A Functional and Pragmatic Approach to NQ-Scrambling in Japanese
Eiki Ono(Takushoku University)
In Japanese, nouns can form numeral NPs with NQs (i.e. numeral quantifiers) marked
by the genitive particle no, as given in (1):(1)

Taroo-ga [NP sansatu-no hon-o] katta.
Taro-Nom three-Gen book-Acc bought‘Taro bought three books.’

The NQs can also be postposed or preposed out of their associated NPs, as given in (2a, b):
(2)

a.
b.

Taroo-ga [NP hon-o] sansatu katta.
Sansatu Taroo-ga [NP hon-o] katta.

These phenomena are generally called Quantifier Floating, and the fronted pattern like (2b) isespecially called NQ-scrambling (see Miyagawa 1989). My presentation deals with thisNQ-scrambling as a main topic.
Miyagawa (1989) provides a syntactic analysis of NQ-scrambling by means of themutual c-command requirement (see Miyagawa (1989) for a detailed discussion of thisanalysis). Contrary to this view, Ishii (1999) considers that all NQs which precede theirassociated NPs are quantificational adverbs, which are different from the stranding type ofNQs that Miyagawa discusses. Ishii claims that although this adverb type is free from thesyntactic restriction of the mutual c-command requirement, it instead must obey the semantic
restriction of having only a multiple-event reading. In other words, this restriction stipulates
that the NQ-scrambling construction is not allowed with a single-event interpretation:
(3)

(4)

Multiple-event readings:a.
Zenbu-de hutatu Taroo-ga mado-oaketa.
in total two
Taro-Nom window-Acc opened‘Taro has opened two windows in total.’(Ishii 1999:253)b.
Kesakara go-nin yuuei
kinsi kuiki-o gakusei-ga oyoida.
this morning since fiveswimming ban zone-Acc student-Nom swam
‘Five students have swum in the No Swimming zone since this morning.’(ibid.:252)
Single-event readings:
a. ?*Yonko Jiroo-ga onigiri-o
itido-ni densi-renze-ni kaketa.
four Jiro-Nom rice ball-Acc all at once microwave-to put‘Jiro microwaved four rice balls at once.’(ibid.:253)
b. ?*Nizyuu-nin ofisu-ni gakusei-ga totoo-onasite yattekita.
twentyoffice-to student-Nom group-Acc forming came over‘20 students came over to my office in a group.’(ibid.:252)

From the contrast between (3) and (4), Ishii concludes that NQ-scrambling is limited to amultiple-event reading.
However, many counterexamples can be found to Ishii’s semantic analysis. For
instance, the following NQ-scrambling examples are perfectly acceptable despite having onlya single-event reading:

(5)

a.

b.

Sansatu matomete Taroo-ga hon-okatta.
three collectively Taro-Nom book-Acc bought‘Taro bought three books collectively.’
San-nin tikara-o awasete gakusei-ga piano-o motiageta.
three with united efforts student-Nom piano-Acc lifted‘Three students lifted a piano together.’

As evidenced by the above examples, it is obvious that NQ-scrambling is irrelevant to event
plurality.
Takami (1998) shows that Quantifier Floating in Japanese can be captured appropriatelyby the functional notion of information structure. In this analysis, it is considered that afloating NQ conveys the most important information (or new information), and thus thepositions where a floating NQ occurs are compatible with two positions which are normallyoccupied by a focus element: a preverbal position like (2a) and a clause-initial position like(2b).
In my presentation, on the basis that Takami’s functional proposal is on the right track,
it is shown that the analysis of NQ-scrambling can be developed further from a pragmaticperspective. The NQ in a clause-initial position has an informational focus in common withthe one in a preverbal position, but the usage of the former is somewhat limited comparedwith the latter. I would like to propose here that NQ-scrambling is more acceptable as thesituation becomes clearer. To ascertain the plausibility of this proposal, let us consider a fewof the above examples again. In (2b) and (5a), these NQ-scrambling sentences are both
acceptable, but in (2b) the NQ sansatu sounds just slightly awkward due to abruptly
appearing in the sentence-initial position without any context; on the other hand in (5a), since
the NQ sansatu is uttered with the adverb matomete, the situation described is clearer, andthus (5a) is more acceptable than (2b). In (4a), if the adverb itido-ni ‘all at once’ is utteredwith the fronted NQ yonko together, the situation described can be understood clearly and its
unacceptability greatly improves, as given below:(6)

Yonko itido-ni
Jiroo-ga onigiri-odensi-renze-ni kaketa.
fourall at once Jiro-Nom rice ball-Acc microwave-to put‘Jiro microwaved four rice balls at once.’

In my presentation, I will deal with more examples and provide a new perspective for thephenomenon of NQ-scrambling in Japanese.

References:
Ishii, Y. (1999) “A Note on Floating Quantifiers in Japanese.” In M. Muraki and E. Iwamoto(eds.) Linguistics: In Search of the Human Mind, 236-267. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.
Miyagawa, S. (1989) Structure and case marking in Japanese. New York: Academic Press.
Takami, K. (1998) “Nihongo-no Suuryooshi-Yuuri-ni Tuite [On Quantifier Float in Japanese].”Gengo 27:1, 86-95; 27:2, 86-95; 27:3, 98-107. Tokyo: Taishukan.