Ideophones,*gaze,*&*facial*expression�
NINJAL&Int’l&Symposium&2016:&Mimetics&in&Japanese&&&Other&Languages&of&the&World&12/18/2016�
Kimi&Akita&(ĩ�Ńĝ)&Nagoya&U&(Ïćç�®)/NINJAL�
!A*preliminary*report*from*Japanese" �[ksiq�Ăö�°Ô���ĉ(OCæð�ÄÝ�
RQ�
• Is&ideophone&utterance&correlated&with&the&speaker’s&gaze*behavior&&&facial*expression?&How?&(Irit&Meir,&p.c.)&([ksiq�ÁDÁ�C64M,.>¬�4Q(�)&
#&• Quantitative&analysis&using&a&multimodal&corpus&of&spoken&Japanese&(��ĉ6><_�ncANQĐ�ÍÜ)&
��
(ÍÜČÃ) �Ideophones&&&faces �
• “…&many&speakers&cannot&find&exact¶phrases&and&prefer&to&repeat&the&ideophone&with&a&more&distinct&elocution,&accompanied&by&facial*expressions*and&body&gestures&if&appropriate.”&(Diffloth&1972:&441)&([ksiqC¶ĬTą 15Q>��3[ksiqTNPD:*P>27Á2�=ŋPÿ2�,.MāġPT;-Q)&
• “In&Kisi&the&ideophone&kpiini%kpiini&‘stinky’&is&accompanied&by&a*crinkling*of*the*nose,&as&is&the&Venda&ideophone&thuu&‘smelling&horribly’”&(Childs&1994:&196)&(�ů$�T¶Ĭ4Q[ksiqT�4QÎ�C�D�;��) �
• “From&the&sequential&context,&the&gestures,&and&the&facial*expression*of&the&storyteller&it&appears&that&walayayayaya&depicts&the&dramatic&scene&of&the&boiling&water&pouring&down&on&the&protagonist[’]s&skin,&…”&(Dingemanse&2011:&332)&(âŮ�āġP�ĉP�C,.(O2<�walayayayaya>$%aYĉC[ksiqD�ŴŬ27ÂT�CũŲAĈ,ţ�@�ÛTŧĖ4QN%)&
��(emphasis&added)�
([ksiq>ł) �
Road&map �
• §1: &Previous&studies&(Ì�ĎĠ)&• §2:&Methods&(�¢)&• §3:&Results&&&discussion&(Ðá�Ùĥ)&• §4:&Conclusions&(Ðî) �
��
(¦Ø) �
1.*PREVIOUS*STUDIES �
Ì�ĎĠ�nyÇĉéŝ�
��
Depiction&model�
• 2&modes&of&representation/signification&��
(cf.&Diffloth&1972;&Clark&&&Gerrig&1990;&Kita&1997;&Güldemann&2008:&Ch.&4)�
• Demonstration&• Performance�• Mimesis&• (Re)enactment& (ŧĖuh{) �
(2;C¶Ĭu�j) �
Depiction*(B8)*• Pictures&(Ţ)&• Iconic&gestures&(ŅŜ�āġP)&• Reported&discourse&(¿«)&• Ideophones&([ksiq)&&&$ Imagistic&(Xt�b�)&$ Gradient&markings&(ª¼�)&$ Basically&iconic&(ķŜ�)&$ “Imagine”&to&interpret&(ĔŜ�) �
Description*(/:)*• Prosaic&words&(�ņĉ)&&&&&&$ Propositional&(ĕÃ�)&$ Discrete&symbols&(īŎ�)&$ Basically&arbitrary&(Ÿ¶�)&$ “Decode”&to&interpret&(Óő�) �
A&cloud&is&hiding&the&sun.&(ēŒ)ŤAŞR<$Q) �
�
(Dingemanse&2011,&2015) �
Paralinguistic&features&accompanying&ideophones�
% �levtevA�
% �j�~>�
• Intonational&foregrounding�
• Phonational&foregrounding�
• Iconic&gesture �• Gaze �
• Facial&expression�
�
Accepted & to appear in Journal of Linguistics
9
breathy voice, stiff voice, falsetto, voicelessness, or whisper. Thus in (3a), pa:t-to is pronounced as [pḁ:t:o], with voiceless phonation. In (3b), gu:t-to is pronounced as [gu̬:t:o], with stiff voice, i.e., with the glottal opening narrower than normal.
(3) a. Mo: bik:ɯɾi-ʃi-te haʃit-te waŋko-no kɯsaɾi-o hodoi-te just IDPH-do-CONJ run-CONJ doggie-GEN chain-ACC untie-CONJ ‘O-ie-jo’ -t:e waŋko-ni it-taɾa pa:t-to [pḁ:t:o] POL-house-SFP-QUOT doggie-DAT say-when IDPH.VL.VOICELESS-QUOT hait-te. enter-CONJ
‘[I] was astonished and ran, untying the doggie’s chain and saying to the doggie, “House, boy,” and then [it] entered [the house] with a rush.’ (D0007010008)
b. … mo: akiɾaka-ni nagaɾe-ga gɯ:t-to [gɯ̬:t:o] mata just obviously flow-NOM IDPH.VL.STIFF-QUOT again kotʃ:i-no ho:-ni hiɾogat-te … over.here-GEN direction-DAT spread-CONJ
‘… obviously, the flow spread far and wide over here again, and …’ (D0007010092)
Expressive morphology refers to special morphological processes applying commonly to
ideophones and rarely to ordinary words, such as reduplication and lengthening (Zwicky and Pullum 1987).3 Languages differ in the types of expressive morphology they make available. In Japanese, we find various types of stem repetition, partial multiplication, emphatic mora augmentation, vowel lengthening, and gemination (Hamano 1998; Nasu 2002; Akita 2009). For instance, the ideophone don ‘bam’ can undergo various processes of expressive morphology, from vowel lengthening (do:n) to partial multiplication (dododon) to stem repetition (don-don-don) (Akita 2009:36).
The following excerpt from the corpus contains expressivised forms of the ideophones jɯk:ɯɾi ‘slow’ and gat(-to) ‘rattling’. The former illustrates vowel lengthening, and the latter illustrates partial multiplication.4 Full stem repetition is shown in (2a) above.
3 Zwicky and Pullum (1987) have used the special behaviour of ideophones to argue that expressive morphology “constitutes a phenomenon that is not within the province of grammar as ordinarily understood” (1987:338). Here, we aim to show that while ideophones are sometimes grammatically peripheral, they nonetheless partake in the morphosyntactic structure of utterances; and it is precisely the fact that they do so to varying degrees that allows us to investigate the inverse relation between expressiveness and grammatical integration. 4 Additionally, gagagagagagagat-to is pronounced at a distinctly slower speech rate than the surrounding words, suggesting another possible type of prosodic foregrounding. Though we do not consider speech rate in a systematic way here, it may be another sign of the depictive use of speech (Childs 1994).
([ksiqAŗ%nyÇĉéŝ) �
(ʼnŦANQ�Ā¨) �
(�ý¢ANQ�Ā¨) �
(ŅŜ�āġP) �
(baan%te&‘bang’)�
(Ăö) �
(°Ô) �
(hatyametya%ni&‘topsynturvy’)�
(doon%to&‘bang’)�
Expressive/depictive*features*(Dingemanse*&*Akita*2016)*(,%�B81A) �
m�~<�
Expressiveness/depiction&×&morphosyntactic&integration�
• & a. &Į)�[G!�#�#��!]*>�:<…&& &Hune%ga &�guruguruut�%to& &mawat%te&& &shipnNOM&&&&&&IDPH & & &nQUOT &spinnCONJ&& &‘The&ship&spun&[G*around)and)around]…’&
(nonRpredicative;&D0007010180)&&b. &…ÆCĴPT�#�#<7O…&& &…&Ie%no& & & &mawari%o& &guruguru*si%te%tara…&& & &housenGEN &aroundnACC &IDPHndonCONJnwhen&& &‘…when&[I]&was&walking)around)the&house…’&
(predicative;&D0007010150) �
��(Dingemanse*&*Akita*2016;&Dingemanse&2011,&2017;&see&also&Kunene&1965;&Samarin&1971;&Childs&1994;&Nuckolls&1996;&Kita&1997;&Son&2010;&Dingemanse&2013) �
(°�¹�ŧĖ¹>ęúõĉ�õ�¹) �Facial&expression! �
• Indexical&(Éı±ß)&– “The&face&is&the&key&to&understanding&emotion,&and&
emotion&is&the&key&to&understanding&the&face.”&(Russell&&&FernándeznDols&1997:&3;&<&Darwin&1872;&Ekman&1977,&etc.)&(łDêÔTÓ+ű�êÔDłTÓ+ű)&
• Demonstrative&(§Ł±ß)&=*depictive*(B8-)*– Facial&displays&in&dialogue&demonstrate/mimic&the&
emotional&experience&at&issue.&(Bavelas&&&Chovil&1997:&337;&see&Clark&&&Gerrig&1990;&cf.&Sidnell&2006&for&a&related&discussion&of&gaze)&(�ÁA'-Q°ÔDêÔďC§Ł�ĦĖ)&
• Interactional&(¬ř�ń±ß)&– Preserving&mutual&affiliation&(Wilkinson&&&Kitzinger&2006;&
Ruusuvuori&&&Peräkylä&2009)&(ªIJêT©Å)&��
(°Ô) �
Speaker&gaze!�• To&the&recipient&(eye&contact)&(VX_~d]i)&– Terminating&a&turn&(Kendon&1967)&(d�~CäÐ)&%&No&
(Torres&et&al.&1997&cited&in&Rossano&2013)&– Showing&aggression&or&intimacy/affiliation&(Argyle&&&Dean&
1965;&EiblnEibesfeldt&1989)&(ĸħ¹�ğŐ¹C° )&– Signaling&the&intended&recipient&of&the&utterance&(Sacks&
et&al.&1974)&(�ÁCÀ-�CÉ�)&– Soliciting&a&response&(Bavelas&et&al.&2002);&mobilizing&
recipient&response&(Stivers&&&Rossano&2010)&(ÿĭCµÖ)&
• Away&from&the&recipient&(eye&release)&(VXzz�c)&– Signaling&renenactments&(Sidnell&2006;&cf.&Stec&et&al.&2016)&
(Þ»=#Q/>C�Ĩ)&≈*depictive*mode*(B8"��)* �
(ĉP�CĂöC±ß) �Summary&of&previous&studies�
• The&speaker’s&facial&expression&&&gaze&(ĉP�C°Ô>Ăö)&– Primarily&characterized&by&their&interactional&functions&(´>2<*@&=�C±ß(Oéŝã-OR<$QN%)&
– Also&associated&w/&some&depictive&properties&(B8�é¹LÉĶ1R<$Q)&
– May&shed&a&new&light&on&the&pragmatics&of&ideophones&([ksiqCĉ«îA�7@ė�) �
���
(Ì�ĎĠCI>K) �
2.*METHODS��¢�
���
Earthquake&Corpus �
• 214&edited&interviews&(5n15&min)&w/&victims&&&rescuers&in&East&Japan&Great&Earthquake&in&2011&(Dingemanse&&&Akita&2016)&(����ŕŇĆŇ��ŊĘ�GCĿëÈJX~dow�214�)&
• Transcripts&&&videos&(à*ø/2�+0)&• 10,413&sentences&(10,413â)&• 500&ideophones&&&179&quasinideophonic&words&
([ksiq500ĉ�æ[ksiq179ĉ)*• Full&of&emotional&speech&(2.(@�Á)įċ)&
http://www9.nhk.or.jp/311shogen/new/� ���
(ŕŇ_�nc) �
���
Coding �• Coded&for&ideophones&&&quasinideophones&([ksiq>æ[ksiqC�Á>Cåø)&– Obvious&facial&change&( O(@°ÔCì¨)&
– Speaker&gaze&(ĉP�CĂöCì¨)&
• Reliability&check&for&10%&of&the&data&(thanks&to&Nahyun&Kwon)&(h�dC10%T¾Ļ¹eZf])&– Facial&change: & &85.71%,&κ&=&.742,&p&<&.001&– Eye&contact: & &72.86%,&κ&=&.571,&p&<&.001� ���
% �levtevA�
% �j�~>�
(_�hW~^) �
(hatyametya%ni&‘topsynturvy’)�
(doon%to&‘bang’)�
Quasinideophonic&words�
• “Deideophonized”&words,&often&adverbial,&that&morphologically&look&like&ideophones&but&are&distinctly&frequent&due&to&their&prosaicnlike,&eventngeneral&meaning&(see&Tamori&1980)&([ksiq>�ĞCęúTÅ9;;L�é��ă>ÐE;(@$�ņľŭ�@¶ĬC7KA�ų£@�?��!��)�27ĉ)&
• e.g.,&dondon&‘one&after&another’,&sukkari&‘completely’,&zut%to&‘all&the&time’�
��
(æ[ksiq) �Predictions�
• Frequency&of&facial&change,&eye&contact,&&&eye&release&(°Ôì¨�VX_~d]i�VXzz�c>Cåøų£)&A. *Ideophonicity*(��!��-)*• Idph&([ksiq)&>&Quasinidph&(æ[ksiq)&
B. *Integration*(9537(3'-)*• Nonnpredicative&(Ĺģĉ«¢)&>&Predicative&(ģĉ«¢)&
��
(ËŌ) �
3.*RESULTS*&*DISCUSSION�Ðá�Ùĥ�
���
Iconic&gesture&&&eye&contact �• eyf>ŘT�7O�µ4QAĺ$Â)jf>�:<*7U=4��'I&ŏ.S�:<Ç:7U=4�ĜD�L%ū¦8(O�'�Dŏ.S�:<Ç:7U=4�62<6C�ŏ.S�>Ç:7>*A��)�[G��$�]*ò9<*7U=4B�&Tirat%to&niwa%o&mi%tara,&yoosuruni&kuro%i&mizu%ga&dot%to&hait%te&ki%ta%n%des%u.&“Omae&nige%ro”%tte&it%ta%n%des%u.&Watasi%wa&“Moo&dame%dakara,&omae%wa&nige%ro”%tte&it%ta%n%des%u.&Sosite&sono&“Nige%ro”%to&it%ta%toki%ni,&ue%ga&[G*doon*to]&oti%te&ki%ta%n%des%u%ne.&‘When&I&took&a&glance&at&the&yard,&black&water&poured&in.&I&said&to&my&wife,&“I&can’t&make&it.&Run&away&without&me!”&And&when&I&said,&“Run&away,”&the&roof&fell&on&us&with)a)bang.’&
(nonRpredicative;&D0007010005) ����
(ŅŜ�āġP�VX_~d]i) �
Facial&change&(1)�• 6C%9ĜC¥A¿:š(:<�6C¿:š(:<¯(R@$CB�Ś+<������ŰIR<�%U>ŰIR�đ>Ç:<$$U8(�(O@$,O$ļ2+<�ļ2+<ļ2+<�$Q%9¡£�óR<$:7C�ĵ)¿-<$:7C@�&Sonouti&watasi%no&karada%ni&hik%kakat%te.&Sono&hik%kakat%te&ugok%are%nai%no%ne.&Itaku%te.&Kitiit*to&hasam%are%te.&Unto&hasam%are,&nan%to&it%te&i%i%n%da%ka&wakar%ana%i%gurai&kurusiku%te.&Kurusiku%te&kurusiku%te.&I%ru%uti&kondo,&nagare%te&it%ta%no.&Nami%ga&hike%te&it%ta%no%na.&‘Before&long&the&debris&got&caught&on&my&body,&and&I&couldn’t&move&due&to&the&pain.&I&was&sandwiched&tightly&between&the&debris.&I&was&terribly&sandwiched&and&it&was&too&painful&for&words.&So&painful.&Then,&the&debris&flowed&away.&The&tsunami&wave&ebbed&away,&I&guess.’&
(nonRpredicative;&painful*%*extremely*painful;&D0007010036) �� �
(°ÔCì¨) �Facial&change&(2)�
• �*(:7=4N�%U���$��&Ooki%kat%ta%des%u%yo.&Un.&Doon*to.&‘[It]&was&a&loud&[noise].&[It]&was&like,&baang.’&(nonRpredicative;&neutral/serious*%*smiling;&D0007010040)&
���
(°ÔCì¨) �
Facial&change&&&eye&contact�
• b�pĊ9=ň�1U>í¤>�·=�=4(O�·A�¥12�13Ï,O$>ň�1U)�ōÒ0>>$%/>=�3Ï�4Ï,O$:<$%F%@ę=·A$I27B�=������B�HU>�&Ziipu%mati%de&kanzya%san%to&syokuin%to,&soto%de.&Desukara,&soto%ni&daitai&zyuuni%san%mei%gurai%to&kanzya%san%ga,&huton%goto%to%i%u%koto%de,&san%mei&yon%mei%gurai%tte%i%u%huu%na&katati%de&soto%ni&i%masi%ta%ne.&De,&bikkuri*des%u%ne,&honto.&‘[We]&were&waiting&for&the&rescue&jeeps&with&our&patients&and&colleagues&outside.&So,&there&were&about&12&or&13&people&and&3&or&4&patients&with&their&bedding.&And…surprising,&it&was.’&
(predicative;&neutral*%*smiling;&D0007010039)&���
(°ÔCì¨�VX_~d]i) �Iconic&gesture&&&eye&release �
• 78�³A�#C��²(O�):<*7Ģĵ8(O�…//I=�[G* �$�]*Å:</OR7-R?L�D�/Cİ=�)ŖI:7(O÷(:7:<$%ê3�&Tada&honto%ni,&anoo,&kawa%kara&agat%te&ki%ta&tunami%dakara…&Koko%made&[G*boon*to]*motteko%rare%ta%keredomo,&haa&kono%hen%de&tikara%ga&yowamat%ta%kara&yokat%ta%tte%i%u&kanzi.&‘Because&the&tsunami&rose&from&the&river,&[it]&took&me&up&here&with)a)bang&but&weakened&around&here,&and&[I]&got&relieved.’&
(nonRpredicative;&D0007010041)&���
(ŅŜ�āġP�VXzz�c) �Ideophonicity&׶language �
������ *����� * ******��� * *��*� * *��������n.s.�
([ksiq¹&×&nyÇĉ) �
ʼnŦ����ý¢���&&āġP���°Ô��VX_~d]i�VXzz�c�
345&
71&135&
9&
233&
31&42& 5&
81&11& 21& 9&
155&
108&365&
170&
170&
104&305& 102&
310&108& 370& 110&
0%&10%&20%&30%&40%&50%&60%&70%&80%&90%&100%&
idph
&
quasinidp
h&
idph
&
quasinidp
h&
idph
&
quasinidp
h&
idph
&
quasinidp
h&
idph
&
quasinidp
h&
idph
&
quasinidp
h&
Intonational&foregrounding&
Phonational&foregrounding&
Iconic&gesture& Facial&change& Eye&contact& Eye&release&
No&
Yes&
356&
19& 123&4&
231&
7& 35& 6& 60&15&
27& 2&
188&
51& 421&66&
199&
47& 312& 44& 335&37&
368& 50&
0%&
10%&
20%&
30%&
40%&
50%&
60%&
70%&
80%&
90%&
100%&
npred& +pred& npred& +pred& npred& +pred& npred& +pred& npred& +pred& npred& +pred&
Intonational&foregrounding&
Phonational&foregrounding&
Iconic&gesture& Facial&change& Eye&contact& Eye&release&
No&
Yes&
Integration&׶language �
������ *������� *������� * *n.s. * *����
Dingemanse*&*Akita*(2016) �([ksiqCõ�¹&×&nyÇĉ) �
ʼnŦ�����ý¢���āġP����°Ô��VX_~d]i��VXzz�c�n.s.)
(floor&effect?)�
Summary&of&the&results �
��
(ÐáCI>K) �
Prediction*A*(ideophonicity) �
Prediction*B*(integration) �
Intonational&foregrounding� Ż&idph&>&quasinidph� Ż&–pred&>&+pred�Phonational&foregrounding� Ż&idph&>&quasinidph� Ż&–pred&>&+pred�Iconic&gesture � Ż&idph&>&quasinidph� Ż&–pred&>&+pred�Facial&change � Ż&idph&>&quasinidph� ż&–pred&=&+pred�Eye&contact � Ż&idph&>&quasinidph� ż&–pred&<&+pred�Eye&release � ż&idph&=&quasinidph� ?&–pred&≥&+pred�
Accepted & to appear in Journal of Linguistics
9
breathy voice, stiff voice, falsetto, voicelessness, or whisper. Thus in (3a), pa:t-to is pronounced as [pḁ:t:o], with voiceless phonation. In (3b), gu:t-to is pronounced as [gu̬:t:o], with stiff voice, i.e., with the glottal opening narrower than normal.
(3) a. Mo: bik:ɯɾi-ʃi-te haʃit-te waŋko-no kɯsaɾi-o hodoi-te just IDPH-do-CONJ run-CONJ doggie-GEN chain-ACC untie-CONJ ‘O-ie-jo’ -t:e waŋko-ni it-taɾa pa:t-to [pḁ:t:o] POL-house-SFP-QUOT doggie-DAT say-when IDPH.VL.VOICELESS-QUOT hait-te. enter-CONJ
‘[I] was astonished and ran, untying the doggie’s chain and saying to the doggie, “House, boy,” and then [it] entered [the house] with a rush.’ (D0007010008)
b. … mo: akiɾaka-ni nagaɾe-ga gɯ:t-to [gɯ̬:t:o] mata just obviously flow-NOM IDPH.VL.STIFF-QUOT again kotʃ:i-no ho:-ni hiɾogat-te … over.here-GEN direction-DAT spread-CONJ
‘… obviously, the flow spread far and wide over here again, and …’ (D0007010092)
Expressive morphology refers to special morphological processes applying commonly to
ideophones and rarely to ordinary words, such as reduplication and lengthening (Zwicky and Pullum 1987).3 Languages differ in the types of expressive morphology they make available. In Japanese, we find various types of stem repetition, partial multiplication, emphatic mora augmentation, vowel lengthening, and gemination (Hamano 1998; Nasu 2002; Akita 2009). For instance, the ideophone don ‘bam’ can undergo various processes of expressive morphology, from vowel lengthening (do:n) to partial multiplication (dododon) to stem repetition (don-don-don) (Akita 2009:36).
The following excerpt from the corpus contains expressivised forms of the ideophones jɯk:ɯɾi ‘slow’ and gat(-to) ‘rattling’. The former illustrates vowel lengthening, and the latter illustrates partial multiplication.4 Full stem repetition is shown in (2a) above.
3 Zwicky and Pullum (1987) have used the special behaviour of ideophones to argue that expressive morphology “constitutes a phenomenon that is not within the province of grammar as ordinarily understood” (1987:338). Here, we aim to show that while ideophones are sometimes grammatically peripheral, they nonetheless partake in the morphosyntactic structure of utterances; and it is precisely the fact that they do so to varying degrees that allows us to investigate the inverse relation between expressiveness and grammatical integration. 4 Additionally, gagagagagagagat-to is pronounced at a distinctly slower speech rate than the surrounding words, suggesting another possible type of prosodic foregrounding. Though we do not consider speech rate in a systematic way here, it may be another sign of the depictive use of speech (Childs 1994).
Depictive*nature*of*ideophones �
Multimodal*nature*of*ideophones+ �
4.*CONCLUSIONS�Ðî�
��
Summary �
• Ideophone&utterance&is&correlated&w/&the&speaker’s&facial&expression&&&gaze&behavior.&([ksiq�ÁDĉP�C°ÔMĂö>¬���)&
• The&correlations&are&somewhat&different&from&what&we’ve&observed&for&expressive/depictive&features&(i.e.,&prosodic&foregrounding,&iconic&gesture).&(°��ŧĖéŝ&[ Ŷœ��Ā¨�ŅŜ�āġP]&A�ORQC>DMMŀ@Q¬�)&! )Why?)
���
(I>K) �Future&direction �
• Qualitative&analysis&of&interactional&data&(O’Reilly&2005;&Dingemanse&2011:&Ch.&11;&Szatrowski&2015;&Burch&&&Kasper&2016)&(�Áh�dCĄ��Š)&
• Comparison&w/&reported&discourse&(Clark&&&Gerrig&1990;&Holt&2000;&Sidnell&2006;&Akita&2015;&Stec&et&al.&2016)&(¿«>CôŨ) �
• Classification&of&facial&expressions&(e.g.,&tellingnfinal&smile)&(Ruusuvuori&&&Peräkylä&2009)&(°ÔC�ķ�ĉPüCŔł@?)&
���
(Ľº) �
Thank*you!�akita&dot&kimi&atsign&nagoya&hyphen&u&dot&jp&https://sites.google.com/site/akitambo/&
Special&thanks:&KLC&&&Nahyun&Kwon�
REFERENCES�ïÙâś�
���
See*also:*Bibliographies&of&sound&symbolic&phenomena&([ksiq✦ě):&https://sites.google.com/site/akitambo/Home/biblio�
• Akita,&Kimi.&2015.&Ideophones&and&reported&discourse&as&depictive&signs.&Joint&project&on&language&&&culture&2014:&Theoretical&approaches&to&natural&language,&1n10.&Osaka&University.&
• Akita,&Kimi.&2017a.&Grammatical&and&functional&properties&of&mimetics&in&Japanese.&In&Noriko&Iwasaki,&Peter&Sells,&and&Kimi&Akita&(eds.),&The&grammar&of&Japanese&mimetics:&Perspectives&from&structure,&acquisition&and&translation,&Ch.&2.&London:&Routledge.&
• Akita,&Kimi.&2017b.&The&linguistic&integration&of&Japanese&ideophones&and&its&typological&implications.&Canadian&Journal&of&Linguistics.&
• Akita,&Kimi,&and&Takeshi&Usuki.&2015.&A&constructional&account&of&the&“optional”"ative&marking&on&Japanese&mimetics.&Journal&of&Linguistics&52(2):&245n275.&
• Argyle,&Michael,&and&Janet&Dean.&1965.&Eyencontact,&distance&and&affiliation.&Sociometry&28(3):&289n304.&
• Baba,&Junko.&2003.&Pragmatic&function&of&Japanese&mimetics&in&the&spoken&discourse&of&varying&emotive&intensity&levels.&Journal&of&Pragmatics&35:&1861n1889.&
• Bavelas,&Janet&Beavin,&and&Nicole&Chovil.&1997.&Faces&in&dialogue.&In&James&A.&Russell&and&José&Miguel&FernándeznDols&(eds.),&The&psychology&of&facial&expression,&334n346.&New&York:&Cambridge&University&Press.&
• Bavelas,&Janet&Beavin,&Linda&Coates,&and&Trudy&Johnson.&2002.&Listener&responses&as&a&collaborative&process:&The&role&of&gaze.&Journal&of&Communication&52:&566n580.& ���
• Burch,&Alfred&Rue,&&&Gabriele&Kasper.&2016.&‘Like&Godzilla’:&Enactments&and&formulations&in&telling&a&disaster&story&in&Japanese.&In&Matthew&T.&Prior&&&Gabriele&Kasper&(eds.),&Emotion&in&multilingual&interaction,&57n85.&Amsterdam:&John&Benjamins. �
• Childs,&G.&Tucker.&1994.&African&ideophones.&In&Leanne&Hinton,&Johanna&Nichols,&and&John&J.&Ohala&(eds.),&Sound&symbolism,&178n204.&Cambridge:&Cambridge&University&Press.&
• Clark,&Herbert&H.,&and&Richard&J.&Gerrig.&1990.&Quotations&as&demonstrations.&Language&66(4):&764n805.&
• Cohn,&Jeffrey&F.,&Zara&Ambadar,&and&Paul&Ekman.&2007.&Observernbased&measurement&of&facial&expression&with&the&Facial&Action&Coding&System.&In&James&A.&Coan&and&John&J.&B.&Allen&(eds.),&The&handbook&of&emotion&elicitation&and&assessment,&203n221.&New&York:&Oxford&University&Press.&
• Darwin,&Charles&R.&1872.&The&expression&of&the&emotions&in&man&and&animals.&London:&John&Murray.&
• Diffloth,&Gérard.&1972.&Notes&on&expressive&meaning.&Papers&from&the&Eighth&Regional&Meeting,&the&Chicago&Linguistic&Society,&440n447.&
• Dingemanse,&Mark.&2011.&The&meaning&and&use&of&ideophones&in&Siwu.&Ph.D.&dissertation,&Max&Planck&Institute&for&Psycholinguistics/Radboud&University&Nijmegen.&
• Dingemanse,&Mark.&2015.&Ideophones&and&reduplication:&Depiction,&description,&and&the&interpretation&of&repeated&talk&in&discourse.&Studies&in&Language&39(4):&946n970.& ���
• Dingemanse,&Mark.&2017.&Expressiveness&and&system&integration:&On&the&typology&of&ideophones,&with&special&reference&to&Siwu.&STUF&–&Language&Typology&and&Universals.&
• Dingemanse,&Mark,&and&Kimi&Akita.&2016.&An&inverse&relation&between&expressiveness&and&grammatical&integration:&On&the&morphosyntactic&typology&of&ideophones,&with&special&reference&to&Japanese.&Journal&of&Linguistics&(FirstView).&
• EiblnEibesfeldt,&Irenäus.&1989.&Humanðology.&New&York:&Aldine&de&Gruyter.&
• Ekman,&Paul.&1977.&Facial&expression.&In&Aaron&W.&Siegman&and&Stanley&Feldstein&(eds.),&Nonverbal&communication&and&behavior,&97n126.&New&Jersey:&Lawrence&Erlbaum&Association.&
• Ekman,&Paul,&and&Wallace&V.&Friesen.&1978.&Investigator’s&guide&to&the&Facial&Action&Coding&System,&Part&II.&Palo&Alto:&Consulting&Psychologists&Press.&
• Ekman,&Paul,&Wallace&V.&Friesen,&and&Joseph&C.&Hager&(eds.).&2002.&Facial&action&coding&system.&Salt&Lake&City:&Research&Nexus.&
• Goodwin,&Charles.&1986.&Audience&diversity,&participation&and&interpretation.&Text&6(3):&283n316.&
• Holt,&Elizabeth.&2000.&Reporting&and&reacting:&Concurrent&responses&to&reported&speech.&Research&on&Language&and&Social&Interaction&33:&425n454.&&
• Kendon,&Adam.&1967.&Some&functions&of&gaze&direction&in&social&interaction.&Acta&Psychologica&26:&22n63.& ���
• Kita,&Sotaro.&1997.&Twondimensional&semantic&analysis&of&Japanese&mimetics.&Linguistics&35(2):&379n415.&
• Nuckolls,&Janis&B.&1992.&Sound&symbolic&involvement.&Journal&of&Linguistic&Anthropology&2(1):&51n80.&
• Nuckolls,&Janis&B.&1996.&Sounds&like&life:&Sound%symbolic&grammar,&performance,&and&cognition&in&Pastaza&Quechua.&Oxford:&Oxford&University&Press.&
• O’Reilly,&Michelle.&2005.&‘Active&noising’:&The&use&of&noises&in&talk,&the&case&of&onomatopoeia,&abstract&sounds,&and&the&functions&they&serve&in&therapy.&Text&25:&745n762.&
• Rossano,&Federico.&2013.&Gaze&in&conversation.&In&Jack&Sidnell&and&Tanya&Stivers&(eds.),&The&handbook&of&conversation&analysis,&308n329.&Malden:&Wiley&Blackwell.&
• Russell,&James,&and&José&Miguel&FernándeznDols.&1997.&The&psychology&of&facial&expression.&Cambridge:&Cambridge&University&Press.&
• Ruusuvuori,&Johanna,&and&Anssi&Peräkylä.&2009.&Facial&and&verbal&expression&in&assessing&stories&and&topics.&Research&on&Language&and&Social&Interaction&43(4):&377n394.&
���
• Sacks,&Harvey,&Emanuel&A.&Schegloff,&and&Gail&Jefferson.&1974.&A&simplest&systematics&for&the&organization&of&turnntaking&for&conversation.&Language&50:&696n735.&
• `iyYc\� rz�&(Szatrowski,&Polly).&2015.�ñĒ�A'-Q[ksiq&(Mimetics&in&taster&lunches)��x�}fn��ĉÚč&(JapanesenLanguage&Education&in&Europe)�19:&95n100.&
• Sidnell,&Jack.&2006.&Coordinating&gesture,&talk,&and&gaze&in&reenactments.&Research&on&Language&and&Social&Interaction&39(4):&377n409.&
• ŪŹź&(Son,&Youngsuk).&2010.&�ŵijĉ��ŵúĉ>āġP�g|oþûCs{ethWV�_�ncANQÊĐ��Š&(Onomatopoeias&and&gestures:&A&multimedia&corpusnbased&quantitative&study&of&Japanese&television&broadcasts)��ÊĐ�ĉ®&(Mathematical&Linguistics)�27(4):&131n153.&
• Stec,&Kashmiri,&Mike&Huiskes,&&&Gisela&Redeker.&2016.&Multimodal"ation:&Role&shift&practices&in&spoken&narratives.&Journal&of&Pragmatics&104:&1n17.&
• Stivers,&Tanya,&and&Federico&Rossano.&2010.&Mobilizing&response.&Research&on&Language&and&Social&Interaction&43(1):&3n31.&
• Tamori,&Ikuhiro.&1980.&Cooccurrence&restrictions&on&onomatopoeic&adverbs&and&particles.&Papers&in&Japanese&Linguistics&7:&151n171.&
��
• Tannen,&Deborah.&1983.&“I&take&out&the&rock&–&DOK!”:&How&Greek&women&tell&about&being&molested&(and&create&involvement).&Anthropological&Linguistics&25:&359n374.&
• Tannen,&Deborah.&1984/2005.&Conversational&style:&Analyzing&talk&among&friends.&Oxford:&OUP.&
• Voeltz,&Friedrich&K.&Erhard,&and&Christa&KiliannHatz&(eds.).&2001.&Ideophones.&Amsterdam/Philadelphia:&John&Benjamins.&
• Wilkinson,&Sue,&and&Celia&Kitzinger.&2006.&Surprise&as&an&interactional&achievement:&Reaction&tokens&in&conversation.&Social&Psychology&Quarterly&69(2):&150n182.&
• Zwicky,&Arnold&M.,&and&Geoffrey&K.&Pullum.&1987.&Plain&morphology&and&expressive&morphology.&Proceedings&of&the&Thirteenth&Annual&Meeting&of&the&Berkeley&Linguistics&Society,&330n339.&
��
APPENDICES�ãě�
���
4&major&ideophone&constructions&in&Jpn�&a. &Quotativenadverbial:&& &ŷ)�#�#�ş:7&& &Unagi%ga &nurunuru*to &subet%ta.&& &eelnNOM &IDPHnQUOT &slipnPST&& &‘An&eel&slipped&slipperily.’&&b. &Collocational:&& &ŷ)�#�#ş:7&& &Unagi%ga &nurunuru& &subet%ta.&& &eelnNOM &IDPHnQUOT &slipnPST&& &‘An&eel&slipped&slipperily.’&&c. &‘Do’nverbal&(pred):&& &/CŷD�#�#�Q&& &Kono&&unagi%wa &nurunuru*su%ru.&& &this &&&eelnTOP & &IDPHndonNPST&& &‘This&eel&feels&slippery.’&&d. &Nominalnadjectival&(pred):&& &/CŷD�#�# *& &Kono&unagi%wa &nurunuru*da.&& &this &&&eelnTOP & &IDPHnCOP.NPST&& &‘This&eel&is&slippery.’& ���
(Dingemanse&&&Akita&2016;&Akita&2017a,&b)�
Quot&(297)&59%&
Colloc&(70)&14%&
'Do'npred&(58)&12%&
NAnpred&(12)&2%& other&
(63)&13%&
(Earthquake&Corpus) �
Previously&proposed&pragmatic&functions&of&ideophones�
• “Soundnsymbolic&involvement”&(Nuckolls&1992,&1996;&Tannen&1983)&(�ù)&"&independence?&(Ě�)&
• “Emotive&intensity”&(Baba&2003)&(êÔC¸1)&• “Epistemic&authority”&(cf.&reported&speech;&Dingemanse&2011;&O’Reilly&2005;&Burch&&&Kasper&2016)&(ÕĪ�½ť)&
• “Expressiveness”&(Childs&1994;&Dingemanse&&&Akita&2016,&etc.)&(°�¹)&
• “Dramatizing&the&climax”&(O’Reilly&2005;&Szatrowski&2015;&Burch&&&Kasper&2016)&(�ÁC]yXsf]cCţ¨) �
� �
([ksiqC±ßA�4QèĤC×Ñ) �
Detailed&results:&obligatoriness�
���
39& 8&
346& 51&
0%&
20%&
40%&
60%&
80%&
100%&
Optional& Obligatory&
70& 18&
366& 45&
0%&
20%&
40%&
60%&
80%&
100%&
Optional& Obligatory&
(Fisher’s&exact&test:&p&=&.49&(n.s.)) �(Fisher’s&exact&test:&p&<&.05)�
Facial&change �Eye&contact �
(cf.&Dingemanse&&&Akita&2016)�
Detailed&results:&predicate&integration�
���
28& 7& 6&
220& 92& 44&
0%&
20%&
40%&
60%&
80%&
100%&
Q& C& V/N&
46& 14&15&
243& 92&37&
0%&
20%&
40%&
60%&
80%&
100%&
Q& C& V/N&
(χ2(2)&=&6.54,&p&<&.05)�
* �
(χ2(2)&=&1.53,&p&=&.46&(n.s.)) �
Facial&change �Eye&contact �
(cf.&Dingemanse&&&Akita&2016)�
cf.&70&prosaic&verbs&(eye&contact)�
���
80&11& 8&
311&108& 43&
0%&
10%&
20%&
30%&
40%&
50%&
60%&
70%&
80%&
90%&
100%&
Ideophonic& Quasinideophonic& V&
(χ2(2)&=&8.05,&p&<&.05)�
** �
** �
cf.&70&prosaic&verbs&(facial&change)�
���
42&5& 2&
305&102& 44&
0%&
10%&
20%&
30%&
40%&
50%&
60%&
70%&
80%&
90%&
100%&
Ideophonic& Quasinideophonic& V&
(χ2(2)&=&6.81,&p&<&.05) �
** �
* �
