Chapter 2 Literature Review
2.2 The numeral FQs in Japanese
The FQs in Japanese have received extensive discussions. The FQs in
Japanese can be either numeral quantifier likes sanhnin ‘three peoples in (56b) (Fujita
1994, Kobuchi 2004, 2007) or non-numeral quantifier like subete ‘alls in (57b)
(Huang and Ochi 2014).10 The former has attracted much more attention than the
latter. This section mainly discusses the numeral quantifier in Japanese since it shares
some intriguing properties with the PNQ and the FQ in Chinese.
(56) Numeral quantifier
a. Kinoo san-nin-no kasyu-ga utat-ta.
yesterday three-CL-GEN singer-NOM sing-PAST
10 In the literature, the two sentences in (57) are translated in the same way.
50
b. Kasyu-ga kinoo san-nin utat-ta.
singer-NOM yesterday three-CL sing-PAST
‘Three singers sang yesterday.s
(Kimilo 2006)
(57) Non-numeral quantifier
a. Taro-wa subete-no gyooza-o tabe-ta.
Taro-TOP all-GEN dumpling-ACC eat-PAST
b. Taro-wa gyooza-o subete tabe-ta.
Taro-TOP dumpling-Ac all eat-PAST
‘Taro ate all the dumplings.s
(Huang and Ochi 2014)
Like English FQ all, the numeral quantifier in Japanese has mainly received
two approaches: Stranding Analysis (Miyagawa 1989, Miyagawa and Arikawa 2007)
and Adverbial Analysis (Fujita 1994, Downing 1996, Kobuchi 2004, 2007).
According to Miyagawass (1989) stranding account, the relationship between
the FQ and its associated nominal phrase is established on the c-commanding
requirement.
51
(58) Mutual c-command requirement: The NP or its trace and the numeral or its trace
must c-command each other.
(Miyagawa 1989)
Miyagawa and Arikawa (2007) modify Miyagawass (1989) stranding account
and claim that the FQ and its associated nominal phrase form a constituent, which can
sustain the requirement in (58).11 As shown in (59), the associated nominal phrase
kasyu ‘singers and the numeral quantifier sanhnin ‘three peoples are a constituent
before the associated nominal phrase is moved away and crosses the adjunct kincc
‘yesterdays. At the same time, the numeral quantifier sanhnin ‘three peoples and the
trace of the associated nominal phrase kasyu ‘singers mutually c-command and then
the anaphoric relationship between them is established directly.
(59) Kasyu-gai [VP kinoo [ti san-nin] utat-ta].
singer-NOM yesterday three-CL sing-PAST
‘Three singers sang yesterday.s
11 The structure Miyagawass (1989) Stranding Analysis adopts is still the ternary branching structure, and therefore, Miyagawa and Arikawa (2007) adjusts the ternary branching struture to binary branching structure.
52
The stranding approach to Japanese numeral FQs is also argued for by
Fitzpatrick (2007). According to him, in some languages the FQ is adnominal and
should be accouted for by Stranding Analysis like Japanese FQ, but in some other
languages the FQ is adverbial and should be accounted for by Adverbial Aanalysis
like English and French.
The other approach to the Japanese numeral FQ is Adverbial Analysis. As
aforementioned, the essence of Adverbial Analysis is that the numeral FQ is not
base-generated in adnominal positions but is an adjunct like an adverb. The main
point is that under adverbial account, the sentence with an FQ in (60) and the sentence
with an adnominal quantifier in (61) have no derivational relationship. Regarding the
quantifying relationship between the numeral FQ and its associated nominal phrase,
the proponents of Adverbial Analysis provide different suggestions; for example
Fujita (1994) proposes head-feature licensing, Kobuchi (2004, 2007) follows Doetjess
(1997) adverbial account, and so forth.
I will not further discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each approach to
Japanese. Nevertheless, I notice that like FQ all in English, Chinese FQs at issue can
only have the subject-oriented reading but Japanese numeral FQs can have
subject-oriented or object-oriented reading (Fujita 1994).
5c
Here, I will discuss an intriguing property of Japanese FQ which is also shared
by Chinese FQ at issue: the two possible readings of an FQ. According to Fujita
(1994), Downing (1996), Kobuchi (2004, 2007), the Japanese FQ may have two
different readings: exhaustive reading and partitive reading, as shown in (60)-(61)
while the adnominal quantifier can only have an exhaustive reading.
(60) Japanese FQ
a. Yakamashii gakusei-ga go-nin ki-ta.
noisy student-NOM 5-CL come-PAST
‘Five of the noisy students came.s
b. Gakusei-ga go-nin ki-ta.
student-NOM 5-CL come-PAST
‘(The) five students came.s
(Fujita 1994)
(61) Adnominal quantifier in Japanese
Yakamashii go-nin-no gakusei-ga ki-ta.
noisy 5-CL-GEN student-NOM come-PAST
‘(The) five noisy students came.s
54
Example (60a-b) show that the FQ gchnin ‘five CLs in Japanese can have
either an exhaustive reading, all the five people, or a partitive reading, five of the
students, while the adnominal quantifier in (61) only allows an exhaustive reading.
One more noteworthy point about the Japanese FQ is that Fujita (1994) demonstrates
that partitivity is a characteristic of the FQ construction, although it is not an inherent
property of the construction. More precisely, the two interpretations rely on different
contexts instead of the FQ itself. That is, if in the context, there exists a relevant set
which is able to be compared with the FQ, the FQ would prefer the partitive reading. If
the relevant set does not exist, then the FQ can only have an exhaustive reading, as
shown in (60a-b), respectively. Consequently, in Japanese, the FQ with an exhaustive
reading usually goes along with an indefinite associated nominal phrase.
This characteristic of Japanese FQs is also used to argue against Stranding
Analysis (Fujita 1994, Kobuchi 2004, 2007) since the fundamental motivation for the
derivational approach is that the sentence with an FQ and the sentence with an
adnominal quantifier are underlyingly the same and these two sentences should have
an identical reading.
In sum, firstly, in light of the FQs in Japanese, it is not surprising that a language
has both numeral and non-numeral floating quantifiers so does Chinese. Secondly, in
Japanese, an FQ can have an exhaustive reading or a partitive reading depending on
55
the context, as shown in (60). I also observe that the Chinese FQ at issue also shares a
similar property.