In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

REVIEWS435 Lightner, Theodore. 1963. Preliminary remarks on the morphophonemic component of Polish. Quarterly Progress Report, Research Laboratory of Electronics, MIT, 71.220-35. ------. 1972. Problems in the theory of phonology: Russian phonology and Turkish phonology. Edmonton: Linguistic Research. Matthews, Peter H. 1972. Inflectional morphology: A theoretical study based on aspects of Latin verb conjugation. Cambridge: University Press. Steele, Richard. 1973. The segmental phonology of Contemporary Standard Polish. Harvard University dissertation. Vennemann, Theo. 1972. Rule inversion. Lingua 29.209-42. [Received 7 May 1979.] Problems in Japanese syntax and semantics. Edited by John Hinds and Irwin Howard. Tokyo: Kaitakusha, 1978. Pp. x, 285. ¥2,800. Reviewed by Chisato Kitagawa, University ofArizona Once in a while, one comes across a book that mirrors the state of the art in a given field with panoramic clarity. The book under review is a good example. This collection of papers presented at a special symposium on Japanese syntax and semantics, held at the University of Hawaii during the 1977 Linguistic Institute of the Linguistic Society of America, contains nine articles by leading theoreticians in Japanese and general linguistics. Five articles share a concern with case-marking. Susumu Kuno's 'Theoretical perspectives on Japanese linguistics' (213-85), given as the keynote speech of the symposium, provides a perceptive and informative up-to-date discussion on four issues—grammatical relations, causatives, case-marking, and passivization— incorporating his critique of the proposals made in this same volume by Masayoshi Shibatani, Shigeo Tonoike, and Sige-Yuki Kuroda, respectively, on the first three of these topics. 'Mikami Akira and the notion of "subject" in Japanese', by Shibatani (52-67), is akin to Shibatani 1977 from the point of view of its theoretical import. But the point he raises, i.e. that a subject NP is a syntactically justifiable entity in Japanese, is an important one yet to be seriously challenged. Tonoike's 'On the causative constructions in Japanese' (3-29) is composed of three parts: a very readable short survey of various proposals made so far on the syntactic and semantic characterizations of the so-called o- and ni- causatives in Japanese, his assessment of the current situation, and his own proposal couched in the framework of Tonoike 1976. Kuroda's 'Case marking, canonical sentence patterns, and counter equi in Japanese (a preliminary survey)' (30-51) can be considered an extension of Kuroda 1965, presenting an elegant formal system in which to account for derivation of certain case particles, i.e. (nominative) ga, (accusative) o, and some instances of (dative) ni. Kazuko Inoue, in '"Tough sentences" in Japanese' (122-54), treats complex issues with her characteristic thoroughness, explicating in particular the nature ofinteractions between the case role ' experiencer' and what she calls 'target' (i.e. a ga-marked NP under certain specific contexts), and the manner in which this affects the interpretation of various 'tough sentences' in Japanese. Other, more miscellaneous articles include 'The sika nai construction and predicate restructuring' (155-77) by Masatake Muraki, a carefully executed study 436LANGUAGE, VOLUME 56, NUMBER 2 (1980) of a construction type in Japanese which somewhat parallels Eng. each other in its distributional peculiarities. His proposal to account for it by means of a constraint on predicate raising, however, has lost its considerable appeal in the face of Sagawa's subsequent analysis (1978) in terms of Chomsky's (e.g. 1973) Specified Subject Condition (see also Suzuki 1977). Noriko A. McCawley's 'Another look at no, koto, and to: Epistemology and complementizer choice in Japanese' (178-212) is not radically different from Josephs 1976 as far as its findings are concerned; but it merits attention for its intriguing suggestion about the relationship between ' ego awareness' and complementizer choice. The last two papers, James D. McCawley's 'Notes on Japanese clothing verbs' (68-78) and John Hinds's 'Conversational structure: An investigation based on Japanese interview discourse' (79-121), deal with speech-act theory and conversational analysis. McCawley's paper, as an extension of J. McCawley 1978, provides a fascinating analysis of Japanese causatives; his central theme is that, among the expressive devices of a language, divisions of labor exist as a regulatory principle—governed by Gricean maxims— between 'simple lexical items' (e.g...

pdf

Share