Creation of an intensifier in progress: a study of the Japanese adverb hutuuni
-
Naomi H. McGloin
and
Moeko Watanabe
Abstract
This paper examines the emergent new usage of the Japanese adverb hutuuni. For most speakers of Japanese, this adverb means ‘ordinarily, usually, normally’, but among young adult speakers of Japanese, it has come to be used as an intensifier. Based on blog and conversation data as well as two surveys, the paper identifies wide ranging new senses of hutuuni, such as ‘very’, ‘fairly/pretty’, ‘contrary to or more than what I expected’, ‘not flattery’, and ‘honestly, speaking a true mind’. Focusing on its intensifier function, Imoto, Ryō. 2011. ‘Futsūni kawaī’-kō [A study of ‘Futsūni cute]. Shōgaku Ronshū 79(4). 59–75 proposes a scale analysis. Noticing that hutuuni typically occurs in a context where the expected level is set low, he argues that the function of hutuuni is to upgrade the level to the hutuu ‘standard’ level. He states that the intensifier usage is not the result of the semantic change of hutuu. The present study, on the other hand, suggests that the intensifier usage of hutuuni involves both syntactic and semantic change. Syntactically, hutuuni which is a verb modifier has come to modify adjectives, which has contributed to its new intensifier function. Semantically, we propose two possible paths to a degree word/intensifier for hutuuni, in line with the framework of the ‘subjectification’ and ‘intersubjectification’ of meaning proposed in Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2003. From subjectification to intersubjectification. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Motives for language change, 124–139. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful for the valuable comments we received from Shigeko Okamoto, Maki Kawada, Ragnar Svare and an anonymous reviewer. The earlier version of this paper was presented at the American Association of Teachers of Japanese Spring Conference, March 15, 2012, and also at the 26th meeting of the Central Association of Teachers of Japanese, Oct. 31-Nov. 1, 2015.
Appendix: Relevant 2016 survey results
| very | fairly pretty | unexpect-edly | more than I thought | not flattery | honestly | as I thought | generally thought | not use | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ex 7 | 20.3% | 44.6% | 14.9% | 13.5% | 0% | 2.7% | 2.7% | 1.4% | 0% |
| Ex 8 | 16.2% | 47.3% | 2.7% | 8.1% | 0% | 4.0% | 6.8% | 1.4% | 13.5% |
| Ex 9 | 39.2% | 17.6% | 8.1% | 6.8% | 1.4% | 14.9% | 1.4% | 0% | 10.8% |
| Ex 10 | 25.7% | 31.1% | 0% | 0% | 4.1% | 39.2% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Ex 11 | 1.4% | 13.5% | 0% | 0% | 1.4% | 63.5% | 2.7% | 0% | 17.6% |
| Ex 12 | 9.5% | 9.5% | 0% | 0% | 1.4% | 58.1% | 14.9% | 4.0% | 2.7% |
| Ex 13 | 18.9% | 23.0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 39.2% | 5.4% | 2.7% | 10.8% |
| Ex 14 | 0% | 12.2% | 27.0% | 13.5% | 4.1% | 40.5% | 2.7% | 0% | 0% |
| Ex 15 | 1.4% | 12.2% | 45.9% | 20.3% | 2.7% | 12.2% | 4.1% | 1.4% | 0% |
| Ex 16 | 6.8% | 31.1% | 1.4% | 1.4% | 24.3% | 20.3% | 4.1% | 10.8% | 0% |
| Ex 17 | 9.5% | 16.2% | 2.7% | 5.4% | 33.8% | 18.9% | 6.8% | 4.1% | 2.7% |
| Ex 19 | 25.7% | 24.3% | 4.0% | 1.4% | 24.3% | 17.6% | 1.4% | 1.4% | 0% |
The percentages shown are the percentages of the respondents’ choice for a particular meaning in a particular context. So, 20.3% for ‘very’ for Ex. 7 means that 20.3% of the respondents (74 in total for this question) chose ‘very’ as the meaning of hutuuni in example (7).
References
Athanasiadou, Angeliki. 2007. On the subjectivity of intensifiers. Language Sciences 29. 554–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2007.01.009.Search in Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1972. Degree words. The Hague: Mouton.10.1515/9783110877786Search in Google Scholar
Breban, Tine & Kristin Davidse. 2016. The history of very: The directionality of functional shift and (inter)subjectification. English Language and Linguistics 20(2). 221–249. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1360674315000428.Search in Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele. 2006. Context types in grammaticalization as constructions. Constructions SV1. 29.Search in Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas & David Wilkins. 2000. In the mind’s ear: The semantic extensions of perception verbs in Australian languages. Language 76(3). 546–592. https://doi.org/10.2307/417135.Search in Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer, Christopher Kennedy & Beth Levin. 1999. Scalar structure underlies telicity in “degree achievements”. In Tanya Mathews & Devon Strolovitch (eds.), Proceedings from Semantics and Linguistic Theory 9, 127–144. Ithaca: CLC Publications.10.3765/salt.v9i0.2833Search in Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 2002. On the role of context in grammaticalization. In Ilse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald (eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization, 83–101. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.49.08heiSearch in Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul & Elizabeth Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Imoto, Ryō. 2011. ‘Futsūni kawaī’-kō [A study of ‘Futsūni cute]. Shōgaku Ronshū 79(4). 59–75.Search in Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher & Louise McNally. 1999. From event structure to scalar structure: Degree modification in deverbal adjectives. In Tanya Mathews & Devon Strolovitch (eds.), Proceedings from semantics and linguistic theory 9, 163–180. Ithaca: CLC Publications.10.3765/salt.v9i0.2820Search in Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher & Louise McNally. 2005. Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language 81(2). 345–381. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2005.0071.Search in Google Scholar
Kitahara, Yasuo. 2005. Zokudan! Mondai na Nihongo [Problematic Japanese: A sequel]. Tokyo: Taishūkan.Search in Google Scholar
Lorenz, Gunther. 2002. Really worthwhile or not really significant? A corpus-based approach to the delexicalization and grammaticalization of intensifiers in Modern English. In Ilse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald (eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization, 143–161. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.49.11lorSearch in Google Scholar
Macaulay, Ronald. 2006. Pure grammaticalization: The development of a teenage intensifier. Language Variation and Change 18. 267–283. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954394506060133.Search in Google Scholar
McGloin, Naomi. 1996. Subjectification and adverbs in Japanese. In Noriko Akatsuka, Shoichi Iwasaki & Susan Strauss (eds.), Japanese/Korean linguistics 5, 287–299. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Search in Google Scholar
Méndez-Naya, Belén. 2008. Introduction to special issue on English intensifiers. English Language and Linguistics 12(2). 213–219. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1360674308002591.Search in Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Matti Rissanen. 2002. Fairly pretty or pretty fair? On the development and grammaticalization of English downtoners. Language Sciences 24. 359–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0388-0001(01)00038-9.Search in Google Scholar
Nishimura, Emi. 2016. ‘Futsūni kawaī’ saikō: takai teido o arawasu to kaishaku sareru fukushiteki seibun ‘futsūni’ no shinyōhō ni kanshite [‘Futsūni kawaī’ reconsidered: On the new usage of an adverbial constituent ‘futsūni’ that is interpreted to express high degree]. Eigogaku Eibeibungaku Ronshū 42. 43–63.Search in Google Scholar
Ohashi, Hiroshi. 2006. The Development of an English intensifier phrase: A corpus-based study. English Linguistics 23(2). 403–432. https://doi.org/10.9793/elsj1984.23.403.Search in Google Scholar
Paradis, Carita. 1997. Degree modifiers of adjectives in spoken British English. Lund: Lund University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Paradis, Carita. 2001. Adjectives and boundedness. Cognitive Linguistics 12(1). 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.12.1.47.Search in Google Scholar
Paradis, Carita. 2008. Configurations, construals and change: Expressions of DEGREE. English Language and Linguistics 12(2). 317–343. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1360674308002645.Search in Google Scholar
Partington, Alan. 1993. Corpus evidence of language change: The case of the intensifier. In Mona Baker, Gill Francis & Elena Tognini-Bonelli (eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair, 177–192. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.64.12parSearch in Google Scholar
Powell, Mava Jo. 1992. The systematic development of correlated interpersonal and metalinguistic uses in stance adverbs. Cognitive Linguistics 3. 75–110. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1992.3.1.75.Search in Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Svartvik Jan. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Sakakibara, Yoshimi. 2013. What does the Japanese adverb futsūni mean? A paper presented at the 2013 thursday seminar of the American Association of Teachers of Japanese.Search in Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65. 31–55. https://doi.org/10.2307/414841.Search in Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1995. Subjectification in grammaticalization. In Dieter Stein & Susan Wright (eds.), Subjectivity and subjectivisation, 31–54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511554469.003Search in Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2003. From subjectification to intersubjectification. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Motives for language change, 124–139. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486937.009Search in Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2012. The status of onset contexts in analysis of micro-changes. Language and Computers 76. 221–255.10.1163/9789401207935_012Search in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Editorial
- Articles
- What voiced obstruents symbolically represent in Japanese: evidence from the Pokémon universe
- Japanese apophonic compounds
- Creation of an intensifier in progress: a study of the Japanese adverb hutuuni
- Subjective constructions in polite discourse: negotiating between Speech-Act Empathy Hierarchy and social hierarchy
- Book Reviews
- Noriko Yoshimura and Mineharu Nakayama: Dainigengo shūtoku-kenkyū eno sasoi: Riron kara jisshō e [An invitation to second language acquisition research: From theory to experiment]
- Prashant Pardeshi, Yosuke Momiyama, Yuriko Sunakawa, Shingo Imai, and Yasunari Imamura: Tagidōshi-bunseki no shin-tenkai to nihongo-kyōiku eno ōyō [New developments in the analysis of polysemous words and their application to Japanese language education]
- Hisashi Noda: Nihongo gakushūsha no dokkai-katē [Reading process of learners of Japanese]
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Editorial
- Articles
- What voiced obstruents symbolically represent in Japanese: evidence from the Pokémon universe
- Japanese apophonic compounds
- Creation of an intensifier in progress: a study of the Japanese adverb hutuuni
- Subjective constructions in polite discourse: negotiating between Speech-Act Empathy Hierarchy and social hierarchy
- Book Reviews
- Noriko Yoshimura and Mineharu Nakayama: Dainigengo shūtoku-kenkyū eno sasoi: Riron kara jisshō e [An invitation to second language acquisition research: From theory to experiment]
- Prashant Pardeshi, Yosuke Momiyama, Yuriko Sunakawa, Shingo Imai, and Yasunari Imamura: Tagidōshi-bunseki no shin-tenkai to nihongo-kyōiku eno ōyō [New developments in the analysis of polysemous words and their application to Japanese language education]
- Hisashi Noda: Nihongo gakushūsha no dokkai-katē [Reading process of learners of Japanese]
