DA-DELETION:
CLASSIFICATION OF CLAUSE-FINAL ELEMENTS IN JAPANESE*
Tsuyoshi Sawada
University of Connecticut

1.

Copula in Japanese

In Japanese, nominal predication is followed by the copula, which essentially comes in one of
the four exponents. Among the exponents, de ar-u is the most basic one in the sense that it
can usually replace any other form. It implicates formal style, unlike the others.
(1)

kanozyo wa gakusha de ar -u
she
TOP scholar DE be -NONPAST‘She is a scholar.’This sequence is standardly analyzed as in (2), following Martin (1975).

(2)

Analysis: de
COPULA.INFINITIVE

ar-u
V-NONPASTDe derives from ni te as in (3), at least diachronically.
(3)ni
DAT/LOCte> nte > nde > de
GERUNDThe other exponents da, ∅ , and na, appear in (4–6). In most cases, they are notinterchangable with one another.
(4)

kanozyo wa gakusha da to omo-ushe
TOP scholar DA C think-NONPAST‘She is a scholar.’*

The author wishes to thank Jonathan Bobaljik, Željko Bošković, An Duk-Ho, Aoyagi Hiroshi, Saito
Mamoru, Murasugi Keiko, Susanne Wurmbrand, Dianne Lillo-Martin, Natasha Fitzgibbons, and Fujii
Tomohiro, and other participants of the University of Connecticut Ling Lunch Talk and ofConnecticut-Nanzan Joint Workshop on Minimalist Syntax for helpful suggestions or encouragements,
and to the editors of this volume at Nanzan University for their extraordinary patience. The author was
not able to incorporate many useful comments in this article. An extension of this work shall appear
sometime later in another format.
Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2, 139–163© 2008 Tsuyoshi Sawada

Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2(5)kanozyo wa gakusha ∅ rasi-i
she
TOP scholar
seem-NONPAST‘She seems to be a scholar.’(6)

sizuka na hito ga
i-ru
quiet NA person NOM be-NONPAST‘There is a quiet person.’

As a working hypothesis, let us assume (7). This hypothesis is to be reconsidered later.
(7)

Analysis: The three forms da, ∅, and na are contraction or deletion of de ar-u.

Among the contracted/deleted forms, na in (6) has a rather straightforward distribution
compared to the other two. This is examined in section 2. After that, the distribution of da in(4) and ∅ in (5) are examined in sections 3-7. Section 8 clarifies the structure of aconstruction that is relevant to the main observation. Section 9 summarizes the results.
Section 10 observes some more phenomena of what will be called beki-group morphemes.
Sections 11 and 12 respectively provide an analysis of da and ∅, and na.
2.

Distribution of Na

In a relative (8) or an appositive clause, the contracted form is na (9), and not da or ∅.
(8)

gakusya de ar-u
scholar DE be-NONPAST

hito
person‘a person who is a scholar’(9)gakusya {*da /*∅/??na} hito
scholarDA
NA person

Na in (9) has anomaly due to an independent factor. That is, modification by genitiveassigned noun phrase (10) is preferred over a relative clause with a noun and na. (See Sawada(2007).)(10)

gakusya no
hito
scholar GEN person

If the predicate in the relative clause is an adjectival noun (11), which cannot take the genitive
case marker (13), the anomaly with na disappears (12).
(11)

sizuka de ar-u
hito
quiet DE be-NONPAST person‘a person who is a quiet’-140-

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)(12)

sizuka {*da/*∅/na} hito
quiet
DA NA person(13) * sizuka no hito
quiet GEN person
The modifee of a relative clause need not be a noun, but can be an adjectival noun such as
you ‘seems.’(14)

kanozyo wa sizuka de ar-u
you dashe
TOP quiet DE be-NONPAST seem DA‘She seems to be a quiet.’(15)

kanozyo wa sizuka {*da/*∅/na} you dashe
TOP quiet
DA NA seem DA

To summarize this section, na has a straightforward distribution: relative or appositive clause,
and is not interchangeable with the other two contracted forms.
3.

Distribution of Da and ∅As noticed at least by Martin (1975), Inoue (1969), Kuno (1973), and Ueyama (1992), theinterrogative complementizer ka in a matrix environment appears with the non-contracted
form (16) and ∅ (17), but not da.
(16)?kanojo wa gakusya de ar-u
ka
she TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST Q‘Is she is a scholar?’(17)

kanojo wa gakusya{*da /∅} ka
she TOP scholar
DA
Q

In embedded interrogative clause, the non-contracted form (18), da (19), and ∅ are allowed.
(18)[kanojo ga
gakusya de ar-uka ] wakar-ana-i
she NOM scholar DE be-NONPAST Q understand-NEG-NONPAST‘(I) do not know whether she is a scholar.’(19)[kanojo ga
gakusya {da /∅} ka] wakar-ana-i
she NOM scholar DA
Q understand-NEG-NONPAST

Considering da/∅-alternation (but not the distribution of de aru), Ueyama (1992) makes ageneralization that can be expressed essentially as (20).

-141-

Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2(20)

Generalization: ∅-form copula appears in Japanese in environments where SubjectAux Inversion occurs in languages like English.

She derives her generalization from the following assumptions:(21)

Analysis:a. Interrogative C must bear [+WH] (Rizzi 1991).
b. A predicate that selects an interrogative clause marks the embedded C as [+WH].
c. The other way to assign [+WH] to C is to move a [I [+WH]]to C.
d. Da-form of the copula blocks I-to-C movement.

From these assumptions, it follows that a matrix interrogative clause in Japanese requires Ito-C movement, and cannot have da.
However, Ueyama does not explain why de aru (16) is allowed in an environment where
da is not. If her intension underlying (21d) is that phonologically explicit da includes somefeatures not included in ∅, which blocks I-to-C movement, then it is natural to assume thatthe non-contracted form de aru has as much features as da, and hence blocks I-to-C
movement as well.
Furthermore, Ueyama’s analysis meets challenge by the existence of much wider rangeof morphemes than ka that follow the copula and have idiosyncratic restriction on the
exponent of the copula. The next four sections observe this fact more extensively.
4.

No Contraction

First of all, a few number of morphemes do not allow any form of contracted copula. They
only allow the non-contracted form.
-- Beki ‘ought to’(22)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-u
beki dashe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST BEKI DA‘She ought to be a scholar.’(23)

kanozyo wa gakusya {*da /*∅} beki dashe
TOP scholar
DA
BEKI DA-- Na ‘do not’
(24)

kimi wa gakusya de ar-una
you TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST NA‘Do not be a scholar.’-142-

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)(25)

kimi wa gakusya{*da /*∅} na
you TOP scholar DA
NA-- Mai ‘I bet not’(26)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-u
maishe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST MAI‘I bet she is not a scholar.’(27)

kanozyo wa gakusya {*da /*∅} maisheTOP scholar
DA
MAI

These morphemes seem to share the common property that they denote strong modality.
5.

Obligatory Da-Deletion

Some morphemes allow only ∅, and not da.
--Ka INTERROGATIVE (matrix)(28)?kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-ukashe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST KA‘Is she a scholar?’(29)

kanozyo wa gakusya {*da /∅} kashe
TOP scholar
DA KA--Rasi-i ‘seems’(30)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-u
rasi-ishe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST RASI-I‘She seems to be a scholar.’(31)

kanozyo wa gakusya {*da /∅} rasi-i
she
TOP scholar
DA RASI-I--Mitai ‘seems, as if’(32)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-u
mitai dashe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST MITAI DA‘She seems to be a scholar.’‘She looks as if she is a scholar.’-143-

Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2(33)kanozyo wa gakusya {*da /∅} mitai dashe
TOP scholar
DA MITAI DA--Nara ‘if’
(34)

kanozyo gagakusya de ar-unarashe
NOM scholar DE be-NONPAST NARA
‘if she a scholar’(35)kanozyo ga gakusya {*da /∅} narashe
NOM scholar
DA
NARA--Sa ‘after all,’ RESIGNATION(36)

douse kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-u
sa
after.all she
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST SA‘After all, she a scholar!’

(37)

6.

douse kanozyo wa gakusya {*da /∅} sa
after.all she
TOP scholar
DA
SA
Optional Da-Deletion

Some morphemes allow both da and ∅-forms.
--Ka INTERROGATIVE (embedded)(38)

kanozyo gagakusya de ar-u
ka wakar-ana-ishe
NOM scholar DE be-NONPAST KA understand-NEG-NONPAST‘I do not know whether she is a scholar.’(39)

kanozyo ga gakusya {da /∅} ka wakar-ana-ishe
NOM scholar DA KA understand-NEG-NONPAST--Ne ‘isn’t it?’(40) ? kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-uneshe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST NE‘She is a scholar, isn’t she?’(41)

kanozyo washeTOPgakusya {da /∅} nescholar DA
NE

-144-

—(41) with ∅ has a feminine flavour.

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)--Yo ‘you know?’(42) ? kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-uyoshe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST YO‘You know what? She is a scholar.’
(43)

7.

kanozyo wa gakusya {da /∅} yoshe
TOP scholar DA
YO—(43) with ∅ has a feminine flavour.

No Da-Deletion

The remaining majority of the morphemes do not allow ∅.
--To COMPLEMENTIZER(44)

kanozyo gagakusya de ar-u
to omo-ushe
NOM scholar DE be-NONPAST C think-NONPAST‘I think that she is a scholar.’(45)

kanozyo ga gakusya {da /*∅} to omo-ushe
NOM scholar DA
C think-NONPAST--Sou ‘I heard that’(46)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-u
sou dashe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST SOU DA‘I heard that she is a scholar.’(47)

kanozyo wa gakusya {da /*∅} sou dashe
TOP scholar DA
SOU DA--Ga ‘although’(48)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-ugashe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST GA‘although she is a scholar’(49)kanozyo wa gakusya {da /*∅} gashe
TOP scholar DA
GA

-145-

Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2--Keredo ‘although’(50)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-u
keredoshe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST KEREDO‘although she is a scholar’(51)

kanozyo wa gakusya {da /*∅} keredosheTOP scholar DA
KEREDO--Kara ‘because’(52)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-ukarasheTOP scholar DE be-NONPAST KARA
‘because she is a scholar.’(53)

kanozyo wa gakusya {da /*∅} karashe
TOP scholar DA
KARA--Shi ‘and’(54)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-ushisheTOP scholar DE be-NONPAST SHI‘She is a scholar, and . . . ’(55)kanozyo wa gakusya {da /*∅} shisheTOP scholar DA
SHI--Tomo ‘indeed’(56)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-u
tomoshe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST TOMO
‘Indeed, she is a scholar.’(57)

kanozyo wa gakusya {da /*∅} tomosheTOP scholar DA
TOMO--Naa ‘I am sentiment about’(58)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-unaashe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST NAA‘I am sentiment about the fact that she is a scholar.’‘I suspect she is a scholar.’-146-

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)(59)

kanozyo wa gakusya {da /*∅} naasheTOP scholar DA
NAA--Zo INTENSIFY(60)

kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-uzoshe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST ZO‘Didn’t you know that she is a scholar?’(61)

kanozyo wa gakusya {da /*∅} zo
she
TOP scholar DA
ZO--Wa FEMININE(62) ? kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-uwashe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST WA‘She is a scholar.’(63)— feminine

kanozyo wa gakusya {da /*∅} washe
TOP scholar DA
WA--Ze MASCLINE(64)?kanozyo wa gakusya de ar-uzeshe
TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST ZE‘She is a scholar.’

(65)

8.

— mascline

kanozyo wa gakusya {da /*∅} ze
she
TOP scholar DA
ZE
On The Ambiguity of To

A note regarding to in section 7 (44) is made in this section. To in (66) allows only da. On theotherhand, there is another to that seems to allow only ∅ (67).
(66)

tanaka ga yamada wo gakusya {da /*∅} to omot-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC scholar DA
to think-PAST‘Tanaka thought that Yamada is a scholar.’(67)

tanaka ga
yamada wo gakusya {*da /∅} to minas-i-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC scholar
DA to regard-EPN-PAST‘Tanaka regarded Yamada as a scholar.’-147-

Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2

From this fact, one may think that the restriction on the form of contracted copula is rather
complicated with to. In the following, four pieces of evidence are provided for the claim thatto in (66) is a complementizer with structure (68) and to in (67) is a particle, i.e., postpositionor case marker, with structure (69). In (69), there is no position for any form of the copula toappear. Then, construction (67) becomes irrelevant for the purpose of observing thecontracted form of the copula.
(68)

tanaka ga [yamada wo gakusya da ] to omot-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC scholar DA C think-PAST(69)

tanaka ga
yamada wo [gakusya to] minas-i-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC scholar PRTC regard-EPN-PASTFirst, in (69), the non-contracted form is not allowed.

(70)

tanaka ga
yamada wo gakusya de ar-u
to omot-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC scholar DE be-NONPAST to think-PAST(71) * tanaka ga
yamada wo gakusya de ar-u
to minas-i-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC scholar DE be-NONPAST to regard-EPN-PAST
Second, the embedded subject with accusative case marking in (66) can be replaced by anominative case (72). This does not happen with (67) as in (73).
(72)

tanaka ga
yamada ga
gakusya da to omot-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada NOM scholar DA to think-PAST‘Tanaka thought that Yamada is a scholar.’(73) * tanaka ga
yamada ga
gakusya to minas-i-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada NOM scholar to regard-EPN-PAST‘Tanaka regarded Yamada as a scholar.’This indicates that (66) is an exceptional case marking construction, whereas the accusative
phrase in (67) is the direct object of the matrix predicate minas- ‘regard.’
Third, gakusya da to in (66) cannot be scrambled (74). In (67), scrambling is possible(75).
(74) * tanaka gagakusya da to yamada wo t omot-ta
Tanaka NOM scholar DA to Yamada ACC think-PAST‘Tanaka thought that, a scholar, Yamada is.’-148-

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)(75)

tanaka ga gakusya to yamada wo t minas-i-ta
Tanaka NOM scholar to Yamada ACC regard-EPN-PAST‘Tanaka regarded as a scholar, Yamada.’This indicates that gakusya da to is not a constituent in (66) but gakusya to in (67) is.
Fourth, the difference appears also in which categories can replace the nominal position.
To in construction (66) allows a predicate of other categories, whereas to in (67) allows only
noun. This is observed in the contrast in (76, 77) with an adjectival noun.
(76)

tanaka ga
yamada wo sizuka da to omot-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC quiet DA to think-PAST‘Tanaka thought that Yamada is quiet.’(77) * tanaka ga yamada wo sizuka to minas-i-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC quiet to regard-EPN-PAST‘Tanaka regarded Yamada as quiet.’
Similarly, an adjective cannot replace the nominal phrase in (67).
(78)

tanaka ga yamada wo kasiko-i
to omot-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC clever-NONPAST to think-PAST‘Tanaka thought that Yamada is clever.’(79) * tanaka ga
yamada wo kasiko-i
to minas-i-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC clever-NONPAST to regard-EPN-PAST‘Tanaka regarded Yamada as clever.’Nor does a verb.
(80)

tanaka ga
yamada ?wo /ga hasit-ta to omot-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC NOM run-PAST TO think-PAST‘Tanaka thought that Yamada ran.’(81) * tanaka ga
yamada wo hasit-ta to minas-i-ta
Tanaka NOM Yamada ACC run-PAST TO regard-EPN-PAST‘Tanaka regarded Yamada as ran.’This follows if the noun in (66) is a predicate, whereas the noun in (67) is not. The latter mustbe either an argument or an adjunct of the matrix predicate minas- ‘regard.’ The structuraldifference is also reflected in their respective English translations.

-149-

Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2This section verified that the to that is not followed by da is not a complementizer.
9.

Generalization

To summarize the restrictions on contraction from sections 3–7, we get table (82).
(82)
Exponent
beki
na
mai
ka
rasi-kumitaid(e)arou
nara
sa
ka
ne
yo
to
sou
ga
keredo
kara
shi
tomo
naa
zo
wa
ze

Interpretation‘ought to’‘do not’‘I bet not’
INTERROGATIVE (matrix)‘seems’‘seems, as if’‘is probably’‘if’‘after all,’ RESIGNATIONINTERROGATIVE (embedded)‘isn’t it?’‘you know?’∅‘I heard that’‘although’‘although’‘because’‘and’‘indeed’‘I am sentiment that’
INTENSIFYFEMININE
MASCLINE

Contraction
*
*
*
∅
∅
∅
∅
∅
∅
da/∅
da/∅
da/∅
da
da
da
da
da
da
da
da
da
da
da

Category
Adjectival Noun

Adjective
Adjectival Noun

Adjectival Noun

Accordingly, the morphemes can be classified into four groups.
(83)

Beki-group. These allow de aru, but do not allow contracted forms.

(84)

Matrix-ka-group. These allow de aru and ∅, but do not allow da.

(85)

Embedded-ka-group. These allow de aru, da, and ∅.

(86)

To-group. These allow de aru and da, but do not allow ∅.

-150-

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)

10.

Beki-Group

This section observes additional phenomena related to beki-group. Among the classes ofmorphemes, the class including beki has straightforward characteristics given in (87).
(87)

Generalization: The morphemes that disallow contraction (beki-group) express strong
modality.

Besides the restriction on contraction, there are additional arguments that suggest thesignificance of establishing the beki-group.
First, beki, na, mai prohibit the past affix -ta.
(88) * gakusya de at-ta
beki dascholar DE be-PAST BEKI DA‘It ought to have been cold.’(89) * gakusya de at-ta
nascholar DE be-PAST NA‘Have not be cold.’(90) * gakusya de at-ta
mai
scholar DE be-PAST MAI‘I bet it was cold.’
Other morphemes allow the past morpheme freely.
(91)

gakusya de at-ta
rasi-ischolar DE be-PAST seem-NONPAST‘She seems to have been a scholar.’(92)

gakusya de at-ta
nescholar DE be-PAST isn’t.it‘(She) used to be a scholar, isn’t she?’(93)

gakusya de at-ta
soudascholar DE be-PAST I.heard.that DA‘I heard that (she) used to be a scholar.’

Second, adjectival predication also has a contracted form in (95), which is (unlike theoptional contraction in nominal predication) obligatory when the adjective and the verb aru
are adjacent (94).

-151-

Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2(94)samu-ku *(mo /sae ) ar-u
cold-A
also/even be-NONPAST‘It is also/even cold.’(95)

samu-icold-NONPAST‘It is cold.’

The three morphemes beki, na, mai again constitute a group in that they prohibit contracted
form of adjectives.
(96)

samu-ku sae ar-u
beki dacold-A even be-NONPAST BEKI DA‘It ought to be even cold.’(97) * samu-i
beki dacold-NONPAST BEKI DA(98)

samu-ku sae ar-una
cold-A even be-NONPAST NA‘Do not be even cold.’(99) * samu-ina
cold-NONPAST NA(100)

samu-ku sae ar-u
mai
cold-A even be-NONPAST MAI‘I bet it will not be even cold.’(101) * samu-i
mai
cold-NONPAST MAI
Other morphemes such as rasi, ne, sou allow contraction of the adjective.
(102)

samu-ku sae ar-u
rasi-icold-A even be-NONPAST seem-NONPAST‘It even seems that it is cold.’(103)

samu-irasi-icold-NONPAST seem-NONPAST-152-

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)(104)

samu-ku sae ar-u
necold-A even be-NONPAST isn’t.it‘It is even cold, isn’t it?’(105)

samu-ine
cold-NONPAST isn’t.it(106)

samu-ku sae ar-u
souda
cold-A even be-NONPAST I.heard.that DA‘I heard that it is even cold.’(107)

samu-isoudacold-NONPAST I.hears.that DA

The two additional phenomena observed in this section suggest that the idiosyncratic natureof beki-group regarding the choice of the contracted form of the copula is not determined by
the phonological/morphological peculiarity of da.
11.

Analysis of Da and ∅This section proposes an analysis of the distribution of de aru, da, and ∅. The analysis to bemade is based on the assumptions in (108).
(108)

a. The gerundive affix -te has pleonastic and meaningful usages.
b. Contraction of ni te into de as in (3) takes place synchronically in the derivation.
Only with the de derived from the meaningful -te, de aru is contracted to da.
c. What has been referred to so far to as ∅ is (underlying) absence of the copula
rather than contraction/deletion. In the relevant cases, the morpheme directly
selects an NP without a copula.

Let us look at point (108a). Based on the different interpretations of te iru construction,
Ogihara (1998) proposes that -te is ambiguous with respect to the value of feature[PERFECT], where [-PERFECT] has no aspectual contribution, and [+PERFECT] hassemantic contribution with respect to eventuality. (109) and (110) with an instantaneous verb
taore- ‘fall’ respectively have concrete result interpretation and experiential interpretation.
(109)

tanaka wa ima taore-te i-ru
Tanaka TOP now fall-TE ASP-NONPAST‘Tanaka is lying down now.’-153-

Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2(110)tanaka wa kyonen taore-te i-ru
Tanaka TOP last.lear fall-TE ASP-NONPAST‘Tanaka has the experience of having fallen down last year.’Ogihara analyzes -te in the respective constructions as [-PERFECT] and [+PERFECT].
Likewise, (111 and 112) with a durative verb tabe- ‘eat’ respectively have on-going(progressive) interpretation and experiential interpretation.
(111)

tanaka wa ima tabe-te i-ru
Tanaka TOP now eat-TE ASP-NONPAST‘Tanaka is eating now.’(112)

tanaka wa kyonen tabe-te i-ru
Tanaka TOP last.year eat-TE ASP-NONPAST‘Tanaka has the experience of having eaten last year.’He analyzes -te in the respective constructions as [-PERFECT] and [+PERFECT]. What ischaracteristic of interpretation with [+PERFECT] is that there is an implicit or explicit eventthat happened in the past interval that caused the experiential state. The present work follows
Ogihara’s analysis of -te.
The next point (108b) stands on the assumption (108a). It will be assumed that thepleonastic and the meaningful -te are contracted with the particle ni to respectively become
the pleonastic de[-PERFECT] and the meaningful de[+PERFECT] (113).
(113)

a. ni te[-PERFECT]  de[-PERFECT]b. ni te[+PERFECT]  de[+PERFECT]The two instances of de in turn have different restriction regarding contraction.
(114)

a. de[-PERFECT] aru * . . . (no contraction)b. de[+PERFECT] aru  da[+PERFECT]/na[+PERFECT] (optional contraction)

Based on these assumptions, let us consider beki-group. Beki-group morphemes areincompatible with -te with [+PERFECT] (115–118). Beki is to be interpreted as deontic
modal, and mai is to be interpreted as epistemic modal.
(115)

tanaka wa ima yuka ni taore-te i-ru
beki da / maiTanaka TOP now floor at fall-TE ASP-NONPAST should DA should.not‘Tanaka should (not) be lying down now.’-154-

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)(116) * tanaka wa kyonen yuka ni taore-te i-ru
beki da /maiTanaka TOP last.year floor at fall-TE ASP-NONPAST should DA should.not‘Tanaka should (not) have the experience of having fallen down last year.’(117)

tanaka wa ima tabe-te i-ru
beki da /maiTanaka TOP now eat-TE ASP-NONPAST should DA should.not‘Tanaka should (not) be eating now.’(118) * tanaka wa kyonen tabe-te i-ru
beki da /maiTanaka TOP last.year eat-TE ASP-NONPAST should DA should.not‘Tanaka should (not) have the experience of having eaten last year.’With na, the [-PERFECT] concrete result and on-going interpretations are unnatural, but they
are still better than experiential interpretation.
(119) ?ima yuka ni taore-te i-runa
now floor at fall-TE ASP-NONPAST NA‘Do not be lying down now.’(120) * kyonen yuka ni taore-te i-ru
nalast.year floor at fall-TE ASP-NONPAST NA‘Do not have the experience of having fallen down last year.’(121) ?ima tabe-te i-runa
now eat-TE ASP-NONPAST NA‘Do not be eating now.’(122) * kyonen tabe-te i-ru
nalast.year eat-TE ASP-NONPAST NA‘Do not have the experience of having eaten last year.’This and the previous observation regarding past tense indicate that the morphemes te[+PERFECT], ta, beki, mai, na are concerned with the same semantic domain, namely
modality/tense, and are exclusive of one another. Then, (124) would be prohibited
underlyingly.
(123)

ni -te[-PERFECT] ar-u beki(124) * ni -te[+PERFECT] ar-u beki
Under the assumption of contraction rules (113), it follows that beki-group morpheme cancooccur with the pleonastic de[-PERFECT] but not with the contentful de[+PERFECT].

-155-

Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2(125)de[-PERFECT] ar-u beki(126) * de[+PERFECT] ar-u beki
In turn, rules in (114) require that de aru that appears with a morpheme in beki-group remains
as is, and does not undergo any contraction.
(127) * da beki
Regarding the distribution of da, Niimura (2007) observes its optionality in thecomplement clause of the complementizer to. Unlike the grammaticality assumed in thepresent work, Niimura judges that da can be optionally deleted with the acceptability
depending on whether the nominal is a predicate or not.
(128)

watasi wa sono otoko wo {sensei /gityou}(da) to omot-te i-ru
I
TOP that man ACC teacher chairperson DA C think-TE ASP-NONPAST(129)

watasi wa sono otoko wo {tanaka /ano hito } ?(da) to omot-te i-ru
I
TOP that man ACC Tanaka that person DA C think-TE ASP-NONPAST

The nominal in (128) is argued to be a predicate, whereas the nominal in (129) is to be anargument. He considers this as essentially similar to the optionality of to be in English
exceptional case marking/small clause construction. In English, the same optionality
difference holds between constructions in which the nominal is a predicate or an argument.
(130)

I consider the man (to be) {tall/a teacher/the president}(131)

I consider the man *(to be) {John/that man/the robber we were talking about}

The test that is used to identify whether the nominal is predicational is to replace be withbecome, which is proposed by Higgins (1979). If replacement is possible, then the nominal isa predicate.
(132)

the man {is/became} tall {a teacher/the president}—predicational(133)

the man {is/*became} {John/that man/the bank robber we were talking about}—non-predicational

Niimura observes that the same contrast holds for Japanese. (134) is an adjective, which isclearly a predicate. Hence it cooccurs with nar- ‘become.’ The nominal in (135) is
predicational, and da can be replaced with nar-. In (136), this is not possible.
(134)

sono otoko ga se ga takaku nat-ta
that man NOM hight NOM high become-PAST‘That man became high.’—predicational-156-

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)(135)

sono otoko ga{sensei /gityou} {da /ni nat-ta}
that man NOM teacher chairperson DA to become-PAST‘That man is/became a teacher/chairperson.’ —predicational(136)

sono otoko ga {tanaka /ano hito } {da /*ni nat-ta}
that man NOM Tanaka that person DA to become-PAST‘That person is/became Tanaka/that person.’ —non-predicational

Niimura’s analysis is essentially as the following. There are two entries for da. One of them
functions as a predicate, and the other does not. When the nominal is a predicate (128, 135),
the non-predicational da is used, and this da becomes obligatory only when it ismorphologically required, such as in finite clauses. When the nominal is not a predicate (129,136), a predicate is required. The predicational da can fulfil this role, but nar- ‘become,’
which only works as a copular element, cannot be used. Da is obligatory in this caseregardless of morphological requirements because of the necessity of a predicate.
Besides the grammaticality judgement regarding the deletion of da, Niimura’s and thepresent analysis may appear to have a potential conflict: his analysis assumes a nonpredicational da, whereas the present analysis allows the appearance of da only when it
carries the meaning [+PERFECT]. However, [PERFECT] and [PREDICATE] (nonpredicate) are different features, and the two accounts can be made compatible. Under theassumption that da is synchronically derived from de aru, the origin of the [+PREDICATE]
feature shall be the verb ar- ‘be.’ Depending on the feature of de and ar-, we can distinguishthree cases. If de is [–PERFECT], then contraction into da does not happen (137a). If de is[+PERFECT], two different das, with different values of [PREDICATE], are derived (137b,
c).
(137)

a. de[-PERFECT] aru * . . .
b. de[+PERFECT] aru[-PREDICATE]  da[+PERFECT -PREDICATE]c. de[+PERFECT] aru[+PREDICATE]  da[+PERFECT +PREDICATE]/na[+PERFECT +PREDICATE]

The two das in (137b, c) are what Niimura distinguishes in his analysis.
Next, let us consider the matrix-ka-group. The morphemes in this group do notnecessarily contain strong modality as part of their interpretation and are compatible with pasttense, but a contrast similar to (123, 124) should be assumed.
(138)

ni te[-PERFECT] ar-u rasi-ku(139) * ni te[+PERFECT] ar-u rasi-ku
Then it will follow that de aru but not da can cooccur with the morphemes in this group.
(140)

de aru rasi-ku-157-

Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2(141) * da rasi-ku
Another point that makes matrix-ka-group different from beki-group is that it allows ∅. This
will follow under the assumption that matrix-ka-group select a nominal in addition to
selecting a clause (108c). (142) occurs not by contraction but underlyingly.
(142)

tanaka ga gakusha rasi-ku
Tanaka NOM scholar seem-A

As for arguments for this claim, some constructions allow a nominal without the copula but
does not allow a clause. For some of the morphemes that belong to matrix-ka-group, relevant
constructions can be found. One construction is where a nominal and rasi-ku is used to mean
‘is typical of.’ This interpretation becomes salient in environments like (143). Even thoughrasi-ku can select a clause in a neutral context, clauses cannot appear in this construction(144, 145).
(143)

tanaka wa gakusya rasi-i
koto wo sita
Tanaka TOP scholar seem-NONPAST fact ACC did‘Tanaka did something that is typical of a scholar.’(144) * tanaka wa hasi-ru
rasi-ikoto wo sita
Tanaka TOP run-NONPAST seem-NONPAST fact ACC did‘Tanaka did something typical of running.’(145) * tanaka wa samu-i
rasi-ikoto wo sita
Tanaka TOP cold-NONPAST seem-NONPAST fact ACC did‘Tanaka did something typical of being cold.’
In such situation, de aru cannot appear either (146).
(146) * tanaka wa gakusya de ar-u
rasi-ikoto wo si-ta
Tanaka TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST seem-NONPAST fact ACC do-PAST‘Tanaka did something typical of being a scholar.’
A different construction is relevant for mita-ku and rasi-ku (147). In this construction, mitaku and rasi-ku modify the predicate. Again, this construction does not allow clauses (148,
149).
(147)

tanaka wa gakusya mita-ku/rasi-ku benkyou si-ta
Tanaka TOP scholar like-A seem-A study do-PAST‘Tanaka studied like a scholar.’-158-

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)(148) * tanaka wa hasi-ru
mita-ku/rasi-ku aru-i-ta
Tanaka TOP run-NONPAST like-A seem-A walk-ASP-PAST‘Tanaka walked as if he is running.’(149) * tanaka wa samu-i
mita-ku/rasi-ku hurue-te i-ta
Tanaka TOP cold-NONPAST like-A seem-A shiver-TE ASP-PAST‘Tanaka was shivering as if he was cold.’
In such situation, de aru cannot appear (150).
(150) * tanaka wa gakusya de ar-u
mita-ku/rasi-ku benkyou si-ta
Tanaka TOP scholar DE be-NONPAST like-A seem-A study do-PAST‘Tanaka studied as if he is a scholar.’(151)

tanaka ga gakusya de ar-ou mono nara tondemonai koto ni nar-u
Tanaka NOM scholar DE be-YOU thing if ridiculus fact to become-NONPAST‘It would be ridiculous if Tanaka were a scholar.’(152) * tanaka ga hasi-ru
de ar-ou mono nara tondemonai koto ni
Tanaka NOM run-NONPAST DE be-YOU thing if
ridiculus fact tonar-u
become-NONPAST‘It would be ridiculous if Tanaka were running.’(153) * tanaka ga
samu-ide ar-ou mono nara tondemonai koto ni
Tanaka NOM cold-NONPAST DE be-YOU thing if ridiculus fact tonar-u
become-NONPAST‘It would be ridiculous if Tanaka were cold.’
Again, de aru cannot appear after the nominal (154).
(154) * tanaka gagakusya de ar-u
de ar-ou mono nara tondemonai koto
Tanaka NOM scholar DE be-NONPAST DE be-YOU thing if ridiculus fact
ni nar-u
to become-NONPAST‘It would be ridiculous if Tanaka were a scholar.’In the above, at least for some morphemes in the matrix-ka-group, it has been shown that
there are constructions where they can select a nominal but not a clause. In that case, de ar-u
cannot appear. This suggests that, in the cases referred to so far as ∅-form, the copula is-159-

Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2

underlyingly absent and the relevant morpheme is selecting an NP. It still remains to beextensively shown that this is true for other morphemes in the group, but this is beyond thereach of the present work.
Although it is difficult to give environments where the embedded-ka-group does notallow a clause, we shall assume that these morphemes also allow NP complement, just byanalogy from the morphemes in matrix-ka-group.
(155)

tanaka ga gakusya ne
Tanaka NOM scholar NE‘Tanaka is a scholar, right?’

These morphemes, unlike the previous ones, do not seem to have any semantic restriction on
their complements. They simply provide meta-linguistic information, or interrogative force.
They should allow -te[+PERFECT]. From this it follows that they can have both de ar-u and da.
(156)

tanaka ga gakusya ne
Tanaka NOM scholar NE‘Tanaka is a scholar.’(157)

tanaka ga gakusya de ar-u
Tanaka NOM scholar DE be-NONPAST‘Tanaka is a scholar.’Finally, let us go on to the to-group. These morphemes are either logical connectors,
pleonastic morphemes, or they express at most meta-linguistic information. There is no clear
reason to assume that they have semantic restriction on their complement. At the same time,
there is no clear evidence that they select a nominal. This consideration gives us the twoforms of the copula in (158, 159).
(158)

tanaka ga gakusya de ar-u
to omo-u
Tanaka NOM scholar DE be-NONPAST C think-NONPAST‘I think that Tanaka is a scholar.’(159)

tanaka ga gakusya da to omo-u
Tanaka NOM scholar DA C think-NONPAST‘I think that Tanaka is a scholar.’Table (160) gives a summary of the analysis provided in this section. The four classes ofmorphemes are characterized by two factors: (i) whether they underlyingly allow -te[+PERFECT],and (ii) whether they can select an NP in addition to selecting a TP. These factors interact
with the assumptions made in (108), and give the desired result.

-160-

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)(160)-te[+PERFECT]
Beki-group*
Matrix-ka-group*
Embedded-ka-group √To-group√
12.

Selection
TPTP, NP
TP, NPTP

Forms
de arude aru, ∅de aru, da, ∅de aru, daAnalysis of Na

This section investigates the derivation of the form na. Traditional grammar assumes aninflectional form called adnominal form for prenominal usages. This term seems to imply
attributive construction, whose structure may be (161) in a generative framework.
(161)[NP [AP samu-i] [NP hi ]]cold-ATRB
day‘cold day’

Past ending can appear in prenominal environment (162), in which case the structure isclearly a relative clause.
(162)[NP [CP [Op1 ∅] [C’ [IP t’1 [AP t1 [A samu-k-]]-at-ta] [C ∅]]] [NP hi ]]cold-A- -be-PASTday‘a day that was cold’

The relative operator and the relative head are zero form and the relative clause appears to theleft of the modified noun in (162). These facts weakens the motivation for assuming theattributive structure in (161) in Japanese for at least adjective and verb, where the adnominal
form is identical to the default form. Thus, if we replace the past ending in (162) with thedefault ending, we get (163). Structure (163) gives us the same string as (161).
(163)[NP [CP [Op1 ∅] [C’ [IP t’1 [AP t1 [A samu-]] –i] [C ∅]]] [NP hi ]]coldday‘a day that is cold’

Since structure (163) comes without additional assumption but by analogy from minimallydifferent and independently motivated (162), assuming (161) has no motivation unless there
is empirical fact that requires (161) in addition to (163).
The only potential motivation for assuming adnominal form in present Japanese is theappearance of na after (noun and) adjectival noun, which is distinct from the other contracted
forms da and ∅ seen in default forms. If the default contracted forms and the form na canboth appear in the same environment, i.e., a prenominal position, then that can possibly be an-161-Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue 3, Vol. 2

argument for assuming both the relative clause and attributive structures in pronominal
positions. However, that is not the case. Actually, da and na are complementary. First
observe relative clauses in past ending. (164) is a relative clause with a noun, and (165) is its
contracted form.
(164)

gakusya de at-ta
hito
scholar DE be-PAST person‘person who was a scholar’(165)

gakusya d-at-ta
hito
scholar DE-be-PAST person(166, 167) are similar pairs with adjectival noun.
(166)

sizuka de at-ta
hito
quiet DE be-PAST person‘person who was quiet’(167)

sizuka d-at-ta
hito
quiet DE-be-PAST person

In a relative clause in the default form, the contracted ending da is not allowed. (169) shows
this with noun in (168) and (171) with adjectival noun in (170).
(168)

gakusya de ar-u
hito
scholar DE be-NONPAST person‘person who is a scholar’(169) * gakusya da hito
scholar DA person(170)

sizuka de ar-u
hito
quiet DE be-NONPAST person‘person who is quiet’(171) * sizuka da hito
quiet DA person
Here comes the use of the attributive form. Na appears just where da cannot, as if its purpose
is to complement da. (172) is grammatical instead of (169) and (173) is so instead of (171).
The reason (172) is not completely grammatical was already discussed.

-162-

Da-Deletion: Classification of Clause-Final Elements in Japanese (T. Sawada)(172)?? gakusya na hito
scholar NA person‘person who is a scholar’(173)sizuka na hito
quiet NA person‘person who is quiet’

The complementarity of da and na suggests that they are allomorphs. There is diachronic
evidence that the origin of the two forms are similar, and this also suggests that they may
have the same underlying form in a synchronic derivation. If this is correct, then (172, 173)
share the same underlying forms as (168, 170). This brings us to the conclusion that there isno need of assuming ad-nominal form as a distinct underlying form. Na is merely one of theforms that appear when the underlying form ni te ar-u ( de ar-u) is contracted. Dependingon the environment of contraction, the result becomes either da or na.

References
Higgins, Francis Roger (1979) The Pseudo-cleft Construction in English. Garland.
Inoue, Kazuko (1969) A Study of Japanese Syntax. Mouton & Co..
Kuno, Susumu (1973) The Structure of the Japanese Language. MIT Press.
Martin, Samuel (1975) A Reference Grammar of Japanese. Yale University Press.
Niimura, Masato (2007) kopyura no toogo-teki-tokuchoo to sono huhensee. Master’s thesis, Nanzan
University.
Ogihara, Toshiyuki (1998) “The Ambiguity of the -te iru Form in Japanese,” Journal of East Asian
Linguistics 7, 87–120.
Rizzi, Luigi (1991) “Residual Verb Second and the Wh-Criterion,” Technical Reports in Formal andComputational Linguistics 2. Université de Genève.
Sawada Tsuyoshi (2007) “Adjectival Noun in Japanese as Noun without Case,” Doo-Won Lee (ed.)
Proceedings of the 9th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar: Locality
and Minimalism, 405-423. Hankuk Publishing Co.
Ueyama, Ayumi (1992) “I-to-C Movement as a Last Resort of Licensing [+Wh],” Ms., Kyoto
University.

-163-