Cover not available
Part of
Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology
Edited by Luca Alfieri, Giorgio Francesco Arcodia and Paolo Ramat
[Typological Studies in Language 132] 2021
► pp. 389–410

Chapter 11
The category ‘pronoun’ in East and Southeast Asian languages, with a focus on Japanese

| Università di Milano-Bicocca
The topic of the paper is an analysis of the debated notion of the category ‘pronoun’ in East and Southeast Asian languages, with a special focus on Japanese. After a description of the main aspects of the notion of ‘person’ as a grammatical category, the focus is devoted to personal pronouns in general and then to personal pronouns in East and Southeast Asian languages. Special attention is devoted to Japanese personal pronouns, taking into account the Emancipatory Pragmatics approach.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Person as a grammatical category
  • 3.Personal pronouns
  • 4.Pronouns in East and South-East Asian languages
    • 4.1A focus on Japanese pronouns
    • 4.2Korean pronouns
  • 5.Ellipsis
  • 6.Towards an emancipatory pragmatics
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 9 July 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.132.11dam
References (53)
References
Azuma, Shoji. 2000. Linguistic strategy of involvement: An emergence of new political speech in Japan. In Beyond Public Speech and Symbols: Explorations in the Rethoric of Politicians and the Media, Christ’l De Landtsheer & Ofer Feldman (eds), 69–85. Westport CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Bachnik, Jane. 1998. Time, space and person in Japanese relationships. In Interpreting Japanese Society, Joy Hendry (ed.), 91–116. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Becker, Alton & I Gusti Ngurah, Oka. 1974. Person in Kawi: Exploration of an elementary semantic dimension. Oceanic Linguistics 13: 229–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bhat, Darbhe Narayana Shankara. 2004. Pronouns. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope & Levinson, Stephen. 1987. Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1971[1958]. Subjectivity in language. In Problens in General Linguistics, 223–230. Coral Gables FL: University of Miami Press.Google Scholar
Cassirer, Ernst. 195 [1923]. The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms, Vol.1: Language. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Cooke, Joseph R. 1968. Pronominal Reference in Thai, Burmese and Vietnamese. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Da Milano, Federica. 2012. Classificazione tipologico-linguistica del giapponese in sincronia. In Introduzione allo studio della lingua giapponese, Andrea Maurizi (ed.), 43–84. Roma: Carocci Editore.Google Scholar
. 2018. La soggettività linguistica: Un’analisi in prospettiva tipologica. In Tipologia, acquisizione, grammaticalizzazione, Marina Chini & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), 51–62. Milano: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
Da Milano, Federica & Jungbluth, Konstanze. To appear. Address systems and social markers. In Cambridge Handbook of Romance Lingustics, Adam Ledgeway & Martin Maiden (eds). Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger. 1999. Demonstratives. Form, Function and Grammaticalization [Typlogical Studies in Language 42]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diller, Anthony. 1994. Thai. In Semantic and Lexical Universals. Theory and Empirical Findings, Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds), 149–170. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ebi, Martina. 2015. Encoding deictic relations in Japanese. In Manual of Deixis in Romance Languages, Konstanze Jungbluth & Federica Da Milano (eds), 597–610. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuji, Yoko. 2012. Differences of situating self in the place/ba of interaction between the Japanese and American English speakers. Journal of Pragmatics 44: 636–662. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanks, William. 1990. Referential Practice. Language and Lived Space among the Maya. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hanks, William, Ide, Sachiko & Katagiri, Yasuhiro. 2009. Towards an emancipatory pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics 41(1): 1–9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanks, William, Ide, Sachiko, Katagiri, Yasuhiro, Saft, Scott, Fujii, Yoko & Ueno, Kishiko. 2019. Communicative interactions in terms of ba theory. Towards an innovative approach to language practice. Journal of Pragmatics 145: 63–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasegawa, Yoko. 2016. Japanese. A Linguistic Introduction. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1999. Why is grammaticalization irreversible? Linguistics 37: 1043–1068. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86: 663–687. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Song, Kyung-An. 2010. On the genesis of personal pronouns: Some conceptual sources. Language and Cognition 2(1): 117–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Helmbrecht, Johannes. 2004. Personal Pronouns. Form, Function, and Grammaticalization. Habilitationschrift, Erfurt Universität.Google Scholar
Hinds, John. 1971. Personal pronouns in Japanese. Glossa 5(2): 146–155.Google Scholar
. 1986. Japanese. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
von Humboldt, W. 1826. Notice sur la grammaire japonaise du P. Oyanguren. Paris: Librairie Orientale de Dondey-Dupré père et fils.Google Scholar
Ishiyama, Osamu. 2019. Diachrony of Personal Pronouns in Japanese. A Functional and Cross-linguistic Perspective [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 344]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iwasaki, Shoichi. 2013. Japanese [London Oriental and African Language Library 17]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koh, Ann Sweesun. 1990. Topics in Colloquial Malay. PhD dissertation, The University of Melbourne.
Kuno, Susumu. 1972. Pronominalization, reflexivization, and direct discourse. Linguistic Inquiry 3: 161–195.Google Scholar
. 1973. The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1987. Functional Syntax. Anaphora, Discourse, and Empathy. Chicago IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
. 2004. Empathy and direct discourse perspectives. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory L. Ward (eds), 315–343. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kuroda, Sige-Yuki. 1967. Generative Grammatical Studies in the Japanese Language. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1995. Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
. 2018. Linguistic concepts and categories in language description. In Tipologia, acquisizione, grammaticalizzazione. Typology, Acquisition, Grammaticalization Studies, Marina Chini & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), 27–50. Milano: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
Martin, Samuel Elmo. 1975. A Reference Grammar of Japanese. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Mosby Irgens, Benedicte. 2017. Person Deixis in Japanese and English. A Constrastive Functional Analysis. PhD dissertation, University of Bergen.
Otsuka, Masayuki. 2011. On ba theory. Paper presented for the lecture on ba theory at the 2011 Tokyo Workshop on Emancipatory Pragmatics. Ms.
Quinn, Charles J. 1994. Uchi/soto: Tip of a semiotic iceberg? ‘Inside’ and ‘outside’ knowledge in the grammar of Japanese. In Situated Meaning. Inside and Outside in Japanese Self, Society and Language, Jane M. Bachnik & Charles J. QuinnJr. (eds), 247–294. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1990. The Languages of Japan. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Shibasaki, Reijirou. 2005. Personal Pronouns and Argument Structure in Japanese: Discourse Frequency, Diachrony and Typology. PhD dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara.
Siewierska, Anna. 2004. Person. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Song, Kyung-An. 2002. Korean reflexives and grammaticalization: A speaker-hearer dynamic approach. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 55(4): 340–353.Google Scholar
Sohn, Ho-Min. 2013. Korean. Seoul: Korea University Press.Google Scholar
Sugamoto, Nobuko. 1989. Pronominality: A noun-pronoun continuum. In Linguistic Categorization, [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 61], Roberta Corrigan, Fred Eckman & Michael Noonan (eds), 267–291. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Takao. 1978. Words in Context. A Japanese Perspective on Language and Culture. Tokyo: Kodansha International.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Dasher, Richard B. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Tsujimura, Natsuko. 1996. An Introduction to JapaneseLlinguistics. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Vovin, Alexander. 2003. A Reference Grammar of Classical Japanese Prose. London: Routledge Curzon.Google Scholar
Whitman, John. 1999. Personal pronoun shift in Japanese. A case study in lexical change and point of view. In Function and Structure. In Honour of Susumu Kuno [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 59], Akio Kamio & Ken-Ichi Takami (eds.), 357–386. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yamaguchi, Yoshinori. 1985. Kodai nihongo bumpoo no seiritsu no kenkyuu [Studies in the birth of old Japanese grammar]. Tokyo: Yuseido.Google Scholar
Yamamoto, Mutsumi. 1999. Animacy and Reference. A Cognitive Approaxh to Corpus Linguistics [Studies in Language Companion Series 46]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Lieb, Hans-Heinrich
2021. Theories of language, language comparison, and grammatical description. In Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language, 132], ► pp. 137 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.