Editor for this issue: <>
A skeptical outsider's comment on the discussion of Japanese "pronouns": If I am not mistaken, the discussion started from the assumption that "boku" is a 1sg personal pronoun. But is it? What is a personal pronoun anyway? You can't call a linguistic form "personal pronoun" before you have studied all aspects of its syntactic and semantic behavior. The mere fact that it can be translated into English by means of the English 1sg personal pronoun in most cases does not qualify as a linguistic justification. A strict distinction should be made between a 'genuine' 1st person pronoun whose sole function is to refer to the so-called first person on the one hand and a noun, or a linguistic form for that matter, which may be used to refer to the spekaer himself/herself. The Japanese word Japanese langauge is not that the '1sg personal pronoun' is used to refer to someone other than the '1st person', but that there are a set of nouns which may be used in a way that reminds the SAE speaker of their personal pronouns. It is a pity that students of the Japanese language, both native and non-native, have erroneously been led to assume that the linguistic forms like "boku," "anata," "kare," etc. are 'personal pronouns'. I am not denying the fact that such a way of presenting Japanese grammar to non-Japanese is very helpful in language classes. I am simply pointing out that the whole discussion stinks and is unfruitful because it is based on an apparently false assumption. The words "boku," "anata," etc. are not very much like personal pronouns in SAE languages, which, it seems to me, count as prototypical pronouns. I would appreciate it if someone would redefine the notion of 'personal pronoun' and start the whole discussion all over again. By the way, why on earth should every language be expected to have a replica of the SAE personal pronoun system? Or would anyone be ready mentioned above, that "boku" etc. should by all means be called and treated as 'personal pronouns' in the authorized Japanese standard grammar yet to be written? Thank you. Kazuto Matsumura G00814Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuesinet.ad.jp
Has anybody pointed out that "anata" and "kare" were historically
demonstratives? "Kanojo" was the combination of a demonstrative
adjective and a noun menaing "that woman". I'm sorry if anybody
has mentioned this, but "boku" was originally a noun meaning
"(supposedly "YOUR") servant". Some scholars doubt if we could
claim the existence of the category "pronoun" in Japanese.
Melody Sutton writes;
>> I have heard Japanese speakers consistently use their own name instead of
>> watashi ("I") when referring to themselves.
Some speakers do, but I think it is a marked case. Some children,
especially girls, use their given names when they address themselves.
True, some teenage girls do the same, but they might be regarded
as immature. Some male adults use their family names, and it gives
a formal, conservative, armylike atmosphere.
I would like to point out one thing. Everybody seems to be saying
that a "pronoun" can be sometimes deleted in Japanese. It seems to me
that it is much appropriate to say that it is added, rather than
deleted, when necessary. I believe the use of zero-pronouns is the most
unmarked case in Japanese. But again the term zero-pronoun itself might
be a misnomer.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Makoto SHIMIZU
Kyushu Institute of Technology
shimizu
hakobera.isct.kyutech.ac.jp
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Canada n. A socialist protectorate full of nice people and clean
streets, with no crime except teevee
R.W. Jackson _The_Diabolical_Dictionary_of_Modern_English_
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue