This article was downloaded by: [Nagoya University]
On: 02 February 2013, At: 23:19
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Writing Systems Research
Publication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pwsr20

How do native Chinese speakers
learning Japanese as a second
language understand Japanese kanji
homophones?
aaKatsuo Tamaoka , Sachiko Kiyama & Xiang-Juan Chu

a baGraduate School of Languages and Cultures, Nagoya
University, Nagoya-shi, Japanb

Department of Japanese Studies, Tianjin Foreign Studies
University, Tianjin, China
Version of record first published: 01 Jun 2012.

To cite this article: Katsuo Tamaoka , Sachiko Kiyama & Xiang-Juan Chu (2012): How donative Chinese speakers learning Japanese as a second language understand Japanese kanji
homophones?, Writing Systems Research, 4:1, 30-46
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17586801.2012.690008

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-andconditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any
representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The
accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently
verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions,claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused
arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of thismaterial.

WRITING SYSTEMS RESEARCH
2012, 4 (1), 3046

How do native Chinese speakers learning Japanese as a second
language understand Japanese kanji homophones?
Katsuo Tamaoka1, Sachiko Kiyama1, and Xiang-Juan Chu1,2

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

1

Graduate School of Languages and Cultures, Nagoya University, Nagoya-shi,Japan
2
Department of Japanese Studies, Tianjin Foreign Studies University, Tianjin,
China

The present study investigated causal relations between lexical/grammatical knowledge
and the ability to make homophonic distinctions among 170 native Chinese speakers
learning Japanese as a second language (L2). The result of a structural equation
modelling (SEM) analysis indicated that the ability to distinguish homophones depending
on sentential context was strongly affected by grammatical knowledge, though not bylexical knowledge. Therefore, grammatical knowledge greatly assists Chinese learners of
L2 Japanese to identify the specific homophone appropriate in a sentential context
among multiple candidates.

Keywords: Japanese kanji; Homophone; Chinese native speakers learning Japanese.

Learning to read a second language (L2) seems to be much easier when L2 uses
symbols similar to those of the writing system of the first language (L1). As a majorpart of the writing system, the Japanese language has adapted Chinese characters,
called kanji in Japanese. As a result, due to the application of their knowledge ofChinese characters, native Chinese speakers learning Japanese as a second language
seem to be able to process Japanese kanji more quickly than native English speakers
who use the alphabet script (e.g., Tamaoka, 1997, 2000). There are at least three times
as many homophones in Japanese as in Chinese (Mochizuki, 1981), so that the correct
word usually must be identified with the help of the kanji script (Tamaoka, 1991;
Tamaoka & Makioka, 2004a). Thus, like native Japanese speakers, native Chinese
speakers learning Japanese (hereafter, Chinese learners of L2 Japanese) makehomophonic errors as they learn many words written in kanji. They experience
difficulties avoiding the homophonic trap embedded in the Japanese writing system.
The present study therefore tested Chinese learners of L2 Japanese to investigate
which factors affect their ability to identify the specific homophone among multiple
candidates that fit into a Japanese sentence.

Correspondence should be addressed to Katsuo Tamaoka, Graduate School of Languages and Cultures,
Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya-shi, Aichi-ken 464-8601, Japan. E-mail: ktamaoka@lang.nagoya-u.ac.jp# 2012 Psychology Press, an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business
http://www.tandfonline.com/pwsr

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17586801.2012.690008

HOW DO NATIVE CHINESE SPEAKERS UNDERSTAND JAPANESE HOMOPHONES

31

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

KANJI ORTHOGRAPHY-AND-PHONOLOGY MAPPING AND KANGOAND WAGO HOMOPHONES
The writing system for the modern Japanese language consists of the kanji and kanascripts. Kanji are morphological units adapted from Chinese. In contemporary
Japanese, kanji represent not only lexical items originated from Chinese (Kango) but
also native Japanese vocabulary (Wago) created by Japanese speakers. Two-kanji
compound words are extremely common, making up approximately 70% of the entries
in a typical Japanese dictionary (Yokozawa & Umeda, 1988).
The kana script further consists of two sets, hiragana and katakana. The hiragana
script is cursive in shape and used for grammatical morphemes as well as for somecontent words. The katakana script is angular in shape, and usually used for writing
loanwords from languages written with alphabets, as well as the names of animals andplants. The hiragana and katakana scripts fundamentally describe Japanese sounds on
the basis of mora-to-kana correspondence. Three scripts of kanji, hiragana, andkatakana are simultaneously used in modern written Japanese texts.
Mochizuki (1981) counted type frequency of homophones listed in a Japanesedictionary, Shin-meikai Kokugo-jiten [New Coherent Japanese Dictionary] publishedin 1972. He found 21,270 homophones out of the total of 58,431 words, or 36.40%. In
contrast, using a Chinese dictionary, Hanyu Pinyin Cihui [Chinese Pinyin Dictionary]published in 1963, Mochizuki counted 5,249 homophones out of the total of 45,200
words, or 11.61%. This includes the use of tonal differences to distinguishhomophones. Thus, although the percentages of homophones identified by Mochizuki
among Japanese and Chinese words are not directly comparable, it may allow us toestimate that there are approximately three times as many homophones in Japanese as
in Chinese.
From the point of view of mapping between orthography and phonology, we willconsider two directions for kanji mappings. First is the direction from orthography tophonology. A single Japanese kanji often has two different types of readings or
pronunciations: On-readings derived from the original Chinese pronunciation andKun-readings originating from the Japanese pronunciation (see Hirose, 1992; Kess &Miyamoto, 1999; Leong & Tamaoka, 1995; Tamaoka, 1991; Tamaoka & Makioka,
2004b). As depicted in Figure 1, the kanji meaning ‘‘stars’’ is pronounced hoshi in
Kun-reading and see or shoo in On-reading. Kun-readings frequently appear as asingle kanji, often having a concrete meaning by themselves. In contrast, On-readings
are generally used for multiple-kanji compound words such as
see za meaning‘‘constellation’’,ee see ‘‘satellite’’, andsee joo ki ‘‘the Stars and Stripes’’.
Kun-reading is also occasionally used for multiple-kanji compounds as in
hosi
zora ‘‘a starry sky’’.
In a recent experiment, Tamaoka and Taft (2010) presented kanji that are given an
On-reading around 50% of the time. These kanji were presented in a context of otherkanji that had either a highly dominant On-reading or a highly dominant Kunreading. The kanji reading was very much biased towards the type of phonologicalenvironment in which it was embedded. Native Japanese speakers easily shifted
between On- and Kun-readings, depending on phonological context, suggesting that
separate On and Kun sublexica exist within the phonological lexicon. Generally
speaking, On-readings are used for Kango while Kun-readings are used for Wago. As
such, a single kanji is mapped into multiple phonological units of On and Kun
sublexica, as depicted in Figure 1.

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 201332

TAMAOKA, KIYAMA, CHU

Figure 1. Kanji orthography to phonology mapping.

The second mapping direction is from phonology to orthography. The standard
Mandarin form of Chinese has the four tones, which greatly contribute to distinguish
multiple homophones. However, the Japanese sound system does not have tones todifferentiate homophones. The Japanese pitch accent may help identify a word, but itvaries depending on dialect, so pitch is often unreliable for this purpose. Different
ways of pronouncing kanji were borrowed from China during various periods(Miller, 1967; Saito, Inoue, & Nomura, 1979). Consequently, different pronunciations
simultaneously exist in the pronunciation of kanji used in modern Japanese. In
simplifying pronunciations of the Chinese tones and adapting three different ways of
pronouncing forms borrowed from China, the Japanese language created a great
number of kanji whose On-readings are homophonic. As shown in Figure 2, a mora
or syllable is mapped into multiple kanji. For instance, according to Tamaoka,
Kirsner, Yanase, Miyaoka, and Kawakami (2002), a sound koo (which consists of
two morae, ko and o, or a single syllable koo) can be written with 65 different kanji
among the Jyoyoo Kanji (, the list of 1,945 commonly used kanji formerly
used in public education), including one Kun-reading. In the same way, a single
mora sound ka can be written with 37 different kanji, including three Kun-readings.
A two-kanji compound word kooka is made by combining the two sound units koo
and ka as shown in Figure 2. This combined sound kooka can represent at least eight
relatively high-frequency two-kanji compound Kango words, as depicted in Figure 3:(school song),(expensive price),(technological faculty),(calcification),(effect),(coin),(descent), and(elevated). These compoundwords are all On-reading combinations.
Homophones are also seen in Wago. For example, as depicted in Figure 4, toru canbe written using at least eight different kanji as‘‘wild-craft’’ or ‘‘adapt’’,‘‘take’’,‘‘take (a picture)’’,‘‘steal’’,‘‘record’’,‘‘catch’’,‘‘consume’’, and‘‘administer’’. Meanings of these homophones are distinguishedby the orthographic aspect of kanji, which carry concepts. However, it is context that
determines which of the homophones fits in a certain sentence.

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

HOW DO NATIVE CHINESE SPEAKERS UNDERSTAND JAPANESE HOMOPHONES

33

Figure 2. Kanji phonology to orthography mapping.

In the present study, kanji homophones are defined as the same sound shared bydifferent kanji, regardless of verb inflections. For instance,tsuku is an intransitive
verb whiletsukeru is a transitive verb. These words inflect differently,(tsukþu) inflects as a godan verb while(tsukeþru) as an ichidan verb. For thisstudy, however, since both verbs share the same kanji , they are considered as (kanji)
homophones. In fact, test items used by the Japan Association for Testing Japanese
Kanji Abilities (Nihon Kanji Nooryoku Kentei Kyookai,)
similarly include homophones which differ in verb inflections.
Given the large number of homophones existing among Japanese words, incorrect
homophonic kanji or two-kanji compound words are occasionally selected even bynative Japanese speakers when they write an essay (e.g., Hatta, Kawakami, &Tamaoka, 1998, 2002). Of the types of errors that native Japanese speakers make,phonologically related kanji writing errors were the most numerous (60.0%), followedby orthographically related errors (43.6%) and semantically related errors (29.7%).
Based on the large percentage of phonologically related kanji errors, we can assume
that native Japanese speakers activate multiple kanji or their compounds by a single
sound, and occasionally replace the target with another inappropriately activatedhomophonic kanji. In fact, psycholinguistic studies (e.g., Sakuma, Sasanuma,
Tatsumi, & Masaki, 1998; Tamaoka, 2005, 2007; Wydell, Patterson, & Humphreys,Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 201334

TAMAOKA, KIYAMA, CHU

Figure 3. Homophones in Kango.

1993) found that multiple kanji and their compound words are simultaneously
activated from a single phonological form.

KNOWLEDGE USED FOR HOMOPHONIC DISTINCTIONS BY CHINESE
L2 JAPANESE LEARNERS
Learning kanji homophones is a major focus of L2 Japanese kanji learning above theintermediate level (e.g., Ishida, 1999; Okazaki, 1993). Like native Japanese speakers, L2
Japanese learners activate multiple homophonic units in lexical items as they memorise
many kanji-presented words. Since Chinese learners of L2 Japanese can easily use theirknowledge of Chinese characters to understand Japanese kanji (Tamaoka, 1997, 2000;
Yamato & Tamaoka, 2009, 2011), they are expected to make homophonic errors similar
to those native Japanese speakers do. Then, how do Chinese learners of L2 Japanesefind the appropriate kanji from multiple homophonic candidates?
An earlier study of native Japanese speakers by Inoki (1976) found context effects
on retrieving homophones among native Japanese speakers. In other words, native
Japanese speakers select the proper kanji-presented lexical item out of multiple
homophonic words based on context. Likewise, Kawaguchi (1993) and Takebe (1989)
suggest that the acquisition of homophonic words by L2 learners requires not only
kanji knowledge but also contextual knowledge for each homophone. As Chinese
learners of L2 Japanese already know a reasonable number of words written in kanji atthe intermediate level of Japanese language-learning, or at least their L1 lexical
knowledge is fundamentally applicable to understand L2 Japanese lexical items, theirkanji knowledge is expected to play a major role in identifying the proper homophoneamong multiple candidates. To accomplish this process, basic grammatical knowledge
enables Chinese learners of L2 Japanese to properly understand the meanings ofsentences prior to identifying an appropriate homophone.

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

HOW DO NATIVE CHINESE SPEAKERS UNDERSTAND JAPANESE HOMOPHONES

35

Figure 4. Homophones in Wago.

The present study, therefore, aimed to clarify causal relations between lexical/
grammatical knowledge and the ability to make homophonic distinctions depending
on sentence context among native Chinese learners of L2 Japanese. Using a structural
equation modelling (SEM) analysis, a causal model of lexical/grammatical knowledge
affecting the ability to distinguish homophones was tested against the obtained data.

METHOD
Participants
A total of 170 native Chinese-speaking undergraduate students learning Japanese in
China (17 males and 153 females) participated in the study. Ages ranged from 18 years
and 0 months to 23 years and 3 months for a mean of 20 years and 5 months with astandard deviation of 10 months. All participants were majoring in the Japanese
language, and had just completed their first (n 65) or second year (n 105)
coursework.

Three latent variables for structural equation modelling (SEM)
Three latent variables for SEM, homophonic distinction, lexical knowledge, andgrammatical knowledge, were measured by actual tests (i.e., observed variables). The
means, standard deviations, correlations, and reliabilities of these tests are reported inTable 1.

Tests of homophonic distinction
Homophonic distinction was measured by using two tests for Kango and Wago
homophonic words. Two sentences written in kana were given to participants.
Participants were asked to select appropriate words to complete the two different
sentences from a list of four homophonic words. For example, two kana sentences

No.

Observed variables

1

2

3

Lexical knowledge (a .867)
1Japanese origins (Wago)
2
Chinese origins (Kango)3
Alphabetic loanwords
4
Function words


0.515***
0.606***
0.410***


0.550***
0.551***

Grammatical knowledge (a .679)
5
Morphological inflections
6
Local dependency
7Complex structure

0.323***
0.133*
0.256***

Homophonic distinction (a .678)
8
Wago homophones
9
Kango homophones
MeanStandard deviation

4

5

6


0.543***



0.326***
0.150*
0.367***

0.356***
0.104
0.337***

0.266***
0.142*
0.370***


0.311***
0.366***

0.104
0.182**

0.151*
0.254***

0.100
0.185**

0.184**
0.328***

8.06
2.87

8.96
1.82

8.79
2.09

6.59
2.72

Note: n  170. *p B.05; **p B.01; ***p B.001.

7

8

9


0.437***



0.231***
0.212**

0.186**
0.236***

0.318***
0.379***


0.533***



9.22
1.66

9.38
1.61

8.75
1.97

6.69
1.99

8.15
1.87

TAMAOKA, KIYAMA, CHU

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

36

TABLE 1Means, standard deviations, and correlations for observed and latent variables

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

HOW DO NATIVE CHINESE SPEAKERS UNDERSTAND JAPANESE HOMOPHONES

37

Osanai koro-o (kaisoo) shita ‘‘(I) looked back on my childhood’’ and Rookyuuka shita
tenpo-o (kaisoo) shita ‘‘(I) renovated a decrepit shop’’ were given to participants, whowere then asked to select two homophones out of four kanji-presented choices, allpronounced as kaisoo, to complete the above two sentences. There were 11 pairs in
Kango and 12 pairs in Wago, with two correct homophones presented among fourchoices for each pair of sentences. These two observed variables construct ability ofhomophonic distinctions. The reliability of the 23 question items (n170) as
measured by Cronbach’s alpha was .678.
The 11 pairs or 22 homophones of Kango are listed in Table 2. All these words andtheir embedded sentences with four homophone choices are presented in the
Appendix. As shown in Table 2, 15 homophones out of 22 are not included in thelexical list of the formerly used Japanese Language Proficiency Test (JapanFoundation, 2002). Yet, 16 Kango homophones out of 22 exist in the Chinese
language: native Chinese speakers in the present study were expected to be able toguess the meanings of a majority of the Kango homophones. Word frequency of eachword was established using Amano and Kondo (2000, 2003 for the CD-ROM version).
This index of word frequency was calculated using a corpus from editions of the Asahi
Newspaper printed from 1985 to 1998, containing a total type frequency of 341,771
morphemic units (not word units) and a total token frequency of 287,792,797
morphemic units. According to this database, the average word frequency of the 22
TABLE 2Chinese originated homophones (Kango) used for the test items of homophonic distinction
Japanese characteristics

No. Targets

Sound

1

yuushiyuushikyooseekyoosee
koji
koji
ikoo
ikoo
kaisookaisoohoosi
hoosi
keeshookeeshookookankookan

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

9
10
11

MeaningHigh aspiration
Volunteers
Forcing
Correction
Firm refusal
Ostentation
Inclination
Transition
Recollection
Renovation
Volunteers
SporesInheritanceWarning
Enjoyment
Favourable
impression
keeki
Cyclicalkeeki
Momentkoomyoo Artificekoomyoo LighttanseePainstaking
tanseeSighChinese characteristics

Japanese
proficiency levelWordfrequency

Corresponding
Chinese words

Sound

Beyond the levels
Beyond the levels
1st level
Beyond the levels
Beyond the levels
Beyond the levels
1st level
1st level
Beyond the levels
Beyond the levels
1st level
Beyond the levels
Beyond the levels
Beyond the levels
Beyond the levels
Beyond the levels

140
1,929
8,779
579
759
1,296
23,158
9,480
1,066
1,410
2,082
114
3,847
933
398
1,609

Not existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Not existing
Existing
Existing
Not existing
Existing
Existing
Not existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Not existing
Existing

xiongzhi
youzhiqiangzhi
jiaozheng
guci
kuashiyixiang
yixinghuixianggaizhuangfengshibaozijicheng
jingzhongjiaohuan
Haogan

2nd level
2nd level
1st level
Beyond the levels
Beyond the levels
Beyond the levels

43,255
3,702
246
285
144
33

Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Not existing
Existing

jingqiqiji
Qiaomiao
guangming
danjingtansheng

Note: ‘‘Beyond the levels’’ refers to a word not included in the lexical list of the formerly used JapaneseLanguage Proficiency Test.

38

TAMAOKA, KIYAMA, CHU

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

Kango homophones tested was 4,784 occurrences with a standard deviation of 9,809,
varying from 33 times forto 43,255 times for.
Likewise, as listed in Table 3, 12 pairs or 24 Wago homophones were used for thepresent study. All these words and the sentences where they are embedded with four
homophone choices are presented in the Appendix. As shown in Table 3, threehomophones were at the lowest proficiency level, the fourth level of the formerly used
Japanese-Language Proficiency Test (Japan Foundation, 2002), 13 at the 2nd level, 3
at the 1st level, and 5 beyond the levels of the test. A large majority of the kanji used
for stems of Kango homophones (22 out of 24 kanji) exist in the Chinese language.
Thus, native Chinese speakers in the present study can guess the meanings of amajority of the items. Word frequency of each word was established using Amano andKondo (2000, 2003 for the CD-ROM version). According to the database, the averageword frequency of the 24 Wago homophones was 4,808 occurrences with a standard
deviation of 7,495, varying from 70 times for
to 32,981 times for.

Tests of lexical knowledge
Lexical knowledge was gauged by four tests classified on the basis of word categories(Miyaoka, Tamaoka, & Sakai, 2011): function words, Kango, Wago, and loanwords(Gairaigo). This test has been used multiple times, almost always with high reliability.
TABLE 3
Japanese originated homophones (Wago) used for test items of homophonic distinction
Japanese characteristics

No. Kanji
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Word

Chinese characteristics

Sound

Meaning

Japanese
proficiency levelWordfrequency

Corresponding
Chinese kanjiSounda-gerua-gerususu-meru
susu-meru
to-ru
to-ru
tsu-gutsu-guhu-keru
hu-keru
ka-ru
ka-ru
ka-eruka-erui-ru
i-ru
ta-tsuta-tsutsu-kutsu-keru
osa-meru
osa-meru
haka-ruhaka-ru

Give (example)
Fry
InviteRecommend
RecruitTake (picture)Continue
Follow(Night) go
Age
Mow
Urge
Cash
Make upNeed
Shoot
Break off
ForswearArriveAdd
PursuePay
PromoteMeasureFourth level
Second level
Second level
Beyond levels
Second level
Fourth level
First level
Second level
Second level
First level
Second level
Beyond the levels
Second level
Second level
Fourth level
Beyond the levels
Beyond the levels
First level
Second level
Second level
Beyond the levels
Second level
Second level
Second level

21,449
1,084
5,002
241
3,834
6,648
3,149
11,554
70
101
439
121
1,017
1,640
1,334
357
2,786
1,390
6,037
7,085
147
3,986
32,981
2,932

Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Not existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Not existing
Existing

ju
yang
quan
jian
cai
cuo
ji
ci
ceng
Lao

qu
huan
ti
yao
she
jue
duan
zhao/zhe
fu
xiu
na

ce

Note: ‘‘Beyond the levels’’ refers to a word not included in the lexical list of the formerly used JapaneseLanguage Proficiency Test.

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

HOW DO NATIVE CHINESE SPEAKERS UNDERSTAND JAPANESE HOMOPHONES

39

These words were taken from the vocabulary list of the Japanese Language
Proficiency Test (Japan Foundation, 2004). There were 12 words for each of thelexical categories of Kango, Wago, and Gairaigo, consisting of four nouns, four
adjectives, and four verbs. In addition, 12 words from each category were crossmatched with lexical difficulties among the three lexical categories using the first to
fourth level of the Japanese-Language Proficiency Test (Japan Foundation, 2004).
Kango were selected from two-kanji compound words such as guchi (‘‘complaint’’),fukyoo (‘‘recession’’), shumi (‘‘hobby’’), yuuboo-da (‘‘promising’’), kengaku-suru (‘‘tovisit’’), and chuumon-suru (‘‘to order’’). Examples of Wago are arasuji (‘‘story’’),sakasama (‘‘upside-down’’), yayakoshi-i (‘‘complicated’’), detarame-na (‘‘nonsense’’),hakadoru (‘‘to make progress’’), and unazuku (‘‘to nod and agree’’). Gairaigo aretaken from alphabetic languages, in this case English, such as saizu (‘‘size’’), kyaria(‘‘career’’), dorai-da (‘‘dry, unsentimental’’), ruuzu-da (‘‘loose’’), massaaji-suru (‘‘tomassage’’), and sutoppu-suru (‘‘to stop’’). As items of function words, we used
grammatical words consisting of more than two morphemes such as -ga-hayai-ka(‘‘no sooner . . . than . . .’’), -ta-tokoro-de (‘‘even if. . .’’), itaru-made (‘‘until. . .’’ or ‘‘up
to. . .’’), kawa-kiri-ni (‘‘start by. . .’’), and yogi-naku-sa-reru (‘‘be obliged to. . .’’).
Lexical knowledge showed a high Cronbach’s alpha reliability of .867 (48 items,n 170).

Tests of grammatical knowledge
Grammatical knowledge was measured by three tests: morphological inflections,
local dependency, and complex structure. Morphological inflections can be correctly
judged within a single lexical unit requiring inflections. For example, a participant
had to choose a correct answer to fill in an empty bracket of a sentence, Ayamattekabin-o kowashita watashi-o, chichi-wa (). ‘‘My father (did not blame) me who
mistakenly broke the flower vase’’ out of the four choices of seme-nakat-ta (a correct
form for ‘‘did not blame’’), seme-nai-dat-ta, semeru-nakat-ta, and seme-naku-te-dat-ta(incorrect forms for ‘‘did not blame’’). In this question item, the correct answer can
only be the lexical unit seme-nakat-ta, as the others are not grammatically correct. In
contrast, local dependency is defined as reference to two neighbouring units todetermine a correct expression. For instance, the correct answer for the empty
bracket of the sentence Kanojo-wa itsumo tamagoyaki-o () tsukuru ‘‘She always
cooks omelets (very well)’’ cannot be determined by only referring to a single lexical
unit. Among the four choices, joozu-ni (correct answer for ‘‘very well’’ in the item),joozu-de, joozu-no, and joozu-na all four choices are grammatically correct expressions by themselves. The correct choice is only identified by noting that the verb
tsukuru (to cook) follows it and require a word ending in -ni. This is a complex
structure which requires reference to a whole sentence in order to determine thecorrect answer. In another example sentence, Don’nani kanojo-ga (), anodaigaku-niwa gookaku shinai daroo ‘‘(No matter) how hard she (tries), she would
not pass an entrance examination at that university’’, the four choices for the empty
bracket are ganbat-temo (correct answer for ‘‘no matter . . . tries hard’’), ganbat-te,
ganbaru-noni, and ganbaru-ga. Each of these four expressions is grammaticallycorrect by itself. However, since an unexpected negative conclusion follows the priorsentence don’nani . . . temo [no matter how . . .], the correct choice has to be ganbattemo. Grammatical knowledge items showed a Cronbach’s alpha reliability of .679
(36 items, n 170).

40

TAMAOKA, KIYAMA, CHU

RESULTS

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

Results of SEM
The SPSS AMOS 17.0J (2008) package was used to conduct SEM in order toinvestigate a causal model constructed with two latent variables of lexical andgrammatical knowledge predicting one latent variable of homophonic distinction.
Each latent variable was measured by the observed variables of the tests previously
described. The model fitting of the present SEM analysis converged to a proper
solution with excellent fit [n170, x2(24)  34.613, p .074, ns.; GFI .957;
AGFI .919; CFI.975; RMSEA .051]. The correlation between lexical andgrammatical knowledge (r .59, p B.001), between lexical knowledge and homophonic distinction (r .54, p B.001) and between grammatical knowledge andhomophonic distinction (r .89, p B.001) were all significantly high. As shown in
Figure 5, the four observed variables of lexical knowledge showed excellent factor
loadings indicating 0.70 for Wago, 0.74 for Kango, 0.79 for Gairaigo and 0.69 forfunction words. The three observed variables of grammatical knowledge also showed
good factor loadings of 0.54 for morphological inflections, 0.52 for local dependency,
and 0.77 for structural complexity. The two observed variables of homophonicdistinction showed relatively high factor loading of 0.66 for Kango and reasonablefactor loading of 0.43 for Wago. All these factor loadings were statistically significant.
A causal relation leading from grammatical knowledge to homophonic distinction
was significant (b.58, p B.001). However, no significant causal relation from lexical
knowledge to homophonic distinction was found (b .01, ns.). Therefore, only
grammatical knowledge was a major factor for Chinese learners of L2 Japanese indistinguishing lexical homophones.

Figure 5. SEM analysis with standardised path coefficients*A causal model which solves the acquisition
process of L2 learners’ homophonic distinction by native Chinese speakers learning Japanese.

HOW DO NATIVE CHINESE SPEAKERS UNDERSTAND JAPANESE HOMOPHONES

41

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

DISCUSSION
The present study indicated that grammatical knowledge has a strong influence on
identifying the proper word from multiple homophones in a sentential context. The
results suggest that the ability of Chinese learners of L2 Japanese to distinguishhomophones was strongly affected by grammatical knowledge, though not by lexical
knowledge. This accords with arguments by Kawaguchi (1993) and Takebe (1989) withrespect to the importance of contextual knowledge regarding homophones. Since
participants in the present study were all native Chinese speakers who had alreadyacquired Chinese characters, which share the same origins as Japanese kanji, they
could roughly guess homophonic stems or words presented in kanji. Therefore, only
their grammatical knowledge was a significant predictor of understanding homophones in a sentence.
In order to distinguish multiple homophones in a sentential context, Chinese
learners of L2 Japanese needed to have sound grammatical knowledge for selecting theappropriate homophone. Morphological inflections assist proper selection of verb
homophones, including different verb conjugation of ichidan and godan. The present
study also tested local dependency as one part of grammatical knowledge. Knowledge
for two neighbouring units helped to determine a correct expression. Furthermore,
knowledge of complex structures was also an important key in improving the ability tomake homophonic distinctions in determining appropriate homophones for complex
sentential conditions.
The results of the present study can only be applied to native Chinese speakers
learning L2 Japanese. Japanese learners with different language backgrounds may
display different results. For native Korean speakers learning L2 Japanese, due to alack of kanji and kanji-presented word knowledge, lexical knowledge may contributestrongly to identifying a proper homophonic word among multiple candidates.
Otherwise, both lexical and grammatical knowledge may be needed to distinguishhomophones. Thus, a further study should be conducted to identify any actual
influential factors for understanding Japanese lexical homophones among speakers ofdifferent L1 backgrounds with different degrees of lexical/grammatical knowledge.

REFERENCES
Hepburn style romanization with no vowel repeated for a long vowel is used for describing Japanese proper
nouns, and the same style with vowel repeated for a long vowel is used for article titles.
Amano, N., & Kondo, K. (2000). Nihongo no Goi Tokusei  Dai-7-kan [Lexical properties of Japanese  Vol. 7].
Tokyo: Sanseido.
Amano, N., & Kondo, K. (2003). Nihongo no Goi Tokusei  Dai-2-ki CD-ROM-ban [Lexical properties ofJapanese  The second volume of CD-ROM verison]. Tokyo: Sanseido.
Hatta, T., Kawakami, A., & Tamaoka, K. (1998). Writing errors in Japanese kanji: A study with Japanese
students and foreign learners of Japanese. Reading and Writing, 10, 457470.
Hatta, T., Kawakami, A., & Tamaoka, K. (2002). Errors in writing Japanese kanji: A comparison of Japanese
schoolchildren, college students and second-language learners of Japanese. Asian Pacific Journal of Speech,
Language and Hearing, 7, 157166.
Hirose, H. (1992). Jyukugo no ninchi katei ni kansuru kenkyuu: Puraimingu-hoo ni yoru kentoo [Aninvestigation of the recognition process for jukugo by use of priming paradigms]. The Japanese Journal of
Psychology, 63, 303309.

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 201342

TAMAOKA, KIYAMA, CHU

Inoki, S. (1976). Doo’on igigo no sainin kioku ni oyobosu bunmyaku kooka [Effects of changed context on
recognition memory of homographs]. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 47, 217221.
Ishida, T. (1999). Nihongo Kyoojyu Hoo [Japanese teaching method]. Tokyo: Taishukan.
Japan Foundation. (2002). Nihongo Nooryoku Shiken Shutsudai Kijyun (Kaitei-ban) [The standard of testing
items (revised version)]. Tokyo: Bonjinsha.
Kawaguchi, Y. (1993). Komyunikatibu apuroochi no kanji shidoo [A communicative approach for teaching
kanji]. Nihongo Kyooiku [Japanese Language Education], 80, 1527.
Kess, J. F., & Miyamoto, T. (1999). The Japanese mental lexicon: Psycholinguistic studies of Kana and Kanji
processing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Leong, C. K., & Tamaoka, K. (1995). Use of phonological information in processing kanji and katakana byskilled and less skilled Japanese readers. Reading and Writing, 7, 377393.
Miller, R. A. (1967). The Japanese language. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Okazaki, M. (1993). Nihongo kyooiku ni okeru kanji shidoo no arikata [The way of teaching Kanji (Chinesecharacter) on Japanese language education]. Artes Liberals, 52, 1128.
Miyaoka, Y., Tamaoka, K., & Sakai, H. (2011). Nihongo no goi tesuto no kaihatsu to shinraisei: Chuugokugo
o bogo to suru nihongo gakushuusha no deeta niyoru tesuto hyooka [Development and reliability of a testof Japanese vocabulary: Test evaluation by the data taken from native Chinese speakers learning Japanese].
Hiroshima Keizai Daigaku Kenkyuu Ronshuu [Bulletin of Hiroshima University of Economics], 34(1), 118.
Mochizuki, Y. (1981). Chuugokugo kenkyuu gakushuu soosho 13: Chiigokugo to nihongo [Studies and learning ofChinese. Vol. 13: Chinese and Japanese] (2nd Edition). Tokyo, Japan: Kooseikan.
Saito, H., Inoue, M., & Nomura, Y. (1979). Information processing of kanji (Chinese characters) and kana
(Japanese characters): The close relationship among graphemic, phonemic, and semantic aspects.
Psychologia, 22, 195206.
Sakuma, N., Sasanuma, S., Tatsumi, I., & Masaki, S. (1998). Orthography and phonology in reading Japanese
kanji words: Evidence from the semantic decision task with homophones. Memory and Cognition, 26,7587.
Takebe, Y. (1989). Kanji no oshiekata  Nihongo o Manabu Hikanjikei Gaikokujin no Tameni [How to teachKanji  Learners of Japanese with non-logographic backgrounds]. Tokyo: Aruku.
Tamaoka, K. (1991). Psycholinguistic nature of the Japanese orthography. Gengo Bunka Kenkyuu [Studies ofLanguages and Cultures], 11(1), 4982. (Matsuyama University).
Tamaoka, K. (1997). Chuugokugo to eigo o bogo tosuru nihongo gakushuusha no kanji oyobi kana hyooki goi
no shori hooryaku [The processing strategy of words presented in kanji and kana by Chinese and English
speakers learning Japanese]. Gengo Bunka Kenkyuu [Studies of Languages and Cultures], 17(1), 6577.
(Matsuyama University).
Tamaoka, K. (2000). Chuugokugokei oyobi eigokei nihongo gakushuusha no bogo no hyooki keitai ga nihongo
no on’in shori ni ataeru eikyoo [The effects of mother-tongue scripts on the phonological processing of theJapanese language by Chinese and English speakers]. Dokusho Kagaku [The Science of Reading], 44, 8394.
Tamaoka, K. (2005). The effect of morphemic homophony on the processing of Japanese two-kanji compoundwords. Reading and Writing, 18, 281302.
Tamaoka, K. (2007). Rebounding activation caused by lexical homophony in the processing of Japanese twokanji compound words. Reading and Writing, 20, 413439.
Tamaoka, K., Kirsner, K., Yanase, Y., Miyaoka, Y., & Kawakami, M. (2002). A Web-accessible database ofcharacteristics of the 1,945 basic Japanese kanji. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 34,
260275.
Tamaoka, K., & Makioka, S. (2004a). Frequency of occurrence for units of phonemes, morae and syllables
appearing in a lexical corpus of a Japanese Newspaper. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments &Computers, 36(3), 531547.
Tamaoka, K., & Makioka, S. (2004b). New figures for a Web-accessible database of the 1,945 basic Japanese
kanji, fourth edition. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 36(3), 548558.
Tamaoka, K., & Taft, M. (2010). The sensitivity of native Japanese speakers to On and Kun kanji readings.
Reading and Writing, 23, 957968.
Wydell, T. N., Patterson, K. E., & Humphreys, G. W. (1993). Phonologically mediated access to meaning forkanji: Is a rows still a rose in Japanese Kanji? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, andCognition, 19, 491514.
Yamato, Y., & Tamaoka, K. (2009). Chugokujin nihongo gakushuusha no nihongo kanjigo no shori ni okeru
bogo no eikyoo [The effects of mother-tongue on the processing of Japanese kanji-compound words bynative Chinese speakers learning Japanese]. Kotoba no Kagaku [The Science of Languages], 22, 117135.
Yamato, Y., & Tamaoka, K. (2011). Nihongo no Onrain yomi ni okeru kanji hyookigo to katakana hyookigo
no shori: Chuugokujin nihongo gakushuusha no goi nooryoku jyooigun to kaigun no hikaku [The online
processing of kanji- and katakana-presented words in Japanese text: A comparison of greater and lesser

HOW DO NATIVE CHINESE SPEAKERS UNDERSTAND JAPANESE HOMOPHONES

43

lexical knowledge groups of native Chinese speakers learning Japanese]. Koide Kinen Nihongo Kyooiku
Kenkyuu Ronbun Shuu [Koide Memorial Journal of Japanese Language Education], 16, 7386.
Yokosawa, K., & Umeda, M. (1988). Processes in human Kanji-word recognition. Proceedings of the 1988
IEEE International Conference on Systems, man, and Cybernetics (pp. 377380). August 812, 1988, Beijing
and Shenyang, China.

Appendix. Test items of homophonic distinctions

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

Kunrei-style romanization with two vowels repeated for a long vowel (e.g., oo, uu) is used to transcribe
Japanese sentences.
Chinese originated homophones (Kango)
1 (1)Yuushi o idaki zyookyoo o ketui sita.
(I) decided to move to Tokyo with high aspiration.
(2)
Syokuba no yuusi de tiimu o tukutta.
Volunteers built a team in our workplace.
Choice2 (1)Kaigi ni syusseki suruyoo kyoosee sareta.
(I) was forced to attend the meeting.
(2)
Musume no hanarabi o kyoosee suru.
(I) let (my) daughter have orthodontic treatment.
Choice3 (1)Kaityoo ni osareta ga kozi sita.
(I) was nominated as the president, but (I) refused firmly.
(2)
Tairitukoku ni zikoku no tikara o kozi sita.
(We) showed off the power of our country toward the conflicting country.
Choice4 (1)Senpoo no ikoo o kakunin suru.
(I) check the other side’s inclination.
(2)
Atarasii seido eno ikoo o kentoo siteiru.
(We) consider transition to a new system.
Choice5 (1)Osanai koro o kaisoo sita.
(I) recalled when (I) was a child.
(2)
Rookyuu ka sita tenpo o kaisoo sita.
(We) rebuilt the dilapidated store.
Choice6 (1)Tiiki eno hoosi katudoo ni tikara o sosogu.
(I) devoted (my) energy for volunteer activities in the community.
(2)
Kono syokubutu wa hoosi de hueru.
This plant reproduces by means of spores.
Choice44

TAMAOKA, KIYAMA, CHU

7 (1)Zigyoo no keesyoo o ketui sita.
(I) determined to take over the enterprise.
(2)
Sono ziken ga syakai zentai eno keesyoo to natta.
The case served as a warning against the entire society.
Choice8 (1)Gakusei syusai de kookan ongakukai o hiraku.
Students host an enjoyable concert.
(2)
Akarui seikaku ni kookan o idaita.
(I) had a favorable impression of his/her cheerful character.
ChoiceDownloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

9 (1)Sinbun de keeki no hendoo o siraberu.
(I) check cyclical changes in newspapers.
(2)
Ziko o keeki ni hodoo ga dekita.
A sidewalk was built after the accident.
Choice10 (1)
Koomyoo na teguti de hito o damasu.
(I) deceive someone with a clever trick.
(2)
Kurayami ni hitosuzi no koomyoo o miidasu.
(I) see a ray of light in the dark.
Choice11 (1)
Tansee o komete ueki o sodateru.
(I) lovingly take care of garden trees.
(2)
Migoto na teien ni tansee o hassita.
(I) let out a sigh about the fabulous garden.
ChoiceJapanese originated homophones (Wago)
1 (1)Gutairee o āgete setumee sita.
(I) illustrated with some specific examples.
(2)
Yuusyoku ni tenpura o ageru.
(I) fried Tempura for dinner.
Choice2 (1)Yakyuubu eno nyuubu o susumeru.
(I) invite (him) to join the baseball club.
(2)
Kaityoo kooho ni kanozyo o susumeta.
(I) recommended her as a candidate for the chair.
Choice3 (1)Kotosi mo sin’nyuusyain o toru yotee desu.
(We) again plan to recruit new employees this year.

HOW DO NATIVE CHINESE SPEAKERS UNDERSTAND JAPANESE HOMOPHONES(2)
Kokode kinensyasyin o torimasyoo.
Let’s take a commemorative photo here.
Choice4 (1)Tuini tyityi no kokorozasi o tugu ketui o sita.
(I) eventually decided to continue my father’s objective.
(2)
Tookyoo ni tugu tosi to zihu siteiru.
(We) feel proud of our city as the second after Tokyo.
Choice5 (1)Aki no yo ga sidai ni hukete iku.
An autumn’s night gradually goes on.

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

(2)
Nenree yori mo hukete mirareru.
(I) look older than (I) actually am.
Choice6 (1)Nootyi de ine no kariire ga hazimaru.
In rice farming lands, harvest time has begun.
(2)
Totuzen huan ni karareru.
(I) suddenly get a feeling of dread.
Choice7 (1)Ginkoo de tegata o genkin ni kaeru.
(I) exchage a bill at the bank.
(2)
Nityiyoobi ni syukkin sita node getuyoobi ni kyuuzitu o huri kaeta.
Because of working on Sunday, (I) made up a compensating holiday on Monday.
Choice8 (1)Apaato o kariru niwa hosyoonin ga iru.
A guarantor is required for renting an apartment.
(2)
Mato o ita situmon datta.
It was a well-directed question.
Choice9 (1)Yuuzin tono kooryuu o tatu.
(I) break off relations with friends.
(2)
Gankake de suki na otya o tatu.
(I) make a wish to a god and forswear tea which (I) like.
Choice10 (1)
Densya wa yotee doori ni eki ni tuita.
The train arrived at the station on time.
(2)
Zyooken o tukete kyoka suru.
(I) give permission with reservations.
Choice45

46

TAMAOKA, KIYAMA, CHU

11 (1)
Daigaku de buturigaku o osameru.
(I) pursue physics at university.
(2)
Kizitu nai ni zeekin o osameru.
(I) pay taxes by the due date.
Choice12 (1)
Zigyoo no goorika o hakaru.
(We) promote the streamlining of the enterprise.
(2)

Downloaded by [Nagoya University] at 23:19 02 February 2013

Hokenzyo de ketuatu o hakaru.
(I) measure (my) blood pressure at a healthcare center.
Choice