Home Stance taking in Japanese Newspaper discourse: the use and non-use of Copulas da and dearu
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Stance taking in Japanese Newspaper discourse: the use and non-use of Copulas da and dearu

  • Michiko Kaneyasu

    Michiko Kaneyasu received her PhD in Japanese linguistics from the University of California, Los Angeles, and is currently a full-time instructor at the University of Colorado Boulder. Her publications include “Grammar and interactional discourse: Marking non-topical subject in Japanese conversation” (2013) and “Mikan yo mikan: Formulaic constructions and their implicature in conversation” (2014).

    EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: February 27, 2015

Abstract

The present study aims to demonstrate how writers display their stances in information-oriented written discourse. In particular, the paper analyzes nominal sentences in three newspaper subgenres, and explicates how the Japanese copulas da and dearu, which are normally considered stylistic variants in written language, are used by journalists as important grammatical resources for expressing their epistemic and evaluative stances toward certain types of information conveyed in nominal sentences. Da in newspaper discourse is used as a marker of the writer’s commitment to the relevance of the information in the given discourse context. Dearu, on the other hand, marks the writer’s own interpretive and evaluative stance. In addition, the non-use of a copula (i.e., a bare nominal) also conveys a certain stance of the writer, namely that the information presented is taken to be factual. The specific kind of stance expressed through the use and non-use of these copula types is closely linked to the functional objectives and concerns of the particular genres.

About the author

Michiko Kaneyasu

Michiko Kaneyasu received her PhD in Japanese linguistics from the University of California, Los Angeles, and is currently a full-time instructor at the University of Colorado Boulder. Her publications include “Grammar and interactional discourse: Marking non-topical subject in Japanese conversation” (2013) and “Mikan yo mikan: Formulaic constructions and their implicature in conversation” (2014).

Appendix

list of abbreviations

ACC

accusative

HP

highlighting particle

NOM

nominative

ASP

aspect

INJ

interjection

PASS

passive

CAUS

causative

INS

instrumental

Q

question

COM

comitative

IP

interactional particle

QT

quotation

COP

copula verb

LOC

locative

TE

te (conjunctive) form

DAT

dative

NEG

negative

TOP

topic marker

EVD

evidential

NML

nominalizer

VOL

volitional

GEN

genitive

References

Aoki, H. 1986. Evidentials in Japanese. In W. Chafe & J. Nicholas (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, 223239. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar

Biber, D. & E.Finegan. 1988. Adverbial stance types in English. Discourse Processes11(1). 134.10.1080/01638538809544689Search in Google Scholar

Biber, D. & E.Finegan. 1989. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text9(1). 93124.10.1515/text.1.1989.9.1.93Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, J. 1985. Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.9Search in Google Scholar

De Haan, F. 1999. Evidentiality and epistemic modality: Setting boundaries. Southwest Journal of Linguistics18. 83101.Search in Google Scholar

Dorfmuller-Karpusa, K. 1990. Intensity markers. Journal of Pragmatics14(3). 476483.10.1016/0378-2166(90)90104-LSearch in Google Scholar

Du Bois, J. 2007. The stance triangle. In R. Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139182. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.164.07duSearch in Google Scholar

Englebretson, R. 2007. Stancetaking in discourse: An introduction. In R. Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 126. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.164.02engSearch in Google Scholar

Haga, Y. 1954. “Chinjutsu” to wa nanimono? [What is Chinjutsu?]. Kokugo Kokubun23(4). 4761.Search in Google Scholar

Haiman, J. 1983. Iconic and economic motivation. Language59(4). 781819.10.2307/413373Search in Google Scholar

Heritage, J. & G.Raymond. 2005. The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly68(1). 1538.10.1177/019027250506800103Search in Google Scholar

Hinds, J. 1986. Japanese. Dover, NH: Croom Helm.Search in Google Scholar

Ishida, K. 2006. How can you be so certain? The use of hearsay evidentials by English-speaking learners of Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics38. 12811304.10.1016/j.pragma.2005.10.006Search in Google Scholar

Iwasaki, S. 2002. Japanese. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Kim, Y-J. & D.Biber. 1994. A corpus-based analysis of register variation in Korean. In D. Biber & E. Finegan (eds.), Sociolinguistic perspectives on register. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kinsui, S. 2003. Baacharu nihongo: Yakuwarigo no nazo [virtual Japanese: the mystery of role-language]. Tokyo: Iwanami.Search in Google Scholar

Kullavanijaya, P. 1997. Verb intensifying devices in Bangkok Thai. In A.S, Abramson (ed.), Southeast Asian linguistics studies in honor of Vichin Panupong, 147152. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kuno, S. 1972. Functional sentence perspective: A case study from Japanese and English. Linguistic Inquiry3. 269320.Search in Google Scholar

Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics. (2 vols) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Maynard, S. 1985. Choice of predicate and narrative manipulation: Function of Dearu and da in modern Japanese fiction. Poetics14. 369385.10.1016/0304-422X(85)90034-8Search in Google Scholar

Mushin, I. 2001. Evidentiality and epistemological stance: Narrative retelling. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.87Search in Google Scholar

Nagano, M. 1972. Bunshoogen shoosetsu. Tokyo: Asakura shoten.Search in Google Scholar

Narahara, T. 2002. The Japanese copula: Forms and functions. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230504530Search in Google Scholar

Ochs, E. 1996. Linguistic resources for socializing humanity. In J. Gumperz & S. Levinson (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity, 407437. New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Palmer, F. R. 1986. Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Stubbs, M. 1986. A matter of prolonged fieldwork: Notes towards a modal grammar of English. Applied Linguistics7. 125.10.1093/applin/7.1.1Search in Google Scholar

Tanaka, A. 2001. Kindai nihongo no bunpoo to hyoogen [grammar and expressions in contemporary Japanese language]. Tokyo: Meiji shoin.Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, G. & S.Hunston. 2000. Evaluation: An introduction. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse, 127. New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, S. & A.Mulac. 1991. A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization of epistemic parentheticals in English. In E. C. Traugott & B. Heine (eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization (vol. 2), 313329. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.19.2.16thoSearch in Google Scholar

Tokieda, M. 1950. Nihon bumpoo koogo hen [japanese grammar – the spoken language]. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten.Search in Google Scholar

Traugott, E. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language65(1). 3155.10.2307/414841Search in Google Scholar

Trent, N. 1997. Linguistic coding of evidentiality in Japanese spoken discourse and Japanese politeness, PhD dissertation. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin Press.Search in Google Scholar

Tsujimura, T. 1960. Ima no buntai to korekara no buntai [present writing style and the future writing style]. Gengo Seikatsu9. 1625.Search in Google Scholar

Uehara, T. 2003. A diachronic perspective on prototypicality: The case of nominal adjectives in Japanese. In H. Cuyckens, R. Dirven & J. Taylor (eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics, 363392. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110219074.363Search in Google Scholar

Watanabe, M. 1953. Jojutsu to chinjutsu. Jutsugo bunsetsu no koozoo [internal and external predication. The structure of predicative phrases]. Kokugogaku13(/14). 2034.Search in Google Scholar

Yamaguchi, N. 2006. Nihongo no rekishi [Japanese language history]. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten.10.5823/jarees.2006.136Search in Google Scholar

Yamazaki, Y. 1958. Gendaigo no bumpoo [modern language grammar]. Tokyo: Musashino shoin.Search in Google Scholar

Yoshida, K. 1971. Gendaigo jodooshi no shiteki kenkyuu [historical study of auxiliaries in the contemporary language]. Tokyo: Meiji shoin.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2015-2-27
Published in Print: 2015-3-1

©2015 by De Gruyter Mouton

Downloaded on 7.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/text-2014-0035/html
Scroll to top button