On null arguments and phi-features in second language acquisition

Yoichi Miyamoto; Kazumi Yamada

doi:10.1515/jjl-2020-2024

Article

On null arguments and phi-features in second language acquisition

Yoichi Miyamoto and Kazumi Yamada

Published/Copyright: November 12, 2020

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Author Information

From the journal Journal of Japanese Linguistics Volume 36 Issue 2

Abstract

Saito, Mamoru. 2007. Notes on East Asian argument ellipsis. Language Research 43. 203–227 argues that argument ellipsis (AE) is available only in languages that lack phi-feature agreement. Accordingly, Japanese, but not English, permits AE. Under Saito’s theoretical framework, this paper compares experimental data from L1 Japanese learners of L2 English (J-EFL) and L1 English learners of L2 Japanese (E-JFL). Given that sloppy and quantificational reading arises from an ellipsis operation (Hankamer, Jorge & Sag, Ivan. 1976. Deep and surface anaphora. Linguistic Inquiry 7. 391–426, Takahashi, Daiko. 2008. Noun phrase ellipsis. In Miyagawa, Shigeru & Saito, Mamoru (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Japanese linguistics, 394–422. Oxford: Oxford University Press, among others), we hypothesize that J-EFL learners, but not E-JFL learners, allow the reading in point with null arguments: AE is available only in the grammar of J-EFL learners, forced by the lack of phi-features in their L2 English grammar, due to L1 transfer. The results from our main study adopting a truth value judgement task supported the hypothesis. Based on our finding, we suggest that correct L2 phi-feature specification can ultimately be obtained when no phi-features are present in L1 (Ishino, Nao. 2012. Feature transfer and feature learning in universal grammar: A comparative study of the syntactic mechanism for second language acquisition. Doctoral dissertation: Kwansei Gakuin University, Miyamoto, Yoichi. 2012. Dainigengo-ni okeru hikenzaiteki-na yōso-ni kansuru Ichikōsatsu [A study on null elements in second language acquisition]. Paper presented at the 84th ELSJ annual general meeting: Senshu University, 26 May).

Keywords: argument ellipsis; sloppy reading; J-EFL learners; E-JFL learners

Corresponding author: Yoichi Miyamoto, Graduate School of Language and Culture, Osaka University, 1-8 Machikaneyama-cho Toyonaka, Osaka, 560-0043, Japan, E-mail: miyamoto@lang.osaka-u.ac.jp

Acknowledgments

We are thankful to Mika Kizu for her help with the data collection. We would like to thank Tae Kudo and Seijiro Sumi for their support in the experiments reported in this study. We are also indebted to Ivan M. Brenes and Regan M. Thomson for their comments on the earlier version of the paper, which appeared in Nanzan Linguistics 10 (2015: pp. 1–20), Nanzan University, Japan. This research was supported in part by the grants-in-aid for scientific research (B) (No.17H02364; PI: Noriaki Yusa) and (C) (No. 24520681; PI: Kazumi Yamada, No. 18K00808; PI: Kazumi Yamada). The usual disclaimers apply.

Appendices

Appendix A

Test Sentences for Japanese EFL Learners (TVJT)

Null subject
1. Sloppy reading
  1. The woman thinks her own cookies are the best, but the man doesn’t think [ e ] are the best.
  2. The woman thinks her own poster is the best, but the man doesn’t think [ e ] is the best.
  3. The woman thinks her own car is the best, but the man doesn’t think [ e ] is the best.
2. Strict reading
  1. The woman thinks her own cookies are the best, but the man doesn’t think [ e ] are the best.
  2. The woman thinks her letters are beautiful, but the man doesn’t think [ e ] are beautiful.
  3. The woman thinks her own car is the best, but the man doesn’t think [ e ] is the best.
Null object
1. Sloppy reading
  1. The man ate his own banana, but the woman didn’t eat [ e ].
  2. The woman cleaned her own car, but the man didn’t clean [ e ].
  3. The man saw his own results, but the woman didn’t see [ e ].
2. Strict reading
  1. The woman looked at her own pencil case, but the man didn’t see [ e ].
  2. The man ate his own lunch, but the woman didn’t eat [ e ].
  3. The man cleaned his own car, but the woman didn’t clean [ e ].

Appendix B

Test sentences for English JFL learners (TVJT)

Null subject
1. Sloppy reading
  a.
  Onnanohito-wa zibun-no kukkii-ga itiban da to omotteiru.
  woman -TOP self -GEN cookie-NOM best be that think
  Demootokonohito-wa [ e ] itiban da to omotte-inai.
  But man -TOP best be that think-NEG
  “The woman thinks her own cookies are the best. But the man doesn’t think [ e ] are the best’
  b.
  Onnanohito-wa zibun-no posutaa-ga itiban da to omotteiru.
  woman -TOP self -GEN poster-NOM best be that think
  Demo otokonohito-wa [ e ] itiban da to omottei-nai.
  but man -TOP best be that think-NEG
  ‘The woman thinks her own poster is the best. But the man doen’t think [ e ] is the best.’
  c.
  Onnanohito-wa zibun-no kuruma -ga itiban da to omotteiru.
  woman -TOP self -GEN car -NOM best be that think
  Demo otokonohito-wa [ e ] ichiban da to omottei-nai.
  but man -TOP best be that think-NEG
  ‘The woman thinks her own car is the best. But the man doesn’t think [ e ] is the best.’
2. Strict reading
  a.
  Onnanohito-wa zibun-no kukkii-ga itiban da to omotteiru.
  woman -TOP self -GEN cookie-NOM best be that think
  Demo otokonohito-wa [ e ] itiban da to omottei-nai.
  but man -TOP best be that think-NEG
  ‘The woman thinks her own cookies are the best. But the man doesn’t think [ e ] are the best.’
  b.
  Onnanohito-wa zibun-no zi-ga zyoozu da to omotteiru.
  woman -TOP self -GEN letter-NOM beautiful be that think
  Demo otokonohito-wa [ e ] kirei da to omottei-nai.
  but man -TOP beautiful be that think-NEG
  ‘The woman thinks her own letters are beautiful. But the man doesn’t think [ e ] are beautiful.’
  c.
  Onnanohito-wa zibun-no kuruma -ga itiban da to omotteiru.
  woman -TOP self -GEN car -NOM best be that think
  Demo otokonohito-wa [ e ] itiban da to omottei-nai.
  but man -TOP best be that think-NEG
  ‘The woman thinks her own car is the best. But the man doesn’t think [ e ] is the best.’
Null object
1. Sloppy reading
  a.
  Otokonohito-wa zibun-no banana-o tabeta.Demoonnanohito-wa
  man -TOP self -GEN banana-ACC eat-PST but woman -TOP
  [ e ] tabe-nakat-ta.
  eat-NEG-PST
  ‘The man ate his own banana. But the woman did not eat [ e ].’
  b.
  Onnanohito -wa zibun-no kuruma -o huita. Demo otokonohito -wa
  woman -TOP self-GEN car -ACC wipe-PST but man -TOP
  [ e ] huka-nakat-ta.
  wipe-NEG-PST
  ‘The woman wiped her own car. But the man did not wipe [ e ].’
  c.
  Otokonohito -wa zibun-no kekka-o mita. Demo onnanohito -wa
  man -TOP self-GEN result-ACC see-PST but woman -TOP
  [ e ] mi-nakat-ta.
  see-NEG-PST
  ‘The man saw his own result. But the woman did not see [ e ].’
2. Strict reading
  a.
  Onnanohito-wa zibun-no hudebako-o mita. Demo otokonohito -wa
  woman-TOP self-GEN pencil case-ACC see-PST but man -TOP
  [ e ] mi-nakat-ta.
  see-NEG-PST
  ‘The woman saw her own pencil case. But the man did not see [ e ].’
  b.
  Otokonohito -wa zibun-no obentoo -o tabeta. Demo onnanohito -wa
  man -TOP self-GEN lunch -ACC eat-PST but woman -TOP
  [ e ] tabe-nakat-ta.
  eat-NEG-PST
  ‘The man ate his own lunch. But the woman did not eat [ e ].’
  c.
  Otokonohito -wa zibun-no kuruma -o hui-ta. Demo onnanohito -wa
  Man -TOP self-GEN car -ACC wipe-PST but woman -TOP
  [ e ] huka-nakat-ta.
  wipe-NEG-PST
  ‘The man wiped his own car. But the woman did not wipe [ e ].’

Appendix C

Test sentences for Japanese EFL learners (acceptability judgement task)

Null subjects
1. Taro has to study English tonight. His mother said needs an English dictionary.
2. Hanako ate three hotdogs. Taro immediately thought was very hungry.
3. John saw a very beautiful woman. He thought was Mary’s mother.
Null objects
1. John bought a new car, but his father is always using when he goes to his friend’s house.
2. John bought a big house, and John wants, too.
3. Before he reads magazines, he always puts in the box.
Distracters
1. Tomorrow, Monica will eat sushi at a sushi bar near the station.
2. English is spoken by a lot of people in the world, but Japanese is spoken only in Japan.
3. I was 20 years old, and my sister was 17 years old when our younger brother was born.
4. What does John see in the park when it started to rain?
5. Where did Mary learn French, which her mother can speak very fluently?
6. Mary gave Mr. Tanaka many cookies which she baked yesterday.

Appendix D

Test sentences for English JFL learners (acceptability judgement task)

Null subjects

(1)

Taroo-ga		akai	huku-no	onna-no	hito-o	mi-ta
Taro-NOM		red	cloth-NOM	woman-GEN	person-ACC	see-PST
	toki,	sono	hito-o	Samu-no	oneesan	da
	when	that	person-ACC	Sam-GEN	elder sister	be
	to	omoimasi-ta.
that	think-PST

(2)

Hanako-wa	raisyuu	tesuto-ga	aru	node,
Hanako-TOP	next week	test-NOM	be	since
issyookenmei	benkyoo	si-teimasu.	Okaasan-wa	hyaku
hard	study	do-PRES PROG	mother-TOP	one hundred
	ten-o	tor-eru	to	omotteimasu.
	point-ACC	get-can	that	think

(3)

Taroo-ga		keeki-o	kaimasita.	Hanako-wa	totemo	oisisou	da
Taro-NOM		cake-ACC	buy-PST	Hanako-TOP	very	tasty	be
to	iimasi-ta.
that	say-PST

Null objects
(1)
Taroo-ga konpyuutaa-o kowasite-simaimasi-ta ga otoosan-ga
Taro-NOM computer-ACC break-PRES-PERF but father-NOM
naosimasi-ta.
fix-PST
(2)
Hanako-ga kuruma-o kaimasi-ta ga, oneesan-ga tukatte-imasu
Hanako-NOM car-ACC buy-PST but elder sister-NOM use-PRES PROG
(3)
Hanako-wa isoide daigaku e ikanakereba-narimasen
Hanako-NOM in a hurry university to go-must
ga, ame-ga hutte-imasu.
but rain-NOM fall-PRES PROG
Taroo-ga kuruma de daigaku made turete-iku to iimasi-ta.
Taro-NOM car by university until take-go that say-PST
Sentences containing two phrases with the particle ‘o’
(1)
Tanaka san-wa susi-o kukkii-o tabe-ta.
Tanaka Mr.-TOP susi-Acc cookie-Acc eat-PST
(2)
Yamada san-wa mado-o doa-o ake-ta.
Yamada Mr.-TOP window-ACC door-ACC open-PST
Sentences containing two phrases accompanied by ‘ni’
(1)
Jon-ga Mearii-ni susi-ni kat-ta.
John-NOM Mary-DAT susi-DAT buy-PST
(2)
Tanaka san-wa Jon-ni kukkii-ni age-ta.
Tanaka Mr.-TOP John-DAT cookie-DAT give-PST
Sentences containing two phrases with the particle ‘de’/‘o’
(1)
Doko-de Mearii-ga gakkoo-de benkyoo sita no
where-LOC Mary-NOM school-LOC study do-PST Q
(2)
Nani-o Jon-ga hon-o katta no.
what-ACC John-NOM book-ACC buy-PST Q

Appendix E

The results of other experiment items on TVJT

(1) J-EFLs’ acceptance rate- overt argument items judged appropriate (%)

	Overt subject				Overt object
	Sloppy		Strict		Sloppy		Strict
	%		%		%		%
Control (n = 10)	3.3	(1/30)	0	(0/30)	0	(0/30)	0	(0/30)
Advanced (n = 11)	6.1	(2/33)	0	(0/33)	24.2	(8/33)	9.1	(3/33)
Intermediate (n = 10)	26.7	(8/30)	3.3	(1/30)	10.0	(3/30)	10	(3/30)

(2) E-JFLs’ acceptance rate- overt argument items judged appropriate (%)

	Overt subject				Overt object
	Sloppy		Strict		Sloppy		Strict
	%		%		%		%
Control (n = 15)	0	(0/45)	2.2	(1/45)	6.7	(3/45)	0	(0/45)
Upper advanced (n = 3)	11.1	(1/9)	0	(0/9)	11.1	(1/9)	0	(0/9)
Lower advanced (n = 16)	0	(0/48)	2.1	(1/48)	8.3	(4/48)	0	(0/48)

References

Alexiadou, Artemis & Elena Anagnostopoulou. 1998. Parameterizing Agr: Word order, V-movement and EPP-checking. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 16(3). 491–539. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1006090432389.10.1023/A:1006090432389Search in Google Scholar

Allan, Dave. 1992. The oxford placement test. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1982. Some concepts and consequences of the theory of government and binding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 2008. On phases. In Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero & Maria Luisa Zubizarreta (eds.), Fundamental issues in linguistic theory, 133–166. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262062787.003.0007Search in Google Scholar

Epstein, Samuel David., Hisatsugu Kitahara & T. Daniel Seely. 2012. Structure building that can’t be. In Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria & Vidal, Valmala (eds.), Ways of structure building. 253–270. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199644933.003.0011Search in Google Scholar

Epstein, Samuel David, Hisatsugu Kitahara & T. Daniel Seely. 2013. Simplest merge generates set intersection: Implications for complementizer ‘that’ explanation. The Proceedings of GLOW in Asia IX. 77–92.Search in Google Scholar

Franceschina, Florencia. 2005. Fossilized second language grammars: The acquisition of grammatical gender. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lald.38Search in Google Scholar

Fukui, Naoki. 1984. Studies on Japanese anaphora I: The adjunct subject hypothesis and ‘zibun’. Unpublished manuscript. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Search in Google Scholar

Hakuta, Kenji. 1975. Becoming bilingual at age five: The story of Uguisu: Harvard University senior honors thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Hankamer, Jorge & Ivan Sag. 1976. Deep and surface anaphora. Linguistic Inquiry 7. 391–426.Search in Google Scholar

Hasegawa, Nobuko. 2005. EPP materialized first, agree later: Wh-questions, subjects and mo ‘also’-phrases. Scientific Approaches to Language 4. 33–80.Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, Roger. 1998. The inaccessibility of formal features of functional categories in second language acquisition. Paper presented at the pacific second language research forum (PacSLRF): Aoyama Gakuin University, 28 March.Search in Google Scholar

Hilles, Sharon. 1986. Interlanguage and pro-drop parameter. Second Language Research 2(1). 33–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/026765838600200103.Search in Google Scholar

Ishino, Nao. 2012. Feature transfer and feature learning in universal grammar: A comparative study of the syntactic mechanism for second language acquisition. Doctoral dissertation: Kwansei Gakuin University.Search in Google Scholar

Jaeggli, Osvaldo & Kenneth J. Safir. 1989. The null subject parameter and parametric theory. In Osvaldo Jaeggli & Kenneth J. Safir (eds.), The null subject parameter, 1–44. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.10.1007/978-94-009-2540-3_1Search in Google Scholar

Kishimoto, Hideki. 2006. Japanese as a topic-movement language. Scientific Approaches to Language 5. 85–105.Search in Google Scholar

Kuroda, Sige-Yuki. 1965. Generative grammatical studies in the Japanese language. Doctoral dissertation: MIT.Search in Google Scholar

Kuroda, Sige-Yuki. 1988. Whether we agree or not: A comparative syntax of English and Japanese. In William. J. Poser (ed.), Papers from the second international workshop on Japanese syntax, 103–143. Stanford: CSLI Publications.10.1075/li.12.1.02kurSearch in Google Scholar

Lakshmanan, Usha. 1991. Morphological uniformity and null-subjects in child second language acquisition. In Lynn Eubank (ed.), Point counterpoint: Universal grammar in the second language. 389–410. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/lald.3.18lakSearch in Google Scholar

Lakshmanan, Usha. 1994. Universal grammar in child second language acquisition. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/lald.10Search in Google Scholar

Liceras, Juana. M. 1988. Syntax and stylistics: More on the pro-drop parameter. In James Pankhurst, Michael Sharwood Smith & Paul VanBuren (eds.), Learnability and second languages. 71–93. Dordrecht: Foris.10.1515/9783110874150-005Search in Google Scholar

Liceras, Juana. M. 1989. On some properties of the “pro-drop” parameter: Looking for missing subjects in non-native Spanish. In Susan M. Gass & Jacquelyn Schachter (eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition. 109–133. Dordrecht: Foris.10.1017/CBO9781139524544.009Search in Google Scholar

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. 2015. Kaku shiken dantai no dēta ni yoru CEFR to no taishōhyō [Comparison table of CEFR and data from other testing organizations]. Available at: https://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/shotou/117/shiryo/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2015/11/04/1363335_2.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Miyagawa, Shigeru. 2010. Why agree? Why move? Unifying agreement-based and discourse configurational languages. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/8116.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Miyamoto, Yoichi. 2012. Dainigengo-ni okeru hikenzaiteki-na yōso-ni kansuru Ichikōsatsu [A study on null elements in second language acquisition]. Paper presented at the 84th ELSJ annual general meeting: Senshu University, 26 May.Search in Google Scholar

Oba, Hiromasa. 2003. The acquisition of wh-movement by advanced Japanese learners of English. Bulletin of Joetsu University of Education 22(2). 587–599.Search in Google Scholar

Oku, Satoshi. 1998. LF copy analysis of Japanese null arguments. Chicago Linguistic Society 34(1). M. Catherine Gruber, Derrick Higgins, Kenneth S Olson & Tamra Wysocki (eds.), Papers from the main session, 299–314.Search in Google Scholar

Oseki, Yohei, & Yoichi Miyamoto. 2014. Some consequences of simplest Merge and φ-defectiveness in Japanese. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 87. 217–228.Search in Google Scholar

Perlmutter, David M. 1972. Evidence for shadow pronouns in French relativization. In Paul M. Peranteau, Judith N. Levi & Gloria C. Phares (eds.), The Chicago which hunt: Papers from the relative clause festival, 73–105. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, University of Chicago.Search in Google Scholar

Phinney, Marianne. 1987. The pro-drop parameter in second language acquisition. In Thomas Roeper & Edwin Williams (eds.), Parameter setting. Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics, vol. 4, 221–238. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-94-009-3727-7_10Search in Google Scholar

Safir, Ken. 1984. Multiple variable binding. Linguistic Inquiry 15(4). 603–638.Search in Google Scholar

Safir, Ken. 1986. Relative clauses in a theory of binding and levels. Linguistic Inquiry 17(4). 663–689.Search in Google Scholar

Saito, Mamoru. 2007. Notes on East Asian argument ellipsis. Language Research 43. 203–227.Search in Google Scholar

Saito, Mamoru. 2011. Two notes on feature inheritance: A parametric variation in the distribution of the EPP. Nanzan Linguistics 7. 43–61.Search in Google Scholar

Takahashi, Daiko. 2008. Noun phrase ellipsis. In Miyagawa Shigeru & Saito Mamoru (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Japanese linguistics, 394–422. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195307344.013.0015Search in Google Scholar

The Japan Foundation. 2017. Relation between JFS-based evaluation and JLPT pass or fail determination. Available at: https://jfstandard.jp/pdf/jfs_jlpt_diagram2017(english).pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Tsimpli, Ianthi-Maria & Anna, Roussou. 1991. Parameter resetting in L2? UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 3. 149–169.Search in Google Scholar

Ueda, Yukiko. 2002. Subject positions, ditransitives, and scope in minimalist syntax: A phase-based approach. Doctoral dissertation: Kanda University of International Studies.Search in Google Scholar

Wakabayashi, Shigenori. 1997. The acquisition of functional categories by learners of English. Doctoral dissertation: University of Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar

Wakabayashi, Shigenori. 2002. The acquisition of non-null subjects in English: A minimalist account. Second Language Research 18(1). 28–71. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658302sr197oa.Search in Google Scholar

White, Lydia. 1985. The ‘pro-drop’ parameter in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning 35(1). 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1985.tb01014.x.Search in Google Scholar

White, Lydia. 1986. Implications of parametric variation for adult second language acquisition: An investigation of the pro-drop parameter. In Vivian Cook (ed.), Experimental approaches to second language learning, 55–72. Oxford: Pergamon.Search in Google Scholar

Zobl, Helmut. 1984. Uniformity and source-language variation across developmental continua. In William E. Rutherford (ed.), Language universals and second language acquisition, 185–218. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.5.15zobSearch in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2020-11-12

Published in Print: 2020-11-26

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/jjl-2020-2024

Keywords for this article

argument ellipsis; sloppy reading; J-EFL learners; E-JFL learners

Onnanohito-wa		zibun-no	kukkii-ga			itiban	da	to	omotteiru.
woman	-TOP	self -GEN	cookie-NOM			best	be	that	think
Demootokonohito-wa [ e ]			itiban	da	to	omotte-inai.
But	man	-TOP	best	be	that	think-NEG

Onnanohito-wa		zibun-no	posutaa-ga			itiban	da	to	omotteiru.
woman	-TOP	self -GEN	poster-NOM			best	be	that	think
Demo	otokonohito-wa [ e ]		itiban	da	to	omottei-nai.
but	man	-TOP	best	be	that	think-NEG

Onnanohito-wa		zibun-no	kuruma	-ga		itiban	da	to	omotteiru.
woman	-TOP	self -GEN	car	-NOM		best	be	that	think
Demo	otokonohito-wa [ e ]		ichiban	da	to	omottei-nai.
but	man	-TOP	best	be	that	think-NEG

Onnanohito-wa		zibun-no	zi-ga		zyoozu	da	to	omotteiru.
woman	-TOP	self -GEN	letter-NOM		beautiful	be	that	think
Demo	otokonohito-wa		[ e ]	kirei	da	to	omottei-nai.
but	man	-TOP		beautiful	be	that	think-NEG

Otokonohito-wa		zibun-no	banana-o		tabeta.Demoonnanohito-wa
man	-TOP	self -GEN	banana-ACC	eat-PST but	woman -TOP
[ e ] tabe-nakat-ta.
eat-NEG-PST

Onnanohito	-wa	zibun-no	kuruma	-o	huita.	Demo	otokonohito	-wa
woman	-TOP	self-GEN	car	-ACC	wipe-PST	but	man	-TOP
[ e ] huka-nakat-ta.
wipe-NEG-PST

Onnanohito-wa	zibun-no	hudebako-o	mita.	Demo	otokonohito	-wa
woman-TOP	self-GEN	pencil case-ACC	see-PST	but	man	-TOP
[ e ] mi-nakat-ta.
see-NEG-PST

Taroo-ga	konpyuutaa-o	kowasite-simaimasi-ta	ga	otoosan-ga
Taro-NOM	computer-ACC	break-PRES-PERF	but	father-NOM
naosimasi-ta.
fix-PST

Hanako-ga	kuruma-o	kaimasi-ta	ga,	oneesan-ga	tukatte-imasu
Hanako-NOM	car-ACC	buy-PST	but	elder sister-NOM	use-PRES PROG

Hanako-wa	isoide	daigaku	e	ikanakereba-narimasen
Hanako-NOM	in a hurry	university	to	go-must
ga,	ame-ga	hutte-imasu.
but	rain-NOM	fall-PRES PROG

Tanaka san-wa	susi-o	kukkii-o	tabe-ta.
Tanaka Mr.-TOP	susi-Acc	cookie-Acc	eat-PST

Yamada san-wa	mado-o	doa-o	ake-ta.
Yamada Mr.-TOP	window-ACC	door-ACC	open-PST

Jon-ga	Mearii-ni	susi-ni	kat-ta.
John-NOM	Mary-DAT	susi-DAT	buy-PST

Tanaka san-wa	Jon-ni	kukkii-ni	age-ta.
Tanaka Mr.-TOP	John-DAT	cookie-DAT	give-PST

Doko-de	Mearii-ga	gakkoo-de	benkyoo	sita	no
where-LOC	Mary-NOM	school-LOC	study	do-PST	Q

Nani-o	Jon-ga	hon-o	katta	no.
what-ACC	John-NOM	book-ACC	buy-PST	Q