Nominative/Genitive Conversion : toward a cognitive typology

本文的分析与以往的研究不同之处在于，它对日语主语标记的历史变化，及物性限制的本质，某些谓语对属格标记主语的偏好，（4）语用关系构式，认为非定语构式与加定语构式的区别应根据概念化的方式来区分。据推测，他们采用密切相关，但不同的认知过程。除了概念化的方式外，相应的形容词结构的语义结构被认为是相同的。本文认为，日语中的无名词性结构最好用参照点模型来表征，并论证了该结构的语义结构也最好用参照点/目标概念化（以下简称R/T概念化）来表征。无附加名构式反映的是R/T概念化，而加附加名构式则是基于标记/界标对齐的概念化（以下简称tr/lm概念化），其背景是概念化者所接受的固有的、不可分割的R/T概念化。

The proposed analysis differs from those in previous studies in that it offers a natural and straightforward account for (a)the historical changes of subject-marking in Japanese, (b)the nature of the so-called transitivity restriction, (c)the preference for the genitive-marked subject over the nominative-marked subject that certain predicates exhibit, and (d)the so-called pragmatic relative construction.It is claimed that the distinction between no-adnominal construction and ga-adnominal construction should be characterized in terms of manner of conceptualization. It is assumed that they employ closely related but different cognitive processes. The semantic structures of the corresponding adnominal constructions are assumed to be identical except for their manner of conceptualization. This is the reason why the two different case-particles can alternate without causing a semantic contrast.It is proposed that no-adnominal construction in Japanese is best characterized in a reference-point model and demonstrates that the semantic structure of the construction is also best characterized as a manifestation of reference-point /target conceptualization (hereafter R/T conceptualization). It is claimed that no-adnominal construction reflects solely R/T conceptualization, whereas ga-adnominal construction employs conceptualization based on trajector/landmark alignment (hereafter tr/lm conceptualization), backgrounding the inherent and immanent R/T conceptualization entertained by a conceptualizer.