Anda di halaman 1dari 21

Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Language Sciences
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/langsci

A contrastive study of Japanese and Korean negative sensitive


items: a grammaticalization approach
KangHun Park*
Department of Japanese Language & Culture, Jeonju University, 303 Cheonjam-ro Wansan-gu, Jeonju, 560-759 Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 3 December 2013
Received in revised form 21 June 2014
Accepted 30 June 2014
Available online 7 August 2014

Negative Sensitive Items (NSIs) in Japanese and Korean are words (or expressions) used
only in negative contexts. Negative Sensitivity in Japanese and Korean, as in many other
languages, is an intricate phenomenon which involves syntactic, semantic and even
pragmatic dimensions. Recently there has been a growing interest in the nature of sika-nai
(sika) only in Japanese and pakkey-anhta (pakkey) only in Korean whose meanings are
similar to each other. In relation to this point, this paper treats another similar NSI, hoka-nai
(hoka) only in Japanese, which the previous relevant studies have comparatively
neglected. What makes the NSIs in Japanese and Korean further intriguing as an object of
inquiry are (i) their synchrony and diachrony, in particular their grammaticalization processes into the NSIs and (ii) their typological and areal linguistic properties. This paper has
two goals. The rst is to examine how sika/hoka in Japanese and pakkey in Korean are
different. In addition, this paper explores how hoka is different from sika and pakkey. In fact,
most previous studies treat sika and pakkey as the same expressions. So are sika and hoka.
The second goal is to explain what makes the discrepancies between sika, hoka and pakkey.
In other words, this study claries what theoretical issues bring about these discrepancies.
In pursuit of those goals, this paper employs panchronic and cross-linguistic approaches. In
particular, this study focuses on the grammaticalization processes into NSIs/postpositional
particles of sika, hoka and pakkey. For this reason, this study is entirely different from the
past ones, in that it explains the linguistic differences between sika, hoka and pakkey by the
grammaticalization approach. Furthermore, this paper proposes innovative conclusions
related to the NSIs in Japanese and Korean, which the previous studies have never pointed
out. Additionally, this study holds that the framework of grammaticzalization can be
another good approach which carries out a cross-linguistic study for examining the nature
of the NSIs Japanese and Korean. Focusing on some theoretical issues such as dialect
contact, synonymic collision, unidirectionality, decategorization, metaphor, specialization,
degrammaticalization and frequency, this paper argues that the NSIs in Japanese and
Korean show differences in the patterns of grammaticalization processes into NSIs/postpositional particles.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Dialect contact
Synonymic collision
Degrammaticalization
Specialization
Postpositional particles

Abbreviations: ACC, accusative marker; ASP, aspect marker; CL, classier; COM, comitative; COMP, complementizer; DECL, declarative; DAT, dative; GEN,
genitive; Ins, instrument; LOC, locative; NEG, negative; NMLZ, nominalizer; NOM, nominative marker; PASS, passive; PAST, past tense; PL, plural; POSS,
possibility; PRES, present tense; Q, interrogative marker; QUO, quotative marker; SFP, Sentence Final Particle; SOU, source; TOP, topic marker.
* Tel.: 82 63 220 4661 (ofce), 82 10 3348 0318 (mobile); fax: 82 63 220 2050.
E-mail addresses: hun0531@naver.com, hun007@hotmail.com.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2014.06.020
0388-0001/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

153

1. Introduction
By using the grammaticalization approach, this paper explains the differences of the Negative Sensitive Items1 (NSIs,
hereafter) between sika only in Japanese and pakkey only in Korean, as seen in (1) and (2).
(1)

a.

b.

(2)

a.

b.

Taroo-wa ringo-sika
tabe-nak-atta.
-TOP apple-SIKA eat-NEG-PAST
Taro ate only an apple.
*Taroo-wa ringo-sika
tabe-ta.
-TOP apple-SIKA eat-PAST
Chelswu-nun sakwa-pakkey mek-ci
anh-ass-ta.
-TOP apple-PAKKEY eat-COMP NEG-PAST-DECL
Chelswu ate only an apple.
*Chelswu-nun sakwa-pakkey
mek-ess-ta.
-TOP apple-PAKKEY eat-PAST-DECL

These expressions, sika and pakkey, can appear only in negative contexts, and they form constructions with the meaning of
only with negations such as nai in Japanese or anh-ta in Korean.2
In the last decade, NSIs have been the focus of a number of studies (See Martin, 1975; Nam, 1994; Kim, 1997, 2001; Konomi,
2000; Nishioka, 2000; Sells, 2001; Hong, 2002; Kuno and Whitman, 2004; Kataoka, 2006, inter alia). Previous studies have
held that sika and pakkey share the syntactic and semantic similarities with each other (See Martin, 1975; Nam, 1994; Kim,
2001; Sells, 2001; Hong, 2002; Lee, 2002, inter alia). However, unlike past studies, this paper argues that the two expressions are not exactly the same and therefore, takes the new approaches in order to analyze them. The past studies have
focused on the two expressions only from a syntactic or semantic point of view; however, they should also be examined in a
diachronic perspective. This study is entirely different from the past ones, in that it takes the grammaticalization approach
and explains the differences between sika and pakkey.
The purpose of this paper is twofold: rst, it is to clarify the true nature of sika and pakkey. Specically, this paper addresses
the following three questions: (i) Are sika and pakkey really the same? (ii) If they are not, how different are they? (iii) What
makes the distinction between sika and pakkey? This paper examines these questions by virtue of a panchronic approach,
which is the synthesis of diachrony and synchrony, as well as cross-linguistic research. This paper also focuses on another NSI
hoka-nai in Japanese, which has been said to be similar to sika. In fact, hoka is a quite essential expression to make a contrastive
study of sika and pakkey; however, it has been neglected so far. The second main purpose of this paper is (i) to explore the
nature of interrelations between sika/hoka and pakkey (ii) to clarify their grammaticalization processes. This paper examines
how sika/hoka and pakkey, which are used as NSIs, have been grammaticalized and what grammaticalization principles and
mechanisms are involved in such processes. These ndings offer us some helpful hints to understand the nature of the
relationship between them.
The main points which will be argued in this paper are the following: rst, unlike the previous studies, the Japanese and
Korean NSIs sika and pakkey are not exactly the same. Neither are sika and hoka in Japanese. Second, this paper argues that the
contrasts of sika, hoka, and pakkey can be accounted by an analysis based on grammaticalization as follows: (i) pakkey and hoka
have quite similar grammaticalization processes into NSIs/ postpositional particles (StageI-III), (ii) however, there is a signicant difference between the two words (Stage IV); unlike pakkey, hoka has undergone a retrogression (degrammaticalization), and (iii) This can be explained by dialect contact; namely, hoka and sika had dialect contact unlike pakkey.
This paper is composed of 5 sections. Section 2 will present the previous studies on sika and pakkey. Section 3 raises some
problems in relation to the previous studies. Section 4 proposes some alternative analyses focusing on the grammaticalization
approach and claries (i) how much the grammaticalization processes between sika and pakkey differs (ii) as well as how sika
is related to hoka. Section 5 provides summary ndings.

1
In previous studies, the three different terminologies have been used as follows: (i) Negative Polarity Item (NPI), (ii) Negative Concord Item (NCI), and
(iii) Negative Sensitive Item. Following Sells (2001), Kataoka (2006), inter alia, this paper employs the term Negative Sensitive Item, because not all NSIs in
Japanese and Korean are classied as NPIs or NCIs. In other words, NSI is employed as a neutral terminology for negative expressions in Japanese and
Korean.
2
There also exist expressions that have a meaning of only in Japanese and Korean; -dake in Japanese and -man in Korean, as shown in (i).
(i)
a.
Taroo-wa
ringo-dake tabe-ta.
-TOP apple DAKE eat-PAST
Taro ate only an apple.
b.
Chelswu-nun sakwa-man mek-ess-ta.
-TOP apple MAN eat-PAST-DECL
Chelswu ate only an apple.
Kim (2001) and Hong (2002) argue that Japanese -dake and Korean -man correspond to each other. However, there is a general consensus that sika is
functionally different from dake in Japanese even though they have the same meaning. This is the same as pakkey and man in Korean (See Kuno, 1999 for
Japanese and Kuno and Kim, 1999; Sells, 2001 for Korean).

154

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

2. Previous analyses
Sika and pakkey have been treated as identical expressions in past studies, such as Martin (1975), Nam (1994), Kim (2001),
Sells (2001), Hong (2002), Lee (2002), inter alia. Their arguments are based on syntactic and semantic similarities between
these two expressions: rst, both sika and pakkey appear only in negative contexts, as shown in (1) and (2). Second, they can be
attached not only to the subject or object (argument, hereafter), but also to non-arguments, as illustrated in (3)(7).
(3)

a.

b.

(4)

a.

b.

(5)

a.

b.

(6)

a.

b.

(7)

a.

b.

yukkuri-sika aruke-nai.
slowly-SIKA walk can -NEG
I have no choice but to slowly walk.
chenchenhi-pakkey kelul swu eps-ta.
slowly-PAKKEY
walk POSS NEG-DECL
I have no choice but to slowly walk.
yamagoya-wa koko-kara-sika mie-nai.
cottage -TOP here-from-SIKA see-NEG
We can see the cottage only from here.
sancang-un yeki-eyse-pakkey
poi-ci
anhnun-ta.
cottage -TOP here-from-PAKKEY see-COMP NEG-PRES-DECL
We can see the cottage only from here.
30 nin-ga kuru-to omot-te ita-noni,
15 nin-sika ko-nak-atta.
CL-NOM come-QUO think-ASP-PAST-though CL-SIKA come-NEG-PAST
I expected 30 people to come, but only 15 people came.
30 myeng-i ol kela-ko sayngkakhayss-nuntey, 15 myeng pakkey o-ci
anh-ass-ta.
CL-NOM come-QUO think-PAST-though
CL-PAKKEY come-COMP NEG-PAST-DECL
I expected 30 people to come, but only 15 people came.
singaku-o
akirameru-sika nai.
going to school-ACC give up-SIKA
NEG
I have only one choice, which is giving up going to school.
cinhak-ul
pokihanun swu pakkey eps-ta.
going to school-ACC give up
POSS PAKKEY NEG-DECL
I have only one choice, which is giving up going to school.
tada jikan-o tubusi-te iru-to
sika omo-e-nai.
just time-ACC waste-ASP-QUO SIKA think-can-NEG
I think they are just wasting their time.
kuce sikan-ul ttaywu-ko iss-ta-ko
pakkey sayngkak-toy-ci
anh-nun-ta.
just time-ACC waste-ASP-DECL-QUO PAKKEY think-PASS-COMP NEG-PRES-DECL
I think they are just wasting their time.

In (3), sika and pakkey are followed by adverbs yukkuri/chenchenhi slowly, and they can be attached to the postpositions kara/
eyse from, as seen in (4).3 They can also co-occur with the classiers -nin/myeng -people, as shown in (5), verbs, as shown in
(6).4 In addition, the examples of (7) show us that they can be attached to quotative markers to/ko. Third, they can occur with
a referential NP with a Case-particle, as exemplied in (8) and (9). They also have a similar co-occurrence relation with a
referential NP as follows: The referential NP of sika/pakkey can be covert, as illustrated in (8) and (9). The referential NP can
appear before or after sika/pakkey, as shown in (8) and (9).
(8)

Taroo-ga
(kudamono-o) ringo-sika
-NOM fruits-ACC
apple-SIKA
Among fruits, Taro ate only apples.

tabe-nak-atta.
eat-NEG-PAST

Hong (2002, pp. 214216) holds that sika and pakkey have similarities in co-occurrence relations with particles as follows:
Co-occurrence relation with particles (: possible to be attached, : impossible to be attached)

sika
pakkey
4

a.

-ga/ka
(NOM)

-no/uy
(GEN)

-o/ul
(ACC)

-ni/eykey
(DAT)

-e/ey
(LOC)

-de/lo
(INS)

-to/wa
(COM)

-kara/eyse
(SOU)







()


However, pakkey needs a possibility operator swu (POSS) when it is attached to verbs, as seen in (6b), unlike sika.

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

(9)

b.

Chelswu-ka (kwail-ul) sakwa pakkey mek-ci


anh-ass-ta.
-NOM fruits-ACC apple-PAKKEY eat-COMP NEG-PAST-DECL
Among fruits, Chelswu ate only apples.

a.

Taroo-ga
ringo-sika (kudamono-o) tabe-nak-atta.
-NOM apple-SIKA fruits-ACC
eat-NEG-PAST
Among fruits, Taro ate only apples.
Chelswu-ka
sakwa pakkey (kwail-ul) mek-ci
anh-ass-ta.
-NOM apple-PAKKEY fruits-ACC eat-COMP NEG-PAST-DECL
Among fruits, Chelswu ate only apples.

b.

155

Next, sika and pakkey show the following semantic similarities: with reference to the meaning of (10), their meaning is
similar to that of only in that the sentences containing these items express both the prejacent and asserted propositions, as
illustrated in (11).
(10)

a.

b.

(11)

Taroo-sika ko-nak-atta.
-SIKA come-NEG-PAST
Only Taro came.
Taroo-pakkey o-ci
anh-ass-ta.
-PAKKEY come-COMP NEG-PAST-DECL
Only Taro came.

Only Taro came.


a.
Prejacent: Taro came.
b.
Assertion: No one other than Taro came.

(Hasegawa and Koenig, 2011)

These facts regarding the similarities of sika and pakkey indicated by previous studies can be summarized as follows:
(12)

[Similarities of sika and pakkey]


a.
Syntactic similarities:
i.
negative sensitivity
ii. distributional properties: co-occurrence relation with (non) arguments, etc.
iii. co-occurrence relation with a referential NP with Case-particles
b.
Semantic similarities:
being similar to only in that sentences containing these items express both the prejacent and asserted
propositions

Based on the facts observed above, most researchers have treated sika and pakkey as identical expressions. However, this
study proposes that these two expressions should not be treated as equal in certain aspects.
3. Problems
The previous studies argue that these two expressions are identical in terms of their syntactic and semantic similarities.
However, they appear quite differently in the following constructions: (i) multiple NSI constructions, (ii) rhetorical questions.
Consider the following examples.
(13)

a.

b.

(14)

a.

b.

*Taroo-sika dare-mo ko-nak-atta.


-SIKA anyone come-NEG-PAST
(Intended meaning) Except for Taro, no one came; Only Taro came.
Chelswu-pakkey amwu-to o-ci
anh-ass-ta.
-PAKKEY anyone come-COMP NEG-PAST-DECL
Except for Chelswu, no one came; Only Chelswu came.

(Kuno and Whitman, 2004)

*huku-sika
nani-mo nak-atta.5
clothes-SIKA anything NEG-PAST
There is nothing but clothes.
os-pakkey
amwukes-to eps-ess-ta.
clothes-PAKKEY anything
NEG-PAST-DECL
There is nothing but clothes.

5
In this study, the Japanese and Korean data of the modern period are based primarily on judgments I have received from twenty Korean and fty
Japanese native linguists.

156

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

(15)

a.

b.

*roujin-tati-sika
kessite koko-o
otozure-nai.
old person-PL-SIKA never here-ACC visit-NEG
Nobody except for the old visits here.
noin-tul-pakkey
kyelko ikos-ul chac-ci
anh-nun-ta.
old person-PL-PAKKEY never here-ACC visit-COMP NEG-PRES-DECL
Nobody except for the old visits here.
(Kim, 1998)

Examples of (13)(15) are, so-called the multiple NSI constructions in which multiple occurrences of NSIs express a single
negative proposition. In (13a)(15a), sika co-occurs with other NSIs dare-mo anyone/nani-mo anything/kessite never and
pakkey co-occurs with amwu-to anyone/amwukes-to anything/kyelko never in (13b)(15b). While sika cannot co-occur
with other NSIs, pakkey can. In fact, Kato (1985), Aoyagi and Ishii (1994), Konomi (2000), Nishioka (2000), inter alia
address that sika cannot co-occur with other NSIs because it must have a one-to-one relation with Neg. On the other hand, Shi
(1997), Kim (1998), Sells (2001), Kuno and Whitman (2004), inter alia, indicate that pakkey can co-occur with other NSIs.
Interestingly, sika can be accepted in multiple NSI constructions under some syntactic environments, unlike what the
previous analyses have held (See Park (forthcoming) for more details). That is, sika can co-occur with other NSIs when it is
accompanied by postpositions, such as -kara from, -de with, -made until, and -tameni for, whereas it cannot co-occur with
other NSIs when it is attached to an element marked either with the nominative case or with the accusative case.6 Consider
the following examples.
(16)

a.

b.

*Taroo-sika nani-mo tabe-nak-atta.


-SIKA anything eat-NEG-PAST
(Intended meaning) Only Taro ate nothing.
watashi-tachi-wa uta -de-sika
nani-mo kaes-e-nai.
we-PL-TOP
song-with-SIKA anything ay back-can-NEG
We cant pay [them] back with anything but a song.

(Aoyagi and Ishii, 1994)

We can see that there is some sort of asymmetry between (16a) and (16b) even though the same types of multiple NSIs are
used; namely, sika and nani-mo anything, co-occur. In (16a), sika is attached to the (covert) case marker,7 whereas the one in
(16b) is followed by a postposition de with (See Obata and Park, 2012; Park, forthcoming for further details). Here, the
following question can be raised: does pakkey hold the same asymmetry as sika? I argue that it does not. In other words,
pakkey is attached to postpositions, as given in (17a), and to subjects or objects, as seen in (17b), can both co-occur with other
NSIs.
(17)

a.

b.

wuli-tul-un nolay-lo-pakkey
amwukes-to kaphul swu
eps-ta.
we-PL-TOP song-with-PAKKEY anything
pay back POSS NEG-DECL
We cant pay [them] back with anything but a song.
Chelswu-pakkey
amwukes-to mek-ci
anh-ass-ta.
-PAKKEY anything
eat-COMP NEG-PAST-DECL
Only Chelswu ate nothing .

(Kuno and Whitman, 2004)

Here, I can make a clear distinction between sika in (16) and pakkey in (17), as summarized in (Table 1).
Table 1
a. Licensing environments of multiple NSI constructions involved with sika. b. Licensing environments of multiple NSI constructions involved with pakkey.
Multiple NSI constructions
a.
Case sika
Postposition sika

*
U

b.
Case pakkey
Postposition pakkey

U
U

6
More specically, sika can co-occur with other NSIs when it is attached to non-arguments, such as adverbs, quotative markers, and adverbial particles
including postpositions.
7
When sika (pakkey) is attached to an element marked either with the nominative case or with the accusative case, those case-markers are phonologically dropped, as seen in (i). When sika (pakkey) is attached to an element marked with postpositions, on the other hand, these markers have to be
maintained, as illustrated in (ii):
(i)
John-ga (i)
*John-ga-sika (pakkey)
UJohn-ga-sika (pakkey)
John-Nom
(ii)
John-kara (ulo pwute)
UJohn-kara-sika (pakkey)
*John-kara-sika (pakkey)
John-from
See Miyagawa (1989) and Watanabe (2009), concerning how case-markers and postpositions are distinguished.

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

157

Moreover, sika is not accepted in a rhetorical question, while pakkey is allowed (See Linebarger, 1987; Han and Siegel, 1996
for more discussion concerning NSI licensing in a rhetorical question). Consider the following examples.
(18)

a.

b.

(19)

a.

b.

*kore-o siensuru hito-wa


kare-sika dare-ga
iru-no-ka?
this-ACC support person-TOP he-SIKA who-NOM exist-NMLZ-Q
(Intended meaning) Except for him, who can support this?
ikes-ul ciwenhal salam-un
ku salam pakkey nwu-ka
tto
iss-keyss-nun-ka?
this-ACC support person-TOP the person-PAKKEY who-NOM again exist-MODAL-PRES-Q
(Intended meaning) Except for him, who can support this?
*Taroo-ga
dekiru sigoto-tte kore-sika nani-ga
aru-no-ka?
-NOM can do work-for this-SIKA what-NOM exist-NMLZ-Q
(Intended meaning) Except for this work, what work can Taro do?
Chelswu-ga hal swu issnun il-i lanun ges-i ikes pakkey
mwe-ka tto iss-keyss-nun-ka?
-NOM do POSS work-NOM thing-NOM this-PAKKEY what-NOM again exist-MODAL-PRES-Q
(Intended meaning) Except for this work, what work can Chelswu do?

To sum up, unlike the previous studies, this section has discussed that sika and pakkey are not exactly the same in terms of
multiple NSI constructions and rhetorical questions. This point makes this study distinguished from the previous ones. Now a
new question arises: how can we make an account for this discrepancy between sika and pakkey? This distinction will cast a
light on the question of the status of sika and pakkey. Section 4 answers this question, proposing that the possible answer to
this question can be found through (i) the grammaticalization approaches and (ii) the nature of the relationship between sika
and hoka.
4. Alternative analyses
This section answers the question as to what factors bring about the discrepancy between sika and pakkey. In the process of
answering this question, this paper suggests that the different grammaticalization related to sika and pakkey account for such
a discrepancy. Before setting up this discussion, we need to see what Japanese expression corresponds to the Korean pakkey in
multiple NSI constructions and rhetorical questions. Here, we focus on Japanese hoka and from this, we provide some
interesting data and facts on the relationship between sika/hoka in Japanese and pakkey in Korean. For this reason, it is
indispensable to examining hoka in details. Section 4.1 treats this issue. Furthermore, Section 4.2 addresses the similarities
and differences of grammaticalization between sika/hoka and pakkey.
4.1. Hoka-nai
In Japanese, there is an expression which is syntactically and semantically similar to sika: hoka. Consider the following
examples.
(20)

a.

a0 .

b.

b0 .

Taroo-sika ko-nak-atta.
-SIKA come-NEG-PAST
Only Taro came.
Taroo-no-hoka
(dare-mo) ko-nak-atta
*(ki-ta).
-GEN-HOKA anyone come-NEG-PAST come-PAST
Only Taro came.
singaku-o
akirameru-sika nak-atta.
going to school-ACC give up-SIKA
NEG-PAST
I have only one choice, which is giving up going to school.
singaku-o
akirameru-hoka nak-atta
*(at-ta).
going to school-ACC give up-HOKA NEG-PAST be-PAST
I have only one choice, which is giving up going to school.

((10a))

((6a))

Like sika, hoka forms a construction with the meaning of only with negation, as shown in (20). It also needs to appear only in
negative contexts, as illustrated in (20a0 .b0 ).8 Moreover, like sika, as shown in (21b) and (22b), a referential NP of hoka can be
covert; thus, the referential NP is allowed to appear before or after hoka, as illustrated in (21a) and (22a).

According to Eguchi (2000), hoka only appears in a positive context when it occurs with a universal quantier zenin everyone as follows:
(EX)
Taroo-no
-hoka
zenin
ki-ta.
-GEN-HOKA everyone come-PAST
Everyone came except Taro.
However, it must only appear in a negative context, as seen in (20a0 , b0 ). Hoka, in modern Japanese, is better to be treated as a kind of a quasi-NSI. This paper
presents the reason in Section 4.2.3-4.2.4. Furthermore, Eguchi (2000) holds that hoka in contemporary Japanese has two usages: exception and cumulation.
The former behaves as an NSI, whereas the latter does not. Therefore, this study focuses on the former case.

158

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

(21)

a.

b.

(22)

a.

b.

Taroo-ga
(kudamono-o) ringo-no-hoka
tabe-nak-atta.
-NOM fruits-ACC
apple-GEN-HOKA eat-NEG-PAST
Among fruits, Taro ate only apple.
Taroo-ga
(kudamono-o) ringo-sika
tabe-nak-atta.
-NOM fruits-ACC
apple-SIKA eat-NEG-PAST
Among fruits, Taro ate only apples.

((8a))

Taroo-ga
ringo-no-hoka
(kudamono-o) tabe-nak-atta.
-NOM apple-GEN-HOKA fruits-ACC
eat-NEG-PAST
Among fruits, Taro ate only apples.
Taroo-ga
ringo-sika (kudamono-o) tabe-nak-atta.
-NOM apple-SIKA fruits-ACC
eat-NEG-PAST
Among fruits, Taro ate only apples.

((9a))

In fact, based on these similarities, many researchers have treated them as one group and refer to them as sonota hite
negating other than that expressions (See Yamaguchi, 1991; Eguchi, 2000; Miyachi, 2007, inter alia). The previous studies have
mainly focused on the similarities between them. However, these expressions show the following differences: rst, unlike sika,
hoka is allowed to appear in multiple NSI constructions when it is attached to the subject or object, given in (23)(25).
(23)

a.

b.

(24)

a.

b.

(25)

a.

b.

Taroo-no-hoka
dare-mo ko-nak-atta.
-GEN-HOKA anyone come-NEG-PAST
Except for Taro, no one came; Only Taro came.
*Taroo-sika dare-mo ko-nak-atta.
-SIKA anyone come-NEG-PAST
(Intended meaning) Except for Taro, no one came; Only Taro came.

((13a))

huku-no-hoka nani-mo nak-atta.


clothes-HOKA anything NEG-PAST
There is nothing but clothes.
*huku-sika nani-mo nak-atta.
clothes-SIKA anything NEG-PAST
There is nothing but clothes.

((14a))

Taroo-no-hoka (dare-mo) nani-mo


tabe-nak-atta.
-GEN-HOKA anyone anything eat-NEG-PAST
Only Taro ate everything.
*Taroo-sika nani-mo tabe-nak-atta.
-SIKA anything eat-NEG-PAST
(Intended meaning) Only Taro ate everything.

((16a))

Second, hoka can appear in rhetorical questions, unlike sika, as illustrated in (26) and (27).
(26)

a.

b.

(27)

a.

b.

kore-o
siensuru hito-wa
kare-no-hoka dare-ga
iru-no-ka?
this-ACC support person-TOP he-GEN-HOKA who-NOM exist-NMLZ-Q
Except for him, who can support this?
*kore-o siensuru hito-wa
kare-sika dare-ga
iru-no-ka?
this-ACC support person-TOP he-SIKA who-NOM exist-NMLZ-Q
Except for him, who can support this?

((18a))

Taroo-ga
dekiru sigoto-tte kono-hoka nani-ga
aru-no-ka?
-NOM can do work-for this-HOKA what-NOM exist-NMLZ-Q
Except for this work, what work can Taro do?
*Taroo-ga dekiru sigoto-tte kore-sika nani-ga
aru-no-ka?
-NOM can do work-for this-SIKA what-NOM exist-NMLZ-Q
Except for this work, what work can Taro do?

((19a))

Third, in contrast to sika, hoka can be attached to only nouns or verbs, as shown in (20a0 ) and (20b0 ).9 In other words, it is
not allowed to be accompanied by adverbs, postpositional particles, classiers, and quotative markers. Consider the following
examples.

9
Furthermore, hoka needs a genitive marker no when it is attached to nouns, as shown in (23a)(25a), unlike sika. This issue is discussed in Section 4.2 in
detail.

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

(28)

a.

b.

(29)

a.

b.

(30)

a.

b.

(31)

a.

b.

159

*yukkuri-hoka aruke-nai.
slowly-HOKA walk can-NEG
I have no choice but to slowly walk.
yukkuri-sika
aruke-nai.
slowly-SIKA walk canNEG
I have no choice but to slowly walk.

((3a))

*yamagoya-wa koko-kara-hoka mie-nak-atta.


cottage -TOP here-from-HOKA see-NEG-PAST
We can see the cottage only from here.
yamagoya-wa koko-kara-sika
mie-nak-atta.
cottage -TOP here-from-SIKA see-NEG-PAST
We can see the cottage only from here.

((4a))

*30 nin-ga kuru-to


omot-te ita-noni
15 nin-hoka ko-nak-atta.
CL-NOM come-QUO think-ASP PAST-though
CL-HOKA come-NEG-PAST
I expected 30 people to come, but only 15 people came.
30 nin-ga
kuru-to
omot-te ita-noni
15 nin-sika ko-nak-atta.
CL-NOM come-QUO think-ASP PAST-though
CL-SIKA come-NEG-PAST
I expected 30 people to come, but only 15 people came.

((5a))

*tada jikan-o tubusi-te iru-to hoka omo-e-nai.


just time-ACC waste-ASP-QUO HOKA think-can-NEG
I think they are just wasting their time .
tada jikan-o
tubusi-te iru-to sika omo-e-nai.
just time-ACC waste-ASP-QUO SIKA think-can-NEG
I think they are just wasting their time.

((7a))

The examples (28)(31) show that hoka cannot be attached to an adverb, a postpositional particle, a classier, and a quotative
marker, whereas sika is allowed, as already mentioned.10 Based on the previous discussion, sika and hoka are quite similar
prima facie, but there are some differences between them.
Here, we can see that pakkey corresponds to not only sika but also hoka. To be more precise, hoka corresponds to pakkey
when they appear in multiple NSI constructions or rhetorical questions, and sika corresponds to pakkey when they are
attached to adverbs, postpositions, classiers, and quotative markers. This can be summarized as follows.
Table 2
Distributional properties of sika/hokaa/pakkey.

a. ability to appear in the negative context only


b-1. ability to appear in multiple NSI constructions when
they are attached to the subject or object
b-2. ability to appear in multiple NSI constructions when
they are attached to postpositions (non-arguments)
c. ability to appear in rhetorical questions
d-1. ability to be attached to nouns or verbs
d-2. ability to be attached to postpositions, adverbs, etc
a
b
c

sika

hoka

pakkey

U
*

?b
U

U
U

*
U
U

U
?c
*

U
U
U

The differences between sika and hoka, as shown in (Table 2a, b-1), are originally discussed in Eguchi (2000) and Kataoka and Miyachi (2011).
Hoka in contemporary Japanese behaves like a quasi-NSI.
Hoka needs a genitive marker when it is accompanied by a noun. In contrast, sika and pakkey do not need it.

We can see two signicant points through (Table 2): rstly, pakkey is the only expression satisfying all of the criteria and
secondly, sika and hoka are in the relation of complementary distribution. These facts cast this question: why has Japanese
developed two different forms, sika and hoka, while Korean only has a single form, pakkey? The answer to this question can be
found in the grammaticalization of these expressions. This point is discussed in the following section.
4.2. Grammaticalization approaches
This paper argues that the contrasts of sika, hoka, and pakkey can be accounted by an analysis based on grammaticalization.
Here, it is necessary to remind the second main claim of this paper:

10
Only in contemporary Japanese, this restriction appears. Interestingly, hoka could be followed by adverbs, postpositions, classiers, and quotative
markers in Old Japanese. This shows that during that time, hoka was grammaticalized as a postpositional particle. This is further explored in Section 4.2.

160

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

[Main Claims of this section]


(i) pakkey and hoka have quite similar grammaticalization processes into NSIs/ postpositional particles (StageI-III):

 categorical change:
 semantic change:

StageI
nouns
physical space

>
>

Stage II
adverbs
non-physical space

>
>

Stage III
postpositional particles (NSI)
exception/delimitation

(ii) However, there is a signicant difference between the two words (Stage IV); unlike pakkey, hoka has undergone a
retrogression (degrammaticalization):

 categorical change:
 semantic change:

Stage IV
nouns (quasi-NSIs)
exception

(iii) This can be explained by dialect contact. Hoka, which was Kamigata-go Kansai dialect used in Edo-period (western
dialect of Kyoto, Japanese old capital), collided with a similar NSI sika, which was Edo-go Edo dialect (eastern dialect of
 period (mid-18th century early 20th
Tokyo, the capital of the Tokugawa shogunate) between the Late Edo and Taisyo
 wa period (1930s)
century). Eventually, hoka has gradually lost its ground as sika became more inuential since the Syo
and has undergone retrogression to nouns (quasi-NSIs). Moreover, they show complementary distribution in modern
Japanese, as seen in (Table 2).
(iv) On the other hand, pakkey has never experienced any dialect contact with any elements; therefore; pakkey has had its
usages in its single form, as shown in (Table 2).
Section 4.2.1 treats similarities of grammaticalization between hoka and pakkey. Section 4.2.2 describes the differences of
grammaticalization between them. Section 4.2.3 claries reasons for the discrepancies and also examines grammaticalization
processes of sika. Section 4.2.4 presents the summary of this section and resolves our main question. The examples of this
section are mainly on the basis of diachronic corpus data. For Old Japanese data, this paper has collected data from forty-eight
literatures, which originated from (i) corpus of Shin Nihon Koten Bungaku Taik
e a collection of classical Japanese literature, (ii)
corpus of Aozorabunko, and (iii) six dictionaries. I have collected Old Korean data from forty-one books, which originated from
(iv) Korean National Corpus in the 21st Century Sejong Project and (v) ve dictionaries.
4.2.1. Similarities on hoka and pakkey
This paper particularly focuses on hoka and pakkey because they have similarities in many aspects, such as morphological
properties and grammaticalization processes.
4.2.1.1. Morphological properties. Hoka and pakkey have morphological similarities, shown in (32).
(32)

a.
b.

hoka (noun; the outside) + ni (locative marker; at) hoka (ni)


pakk (noun; the outside) + ey (locative marker; at) pakkey

This morphological similarity is based on the etymological roots of hoka and pakkey. This point is treated in the next section.
Furthermore, they can be attached to the topic marker -wa in Japanese or un/nun in Korean, as portrayed in (33).
(33)

a.

b.

yume-nohoka (ni) -wa nani-mo mot-te


i-nai sy
ozyo.
dreams-GEN-HOKA (LOC)-TOP anything have-ASP-NEG girl
A girl who has only dreams.
kkwum-pakkey-nun amwukes-to gaci-go iss-ci
anhun sonye.
dreams-PAKKEY-TOP anything
have-ASP-COMP NEG girl
A girl who has only dreams.

However, sika cannot be attached to wa, illustrated in (34).


(34)

*yume-sika-wa
mot-te
i-nai sy
ozyo.
dreams-SIKA-TOP have-ASP-NEG girl
(Intended meaning) A girl who has only dreams.

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

161

4.2.1.2. Grammaticalization processes. This section shows that hoka and pakkey are quite similar in terms of grammaticalization
processes. According to Yamaguchi (1991), Miyachi (2007), inter alia, hoka did not have any usages of occurrence with
negation at the outset. In fact, it was rst used as a noun with a meaning of the outside or the different location, as shown in
(35).
(35)

a.

b.

wagaseko-ni
koisubenagari asikaki
-no-hoka
-ni
nagek
o aresikanasimo.
my honey-DAT miss so much fence of reed-GEN-HOKA-LOC grieve so much
I feel sorry for myself who is grieving at the different location as if we were separated by a
shu
 (17:3975), 9C)
fence of reed because I miss you so much.
(Manyo
sime-no-hoka-ni-wa
motenasi-tamawa-de.
straw rope-GEN-HOKA-LOC-TOP treat-please-NEG
Please do not treat them out of this line.
(Genjimonogatari, 11C)

In (35), hoka refers to a physical space; namely, the different location, as in (35a) and the outside, as in (35b). It is possible to
predict where the meaning came from. It resulted from its morphological property, as discussed in (32a). Interestingly, this
point falls on pakkey. According to Heo (2002) among others, pakkey did not have any usages of occurrence with negation at
the outset. In fact, it was rst used as a noun with a meaning of the outside, as shown in (36). In other words, pakkey in (36)
refers to a physical space.
(36)

a.

b.

seng pas11-kuy
pul-i
pichwiye sipphalca i kwuhasilyeni.
castle PAKKEY light-NOM shine
Mr. Lee
rescue
Mr.Lee will rescue us when a light shines out of the castle.
ta sengpokhako mwun pas-kuy nilale tongmyenhaya syetoy.
all dressed up door PAKKEY go facing east
stand up
All have to be dressed up and stand toward the east side.

(Yongpiechenka (69, 15C))

(Kalyey(3:8a), 18C)

At the second stage, hoka and pakkey were used as an adverb with a meaning of unexpectedly, as illustrated in (37) and
(38).12
(37)

[hoka]
a.
mugura-no kado-ni omohi -no-hoka-ni raukagenaramu hito-no tojiraretaramukoso.
ivy-GEN house-LOC expectation-GEN-HOKA-LOC pretty person-GEN stay indoors
A thing which a pretty woman is staying indoors out of expectation in the thatched
house.
(Genjimonogatari, 11C)
b.
ima-wa tada kokoro-no-hoka-ni kiku mono-o sirazugahonaru ogin
owakaze.
now-TOP just heart-GEN-HOKA-LOC hear thing-ACC know not face reed and wind
 14:1309, 13C )
In spite of myself, I miss you when I hear the sound of reed through the wind. (Sinkokinshu

(38)

[pakkey]
a.
saykak paskuy swu-ioni
tayswu-to
iltyeng
kispi
nekisiolsoy.
thought PAKKEY method-because captain-also denitely pleasantly consider
The captain will be pleasant because it is an unexpected method.
(Chephhaysine 5:10b, 17C)
b.
onal -un saykak paskuy swulswuli macha
taykyengiaptosoy.
today-TOP thought PAKKEY smoothly complete very lucky
It is very lucky to complete unexpectedly without any trouble .
(Chephhaysine 4:5a, 17C)

At this stage, the two words were attached to abstract nouns, such as thought or expectation, and also had meanings of
exception. Specically, they refer to a non-physical or abstract space.
At the next stage, hoka and pakkey had a usage of occurring with the negative. In fact, hoka rst had a usage of occurring
 period (16th18th century). Consider the following examples.
with the negative during the Kinse
(39)

11
12

a.

omae-no na-hoka demase-nu.


you-GEN name-HOKA appear-NEG
igo
sin, 1722)
Only your name appeared. (Sinjuyo

According to Heo (2002), the form of pakk was transformated as follows: pas > pask > pakk.
Bak (1997) shows how pakkey has been grammaticalized from physical space to non-physical space from a semantico-pragmatic perspective.

162

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

b.

tubu hodo-hoka
gozanse-nu.
grain about-HOKA exist-NEG
There is only a little left.

giguruma, 1722)
(Hotokegozeno

In (39), we can see that hoka has a meaning only with negation. It is clear that hoka behaves not only as an NSI but also as a
delimiter. Here, it is necessary to pay attention to the distributional properties of hoka at this stage. Unlike hoka in (35) and
(37), that in (39a) is not accompanied by a genitive marker no anymore, although it is attached to a noun. Moreover, hoka can
be attached to an adverbial particle hodo about in (39b). These data show that hoka was grammaticalized as a postpositional
particle in this period. Interestingly, hoka at this stage was also used in multiple NSI constructions, as seen in (40a), and in a
rhetorical question, as shown in (40b).
(40)

a.

b.

tomodati-ga hitori
-hoka-ni-wa
dare-mo i-masen.
friend-NOM one person-CL-HOKA-LOC-TOP anyone exist-NEG
I have only one friend, that is, him.
(Marumarutinbun 525, 1886)
in
-yori hoka-wa, dareka kimiyori sakini akazuki-o torase tamaubeki.
emperor -YORI HOKA-TOP who you
before glass-ACC carry
si, 17C)
Who can rst carry the glass except the emperor?
(Otogizo

Pakkey also experienced similar processes like hoka did. It rst had a usage of occurring with negation in the early 20th
century. Consider the following examples.
(41)

a.

b.

kuney-tul-uy uycihal kos-un


ocik kwun-uy phwum-paskey eps-ta.
they-PL-GEN depend place-TOP just you-GEN arm PAKKEY NEG-DECL
There is only you that they can rely on. (Thalchwulki, 1925)
kisil kinayceng-ul kemsahaye po-myen ku-nun chwulcik-ul tanghan kes-paskey eps-ta.
actually reasons-ACC investigate if he-TOP nish working-ACC forced NMLZ-PAKKEY NEG-DECL
In fact, he was just forced to nish work as a result of the investigation.
(Toklipsipmwun, 1920)

In (41), pakkey has a meaning only with negation. Moreover, pakkey at this stage were used in multiple NSI constructions, as
in (42a), and in a rhetorical question, as in (42b).
(42)

a.

b.

kukes-i
ku-uy swuuy-ka toyl cwul-un casin-paskey-nun
amo-to molnases-es-ta.
it-NOM he-GEN shroud-NOM become NMLZ-TOP oneself-PAKKEY-TOP anyone NEG know-PASS-DECL
Nobody knew but him that it would bring about his death.
(Tongailbo, 1923)
i-eyse
tehan pwulhayngiya inlyu-ey
wuli-paskey te
is-keyss-na?
this more than unhappiness human beings-LOC we-PAKKEY more exist-MODAL-Q
Is there anyone who is unhappier than us in this world?
(Elin huysayng, 1910)

At the fourth stage, hoka could be attached to various postpositional particles, as shown in (43), and was followed by
 period (19th early 20th century), as seen in (44).
classiers or adverbs during the Meiji Taisyo
(43)

a.

b.

c.

(44)

a.

b.

Ky
oto-made-hoka ika-nai.
Kyoto-until-HOKA go-NEG
They go only up to Kyoto.
denwa-de-hoka hanasa-nak-atta.
phone-on-HOKA speak-NEG-PAST
I spoke only on the phone.
minami-e hoka muka-nu.
south-LOC HOKA direct-NEG
We direct only to the south.

(Yamada, 1922)

5 nin -hoka ki-nu.


CL HOKA come-NEG
Only ve people came.
wazuka-hoka nokot-te i-nai.
a little HOKA left-ASP-NEG
There is only a little left.

(Yamada, 1922)

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

163

Judging from the fact that hoka could be freely attached to various postpositional particles, classiers, and adverbs, as shown
in (43) and (44), hoka was more grammaticalized as a postpositional particle at this stage than that from the rst to the third
stage. Furthermore, it is clear that hoka was more grammaticalized as an NSI during this period as well.
Similarly, pakkey was attached to various postpositional particles in the 1920s, as seen in (45).
(45)

a.

b.

anhay-ga ssunun ton-un gu nay-gey-nun taman silepnun salam tul-lo-pakkey poi-ci-anhnun.


wife-NOM spend money-TOP me for-TOP just silly person-PL-as PAKKEY see-COMP NEG
It seems just silly to me that my wife spends her money.
(Nalkay, 1925)
ce ilsin-uy ancen-ul tomohanunte-kkaci pakkey-nun kungli-ka ttulhli-ci mos han kes-un.
that own-GEN safety-ACC consult-until-PAKKEY-TOP plan-NOM approach-COMP can-NEG do NMLZ-TOP
The reason why he tries to consult only his own convenience.
(Mincokuy coyin, 1948)

From this point of view, it is possible to reach the conclusion that pakkey was grammaticalized as a postpositional particle at
this period. Furthermore, it is clear that pakkey was completely grammaticalized as an NSI as well.
Based on the facts presented thus far, the grammaticalization processes of hoka and pakkey can be summarized as follows:
(46)

a.

b.

[hoka]
StageI
Noun
hoka
[pakkey]
StageI
Noun
pas

StageII
> Adverb
> hoka (ni)

StageIII-a
> 1st stage of postposition13 (NSI)
> hoka (ni)

StageIII-b
> 2nd stage of postposition (NSI)
> hoka

StageII
> Adverb
> paskuy

StageIII-a
> 1st stage of postposition (NSI)
> paskey

StageIII-b
> 2nd stage of postposition (NSI)
> pakkey

(47)
a.
b.

Semantic change:
Categorical change:

StageI
physical space
noun

StageII
> non-physical space
> adverb

StageIII
> exception/delimitation
> postpositional particle/NSI

The semantic change in (47a) can be accounted by the hypothesis of unidirectionality in terms of grammaticalization. Heine
et al. (1991a) and Bybee et al. (1994) hold that abstraction or abstractness increases the progress of grammaticalization from a
concrete domain to an abstract domain. This can explain the processes of StageI > StageII, as shown in (47a). Moreover, Claudi
and Heine (1986), Sweetser (1982, 1987), and Fleischman (1989) postulate the process which is involved in grammaticalization is metaphorically structured. Prepositions or postpositions are often grammaticalized from the terms that originally
denote spatial concepts, as has been widely attested in numerous studies across languages (Rhee, 2004, p. 171). It is also
universal that spatial terms are recruited to express temporal concepts in terms of metaphors, such as the notion of
PERSON > OBJECT > PROCESS > SPACE > TIME > QUALITY (Heine et al., 1991b). The changes of domain tend to proceed from
the left to the right, resulting in increasing abstraction; namely, a unidirectional semantic change. This can account for the
processes of StageII > StageIII. In fact, the grammaticalization processes of hoka/pakkey can be explained by this. Consider the
following example.
(48)

We are behind in paying our bill.

(Traugott, 2003)

In (48), behind originally has a spatial concept, but it is metaphorically derived from the spatial term (SPACE > TIME). According to Lakoff and Johnson (1980), a metaphor implies a conceptual transfer from a source to a target domain (domain
transfer). Moreover, they address that metaphorical transfer transports not only a form, but also the inferences linked to the
properties of the form. Interestingly, there exists a semantically similar expression of hoka/pakkey in English, but, as seen in
(49).
(49)

a.
b.
c.

Nobody but John came.


John-no-hoka
dare-mo ko-nak-atta.
-GEN-HOKA anyone come-NEG-PAST
John-pakkey amwu-to o
-ci
anh-ass-ta.
-PAKKEY anyone come-COMP NEG-PAST-DECL

Hoeksema (1996) shows that the English exceptive expression but did not have usage of exception at the outset in Old
 tan (by out), and it
English (See von Fintel, 1993 concerning the but in contemporary English). The etymology of but is bu
was used only as an adverb, outside of at the outset.14 This is quite similar to the grammatical processes of hoka/pakkey, as

13
1st stage of postposition refers to the case that hoka and pakkey are attached to nouns or verbs, and 2nd stage of postposition indicates the case that
they are accompanied by various primary postpositions, such as -de/lo with, -made/kkaci until, etc.
14
In fact, but is currently used as a preposition with a meaning of outside of in Scotland: (EX) Away but the hoose and tell me whaes there.

164

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

seen in (47). Signicantly, data from other languages indicate the same phenomena. For example, exceptive expressions auber
in German or buiten in Dutch also have similar grammatical processes as to that in Japanese, Korean and English.
Furthermore, the categorical change of (47b) can also be explained by decategorization. Hopper (1991, p. 22) denes the
decategorization as follows:
.forms undergoing grammaticization tend to lose or neutralize the morphological markers and syntactic privileges
characteristic of the full categories Noun and Verb, and to assume attributes characteristic of secondary categories such
as Adjective, Participle, Preposition, etc..
Specically, Hopper and Traugott (2003) argue that there cross-linguistically exists a cline of categoriality as follows: major
categories (nouns/verbs) > intermediate degree (adj/adv) > minor category (prep, conj, aux, pro, demonstrative, closed
categories). Given the hypothesis of unidirectionality, it can be hypothesized that diachronically, all minor categories have
their origins in the major categories.
4.2.2. Differences on hoka and pakkey
In this section, interesting phenomena (i.e. differences on grammaticalization processes of hoka and pakkey) is introduced.
One of the biggest contrasts between them is that hoka has undergone retrogression unlike pakkey, which I call StageIV. First,
the usage of hoka as a postpositional particle disappeared in 1930s. Recall that hoka in contemporary Japanese cannot be
attached to postpositions, adverbs, quotative markers, or classiers. Furthermore, hoka is attached only to nouns or verbs
given in examples (28a)(31a), which are repeated below:
(50)

a.

b.

c.

d.

e.

*yamagoya-wa koko-kara-hoka mie-nak-atta.


cottage
-TOP here-from-HOKA see-NEG-PAST
We can see the cottage only from here.
*yukkuri-hoka
aruke-nai.
slowly-HOKA walk can -NEG
I can walk only slowly.
*tada jikan-o tubusi-te iru-to
hoka omo-e-nai.
just time-ACC waste-ASP-QUO HOKA think-can-NEG
I think they are just wasting their time.
*30 nin-ga kuru-to
omot-te ita-noni
15 nin-hoka ko-nak-atta.
CL-NOM come-QUO think-ASP PAST-though CL-HOKA come-NEG-PAST
I expected that 30 people would come, but only 15 people came.
Taroo-no-hoka
(dare-mo) ko-nak-atta
*(ki-ta).
-GEN-HOKA anyone
come-NEG-PAST come-PAST
Only Taro came.

((29a))

((28a))

((31a))

((30a))
((20a0 ))

Additionally, hoka must be placed behind a genitive marker no when it is attached to nouns, as seen in (20a0 ), repeated as
(50e). Based on the corpus data examined by this paper, hoka has again required the attachment of no to nouns since the
 wa period (1927 -), as seen in (51).
Syo
(51)

a.

b.

k
oi-to k
eai-no-hoka
nani mono-mo mot-te i-nai.
favor-and respect-GEN-HOKA anything
have-ASP-NEG
A person who has only favor and respect.
nihongo-no-hoka
sira-nai Sugita nit
osuih
e-wa.
Japanese-GEN-HOKA know-NEG
seaman recruit-TOP
The seaman recruit, Sugita who knows only Japanese.

 4, 1927)
(Terada Torahiko zenshu

jima, 1938)
(Ukabu hiko

This phenomenon needs attention. According to the discussion in Section 4.2.1, hoka either needed or didnt need the genitive
marker depending on the period as follows:
(52)

9th C end of 16th C


Stage I$II
noun + no + hoka

>

early 17th C 1920s


Stage III
noun + hoka

>

1930s (1927) Present Day


Stage IV
noun + no + hoka

This shows us that hoka has been grammaticalized as a noun > a postpositional particle > a noun.
In contrast, pakkey has never undergone retrogression. In fact, as already seen in (3b)(5b) and (7b), which are repeated as
(53), it can be attached to postpositions, adverbs, quotative markers, or classiers in contemporary Korean:
(53)

a.

b.

chenchenhi-pakkey kelul swu eps-ta.


slowly-PAKKEY walk POSS NEG-DECL
I have no choice but to slowly walk.
sancang-un yeki-eyse-pakkey
poi-ci
anh-nun-ta.
cottage -TOP here-from-PAKKEY see-COMP NEG-PRES-DECL
We can see the cottage only from here.

((3b))

((4b))

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

c.

d.

165

kuce sikan-ul ttaywu-ko iss-ta-ko pakkey sayngkaktoy-ci anh-nun-ta.


just time-ACC waste-ASP-DECL-QUO PAKKEY think-COMP NEG-PREG-DECL
I think they are just wasting their time.
30 myeng-i ol kela-ko saykakhayss-nuntey, 15 myeng pakkey o-ci
anh-ass-ta.
CL-NOM come-QUO think-PAST-though
CL-PAKKEY come-COMP NEG-PAST-DECL
I expected 30 people to come, but only 15 people came.

((7b))

((5b))

Second, few usages of hoka as an NSI have left their traces in modern Japanese. Specically, when hoka is attached to a
subject or an object, it is more natural for it to have another NSI, indeterminate-mos, such as dare-mo or nani-mo in the
rightward, as seen in (54a) and (55a). However, it is quite awkward when hoka does not come with the indeterminate-mos, as
shown in (54b) and (55b).
(54)

a.

b.

(55)

a.

b.

watasi-no-hoka dare-mo sira-nai.


I-GEN-HOKA anyone know-NEG
Nobody but I know it.
??watasi-no-hoka sira-nai.
I-GEN-HOKA
know-NEG
Nobody but I know it.

(Modern Japanese)

mizu-no-hoka
nani-mo noma-nai.
water-GEN-HOKA anything drink-NEG
I drink nothing but water.
??mizu-no-hoka
noma-nai.
water-GEN-HOKA drink-NEG
I drink nothing but water.

(Modern Japanese)

 period, as shown in (56).


This stands in sharp contrast with hoka in the Taisyo
(56)

a.

b.

watasi-hoka sira-nu.
I
-HOKA know-NEG
Only I know it.
mizu-hoka
noma-nu.
water-HOKA drink-NEG
I drink only water.

 period)
(Yamada, 1922: Taisyo

 period)
(Yamada, 1922: Taisyo

 period, hoka did not need a genitive marker and indeterminate-mos. This shows us that hoka in modern
During the Taisyo
Japanese behaves more as an exceptive expression than as an NSI. In fact, hoka, as seen in (54)(55), is quite similar to the
English exceptive expression but, shown in Section 4.2.1.3. Meanwhile, hoka does not need an indeterminate-mo when it is
attached to verbs, as shown in (20b0 ), repeated as in (57) below.
(57)

singaku-o
akirameru-hoka nak-atta.
going to school-ACC give up-HOKA NEG-PAST
I have only one choice, which is giving up going to school.

This phenomenon shows us that hoka has been losing its usage as an NSI and has behaved like a quasi-NSI.
In contrast, pakkey does not need an indeterminate-to when it is attached to subjects or objects, as shown in (58).
(58)

a.

b.

na pakkey molu-n-ta.
I PAKKEY know NEG-PRES-DECL
Only I know it.
mwul pakkey masi-ci
anh-nun-ta.
water PAKKEY drink-COMP NEG-PRES-DECL
I drink only water.

To sum up, there are differences on the grammaticalization processes of hoka and pakkey in terms of StageIV; hoka in
modern Japanese has undergone degrammaticalization unlike pakkey as follows.
(59)

[degrammaticalization of hoka]
Stage I
Stage II
a.
C.C.:
noun
> adverb
b.
S.C.:
physical space
> non-physical space

Stage III
> postpositional particle/NSI
> exception/delimitation

Stage IV
> noun/quasi-NSI15
> exception

166

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

From the descriptive facts concerning the contrasts between hoka and pakkey, we now arrive at the following question: what
makes that discrepancy? Section 4.2.3 answers this question.
4.2.3. What makes such a discrepancy?
This paper proposes that the reason can be explained by the following theoretical framework: synonymic collision based
on dialect contact. According to Iwata (2010), a word comes into collision with another because of internal or external
factors, cited by Dauzat (1922), and the external factor mainly refers to the transmission of words from one locality to another;
this eventually causes dialect contact. Moreover, Iwata (2010, p. 116) addresses that word collision consists of two types:
homonymic and synonymic collision. This paper focuses on the synonymic collision, because it is hard to treat those two types
in this paper at the same time. Synonymic collision is dened as the conict between different forms for a single referent,
according to Iwata (2010, p. 117). Assuming that one form A, existing in an area, encountered another form B, which had
been transmitted from an adjacent area; the forms come to compete with one another for a single entity. Interestingly, we can
apply the dialect contact to sika and hoka. In fact, Konosima (1966), Yamaguchi (1991), Miyachi (2007), inter alia indicate that
sika was from Edo-go Edo dialect (eastern dialect of Tokyo, the capital of the Tokugawa shogunate), whereas hoka came from
Kamigata-go Kansai dialect used in Edo-period (western dialect of Kyoto, Japanese old capital) (See Miyachi, 2007 concerning
the Linguistic Atlas of Japan in greater detail). It is assumed that the A can be applied to sika and B to hoka. Specically, they
encountered each other at rst in the Late Edo period and came to compete with one another for a single concept for many
years. Eventually, hoka, which was the Kansai dialect used in Edo-period, has faded away. Instead, sika which was the Edo
 wa period (around 1930s-) replaced position of hoka. Ever since the Syo
 wa period began, hoka has
dialect used in the Syo
undergone degrammaticalization (from a postpositional particle) to a noun and (from an NSI) to a quasi-NSI, whereas sika has
been further grammaticalized as a postpositional particle and an NSI. On the other hand, pakkey in Korean has never had any
history of undergoing dialect contact with any other items.
We nd that this line of reasoning is supported by some pieces of evidence in the following sub sections.
 period. This section deals with the grammaticalization processes of sika and
4.2.3.1. Sika and hoka between Late Edo and Taisyo
 period (mid-18th C early 20th C). Konosima (1966), Yamaguchi (1991), Miyachi
hoka between the Late Edo and Taisyo
(2007), inter alia indicate that the etymology of sika is unknown because of the shortage of data in the literature.16 They
also mention that sika suddenly appeared in literature in the middle of the 18th century, and it had a usage as an NSI, as seen
in (60).
(60)

a.

b.

d
oka muk
o-wa oira-ga tukaikonde-demo iru-to-sika omowa-ne-wana.
likely they-TOP we-NOM use all-though-QUO-SIKA think-NEG-SFP
It seems that they only think that we all carelessly use.
(Syarebon: Kakutamago, 1784)
 kyu-ryo
 -sika nai.
sorekara kane-no
saikaku-o
sitemita tokoro-ga motiai-ga ju
and then money-GEN get money-ACC try-NMLZ-but possession-NOM 19 -CL- SIKA NEG
I tried to get some money but I had only 19 Ryou.
(Syarebon: Minatonezumi, 1800)

Sika is attached to a quotative marker and a classier, as seen in (60a) and (60b). Furthermore, it shows up only in the negative
contexts. These two points indirectly show that sika had already had a usage as a postpositional particle and as an NSI from the
point it rst appeared in literature. Unfortunately, we have no way to nd the previous usages of sika in (60) due to insufcient
data.
Anyhow, the usage of sika during this period was also similar to that of hoka. Consider the following examples.
(61)

a.

b.

ano isya-wa
dokumoru-to-hoka omow-are-nu.
that doctor-TOP poison-QUO-HOKA think-PASS-NEG
I think that the doctor does nothing but put the poison.
soredewa hu-no-ji-ga
mutu-hoka-wa-ne-e.
then
HU-GEN-letters-NOM 6-CL-HOKA-TOP-NEG-SFP
Then there are only six letters of HU.

(Zappai: yudarahi, 1706)

(Hanashibon, 1783)

Hoka is attached to a quotative marker and a classier, as seen in (61a) and (61b). It behaves quite similar to sika of (60).
Furthermore, they could be attached to various postpositional particles, adverbial particles or adverbs based on the data such
 period, as seen in (62).
as nihon k
ogoh
o k
ogi A Handbook of Colloquial Japanese (Yamada, 1922) around the Taisyo
(62)

15

a.

gata-kara-sika
yu
dekaker-e-nu.
evening-from-SIKA go out-can-NEG
I can go out only after the evening.

In support of this, more data are shown in Section 4.2.3.1 and Section 4.2.3.2.
Kim (1997) holds that hoka was derived from Korean pakkey and sika from hoka. Similarly, Yamaguchi (1991) addresses that sika was derived from hoka.
However, their arguments are hard to be accepted because we can never nd the phonetic changes p > h > s in pre-modern Japanese.
16

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

a0 .

b.

b0 .

c.

c.

d.

d.

T
oky
o-kara-hoka
ki-nu.
Tokyo-from-HOKA come-NEG
They came only from Tokyo.
kuji
-made-sika matar-e-nu.
9 oclock-until-SIKA wait-can-NEG
I can wait only until 9 oclock.
Ky
oto-made-hoka ika-nai.
Kyoto-until HOKA go-NEG
They go only up to Kyoto.
kore-dake-sika
nokot-te i-nai.
this-only-SIKA left-ASP-NEG
Only this has been left.
kore-dake-hoka nai.
this-only-HOKA NEG
There is only this.
chotto-sika mi-nak-atta.
a little-SIKA see-NEG-PAST
I saw it just a little bit.
wazuka-hoka nokot-te i-nai.
a little HOKA left-ASP-NEG
There is only a little left.

167

((43a))

((44b))
(Yamada, 1922)

In (62ab) and (62a0 b0 ), both sika and hoka are attached to the same postpositional particles kara (from in English)/made
(until in English) and they are followed by the same adverbial particle dake only, as seen in (62c, c). They are also attached
to adverbs, chotto/wazuka a little, as seen in (62d,d). Considering the similarities between sika and hoka, Yamada (1922, p.
193) treats sika and hoka as the same expressions, and call them kakarimusubi bounded form.
Moreover, in the Meiji period, both sika and hoka could appear in multiple NSI constructions, as in (63).
(63)

(64)

soredewa Waroo hitori


-ni-sika
dareni-mo mi-masen-kara.
then
one person-CL-DAT-SIKA to anyone see-NEG-because
rakugoshu
 s
Because nobody but Waro see it.
(Meijitaisyo
e:1/Tekkai, 19C)
a.

b.

soko-ni-wa
kotoba-ni arawasa-nai
aizu-ya,
miburi, susurinaki, toiki
the place-LOC-TOP words-with express-NEG signal-and gesture sobbing a sigh
nado
hoka
nani-mo arima-sen.
and so on HOKA anything exist-NEG
There is nothing but a signal, a gesture, sobbing, or a sigh etc. which cannot be expressed
by words there.
(Osimusume suba, 1923)
tomodati-ga hitori
-hoka-ni-wa dare-mo i-masen.
friend-NOM one person-CL-HOKA-LOC-TOP anyone exist-NEG
I have no friends but him.
((40a))

In (63), sika attached to the dative marker ni, co-occurs with another NSI dareni-mo to anyone. In (64a), hoka attached to
adverbial particle nado and so on co-occurs with nani-mo anything. Moreover, hoka attached to a classier hitori one
person, occurs with dare-mo anyone in (64b).
 period discussed so far, it is concluded that (i) they are
On the basis of the examples between Late Edo period and Taisyo
 period
quite syntactically and semantically similar expressions as NSIs or postpositional particles; (ii) hoka in the Taisyo
satised the criteria of (Table 2 b-2); hoka can appear in multiple NSI constructions when it is attached to non-arguments and
of (Table 2 d-2); it can be attached to non-arguments, which are never allowed in contemporary Japanese. In other words,
 period satised all the criteria of (Table 2), similar to the Korean pakkey used in contemporary Korean.
hoka during the Taisyo
 period in terms of use frequency. That is,
There was a difference between hoka and sika around the Taisyo
hoka was more frequently used as an NSI than sika. This paper has examined use frequency between hoka and sika
in several short stories published during this period. This process makes it possible to reach the interesting
conclusion.
Table 3
 period.
Use frequency between hoka and sika in Taisyo

a. Mazusiki hitobito no mure (58,634 words, published in 1916)


b. S
odaku-no sinri-ni tuite (3,800words, published in 1912)
c. Gogo (1,320 words, published in 1917)

sika

hoka

1
0
0

18
4
2

168

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

According to Bybee (2001) (2003), use frequency affects the degree of grammaticalization, which is called Frequency Effects. Specically, Frequency Effects indicates that an item with higher frequency has undergone more
advanced grammaticalization. Based on this conclusion, as seen in (Table 3), we can surmise that hoka was more
 period.
grammaticalized as an NSI than sika, at least in the Taisyo
wa period to present day. This section provides grammaticalization processes of sika and hoka
4.2.3.2. Sika and hoka between Syo
wa period to the present day (1930s present day). Interestingly, sika and hoka have behaved quite differently
from the Syo
 wa period. First, hoka has undergone degrammaticalization from an NSI/a postpositional particle to a quasai-NSI/
since the Syo
a noun, as already discussed in Section 4.2.2. In contrast, sika has more grammaticalized as a postpositional particle unlike
hoka. For example, sika can be attached even to more complex forms of postpositions, such as secondary postpositions, as seen
in (65).
(65)

a.

b.

dona riron-mo gakusetu-mo


kij
o-ni oite-sika t
uy
osi-nai.
any theory-even theory-even desk-in-SIKA work-NEG
All theories can work only in the desk.
(Ensyutu-ni tuite, 1938)
ningen-wa donnani nagaikisite-mo
takadaka 100 sai gurai made-sika ikite-wa i-nai.
human-TOP no matter how long live-though just
years old about until-SIKA live-TOP-NEG
Human beings can live only up to about 100 years old no matter how long they live.
no yoridokoro, 1952)
(T
eko

In (65a), sika is attached to the secondary postposition -ni oite in, and it is also accompanied by gurai made about up to in
wa
(65b). I call these phenomena the third stage of postpositions hereafter. This usage of sika did not appear until the Syo
wa period. Consider the following data.
period. Therefore, sika has been more frequently used as an NSI than sika since the Syo
Table 4
 wa period to the present day.
Use frequency between hoka and sika from the Syo

a. Gokuch
ue no tegami (67,371 words, published in 1943)
b. Kokusikansatujinjiken (295,234 words, published in 1977)
c. 1Q84: book 1 (347,261words, published in 2009)

sika

hoka

15
47
108

4
23
12

Results of (Table 4) stand in sharp contrast to those of (Table 3). This shows us that sika has been more grammaticalized
than hoka.
4.2.3.3. Dialect contact. In relation to those phenomena considered in the previous subsection, some questions may arise.
First, why has hoka undergone degrammaticalization from an NSI/postpositional particle to a quasi-NSI/noun? The answer to
this question is because sika has been more prevalent than hoka, which is syntactically and semantically the same as the latter.
They rst encountered each other during the Late Edo period and came to compete with one another for a single entity for
many years (/ synonymic collision). Eventually, sika has won against hoka.
Second, what mechanisms have worked here? It can be explained by dialect contact. In fact, they respectively
belonged to different dialect; whereas sika came from Edo-go, the Edo dialect, and hoka was from Kamigata-go, Kansai
dialect used in Edo-period. In other words, they were used in totally different districts until the Late Edo period; however,
they rst came to contact in the Late Edo period because ofcial languages changed from Kamigata-go to Edo-go. In fact,
this phenomenon was accelerated during the Meiji period (18681912) because of genbun itchi (unication of written and
spoken styles) movement. Beginning in the Meiji period, Japan underwent a drastic change from being a country with
many subgroups and corresponding dialects to a single united nation with one standard language. The standardization of
the Japanese dialect had spread from Tokyo to the rest of the country via the mass communication means, such as novels,
lm and radio. Tokyo became the media hub of Japan and dialect levelling occurred when Japanese people outside of
Tokyo connected with ctional characters from lms or novels set in Tokyo (Teshigawara and Kinsui, 2011, p.47). As a
result, the Tokyo dialect became naturally assimilated into rest of Japan and it was widely used all over the country from
 to early period of Syo
wa, according to Oda (2008) and Kinsui (2003). Here, recall the contrasts of use
late period of Taisyo
frequency between hoka and sika in (Table 3) and (Table 4). As already discussed, hoka used to be more grammaticalized
 period, whereas sika has been more grammaticalized as an NSI than sika since Syo
wa
as an NSI than sika during the Taisyo
period.
Third, what evidence can be provided for the dialect contact? First of all, it can be found by the Korean pakkey. As discussed so far, pakkey and hoka used to be quite similar in terms of their syntactic and semantic features. Nevertheless, they
have differently behaved in modern ages; that is, pakkey has been more grammaticalized as an NSI/postpositional particle,
while hoka has been degrammaticalized from an NSI/postpositional particle to a quasi-NSI/noun. What has caused the differences between pakkey and hoka? This paper explains it by dialect contact. To be more precise, pakkey in Korean can
continue to be more grammaticalized as an NSI/postpositional particle because it has never been in contact with any

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

169

synonymic items, whereas hoka in Japanese cannot perform such grammaticalization because it has been in contact with a
synonymic item sika. In light of reasoning, it is natural to assume that hoka could be grammaticalized similar to pakkey now, if
hoka had not encountered sika.
There is another evidence supporting the dialect contact. According to Yamaguchi (1991), Kinsui (2003), Oda (2008), inter
alia, synonymic collisions between Kamigata-go and Edo-go were often undergone during the Late Edo period. The expressions
from Kamigata-go and Edo-go were mixed at the rst stage. In fact, some expressions from Kamigata-go were more frequently
used than those from Edo-go; but eventually, expressions from Kamigata-go have gradually faded away while Edo-go still
survives.
(66)
a.
b.
c.

Copula:
Clause marker:
Negation:

kamigatago
-jiya
-sakai
-nu

vs.

edogo
-da
-kara
-nai

be
because
not

This phenomenon is exactly the same as that of hoka and sika. Therefore, we can see that dialect contact between hoka and
sika is not unusual in the history of the Japanese language.
Fukushima and Heap (2008) and Iwata (2010) claim that the dialect contact is observed cross-linguistically; in particular,
not only in many European languages such as German and Spanish, but also in many Asian languages such as Chinese and
Japanese.
4.2.4. Discrepancy on division of labor
To sum up, the grammaticalization processes of hoka, sika and pakkey are the following:
(67)

(68)

(69)

[hoka]
Stage I Stage II Stage III-a
9th C
early 17th C
Noun > Adverb > 1st stage of postposition (NSI)
hoka > hoka (ni) > hoka (ni)

Stage III-b
end of 19th C
> 2nd stage (NSI)
> hoka

Stage IV
mid-20th C (1930s)
> Noun (quasi-NSI)
> hoka

[sika]
Stage III-a
mid-18thC
1st stage of postposition (NSI)
sika

Stage III-b
19thC
> 2nd stage (NSI)
> sika

[pakkey]
Stage I Stage II StageIII-a
mid-15th C
- early 20th C
Noun > Adverb > 1st stage of postposition (NSI)
pas
> paskuy > paskey

StageIII-b
StageIV
early-mid 20th C still ongoing17
> 2nd stage (NSI) > 3rd stage (NSI)
> pakkey
> pakkey

Stage IV
mid-20thC (1930s)
> 3rd stage (NSI)
> sika

Now, returning to our main question, what factors bring about this discrepancy in terms of distributional properties of
sika/hoka/pakkey, as seen in (Table 2)? This can be explained by the points that have been discussed so far. First, a division of

17
The results of the examination, it shows that the degree of grammaticalization of sika is higher than that of pakkey. This idea is supported by the
following point: rst, sika greatly outnumbers pakkey in examining use frequencies with six different types of books. Second, it is quite awkward when
pakkey is attached to secondary postpositions, as shown in (ia) and (iib). This stands in sharp contrast with one of sika, as seen in (ib) and (iib).
(i)
a.
??ipen-ey-nun nongep-ey kwanhayse-pakkey
enkup ha-ci
anh-kess-ta.
this time-TOP agriculture-with regard to-PAKKEY mention-COMP NEG-MODAL-DECL
They will mention only with regard to agriculture this time.
b.
konkai-wa
nougyou-ni kansite-sika
genky
usi-nai.
this time-TOP agriculture-with regard to-SIKA mention-NEG
They will mention only with regard to agriculture this time.
(ii)
a.
??ikes-un
sako
wenil-ul ceytaylo haymyeyng ha-ko nase-pakkey (selmyeng-ul) hal swu eps-ta.
this-TOP accidents reason-ACC surely
gure out-and then-PAKKEY
explanation-ACC do-POSS NEG-DECL
We can do it only after we surely gured it out.
b.
kore-wa jiko
gen-in-o
tyanto kaim
esi-te kara-sika deki-nai.
this-TOP accidents reason-ACC surely gure out-and then-SIKA can-NEG
We can do it only after we surely gured it out.
This fact suggests that the grammaticalization of pakkey has not been completed yet unlike sika. That is, the third stage of postpositions or StageIV is still
ongoing. This line of reasoning can be supported by the point that the grammaticalization processes of sika into an NSI have been periodically earlier than
that of pakkey, as shown in (68) and (69). See Park (forthcoming) for more details.

170

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

labor exists between sika and hoka in modern Japanese. In other words, it may be plausible to argue that they have shared
their functions with a division of labor as a result of different specialization (Hopper, 1991). In fact, we can conclude that sika
 period.18
and hoka in modern Japanese do not share their functions with each other, comparing them with those in the Taisyo
Second, the reason why Korean pakkey is the only expression that has all distributional properties is that it has not
encountered any similar items, unlike Japanese sika and hoka.
5. Concluding Remarks
In this paper, I have argued that there are signicant syntactic differences between sika in Japanese and pakkey in Korean;
and this position is clearly distinguished from that of the previous relevant studies. Furthermore, in the light of the same
approach, I claim that sika is different from hoka in terms of their distributional properties.
In fact, pakkey corresponds to not only sika but also hoka. In relation to this point, I propose the following: (i) sika and
hoka share their functional uses, unlike pakkey, in terms of specialization, (ii) and this engenders the differences in their
grammaticalization processes. The Japanese NSIs, sika and hoka, have undergone synonymic collision since they were rst
encountered in the Late Edo period. This can be explained by dialect contact. That is, they were synonymic expressions at
that time and individually belonged to different dialects; Kamigata-go Kansai dialect used in Edo-period (hoka) vs. Edo-go
Edo (present-day Tokyo) dialect (sika). Edo was becoming the new center and the capital of Kyoto represented the old,
traditional center. Radical changes of the ofcial language from Kamigata-go to Edo-go in the Late Edo period caused the
synonymic collision. Since this period, they have competed with each other and have shared their functions. In contrast, the
Korean NSI pakkey has never undergone any dialect contact because the ofcial language has never been changed since it
was established. This is why there exists a single form of pakkey in Korean, whereas there exists two different forms in the
Japanese sika and hoka. The arguments concerning dialect contact in Japanese can be supported by (i) a contrastive study
with the Korean pakkey and (ii) some similar Japanese examples, which experienced dialect contact during the Late Edo
period.
In addition, this paper claries the following two questions:
 What is the nature of the interrelations between sika/hoka and pakkey?
 What are the grammaticalization processes of sika/hoka and pakkey?
Most of the past studies conduct a comparative study of sika and pakkey only because they are syntactically and semantically
similar; however, it is time to focus on hoka and pakkey. In fact, they are morphologically and etymologically similar. Even
 period had all usages as an NSI/postpositional particle,
though they are not the same in the contemporary age, hoka in Taisyo
like pakkey does now. Their grammaticalization processes used to be similar, as shown in (47), and are repeated below:
(70)

a.
b.

Semantic change:
physical space > non-physical space > exception/delimitation
Categorical change: noun
>
adverb
> a postpositional particle/an NSI

However, hoka has been degrammaticalized from an NSI/postpositional particle to a quasi-NSI/noun because it has been
 wa period. In contrast, pakkey has been more grammaticalized as an NSI/
gradually overwhelmed by sika since the Syo
postpositional particle because it has never collided with any synonymic elements. As already discussed in Section
4.2.3.3, it is natural to assume that hoka could be more grammaticalized now as an NSI/postpositional particle than
pakkey if hoka had not encountered sika. On the other hand, sika has been more grammaticalized as an NSI/postpositional particle because competitors like hoka do not exist anymore. In contrast, hoka has been more degrammaticalized; therefore, it is assumed that hoka might lose its status as an NSI and would be used as an exceptive expression
in the future.
Acknowledgments
The earlier version of this paper was presented at the 5th New Reections on Grammaticalization, July 1619, 2012, at
University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. I am indebted to the audience for questions and helpful comments. I
also would like to thank SeongHa Rhee, Asako Miyachi, Kaoru Horie, ChangHak Moon, JungMin Kim, Whitman John, Koichi
Takezawa, Yoshiki Mori, Yoshiko Numata, DaeYoung Kim, WonSun Shin, Anastasia Kim and anonymous reviewers for their
insightful remarks. Needless to say, all remaining inadequacies and errors are my own responsibility. My due thanks also go to
the Korean and Japanese informants who were willing to cooperate in the survey.

18
However, there is one exception; namely, when sika and hoka are attached to verbs, they function in the same way, as shown in (20b, b0 ). Additionally,
they seem to be the same as each other when they areattached to nouns, as seen in (20a, a0 ). However, they are not the same in a strict sense. Hoka in (20a0 )
is closer to an exceptive expression than an NSI, whereas sika in (20a) is an NSI and a sort of a delimiter.

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

171

References
Aoyagi, H., Ishii, T., 1994. On NPI licensing in Japanese. In: Akatsuka, N. (Ed.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics 4. CSLI Publications, Stanford, pp. 295311.
Bak, S.Y., 1997. Pakkey-uy mwunpephwa hyensang (Pakkey: a case of grammaticalization in Korean). Ene 22-1, pp. 5750.
Bybee, J.L., 2001. Phonology and Language Use. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Bybee, J.L., 2003. Mechanism of change in grammaticalization: the role of frequency. In: Janda, R., Joseph, B. (Eds.), A Handbook of Historical Linguistics.
Lawrence, London, pp. 602623.
Bybee, J.L., Pagliuca, W., Perkins, R., 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. The University of Chicago
Press, Chicago and London.
Claudi, U., Heine, B., 1986. On the metaphorical base of grammar. Stud. Lang. 10 (2), pp. 297335.
Dauzat, A., 1922. La Gographie Linguistique. Flammarion, Paris.
ho
, [Two usages of hoka], Aitikenritu daigaku gaikokugogakubu kiyo
, [Journal of the school of foreign studies, Aichi Prefectural
Eguchi T., 2000. Hoka-no ni Yo
University] 32, pp. 291320.
von Fintel, K., 1993. Exceptive constructions. Nat. Lang. Semant. 1, pp. 123148.
Fleischman, S., 1989. Temporal distance: a basic linguistic metaphor. Stud. Lang. 13, pp. 150.
Fukushima, C., Heap, D., 2008. A report on the international conference geolinguistics around the world. Dialectologia 1, pp. 135156.
Han, C.H., Siegel, L., 1996. Syntactic and semantic conditions on NPI licensing in questions. In: Agbayani, B., Tang, S.-W. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th West
Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. CSLI Publications, Stanford, pp. 177191.
Hasegawa, A., Koenig, J.-P., 2011. Focus particles, secondary meanings, and lexical resource semantics: the case of Japanese sika. In: Mller, Stefan (Ed.), The
Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. CSLI Publications, Stanford, pp. 81101.
Heine, B., Claudi, U., Hnnemeyer, F., 1991a. Grammaticalization: a Conceptual Framework. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Heine, B., Claudi, U., Hnnemeyer, F., 1991b. From cognition to grammar. In: Traugott, E., Heine, B. (Eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization. 2 vols, vol. 1..
John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 149187.
Heo, J.Y., 2002. Pwucengmwun-uy Tongsicek Yenkwu (A Diachronic Study of Negation). Yeklak; Seoul.
Hoeksema, J., 1996. The semantics of exception phrases. In: van der Does, J., van Eijck, J. (Eds.), Quantiers, Logic and Language. CSLI Publications, Stanford,
pp. 145177.
Hong, S.M., 2002. Hanile Taycopwunsek (A Contrastive Study between Korean and Japanese). Yeklak; Seoul.
Hopper, P.J., 1991. On some principles of grammaticalization. In: Traugott, E.C., Heine, B. (Eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization, vol. 1. John Benjamins,
Amsterdam and Philadelphia, pp. 1735.
Hopper, P.J., Traugott, E., 2003. Grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Iwata, R., 2010. Chinese geolinguistics: history, current trend and theoretical issues. Dialectologia (Special issue 1), pp. 97121.
Kataoka, K., 2006. Neg-sensitive Elements, Neg-c-command, and scrambling in Japanese. In: Vance, T., Kim, J. (Eds.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics 14. CSLI
Publications, Stanford, pp. 221233.
goteki jo
 ken (Semantic feature and Syntactic conditions of hoka and sika). In: Proceedings of
Kataoka, K., Miyachi, A., 2011. Hoka to sika-no Imitokusitu-to To
the 142th Meeting of the Linguistic Society of Japan, pp. 170175.
Kato, Y., 1985. Negative Sentences in Japanese. In: Sophia Linguistica 19. Monograph. Sophia University, Tokyo.
Kim, A.H.-O., 1997. The NPI Pakkey and universal quantier negation in Korean. In: Kuno, S., et al. (Eds.), Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics 6. Dept. of
Linguistics, Harvard University, pp. 323337.
Kim, A.H.-O., 2001. Correspondences in scalar focus particles of Japanese and Korean: a comparative perspective. In: Horie, K., Sato, S. (Eds.), CognitiveFunctional Linguistics in an East Asian Context. Kurosio Publishers, Tokyo, pp. 207234.
Kim, Y.H., 1998. Pwuceng Kuksenge-uy Hekayangsang (Licensing conditions of Korean NPIs). Hangul, 240241, pp. 263297.
Kinsui, S., 2003. Vatyaru Nihongo Yakuwarigo no Nazo (Puzzles of Role Language in Virtual Japanese). Iwanami, Tokyo.
Konomi, K., 2000. On licensing of SIKA-NPIs in Japanese. In: Takami, K., Kamio, A., Whitman, J. (Eds.), Syntactic and Functional Explorations: In Honor of
Susumu Kuno. Kurosio Publishers, Tokyo, pp. 5182.
 u
 (A Study of Japanese Particles). Oh
 sya; Tokyo.
Konosima, M., 1966. Kokugojosi-no Kenkyu
Kuno, S., 1999. The syntax and semantics of the dake and sika constructions. In: Kuno, S., Bert, V. (Eds.), Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 7. Dept.
of Linguistics, Harvard University, pp. 144172.
Kuno, S., Kim, Y.J., 1999. The syntax and semantics of the man and pakkey constructions. In: Kuno, S., et al. (Eds.), Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics, vol.
8. Dept. of Linguistics, Harvard University, pp. 436456.
Kuno, S., Whitman, J., 2004. Licensing of multiple negative polarity items. In: Kim, Y.K., Whitman, J. (Eds.), Kuno in Korean Linguistics. International Circle of
Korean Linguistics, Seoul, pp. 207228.
Lakoff G., Johnson M., 1980. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Lee, C.M., 2002. Negative polarity in Korean and Japanese. In: Akatsuka, N., Strauss, S. (Eds.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics 10. CSLI Publications, Stanford, pp.
481494.
Linebarger, M., 1987. Negative polarity and grammatical representation. Ling. Philos. 10, pp. 325387.
Martin, S.E., 1975. A Reference Grammar of Japanese. Yale University Press, New Haven and London.
Miyagawa, S., 1989. Structure and Case Marking in Japanese. Academic Press, San Diego.
bunko
 zo
 siteki Kenkyu
 (The Structure and History of Japanese Sika-nai). Hituji syobo
; Tokyo.
Miyachi, A., 2007. Nihongozyosi Sika-ni kakawaru Ko
Nam, S.H., 1994. Another type of negative polarity item. In: Kanazawa, M., Pion, C. (Eds.), Dynamics, Polarity, and Quantication. Center for the Study of
Language and Information, Stanford, pp. 315.
Nishioka, N., 2000. Japanese negative polarity items wh-MO and XP-sika phrases: another overt movement analysis in terms of feature-checking.
In: Takami, K., Kamio, A., Whitman, J. (Eds.), Syntactic and Functional Explorations: In Honor of Susumu Kuno. Kurosio Publishers, Tokyo, pp.
159184.
Obata M., Park K.H., 2012. Case-Markers vs. postpositions: co-occurrence restrictions on negative sensitive items. Paper presented at the 8th Workshop on
Formal Altaic Linguistics Conference.
 ko
 (A Study on the History of Japanese Language). Sanke
sya; Tokyo.
Oda, M., 2008. Nihongosi Yo
Park K.H., 2012. Grammaticalization of negative sensitive items pakkey in Korean and sika in Japanese. Paper presented at the 5th New Reections on
Grammaticalization Conference.
Park K.H., A discrepancy in the dgree of grammaticalization of Korean and Japanese negative sensitive items: a corpus-based study, In: Giriko M., Kanzaki K.,
Nagaya N., Takemura A., (Eds.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics 22, CSLI Publications; Stanford. (forthcoming).
Rhee, S.H., 2004. Grammaticalization of spatio-temporal postpositions in Korean. J. Ling. Sci. 31, pp. 169188.
Sells, P., 2001. Negative polarity licensing and interpretation. In: Kuno, S., et al. (Eds.), Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics 9. Dept. of Linguistics, Harvard
University, pp. 322.
Shi, C.K., 1997. Pakkey-uy Heyngtay Tongsalon (The Morpho-sytax of pakk-ey). Kwuehak 30, pp. 171200.
Sweetser, E., 1982. Root and epistemic modals: causality in two worlds. Berkeley Ling. Soc. 8, pp. 484507.
Sweetser, E., 1987. Metaphorical models of thought and speech: a comparison of historical directions and metaphorical mappings in the two domains.
Berkeley Ling. Soc. 13, pp. 446459.
Teshigawara, M., Kinsui, S., 2011. Modern Japanese Role Language(Yakuwarigo): ctionalized orality in Japanese literature and popular culture. Sociolinguist. Stud. 5 (1), pp. 3758.

172

K. Park / Language Sciences 45 (2014) 152172

Traugott, E.C., 2003. From subjectication to intersubjectication. In: Hickey, R. (Ed.), Motives for Language Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
pp. 124142.
s e
bunpo
 (Syntax in Generative Grammar). University of Tokyo; Tokyo.
Watanabe, A., 2009. Se
goho
 Ko
gi (A Handbook of Colloquial Japanese). Takarabunkan; Tokyo.
Yamada, Y., 1922. Nihongo Ko
 (Origin of sika). Gogenkenkyu
 3, pp. 3448. Meijisyoin; Tokyo.
Yamaguchi, G., 1991. Hukujosi sika-no genryu

Corpus
Japanese:
(i) Shin Nihon Koten Bungaku Taik
e (CD-ROM) [a collection of classical Japanese literature] (http://www.nijl.ac.jp/pages/database/).
(ii) Aozorabunko (www.aozora.gr.jp/).
Korean:
Korean National Corpus in the 21st Century Sejong Project (CD-ROM) (http://www.sejong.or.kr/).