文発話に先行する間投詞としての why

間投詞的な談話標識 why （具体例：'Why, that's a brilliant idea!'） は，現代英語では比較的まれで，古めかしさやわざとらしさを連想させる．本稿では，why がそれに後続する文発話の意味にいかに貢献するかを考察し，文発話に先行して多く用いられる間投詞 well （Schourup 2001） と同様，why は，発話の直前に話し手が持っていた心的状態をジェスチャー的に表すものとして解釈されると主張する．why は，発話の出だしに用いられると，聞き手に表意（explicature: 関連性理論の用語で，発話により伝達される想定を意味し，論理形式を推論によって発展させたものを指す）の構築を促すことで，why に後続する発話の解釈に貢献していると考えられる．つまり，why は，それに後続する文発話によって表出される命題を高次の記述に埋め込むことで，表意に貢献すると結論づけられるのである．さらに，well と why の機能に関しても詳細に比較検討した．両者は，本来ジェスチャー的であり，高次表意 （higher-level explicature） に貢献し，他の様々な特徴を共有するが，この二つの標識によって表される心的状態は本質的に正反対のものである．最後に，why と他の非命題的な表現との関係についても議論し，疑問詞 why からどのような歴史的過程を経て間投詞 why が生じたのかに対しても，説明を提案する．

On the distribution of demonstratives in the anaphoric use

The purpose of this paper is to build a model that gives a natural explanation of the distribution of demonstratives in the anaphoric use. Discourse Management Theory (DMT; Takubo and Kinsui (2000) among others) provides a persuasive model for this issue. However, this theory faces some difficulties, especially when dealing with sentences such as those presented in Iori (1997) and Tsutsumi (1998). I argue that this is because the theory is strongly based on the concept of 'experience,' however, these problems are solved when we adopt the model presented in this paper.

We create (at least) two worlds in our mind: one of these is Ws and the other is Wp. Ws is the world in which we refer to things directly (such as proper nouns and things that the speaker believes to exist in the real world (Wo)) while Wp is the world where every element is altered to a variable (x, y). Following Tsutsumi (1998), we assume that Ko/A-series refer to elements in Ws and So-series to those in Wp. This predicts that if an object is registered in both of the worlds, then both Ko (A)/So-series can be used. If it is registered in only Ws or Wp, then only Ko (A) or So can be used respectively. This idea is reminiscent of that of DMT's, however, by abandoning the concept of 'experience,' and introducing the idea of 'variable' for the So-series demonstratives, we succeed in explaining a wider range of data than DMT can deal with.

Modality in Verbs of Central and Southern Okinawan Dialects

In the present investigation, it is claimed that, in the group of dialects spoken in the central and southern parts of the Okinawan main-island, there is a position of modality signaled by inflectional forms of verbs. The modality involves the notion of certainty, and occupies its own morphological position in the ordering of Verb Root (+Aspect ［durative］)(+Negative)(+Style ［｛honorific, polite｝］)(+Modal)(+Tense) + Mood. Modal distinctions are made by the morpheme /+yi/ 'to be certain,' conveying information about a past event directly acquired through observation, and the other /+tee/ 'to be less certain,' conveying information about the preceding event inferred from observation at the time of the utterance. In the case of the absence of such distinctions, information about the past is taken to be through hearsay. As expected, the two modal forms neither co-occur with the first person subject in the declarative sentence nor with the second person subject in the interrogative, because neither the speaker nor the hearer can observe his/her own act. It is shown that the modal form /+yi/ neither co-occurs with the non-past tense nor with the negative, because only the past event can be subjectively observed and the negated event itself cannot be observed. However, it is argued that, if the speaker's act is in his/her dream or in the subjunctive world, it can be the object of direct observation.

On the nature of the relative clauses in concealed questions and their 'interrogative' interpretation

The aim of the present paper is to develop an analysis of concealed questions (＝CQ) in English, concentrating specifically on their semantic interpretation. Assuming that the most typical CQs are ones that involve an 'NP +"complement" relative clause (＝RC)' structure such as the italicized part in (i) (the bracketed part is the RC in question), we first discuss some aspects of complement RCs, including those aspects related to their relatives, antecedents, and gaps inside the RCs:
(i) I don't know the kind of man [he was ten years ago].

In doing so, we specifically argue that the familiar 'variable' interpretation available to the gaps inside ordinary restrictive RCs cannot be made available to the cases of the complement RCs involved in CQs； we argue, instead, that in CQs the gaps in question correspond to N' that denotes 'generic concept.'

A crucial idea in the present study is the 'generic concept and its instantiation.' This idea, together with the 'definiteness and the attendant existential presupposition,' plays a central role in determining the details of the semantic interpretation of complement RCs, and for that matter, that of CQs containing such RCs.

In the final part of the paper, we propose a grammatical process called 'reanalysis,' whereby a relative clause structure (when the noun phrase containing the RC occurs with a predicate such as tell and show) is reanalyzed as an interrogative clause structure at LF； by introducing the variable 'X,' we claim that it will be possible for the noun phrase containing an RC to be reinterpreted 'similarly' to an indirect wh question. We also claim that the existence of the 'non-information-seeking' reading of CQs follows from our analysis of RCs.

動名詞補文における名詞的補文標識 Of と PRO について

本論文では，動名詞を主要部とした節の前に現れる of について考察し，この of が補文標識であり，of を主要部とした CP を形成するという分析を提案している．この分析の根拠として，純粋な前置詞句と比較しつつ，幾つかの経験的根拠を挙げるが，とりわけ，前置詞の後に PRO が通常許されないのに対し，of が直後に音声を持つ NP のみならず PRO の生起を許す事実を詳しく検討し，この事実は，of が前置詞とは異なり，格を認可しない補文標識であるという性質を持つことに由来すると論じる．更に，T に位置する -ing は，ポルトガル語の不定詞と同様，AGR 素性がプラスのものとマイナスのものの 2 種類があると論じる．また，Grimshaw （1991） 及び Rooryck （1994, 2000） の概念を援用し，この種の of は V 素性と N 素性が未指定である T の拡大投射であると規定する．更に，Kayne （1981） に基づき，この種の of がロマンス諸語にも観察されることを指摘する．

Coordination in terms of -to and the Constituency of Floating Quantifiers in Japanese

This paper adds some support to the claim that in Japanese a floating quantifier (FQ) and its host-NP can form a single constituent (more specifically, can form an NP). The claim itself is found in Kamio (1977, 1983) and Kawashima (1998) among others, but Koizumi (2000) presents an alternative analysis of the crucial example and raises a question on the validity of the argument for this claim. The aim of this paper is to argue that the alternative analysis proposed in Koizumi (2000) is not adequate and that the original claim should still be regarded as tenable.

The key construction is a coordination in terms of -to, which is often assumed to be a conjunction of two constituents of the same kind. This paper describes how the to-coordination involving an FQ is restricted, and points out that there are numerous instances of to-coordination which cannot be accounted for under the analysis proposed in Koizumi (2000). This paper also shows that a sequence made up of an FQ and its host-NP should be clearly distinguished from other sequences containing an FQ. It is shown that the former can be conjoined with an ordinary NP while the latter cannot. I leave open the question why the latter can sometimes be conjoined, but the fact that the former can be conjoined with an ordinary NP indicates that it is an NP, a conclusion which supports the claim in Kamio (1977, 1983) and Kawashima (1998).

個体レヴェル述語としての英語の「異常受身」

英語で This cup has been drunk beer out of. のように動詞によって統率されていない前置詞句内部から受身化が起っている受身文は，これまで Bolinger （1975） や Takami （1992） など機能論的な観点からしか分析されていない．本稿では，この種の受身文がどのような時に適切となるのかを形式意味論的に考察し，その適応条件を統語論的に説明する分析を示唆する．

まず，これまでの研究で不明瞭だった「擬似受身」（He was laughed at by Mary. のように動詞と前置詞が統率により「再分析」される場合）と「異常受身」（This cup has been drunk beer out of. のように付加詞から受身化が起こる場合）の統語的な違いを明確化する．次に，後者の異常受身が，Kratzer （1995）, Diesing （1992） の言う個体レヴェル述語に該当することを，（1）点的な時間副詞と共起しない，（2）独立分詞構文で条件節の解釈を持たない，（3）知覚動詞の補文に入らないという観察から立証する．更に，この意味的性質を反映する統語構造を示唆し，異常受身が名詞句移動によって派生されるのではなく，もともと基底生成された主語を取ることを述べる．これにより，従来，「特徴づけ」などの曖昧な名称で呼ばれていた機能が統語構造から導き出されることになる．