Noun Phrases in Japanese and English: A Study in Syntax, Learnability and Acquisition

K. Murasugi, 1991

for $24.95 x

Abstract (Summary)

In Japanese, the genitive Case marker no is inserted after NP and PP prenominal modifiers, but not after relative clauses. Saito (1982) and Fukui (1986), among others, propose a no-insertion rule to account for this fact. Harada (1980) and Clancy (1985) observe that some Japanese speaking children, at around 2 years old, insert no even after relative clauses.

This thesis presents a hypothesis as to what the overgenerated no is, and as to how children retreat from this overgeneration. In order to attain answers to these questions, I first discuss in Chapter II the syntactic properties of several types of no in Japanese. In particular, I argue that nos of categories N and C exist, contrary to Kitagawa and Ross (1982), and Fukui (1986), but as suggested in Okutsu (1974) and Hoji (1990). This sets up three candidates for the overgenerated no: the genitive Case marker, no as N, and no as C.

Chapter III deals with the syntax of Japanese relative clauses. I first extend Perlmutter's (1972) analysis along the lines of Saito's (1985) analysis of topicalization, and claim that Japanese relative clauses may but need not involve movement. Based on this assumption, I draw two conclusions: (i) Japanese has pro PP for time and place adjuncts, and (ii) Japanese relative clauses are IP (the IP hypothesis).

With the syntactic analysis in Chapters II and III, Chapter IV addresses the questions concerning the overgenerated no in question. On the basis of further acquisition studies, I first draw the conclusion that the overgenerated no is of the category C. The focus, at this point, moves to the learnability question: why and how they retreat from it. Here, I rely crucially on the conclusion drawn in Chapter III that Japanese relative clauses are IPs. Based on this conclusion, I propose that Japanese children make the initial hypothesis that relative clauses are CPs, and lexically realize the head C as no. They later attain the knowledge that Japanese relative clauses are IPs, and hence, cease to overgenerated no. It is shown finally that this hypothesis meets the learnability criterion. On the basis of the positive evidence on the structure of pure complex NPs, Japanese children infer that all prenominal sentential modifiers, in particular, relative clauses are IPs. Thus, the IP hypothesis receives support from the studies in syntax, learnability and acquisition.

Table of Contents:

Introductory Remarks...................................................................................................................1

1.1          Theoretical Assumptions..................................................................................................1

1.2          Basic Differences between Noun Phrases in English and Japanese...........................4

1.3          Acquisition Puzzle..............................................................................................................13

Japanese "No" ................................................................................................................................20

2.1      Genitive Case Markers......................................................................................................21

           2.1.1   'Of,' ''S,' and 'No'...................................................................................................21

2.1.2   Genitive Case Marker Insertion Rule.................................................................28

2.1.3   'No'-Insertion Rule................................................................................................36

           2.1.3.1 Syntactic Status of Japanese Adjectives................................................36

           3.2.3.2 An Insertion Rule as a Case Marking Mechanism................................51

2.2      'No' as Nominal Category..................................................................................................56

           2.2.1   The Standard Analysis...........................................................................................58

           2.2.2   Kitagawa and Ross (1982) .....................................................................................65

           2.2.3   The Pronoun 'No' and the English 'One'.............................................................74

2.3      'No' as Complementizer......................................................................................................93

           2.3.1   Complementizer 'No'..............................................................................................94

           2.3.2   "The Formal Noun 'No'" and the Question Marker 'Ka'..................................104

2.4       Conclusion.............................................................................................................................111

Relative Clauses.................................................................................................................................113

3.1       Introduction..........................................................................................................................113

3.2      Previous Research.................................................................................................................114

           3.2.1   The Basic Facts..........................................................................................................114

           3.2.2   Saito's (1985) Analysis of Topicalization...............................................................120

3.3      An analysis of Japanese Relative Clauses..........................................................................128

           3.3.1   PP pro: Pure vs. Quasi Adjuncts..............................................................................128

           3.3.2   Base Generation of Empty PPs................................................................................134

3.4      IP Hypothesis...........................................................................................................................140

           3.4.1   The ECP.......................................................................................................................141

           3.4.2    The Antecedent Government in Relative Clauses...............................................146

           3.4.3   Pure Complex NPs......................................................................................................154

           3.4.4   Cleft Sentences...........................................................................................................162

Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................165

Overgeneration of 'No': Its Acquisition and Learnability..............................................................166

4.1      The Category of the Overgenerated 'No'.............................................................................166

           4.1.1   Apparent Problems for the Case Resistance Principle..........................................169

           4.1.2   Undergeneration in PP Modifiers.............................................................................174

           4.1.3   Overgeneration of 'No' in Relative Clauses.............................................................177

           4.1.4   Acquisition of CP/IP Modifiers....................................................................................181

4.2      Syntactic Evidence for the IP Hypothesis..............................................................................185

4.3       The Learnability of the IP Hypothesis...................................................................................192

4.4       Conclusion: Where Acquisition, Learnability, and Syntax meet......................................197

           4.4.1   IP Hypothesis................................................................................................................197

           4.4.2   Additional Evidence from Korean..............................................................................199

An Experimental Study of the Overgeneration of 'No'.....................................................................205

5.1      Introduction...............................................................................................................................205

           5.1.1   Children's Production of NPs Containing Prenominal Modifiers.........................205

           5.1.2   Paradigm Tested.........................................................................................................206

                       5.1.2.1 Group O...........................................................................................................207

                       5.1.2.2 Group N...........................................................................................................208

5.2      Methodology of the Experiments..........................................................................................209

           5.2.1   Elicited Production......................................................................................................209

           5.2.2   Experimental Design..................................................................................................211

                       5.2.2.1 Elicitation of the Relative Clauses (Ss and APs) and Prenominal NP

Modifiers.........................................................................................................212

                       5.2.2.2 Elicitation of PP Prenominal Modifiers.......................................................215

                       5.2.2.3 Elicitation of the Inalienable Possessives: the Puzzle Game....................217

           5.2.3   Imitation Task...............................................................................................................218

5.3      Experiment 1: Longitudinal Studies........................................................................................218

           5.3.1   Subjects.........................................................................................................................219

           5.3.2   Procedures....................................................................................................................220

           5.3.3   Results............................................................................................................................220

                       5.3.3.1 Overgeneration of 'No'..................................................................................220

                       5.3.3.1.1 Overgeneration of 'No' in Sentential Modifiers.....................................221

                       5.3.3.1.2  AP-Prenominal Modifiers.........................................................................223

                       5.3.3.1.3  Pure Complex NPs.....................................................................................225

                       5.3.3.2 Proper 'No'-Insertion in NPs.........................................................................226

                       5.3.3.3 Undergeneration of 'No' after PP Modifiers..............................................230

           5.3.4   Retreat..........................................................................................................................231

           5.3.5   Principle Dependent Overgeneration.......................................................................232

5.4      Experiment 2: Cross-Sectional Studies...................................................................................233

5.4.1   Subjects......................................................................................................................................233

5.4.2   Procedures.................................................................................................................................234

           5.4.2.1 Pre-Test.........................................................................................................................235

5.4.3   The Results of the Cross-Sectional Experimental Study......................................................237   

           5.4.3.1 Adult Controls..............................................................................................................237

           5.4.3.2 Results of the Pre-Test................................................................................................237

           5.4.3.3 Lack of Relative Clauses..............................................................................................239

           5.4.3.4 Overgeneration Paradigms........................................................................................240

           5.4.3.5 Aged that Overgeneration Takes Place: A Speculation...........................................241

           5.4.3.6 Toyama Dialect.............................................................................................................243

5.5      Discussion...................................................................................................................................243

           5.5.1   Overgeneration of 'No' with Relative Clauses.........................................................243

           5.5.2   Undergeneration of 'No' after PP Modifiers............................................................244

           5.5.3   Two Types of Overgeneration....................................................................................247

           5.5.4   Type Types of Adjectival Verbs..................................................................................250

Concluding Remarks..............................................................................................................................253

6.1      A Solution for the Puzzle..........................................................................................................253

6.2      Capturing the Overgeneration in the Parameter Theory....................................................256

Bibliography...........................................................................................................................................258

Appendix A: Abbreviation.....................................................................................................................267