Although there are also exceptional uses, tense is the grammatical category that expresses with regard to a time-limited event a temporal earlier than or later than relationship between a reference time and the time of the event the sentence is describing. In a main clause, the reference time is basically the time of speech.
In Japanese, tense is expressed by changes in the form of the predicate.
Tense can be either past or non-past. The non-past form is not limited to ugoku
[move.CONCL] ‘move’, but ugoka-nai [move.IRR-NEG] ‘not move’, and ugoki-masu [move.ADVL-POL] are also non-past forms. The past forms that stand in opposition are ugoi-ta [move.ADVL-PST] ‘moved’, ugoka-nakat-ta [move.IRR-NEG.ADVL-PST]
‘didn’t move’, andugoki-masi-ta[move.ADVL-POL.ADVL-PST]‘moved’, respectively.
Tense appears in all type of predicate: verbal, adjectival, and nominal. The appearance of tense is not constrained solely by the lexical and grammatical type of the predicate. Although how tense is expressed is influenced by the lexical and grammatical type of the predicate, what ultimately influences its expression is the semantic type of the event the sentence expresses and the sentence type as viewed from its speech-communication function.
In terms of speech-communication function there are imperative and inten- tional sentences. Tense does not appear in these. Events shown by imperatives and intentional sentences are all unrealized events. The predicates of imperative and intentional sentences take forms in which there is no way of showing tense, as in ugok-e [move.IMP] ‘Move!’, ugoi-tekure [move.ADVL-GER.give.IMP] ‘Move, please’, and ugok-oo [move.INTF] ‘Let’s move!’. The types of sentences in which tense appears are declarative and interrogative sentences. However, not all tense forms appearing in declarative and interrogative sentences express a proper tense mean- ing. Whether the forms express the proper tense meaning of the occurrence of an event being earlier or later with respect to the time of speech is influenced by the semantic type of the event. It is in sentences that express actions or states that the meaning of proper tense is realized in declarative and interrogative sentences. In sentences that express attributes of people or things that are not easily changed, the tense meanings that tense forms express are different from the normal meanings.
(65) Sakuzitu kare wa siken o uke -ta.
the.other.day he TOP exam ACC take.ADVL PST
‘The other day he took an exam.’
(66) Sakuya boku wa onaka ga itakat -ta.
last.night I TOP stomach NOM hurt.ADVL PST
‘Last night I had a stomachache.’
(67) Nara no daibutu wa ookikat -ta.
Nara GEN large.statue.of.Buddha TOP big.ADVL PST
‘The large statue of Buddha in Nara was big.’
The type of events expressed by these sentences are: (65) action, (66) state, and (68) attribute. The action and states have a temporary existence that will disappear after the passage of some period of time. In contrast to these, attributes are something with which a person or thing is furnished and are not something that are time- bound in the sense that they exist only for a limited period of time. The past tense
form in (65) shows that the event of the subject’s taking an exam occurred in the past. In the same way, the past tense in (66) shows that the situation of having a stomachache happened in the past. In contrast, the past tense in (67) does not show a period of existence for the situation of Nara’s statue of Buddha being big.
The past form in (67) involves a cognitive-experiential time and shows that the speaker became conscious of and experienced a situation in the past. The past tense appearing in attribute sentences does not express the usual tense meaning.
Tense does not appear in highly subordinate clauses.
(68) Ame ga huru node,
rain NOM fall.CONCL CONJCTPART/REAS sentakumono o toriire -ta.
laundry ACC take.in.ADVL PST
‘Since it was about to rain, I took in the laundry.’
(69) Ame ga hut -ta node,
rain NOM fall.ADVL PST CONJCTPART/REAS sentakumono o toriire -ta.
laundry ACC take.in.ADVL PST
‘Since it had rained, I took in the laundry.’
(70) Kare ni at -ta ga,
he DAT meet.ADVL PST CONJCTPART/COOR
sono mae ni kanozyo ni mo at -ta.
that before TEMLOC she DAT PART meet.ADVL PST.
‘I met him, but before that I met her.’
Anodereason clause is comparatively low in subordination. As shown in (68) and (69), even in anodereason clause the non-past versus past forms of the predicate do not show earlier or later with respect to speech time as reference time. Instead, the reference time with respect to which it expresses earlier or later than is the event time of the main clause. The predicate of the subordinate clause in (70) is in the past tense form. However, the event of the subordinate clause did not happen before the event of the main clause, but happened after. In (70), the past tense of the predicate of the subordinate clause, like the main clause, takes speech time as the reference time relative to which it expresses earlier or later than. It is thegaadversative coor- dination clause, which is extremely low in subordination, that takes speech time as the reference time relative to which it expresses earlier or later than.
As a string of words has a temporal situation element added and the predicate expresses tense, it moves even closer to becoming a complete sentence.
6 Toward becoming a sentence
A sentence can be broadly divided into a part that expresses a proposition and a part that expresses modality. The proposition is, broadly speaking, the part in which the speaker expresses an objective happening or circumstance he has taken note of in the external world or in his internal world. The proposition part includes the grammatical categories through polarity, politeness, and tense.
Proposition and modality basically have the following layered structure.
(71) [[proposition] modality]
This layered structure is not at a string level but is on the structural level.
(72) Zannen.na koto ni tabun kono hukeiki,
unfortunate.ADN matter COP/ADVL probable this recession
toobun tuzuku daroo ne.
for.awhile continue.CONCL PRES SFP
‘It’s unfortunate, but this recession will probably continue for a while, don’t you think?’
Taking (72) as an example, proposition and modality can be shown as follows.
(73) [Zannen.na koto ni[kono hukeiki, tooban tuzuku]daroo ne]
Nitta (1991, 2009b) establishes cognitive modality and speech-communicative modality as core modalities.
(74) Kare wa siken o uke -nakerebanaranai -daroo.
he TOP exam ACC take.ADVL DUTY PRES
‘He will probably have to take an exam.’
As shown in (74), so-called deontic modality can have cognitive modality added to it and, compared to cognitive modality, has a strongly objective character.
Cognitive modality expresses how the speaker apprehends the proposition cognitively. Cognitive modality is basically expressed by changes in the form of the predicate word. Cognitive modality can, as afirst cut, be divided into judgements taking the circumstances expressed by the proposition as being something certain, and conjectures taking the proposition as something uncertain from one’s imag- ination or from inference. Judgements are shown by unmarked forms like suru [do.CONCL], or takai [expensive.CONCL]. Conjecture is shown by the addition of an auxiliary verb as insuru daroo[do.CONCL PRES]‘will probably do’ortakai daroo
[expensive.CONCL PRES] ‘is probably expensive’. There are also expressions of cognitive modality that involve probability. These are expressed by the addition of an auxiliary verb equivalent as in suru-kamosirenai [do.CONCL-for.all.I.know]
‘may do’ortakai-nitigainai[expensive.CONCL-without.a.doubt]‘definitely expensive’. Furthermore, there are also expressions of cognitive modality that involve evi- dentiality. These are expressed by the addition of auxiliary verbs, as in suru-rasii [do.CONCL-seems] ‘it seems he will do’or takai-yooda [expensive.CONCL-apparent]
‘it is apparently expensive’.
Speech-communicative modality are expressions of how the speaker conveys the proposition or the proposition with cognitive modality added to realize a given communication function. Speech-communicative modality includes declarative, inter- rogative, imperative and intentional. It is only with declarative that a variety of cognitive modality forms appear.
(75) Asu wa ame ni naru -daroo.
tomorrow TOP rain DAT become.CONCL PRES
‘It will probably rain tomorrow.’ (76) Sugu yamete -kudasai.
immediately stop.GER AUXV/REQ
‘Please stop that immediately.’
(77) Asu wa ame ni naru daroo
tomorrow TOP rain DAT become.CONCL PRES
ga, asatte wa hareru daroo.
CONJCTPART/COOR day.after.tomorrow TOP clear.up.CONCL PRES
‘It will probably rain tomorrow, but it will probably clear up the day after.’ (78) *Sugu yamete -kudasai ga
immediately stop.GER AUXV/REQ CONJCTPART/COOR nakanaka yame -nai.
quite stop.IRR NEG
‘Please stop that immediately, but (they) just don’t stop.’
In (75) only cognitive modality appears in an explicit form asdaroo. In (76) speech- communicative modality appears explicitly in the formtekudasai. As shown in (77), even if a string of words includes cognitive modality, it can form part of a sentence as a subordinate clause. In contrast, (78) is ungrammatical. Once a string of words is formalized explicitly as having speech-communications modality, it cannot no longer become part of another sentence. By including speech-communicative modality, a string of words becomes a sentence.
The sentence is the fundamental unit of linguistic activity. A string of words forms a proposition expressing the necessary grammatical categories appropriately and the addition of modality to the proposition completes the sentence. Ultimately, a string of words has no existence as a unit below the sentence unit and it is the speech-communicative modality that makes the string a sentence.
7 On how to treat modality
In this chapter we have adopted capturing and identifying grammatical categories from the oppositions seen in predicate word paradigms as a way of analyzing and describing the meaning expressed by the forms of expression in a sentence.
Naturally other ways of analyzing and describing grammatical categories have been put forth. For example, there is the position advocating analyzing and describing sentence meaning giving weight to the meanings of the auxiliary verbs and particles that express the grammatical meanings.
Within the grammatical categories as well, there have been a variety of proposals on how to treat modality. In this chapter, modality has been situated as one of the grammatical categories expressed by the predicate. In this case, to put it more precisely, this means that modality is one of the morphological categories expressed by changes in the form of the predicate. Modality is realized by changes in the forms of the predicates in a broad sense, including changes in suffixes as inhasire [run.IMP] ‘Run!’, the addition of an auxiliary verb as in hasiru-daroo [run.CONCL- PRES]‘(He’ll) probably run’, or the addition of a particle as inhasiru-kana[run.CONCL- PART]‘I wonder whether he’ll run’. However, although the grammatical categories may be realized through changes in the form of the predicate, the scope within which the respective grammatical categories operate is determined. The breadth of the scope within which the respective grammatical categories operate differ among categories. For example, aspect does not operate on a structure in which tense is realized but, rather, tense operates on a structure in which aspect is realized. That is, the scope of tense is broader than the scope of aspect. Concerning the cognitive modality expressed by daroo, the form itself never appears in a past tense form.
Daroodoes not bear tense. The scope of the cognitive modality expressed bydaroo is broader than the scope of tense. That is, the cognitive modality expressed by darootakes as its scope of operation a sentence structure that is already furnished with tense.
This chapter has adopted the position that the basic semantic and syntactic structure of a sentence is formed by a proposition and modality. To further state the position: putting aside exceptions, a sentence is formed by the proposition’s taking on modality. This kind of position is influenced by one traditional thread in the theory of sentence formation in Japanese grammar studies like Tokieda (1931) and
Watanabe (1971). The view of modality in this chapter is one that goes in the direction of taking the sentence as a unit of linguistic activity and extracting the conditions for the formation of sentence as a unit of linguistic activity.
Naturally, there are other positions concerning how to treat the sentence and other views of modality. One influential position is that of Onoe (2004, 2014). Onoe’s ideas are presented in a comprehensive form in the commentary entries he wrote for Nihongo BunpōGakkai (2014). Onoe (2014) takes the position that, in a sentence like Neko ga nete-iru[cat NOM sleep.GER-AUXV.CONCL]‘A cat is sleeping,’some kind of existential recognition is expressed through the linking of the subjectneko gaand the predicatenete-iruand through this a sentence is formed. The subject expresses something that exists and the predicate expresses the manner in which it exists.
Also, for him, the specialized sentence-final forms for the purpose of speaking of an event in an unreal world are modal forms and the meaning that is brought to the sentence by these modal forms is modality. Onoe (2004) labels this position a theory of modality as a theory of moods. Thus, in the case when one is speaking of an event in the real world, without including any specialized modal forms, there is no modality included. That is, modality is a question of the form of the predicate as constituent in opposition to the subject and moreover, is a question of whether a sentence takes a specialized form.
In Onoe (2014) the following are given as modal forms. First, forms in which the auxiliary verbs -yoo, -mai, and -bekida appear are given, such as uke-yoo [take.INTF] ‘let’s take’, ukeru-mai[take.CONCL-NEG.PRES] ‘probably will not take’, andukeru-bekida[take.CONCL-OBLIGATION]‘ought to take’. These forms are called the predicate modal forms (johōkeishiki). Next, there are forms in which an auxiliary verb equivalent like -daroo, -kamosirenai, -yooda, or -nakerebanaranaihas been added to a predicate, as in ukeru-daroo [take.CONCL-PRES] ‘will probably take’, ukeru- kamosirenai[take.CONCL-for.all.I.know]‘may take’,ukeru-yooda[take.CONCL-appear]
‘looks like (he will) take’, and uke-nakerebanaranai [take.IRR/DUTY] ‘must take’. These auxiliary verb equivalent forms are called predicate-external forms (jutsugo gaisetsu keishiki). Whether they are forms resulting from predicate modals or from predicate-external forms, they are all involve the form of the predicate and the recognition of the existence they express is recognition of an existence in an unreal world. Thus, these end up being modal forms. This way of treating modality is probably close to the view of modality in Western linguistics.
In Onoe (2014) cases such asAitu wa hannin-daroo[he TOP criminal-COP/PRES]
‘He’s probably a criminal’that express a circumstance the reality of which is uncon- firmed and cases such asGakusei wa hon o yomu -bekida [student TOP book ACC read.CONCL-OBLIGATION]‘Students ought to read books’that express a circumstance that ought to be realized are given as events in an unreal world. In addition, forms expressing intention, likeGohan o tabe-yoo[meal ACC eat.ADVL-INTF]‘Let’s eat.’or requests, likeGohan o tabe-ro[meal ACC eat-IMP]‘Eat!’express circumstances still unrealized and are events in the unreal world.
In contrast to forms likeuke-yoo orukeru-bekida, forms likeuke-ta[take.ADVL- PST]‘took’andukete-iru[take.GER-AUXV]‘be taking’are forms expressing past tense or expressing continuative aspect, that is to say, need to be situated as forms relating events in the real world.
However, there are problems with the following.
(79) Kare wa sakuzitu siken o uke -ta.
he TOP the.other.day exam ACC take.ADVL PST
‘He took a test the other day.’
(80) Kare wa kitto sakuzitu siken o uke -ta.
he TOP surely the.other.day exam ACC take,ADVL PST
‘He surely took an exam the other day.’
The predicate of both (79) and (80) isuketa, a form expressing an event in the real world. In fact, (79), reflecting the type of its predicate, does express an event in the real world. However, even though (80) has the same predicate form used for talking about events in the real world, because it co-occurs with the adverbkittoshowing degrees of certainty, the sentence actually talks of an event in an unreal world. The phenomenon arises here of a predicate form used for relating events of the real world being used in a sentence relating events of an unreal world.
However, this kind of phenomenon remains a problem as well for the stance adopted in this chapter of treating modality as one grammatical category of the predicate operating over afixed scope. Modality is a grammatical category that is more difficult to analyze and describe than categories like tense.
Acknowledgments
This chapter has been translated into English by John Haig based on the Japanese manuscript prepared by the author.
References
Kudō, Mayumi. 1995.Asupekuto,tensu taikei to tekusuto[Text and the system of aspect and tense].
Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
Minami, Fujio. 1974.Gendai Nihongo no kōzō[The structure of modern Japanese]. Tokyo: Taishukan Shoten.
Minami, Fujio. 1993.Gendai Nihongo bunpōno rinkaku[Outline of the grammar of modern Japanese].
Tokyo: Taishukan Shoten.
Mio, Isago. 1958.Hanashi kotoba no bunpō[The grammar of the spoken language]. Tokyo: Hōsei Daigaku Shuppan-kyoku.
Nitta, Yoshio. 1991.Nihongo no modariti to ninshō[Modality and person in Japanese]. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
Nitta, Yoshio. 1995.Nihongo bunpō gaisetsu: Tanbun hen[Outline of Japanese grammar: Simple sentences]. In Tatsuo Miyazima and Yoshio Nitta (eds.), Nihongo ruigi hyōgen no bunpō: Tanbun hen[Synonymous expressions in Japanese: Simple sentences]. 1–39. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers.
Nitta, Yoshio. 2009a.Nihongo no bunpōkategorīo megutte[On grammatical categories in Japanese].
Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
Nitta, Yoshio. 2009b.Nihongo no modariti to sono shūhen[Japanese modality and its periphery].
Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo
Nitta, Yoshio. 2010.Goiron-teki tōgoron no kanten kara[From the view of lexical syntax]. Tokyo:
Hituzi Syobo.
Nihongo Bunpō Gakkai (ed.). 2014. Nihongo bunpō jiten[Japanese grammar dictionary]. Tokyo:
Taishukan Shoten.
Okuda, Yasuo. 1985. Kotoba no kenkyū: josetsu [Language research: Introduction]. Tokyo: Mugi Shobō.
Onoe, Keisuke. 2004.Bunpōto imi I[Grammar and meaning I]. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers.
Onoe, Keisuke. 2014.Shugo, jutsugo, bun, modariti[Subject, predicate, sentence, modality]. In Nihongo Bunpō Gakkai (eds.),Nihongo bunpō jiten[Japanese grammar dictionary]. Tokyo: Taishukan Shoten.
Suzuki, Shigeyuki. 1996.Keitairon josetu[Morphology: Introduction].Tokyo: Mugi Shobō. Takahasi, Tarō. 1994.Dōshi no kenkyū[Studies on verbs]. Tokyo: Mugi Shobō.
Tokieda, Motoki. 1931.Kokugogaku genron[Japanese language studies theory]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
Watanabe, Minoru. 1971.Kokugo kōbunron[Theory of Japanese grammar]. Tokyo: Hanawa Shobō.