ON THE ACQUISITION OF CAUSATIVES IN JAPANESE*
Keiko Murasugi [1], Tomoko Hashimoto [1], and Sachiko Kato [2]Nanzan University [1] and MIT [2]

1. Introduction
In Japanese, there is a productive causative form, that is, a typical Japanesemorphological causative involving the causative morpheme –(s)ase, as shown in (1).1(1)

Taroo-ga Hanako-nihon-oyom-(s)ase-ta
Taroo-NOM Hanako-DAT book-ACC read-CAUS-PAST‘Taroo made Hanako read the book’

It has been assumed that Japanese morphological causatives are biclausal. Matsumoto (1998,
2000a, 2000b, 2000c), however, argues that there are causative sentences that exhibit monoclausal properties, ‘the lexical –(s)ase causative’ in a term coined by Matsumoto. The
following example is of this type:(2)

Sono onnanoko-ga ningyoo-ni kutu-ohak-(s)ase-ta
that girl-NOM
doll-DAT shoes-ACC put on-CAUS-PAST‘The girl put shoes on a doll.’

In studies of the acquisition of Japanese causatives, it has been reported that themorpheme –(s)ase is used at a relatively early period and at this point children can create
sentences that have biclausal structures. However, if we closely look at the interpretation of
the early utterances of causative sentences, we find that they are lexical causatives notsyntactic causatives. Accordingly, we can posit that the lexical –(s)ase causative is acquired
earlier than “regular” causatives.
In this paper, we will investigate the acquisition process of the Japanese causative
construction which employs the morpheme –(s)ase. We will show that the lexical –(s)ase*

This paper was presented at the 28th Annual Boston University Conference on Language
Development. We would like to thank Mamoru Saito for helpful comments and suggestions on thematerial in this paper. The research reported in this paper was supported in part by JSPS Grant-in-Aid
for Scientific Research (B) #15320071 (St. Luke's College of Nursing) and the Nanzan University
Pache Research Grant I-A.

1

The first consonant of the causative morpheme –(s)ase is dropped when it is attached to verbs thatend with a vowel.

Nanzan Linguistics 2: Research Results and Activities 2004

causative is acquired early, and provide support for Matsumoto’s hypothesis that causative
constructions with the morpheme –(s)ase are structurally ambiguous: they may have acomplex structure with –(s)ase as an independent verb as generally assumed in the literature,
but they may also have a simple structure with a non-agentive causee and V-(s)ase as thepredicate. In the following section, we will survey morphological causatives in Japanese andintroduce Matsumoto’s proposal about the lexical –(s)ase causative. In section 3, based on a
five-year-longitudinal-observational study with a Japanese speaking child, we will show thatJapanese morphological causatives are acquired in three steps. First, causative sentences areproduced without the morpheme –(s)ase, and then sentences with a non-agentive causee areobserved. Finally, children acquire more “regular” causatives with an agentive causee. Herewe will point out that the acquisition of syntactic causatives, which are widely assumed tohave an embedded structure, is in fact rather late. Section 4 concludes this paper.
2. Japanese Morphological Causatives
2.1. Morphological Causatives
In Japanese, causative verbs are productively formed by attaching the causative
morpheme –(s)ase to verb stems. The examples (3) and (4) show the possible patterns inJapanese morphological causatives.
(3)a. Taroo-ga Hanako-o(niwa-de) asob-(s)ase-ta
Taroo-NOM Hanako-ACC (garden-in) play-CAUS-PAST‘Taroo made Hanako play (in the garden).’b. Taroo-ga Hanako-ni(niwa-de) asob-(s)ase-ta
Taroo-NOM Hanako-DAT (garden-in) play-CAUS-PAST‘Taroo let Hanako play (in the garden).’(4)

Taroo-ga Hanako-ni/*-otegami-o kak-(s)ase-ta
Taroo-NOM Hanako-DAT/*-ACC letter-ACC write-CAUS-PAST‘Taroo let/made Hanako write a letter.’

As shown in (3), when the embedded verb is intransitive (unergative), the causee can bemarked either with the accusative or dative case. As is indicated in the English translation,
the interpretations differ between (3a) and (3b). The coercive interpretation is easy to arrived
at when the causee is in the accusative, while it is said that the permissive interpretation iseasily obtained when the causee is dative.
The distinction in the case marker on a causee does not appear when the embedded verbs
are transitive as shown in (4). This is because of the Double-o Constraint (Harada, 1973;
Inoue, 1976; Kuroda, 1965; Shibatani, 1973), which prohibits more than one NP marked with–o in one tensed clause.

− 48 −

On the Acquisition of Causatives in Japanese (K. Murasugi, T. Hashimoto and S. Kato)

It has been assumed that Japanese morphological causatives are biclausal (Kuroda, 1965;
Kuno, 1973; Shibatani, 1976; Inoue, 1976 etc.). We have some evidence for the biclausalityof causative sentences: the reflexive pronoun zibun ‘self’ and Condition (B) of the binding
theory, for example.
Japanese reflexive pronoun zibun can only take a subject as its antecedent:(5)

age-taTarooi-ga Hanakoj-ni zibuni/*j-no hon-oTaroo-NOM Hanako-DAT self-GEN
book-ACC give-PAST‘Taroo gave Hanako his/*her book.’

In (5), where the ditransitive verb is used, the subject Taroo can behave as the antecedent ofzibun but the indirect object Hanako cannot.
In morphological causatives, however, the interpretation of zibun is ambiguous:(6)

Tarooi-ga Hanakoj-ni zibuni/j-no namae-okak-(s)ase-ta
Taoo-NOM Hanako-DAT self-GEN
name-ACC write-CAUS-PAST‘Taroo made Hanako write his/her name.’(6) shows that both Taroo and Hanako can behave as the antecedent of zibun. This meansthat both Taroo and Hanako function as a “subject”. On the assumption that a clause has one
and only one regular “subject”, this fact shows that the morphological causatives have abiclausal structure.
Binding Condition (B) also provides evidence for the biclausality of causative sentences.
(7)

a. * Hanakoi-ga kanozyoi-o hihansi-ta
Hanako-NOM she-ACC
criticize-PAST‘Hanako criticized her.’b. Hanakoi-ga Taroo-ni
kanozyoi-o hihans-(s)ase-ta
Hanako-NOM Taroo-DAT she-ACC
criticize-CAUS-PAST‘Hanako made Taroo criticize her.’

In (7), Hanako and kanozyo ‐ ‘she’ – cannot refer to the same person. This is due to
Condition (B) of the binding theory, which prohibits coreference between a name and apronoun that are clause-mates. On the other hand, this type of coreference is allowed in thecase of the causative sentence (7b). This shows that the name and the pronoun are not clausemates in (7b), that is, the example has a structure with embedding.
From these facts presented above, it has become generally accepted that allmorphological causatives in Japanese have biclausal structures.

− 49 −

Nanzan Linguistics 2: Research Results and Activities 2004

2.2. The Lexical –(s)ase Causatives
Because of productivity, it has been said that all morphological causatives have biclausal
structures. However, Matsumoto has argued in recent articles that there are sentences that do
not exhibit biclausal properties. When the following verbs are followed by –(s)ase, thesentence is ambiguous:(8)

haku ‘put … on one’s own body’taberu ‘eat’
nomu ‘drink’siru ‘come to know’motu ‘come to have’ou ‘carry … on one’s back’

matou ‘put … on, wrap oneself in’
kuu ‘eat’suu ‘suck’kiku ‘hear’nigiru ‘grip’(Matsumoto, 2000c:144)(9)

a. Taroo-ga Hanako-ni
kutu-ohak-(s)ase-ta
Taroo-NOM Hanako-DAT shoes-ACC put on-CAUS-PAST‘Taroo made Hanako put on the shoes.’b. Taroo-ga Hanako-ni
miruku-o nom-(s)ase-ta
Taroo-NOM Hanako-DAT milk-ACC drink-CAUS-PAST‘Taroo made Hanako drink milk.’(9a-b) are ambiguous, as shown in (10) and (11) respectively.
(10) a. Taroo gave an order to Hanako and made her put on shoes.
b. Taroo put shoes on Hanako’s feet.
(11) a. Taroo ordered Hanako to drink milk.
b. Taroo feed Hanako milk.
In (10a) and (11a), Hanako is interpreted as an agent, while in (10b) and (11b), Hanako does
not seem to be an agent but instead a goal.
The two interpretations, however, are disambiguated in the case of (12).
(12) a. Sono onnanoko-ga ningyoo-ni kutu-ohak-(s)ase-ta
doll-DAT shoes-ACC put on-CAUS-PAST
that girl-NOM‘The girl put shoes on a doll.’b. Sono onnanoko-ga ningyoo-ni miruku-o nom-(s)ase-ta
doll-DAT milk-ACC drink-CAUS-PAST
that girl-NOM‘The girl fed a doll with milk.’− 50 −

On the Acquisition of Causatives in Japanese (K. Murasugi, T. Hashimoto and S. Kato)

Since ningyoo ‘doll’ cannot be an agent, (12a-b) only have the interpretation where it is a goal.
Matsumoto (1998, etc.) points out that (12a-b) represent the same kind of meaning as (13),where the lexical causative verb or the ditransitive verb kiseru ‘put … on, dress’ is used.
(13) Taroo-ga manekin-ningyoo-ni sono huku-okise-ta
the clothes-ACC put on-PAST
Taroo-NOM mannequin-DAT‘Taroo put the clothes on the mannequin.’
Matsumoto goes on to point out that causative sentences like (12) do not have a complex
structure with an embedded clause. Instead, it has only one verb of the form V-(s)ase. Thisconfirmed by the example in (14).
(14) Hanakoi-ga umaretabakari-no akatyanj-ni zibuni/*j-no kutusita-o hak-(s)ase-ta
Hanako-NOM newly born-GEN baby-DAT self-GEN socks-ACC put on-CAUS-PAST‘Hanako put her socks on the newly born baby.’
As a newly born baby cannot be an agent, the dative phrase in (14) is only interpreted as agoal. Zibun in this example unambiguously refers to Hanako and not to the newly born baby.
This analysis implies that –(s)ase is ambiguous in the adult grammar of Japanese. When
it is an independent verb, it takes a vP-projection as its complement and yields a complex
structure. In this case, the dative phrase is interpreted as an agent. In the other case, it can
combine with a verb and yield a morphologically complex verb V-(s)ase to yield a simple
sentence with no embedding. The dative argument in this case is interpreted as a goal. It
implies that the morphologically complex verb V-(s)ase can be analyzed as a ditransitive
verbs.
(15) summarizes the syntax of Japanese morphological causatives we assume in thispaper.
(15) There are two types of –(s)ase:
a. Syntactic causative –(s)ase:(i) It takes a vP-projection as its complement.
(ii) It makes a complex structure.
(iii) The dative phrase is interpreted as an agent.
b. Lexical causative –(s)ase:(i) It yields a morphological complex verb V-(s)ase.
(ii) It makes a simplex sentence with no embedding.
(iii) The dative phrase is interpreted as a goal.

− 51 −

Nanzan Linguistics 2: Research Results and Activities 2004

3. The Acquisition of Japanese Morphological Causatives
In this section, we will show how Japanese morphological causatives are acquired. We
will show that some differences are observed between the lexical –(s)ase causative and the“regular” syntactic causatives in the acquisition of causatives, and that the lexical –(s)ase
causative is produced at the same stage as the ditransitive construction.
3.1. The Data
Our data are based on a longitudinal-observational study by Hashimoto and Murasugiwith a Japanese-speaking child, Akkun, over the period of five years.
In the following section, we will discuss the early stage in the acquisition of verbs andthe process of the actual forms of the verbs. We argue that there are some utterances with noovert verbs but exhibit ditransitive meaning in the very early stage. We then outline the nextstage where the light verb suru occurs productively in similar utterances. Next, we present
some consistent “mistakes” made in this process. Finally, we present data on the acquisitionof causatives. Syntactic causatives in Japanese are widely assumed to have embedded
structures, and their acquisition is rather late, whereas our data indicate that a specific kind ofsyntactic causatives, that is lexical –(s)ase causatives, show up relatively early.
3.2. The Acquisition of Causatives
3.2.1. Stage I: The Acquisition of Ditransitive
Akkun’s typical utterances around the age 2 are shown in (16)-(18). In all of thefollowing examples, there is no verb. However, the number of arguments and the intended
meaning show that the verb give is missing.
(16) Koe. Papa, hai doozyo ∅this daddy please(2;0) (theme-goal)‘This one. (I want to give it) to Daddy.’(17) Motto, koe, buubu ∅more this water(2;1)‘(I will give) more water to this.’(18) Koe, Akkun, Mama, hai doozyo ∅this Akkun mommy please(2;5) (theme-goal-source)‘Mama, please give this to Akkun (/me).’In (17), there is no verb, and the verb give is missing. In (16) and (18), hai doozyo appears at
the end of the utterance. It literally means ‘yes, please’, and Akkun is using it to express themeaning of give or possibly the transfer of an item from one person to another.

− 52 −

On the Acquisition of Causatives in Japanese (K. Murasugi, T. Hashimoto and S. Kato)

At around 2;5, however, the light verb suru ‘do’ occurs in his utterance. Akkun started
placing tiyu, whose adult counter part is suru ‘do’, at the end of utterances quite productively.
Some examples are shown from (19) through (24).
(19) Mama, Akkun hai-doozyo tiyu
Mommy Akkun pleasedo(2;5) (goal-agent)‘Akkun(/I) will give it to Mommy.’(20) Kotyan koe Akkun hai-doozyo tiyu
Kotyan this Akkun pleasedo(2;7) (goal-theme-agent)‘Akkun(/I) gives this to Kotyan.’(21) Mama, Akkun koe pakutiyu
Mommy Akkun this onomatopoeia do(2;7) (goal-agent-theme)‘Akkun(/I) will put this into Mommy (‘s/your mouth).’(22) Koko maamoi maamoi tiyu
here circular circular do(2;9)‘(I) draw a circle here.’(23) Akkun nezikuyukuyu tite, kono ko syabeyu
Akkun winding around do this one talk(2;9)

‘When Akkun(/I) will wind this one around, it will talk.’(24) Mama, otitayo. Akkun-ga poitita kaya
Mammy fell
Akkun-NOM onomatopoeia did because(3;0)‘Mommy, (it) fell (on the floor), because Akkun (/I) threw (it down).’
In above examples, the “predicates” that appear right before tiyu are typically onomatopoetic
expressions. For example, paku in (21) is sound that describes a person putting a food into
his or her mouth or food going into a person’s mouth. The utterance means ‘Akkun put thisin Mother’s mouth’. Maamoi in (22), which corresponds to marui in adult speech, means‘circular’. Akkun, writing circles, said this meaning ‘I write circles here’.
The adult counter part of tiyu, suru ‘do’, can assign the agent role, like English verb do.
It can be conjectured that Akkun uses tiyu in order to express the agentivity, and produce
agentive ditransitives productively based on his grammar at the time.
3.3.2. Stage II: The Acquisition of the Lexical Items for Ditransitives
As we have seen in the previous section, by the age around 3, Akkun begins to produce
ditransitive sentences using the light verb tiyu (suru) ‘do’. What Akkun then needs to do is to− 53 −

Nanzan Linguistics 2: Research Results and Activities 2004

acquire the actual lexical items for ditransitives. His acquisition of actual verbs starts earlyand proceeds step by step. He can produce unaccusative sentences with correct verb forms ataround 3 years old:(25) Dango-ga,
uta pakantite, dango-ga
atta
dumpling-NOM lid onomatopiea do
dumpling-NOM there-be(2;9)‘A dumpling. There is a dumpling (when I) opened the lid (of the box).’(26) …Akkun-no papa-ga
muti
yatta toki, ame-ga hutta
Akkun-GEN daddy-NOM mosquito did when rain-NOM rain

(3;0)‘When…Akkun’s(/my) daddy lit a mosquito coil, it rained.’
The ditransitive verb ageyu, which means ‘give’ and corresponds to ageru in adult Japanese,
appears at 2;7, and its past counterpart ageta ‘gave’ also appears at 2;10:(27) Mamatyotto ageyu
Mommy a little give

(2;7)

‘Mommy, (I will) give you a little bit.’(28) Kinnou
Akkun akatyan toki papa ni koe
sometime ago Akkun baby when daddy to this

ageta
gave

(2;10)‘Akkun gave this to Daddy sometime ago, or when he was a baby.’
At this stage, an interesting phenomenon is observed. Akkun keeps making a systematic“mistake” concerning transitive-unaccusative pair constructions. In Japanese, there are lots oftransitive-unaccusative pairs that are morphologically related. The examples of such pairs areshown in (29) and sentential examples in (30) and (31).
(29) a.
b.
c.
d.

miseru ‘show’ / miru ‘see’utusu ‘copy’ / uturu ‘get copied’
todokeru ‘deliver’ / todoku ‘get delivered’osieru ‘teach’ / osowaru ‘be taught’(30) a. Taroo-ga Hanako-osyasin-ni utus-u
Taroo-NOM Hanako-ACC picture-IN copy-PRES‘Taroo takes a picture of Hanako’
b. Hanako-ga syasin-ni utur-u
Hanako-NOM picture-IN get copied-PRES‘Hanako appears in a picture’− 54 −

On the Acquisition of Causatives in Japanese (K. Murasugi, T. Hashimoto and S. Kato)(31) a. Hanako-ga hon-oTaroo-ni
todoke-ru
Hanako-NOM book-ACC Taroo-DAT deliver-PRES‘Hanako delivers a book to Taroo’b. Hon-ga
Taroo-ni
todok-(r)ubook-NOM Taroo-DAT get delivered-PRES‘A book is delivered to Taroo’
Let us now consider the mistakes that Akkun made. Akkun frequently usedunaccusatives for transitives and unaccusatives with two arguments for ditransitives, butnever vice versa. Note that this kind of mistake continues for two years up to the age 4;8.
Some examples are provided in (32)-(37).
(32) Koe ziityan-ni
miyu
this Grandpa-DAT see(2;9)‘(I will) show this to Grandpa.’
Instead of show, we have see. This is the usage of the transitive (unaccusative) form forthe ditransitive verb.
(33) Akkun ima kaya koe nayabu
Akkun now from this be in line

(2;11)‘From now, Akkun will put these in line.’
Instead of put...in line, we have be...in line. This is the usage of the unaccussative form
for the transitive verb.
(34) Nee, ati-o
hirogatte
INT legs-ACC spread (vi.)(3;7) (Akkun is requesting)‘Please, spread your legs.’
Instead of spread (vt.), we have spread (vi.). This is the usage of the intransitive form
for the transitive one "make something spread."(35) Kore, ai-toku
kara saa
INT
this open (vi.)-keep as(4;5)‘(I will) open this and keep it open, so...’Instead of open (vt.), we have open (vi.). This is the usage of the unaccusative form forthe transitive one "leave something open."− 55 −

Nanzan Linguistics 2: Research Results and Activities 2004

(36) Kono yatu ni isi-odoite-moratte nee
this thing by rock-ACC remove-have INT(4;6)‘(I) have the rocks removed by this one.’Instead of remove (vt.), we have remove (vi.). This is the usage of the unaccusative form
for the transitive one "have something removed."(37) Todok-okka, ano hito
ni todok-ou todok-ou
arrive-let'sthat person to arrive-let's arrive-let's(4;8)‘Let's send (it). Let's send (it) to that person.’Instead of send, we have arrive. This is the usage of the unaccusative form for the
ditransitive verb.
It should be noted that all this happens in the process of the acquisition of actual lexical
items. So, the correct forms are occasionally used along with the incorrect ones. Consider thefollowing examples:(38) a. Baatyan-ni
koeGrandma-DAT thismityeyushow(2;10) (cf. (32))‘(I) show this to Grandma.’b. Tigau. Ake-toku
dakeno
open (vt.)-keep just(4;5) (cf. (35))‘No. (I will) just keep it open.’
Around the same time as Akkun uttered (32) using miru ‘see’ instead miseru ‘show’, heproduced (38a) with the correct form of the verb. Similarly, in the same month as he uttered(35) with the unaccusative aku ‘open (vi)’, he produced (38b) with the correct akeru ‘open(vt.)’.
3.2.3. Stage III: The Acquisition of the Lexical –(s)ase Causative
The V-(s)ase form is not used in the context where it is used. Akkun just used regularverbs, and the causative morpheme –(s)ase is missing. The examples are shown in (39)-(41).
(39) Mama
Akkun non-de
Mommy Akkun drink-request form(2;8) (Akkun is requesting)‘Mommy, please pour (this milk) into Akkun’s mouth.’− 56 −

On the Acquisition of Causatives in Japanese (K. Murasugi, T. Hashimoto and S. Kato)(40) Papa koe nui-de
Daddy this undress-request form

(2;10) (Akkun is requesting)‘Daddy, please take these (clothes) off.’
Intended meaning: Please make Akkun undressed.
Literal meaning: Please take your dress off, Daddy.
(41) Mama-ga
pantyunui-datoki
Mommy-NOM underpants undress-PAST when

(3;2)‘(I hurt) when Mommy took my underpants off.’
Intended meaning: … when Mommy took underpants off Akkun.
Literal meaning: … when Mommy took her underpants off.
In (39), the transitive verb nom-u ‘drink’ is used instead of the “causative” verb nom-(s)ase-ru‘feed … to (milk)/make … drink (milk)’, and in (40) and (41), the transitive verb nug-u‘undress/take off’ is used for expressing the “causative” verb nug-(s)ase-ru ‘take something
off someone /make … undress’.
Before Akkun started producing “regular” causative sentences at around the age of 5,
there are sporadic instances of the morpheme –(s)ase much earlier:(42) Akkun-ni tabe-(s)ase-tee
Akunn-dat eat-CAUS-request form

(3;6) (non-agentive)‘Please feed Akkun(/me) (with food).’(43) Nomi-tatye-te
drink-CAUS-request form

(3;7) (non-agentive)‘Please feed me (with miso sope).’
While Akkun can use correct verb forms like (42) and (43), he still continues to use the wrong
forms. It is noticeable that this mistake is very similar to mistakes that Akkun made when he
was acquiring ditransitives, and it occurs at the same period. We propose that this mistake isconsidered as one of the mistakes in transitive-ditransitive pairs.
Considering the meaning that the sentences (42) and (43) express, we notice that they do
not express the meaning of “regular” causatives. If we consider (42) and (43) as “regular”
causatives, (42), for example, should signify ‘You(Mommy) permit me(Akkun) to eat (somefood)’, but the sentence does not convey this meaning.2 It expresses ‘You feed some food tome(Akkun)’ instead. With this interpretation, the “causee” Akkun is not agentive, but it is2

When (42) is interpreted as syntactic causatives, the sentence is interpreted as permissive causatives
since the request form is used. Here, it is important that the causee is agentive. In syntactic causatives,the causee is always agentive whether they are permissive causatives or coercive causatives.

− 57 −

Nanzan Linguistics 2: Research Results and Activities 2004

only behave as a goal just like a goal phrase in a ditransitive sentence. This is the meaningthat the lexical –(s)ase causative states.
Thus, the data shows that the lexical –(s)ase causative and the ditransitives are acquiredin the same period and that they are acquired in the same way. This indicates that the lexical–(s)ase causative is an instance of ditransitives.
3.2.4. Stage IV: The Acquisition of Syntactic Causatives
The following sentences with an agentive causee have never been seen until around theage of 5:(44) Obaatyan-no toko de tabemas-u Att, biiru dake nom-(s)ase-tekudasai (5;3)
Grandma-GEN room at eat-PRES INT beer only drink-let-request form please‘(I will) eat (a dinner) at Grandma’s room. Eh, only beer, allow me to drink beer,please.’Akkun started using “regular” causative sentences much later, around the age of 5. In (44),
Akkun asks his mother to let him eat or drink something (by himself). In this sentence,
Akkun does not ask someone to feed him. Thus, the causee, which is not overtly expressed, isagentive in (44).
To sum up, in this section, we showed how morphological causatives are acquired inJapanese, by investigating longitudinal data from a Japanese speaking child. We showed thatthe lexical –(s)ase causative is acquired at the same period as ditransitive sentences are
acquired, and it is acquired earlier than “regular” syntactic causatives, which have biclausal
structures.
4. Conclusion
In this paper, we presented acquisition data obtained from a longitudinal study, anddiscussed how children acquire Japanese causative constructions. We showed that the lexicalcausative is acquired earlier than “regular” causatives. Syntactic causatives in Japanese arewidely assumed to have embedded structure, and their acquisition is in fact rather late. The
lexical –(s)ase causative, on the other hand, is acquired relatively early. We also showed that
our acquisition study provides supporting evidence for Matsumoto’s analysis ofmorphological causatives.
Finally we briefly mention the implication for previous studies about acquisition ofJapanese causatives. In Shirai et al. (2001), they have reported that indirect causatives, which
seem to be biclausal, are acquired relatively early, pointing that children tend to use causative
sentences with request form. At a glance, their conclusion seems to conflict with ours.
However, if we closely examine their data, we find that the morphological causative sentencesthat children use at the early stage might be classified into the lexical –(s)ase causative.

− 58 −

On the Acquisition of Causatives in Japanese (K. Murasugi, T. Hashimoto and S. Kato)

Shirai et al. (2001) examine two kinds of data: cross-sectional data and longitudinal data.
With regard to the cross-sectional data, they report that the following 23 tokens (6 types) of
causative –(s)ase were found:3(45) tabe-sase-te ‘Let (me/him) eat.’ (16 tokens)
hukuram-asi-te ‘Please inflate (the balloon).’ (2 tokens)
ire-sase-te ‘Let (me) put (it) in.’ (2 tokens)kikae-sase-te ‘Let (me/him) change clothes.’ (1 token)
sase-te ‘Let me do (it).’ (1 token)
osimes-ase-te ‘Let (me/him) put on a diaper.’ (1 token)
They show that all the examples in (45) except hukuram-asi-te ‘swell-CAUS-request form’ fall
into indirect causatives.
As for the longitudinal data, although Shirai et al. do not present all the actual examples
because of their aim of study, they mention that in Kii’s data between 1;0 and 2;7, hak-ase-te‘put something on-CAUSE-request form’ is observed at 1;6. They analyze that its intended
meaning is ‘Help me put on (the clothes)’. That is, hak-ase-te is considered as an example ofindirect causatives.
They do not take the lexical –(s)ase causative into account because their analysis is basedon the traditional classification of Japanese causatives. It has been believed that Japanese has
lexical causatives and morphological causatives, and that morphological causative sentences
contain the causative morpheme –(s)ase whereas lexical causatives do not. As pointed out inShibatani (1976), Japanese morphological causatives can express both direct causation, i.e.
manipulative/directive causatives, and indirect causation, i.e. permissive/assistive causatives.4
And all morphological causatives have been believed to be biclausal. So, in Shirai et al.
(2001) the causative sentences containing –(s)ase are automatically classified either into
indirect causatives or into direct causatives, which have biclausal structures.
However, our study showed that at early stage of acquisition of Japanese causatives,
there is no sentence that conveys the meaning of indirect causation. For example, tabe-sasete ‘eat-CAUS-request form’ means not ‘let (me) eat’, as mentioned by Shirai et al. (2001), but‘feed (some food) to me/put (some food) into my mouth’. Keeping this in mind, let us
consider the examples in (45). Although they do not mention when each causative verb isuttered, we find that most tokens can be considered as the lexical –(s)ase causative. Thus, wesuggest that the data presented in Shirai et al. (2001) can be the lexical –(s)ase causatives notindirect causatives with a biclausal structure.

3

The data consist of transcribed conversational data of 2-, 3- and 4-year-old Japanese children.

4

A lexical causative seems to be more directive than morphological causatives. It expresses directcausation.

− 59 −

Nanzan Linguistics 2: Research Results and Activities 2004

References
Harada, Shin-Ichi (1973) “Counter Equi NP Deletion,” Annual Bulletin of the Research Institute of
Logopedics and Phoniatrics 7, 113-47.
Inoue, Kazuko (1976) Henkei-bunpou to Nihongo [Transformational Grammar and Japanese],
Taishukan, Tokyo.
Kuno, Susumu (1973) The Structure of Japanese Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Kuroda, S.-Y. (1965) Generative Grammatical Studies in the Japanese Language, Ph.D. dissertation,
MIT.
Matsumoto, Yo (1998) “A Reexamination of the Cross-linguistic Parameterization of Causative
Predicates: Japanese Perspectives,” in Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway King, eds.,
Proceedings of the LFG 98 Conference, CSLI Publications, Stanford.
Matsumoto, Yo (2000a) “Nihongo-ni okeru Tadousi/nizyuutadoosi-pea to Nitieigo-no Sieki-outai[Transitive/ditransitive Verb Pairs in Japanese and Causative Alternation of Japanese andEnglish],” in Tadao Maruta and Kazuyoshi Suga, eds., Nitieigo-no Jita-no Kootai[Intransitive/Transitive Alternation of Japanese and English], Hituji Syobo, Tokyo, 167-207.
Matsumoto, Yo (2000b) “Osowaru/osieru nado no Tadoosi/nizyuutadoosi-pea no Imiteki Seisitu (The
Semtntic Nature of Transitive/ditransitive Verb Pairs like osowaru ‘learn’ and osieru‘teach’),” in Susumu Yamada, Yasuto Kikuchi and Yosuke Momiyama, eds., Nihongo - Imi
to Bunpoo no Fuukei: Kunihiro-Tetsuya-kyooju Koki-kinen-ronbunsyuu [Japanese – The
Landscape of Meaning and Grammar: A Festschrift for Professor Tetsuya Kunihiro on his
70th Birthday], Hituzi Syobo, Tokyo, 79-95.
Matsumoto, Yo (2000c) “On the Crosslinguistic Parameterization of Causative Predicates:
Implications from Japanese and Other Languages,” in Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway
King, eds., Argument Realization, CSLI Publications, Stanford.
Miyagawa, Shigeru (1980) Complex Verbs and the Lexicon, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Arizona.
Murasugi, Keiko, Tomoko Hashimoto, and Sachiko Kato (2004) “On the Acquisition of Causatives inJapanese,” in Online Proceedings Supplement of BUCLD 28.
Shibatani, Masayoshi (1973) “Semantics of Japanese Causativization,” Foundations of Language 9,327-73.
Shibatani, Masayoshi (1976) “The Grammar of Causative Constructions: A Conspectus,” in
Masayoshi Shibatani, ed., Syntax and Semantics vol. 6: The Grammar of Causative
Constructions, Academic Press, New York, 1-40.
Shirai, Yasuhiro, Susanne Miyata, Norio Naka, and Yoshio Sakazaki (2001) “The Acquisition of
Causative Morphology in Japanese: A Prototype Account,” in Mineharu Nakayama, ed.,Issues in East Asian Language Acquisition, Kurosio Publishers, Tokyo, 182-203.

− 60 −