界定日語中的分類詞 - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)國立政治大學語言學研究所碩士論文 National Chengchi University Graduate Institute of Linguistics Master Thesis. 指導教授：何萬順博士 Advisor：Dr. One-Soon Her. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學界定日語中的分類詞. ‧. Identifying Classifiers in Japanese. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. 研究生：王維撰 Student：Wei Wang 中華民國一○四年七月 July, 2015. v.

(2) Identifying Classifiers in Japanese. BY Wei Wang. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學 A Thesis Submitted to the. ‧. Graduate Institute of Linguistics. y. Nat. In Partial Fulfillment of the. n. al. er. io. sit. Requirement for the Degree of Master of Arts. Ch. engchi. July, 2015. i n U. v.

(3) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v.

(4) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. Copyright © 2015 Wei Wang All Rights Reserved. i n U. v.

(5) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 這份論文能夠順利完成，首先真的一定要感謝指導論文的何萬順老師，何老師從課堂上提出分類詞的概念時，這個主題就深深的吸引了我；之後加入老師國科會的計畫，了解分類詞議題的廣泛與深度後，更是真真切切地建立了我對於這個主題的興趣。雖然覺得自己永遠說不出像何老師那麼有想法和邏輯性的話語，但是跟隨著他的路途，不知不覺便會耳濡目染，懂得思考問題、懂得整理規則。謝謝最敬愛、最崇拜的何老師總是能一語道破問題核心，proposal 之後雖然我先踏入職場而使論文進度遲緩，但是何老師仍然不厭其煩地幫助我釐清論文內的問題，使我能順利口試畢業。還有許多教授都讓我心存感謝。口試時也感謝張郇慧老師以及謝富在老師. 政治大楚，以及英文使用上如果有失誤，教授們亦會提出明確的改進方向。立回憶就讀政大語言所的過程，修課期間竟然不是辛苦的，其實真的是非常. 的不吝指教，不但提出關鍵性的細節，讓我學習到如何將陳述表達得更加簡單清. ‧ 國. 學. 非常的快樂，教授們的教學一直都讓我超級有學習的動力，何萬順老師、張郇慧老師、蕭宇超老師、徐嘉慧老師、黃瓊之老師、詹惠珍老師、萬依萍老師、莫建. ‧. 清老師等，真的，每一門修過的課，都是印象深刻的，甚至想得起來自己在哪門課裡思考又成長了哪些方面。政大語言所很特別，雖然學習不乏壓力、生出報告. y. Nat. er. io. 學期間，我覺得學習語言學真的好快樂！. sit. 時不乏煩躁，但是總歸起來我的「學習熱忱」、「學習動力」都被激發了出來，求. al. 再來要感謝所上的好同伴們，同儕的感情好、合作無間也是這幾年研究所. n. v i n 生活快樂的理由之一。謝謝跟隨何老師腳步時有景芃的陪伴和督促、修許多課時 Ch U i e h n c g 培禹常和我一起討論問題及願意幫我校正論文語句、大衛和吹吹讓我有無比快樂的日文課、Henry 和阿中每次聚會的幽默、強尼和阿卡會帶我討論深入的問題、涵吉每次碰面時的關心和討論、婉婉蜜珊如如每次吃飯時的彼此關懷，與你們相處是我一生中非常美好的回憶。論文完成過程，感謝兩位日文母語人士──栗原祐美和 Mazuki Yamamoto 提供的協助和諮詢，感謝羅雅婷協助的問卷翻譯，感謝願意填這份問卷的所有母語人士，感謝柯定吟幫忙校正論文語句，以及所有其他人所提供的任何協助。謝謝我一直以來的好朋友翡珊、沛均、定吟等的支持，你們的鼓勵總是能給予我無比的動力。感謝姑姑的支持，是姑姑堅持讓我完成了研究所的學業，是姑姑無私的奉獻成就了今日的我，以及最後感謝邱祥霖及其餘親友一直以來的陪伴和支持。 iv.

(6) 國立政治大學研究所論是論文摘要研究所別：語言學研究所論文名稱：界定日語中的分類詞指導教授：何萬順博士研究生：王維論文內容提要：(共一冊，21, 313 字，分五章節) 日文與中文一樣，皆是使用分類詞的語言。長久以來不乏學者討論日文的量詞，然而，對於界定何者為分類詞、如何區分助數詞、量詞和分類詞等議題，. 政治大. 卻缺少統一的定論；一方面是因為語言學上對於分類詞的定義缺乏一定的標準，. 立. 另一方面，傳統日文文法書中的概念，往往僅用「助數詞」一個詞類就概括了所. ‧ 國. 學. 有數量詞後面的詞類。. ‧. 本篇論文最主要的目標便是依照一個統一且清楚的定義，來界定日文的分. y. Nat. al. er. io. sit. 類詞。此次研究先參考了四位語言學者的研究，和四本文法書中的分類詞列表，. v. n. 共整理出前人所列出 673 個可能的分類詞，之後再透過 JpWac 和 Google Search. Ch. engchi. i n U. 蒐羅實際語料，對這 673 個詞逐一進行句法和語意測試，最後界定出其中只有 115 個是真正的日文分類詞。在此之後，為瞭解日本人對於名詞的分類和意識，便從這 115 個分類詞由底層到高層建立一項名詞的分類整理。最後，再由出一份問卷請以日文為母語的日本人填寫使用頻率，初步了解現代日本語中分類詞的使用狀況。結果顯示，僅有 27 個分類詞堪列為現代日本語中常使用的分類詞，期望這些真正的分類詞能成為日後臺灣在日文教學之參考。 v.

(7) Abstract. Japanese is one of the languages that use numeral classifiers, which can be combined with both numerals and nouns. However, Japanese grammar books tend to use “counters” to call all morphemes preceded by numerals, and in linguistic studies, the definition of numeral classifiers is controversial. Therefore, there is no consistent analysis in identifying Japanese classifiers.. 治政 The goal of this thesis is to identify Japanese 大 classifiers based on one consistent 立 ‧ 國. 學. model. Eight previous works from both traditional grammar and linguistic areas were reviewed, and 673 possible classifiers were collected. Each of the 673 possible. ‧. classifiers is tested to identify true Japanese classifiers. Two corpora, JpWac and. sit. y. Nat. n. al. er. io. Google Search, are used to collect raw data for syntactic and semantic tests. As a. i n U. result, only 115 true Japanese classifiers are found.. Ch. engchi. v. After identifying the true classifiers, a bottom-up classification is performed to understand the concept of noun categorization by native Japanese speakers. A questionnaire is created to evaluate the usage frequencies of these true classifiers. Based on the survey, only 27 out of the 115 classifiers are estimated to be frequently used classifiers.. vi.

(8) Table of Content List of Tables List of Figures. viii ix. Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Motivation and Purpose 1.2 Convention of the Data 1.3 Organization of the Thesis. 1 4 12 14. Chapter 2 Literature Review 2.1 Definitions of Japanese Numeral Classifiers 2.2 Inventories of Japanese Numeral Classifiers 2.3 Issues in Contemporary Japanese 2.4 Remarks. 16 17 37 47 50. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Chapter 3 Methodology 3.1 Raw Data for Tests 3.2 Syntactic and Semantic Tests 3.3 Remarks. sit. n. er. io. al. y. Nat. Chapter 4 Results and Discussions 4.1 True Classifiers 4.2 Semantic Categorizations 4.3 Preliminary analysis of Frequency. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. 52 52 55 67 68 68 77 82. Chapter 5 Conclusion 5.1 Observations when Identifying True Classifiers 5.2 Suggestions on Japanese Teaching 5.3 Implications and Further Research. 85 85 86 89. References Appendix 1. 90 98. vii.

(9) List of Tables. Table 1. 54 Cs listed in Sanches (1977; 54). 38. Table 2. 20 Cs listed in Denny (1979; 320). 40. Table 3. 154 Cs listed in Downing (1984, 1996; 294-310). 40-41. Table 4. 39 Cs listed in Downing (1983; 347). 42. Table 5. 32 Cs listed in Matsumoto (1991; 82-83, 1993; 701-704). 42. Table 6. 115 Cs listed in 顧 (2004). 46. Table 7. 53 Cs listed in 錢 (2011; 70-72). 47. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. Table 8. 105 true Cs that passed the syntactic test and corpus examination. ‧. Table 9. 10 Elements that could be both classifiers and measure words. 68-69. Nat. sit. y. 69. io. n. al. 71. er. Table 10. 485 Deleted morphemes and the reasons for deletion Table 11. 14 echo Cs listed in previous works. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. 72. Table 12. Concept of “one pair of shoes” and “one shoe” with Japanese “足”. 74. Table 13. Classifiers evaluated as commonly or uncommonly used. 83. Table 14. Categorization distribution of core classifiers. 84. Table 15. So-called “量詞” listed in Japanese textbooks. 87. viii.

(10) List of Figures. Figure 1. Noun classifications of Japanese grammar book in 蔡 (2010; 20). 30. Figure 2. Japanese classifier categorization in Uchida and Imai (1999; 51). 36. Figure 3. The Japanese classifier categorization system in Yamamoto (2005; 50). 36. Figure 4. The Japanese classifier categorization system in Denny (1979; 320). 39. Figure 5. Word sketch of “本” in JpWac. 53. Figure 6. The search result of “本” in JpWac. 54. Figure 7. Outline of the categorization. 78. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. Figure 8. True classifiers in the category “animate”. 78. ‧. Figure 9. True classifiers in the category “inanimate-shape”. Nat. sit. y. 79. io. n. al. er. Figure10. True classifiers in the category “inanimate-function”. Ch. engchi. ix. i n U. v. 80.

(11) Chapter 1 Introduction. Classifiers are commonly seen in languages around the world. Classifiers coerce and select the nouns (Huang and Ahren 2003), that is to say, one classifier may co-occur with a set of specific nouns. Also, classifiers could be regarded as noun. 政治大. categorization devices (Aikhenvald 2000).. 立. There are different types of classifiers, such as noun classifiers, verbal. ‧ 國. 學. classifiers, and numeral classifiers (Aikhenvald, 2000). For these different types of. ‧. classifiers, they have a common characteristic--to sort the world based on our. Nat. io. sit. y. conception. The difference among these types of classifiers lies in the syntactic. er. behaviors and word classes of the “classifier” morphemes. For Japanese classifiers. al. n. v i n discussed in this thesis, theyC areh“numeral classifiers” e n g c h i U that may be adjacent to. numerals, unlike noun or verbal classifiers in which the classifier morphemes are the noun or the verb itself. Aikhenvald suggests that the use of “numeral classifiers” is common in languages in East and Southeast Asia, including Japanese. The reason Japanese adopting “numeral classifiers” as noun categorization devises may be due to the influence of the Chinese language. From the historical perspective, 周 (2009) 1.

(12) reported that Japanese has long been influenced by Chinese. According to written records excavated in Japan, Chinese classifiers were introduced in Japan in the fourth century. Since the Japanese language adopted the Chinese classifiers system at the very early stage of its language development, Japanese and Chinese use the same type of classifiers, namely numeral classifiers. Moreover, the kanji (漢字, Chinese characters) system is also used for classifiers in written Japanese.. 政治大. Although existence of numeral classifiers in Japanese and the categorization. 立. function of Japanese numeral classifiers are beyond controversy, previous studies still. ‧ 國. 學. provide dissimilar definitions for numeral classifiers. As a result, which Japanese. ‧. words can be identified as numeral classifiers is controversial. Additionally, the. Nat. io. sit. y. number of Japanese classifiers estimated by previous studies also varies. If there is no. er. agreement over the identity of Japanese classifiers, then, the study of previous works. al. n. v i n on the syntactic behavior of C thehclassifiers may be U e n g c h i inconsistent.. With regard to traditional Japanese grammar books and dictionaries, the definitions of classifiers are even vaguer. The reason is that, traditionally, the classifiers are listed in the “助数詞” category in Japanese, or “counters” in English. The distinction between “counters” and “classifiers” is unclear in traditional Japanese grammar. Counters are morphemes that appear immediately after numerals, so “counters” 2.

(13) in Japanese might contain words like nouns, classifiers, measure words, or units of measurement, etc. “Numeral classifiers” is just one type of “counters”, so the number of possible Japanese classifiers listed in traditional grammar books may be bigger. True classifiers are mixed with counters. Thus, the task of identifying true classifiers from counters is inevitable. The main goal of this thesis is to identify true Japanese numeral classifiers from. 政治大. the lists that include non-classifier elements as measure words, echo classifiers, units. 立. of measurement, nouns, and combination of classifiers and nouns, etc.. ‧ 國. 學. If what could be identified as Japanese classifiers is a controversial issue in. ‧. previous studies, it would also influence the discussions of syntactic or semantic. Nat. io. sit. y. behaviors. Using consistent syntactic tests to examine true Japanese numeral. er. classifiers is also required. This thesis tries to generate the list of true Japanese. al. n. v i n numeral classifiers by usingC a consistent of classifiers and test them with h e n gdefinition chi U consistent syntactic behaviors. Another issue worth discussing is the “noun categorization” function of classifiers. If previous studies are not able to accurately identify Japanese classifiers and the number of Japanese classifiers, then how to categorize Japanese classifiers will be another issue without a consistent conclusion. If classifiers are identified and sorted properly based on semantic features, this could reveal how Japanese people 3.

(14) categorize nouns and the world. Finally, as the list of Japanese classifiers ( “classifiers” will be abbreviated as “Cs” in the following chapters) is determined, it will also be helpful for discussions in language teaching and second language acquisition for Taiwanese learners.. 1.1 Motivation and Purpose. 政治大. 1.1.1 The Cs identified in previous studies. 立. From the traditional view point, the definitions of numeral Cs are inconsistent. ‧ 國. 學. and vague, and the number of Japanese Cs estimated by separate studies varies.. ‧. In linguistic studies, Sanches (1977) listed 55 Cs, Denny(1979) listed only 20. Nat. sit er. io. 150 Japanese Cs.. y. Cs, Matsumoto (1991,1993) listed 32 Cs, and Downing (1983, 1984, 1996) listed over. al. n. v i n From grammar books C andhdictionaries, Iida listed e n g c h i U 550 counters, while the NHK. dictionary listed 257 counters. In addition, in grammar books written in Chinese, 顧 (2004) listed 115 Cs whereas 錢 (2011) listed only 53 Cs. The numbers of possible Japanese Cs in previous works are between 20 and over 500. This indicates that the definition of Cs needs to be well-defined and re-examined to accurately identify true Japanese Cs.. 4.

(15) 1.1.2 Linguistic discussions about classifiers Despite the fact that the disputable definition of Japanese Cs provides a research gap worth analyzing, there is another reason to show that it is important to identify true Japanese numeral Cs – if classifiers are not clearly defined and separated from other syntactic elements, the results of some syntactic tests or semantic predictions will be affected.. 政治大. Previous studies investigating Japanese numeral Cs and Japanese syntax focus. 立. more on analyzing the syntactic structures of Cs. According to Watanabe (2006) and. ‧ 國. 學. Philip (2006, 2007), the structures of Japanese numeral Cs are shown in example (1):. Nat. バナナ. お. 食べた。 1. nin. ga. banana. o. tabeta. banana. n. al. C NOM. Ch. engchi. “Three students ate banana.” b. 三. 人. 学生. が. ACC ate. er. io. student 3. が. sit. gakusei san. 人. y. 三. ‧. (1) a. 学生. i n U. バナナ. v. お. 食べた。. o. tabeta. (predominant in old Japanese, 42.8%) san 3. nin gakusei ga. banana. C. banana. student NOM. ACC. ate. “Three students ate banana.” 1. Examples shown in this thesis are presented in four lines to denote the differences. The first line shows the characters using the kanzi(漢字) system, the second line shows the spelling in Japanese, the third line presents the glossaries, and the fourth line displays the English translation. 5.

(16) c. 学生. が. gakusei ga. 三. 人. san. student NOM 3. バナナ. お. 食べた。. nin. banana. o. tabeta. C. banana. ACC. ate. “Three students ate banana.” d. 学生. の. 三. gakusei no san student GEN 3. 立. 人. が. バナナ. お. 食べた。. nin. ga. banana. o. tabeta. 治 banana 政C NOM 大. ACC ate. 人. の. 学生. が. バナナ. お. C. gakusei. ga. banana. o. tabeta. sit. 3. no. GEN student NOM. n. al. banana. Ch. engchi. “Three students ate banana.”. ACC ate. er. nin. io. Nat. san. ‧. (predominant in modern Japanese, 45.8%) 2. 食べた。. y. e. 三. 學. ‧ 國. “Three students ate banana.”. i n U. v. The morpheme with the Chinese character “人” in the spelling of にん /nin/ is a noun in Chinese, but it is a [+human] C in Japanese. The issues of the famous “floating quantifiers” (Miyagawa, 2006) and the structural differences in examples (1a) to (1e) are not essentially related to the main focus of this paper, so they are not discussed in detail. Also note that Alan (1995) suggested that in modern Japanese,. 2. The statistics is based on Downing and Noonan eds.(1995; 209) in which a total of 208 samples were studied and the most frequent C structure in old and modern Japanese is found. 6.

(17) [Num CL-の N] is the predominant construction. This factor may affect the syntactic test process in Chapter 3. Many studies claimed that Japanese Cs are modifiers of the following verb phrase (abbreviated as “VP”), and three proves show that Japanese numeral Cs are modifiers of VP. However, this is possibly because of the inconsistent definitions and the elements taken in syntactic tests whose results satisfy this prediction.. 政治大. First of all, in example (1c) above, some elements, such as “昨日” (“yesterday”). 立. can be inserted between the NP and C, as shown in the following example (2) .. ‧ 國. 學. Sentence (2a) does not prove that Cs are modifiers of NP or VP. However, in sentence. ‧. (2b), if “昨日” is inserted between “学生” and “三人”, then it seems like the numeral. Nat. io. sit. y. “三” (さん, /san/, “three”) and C “人” are much closer to the following VP (バナナお. er. 食べ, “ate banana”) than the preceding NP (学生, “students”). Therefore, 周 (2009). al. n. v i n and Kuno (1973) suggested C thathJapanese Cs are not e n g c h i U modifiers of the NP (student) but modifiers of the VP (ate banana). Furthermore, Nakanishi (2003) even claimed that Cs are modifiers of both the NP (student) and the VP (ate banana). He suggested that the C is “subject to constraints in both the VP and NP domains” based on his own terminology.. 7.

(18) (2) a. [昨日] [学生 kinou. gakusei. が]. [三. 人]. [バナナ. お. ga. san. nin. banana. o. 3. C. banana. yesterday student NOM. 食べ-た]。 tabe-ta. ACC eat-past tense. “Three students ate banana yesterday. b. [学生. が]. [昨日]. [三. 人]. [バナナ. お. 食べ-た]。. ga. kinou. san. nin. banana. o. tabe-ta. gakusei student. 政 3治C 大banana. NOM yesterday. 立. ACC eat-past tense. “Three students ate banana yesterday.”. ‧ 國. 學. This viewpoint is worth re-examining because the syntactic position of “昨日”. ‧. can be changed to the beginning of this sentence. If “昨日” is not inserted between. Nat. io. sit. y. NP and C, as shown in example (2a), then this proof is invalid.. er. In addition to the second proof addressing that Cs are modifiers of VP, it is. al. n. v i n relevant to the definition of C theh Cs. Philip (2006) compared two possible meanings of engchi U a sentence in example (3). He suggested that the event C “発” (with the spelling of hatsu /hatsɯ/, はつ) is used to count the event “shot”, but not the noun object “pistol”, based on the fact that the meaning of this sentence is not “there were three pistols”, but “there were three pistol shots (three shooting event)”. Therefore, he claimed that the C “発” modifies the VP (うたれた, “shot”), but not the NP (ピストル, “pistol”). 8.

(19) (3) ピストル pisutoru pistol. が. そこ. で. 三. 発. ga. soko. de. san. patsu. there. at. 3. NOM. C. うたれ-た。 utare-ta shoot-past tense. “There were three pistol shots.” (C 発 counted the VP shooting event) *”There were three pistols.”. *( C 発 counted the NP pistol). However, it is because of the inaccurate definition of Cs that led to the “C is the. 政治大. modifier of VP” prediction. In the later chapter, a more conscientious definition of C. 立. will be provided. Cs can be viewed as profilers that sometimes focus on some specific. ‧ 國. 學. features of an NP, but not on the whole characteristics of NP. As a matter of fact, this. ‧. second proof indicates that it is unclear whether Cs modify VP.. Nat. io. sit. y. The final proof is relevant to Cs and measure words (abbreviated as “M” in this. er. thesis) identification. Example (4) shows the revised sentences of Nakanishi (2003).. al. n. v i n C hto verify his pointUthat C/M phrases are sometimes Nakanishi provided the example engchi modifiers of NPs, and other times they are modifiers of both VPs and NPs. He provided the term “split classifiers/ measure phrases” to explain the behavior of. examples (2b), (3), (4a) and (4b), which the C/M phrases are separated away from the NP by elements like “yesterday” or prepositional phrases (abbreviated as “PP”). He suggested that these “split classifiers/ measure phrases” should be the modifiers of the adjacent VPs. With the same VP (spilled) in both (4a) and (4b), only 9.

(20) sentence (4a) is grammatical. (4b) is ungrammatical because the slot after numeral “三” (“three”) is not a C or M like “度” (it means “degree”). In other words, if (4a) is a grammatical sentence, then the element following numeral “三” would definitely be a C or M. As a result, Nakanishi suggested that a C/M phrase may coerce not only an NP (水, meaning “water”) but also a VP (溢れた, meaning “spilled”). が]. (4) a. [水. mizu ga. の. [机. で]. 杯]. [三. 政no ue治 de 大san. tukue. 立 table GEN. water NOM. on. POS. bai. 3. [溢れ-た]。 3 kobore-ta. M-cup spill-past tense. 學. ‧ 國. 上. “Three cups of water was spilled on the table.” の. 上. で]. [三. 度]. ‧. [溢れ-た]。. mizu ga. tukue. no. ue. de. san. do. kobore-ta. io. が]. table. sit. Nat. y. [机. water NOM. al. GEN on. POS. 3. degree. er. b. *[水. n. v i n “*Three degree C of water on the table.” h e nwasg spilled chi U. spill-past tense. 4. For his “non-split classifiers/ measure phrases” idea, in examples (1a), (1b), (1d), and (1e), the C/M phrases are contiguous with the NP. He suggested that they could only modify the adjacent NP, so the C/M could be a modifier of both NP and VP.. 3. In the original example, (4a) is 水が机の上で三リットルこぼれた (Three liters of water spilled on the table). The comparison of (4a) and (4b) is not sufficient to prove his point on slit classifier/ measure phrases, because “liter” and “degree” are not classifiers or measure words. 4 The word “度” with the spelling of /du/ could be degrees or times of events. In example (4b), if the meaning of 度 is for counting times, then it is a classifier and the sentence will be grammatical. 10.

(21) However, what satisfies his hypothesis (that Cs are modifiers of VP) is the difference in the properties of the C/M and non-C/M elements, but not the syntactic structure itself. The reason which made (4a) grammatical and (4b) ungrammatical is due to the semantic differences between the M “杯” and unit of measurement “度” . Also, the same prediction could be made based on his “non-split classifier/ measure word phrases” idea.. 政治大. Consider examples taken from Google Search in (5a) and the made-up sentence. 立. (5b), it is very clear that for Philip’s “non-split C/M phrases”, (5b) is still a. ‧ 國. 學. semantically-illness sentence because the morpheme after the numeral “三” is not a C. ‧. or M. The main reason that makes (4a) and (5a) grammatical is whether the syntactic. Nat. 水. 溢れて、…。. n. al. が. san 3. pai. C hga koborete engchi. mize. M-cup water NOM. spilled. “Three cups of water spilled, and…” b. *三 san 3. 度. 水. が. 溢れた。. do. mize. ga. koboreta. degree water NOM spilled. “*Three degree of water spilled” 11. sit. 杯. er. io. (5) a. 三. y. elements that the author chose to do the tests are C/M or not.. i n U. v.

(22) If we agree that the C or M phrases seems to modify the VP in examples (3) and (4a), the same for the so-called “non-split C/M phrases”, they will also be modifiers of VP. Example (6) is also a copy of the results from Google Search. For sentence with adjacent C (発) and NP (ピストル, meaning “pistol”), the C may still seem to refer to the shooting event but not the NP “pistol.” (6) 三 san. ピストル. patsu. pisutoru. 立. C. pistol. で. 三連射し-た。. sanrenshashi-ta 政te 治大 INS. three times shoot-past tense. “There were three continuous pistol shots.”. 學. ‧ 國. 3. 発. ‧. “*There were three pistols.”. Nat. io. sit. y. Thus, it is important to define Cs conscientiously and to identify Japanese Cs. er. carefully, because the definition may affect the syntactic tests or semantic discussions.. al. n. v i n Therefore, the main purposeC ofh this paper is to carefully e n g c h i U re-examine what could be. called as Cs in Japanese, and discuss how nouns can be categorized by Japanese Cs.. 1.2 Convention of the Data In order to identify as many numeral classifiers as possible and develop C inventory, the Japanese Cs listed by previous studies should be collected first, then the data could be integrated to reveal the complete list of Japanese Cs. 12.

(23) The data collected in this paper is from previous works in two fields – linguistic studies and grammar books or dictionaries. For linguistic works, Japanese C lists created by four linguists are used, including dissertations and journal papers. Most of the studies are written in English and only one study is written in Japanese. The purpose of collecting data from these studies is to get a full picture of Japanese Cs defined by previous linguistic analysis,. 政治大. which aids in the identification of true Cs out of these lists.. 立. Secondly, four grammar books and dictionaries are used to collect the data of. ‧ 國. 學. Japanese Cs. Lists of “counters”(助数詞) are used to examine true Cs because many. ‧. possible Japanese Cs are considered as counters in traditional Japanese grammar. Two. Nat. io. sit. y. of the books are written by Japanese native speakers: one is a grammar book of. er. Japanese counters and the other is the list of counters in the appendix of a dictionary. al. n. v i n published by NHK. For the C other two grammar books he n g c h i U written in Chinese, one book is published in Mainland and the other in Taiwan. These grammar books are used because language acquisition is an important field in the discussion about Cs. So the traditional view on Japanese Cs in teaching should be considered as well. The C list can be consulted to provide advices on learning Japanese as a second language in Taiwan. In the process of identifying Japanese Cs and to check whether the syntactic test 13.

(24) could lead to grammatical sentences, raw data of Japanese is needed. So one online Japanese corpus, JpWac in Sketch Engine, and Google Search are used to do the tests. JaWac is a Japanese Web Corpus which contains 409,384,405 tokens and 333,246,192 words. The data is collected from 49,544 documents. All searched data is segmented according to the part-of-speech. JpWac is used to identify the nouns adjacent to possible Japanese numeral Cs. In Google Search, the language is set to. 政治大. Japanese so that grammatical sentences that are commonly used are collected to. 立. examine the syntactic structure and to find the true Cs in Japanese.. ‧ 國. 學 ‧. 1.3 Organization of the Thesis. Nat. io. sit. y. This thesis is organized as follows. In the first chapter, the motivation and. er. purpose of identifying Japanese numeral Cs are discussed, and the method of data. al. n. v i n Cthe collection is also presented in U thesis. h eintroduction n g c hofi this. In Chapter 2 on literature review, traditional and recent definitions of classifiers are first discussed to determine a proper and evident way for identifying true Cs in Japanese. Then, the various lists of Japanese Cs in previous studies and grammar books are reviewed. The definitions of each work are mentioned as well. The third part of the chapter touches on the issues of eliminating classical Cs in contemporary Japanese. 14.

(25) In Chapter 3, the main focus is to introduce a method of examining all the possible Japanese Cs, and then some syntactic and semantic tests are provided to ensure that the data collected from previous works is re-analyzed carefully. Chapter 4 provides the analysis of the Japanese classifier inventory for the present result and includes a bottom-up categorization figure of Cs. The last part of Chapter 4 contains the statistics on the usage frequency for Cs.. 政治大. In the last chapter, some suggestions in teaching Japanese as a second language. 立. will be provided.. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 15. i n U. v.

(26) Chapter 2 Literature Review. Japanese numeral Cs has long been discussed in previous studies and traditional grammar books. However, the definitions of numeral Cs in previous linguistic studies are different, and it often leads to different standards for identifying Cs.. 政治大. Most of the studies agree that Cs indicate some “inherent nature” of objects.. 立. That is to say, Cs may occur with a set of specific nouns, and the nouns share some. ‧ 國. 學. common features.. ‧. Nonetheless, different studies provide different ideas of the nouns’ “inherent. Nat. io. sit. y. nature”, and the definition of Cs is still not clear cut enough to identify Cs out of Ms. er. (measure words). In addition, some elements such as pure nouns are counted as Cs in. al. n. v i n previous studies. Because ofC thehdifferent definitions e n g c h i U and standards identifying the. word class “C”, Cs listed in previous studies could be very different from one study to another. In this chapter, previous studies are reviewed for three general aspects. First is to review the difference in the definitions of C in previous studies. Then, the theoretical framework on which this thesis is based is addressed. Since Cs could be viewed as a kind of noun categorization device, previous studies discussing how 16.

(27) Japanese Cs categorize nouns is presented in this chapter as well. The second aspect is to review the lists generated in previous studies. Since dissimilar definitions would lead to different standards for identifying Japanese Cs, and the main goal of the thesis is to identify the inventory of Japanese numeral Cs, the C lists discussed in previous studies are reviewed. For the last part of the literature review, issues in contemporary Japanese and. 政治大. teaching Japanese as a second language will be reviewed. After the list of true. 立. Japanese Cs inventory is established, it can also be applied to practical issues of. ‧ 國. 學. Japanese language.. ‧. Nat. io. sit. y. 2.1 Definitions of Japanese Numeral Classifiers. er. 2.1.1 Common consensus of Japanese numeral classifiers. al. n. v i n C h of Cs may contain Traditionally, the discussions e n g c h i U not only common views but. also some discrepancies. There is a common consensus suggesting that Cs will indicate some nature of nouns. For example, Aikhenvald (2000) reported that Cs are elements that categorize nouns by the inherent properties of the entities. Senft (2000) also claimed that the Cs might categorize nouns based on semantic criteria. Therefore, Cs could select nouns with specific features – a true C could only collocate with a set of specific nouns. Lucy (1996) stated that more than one noun 17.

(28) could co-occur with one C, and those nouns share some features in common. Huang and Ahren (2003) studied Chinese Cs like 條, 朵, 回, etc., and suggested that Cs could “coerce” the adjacent nouns. Philip (2004) studied Japanese syntactic structure, and he also stated that there is semantic agreement between Japanese Cs and the adjacent nouns. Example (7) is quoted from Philip (2004; 163). The factor that makes (7a) grammatical and (7b) ungrammatical is the selection of the C and the semantic. 政治大. feature of the NP 学生 (“students”). In (7b), the morpheme “匹” is a C commonly. 立. used with animals such as cows and dogs, so “匹” could not co-occur with the human. ‧ 國. 學. NP “学生”. However, in (7a) the C “人” would co-occur with human nouns. Thus,. ‧. only example (7a) is grammatical. A specific Japanese C that will coerce a set of C “人” in (7a) matches the human NP like “学生” or. io. sit. y. Nat. specific nouns, the Japanese. er. “女”(woman), while the Japanese C “匹” in (7b) matches animal NP like “猫” (cat) or. al. n. v i n C h that the syntacticUstructure of Cs is conditioned by “犬”(dog).Thus Philip suggested engchi the semantic requirement, and he has proved that Cs may label some nature of the nouns. (7) a. 三 san 3. 人. の. 学生. が. 来-た。. nin. no. gakusei. ga. ki-ta. NOM. come-past tense. C[+human] GEN student. “Three students came.” 18.

(29) b. *三 san 3. 匹. の. 学生. が. biki. no. gakusei. ga. C[-human] GEN student. 来-た。 ki-ta. NOM. come-past tense. “Three students came.” In addition, there are features of Cs that do not cause a debate: the “individuation” and the “counting” characteristics. Quine (1968) defined Cs from a. 政治大. philosophical point of view and suggested that the idea of original nouns like “牛” in. 立. Chinese is only a grouping of “cattle” in our mind, but by adding a C (for example, a. ‧ 國. 學. cow “一隻牛”), the grouping term becomes an individuative term, making the. ‧. thoughts distinct from the mass idea in conception.. Nat. io. sit. y. For counting characteristic, Ueda (2009; 125) provided the following example. er. (8) to explain that Cs denote countability feature of nouns. The C in example (8) is. al. n. v i n C co-occur “つ”, it is generic C and it can many nouns but not with uncountable h e n gwith chi U nouns. Since the noun “水” (water) in (8b) is uncountable, this makes (8b) ungrammatical. This example proves that Cs denote the “countability” feature of NP. (8) a. 一. つ. の. コップ。. Hito. tsu. no. coppu. 1. C. GEN. cup. “one cup” 19.

(30) つ. b. *一. の. 水。. Hito. tsu. no. mizu. 1. C. GEN water. “*one water” Nevertheless, the identification of Cs is still debatable because part of the definition is vague, making it hard to distinguish a C from M or other morphemes. 政治大. based on the common views of Cs.. 立. 2.1.2 Traditional views of classifiers and measure words. ‧ 國. 學. With regard to the discrepancies in the definitions of C’s, the idea of “indicate. ‧. come inherent nature of nouns” is vague. Moreover, it is unclear what the standard is. Nat. io. sit. y. for distinguishing classifiers (Cs) from measure words (Ms). Some of the studies. er. might draw a clear distinction between Cs and Ms, while some might not.. al. n. v i n Ch In studies that do not differentiate U they might also view e n gCscfrom h i Ms,. morphemes indicating quantity or volume of the nouns as Cs. For example, Lyons (1977) suggested that Cs are obligatory in syntactic structure; they may indicate the nature of the entity. He divided Cs into sortal and mensural Cs. Sortal Cs could indicate the categorization of nouns, such as “條” (coerce long, thin objects) in Chinese. In contrast to sortal Cs, mensural Cs are elementally individuate nouns in terms of the quantity, such as “箱” (it means “box of something”) in Chinese. Croft 20.

(31) (2001) further divided the mensural Cs into four types – partitive, measure, group, and arrangement Cs. Chao (1968;585) also included both Cs and Ms in the morpheme “measures”, and he divided “measures” into 9 types – group measures, partitive measures, and container measures, etc. Chao treated true Cs as a type of “measures.” Although Gil D. (1994) ruled that mensural numeral Cs (like “箱” in Chinese) may occur with nouns of low countability, mensural numeral Cs are still treated as. 政治大. one type of Cs. Nonetheless, it is still unclear how the features of “quantify” and. 立. “kind” can be considered “inherent features” of nouns. Some of the previous studies. ‧ 國. 學. do not treat mensural Cs as true numeral Cs, but rather view them as Ms.. ‧. Although the studies discussed do not give a clear cut distinction between Cs. Nat. io. sit. y. and Ms, in actuality, the nature of “條” and “箱” in Chinese is not the same. “條” in. er. Chinese indicates the long-shaped feature of NP (for example, “一條蟲” is. al. n. v i n C h is not), while “箱” grammatical in Chinese, 一條書 e n g c h i U does not coerce specific nouns (for example, 一箱蟲, 一箱書 are both grammatical in Chinese). It is necessary to make a further distinction between Cs and Ms. Although some researchers have defined rules to distinguish Cs and Ms, the rules are unclear. For example, Tai and Wang (1990) suggested that Cs are words that categorize nouns by indicating some “salient properties” of the nouns, while Ms indicate the “quantity” of the nouns and, thus, could not be noun categorization 21.

(32) devices. Tai (1992) also stated that in Chao (1968)’s analysis, the “9 types of measures” could be divided into Cs and Ms. He thought that Chao (1968)’s “individual measures” are actually true Cs, group measures, partitive measures, and container measures, etc., belong to Ms. In addition, Cheng and Sybesma (1998) claimed that Cs are used to count countable entities, while Ms cannot denote individuality and they are used to modify. 政治大. mass nouns. Thus, they considered Ms as “mass-classifiers”. 5 These studies tend to. 立. distinguish between Cs and Ms.. ‧ 國. 學. If the standard rules distinguishing C/M are not clear enough, it may lead to. ‧. difficulties in differentiating Cs from Ms. In studies discussed previously, they. Nat. io. sit. y. suggest that Cs may denote some “salient properties” of nouns, while Ms may denote. al. er. the “quantity” of nouns, the standard of judging whether a property of noun is “salient”. n. v i n C h some features ofUnouns, the M could unintentionally is unclear. If an M could indicate engchi be treated as a C. In example (9), all three sentences are grammatical in Chinese, the C ‘條’ in (9a) indicate long, thin objects, so the NP ‘繩子’ could be used with the C. In (9b) and (9c,) the morpheme “包” (it means “bag of something”) does not refer to the inherent properties and individuality of specific nouns, and it denotes the quantity of nouns, so normally it will be treated as an M in (9b). However, in the case of (9c),. 5. The terminologies in Cheng and Sybesma (1998) were not Cs and measure Ms, they called them “classifiers” and “massifiers”(or mass-classifiers). 22.

(33) it seems that “包” might accidentally indicate the property of “垃圾袋” (garbage bag). Thus, the morpheme ‘包’ could probably be wrongly identified as a C. The problem of this definition results in the confusion over what degree we could view a morpheme as denoting the “salient properties of the nouns.” The standard in identifying classifiers should be refined to be clearer and more precise. (9) a. 一. 條. 繩子 (in Chinese). yi. tiao. shengzi. 1. C-long. 立. 政治大. rope. ‧ 國. 學. “One rope.”. rope. y. shengzi. M-bag. n. al. er. sit. bao. io. 1. 繩子 (in Chinese). Nat. yi. 包. Ch. “One bag of ropes.” c. 一. ‧. b. 一. engchi. 包. 垃圾袋 (in Chinese). yi. bao. lecedai. 1. M-bag. garbage bag. i n U. v. “One bag of garbage bags.” Studies analyzing Japanese Cs may face the same difficulty in identifying C/M. Philip (2007) reported that Cs are used to denote individuality, and he categorized 23.

(34) Japanese Cs into individual, measure, monetary, temporal, and degree Cs. Similar to the idea presented in this paper, Paik and Bond (2002) suggested that there are five types of Japanese numeral Cs: sortal (could be further divided into kind, shape and property classifiers), event, mensural, group, and taxonomic classifiers, as shown in (10). This typology is a mixture of both Cs and Ms. (10) a. sortal classifiers：つ (tsu, generic classifier for individual items). 政治大. b. event classifier：回 (kai, denoting times). 立. c. mensural classifiers：センチ (senchi, it means “centimeters”). ‧ 國. 學. d: group classifiers：群 (mure, it means “a group of”). ‧. e: taxonomic classifiers：種 (syu, it means “a kind of”). Nat. io. sit. y. Although Tai(1994) suggested that Cs coerce nouns by their “inherent” or. er. “permanent” properties, while Ms refer to relatively “contingent” or “temporary”. al. n. v i n C h to what degree the properties of nouns. Nevertheless, e n g c h i U reference to nouns’ inherent property is sufficient to determine whether the elements are Cs? Additionally, “relative” is not an absolute value, which resulting in a gray area between Cs and Ms. Therefore, the distinctions between Cs and Ms in traditional analysis are not clear enough to differentiate Cs and Ms from each other. 2.1.3 The theoretical framework of the thesis The theoretical framework of this thesis is based on the principles of identifying 24.

(35) Cs in Her (2010a, 2010b, 2011, 2012). Her provided two principles to determine whether the morphemes are true Cs or not. The principles are described in (11). (11) a. C/M Distinction in Set Theory Given a well-formed phrase [Num K N], X is the set of properties denoted by K, and Y is the set of properties denoted by N, Ki is C iff X⊂Y; otherwise, K is M.. 政治大. b. Mathematical Distinction of C/M. 立. Given [Num X N], X=C iff X =1; otherwise, X=M.. ‧ 國. 學. The first principle (11a) indicates that Cs should refer to some properties of. ‧. nouns, the morpheme K is a C if and only if the morpheme K can denote the. Nat. sit er. io. studies.. y. properties of the adjacent nouns. This principle in (11a) was consistent with the other. al. n. v i n C h provides a furtherUconstraint: Cs are equal to the The second principle (11b) engchi. multiplicand 1. In previous works, it is not debatable to state that Cs may indicate the individuality of countable nouns. However, the distinction between Cs and Ms is still vague if we only apply the first principle (11a). With the help of the second principle (11b), it will be much easier to distinguish Cs from Ms, since Her sets a precise standard to differentiate between Cs and Ms. These principles will solve the problem with a clear distinction between Cs and 25.

(36) Ms. For example, in (12), the NP in (12a) and (12b) is “cigarette”, but being a C or M can lead to different ideas. In (12a), the C “本” in Japanese (the spelling is ほん hon /hɔn/) indicates one dimensional long feature of the cigarette, and the number of cigarettes in (12a) is 1x1=1, implying that there is only one cigarette in (12a). In (12b), the M “箱” does not specify any inherent property of the cigarette, and the number of “箱” is not necessarily 1 cigarette either. “One box of cigarette” could elicit the idea. 政治大. of “one or more cigarettes.” The number of cigarettes in (12b) 1xM=not necessarily 1,. 立. tabako. ip. pon. 1. C. 1x1=1 cigarette. io. sit. Nat. cigarette. 本. n. al. er. “one cigarette” b. タバコ. y. 一. ‧. (12)a. タバコ. 學. ‧ 國. therefore “箱” is a M.. 一. C h箱 engchi. tabako. hito hako. cigarette. 1. M. i n U. v. 1xM=not necessarily 1 cigarette. “one box of cigarette” Moreover, Her (2012) also proposed the concept of “profiler” to explain the characteristic of Cs. The following example (13) is quoted from Her (2012; 1673). Her suggested that different Cs could refer to separate semantic attributes of nouns. In 26.

(37) example (13), “尾”, “條” and “隻” are all Cs in Chinese – the differences lie on the properties they denote. In (13a), “尾” may indicate the “tail” of a fish, and in (13b) and (13c), “條” and “隻” may profile specific “long-shaped” and “animacy” features of the fish. That is to say, Cs would not always indicate all features of NP. (13)a. 一. 尾. 魚 (in Chinese). yi. wei. yu. 1. C-tail. fish. 立. 政治大. b. 一. tiao. yu. Nat. io. sit. y. C-long shape fish. “One fish” (profiles the long-shape). n. al. c. 一. 隻. yi. zhi. 1. C魚h (in Chinese) engchi. er. 1. 魚 (in Chinese). ‧. yi. 條. 學. ‧ 國. “One fish” (profiles the tail). i n U. v. yu. C-animacy fish. “One fish” (profiles animacy) Her addressed that Cs are “profilers.” They could profile some or all features of an object. The theoretical frame with “profiler” will also solve the problem in example (3). Recall the example (3) in chapter one (P.12), it appears that the C “発” 27.

(38) could not be the modifier of the NP (pistol), but the modifier of the VP (shooting event), leading to the traditional assumption suggesting Cs are modifiers of VPs. Once Cs are viewed as “profiler”, then the C “発” can refer to the shooting event only. In the following example (14), (14a) presents the principle while (14b) and (14c) are examples in Japanese. (14a) states that if the element between the numeral and noun is a C, then the C could be deleted without changing the meaning, but a M could. 政治大. not. In example (14b), the semantic property of C “匹” (C for animals) is x1. 立. multiplicand, so the deletion of C will not change the number of dogs it counts.. ‧ 國. 學. However, in (14c), the element between the numeral and noun is an M “箱”, which. ‧. means “a box of cigarette”, the number of cigarette is not necessarily one, so the. Nat. sit er. io. Cs.. y. deletion will lead to misunderstanding. This syntactic test can be used to test Japanese. al. n. v i n C hin Numeral Quantification (14)a. C/M Distinction Scope engchi U Given a well-formed [Num K N], if Num scopes over N, then K = C; otherwise, K = M. b. 三 san 3. 匹 biki C. 犬 inu dog. =. 三 san. 犬 inu. three dog. ‘three dog’ 28.

(39) c. 一. 箱. タバコ ≠. hito hako 1. tabako. 一. タバコ. hito tabako. M-box cigarette. one cigarette. ‘One box of cigarette’ ‘*One cigarette’ Another principle (15) is from Her (2012; 1672). Her claimed that in Chinese the adjective modifying C could modify the following noun as well, but an adjective. 政治大. could not modify both the M and the noun. Japanese C does not support the. 立. modification of an adjective, so this may not be applicable to Japanese.. ‧ 國. 學. (15) a. C/M Distinction in Adjectival Modification Scope. ‧. If either [Num A-K N] = [Num K A-N] or [A-K-de N] = [A-N]. Nat. al. = 一顆大蘋果 (in Chinese). er. io. b. 一大顆蘋果. sit. y. semantically and A refers to size, then K = C, and K ≠ M.. n. v i n Ch da ke pingguo U e n gyi ckeh dai pingguo. yi 1. big C apple. 1. ‘one big apple’ c. 一大箱蘋果. C big apple. ‘one big apple’ ≠ 一箱大蘋果 (in Chinese). yi da xiang pingguo. yi xiang da pingguo. 1. 1. big M apple. ‘one big box of apples ’. M big apple ‘one box of big apples’ 29.

(40) Her (2012) also presented some syntactic tests for distinguishing Chinese Cs and Ms. These syntactic tests are useful to identifying Chinese Cs and Ms, and some of them could be applied to test Japanese Cs in this thesis. Her’s model of distinguishing Cs from Ms, and Her’s idea of using Cs as “profilers” with some syntactic test will be the theoretical basis for this thesis. 2.1.4 Other elements that are not true classifiers. 政治大. To define true Cs in the lists from previous studies, the main issue is the. 立. definition of Cs and how to distinguish them from Ms. Her’s model is used to identify. ‧ 國. 學. the Japanese Cs. In addition, there are other elements (such as echo Cs, pure nouns,. ‧. units of measurement, etc.) that could possibly be identified as Cs in previous works.. Nat. io. sit. y. Figure 1 summed up how 蔡 (2010; 20) described the traditional category of. er. Cs as counters in Japanese grammar books. She, on the other hand, suggested that. al. n. v i n Cone counters “助数詞” are in fact of nouns, and a majority of the traditional h etype ngchi U Japanese grammar books do not provide further categorization within counters.. Figure 1. Noun classifications of Japanese grammar book in 蔡 (2010; 20) 30.

(41) Since Japanese counters “助数詞” are words along with numerals, the counter list provided by Iida (1999) and NHK dictionary are relatively huge. Also, previous studies, such as T’sou (2001), might not strictly distinguish the terminology of “counters” and “classifiers”. In T’sou (2001), T’sou used the terminology “counters or classifiers” for Japanese Cs. This indicates the fact that there is no exact distinction between Japanese counters and Cs in previous studies.. 政治大. In traditional Japanese grammar, Cs are in a mixed category of counters.. 立. However, the syntactic behaviors of units of measurement, pure nouns, echo. ‧ 國. 學. classifiers, etc. are not the same. So they cannot be treated as the same syntactic. ‧. element.. Nat. io. sit. y. First of all, with regard to the echo Cs, Sornlertlamvanich, Pantachat, and. er. Meknavin (1994) suggested that there is a stage in classifier generation where Cs may. al. n. v i n be created as many as nouns.CTai (1990) also reported that Cs are originally h and e nWang gchi U nouns. As a result, it is reasonable to say that some of the Cs may be created by repeating the nouns. Downing (1984, 1996) proposed that echo Cs are “repeaters”, which means a new C can be formed by repeating the original noun. Wang (1994; 76) provided an example of echo Cs in Chinese, as shown in the following (16). Wang (1994) thought that the morpheme “人” (meaning “people” as a noun) is an echo C, which echoes the noun “人” and modifies the NP “太學生” (student). 31.

(42) (16). [太學. 生] [三. 千]. tai xue sheng san qian student. 3. 書] (in Chinese). [人]. [上. ren. shang shu. thousand C?. submit statement. “Three thousand students submit a statement (to a higher authority).” However, it is worth analyzing whether an echo C is a true C. Peyraube (1991) questioned that because the morpheme “人” in Chinese could never be in the [Num C. 政治大. N] structure, “*三人學生” is in fact an ungrammatical combination. Moreover, in the. 立. example (16), the morpheme “人” could possibly be the noun itself, it could not be a. ‧ 國. 學. C that modifies other following noun, and the true C is actually the deleted generic C. ‧. “個”. The revision in the following example (17) shows that “三千個學生” is. Nat. io. sit. y. grammatical in Chinese, and it proves that the true C is “個”, the morpheme “人”. n. al. er. should is not a true C, but a pure noun. (17). [太學生]. C[三h. tai xue sheng. san. student. 3. [個] e 千] ngchi. iv n U[人]. [上. 書] (in Chinese). qian. ge. ren. shang shu. thousand. C. people. submit statement. “Three thousand students submit a statement (to a higher authority).” The Japanese C lists provided by previous works may contain some echo Cs. For example, Downing (1983, 1984, 1996) and Iida(1999) have identified many echo Cs in their list of Japanese Cs. They both included the echo C “人” (with the spelling 32.

(43) にん nin /nin/ counts the number of [+human] nouns) is counted as a C in every list of linguistic studies and grammar books. However, in contemporary Japanese, some echo Cs have lost the C function and act like pure nouns. It shows that including syntactic tests and identifying true Cs are essential tasks. Therefore, in Chapter 3, echo Cs will be tested to identify true Cs. Secondly, for “unit of measurement” or “date expression”, their syntactic. 政治大. behaviors are not the same as Cs. Bender and Siegel (2005) already suggested that not. 立. all of the counters have the same syntactic behavior. They discovered that the. ‧ 國. 學. syntactic position of date expression may be similar to Cs, based on the fact that they. ‧. are all preceded by numerals in Japanese. Nevertheless, they also found that Cs. Nat. io. sit. y. contain so-called “combinatoric potential” while the date expressions do not. As. er. shown in the following example (18), it is difficult for “date expression” or “unit of. al. n. v i n C other measurement” to be used with while true Cs would normally be followed h e nnouns, gchi U by a noun. (18)a. date expressions 十. 月. juu. getsu. 10. month. “October” 33.

(44) b. unit of measurement 十. ボレト. juu. bonto. 10. pound. “ten pound(UK currency)” c. true classifiers 枚. juu. mai. 10. 名刺. 政治大. 立meisi. C. N-business card. 學 ‧. ‧ 國. 十. “ten business cards”. Nat. io. sit. y. Except for “units of measurement” and echo Cs, there are other syntactic. er. elements worth considering – pure nouns. In the lists of Cs from previous works,. al. n. v i n C hThe syntactic behaviors nouns are sometimes included. e n g c h i U of true nouns are not the same as Cs. Comparing to Cs, pure nouns like “車” (with the spelling くるま kuruma /kɯlɯma/ or しゃ sha /ʃa/, “car”) are not followed immediately by a noun, while a noun following a C is commonly seen in Japanese. Pure nouns should be excluded as well. If true Cs can be identified, the next important issue is to categorize these true Cs. Since Cs denote some or all properties of nouns, Cs can be considered as noun 34.

(45) categorization devices. The following section describes the noun categorization functions of Cs in previous studies. 2.1.5 Classifiers as noun categorization devices After identifying true Cs in Japanese, another important task is to analyze how Cs work as noun categorization devices. In former studies, there are a lot of discussions about the categorization of Japanese Cs.. 政治大. As the differences between different Cs are purely semantic (Amazaki, 2000),. 立. the categorization of Cs may be based on some semantic features or properties of the. ‧ 國. 學. nouns coerced. In addition, the features Cs refer to are not mutually exclusive. There. ‧. can be taxonomic sisters (Bond and Paik (2000), Huang et al (2008)); thus, Cs could. Nat. io. sit. y. be categorized into different groups according to the features they profile.. er. There are many features of nouns that Cs could possibly refer to. Huang and. al. n. v i n Ahren (2003) suggested thatC Cshmay denote the “individualities”, “kinds” and “events” engchi U features of nouns. Adams and Conklin (1973) analyzed the Cs in 37 East and Southeast Asian languages and suggested that “animacy”, “shape”, and “function” are the major features. Tai (1994) studied Chinese Cs and concluded that “shape”, “animacy”, “size”, “consistency”, and “refers to parts of the objects” are ways to classify Chinese Cs. In previous studies analyzing Japanese numeral Cs, Iida (1999) compared the 35.

(46) living, dead, and toy snakes, and found that “animacy” is an important feature to relay information in Japanese. Shrestha (2010) suggested that the crucial features in Japanese Cs are “shape”, “size”, “activities” and “nature”, and Japanese tend to categorize inanimate objects more elaborately. Moreover, Figure 2 shows the categorization in Uchida and Imai (1999;51), who categorized Japanese Cs based on features like “kinds”, “animacy”, and “place”, etc.. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. n. v i n C h categorization inUUchida and Imai (1999; 51) Figure 2. Japanese classifier engchi Also, figure 3 is created by Yamamoto (2005;50), who only categorized Japanese Cs according to “animacy”, “concrete”, “shape” and “function” features.. Figure 3. Japanese classifier categorization system in Yamamoto (2005; 50) 36.

(47) The different Japanese classifier categorization systems indicate the fact that the categorizations made by separate works are inconsistent. A more detailed and unified classification should be made. However, previous studies still show that “animacy”, “shape”, and “function” might be crucial factors to categorize Cs.. 2.2 Inventories of Japanese Numeral Classifiers. 政治大. The first four studies are done by authors with linguistic backgrounds; they are. 立. Sanches (1977), Denny (1979), Downing (1983, 1984, 1996) and Matsumoto. ‧ 國. 學. (1991,1993). Japanese Cs listed in Sanches (1977), Denny (1979), Downing (1983,. ‧. 1984, 1996) are often cited by other linguistic studies, which are major studies in. Nat. io. sit. y. Japanese Cs. Thus, their lists of Japanese Cs are included in this thesis. Among these. er. four linguistic studies, Downing (1983, 1984, 1996) made the most integral Japanese. al. n. v i n C inventory, which containsC 154 U data used in this thesis. hCs, e nandgitcishthei primary With regard to the other four works, they are traditional Japanese grammar. books or dictionaries, Iida (2004), the appendix in《NHK 日本語発音アクセント辞典》(2006), and grammar books of 顧(2004) and 錢(2011). Within these four lists, the list in Iida (2004) provides the most integral data because she listed around 550 counters in Japanese.. 37.

(48) 2.2.1 Sanches (1977) Sanches defined Cs as linguistic forms that would describe some critical attributes of nouns, and he divided Japanese Cs into four major subcategories, as shown in the following (19). (19) a. containers: had not been explained. b. taxonomy-specific classifiers: 脚 (kyaku, for legged furniture). 政治棹 (sao,大for non-legged forniture). 立. 枚 (mai, for 2D object). 學. ‧ 國. c. shape classifiers: 本 (hon, for 1D object). ‧. d. process classifiers: 塊 (katamari, lump of the object). Nat. io. sit. y. 握り(nigiri, a grasp of the object). n. al. er. He has listed a total of 54 Japanese Cs, as shown in Table 1. 尾. 部. 着. bi 編. bu 片. chaku 匹. hen 塊. hen 機. hiki 片. katamari ki 握人 nigiri 据え sue 撮み. Ch 挺. chou 品. 貼. 台. e njoug cdai hi 本. 架. hin 個. hon 句. ka. kire 連. ko 輪. ku. nin/ri 筋. ren 体. rin 玉. suji 羽. tai 葉. tama 膳. you. zen. tsumami wa. 脚 kyaku 棹. 両 ryou sao 蹄滴 tei. teki. Table 1. 54 Cs listed in Sanches (1977; 54) 38. iv 幅 n U. 振. 張. fuku 株. furi 塊. hari 巻. 発 hatsu 艦. kabu 球. kai 枚. kan 面. kan 門. kyuu 冊. mai 隻. men 首. mon 艘. satsu 点. seki 頭. shu つ. sou 粒. ten. tou. tsu. tsubu.

(49) The main purpose of his study is to survey the historical changes of Japanese Cs. Sanches found that the usage of Cs in Japanese has gradually declined through time. With the loss of specific Cs, generic Cs are used more often throughout Japanese history. 2.2.2 Denny (1979) The main focus of Denny’s paper is to do a semantic analysis of Japanese Cs.. 政治大. Denny found features including “places”, “kinds”, “shape”, and “animacy”, etc., as. 立. shown in Figure 4. His classification has contributed to the study of Japanese Cs and. ‧ 國. 學. provided much insight.. ‧. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. Figure 4. Japanese classifier categorization system in Denny (1979; 320) Unfortunately, Denny did not provide an exact definition to identify Cs, and the number of Cs he identified is only 20, as listed in Table 2. 39.

(50) 着. 挺. 台. 張. 匹. 本. 株. chaku. chou 枚. dai 人. hari 輪. hiki 冊. Hon 艘. mai. nin/ri. rin. satsu. Sou. 脚 kyaku. 機. 個. kabu 卓. ヶ所 kasho つ. ki 粒. ko 羽. taku. tsu. tsubu. wa. Table 2. 20 Cs listed in Denny (1979; 320) 2.2.3 Downing (1983, 1984, 1996) Downing made great efforts to identify Japanese Cs, and he reported that there are 154 Cs in Japanese. In addition, Downing has developed a method to identify Cs. 政治大. in Japanese. The following example (20) is the simplified version of his three. 立. principles in identifying Japanese Cs.. ‧ 國. 學. (20) a. It may directly follow a numeral.. ‧. b. It readily co-occurs with a noun.. y. Nat. er. io. sit. c. It denotes a natural unit of the referent.. These principles are similar to the studies mentioned earlier, and based on these. n. al. Ch. engchi. principles, the 154 Cs are listed in Table 3.. i n U. v. 悪. 案. 尾. 部. 着. 帙. 挺. 貼. 張. 台. aku. an. bi. bu. chitsu. chou. jou. chou. dai. 題. 段. 柄. 枝. chak u 幅. 振. 房. 封. 蓋. 具. dai 軍. dan 鉢. e 杯. eda 犯. fuku 張. furi 柱. fusa 発. fuu 瓶. gai 編. gu 部屋. gun. hachi. hai. han. hari. hatsu. hei. hen. heya. 匹. 品. 本. 表. 寺. hashir a 軸. 条. 錠. 樹. 什. hiki. hin. hon. hyou. ji. jiku. jou. jou. ju. juu. 40.

(51) 架. 顆. 株. 掛. 巻. 管. ka. ka. kabu. kake. kan. kan. カプセル. 襲. 桛. 頭. kasan e. kase. kashir a. 騎. 基. 機. 方. 片食. 片枚. 飾. 茎. 件. kapuser u 軒. kata. katama i 個. kazar i 国. kei. ken. ken. ki. ki. ki. 机. katag e 戸. 駒. 齣. 喉. 校. 口. 行. ki 梱. ko 腰. ko 笏. koku 躯. koma koma 句口. kon 口. kou 茎. kou 闋. kou. kori. koshi. kotsu. ku. ku. kuchi. kuki. 曲. 局. 枚. 巻. 名. 門. kusar i 問. kyok u 棟. kyoku mai. mon. mon. moto. 輌. 領. mune. nin/ri. ジ. ryou. ryou. 粒. nagar e 流. ロール. 提. peiji 棹. 差. 札. 冊. rooru 莢. 隻. 席. ryuu 線. ryuu 社. sage 枝. sao 至. sashi 翅. satsu 室. saya 食. seki 首. seki 鎧. sen. sha. shi. shi. shi. satsu シート. shoku. shu. shuku. 卓. 玉. 垂. tama 套. tare 頭. soku 艇. sou 蹄. sou 滴. tei 灯. tei 通. tou 葉 you. y. sit. shitsu. 体 v a l 据え筋 C h suji suwari Utain i sue engchi. n. 艘. shiito 据. ritsu. ‧. io 層. rin. 學. Nat. 足. ren. er. 人. 面耳治 maki政 mei men mimi 大立ペイ連輪律. ‧ 國. 流. ku. 脚 kyaku 本. 点. 店. 所. 戸前. taku 党. teki 通. ten 壷. ten 粒. tokoro 釣. tomae 通話. tou 宇. tou 羽. tou 翼. toori 座. tsuu 剤. tsubo 膳. tsubu. tsuri. tsuuwa. u. wa. yoku. za. zai. Zen. Table 3. 154 Cs listed in Downing (1984, 1996; 294-310) Downing’s inventory of Japanese numeral Cs is cited by many later studies, which made similar claims that there are around 150 Cs in Japanese.. 41.

(52) In addition, in his other work that is worth mentioning, Downing (1983) listed 39 Cs. However, many possible Cs and the generic C “つ” are not included in Downing (1984, 1996). Therefore, this paper supplements Downing’s Japanese C list. The list in Downing (1983) is shown in Table 4 below. The Japanese Cs listed in Downing (1983, 1986, 1996) are very important references in this thesis. 台. 枝. 派. dai 株. Eda ヶ国語. 鉢. 名. ha カプセ kakokuko ル kapuseru 面棟. mei 氏. Men 足. si. Soku. kabu. ヶ所 kasho ken. 品. 本. 条. 錠. hin 個. hon 齣. jou 間. jou 枚. koma. ma. mai. 室. 色. 州. 政治 ken大ko 人. 輪. 輌. 冊. mune 筋. nin/ri 滴. rin つ. ryou 通. satsu 粒. suji. teki. tsu. tsuu. tsubu wa. 學. shitsu shoku shyuu 羽字. ‧. ‧ 國. 立. hachi. 匹発 hatsu hiki 件軒. Table 4. 39 Cs listed in Downing (1983; 347). Nat. sit. y. zi. io. n. al. er. 2.2.4 Matsumoto (1991,1993). i n U. v. Matsumoto surveyed 32 Cs and the prototypical meanings. He reported that a C. Ch. engchi. has semantic restriction on nouns. Table 5 lists the Cs discussed by Matsumoto. 部. 着. 挺. 貼. 丁. 台. 匹. 本. 方. 件. bu 軒. chaku 機. chou 個. jou 句. jou 曲. dai 枚. Hiki 名. hon 棟. kata 人. ken 冊. ken 隻. ki 首. ko 足. ku 艘. kyoku mai 筋滴. mei 頭. mune 通. nin/ri つ. satsu 通. seki 粒. shu 羽. soku. sou. suji. Tou. toori. tsu. tsuu. tsubu. wa. teki. Table 5. 32 Cs listed in Matsumoto (1991; 82-83, 1993; 701-704). 42.

(53) To sum up the four major linguistic studies above and eliminate Cs repeatedly listed in more than one studies, there are 176 Cs left. These 176 possible Cs defined by previous linguists are re-analyzed in the later chapter. 2.2.5 Iida (2004) and NHK 日本語発音アクセント辞典 In order to collect as many Cs as possible to build the list, the grammar book and dictionary written in Japanese below are considered. Iida (2004) 《数え方の辞. 政治大. 典》 and 《NHK 日本語発音アクセント辞典》 viewed Cs from the aspect of. 立. traditional Japanese grammar, and the Cs are grouped under the category of “counters”. ‧ 國. 學. (助数詞). Although the purpose of these dictionaries is not for linguistic studies and. ‧. Nat. io. sit. very useful for building an integral Japanese C inventory.. y. they do not provide a clear definition of Cs, the vast number of possible Cs is still. er. In Iida (2004)《数え方の辞典》, the purpose of this book is to demonstrate how. al. n. v i n C h of the book is devoted to use counters. Almost two-thirds e n g c h i U to the list of counters and. the corresponding objects. There is a list of counters in the last chapter from page 330 to page 359 and the definition of each counter is also provided. Iida listed 550 counters, and she had only classified them into 91 “unit of measurement” counters and 459 “non-unit measurement” counters. Nonetheless, the so-called “unit-measurement” counters are definitely not Cs, because they do not denote the property of nouns, and the number of objects these counters denote is not 43.

(54) necessarily 1. Example (21) shows Iida’s only categorization of counters. (21) a. unit measurement counters 十. オンス. 牛肉. juu. onus. gyuuniku. 10. ounce. beef. “10 oz beef”. 政治大. b. non-unit measurement counters 頭. 立. 牛. tou. gyuu. 10. C [+animate] cattle. ‧. juu. 學. ‧ 國. 十. Nat. io. sit. y. “Ten cattle”. er. In NHK 日本語発音アクセント辞典》, the list of counters is provided in the. al. n. v i n C h89. The focus of this appendix from page 64 to page e n g c h i U dictionary is to specify separate spellings because there are different readings when a counter is attached to different numerals. The number of counters listed in this book is 257 without further classifications.. Due to the fact that most of the counters are not true Cs, the list of 550 and 257 counters is not shown in this thesis. In these two books, the counters are elements with nominal-like nature and could be preceded by numerals. Therefore, even for the 44.

(55) unit of measurement elements like オンス(onus, ounce), the list may contain elements other than Cs, for example Ms and normal nouns. Example (22) is a translated sentence from Iida (2004). Even Iida did find that some of the counters are Cs while some are not. In this example, Iida addressed that “車” is not the C of cars, but “台” is. (22)車 sha. 立. “car”. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. Definition: 1. Normally, cars would be counted by using “台”.. ‧. 2. It indicates the quantity of the car loading.. Nat. io. sit. y. Normally, in the [Numeral C N] structure, if N is “車” (meaning “car”), then C. er. should be “台” to form the “一台車” constituent, and “*一車車” is not a grammatical. al. n. v i n combination. In addition, inC thehsecond definition of e n g c h i U“車” in example (22), it suggests. that the quantity of “一車” is not equal to x1 (one car), but it refers to the loading, as a result, “車” is not a true C but a noun. 2.2.6 顧(2004) and 錢(2011) In 顧(2004)’s and 錢(2011)’s grammar books for Chinese learners of Japanese, the definition of Cs is not provided. They consider Cs as “量詞” in Chinese. 顧(2004) lists 115 possible Cs and 錢(2011) listed 53, as shown in Table 6 and Table7. 45.

(56) 尾. 部. 着. 丁. 台. 題. 段. 杯. 発. 匹. bi 本. bu 条. chaku 錠. jou 巻. dai 件. dai 軒. dan 機. hai 戸. hatsu 個. hiki 校. hon 行. jou 句. jou. ken 局. ken 枚. ki 名. ko 面. ko 人. kou 輪. kou. ku. 脚 kyaku. kan 曲 kyoku. mai. mei. men. nin/ri. rin. 連. 粒. 冊. 足. Kyok u 層. 艘. 点. 頭. 通. 通. ren 羽. ryuu 膳. satsu 字. soku 位. sou 円. sou 日. ten 課. tou 階. toori 回. tsuu ヶ月. wa. zen. zi. i. en. ka. ka. kai. kai. 月. 月. 缶. 期. 斤. 区. gatsu. tsuki. カロリー. kagets u 組. kin. ku. kumi. 學. kan. 立. 次. 時. 時間. 時限. 尺. 種. sai 重. sara 周年. ji 女. toki 乗. jikan 畳. jigen 寸. shaku 銭. jyuu. jyuunen. jo. jyuu jyuu. sun. sen. shyu センチ. 包. 度. senchi 等. tsutsum i 箱. do. tou. 班. 番. paku. hako. pan. ban. メートル. 夜. ‧ 國. 皿. shyuu. 男. daasu 人前. 代. 束. 町. 対. 坪. taba. choo. tsui. tsub o 泊. dai. al. n. soroi. ダース. y. shyu u 揃い. Ch. 倍. 拍. i n U. v. ninma e. nen. パーセント. 晚. 秒. 分. paasent o 袋. 分. 歩. 幕. マワリ. ban. byou. bun. hukuro. hun. po. mak u. mawari. nan. 年. sit. gou 週. er. keta 周. io. 号. ‧. karori i 歳. Nat. 桁. 級キロ治政ki kyu 大 kiro. e nbaig c hpaki u. 役. 両. 列. 把. 割. yaku. ryou. retsu. wa. Waru. Table 6. 115 Cs listed in 顧 (2004). 46. metor u. ya.

(57) 着. 台. 匹. 本. 株. 軒. 戸. 個. 枚. 棟. chaku 人. dai ペイジ. hiki 冊. Hon 通. kabu 頭. ken つ. ko 羽. ko 円. mai 日. mune 階. nin/ri 月. satsu キロメートル. Tsuu クラス. tou 合. tsu 石. wa 歳. en 時. ka 尺. kai 厘. gatsu. peiji キログラム. gou. koku sai. ji. shaku. 勺. kirogur amu 週間. kiromet oru 升. Kuras u 丈. shak u. 寸. 畝. 町. 坪. トン. shyuuk an. shou. Jou. sun. se. choo. tsubo. ton. shaku. ドル. 年. 秒. doru. nen. byou. ‧ 國. リットル. 話 wa. ポンミリメトートル. メートル. pond mirimet meto oru ru. ‧. youbi. トル. 學. 曜日. senchi metoru 平方ボントキロ bonto メートル. 政平方治大メー Hun 分. 立. センチメートル. rittoru. y. Nat. er. io. sit. Table 7. 53 Cs listed in 錢 (2011; 70-72). To sum up, if we collect all the data and delete the repeated ones, there are. n. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. around 673 possible Cs in total. In this thesis, each of the 673 possible Cs is examined to find the true Cs.. 2.3 Issues in Contemporary Japanese Studies suggest that Cs are obligatory in syntactic structures. For example, Sumiya (2006) addressed that Cs are necessary in sentences. However, there are hundreds of Japanese Cs listed in previous studies, but not all of them are necessarily 47.

(58) used in contemporary Japanese. Some specific Cs might not be used anymore and are replaced by more commonly used Cs or generic Cs. Downing (1984, 1996) created a questionnaire to investigate the frequency of 154 Japanese Cs, and he concluded that the most frequently used Cs cover around 80% of Cs in use. Therefore, many Cs in classical Japanese are not use in contemporary Japanese.. 政治大. Moreover, 洪 (2003) studied Japanese newspapers and advertisements, and she. 立. stated that newspaper publishers tend to avoid using low frequency Cs. 洪 claimed. ‧ 國. 學. that 朝日新聞社 6 (Asahi Newspaper Publisher) has established rules for using Cs. ‧. and they are translated and listed in the following example (23). These rules tend to. Nat. io. sit. y. use more commonly or more frequently used Cs. As shown in (23a), Asahi. al. er. Newspaper Publisher would avoid using distinct Cs on objects of a kind, which might. n. v i n C h less frequently used therefore eliminate some specific, e n g c h i U Cs. (23) Rules by Asahi Newspaper Publisher:. a. Use the same counters (助数詞) to count objects of a kind. b. If there are many counters that can be used in a sentence, use the one with relatively broader criteria.. 6. 朝日新聞社 (Asahi Newspaper Publisher) is the biggest newspaper publisher in Japanese. According to their public sales statistics, from July to December in 2013, the daily sales volume for the morning post was around 7.6 million and evening post around 2.7 million. The website is: http://www.asahi-np.co.jp 48.