Review of Bjarke Frellesvig and John Whitman (2008).
Proto-Japanese: Issues and Prospects

Thomas Pellard

► To cite this version:

Thomas Pellard. Review of Bjarke Frellesvig and John Whitman (2008). Proto-Japanese: Issues and Prospects. Cahiers de linguistique - Asie Orientale, 2010, 39 (1), pp.95-114. 10.1163/1960602810X00089. halshs-00771242

HAL Id: halshs-00771242

https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00771242

Submitted on 8 Jan 2013

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>
Bjarke Frellesvig and John Whitman (2008). *Proto-Japanese: Issues and Prospects*. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 229 p.

The volume under review contains ten contributions on the reconstruction of Proto-Japanese (PJ) by the leading specialists in the field. Proto-Japanese is defined as the common ancestor of the Japanese language proper and the Ryukyuan languages, and it corresponds to what is commonly referred to as “Proto-Japonic” in other works (Serafim 2003, Miyake 2003b, Pellard 2008, Vovin 2009). These contributions are revised versions of papers presented at the *Workshop on Proto-Japanese* held at the XVIth *International Conference on Historical Linguistics* (Copenhagen, 2003).

# 1 OVERVIEW

This volume provides a the state-of-the-art of the reconstruction of PJ as well as new proposals on a vast array of topics: segmental phonology, dialect evidence, accent, and morpho-syntax. The volume opens with an introduction summarizing the current thinking about Old Japanese (OJ) and PJ. The chapters are then organized into four parts covering all aspects of the proto-language.

The first part, “Reconstructing the basic phoneme inventory”, includes two contributions on the reconstruction of segmental phonology. The first one, by B. Frellesvig and J. Whitman, proposes to add a seventh vowel *i* to the PJ vowel system on the basis that OJ<fnref n="1" /> -o alternates with both -wi (< *ïi) and -e (< *əi). In his contribution, J. Unger adduces philological and dialectal evidence to reconstruct a PJ *ŋ. He also argues for his own earlier proposal of a more complex PJ consonant system (Ramsey & Unger 1972). The main feature of his reconstruction consists in voiced obstruents which undergo lenition by the time of OJ.

While the reconstruction of PJ has been traditionally almost exclusively based on philological evidence and internal reconstruction of OJ, recent years have seen more and more studies incorporating evidence from the different Japanese dialects and the Ryukyuan languages. This is the case of the two contributions of the second part, “Use of dialects in reconstruction”. T. Onishi examines the problem of the divergence of the Japanese dialects and the geographic distribution of linguistic features. He reassesses the existence of a major division between Eastern and Western dialects in mainland Japan and then proposes an original calculation method to date the separation time between Eastern and Western Japanese. The next contribution by L.A. Serafim stresses the crucial importance of Ryukyuan for the study of the history of Japanese. The author gives an overall account of the phonological correspondences between Japanese and Ryukyuan and shows the Ryukyuan data requires to reconstruct more vowels in PJ. On the other hand, Serafim argues that the Ryukyuan verb forms cannot be directly compared to those of Japanese. The chapter ends with a summary of the author’s hypothesis on the origin of the *kakari musubi* syntactic pattern.

<footnote n="1">¹In the volume under review, the *otsurui* syllables are transcribed as *Cwi*, *Ce* and *Co*, while the *kōrui* ones are transcribed as *Ci*, *Cye* and *Cwo*.</footnote>
The third part, “Reconstructing accent”, gathers three contributions on what is probably the most complex and controversial issue in Japanese historical linguistics: the reconstruction and historical developments of the accent/tone system. The first one by A. Matsumori concentrates on the system of proto-mainland Japanese. M argues that, contrary to the traditional assumption, we have to reconstruct a PJ system very different from that of Middle Japanese, with for example a very unique *HLH pattern for nouns of the class 3.1. The second one, by M. Shimabukuro, examines the tonal correspondences between Japanese and Ryukyuan. The author elaborates on the discovery by Hattori (1958) that the tonal classes of Ryukyuan do not correspond in a straightforward manner to those of Japanese. Like Hattori, S proposes the extra cor-respondences should be accounted for by positing earlier initial vowel length. In his contribution, A. Vovin develops a tonogenesis scenario for PJ, based on the previous work by Hattori and Martin. Initial low tone is accounted for by positing the initial long vowels mentioned above plus some initial voiced obstruents. Words with initial high tone are in turn reconstructed with voiceless or glottalized onsets. V also recon-structs an earlier final *-m as the source of the final contour of 2.5 nouns.

The final part, “Reconstructing morphology and syntax”, begins with an internal reconstruction of the PJ verbal morphology by J. Whitman. Specifically, he proposes that all the bigrade verbs (nidan) are derived and incorporate the verb e ‘get’ into their stem. This leads him to reconstruct different types of PJ verb roots: consonant-ending roots and vowel-ending roots. The following chapter by B. Frellesvig addresses a sim-ilar topic. F examines the different morphophonological processes attested in the OJ verb morphology as well as the different verb classes and their paradigms. He partially agrees with Whitman’s proposal but feels still another formative (*-(C)i ‘inchoative’) should be reconstructed to explain the origin of the bigrade verbs. F argues that the bigrade verbs belong to a younger morphological layer and are of secondary origin. He adduces statistical and morphophonological evidence to support this view. The very last contribution by J. Wrona examines the functions, meanings and syntactic properties of several nominal and adnominal forms of OJ. He concludes the adnom-inal complements are a late development in OJ and that they originate from relative constructions.

## 2 EVALUATION

This volume is a very important and welcome contribution to the field of Japanese and Ryukyuan historical linguistics. It provides both an overview of the current thinking and a collection of the most recent and interesting proposals. It also covers all aspects and sub-fields of Japonic historical linguistics, as well as the most important and con-troversial questions. All the contributions are of the highest quality and give a good idea of the current issues and prospects of PJ reconstruction. The number and variety of topics addressed makes it difficult to give a faithful and complete account of all the contributions. I shall however try to highlight some of the major and most innovative proposals, and also as add a few remarks when I feel it might fuel further research.
## 2.1 Evidence for seven vowels in proto-Japanese (B. Frellesvig and J. Whitman)

B. Frellesvig and J. Whitman propose to reconstruct a seven-vowel system for PJ. They first rightly criticize the four-vowel system, which until recently was the prevalent theory in the field, by showing it is unable to account for the comparative data from Ryukyuan and Eastern Old Japanese. They acknowledge Hattori (1978–1979)'s major breakthrough and reconstruct two mid-vowels, *e and *o.<fnref n="2" /> However, one can only regret the authors do not give more actual examples of the correspondences underlying these reconstructions, and a detailed and systematic account of the correspondences between Japanese and Ryukyuan remains to be published.<fnref n="3" /> I however disagree with some of the Proto-Ryukyuan reconstructions quoted from Serafim (unpublished) and adduced as evidence for PJ *e. These include ‘island’ and ‘tongue’, which should respectively be reconstructed as PR *sima and *sita rather than as *sema and *seta, as is clear from the comparison with Miyako Ryukyuan (e.g. Ōgami suma and not *sima, suta and not *sita). Moreover, as the authors themselves demonstrate in a clear fashion, the Ryukyuan data is the only truly reliable evidence for the reconstruction of *e and *o. It is therefore surprising they propose some new etymologies involving *e and *o on the basis of OJ-internal evidence only. A look at the Ryukyuan evidence reveals several of their reconstructions should be corrected. This is the case of ‘way’ (Ōgami mks < PJ *miti, not *Vmti < PJ *mite) or ‘breast’ (Ōgami kss < PJ *ti, not *Vtii < PJ *te) among others.

The authors further propose to reconstruct a seventh vowel *i. In this case, there seems no be no supporting evidence from Ryukyuan, and this reconstruction is based on OJ-internal evidence only. This new hypothesis tries to account for the following fact: some roots ending in -o alternate with wi, other ones with e. F and W's solution is to reconstruct *i for the -o alternating with -wi, and *ə for the -o alternating with -e. However, some of the examples are problematic, like opwisi, a proper name, which could be interpreted as a contraction of opwi-isi 'growing stone' rather than of opo-isi 'big-stone'. The word 'fire' po- ~ pwi requires caution too since the Ryukyuan languages have unexpected reflexes which do not follow the usual sound correspondences. Some other examples like 'seaweed' mo ~ me are of a different nature since they do not involve a morphophonologically conditioned vowel alternation between a bound and a free form. The number of truly reliable examples is thus actually rather low, and it is not sure whether reconstructing an extra vowel to account for these is a better solution than assuming the existence of three or four irregular forms.

F and W's hypothesis of a seventh vowel tries to explain in a unified fashion some irregular alternations, but the evidence remains limited for the time being, and further research will be required in order for this reconstruction to get general acceptance.

<footnote n="2">²See also Thorpe (1983), Hino (2003), Miyake (2003b), Pellard (2008).</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³Thorpe (1983) is the most comprehensive comparative study of Japanese and Ryukyuan, but the presentation of the correspondences is not very clear and there are few actual examples. See however Pellard (2008, 2009a) for some further evidence.</footnote>
## 2.2 Early Japanese lexical strata and the allophones of /g/ (J.M. Unger)

In his contribution, J.M. Unger revives his own earlier proposal (Ramsey & Unger 1972) about the PJ consonant system. Here he focuses on the diachronic development of OJ /g/, which he argues has two different origins in PJ: a sequence *NVk via vowel syncope, but also *η. The scenario he proposes is as follows: PJ had a series of voiced obstruents *b, *d, *z, *g which underwent lenition before the time of OJ; after the loss of *g, *η merged with syncopated *Nvk to become PJ /g/, a prenasalized velar stop.

Unger rightly points out that, contrary to the conclusions of Miyake (2003a), the transcriptional evidence does not really preclude the possibility that OJ /g/ had a nasal allophone [ŋ]. It is true that Middle Chinese *ŋ is not the most often used consonant to transcribe OJ /g/. However, OJ /m/ is most frequently transcribed with Middle Chinese *mb in the Nihon shoki, though it is generally accepted it should be reconstructed as *m and not as *mb.

Nevertheless, the voiced obstruents hypothesis of Ramsey & Unger (1972) still remains controversial. The comparative evidence from Ryukyuan sometimes adduced can be shown to be the result of a rather late innovation (Bentley 2008, Pellard 2009a, Vovin 2009), and the comparative evidence from Korean cannot be readily accepted since the genetic relationship between Japanese and Korean is still controversial. Miyake (2003b) has also given several counterarguments to the voiced obstruents theory.

U's theory of voiced obstruents and *ŋ is a plausible one, and the author has shown how it can be easily integrated in a general scenario of the historical developments of Japanese phonology. However, the traditional simpler system is still able to explain the majority of the facts well enough. If the voiced obstruents posited by U did exist, they are still beyond our reach for the moment.

## 2.3 Proto-Japanese and the distribution of dialects (T. Onishi)

Onishi reassesses the existence of a major division between Eastern and Western dialects in mainland Japan and illustrates his point with over a dozen of beautiful and very informative dialect maps. The author also shows the existence of a concentric distribution of linguistic features within Western Japanese, with the center being located in the Kinai region.

O then proposes an original calculation method to date the separation time between Eastern and Western Japanese. This method is different from both glottochronology and the recent Bayesian methods of linguistic dating. However, O's method suffers from the same kind of problems as glottochronology, such as the assumption of a constant rate, in this case not of word replacement but of spatial diffusion. A more detailed explanation of the method used and a thorough testing would be needed to assess its validity.

The conclusion that Eastern and Western Japanese must have been two different languages mutually hardly intelligible during the Old Japanese period is difficult to accept. Though some major differences can be observed, the existing attestations of the Eastern dialects in the 8th c. show they were rather close to the Western dialect of
the capital.

## 2.4 The uses of Ryukyuan in understanding Japanese language history (L.A. Serafim)

The fourth contribution by L.A. Serafim shows the crucial importance of Ryukyuan for the study of the history of Japanese.

S, after an overall account of the phonological correspondences between Japanese and the Shuri dialect of Okinawan, examines some important sound changes that have occurred in Shuri. He seems to assume vowel raising has happened *twice* in the history of Ryukyuan, while other scholars usually assume it just happened once (Hattori 1978–1979, Thorpe 1983, Pellard 2009a, 2008). However, no concrete evidence for this early vowel raising is presented, and the reasons behind this original hypothesis remain unclear.

Still, S. makes clear the point that the Ryukyuan data requires us to reconstruct more vowels in PJ and thus reinforces with more actual Ryukyuan data the point made by F and W. While there is no Ryukyuan evidence for the vowel *i* posited by Frelesvig & Whitman, S tries to integrate that seventh vowel into his own scenario, which opens more perspectives for future research.

S also summarizes evidence that shows the Ryukyuan verb forms cannot be directly compared to those of Japanese. I can add this is is the case not only for Northern Ryukyuan, as shown by S, but also for Southern Ryukyuan: some Miyako verb forms which are strikingly similar to those of Japanese have in fact a more complex origin (Pellard 2009a).

## 2.5 On the reconstruction of the proto-accentual system of Japanese (A. Matsumori)

This chapter by Akiko Matsumori concentrates on the comparison of several Japanese dialects and the reconstruction of the prosodic system of proto-mainland Japanese (PMJ). She clearly shows the accentual/tonal system of those dialects cannot be derived from the Middle Japanese (MJ) system as traditionally reconstructed.

Many scholars have made the same observation and have proposed various solutions to the problem. The most provocative one by Ramsey (1979, 1980) and de Boer (to appear) is to rework the interpretation of the Middle Japanese material. On the other hand, Matsumori (and others) have preferred to push further back in time the date of divergence of the Japanese dialects and to reconstruct a PMJ system much different from the MJ one. This is however in contradiction with the relatively shallow time depth we can observe in the lexicon, grammar and segmental phonology of the mainland Japanese dialects.

It must be mentioned that the tonal system of Middle Japanese given on p. 107 contains a mistake: the pitch shapes given are not those of nouns when followed by the marker ga, but when followed by no. Here lies a major difference between Middle
Japanese and most modern dialects, and though it does not have any direct consequence for M's reconstruction, it should be corrected.

Kindaichi's work on the typology of tonal changes in Japanese, summarized by M, is highly dependent on the historical reconstruction of MJ, and some cross-linguistic evidence would have been a welcome addition. It is true that in Japanese, as well as in many other languages, tones tend to shift to the right, and this point is heavily emphasized by the proponents of the traditional hypothesis because it supports their view that the Tokyo-type dialects can be derived from MJ by shifting high tone to the right, while the Kyoto-type ones would have undergone few changes. Nevertheless, they often forget to mention that a leftward shift is uncontroversially attested in the Kyoto dialect.<fnref n="4" />

The main features of her reconstruction is the *HLH pattern posited for the category 3.1, a pattern not attested in the MJ system, and the process of downstep assumed to have occurred in several dialects. Downstep is a well-attested phenomenon in Bantu and other tonal languages, and Japanese historical tonology can only benefit from such cross-linguistic comparisons.

M presents evidence from still other dialects in support of her reconstruction, but she also adds evidence from internal reconstruction. She points out an interesting phenomenon that might be the remnant of an earlier pattern: in the speech of the older generation of the Tokyo dialect, 3.1 nouns have a final accent when they are the second member of a compound. This view is clearly in the same vein as Wada (1943) and Ramsey (1979, 1980), who proposed the idea that compound nouns can preserve older pitch patterns.

Finally, M examines the correspondences of Japanese and Ryukyuan. Though she acknowledges the correspondences are not straightforward, she does not recognize the need to posit more categories in PJ. However, M admits there seems to be no conditioning environment that could explain the split correspondences. In such a case the comparative method requires to reconstruct more categories, and having eight tone patterns for dissyllabic nouns is not that problematic, despite M's opinion. Positing only one extra tone for PJ besides H and L gives nine possible tone patterns for dissyllables.<fnref n="5" /> Though M does not directly address Shimabukuro's reconstruction, she states a proto-Ryukyuan reconstruction is probably still premature and that we still need to collect more data. I fully agree with this opinion given the fact that existing descriptions are often inadequate.<fnref n="6" />

<footnote n="4">⁴A leftward shift is clearly attested for the 3.2 (HHL > HLL) and 3.4 (LLL > HHL (sic!) > HLL) categories as well as in quadrisyllables (HHHL > HHLL). See Komatsu (1977), Uwano (1977), Martin (1987:344), Nakai (2001).</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵Compare also with the Bantu language Makonde, which exhibits eight tonal contrasts for dissyllabic nouns Kisseberth & Odden (2003:60).</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶See for example Hayashi et al. (2009) on the previous descriptions of Ikema Ryukyuan.</footnote>
## 2.6 A reconstruction of proto-Japanese accent for disyllabic nouns (M. Shimabukuro)

It is known since the major discovery by Hattori (1958) that the tonal classes of Ryukyuan do not correspond in a straightforward manner to those of Japanese. This has been confirmed in recent years thanks to several studies based on fieldwork (Matsumori 1998, 2000, 2001, Hayashi et al. 2009). S adduces evidence from several dilects of various Ryukyuan languages to add further support to this view.

Unfortunately, the second-hand data S has chosen to use is not always accurate, like the data from the Ikema dialect of Miyako Ryukyuan: while the tonal *classes* S reconstructs are indeed mostly correct, the *pitch shapes* and the phonological analysis he quotes from Hirayama have been shown to be inaccurate (Hayashi et al. 2009).

S rightly criticizes Matsumori's position that there has been an unconditioned split of tone classes in Ryukyuan and that the reconstruction of more categories can be dispensed with: without evidence for a conditioning factor, more categories have to be reconstructed.

S suggests that these supplementary categories originate from PJ long vowels. However, counterarguments to the reconstruction of such long vowels have been recently proposed (Pellard 2009b). A full treatment of this question is beyond the scope of this review, but there is strong evidence indicating the long vowels of some Northern Ryukyuan dialects are a late secondary development. For example, long vowels fail to appear in many compounds, and on the other hand several late Sino-Japanese loanwords have undergone vowel lengthening. While the vowel-length hypothesis is problematic, the fact we must reconstruct more categories is clearly established and cannot be overlooked. The exact reconstruction of these categories will remain one of the main issues of future research.

Aside from this, the table on p.139 contains a typo: PMJ categories 2.3 and 2.4 are both given as *LL, but 2.4 should be *LH if one follows S's reasoning.

## 2.7 Proto-Japanese beyond the accent system (A. Vovin)

The last contribution on accent/tone is an insightful tonogenesis scenario by A. Vovin. Elaborating on the idea that part of the low initial tones ("low register" in the traditional terminology) can be explained to have developed from earlier vowel length, he proposes the remaining instances of initial register go back to earlier segmental contrasts. Drawing from typological considerations on the development of tones, V reconstructs long vowels (on the basis of Ryukyuan) and voiced initial consonants for words with an initial low tone. Words with initial high tone are reconstructed with short vowels, voiceless consonants or a glottalized onset. However, since this scenario relies on the same hypothesis developed by Shimabukuro about vowel length, it suffers from the same problems exposed above. I thus fear the explanation proposed for the origin of initial tone/register in Japanese is still premature, though future research may prove it to be right.

The proposal of an earlier final *-m as the source of the class 2.5, first proposed by Polivanov, is probably more workable. It is based on the comparison with Korean,
no matter whether the examples adduced turn out to be cognates or loans, and on internal reconstruction. V tries to show that the roots of adjectives and verbs for which a derived 2.5 noun exists must be reconstructed with a final -m. He thus argues that in verbs like *wosame* ‘to rule’, the m is not part of a suffix but of the root, and that it is the source of the tone pattern of *wosa* 2.5 ‘elder’. The traditional view is that the -m- is in fact a verbal suffix *-ma*, but as Vovin points out, no precise value has been assigned to this suffix, and its function is unclear. An issue remains unanswered about the class 2.5: why does the final contour tone of this class reconstructed as coming from *-m* appear only in low register nouns and not in high register ones? In other words, why are there only (in the traditional reconstruction) LF nouns and no HF nouns, and what happened to the high register nouns ending in *-m*?

The tonogenesis hypothesis proposed by V will surely trigger more research in this domain, but a detailed scenario will have to wait for a more accurate reconstruction of the PJ tone system.

## 2.8 *The source of the bigrade conjugation and stem-shape in pre-Old Japanese* (J. Whitman)

J. Whitman investigates the transitive/intransitive pairs of verbs like *tuk-‘attach (intr.)’* vs. *tuke-‘attach (trans.)’* or *sak-‘split (trans)’* vs. *sake-‘split (intr.)’. He tries to find into this pattern of transitivity alternation the key to understand the origin of the Japanese verb classes. After having reviewed the existing hypotheses about the origin of the Japanese conjugation classes and the shape of verb roots, he proposes that the bigrade verbs (*tuke- and sake- in the above examples*) are a derived secondary class, but refutes the view they incorporate a simple “transitivity flipper” morpheme and its connection with Korean -hi/ki/li/i-.

W elaborates on Yoshida (1973)’s proposal that the source of the bigrade conjugation is the verb *e-‘get, obtain, be able to’*. This verb is remarkable and could be called a zero verb since, as W notes, its forms consist exactly of the lower bigrade conjugation endings. The semantic relationship and grammaticalization process posited are convincing and supported by typological comparisons with other languages. W also notices the similarity of the verb *e-* with the paradigms of two other monosyllabic, and irregular, verbs: *ko-‘come’* and *se-‘do’*. However these verbs are only similar and not identical, and different rules, or constraints, are needed to reduce them to a single morphological paradigm.

The hypothesis of W is well argued but some points remain unclear, like why *opo + *ey gives *opoy > opwi* and not *opey > *ope*. On the other hand, W’s hypothesis makes an important prediction: all upper bigrade verbs (in -Cwi) are derived from original vowel-final stems, since *-C + *ey > Ce*. Further work will show whether counter-examples falsify this prediction. This also explains the numerical imbalance observed: upper bigrades contain vowel-final roots only, lower bigrades contain consonant-final roots too.

W’s scenario implies that transitive verbs in -s- go back to earlier vowel-final roots, while transitive bigrade verbs should be reconstructed with a consonant-final root. A
number of exceptions where *both* a transitive form in -s- and one in -e- exist are assumed to be the result of a later formation of a bigrade to express a semantic distinction.

W's hypothesis is an important advance in the reconstruction of the PJ verb morphology. It makes several interesting assumptions and predictions that can serve as the basis of further research.

## 2.9 On reconstruction of proto-Japanese verb inflection (B. Frellesvig)

This chapter by B. Frellesvig is closely related to the preceding one, though F does not accept all the proposals of W. F tries to give an overall account of the PJ verbal morphology and pays special attention to the different chronological layers.

F first examinates the different morphophonological rules of simplification of vowel sequences, one of the key point for reconstructing PJ phonology and morphology. He carefully distinguishes vowel deletion, a synchronic process motivated by phonotactic constraints, from vowel contraction, a diachronic sound change.

F acknowledges the important contribution by W to the reconstruction of the shape of PJ verb roots and accepts two main points: the reconstruction of both vowel-final and consonant-final verb roots, and the fact bigrade verbs are derived by incorporation of the verb *e*- ‘get’. However, he argues that not *all* bigrade verbs involve the same grammaticalized formative. Apart from the verb ‘get’ *e-* < *a-*(C)i-, F reconstructs an inchoative suffix *-(C)i-* for inchoative bigrade verbs derived from (mostly) adjectives, which do not take part in transitivity alternations. This view is motivated by the functional differences observed and by phonological problems arising from W’s hypothesis. F also proposes some bigrade verbs with monosyllabic stems arose by contraction of a disyllabic stem or loss of a final consonant, but no actual evidence is adduced in support of such reconstructions.

F distinguishes between primary and secondary, derived, verb classes. He thus considers the bigrade class to be a secondary one since it is made up of lexicalized verbs that incorporate a root followed by an other formative. He then goes on to show the bigrade verbs belong to a younger morphological layer. The quantitative and morphophonological evidence adduced is not really conclusive, but the morphological constraints he found are a much more interesting point. The incompatibility of the bigrade verbs with the honorific, passive, one causative and stative “auxiliaries” is indeed an important find. However, contrary to F statement, one can find reasons for some of these restrictions, at least for some verbs. For instance there is no need for *ok-wiru* ‘rise’ to have a causative derived verb in *-as(e)- since there is already a lexicalized causative verb ‘raise’ *okos-. F’s interpretation is that the bigrade verbs were created *af-ter* the appearance of those suffixes, and that during the OJ period the bigrade verbs were still not fully integrated into the Japanese verb morphology. The formation of the negative reveals an important difference between the vowel-final root quadrigrades and the bigrades (viz. ‘draw close’ *yəsə + anV > *yəsanV > yosanV vs. ‘dawn’ *ake + -anV > akenV*). F views this fundamental difference as reflecting a chronological difference: the negative forms of bigrades were formed *after* those of quadrigrades and
the reanalysis of the negative *anV* as a suffix *-nV*. I would like however to point to another possible explanation: vowel-final quadrigrades end in a single vowel, in other words with a light syllable, while bigrades end in a vowel that come from a contraction of two and was probably realized as a diphthong, thus forming a heavy syllable; this might explain the difference observed and one could conclude the initial vowel of the negative morpheme deleted a vowel in light syllables but dropped after heavy syllables.

Together with Whitman's contribution, F has pointed out several issues in the reconstruction of PJ verb morphology and shown there are still prospects for important discoveries in this domain.

## 2.10 The Nominal and Adnominal forms in Old Japanese: consequences for a reconstruction of pre-Old Japanese syntax (J. Wrona)

The chapter by J. Wrona is a welcome contribution on Japanese historical syntax since it not only gives a synchronic account of the OJ nominal and adnominal forms but also investigates their origins and diachronic developments. W had the very good idea to undertake an empirical and comprehensive study of all the forms attested *phonographically* in the whole OJ corpus. His analysis is thus firmly based on concrete evidence and does not just elaborate on previous accounts. The author gives a catalog of the different types of nominal and adnominal forms derived from verbs and adjectives, together with a classification of their uses. These include the *-aku*, *-(r)u*, *-ki* and *-sa* forms, as well as the formal noun constructions.

W gives a detailed classification of the different functions, syntactic properties and pragmatic status of the different constructions. The analyses proposed are clear and well argued, with occasional appeals to cross-linguistic parallels. The presentation of the *kakari-musubi* syntactic pattern is interesting as it departs from the traditional descriptions. It is very close to the similar construction found in modern Miyako Ryu-kyuan (Shimoji 2009): different focus types are marked by different focus markers attached to phrases, different speech acts are encoded by different verb forms, and there are restrictions regarding the co-occurrence of the two categories.

W convincingly demonstrates the primary function of adnominal forms was to form relative clauses, and that their uses in complement clauses are a secondary development. This leads to the conclusion that adnominal complements are a late development in Japanese.

## 3 CONCLUSION

*Proto-Japanese: Issues and Prospects* is clearly a major publication in the field of Japonic historical linguistics. It presents an up-to-date reconstruction of PJ which corrects and amends the previous standard reconstruction embodied by *Martin* (1987). At the same time, it is full of innovative proposals and new developments of existing theories. Needless to say, it opens many prospects for further research.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

BENTLEY, John R. (2008). *A linguistic history of the forgotten islands: A reconstruction of the proto-language of the Southern Ryukyus*. Folkestone: Global Oriental.

DE BOER, Elisabeth (to appear). *The Historical development of Japanese tone*. Harrassowitz.

HASHIMOTO, Mantarō (ed.) (1977). *On’in, Iwanami kōza Nihongo*, vol. 5. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten.

HATTORI, Shirō (1958). Amami guntō no shohōgen ni tsuite – Okinawa/Sakishima shohōgen to no hikaku. *Jinrui kagaku* IX.

HATTORI, Shirō (1978–1979). Nihon sogo ni tsuite 1–22. *Gengo* 7(1)–7(3), 7(6)–8(12).

HAYASHI, Yuka, PELLARD, Thomas, TAKUBO, Yukinori, KUBO, Tomoyuki & IGARASHI, Yōsuke (2009). The Tone system of Ikema Ryukyuan. Paper presented at the workshop *The history & reconstruction of Japanese accent*, CRLAO-CLI, Paris, 3–4 September 2009.

HINO, Sukenari (2003). Nihon sogo no boin taikei – Jōdai Tōgoku hōgen shiryō ni yoru saikō (a reconstruction of the proto-japanese vowel system on the basis of the data from Eastern Old Japanese). In: *Vovin & Osada (2003)*, pp. 187–206.

KAJI, Shigeki (ed.) (2001). *Cross-linguistic studies of tonal phenomena: Tonogenesis, Japanese accentology, and other topics*. Tokyo: ILCAA.

KISSEBERTH, Charles & ODDEN, David (2003). Tone. In: *The Bantu languages*, NURSE, Derek & PHILIPPSON, Gérard, eds., London: Routledge, pp. 59–70.

KOMATSU, Hideo (1977). Akusento no hensen. In: *Hashimoto (1977)*.

MARTIN, Samuel E. (1987). *The Japanese language through time*. New Haven; London: Yale university press.

MATSUMORI, Akiko (1998). Ryūkyū akusento no rekishiteki keisei katei — ruibetsu goi 2-hakugo no tokui na gōryū no shikata o tegakari ni. *Gengo kenkyū* 114: 85–114.

MATSUMORI, Akiko (2000). Ryūkyū no takei akusento taikei ni tsuite no ichi kōsatsu — Ryūkyū sogo ni okeru ruibetsu goi 3-paku go no gōryū no shikata. *Kokugogaku* 51(1): 93–108.

MATSUMORI, Akiko (2001). Historical tonology of Japanese dialects. In: *Kaji (2001)*, pp. 93–122.

MIYAKE, Marc Hideo (2003a). *Old Japanese: A phonetic reconstruction*. London; New York: RoutledgeCurzon.

MIYAKE, Marc Hideo (2003b). Philological evidence for *e and *o in pre-Old Japanese. *Diachronica* 20(1): 83–137.

NAKAI, Yukihiko (2001). The history of the kyoto accent. In: *Kaji (2001)*, pp. 129–143.

PELLARD, Thomas (2008). Proto-Japonic *e and *o in Eastern Old Japanese. *Cahiers de linguistique – Asie orientale* 37(2): 133–158.

PELLARD, Thomas (2009a). Ōgami — Éléments de description d'un parler du Sud des Ryūkyū. Ph.D. thesis, École des hautes études en sciences sociales.

PELLARD, Thomas (2009b). Once again on long vowels and register in proto-Japonic. Paper presented at the workshop *The history & reconstruction of Japanese accent*,
CRLAO-CLI, Paris, 3-4 September 2009.

RAMSEY, Robert R. & UNGER, J. Marshall (1972). Evidence of a consonant shift in seventh-century Japanese. *Papers in Japanese linguistics* 1(2): 270-295.

RAMSEY, Robert S. (1979). The Old Kyoto dialect and the historical development of Japanese accent. *Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies* 39(1): 157–175.

RAMSEY, Robert S. (1980). Nihongo no akusento no rekishiteki henka. *Gengo* 9(2): 64–76.

SERAFIM, Leon A. (2003). When and from where did the japonic language enter the Ryukyus? — A critical comparison of language, archeology, and history. In: *Vovin & Osada* (2003), pp. 463–476.

SHIMOJI, Michinori (2009). *A Grammar of Irabu, a Southern Ryukyuan language*. Ph.D. thesis, ANU.

THORPE, Maner L. (1983). *Ryūkyūan language history*. Ph.D. thesis, University of Southern California.

UWANO, Zendō (1977). Nihongo no akusento. In: *Hashimoto* (1977).

VOVIN, Alexander (2009). *Koreo-Japonica: A critical study in the proposed language relationship*. University of Hawai'i Press.

VOVIN, Alexander & OSADA, Toshiki (eds.) (2003). *Nihongo keitōron no genzai (Perspectives on the origins of the Japanese language)*. Kyoto: Kokusai Nihon bunka sentā.

WADA, Minoru (1943). Fukugōgo akusento no kōbu seiso to shite mita nionsetsu meishi. *Hōgen kenkyū* 7(1): 1–26.

YOSHIDA, Kanehiko (1973). *Jōdai jodōshi no shiteki kenkyū*. Tokyo: Yūseidō.

Thomas PELLARD

Kyoto University, Graduate School of Letters, Department of Linguistics

Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan