Table Of ContentTENSE,ASPECT,ANDNARRATIVEORGANIZATION
INPOLISHANDJAPANESE
By
DAVIDRICHARDBOGDAN
ADISSERTATIONPRESENTEDTOTHEGRADUATESCHOOL
OFTHEUNIVERSITYOFFLORIDAINPARTIALFULFILLMENT
OFTHEREQUIREMENTSFORTHEDEGREEOF
DOCTOROFPHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITYOFFLORIDA
1998
Copyright1998
by
DavidRichardBogdan
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
IcouldnothaveattemptedthisstudynorwouldIevenbein
the field oflinguistics were it not for the chair ofmy committee, Dr.
WilliamJ. Sullivan. Hesparkedmyinterestinlinguisticover20years
ago when I was still an undergraduate majoring in physics. He has
guidedme throughmymaster’s andmydoctorateall along, goingwell
beyondwhatwould be expected oforhoped forfrom an advisor. The
original suggestion for a tripartite discourse structure reflected in
tense/aspect choices emerged from his work in teaching Russian
composition. Doingmydissertationfromhalfwayaroundtheworldhas
putextremepressureonhim,andIapologizeforthis,while, atthesame
time,thankinghimforallhishelp.
Ialsowanttoexpressmyappreciationtotheothermembers
ofmycommittee,ProfessorsJeanCasagrande,ChaunceyC.Chu,AnnK.
Wehmeyer, and Douglas D. Dankel, who have all provided valuable
insightandassistanceallthroughoutmyextendedgraduatecareer.
iii
I am deeply indebted to Dr. Danuta Romanowska at
Uniwersytetim. AdamaMickiewiczainPoznan, Poland. Correctingmy
error-riddene-mailversion, shecarriedoutthePolishsurveyforme in
herclasses, andsentallthematerialsbacktome. Asthe surveywas
essentialtothisstudy,Icannotsufficientlyexpressmygratitude.
My appreciation also goes to Dr. Alfred Majewicz (also at
UAM) for sending a copy of his book, to Dr. Shoichi Iwasaki for
responding to my e-mail questions pertaining to his dissertation and
book,toSawakoAgawaforpermittingmetouseaportionofheressayas
the surveymaterial forJapanese, and to Mr. Yoshihiro Sugita ofALC
PressforhelpingmecontactMs.Agawa.
IneedtothankmyfamilyintheUSforhavingsupportedmy
effortsforsomanyyearsandfortheirbeliefinme. Myfamilyhere in
Japan (including my in-laws) has also been very supportive. I must
apologizetoandthankmytwoyoungchildren,whohavenothadawhole
lot ofaccess to their father in recent months, and mywife, who has
helped me in my attempts to isolate myself in order to write this
dissertation. Shehasalsoprovidedmanyveiyhelpfulinsightsintothe
Japanesedata.
iv
TABLEOFCONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
iii
ABBREVIATIONS ix
ABSTRACT x
INTRODUCTION
1
11..21 PNarrerlaitmiivnearaynRdeNmaarrrkatsiveStructure 11
1.3 ContentoftheStudy 4
1.4 Notes 5
TENSEANDASPECTINPOLISH 6
2.1 Introduction 6
2.2 BasicConcepts 6
2.2.1 Tense 6
2.2.2 Aspect 8
2.2.3 Perfective/ImperfectiveDivision 9
2.2.4 Aktionsart 10
2.3 ThePolishTense-AspectSystem 11
2.4 AspectinPolish 12
2.5 DiscourseApproachestoAspect 16
2.5.1 DiscourseFunction 16
2.5.2 RhetoricalFunctions 17
2.5.3 ThreeNarrativeFunctions 18
2.5.4 ATestofAspectUseinRussian 21
2.6 Terminology 24
2.7 ThePolishAnalysis 25
2.8 Notes 26
TENSEANDASPECTINJAPANESE 28
3.1 Introduction 28
3.2 SogaonTenseandAspect 29
3.2.1 JapaneseTenseMorphology 29
3.2.2 Aspect 31
3.2.3 VerbClassificationinJapanese 32
3.2.4 SogaandNarrativeStructure 34
3.3 Szatrowski'sApproach 36
3.3.1 Introduction 36
3.3.2 Approach 37
3.3.3 FeaturesTested 37
3.3.4 Methodology 38
v
1
3.3.5 ResultsforIndividualFeatures 40
Pastness 41
NarrativeEvent 42
Continuity 44
SpeakerA'sExperience 45
Vividness 45
Generality 48
Characterization 48
Evaluation 49
Emotionality 49
Explanation 50
Description 50
3.3.6 SummaryofResults 51
3.4 Iwasaki'sApproach 54
3.4.1 Introduction 54
3.4.2 TypesofSubjectivity 55
3.4.3 Functionsofthe-taand-ruForms 57
Temporalandnon-temporaluseof-taand-ru 57
Temporalusewithinthenarrative 58
3.4.4 TheData 60
Texttypes 60
Clausesinvestigated 61
3.4.5 InformationAccessibility,TransitivityandSpeaker's
Perspective 63
3.4.6 Results 66
-ruinfirst-personclauses 66
-tainnon-first-personclauses 67
Hiddenexperiencer 68
Discovery 70
3.5 VividnessRevisited 72
3.6 Notes 73
ANALYSISOFTHECAMPINGSTORY 76
4. PreliminaryRemarks 76
4.1.1 FactorsInfluencingTense 77
4.1.2 FactorsInfluencingAspectChoice 81
4.2 TheData 82
4.2.1 SurveyMethodology 83
4.2.2 OrganizationofResults 86
4.2.3 ExplanationofAppendicesP-3,P-4,P-5,andP-6 88
4.2.4 TheNumbers 90
4.2.5 The90%/10%Cut-off ’ 92
4.3 OverallStatisticalResults 93
4.3.1 Speaker’sAspectChoice 93
4.3.2 Speaker'sTenseChoice 95
4.3.3 Respondents'AspectChoice 96
4.3.4 Respondents'TenseChoice 97
vi
4.4 DetailedAnalysis 99
4.4.1 Preliminaries 99
4.4.2 GeneralObservations 99
4.4.3 TenseSequencinginPolish 100
4.4.4 InteractionoftheInfluencesontheData 101
4.4.5 SubordinationandTenseSelection 103
4.4.6 NegationandAspectVariation 113
4.5 FunctionalApproach 116
4.5.1 PointofViewandSubstories 117
4.5.2 DiscourseFunctionsandNarrativeStructure 123
4.6 Notes 128
JAPANESEANALYSIS 130
5.1 Introduction 130
5.2 TheDataSurveyMethodology 130
5.3 Results 132
5.3.1 Appendices 132
5.3.2 OverallNumbers 133
5.3.3 IndividualChoices 135
5.3.4 T/AFormsandDiscourseFunction 135
5.3.5 Clause-by-ClauseAnalysis 139
(1)dekita'hadopenedup' 139
(2)ittemita'went' 140
(3)aru'weren't' 140
(4)sageta'lowered' 141
(5)tateteiru'gave' 142
(6)hohoenda'smiled' 143
(7)atta'looked' (8)ii'wasnice' (9)datta'was' 143
(10)aru'seemed' 145
(11)hiraku'opened' 145
(12)yattekita'came' 146
(13)aru'was'(14)hohoende-wa-iru'wassmiling' . . . 146
(15)satteitta'left' 147
(16)motteita'wascarrying' 147
(17)wakaranai'don'tknow' (18)rashii'lookslike' .. 148
(19)aru'was'(20)makushitateru'rattledoff 148
(21)totteita'weretaking' 149
5.4 Comments 149
5.5 Notes 150
CONCLUDINGREMARKS 152
6.1 DiscourseFunctionandNarrativeStructure 152
6.2 Context-sensitiveMarkedness 154
6.3 Substories,PointofView,andNarrativeStructure 156
6.4 BackgroundandSubordination 157
6.5 ConcernsabouttheDataandMethodology 159
6.6 FinalComments 160
vii
TRANSCRIPTOF CAMPINGSTORY 162
TRANSLATIONOFCAMPTEXT 166
COMBINEDRESULTS 170
RESULTSFORSPEAKER 176
T&AGroup 176
TGroup 179
AGroup 180
RESULTSFORRESPONDENTS(90%ANDOVER) 182
T&AGroup 182
TGroup 184
AGroup 185
SLOTSWITHHIGHVARIATION 186
T&AGroup 186
TGroup 187
AGroup 187
NARRATIVEFUNCTIONANDPOINTOFVIEW 188
BREAKDOWNOFDISCOURSEFUNCTION 195
Plot 195
Description 197
Flashback 200
Interaction 200
JAPANESETEXT 202
TRANSLATIONOFJAPANESETEXT 204
COMBINEDRESULTS 206
WRITERSCHOICES 207
RESPONDENTS' CHOICES 208
NARRATIVEFUNCTIONANDPOINTOFVIEW 209
BIBLIOGRAPHY 210
BIOGRAPHICALSKETCH 217
viii
ABBREVIATIONS
SP = speaker'sperspective(Iwasaki)
DF = discoursefunction(approach)
t/a = tense-aspect
P = perfective
i = imperfective
np = non-pastperfective
ni = non-pastimperfective
PP = pastperfective,
Pi = pastimperfective.
np-perf = non-pastperfective
np-imp = non-pastimperfective
p-perf = pastperfective,
p-imp = pastimperfective.
P? — past(aspectundetermined)
<mod> = modal
<fi> = future(disjoint)imperfective
<c> = command
<part> = participle
ix
AbstractofDissertationPresentedtotheGraduateSchool
oftheUniversityofFloridainPartialFulfillmentofthe
RequirementsfortheDegreeofDoctorofPhilosophy
TENSE,ASPECT,ANDNARRATIVEORGANIZATION
INPOLISHANDJAPANESE
By
DavidRichardBogdan
May, 1998
Chairperson:WilliamJ.SullivanIII
MajorDepartment:PrograminLinguistics
This studyisconcernedwiththe relationshipbetweennarrative
structure and the use of tense-aspect forms. Two quite different
languages,PolishandJapanese,areinvestigatedandcompared.
There is morphological/syntactic/semiological (distributional)
evidence for three types oftext function in narrative structure: plot,
description,andbackground.
Plot clauses advance the plot line of a narrative and are the
backbone of the story. Description clauses provide supplementary
materialaboutthesetting, describingthephysicallocus oftheaction,
the physical condition ofthe participants, their states ofmind, etc.
Clausesofthethirdtype, background, representeventsand situations
x
