The study investigates how speakers use ‘nai-expressions’ (a verb root + the negative suffix (a)nai as in shabere-nai ‘cannot speak’ and ik-anai ‘will/do not go’) in naturally occurring conversation. The data demonstrate that although negative utterances have been considered to be ‘grammatical’ constructions that simply negate the truth value of a proposition, nai-expressions show formulaic tendencies and serve not only to express a speaker’s emotional personal stance on a particular story/event but also to create interpersonal space with other conversation participant(s) and to involve them in the story/event. The patterns which emerged from the data are quite similar to those in Ono and Thompson’s study on Japanese adjectives. As they pointed out, some of nai-expressions in the data may also be re-analyzed as adjectives.
BackusA (1999) Evidence for lexical chunks in insertional codeswitching. In: BrendemoenELRyenE (eds) Language Encounters across Time and Space. Oslo: Nobus Press, pp. 93–109.
2.
Bardovi-HarligK (2006) On the role of formulas in the acquisition of L2 pragmatics. In: Barodovi-HarligKFélix-BrasdeferCOmarAS (eds) Pragmatics and Language Learning: Vol. 11. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign Language Resource Center, pp. 1–28.
3.
Bardovi-HarligK (2009) Conventional expressions as a pragmalinguistic resource: Recognition and production of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics. Language Learning59(4): 755–795.
4.
Bardovi-HarligK (2012) Formulas, routines, and conventional expressions in pragmatics research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics32: 206–227.
BenvenisteE (1971) Problems in General Linguistics, translated by MeekMary Elizabeth. Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami Press.
7.
BiberDConradS (1999) Lexical bundles in conversation and academic prose. In: HasselgardHOksefjellS (eds) Out of Corpora: Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 181–190.
8.
BiberDJohanssonSLeechG, et al. (1999) Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
9.
BushN (2001) Frequency effects and word-boundary palatalization in English. In: BybeeJHopperPJ (eds) Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 255–280.
10.
BybeeJ (2002) Phonological evidence for exemplar storage of multiword sequences. Studies in Second Language Acquisition24: 215–221.
11.
BybeeJ (2006) From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language82(4): 711–733.
12.
BybeeJ (2007) Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13.
BybeeJScheibmanJ (1999) The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: The reduction of don’t in American English. Linguistics37: 575–596.
14.
CaludeA (2009) Formulaic tendencies of demonstrative clefts in spoken English. In: CorriganRMoravcsikEAOualiH, et al. (eds) Formulaic Language, Vol. 1, Distribution and Historical Change. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 55–76.
15.
Cameron-FaulknerTLievenETomaselloM (2003) A construction based analysis of child directed speech. Cognitive Science27(6): 843–873.
16.
ClancyP (1980) Referential choice in English and Japanese narrative discourse. In: ChafeW (ed.) The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural Linguistic Aspect of Narrative Production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, pp. 127–202.
17.
CorriganRMoravcsikEAOualiH, et al. (eds) (2009) Formulaic Language, Vol. 1, Distribution and Historical Change. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
18.
Du BoisJSchuetze-CoburnSPaolinoD, et al. (1993) Outline of discourse transcription. In: EdwardsJALampertMD (eds) Talking Data: Transcription and Coding in Discourse Research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 45–89.
19.
ErmanBWarrenB (2000) The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text20(1): 29–62.
20.
GeyerN (2007a) Self-qualification in L2 Japanese: An interface of pragmatic, grammatical, and discourse competence. Language Learning57(3): 337–367.
21.
GeyerN (2007b) The grammar-pragmatics interface in L2 Japanese: The case of contrastive expressions. Japanese Language and Literature41: 93–117.
22.
HagaY (1954) Chinjutsu to wa nani mono? [What is modality?]. Kokugo Kokubun23: 47–61.
23.
HallidayMAKHassanR (1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
24.
HickeyT (1993) Identifying formulas in first language acquisition. Journal of Child Language20: 27–41.
25.
HindsJ (1982) Ellipsis in Japanese. Edmonton, AL, Canada: Linguistic Research, Inc.
26.
HudsonME (2008) Riyuu ‘reason’ for nai desu and other semi-polite forms. In: JonesKOnoT (eds) Style Shifting in Japanese. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 132–159.
27.
IkeyaAKawamoriM (1998) The two kinds of Japanese negative nai in terms of their NP1 licensing conditions. In: Proceedings of the 12th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, Singapore, 18–20 Feburuary 1998, pp. 69–81. Singapore: Chinese and Oriental Languages Information Processing Society.
28.
IwakuraK (1974) Nichi-Eigo no Hitei no Kenkyuu [A Study of Japanese and English Negatives]. Tokyo: Kenkyusha.
29.
JohnstoneB (1987) An introduction: Perspectives on repetition. Text7(3): 205–214.
30.
JordenEHNodaM (1987) Japanese: The Spoken Language, Part 1. New Haven, CT; London: Yale University Press.
31.
KatoY (1985) Negative Sentences in Japanese. Sophia Linguistica Monograph 19. Tokyo: Linguistic Institute for International Communication, Sophia University.
32.
KerzEHaasF (2009) The aim is to analyze NP: The function of prefabricated chunks in academic texts. In: CorriganRMoravcsikEAOualiH, et al. (eds) Formulaic Language, Vol. 1, Distribution and Historical Change. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 97–115.
33.
KunoS (1980) The scope of the question and negation in some verb-final languages. CLS16: 155–169.
34.
McGloinNH (1986) Negation in Japanese. Edmonton, AL, Canada: Boreal Scholarly Publishers and Distributors, Ltd.
35.
MaynardS (1989) Japanese Conversation: Self-Contextualization through Structure and Interactional Management. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
36.
MaynardS (1993) Discourse Modality: Subjectivity, Emotion, and Voice in the Japanese Language. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
37.
MaynardS (2002) Linguistic Emotivity. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
38.
MoriJ (1999) Negotiating Agreement and Disagreement in Japanese: Connective Expressions and Turn Construction. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
39.
NakayamaTIchihashi-NakayamaK (1997) Japanese kedo: Discourse genre and grammaticization. In: SohnHHaigJ (eds) Japanese/Korean Linguistics 6. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 607–618.
OnoTSadlerM (2001) The status of ‘canonical’ transitive clauses in Japanese conversations. Report, The Eleventh Conference on Japanese/Korean Linguistics, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, June.
OnoTThompsonSA (2009) Fixedness in Japanese adjectives in conversation: Toward a new understanding of a lexical (‘part-of-speech’) category. In: CorriganRMoravcsikEAOualiH, et al. (eds) Formulaic Language, Vol. 1, Distribution and Historical Change. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 117–145.
44.
OnoTThompsonSA (2017) Negative scope, temporality, fixedness, and right- and left-branching: Implications for typology and cognitive processing. Studies in Language41(3): 543–576.
45.
PawleyASyderF (1983) Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In: RichardsJCSchmidtRW (eds) Language and Communication. London: Longman, pp. 191–227.
46.
SadlerM (2007) Grammar in Use Across Time and Space: Deconstructing the Japanese ‘Dative Subject’ Construction. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
47.
SadlerM (2010) Subjective and intersubjective uses of Japanese verbs of cognition in conversation. Pragmatics20(1): 109–128.
48.
ScheibmanJ (2007) Subjective and intersubjective uses of generalizations in English conversations. In: EnglebretsonR (ed.) Stancetaking in Discourse. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 111–138.
49.
ShinzatoR (2006) Subjectivity, intersubjectivity, and grammaticalization. In: SuzukiS (ed.) Emotive Communication in Japanese. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 15–33.
50.
SuzukiS (2006) Emotive Communication in Japanese. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
51.
SvennevigJ (2003) Echo answers in native/non-native interaction. Pragmatics13(2): 285–309.
52.
SweetserEE (1990) From Etymology to Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53.
TakanoS (2008) Variation in prosodic focus of the Japanese negative nai. In: JonesKOnoT (eds) Style Shifting in Japanese. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 285–327.
54.
TakuboY (1985) On the scope of negation and question in Japanese. Papers in Japanese Linguistics10: 87–115.
55.
TannenD (1989) Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
56.
UeharaSFukushimaE (2008) Masen or nai desu – That is the question: A case study into Japanese conversational discourse. In: JonesKOnoT (eds) Style Shifting in Japanese. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 161–184.
57.
WoodD (2012) Formulaic Language and Second Language Speech Fluency: Background Evidence and Classroom Applications. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
58.
WrayA (2002) Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
59.
WrayA (2008) Formulaic Language: Pushing the Boundaries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
60.
YamadaM (2000) Negation in Japanese narratives: A functional analysis. PhD Dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
61.
YamadaM (2003) The Pragmatics of Negation: Its Functions in Narrative. Tokyo: Hitsuji Shobo Publisher.
