Files in this item
|(no description provided)|
|Title:||Pragmatics and Grammatical Descriptions (Japanese)|
|Department / Program:||Linguistics|
|Degree Granting Institution:||University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign|
|Abstract:||The goal of the dissertation is to argue for the recent position that strictly distinguishes between grammar and pragmatics and discuss its consequences. By now it is clear that "raw" linguistic data contain many pragmatic elements, whether they are speech act properties, implicatures, beliefs and intentions of the speech participants, or what not. In analyzing such data linguists, in my view, are constantly faced with two problems; one is how to distinguish pragmatic matters from purely grammatical aspects of the data, and the other is what to do with such pragmatic elements. The second problem has to do with a proper conceptualization of the relationship between pragmatics and grammar. In particular, linguists must have clear conception as to what the proper domain of each field is, and what the exact nature of the mode of their interaction is. This is, in my opinion, one of the outstandingly important empirical issues in current theoretical linguistics.
The first problem concerns ways of determining, in a given situation, what is pragmatic and what is grammatical. If one decides to take the position that denies the heterogeneous nature of raw linguistic data, this problem will not arise at all. I will argue, however, that such a position cannot be seriously maintained.
These are the two major issues this study addresses. The arguments in the body of the thesis will take the form of analyses or reanalyses of some problematic phenomena in Japanese and English where one's position on the above issues will have a serious effect on resulting grammatical descriptions of the phenomena. Two highly controversial areas of Japanese grammar, i.e. passives and causatives, issues concerning honorifics and politeness in general, and an analysis of the English complement-taking verb have are some of the major descriptive issues taken up in this study. In each case, it will be shown that the position being argued for can provide solutions to the controversies and/or lead to what seems to be the optimal over-all descriptions.
Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1987.
|Date Available in IDEALS:||2014-12-15|