…kere keishiki no hongi [Basic meaning of the koso…kere form]
1. Kokugo to Kokubungaku 16.2.
Ishida, Haruaki. 1939b. Koso…kere keishiki no hongi [Basic meaning of the koso…kere form]
2. Kokugo to Kokubungaku 16.3.
勝又隆 (2012)「古代日本語における係助詞ソ（ゾ）の出現傾向について」
『日本言語学会第 145 回大会予稿集』日本言語学会
勝又隆 (2009)「語順から見た強調構文としての「―ソ―連体形」文につい
て」『日本語の研究』5-3
Kuroda, S.-Y. 2007. On the syntax of Old Japanese. In Bjarke Frellesvig, Masayoshi
Shibatani, John Charles Smith (eds.), Current Issues in the History and Structure of
Japanese, 263-317. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers.
Morino, Takaki. 1989. 係助詞「ぞ」についての考察：『源氏物語』の用例から. 国語
学研究と資料 13: 8-22.
Morino, Takaki. 2002. 係助詞「こそ」の機能とその変容の要因に関する考察. 国語学
研究と資料 25:1-13.
Moro, Andrea. 1997. The Raising of Predicates. Cambridge University Press.
Nomura, Takashi. 1993. Joodaigo no ‘no’ to ‘ga’ nituite [Old Japanese ‘no’ and ‘ga’].
Kokugo Kokubun 62.2:1-17.
Ohno, Susumu. 1984. Nihongo no kobun: Kakari joshi no yakuwari [Japanese clause
structure: The role of kakari particles] 1. Bungaku 52.12:54-69.
Ohno, Susumu. 1985a. Nihongo no kobun: Kakari joshi no yakuwari [Japanese clause
structure: The role of kakari particles] 2. Bungaku 53.3:25-41.
Ohno, Susumu. 1985.b Nihongo no kobun: Kakari joshi no yakuwari [Japanese clause
structure: The role of kakari particles] 3. Bungaku 53.5:73-92.
Ohno, Susumu. 1985c. Nihongo no kobun: Kakari joshi no yakuwari [Japanese clause
structure: The role of kakari particles] 4. Bungaku 53.7:13-32.
Ohno, Susumu. 1985d. Nihongo no kobun: Kakari joshi no yakuwari [Japanese clause
structure: The role of kakari particles] 5. Bungaku 53.9:105-124.
Ohno, Susumu. 1993. Kakari-musubi no Kenkyu [On kakari-musubi]. Tokyo: Iwanami
Shoten.
13
Prince, Ellen. 1978. A Comparison of Wh-Clefts and it-Clefts in Discourse. Language 54.4:
883-906.
Quinn, Charles. 1997. On the origins of Japanese sentence particles ka and so. In: Ho-min
Sohn and John Haig (eds.), Japanese/Korean linguistics 6, 61-89. Stanford: Center for the
Study of Language and Information.
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery. In L. Haegeman, ed., Elements
of Grammar, 281-337. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Saji, Keizou. 1974. Kakari-musubi no issokumen: Shudai, jojutsu(bu) ni kanrenshite [One
aspect of kakari-musubi: Concerning topic and comment]. Kokugo Kokubun 43.5:1-30.
Sasaki, Takashi. 2003. Jodaigo Kobunron [Sentence structures in Old Japanese]. Tokyo:
Musashino Shoin.
Sarafim, Leon and Rumiko Shinzato. 2005. On the Old Japanese kakari (focus) particle koso:
Its origin and structure. Gengo Kenkyu 127:1-49.
Shinzato, Rumiko. 1998. Kakari-musubi revisited: Its functions and development. In: David
Silva (ed.), Japanese/Korean linguistics 8, 203-216. Stanford: Center for the Study of
Language and Information.
Takeuchi, Michiko. 1983. Monogatari no kaishaku bunpo. Nihongogaku 2.9.
Tsuta, Kiyoyuki. 2011. Koso…izenkei kenkyushi [Survey of research on koso…izenkei].
Nihongo Nihon Bunka 37:35-57.
Watanabe, Akira. 2002. Loss of Overt Wh-Movement in Old Japanese. In: D. Lightfoot, ed.,
Syntactic Effects of Morphological Change, 179-195.
Watanabe, Akira. 2005. Minimarisuto Puroguramu Josetsu: Seisei Bunpoo no Aratana
Choosen [Introduction to the Minimalist Program: The New Challenge of Generative
Grammar]. Tokyo: Taishuukan.
Whitman, John. 1997. Kakarimusubi from a comparative perspective. In: Ho-min Sohn and
John Haig (eds.), Japanese/Korean linguistics 6, 161-178. Stanford: Center for the Study
of Language and Information.
Yanagida, Yuko. 2006. Word Order and Clause Structure in Early Old Japanese. Journal of
East Asian Linguistics 15: 37-67.
Yanagida, Yuko. 2012. The Syntactic Reconstruction of Alignment and Word Order: The
case of Old Japanese. In Ans van Kemenade and Nynke de Haas (eds.), Historical
Linguistics 2009, 107-128. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Yanagida, Yuko and John Whitman. 2009. Alignment and Word Order in Old Japanese.
Journal of East Asian Linguistics 18.2: 101-144.
Primary source
The Manyoshu examples were copied from the following digital corpus:
山口大学教育学部『万葉集』検索コーパス(ver 2.2.0)
http://infux03.inf.edu.yamaguchi-u.ac.jp/~manyou/ver2_2/manyou.php
14

Download Report