MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2342782763 · doi:10.14288/1.0088582

Japanese interactional particles yo, ne and yone : their functions and acquisition by Japanese language learners

2009· article· en· W2342782763 on OpenAlexaff
Yasuko Goto

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsPsychologyLanguage acquisitionSecond-language acquisitionCommunicationPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Japanese language possesses a class of particles called "interactional particles" which appear in and facilitate interactions among people. This thesis analyzes the functions and Japanese language learners' acquisition of the interactional particles yo, ne and yone, which frequently occur in Japanese conversations. Employing speech data obtained from spontaneous conversations and written data from questionnaires and fill-in-the blank tests, the present study analyzed yo, ne and yone as used by Native Japanese Speakers (NJSs) and Japanese Language Learners (JLLs). It is generally understood that yo marks new information and ne elicits and demonstrates agreement. Based on the analyses of yo, ne and yone in previous works, I propose that the fundamental function of yo is "pointing to the speaker's private world" and that that of ne is "pointing to the common ground of the speaker and addressee." Yone, the combination of yo and ne, also points to the interlocutors' common ground. Due to the existence of yo, yone further reveals the speaker's personality: uncertainty about information and empathy toward the addressee. The NJS data revealed two notable practices which contrast with general understanding concerning the use of these particles. First, the NJSs presented new information in conjunction with ne, often accompanied by the nominalization form n(o) (da/desu). Secondly, they often requested agreement by employing yone. I claim that the NJSs' inclination for using ne and yone, the particles of "common ground," exemplifies a politeness strategy and Japanese communicative styles (e.g., expressions of enryo 'reservedness', omoiyari 'empathy' and wakimae 'discernment'), both of which are oriented to the unification of understandings between the speaker and addressee. The JLLs underused yone and overused ne. The JLLs' use of yone was approximately 10% lower than that of the NJSs. In contrast, the JLLs' use of ne was 20% higher than that of the NJSs. Furthermore, the JLLs misused yone and ne due to inadequate instruction on their use both in textbooks and classrooms. In particular, the JLLs showed difficulty when presenting new information by properly combining ne and yone with the nominalization form. This indicates the importance of the ability to handle the nominalization form along with yo, ne and yone. The present study revealed the JLLs' inadequate acquisition of the use of yo, ne and yone, which conform to politeness strategies and Japanese communicative styles. In conclusion, I suggest that Japanese textbooks and classrooms should pay more attention to the effects of these particles on human relationships. I also propose the introduction of yone, which is not often dealt with, into Japanese language teaching because of its significant contribution to Japanese interaction and discourse: an essential device for demonstrating agreement and exemplifying Japanese politeness and communicative styles.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.172 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning→French-language works237,207→