Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

"You know, I know" : functions, uses, and acquisition of the Japanese noda predicate Renovich, Sachiko Omoto 2000

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_2000-0548.pdf [ 9.84MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0089609.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0089609-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0089609-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0089609-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0089609-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0089609-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0089609-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

"YOU KNOW, I KNOW" F U N C T I O N S , USES, A N D A C Q U I S I T I O N OF T H E J A P A N E S E NODA P R E D I C A T E by SACHIKO OMOTO RENOVICH B . A . , The University o f British Columbia, 1992 B . E d . , The University o f British Columbia, 1993 A THESIS S U B M I T T E D IN P A R T I A L F U L F I L M E N T OF T H E R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R T H E D E G R E E OF M A S T E R OF A R T S in T H E F A C U L T Y OF G R A D U A T E STUDIES (Department o f Asian Studies)  W e accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  T H E U N I V E R S I T Y OF BRITISH C O L U M B I A June 2000 © Sachiko Omoto Renovich, 2000  In  presenting  degree freely  at  this  the  available  copying  of  department publication  of  in  partial  fulfilment  of  the  University  of  British  Columbia,  I  agree  for  this or  thesis  reference  thesis by  this  for  his  and  scholarly  or  thesis  study.  for  her  I further  purposes  gain  permission.  Department  of  As~\(KM- S " t " U ^ - £ S "  T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f British Vancouver, Canada  Date  DE-6  (2/88)  OrvJ^ a 4  JL!  .  1  Columbia  <=±cnrV  that  agree  may  be  It  is  representatives.  financial  requirements  shall  not  that  the  Library  permission  granted  by  understood be  for  allowed  an  advanced  shall for  the that  without  head  make  it  extensive of  my  copying  or  my  written  Abstract In the Japanese language, there are various modal elements, which mark speakers' subjective attitudes toward propositions.  One o f the most common modals is the noda  predicate, which possesses the dual function of either asserting the truth of the position or relaying the speaker's desire for information sharing. Japanese Native Speakers (JNSs) use noda frequently i n conversation; however, Japanese Language Learners (JLLs) often face difficulty i n learning noda because of its wide variety i n function and use. T o determine the nature of noda use, this study examines conversational data from role-plays and a case study of two J L L s . The main aims of this thesis are 1) to review research on noda and to provide a cohesive and concise explanation of its functions and 2) to examine the use and acquisition of noda by J L L s . Following Noda's (1997) categorization, noda can be divided broadly into two types: scope and mood. Noda of scope exhibits the speaker's assertion that the proposition is true, while noda o f mood marks the speaker's strong desire for information to be shared by speaker and hearer. This study proposes a framework with which to understand the functions of noda, and classifies information which is speaker-oriented (+ Speaker/- Hearer knowledge), hearer-oriented (-Speaker/+ Hearer), and shared (+ Speaker/+ Hearer). J L L s first tend to use noda with speaker-oriented information, and later acquire functions related to hearer-oriented and shared information. In the study of role-plays, J L L s with higher oral proficiency levels as rated by the A C T F L - O P I (Oral Proficiency Interview) used a higher frequency of noda. Both the J L L s and JNSs used noda primarily to provide and seek explanations. The intermediate-level J L L s ii  underused noda in providing supplemental explanations.  Other uses of noda in the role-plays  included emphasizing information, seeking validity, and back-channeling. The two J L L s i n the case study did not notice the use of noda during conversations with the J N S , but began to use noda more frequently during practice conversations upon receiving explicit instructions on the use of noda. While the post-test did not demonstrate increased use of noda due to the limited time o f this study, there are clear indications for pedagogy.  First, because the  functions o f noda are varied and numerous, Japanese language textbooks and classrooms should not be limited i n providing only the 'explanation' function of noda. Second, the frequent use o f noda i n Japanese conversation suggests that it should be an area of focus in oral practice. Finally, J L L s need to develop skills i n both comprehension and production of noda to improve their Japanese discourse.  iii  Table o f Contents  Abstract  ii  Table of Contents  iv  List of Tables  viii  List of Figures  ix  List of Abbreviations  x  List o f Symbols and Transcription Conventions Acknowledgements  xi xii  Chapter One: Introduction  1  1.1  The Japanese noda  1  1.2  Functions of noda  3  1.3  Noda in Japanese discourse  8  1.4  Comparison of noda to related phrases in other languages  9  1.5  Comparison of noda to English you know  10  1.6  Organization of the thesis  12  Chapter T w o : Review of noda  13  2.1  Previous studies on noda  13  2.2  Noda and Sakakibara's pragmatic analyses of noda  19  2.2.1  Noda's (1997) typology  19  2.2.2  Sakakibara's concept of noda  26  iv  Chapter Three: Characterization of noda 3.1  3.2  3.3  31  Distribution of noda  31  3.1.1 Distribution of noda of scope ( N D  scope  )  33  3.1.2 Distribution of noda of mood ( N D  m o o d  )  39  Structure of noda  42  3.2.1  Phrase structure of modals in Japanese  43  3.2.2  Phrase structure of noda  47  Characterizations of noda  50  3.3.1  The speaker's perception  50  3.3.2  Information framework of noda  51  3.3.3  Functions of noda under the information framework  54  Chapter Four: Methodology  59  4.1  Introduction of data collection  59  4.2  Role-plays  60  4.2.1  Participants  60  4.2.2  Procedures for data collection  61  4.2.3  Procedures for analysis  61  4.3  Case study  65  4.3.1  Procedures for data collection  66  4.3.2  Procedures for analysis  67  Chapter Five: Analyses of role-plays  68  5.1  N o d a use by oral proficiency levels in role-plays  68  5.2  Functions of noda used in role-plays  69  v  5.3  Acquisition sequence of noda  72  5.4  Possible use of noda for J L L s  73  5.5  Explanation giving (+Speaker/-Hearer)  76  5.5.1  Explanation giving by JNSs  76  5.5.2  Explanation giving by J L L s  78  5.6  Validity posing (+ Speaker/- Hearer)  5.7  Explanation seeking (-Speaker/-i-Hearer)  81  5.7.1  Explanation seeking by JNSs  82  5.7.2  Explanation seeking by J L L s  83  5.8  Emphasis and reproach (+ Speaker/-i- Hearer)  84  5.9  Back-channel (+ Speaker/+ Hearer)  85  Analyses of case study  88  6.1  Implicit learning stage  89  6.2  Explicit learning stage  93  6.3  Contexts of noda use  100  6.4  Interlanguage pragmatics  104  Chapter Six:  Chapter Seven: Conclusion  '  80  106  7.1  Functions and contexts of noda use  106  7.2  J L L s ' acquisition of noda  107  7.3  Pedagogical implications  109  7.3.1  Treatment of noda in textbooks  110  7.3.2  Suggestions for instruction  113  7.4  Limitations  114  7.5  Further studies  115 vi  Data Sources  118  Japanese Textbooks Examined  119  References  120  Appendices: Appendix A  Categorization of modals  128  Appendix B  Distribution of noda of scope  129  Appendix C  Distribution of noda of mood  131  Appendix D  Native speaker grammaticality judgements of noda use (scope)  132  Appendix E  Sentences used in the grammaticality judgements  133  Appendix F  Backgrounds of Japanese Language Learner (JLL) participants  134  Appendix G  Backgrounds of Japanese native speaker (JNS) participants  135  Appendix H  Transcriptions of role-plays  136  Appendix I  Grammaticality judgements of noda use by J L L s  199  vii  L i s t of Tables  1.1  Various forms of the noda predicate  2  2.1  Characteristics of noda of mood  21  2.2  Noda in subordinate clauses  23  2.3  Noda's overview of noda  25  2.4  Grice's cooperative principle  26  5.1  Frequency of noda use by O P I rating  69  5.2  Correct use of noda under the information framework  70  5.3  Possible use of noda for intermediate-level J L L s  74  5.4  Possible use of noda for advanced-level J L L s  74  6.1  Frequency of noda use in the case study  95  6.2  Contexts of noda use in the case study  100  7.1  Introduction of noda in Japanese textbooks  111  viii  L i s t of Figures  2.1  C o o k ' s framework of accessible and inaccessible knowledge  17  2.2  K a m i o ' s territory of information  18  3.1  Masuoka's hierarchical structure for the Japanese sentence  44  3.2  R i z z i ' s framework  45  3.3  Phrase structure of the two noda  47  3.4  Internal strucure of noda of scope  48  3.5  Information framework of no da  51  3.6  Functions of noda under the information framework  52  6.1  Graph of noda use in the case study  95  ix  L i s t of Abbreviations  ACC  accusative marker  CAU  causative  CPL  copula  DAT  dative marker  EXC  exclamation  GEN  genitive marker  IMP  imperative  LOC  locative marker  ND  noda  NEG  negative  NMR  nominalizer  NOM  nominative marker  PAS  passive  PST  past tense  PRF  perfective aspect  PRG  progressive aspect  Q  question marker  QUO  quotative marker  SFP  sentence final particle  TOP  topic marker  1/3PS  1st person singular/3 rd person singular  1PP  1st person plural  X  List of Symbols and Transcription Conventions  V  grammatical  (C)  correct use of noda  *  ungrammatical  (I)  incorrect use of noda  ?  questionable  (R)  recommended use of noda  %  varied grammaticality judgement  Japanese  English  unraised intonation  0  ?  rising intonation  ,  recognizable pause (under .5 second)  ()  recognizable pause (over .5 second)  [  the beginning of overlapped speech  =  speech which comes immediately after another person's speech (i.e. latched utterances)  m  (laugh)  laughter  :  emphatic vowel elongation  X  X  inaudible utterance  word  word  English pronunciation  xi  Acknowledgements  I would like to express my sincerest appreciation to the members of my M . A . thesis committee:  Drs. Y o k o Collier-Sanuki, Rose-Marie Dechaine, G l o r i a Tang and N a m - L i n  Hur. Their insightful comments and questions were key in the writing of this thesis. I am particularly grateful to my graduate studies supervisor Dr. Collier-Sanuki, whose constant encouragement and valuable suggestions helped me tremendously with my study. I would also like to thank Dr. Hirokazu Tanaka for reading parts of my thesis draft and offering useful comments. I am also thankful to the participants in the research and the friends who have supported me through my study. M y peers in the Asian Studies Department, Shino Takahashi, M i c h i k o Suzuki, M a i k o Shimada, and Kaeko Aragaki as well as Y u k a Kurihara in Language Education, especially provided me help and encouragement. Finally, I am grateful to my husband and my family for enabling me to accomplish my goal of writing this thesis.  xii  1 Chapter O n e Introduction  The noda predicate is used extensively in Japanese discourse and has been under intense study (e.g. Alfonso 1966, M c G l o i n 1983, Maynard 1992, Noda 1997). Researchers such as Maynard (1992) and Sakakibara (1998) note that noda is a difficult feature for Japanese Language Learners (JLLs) to master because of its numerous functions; however, most research to date has focused on natural and generated examples of Japanese Native Speakers (JNSs). This thesis examines noda from a pedagogical point of view, and studies conversational data from J L L s to provide insight into their acquisition of noda. The goals of this research are two-fold:  1) to review research on noda and to provide a cohesive and  concise explanation of its functions and 2) to examine the use and acquisition of noda by J L L s . This chapter gives a preliminary introduction of noda, discusses its use in Japanese discourse, and compares it to similar phrases and/or grammar structures in other languages. The last section w i l l then outline the organization of this thesis.  1.1 T h e Japanese noda Noda is the combination of nominalizer no and copula da and attaches to the dictionary form of verbs, /-adjectives, no-adjectives or nouns.  1  While previous researchers have used  different terms, i.e., extended predicate (Jorden 1963), n desu (Kuno 1973, M c G l o i n 1989) and nominal predicate (Maynard 1996, 1997a), I w i l l use noda to refer to its various forms.  'When noda attaches to na-adjectives and nouns, the copula changes from da to the attributive form na, as seen in Table 1.1.  2 category  dictionary form  1. polite noda  + <DX-?I  2. plain noda [-force]  verb  tf < iku  + (Dili hit + noda/n-da  hX-f  +no  + nodesu/n-desu  (ff<)  hXir  (iku)  n-desu  (tf<) (iku)  3. plain noda [+force]  no  (tf<) (iku)  (m^)  hit  no  (takai)  n-da  <D  ^fc n-da  go  i-adjective  (Ajvv h x r (takai) n-desu  takai expensive  na-adjective  mm?*)  mmtc  kirei da beautiful  Asx-r  (takai)  .  (kirei na) n-desu *  mmtc)  (kirei na) no  (ffiMte) hit (kirei na) n-da  hx-r  * (kirei da) n-desu  tame.  noun  seito da student  mm)  tux-t  (seito na) n-desu  * mm)  <D (seito na) no  (&W£)  hit  (seito na) n-da  /oxi-  * (seito da) n-desu  Table 1.1 Various forms of the noda predicate  Table 1.1 presents three variations of noda, 1) polite, 2) plain [-force] and 3) plain [+force].  2  Each category adds different forms of the noda predicate to the verbs, adjectives  and nouns. First, the polite noda (nodesu) is a combination of no and the polite form of the copula desu. Second, no is the plain form of noda without the added force of the copula. A fourth variation, no-de-aru (nominalizer+copula+exist) will not be dealt with in this thesis because it is not used in conversation.  3 Third, noda is the plain form with the copula da. Because the presence of the copula in noda adds force to the statement, I w i l l characterize no as.[- force] and noda as [+ force]. In both 3  the polite and plain forms, the nominalizer no may contract to n producing the colloquial versions n-desu and n-da.  1.2 Functions of noda Alfonso (1966) determines that speakers use noda i n order to add various nuances to the information they are conveying. He concludes that noda "indicates some explanation, either of what was said or done, or w i l l be said or done, and as such always suggests some context or situation" (1966: 405). M c G l o i n states that with noda, the speaker is able to "present information as if it were shared information between the speaker and the hearer" (1989: 89). She suggests five major effects of noda: explanation, conjecture, rapport, reproach, and backgrounding. The five functions are discussed below. The first major and most-widely discussed use of noda is to give explanations for actions or situations. (i)  4  m»  nm  %  Nanika  ryoori  o  something  dishes  A C C make-must  Mochiyori  no  paatii  whwtat^^t^A^  tsukura-nakerebanarimasen.  ni  iku n-desu.  potluck G E N party L O C go N D I must cook something. I ' m going to a potluck party.  Maynard (1992: 597) states that no functions similarly to noda with different degrees of depersonalization/distancing and personalization/emotional involvement. 3  4  The examples in this section are mine, based on the descriptions given by McGloin (1989).  4  In example (1) the speaker explains that he needs to make a dish because he is going to a potluck party.  5  The use of noda makes it apparent that the speaker is explaining the reason  for his action. The second use of noda that M c G l o i n discusses is interrogatives based on conjecture. When the speaker sees a friend dressed to go out, he may ask the question in example (2a):  (2a)  A:  B:  V-si/tL  <D 7^ff< Jon-san no paatii ni iku John G E N party L O C go (Tell me.) Are you going to John's party?  A^tri"  n-desu ND  tf  a  ?  ka? Q  T L X , Uish t f?< A/Tr-f-. Ee, mei-san to iku n-desu. Yes May with go N D Yes, I am going with M a y .  The speaker in (2a) has a basis for guessing that his friend is going out, and asks the question expecting to know more, such as with whom his friend is going and what he w i l l do there. The hearer responds appropriately, explaining that he is going to the party with M a y .  (2b)  A:  i / a V ^ (D K fftti" Jon-san no paatii ni ikimasu John G E N party L O C go Are you going to John's party?  B:  ftZt-fo Ee, ikimasu. Yes go Yes, I ' m going.  ^? ka? Q  On the other hand, the question in (2b) without noda is a neutral information-seeking question which the hearer may answer with a simple yes or no as in the example given. 5  This paper will use he and its variants {him, his) to represent both genders.  5 The question in (2a) may also take additional overtones depending on how it is spoken. The intonation patterns below demonstrate how the same sentence can be uttered to indicate surprise (2c), reproach (2d), or back-channeling (2e).  \ (2c)  v  ?  a y $ ^ • ( D  Jon-san  no  A—7-4  paatii  —  fr<  ni  iku  A/Trf"  frl  n-desu  ka?  O h ! Are you going to John's party?  (2d)  v  i ;  3 > $ ^  Jon-san  co  A—7-4—  \z.  no  paatii  ni  ff<  iku  hX-f  fr—  ?  n-desu  ka:?  h-V-f n-desu  A\ ka.  Don't tell me you're going to John's party?  (2e)  i/ay^/o  co  A—7-4—  \c  fr<  Jon-san  no  paatii  ni  iku  Y o u ' r e going to John's party. I see.  Conjecture questions as in (2c) are often spontaneous and indicate the speaker's surprise, as confirmed by his tone of voice. The question may also contain nuances of criticism and exasperation as in (2d), in which the speaker questions the hearer's choice i n going to the party. O n the other hand, noda with falling intonation as in (2e) signals that the speaker is attentively listening and provides back-channel cues equivalent to "I see" in English.  6 The third use of noda affects rapport with the hearer, and represents the speaker's attempts to involve the hearer in his story/information:  (3a)  A:  i?a>£A, <D A-*r<< - ^ ?T< /uV-f, Jon-san no paatii ni iku n-desu. John G E N party L O C go ND (You know,) I ' m going to John's party.  B:  6  feo  Tanoshi-soo desu ne. enjoyable-seem C P L S F P It seems enjoyable. (3b)  A:  S/alsZA, <D ^ - f ^ - f c fft*"f. Jon-san no paatii ni ikimasu. John G E N party L O C go I ' m going to John's party.  B:  Ztifrb fa £. u^-f- ^ ? Sorekara nani o shimasu ka? then what A C C do Q What w i l l you do after that?  In example (3a) the speaker is willing to share information about his plans. The hearer may respond with questions about the party, or make comments such as "That sounds nice." to show interest in the speaker's life.  O n the other hand, the sentence i n (3b) without noda  relays neutral information, appropriate for such contexts as an interview in which the speaker is asked about his plans for the next day. The detached tone o f (3b) lacks the sense of involvement in (3a).  ' W h i l e sentences with noda may be interpreted as assertion depending on context, this paper w i l l examine noda's function in sharing information.  7 M c G l o i n ' s fourth use of noda proposes that the speaker highlights known information to reproach the hearer:  (4)  ^  K  Paatii  ni  f^-fi  iku  ^  * # ^ L T  t , ^ ^  n-da kara chanto  kigaete  < / C £ I ^ !  kudasail  party L O C go N D so properly change please We're going to a party (you know), so change into proper clothes!  In example (4) the speaker may be ordering her husband who is wearing a t-shirt and jeans when they are expected at a formal party. She berates him for not being prepared when he should know better. A s M c G l o i n suggests, the combination of noda with the conjunction kara (so) often carries a reproachful tone. M c G l o i n ' s fifth use of noda, giving background information, is similar to explanation in that the speaker explains background information when making invitations or requests:  (5)  i?ai/£/»  <D  Konban  jon-san  no  tonight  John  G E N party  isshoni  iki-masen  ka?  paatii  ic  ff<  A,'x*i-  ni  iku  n-desu kedo,  L O C go  ND  if£\ and/but  together g o - N E G Q I am going to John's party tonight; do you want to come with me?  The speaker i n example (5) gives the background information that he is going to a party, and invites the hearer to j o i n him. A s attested in Iwasaki (1985), the use o f noda with the conjunction kedo (and/but) gives a sense of cohesion between the background information and the invitation.  8 F r o m the above examples, we see that the functions of noda vary depending on the context and the manner in which it is stated. Its use varies between the types of discourse, whether they be objective formal reports or more personalized natural conversations. Additionally, noda is used in both oral and written Japanese. The next section w i l l examine the frequency of noda use in natural discourse.  1.3 Noda in Japanese discourse Maynard's (1992, 1997a, 1997b, 1998) studies on noda in conversation and writing give evidence of its pervasive use in Japanese discourse. In her study of conversational data from 20 native-speaker dyads, Maynard (1992) found the use of noda in approximately 25% (317/1244) of the sentences analyzed. Her (1997b) analysis of five television news reports 7  reveals that the use of noda varies according to the type of communication i n the news reports. Referring to Goffman's (1981) concept oi footing in discourse, Maynard divides the utterances into two categories: 'announcing' (reporting directly to the viewer) and 'talking' (speaking to other reporters doing the news). While noda is used only 6% of the time in the 8  announcing mode, it increases to 31% in talks.  9  Noda use in writings also varies according to genres. Following Sugimoto's (1990) study which cites front page newspaper articles as rarely containing noda, Maynard (1997a)  A11 percentages in this section are based on the unit, number of noda use/total number of sentences.  7  Goffman (1981) describes/oofmg in relation to the participants' alignment, stance, posture, and self-projection in communication. He states that what the speaker communicates, how he communicates, and how he accepts the listener's response all represent the speaker's attitude. 8  Other potential influences on the differences may be that the 'announcing' portion originates from a written form relayed to the newscaster by a teleprompter, and that the script writer's style of speech is different from the newscaster. 9  9 analyzes newspaper articles and finds noda use in her sample to be 0% (0/37). Sugimoto reasons that the goal of front page news i n newspapers is to report facts i n a straightforward and objective manner, counter to the personalized tone of noda. O n the other hand, Maynard (1992) analyzes 58 short stories written by amateur writers and finds a range of noda use from 6% (4/68) to 25% (24/97). Maynard attributes this range of use to the varied writing styles of the texts, and concludes that stories written in the style o f oral-narratives have a higher frequency of noda than stories written from an objective viewpoint. G i v i n g credence to her suggestion, the 24 personal narratives in Maynard's (1997b) study contained 18% use of noda (205/1109). The studies above clearly show that when the speaker or writer exhibits an awareness of the audience i n the discourse, he frequently uses noda. Use of noda varies according to situation and discourse style: frequent during natural conversations and personalized writing (18-31%), and infrequent in de-personalized objective writing and news 'announcing' (0-6%). Because natural conversation contains a high frequency of noda, this thesis w i l l examine conversational discourse of J L L s and JNSs.  1.4 Comparison of noda to related phrases in other languages Various researchers (Maynard 1996, Noda 1997, Sugimura 1982) have compared noda to the English "It is that. . . " , the French "C'est (. . .) que.  and the Chinese "shi. . .  de" (jcl. . . frx)) constructions. Maynard's (1996) study comparing an English literary work to its Japanese translation and a Japanese novel to its English counterpart shows interesting  10 results.  10  She compares noda to the English "It is that. . .". or "It is . . . if. . .". constructions  and refers to them as nominalization-related expressions. While the English translation has fewer nominalization-related expressions than the original Japanese version, the Japanese translation includes noda not found in the English original. Likewise, Noda's (1997) comparison of a Japanese novel to its French translation reveals infrequent uses of "c'est (. . .) que. . ." . and "est-ce que. . .". where noda appears in the original text." Sugimura (1982) also finds numerous instances i n which the Japanese noda does not translate into the Chinese " s h i " and/or "de", and concludes that the "shi. . . de" structure is not synonymous with the Japanese noda.  1.5 Comparison of noda to English you know M c G l o i n (1989) suggests a resemblance of noda to the English "you know" in creating rapport.  Pragmatic studies of this discourse marker by linguists such as Sebba and Tate  (1986), Huspek (1989), and Jucker and Smith (1998) indeed demonstrate distinct similarities to the Japanese noda}  2  According to Jucker and Smith, a discourse marker is a device that  the speaker uses to negotiate the common ground and aid the hearer in integrating information. "'Maynard compares Kooboo Abe's Tanin no Kao 'The Face of Another' to its English translation, and Saul Bellow's Dangling Man to its Japanese translation. The use of noda is as follows. Abe, Kooboo. 1968. Tanin no Kao 30.5% (61/200) Saunders, E. Dale. 1966. The Face of Another 4.23% (9/213) (English translation of Tanin no Kao) Bellow, Saul. 1944. Dangling Man 2.5% (5/200) Oota, Minoru. 1971. Chuuburarin no Otoko. 11.32% (24/212) (Japanese translation of Dangling Man) "Noda compares Banana Yoshimoto's Kicchin 'Kitchen' to its French translation and finds that, of the 418 uses oi noda in Japanese, only 41 are marked by "c'est (...) que...". or "est-ce que...", in French. Moreoever, she finds 68 instances in which noda is not used, but is still translated into the French phrases. You know has been interpreted as compromisers (James 1983), tags (Sebba and Tate 1986), and phatic connectives (Bazzanella 1990). This paper adopts the interpretation that you know is a discourse marker (Watts 1989, Salmons 1990, Jucker and Smith 1998). n  11 Discussions of you know, like noda, centre around how the speaker wishes the hearer to interpret an utterance.  Ostman (1981: 17) describes you know as a way for the speaker to  encourage the hearer to cooperate and/or accept the proposition as mutual background knowledge. Jucker and Smith categorize you know as "an addressee-centred  presentation  marker which relate the information to the presumed knowledge state o f the addressee" (1998: 174). Through their analyses of qualitative data, they conclude that "you know is a strategic device used by the speaker to involve the addressee in the joint construction o f a representation" (1998: 196). Whether or not the hearer previously knows the information, the discourse marker you know invites the hearer "to recognize the relevance and the implications of the utterance" (1998: 194). L i k e the above descriptions of you know, the Japanese noda possesses similar characteristics of engaging the hearer in conversation. You know, like noda, is used frequently in conversation, as seen i n studies by Watts (1989), Salmons (1990) and Freed and Greenwood (1996). Jucker and Smith's (1998) data of natural speech reveal on average one use of you know per minute between strangers, and 1.4 between friends. Huspek (1989) studies the use of you know by manual workers (0.296 per sentence) and examines its use in the context of linguistic variability and power. Future systematic comparisons of noda and English you know w i l l likely reveal the exact nature of these similarities and differences. Moreover, possible comparisons to other discourse markers may extend the knowledge of noda in Japanese discourse.  13  For example, the discourse marker tell me in ( 2 a ) gives the interpretation that the speaker genuinely is interested in the information. The use of noda in (2e) has the sense of the backchanneling feature / see in English. Comparisons of the Japanese noda to English conversation will need to go beyond previous comparisons to "It is that. ..". 13  12  1.6 Organization of the thesis This chapter introduced background information regarding the functions and uses o f noda and its comparison to phrases in other languages. Chapter T w o summarizes previous research on noda highlighting the key features of speaker and hearer knowledge. Based on distributional data, Chapter Three characterizes the structure o f noda. It also proposes a comprehensive framework with which to explain various functions and overtones of noda. Chapter Four describes the data-collection method for this research. Chapter Five analyzes data from role-plays conversations by J L L s and JNSs. Chapter Six examines the use of noda by two J L L s over a period of five months. The final chapter presents research conclusions, with implications for pedagogy and directions for future research.  13  Chapter Two Review of noda  This chapter summarizes previous research on and analyses of noda. Section 2.1 describes select studies on noda, highlighting their strengths and limitations i n depicting its functions and uses.  Section 2.2 focuses on Noda (1997) and Sakakibara's (1998) recent  classifications of noda.  2.1 Previous studies on noda Explanations of noda often focus on a single function, i.e. explanation, assertion, showing concern, failing to cover its multi-faceted nature.  O n the other hand, researches  which aim to describe the diversity of noda provide lists of functions rather than pointing out fundamental characteristics. Moreover, descriptions of the effects of noda are not as helpful for J L L s as explanations of the reasons and appropriate contexts for its use. In searching the root function o f noda, this section examines previous studies, focusing on key concepts which run through the various approaches. Kuno (1973) highlights the explanatory nature of noda and describes its interrogative form as questions that request "the hearer's explanation of what the speaker has heard or observed" (1973: 225). He distinguishes between the contexts of the following two sentences, without and with noda: (la)  {RT  £  L T l ^ - f  Nani  o  shi-teimasu  what A C C do-PRG What are you doing?  frl  ka? Q  14  (lb) Nani  £•  L T V ^ <DX~f #>?  o  shi-teiru  nodesu ka?  what A C C do-PRG ND Q (You seem to be involved in something.) What is it that you are doing? (Kuno 1973: 225) In example ( l a ) , the speaker asks the question without observing what the hearer is doing. The conversation could be over a telephone or e-mail. In contrast, the speaker i n example (lb) observes what the hearer is doing, and requests an explanation. This use is equivalent to what M c G l o i n (1989) calls conjecture. Kuroda (1973) proposes another view of noda, from the perspective of epistemics. He labels noda as a marker of the speaker's a priori supposition and assertion of a proposition. A o k i (1986) extends Kuroda's view, proposing that the nominalizer no acts as an evidential in indicating the existence of valid evidence.  1  He describes no as a marker of fact and  concludes that "semantically it removes the statement from the realm of a particular experience and makes it into a timeless object. The concept thereby becomes nonspecific and detached" (1986: 229). While the explanation and evidential features above capture elements of noda, they do not account for other features such as politeness ( M c G l o i n 1980), closeness (Endo 1986), emotive tone (Makino and Tsutsui 1989), and cohesive power (Iwasaki 1993). Maynard (1992) defines noda under her construct of commentary predicates.  She  posits that commentary predicates represent a speaker's commentary on the proposition, functioning as discourse modality. The commentary predicate "codes the speaker's cognitive 2  process of 1) objectification through nominalization, 2) personalization through the predicate 'Aoki (1986: 223) explains the three types of Japanese evidential as follows: 1) gar used with sensations not experienced by the speaker Ex. Kare wa atsu-gatteiru "He is hot." 2) no used with nonspecific evidential statements Ex. Kare wa atsui-noda "I know that he is hot." 3) soo, yoo and rasii used with hearsay and inferential statements Ex. Kare wa atsui-yooda "He seems hot."  15 da, and 3) situationally and interactionally appropriate information organization through the topic-comment structure" (1992: 563). First, nominalization signals distance between event and speaker, and an event that is objectified through nominalization becomes distant from the speaker (1996: 937).  3  Second, following Tokieda's (1950) classification of the predicate da  as ji (non-objectified expression), Maynard proposes that da adds subjective overtones by expressing the speaker's attitude. Third, based on M i o ' s (1948) typology of sentences i n 4  Japanese, Maynard compares noda, with its topic and nominal predicate structure, to handanbun (sentences of judgement). The concept of commentary predicates is useful i n understanding 5  the relationships between the proposition, nominalization, and addition of copula; however, the exact nature of the speaker's commentary in noda is not delineated concisely. Other researchers attempt to summarize the wide array of functions for noda by formulating lists. Ohta (1984) cites nineteen referential, propositional, and referential features of noda. Tanomura (1990) points out features of noda such as shoozensei continuity, kiteisei 6  Maynard (1997a, 1998) states that commentary predicates have the structure [clause + nominalizer + copula da/dearu] and express a speaker's interpretive commentary on the information in the clause. An example is kara da which gives a reason, as in Kare ga konai no wa Ken ga konai kard da. "The reason why he isn't coming is that Ken isn't coming." 'Maynard draws on the idea of nominalizations as objectified and abstracted concepts from Brown and Levinson (1987) and Langacker (1987). Tokieda (1950) identifies shi as categories of words which have been objectified and conceptualized (i.e. nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs) and ji as non-objectified, subjective expressions which include conjunctions, exclamatory expressions, auxiliary verbs and particles. 4  Mio (1948) classifies sentences into 1) genshoobun 'sentences of immediate description', 2) handanbun 'sentences of judgement', 3) mitenkaibun 'exclamatory sentences', and 4) bunsetsubun 'sentences with topical ellipsis'. 5  Ohta (1984: 161-152) lists two referential features (deictic and anaphoric), fourteen propositional features (explanatory, confirmatory, elicitory, instructional, self-assertive, self-reasoning, recollective, regretful, suasory, conjectural, exclamatory, dubitatory, accusatory, and assumptive) and three attitudinal features (emotive, peremptory and reserved). fi  16 fixed nature, hirekisei revelation, and tokuritsusei specificity.  7  Kunihiro (1992) presents  examples of noda such as decision, acceptance, gentle refusal, and advice. H e proposes that noda represents "the subjective judgement in recognizing the present state as being related to an established proposition" (1992: 19).  Each work highlights elements of noda and extend  its characterization; however the works do not provide a simple definition which would guide J L L s in the appropriate use of noda. Cook (1990) and Kamio (1997) take two approaches to viewing information through the knowledge status of the speaker and hearer. Cook (1990) defines her concept of accessible and inaccessible knowledge, and K a m i o (1997) postulates his theory on the Territory of Information. Cook (1990) studies the characteristics of no as a sentence-final particle and focuses on the notion of accessibilty to knowledge. Cook posits that no indexes group authority where the group "assumes responsibility of the truth of the utterance" (1990: 408). In other words, information marked by no is deemed accessible to the interlocutors and/or society in general. F r o m her framework in Figure 2.1, Cook explains that no is used with accessible knowledge as in (a).  Area 1 indicates information that is general knowledge in society  (common knowledge) and area 3, information that is known to interlocutors (shared knowledge). When information is both common knowledge and shared knowledge, it is located in area 2. She concludes that the speaker uses no with propositions which are either known to society  'Continuity refers to the reference of sentences with noda to previous contexts. Fixed state refers to the fact that noda usually takes the proposition as an established entity. Revelation refers to the sense of noda in expressing information that is difficult for the audience to know such as personal thoughts and situations. Specificity refers to the use of noda in specifying a certain situation as opposed to other situations, such as in asking "Did it rain?" rather than assuming that someone sprayed water on the ground.  17 and/or known to the speaker and hearer, offering a wider interpretation than the traditional account of its use with only shared knowledge.  (a) Accessible knowledge  (b) Inaccessible knowledge  Common knowledge  Undisclosed psychological states  Shared knowledge  Figure 2.1 Cook's framework of accessible and inaccessible knowledge (Cook 1990: 409)  A s Cook states, no is used with accessible knowledge; however, there are cases in which no can be used with inaccessible knowledge (b) as in undisclosed psychological states. For example, a child may reveal his feelings to his mother to elicit empathy in an utterance such as Boku kanashii-no "I am sad". C o o k ' s distinction of what types of information is deemed accessible (common/shared) and inaccessible is not clear. Furthermore, questions remain as to the speaker's intentions in marking information with no. K a m i o ' s (1997) Territory of Information situates information relative to the speaker and the hearer depending on various predicate structures as in Figure 2.2. K a m i o specifies the Territory of Information as a bound area where the location of the information determines the information's hierarchical territory.  18  information Speaker  I 1  1  1 n  Hearer  I  1  1  n  1 0  information 1  1 0  (Information in the Speaker's Territory)  Figure 2.2 Kamio's territory of information (Kamio 1997: 17)  The above figure represents information in the Speaker's territory where it is located closer to the Speaker.  O n the Speaker's scale, information is represented as greater than the  middle-ground n. The information is less within the Hearer's territory with a value less than n on the Hearer's scale. In contrast, information that is more within the Hearer's territory would be depicted as greater than n on the Hearer's scale. When the information is totally within one territory, then the value would b e l on one scale and 0 on the other. K a m i o concludes that "information which is difficult to imagine or predict should be expressed in the noda form" (1997: 65). Example (2) represents information in the Speaker's territory which may be inaccessible to the hearer.  (2)  H f B ^ Yoshida-san ga  kinoo  gootoo ni  M r . Yoshida N O M yesterday mugger by M r . Yoshida was attacked by a mugger yesterday.  &Zt>ti1t oso-ware-ta  htl n-da  J;. yo.  attack-PAS-PRF  ND  SFP  8  (Kamio 1997: 65) The information i n example (2) that M r . Yoshida was attacked yesterday is unexpected and unknown to the Hearer. The Speaker can use noda to mark such information when it may be This thesis adopts Uechi's (1998) proposal of an aspectual head above the verb and analyzes ta as a perfective morpheme rather than a past morpheme. 8  19 beyond the Hearer's territory. Likewise, K a m i o describes psychological information as generally unobservable characteristics which may be represented with noda. W h i l e it is true that noda is often used with information i n the Speaker's territory, the theory does not clarify contexts i n which noda is used with information i n the Hearer's territory, such as with questions. Moreover, the reasons for use and non-use of noda need to be examined further. Based on the studies above, we notice several common concepts among the studies. First, noda is related to the speaker's perception of the proposition. Second, i n representing the speaker's judgement, supposition, idea, etc., the sentence with noda is subjective. Third, its use is related to the status of the information knowledge as perceived by the speaker. Chapter Three w i l l revisit these key concepts and propose a comprehensive framework i n characterizing noda.  2.2 N o d a a n d S a k a k i b a r a ' s pragmatic analyses of noda This section examines recent studies by two researchers in characterizing the functions of noda. Section 2.2.1 provides an overview of Noda (1997), in which she differentiates the features of scope and mood. Section 2.2.2 summarizes Sakakibara's (1998) notion o f the speaker's belief.  2.2.1  N o d a ' s (1997) typology Noda (1997) divides noda into two broad categories: scope and mood. She summarizes 9  the function of scope as placing focus on parts of a sentence, and mood as the speaker taking  9  The translations of terminology and examples are mine based on Noda's work in Japanese.  20 a proposition as a fixed state. Referring to previous studies, Noda equates her definition of noda of scope to M i o ' s (1948) handanbun (sentences of judgement), M i k a m i ' s (1953) shitei (specification) and Masuoka's (1991) jojutsu yooshiki handangata no setsumei (explanation of judgement forms of predicates). Noda of mood is deemed to be similar to M i o ' s (1948) bunsetsubun (clausal sentence), Mikami's (1953) kaisetsu (explanation), and Masuoka's (1991) haikei setsumei (background explanation) and kiketsu setsumei (consequential explanation). Noda proposes that the noda of scope exhibits a contrastive characteristic, similar to nominal sentences with the topic marker wa. Noda used in negative clauses such as Y nodewanai indicates that the proposition i n Y is inaccurate, while the contrasting Y ' is accurate. (3)  iiiW&h  *s  Satoo-san ga  A,U*ftv\  kuru  n-janai  §fr*<^  Suzuki-son  ri*  ga  5f53  hit.  kuru  n-da.  M r . Sato N O M come ND-NEG M r . Suzuki N O M come N D It is not that M r . Sato is coming. M r . Suzuki is coming. (Noda 1997: 34) In example (3) M r . Sato and M r . Suzuki are contrasted by the use of n-janai. The negative noda also places focus on elements other than the non-realization of a state: (4)  fx^tc^ Iki-tai Go-want  rf< kara i k u so go  tr>b  ©T*fi*v\ nodewanai. ND-NEG  I am not going because I want to go. The use o f noda in example (4) allows the negative to be placed on the whole proposition, "I am going because I want to go." rather than simply on the verb to go. The speaker asserts that there is a different reason for him going, such as pressure from an outside force or sense of duty. Noda calls this highlighting of focus prominence, which can be expressed through prosodic measures and contextual understandings. Fundamentally, noda of scope asserts the  21 tekisetsusei (appropriateness) of the proposition and is related to the evidential reading of noda by Kuroda (1973) and A o k i (1986). Noda describes the second categorization of noda as one of mood. She divides noda of mood into two categories: taiji teki 'situational' and taijin teki 'interpersonal'. Situational mood refers to the speaker's understanding of a proposition previously unrecognized by himself and does not necessarily require the presence of an audience. In contrast, interpersonal mood requires the hearer's presence whereby the speaker relays information he knows to the hearer. Noda further sub-divides the categories into those with or without previous discourse kankeizuke/hikankeizuke.  Noda  of mood  Previous Discourse No Previous Discourse  Table 2.1 below gives an overview of the four categories:  Situational  Interpersonal  understand Q as the situation/meaning of P  present Q as the situation/meaning of P  understand Q (as a fixed situation)  present Q (as a fixed situation)  Table 2.1 Characteristics of noda of mood (Noda 1997: 71) In situational mood, the speaker voices information he has just understood, while in interpersonal mood he relates information to a hearer. Noda with previous discourse takes the form [P [Q noda]] where [P] represents previous discourse and [Q] the nominalized concept.  [P] could also be non-verbal contextual cues such as observations made by the  speaker. When there is no previous discourse related to the nominalized concept, the structure is simply [Q noda].  22 The speaker's goals in situational and interpersonal mood are distinct. H i s goal in situational mood is to recognize information such as in thinking aloud; whereas in interpersonal mood information is presented to another person. The examples below represent the four categories of noda of mood: (5) situational/previous discourse, (6) interpersonal/previous discourse, (7) situational/no previous discourse and (8) interpersonal/no previous discourse.  (5)  d j B ^  •  #  Yamada-san  ftfeo  ga  ko-nai  fW  naa.  Kitto  #  yooji  M r . Yamada N O M c o m e - N E G S F P probably errand M r . Yamada is not coming. He must have things to do. (6)  m,  mB  Boku, ashita  it  #fcv^  x.  mm  wa  ko-nai  yo.  Yooji ga  Soo  i)\ ka,  ZOO 74 y f kono suicchi  &  o  Wiosu  That Q this switch A C C push Oh that's right. I need to turn on this switch. (8)  mT  ZOO  74 Kono suicchi  £  o  osu  Ml ! n-da!  This switch Turn on this switch!  ACC  push  ND  Ml.  aru  .  n-da.  N O M exist  ND  MI.  &  IPS tomorrow T O P c o m e - N E G S F P errand F m not coming tomorrow. I have things to do. (7)  fc§  ga  aru  N O M exist  n-da. ND  Ml. n-da. ND  (Noda 1997: 72)  In examples (5) and (6) the speaker has contextual reference from the first sentences. According to Noda, (5) is an example of situational mood in which the speaker voices what he has realized, possibly to himself. (6) is an example of interpersonal mood, in which the speaker relays to a hearer information about running errands.  10  In these cases, noda is used to present  Interpersonal mood is not limited to information about the speaker and hearer. For example, boku IPS in (6) could be replaced with Tom to read, "Tom isn't coming tomorrow. He has things to do". While the information is about a third party, the presentation of information remains speaker to hearer.  23 the second sentence as being related to the first sentence, i.e. previous discourse. explains that in contrast, (7) and (8) lack previous discourse."  Noda  In (7) the speaker notices  what he needs to do and makes a comment, as i f thinking aloud. Example (8) presents a command in which the speaker shouts an order for the hearer to obey.  12  Noda (1997) also examines the use of noda in subordinate clauses and creates a list of predicates. She runs grammaticality tests and categorizes them into scope and mood, as i n Table 2.2.  predicates with noda noda of scope  noda of mood  (D-Vit  nodewanai node* nodeari nodeatte nodattara nodeareba nonara nodewa  (neg) + conjunction (and) (be) (be) (if) (be+if) (if) (and+TOP)  (Dtctf <Dtclftl¥$> <Df£frh  nodaga (and/but) nodakeredomo (and/but) nodakara (so)  Table 2.2 Noda in subordinate clauses  (Noda 1997: 152)  (*node as no + de is differentiated from the conjunction 'so/therefore')  1  "Noda (1997) describes the difficulty of distinguishing between previous discourse and no previous discourse when there may be a non-verbal contextual cue. For example, in (7) and (8) one might argue that the speaker has the visual reference of looking at the light switch before making an utterance, and therefore falling under previous discourse. In (8) the speaker can also encourage himself to do an action, in which case he would need a previous reference. l2  Noda gives the example, M^P£oTV>3<£>T?, •#*l^o"CV »<5<D"TrB:ftV\, Ame gafutteiru node, yuki gafutteiru nodewanai. "It is not that it is snowing; it is raining." However, she explains that this form is rarely used so as to avoid confusion with node meaning 'therefore'. l3  -  24 Predicates with the noda of scope are based on assuming the actualization o f a state.  For  example, A nodattara B (noda + if) is based on the idea that state B holds i f the proposition in A is realized. (9)  -lifr) t.x ^ X V^< htc-otch, m-ox v^< i „ Toori made aru-ite iku n-da-tta-ra, oku-tte iku yo. Street to w a l k - P R F go N D - P S T - i f escort-PRF go SFP. If you are walking to the street, I ' l l go with you. {Ichigo Doomei: 213=cited in Noda 1997: 160)  Sentence (9) shows an example of noda of scope i n the context of an ' i f clause. According to Noda, combinations of noda of mood with conjunctions play various roles. For example, nodaga/nodakeredomo can 1) relay a speaker's emotion of surprise or frustration (contrast); or 2) present information perceived to be unknown to a hearer (backgrounding).  (10)  t±js,  t i o i  Shachoo, chotto President, a bit chZ> aru exist  nb^-h^h Hirari-chan Hirari  LXT if if, n-desu kedo, ND and/but  K ni DAT  10# juppun 10 minutes  tif^AoT  m  oriitte especially  hanashi ga talk NOM  hodo ii about good  *  s  ri»Lk? kashira? Q  Lit. Sir, there is a special talk with Hirari, but is about 10 minutes good? I have something important I want to discuss with Hirari. Could I take her out for 10 minutes? (Hirari 2: 369=cited i n Noda 1997: 172)  Example (10) shows an example of nodaga in a clause as backgrounding, where the speaker explains her intentions in requesting time to talk with an employee. N o d a summarizes the characteristics of noda into Table 2.3 below.  She takes a  parametric approach in her categorization, differentiating the properties of the nominalizer no  25 and the three types o f noda.  H  Noda's detailed approach to the various noda categories and  functions provides a thorough analysis of noda; however, its complexity would be overwhelming to J L L s . For a more accessible explanation of noda, we turn to Sakakibara's (1998) analysis.  nominalizer no  noda of scope  noda of situational mood  noda of interpersonal mood  1. lack of ga-no conversion  no  yes  2. no-n contraction  no  yes  3. attachment to nouns  no  no  4. wa insertion  no  no  5. lack of negative  n/a  no  6. requirement of hearer  no  no  T a b l e 2.3 Noda's overview of noda  SsSlllMfeiiMiilil VCS  & no  yes yes  (Noda 1997: 247)  1. Ga-no conversion refers to the possibility of converting the nominative marker ga to the genitive marker no. Sentences with noda do not allow ga-no conversion. Ex. Suzuki-san ga/*no kuru n-da. Mr. Suzuki (NOM/*GEN) is coming. 2. No in noda contracts to n in colloquial speech. 3. Noda of mood attaches itself naturally to nouns while noda of scope does not. ??Jon wa gakuseina nodewanai. Sensei na noda. "John is not a student. He is a teacher." (noda of scope) Jon wa gakusei na n-desu yo. "You know, John is a student." (noda of mood) 4. Noda of mood allows the topic marker wa while noda of scope does not. Ex. Jon ga/*wa iku-n-da-ttara boku mo iku yo. "If John (NOM/*TOP) is going, I will too." (noda of scope) Jon ga/wa raishuu iku-n-desu ga sono toki demo ii desu ka? "John (NOM/TOP) is going next week; is it okay then?" (noda of mood) 5. The negative form nodewanai is available in noda of scope, but not in noda of mood. 6. Noda of interpersonal mood requires a hearer.  26  2.2.2  Sakakibara's concept of noda Sakakibara (1998: 86) defines a two-part characteristic of noda: 1) the proposition is  represented as known to the speaker and the hearer, and 2) this representation of known information is based on the speaker's belief. T o explain her hypothesis, Sakakibara turns to Grice's (1975) framework of the Cooperative Principle summarized in Table 2.4:  The Cooperative Principle: Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged.  Maxim of Quantity I. M a k e your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purpose of the exchange). II. D o not make your contribution more informative than is required.  Maxim of Quality I. D o not say what you believe to be false. II. D o not say that for which you lack adequate evidence. Maxim of Relation: B e relevant. Maxim of Manner: Be perspicuous. I. A v o i d obscurity of expression. II. A v o i d ambiguity. III. B e brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity). I V . Be orderly.  Table 2.4 Grice's cooperative principle (Grice 1975: 47)  Following Grice, Sakakibara proposes that people communicate within the boundaries of the Cooperative Principle, and that the hearer attempts to interpret the implications and nuances  27 when the speaker intentionally violates one of the maxims. In this way the speaker can break the various maxims in presenting information as i f it is shared.  Sakakibara examines four  types of information status in which noda is used: 1) known to both the speaker and hearer; 2) known only to the hearer; 3) known only to the speaker and 4) known by neither the speaker nor the hearer. She concludes that each of the four types violates Grice's maxims: the first, the M a x i m of Quantity II and the rest, the M a x i m of Quality. When the information relayed in the noda clause is known to both the speaker and the hearer, Sakakibara (1998) proposes that it violates the M a x i m of Quantity II because repeating information is redundant. She explains that the speaker relays the information a second time because he is not satisfied that the hearer has completely understood the information as seen in example (11):  (11)  Al:  Kyooko-san  WP ^ Koobe e  i o  kae-cchau  Kyoko Kobe L O C return-regret K y o k o is going back to Kobe.  yo. SFP  Bl:  A2:  Shi-tteru  yo.  Know-PRG I know.  SFP.  M-?- £ ^ Kyooko-san  WP ^ Koobe e  hit i „ n-da yo.  ft o -fe) ^ 5  kae-cchau  Kyoko Kobe L O C return-regret K y o k o is going back to Kobe. B2:  b)5»oT5-  oT !  Waka-tteru tte!  ND  m  K.  ¥ o  L6  Ore  ni  doo  shiro tte  oT  SFP  W5  hfl  iu  n-da yo!  k n o w - P R G Q U O ISP D A T how do Q U O say I told you I know. What do you expect me to do!  £!  N D SFP  (Sakakibara 1998: 91)  28 The information given in A l and A 2 are exactly the same, yet A l is neutral, while A 2 shows redundant repetition and a sense of reproach. Sakakibara explains that A is criticizing B for being indifferent about K y o k o ' s departure, and is trying to convince B that he should do something about it. The outburst i n B 2 shows that B has interpreted the critical overtone i n A2. Instead o f overtly expressed information, shared information may also be i n the form of visual observation.  According to M c G l o i n (1989) sentences without noda are neutral  information-seeking questions where the answer may be a simple yes or no, while the same question with noda represents conjecture on the part of the speaker, seeking more information. For example, a speaker finds an invitation card from Dave for his roommate and asks the question in example (12): (12)  f-f7'  CO  X - f - f -  ^  fr<  CO?  Deibu no paatii e iku no? Dave G E N party L O C go N D Are you going to Dave's party? (Sakakibara 1998: 92) Because the speaker knows about the party through the invitation card, the roommate is obliged to give more than a simple yes/no answer such as why he was invited or why he didn't tell the speaker about the party. The second category of conversation that Sakakibara (1998) proposes depicts situations in which the hearer knows information but the speaker does not. She refers to this as the violation of the M a x i m of Quality which states that the speaker should know that the information relayed is true. B y implying that the information is already known to both the speaker and hearer, the conversational effect is of implicitly showing involvement i n the hearer. The use  29 of noda i n questions such as example (13) implies that the hearer's personal information is or should be known to both the speaker and the hearer.  (13)  it B-san wa  fa  £  nani o  & - < 5 hXT  tf. taberu n-desu ka?  B T O P what A C C eat What are you going to eat?  ND  Q  (Sakakibara 1998: 93) The use of noda implies concern and interest i n the hearer, and usually connotes a close relationship (family, friends, and spouses). The third area of conversation that Sakakibara examines is when the information is known only to the speaker. B y relaying the information as i f it is known, the speaker can convey strong emotion and/or involve the hearer in the conversation: (14)  A:  if 5 Doo  Lfc  shi-ta  hX-f tf. n-desu ka?  how do-PRF ND What's wrong with you? B:  jotefr  Onaka  Q  V^cV^ A,-efo  ga  itai  stomach N O M hurt I have a stomachache.  n-desu. ND (Sakakibara 1998: 94)  According to Sakakibara, B responds to A ' s question, sharing information as i f it is known i n order to create a conversational effect.  It is interesting to note that a friend might ask the  question i n A , but a doctor or flight attendant in a more formal setting would not use noda i n a similar question. The use of noda implies closeness, except in extreme cases where even strangers are expected to show concern (for example B clutching his stomach in pain).  30 The final area of information status is the rhetorical use of noda in which the information is not known to the speaker or the hearer. According to Sakakibara (1998), by exploiting a violation of the M a x i m of Quality, the speaker emphasizes the fact that no one knows the information.  (15)  m  fi  M  Ore  wa  nani o  &  ^o-cv^  ya-tteiru  IPS T O P what A C C d o - P R G What am I doing?  htir  n-da? ND  (Sakakibara 1998: 95) The rhetorical question in (15) carries overtones of frustration and/or confusion. L i k e the examples above, Sakakibara's proposal o f situating speaker and hearer knowledge aids i n understanding the contexts and overtones o f utterances. Her classification of information knowledge subsumes and organizes previous analyses such as explaining, creating rapport, and showing involvement; however, it does not include noda o f scope where the speaker asserts the actualization of a state. Moreover, her characterization of noda as "information believed by the speaker to be known to the speaker and hearer" becomes problematic when examining motives for the speaker's use o f noda. The analysis raises questions as to why the speaker would present information he believes to be already known and why he uses noda in certain contexts while not i n others. Keeping these questions i n mind, Chapter Three examines structural and functional characteristics and proposes a definition and framework in understanding noda.  31  Chapter Three Characterization of noda  This chapter describes the characteristics of noda from the perspectives of distribution, syntax and functions. Sections 3.1 and 3.2 examine the distributional properties and phrasal structure of noda. The aim of these sections is to investigate the properties of noda of scope and mood, and specifically differentiate the two types.' Section 3.3 combines relevant data from the analyses and proposes a framework of noda for this study.  3.1 D i s t r i b u t i o n o f noda This section gives descriptive generalizations about the two types of noda as defined by Noda (1997) as scope and mood. A s seen in Section 2.2.1, she proposes that noda o f scope ( N D  scope  ) marks the focus and actualization of a state, while noda o f mood ( N D  m o o d  )  presents information as a fixed state. Based on L y o n s ' (1977) definition of modality, this study treats both types o f noda as modals, i n that they express a speaker's attitude and opinion toward the proposition.  (1)  0 *  ^  Nihon  e  ff#fc<*V>  iki-taku-nai  COfc nodewanai noda.  ©Trfifc^  Japan L O C go-want-NEG ND -NEG It is not that I don't want to go to Japan. s c o p e  ND  m o o d  Example (1) gives evidence of the two distinct noda. Under Noda's classification, scope places a focus on "not wanting to go to Japan",  and mood gives a sense o f presenting  'Other sections of this thesis do not explicitly differentiate noda of scope and mood in the glosses.  32 information to the hearer as being related to previous discourse, i n the sense that perhaps the speaker is showing reservations about going to Japan. The distributional analyses of the two types of noda are based on data checked by eighteen Japanese native speakers (JNSs).  Appendix A shows the categorization of modality  used for this paper. Takahashi (1999) i n examining modal suffixes in Japanese, proposes three main categories of modality: deontic, epistemic, and discourse. The first type marks obligation, permission, or prohibition of an action; the second a speaker's perception of the truth of the proposition; and the third a speaker's attitude toward the hearer or situation. She further sub-divides each of the three types of modality into two sub-categories: primary modality (P-Mod) and secondary modality (S-Mod). Nitta (1991) and Masuoka (1991) contrast the qualities of primary and secondary modality, proposing that primary modality is restrictive, in the sense that it does not have negative forms, nor exhibit tense variation, but shows the attitude of only the speaker. O n the other hand, secondary modality is not restrictive. W i t h i n the category o f epistemic modality, an additional subset of evidentials marks the speaker's attitude based on what he has seen, heard, or read. In summary, then, there are three main categories of modality, with seven sub-categories: deontic (P and S) epistemic (P and S, and evidential S), and discourse (P and S). The next sections examine the distribution of noda in relation to these seven modal elements.  33 3.1.1 Distribution of noda of scope ( N D Noda of scope ( N D  scope  scope  )  ) places a focus on an element of the proposition. It may take  the four forms noda (non-past), nodewanai (negative), nodatta (past) and nodewanakatta (negative-past) as i n the examples below. (2a)  i/3>  ti  B *  ^  fjofc  <Dtl„  Jon wa nihon e i-tta noda. John T O P Japan L O C go-PRF N D It is that John went to Japan. (John did go to Japan.) s c o p e  (2b)  ^ f r o f c <£>Tf f i f c v * . Jon wa nihon e i-tta nodewanai. John T O P Japan L O C go-PRF N D -NEG It is not that John went to Japan. (John did not go to Japan.) i/ay  ti  B *  s c o p e  (2c)  i/a>  ti  B *  ^  rrofc  (Dtc.itc  Jon wa nihon e i-tta nodatta. John T O P Japan L O C go-PRF N D -PST It was that John went to Japan. scope  (2d)  i?a> ti Jon wa John TOP It was not that  B * ^ firofc ofc. nihon e i-tta nodewanakatta. Japan L O C go-PRF N D -NEG-PST John went to Japan. scope  Noda o f scope in examples (2a) to (2d) highlights the fact that it was Japan where John went. Commonly used in narratives, sentences with noda of scope can be used to describe events and experiences. Noda (non-past) may represent either scope or mood depending on the context. For example, instead of placing the focus on Japan i n (2a), the same sentence with noda o f mood can create a sense of rapport in relaying information to a hearer. W i t h negation or past tense, noda o f scope becomes obligatory. It functions similarly to a verbal auxiliary such as the English do-support, i n that negation "John did not go to Japan" and affirmation "John did go  34 to Japan" induce noda of scope.  2  However, there are several differences between noda of  scope and do-support. First in English for the sentences (2a) and (2b), a prosodic emphasis would be placed on the focus element Japan, while in Japanese, the structure and context highlight the focus. For example, to place focus on John, the nominative marker ga would be used. Second, unlike the auxiliary do, noda of scope can take separate negation on the verb. Example (3) represents a sentence with separate negation on the verb and noda.  (3)  i/3>  Jon  It wa  V^T^LV^  isogashli  frb kara  fffrtefr^tc ikanakatta  cDTrte&V-^  nodewanai.  John T O P busy so go-NEG-PRF N D ?John did not not go because he was busy.  Iki-taku-nai  kara ika-na-katta  s c o p e  -NEG  noda.  go-want-NEG so go-NEG-PRF N D He did not go because he did not want to go. s c o p c  Third, as seen in examples (2c) and (2d), noda of scope can also be past and negative-past, an equivalent of which does not exist in do-support. The distribution of noda of scope ( N D  scope  ) is summarized in Appendix B . Noda of  scope is incompatible with Deontic P - M o d and cannot co-occur. Noda of scope positions after Deontic S - M o d .  The formula Deontic S - M o d < N D  s c o p e  represents this relationship  where noda of scope occupies a higher position on the tree structure, as w i l l be seen in the next section.  Because Japanese is a head-final language, noda of scope positions after  Deontic S - M o d with an assumption that N D  2  s c o p e  takes a head position.  3  I am grateful to Dechaine (p.c.) for pointing out the similarities.  This paper treats modals as head positions based on Cinque's (1999) proposal of verbal suffixes as clausal functional heads and adverb phrases as specifiers of functional phrases. 3  35 (4a)  (4b) ??  tf Jon ga nihon John N O M Japan It is not that John may  ^ ffoTkV^ (DXitt^c e i-ttemoii nodewanai. L O C go-may ND -NEG go to Japan. s c o p e  a yj&s 0 * ^ fr<<BT?ttfc< T<fei^v\ 7on ga nihon e iku-nodewanaku temoii John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D - N E G may It is O K that it is not that John is going to Japan. s c o p e  Because noda of scope asserts the accuracy or inaccuracy of a proposition, a speaker may highlight the fact that John may not go to Japan, as i n example (4a), but cannot place permission on the assertion itself, or the degradation of (4b) results. Deontic P - M o d s like imperatives cannot be combined with noda of scope as can be seen in the following examples:  (5a) * 0 * Nihon Japan  ^ ff*t <DX*tZte^ ! e ik-e nodewanai! L O C go-IMP N D -NEG  (5b) * 0 * Nihon Japan  ^ f K t f r e f c t * ^ TL\ e iku-nodewanai e! L O Cgo-ND -NEG IMP  s c o p e  s c o p e  Elements such as commands and assertions cannot be used together, and hence, resultant sentences are ungrammatical. In general the JNSs accepted noda of scope before all epistemic modals. Contrary to expectation, results exhibited some variation in the acceptability of the word order (Appendices D & E) as in the following examples:  (6a)  v > 3 > tf 0;£ ^ fx< © " ^ t e f t v ^ #>>bL*i&V\> Jon ga nihon e iku-nodewanai kamoshirenai. John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D - N E G might It might not be that John is going to Japan. s c o p c  36 (6b) % Pay  Jon  tf  0 *  ^  ff^&Lti&v^  ga  nihon  e  iku-kamoshirenai nodewanai.  John N O M Japan L O C go-might It is not that John might be going to Japan.  ©Tftiftv^ ND  s c o p e  -NEG  A majority o f the JNSs (14/18) accepts the order of example (6a) ( N D  s c o p e  < Epistemic  S-Mod) where the modality kamoshirenai (might) falls on the negative assertion. other hand, the order of example (6b) (Epistemic S-Mod < N D  s c o p e  O n the  ) produces mixed results.  4  In example (6b) noda of scope places a focus on kamoshirenai (might), producing the sentence "It is not that John might go to Japan." Noda of scopealso occupies a position preceding both Discourse S-Mods and P-Mods. For example, noda of scope co-occurs with the Discourse P - M o d in the following manner:  (7a)  i?3V  as  0 *  ^  ff< «>T?fi£fcv >  Jon  ga  nihon  e  iku-nodewanai yone?  ,  <fcfa?  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D -NEG SFP It isn't that John is going to Japan, is it? s c o p e  (7b) * i?a>  Jon  tf± ga  0 *  ^  fT<«kfc  ©TifiJfeV.  nihon  e  iku-yone  nodewanai.  John N O M Japan L O C go-SFP ND It is not that John is going to Japan isn't it.  s c o p e  -NEG  In example (7a), the tag question represented by the discourse modality yone w i l l grammatically follow the assertion in noda of scope ( N D  s c o p e  < Discourse P - M o d ) .  In contrast, noda of  scope i n example (7b) cannot assert the clause containing the tag question.  The eighteen JNSs judged example (6b) as follows: grammatical (4), questionable (6), and ungrammatical (8). 4  \  37  W e have seen i n the above examples that the nominalizer no and copula da are adjacent to each other. When no and da are separated, the sentence is ungrammatical as in example (7) below: (8)  *  ft<<D frbvtitw -efctftv\ Jon ga nihon e iku-no kamoshirenai de-wanai. John N O M Japan L O C g o - N M R might CPL-NEG It is not might that John is going to Japan.  i/ay  j&s  a *  ^  F r o m the ungrammaticality of example (8), it follows that the nominalizer no and copula da must function as units as i n noda, nodewanai (negative), nodatta (past) or nodewanakatta (negative-past), or at the least be adjacent to each other without any elements i n between them. The general placement of noda of scope i n light of the distributional data is as follows. (9)  Deontic S - M o d < N D  s c o p e  < Epistemic M o d < Discourse M o d  The examples below give further evidence that the position of noda o f scope is between Deontic S - M o d and Epistemic M o d .  (10a)  i?ay Jon John It might  ft FJ;fc ^ h<^f£ (Dtftte^ L*iftV\, ga nihon e iku-bekina nodewanai kamoshirenai. N O M Japan L O C go-should ND - N E G might not be that John is the one who should be going to Japan. s c o p e  (10b)??v 3>ft FJ* ^ f K ^ t <D-Viit£^o Jon ga nihon e iku-beki kamoshirenai nodewanai. John N O M Japan L O C go-should might ND -NEG It is not that John might should go to Japan. :  s c o p e  ft 0* ^ fr<<7>Wft^ a»<bL*Uev\, Jon ga nihon e iku-nodewanai beki kamoshirenai. John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D - N E G should might It might should not be that John go to Japan.  (10c)*v3>  scope  38 In the predicted order of example (10a), noda of scope places focus on John, and the epistemic modality in turn places the feature of possibility on the negative assertion. Example (10b) positions noda of scope after both deontic and epistemic modalities, and is judged degradable.  The reverse positioning of noda of scope before both deontic and epistemic  modalities in example (10c) results in an ungrammatical sentence. The basic order for noda of scope in (9) holds. Noda of scope places focus on elements of the proposition and marks the actualization of a state. In fact, it functions as epistemic modality in that it represents a person's perception of the truth of the proposition. The speaker states that the information in the proposition holds using noda, or that it does not hold, using nodewanai (negative). For the primary/secondary distinction, noda of scope functions as secondary modality in that it has a negative form, exhibits tense variation, and shows the attitudes of people other than the speaker.  For  example, the speaker can state the perceptions of a third person without committing to the information himself: (11)  /Vtt *Ja>' tt •}£ frofc M e r i i wa jon wa nihon ni i-tta Mary T O P John T O P Japan L O C go-PRF M a r y is thinking that John did not go to Japan.  £>Trfi/j^  nodewanai ND -NEG s c o p e  h S o T V ^ o to omo-tteiru. Q U O think-PRG  The perception of the proposition not being true is M a r y ' s and not necessarily that of the speaker.  Based on the above descriptions, I w i l l restate (9) classifying noda of scope as  Epistemic S - M o d (but usually occuring before other Epistemic S - M o d elements). (9')  Deontic S - M o d < ND  scope  Epistemic S-Mod < Epistemic P - M o d < Discourse M o d  This categorization raises important implications about the nature of modalities in Japanese: first, multiple modalities from the same category could be represented in one sentence (examples  39 6 and 10); and second, the modal elements organize i n a set order within the category. T o 5  determine the exact nature of the relationship and combination of modals in Japanese, more studies such as Saji (1991) which examine compatibility and ordering o f modality, are needed. The next section examines the properties of noda of mood.  3.1.2 D i s t r i b u t i o n o f noda of m o o d ( N D  m o o d  )  Based on the distribution as seen in Appendix C , noda of mood ( N D  m 0 0 d  ) occupies a  position above deontic modality, noda of scope, and epistemic S - M o d in the order Deontic S - M o d < N D  s c o p e  < Epistemic S-Mod < N D  m o o d  . The following examples contrast the  placement of noda of mood in relation to the Epistemic S - M o d (evidential) rashii (seem).  (12a)  y a >  Jon  ft  ga  0*  ^  tf<£>LV^  nihon e  iku-rashii  John N O M Japan L O C go-seem John seems to be going to Japan. (12b) *i?a>  Jon  ft  ga  0 *  ^  nihon e  ft</vt£  n-da. ND  m o o d  £>Lt/\  iku-n-da  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D John seems to be going to Japan.  h t l o  m o o d  rashii. seem  The mood o f the speaker presenting information to the hearer envelops the whole idea that John seems to be going to Japan i n example (12a). The reverse order i n (12b) of situating noda of mood before rashii (seems) is ungrammatical.  I n relation to the second implication, the J N S s may have varied i n the grammaticality judgements o f noda o f scope i n combination with other Epistemic S - M o d elements because they were of the same category. 5  40 In contrast to the examples above, noda of mood cannot follow Epistemic P - M o d : (13a)*v y  tf  3  Jon  ga  0*  ^  nihon e  ft<tc6o  htl.  iku-daroo  n-da.  John N O M Japan L O C go-probably John is probably going to Japan. The placement of n-da ( N D  m 0 0 d  NDmood  ) preceding daroo (Epistemic P-Mod.) is also ungrammatical,  because the copulas are repeated as iku-n-da-daroo as in example (13b): (13b)*^ay  Jon  tf  ga  0*  -  ft<ht£  nihon e  t£6 0o  iku-n-da daroo.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D m o o d probably John is probably going to Japan.  Keeping in mind that the epistemic modality daroo consists of the copula da and the volitional form of existence roo, a third possibility arises in which the copula of n-da is considered equivalent to the copula of daroo. If the two copulas overlap, producing iku-n-daroo, the sentence is grammatical: (13c)  i/3>  tf*  0*  ^  r r < A , : / c 3 5o  Jon  ga  nihon e  iku-n-da-roo.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D John is probably going to Japan.  mood  -probably  Example (13c) represents the grammatical sentence with a single overlapped copula. The order then, is N D  m o o d  < Epistemic P - M o d with the stipulation that the copula da overlaps.  Noda of mood like noda of scope occupies a position preceding both discourse modalities, S - M o d and P - M o d ( N D (14a)  l?a>  tf  0*  Jon  ga  nihon e  ^  m o o d  < Discourse M o d ) .  f?<A,fc  Xte*  iku-n-da yone.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D John is going to Japan, isn't he?  m o o d  SFP  41  3 1 / ft a * ^  (14b)  Jon  ga  nihon e  n<xu ^ f c o iku-yone n-da.  John N O M Japan L O C go-SFP John is going to Japan, isn't he?  ND  mood  .  Noda of mood must occupy a position in front of sentence final particles, as in example (14a), for the sentence to be grammatical.  Placing noda o f mood after the discourse modality  results i n the ungrammatical sentence (14b). Noda of mood presents information to the hearer as a fixed state (Noda 1997) and marks information as known i n the context of discourse to improve its reception by the hearer (Sakakibara 1998). A s such, it possesses characteristics o f both epistemic modality (speaker's perception of the truth of the proposition) and discourse modality (speaker's attitude toward the hearer or situation).  In the above distributional data, noda o f mood  occupies a position after Epistemic S-Mod and before Discourse M o d (both S and P). Noda of mood does not have a negative form nor tense markings, and can only express the attitude of the speaker; hence it is a Primary Modality. A s we examined i n (13c) the copula of noda overlaps with the copula i n daroo (probably), an Epistemic P - M o d .  Based on the above  properties, I w i l l classify noda of mood under Epistemic P - M o d , with the assumption that its discourse functions become available through contextual and phonological effects. In summary, I propose the following order of the two noda, based on the relevant distributional data: (15)  Deontic S - M o d < ND  scope  Epistemic S-Mod < N D  mood  Epistemic P - M o d <  Discourse S - M o d < Discourse P - M o d Section 3.2 w i l l examine the structure of noda based on the order of modal elements proposed in (15).  42 One final characteristic of noda of mood is that, as seen i n Chapter One, the plain form of noda has two variants: nominalizer only or nominalizer + copula. (16a)  i/aV  Jon  tf  ga  nihon  ^-  e  U<(D„  iku-no.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D John is going to Japan. (16b)  no  MOOD  i?a>  tf  ra*  ^  tf<^/co  Jon  ga  nihon  e  iku-n-da.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D John is going to Japan.  MOOD  (nominalizer only)  n+da (nominalizer + copula)  Both examples (16a) and (16b) express the speaker's desire to share information. W i t h the added force of the copula da, example (16b) carries more emphasis.  6  The overlap of copulas  in (13c) and the existence of two separate forms of noda i n (16a) and (16b) attest to a distinction between the nominalizer no and copula da i n noda of mood. Therefore I propose that the no and da are separate head positions.  The implications o f distinct heads are  discussed in the next section.  3.2 Structure of noda This section analyzes the structure of noda i n relation to Japanese syntax. Both the noda of scope and noda of mood function as modals i n that they follow the proposition and express the speaker's attitude and opinion towards the proposition. Through examination o f various syntactic approaches, the two noda as part of Epistemic S - M o d and P - M o d are situated on the phrasal tree structure.  'See Maynard (1992) for a discussion of intepretations of no and noda.  43  3.2.1 Phrase structure of modals i n Japanese This section highlights four views of the modal structure.  First, Tateishi (1990)  situates M o d a l Phrase (ModalP) between Inflection Phrase (IP) and Complementizer Phrase (CP) in Japanese. Second, Masuoka (1991) proposes a general outline of modal elements in Japanese.  Third, R i z z i (1997) proposes a hierarchy of multiple C P projections based on  Italian, French and English. A n d fourth, Cinque (1999) draws on data from various languages to highlight similarities between hierarchies of adverbs and functional heads. Tateishi (1990) analyzes the distribution of daroo (probably) and gives evidence to situate M o d a l P between the IP and C P as in example (17). [ i? yft  (17)  0*  3  [ Merii  wa [  [  [ jon  ga  -  nihon e  7  ft<]tc5?  iku] daroo  ]t ] to  ] Wofeo  ] i-tta.  ]  ]  [ Mary T O P ^ [ , p [ John N O M Japan L O C go ] probably ] Q U O ] say-PRF ] M a r y said that John w i l l probably go to Japan. m  Moda  IP2  The IP "John w i l l go to Japan" is dominated by the ModalP daroo which in turn is dominated by the C P "that" and the IP "Mary said". A s a head-final S O V language, Japanese projects 8  higher projections of ModalP and C P to the right, in contrast to head initial languages such as English. Tateishi (1990) justifies the position of M o d a l P with daroo; however as Takahashi (1999) concludes, a single functional projection does not explain how multiple modals are possible in Japanese.  7  This thesis classifies daroo as Epistemic P-Mod.  While it is clear that the head of CP is to (that) and the head of ModalP is daroo (probably) it is not clear what occupies the head of IP for both "Mary said" and "John will go to Japan." For example, Fukui (1995) calls the Japanese Inflection defective in that it does not have features, but functions simply as a place holder for tense morphemes such as -ta (past) and -ru (non-past). This paper adopts Uechi's (1998) view of aspectual head position below epistemic modality and tense. In this view, the head II in example (15) would hold -ta (perfective) from itta (said) and 12 would hold -u (non-perfective) from Iku (go). 8  44 (18)  i? > B * Jon wa nihon e John T O P Japan L O C John might (probably) go to 3  ft<fri>l,tite^ tihb* iku-kamoshirenai daroo. go-might probably Japan.  A s i n example (18) even daroo (probably) could be combined with other modals such as kamoshirenai (might) and nakerebanaranai (must). A single M o d a l P cannot account for the existence for the two modals in (18). Clearly there is a need for more projections to take the modalities. Masuoka (1991) categorizes modality into six areas and proposes the structure i n Figure 3.1. In general, elements exhibiting the strongest modality (speaker's attitude) are the furthest from the proposition (6 and 5) at the top of the tree structure:  sentence  b 1. 2 a. b. 3. 4 a. b. 5. 6 a. b.  Modality Modality Modality Modality Modality Modality Modality Modality Modality  of toritate (Topicalization) of mitomekata (Affirmation / Negation) of tensu (Tense) of setsumei (Explanation) of kachi-handan (Value Judgement) of shingi-handan (Truth Judgement) of hyoogen-ruikei (Types of Expression) o f teinei-sa (Politeness) of dentatsu-taido (Communication Attitude)  Figure 3.1 Masuoka's hierarchical structure for the Japanese sentence (Masuoka 1991: 44)  45 Assuming the proposition to be IP, the modalities occupy head positions of categories dominating IP. Compared to Tateishi's (1990) proposal of a single M o d a l P , Masuoka's analysis seems more promising for situating the two noda in that it allows for the representation of multiple modality in Japanese. R i z z i (1997) takes generative data from Romance and Germanic languages to determine the hierarchy of modal elements in the systems of projections dominating IP. He specifies main elements of finiteness, force, and focus. According to R i z z i , the element closest to IP is Finite Phrase (FinP) which selects a finite or non-finite IP. The element ForceP houses complementizers such as that in English and que in French. The optional projections of Topic and Focus differ in position according to language. R i z z i ' s overall framework shows Finiteness and Force surrounding optional Topic and Focus. R i z z i ' s model as adapted to the head-final structure of Japanese is shown in Figure 3.2.  F i g u r e 3.2 R i z z i ' s framework (adapted from R i z z i 1997: 297)  Taking into consideration the features of noda of scope and mood, scope is related to R i z z i ' s lower complementizers, and mood to his upper complementizers. The monomorphemic  46 noda of scope is a nonfiniteness complementizer which is often selected by Negative.  9  It  would occupy a position low on the C system and facing the inside IP, hence Finiteness. O n the other hand, noda of mood is more related to marking propositional force on the sentence, and occupies a position higher in the C system. No and da of mood act as free functional morphemes, more so than noda of scope. Before positioning the two noda in the phrasal tree structure for Japanese, we examine Cinque's (1999) proposal of multiple functional heads. Cinque (1999) categorizes functional heads into over thirty subcategories within the main categories of Aspect, V o i c e , Tense, Modality, and M o o d .  He examines data from  numerous languages to provide a generic hierarchy of functional heads.  The section of  Cinque's list relevant to determining the position of noda in Japanese is as follows:  Mod  <  ability/permission <  M  ° epis d  t  e  m  ic  M  ° obligation < d  < Mood  e v i d e m i a l  M  ° voli,ion < d  < Mood  e v a l u a t i v e  M  ° possibility < ° necessity < d  < Mood  M  d  s p e e c h a c t  M o  ° irrealis < d  T  fu,ure <  T  past  (1999: 106)  What Cinque terms Mod or root modality equates to the term deontic modality in this thesis. Not all categories, like M o o d  evaluative  apply to Japanese. To compare Cinque's analyses to the  distributional data from section 3.1, the hierarchy represented in (15) is repeated below. (15)  Deontic S - M o d < N D  SCOPE  Epistemic S-Mod < N D  M O O D  Epistemic P - M o d <  Discourse S - M o d < Discourse P - M o d First, the analyses for noda in (15) condenses Cinque's proposal into five categories. Second, (15) assumes that the sub-classifications of modality, such as permission and obligation, are grouped in the phrasal structure.  Third, distribution of noda reveals multiple projections  Noda of scope is obligatory with negation placed on the proposition.  9  47 from the same cateogory in Epistemic S-Mod (examples 6a and 10a) and Epistemic P - M o d (example 13c).  10  Finally, (15) implicitly includes negative and tense feature markings on  Epistemic S - M o d , as w i l l be seen in the next section.  3.2.2 Phrase structure of noda Distributional data reveal several characteristics of noda. 1) N D and ND o c c u p y different positions, N D as part of Epistemic S - M o d (after Deontic S-Mod) and N D as part of Epistemic P - M o d (before Discourse S-Mod.) 2) N D expresses negative and tense (S-Mod) while N D does not (P-Mod). 3) The nominalizer no and copula da of N D form one head. 4) The nominalizer no and copula da of N D form two separate heads. a) The copula of N D noda and Epistemic P - M o d daroo overlap. b) N D without copula is possible as in example (16a). s c o p e  mood  s c o p e  m o o d  s c o p e  m 0 0 d  s c o p e  m 0 0 d  m o o d  m o o d  Figure 3.3 Phrase Structure of the two noda Multiple projections from the same category may be a parameter of the language where Epistemic S-Mod, P-Mod and Discourse P-Mod allow multiple elements, and Deontic S-Mod and Discourse S-Mod do not. Deontic S-Mod does not seem to allow dual projections. For example, beki-da (should) and temoii (may) marking obligation and permission are ungrammatical when combined. *Jon ga nihon ni i-ttemoii bekida. "*John should may go to Japan." *Jon ga nihon ni iku-beki demoii. "*John may should go to Japan." Discourse S-Mod possesses the single feature of politeness and thus cannot be combined. Discourse P-Mod of sentence final particles in Japanese may be another category in which two projections from the same category are possible. The category includes the sentence final particles yo and ne as well as their combination yone.  48 Figure 3.3 shows the placement of noda of scope and noda of mood i n the phrasal structure of Japanese modals based on the above findings. Noda's (1997) original argument for two distinct noda holds in the distribution. The noda of scope, as well other Epistemic S - M o d take negative and tense." F o r example, taking the linear order of negative past noda, nodewanakatta (norfa+negative+past) its form suggests higher projections of Negative Phrase (NegP) and Tense Phrase (TP).  12  The  form does not allow any morphemes between the elements. Figure 3.4 demonstrates the internal structure of noda of scope.  TP  /  \ /  r  \  NegP T / \ -katta Neg' / \ E M P Neg / \ -wana EM' / \ E M (Epistemic Modal) -node  Figure 3.4 Internal structure of noda of scope  Other examples of negative past Epistemic S-Mod Jon ga iku-ni-chigai-na-katta. (go-doubt-NEG-PST) Jon ga iku-hazude-wana-katta. (go-expected-NEG-PST) Jon ga iku-kamoshire-na-katta. (go-might-NEG-PST) ?Jon ga iku-yoode-wana-katta. (go-looks-NEG-PST) ?Jon ga iku-soode-wana-katta. (go-said-NEG-PST) ?Jon ga iki-soode-wana-katta. (go-looks-NEG-PST) 12,  include There was no doubt that John would go. John was not expected to go. John might go. John did not look as to be going. John was not said to be going. John did not look as to be going.  This paper adopts Uechi's (1998) proposal of post-verbal heads where VP is dominated by deontic modal (root modal), aspect, epistemic modal, and tense.  49 Noda as part of the epistemic modality projects the Epistemic Modality Phrase ( E M P ) , which functions similarly to R i z z i ' s (1997) lower Comp. In noda of scope, unlike noda of mood, the copula da is required so that it can take the negative and tense markings: the nominalizer no cannot exist on its o w n .  13  This section introduced structures for noda of scope and mood. M u c h work remains in situating noda in the Japanese modality system. The relationship and structure of multiple modals from the same category i.e. Epistemic S - M o d , P - M o d , and Discourse P - M o d , and their relative hierarchy need to be examined.  In the distributional data, grammaticality  judgements by the NJSs reveal tendencies but are not necessarily consistent.  Further study  of modal combinations with strict control for contextual cues may reveal similarities and differences in the N J S s ' grammatical perceptions according to influences such as dialect variation, age difference, and exposure to other languages. Finally, more work is needed in the delineation of the heads no, da, roo in relation to Epistemic P - M o d and Deontic P - M o d , as well as their seeming ability to index discourse modality features.  There are two epistemic S-Mod which optionally take no in front of its phrase: ka-mo-shire-nai (might) (Q-also-know-neg) and ni-chigai-nai (no doubt) (to-doubt-NEG). Jon ga iku-ni-chigai-nai. (go-doubt-NEG) There is no doubt that John would go. Jon ga iku-no-ni-chigai-nai. (go-no-doubt-NEG) There is no doubt that John would go. Jon ga iku-ka-mo-shlre-nai. (go-Q-also-know-NEG) John might go. Jon ga iku-no-ka-mo-shire-nai (go-no-Q-also-know-NEG)John might go. It is interesting to note that both of these forms contain a negative. The addition of no with the modality seems to behave similarly to noda in placing focus on an element in the proposition, in this case John. Further study is needed to determine whether the optional no preceding these elements is related to the nominalizer in noda of scope. 13  50  3.3 Characterizations of noda Having examined several different analyses of noda, this section combines the various ideas into a comprehensive whole. The distributional data i n Section 3.1 supports Noda's (1997) postulation of two separate noda: scope and mood. Section 3.3.1 defines the two noda for this thesis. Section 3.3.2 extends Cook (1990) and K a m i o ' s (1997) construct o f locating information and proposes a framework from which to understand noda. Section 3.3.3 examines how various utterances fit this information framework of noda.  3.3.1 The speaker's perception This paper adopts Noda's (1997) proposal of two separate noda, and suggests that the speaker uses them for distinct purposes. With noda of scope on one hand, the speaker asserts the (in)accuracy o f information based on his belief.  He highlights information that he  perceives to be unknown to the hearer. On the other hand, this thesis proposes that the noda of mood marks the speaker's strong desire for information to be shared between the speaker and hearer. B y using noda of mood, the speaker indicates that he emphatically desires the information to be shared, and the hearer to respond to the overtones and implications associated with this intention. Sakakibara (1998) argues that the speaker relays a message as i f it were already shared i n order to improve reception of the information; however, her proposal leaves the unanswered question o f why the speaker would repeat information using noda i f he believes the information to be already known.  14  This paper's definition is based rather on the  actual perception of need for information sharing, i.e. relaying something that the speaker  14  I am grateful to Collier-Sanuki (p.c.) for pointing out the contradictions.  51 knows, asking for information about what the hearer knows, or emphasizing information already known. The next section examines in detail the functions of noda under the framework of speaker and hearer knowledge.  3.3.2 Information framework of noda This paper proposes an information framework marking + and - features for information knowledge by the speaker and hearer. It takes a parametric approach where at the time o f the speaker's utterance, the information is perceived to be either known or unknown to the speaker and hearer. Figure 3.5 represents the information framework of noda.  Hearer knowledge +  + Speaker knowledge  I  II  III  Figure 3.5  Information framework of noda  W h i l e Sakakibara (1997) proposes four classifications of noda use, this paper takes the approach that there are three possible domains. Sakakibara's fourth context is deleted because modality marks a speaker's attitude and opinion toward the proposition, and would not be used with information unknown to the participants of the conversation. The speaker shows involvement i n the information either by asserting it with the noda of scope, or showing his desire for its sharing with the noda of mood. Figure 3.5 describes the three possible domains of information knowledge at the time o f the speaker's utterance:  I) known to both the  52 speaker and the hearer, II) known only to the speaker, and III) known only to the hearer. For example, the following sentence about going to Japan exhibits the feature + Speaker/- Hearer of Domain II. (19)  MM  B *  Raishuu  iz:  fi<  nihon ni  iku  htCo  n-da.  next week Japan L O C go ND I am going to Japan next week.  n-da  n-da  N D ,scope  N D mood  There are two possible interpretations of example (19). First, with noda of scope, the speaker could be asserting that it is next week that he is going to Japan, or that it is Japan where he is going. With noda of mood, the speaker marks his desire for the hearer to know the information, creating a sense of rapport. Noda of scope would be marked with a falling intonation; noda of mood, a slightly rising intonation. Various functions of noda can be categorized into the information framework as in Figure 3.6: x x  +H  • • • •  +S  emphasis reproach back-channel rhetorical question  H  •<—  A  Speaker knowledge  III  -s  Hearer knowledge  -H  • assertion (scope) • posing validity (scope) • giving explanation, reason, background information • creating rapport • giving commands  • conjecture • seeking explanation • creating rapport (question)  Figure 3.6 Functions of noda under the information framework  53  The framework in Figure 3.6 represents the three domains of information knowledge and lists functions related to each o f the domains. The functions of assertion and posing validity i n Domain II represents noda of scope; the remaining functions, noda of mood. B y adding the overtone of desiring information to be shared, noda of mood creates the effect that M a k i n o (1999) terms hikikomi or 'drawing i n ' of the hearer. It creates a magnetic effect i n which the speaker attempts to draw information towards the condition + Speaker/-!- Hearer. The arrows in the diagram represent this effect of pulling information towards Domain I. This effect of drawing in the hearer does not apply to the noda of scope. In Figure 3.3 noda of scope occupies a lower complementizer position marking Epistemic S-Modality asserting the truth value of the proposition. In the context o f the information framework, the speaker must know the information well enough to be able to present it as fact, and i n cases to highlight parts of the information. The noda o f mood occupies a higher complementizer position, carrying greater propositional force and discourse features of creating a common ground between the speaker and hearer. The effect of negotiating a similar viewpoint is the pulling of information toward the status +Speaker/+Hearer.  The  status o f knowledge at the time of the speaker's utterance, and the subsequent effect of drawing in information are thus key in understanding noda o f mood. Noda of scope remains static i n Domain II +Speaker/-Hearer, while noda of mood exerts a cyclic push-pull effect of giving and receiving information. Based on the framework i n Figure 3.6, the next section examines the various functions of noda according to the above three domains.  54  3.3.3 Functions of noda under the information framework This section highlights features within each of the three domains proposed in the previous section. When information is already shared (+ Speaker/-)- Hearer) as in Domain I, using noda relays a sense of repeating redundant information. Sakakibara (1997) states that noda can create nuances of reproach and criticism when the speaker highlights known information. However, there are cases when noda is used with already shared information without reproachful tones as suggested by Hamano (1999). (20)  -fro3^< Mfc htl frb ^ o < ^ L T frfr tt"? Sekkkaku ki-ta n-da kara yukkurishite ike ba? especially come-PRF N D so relax go if Y o u came all this way, so why don't you stay awhile?  In example (20) the speaker persuades the hearer to stay, citing the hearer's special trip as a reason to do so. This use of noda highlights information in the first clause to bring it to the special attention of the hearer. Another use of noda i n Domain I occurs when the speaker gives back-channeling to information from the hearer.  (21)  ^5 Soo that I see.  ta  Lt£}  na n-da. CPL ND <falling intonation>  In (21) the speaker indicates that he understands what the hearer says and responds with a back-channel to indicate that he is listening to and involved in the hearer's information or story. The final feature of Domain I is rhetorical questioning.  U n l i k e Sakakibara (1997),  this paper classifies this use as information known to both the speaker and hearer, because  55 the intent of the speaker in posing a rhetorical question is to emphasize the fact that the question is unanswerable and to show his frustration at the lack of knowledge. (22)  m*p  tt  ifr.  Tanaka wa  doko  fjofc  ni  i-tta  hut-  n-da?  Tanaka T O P where L O C go-PRF N D Where (on the earth) has Tanaka gone?  A group of colleagues waiting for M r . Tanaka may ask the question in (22), posing a rhetorical question which no one can answer. The speaker knows that the answer is unavailable, but makes the utterance with overtones of reproach and anger. Noda of scope falls under Domain II with the features +Speaker/- Hearer, whereby the speaker holds information that the hearer does not know.  15  He proposes what he believes  to be true, asserting his beliefs about events, situations, or actions, etc.  (23)  EH4i  ft  Tanaka ga  0*  K  nihon ni  ftotc  i-tta  noda.  Tanaka N O M Japan L O C go-PRF N D Tanaka has gone to Japan.  In example (23), the speaker asserts the fact that Tanaka went to Japan, highlighting Tanaka through the use of the nominative marker ga. The slightly falling intonation of noda indicates assertion under noda of scope.  "While in most cases the noda of scope reflects assertion from the speaker, there are limited contexts in which the assertion may be that of a third person. The effect is in the form of hearsay: ffl*  ft  O T t t T ^  ^5/Co  Tanaka ga kuru nodewanai sooda. Tanaka NOM come ND-NEG hear It is said that Tanaka is not coming. (Tanaka is said to be not coming.) In contexts of hearsay from a third person, the information framework does not apply.  56 Noda of scope may also be used under Domain II to pose the validity of something that the speaker believes to be true.  For example, with a rising intonation, the speaker poses a  question to which he expects the hearer to agree: (24)  Hrfj  ft  ff<  Tanaka ga  iku  n-janai?  Tanaka N O M go ND-NEG Tanaka is going, isn't he?  The speaker has a good idea that Tanaka is the person going. Instead of asserting the fact with the affirmative noda which may sound direct, the speaker poses the validity of the proposition in the form of a tag question. Noda of mood in Domain II is used to relay information for various purposes: creating rapport, explaining, giving background information, and making commands. In the example below, the speaker shares information about himself and creates a sense of rapport with the hearer.  (25)  %.ft  0*  Raigetsu  nihon ni  K  ff<  /Wco  iku  n-da.  next month Japan L O C go  ND  (You know) I ' m going to Japan next month. He communicates his plans to the hearer using noda with a slightly rising intonation. The hearer is thus invited to respond with comments or questions about the trip.  16  Noda of mood  is often used to give background information so that the speaker can make invitations, requests, or comments about the information.  Conversely, the use of noda with a sharp falling intonation may have the effect of a command. "You are to go to Japan next month!"  57 (26)  mm  <D  £zga no  f^n  as  chiketto ga  r#c  &3 X t t  nimai  am  Wif  n-desu kedo  movie G E N tickets N O M two exist N D I have two movie tickets. Would you like to go?  iki-masen  and/but g o - N E G  ka? Q?  In example (26) the speaker wants the hearer to know that he has movie tickets as background information for his invitation to take the hearer out. Rather than beginning the sentence with a direct invitation which may sound abrupt, giving background explanations adds to the conversational effect of politeness and natural flow. In Domain III when information is known only to the hearer, (- Speaker/+ Hearer), the speaker uses noda in the form of questions. The speaker may seek explanations, or ask questions to create rapport and demonstrate involvement in the hearer's life. (27)  0*  (D  Nihon  no  doko  K ni  ff<  ©?  iku  no?  Japan G E N where L O G go Where are you going in Japan?  ND  The speaker in (27) asks for more information and shows interest i n the hearer's story. Speakers may also ask questions when they have indications about the information. M c G l o i n (1989) terms this use conjecture. In contrast to general questions, questions based on conjecture are based on the speaker's partial knowledge of the relevant information. F o r example, the speaker i n (28a) and (28b) notices that the hearer is carrying some travel pamphlets and makes the assumption that the hearer is probably thinking of travelling. Because questions based on conjecture involve prior indication of information, they are close to the area of speaker knowledge, and are located at the top edge of Domain III as indicated in Figure 3.6.  58  (28a)  ffift iz. Ryokoo ni  •  fif<  iku  <D ? no?  (28b) Mf  travel L O C go ND Are you going travelling?  Ryokoo ni  ff<  iku  © - ?  no:?  travel L O C go ND Are you going travelling?  Conjectural questions may convey various emotional overtones such as surprise, approval, and disdain. For example, i n (28a) the speaker may first exclaim a ' o h ' before asking the question i f he is surprised. In contrast, the speaker i n (28b) communicates disapproval through intonation and emphatic elongation of no:. The hearer interprets the overtones and responds by explaining or justifying his situation. U s i n g this information framework for noda, the following chapters analyze actual data from conversations by Japanese language learners to determine the nature of their noda use. The next chapter describes the methodology used for the data analyses of role-play and case studies.  59  Chapter Four Methodology  Chapter Three of this thesis defined the framework of noda for this study. W i t h noda of scope, the speaker asserts the truth value of the proposition, while with noda of mood, the speaker expresses his strong desire for the information to be shared between speaker and hearer.  The remainder of this thesis examines the use of noda by Japanese Language  Learners (JLLs) and Japanese Native Speakers (JNSs) and poses the following research questions: (1) H o w frequently do J L L s and JNSs use noda in conversation? (2) In what contexts and functions do J L L s and JNSs use nodal (3) What is the nature of J L L s ' acquisition of nodal To answer these questions, this study analyzes conversational data from J L L s and JNSs i n Chapters Five and S i x . The following sections in this chapter describe the methodologies used in the data collection and analyses.  4.1 Introduction of data collection In order to gain a broader perspective on noda use by J L L s and JNSs, data collection for this study includes the audio-taping of one-time role-play conversations as w e l l as a longitudinal case study o f two J L L s .  Section 4.2 outlines the methodology used for the  role-play conversations and Section 4.3 explains the procedures for the case study.  60 4.2 Role-plays The role-plays were taken from longer interviews or institutional A C T F L - O P I s (The American Council of the Teaching of Foreign Languages Oral Proficiency Interview). The 1  next sections explain the reasons for adopting this methodology and describe the participants, data collection procedures, and analytical methods.  4.2.1 Participants The participants in this research were enrolled i n a third-year Japanese course at the University of British Columbia ( U B C ) in 1998/99. The course was an advanced conversation 2  and composition class which consisted of oral practice, conversation, grammatical analysis, and composition. A s part of the final evaluation of the eight-month course, the students were all given oral interviews i n the format of the A C T F L - O P I by trained raters. Participation i n the research was voluntary. This study analyzes the role-plays of the 24 students who used noda out of the 56 students who gave permission to be part of the research. The range o f Japanese studies (2 to 14 years) and stay in Japan (none to 4 years) reflects a mixed group of language learners. The students' profiles are given in Appendix F .  'For an overview of the ACTFL OPI see Hadley (1993), The ACTFL oral proficiency interview tester training manual 1999 (ed. by Breiner-Sanders et al.) and the ACTFL proficienty guidelines 1986. For issues related to the ACTFL OPI in Japanese, see Makino (1991) and Johnson (1997). The students who volunteered to participate signed consent forms as required by Ethical Reviews at UBC. Data collection was approved by the UBC Research Services. I would like to express my gratitude to the anonymous participants, and to Dr. Collier-Sanuki for allowing me to use data obtained from her Japanese classes. 2  61  4.2.2 Procedures for data collection Each thirty-minute interview was recorded on audio-tape and used to determine the level of proficiency according to the A C T F L rating scale. The interviews included sections related to the description of daily life, comparison, explanation, situational conversation, and role-play. I elected to use the role-play portion for this study because of its standard use in all OPIs and stand-alone nature.  3  Further, the role-play conversation reflected natural  conversation. B y adopting characters in the role-play, the J L L s were able to perform relatively free from the constraints of the interviewer/interviewee relationship.  4.2.3 Procedures for analysis The role-play section generally consisted of the reading aloud of the role card by the J L L , the subsequent role-playing (approximately five minutes), and a brief wind-down section, where the interviewer thanked the J L L s and sometimes asked i f they had faced similar situations in the past. The analysis focused solely on the conversation and did not include the other components of the role-play procedure.  Transcription conventions are listed in the  index, and the transcriptions are provided in Appendix H . T o segment the role-play data for analysis, different issues were first considered. Tannen (1982) points to the difficulty in interpreting oral data because of the variety of false starts, fillers, and repetitions, causing disjointed sentences in conversational data. Specific to Japanese, Maynard (1989) and Iwasaki (1993) propose units for analysis which include phrase-bounded phrasal units (PPU) as bound by pauses (Maynard 1989), and intonation In the OPI an interviewee is typically asked to talk about himself, explain various procedures, discuss opinions, and perform role-plays. 3  62 units (IU) which carry ideational components and could be lexical/phrasal or clausal (Iwasaki 1993).  Goto (1998) discusses the difficulty of applying P P U and I U to conversations by  J L L s , concluding that the use of repetitions, hesitation noises, etc. by J L L s may be differently motivated than those used by JNSs. To avoid subjective interpretations of discourse features such as pauses and repetitions, this thesis refers rather to the structural properties of the conversation and uses the clausal unit for analysis. The clausal unit represents a clause 4  marked by a subject and predicate, similar to Chafe's (1987) explanation of the English Intonation Unit. It is appropriate to use the clausal unit in analyzing noda because noda functions as modality which attaches itself to propositions represented by clauses.  5  Lyons  (1977) highlights the unity between physical order (intonation unit), grammatical order (clause) and semantic order (proposition). The J L L s also produced at times fragmented utterances lacking predicates, giving the semblance of 'incomplete sentences' (which were sometimes completed by the hearer). This thesis defines the clausal unit as the potential for uttering a complete clause, and includes sentence fragments as clausal units. In other words, a clausal unit is minimally a content-bearing fragment and maximally a coherent clause. Features such as hesitation noises such as aa (oh) and ee (yeah), back-channeling cues like hai (yes) and un (uhhuh), yes/no responses hai (yes) and He (no), and repetitions due to mispronunciations were not classified. The following examples represent the division of conversational data into clausal units. In the examples the J L L is role-playing a situation in which he has found an insect in his food at a restaurant. This study adopts the view that clauses with noda predicates are single clauses and that noda is not an additional clause. 4  The null-subject feature of Japanese allows the presence of subjects to be optional when it is contextually clear to the speaker and hearer. 5  63 (1)  fo\ zz % xyt*) \ x>t> r > f c o * > « 9 * - r . A/ So&o ra' mo hitori! Hito, hitotsu arimasu. EXC there L O C also one person (one) one exist O h ! There is also one there.  (2)  zz.! Soko! there It is there!  Despite the difference i n their lengths, both examples (1) and (2) represent one clausal unit. Example (1) forms one clause where hitotsu, meaning one insect, is predicated by the verb exist. The exclamation and repeated self-corrections do not affect the analysis of the clausal unit.  In example (2) the single utterance soko (there) forms a clause with the implicit  understanding, "The insect is there". In both cases, noda could be attached to the the endings to form noda clauses. Once the transcriptions were divided into clausal units, noda use was coded according to the following classifications: 1) correct use of noda (C), 2) incorrect use of noda (I), and 3) recommended use of noda (R). The following role-play o f asking a security guard to unlock the office door highlights examples of the three types. (3) ( C ) f c © ^  ti  ZOO JT747  K  XV  Anoo, watashi wa kono ofisu ni hairi-tai um IPS T O P this office L O C enter-want U m , I would like to get in this office, b u t . . . (4) (I) £<D Sono that  A ti tehfr Mi iz. tfoTS hito wa nanka ryokoo ni i-tteru person T O P u m travel L O C go-PRG  A,X~t ft i f - * n-desu kedo:, ND and/but  hXT frb-, n-desu kara:, ND so  (C)*r© A iz. ' H f S LX <t CtiftV^ A,X-to Sono hito ni denwa shite mo ko-re-nai n-desu. that person D A T phone do even i f come-able-NEG N D That person is on a trip so even i f I call her she can't come.  64 (5) ( R ) E #  Gofun  m  mae  gurai ofisu  £  HJT-, i i  o  dete:, kagi o  £  &ftTL*V^Lfc.  wasurete-shimaimashi-ta.  5 minutes before about office A C C leave keys A C C forget-regret-PST I left the office about five minutes ago, and forgot my keys.  Example (3) is a correct use of noda (C) in which the J L L explains to the guard that she wishes to enter the office, implicitly requesting to have the door opened.  In example (4) the  J L L ' s use of noda in the first clause is incorrect (I), because its combination with the conjunction kara (so) over-emphasizes the reason that her co-worker is away and thus sounds rude. Example (5) is an instance of recommended use (R) in which the J L L should use noda to explain the fact that she forgot her keys. To code the data, two JNSs first read each transcription, citing possible areas where noda could be used.  Second, minimal pairs, with and without noda, were provided as  options (see the transcriptions in Appendix H ) . Third, three J N S informants coded each option as appropriate, questionable, or inappropriate (Appendix I). Finally, the coding was combined and re-analyzed as correct, incorrect, or recommended according to the judgements of at least two J N S s .  6  After coding, statistical differences and correlations of correct noda use were calculated between the intermediate, advanced, and superior-level J L L s under the O P I rating. The data was then re-classified into three types of information status as proposed in Chapter Three: 1) previously shared information (+ Speaker/-l- Hearer); 2) information known only to the speaker (+ Speaker/- Hearer); and 3) information known only to the hearer (- Speaker/+ Hearer).  The JLLs' use of noda was coded as correct (C) if at least two JNSs found the use correct, and incorrect (I) if at least two JNSs found the use questionable or incorrect. If at least two JNSs found the non-use of noda questionable or incorrect, the section was coded as recommended use of noda (R). The coding is not biased by possible dialect variations because the JNSs' backgrounds represent different regions. 6  65 Chapter Five provides a detailed explanation of the functions of noda according to the various domains of information.  4.3  Case study The second type of data collection centred around the language acquisition of two  J L L s , Susan and David. A t the time, the participants were second-year university students at the University of British Columbia. The students were chosen because they were intermediatelevel students as rated by A C T F L - O P I , taking Japanese courses during the time of the study, and had prior experiences of staying in Japan. Both J L L s were of Taiwanese backgrounds, and had studied Japanese for four years at high school and one year at university at the beginning of the study.  7  Susan had undergone a 2-month intensive second-year Japanese  program at the Tokyo Foreign Language University while homestaying in Japan. She was taking two third-year Japanese courses at the time of this study. David had previously taken 8  Japanese lessons at a private heritage language school in Vancouver. With instructor peimission, he concurrently took second-year and third-year Japanese courses in his first year at the university, and was taking two fourth-year Japanese courses at the time of the study. He had 9  travelled to Japan on two occasions for short periods of time. The purpose of the case study was to qualitatively examine the nature of the J L L s ' use and acquisition of noda. The duration of the study was approximately five months, with  'Chinese, as discussed in Chapter One, does not have an equivalent form to noda. Susan was taking an advanced Modern Japanese reading course and an advanced conversation and composition course. 8  9  David was taking reading courses in Modern Japanese literature and Japanese newspapers.  66 meetings approximately forty-five minutes in length every two to three weeks. I audio-taped and observed each session, and later transcribed the tapes for analysis. To study the J L L s ' perceptions of language use, the J L L s were asked to write reflections about their language use in journals. Furthermore, to determine the language levels of the case-study participants, A C T F L OPIs were administered at the outset and conclusion of the study.  4.3.1  Procedures for data collection The study examined pre-, mid-, and post-effects of acquisition of noda. In the pre-,  mid-, and post-tests, the J L L s engaged in open-ended conversation for approximately forty minutes. The first five minutes of data were excluded, based on the recognition that taped conversations become more natural over time (Maynard 1989). Three sessions between the pre- and mid-tests focused on language learning through implicit means.  During these  sessions the J L L s had interviews, conversations on specified topics, and role-plays with a JNS. They had opportunities to listen to the JNS talk on the same topics and perform similar role-plays. They also listened to other JNSs performing similar role-plays. A l l tapes were transcribed, and the J L L s were asked to listen to the tapes, read the transcriptions, and reflect on the language used by themselves and the JNSs.  The sessions between the m i d - and  post-tests focused on explicit learning of noda. I interviewed the J L L s about their understanding of noda, explained about its various uses, and gave them immediate feedback as they practiced conversations with each other. The last ten minutes of the practice conversations were taped for analysis.  67 4.3.2  Procedures for analysis The transcriptions of the J L L s and the JNSs were classified into clausal units and the  frequency of noda use was calculated. Noda was then classified into speaker-oriented, hearer-oriented, and shared information under the information framework.  Interview data  and journal entries were examined for information relevant to the study. The findings are summarized in Chapter Six.  68  Chapter Five Analyses of role-plays  This chapter examines conversational data from the role-plays of 24 J L L - J N S dyads as described in section 4.2, and 4 JNS-JNS dyads. The data analysis focuses on the language used by one person for each dyad, for a total of 28 data.  Section 5.1 summarizes the  frequency of noda use by J L L s and JNSs grouped into three major A C T F L oral proficiency levels: Intermediate, Advanced, and Superior. This study w i l l also group the four JNSs with the single superior-level J L L .  1  Section 5.2 categorizes noda use in role-plays into five  functions: 1) explanation giving, 2) validity posing, 3) explanation seeking, 4) emphasis and reproach and 5) back-channel. Section 5.3 examines the acquisition sequence of noda based on the categorizations. Section 5.4 highlights the possible uses for noda as recommended by the JNS informants. Subsequent sections analyze each function of noda in detail.  5.1 Noda use by oral proficiency levels in role-plays Data analysis reveals that for the three oral proficiency groups - Intermediate, Advanced, and Superior - the use of noda increased as language level increased. Table 5.1 records the mean percentage of noda use by each of the three groups. Value N represents the number of 2  people in each group. The mean frequency of noda use per clausal unit ranges from 7% for the intermediate-level J L L s to 25% for the superior-level J L L and the JNSs. 'The JNSs in this study would rate superior if they were to take the OPI. This study only includes intermediate level JLLs who used noda in their role-plays. Because many intermediate level JLLs (55%=31/56) did not use noda in their role-plays, the actual mean for the intermediate level would be lower. Of the intermediate level JLLs who used noda, only one JLL was rated intermediate-low (who used a formulaic expression); the rest were mid or high. 2  69  N (number of participants)  Mean (noda use / number of clauses)  Intermediate  19  7.26%  Advanced  4  15.73%  Superior & native  5  25.02%  F=27.699  Table 5.1  Significance<.001, with 2 df  Frequency of noda use by OPI rating  The Pearson's correlation coefficient is 0.830, indicating a high positive correlation between OPI levels and noda use. The analysis of variance ( A N O V A ) shows a significant difference of noda use between the different levels based on the O P I rating at the .001 level. The Post Hoc Tukey test reveals significant differences between usage at each of the levels, indicating a significance level at .011 between the intermediate and advanced levels, .000 between the intermediate and superior levels, and .024 between the advanced and superior levels.  5.2 Functions of noda used in role-plays The use of noda in the role-plays were analyzed according to the information framework as set i n Chapter Three.  3  Within the three categories of information knowledge, the data  revealed that the J L L s and JNSs used noda to give explanations and to pose validity when the speaker knew information, to seek explanations when the hearer knew information, and to emphasize information and give back-channeling when it was already shared.  A s s t a t e d i n C h a p t e rT h r e e , t h i s t h e s i s d o e sn o ti n c l u d e- S p e a k e r / - H e a r e ri n t h ef r a m e w o r k b e c a u s e i t t a k e s t h e v i e w t h a t f o r t h e s p e a k e r t o u s e noda, h e m u s t b e i n v o l v e d w i t h t h e i n f o r m a t i o n i n t h e s e n s e t h a t h e k n o w s t h e i n f o r m a t i o n , o r h e d e s i r e s i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m t h e h e a r e r . 3  70  Noda  +S: II  +S/-M  Functions  expLinaiion giving  validity posing  -S/+H explanation seeking  +S/+H  +S''i II  emphasis/ reproach  hackchannel  Total  OPI level  Intermediate  5.3 % (28/530)  (Y-,  0.4% (2/530)  o<;;  0%  5.7% (30/530)  Advanced  3.2 -J (5/155;  0%  5.8% (9/155)  3.9% (6/155)  (Y-i  12.9% (20/155)  Superior / Native Speaker  1 1.6% 146/395)  6.8% (27/395)  3.3'.* (13/395)  2.3% (9/395)  25.3% (100/ 395)  f  1.3 ,Y R  (5/395)  (unit=correct number of noda use I total number of clausal units)  Table 5.2 Correct use of noda under the information framework  Table 5.2 outlines the use of noda in each of its functions, with frequency percentages for each function type over the total number o f clauses.  The values indicate the correct  number of noda use by the J L L s and JNSs. The incorrect use of noda was not included in the tables because they were too few to base conclusions. Both the J L L s and JNSs used noda 4  primarily to give explanations and to seek explanations. The JNSs and superior and advancedlevel J L L s also used noda to emphasize information. The superior-level J L L and JNSs used noda to pose validity from the hearer in the form of a tag question. Moreover they used the set phrase soona-n-desu-ka T see' as a form of back-channel feedback (acknowledgement of  "incorrect use of noda tallied as follows - intermediate (6), advanced (4), and superior (1). Examples are given in the following sections.  71 listening by the speaker).  5  In the role-plays, the superior-level J L L and JNSs used noda in all  of the five functions; while the advanced J L L s used it in three, and the intermediate J L L s two. A m o n g the most frequent function of explanation giving, the participants typically used noda to explain their situation in order to seek help in solving a problem such as i n example (1). (1) (C)gpm Heya rooom I forgot  co m . £ co cfj ic Jsitifc hX-t ft i f - , no kagi o heya no naka ni wasure-ta n-desu kedo:, G E N key A C C room G E N in L O C forget-PST N D and/but the keys in the room and. . .  In example (1) the J L L explains to the security guard at the office why he cannot get inside. He later asks the guard to unlock the door for him. Another common case of noda use was in seeking explanations: (2) (C) @ # oo  W  oo  Z.t  bti\  fthX-  J£5» A9Jfc  Lftl^  00  1  Jibun no karada no koto toka, nande soo, taisetsuni shi-nai no? self G E N body G E N fact such as why that take care d o - N E G N D W h y don't you take care of yourself, like your health?  In example (2), the J L L demands an explanation of his circumstances from an old friend who now lives on the street. The tone of noda is appropriate to demonstrate concern and interest in the hearer's life.  5  For explanations on Japanese discourse, see Maynard (1989)  72 5.3 A c q u i s i t i o n sequence of noda The J L L s ' use of noda reveal that the types of functions become more varied with higher oral proficiency and that the J L L s develop their use of noda through stages exhibiting the following features as seen i n Table 5.2. Noda is mostly used at the intermediate stage to 6  mark speaker-oriented explanation giving, at the advanced stage to mark hearer-oriented explanation-seeking and to a lesser degree shared-knowledge emphasizing, reproaching and back-channeling, and at the superior stage to mark speaker-oriented features as well as hearer-oriented and shared-information features. The predominant use of speaker-oriented explanation-giving at the intermediate-stage is expected, because at the early stages of language acquisition, language learners focus almost solely on messages they wish to convey to the hearer. The central focus is on the self and the perspective primarily from self to other. Furthermore, the J L L s did not use noda with shared information in the role-play probably because they did not possess the skills to create discourse effects of drawing in the hearer. The intermediate-level J L L s in the role-play were focused on providing information about themselves, with the intent of gaining help from the hearer. Dechaine (p.c.) suggests an added feature for +Speaker functions: emphasis/reproach (+ Speaker/+ Hearer/+ F) back-channel (+ Speaker/+ Hearer/- F) explanation (+ Speaker/- HearerAf F) validity posing (+ Speaker/- Hearer/- F) The use of noda from Table 5.2 seems to suggest a hierarchy from early acquisition to late acquisition in the general order + Feature to - Feature, and speaker-oriented knowledge to hearer-oriented knowledge and shared information. The unmarked form would represent the neutral form without noda. The analysis predicts that JLLs and JNS children would use the form without noda, and when they notice the subjective overtones of noda, would start using the marked form of noda, first in relaying speaker-oriented information, then in hearer-oriented information and shared information. This is in keeping with how the self supersedes the other and group in child and second language acquisition. The acquisition sequence then, would be as follows: 1) explanation giving (+ Speaker/- HearerAf F) 2) explanation seeking (-Speaker/+Hearer) 3) emphasis/reproach (+ Speaker/+ Hearer/+ F) 4) back-channel (+ Speaker/+ Hearer/- F) 5) validity posing (+ Speaker/- Hearer/- F)  73 A t the second stage of acquisition, the advanced-level learners use the hearer-oriented seeking-explanation as a strategy to gain information in determining their position within the discourse. Rather than the straightforward presentation of information as in the intermediatestage, advanced-level J L L s take a broader perspective i n seeking information, giving explanations and emphasizing information. In the role-plays, they asked for the hearer's perspective, and presented their own views. A t the final stage, superior-level J L L s and JNSs have the ability to choose the strategies in achieving the goals of the conversation. In the role-plays they gave explanations about their situation, sought information from the hearer, added further explanations, and emphasized shared understandings to persuade and convince the hearer to act i n a certain manner. The effect of negotiating the common ground is most apparent at this stage where they use a more balanced range of speaker-oriented, hearer-oriented, and shared knowledge features to achieve tasks such as persuading a friend off the street, having a security guard unlock a door, or having an airport attendant locate and deliver misplaced luggage. The varied use of noda is appropriate for the two-way exchange and sharing of information i n the role-plays.  5.4 Possible use o f noda for J L L s The mean correct use of noda for the intermediate-level J L L s was 6% of the clausal units, and for advanced-level J L L s 13%. When the coders conducted grammaticality judgements on the role-plays based on minimal pairs, their recommendation of additional noda use averaged to 10% for intermediate-level J L L s and 4% for advanced-level J L L s . Tables 5.3 and 5.4 represent the recommended noda use for the two groups.  74  Noda Functions  +S/-H explanation giving  +S/-H validity posing  -S/+H explanation seeking  +S/+H emphasis/ reproach  +S/+H backchannel  Total  Noda use  Correct use  5.3 % (28/530)  0%  0.4% (2/530)  0%  0%  5.7% (30/530)  Recommended use  9.4 % (50/530)  0.2% (1/530)  0.4 % (2/530)  0.2% (1/530)  0.2% (1/530)  10.4% (55 /530)  Possible use  14.7% (78/530)  0.2% (1/530)  0.8% (4/530)  0.2% (1/530)  0.2% (1/530)  16.0% (85/530)  Table 5.3 Possible use of noda for intermediate-level JLLs  Noda Functions  +S/-H explanation giving  +S/-H validity posing  -S/+H explanation seeking  -S/+H emphasis/ reproach  +S/+H backchannel  Total  Noda use  Correct use  3.2% (5/155)  0%  5.8% (9/155)  3.9% (6/155)  0%  12.9% (20/155)  Recommended use  0.6 % (1/155)  0%  3.2 % (5/155)  0%  0%  3.9 % (6/155)  Possible use  3.9% (6/155)  9.0% (14/155)  3.9% (6/155)  0%  16.8% (26/155)  0%  Table 5.4 Possible use of noda for advanced-level JLLs  75 The majority of recommended uses for intermediate-level J L L s , 50/530 (9%), was to use noda more frequently i n giving explanations. The advanced-level J L L s , on the other hand, used noda appropriately to give explanations. The coders recommended that advanced-level J L L s use noda i n questions when they sought explanations in 5 of 155 clausal units (3%). Specific uses of noda are discussed in detail i n subsequent sections. The correct use o f noda by J L L s depicted i n the top rows of Table 5.3 and 5.4 indicates the J L L s ' appropriate choice in using noda. There were cases in which the use was appropriate, but the sentence was ungrammatical. The following examples represent cases in which the use of noda was counted as correct usage, but included incorrect grammar or form. For example, a few J L L s attached noda to an incorrect form of the preceding word.  (3) (C)ffi&  <D  Nimotsu ni  watashi no  mnm  ©  hikooki no  t  *m^^L±  h-Q^r  ft  bangoo mo kakimashi-ta n-desu ga  luggage D A T IPS G E N plane G E N number also write-PST I also wrote the flight number on the luggage, and. . .  ND  and/but  In example (3) the use of noda is appropriate i n explaining that the J L L wrote her flight number on a missing piece of luggage; however, the verb preceding noda should be i n the plain form kaita, instead of the polite form kakimashita as used in (3). In other cases, the J L L s used the casual (plain) form of noda when a context required more formality. In the following example, the J L L asks her supervisor for time off work:  (4) (C)iift,  .  Kachoo,  ft; onegai ga am fcjggvN  hit n-da kedo:,  section chief request N O M exist ND Sir, I have a request, and. . .  and/but  76 The phrase aru-n-da-kedo is too casual to use in the hierarchical system of a company where the superiors are addressed with formality; the correct phrase would be aru-n-desu-ga, i n which n-desu is the polite form of noda and ga (and/but) is a polite version of kedo.  5.5 Explanation giving (+ Speaker/- Hearer) The JNSs repeatedly used noda in explaining their predicament to the hearer. However, the J L L s often used noda only with the initial explanation of the problem, omitting its use in subsequent explanations of their situation.  5.5.1 Explanation giving by JNSs The JNSs' gave explanations using noda with conjunctions and sentence final particles (i.e. ne, yo and yone). They frequently used noda with the conjunction kedo or ga (also/but) in the forms n-desu kedo or n-desu ga. (5)  1  Participant: Context:  JNS 2 A traveller is looking for missing luggage, and explains the situation at the airport luggage counter in order to have it delivered to her hotel when found.  ffim  ft  As, h<D? #ori>£>fc^ A/Tff tfflif-, Sumimasen, anoo nimotsu ga mitsukara-nai n-desu keredo: Excuse me um luggage N O M f i n d - N E G ND and/but Excuse me. U m I can't find my luggage...  2a Anoo Um  7f7y ragejji luggage  <D tv—k, <D pJr JU£ t r o t no kureemu no tokoro mini i-tte G E N claim G E N place look g o - P R G  ki-ta n-desu kedomo, come-PRF ND and/but U m , I went and checked at the luggage claim area...  77 2b  tHT^TftV^ hXir detekite-nai n-desu ga: come o u t - N E G N D and/but but my luggage hasn't come o u t . . .  3  h<Do, V^o JI< hXLlo fro Anoo, itsu todoku n-de-shoo ka. Um when arrive ND-probably Q U m , when is it going to arrive?  4a  hcoo, Anoo, um  isT.Y>v I? mw&g £ L T , X— %£*)m& <o mm # t / % shiatoru de noritsugi o shite, de: noritsugi no tokini nimotsu mo Seattle at transfer A C C do then transfer G E N time luggage also  -mz. & <D M'nWt iz m^T te-ftc^fc hx~t isshoni tsugi no hikooki ni nosete moraeru hazuda-tta n-desu kedomo: together next G E N plane D A T put on receive expect-PST N D and/but U m , I transferred at Seattle, and when I transferred the luggage was supposed to be put on the next plane with me but. . . 4b  t i i o i  Chotto a little  tfi 'MoXtc sore ga chiga-tte-ta that N O M differ-PRG-PST  Wt K ffoTLtoT^ tokoro ni itte-shima-tteru place D A T go-regret-PRG It seems that that wasn't the case  &tc^ mitai seem  X\ &<D? m co de anoo hoka no and u m other G E N  &tc^ ft LX-f frif%-, mitai na n-desu kedomo: seem C P L N D and/but and um it seems like it has gone somewhere else.. .  co ~}j ic ffotltofc ± 5 ft AyXir tf\ shikago no hoo ni itte-shima-tta yoo na n-desu ga Chicago G E N way D A T go-regret-PRF seem C P L N D and/but  5a  ch<Do, fLfit Anoo, eeto um um  5b  t£hbfr, A y / 7 - A SfoT nantoka, bankuubaa ni motte somehow Vancouver L O C bring U m , it seems to have gone to Chicago, Vancouver?  # T %?>X.ft^ XL-Z.0 fro kite morae-nai deshoo ka come receive-NEG probably Q but could it somehow be brought to  Within the five turns in conversation (5), the J N S uses the form n-desu kedo/n-desu ga a total of six times to explain her situation. She begins with the main explanation that she cannot find her luggage, then continues with supporting explanations that she checked the turnstile and could not find her luggage there, that the luggage was supposed to have been transferred to her plane, and that the luggage seems to have been sent to Chicago instead.  78 In conversation (5) it is interesting to note that the request for help is implicitly embedded i n the context of the conversation and is only directly stated at the end of turn 5. Althought kedo and ga are conjunctions which join two clauses, the use of n-desu kedo/ n-desu ga is not limited to use in complete sentences. The two clauses i n turn 2 reveal that JNSs also use n-desu kedo/n-desu ga in succession to give a variety of explanations. W h e n the sentences are not completed with a subsequent clause, the JNS emphatically elongates the  vowel at the end of n-desu keredo: in 1, n-desu ga: in 2b, and n-desu kedomo: in 4a and 4b. Most uses of the elongated forms signal the end of turns, ( 1 , 2 and 4b) and are indicative of the indirect speech style of Japanese.  7  5.5.2 E x p l a n a t i o n giving by JLLs The JNSs always started with a specific explanation of their problem, as i n example (5).  This is possible because the request for help is understandable from the context o f  approaching a clerk, service representative or security guard. O n the other hand, the J L L s sometimes used such formulaic expressions as onegai-ga aru-n-desu-ga T have a request', or ohanashi-ga-aru-n-desu-ga T have someting to talk about' to start the role-play.  After  giving the main explanation with noda, the intermediate-level J L L s mostly did not continue to use noda with other added explanations.  7  See Maynard (1989) for discussions on fragmentation in Japanese discourse.  79 (6)  Participant: Context:  JLL 4 A worker asks the security guard to let her in because she has locked herself out of the office.  la hhooo, fcH^ tf (C) Anoo onegai ga um favour N O M lb (R)  ic  cb%> AsVi-  tf-,  aru n-desu ga:, exist ND and/but  cbooo, fe ttX®£t.1r tf^-, Anoo, watashi wa: kaisha de: hatarakimasu ga:, um IPS T O P company L O C work and/but  m. %  ib-, fe ttZ\CD um % a i r tfb-, ^ o t ^ v tfb-, Aa, watashi wa: kono heya o dete kara:, kagi o motte-nai kara:, um IPS T O P this room A C C leave after key A C C h a v e - N E G so  ld ^ 3 = - , ^tlbtite<* fc!9£Lfc. (R) Ima:, irerarenaku narimashita. now (enter-able-NEG) became Excuse me. I have a request. U m I work at this company, but I left this room without my keys, so I can't enter now. Lines l b and I d are explanations that the J L L is a worker at the building, and that she is unable to enter the office because she left her keys inside. Therefore, the J N S informants recommended the use of noda for these lines. lb'  Id'  hCDo, fe tt C(D £fcL T r f / ) ^ T V ^ < 5 hXir tf\ Anoo, watashi wa kono kaisha de hatarai-teiru n-desu ga, um IPS T O P this company L O C w o r k - P R G ND ' and/but ^t,  Ima, now  Aft&V  A,T?-f  tfi-  hai-re-nai n-desu ga: enter-able-NEG ND and/but  Examples ( l b ' ) and (Id') with noda added make the utterances more natural. W h e n talking in role-plays which require explanations of situations, J L L s should remember to use noda not only with the initial explanation, but also in subsequent related explanations as well. 8  A s uttered, ire-rare-naku is ungrammatical. The correct form would be hai-re-naku.  80 5.6 Validity posing (+ Speaker/- Hearer) When the speaker holds a belief and desires the hearer to realize the validity of his belief, he may use the negative form of noda with a rising intonation i n the form of a tag question. This use of noda falls under Noda's (1997) noda of scope; however, rather than asserting the inaccuracy of a proposition, the speaker poses the validity of the relevant information: (7)  1  Participant: Context: fc! Ne:! Hey  J L L 24 The speaker gives advice to her friend who is considering marriage.  ^otfU ^hifWL & B * ic otlT t t - , Yappari ichido: kare o nihon ni tsurete kite:, as expected once 3PS A C C Japan L O C bring come  a-wasete mi tara ii n-janai? m e e t - C A U try i f good ND-NEG Hey! Wouldn't it be good to bring him to Japan and have him try meeting them?  In example (7) the superior-level J L L suggests her friend introduce her boyfriend to the parents who are against their marriage, i n order for them to become acquainted with h i m . The speaker uses noda to present her belief that it would be a viable option i n resolving the situation. The hearer is invited to recognize the validity of her suggestion. 9  The intermediate and advanced-level J L L s did not use phrases to pose validity except in one case where a J L L sought to have the hearer verify the situation:  Collier-Sanuki (p. c.) points out that this use could also be construed as -SpeakerAHearer to indicate uncertainty; however, this paper takes the approach that the speaker poses the tag question to which she knows a definite answer, and that her ultimate goal is for the hearer to realize the correctness of her belief, and hence terms the use +Speaker/-Hearer.  81 (8)  Participant: Context:  1  (R)  J L L 17 The speaker is involved in a bicycle accident and negotiates with the other rider to seek compensation for damages.  <F> .SH  Anata  no  you  G E N way  ft,  hoo ga,  J&ofrift butsuka-tta ja- nai  %  &  watashi ga  N O M IPS  JLxftl^  mi-e-nai  fth  £o-f  5t5T-,  kara massuguni kite:,  N O M see-able-NEG so  straight  come  -e-f- ft-! desu ka: ?  collide-PRF C P L - N E G C P L Q Wasn't it that you came straight this way and collided into me, because you couldn't see me?  The coders recommended that the J L L use noda to form butsukatta-n-ja-nai-desu-ka? W i t h the addition o f noda, the phrase sounds more polite where the speaker poses the validity of the claim that she believes to be true, rather than the phrase without noda which directly accuses the hearer.  5.7 E x p l a n a t i o n seeking ( - Speaker /+ Hearer) When seeking explanations from the hearer, noda is often used. The intermediate-level J L L s only infrequently posed questions. In the advanced and superior-levels, two o f the subjects, J L L 22 and J N S 4, used noda to seek explanation the most, 7 times and 9 times respectively. In the role-play they sought information from their homeless friend now living on the streets. The frequent use of explanation seeking with this type of role-play suggests that topic influences the kinds of language functions used in role-plays.  82 5.7.1 E x p l a n a t i o n seeking by J N S s The JNSs used noda each time they requested explanations from the hearer.  The  example below shows a succession of questions seeking information about the hearer's situation: (9)  Participant: Context:  1  JNS 4 The speaker talks to a former friend now living on the streets.  i£ 5 L T MbLXh Dooshite kurashi-ten  60 ? no?  10  how live-PRG ND H o w are you living now?  2  i£c\ K Doko ni  &hXh (Dl sun-den no?  where L O C l i v e - P R G N D Where are you living?  3  %  Ie  tf  ga  ftV^  nai  (D  1  no?  jaa,  house N O M exist-NEG N D then Y o u don't have a place to live then? 4  f£±. X  mbLXZ  Rojoo de  kurashi-teru no?  (Dl  jaa,  street L O C l i v e - P R G N D then Y o u ' r e living on the street then?  In each turn the speaker asks for more information from the hearer. Consequently, noda in the above examples demonstrates the speaker's involvement and concern in the hearer's life.  The questions in this section all have rising intonations. A falling intonation can be used on sentences without interrogative pronouns; however in this case the speaker would be sharing information about himself (+ Speaker/- Hearer). Examples 1-4 also all have the form no without the copula da, common in questions. 1  83 5.7.2 E x p l a n a t i o n seeking by J L L s Intermediate-level J L L s did not use noda to seek explanations, except in a few instances. In forming questions with noda, J L L s may face difficulties with yes-no questions. Questions of this type make presuppositions about a hearer's intention, and often demonstrate an accusing tone, especially when the preceding verb is in the negative form. (10)  Participant:  J L L 13  Context:  A traveller is looking for missing luggage, and explains the situation at the airport luggage counter in order to have it delivered to her hotel.  1  -fcT-jv  (I)  Hoteru ni  iz.  ffityj  &  iloT  nimotsu  o  okutte itadake-nai  v^/t/cfrftv^  A/i?L,fc5  ?K  n-deshoo ka.  hotel L O C luggage A C C send receive-NEG ND Y o u can't send the luggage to my hotel?  Q  The use of noda i n example (10) indicates a presupposition that the attendant is unwilling to deliver luggage, and demands an explanation o f why she is unwilling.. In cases where the speaker simply wishes to make a request, noda should not be used. J L L s at the advanced level began to use noda appropriately with wh-questions, as i n example (11) to find out about his friend's current situation. (11)  Participant: Context:  J L L 22 The speaker talks to a former friend now living on the street.  1  W.M tt Kazoku wa  if 5 ft doo na  (C)  <oi  no?  family T O P how C P L ND H o w is your family?  (R)  Kazoku to  zenzen  renraku to-tte-nai  family and completely contact t a k e - P R G - N E G Y o u haven't kept in contact with your family at all.  84 3 (C)  ^A,ft i t Sonna michi that street H o w is it living  X. HA.XX t'o ft • © ? de sun-dete doo na no? L O C l i v e - P R G h o w C P L ND on a street like that?  The J L L is personally involved in the hearer's situation and later persuades her to find work to get off the streets. Therefore, the personal tone of questions in turn 1 and 3 with noda is appropriate; the J L L should also use noda with line 2 to indicate his strong desire for an explanation.  5.8 Emphasis and reproach (+ Speaker/+ Hearer) The advanced and superior-level J L L s and JNSs effectively used noda to emphasize information known to both the speaker and the hearer. (12)  1 (C)  Participant: Context: mu Ryoohoo both It doesn't  J L L 23 The speaker convinces his wife that they should both do the housework.  bi>. tt* £ . LT-5 ztlz. li frfrbte^ hit fth-. tomo, shigoto o shi-teru kotoni wa kawara-nai n-da kara:, also work A C C d o - P R G fact T O P differ-NEG ND so changethe fact that we both work, s o . . .  The J L L persuades his wife to let him share the housework, citing the reason that they both work. The use of noda is appropriate in emphasizing previously shared information for the speaker to make his case. When a speaker repeats and emphasizes information known to both the speaker and the hearer, the effect could also be one of reproach, as described by Sakakibara (1998).  85 (13)  la  lb  Participant: Context:  fc, A, oh Oh,  JNS 1 A customer has just been told by the store clerk that the store does not give refunds and that the store policy is written on the bottom o f the receipt.  T?<b It /b£v^ tf i < i l x . * - ^ fc-. demo kore wa chiisai moji de yoku mi-e-masen ne:. but this T O P small print and well see-able-NEG S F P but this is very small print and hard to see.  <t5 '>L ft 3 X ff^.T Moo sukoshi ookina ji de kaite more slightly large letter by write s  wfc/c>ft^ itadaka-nai to:, receive-NEG i f  Z\fi it. ^ A , f t Fi? »^T&ofc kore wa konna tokoro ni kaite-a-tta this T O P this kind place L O C write-is-PST  zti It fetoi, kore wa chotto, this T O P a little  frn-desu ka:. ND Q  B  <If you don't write it in bigger letters, this is a bit, this, it's written in such a place.> Y o u need to write it in bigger letters; this is a b i t . . .it's hard to see where it's written.  In example (13) the customer expresses her criticism that the salesperson did not clearly state the store's policy when she first bought the item. It is obvious from her statement that she thinks that the fault lies with the store; however, the reproach is stated indirectly and is more polite than directly criticizing the store. This type o f noda use is more subtle than straight forward explanations, and difficult for J L L s to master.  5.9 B a c k - c h a n n e l (+ Speaker/+ Hearer) The fifth and final use of noda i n the role-plays is back-channelling. B y using the phrase soo-na-n-desu-ka T see' the speaker acknowledges to the hearer that he understands something that the hearer has previously stated.  86 (14)  1  Participant: Context:  JNS 3 A worker asks the security guard to let her in because she has locked herself out of the office.  u * . 14 <r> A Ja, hoka no hito  kz. ni  then  D A T contact  c\t  other G E N person ft  koto na  A,Xi~  & renraku o  t-ox totte  A C C take  t  mm  mo  muri  o r  tte  even i f impossible Q U O  XU—o  n-desu yone:  fact C P L ND SFP Then it means that even i f I contact someone else, it's not possible.  2  fe A  ^5 soo  ft na  hXir frn-desu ka:  oh that way C P L ND Oh I see.  0  Q  In example (14) the guard (hearer) has previously explained that he cannot let her in even i f she calls a co-worker to verify her position in the company.  The speaker (worker) first  emphasizes the information in line 1 to seek confirmation, and includes the back-channel in line 2 to show that she understands the information. The J L L s infrequently gave back-channels after receiving explanations. In one case, in a role-play similar to the one above, the security guard explained that she had been previously stabbed by a knife and could not let the employee inside the office. The intermediatelevel J L L responded with soo-desu-ka "Is that so", without noda; however, in such cases of extreme emotion, soo-desu-ka sounds too neutral and impersonal. The J L L should have used the more personal soo-na-n-desu-ka, with noda to show concern.  87 The J L L s with higher oral language proficiency used noda more frequently i n the role-plays. The use of noda seemed to go through the most transition at the advanced level and solidify by the superior-level. Both J L L s and JNSs used noda most frequently to explain situations. The intermediate-level J L L s tended to use noda when they first explained their situations to the hearer. The JNSs and superior-level J L L often provided explanations combining noda with the conjunctions kedo/ga (and/but) and sentence final particles.  Other than giving  explanations, the advanced-level J L L s also used noda to seek explanations and emphasize information. The superior-level J L L and JNSs further used noda i n tag questions and backchannels. The data revealed an acquisition sequence beginning from speaker-oriented functions at the intermediate-level, through hearer-oriented functions at the advanced level, and a balanced use of speaker and hearer-oriented and shared information functions of noda at the superior level." While most uses of noda by J L L s were correct uses, incorrect uses included making hasty (and often rude) presuppositions by using noda.  The informants mostly  recommended the addition of noda in contexts where the J L L provided explanations. In several cases, the recommendation was to use noda with explanation-seeking questions.  88 Chapter Six Analyses o f case study  This chapter examines two Japanese Language Learners' (JLLs) use of noda over a period of five months. The case-study design is appropriate for this study based on Johnson's (1992) description o f case study as research which "informs us about the processes and strategies that individual L 2 (second languge) learners use to communicate and learn, and how their own personalities, attitudes, and goals interact with the learning environment, and about the precise nature of their linguistic growth" (1992: 76). This present study takes interest i n the qualitative nature of how J L L s perceive and acquire noda and set out to conduct a case study research. This case study, as stated i n Chapter Four, is driven by the following research questions: (1) When and how do J L L s use nodal (2) What is the nature of J L L s ' understanding of nodal (3) H o w do J L L s acquire the use of nodal Through references to interviews and personal journals, this chapter analyzes the learning process o f the two J L L s . Section 6.1 discusses the implicit learning stage of the study, and Section 6.2 the explicit learning stage. Section 6.3 highlights the J L L s ' uses of noda within the conversational data. The distinction between explicit and implicit learning in this study is based on the deductive/inductive distinction drawn by Richards et al. (1997). Learners are specifically taught rules and given explanations about language in explicit learning (deductive), while  89 learners discover about language themselves without being taught specific rules i n implicit learning (inductive). Krashen (1982) differentiates language acquisition as a subconscious process similar to child first language acquisition and learning as a conscious knowledge of rules. Recent studies on noda (Yoshimi forthcoming and Iwai 2000) examines J L L acquisition of noda through explicit instruction and conscious learning. In the studies, intermediate-level J L L s at the Univerisity of Hawaii improve i n their use o f noda i n narrative story-telling through native speaker models, explanatory handouts, communications and corrective feedbacks'.  planning sessions,  practice  This case study set out to explore whether  implicit learning and/or explicit learning would have any effect on the J L L s ' use of noda.  6.1 I m p l i c i t learning stage During the implicit learning stage (sessions 2 to 4) as discussed in section 4.3.1, the aim was for the two J L L s i n the study, Susan and David, to discover the use o f noda i n natural conversation and attempt to incorporate noda into their own conversation. The J L L s talked with a Japanese native speaker (JNS) who frequently used noda (25-26% o f clausal units). After each session, the J L L s listened to the taped conversations and read the transcriptions of the tape, and wrote comments in their journal about the language used i n the tapes. Their use of noda in conversation remained infrequent (0-3%) during this stage, similar to their use of noda during the pre-test (session 1). Although the JNS often used noda, the J L L s did not remark on its use either in their journals or in the interview. Their journals indicate concern with lexical choice and grammatical accuracy such as the use of correct tense and particles. 'in both studies n-desu improved the most, n-desu ne and n-desu kedo improved to a lesser degree, while n-desu yo did not improve.  90 W i t h regards to session 4, David wrote the following points in his journal: -made some basic grammar mistakes (i.e. chiisai deshita) -past and present tense confusion -shift from formality to informality, inconsistent -missing particles Susan also noted her difficulty in speaking Japanese, remarking that she "could not concentrate in all ways (expressing ideas, grammar and fluency)". Neither mentioned noda, however. The J L L s noticed that they had improved i n areas such as giving more back-channelling, pausing less often, and using more appropriate vocabulary. The mid-test at session 5 also did not indicate increased use of noda. During the pre-test, implicit learning stage, and mid-test of the study (sessions 1 to 5), Susan predominantly uses the form nano/nandesu in questions and statements (11/12 uses o f noda). She used noda only infrequently, seemingly to mark emphasis:  (i)  mz  mm  Kaeru  jikan toka  tfr  -# *® ft <D ichiban taisetsu na no. 0  return time such as most important C P L ND Things like going home on time are the most important.  In example (1) she explains that at her workstudy, the workers were focused on their break times and getting off work on time. A t the conclusion of the conversation, Susan emphasizes that leaving work on time is more important than completing work that needs to be done. In the example below, Susan and David talk about their experiences taking Japanese-style baths.  (2) *  tt  Onsen  3--*  wa  •* ^ r *  yuusu hosuteru  hotspringTOP youth hostel The hotspring is a youth hostel.  ft  na  <D  0  no.  C P L ND  91 In example (2), Susan wishes to emphasize the fact that the only hotspring she has gone to is at a youth hostel, and that she has therefore not yet experienced a true Japanese-style hotspring. The corrected version (2') makes the effect clear. (2')  %  tf  Aofc  Watashi ga  00  hai-tta  —  tt  no  wa  • H^^T/V  OO  S.H  yuusu hosuteru  no  onsen  I N O M enter-PRF N M R T O P youth hostel The hotspring I went to was at a youth hostel.  ft  oo.  na no  G E N hotspring C P L N D .  Example (2') is appropriate because it emphatically states that the hot spring she is refering to was i n a youth hostel, and the use of noda draws in the hearer to her experience. David uses noda both with and without na (copula) during the implicit learning stage. (3)  Playland  t  1/^5 FJf  Playland  to  iu  £  jtt-oT^&T  tokoro o  tf?  shi-tteimasu ka?  Playland Q U O say place A C C know-PRG D o you know a place called Playland? (4)  mmm,  mmm  Yuuenchi,  yuuenchi  Q  A,-?I-„  ft  na  n-desu.  amusement park amusement park C P L N D Amusement park, it's an amusement park.  In line (3) D a v i d introduces a new topic to the J N S . Hearing that she does not know what Playland is, he explains to the J N S using noda to indicate that he would really like her to know the information so that he can continue talking about going to Playland for a high school-field trip. David also uses noda to ask questions of Susan.  (5)  ym  %  wkvit  Supeingo  o  benkyooshi-ta n-desu ka,  Spanish A C C study-PRF Susan, did you study Spanish?  h-vr ND  tf, Q  suuzan-san Susan  tto  wa. TOP  92 Susan and D a v i d discuss studying languages other than Japanese or Chinese. H a d Susan given any indication that she had studied Spanish, by saying a Spanish phrase, for example, or carrying a Spanish book, David could have made a conjecture and asked the question i n example (5) to find out more information. However, because she d i d not give any such indication, his question in (5) is out of context. It would be more appropriate to ask a neutral question without noda as in (5'). (5')  a  x^ym  &  z.t  ft  &9£-f  Suuzan-san wa supeingo o benkyooshi-ta koto ga arimasu Susan T O P Spanish A C C study-PRF fact N O M exist Have you studied Spanish before?  ft!  ka? Q  The question i n (5') does not make assumptions and simply inquires i f Susan has studied Spanish before. T o use noda effectively in this context, the question would need to be more general such as a WH-question.  (6)  Win Donna gengo if/oft  £  o  M^Ltc Zt ft benkyooshi-ta koto ga  what languages A C C study-PRF fact What languages have you studied before.  &?> A,X-f  am  ft! n-desu ka?  N O M exist ND  Q  To show interest and create rapport, D a v i d could ask Susan about her general study o f languages as in example (6), without making assumptions. Immediately after the mid-test conversation i n session 5, I interviewed the J L L s individually and asked about their understanding of the uses and functions o f noda. Both indicated that they had not paid particular attention to its use by the J N S , although Susan stated that she had noticed the frequent use of noda when she studied in Japan. The J L L s were uncertain about the functions of noda. D a v i d thought that it marked formality and  93 emphasis, while Susan thought that it was a softer version of tsumori (intention) and that it sometimes had emotive qualities. She stated that she had not focused on noda because its use did not seem to affect the meaning of the sentence. A t the end o f the interview, I asked the students to reflect on their use of noda for the next session.  6.2 E x p l i c i t learning stage The explicit learning stage consisted of three sessions which focused on explicit explanations of the functions of noda and the practice of its use. Before beginning instruction about noda i n session 6, I again asked the students about their understanding of noda. This time Susan had researched explanations from various resources, and she stated that noda was used i n explaining, urging people to respond, as well as giving reasons. She expressed her surprise at the variance from her previous understanding. O n the other hand, she stated that she was still not certain of their uses because the contexts of noda use referenced i n the books were limited to set situations, and she suspected that there were more. D a v i d also stated that i n reflecting on his previous use of noda, he was uncertain of how and why he used noda when he did. A t the beginning o f each session during the explicit learning stage, I explained the various uses o f noda with sample sentences and handouts.  During the J L L s ' practice  conversations with each other, I also gave immediate feedback about the appropriate use of noda. The J L L s began to use noda frequently i n their conversations (see Figure 6.1 and Table 6.1). D a v i d began to adopt the use of noda immediately upon the first session o f explicit instruction (session 6). Susan showed more hesitation, writing i n her journal, "to me  94 it is hard to use it in an appropriate situation because it is really unfamiliar to me." In session 7, she started to incorporate noda into her conversation. She wrote,  Since knowing the appropriate use of no/n-desu, I started to take note of that when having conversations with David; however, because it is kind of new to me, I started to talk slower, but sometimes I still forgot to use it. . . After listening to the explanation of n-desu, I started to notice the frequent use of n-desu in Japanese converation. It really makes sense such as showing strong interest in the information or giving background information, etc. I noticed that I hardly use this pattern, and indeed, sometimes use it (-nano) in a weird situation which does not fit in.  The J L L s ' use of noda varied during the sessions, dropping in session 8 and the post-test.  Susan O  Pre-test  Implicit Learning  Mid-test  E x p l i c i t Learning  Post-test  Figure 6.1 Graph of noda use in the case study  Susan 1 Pre-test  4.3%  2  David  Native Speaker  (8/187)  4.7%  (9/192)  0%  (0/43)  2.8%  (1/36)  25.5% (12/47)  3  0%  (0/55)  0%  (0/80)  26.8% (37/138)  4  3.0%  (3/99)  0%  (0/68)  26.2% (38/145)  5 Mid-test  1.2%  (2/161)  1.8%  (3/169)  6  2.6%  (1/38)  28.0%  (14/50)  7  33.3%  (13/39)  38.9%  (28/72)  8  14.5%  (11/76)  8.8%  (6/68)  9 Post-test  3.4%  (4/118)  1.5%  (2/131)  The numbers in the brackets indicate the total number of noda use over the total number of clauses. Table 6.1 Frequency of noda use in the case study  96 The decrease in the J L L s ' use of noda during the last two sessions (8 and 9) may be due to the fact that the J L L s focused more on content than form. LoCastro (1997) and Lightbown and Spada (1993) cite several reasons why pedagogical interventions may not effect change: 1) poor teaching, 2) insufficient time, 3) influence of developmental stages, and 4) sociocultural attitudes.  The J L L s ' use of noda is incorporated in their pragmatic  competence, "the knowledge underlying abilities to interpret, express, and negotiate social activities and their meanings beyond what is literally expressed" (Austin 1998: 328). Drawing on Bouton (1994), LoCastro (1997: 97) concludes in her study that first, pragmatic competence development is a complex interaction of values, language proficiency and social practices; second, language learning environments and societal attitudes towards L l and L 2 affect language development; and finally, language development requires time and exposure and experience with naturalistic input.  2  Takahashi (1996) calls for more research i n the area of  explicit instruction and learner variables in the teaching of pragmatic features. Susan and David's increased use of noda during the explicit learning stage made their conversation sound more like natural Japanese. Compare example (7) from the implicit learning stage without noda to example (8) from the explicit learning stage with the use of noda. In both examples, David is expressing his opinions.  LoCastro's (1997) study of explicit teaching of politeness to Japanese university students learning English, like this study, does not show expected positive effects on the students' language behaviour.  97 (7)  ^  b  Z<D  te.  m  <D  fcW  tt,  ^ttt9  mM&  ft  Ima kangaeru to ne, sono toki no kyooiku wa, yahari mondaiten ga now think i f S F P that time G E N education T O P certainly problems N O M  arimasu exist  &o fc'oT fe© ne. Datte ano S F P because um  f--lfti£ fcLT tt ft, kodomotachi toshite wa ne, children as TOP SFP  nfc3 ' , tt>*9 tt Tf-f- *a yahari shikaru bakari wa dame desu ne. certainly scold only T O P bad C P L S F P ^tt<9  0  If I think about it now, the education at that time had problems. Because for children, it is not good just to scold them.  (8)  ^tt^ mm Yahari bokutachi certainly 1PP  <D £**tfc mft tt mo ft As-z-to no umare-ta jidai wa heiwa na n-desu. G E N born-PRF time T O P peaceful C P L ND  X-fftb ft, Desukara ne, therefore S F P  v^5 iu say  ^-5 soo that  w  /N—t>h  hyaku one hundred  paasento percent  IHff o £ -^ttt? sensoo no kowasa o yahari war G E N scariness A C C certainly mm - r ^ f t ^ A,-**-? t3.o rikai deki-nai n-desu ne. comprehend c a n - N E G ND SFP  Y o u know the time we're born in is peaceful; so you know we can't truly comprehend the destruction of war.  In example (7) D a v i d criticizes education in Taiwan as being authoritarian. The sentences sound somewhat disjointed exhibiting a neutral tone despite discussing something about which David feels strongly. The native-like use of noda in (8) creates an emotive overtone and sense of rapport which draws in the hearer. When using noda, the J L L s sometimes exhibited the following characteristics: pausing and self-correction, concern with use of noda, and the predominant use of nan-desu (copula +  98 noda) over n-desu (noda). The J L L s often corrected their own utterances, repeating phrases with noda as in example (9):  (9)  fe  Watashi  f±  TSffi^  t  wa  omoroshiroi to  S v ^ i " UK  SoTS  A,~?-f  omoimasu ga,  omo-tteru n-desu ga,  IPS T O P interesting Q U O think but think-PRG N D I think it is interesting but, you know I think it is interesting but. . .  tf\ and/but  In example (9) Susan tells David of her interest in an article she read about cartoons, first without noda, then correcting herself to include noda. Susan notices her uncertainty when speaking, and writes, "I was struggling with expressions sometimes, resulting in switching words/expressions back and forth." The J L L s also use rising intonations i n non-question forms when they are uncertain about their predicate choice. Sometimes the J L L s ' concern with the use of noda seems to override their concern about accuracy, resulting in ungrammatical sentences like in example (10):  (10) * i a *  Kiji  o  miRLtc  M  ft i f -  honyakushi-ta  n,  kedoo:  article A C C translate-PRF I translated the article, but...  3  N M R and/but  In example (10) Susan explains to D a v i d that their class translated Japanese newspaper articles. W h e n using the form n-desu kedo (noda + and/but) as in example (10), the J L L s sometimes omitted the required copula da/desu. Moreover, the J L L s used na n-desu ( C P L + noda) with a l l adjectives, instead o f correctly choosing n-desu with /-adjectives and nan-desu with na-adjectives and nouns. The use of noda omitting the copula as in (10) may be seen in some dialectical variations of Japanese. 3  99  J L L s often confuse /- and na-adjectives, and in the case of noda, may perceive nan-desu to be the more salient form. In the following examples, David responds to Susan that translating is indeed difficult:  (11)  (12)  SIL^ ft hx-t fto Honyaku wa hontooni muzukashii na n-desu ne. translation T O P truly difficult C P L ND SFP It's really hard to do translations, isn't it.  * a m  tt  *mz.  ft AsX-r ^tt^, A, taihen na n-desu ne, yahari, oh a lot of work C P L ND S F P certainly Oh, translations are certainly a lot of work, aren't  mm <D zt« honyaku no koto. translation G E N thing they.  The use of na n-desu ( C P L + noda) is incorrect with the /-adjective muzukashii (difficult) in example (11), but correct with the na-adjective taihen (a lot of work) in example (12). (11')  SIR tt mL^ A / T f t fto Honyaku wa hontooni muzukashii n-desu ne. translation T O P truly difficult ND SFP It's really hard to do translations, isn't it.  The correct form of (11) is muzukashii n-desu, as in example ( l l ' ) .  4  This section described  the structural features of noda use. The next section examines the contexts of its use. "instead of wa (TOP) and no koto (GEN + fact) which gives a formal tone in (12), the two examples could use tte (QUO) after the topic translation, creating similar phrases as in the examples below. fBlR  ot  KLV^  A,t?-f-  tao  Honyaku tte hontooni muzukashii n-desu ne. translation QUO truly difficult ND SFP It's really hard to do translations, isn't it.  fe, SIR o T ^ o i f 19 jzM & LX-T feo A, honyaku tte yappari taihen na n-desu ne. oh, translation QUO certainly a lot of work CPL ND SFP Oh, translations are certainly a lot of work, aren't they. The above sentences provide a clear sense that the speaker empathizes with the hearer's experiences.  100  6.3 Contexts of noda use The use of noda by the J L L s and JNS was divided into the three domains of information status as described i n Chapter Three. Data analysis reveals that Susan and D a v i d mainly used noda with speaker-oriented information (+ Speaker/- Hearer) and less with hearer-oriented (- Speaker/+ Hearer) and shared information (+ SpeakerAf Hearer). The acquisition sequence reveals a similar pattern to that of the role-play data in which the J L L s first learn to use noda with speaker-oriented information, then hearer-oriented and shared information. The J N S used a balanced mixture of functions from the information domains. Table 6.2 shows the number o f noda used during the course of the case study (9 sessions for the J L L s and 3 sessions for the J N S ) . The percentages represent the frequency of noda use in each domain according to each person.  Speaker-oriented (+S/-H)  Hearer-oriented (-S/+H)  Shared information Total use of noda (+S/+H)  Susan  34/816 (4.2%)  6/816  (0.7%)  2/816  (0.2%)  42/816 (5.1%)  David  39/866 (4.5%)  18/866 (2.1%)  6/866  (0.7%)  63/866 (7.3%)  JNS 1  32/330 (9.7%)  24/330 (7.3%)  31/330 (9.4%)  87/330 (26.4%)  (total noda use/total number of clausal unit)  Table 6.2 Contexts of noda use in case study  Susan and David used noda most frequently to relay information that the hearer did not know (+ Speaker/- Hearer) to give explanations and create rapport.  Similar to the  role-plays, it is natural that the J L L s would first acquire the use of noda to relay speaker-oriented  101 messages, because the fundamental methods of communication are to express one's own ideas and thoughts to an audience. For example, when discussing about travelling, Susan describes an aboriginal community in Taiwan to David. (13)  0 * M ft /o-vt «t„ Minna nihongo mo joozu na n-desu yo. Everyone Japanese also skilled C P L N D SFP Everyone is also good at speaking Japanese (you know). ^ f t  She creates a sense of rapport in sharing information she has knowledge of, while also explaining about the tribe to David. While the J L L s used noda most frequently with speakeroriented information (4.2% and 4.5%), the frequency still did not reach half of the native speaker's use (9.7%). One difficulty the J L L s faced in using noda to convey information was in combining it with various sentence-final particles. Goto (1998) highlights J L L s ' difficulty i n using appropriate combinations of noda and sentence-final particles and calls for detailed studies. For example, David points out the confusion in choosing the correct combination: I guess the most confusing part of n-desu is the distinction between n-desu ne and n-desu yone. I often find it extremely difficult to distinguish between the two. It.appears to me that there seem to be many cases where both are fine. In the case study conversations, Susan and D a v i d often repeated their utterances, trying out different combinations of noda with sentence-final particles. (14)  0 *  co,  0 *  Nihon  no  nihon  Japan  G E N Japan  iz,  ov^T  ni  tsuite  D A T about  mULTV^ hXT, honyakushi-teim n-desu  iru  v^v^5ft  z\b  &  iroirona  koto  various  things  hXT ta, n-desu ne, im  o ACC  hX-f j ; ta ? n-desu yo ne?  translate-PRG ND PRG ND SFP P R G N D SFP SFP I am translating various things about Japan. <rising intonation>  102 In example (14) Susan explains to David that she has been translating various articles about Japan. She first simply uses n-desu (noda), then repeats the predicate using the sentence-final particles ne and yone. She finally ends with a rising intonation, revealing uncertainty about how to end her sentence. Another feature about the J L L s ' use of noda with speaker-oriented information, is that they sometimes over-generalized its use with expressions of thoughts and emotions: (15)  Xft^tc  Yoka-tta  A,X"to  n-desu.  good-PRF N D It was good you know.  Yahari  -  sugoku omoshiro-katta, katta  n-desu ne.  certainly very interesting-PRF P R F N D It was very interesting as expected you know.  SFP.  In both examples, D a v i d expresses his emotional responses to different experiences. In the first, he finds his research project rewarding and educational, and in the second, the animation film he watched interesting. JNSs normally use a more neutral tone without noda when talking about personal thoughts and emotions. The use of noda as sharing o f information carries an overtone of desiring the hearer to share similar opinions and feelings with the speaker; in such contexts its use may be construed as forcing opinions on the hearer, and is generally avoided. Therefore, the examples in (15) and (16) should not include noda. Areas such as personal thought and emotion may need special attention when teaching J L L s about  noda. The J L L s at times were successful in using noda in the second domain of hearer-oriented information ( - Speaker/-!- Hearer).  A s language learners develop proficiency, they are  103 increasingly able to ask questions o f others and to take wider perspectives i n viewing information. The J L L s in the case study sometimes asked questions with noda to demonstrate interest and involvement with the hearer:  (17)  }£ht£  tm  &  muLtc  hx-f  Donna kiji o honyakushi-ta what kind article A C C translate-PRF What kind of articles did you translate?  n-desu ka? ND Q  When Susan discusses about writing translations in a Japanese class, David asks the question in example (17) to convey his interest i n Susan's answer. Noda establishes the sense, "I really would like to know". When Susan gives a general answer that the articles concerned various topics about Japan, D a v i d presses for more information, asking the question i n example (18). (18)  0* tc ov>T b <D f i Nihon ni tsuite to iu no wa Japan D A T about Q U O say N M R T O P What kinds of things is it when you say 'about  <!fA,ft zb ft donna koto na what kind thing C P L Japan'?  AjX-t tfl n-desu ka? ND Q  In example (18) David asks Susan for additional explanation. Susan recognizes the cue and responds by giving more detailed descriptions of her translation assignments. The J N S in the case study frequently asked questions about the J L L s using noda, especially i n the first session when they were first introduced to each other. The final area o f noda use, shared information, was the lowest o f the three for both Susan and David. They used noda to emphasize already shared information: (19)  fcoT &ik fi &<D fN> Datte taipei w a ano toshin because Taipei T O P um city Taipei is a metropolitan city s o . . .  ft hXt frb. na n-desu kara, C P L N D so,  104 In example (19) D a v i d emphasizes that because Taipei is such a metropolitan city, other places in comparison are more suburban. The JNS in the case study often asked for information from the J L L s , repeated it for confirmation and gave back-channel cues, creating a sense o f interest and empathy. The balanced use of noda by the JNS over the three domains represent the key features o f relaying and asking for information, and highlighting the sharing o f information to establish the common ground.  6.4 Interlanguage pragmatics This study suggests that, while J L L s may be aware of features of language such as the occurrence o f noda i n Japanese conversations, awareness is not enough to shift their interlanguage.  Schmidt (1990) outlines six influences on noticing: frequency, salience,  instruction, processing ability, readiness, and task demands. Skehan (1998) explains, Instruction can work in a more complex way by making Salient the less obvious aspects of the input, so that it is the learner who does the extraction and focusing, but as a function of how he or she has been prepared... . The consequence of Schmidt receiving instruction was that what had been unstructured, undifferentiated input (but whose nonunderstanding had not impeded comprehension very much in the past) became noticeable and analysable, leading to future progress, (p.49) It is also difficult for J L L s to pick out discourse features of language when they are given whole contexts of extended discourse. It is simpler for them to notice obvious grammatical mistakes, like lexical items and verb inflections, rather than discourse features like noda, especially i f the feature does not affect the content of the proposition. In the case of features like noda where an equivalent form does not exist in English, explicit instructions are necessary.  105 In his influential work on consciousness in pragmatic learning, Schmidt (1993) states that language learners need to be attentive to linguistic forms, functional meanings, and relevant contextual features.  Furthermore, Schmidt (1993) advocates explicit teaching o f  pragmatic knowledge using a consciousness-raising approach. W h i l e this case study does not find an increase o f J L L s ' use of noda in the post-test, the J L L s d i d use noda more frequently during the explicit learning stage. The J L L s also indicated that it is useful to hear example sentences and explanations of functions. The case study of Susan and David suggests that while learning about noda may be difficult, explicit instruction on its use and practice conversation do help J L L s use noda i n conversation. The J L L s used noda most frequently with speaker-oriented information, and less frequently with hearer-oriented and shared information. A t the conclusion of the research the J L L s remarked that they felt more confident in using noda, but still not quite familiar with its use because they had just started using it. In their journals, the J L L s reflected that possible ways to help them use noda naturally were to practice its use more i n conversation and to listen to conversations between JNSs.  106 C h a p t e r Seven Conclusion  This chapter summarizes the functions and contexts of noda use and their acquisition by Japanese Language Learners (JLLs). It also examines pedagogical implications for teaching noda in the Japanese language classroom. Finally, it highlights the limitations of this thesis and poses directions for future research in the area of noda.  7.1 Functions a n d contexts o f noda use A s discussed in Section 2.2.1, noda has two major functions:  scope and mood.  Noda of scope asserts information as accurate or inaccurate. Its negative form, " . . . n-ja-naiV may also be used as a tag question to pose the validity for what the speaker believes to be true. Both Japanese Native Speakers (JNSs) and J L L s used noda of mood more frequently than that of scope. Since the uses of noda of mood vary widely, this thesis poses a framework of information status to provide a guideline in understanding the functions of noda o f mood. The uses of noda of mood essentially reveal a speaker's subjective overtone that he has a strong desire for the information in the preceding proposition to be shared between speaker and hearer. Therefore, depending on a speaker or hearer's knowledge status, noda of mood can add overtones such as explaining, creating rapport and emphasizing to the utterance. In the role-plays, the JNSs most often used noda to offer and seek explanations. These uses of noda are natural when we take into account that the nature of the O P I role-plays was to explain situations in order to resolve problems. It is noteworthy that the JNSs used  107 noda not in isolation but mostly with conjunctions such as kedo (and/but) and ga (and/but) and sentence-final particles such as ne and yone. One possible interpretation of the addition of these conjunctions and particles is that they work to diminish the directness of the utterances, and hence act as politeness strategies. The JNSs also used noda to emphasize information and provide back-channelling to the hearers. Moreover, i n their use of noda the JNSs used a variety of intonation patterns to add emotive overtones to their utterances. Through the use of noda, a speaker signals to a hearer how he would like information to be perceived. The hearer interprets this overtone and is able to respond accordingly. The use of noda provides a common ground from which speakers and hearers can extend their conversations with an understanding of where each stands in relation to the other. The analyses i n this study point to two key features in noda use: 1) how the speaker perceives the status of information at the time of utterance (+/- knowledge of information by Speaker and Hearer); and 2) whether or not the speaker believes that the information should be shared between the speaker and hearer. The various nuances o f noda and the contexts o f their use can be better understood by taking these two features into account.  7.2 J L L s ' acquisition o f noda There are four main implications from the analyses of the role-plays and case studies. First, J L L s increasingly use noda as their language proficiency develops.  Second, J L L s  progress through stages of acquisition of noda, using it first with speaker-oriented information (+ Speaker/- Hearer), next with hearer-oriented information (- Speaker/-i- Hearer), and finally with shared information (+ Speaker/-!- Hearer). Third, the J L L s in the case study used noda  108 during focused practice but avoided using noda during the post-test, pointing to variability in its use through language development and influence o f task types. Finally, acquisition o f noda, like language learning i n general, requires time. Sakakibara (1998) points out that noda marks how a speaker wishes information to be perceived by the hearer without changing the content o f the proposition. F o r language learners this is a difficult area to master because such conversation management strategies require sophistication of language use beyond the basic proficiency of conveying information. Lower-level J L L s may be more concerned with fundamental language features such as selecting the correct lexical item, particle, and verb tense, than how to convey messages to the hearers. A s J L L s develop their Japanese language skills, their noda use becomes closer to the target use. The J L L s ' O P I language proficiency correlated with their use o f noda; the acquisition o f noda was complete by the time J L L s reached the superior-level. Intermediate-level J L L s predominantly used noda to relay information they knew to the hearer in the form o f giving explanations and creating rapport. The focus on self reflects the basic use o f language to communicate one's ideas to an audience. A t the advanced-stage, J L L s increasingly used noda with hearer-oriented information to seek explanations and show involvement i n the hearer. The ability to ask questions o f the hearer reveals an advanced skill of adopting a wider perspective. A t the superior-stage, the J L L and JNSs used noda with a variety o f speaker-oriented, hearer-oriented, and shared information features. The relatively balanced mixture o f relaying information, seeking information, and confirming shared knowledge highlight the main function of noda to negotiate the common ground between the speaker and hearer.  109 W h i l e the J L L s in the case study had known that NJSs used noda frequently i n conversations, they did not pay attention to the meaning and function of noda. With explicit instruction and practice the J L L s began to use noda in their practice conversations; however, during the post-test open conversation, they avoided its use. Tarone (1983) proposes a range of language use, from the careful style elicited by grammaticality judgements, to the vernacular style of natural conversations. The differences between the explicit teaching stage and the post-test may confirm differences between conversation practices focusing on the use o f noda and natural conversation focusing on the messages the speakers wish to convey. Learning noda requires a long-term cycle of awareness, explanation and practice, and hence, short isolated instruction sessions may be insufficient for acquisition. Ellis (1985) points out the variability in interlanguage, explaining that language learning is dynamic and not linear. According to E l l i s , language learners continually engage various language forms, mapping form to functions in a slow process that involves a constant restructuring of the interlanguage system (1985: 95-96). Thus, Japanese language classrooms can introduce noda at the introductory levels and continue to provide explanation and opportunity for practice so that J L L s become accustomed to using noda in their conversations.  7.3 Pedagogical implications This section outlines the implications of teaching noda in Japanese language classrooms. The first section examines traditional accounts of noda i n textbooks, and the second section provides suggestions i n teaching noda.  110 7.3.1  Treatment of noda i n textbooks Textbooks provide various contexts in which to practice noda; however, most cite  only two of its functions as listed in Table 6.1:  'giving explanations and reasons', and  'making requests by explaining what the speaker wants done'.  (la)  (lb)  to Doo  Ltc hXir tf? shi-ta n-desu ka?  how d o - P R F N D "What's wrong?"  Q  Z\<D %m Kono eigo  frfrbft^ wakara-nai  tf ga  ' AsX"to n-desu.  this English N O M understand-NEG N D "I don't understand this English."  {Japanese in Modules 2: 51) For example, the speaker in (la) notices his friend looking puzzled and requests an explanation, to which the friend responds that he does not understand the meaning of an English word, and therefore needs help. The second use cited in textbooks is to give background information.  (2)  £  $y-~v>f  K  [iib-nsL^ A,XT tf\  Kono shatsu o  co  i/^y.  kuriiningu  ni  dashite-hoshii n-desu ga,  this shirt A C C dry-cleaning L O C send-want " I ' d like this shirt sent out to the dry-cleaners, but. . ."  ND  and/but  (Japanese in Modules 3: 20) In example (2) the speaker gives his shirt to the hotel staff, explaining his desire to have the shirt sent out to the drycleaners . While the examples and exercises introduce students to 1  some contexts, they do not expose students to the wide range of noda use in conversation such as in creating rapport, emphasizing information, and persuading. Teachers need to supplement textbooks by providing further contexts and explanations of noda.  'Takahashi (1996) studies the pragmatic transferability of requests between Japanese and English using the forms "would like" V-te itadaki-tai-n-desu-kedo and "want" V-te hoshii-n-desu-kedo.  Ill ^ ^ ^ I n t r o d u c t i o n ^ ^ ^ o T e x t b o o k ^ ^ ^ C h a p t e r  Bunka Shokyu Nihongo  Explanation f noda  -explaining -making requests  • M y stomach hurts. • I'd like to use the video machine. . .  -explaining -giving reasons  • Would you like to go to a movie? I'm going to the beach.  -explaining -justifying  • Do you like sushi? Yes I do.  16, 22, 36 Japanese for College Students  Major example sentences (English translation)  Major example sentences  8, 30 Japanese for Everyone 6 Japanese in Modules  -explaining -giving reasons -making requests  • What's wrong? I don't understand this English. • I'd like this shirt sent to dry cleaning . .  -explaining  • What are you doing? • I'm going to play cards tonight.  -explaining -requesting a confirmation  • Are you going home? • W h y didn't you come yesterday?  n/a  • The pool is on the other side, right? • It is not convenient then.  8, 10, 11, 13, 15 Kimono 3 4,9 Nakama 7, 11 Pera Pera (Yoroshiku) Special Interest Speak Japanese 2 2 Yookoso 4, 14  -explaining -adding personal feeling  • W h y aren't you going to school? • I really want to see my friend.  -explaining • What are you doing? -giving reasons • You're not going to -questioning with class? (rising/falling assumptions intonation)  • m\  ^5ft/^f-o  • if 5  V±&Trti>\  • if 5 LT£<£> 5515ft  to • if 5 L T ¥ * M f  ^ft^  X-to •  ^ x ^ x ^ ^ ^ o ft ? (rising/falling intonation)  Table 7.1 Introduction of noda in Japanese textbooks  112 In some cases, textbooks include uses of noda without explanations. For example, the following use is to emphasize information and seek confirmation:  (3)  f-)V It Puuru wa  %<D tt/uft^ &t> K sono hantai gawa ni  hZ> hXlr Uo aru n-desu ne.  pool T O P that opposite side L O C exist N D SFP The pool is on the opposite side of that (water fountain) right?  (Pera Pera: 12) In example (3) the speaker repeats directions to the pool previously given by the hearer. When noda is used in situations other than 'explaining', teachers should pay special attention to point out the different functions to the students. Another area i n the study o f noda is the use of correct intonation patterns. F o r example, Yookoso (1994: 254) describes the use of rising and falling intonations in negative questions with noda in example (4). (4)  $7 7s  ^  Kurasu e  fxfrti^  A/Trf" fro  ika-nai  n-desu ka.  class L O C go-NEG N D Y o u ' r e not going to class?  Q  (Yookoso 1994: 254) In example (4) the speaker assumes that the hearer w i l l go to class by using a rising intonation, and that the hearer w i l l not go with a falling intonation. Building on information available i n textbooks and other resources, teachers should provide guidance on different uses o f noda with appropriate intonations. Ancilliary audio materials such as cassette tapes and C D s w i l l also provide students with opportunities to listen to correct intonation patterns.  113  7.3.2 Suggestions for instruction In the language classrooms, teachers should provide opportunities for J L L s to notice the various functions of noda, listen to authentic conversations which include noda, and to practice using noda i n conversations. A s stated in the previous section, it is important for J L L s to learn the various functions of noda, not just that of 'explanation'. Teachers can explain the functions of noda using frameworks such as the information framework suggested in Chapter T w o or grammar books such as M c G l o i n (1989) or Tips for improving your Japanese (1989). T o extend J L L s ' awareness of noda, teachers should also give examples with various intonations and overtones. Sakakibara (1998) suggests for language teachers to explain fundamental characteristics o f noda so that J L L s can themselves infer various conversational effects according to the different linguistic and socio-cultural contexts. H e r proposal of class and group discussions on contexts of noda use w i l l also be beneficial for students to build awareness. Language classrooms can incorporate the listening of authentic dialogues o f J N S conversations. Teachers can focus students' attentions to the various uses of noda so that they understand the contexts of its use. Under Krashen's (1982) proposal o f exposing students to 'comprehensible input' students can be provided language which is challenging yet comprehensible through context and extralinguistic cues. Unless J L L s are exposed to natural language incorporating the use of noda and conditioned to notice its use, they w i l l ignore its use like the J L L s did at the beginning of the case study. Similar to the concept of 'comprehensible input', Swain's (1985) 'comprehensible output hypothesis' proposes that "negotiation of meaning needs to incorporate the notion of  114 being pushed toward the delivery of a message that is not only conveyed, but that is conveyed precisely, coherently and appropriately" (1985: 249). Moreover, conversation practice for the J L L s should be made a part of classroom routine so that they have opportunities for extended discourse, outside of short question and answer sessions i n which noda is hardly used.  F o r J L L s to be able to use noda effectively, they w i l l also need practice i n using  various combinations of noda with conjunctions and interactional particles. It may also be beneficial for teachers to provide corrective feedback and encouragement during the practice conversation sessions. When the J L L s internalize the various functions of noda, they w i l l have a better understanding of the discourse effects and power noda carries i n conversation.  7.4 Limitations This section describes the main limitations of this thesis. First, the analyses of the role-plays were limited to general observations and categorizations. Detailed analyses of the contexts in which J L L s used noda appropriately and inappropriately would better illuminate the J L L s ' acquisition of noda. A s well, investigations into contexts of obligatory and optional noda uses would have been useful. Moreoever, in the present study, the role-play participants 2  represented mostly intermediate level J L L s . A larger number of advanced and superior-level J L L s would have provided a more balanced picture o f the J L L s ' acquisition o f noda. Furthermore, the J L L s may have been inhibited to an extent by the format for the role-plays: taped interview conversations with JNSs they considered their teachers.  It may have been  helpful to conduct role-plays with peers and to compare the language used in the conversations. Obligatory use would be when the J N S s coded the non-noda option a s incorrect and the noda option a s correct. I n optional use, both the non-noda and noda options would be correct.  115 Secondly, in the case study of David and Susan, a longer research period would have revealed more about their acquisition process of noda. The explicit instruction sessions could also have been more structured to include timed sections on explanation, discussion, practice and free conversation. A detailed analysis of the conversations as suggested for role-plays w o u l d also have better indicated the J L L s ' incorporation of noda into their interlanguage.  T o provide more opportunities for authentic communication, the explicit  instruction sessions could also have included conversation times with JNSs. Finally, the explanations of the functions and structure of noda in this thesis are limited in the uses they cover. For example, the information framework proposed in Chapter Three could be expanded to represent more functions of noda through further examination of generative data based on minimal pairs and corpus data. The study focused on conversations between people and did not highlight Noda's (1997) explanation of situational mood. The relationships between various functions and phrases (such as emphasis through n-desu kara or backgrounding with n-desu kedo/ga) also was not fully explored.  7.5 F u r t h e r Studies This research revealed that Japanese native speakers often use noda with conjunctions and sentence-final particles. Further research in the functions of various combinations is needed to allow Japanese language learners to understand how to use noda appropriately. Moreover, the effects of noda vary with the intonation placed on the sentences. For example, a simple question with noda may show emotive overtones of surprise, envy, disapproval, etc. Future studies in the phonological features of noda use w i l l also aid J L L s in using noda.  116 The structure of the Japanese modal system remains unclear and an area for much research. The field needs systematic analyses of distributional data and relationships between the modals. Noda needs to be situated among other sentence predicates within a general structural framework. Negative and tense marking on modals can also be compared to how noda mark those features.  Because the discourse features of noda do not seem to fall under  the structure itself, research i n the interface between syntax and phonology is needed to determine the exact nature of the discourse marking on noda. The teachability o f noda and learner backgrounds are two areas requiring further study. Schmidt's (1993) proposal of explicit pragmatic teaching needs more empirical research, especially in contexts of foreign language classrooms. Whether instruction o f noda directly affects acquisition w i l l be shown through longer longitudinal studies and follow-up researches. Furthermore, studies can take into account the backgrounds and contexts of Japanese language use.  The advanced and superior-level J L L s i n this study either had parents who spoke  Japanese or had lived in Japan for several years. In some cases through friends, room-sharing or exchange opportunities, J L L s also had had exposure to Japanese outside the language classroom. H o w various backgrounds and contexts affect the learning o f noda would also aid i n understanding the acquisition process of noda. This thesis examined the characteristics of noda i n Japanese discourse. The study also analyzed the use of noda by J L L s in role-plays, as well as the longitudinal case study of two students, D a v i d and Susan, in their developing use of noda. The varying analyses o f functions for noda point to a need for a generic and concise explanation for J L L s . This study proposed a framework from which J L L s can themselves discover the uses of noda. Further  117 research i n the pedagogy of noda w i l l provide guidance on how to approach their instruction in the language classrooms.  Finally, use of noda can be considered i n relation to other  features such as sentence-final particles, conjunctions, and intonation patterns, to provide indepth analyses of when, how and why noda is used.  118  Data  Sources  Abe Kooboo. 1968. Tanin no kao [The face of another]. Tokyo: Shinchoosha. B e l l o w , Saul. 1944. Dangling man. New York: The Vanguard Press, Inc. M i t a Masahiro. 1991. Ichigo Doomei [Ichigo alliance]. Tokyo: Shueisha. Oota Minoru. 1971. Chuuburarin no otoko (translation of Dangling man). Tokyo: Shinchoosha. Palme, Dominique and K y o k o Sato. 1994. Kitchen (translation of Kicchin). France: Gallimard. Saunders, E . Dale. 1966. The face of another (translation of Tanin no kao). N e w York: G . P. Putnam's Sons. Uchidate M a k i k o . 1993. Hirari [Hirari]. Tokyo: Kodansha. Yoshimoto Banana. 1988. Kicchin [Kitchen]. Tokyo: Fukubu Shoten.  119  Japanese Textbooks E x a m i n e d  Bunka shokyuu nihongo. 1994. Bunka Institute of Language. Tokyo: Bonjinsha. Japanese For College Students. 1996. International Christian University. Tokyo: Kodansha International L t d . Japanese For Everyone. 1990. Susumu Nagara et al. Tokyo: Gakken Company, Ltd. Japanese in Modules. 1993. Tsuyako Coveney, Masahito Takayashiki, and Naoko Honma. Tokyo: A L C Press Inc. Kimono. 1992. Sue Burnham et al. Sydney, Australia: CIS Educational. Nakama. 1998. Seiichi Makino, Y u k i k o Hatasa, and Kazumi Hatasa. New York: Houghton M i f f l i n Company. Speak Japanese. 1990. Hisako Yoshiki and K i y o Saka. Tokyo: Kenkyusha Publishing Company, Ltd. Yookoso! An Invitation to Contemporary Japanese. 1994. Yasu-Hiko Tohsaku. New Y o r k : M c G r a w - H i l l Inc. Yoroshiku: Pera Pera. 1994. National Japanese Curriculum Project. Victoria, Australia: Curriculum Corporation.  120 References  American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. 1986. ACTFL proficiency guidelines. Hastings-on-Hudson, N Y : A C T F L . Alfonso, Anthony. 1966. Japanese language patterns. Tokyo: Sophia University. A o k i , Haruo. 1986. Evidentials in Japanese. Evidentiality: the linguistic coding of epistemology, ed. by Wallace Chafe and Johanna Nichols, 223-238. New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Austin, Theresa. 1998. Cross-cultural pragmatics - building i n analysis of communication across cultures and languages: examples from Japanese. Foreign Language Annals 31.326-341. Bazzanella, Carla. 1990. Phatic connectives as interactional cues in contemporary spoken Italian. Journal of Pragmatics 14.629-647. Bouton, Lawrence, F . 1994. Conversational implicature in the second language: learned slowly when not deliberately taught. Journal of Pragmatics 22.157-167'. Breiner-Sanders, Karen E . , Lizette Mujica Laughlin, Pardee Lowe Jr. and John Miles, (eds.) 1999. ACTFL oral proficiency interview tester training manual. Yonkers, N Y : A C T F L . B r o w n , Penelope and Stephen C . Levinson. 1987. Politeness: some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chafe, Wallace. 1987. Cognitive constraints on information flow. Coherence and grounding in discourse, typological studies in language If  ed. by Russell S. Tomlin. Amsterdam:  John Benjamins Publishing Company. Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads. New York: Oxford University Press.  121 Cook, Haruko Minegishi. 1990. A n indexical account of the Japanese sentence-final particle no. Discourse Processes 13.401-439. Ellis, R o d . 1985. Understanding second language acquistion. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Endo, M . 1986. Supplementary grammar notes to An Introduction to Modern Japanese, Part I. A n n Arbor, Center for Japanese studies, The University of Michigan. Freed, A l i c e , and A l i c e Greenwood. 1996. Women, men, and type of talk: what makes the difference? Language in Society 25.1-26. Fukui, Naoki. 1995. Theory of projection in syntax. Stanford: C S L I Publications. Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of talk. Philadelphia: Univeristy of Pennsylvania Press. Goto, Yasuko. 1998. Japanese interactional particles yo, ne and yone: their functions and acquisition by Japanese language learners. Vancouver, B C : University of British Columbia Masters thesis. Grice, H . P. 1975. Logic and conversation. Syntax and semantics, vol. 3: speech acts, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan, 41-58. New York: Academic Press. Hadley, A l i c e Omaggio. 1993. Teaching language in context 2nd edition. Boston, M A : Heinle & Heinle Publishers. Hamano, Shoko. 1999. Preventing misuse of no desu: the case of overgeneralized no desu-kara. The seventh Princeton Japanese pedagogy workshop proceedings, ed. by Seiichi Makino, 17-27. Huspek, Michael. 1989. Linguistic variability and power: an analysis of Y O U K N O W / I T H I N K variation i n working-class speech. Journal of Pragmatics 13.661-683. Iwai, Tomoko. 2000. Acquisition of the discourse marker n desu by J F L learners. Paper presented at the American Association of Applied Linguistics Conference, Vancouver, B . C .  122 Iwasaki, Shoichi. 1985. Cohesion, nonchallengeability and the -n desu clause in Japanese spoken discourse. Journal of Asian Culture 9.125-142. . 1993. The structure of the intonation unit i n Japanese. Japanese/Korean linguistics 3, ed. by Soonja Choi, 39-53. Stanford: Stanford University Press. James, A l l a n R. 1983. Compromisers in English: a cross-discipoinary approach to their interpersonal significance. Journal of Pragmatics 7.191-206. Jorden, Eleanor. 1963. Beginning Japanese, Part 2. New Haven: Yale University Press. Johnson, Donna. 1992. Approaches to research in second language learning. N e w Y o r k : Longman. Johnson, Y u k i . 1997. Proficiency guidelines and language curriculum: making A C T F L proficiency guidelines effective in furthering Japanese language proficiency. Applied Language Learning 8.261 -284. Jucker, Andreas H . , and Sara W . Smith. 1998. A n d people just you know like ' w o w ' : discourse markers as negotiating strategies. Discourse markers: descriptions and theory, ed. by Andreas H . Jucker and Yael Z i v , 171-201. Philadelphia, P A : John Benjamins Publishing Company. Kamio, A k i o . 1997. Territory of information. Philadelphia, P A : John Benjamins Publishing Company. Krashen, Stephen. 1982. Principles and practice in second language acquisition. N e w York: Pergamon Press. Kunihiro, Tetsuya. 1992. 'Noda' kara 'noni' / 'node' e - 'no' no kyootsuusei [Noda, noni and node - the common features of no]. Nihongokenkyuu to Nihongokyooiku [Japanese research and education], ed. by Quackenbush et al., 9-34. Nagoya, Japan: Nagoya University Press.  123 Kuno, Susumu. 1973. The structure of the Japanese language. Cambridge, M A : M I T Press. Kuroda, S.-Y. 1973. Where epistemology, style, and grammar meet: a case study from Japanese. A Festschrift forMorris Halle, ed. by Stephen R. Anderson and Paul Kiparsky, 377-391. N e w York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Langacker, Ronald W . 1987. Nouns and verbs. Language 63.53-94. Lightbown, Patsy M . and Nina Margaret Spada. 1993. How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press. LoCastro, Virginia. 1997. Pedagogical intervention and pragmatic competence development. Applied'Language Learning 8.75-109. Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Makino, Seiichi. 1991. A C T F L no gaikokugo nooryoku kijun oyobi soreni motozuku kaiwa nooryoku tesuto no rinen to mondai [Ideas and problems related to the A C T F L foreign language proficiency ratings and the oral proficiency interview.] Sekai no Nihongo Kyooiku [Japanese Language Education in the World] 1.15-32. . 1999. Oto to i m i no kankei wa nihongo dewa uenka [Is there a relationship betweeen sound and meaning in Japanese?] Linguistics and Japanese language education, td. by Y u k i k o Sasaki A l a m , 1-32. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan. Makino, Seiichi, and M i c h i o Tsutsui. 1989. A dictionary of basic Japanese grammar. Tokyo: Japan Times. Masuoka, Takashi. 1991. Modaritii no bunpoo [Grammar of modality]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan. Maynard, Senko Kumiya. 1989. Japanese conversation: self-contextualization through structure and interactional management. Norwood, N J : A b l e x Publishing Corporation.  124 . 1990. An introduction to Japanese grammar and communication strategies. Tokyo: The Japan Times. . 1992. Cognitive and pragmatic messages of a syntactic choice: the case of the Japanese commentary predicate n(o)da. 7ejtfl2.563-613. . 1996. Contrastive rhetoric: a case of nominalization in Japanese and English discourse. Language Sciences 18.933-946. . 1997a. Synergistic strategies in grammar: a case of nominalization and commentary predicate in Japanese. Word 48.15-40. . 1997b. Danwa bunseki no kanoosei [The potentiality of discourse analysis]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishers. . 1998. Principles of Japanese discourse: a handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. M c G l o i n , Naomi Hanaoka. 1983. Some politeness strategies in Japanese. Papers in Linguistics, Special issue: Studies in Japanese Language Use, 127-145. . 1989. A students' guide to Japanese grammar. Tokyo: Taishukan Publishing Company. M i k a m i , Akira. 1953. Gendaigohoo josetsu shintakusu no kokoromi [Introduction of modern Japanese grammar]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan. M i o , Isago. 1948. Kokugohoo bunshooron [Discourse studies of Japanese]. Tokyo: Sanseidoo. The National Language Research Institute Centre for Teaching of Japanese as a Foreign Language. 1989. Tips for improving your Japanese. Tokyo: Bonjinsha. Nitta, Yoshio. 1991. Nihongo no modaritii to ninshoo [Modality and person in Japanese]. Tokyo: Hitsuji Shoboo.  125 Noda, Harumi. 1997. 'No(da)' no kinoo [The functions of no(da)]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan. Ohta, Kaoru. 1984. O n the N O D A construction. Proceedings of the Nitobe-Ohira memorial conference on Japanese studies held at the University of British Columbia 23-25 1984, ed. by Matsuo Soga, 124-173. Vancouver: The University of British Columbia. Ostman, Jan-Ola. 1981. You know: a discourse functional approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins B . V . Richards, Jack C , John Piatt and Heidi Piatt. 1997. Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. England: Addison Wesley Longman Limited. R i z z i , L u i g i . 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. Elements of grammar: handbook in generative syntax, ed. by Liliane Haegeman, 281-337. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Saji, Keizoo. 1991. Nihongo no bunpoo no kenkyuu [Study of Japanese grammar]. Tokyo: Hitsuji Shoboo. Sakakibara, Sonoko. 1998. Gricean-pragmatics account of the Japanese sentence final form noda and its preliminary implication on pedagogy. The sixth Princeton Japanese pedagogy workshop proceedings, ed. by Seiichi Makino, 85-102. Salmons, Joe. 1990. Bilingual discourse marking: code switching, borrowing, and convergence in some German-American dialects. Linguistics 28.453-480. Schmidt, Richard. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11.17-46.  126 . 1993. Consciousness, learning and interlanguage pragmatics. Interlanguage pragmatics, ed. by Gabriele Kasper and Shoshana B l u m - K u l k a , 21-42. N e w Y o r k : Oxford University Press. Sebba, Mark, and Shirley Tate. 1986. Y o u know what I mean? Agreement marking in British Black English. Journal of Pragmatics 10.163-172. Skehan, Peter. 1998. A cognitive approach to language learning. N e w York: Oxford University Press. Sugimoto, Kazuyuki. 1990. ' N o da' no shujusoo [Various aspects of 'no da']. Nihongogaku ronsetsu shiryoo [Articles of Japanese studies] 27. 217-214. Sugimura, Hirofumi. 1982. ' S h i . . .de' - Chuugokugo no 'noda' no bun ['Shi. . . de' - the 'noda' sentence in Chinese]. Kooza nihongogaku [Japanese linguistics] V o l . 12, ed. by Kenji Morioka et al., 155-172. Tokyo: Meiji Shoin. Swain, M e r r i l l . 1985. Communicative competence: some roles of comprehensive input and comprehensible output in its development. Input in second language acquisition, ed. by Susan Gass and C . Madden, 235-253. Rowley, M A : Newbury House. Takahashi, Satbmi. 1996. Pragmatic transferability. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18.189-223. Takahashi, Shino. 1999. Descriptive generalizations of modal elements in Japanese. Vancouver, B C : University of British Columbia comprehensive exam. Tannen, Deborah. 1982. The oral/literate continuum in discourse. Spoken and written language: exploring orality and literacy, ed. by Deborah Tannen, 1-16. Norwood, N J : Ablex Publishing Corporation. Tanomura, Tadaharu. 1990. Gendai nihongo no bunpoo 1 "No da" no imi to yoohoo [Modern Japanese grammar 1: the meaning and use of "no da"]. Tokyo: Izumi Shoin.  127 Tarone, Elaine: 1983. On the variability of interlanguage systems. Applied Linguistics 4.143-163. Tateishi, K o i c h i . 1990. The s-structure syntax of the subject and 's-adjunctions'. Amherst, M A : University of Massachusetts dissertation. Tokieda, M o t o k i . 1950. Nihonbunpoo koogohen [Grammar of oral Japanese]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. Uechi, A k i h i k o . 1998. A n interface approach to topic/focus structure. Vancouver, B C : University of British Columbia dissertation. Watts, Richard J. 1989. Taking the pitcher to the ' w e l l ' : native speakers' perception of their use of discourse markers in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 13.203-237. Y o s h i m i , Dina Rudolph, forthcoming. Explicit instruction and J F L learners' use of interactional discourse markers in extended telling. Pragmatics in language learning, ed. by Kenneth R. Rose and Gabriele Kasper. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  128  Appendix A Categorization of modals  Japanese  la  Deontic S-Mod obligation prohibition permission  lb  2c  Epistemic S-Mod evidentials  Discourse S-Mod politeness  3b  ik-e ik-oo  Go! Let's go  iku-nichigainai iku-hazuda iku-kamoshirenai  w i l l go should be going might go  iku-yooda iku-rashii iki-sooda iku-sooda  appears to be going seems to be going looks to be going heard to be going  iku-daroo iku-mai  probably w i l l go probably w i l l not go  iki-masu  w i l l go  iku-ne iku-yo, etc.  w i l l go, right? w i l l go  Epistemic P-Mod probability  3a  must go must go should go must not go may need not go  Epistemic S-Mod certainty expectation possibility  2b  ika-nakerebanaranai/ikenai ika-nakutewanaranai/ikenai iku-bekida it-tew anaranai/ikenai it-temoii ika-nakutemoii  Deontic P-Mod imperative volition  2a  English  Discourse P-Mod sentence final particles  (based on Takahashi 1999: 5)  129 Appendix B Distribution of noda of scope (negative)  la Deontic S-Mod  (la) V Jon ga  nihon e  (lb) ?? Jon  nihon e  [4a]  [4b]  l b Deontic P-Mod  it-temoii nodewanai.  John NOM Japan LOC go-may ND-NEG It is not that John may go to Japan. ga  iku-nodewanaku temoii.  John NOM Japan LOC go-ND-NEG may/it is OK It is OK that it is not that John is going to Japan.  (2a) * nihon e  ik-e nodewanai!  Japan LOC IMP ND-NEG (2b) * nihon e  iku-nodewanai e!  Japan LOC go-ND-NEG IMP 2a Epistemic S-Mod  (3a) % Jon  ga  nihon e  iku-kamoshirenai nodewanai.  (3b) V Jon ga  nihon e  iku-nodewanai kamoshirenai.  (4a) % Jon  ga  nihon e  iki-soona nodewanai.  (4b) V Jon  ga  nihon e  iku-nodewanasa sooda.  (5a) * Jon  ga  [8a]  [8b]  2b Evidential S-Mod  [9a]  [9b]  2c Epistemic P-Mod  John NOM Japan LOC go-might It is not that John might go to Japan.  ND-NEG  John NOM Japan LOC go-ND-NEG might It might not be that John is going to Japan. John NOM Japan LOC go-looks ND-NEG It is not that John looks like he is going to Japan.  John NOM Japan LOC go-ND-NEG looks It does not look like John is going to Japan. nihon e  iku-daroo nodewanai.  John NOM Japan LOC go-probably ND-NEG (5b) V Jon  ga  nihon  (6a) * Jon  ga  nihon  e  iku-nodewanai daroo.  e  iki-masu nodewanai.  John NOM Japan LOC go-ND-NEG probably "It is probably not that John is going to Japan."  3a Discourse S-Mod  John NOM Japan  LOC go-polite  (6b) V Jon  ga  nihon  e  (7a) * Jon  ga  nihon e  ND-NEG  iku-nodewa arimasen.  John NOM Japan LOC go-ND-NEG polite It is not that John is going to Japan.  3b Discourse P-Mod  iku-yone nodewanai.  John NOM Japan LOC go-SFP (7b) V Jon  ga  nihon e  ND-NEG  iku-nodewanai yo ne.  John NOM Japan LOC go-ND-NEG It is not that John is going to Japan, is it?  [number from Grammaticality judgement]  SFP  130  Appendix B Distribution of noda of scope (past) la Deontic S-Mod  (la) ?  Jon ga  nihon e  it-temoii nodatta  John N O M Japan L O C go-may N D - P S T It is not that John may go to Japan.  (lb) * Jon ga  nihon e  iku-nodatta  temoii.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D - P S T may/it is O K It is O K that it is not that John is going to Japan. l b Deontic P-Mod  (2a) * nihon e ik-e nodatta! Japan L O C I M P N D - P S T  (2b) * nihon e  iku-nodatta e!  Japan L O C g o - N D - P S T  2a Epistemic S-Mod  (3a) % Jon ga  nihon e  IMP  iku-kamoshirenai nodatta.  John N O M Japan L O C go-might It is not that John might go to Japan.  (3b) V Jon ga  nihon e  ND-PST  iku-nodatta kamoshirenai.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D - P S T might It might not be that John is going to Japan.  2b Evidential S-Mod  (4a) % Jon  ga  nihon e  iki-soona nodatta.  John N O M Japan L O C go-looks N D - P S T It is not that John looks like he is going to Japan.  (4b) * Jon  ga  nihon e  iku-nodatta  sooda.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D - P S T looks It does not look like John is going to Japan.  2c Epistemic P-Mod  (5a) * Jon ga  nihon e  iku-daroo nodatta.  John N O M Japan L O C go-probably N D - P S T  (5b) V Jon ga  nihon e  iku-nodatta daroo.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D - P S T probably "It is probably not that John is going to Japan."  3a Discourse S-Mod  (6a) * Jon  ga  nihon e  John N O M Japan  (6b) V Jon ga  iki-masu nodatta.  L O C go-polite  ND-PST  nihon e iku-nodeshita.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D - P S T polite It is not that John is going to Japan.  3b Discourse P-Mod  (7a) * Jon ga  nihon e  iku-yone nodatta.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - S F P  (7b) V Jon ga  nihon e  ND-PST  iku-n-datta yo ne.  John N O M Japan L O C g o - N D - P S T It is not that John is going to Japan, is it?  SFP  131 Appendix C Distribution of noda of mood  l a Deontic S-Mod  (la) V Jon ga nihon e it-temoii n-da. John N O M Japan L O C go-may N D "It's O K for John to go to Japan." (lb) * Jon ga nihon e iku-n-da temoii. John N O M Japan L O C go-ND may  lb Deontic P-Mod  (2a) * nihon e ik-e n-da! Japan L O C go-IMP N D "Go to Japan!" (2b) * nihon e iku-n-da e! Japan L O C go-ND IMP  2a Epistemic S-Mod  (3a) V Jon ga nihon e iku-kamoshirenai n-da. John N O M Japan L O C go-might ND "John might be going to Japan." (3b) * Jon ga nihon e iku-n-da kamoshirenai. John N O M Japan L O C go-ND might  2b Evidential S-Mod  (4a) V Jon ga nihon e iki-soona n-da. John N O M Japan L O C go-looks N D "John seems to be going to Japan." (4b) * Jon ga nihon e iku-n-? sooda. John N O M Japan L O C go-ND looks  2c Epistemic P-Mod  (5a) * Jon ga nihon e iku-daroo n-da. John N O M Japan L O C go-probably N D "John will go to Japan probably." (5b) * Jon ga nihon e iku-n-da daroo. John N O M Japan L O C go-ND probably  3a Discourse S-Mod  (6a) * Jon ga nihon e iki-masu n-da. John N O M Japan L O C go-polite N D (6b) V Jon ga nihon e iku-n-desu. John N O M Japan L O C go-ND polite "John is going to Japan."  3b Discourse P-Mod  (7a) * Jon ga nihon e iku-yone n-da. John N O M Japan L O C go-SFP N D (7b) V Jon ga nihon e iku-n-da yone. John N O M Japan L O C go-ND SFP "John is going to Japan isn't he."  Appendix D Native speaker grammaticality judgements of noda use (scope) 3';  I•  Coder  *+  5  6  "7 "8,  9  .  ?  ?  10  11  12  .  ?  V  ?  *  V  *  *  13  14  17  18  ?  ?  .  ?  ?  V  ?  ?  V  ?  ?  V  ?  ?  V  |5  16  *  ;  M o d a l Categories  I l i l M  <Nn  V  DS  o b l i g a t i o n  <ND  V  *  [3a]  DS  p r o h l b i t l o n  <ND  V  *  [4a]  DS  p  e  r  m  i  s  s  i  o  n  <ND  V  V  [5a]  DS  p  e  r  m  i  s  s  i  o  n  <ND  V  V  [lb|  N D < L) S „ , , ,  L2bj  N D ' f D  13b]  N D < D S ,  [4b]  N D <,D S  \5b]  ND<pS  [6a]  EpS  c e r t a i n l y  [7a]  EpS  e x p e c t a t i o n  [8a]  EpS  M«l  DS  [2a]  „,  o b l l  h  S  *  V  < N D  |7b|  ND<IZpS \ D < L  S _,  l^'l  I-PS  [%]  N D < Ep S  l l L n l  i  n  l  p  V  V  V  ?  ?  V  V  V  V  V  ?  V  V  ?  V  V  V  v.  V  ?  V  *  ?  b ] l i l >  „,<ND r t l l l e n l l d l  *  *  *  *  III  *  -j: i l l  ?  V  *  *  ?  ?  V  *  *  ?  *  \  *  ?  ?  ?  V  ?  ?  V  ?  *  V  •)  9  V  9  M.  9  "V, |N  V  *  *  ?  V.  V  A/.  V  V  *  V  V  ?  *  V  V  V  V  V V  [11a]  D S < N D < E p S  [12a]  D S < N D < E p S  [I0b|  1) s .- | p s .- M )  [llb|  DS<I:pS<ND  V  [I2b|  D S < l - p S < N D  V  ^ .  *' •fi  Ep=Epistemic  ill ill  .i  *  *  *  *  WSB  iHi  * Ijpjf  •*  * *  *  ?  ?  *  ?  *  ?  *  ?  *  ?  *  ?  ?  V  *  *  *  *  •)  V V  *  9  V  *9  V  V  9  V  •\  llj  9  V  \  ?  *  ?  ?  *  ill  V  v..  \ \  V  9  V  ?  V  *  ?  V': i l l  ipl 9  j  V  111  ?  *  V  V  \  H  V  ?  ?  V  V  V  V  V  V  V  V  ?  ?  V  V  ?  V  V  A/  V  V  V  V  ?  *  ?  V  V  ')  '•'<  V-  9  •>  fy  ?  ?  •/<  \  '1  *  '  * *  •N  V  *  *  B |  ?  ">  *  ?  V  ?  *  * 111i m * Sill . * *  ?  D S < N D < E p S  V  *  *  *  [10a]  D=Deontic  V  V  i  y  e % p x I d I 1 1 1 I I  [8b |  P  s  ?  llll  ,  < N D  M  *  111  < N D  S  ?  *  p e r n i j s s l 0 1 1  N I X E  V  *  „„„„  |6b|  ?  *  o b l i g a t i o n  p 0 S S l b i l i t y  ?  111  M I ] ( i n  p c r m i s  P  V  •)  9  3j:  )  •)  •>  ••>  ND=noda p r e d i c a t e  ?  ?  5?  >••  \  \  *9  \  S=Secondary  (Sentences u s e d i n the g r a m m a t i c a l i t y j u d g e m e n t are listed i n A p p e n d i x E )  *  133  Appendix E Sentences used in the grammaticality judgements (noda of scope negative) [la]  ika-nakerebanaranai nodewanai go D S - M o d  [2a]  iku-bekina go D S - M o d  [3a]  it-temoii ..  ika-nakutemoii go D S - M o d  [6a]  iku-nichigainai  [10a]  [10b]  [lib]  nodewanai  ND-NEG  possibility  [5b]  [6b]  nodewanai ND-NEG  evidential  [8b]  ND-NEG  iki-soona  DS-Mod  [9b]  ND-NEG  iku-nodewanai  bekida  go  DS-Mod  ND-NEG  iku-nodewanaku ND-NEG  iku-nodewanaku ND-NEG  p0SSlbility  Ep S-Mod  iku-nodewanai  hazuda  go  Ep S - M o d  ND-NEG  kamoshirenai Ep S-Mod  ND-NEG  iku-nodewanasa  sooda  go  Ep S-Mod  ND-NEG  possibllity  ND-NEG  hazuda  ika-nakerebanaranai hazuna  nodewanai  iku-bekina obligation  iku-beki go D S - M o d  expectation  ND-NEG  nodewanai  kamoshirenai  ND-NEG  Ep S - M o d  kamoshirenai obligation  Ep S - M o d  possibility  expectation  go  Ep S-Mod  expectation  certainty  iku-nodewanai  ND-NEG  obligation  p e m i s s l o n  nichigainai  ND-NEG  ika-nakerebanaranai nodewanai  Ep S - M o d  permission  iku-nodewanai  go D S - M o d  ob]igation  temoii D S-Mod  go  ika-nakerebanaranai kamoshirenai nodewanai Ep S - M o d  prohibition  D S-Mod  Ep S - M o d  obligatlon  tewanaranai • D S-Mod  nakutemoii  ND-NEG  kamoshirenai  ND-NEG  o b l i g a t i o n  iku-nodewanara  ika-nakerebanaranai nodewanai ob]igation  o b l i g a t i o n  go  go D S - M o d  go D S - M o d [12b]  nodewanai  expectation  nakerebanaranai  go  go E p S - M o d  go D S - M o d [12a]  [4b]  ND-NEG  iku-kamoshirenai nodewanai  go D S - M o d [11a]  nodewanai  ND-NEG  iku-nodewanara go  go  nodewanai [7b]  go E p S - M o d [9a]  ND-NEG  certainty  iku-hazuna go E p S - M o d  [8a]  [2b]  ND-NEG  ND-NEG  go E p S - M o d [7a]  [lb]  nodewanai [3b]  prohibition  go D S - M o d [5a]  ND-NEG  nodewanai obligation  it-tewanarani go D S - M o d  [4a]  ob]igation  possibility  nodewa ND-NEG  possibility  evidentiaI  134  Appendix F Backgrounds of Japanese Language Learner (JLL) participants JLL #  Sex  Native Language  Language Spoken at Home  Period of Japanese Study  Period of Stay in Japan  Parents speak Japanese  OPI Rating*  1  F  Man/Cant.  Man/Cant.  2 years  None  No  I-L  2  M  English  English  3 years  7 months  No  I-M  3  M  Korean  English  4 years  None  No  I-M  4  F  Cantonese  Cantonese  3 years  None  No  I-M  5  F  Eng/C/M  Eng/C/M  3 years  2 months  No  I-M  6  M  Mandarin  Mandarin  3 years  1 week  Yes  I-M  7  M  n/a  n/a  n/a  n/a  Yes  I-M  8  F  Gujarati  Guj./Eng.  7 years  None  No  I-M  9  F  Eng./Can.  Eng./Can.  7 years  None  No  I-M  10  F  Cantonese  Cantonese  4 years  10 days  No  I-M  11  M  Mandarin  Mandarin  2 years  1 week  No  I-M  12  F  Cantonese  Eng./Can.  3 years  None  No  I-M  13  F  Cantonese  Cantonese  5 years  1 week  No  I-M  14  F  Korean  Korean  4 years  6 months  No  I-H  15  F  Mandarin  Mandarin  4 years  10 days  No  I-H  16  F  n/a  n/a  n/a  n/a  n/a  I-H  17  F  Cantonese  Cantonese  3 years  None  No  I-H  18  F  English  English  5 years  1.5 years  No  I-H  19  F  Mandarin  Mandarin  5 years  None  No  I-H  20  M  n/a  n/a  n/a  n/a  n/a  A-L  21  M  English  Japanese  14 years  2 months  Yes  A-L  22  M  English  English  2 years  1 month  Yes  A-H  23  M  English  English  5 years  1 month  Yes  A-H  24  F  Cantonese  Cantonese  3 years  4 years  Yes  S  *OPI ratings n/a  I=Intermediate L=Low information not available  A=Advanced M=Mid  S=Superior H=High  Appendix G Backgrounds of Japanese Native Speaker (JNS) participants  Sex  Visa status  Length of stay in Canada  Birth place (Prefecture)  1  F  graduate student  8 months  Shizuoka  2  F  graduate student  5 years  Nagano  3  F  visitor  1 month  Tochigi  4  M  English language student  2 months  Aomori  136 Appendix H Transcriptions of role-plays  J L L utterance  coding of J L L utterance  a  minimal pair options  IT correct choice based on J N S judgement  Sample transcriptions (examples 3-5 from Chapter Four)  (C) Correct use of noda  (I) Incorrect use of noda  (R) Recommended use  of noda  (C)  A *9 tc^AsX"i~1r?}f  (I)  4  (R)  5  a  ©  ^•.tlXL-t.^tch-Vi'  137 JLL  1  Interviewer  Student Y o u are returning to your country tomorrow. Y o u have a lot of luggage. A s k your superior to take you to the airport by car. m\  (C) 1  fri  ibX-ot^sm^fth^AsXir^  a  ^fiHJB£-£-HonBKonKfz:4§!9£1-„  (R) 2 b  x,  (ttvo x -  jb—tfr-intAso  ^»§JfBOTiz:*§3A,-et.  t'ft'O^A.o ?  Z 5  Xi-Uo x x o () x o i - l f f c ^ - i t t , %\i, & o  f T ^ t ^ ^ o  if 5 L T . S R l i l T O ^ & 5 3 ^ e > , x.— i:—/JN;I|^A^Oific, 0 ttv\  t>frV).tnt/u.  & -  JLL  138  2  Interviewer  Student Y o u need to take days off during an extremely busy period at work. Explain it to your boss.  (ny,  n y )  fe,  ttlft^A,,  02^)  fet^-tirA,,  fe, 1b i: ^ b i>w^X-ffr fe, v v ^ - f - J : .  ?  if5L£L/c^? &—,  fecofe—fe©5,  ttfi^A,,  fe<£>5,  (R) 1 a b  fe, 3}? — A y ^ H r ^ ^ t f f - ^ o  5-m.T%hxi-fr?  mBimrZhx-ffr?  ttV\ (R) 2 a b  (R) 3 a b fe,  !  hhbhzoxi-fro  Z5X*-t.  LXZfrbo  vxzAsT-t.  fe<£>,  feCO, fetfX  ±nz>hx-fo  fe<£>,  139  0 xi^ti,  kfrofcx-tto-a  m\  (R) 4 a b  Aft ft  fev^cv^-ffrif  ikt.lkXi>b^tc^/uXiriiti!  0 ^ W ) t L f e .  igv^tif.  0 ^> if 5 - ^ o f c } $ 5 # ^ v \  L i 5 ^ i  -e-f^?  x ? if' 5 = =fitt.  (R)  /KHi H  h BMB *  f^tfC !  ®ttti1t/uo  0 ffi^TV^cfc < (R) 6  0  a b  ^^-rfbT-^^i-S^^-f.  if 5 L T : : * ^ - ? - * - / ^ ? (R) 7 b ^  Xi,,  ^ i f ?i-%A;Xi-fr!  mt>  m,  ma,  m,  z\(D\-m\,tc<t^A xiJ  D^feo (Q 8 a  ^ , A^bfev^--e-r. Ay, A¥Ltc^X-f  b  A,, A ^ L ^ V ^ ^ I " .  a  Jz¥XMl$LLfc^X-t„  (R: 9 b ttV\  z<Dftm\sit<  -X'¥xm^Ltc^A.X-f°  ^ T ? ?  ho,  ztix.  0  140  10  L i 5^ftv\  0  ^a^^L/fco  fcte&friftL-t?,  b^&,  LJ; 5o  L i 5^'ftv^b± 5o  141 JLL 3  Interviewer  Xoia-,  Student  0  Ztil^^-xirte.-  UT, h yyt£(DX,  UTbyXD  v—fr-^U^X^^X-tft-l  if fob, &CQo  (ttv^) ^ - c v ^ c ^ r j c , &ftA^X^fc/vXirte.  &A,^  0  L  x . x . i o J; b'hi. b ft—, ( I M x : o i _ 4  MOtiiftiA-oX^tcAsXlTv ^ { c v ^ - T r f - T K fifth,  ( f c f c !) ^ %\%UT byycoA  Xi~o  ± oi:-fe©5>  (fiv^)  Jc vJ%^^X&X<tc£is\.  g  <  D  ^^X-tft?  /  A,,  |  4? rxx  .  v ^ - e f - ; ^ f±v\ v ^ - e l ^ i fifth, &xi>M<Dttfxi>\/^x-t<, Giv^) -  0  (R)  r>§r"ic^^-<fev^-rij-if\  I  i^^oij^^-t. 2  a  h—v^x-fft  ifti*s—#v>v^tri-^ ?  ?  142  ^bXirU,  frOb'ht£hfr£<X$5^V^  bfr^XTifH, bfrh^^hift. btfte^hX-fiib',  (R) 3 a b  = fe, ^oXirfrll^^h, (D-^y h^ch^Ot.Tiftlb\  hh<D^V;<—jj-  ( t t W  (£)  fr^X,  (ttV^)  ^ o i K L J t .  fe, frOb'hX'tfr'i fe,  fr-ob'hb'  ttv\  if5€.  ttv\  fro  b" hie L-*1"o  ttV\  fe,  *DV^L-€:5'1f-f-feo  o^'-,  0  fe  ttV\ fa"? I, J: 5  !d t U 5 r T r 1 - ^ ? ^ L L t - - t - o  (C) 4 a b  fe-SA^-f-tf-^f, V^hXTifb', EoXTfr?  X.X?^A,ft^ttt,  (ttV^) t^X'Tita-  !  C\tlX"tt3-—C\<D 7L7L  M<Dc\bx-fte-, MV^1"- ! ^,  ^m^LfrLX,  (fefe)  : tif? L v ^ o  b fe<£>5,  #>*.L-*-f-ft*iif,  ( x x )  ^ * > j j s  gctt^A,ft*a  (R)  0  / h $ v \  fe©5^  ^(D—  &ito%Xit-Js>.miZ.^t£^$kXTfrb, $5%m<D (ttV^) ZZLlCfthfrZ&ftX-jSAtlK  Ctiff  bh iz. fr x .  ^xi~fr.  h^^hXirfr\  143  6  <Dv7 b 7  7  a. b  &tc b  &v>$1-fr£f, m5A,-?W£\  & ! *ZK:i>x>b V \X>b. (slit ?) !  rT-ef„  nb^foVt-fo  i i - ! i f c o f c ^ t „  fiv^ (fife)  ^rtitiH,  (x?)  i M i ^ ^  j o ^ L v ^ ^ f - f ft—o  8  (R) 9  rxx  ^sg^^cv^tw.  144 fo, £ f j \  salmon-f L (^ ? )  £ Jtl^fcv^-cf-ri* ? 10 b fo, ^--^yxs-tft?  & it  liv^ ! £ £ V > £ - ? -  ftftafo ttV\  fefe, 0  11 a  fcfe,  310*31111^*^0  x , itittMlr-r^o  ztimi^^fo^t^/wft?  b .(Dio0s\<D^K,  BktDMftfo*)  *1~fto  fofo ! ^ M ^ ' ^ I ^ -  (R) 12 a b  *5Ka*«? L £ - f . if5"b,  &<9#i5  i^  lA^fM^t^tfLfCo  - f ^Jj-frA,,  145 JLL  4  Interviewer  Student Y o u stayed late at work and are the only one in the office. Y o u leave to get a drink of water and lock yourself out. Y o u don't have identification with you. Explain the situation to the guard and ask him/her to open the door to your office. (C) 1  hoob, b  j$M^tf&%>A,X"ti>s-  &<D5,  jsM^frfoZhX-ffr-  (R) &t±x-mg 2 et &©5%ltZ(D^±xm^XV^Tfrb  ftVMC  (R) 3 a b  mtZ(D^±xm^X^Z>hXTfr-  V\ftfe>:ftftV\  Atlfetlft<ft^£Lfc„ Attft<ft^*bfe„ Atiftv^-ei"o  •f-^trJT^fj-,  ib<D-,  (R) 4 a b rmh^k&fzhx-to  (R) 5 a b  c^ftcDttMftA^I ^ -  5 ^ , tr'b, ^ftattfiSFJ&v^ £ (R) 6 a b  mt^oi>c\0D  KT —£r£dobT\  146  (C) 7 b  &©M£:P£xTV>ft^A,-ef(£) i f ? L J ; 5 ^ f t -  fe©5,  if 5 L~k L i 5 t a —  fete,  (R)  */c-fc<  (£)  ^ t t ^ L f c v ^ t ^ -  8 b  X^kifttcitm^Vtc^hXTtf-  fe©5 4 * » - , (C) 9 a b  ^<D§|$M£,  *fcvvftfc<v^&v\ /^Tr-fri*-, Af>&<T«:V^t£^A^A£>& < xm^-ff^/vXTtf-.  hcob-,  if 5 Lfc£> — V V v C L j : 5fc 0 ffl^  £fe,  O fetf>5> 5 - A / , 4-, if 5 L f c ^ v ^ t S v ^ - f r t * . .  (RB)  fe©5  fe-A,feco-fecD-5-A,. fe, fecDJtiicoID &r, < £ . o / c < b - , fe©-, f£ co i fe oo- m hb<D-W%-&-to ^Hfrb(cough) fe©5 ^ ^ M ^ - A ^ T < / £ £ i \ *r*i#>£>, fe-, msooib^lic-, &(D|±M RJE& (5 A,) fe©-, feftfcfc^oTV^-f-o 5-A,,  if 5 L i 5^&-  Xi>-{&oo  0  fe<D5, 10 b if 5 L t U i 5 ft- !  fefe,  V^Trffrif—»  t-f-fc-o  •tr^feft7ttt|fico^'&^fe 9*f"^ o l  fe©5,  i  Xi>mclj&fccb%/vXi-fr  hoo-, 5-A,, fe©5-, t ^ , (5A,) fe©5-5-A,, (ffl) «IS&- (5A,) , tf»«9T-  ttv\ fe®, fcv^-e-fo  fe<D-ft!i©^±Mfc-, OtvO LT—,  £&xW}<c\biichtetcK,  mm.  &-1IS&L fecD-feSMtMtt, fcH**"fo  JLL 5  Interviewer  Student  ^rtLtf, & © 5 " t % ; f S # © A k : % 5 H^J&S^SA/T'-t-,}:. (A,) ?£<DX\ SA^-to  ^-fe^-^A^A^i-?-© «5**^i&L.fcfS5* V^t s  ft-ft-df-A  (fi—£0>mf&#*£i©-f-5  ^ t t i  (fiv^) =fefi,  5ft-%  fSMLT^*-t"=  JBJiLJ: 5 i i S o T V ^ c A f i - , 5*£MLTJi£A,#;v^A,-?-fo  v^v^-f^ ?  ^ - ! , ^fetLt 5 ! f o T < « ^ \ .(fi-H / c > k S S J i - r a «fc 5 w o r < tl £ ^ V^T?-fft ! ¥ ^ v  v  £ — ,  fe^Afi^o^j;  < t—,  148 fe©fc:&*bot,b  M i ^ ^ t L i  5?  ' S ^ T t < " S t l * > ^ 5 too. fcfciit^T-feA^fc-^M^L-, 2  a b  Tr'b^itt^T^V^^L—, -C 'fcffi]fetrt'<T!6^V^^^^^cL-, !  3  7s  h LXfcOOX.  ~&tc- !  (R)  Hgfc'C  L i 5 f a - !  a b  —iRffcv^-r/Lj: 5 - ! - ^ C V ^ c A ^ L J; 5 !  i B j y X .— - ^ A / f t © - ^ — < t o 7HoT^5 H£A,©v^A&A^t, g o t i A i  a  feA,fct-fifc-eL± 5 ? —liffcl^T? L ± 5 ?  b  -liffcV^A/^Lj; 5 ?  a  v^ot-ifffc^SH^coTfeS  <fc&=  149  (C)  7  a b  —Att*£t£L<  ftlbftV^CD  c  S o t WL<DAlZtcbbtcbb  ! <fe L — ^ \  IJA^WJ;^ ? 8  •€:COP#ttft,  a b  liif&v^ ? Ifti&v^ ?  c  il^A/L;*ftV^ ?  d  -8^A/D*&V^(D ?  - # & © i £ ^ V ^ o T W 5 t f - £ \  V ^ £ -  !.  &<£>5HAcDJ||£  JLL  150  6  Interviewer  tt*, a>,  Student  t°5fc&iitAjVi-jt>\ zAstz  Y o u stayed late at work and are the only one i n the office. Y o u leave to get a drink of water and lock yourself out. Y o u don't have identification with you. Explain the situation to the guard and ask him/her to open the door to your office.  tt^-ei-frtif-o x?^5tt*£A,, if'^/cTf-f-^- ?  &f*SI&L!9 3H£A/fe-.  (R) 1  ftSifiiflftv^TV^Lfcris, b &a£'#^T^^-et-/^.  (R) 2  a-fc-£tfei?fcfcfC!±l&LfcriS,  a)  a b  ^fe-ID,  ID ( x ?)  0  ID£|#oT(il3©££:fiTtt£v^tt/co I D ^ o T f t ^ ^ t i T t t ^ o f c A , - ^ ,  fife, i ^ S t i - f ^ o / c A ^ t - ^ , i£5tt/c A , ?  fr/t tt —o  (v^x) A^, -Xmx-f-U.  (v^x) 0 &<D 0 i ^ ) I D , / c / c I D £  151  (ttv>) fi, &©5, x.&A,-?-f\  tc\^Xirfr?  £&XTfr-?  .  fiv\  0 $t ^fc  02^)  fiv\ ri»v\ M t , &tt©£tt&!f§»9 te:  (C)  ID£^o©££;ftTL£ofci;?Tofc^£  4  (R) 5 a b  cbX)tftb  zg^t-to  152 JLL  7  Interviewer  Student Y o u stayed late at work and are the only one in the office. Y o u leave to get a drink of water and lock yourself out. Y o u don't have identification with you. Explain the situation to the guard and ask him/her to open the door to your office.  1  a  B-^LTL4^tLfc„  o -y 9 m%%m<Drpte7£tltchXT-tt¥-,  (C) 2 b  M&UmcD^Kl&tltchXlrtf  b~-,  (C 3  o i - ,  Zox-ffr-o (R)  rpbmmwfecb b  Ziim^xirtfb\  4\ $ n I Href-ft if,  frtt>^xi-  0  hfr^O^VtCo  L^ SfSLT^TT$V\ ,  *>  t-tftif-  4^fiEW»«fc^-tH-ftif-  frtLfrte^AsXi"?  m\  mtfxtbotcb.  JLL  153  8  Interviewer  Student Y o u want to buy a t.v. set from a discount electrical shop, but would like to buy it at an even cheaper price. A s k the store keeper to discount it more.  ir y b %  (C)  iixtt,  fl<7A  v ^ v ^ f t # 5 / £ J ; «3 <b, * f £  ^X-fo  (R)  (A, A,-)  A—t-y  b<  h^^X-to  xk-tmz-Oo^utliMJ-ZXlr. b.  (R) 4 a b c  Tr^2::©xi/tf^j!U£Ao;^'Trt-  0  154  (ho)  tzy)t.i£hfr  a  fe©, feR$$H$5&&&5. fotDMMk^y -ft&tcb'Ot.i'fco  fe©, xi>, mt^M, E/N—feyh<-"feV^fe,  ftv\  &<X%-&T-&o  (ttV^) Ztlly^m&b. U&b 3£/N—fey h i , £ < L $ b J : 5 . ZyX-ffro  mcDiEbcft^fcjf&v^b^-kT-o . ^[-|zg/^—fey hT?-rta  x.-,  BMZ.'*—fe>  m &^*1-=  r-ftA,-Wa  m  0  0  5  z 5  f - r ^ .  fe,  *;5ftA,-e-fri\>  a b  fe-  ^ i o t l i  #X.£-fo  fey h u - ^ j f e v ^ i - ^ ? ttV\  ZyXT,  v^D I t . ttl\  ^ ^ , t o t - ,  fc£V\  V^V^-f.  155  JLL 9  Interviewer Student When you arrive at the airport in Osaka your luggage is not in the baggage claim area. Y o u speak with a service representative. Describe your luggage, explain why you and your luggage did not arrive on the same flight, and make arrangements to have the bags delivered to your hotel.  (C) 1 a b  mm&tebvtc/vx-f-  (R) 2 a b  ^my * •^ y  ifZX-,  L £ A,  check in o t H f t ^ ? c h e c k i n g — , 5 — A / , fete—/<y^ — ^ ' — T (5A,) y—MT-fr-tj-VZ—X* (5 A,) baggage baggage o T ^ T r i " ^ & , ri»l£A,- ( £ ) £ - (ffi) fetf'T- Oiv^) (M) t i t Giv^) T ^ f e - f e A , , ^ © baggage, h, ^oofrlf/v-^(5 A,) (RB) A,,  (R) 3 a b  Mfcb-,  mm mm  5 - A , . a»tfA,£-,  (R) b  tiv\  if 5 Lt.La  5? '  ^^T^ftv^A/TH-o  (Iffl)  l o t t -  156 i£5L£,  &, x . o i - O  fc-A,,  ^  (^Rfl)  5-  h-T?£*-ftf>.  if  u # - M i - , 5 - A , , ttv\ & £ £ & v ^ - t - f t * £ -f^T^r if 5 Ltc b,  fc,  m  t o t -  (oh,) (BSD i r ' C ^ L o s t and F o u n d s & 19.^-f-^  ZLZLX-fc  0  -e4>Lost and FoundoTinT-C?1-^„ (5?) Lost and Foundtt,  fett-oh,  /£*i  pickup - r - t § ^ t ,  O pick up o T W T f ^ ?  p i c k u p tt- (£) 5 - A , , *>-; O K , (Rfl) pick u p t t - (RB) b&ObZ, m (5 A,) & OK, (Rfl) x . o t - , (RB) OKA,-, (Rfl) A , - , (Rfl) 4\ ^ « 9 * L f e o «A,i;?A„  tfAstefrii/uX-i-fr. 5  a b  C  ^<T, ^ < T , £3v4S&A,-ef-o  fi^SfD^O^TV^A^-To  (5 A,) A , - ,  (Rfl)  mtbit^-?  5-A,,  &ttf&tt{&©?Mrafcfe5f£  (R)  c  t&^S-f.  & » & f c * # © j | * f T $ f c & 3 A,/£ £ S v ^ 1 - „  5 - A , , t o t - (RB) * > £ L . f ± - ^ 3 ; - (5 A,) / K i t - (5 A,) v ^ L i t (5 A,) ® t f > - £ & , $ c < D - ^ x ^ ^ o - C - (5 A/) 5 - A / , (RB) feb ) t - (5A,) (5 A,) i i f c - t t - f - . ^«9*L/t„ &, m T * - f - ^  ttv\ 0  ttv\  &*j£1"<fco  ttv\  157 JLL  1 0  Interviewer  Student  Y o u need to take days off during an extremely busy period at work. Explain it to your boss. (C) 1 a b c d  ISft,  mi^ft&V&iriib\  fs%tc^<DX\ A/-£A,fz:*>, £ / U £ i b £ , £ / U £ o£:A/—vt&, vttf, x . — T / w ^ V T>v^A h%, l*tr, tt**iT<*i|H^ri»? x(R) 2 a b c d  itlX  ? ^^,  eft-e  ^ ^ ,  ^>-r,  JH-trttstvr  x.— b —\ if' 5 <9 ^ 5 i f 5 ^ * 5 f i , i f 5 D ^ 5 f i , A £ A , £ B $ / U i , T / W N - Y b£r, fifc?>#, fifcfe 0 fet L T f A i : L T f i f c ^ t T ^ £>v\ fa-eta*  ?fc>#»£>fcv\,  ?A, f A i r L T ,  fefcLT,  f±*£,  "ttUi  fAirLT  & t LTT;w^  h- £ 1 " t U i  *A t L T f i f a - e - f - ^ ^ i f t f i ?  ftitt,  AX,  ftttt,  A,A4A,  a,  tz±t>.  158 & t V ^ 5 , & t & t L T t ^ 5 © t t . A , , fettftcft A £ A , t B £ A , t t (A,) iwibi^, iwii;p#fc, ^ ± fc, ^ I t e t t f c ? > ^ t 5 t v ^ 5 n kx-tc  T%-A£A,tB£A,<fe, tT^IjM&A/c^o,  b  V^LJZ^LV^,  ^ V ^ L V \  A X , A£A/tB£A,tt  x.-t~,  ZOA^ft  4-H s RSJ&S ©tefegi-ei-fco  (R)  fd&t,  i*ff^#*v>  a w.mknn^n^x^A.o (R) 6  At, fa#>£  (x.-t-) ^ ^ T ^ T i ^ A t , 5ISLT&©5,  a b  tt  feL<T^A3t:A^:tJ§.5A,Tl-„  V ^ L ± ^ U  A&bZi±^ftt>frb?j:^frb-,  ksh, A £ A / t B £ A , ,  159 JLL  1 1  Interviewer  Student When you arrive at the airport i n Norita fiSEH, 5A> your luggage is not i n the baggage claim area. Y o u speak with a service representative. Describe your luggage, explain why you and your luggage did not arrive on the same flight, and make arrangements to have the bags delivered to your hotel.  f±l\  fe,  (Q l  fc&o  ft if,  Tbioi;  fgas&S/k-et-ttif, a b  &|Mc* L f c V ^ i ^ f e 9 £ W i f , & P ^ L / f c V ^ i ; ; ^ f e 5 ^ - f frif,  ? 2  fo-ZyXtfr  (fefe) £ * * > £ L ; / t f e  m\  (R) 3 a b  Xfe— D^>, fe—, L ^ — f e — , fe — , 4> L — / v — &<z>TO£#.;fc£ i r ^ ' f e «9 £ 1 " ^ o  fe-,  l ^ ,  & © # t i © ^ * 3 t i ,  fe-v^x.v^x., <£>,  fe^v^fc,  red-Tf-f^o  x . - , fe^v\  fe—iMXti,  fe*v^i"o  fe—x.—, fe^v^-f-o  3 0 centimetre,  fe,  160  a b  fe — 4 5 centimetre <* lb V^1~„ 4 5-feyf-<*£>^T*-f-. 4 fcA/Tr-f-o  fe-, ^ ! 7 ^ ^ f e ' l i o f c O - * 3 ± S , i-fe<D±«i;-, fe-ir-Sg&ltgftSgftffi (£) (RB) fiS&document, fi^fc-Mfci ^ f e ^ - f o  5 fe—€:tLfi^S!5*i-fe. if 5 L f c l b V ^ l r t - ; ^ ?  a b  S - r ^ y ^ © I  if 5 . L * L i 5< if 5 Lfcfev^-et";^,  5 A,, =  v^—v^frfcb  <^3ftfe, fo~, fo~, ZL%l\$-1sk<D&m<DWfe%r  fo-u fo-htco, m, m^^tib, fatenmx fo,  %(D^/v<Dmnm^xi-o  t * V \ fe(7X I J ^ - ^ ^ L T i ^ V ^ ^ L-tl ftV^L--, W K o t , (fo, B< !) fe#K i f - i f 5 ^ o T E g i J L / c fev^-ef tf\ Ahllx^ijTffe-^ticDhandle,  a b  f±V\  tev\  frtf^  iijffl^i:«v^.fc«9*-t-. LLiEgtefliriiFV^'Cfe^A^I-o  £ L7c<, i f 5 k f e ^ i ; 5  i - ^ - ^ h o  fe >9 *s t 5 . fc£v\  if 5%,  fe^i  5  handled,  feo^if.  JLL  161  1 2  Interviewer  Student When you arrive at the airport in, blank, {%) your luggage is not in the baggage claim area. Y o u speak with a service representative. Describe your luggage, explain why you and your luggage did not arrive on the same flight, and make arrangements to have the bags delivered to your hotel.  5l5£L7to 1  a b  MMK^tchX~to  xi,. (R) 2 a b  a b  2f£<z>&tt©-et;&\>  (ttvv (5A,)  Hff#J<D]g-e, fe(Z)^t|fjtt, &V)t.1-frt>. ?ffftl<DJi^fcO^]!ij^v^Tfei9 £ - f ^ o ffi®<D&ir.%<D%m&^X$>%>fvXl-, &<D%ffibZ*^ xi/v •  •t£Lfc,  (C)  fife, *-*Uif5r#-e,  tyofr!bt£^A,Xl-.  feo^jj, A,-, fe-, & © - < 6 V ^ < o < T - ,  feo,  4  X~ffrib—,  -x%<x-,  fe-, t-,  3  &otf-£>*lftV\  £Ef3L£-to  A,-eta*  a b  m^x^tc/oX-ttf fe, fe-©-fe-?ii^o^-y/<-tt ®-x.oix . o i - 4 0 l -e-f,  (5 A,) J A L  162 fcfWc (RB) b'Zfrb,  (RB) t ^ o t ^ & A ^ i ^  fe-ffrfc.  MMte^tcA. —/<  5  a I B ^ y ^ b  ( & & ! ) IStf-feA,-e#-#>o ttv\  -€r 5, ^ 5 T ^ - „  &o,  & - A , ,^ o ^ o t t -  ttv\ t ^ ^ t L f e . tt*, H^T^S-TO T \ 7L-t, tt*, ^O^ofc?), £-5-A/,  .(RB)  SCD^^-A-  fc-A/,  t o t ,  1  *?/5^*tt/Co * x / K D ,  b  &<z>*7vWi^<0jfi<*A,-Tr-f%  a b  *cx^©^tiittRaddison HotelTi". tfcr/WiRaddison Hotellrl". jftrvWiRaddison H o t e l f t A / T l , ,  x . - £ , jfiv^  5A,o x . - t , tt*, * o ^ o f c ? ) , Raddison H o t e l © , x.— t , ^r-^n/i^-^y  -  (5 A,) (5 A/)  163  JLL 13  Interviewer  Student  When you arrive at the airport in Narita, your luggage is not in the baggage claim area. Y o u speak with a service representative. Describe your luggage, explain why you and your luggage did not arrive on the same flight, and make arrangements to have the bags delivered to your hotel. fe<D5, ~t&t. &Aj J  a  tev\ (C) 1 a b  ^fr&oZb&cbZhXttfk'h ± o i r f s j v ^ c v ^ btfcb^^-Tlfb' ibi. o bfil^tc^: bfrchZ/oXTtfb'  cb<D-t>,  fete-,  fe,  &  fl^BH<£>fj}c\  fe, A ' V ^ - A — f r b ,  (R) 2 a b  i?^4  fe-  • 3=-4  - R 3 m , # * > £ L f c , ft i f .  %  o-mmi>ft-h&Ltcv-b\ fc5-P#fflk#o£^-r$tif,  (R) fe©, &©TO&j|o}t£-frA/. 3 a fe<£>, fe©#t/^o^!9 £-trA,„ b fe<©, fe©^^o^feft^-e-t-  0  ££9*L?tfe.  m fe- if 5 • f - f t l i W - C L J: 5  if 5 L f c k w ^ L ± 5 is- ? A,-,  ci) tev\  a  fe^S^Lfco  (5A,) A , - f e © - ,  ^LT^T^fafcftftV^LJ:  fe-  5#>.  fc-i&riSLTfcw^-e-ffrif-  i;X*?5?^^i-^ ? fe(D—, fe—, — o ^ i ^ ^ T r f - o  5 5 A,, ^ t u  -o-et^ ?  a b  A£/£/M3 ^ / ^ n  (5 A,)  fe©—  -^i^Tfe3A,-eto  164 *#v\ ^X-ffr  o - c . if*u<*S>v\*:£ ? fe-,  5 A,, \[fr—, A H - ^ x - r  O  -"C^v\ %k<D-&mt (oh)  fe-,  &LT#*-f-frif-,  (£) £A,fc*#vvTrL.j: 5 ? (£)  fe,  «v^Tfet9£i-„  5-A.,  (5 A/5 A/) if 5 L t b i 5» fe-Mir^iffc, fttfo^^-e-fttif  (R)  6  a b  «9*^i-*tif  ^oTV^cfcfr/j^A^Li: 5  (I)  7  »i/7ffc/at5o^  a b  A,-, x . - i - 0 A , - , i i § © 3 0 0 ORfi * ^ I 9 1-ftttLif, V M / ^ 1 " ; K i t - i U i C o t - s , (£) fe©5-, (5A,) A,-A,-, m - c t - , fe- o fe-ot-, fe-, V^-^LT<^T-fe-£5LV^1-^„ fefe, i ^ - r r f - i o f i v \  ^LTft^ofcoif 5 til"?  fe-, (C) 8 a b  if 5 kfe *9 5 ^^'v^-to T £ i \ « v \ 'if 5 t&Vfrb  fc£v\ K 5 £'£V£1\  o  fe-,  (ra) - c ^ t i s - ,  te^V^5#>'l^A;-C-f-, frjf. fi^WS^Vv^-ffrtif, fi-^WSS^wV^-fftif,  fe-«v\  JLL  165  1 4  Interviewer  Student  SA/^oft^fc,  +¥<  b^mo^x\ ^  ttV\  W c l ! J - - H l ' ^ t .  (R) 1 a  ^fc£<P^£-gLfcas, - g - & £ © # £ T Lfctfs,  (C)  ^m^AkX^tc/uXi-,  A, a*?  2  a b  (C) 3  ^as=A  A,-etc  5fe£©£ a b c d  >•  ^K%tcLXW,  >-  6lZ.m^tcA,Xi-ft\  166  (C) 4 a b  Tt,  ifrtefri.  5 if-  LX^ZA,X*i-£.  m m  f A i ^ ^ o i ^ v ^ v ^ o t t * ^  5 - A , , £ & v ^ A , T - f ftif, 44ttt< o T f t x . o  t i o t  tt*, ziilRg $>&Z:5X"tfro tt*, £ f a i ; ^ f t 3 ^ % ttti^-tLUt if, tt*&, 7L-hif 5 tt&tti if"5  ttfc^V^T-t^,  5  tfWc^o  A , - & # , ^%&<D¥$Ltl^1t<Dk-,  (R) 5 a b f*V\  fc>#^3=L,fco  tt*,  ifA,&^£  i^T% o^/ci^irJgv^-f;^ vvr<b b^tc^t^t.irft  t > i o t t i t  * * L j ; 5 ,tt*,40fiif'5 t ^ ^ b ^ ' if'5 fc, 1 " ^ * ^ T t t f c  JLL  167  1 5  Interviewer  Student Y o u return with a coat to the drycleaner. Explain to the owner why you are returning the coat to be re-cleaned at her expense and why it is in her interest to do a good job.  fo, S V \ (C) 1 a b  x . - t * l f ^ \  fectiot-  IS L / C V ^ n t ft^fo 5 A , T 1 - ; ^ *5PH£ Vtc^Zbftifo Q t-i-it)^ Lfcv>e A,-e-ra^  >?'LX<tl,  V^c/efJtftV^TLi  ofto  TL, fo<DZ\<D=i-bX~f ft ? T % 4 t 5 iiTv^oL*v^1-ftu ^ © ^ - K Xi>fo<D$, ^(DolZU,  a  • tLVMCTfe \) £ - £ A , T L 7 t f t o %frW£t£iX^-£. &A,XV±o :  L T & g & f c f c i f f i L L T * 5 Y) ^ir<DX X. ( £ ) T t ,  a b  c\cr>^— b&, fo<Do,  fo<DC<D=i-b&,  ft^X^tcfeX  •&tcMXf£^Xi-£U, STV^-tXc MXv^^AsX"?,  /<y^%£/cA-oTV^1-J;;Ja, f c ^ ^ - t ,  TLTL,  &  ^^6A,^fi^lz.LXfo<DZL(Di:  m ic A flX T-f-ft V ^ o t  LL T  *58l L I ' S J; 5 ft - t tZlfcttiZ. £ h  »9f--fft  -,  bXli  m ztuthx o . i ; A ^ T i - i f t o  foozo^-  168  a  x.x.fe©5 — b-c-fi&u  S+bVH&V^L/t.  F&z\-hbcotXtU, -el-^fev^oV^ofe©^  kov^T  (R)  ft^fobT-ggftv^l-fr? te/wbfrX^f^X-ffr?  a -c%HtBfe©£>  b?  v-~yyL±®%&&'t  3  rfc-t-ftBtefc,  fe©5fe£^,  *>*A,t,  (R) 6 a b  5^  fe© 5 M W o v ^ T v ^ ^ i f L f c .  fc-iv^-fifc  fe©&o£:}o&£A,£IB^L--t\ fefe^-^-f  ?  S-^fcot,  ^^-Cl-i^o  tev\  *LXl>ob&%-£A;\*Z-Z.K?})-~y  D ^ f e © i M ^ J A ^ — ttc^r&fr  t f x t w 5 c i f ,  b^m^Xf^Vtcoo^m^  $f^XbLtc*)\£'£>ftv\  AtiX  £ f e £ 3 L <  OiV'O  JLL  169  1 6  Interviewer  Student Your landlord has complained you're disposing of your rubbish incorrectly. Explain to him or her that the rubbish is not yours. rubbishttftfc- ? tt*fe,  ttl\ ^ 5 T j - t %  -eta*?  ( t t l ^ ) h<D5z.<DZ?t^ fife ?  1  !  fitfX tt^ftv^T-f-J;& 0) tt A, IA©tt*ftVXTl-J;-  a b  i f & ft f c © ^ ( D BU f c *3 V ^ T & 5 tt * ft v \ >fc^ ?  rygti^ j  r&ftfc©feftfc©£\^Tttj;o  j£ti r x x rfi#\ t t # \ Mt\ £/i>£>,  tt, ^i:t£i:ftttfeftfc©tt*ftv^T-f;^  Mfrft&o?  T t - , X.X.-,  £<z>£#£-,  ?  *^T-r-„ fe©tt*ftv^Ti-  0  a  f£cDtt*&*9  b  fe(Z)tt*ftVXT-fo  if©j;5^trjtt£1-^?  ^£tim#ttif  ttv\ e.£>A,ft£i\ M ?  © <fc 5 fdtJti ttt-f^ ? fctf* *) t.-tfr ? IftPJi ttT < tl £ V \ i f < D £ Oil  C\ ' f c g V ^ T i o x.X.-Tt-fe  170  3  fe© 5 fefi—Mfflfc 0 * ^ f r # £ bfc„ 4 b  stt-Mras^ffo-c^-^i-.  (Q fooomztctcmz-m^tcisfr v tzhxi-o 5 a ibco, mz,m-o±iffr^)XTo b fe©, ^ f c i ^ o ^ i ^ ^ v j 3feA^-??-t0  6  a b  /c^ofe©^©U^^V^-fo f c ^ f e f e © i c © U ^ f e 9 £-frA,o fc^fefA©^©D^^v^'C-t-o  Ibftltk-M&te^XLi.  =-f%mz,  coo, \£=—;v%,  btf-  !  <<ot, fe- ! frfrV&L±  7  i xi>%i>\s^i>zb  vt.To  a b ! 'cuz fe©5fettSibftfttilfft  8  *)  a b  c.-g.'o*-f '^comxi-te-c 0  tcfrb-  tit/uo  171 JLL  1 7  Interviewer  Student A t the crossing, your bicycle collides with another bicycle. Both bicycles are badly damaged. Y o u don't believe you are to blame. Negotiate with the other rider.  f i v \ L ^ , fe^\ &$xMX\ (tev^  %±  feS5^  Oiv^) n o ^ f e , aift/c^o^fete,,  U V ^ - f ^ o V^x.fe©77, f c o T . 1  M^X-ti...  a b  & & f c ^ V ^ f e V ^ c l > A , " T ? L J; ? (I) 2 a b if 5 L T ? f t t t : o ^  Mb, Mb, mb,  m&vxfr^hx-tx. fte»ot^t^j; mzmm-oxt^hx-rx. 0  it^^o-fe^fe  ZbXo •e 5  mz,  Xi> ! CZ\bZfo<Db £^&X-f£o y  ? ZbXlrX-  !  if 5 L T r .  (R) 3 a b c b-ht, tint, itm&teb, cb?£Z>h D^&V^&o ftf^fe^o^fe/^v^L^^V^ frfco ch^fctfzi-o-hiicMtcfrbS'ofr^fcco  &lz,&ifr  ^tcl>*?t£^X"tfr— ? otcV^ft^Xi-fr— ? o^U-^JfeV^tr-t-^ ?  fcfrb  172  (R) 4 a  SofrV)^.hfcXo  b  (I) 5 a  vv$>, ^^/ e  b  c  mti&CfcX 6  !  a  b  fe©g$SJil%  &&fc^V^feig;ftfc^^^ ? v^<  fe  !  frfr%>  tH5  ?  = D * , u * ;fe%,&<D&ii&mi>&mii^v)t.-t  0  •e 5  ?  tu±5o  (A,AJ  v^^tv^^feo  173 JLL  1 8  Interviewer  Student Y o u stayed late at work and are the only one i n the office. Y o u leave to get a drink of water and lock yourself out. Y o u don't have identification with you. Explain the situation to the guard and ask him/her to open the door to your office.  (C) l a b  A^cvXTi-frifA^/cV^Tl-frifA^/cV^T-tfrif-  fcfc, tt*ttl£oTT£V\ v^, (R) 2 a tt*fefe©t±MffiEj|-£T  h(D-tcftb-5  ^mtyty4  7^HiX-  8Sti-CLtv>4Lft. i i ^ ^ t L T L * V > t Lfco  < f£ £ v \ x.-- ^ 5 T - f f t (C) 3 a b  tt*,  0  toTftVXT-f-frif-, Tt^toTV^-tbUtif-, T t ^ t oTV^VXT-f-frif-,  if 5 tt^ttJ; 5 ^  if5tt£ttj;5ft ft-,  ^>^ifflCO— K ^ y v ^ t ,  l / ^ o L ^ ^ t  r^ttfe-ATl~o ZoXi-fr,  i f 5 tt£tt i 5 ^ f t — =  = i f 5 tt£ L i 5° i J; *3 £ ttfcft- = =ft-, V^,  TtP^tfcb&itfcftoib*5  H i f r T ^ ; * ^ ! (9?)  A,T ! = = V^Tt!M5JtWfr&V^o,  174 V^,  fcibXir,  sV-Mtf  oft<Ttt TL- ! X^KDMb^ (R) 4 a b c d  t.-tfrb.  !  '}!ttft<ft^3;t'j§tift<ft3A,Ti'J§tLft< / i o T L I ^ ' i t 'Jftlft < ft o T 5 A,T"f 5o©iC©tli:;^  ft-  (R) 5 a b $ T 7 4 Xfc—„  »ftWT:f-;^ft-^£^£L;fcftftA,?K ft^ft^ftv^T-f^ft-, ft-,  if"5LJ;5, g o t .  fefi,  ^ o ^ - ^ .  hx-tn  (C) . -^ >T I^ 7L ^- LT TV 5 6 a ^-f^if, b ^T£LT3A,T-t-frif,  i^7^oT3A,T-f-^£,-,  (I) 7 b  WiiKfi^XZ/vX-tfrb  (C) 8  i(DKK m,X^flt^A X-tftb ,  J  b  ^©AtcmS-SLTt^tLftvXTl-o  if5LtbJ;5 if" 5 L £ L J; 5 ffl «9 * L f c f t - i f 5  L£ 5  if.  175  b c  ^CKfeb TV\?<DUb, c  fehb{mtite<te%A,XTfrb, ra^fc^i/jKftoTLSv^l-  cbZl^^cbv-t.  10  4-Btev^-tfA,  cbfo, ZoXTfr,  frfrvlHLfCo  ^ ! B o fefe, {%)  D*,  LJ:5#  JLL  176 1  9  Interviewer  Student Y o u stayed late at work and are the only one i n the office. Y o u leave to get a drink of water and lock yourself out. Y o u don't have identification with you. Explain the situation to the guard and ask him/her to open the door to your office.  fe, if 5 LtchX-ffr  ? fe©, -tfrltfthttlf-, fe©? 0 '<4 V & L T v ^ T — , fe©5, xi>—, *Lfc, cox-.  if\ Eb MzhXirfr-1 (Diftfif b LfchXTfr-  ^TJV  <Diffri~%  (*.?) ? •f^tVtc,  i-^tVtc,  ;W^£Lfc?fe©,  = fefe-?-5#\ tev^ = =  fe©t7^0MoT,  (R) 1 a b fefe,  Ztifem Y) t.  7k£*#oT#£L/c  tlfrb8&&;h/rL*^*L£. ® £ ; £ t i T L * ofcA,Tr1-„  LfcU-o 4-fe© K T £ f e o f r o T - V ^ c f c ' t f & V ^ L J:  cb~?si>hi:^b. IsiXft^/uXirfr-  fe©5, ?  ^ © t t ^ o T -  fe©, JT74 7\ltZ.cbY)-&-fo  (R) b c b - Z i U t m v t T t e - X i ) .  fi&t-yV  ^fe^A,-^  fe©5fe = fe«#B ! - o , C ^ , fe©, # , 5f5T5 «t- ! c b b M X ^ & T £ - c fefefe©M£JlTo  t U ^ c ^ l i  5-fete, g o t ,  ttMri*  Z5Xiri>»-, fe-c£ofcft-o v ^ L £ - f o fe©fe©-, fe©, fe©5^~7^ TsKfxoT.fe,  fe-, fe© ()  fe©*5ff fe©M^ fefflt7^tto,  fe^)£i-©-c-fe©5, ^ f t * - 0 t o t : X . , ^ £ ^ o i fefttftUf  177 (C) 3 a b  ^'J§tlftVXT-f-„  &©Ttfett&©5,  (I) 4  0  5 X-ttZo  ^A^MTttftvXT-ffto a- I ^ A c D l J i T t t f e 9 ^A.lft\ b M v ^ A © I i ? tt ft v ^ x-t If if\  ^v^frtvTt, £-£A,ft- !  \zh<DYT*?mx-, Tt&u  = Hifrfc&ifSfc $ £ fix  b Zfc o  a b  = 1f  DT</c£l^!  (Q 6  5lfe*lf£feTi-  fefe,  *^KO/CA,TI-. a  ^ f c K ^ L - f c .  b c  *^fdfflo^Ti1-. * S £ B o T l t „  0  D*&fe<7A  ttv^  ^5T-f-^ ! -€:5Ti-^ ! ^5ftA,T-f-^ !  5  ItAsXi:  rxx  mts,  (ttv^) p * , & H * £ A , T I -  itt££&<£>;^LT< t i f t v \  0  ttV\ ttV\ ttV\ fcri^^L/fc. t L t U  fecDOJHT-f  o &©5,  •etttt-oittf&o/^T-t-.  (R)  fc^ot  %mk<nM^%  ft i f - .  <*i£-£  178  a b ^ - u i / U i o if 5 u f c A , ?  (R) 7 b  fc©5ii££tLTL£ofc^-f-  0  if, if e f c ^ f c A , - e t ^ ? (R) 8  Tt&tfX  (C] 9  fefe,  ;b^3;L/co  frbmmu x  if z.  D*,  4-^cofe(D, t f / K D ; # - F ( i f e © ! S £ r  &co5 K T £ H f t f t v X T l - „  &©5,  5 ^-e-r^ ?  10 a b  K © •£  h v x v ^ § ^ i?t„  iT^-otfXitcZ^Uo  Jii\  $i5fto-o  fiv^iv\ fr^tLfc,, ££5ftb-o  Oiv^)  179 JLL  2 0  Interviewer  Student  OivO u-;vy°v4\ZXirU. x.-bL ^ f e f e c D f e t i h^^Ay<D7x'MXTo Ot^) X%lt, 7L—b—. bXlt>W<T>Wyfi—;V fp##LT, (A,) fe©<bfe&5i, ' W T J : 5 t H o ^ ^ i " . fe, htcLOi^?)  t , x - i - f e t t ! x . - i - f e < Z ) 5 r A T — igffc  T r & f i , fe<£>5, ^ o t f f l - A ^ & L t t t U i i JgoTV^A^-ffao (fe, hA£/Ui b&^X^hX-To tlfrb (fe) fe^fe fex.hA—,  iofff^wo/c^dfrfti:,  (I) 1 a b  / N - hl—bbtl-tb^y&fc^XLi.  b? U^,  (I) 2 a b  c d  £ bii-h^b  b^b X *) <k,  fe©5-!tfcfe  5fc*»£LT3&<fc3A/T-t-J:. A^LT3iK£i9*-f L T 3 f i < ?fcS/l>-T*-#-J;o L T 3 S < ft 3 b ^ t T o TxWsb L T 3 t < ft 5 b hX-f  0  h— rxx&o-c,  180 feJi^oi^  (C) 3 a b  /\ —  /•N /\  hi— hi— hi—  tbT. tbt. i b t ,  3SK*5A,-C'1-,J:.  fcot-> ^rti^-, (x.x.) &<D5fe© «^©/£-)iv^^frtiif-, ^tt%feofe A ^ 3 < £ > - „ ' ( 5 A / ) t & ^ 5 U^fe> v^Utofeti§oTV^©feo (5—A,) ^ o ««9 fe g #<z> r. i : tev^ ft if\  if 5 1 t U S V v ^ i : S 5 A, " T r t ^ ? if 5 ? if 5 - f t i t e V v ^ S 5 A/tft-#> ? -  (I) 4 a b D^fe,  &0>5£*ftc !  A,.  5  a b  A/, A,,  if 5 L T ^ S * * ? if 5 L T ^ S ^ J ' * © ? £-fiti#J.  hottttfe;  tigers ft if. (R) fe^ 5 ? 6 a fe^5 ? b fe^5-ft<£>? M * V T ; % / ' N — r"t"—^  ?mmzi,^ i  (R)  7  a  Km-otc ?  if 5 hxtmn  (A/A,) : £ o f e f e „ & © 5 , (AX) ^ y  hi—  t t o t s ? W B L V ^ t f oT5 ?  181  (5A,)  fe-  A,A,^-tis,  r-ift ^ 5 .  ;  e 5 ^ t b t L f t v ^ o  & © 5 ,  0 fe—7-lft^v^v>i ? tt*ftv\  h - ^ — f i t btlh*? 5 , T t ,  & © 5 , 4-?]S^v^iv^ofcifto v^A/ft^J,  ftoCK&©5,  A,,  ab, ^ e ©  V 1 t U o  -t"si-^v^frif-  fc^tt©^fai,  fo<Do^-mz,  T,  1 0 Ofg<*£>^A-^ft£fc, &©54itt,  (^)  v^6A,ft^i:£,  * > © 5 v ^ A y & J l i : £ : L . f t # *  1 0 0 { g U f c S £ ' b ?>5AyTl-io  (I) 8  UT,  h<Dbs  a  l  b c  1 0  d  0  0fg©S&%S>5  Ofg-©gt  f ^ A ^ c i o  1 0 Ofg©f i ^ v ^ t i . l 0 (H@©^t 6 5 A v T - f - i o  Tt^A,ft©TffH?>JJ; ! f c o t l B - (A, A,) j^sfrif-, * 5 & t e r i ^ 3  ( A X ) U  t oTtfcoT/N-  (A, A , )  Wcofcb^ ffiMtt^^S  U  r-7—©Ci^c^T  lt-|^ct©-o •^5^<t-o  0 A,, ^ r S f c f c - .  A X , 0A X  if?L T t T « ,  tofrftv^?  A,.  (R) 9 a b A X V ^  i  &©5,  10 a b  =A®&©-? ( U )  ^Mf£ofco^tLfi  AX,  if 5 L T t T - t t t t t b ^ f t V ^ ? if 5 U T t T - t t t t t  bt>t£^(D!  A,£lftfl&©;Su§;&sv>5.J:o  mZJ-iM^A^Zi-fb $f±^t%^HAtv^A,f£frif  .  182  (^) o W 5 0ttt> <fco,J;JS5 b * f t - l / ^ =  (C) 11 a b UJ©^C,  & © 5 , »*&ji£L;fcv\,  r.Acn&Xo \  £  — •  (5-A/)  m^fo(Obl-\^(0 (%) fc©5,  ^<D^f-i£<D,  (C) 12 a b  &©9iEM£^T^fc?>, •^©^jgfciif ^  ^ 3 ? (5?)  TOJ^T^§  5ft3#>,  ?  rt?*»ofe—. b * & - ^ o T ^ 3 o b*> MLfroitb,  b*fe,  i©Att^-ht-ilSit5ot  fiitigbT^Mftte^- X A , ) ^rbfc<^  ftv^o-c&o-t5A,-rr?Y (&-) ^ ® ^ © & # £ A , ! ©Hfffctfo-c-, bftv^rpbT^oTT^v^ortT<  ^A,&K*IA,T-TO  A X ^ t U ^ HAot, HA©  183 r&,  *s^-e.  fefete-,  %(Dte,  tlAvX ! - — ^ C i f o T 5 ( 7 ) t 5 , ^ n t ^  5 - A , o &©5,  ftire-r^?  (C) 13 a b  ftiS 3 -fa*? MSc£3^®5A,ti-^?  (R) 14 a b  t % ztiit'&mmtt*ft^ t - r 1 t ztimkmysstt*ft^ A, x-r  $#fe o THT- $ftV >tt,fe<fc - !  A,, 1 5  ttTtl"^  ? M{&fti\  A O i b-C©F^St?-f-%^ ARUfi^ftrpmt-f^o (Q 15 a b  rx^£t£te}S5  fc©5,  u^fcfT^WAtfs  AP«cfefefe£Jg, oTv^A,~e-t-^ ? Arae^^fefefeis Ara^fcfefefeiJg o T V ^ A / t ' f - ; ^ ?  tt-, fefeJS5 t f t t t ^ f t v ^ t - f ^ ? *stf\  fc^ttv^J;  tj,  A>, ibXirfr? (hh) fe©5, cb<D Xi>^5 A,ftg]*©A;^i\ v ^ f i f e ( A , - ) $^4> &©5^3^g:&TSS5 5l5tLi?? = y  = i i o T t , v ^ o V ^ f t H ^ r i l T k - , fe© ^ © A t H o A i ^ M t t f e ^ , &©Air&©A tt^Siif  ttftv^oT,  /e^ftHftv^t-t-J:fe-  !  ^ © S © A ^ - ?^5 L T S I t ^ - ? v^£^t«fti^-f fe^fe^o(± ^^n*3^ttV^t1-<t0  fr^te-  ! © 0  i t t t ,  f(fcttftv^i-^?  184  H^Xto  =f£^fey-yXA»ftv\ f i - f l - i f f e  tn^Xto  —o%fta^ofe^t-f  ^fe-.  0  Trfc,  fe©5.  -€"5 V ^ ^ ^ f c ^ o T ^ f e ©  g ^ i t ^ L T V ^ i o  16 a b •tkg^ftiTf'b,  #,<DAt^  ffi*J7£fcfeoT5,.  g#iit3W£J; g#ii g#]|  t£<Z)#»3*>*A,  WinLX&lfX<  f£ £ V \  (C) 17 a b  nAv^-tcfcfe ! cb<Db\%frK  (C) 18 a b  ^ 5 ^ 1 " ^ -  ^A$^  0  h i f ^ H  !  r.x^^hxt^U  04?)  fe^fe*^{chA^&iiivx  0  (£)  zzM^Zhxtkto  !  JLL  185  2 1  Interviewer b*,  Student ztiftb%fttr^>ib^^  fe©*ltft.  (C) 1 a b  &  3-x^AoT^Tl-frif, 3 - 7. K A o T V ^tc ^ T -f" 11 if.  *5A  2  «3 T - t o  b a  b^b,  h ^ J I U f 5 i f — U B C £>B  fe©5  if 5  t r T M ^ L T V ^ - f - .  &©B*TllK < &<£>B;fcTfi < tbCDB&xm  &>(Do it—  b-^6Aytj:Xftb(Dhcob-  hob&MiKft!&mte<7)X\ bb b T t jft©T,  A,-  o t - r r s ,  fc©5  o A,-ir-  v ^ o b*3A/b*&v^T1-;^? ^ ^ ^ L V ^ ^ T 1 - ^ O  X ~ ,  &-f-£>T\  a  «V\  b * , *?^«9*bfc  Tt-fe©-EH^7fe  &©5if5bTt  t^TTJOtft^TbJ:  if b t f e ^ i r 5 £ 3 V > & 1 \  b*\  JLL  186 2 2  Interviewer  Student  Oiv^) T t , * - A i / X / U t t . •t?1".  (fiv^)  OiW TSifi^oTj#^LT*-Al/X  £5fcoTv^5<£>£fef<:-o± o i | j ; i # U T < ? if .5 T?1-a» ? hfrV * ? fctt*-Al/7>T?-f-o (fife) * — A U - * T j \ (fife) ^ H & L t v ^ - f - . &3i?KK©[)#<D tcMx-to ^^x-fti\ D*fe, fe©t*^ic r if 5, if 5, TJN —  if 5 V ^ 5 * ^ - ^ o T  £ 1 " ^ £fe. 4 ^ M - A ^ ^ u ^ ^(Da^P>#^Ati7t!9 A £ (fiv^ i f 5 ( S 5 L f e i 9 LXmmW^tcY) bfrLXZA, -e-tfe. O i v \ ) f i v \ icfrb^frZkote W o T < / c £ v \ v ^ T l " ; ^ - ? U*fe> & f i fe, & ,  R  n - i t * i t < D - m  (C) 1 a b 0  5,  ) a b  5 ft o  * o tc ?  X .  '^fiif5^©? ^ ^ f i if 5 ? id£fiif5ft©>? ^.mt^^mt^xt^ id&i^^Sf&iroTft^ mmt±fm^t-oxf^(D  A/A>£&O o  c 5 ^ o ^ * 7 t © » ?  f l J ^ | o T & t « 4 V >  (C) 2 a b  3  >  X . X .  ^A,ft;tTftA,TT,  187 (C) 4 a b  if 5 f t © ? if 5 ? if 5 ft© ?  (C)  *:5^5^C*#*>fci, ftv^©? ^5^5M*#-oteft^? -€-5 ^ 5 M * # * > t 4 f t v ^ © ?  a b ftv^ftv\  £>/vif < £ < o-c\ (C) 6 a b  7L -flkjXt)ht<  £</^© ? ? X. - f t A / T r f t / u i f < X. -ftA,-e£>A,if < £v^© ? ^5^5fei?^fe7t/cT%  &^tA,t  feofc  5©t, (C) 7 a b  V^i^So©? v ^ i f o ? W>i:go ©?  /v/v> ^ i / c Uo £#©> (C) 8 a b  9  ft^-c^5. ftA,-?^, tlhX^b,  WcDCbbfr, A^JtLftv^©? A^t-ft^? 7v9JfcLft^©?  a b 0  10 a b  ^ £ < T t  (^) , %t>mz..  ^fe^t^v^^^t^l;*ft^^<t„  *>*A,i;,  0  mmw  188  11 a b 7L— ?  b^fc,  (R) 12 a b  « b f t < H.^bft<  5fctt,  imat.  (C) 13 a b  £$y&b<fti^ £fMSb<ftV^ £ M b < f t v ^ tS5^fe^t^fe  bft^X -fe^^^feftv^fei  *c — X s & b V ^ ? icDflllfeoT,  A/—1=1 Efel^i Uo  0 Sfttt, 0 ^Atg&feU  WA/D*fcV»? 14 a  t 5  i f ^ S S K i t T S i ,  X5&iXZ>i>*t>fr%  ?  bTftl^fel\ 0 !6*t^IHbTSiS5 ic  •€rA,ft;i <t>  ftV^ftV\  MfeoTbT 0 V ^ , £&*N_>IEbTV^J;o  ttfe-^ft^  tft^oTo fife it b ^ f t < o *m<D%i&ltlbi>fr/uft'b&VX  fe^fe1b^£^ft©£  ^^—,  ./vxftfeoTft^^^ov^fei?-,  f^?Abft^ofe 9 i ^ o V ^ o  LTS^^fe-  Mc^ISJto-C  189  15 a b c d ^f£tf 0 ' J ^ ^ U * f t - ^ ?  D*ftl\ W o t S U-*ftV^(Do  W o t 5 ^ D ^ o  rf±*tt,  13*, t 5 r r ^ f t # * o A>, & 9 ^ t ,  0  o &&-  u*feft-o U*2bfto  #6ot^SiJ^.  jff©#{sot  190 JLL  2 3  Interviewer  Student  M£As&x*1-teo  (ttv^) hoob, v^o%  ^&^TW5feo5#>fe§#%3;fc <fe£v\  O i i ^ ) -c-, H £ / U 4 £ »  AftA/-e#"fe<,  O i — V ^ V ^ - f - ^ ?=  L*&fe»ib± o£^v^^7£'Jl£A,fc: ftfe-tf-OI^T m f i v \ tt^fe, fe, & f t f e ^ i S ( D i l t  &&$:&<Dti:mi£A,t£fr  fe-  =  m  -?%:&3;x.%feu (C) 1 a b  ®Bf SftWCSA/fcL-, ^ B l  Jg&ftTV^fcS 5 ^ f e - f e ,  (C) 2 a b  £tt£ttTr  # 4 «9 f i - f t ^ f t v ^ ; / c > fe ££^ft/u^ftv^fe tt^^^ftv^fe^fe  fc^-stft^ftT?,  fr^^fe-  fe,  WB^fe-WBlfc^ftL£  191  3 b (C ) 4 a  &©5SfcoTi!g&ftT5^c5 5 ? tcftb-^^&fo^A,tlftb. /£^^-*3Sv^-KtLS^o>  fc, —Xfth<D 5 CfixcDiS^ t t , —Arisitfl-ft  (C) 5 a b fcot,  (£)  &ftfe©tt^A^ft^c%©=  ^ b X-ffr  ? fra»!9 * Lfc, t 5  ftv^Trt\  192  JLL  2 4  Interviewer  Student  y I M ?/i><3T$s&&frfr KJ ^-tXUlBimvtc K> I T , tcftbXirU, UA^Ayt LXl\ i<D * 3 ^ ^ 7 t < $ A > 5 & ^ S ^ £>—, LftVMS 5 #>VV^ o T v ^ S c i i T , -efefirfJK^, " i M ^ f c L/tra 5 # W o T V ^ 5 i c E f t ^ - H a , , (»vO :  - ^ f e i 5 oTV^5 'J I M ^/loSS&fcH'&.fc 5 o T i ^ 5 fe©5,  if 5  &<D5,  u •y-'f  fc&©Jt&^£>^£Ay,  ^/Kz>fi ?&Ay-ei-tttLif^ i  (C) 1  a b  m^5Xir£ {iv^^ftAvT-f-J;.,  a b  ft •ja^teftv^Az-ef-fc. ft ^ f t f t v ^ - f - f t o ft ^ ^ f t f t V ^ T - f - f t o  (C) 2  0  <D—, 02v>) i ^ l t ^ i - r V ^ S ^ S f t c D T - , Lftv^irv^3v^ftgE$g#sft < ft 19  ££Tl^PH«:o-C T t t 5 ,  £1"<fcfc-o  T-tt^ioeirt  ^ L ^ m ^ T # T ^ o # x . T t * ^ £ + ^ I H f c ^ 5 ir  193 (R) 3 a b c d  &©5,  Hv^-t-Jtitif  -SfcfctiotUofe^M  TrSMxftv^D*ft^A,-T?Lj;  5**-.  fex_, &cDffilfJ£</*T%  fex.ftv^A3i<k^5^fe,  (C) 4 a b A,, ^ W J i t L T L £ x . t t \  (ttW  ^5fit?  ttfe--C%£fc-! (C) 5 a b  (£)  &<5^fe-  v^D-^&v^-f"^— ?  ^thjflZ. c b V ^ o f c fe rxx  (C) 6 a b  , I-l-J BS ^ A.o  A-ei-ftttif—.  &&,  0 Zyf)\  x—, t±-, fe© 5  D^fe,  ()  U*£fe^(D#tt  o ^m^^vtm-Kxt-  ffV^T^T—^  fe>x.£"t"^  ? -t L-fc fe-?:ti&r  194  (£)  —  A, n *>f)f^oTSt ifto Oiv>) X\ focD?, iybXMoM^tft ic fi^^SEft v ^ Jg 5 A, frft if t - , U *fe<D%ftWt II x -r - y - £ ^ <z>£ Ji tf>, OiW M8ifci:l,&1\ X\ yvT-*/--£h<r> Mwrnmrn^L-tcft-ox^/uX^u fiv\ -tfrt.MA„  iCfe/u,  (xx) g ( D A f t ^ ? T^oATrf-;^ ?  fccOXx-i-'-^A,  <D;£ui{iB*AcD = = FJ*Ai = X\ * t ^ A ^ t ,  rfg^LfcV^  4&oxx-^^fc£fc£B*j£*3$B? i s f c o t - , (ttv^) ^ c D i u ^ i o - c ^ f c A , ^ A , f t l S £ - Oih) i:5V^X~ffr-? Oiv^ ; x ^ - y - £ ^ B f i £ ^ f c < ^ o t 5 oC>  oa^o  <D\%x  (m^)  o .  ©£*L ^ -e-f - ft ft if % (I) 7 a *>©^LT?-rftti-iftb &0&*L/j^-et-ft*iif fc#^A©J§1£f£o  Trite:  0  £#tt-c?-f-J:;ko  195 v\  0 fcfe,  (C) 8 a b  ^ 5 * ^ ^ — 0  fe©^^v>fcfto  A,-?-t-frftif-,  z<Dmm<D$cmxi>cbK)-&hx. (C) 9 a b  x-b-rzKM  ^33l%LX^%/uX-f£.-o  im  5^ft— b (C) 10 a b &Z>fri>Lti$Ht/ut}ti!?i>-,  ^bhx-rnfiift-  ( x x . ) x$>  T?4>, ©4-  fe--Attt-C^»ffi@ftfeo  B;fcig0>®3&fiLT*t;<D-Cr-,  (Q 11 a b  (C) 12 a b  5 hbbibfrite^frb  IS«0*  196  (C)  A^-fftif-o  13 a b ^5,  ,®5A,-etftif-.  ! B*Al?  X^fciOMfr^Z-bi*-  ftV^irif  SV^^ftif-o  5 LT<bfe- ! fife,  <b 5 £ 5v^5 £ t f c / i o t L | o t -  A,-  (fife)  ^ 5  -r-f  (C) 14 a b 0  T ? ^ - , 0  fe-B*Am^A^o^3  f i ^ r " 9 t ^ L - > %fei9£-TL-,  4>o(i t9,  fecDHAft  0  fe-  t  () i ! i f t # J * !  0)  mt-f-ob  (C) 15 a b  (c;a 16  b  x . - f e © f e - ,  5 £  <^oTl^7?>A,l>*ftV^£  Az-Xf-f-J^-if—  m^*i-ftif-. & 5 A,  J H ' o T l ^ W i f e -  gv^©-Ci-^fefe-o  D ^ f e , *5"?-f"^. fe^fe,  (^)  D*£/cfe<D^-T-£A,i^  (%)  0  O i W  &mwttLt--r, ZyXTfi\ •tirA, r ^ f e -  hooxybcb-,  ^ - o j i i n ^ A ^ :  fe § ^ fe t - w o T | £ # L T  <ft5. i  * 5 i l v ^ L i t . 4- 0 f i i f 5 % t>  5  mz-byfehkK,  fT4>-  0  f i t  197  fe,  V^x.-  tt*,  & t t * £  tt£  tt7c—  0  ft--ft(C) 17 a b i f btl-otz-  fSttT;/cA,£fJxif-, fSLT#.&A/EJtif-,  ? if—5 ! ^ o t t / ^ ^  (C) 18 a b  5^ft^*5o  -f^  WofcA/fcfrifft—, Wofcfrifft-, WofcA/fcfrifft—,  ftv^ttft-o i —tA,ft£ i v v b f t v ^ f t A / i r ^ L T J : - , (£) / j u i t t * f t - ^ ! ft-  A,, T c o T f t - , t 5 f t , oflT<-5&A/T Wo7tfe- ! & . 5 f t ^ M r ^ f r o * > * 5  ! ^ o f f ^ V ^ B ^ f c o f t T t T - ,  (C) 19 a b  ^b^T^fc^V^tt**^, ^b-fr-O^/t f b v ^ t t * f t v \ iH?ii:T^fcsbV^VXtt*ftV\  (C) 20 a b c d  flr2>fr;/c{S5 7 ^ V X t t * & l ^ ? ^b^/cfs^v^tt*^ ? t£;b^fc{S5^v^A,tt*&^ ? tg*^fcS5 5^v^tt*&v^<D ? #;b^cS5^vXtt*&^© ?  198  bfrfrbte^bf)\  XX.-!  ftA/ta\  (J£) *:5Vvb*LT<k;te, ^ f t t  (5-A,) W - H I (5-A/)  ^ S t 5 - 0  A, A,, -iffcffo-Ci\  U*feo  A^  v^xi^x  Zb^bCb^^XfctiX—o  199 Appendix I G r a m m a t i c a l i t y judgements of noda use by J L L s * socio-linguistically ungrammatical V grammatical 7 questionable R recommended noda use C correct noda use I incorrect noda use JLL #  Opt ion  1  la  JNS A  JNS B  JNS C  7  Ib  2  2a  V  ?  2b  V  V  la V  \  2a  7  V  2b  V.  V  ?  7  3a  7  3b  *  *  Illi!  2a 2b  R  R  R  111  6a  ?  ?  ?  6b  V  V  V  7a  *  Sflll  ill  8b  R  10b  V  la  R  V V  V  5a  -  8a  4b  V  R  5a  7  5b  V  6a  *  ?  7  6b  V  V  \  7a  mm  ' V 'V ?  11a  .  •Rl  1 Ih  llB  7b  7  7  12b  V  V  .  7  B  V  c R  R  R  R  R  V  v C  *  R  8b R  7  B  B  111  8a  •  12a  *  C  V  *  ?  ?  V  :  *  V  V  m "v  ilil  V  4b  6a  •  \  4a  7a  •  7  7  *  •) • i l l i  3a  7  JLL  c  V  *  V  JNS  V  4a  *  <•  JNS B  2b  3b  V  JNS A  Ib  V  liiyii R R  4  v  ?  V  Opt ion  V  10b  V  V  •>  C  V  ?  7  V  V  *  V  V  ?  R  JLL #  V  V  10a  ?  JLL  c  2a  \  •  JNS  3b  8b  9b 10a  V  9a lilllp 9b " V , '  *  7  R  JNS B  *  3a  7b  IIP*i l l D  9a  JNS A  5 b iif|i  R  ,  8a  la  6b  5b  7b  3  R  4b 5a  Opt ion  lb  V  *  JLL #  c R  Ib  4a  JLL  ill  5  9a  •111  9b  V  10a  V  V  10b  ?  V  la lb  R  ?  B IlliB 111 B V  2a  V  ?  V  2b  V  V  V  c:  200 JLL #  Opt ion  5  3a  H  ')  3b  \  %  4a  V  ?  ?  4b  V  V  5.i  •  JNS A  JNS . JNS JLL B C  6a  7  V  ?  6b  V  V  V  7a  V  \-  7b  7  111 V  8  v  4a  *  la  2b  V  *  7  ?  3b  V  V  4a  7  V  v  V P^lllliP  ?  V V  R  R  9  V  C  Id  V  2a R  111 7  R  7  7  lb  V  V  2a jlljjjj 7 \  0  7  3b  V  V  4a  7 fV  4b  %  R  5a  V  5b  V  V  6a  * Bl  V  6h  IBl  6c  0  0*  5b  •v  R  6a  ill  6b la  *  R  2a  V  Hi  •  V  *  ? V  * *  \  V  V  IB  V  7  3b  V  4a , V  \  4b  \  \  5a 5b  v.-  V  lb  3a  V  0  C  11  R  7  5a  R  •)  2c  2b  \  lf||i^  C  SIB  2d  v  ?  •  V  2b  4b  C  (  V  nil  3a  *  :  la  2b  V  lc  V  2b  2a  *  ?  7  sj:  *  3a  *  V  *  ?  *  lb  lb  V  \  V  *  *  A  *  *  7  V  la  *  *  \  V  IP  la  4a  •t  '  (ill Bill  10  H  5b  5a W5b  V  V  V  ?  V  \  \  V  V  7c  3b  5a  4b  R  (  V  *  ?  * "• V 7  V  4a  ?  R  3a  ?  ill  7b  Wmmm  * •.•  V  8c  \  C  7  Bill  JLL  c  V  4c  3b  B l  iimi  JNS  2b  ?  V  7a  JNS B  V  *  *  9  JNS A  V  *  •MB  Illl  Opt ion  2a  R  8b  3a  •)  JLL #  v"  4b  2a  JLL  V  V  :  JNS C  lb  V  Ib  JNS B  ••iii  3b  *  la .  JNS A  3a  8a  8d  7  Opt ion  4b  -v  7c lliSii IIISII  6  R  V lllilllli  V  #  7  •  5b  JLL  V • V  llll  R  R  C  R  201 JLL #  Opt ion  11  6a  12  JNS JNS B c  v  JLL  Mil  JLL #  Opt ion  13  7a  IIBI  7b  7  V  JNS JNS A B  JNS  c  6b  iilll  •)  la  ?  V  V  8a  *  ?  V  lb  V  ?  V  8b  V  V  V  2a  *  la  *  •)  7  2b  V  V  •v  R  14  V  V  lb 2a 2b  ?  3a  ill 1  3b  IB  3a  V  V  ?  3b  V  7  V  4a  V  V  4h  Hi  \  5a  V  V  5b  ?  7  V  3d  V  V  V  Slpii  4a  *  4b 5a  6a 6b  13  JNS A  •  C  3c  ,„.^  \  V  7a  \  V  V  7b  V  ?  V  <Sa  "s  V  v ,  8b  •191  •)  la  *  lb 2a 2b  6a 6b  V  JB|  3b  V  ?  4a  Ills  R  16  5b  .V  V  V  6a  V  v  -\/  7  *  6b  %  lb  V  2a  17  i l l jjli  V',  llll IBl  11HI V  V V  ill ;v  2b  C  *  7  3a  *  *  V  3b  V  V  V  3c  *  *  V  4a  *•  \  4h  \  5a  V  V  5b  7  7  V  \  5a  7  ?  V  5b  V  V  V  *  9  V  i?v Iv-  la  V  V  V  lb  7  *  ?  R  R 18  c  Pip111H i V  V" 7  6b  V  la  4b  V  V  c  V  7  ISI 1111HI  in v *  6a  V  R  3a  V  *  •J  R  V  5a  7  ')  5a  ill  7  •je  I  V  8b  JLL  ?  4b  c  2b  liH  C  JNS C  llll i i i  V  C  V  4a  V  V  /  R  V  V  '  *  )  V  •  7  8a  2a  <  3b  ?  ?  .  c  ?  *  4a  V  *  V  V  V  7b  V  V  3a  V  V  3b  2b  JNS B  lill pil iiiiti Hill IiiIJi  V  lb  R  1  JNS A  7a  1181  .  2a  7  ?  ?  16  7  • • KB llSfll >  *  IB 111  Opt ion  #  C  *  3a  5b  V  5b 15  JLL  .  la  *  4b  C  JLL  1 R  R  11Bll*it V  6a  111111  V  6b  IlSl  V  la  *  *  *  lb  V  V  V  I  C  202 JLL #  IS  Opt ion  JNS A  JNS B  JNS C  JLL  2a  *  >  \  R  2b  V"  3a  7  6a  V  4a  *  >  4b  \  7  5a  V  Bill V*  5b 6a  f  6b  V  V  7  V  V  7a 7b  Sa • p l l 8b  6d  V  7a  *  7b  \  7  ill 11111 H  Sa  Sc  *  8d  7 lill^l*^ R  10a  V  MI  10b R  9a  *  \  .  12a  9b  V  *  V  13b  V  V  H a  7  7  14b  V  15a  *  15b  V  \  fill  %  V  V  1  2b  *  7  V  9c  *  V  V  2c  V  V  V  Ida  9d  V  V  V  2d  V  V  V  16b  \  \  I0h la  *1P1|I  *  IS  R  V  V  V  2a  <  •  -.  111(II  3a  ')  3b  V  4a 4b  3b  ?  lb  2b  R  V  C  B  ?  Sag . vii* 5b tf'  5a  6a V  t  4a 4b  Hf fiji•11 •?  3a  7  Pll \  .  7  V \  B•V 7  V  I  7a  ?  7b  V  V  B? B V  V  17b  V  V  V  ISa  •1  V'  pll  ISh  V  V  V  la  ?  7  V  lb  V  V  V  2a  \  V  .A  R  21  C R  C  IS . V  c  V  2b R  V  ?  17a  I  C C  "ijjj  .  6b  .  jjjlls i l i l mm V  R  7  13a  12b  *  l3l|111  *  V  c  1  7  IP' ?  V  ?  •?  .  V  2a  10a  ill  llllllfllll  V  V  7  9b  7  •  7  l i b  Ib E l  B  •  B  B  ?  V  la  >  JLL  c  B  *  V  JNS  11a  V  ?  JNS B  \  9a  V  V.  JNS A  8b iJpM  8b  10b 20  20  9b  7  8a  i  Opt ion  c  10a  *  R  JLL #  7  9a  19  ?  *  •B  \  *  *  7  c:  JLL  7  6c  7  c  Illi  R  R  JNS  •  6b  \  ?  JNS B  C  BP  •  JNS A  5a  7 V  4d  19  Opt ion  5b  V  i  #  V  3b  4c  JLL  llllliillill  3a  *  V  3b  V  w  C C  C  203  JLL #  21  Opt ion  4a 4bl  22  JNS • A  JNS B  M V ?  la lb 2a 2b 3a  V  llilll lPI *  JNS C  ill  JLL #  Opt ion  JNS A  JNS B  JNS  c  #  22  14c  9  V  V  24  14d  V  V  15a  V"; . v  15b  V~  15c  A/  c  V V  JLL  •v  c ?  R  23  la  V  lb  4a  V  2a  »  ^Itliyilli  5a 5b  V  Cu  >•••  hh  c  \, -y ?  V  V  V  c  V  7b 8a  *-  '  IB ?  9b  .  10a  V  10b  V  ?  12b  V  \\\  Ep  Ph  *  14b  *  4b  .  5a  iflfll  ltl|| iiilllit H i  *w  8a  "V  8b  V  V  9a  *  *  V  9b  V  V  1.0a  *  ?  10b  V  V  1 la  \  1 Ih  \  V  12a  *  B  c  V  12b  ?  13a  •  ('  III  (•  la  *  *  lb  V  V \  *  j|§j  ?  c •>  c c c  ?  B*  V  V  c  •  .  V ?  14b  V  V  ?  V  c  V  15a  c  I  *  1 >b 14a  JLL  c  7b  B V  JNS  V  fiiiiiiiii  \  JNS B  (•  15b  A/  16a  ?  V V  c  16b  V  V  R  17a  *  7  c  2b  V  \  ?  V  3a  ?  V  *  V  V  3b  V  V  V  17b  .  3c  ?  V  V  18a  3d  V  V  V  18b  4a  .  Illi  l>a  BUI nm)  19b  llJii mm (  ?  R  4b  .  •Pf*  14a  ?  •  2a  1 lb 12a  ?  JNS A  ""V  ? ;  1 la  IH  c  V  5b 24  ^  8b 9a  c  %  3a  lllllllslsl  7a  '•  ;>/  4a  IllllE l B Wt  *  Opt ion  •fl  c  2b  3b  IBli  *  ?  JLL  7a  V  15d  3b  4b  ;  JLL  5a V  V  c  V  c  5b 6a  ?  B B * *  6b  > V  B  c  c  V  *  ?  V  c  V  l  20a  *  ?  ?  20b  V  V  V  20c  *  ?  ?  20d  V  V  c  


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items