Evidentiality, Modality and Causality
-- corpus and neurolinguistic studies --
○Yurie Hara（WU）・Naho Orita（Tokyo University of Science）・Deng Ying（UT）・Takeshi Koshizuka（okyo University of Science）・Hiromu Sakai（WU）
||Davis&Hara (2014) and Hara (2017) argue that: 1. The Japanese sentence final auxiliary yooda ‘it seems’ as in (1) is a morpheme of evidentiality which is distinct from
canonical modal auxiliaries like daroo ‘I bet’ in (2) defined in (3). 2. The semantics of yooda re lies on the notion of causality as informally defined in (4).
(1) Ame ga futta yooda. (rain NOM fell EVID)
‘It seems that it rained.’
(2) Michi ga nureteru daroo. (road NOM wet I bet)
‘ The streets are wet, I bet.’
(3) Daroo(p) is true at f,g,w iff Must(p) is true at f,g,
(4) Yooda(p) is defined iff q such that p normally causes q. (presupposition)
If defined, Yooda(p) is true at w iff the speaker
perceives q at w. (assertion)
Corpus and EEG studies were conducted to reveal behavioral and neurological d differences between processing of modals and evidentials.
|| / / / / / / /
||Evidentiality / Modality / Causality / corpus / NPMI / EEG / ERP / neurolinguistic
||信学技報, vol. 119, no. 151, TL2019-13, pp. 15-15, 2019年7月.
||Print edition: ISSN 0913-5685 Online edition: ISSN 2432-6380