@misc{oai:ir.soken.ac.jp:00000049,
 author = {Lansisalmi, Riikka and ランシサルミ, リーッカ and LANSISALMI, Riikka},
 month = {2016-02-17, 2016-02-17},
 note = {It is common knowledge that in Japanese subjects can frequently be ellipted.  This is the reason there is often no need for an overt term referring, for example, to the first or second person.  Studies of ellipsis in Japanese abound, but the natural extension of such inquiries, namely, those aimed at answering the question "What do terms that are generally ellipted accomplish when they are present?" are fewer in number.  The present study is intended to fill in some of the lacunae left by earlier research dealing with Japanese person-designating terms.  Its focus is on general problems related to the occurrence of overt first and second person-designating terms in Japanese conversational discourse.  The term "first and second person-designating terms" is used to refer to the words speakers employ to refer to themselves (first person) and to their addressees (second person) in discourse.
  The purpose of my study is two-fold.  First, I investigate the kind of pragmatic functions these terms have in Japanese discourse.  Second, strategic functions of first and second person terms as markers of frame and footing shifts are examined.  In this case the main focus is on expressive shifts from unmarked or habitual use to a marked form.  Data for my study were gathered mainly from Japanese movies (five in total), and analyzed with the help of a native speaker.  Because of the visual character of films, I was also able to make use of nonverbal communication in my analysis.  Analyzed terms comprise proper names, titles, kinship terms, status terms, (so-called) personal pronouns, and so forth.
  The approach I apply is micro- or interactional in its orientation and focuses on the function of given linguistic items in conversational discourse.  The methodology is derived mainly from pragmatics, interactional analysis, frame analysis and the study of linguistic politeness, and it emphasizes the fact that linguistic forms should always be analyzed in a specific context.  It is involved with the discovery and description of the various methods, alms and strategies that speakers have in their disposition to engage in conversation.  Challenging the more "traditional" sociolinguistic view, I make the claim that the use of first and second person-designating terms is regulated not only by static social factors (e.g., age, social status), but also by moment-by-moment goals of the interactants.
  In the theoretical part of my dissertation, I first introduce a number of studies carried out in related fields of linguistic research.  This overview is divided into two sections, the first concentrating on previous studies dealing mainly with Western languages, and the second on studies examining Japanese.  In the chapters that follow, I present the sources, data and methodology applied in the analysis.  Certain theoretical aspects, such as the concept of 'markedness' and person-deixis, are included in the methodological discussion.  I further address a number of general problems related to person-designating terms in Japanese.  I point out that, in general, linguists tend to be extremely vague when dealing with these terms.  In addition, the following concepts and issues are discussed with a number of illustrating examples:  'person' in Japanese, uchi/soto ('in-group / out-group'), group /individual indexicality', 'intergroup /intragroup communication', linguistic politeness, and ellipsis of person-designating terms.  I also show that it is important to make a distinction between so-called bound forms and free forms of person-designating terms.  However, as is demonstrated, this dichotomy cannot be applied to Japanese without difficulties.  An "intermediate" category of terms without the topic marker (wa) needs to be discussed separately.
  The second main part of the study, its analytic section, comprehends four chapters discussing (1) bound forms of first and second person terms, (2) "intermediate" first and second person terms without the topic marker wa, (3) free forms of second person terms (vocatives) and their pragmatic functions, and (4) first and second person term changes as markers of shifts in frame (and footing).
  First, I concentrate on person-designating terms which are generally required for sentence construction (e.g., Sensee no hon desu ha?).  Following the definition suggested by Braun (1988: 11) in the field of address form research, syntactically bound forms are considered to be integrated parts of sentences, whereas syntactically free forms generally occur "outside" the sentence construction (preceding/succeeding the sentence/inserted into the sentence).  A closer examination of the category of syntactically bound forms reveals that although it has been generally advanced that (so-called) personal pronouns do not differ syntactically or functionally from nouns in Japanese and therefore should not be considered as a separate category, there are some distributional differences.  When separated from "wa-less" forms and free forms, bound forms seem to be selected from a more restricted array of person-designating terms. The difference is particularly remarkable in the second person.  This is no doubt due to the fact that a speaker who is in a position to use both personal pronouns and nouns in second person reference (usually a social superior or equal) generally opts for the former in the case of bound forms and for the latter in the case of free forms (vocatices) (cf. Wada-san ittai anata wa kono hatsukakan, dare no tame ni mokuhiken o tsukatte orareru n desu ? ).
  Second, "intermediate" terms (e.g., Michiko-chan[,] iku no?), oscillating between bound forms and free forms, are discussed in connection with politeness, male and female speech, and pragmatic functions.  Because of the existence of this group, Braun's (1988) notions of syntactically bound forms (first and second person in this study) and syntactically free forms (second person) can be applied to the categorization of the analyzed terms only partially.  It is demonstrated that from a pragmatic point of view this dichotomy is not sufficient to account for ,Japanese spoken discourse, which displays also an "intermediate" category of "wa-less" first and second person terms having both "bound form-like" and "free form-like" characteristics.
  Third, free forms (of address) (e.g., Tanaka-kun, ima nanji?) and their pragmatic functions are analyzed with the help of a modified version of a typology of vocative functions set up for Spanish by Haverkate (1984) and analyzing methods employed in politeness theory.  Following Haverkate, I divide the functions Japanese vocatives have in conversational interaction into four groups:  (1) attention-getting devices (with various subcategories), (2) substitutes for specific illocutionary-function-indicating devices (with various subcategories), (3) allocutionary devices to bring about particular perlocutionary effects, and (4) (obligatory) honorific forms of address.
  An interesting finding is related to the location of overt first and second person-designation terms in utterances.  While the majority of these terms occur sentence-initially, which could perhaps be called the unmarked position, at least some sentence-middle and sentence-final (postposed) terms seem to be linked to specific expression types.  For example ("wa-less") postposed second person terms are often characteristic of evaluative sentences or reproaches, and sentence-middle free forms (vocatives) can be associated with an emphasis function.  While linguists have generally tended to concentrate either on the analysis of formal properties of discourse elements without reference to pragmatic or communicative functions that might be involved, or on the examination of pragmatic or communicative functions without reference to formal properties, the aforementioned examples suggest that combining both aspects might actually be a more profitable approach.  Some formal properties, such as the position of person-designating terms, may, in fact, be linked to specific pragmatic functions.
  Fourth, I show that the Japanese do not always conform to their nearly automatic wakimae (discernment), but that strategic uses of person-designation also exist.  In this analysis, I employ the method of frame analysis and divide frame shifts into three subcategories:  (1) frame-internal shifts, (2) frame-external shifts, and (3) "overall" (social) frame shifts.  Mismatch of frames is also discussed with an illustrating example. Since the concepts of frame (and footing) seem to be partially overlapping with the vocative category of allocutionary devices to bring about particular perlocutionary effects suggested by Haverkate, I propose that it might actually be easier to comprehend the functioning of terms belonging to this category within the framework of interactive frames.  The notion of 'frame' refers to a definition of what is occurring in interaction;  without it interpretation of utterances would be impossible.  When analyzing shifts of person terms, in addition to the existing social relationship between the interactants, one must also take into account the frame(s) of the situation.   At first it is necessary to examine what kind of first and second person-designating terms the characters depicted in the films usually employ with other characters.  If there is a shift to an unusual (marked) term-and it cannot be explained by sociolinguistic factors such as formality of the situation, for example-the shift may then be analyzed as a marker of frame (and footing) shift.  In order to comprehend a given utterance, the interlocutor (and the speaker) must know within which frame it is intended.  An unusual person-designating term may therefore have the function of a signal:  perhaps the speaker wishes to warn his/her interlocutor that the message following the unusual term should be interpreted outside the situational frame, for example as a joke.
  It is concluded that researchers have paid little attention to overt first and second person terms occurring in Japanese spoken discourse.  It is naturally important to point out that, in many contexts, these terms are by no means obligatory.  However, as demonstrated by the analysis of my data, it is also important to consider the roles these terms play in certain types of conversational interaction, such as common casual face-to-face conversation.  Instead of overemphasising the fact that uchi/solo boundaries are constantly shifting in Japanese spoken discourse, it should not be forgotten that depending on the context, there is also continuous shifting of boundaries between group and individual indexicality.  It would seem that, while group indexicality can often be associated to formal speech and the public sphere, individual indexicality relates to more informal speech styles and the private domain, allowing more "creative" ways of expression than what is generally permitted by "rules" of wakimae.  This constatation, in turn, provides an attractive link to theories of politeness.  Although Japanese, with its wide variety of polite expressions, is generally considered to be a language displaying characteristics of negative politeness, among in-group members, by contrast, there is a preference toward positive politeness.  Positive politeness is evidenced in casual conversation, for example, in numerous uses of particles and filters, and to this it can be added that also frequent direct reference to the second (and first) person can be interpreted as having the function of displaying the kind of "friendly directness" associated with positive politeness.  These kinds of terms often appear without the topic marker wa.
  Since the starting point of my study was the occurrence of overt first and second person terms in general, several quite diverse methods had to be applied and a multitude of areas explored in order to be able to sketch the picture that emerged.   Admittedly, this kind of approach can be characterized as rather unconventional in the field of linguistics, but it also has its merits.  As the division of linguistic research into various fields has led to the fragmentation of linguistic phenomena as well, rather than trying to form a coherent view of more general phenomena, linguists tend to stick to their "own field", neglecting the ideas, methods and results other (linguistic) disciplines could offer.  However, as demonstrated in this study, one field is often not enough if one wants to understand even such "simple" discourse elements as person-designating terms., application/pdf, 総研大甲第305号},
 title = {Overt First and Second Person-Designating Terms in Japanese Discourse : A Pragmatic Perspective},
 year = {}
}