Where Do Temporality,Evidentiality and Epistemicity Meet?A Comparison of Old Japanese-Ki And-Keri with Turkish-Di And-Mis*

言語研究(Gengo Kenkyu)99(1991),25～57 25

Where do temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity meet?A comparison of Old Japanese-ki and-keri with Turkish-di and-mis*

Rumiko SHINZATO

[ABSTRACT]This paper explores the interplay among the three seemingly heterogeneous notions of temporality(i.e.,tense and aspect),evidentiality(i.e.,acquisitional sources of information), and epistemicity(degree of integration of acquired information into one's consciousness).Specifically,this paper points out that the following correlation is found cross-linguistically both in Turk- ish and Old Japanese.

*The earlier and abridged versions of this paper were presented at the following meetings:34th meetings of International Linguistic As- sociation(1989),15th Minnesota Conference in Linguistics(1989)and Middlebury Conference on Japanese Linguistics and Japanese Teaching (1990).The earlier versions of the paper appear in Shinzato(1990) and forthcoming.The interplay of the three notions in Okinawan,and Modern Japanese is discussed in Shinzato(In Press b.).I would like to express my gratitude to the Japan Studies Executive Council at the University of Pittsburgh for providing me with two travel grants to 26 Rumiko SHINZATO Based on the above findings,this paper argues that such correlation does not exist as a mere coincidence but rather as a consequence of an implicational relationship among the three notions. That is,the evidential dichotomy of'direct vs. indirect experience' can be united with the temporal dichotomy of'instantaneous vs. durative aspect' in terms of the epistemic dichotomy of'integrated vs.non-integrated information'.This is because the speaker's direct experience is instantly assimilable (c.f.instantaneous aspect),thus conceptualized at the time of speech.In contrast,inference,hearsay and surprise information take some span of time to be integrated (c.f.durative aspect),and are thus likely to be non-integrated at the time of speech.Additionally,this paper also explores how Hop- per's discoursal dichotomy of foregrounding and backgrounding correlates with the temporal dichotomy exhibited in Old Japanese -ki and -keri.

1.Introduction A widely accepted view of the study of temporals is that temporals cannot be accounted for solely on the grounds of temporal notions such as tense and aspect.As a consequence,various non-temporal notions such as'participants'involvement'(Lakoff 1970),'speaker's perspectives'(Inoue 1978),'speaker's attitude' (Friedman 1986),'displacement'(Randriamasimanana 1987), 'speaker's conscious involvement'(Slobin and Aksu 1982) and 'evidentiality'have been proposed .Among these,this paper especially focuses on evidentiality and epistemicity.It then discusses their interplay with temporality and further presents a feasible

attend the first two meetings.I am grateful to Noriko Akatsuka,Paul Hopper,David Kemmerer,Patricia Lee,Lori Levin,Hiroshi Miyaji and Leon Serafim for many valuable comments and discussion of the subject matter.I am also very grateful to the two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on the earlier version.Needless to say, any shortcomings of this paper are mine. Where do temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 27 explanation of such an interplay. Since the terms evidentiality and epistemicity exhibit rather diverse usages among linguists(Lyons 1976;Givon 1982;Palmer 1986;Akatsuka 1983,1985),it is imperative to clarify how these terms are used in this paper.By evidentiality,I mean 'source of information',or how a piece of information is acquired,that is,whether it was acquired by means of perception,inference,or hearsay.This concept has been frequently employed,especially in the descriptive works of American Indian languages(e.g.Whorf 1956;Matthews 1965;Parks 1976). By epistemicity,I mean how a piece of acquired information is integrated or assimilated into one's body of knowledge.The works of Akatsuka(1983,1985),Slobin and Aksu(1982),Aksu- Koc and Slobin(1986)and Givon(1982)have greatly contributed to this notion.Based on her study of conditionals and comple- mentizers in Japanese together with the existing studies of evidentials in three Balkan languages,Akatsuka proposes the following epistemic scale(Figure 1)as representing 'the speaker's sub- jective evaluation of the ontological reality of a given situation' (Akatsuka 1985:635-636) and respective speaker attitudes (Figure 2,Akatsuka 1985:625):Figure 1 28 Rumiko SHINZATO

Figure 2

REALIS POSITIVE CONVICTION : 'I know that this is the case.' IRREALIS SURPRISE : 'I didn't know this until this moment !' UNCERTAINTY : 'I don't know if this is the case.' NEGATIVE CONVICTION : 'I know that this is not the case.'

Givon (1982: 41-42) proposes a 'three-segment scale of the epistemic-or evidential-space in human language.' (Figure 3)"

Figure 3 A. HIGHEST CERTAINTY (BY CONTRACT) : deictic obviousness, presupposed knowledge, mystically-reveale knowledge, apriori-synthetic knowledge and analytic knowledg. EVIDENTIALITY NOT REQUIRED B. MEDIUM CERTAINTY (BY EVIDENCE) : REALIS-asserted EVIDENTIALITY REQUIRED C. LOWEST CERTAINTY (BY HYPOTHESIS) : IRREALIS-asserted EVIDENTIALITY IMPOSSIBLE

It seems that there is some difference between Akatsuka's usage of 'realis' and that of Givon's : Akatsuka's 'realis' corresponds to category A and her 'irrealis' corresponds to categories B and C in GivOn's scale. Nonetheless, both papers organize different types of information in similar hierarchical orders. In- corporating both of their ideas of epistemic scales, this paper, under the term epistemicity, recognizes three levels of integration of acquired information (Figure 4).

1) This information appeared in a chart in Givon's paper, however, I purposely changed the format for the sake of presentation. Where do temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 29

Figure 4

A. INTEGRATED/ASSIMILATED INFORMATION : information which is fully assimilated/integrated in one's consciousness as something well-justified and unchallengeable. B.SURPRISE INFORMATION: information which was unintegrated or unassimilated originally is now becoming integrated,thus evoking the semantic effect of surprise. C.NON-INTEGRATED/NON-ASSIMILATED INFORMATION: information which is not yet integrated/assimilated.

There are two important points to be made on the above. One is that degree of integration decreases from A to C.The other is that there is an important division drawn between A on one hand and B and C on the other.A entails integrated/assimilated information while B and C entail non-integrated/non-assimilated information.It should be emphasized that at the time of speech,surprise information is outside the consciousness or at the edge of concsiousness at best,and thus is taken as non-integrated information.This major division corresponds to Akatsuka's realis vs.irrealis dichotomy. The organization of the paper is as follows.First,it intro- duces Slobin and Aksu's analysis of the two Turkish past tense suffixes,-di and -mis to present how the three seemingly unre- lated notions,temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity coexist in the Turkish past tense suffixes.It then discusses the two Old Japanese past tense auxiliaries,-ki and-keri to demonstrate that such correlations hold cross-linguistically in Old Japanese a well. Based on the findings from the two languages,this paper argues that such correlations do not exist as a mere coincidence but rather as a consequence of an implicational relationship among the three notions.Additionally,this paper touches upon the notion of psychological distance exhibited in these forms and it also explores the interplay of discoursal and temporal notions coexisting 30 Rumiko SHINZATO in -ki and -keri.

2.Slobin and Aksu's analysis of -di and -mis According to Slobin and Aksu(1982),the two Turkish past tense suffixes -di and -mis have traditionally been labeled in terms of evidential dichotomies such as 'witnessed speech vs.reported speech';or 'direct experience vs.indirect experience'.For instance,example 1 indicates what the speaker perceived and example 2 indicates what the speaker inferred,or heard second- hand. (1)gel -di. come past of direct experience 'He/she/it came .' (2)Kemal gel-mis. past of indirect experience (a)inference:The speaker sees Kemal's coat hanging in the front hall,but has not yet seen Kemal. (b)hearsay:The speaker has been told that Kemal has ar- rived,but has not yet seen Kemal. What creates a problem for the evidential dichotomies as mentioned above,however,is the fact that sentence 2 can also be given the interpretation that the speaker has unexpectedly found Kemal,as below.2)3)

2)It was pointed out to me by one of the participants at the Minne- sota Conference of Linguistics that the English inferential auxiliary, seem has this usage as well.In the same context,English speakers would say,'It seems Kemal is here.'even though it is evident that he is here. 3)Delancey(1981)mentions that Syuwa,a Tibetan language of Ne- pal,also uses an inferential construction to express the speaker's surprise as follows: 25)dang kongmu nuphela singha durbar nangla mei yesterday night midnight (place name) inside fire chii-du. burn-PERF Where do temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 31

(2)Kemal gel-mis. (C)surprise:The speaker hears someone approach, opens the door,and sees Kemal-a totally unex- pected visitor. Apparently,the speaker's own discovery,whether it is accidental or not,falls in the realm of the speaker's direct experience. Therefore,given the evidential dichotomy,the expected form is the direct experience marker,-di. However,the chosen form is the indirect experience marker,-mis.This long puzzled traditional Turkish grammarians. Yet another case where the evidential dichotomies fail is presented by Slobin and Aksu(1982).They observed that the resignation of the Turkish Premier Bulent Ecevit was reported with the indirect experience marker,-mis as in sentence 3.In contrast, the resignation of Richard Nixon was reported with the direct experience marker -di as in sentence 4,although both were matters of hearsay and thus equally indirect.The only difference was that Nixon's resignation was expected, but Ecevit's resignation came as a total surprise. (3)Ecevit istifa resignation make '(It is reported that)Ecevit resigned .' (4)Nixon istifa et-ti (=di). resignation make Nixon resigned.' Furthermore,Slobin and Aksu observed that as time passed, example 3 was reported with -di as in example 5.

'Yesterday evening in the middle of the night a fire broke out in Singha Durbar [it seems].' Delancey says (1981:649),'This is spoken by someone who had gone to watch the fire and thus had first-hand knowledge that a fire had broken out, but hadn't been there to see it start.' 32 Rumiko SHINZATO

(5)Ecevit istifa et-ti. resignation make Ecevit resigned.' ' Based on such observations,Slobin and Aksu(1982:198)con- clude: '...the central meaning of the distinction is not so much one of the modality of direct versus indirect experience,but rather one of the degree to which the speaker's mind has been prepared to assimilate the event in question prior to forming an utterance about that event.' To recapitulate,-di was used for Richard Nixon's resignation because people's minds were prepared for it.In contrast,-mis was used for Ecevit's resignation because it came as a total surprise.That is to say,people's minds were unprepared.Further- more,-di took over from -mis when the shock of the event had had a chance to dissipate.Slobin and Aksu(1982:196)add,'Psycho- logically,information which has been stored for some time becomes assimilated to one's own knowledge,often losing the qualification as to its source.'What is suggestive in Slobin and Aksu's view is that their notion of'prepared mind'(i.e.,whether or not our minds are prepared for certain events)parallels the notion of epistemicity dealt with in this paper.In terms of epistemicity,the Turkish -di and -mis are characterized as encoding integrated and non-integrated information respectively. Another distinctive usage of -di and -mis in narrative contexts is pointed out by Slobin and Aksu.For instance,-di is used for reporting historical accounts and realistic fiction.In contrast, -mis is used for such narrative contexts as myths ,folk tales and fairy tales.The use of -di in such narrative contexts is reminiscent of Givon's category of'highest certainty'(Cf.Figure3).It seems that historical accounts correspond to Givon's 'apriori-synthetic knowledge',that is 'the huge body of generic knowledge Where do temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 33 shared within the culture,most commonly coded in language in the knowledge of the dictionary' (1982: 42). As to the usage of -mi$ in such narrative contexts , Slobin and Aksu (1982: 198) of- fer the following explanation: there are some kinds of events for which one is always unprepared-events which partake of a quality of unreality or other worldliness. 'Unreality' or 'other worldliness' recalls Givon's category C, 'lowest certainty, irrealis asserted.' Employing the notion of epistemicity,we can accordingly argue that information in historical accounts and realistic fiction can be well-internalized and unchallengeable information, thus -di, the integrated information marker,is used.In contrast, information in unrealistic or otherworldly narratives is unjustifiable,and thus can not be integrated as unchallengeable knowledge.As a result, -mis,the non-integrated information marker, is used. As to the temporality of -di and -mis,Underhill(1976)char- acterizes the temporal nature of -di as 'simple past' or `aorist'. Slobin and Aksu state that -mis is claimed to have its historical and ontogenetic origin as a perfect tense marker.A similar correlation between temporality and evidentiality also pertains in the Balkan languages.4) According to Friedman(1986), the Common Slavic aorist and perfect developed into the definite and indefinite past,respectively,in Balkan Slavic.Furthermore,Friedman argues that the definite past and indefinite past express the meanings of the speaker's confirmation and non-confirmation of the information being conveyed,respectively.Thus,in Balkan Slavic as well,we obtain similar correlations of the aorist to definite/confirmational

4)Obviously, Turkish does not belong to the Slavonic language family. However,there is a possibility that they share some areal characteristics with Turkish. According to Comrie(1976:108),Bulgarian and Georgian inferentials were developed under Turkish influence. Fried- man's study is presented here to supplement Slobin and Aksu's study, which does not delve into the temporal aspects of -di and -mis. 34 Rumiko SHINZATO

past and the perfect to indefinite/non-confirmational past. What emerges from the above discussion is the following coexisting values of the three notions in each past tense auxiliary (Figure 5):

Figure 5

-di evidentiality: direct experience/historical accounts/ realistic fiction temporality:simple past/aorist epistemicity:integrated information -mis evidentiality:indirect experience/surprise temporality:perfect epistemicity:non-integrated information

3.Old Japanese past tense auxiliaries,-ki and -keri5)6) 3.1.The evidential accounts In analyzing the usage of Old Japanese past tense auxiliaries,

5)In this paper,the vicissitude of -ki and -keri is not discussed. Sandness(1982)is a most comprehensive study in this regard includ- ing the vicissitudes of -tsu,-nu,-tari,and -ri as well. 6)There are some scholars who refute the common practice of pairing -ki with -keri,Sandness(1982),for example,argues that -ki should be paired with -tsu but not with -keri as past tense auxiliaries. She differentiates -ki and -tsu as such that -ki is imperfective whereas -tsu is perfective.I am not totally convinced with her pairing nor with her labeling.First,there are also examples which suggest exactly the opposite aspectual labeling as Sandness herself noted.In addition,some examples such as ari-ki,which she labels imperfective because of its meaning of'used to be',might have developed such meaning because of the stative nature of the verb,ari rather than the temporal suffix -ki.Secondly,there is a noteworthy fact that the differences of -nu and -tsu in cooccurring verbs(i.e.,-nu with intransitive and -tsu with transitive verbs)and in aspectual meaning(shutai no henka[change wrought in a subject]for -nu and she- tai no doosa sayoo[activity of a subject]for -tsu as in Suzuki [1986]) parallel the differences of the two types of the -te ire construction in Modern Japanese(see Okuda 1984).Because of'this,I believe Where do temporality, evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 35

-ki and -keri ,what strikes us is their close resemblance to Turkish -di and -mis.7)Not surprisingly,the distinction between Old Japanese -ki and -keri was also once described in terms of evidential dichotomies such as'witnessed events vs. reported events' (Hosoe 1932),'direct experience vs.hearsay'(Saeki 1959;Toki- eda 1954)and 'direct experience vs.indirect experience'(Konoshi- ma 1973). For example, sentences 6 and 7, which are encoded with the direct experience marker -ki, convey information which was acquired through the speaker's direct experience.(Note the first person subject in the following.) (6)'Aru toki ni wa kishie'kata yukusue mo sometimes TOP came direction destination also shira-zu umi ni magire -mu to shi-ki.' know-not sea in stray-probable COMP do '"Sometimes ,I did not know where I came from and where I was going to,and I was about to be lost at sea."' (From Taketori monogatari) (7)'Aru toki ni wa kate tsukite kusa no ne o kuimono sometimes TOP food exhaust herbs of roots OBJ food to shi-ki.' as do '"Sometimes , our provisions exhausted, we fed on the roots of herbs."' (From Taketori monogatari) In contrast, -keri, the indirect experience marker, entails in-

that it is worthy of reanalyzing -ki, -nu and -tsu suffixes inthis light before disregarding the conventional pairing. 7)The close resemblance of Turkish and Old Japanese at the evidential level was very briefly mentioned in a few sentences in Kindaichi (1957),without any further discussion. 8)Although -shi is an adnominal form of the past tense auxiliary,-ki, I purposely avoided specifying it in the gloss.Nor did I treat this as a variant of -ki in this paper because it has been claimed that -ki and -shi are different functionally and etymologically. 36 Rumiko SHINZATO formation which the speaker infers,as in sentences 8 and 9",or hears second-hand,as in sentences 10 and 11. (8)"Tare kaku okashiu shi-tara -mu. who this way interestingly do-complete-probable Kakute machi-keri." this way wait '"Who did '"Who this [interestingly]?They must have been wait - ing for me."' (From Ochikubo monogatari)

(9)Mire-ba ue no hakama mo nuwade look-when top trousers also not yet sew

oki-tari•c 'Te o dani fure-zari-keru wa•c(=keri)'

leave-complete hand OBJ even touch-not 'When (the Great Lady) saw that the trousers were left

without even being sewn,(she said),"You must not have

even touched this•c"' (From Ochikubo monogatari) (10)Ima wa mukashi,Taketori no Okina to iu mono long time agoCOMP called man ari-keri. exist '(I heard that) a long time ago ,there was a man called Taketori no Okina.' (From Taketori monogatari)

(11)Kano Morokoshi-bune ki-keri.Onono Fusamori,moodekite that Chinese ship comecame back

moonoboru to iu koto o kikite•c

come(to Kyoto)COMP OBJ heard `(They say that) Chinese ship came back .I heard that Ono-

no Fusamori came back(on it)and will come to Kyoto•c'

(From Taketori monogatari)

9)These examples are pointed out by Suzuki(1986)as conveying inferential meanings. Where do temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity meet?37

The evidential labels for-ki and-keri are corroborated by the fact that-ki often appears in direct quotations while-keri appears in non-direct quotations.Since the direct quotations proceed from the point of view of a character,it naturally facilitates the delivery of the character's own experience first-hand.In contrast,non-direct quotations proceed from the point of view of the story teller,thus allowing a character's experience to be reported second-hand by the story teller.For instance,-ki examples 6 and 7 and -keri examples 10 and 11 are all collected from the same story,but their distribution is quite distinct:the-ki examples all appear in direct quotations,while the-keri examples all appear in non-direct quotations.In fact,all the instances of-ki in the entire Taketori monogatari appear in direct quotations.Konoshima (1973)also reports that out of 110 instances of-ki in Genji monogatari,80 instances appear in direct quotations.10) The parallelism with Turkish is carried one step further by the fact that-keri is also used as a marker of surprise,sudden realization,or exclamation,as does the Turkish-mis.Examples 12 and 13 demonstrate this. (12)Niwakusa ni murasame orite koorogi no naku garden grass on shower fall crickets of chirp koe kikeba aki chikazuki-ni-keri. voice hearing fall approaching complete 'Seeing the shower falling on the garden grass and hearing the crickets chirp,(I suddenly realize) fall is approaching.' (From Shin-kokin wakashuu) (13)Furusato to narinishi Nara no miyako ni mo former home COMP became of city in even

10)Additionally,Hashimoto(1969)quotes Mitsuya's findings that-ki predominantly appears in quotations,while-keri appears in non-quotations. 38 Rumiko SHINZATO

iro wa kawara-zu hana wa saki-keri. colors TOP change-not flowers bloom 'Even at Nara ,now my former home,why,the flowers still blossom in the colors of yesteryear!' (From Kokinshuu) Just as the surprise function of-mis has puzzled traditional Turkish grammarians,this surprise/exclamation function of-keri was an anomaly to the evidential accounts of Old Japanese.Some grammarians such as Tokieda(1954)argue that such meanings are created when the past tense auxiliaries are used for a presently occurring event.An example of this would be Modern Japan- ese to as in sentence 14. (14)Yoku yat-ta. well do-past 'Well done .' His argument is unclear as to why-keri' instead of -ki is used to express the surprise/exclamation effect although both could serve equally well as auxiliaries of past tense. Another parallel to Turkish is the contrastive distribution of -ki and -keri in narratives.Just like Turkish -di,-ki is used in historical accounts such as Kojiki as in sentences 15 and 16: (15)Kare,sono usagi Yasokami no oshie ni shitagaite so that rabbit 's advice to follow fushi-ki. lie down-past 'So that rabbit ,following Yasokami's advice,lay down.' (From Kojiki)

(16)'•cmusume no na wa Kushinadahime to iu.' daughter of name TOP COMP say

to mooshi-ki.

COMP say (humble)

(He)said, "My' daughter's name is Kushinadahime."' Where do temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 39

(From Kojiki)

As expected,the use of-ki in the historical accounts also creates a problem for the evidential label of'direct experience'or'witnessed events'because what is stated in sentences 15 and 16 are obviously not something the writer witnessed nor experienced.In order to overcome this difficulty,Nakanishi(1982)argues that historical facts had to be originally experienced by someone,and

that in Kojiki,the writer had utilized a rhetorical device of iden-

tifying himself with those individual experiencers.An additional difficulty is the fact that the-ki is predominant in kanbun kun-

dokugo(the Japanese language used for reading documents writ-

ten in Chinese)as pointed out in Tsukishima(1963).Konoshima

(1973)speculates that the indirect nature of-keri conflicts with

the kanbun kundokugo styles.I believe,however,that there are two

points which bear significance to any adequate analysis.One is that

the stories in kanbun kundokugo are either historical or highly

religious in their contents as pointed out by Tsukishima.The

other is that-keri is also used in the same stories in place of the

speaker's surprise or sudden realization,as in sentences 17 and

18.Interestingly,-keri encoded sentences are often led by the

introductory phrase,'I just realized•c'11 (17)Ware ima hajimete shiri-nu,Nyoraitaishi wa I now for the first time know-perfect TOP han nehan shi-tama-zu,shari wo todome-tamau linger nirvana do-honorific-not bones OBJ keep-honorific koto wa shujoo no mi wo ekishi-tamawa-mu COMP TOP living things OBJ benefit-honorific-probable to nari-keri. COMP become 'I just realized that Nyoraitaishi does not linger in nirvana , and keeping his bones would widely benefit living things.'

11)The following examples are taken from Tsukishima(1963). 40 Rumiko SHINZATO

(From Konkoomyoosaishoo-ookyoo) (18)Ima sunawachi shiri-nu.muchi no mono no now just know-perfect ignorance of person gotoku ari-keri. like be 'I just realized that I had been like an ignorant person .' (From Hokkekyoo)

As for the parallel usages of-keri to Turkish-mis,two can be mentioned:one is its frequent use in narratives of fictional works such as Taketori monogatari and the other is its metaphorical use pointed out in Sandness(1982).Sandness says that in the following poems,19 and 2012),the writer constructed a metaphor.In real life,she adds (1982:60),'Kyoto is not a brocade

dew is not made of birds' tears•c' •c (19)Mi-wataseba yanagi sakura wo koki-mazete look across willows cherry trees OBJ interspersed miyako zo haru no nishiki nari-keru (=keri). capital EMPH spring of brocade become 'When I look across ,the willows and cherry trees are color- fully interspersed,and the capital is a spring brocade.' (20)Yamada moru aki no kari-io ni oku mountain field guard autumn's temporary hut on fall tsuyu wa inaosedori no namida nari-keri. dew TOP inaose bird's tears be 'The dew falling on my temporary hut during the autumn when I guard the mountain field is the tears of the inaose bird.'

The metaphorical use of-keri is reminiscent of what Slobin and Aksu describe as'events which partake of a quality of unreality

12)To be consistent with the rest of the example sentences,the trans- cription here is changed from what appears in her paper and the gloss is added,but her translation is retained. Where do temporality, evidentiality and epistemicity meet ? 41 or other worldliness.' (Cf. sec. 2) 3.2. The temporal accounts Coexisting with the evidential accounts are the temporal accounts of -ki and -keri. In the temporal framework, Hashimoto (1969) applies Jespersen's claim about the distinction between the aorist and the imperfective to his analysis of -ki and -keri13). According to Jespersen (1976), the aorist and imperfective aspects correspond to the two meanings of English then: that is, then, meaning 'next', or 'after that' and then meaning 'at that time'. Jespersen (1965: 276) further states that 'the aorist carries the narrative on, it tells us what happened next, while the imperfective lingers over the conditions as they were at that time and expati- ates on them with more or less of prolixity.' Hashimoto asserts that such a meaning difference can also be found in -ki and -keri; that is, -ki shares the same meaning with the aorist and -keri with the imperfective. Yoshida (1973) in his survey discussion of the previous literature concludes that the temporal difference between -ki and -keri can be summarized as being 'instantaneous vs. durative.' Suzuki (1986) captures the distinction between -ki and -keri as 'aorist vs. perfect14) and 'definite past vs. indefinite

13) Comrie (1976: 11-12) points out that 'in discussions of aspect, as opposed to many other areas of linguistics, there is no generally accepted terminology...On the one hand, different labels are used to refer to the same phenomenon, while on the other hand, and even more confusingly, the same label is often applied by different linguists to radically different concepts.' For the sake of terminological consistency, throughout this paper Comrie's terminology is adopted. For this reason, both Hashimoto and Jespersen's language-particular term, "imperfect", is replaced by Comrie's term, "imperfective". 14) It should be remembered that "perfective" and "perfect" refer to different aspectual properties. Comrie (1976: 12) clearly distinguishes them as follows: `The term "perfective" contrasts with "imperfective", and denotes a situation viewed in its entirety, without regard to internal temporal consistency; the term "perfect" refers to a past situation which has present relevance'. 42 Rumiko SHINZATO

past.' Kasuga (1942) argues that since the speaker's surprise/exclamation reflects the present state of the speaker, it is more rea- sonable to regard -keri as a present tense auxiliary. Similarly, Mabuchi (1963) refutes the characterization of -keri as an auxiliary of past or recollection. Because of this reason, he takes the standpoint that the comparison of -ki and -keri as the same past tense auxiliaries is an invalid issue to begin with. The auxiliary -keri certainly possesses the characteristics to be regarded as an auxiliary of present. However, I do not believe that it is a present tense auxiliary in the ordinary sense, nor do I refute all the previous analyses which address the distinction between -ki and -keri. Thus, if Mabuchi's account is set aside, the temporal distinctions presented above, though diverse and dis- parate as they may appear, boil down to such basic temporal dichotomies as 'instantaneous vs. durative' or 'aorist vs. perfect'. The imperfective aspect overlaps with the durative aspect in many cases, and the perfect aspect can be seen as durative because of its inclusion of a period of time starting in the past and lasting to the present. The temporal accounts are certainly insightful in their own light, however still fail to incorporate the important findings disclosed in the evidential accounts. 3.3. The epistemic account As seen in Slobin and Aksu's proposal for the Turkish suffixes, I believe that what is vital to the distinction between -ki and -keri is the notion of epistemicity.15) In terms of epistemicity, they are characterized as conveying integrated vs. non-integrated information respectively. Recall that -ki encoded information was either directly experienced events or historical/religious accounts.

In the prevalence of the evidential distinctions, Ono (1968) and Matsuo (1936) (based on the quote by Konoshima [1973]) stand out as illuminating studies because of their inclusion of the concept of memory and consciousness. Where do temporality, evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 43

I believe that what unites such diverse types of information is the notion of integrated information. Normally, the speaker's direct experience is instantly assimilable and the information appearing in historical and religious accounts is that which is already assimilated into one's body of knowledge (i. e., integrated). The speaker's direct experience, historical documentation and religious accounts correspond to Givon's terms 'deictic obviousness', 'apriori- synthetic knowledge' and 'mystically-revealed knowledge', respectively, all of which form a natural class as unchallengeable knowledge.16" In this light, a different explanation can be offered for the predominant use of -ki in historical documents (e. g. Kojiki) and kanbun kundokugo (Cf. sec. 3.1.). I believe that what is crucial in the selection of a past tense auxiliary is not such stylis- tic or rhetorical measures as claimed by Nakanishi and Konoshi- ma, but rather the nature of the stories (i.e.,their historical or religious orientation). If it were not, then the existence of -keri in the very same stories becomes inexplicable. In contrast, recall that -keri conveys the meaning of surprise, inferential or hearsay information. I assert that here again what permeates such heterogeneous usages is the notion of non-integrat-

16) Givon (1982) does also point out a case where the correlation between 'direct experience', 'highest certainty' and 'fact/truth' breaks down. In Sherpa, the Life of the Buddha, the truest and most certain stories are told in the hearsay mode with the suffix -no. I am not an expert on Sherpa so this is no more than a speculation. However, this Sherpa case seems to have some twists. The tense skews the meaning of the evidential suffix, -no; it also acts as a direct experience marker in present progressive and habitual. Woodbury (1986: 195) suggests that 'when the time reference of an evidential category is different from that of the proposition with which it occurs, the resulting evidential value will be non-experiential.' The question is whether there is any possibility that the Life of the Buddha stories were narrated in historical present. If so, the time reference of the proposition, present, meets with the time reference of the suffix, -no, and thus the experiential mode can be obtained. 44 Rumiko SHINZATO ed information.First,surprise information is considered as not yet integrated into the speaker's consciousness.If it were integrated , it could no longer be a surprise to the speaker.In this regard,it is crucial to realize that language is sensitive to the distinction between what has already been experienced and what is being experienced,even though both are equally 'the speaker's direct experience.'17)This is not something exotic only to Old Japanese. Evidently,Modern Japanese also lexicalizes this difference in the case of the verb,to remember,as in oboete iru and omoidasu as pointed in Akatsuka (1985).The former refers to the situation in which the speaker keeps some information in his memory,whereas the latter refers to the situation in which some information is just returning to the speaker's consciousness.Needless to say, the former parallels the situation which-ki encodes,while the latter parallels the situation which-keri encodes.Similarly,in Chinese such a difference is lexicalized as ji de 'keep in memory' and xiang qi lai 'is just returning to consciousness.'18)Secondly, inferential information is something which the speaker is not sure of,and thus is considered to be non-integrated.Thirdly,hearsay information takes some time to be digested and internalized by the speaker,thus at the time of speech,it is likely to be not assimilated.Akatsuka(1985:638)makes a strong point in this regard,saying that 'Humans,unlike machines which lack the abili- ty to think and feel,do not learn instantaneously;humans need time and experience before they can digest and internalize the

17)At first glance,Yoshida's(1989)account may appear contradictory to the present analysis.Yoshida claims that-keri in Manyooshuu can be understood as an element to recognize information as certain.I interpret his claim as such that -keri is used for information the speaker is presently recognizing to be certain,rather than what he has already recognized to be certain. Thus,I believe that his argument does not contradict my claim of-keri as a marker of non-integrated or irrealis information. 18)I owe this information to Shigehisa Kuriyama. Where do temporality, evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 45

acquired information.'On Akatsuka's epistemic scale,these three types of information all fit in the continuum of the irrealis domain. Her finding that the Japanese complementizer to treats surprise information as a natural class with inferential and hearsay information also supports this grouping. What emerges from the above discussion are the following coexisting values of three notions for each past tense auxiliary (Figure 6).

Figure 6

4.Interaction of temporality, evidentiality and epistemicity The above data from the two languages lead to the following correlations (Figure 7):

Figure 7 46 Rumiko SHINZATO

A question might arise regarding the identical correlation of the three notions in the two languages:is it coincidental or not? This paper considers it as a natural consequence of some implicational relationship existing among the three notions.First,with regard to the correlation between evidentiality and temporality, Comrie's account of the close semantic tie between the perfect and inference is suggestive.Observing that a formal relation exists between the perfect and inferential forms of Bulgarian, Georgian, and Estonian,Comrie(1976:110)gives the following explanation: ' ...with the perfect,a past event is related to a present state,in other words the past event is not simply presented per se,but because of its relation to a present state.With inferential,the past event is again not presented simply per se,rather it is inferred from a less direct result of the action.' A similar explanation is also presented by a Japanese grammarian. Yamada(1922:411)states19): '...keri not only expresses a retrospect,but also it takes the present state of affairs as a starting point. Expressed in terms of etymology,ari places the starting-point in the present,and ki expresses a retrospect.It is a case of looking at the result and thinking of the cause,of recollecting the past and expres- sing a judgement of the present.' The etymology of -keri is another controversial issue.Some scholars(e.g.Hojo 1964)analyze it as being a compound of the renyookei(attributive form)of the verb come and ari'to be'.The bases for Hojo's analysis are the facts that the past tense auxiliary -ki has no attested renyookei form and that a manyoogana spell- ing appears as come and ari.Yamada,on the other hand,speculates that the past tense auxiliary -ki might have had the renyookei further back in history,therefore it is plausible that -keri is

19) This translation is adopted from George Sansom (1928:186). Where do temporality, evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 47 a compound of the renyookei of the past tense auxiliary -ki and ari.Whichever theory is correct,however,it is certain that-keri is etymologically perfect because some languages such as Thai incorporate the verb come(Cf.Delancey 1981)20)and others com- bine present auxiliary with past participle(Cf.Comrie 1976,esp. 106-108) to form the perfect aspect. Furthermore, in the light of -keri as perfect , the inferential meaning of -keri follows easily. Anderson(1986)reaches the following correlation between evidentiality and temporality after examining a variety of lan- guages21):the perfective(i.e.,aorist)to directly witnessed events and the perfect to inference.Anderson also claims that certain past tense markers(mainly punctual)have been taken as past witnessed evidentials,as exemplified in the Aymara language. Secondly,the correlation between evidentiality and epistemicity can be justified in the following way(Cf.sec.3.2.).The speaker's direct experience is considered to be instantly assimilable and the information in the historical documents is regarded as that which is already assimilated as part of one's knowledge. Thus,both types of evidentials are colligated by the epistemic notion of integrated information.On the other hand,second-hand information takes some time to be assimilated or internalized into one's body of knowledge;inferential information is something which the speaker is not sure of;and information which evokes a surprise/exclamatory effect is exactly this non-integrated information which was totally outside the speaker's consciousness until the very moment of speech.Thus,all these three types of evidentials are united by the single epistemic notion of non-integrated information.

20) I am grateful to David Kemmerer for calling my attention to this paper. 21) These correlations are extracted from the figure entitled"Correlated systems: actuality, mood/assertion, aspect, evidentiality"(p.310). 48 Rumiko SHINZATO

Thirdly,the correlation between temporality and epistemicity can be accounted for if we hypothesize that the temporal duration expressed by temporals corresponds to the internalization period of acquired information.Recall that the information that -ki marks is either instantly integrated/assimilable or already integrated.Thus,in this sense,internalized information is seen as consonant with the instantaneous aspect.In contrast,inferential information takes some span of time for deliberation and hearsay information requires some time for the assimilation of the acquired information to one's existing knowledge.The information which evokes the surprise or exclamation effect is considered to have existed in the speaker's subconsciousness for some time. Thus,in this sense,non-integrated information is congruent with the durative aspect.A similar account is also offered in Nakau (1979).Nakau argues that the aspectual difference between omou (simple present tense)and omotte iru(present progressive/durative)in Modern Japanese reflects a difference in thinking process. The former implicates the thinking process at the speaker's instantaneous present, whereas the latter implicates the durative thinking process whose inceptive point occurred some time in the past. Nakau explains that the reason that sentence 21a is ungrammati- cal is because the speaker has no way of knowing instantaneously what the third person is thinking at the time of speech. In contrast,the reason that sentence 21b is grammatical is because the speaker may obtain some means to conjecture the third person's thought in the period of time from the past to the present as rep- resented in the progressive verb form. (21)a.*Makkusu wa An o shoojikida to omou. b.Makkusu wa An o shoojikida to omotte-iru. Max TOP Ann OBJ honest COMP think 'Max thinks that Ann is honest .' Viewing the three notions of temporality,evidentiality and Where do temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 49

epistemicity in this way,it is easy to understand why so many accounts concerning the distinction between -ki and -keri with such diverse approaches could all be correct in one way or another. It is because each of them depicts a partial aspect of the whole issue.

5.More on temporality:psychological distance Slobin and Aksu(1982:198),in their concluding remarks, briefly mention that their native speakers shared the vague feeling that the events encoded by -misare felt to be more 'psychologi- cally distanced' than those encoded by -di.By 'psychological distance,'they meant 'not a matter of placement of events on a time line,but rather one of relative closeness of events to one's ongoing feeling of participation in here-and-now.' A similar distinction is also operative in Old Japanese grammar. It has been suggested that -keri describes events objectively or with some spacial and temporal distance,while -ki describes events directly (Cf.Kobayashi 1927;Takeoka 1963;Yoshida 1973).Ogawa (1983)claims that -keri is used in narrative to show remoteness on the part of the narrator from lack of empathy with characters32). He notes that in the beginning part of the Azumaya chapter of Genji monogatari where the narrator's empathy is on Kaoru, sentences with Kaoru as a subject unfold without -keri,whereas sentences with the other characters such as Bennoamagimi or Kitanokata as a subject take -keri. What is of interest from the point of view of such a correlation between the perfect aspect and objective expressions is Inoue's (1978)analysis of the Modern Japanese perfect tense marker -te iru.Inoue claims that -te iru is used when the speaker makes an objective and evidential statement.Thus,in the context where

22)I am grateful to Nobuo Ogawa for forwarding his article to me. 50 Rumiko SHINZATO the speaker reviews John's employment record as in sentence 22, the use of-te iru is appropriate,but not that of the simple past tense marker -ta,which lacks such objective sense.In contrast, however,where the speaker refers to his own lay-off and no such objective sense is involved as in sentence 23,-te iru is inappropriate. (22)John-wa juu-nen -mae -ni General Motors -o ten years ago in OBJ

yame-sase-rare a.te iru leave-Cause-Pass b.?ta ' John was laid off by General Motors ten years ago.' (23)Watashi-wa onaji-toshi -ni Chrysler -o yame I same year in leave

sase-rare a.*te iru Cause-Pass b.ta. 'I was laid off by Chrysler in the same year .'

6.More on temporality:discourse After examining the usage of -keri in Genji monogatari, Murasakishikibu nikki and Makurano sooshi,Takeoka(1963)proposes that the central meaning and function of-keri is to place the-keri encoded events in 'anata naru ba'(distanced contexts) from the ongoing narrative contexts23).He claims the-keri encoded events possess the following characteristics in comparison with the events which precede and/or follow them: A.The-keri encoded events are simultaneous with the preceding events,while the-ki encoded events follow the preceding events chronologically. B.The subjects of the -keri sentences are often different from the subjects of the preceding sentences.The -keri sentences describe characters who hold some spatial or psy-

23) I believe that Ogawa's (1983) account of the narrative function of -keri basically points to the analysis as Takeoka's. Where do temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 51

chological distance from the main character in the narrative. In this regard,what comes to mind is Hopper's(1979;1982) discoursal dichotomy of foregrounding and backgrounding24).The foregrounded events are sequenced successively in real-world chro- nological order,while the backgrounded events are concurrent with the foregrounded events,amplifying or commenting on them. In the following Swahili example taken from Hopper (1979: 214), the prefix ka-and ki-are adhered to the foregrounded and the backgrounded events respectively.The difference between the foregrounded and backgrounded events is seen in Hopper's flow- chart,in which the chronology runs from top to bottom with the backgrounded events indicated by a 'shunt' to the side. (24)Tu-ka-enda kambi-ni,hata usiku tu-ka-toroka, we went camp to and night we ran off tu-ka-safiri siku kandha,tu-ki-pitia miji fulani, we traveled days several we passed villages several, na humo mwote hamna mahongo and them all was-not-tribute 'We returned to the camp ,and ran away during the night,

24) I am grateful to Paul Hopper (p.c.) for calling my attention to his papers. 52 Rumiko SHINZATO

and we traveled for several days,we passed through several villages,and in all of them we did not have to pay tribute.' Hopper claims that in the backgrounded clauses, topic changesand introduction of new information in the preverbal position (i.e., indefinite subjects)are common,but they are unlikely in the foregrounded clauses.Furthermore,more relevant to the present study,Hopper notes that in the foregrounded clauses,punctual verbs (e.g.enda'went back',toroka'ran away')are used,while durative(safiri'journeyed'),iterative(pitia'passedthrough'),or stative(hamma'there is not')verbs are used in thebackground- ed clause.This is because'a foregrounded event is contingenton the completion of a prior event,'and because the punctualverbs tend to have a perfective aspect. Comparing Takeoka's analysis of -keri with Hopper's discoursal dichotomy,it is evident that -ki and -keri possess thediscour- sal functions of foregrounding and backgrounding respectivelyand that the temporal properties of both auxiliaries(i.e.,instantaneous vs.durative)are consonant with the temporal opposition (i,e., punctual vs.durative)Hopper described.Furthermore,Jespersen's account of the aorist vs.imperfective distinction,andHashimoto's adoption of it (see sec.3)are appreciated as basicallypointing out the same discoursal dichotomy as Hopper's.

7.Conclusion As Hopper (1982:3)eloquently states,the categories oftense, aspect and modality are pervasive and universal.Therefore,the implication of studies of these categories for language,perception and learning ought to be obvious,yet for most of the historyof Western linguistics,they have been shadow categories.In the same vein,Chafe and Nichols(1986:viii)point out that anevi- dentiality conference held at Berkeley(the outcome of which is their book)was the first one of that art.They believe thatthe Where do temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 53 time is not ripe for offering a single,unified approach to evidentiality and that it is now more appropriate to explore various data, viewpoints and interpretations. Given such a background,this paper is presented as an at- tempt to contribute a case study of Old Japanese and Turkish on such 'shadow categories' in order to deepen our understanding of the least studied categories.Specifically,this paper has shown that there is some correlation among temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity existing cross-linguistically in Old Japanese and Tur- kish.Then it argued that such correlations occurred not as a coincidence,but rather as a consequence of implicational relation- ships among these three notions.Thus,in offering such an explanation,this paper also proposes that the seemingly heterogeneous notions of temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity can be united and that furthermore,doing so results in a more ben- eficial analysis of each notion. From the theoretical perspective,I believe that this adds another piece of supportive evidence to the theory of epistemology developed by Akatsuka.After all,the epistemic scale operates on a time line,and thus the temporal analyses constitute an in- dispensable part of the theory of epistemology.

REFERENCES

Akatsuka,Noriko.(1983).Conditionals.Papers in Japanese Linguistics

9.1-33.

•\ (1985).Conditionals and the epistemic scale.Language 61:3.625-

639.

Aksu-Koc,Ayhan A.and Dan I.Slobin.(1986).A psychological account

of the development and use of evidentials in Turkish.Evidentiality:

the linguistic coding of epistemology,ed.by Wallace Chafe and

Johanna Nichols,159-167.New Jersey:Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Anderson,Lloyd B.(1986).Evidentials,paths of change,and mental 54 Rumiko SHINZATO

maps:typologically regular asymmetries.Evidentiality:thelinguis-

tic coding of epistemology,ed.by Wallace Chafe and JohannaNi-

chols,273-312.New Jersey:Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Comrie,Bernard.(1976).Aspect.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press.

Delancey,Scott.(1981).An interpretation of split ergativityand related

patterns.Language 57:3.626-657. Friedman,Victor A.(1986).Evidentiality in the Balkans:Bulgarian,

Macedonian,and Albanian.Evidentiality:the linguistic coding of

epistemology,ed.by Wallace Chafe and Johanna Nichols,168-187.

New Jersey:Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Givon,Talmy.1982).Evidentiality and epistemic space.Studies in lan-

guage 6.23-39.

Hashimoto,Shinkichi.(1969).Joshi jodooshi no kenkyuu.Tokyo:Iwana-

mi Shoten.

Hojo,Tadao.(1964).Seiritsu kara mita'keri'no hongi.Gekkan bumpoo

34.32-38.

Hopper,Paul.(1979).Aspect and foregrounding in discourse.Syntax and

semantics,volume 12:discourse and syntax,ed.by Talmy Giv6n,

213-241.New York:Academic Press.

.(1982).Aspect between discourse •\ and grammar:anintroductory

essay for the volume.Tense and aspect:between semantics andprag-

matics,ed.by Paul Hopper,3-17.Amsterdam:Benjamins.

Hosoe,Itsuki.(1932).Dooshi jisei no kenkyuu.Tokyo:IwanamiShoten.

Inoue,Kyoko.(1978).Speaker's perspectives and temporal expressions

a case study from Japanese and English. University of Michigan

papers in linguistics.105-115.

Jespersen,Otto.(1924).The philosophy of grammar.London:Allen &

Unwin.also from New York:W.W.Norton & Company Inc.(1965).

Kasuga,Masaji.(1942).Saidaiji konkoomyoosaishoo-ookyookotenno koku-

gogakuteki kenkyuu.Tokyo:Iwanami Shoten.

Kindaichi,Haruhiko.(1957).Toki,tai,soo oyobi hoo.Nihonbumpoo

kooza 1 sooron,223-224.Tokyo:Meiji Shoin.

Kobayashi,Yoshiharu.(1927).Kokugo kokubumpoo yoogi.Tokyo:Kyoo-

hunsha. Where do temporality, evidentiality and epistemicity meet ? 55

Konoshima, Masatoshi. (1973). Kokugo doosi no kenkyuu. Tokyo:O- fusha. Lakoff, Robin. (1970). Tense and its relation to participants.Language 46 : 4. 838-849. Lyons, John. (1977). Semantics 2. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. Mabuchi, Kazuo. (1963). Jodooshi 'ki' to 'keri' no kubetsu wanan to miru ka. Kaishaku to kanshoo October. 76-81. Tokyo: MeijiShoin. Matsuo, Sutejiro. (1936). Kokugohoo ronkoo. Tokyo : Bungakusha. Matthews, G. H. (1965). Hidatsa syntax. The Hague: Mouton Co. Nakanishi, Uichi. (1982). Dooshisei jutsugo no shiteki tenkai.(2) asupe- kuto, tense. Kooza Nihongo-gaku 2.122-140. Tokyo : Meiji Shoin. Nakau, Minoru. (1979). Modaritii to meidai. Eigo to Nihongo to,ed. by Hayashi Eiichi Kyooju kanreki kinen rombunshuu kankoo iinkai, 223-250. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan. Ogawa, Nobuo. (1983). The meaning and function of the suffixes,-ki, keri, -tu, -nu, -tari and -ri in Genji monogatari. Universityof- Penn- sylvania Ph. D. Dissertation. Okuda, Yasuo. (1984). Kotoba no kenkyuu josetsu. Tokyo : MugiShobo. Ono, Susumu. (1968). Nihonjin no shikoo to jutsugo keishiki.Bungaku 2.25-36. Palmer, F. R. (1986). Mood and Modality. Cambridge : CambridgeUniver- sity Press. Parks, Douglas R. (1976). A grammar of Pawnee. New York :Garland Publishing Co. Randriamasimanana, Charles. (1987). Tense/aspect and theconcept of displacement. Journal of pragmatics 11. 193-209. Saeki, Umetomo. (1959). Shin koten bumpoo. Tokyo: Sanseido. Sandness, Karen Elsa. (1982). The evolution of the Japanesepast and perfective suffixes in the Kamakura and Muromati periods. Yale University Ph. D. Dissertation. Sansom, George. (1928). An historical grammar of Japanese.London: Oxford University Press. Shinzato, Rumiko. (1990). Ki to keri no kubetsu o megutte.Kokubun- 56 Rumiko SHINZATO

gaku gengo to bungei 105.99-105. (In Press a.),Old Japanese ki and keri reconsidered:realis vs.irrealis information.(To appear in the Proceedings of Middlebury Conference on Japanese Linguistics and Japanese Teaching 1990) (In Press b.).Epistemic properties of temporal auxiliaries:A case study from Okinawan,Japanese and Old Japanese.(To appear in Lin guistics,v.29,no.1,1991)

Slobin,Dan I.and Ayhan A.Aksu.(1982).Tense,aspect,modality in the

use of Turkish evidential.Tense-Aspect:between semantics and

pragmatics,ed.by Paul Hopper,185-200.Amsterdam:Benjamins.

Suzuki,Yasushi.(1986).Kodai Nihongo no kako keishiki no imi.Matsu-

mura Akira kyooju koki kinen kokugo kenkyuu ronshuu,ed.by Matsu-

mura Akira kyooju koki kinen kai,106-131.Tokyo:Meiji Shoin.

Takeoka,Masao.(1963).Jodooshi keri no hongi to kinoo.Kokubungaku

gengo to bungei 31.also appeared in Ronshuu Nihongo kenkyuu 7,

jodooshi(1979),ed.by Umehara Yasunori,188-192.Tokyo:Yusei-

do.

Tokieda,Motoki,(1954).Nihon buｍpoo bungo-hen.Tokyo:Iwanami

Shoten. Tsukishima,Hiroshi.(1963).Heian jidai no kanbun kundokugo ni tsukite no kenkyun.Tokyo:TokyoDaigakuShuppankai. Underhill,Robert.(1976).Turkish grammar.Mass:MIT Press. Yamada,Yoshio.(1922).Nihon bumpoo ron.Tokyo:Hobunkan. Yoshida,Kanehiko,(1973).Joodaigo jodooshi noshiteki kenryuu.Tokyo: Meiji Shoin. Whorf,BenjaminLee.(1956).Languge,thought and reality.Mass:MIT Press. Woodbury,C.Anthony.(1986).Interactions of tense and evidentiality: a study of Sherpa and English.Evidentiality:the linguisticcoding of epistemology,ed.by Wallace Chafe and Johanna Nichols,188-202. New Jersey:Ablex Publishing Corporation. Where do temporality,evidentiality and epistemicity meet? 57

Temporality,evidentiality,epistemnicityの接点はどこか。

古代日本語の「キ」「ケリ」とトルコ語の-di,-misの比較

新里瑠美子

本稿では,時の助動詞において,evidentiality(情報源の差異),epistemicity

(認識内/外の情報)が,いかにtemporality(時・態)と関わるかを考察する。

具体的に,古代日本語の過去の助動詞キとケリ,トルコ語の過去の助動詞-di,

misを取り上げ,次のような対応を指摘する。 -

キ/-di:直接体験瞬間態認識内情報

ケリ/-mis:間接体験持続態認識外情報

上記対応は,直接体験を瞬時(瞬時態と呼応)にして認識の内に吸収され得るも

の,又間接体験を,ある時間幅(持続態と呼応)を経ての後吸収され得るもの,

ゆえに発話時では認識外情報と考えるとうなづける。本稿では更に,竹岡の「物

語の現場」(キの用法)対「あなたなる場」(ケリの用法)という対立概念と,

Hopperのforegrounding対backgroundingというdiscourseの概念との呼応

も指摘する。又,前者には瞬間態が,後者には持続態が多いとのHopperの指摘

は,キ,ケリの瞬間態対持続態の差異によく合致する。

(改稿論文受理日1990年11月20日)