Intersubjectivity in Chinese and Japanese Yes-no Questions

Abstract

Cross-linguistic syntactic similarities can be deceptive as indicators of discourse-pragmatic functions. This comparative study demonstrates that such similarities in form do not necessarily map their function. By using discourse analysis to examine yes-no questions in natural conversations of Mandarin Chinese (236 cases) and Japanese (127 cases), my study argues that the intersubjectivity that emerges from on-going interactions between interlocutors is a primary factor driving speakers to choose different interrogative forms in various sequential contexts. In particular, this study demonstrates that 1) Chinese speakers often use zero-marked yes-no questions (YNQs), while Japanese speakers rely on-no desu ka YNQs to respond to “newly-learned” information from the addressee for the purpose of showing interest or expressing surprise in order to solicit further elaboration from the addressee; 2) Chinese V-not-V questions share certain intersubjective features with Japanese zero-marked YNQs in that both convey the speaker’s eagerness and high expectation for confirmation from the addressee in similar interactive contexts such as invitations.

Keywords

Questions / yes-no questions / discourse-pragmatic function / intersubjectivity / newly-learned information

References

[1] Akatsuka, Noriko. (1985). Conditions and the epistemic scale. Language, 61(3), 625-639.

[2] Bach, Kent & Harnish, Robert. (1979). Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

[3] Brazil, David. (1985). The Communicative Value of Intonation. Discourse Analysis Monograph No.8. University of Birmingham: ELR.

[4] Chang, Li—Hsiang. (2001). Two forms of yes—no questions in Mandarin Chinese: A Functional analysis. High Desert Linguistics Society, 4, 23-32.

[5] Chu, Chauncey C. (1998). A discourse grammar of Mandarin Chinese. New York: Peter Lang.

[6] Gordon, David & Lakoff, George. (1975). Conversational postulates. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics. Vol. III: Speech acts (pp. 83-106). New York: Academic Press.

[7] Gunlogson, Christine. (2001). True to form: Rising and falling declaratives as questions in English. NY: Routledge.

[8] Hinds, John. (1984). Japanese. In W. Chisholm et al. (Eds.) Typological studies in language. TSL Vol. 4. Interrogativity (pp. 145-188). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

[9] Hudson, Amelia & Holbrook, Anthony. (1975). The meaning of questions. Language, 51, 1-32.

[10] Iwasaki, Shoichi. (1993). Subjectivity in grammar and discourse: Theoretical considerations and a case study of Japanese spoken discourse. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

[11] Karkkainen, Elise. (2006). Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity. Text and Talk, 26(6), 699-731.

[12] Katz, Jerrold J. & Postal, P. M. (1964). An integrated theory of linguistic descriptions. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

[13] Li, Charles & Thompson, Sandra A. (1979). The pragmatics of two types of yes—no questions in Mandarin and its universal implications. Chicago Linguistic Society, 15, 197-206.

[14] Li, Charles & Thompson, Sandra A. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press.

[15] Labov, William & Fanshel, David. (1977). Therapeuthic discourse. New York: Academic Press.

[16] Lim, Ni—Eng. (2011). From subjectivity to intersubjectivity: Epistemic marker wo juede in Chinese. In Yun, X.et al. (Eds.), Current issues in Chinese linguistics (pp. 129-166). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Press.

[17] Lyons, John. (1977). Semantics. Vol. 2. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

[18] McGloin, Naomi & Konishi, Yumiko. (2010). From connective particle to sentence—final particle: A usage—based analysis of shi “and” in Japanese. Language Science, 32(5), 563-578.

[19] Narahara, Tomiko. (2002). The Japanese copula: Forms and functions. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

[20] Nuyts, Jan. (2001). Subjectivity as an evidential dimension in epistemic modal expressions. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(3), 383-400.

[21] Pizziconi, Barbara. (2009). The interactional consequences of epistemic intedexicality—Some Thoughts on the Epistemic Marker—kamoshirenai. In Japanese modality: Exploring its scope and interpretation, Ed. by Barbara Pizziconi & Mika Kizu. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

[22] Quirk, Randolph; Greenbaum, Sidney; Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. (1972). A Grammar of Contemporary English. Essex: Longman Group United Kingdom.

[23] Quirk, Randolph; Greenbaum, Sidney; Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. New York: Longman.

[24] Ree, Joe. (1981). The problem of the pragmatics and universality of a disjunctive type of yes—no question. Papers for the Regional Meetings. Chicago Linguistic Society, 17, 311-317.

[25] Thompson, Sandra. (1998). A discourse explanation for the cross—linguistic differences in the grammar of interrogation and negation. In Anna Siewierska & Jae Jung Song (Eds.) Case, typology and grammar: In honor of Barry J. Blake. (pp. 124-139) John Benjamins.

[26] Traugott, Elizabeth. (2003). From Subjectification to intersubjectification. In Raymond Hickey (Ed.) Motives for Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[27] Wang, Yan. (2009). A cross—linguistic study of yes—no questions in Japanese and Chinese conversational discourse. Madison: University of Wisconsin—Madison.

[28] White, Peter R. R. (2003). Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text, 23(2), 259-284.