Parametric Variation in the Semantics of Comparison: Japanese vs. English

Abstract

This paper proposes a semantic analysis of comparison constructions in Japanese which is crucially different from the standard semantics of comparatives as developed for English and related languages. The interpretation of the Japanese comparison construction is determined to a larger extent by pragmatic strategies, as opposed to compositional semantics. The syntactically provided item of comparison (the constituent accompanying yori) does not, in contrast to an English than-clause, have a degree semantics; it ultimately contributes an individual. From this item the real comparison has to be inferred. We argue that Japanese does not have English-style degree operators and probably lacks abstraction over degree variables in the syntax altogether. The proposed analysis accounts for a number of empirical differences between Japanese and English. A more general outcome is that the semantics of comparison is subject to crosslinguistic variation. A parameter of language variation is suggested as the source of the differences we observe.

Japanese comparatives are semantically conjuncts: a dynamic view

“…The reason why I do not use typical adjectives is that they are difficult, if not completely impossible, to use in the complement position of yori. Incidentally note that Beck, Oda and Sugisaki (2004) argue with examples like (i) that Japanese lacks comparative subdeletion, and claim that the language does not have binding of degree variables in the syntax.…”

Motivating Certain Variation Patterns in Degree Constructions: Semantics Meets Grammaticalization

“…Firstly, we investigate patterns of cross-linguistic variation in the area of degree constructions that have recently been brought to the attention of theoretical linguists (cf. Beck et al 2004). (For a typological investigation, see notably Stassen 1985.)…”

“…

ABSTRACTWe analyze patterns of variation in degree constructions as ultimately semantically motivated (Beck et al 2004); more precisely, as rooted at the (structured) level of logical form via a parameter based on binding. The paper pursues two related objectives.

…”

“…But certainly not all languages implement such constructions analogously. According to Beck et al (2004), the cause for variation may run deeper than superficial dissimilarities. A conceptually more profound reason is claimed to lie in a type of intrinsic variation within the compositional component, so that it becomes possible for some languages not to produce the desired logical forms at all.…”

“…John-Top which degree smart Q 'To which degree is John smart?' Beck et al (2004) propose to account for such variation through the degree-abstraction parameter, DAP, rendered in (5) While the parameter is motivated through its semantics, it is stated in configurational terms. The idea is that it applies at the level of LF, i.e.…”