A study of corresponding transitive and intransitive verbs in Japanese

Abstract

The Japanese verb system is characterised by a large number of corresponding transitive and intransitive verbs. Corresponding transitive and intransitive verbs share the same roots and usually transitivising or intransitivising affixes are distinguishable in pairs. The common relationship among the three noun phrases in corresponding transitive and intransitive sentences is such that the direct object in the transitive sentence equals the subject in the intransitive sentence. This means that the intransitive and the passive sentences seemingly have a very similar meaning. This paper attempts to clarify the differences involved between the two forms. It first defines corresponding transitive and intransitive pairs, then examines the pairs which do not allow the interaction of passive forms. Where there is passive form interaction, one clear-cut difference between intransitive and: passive forms is found in the actual meaning of verbs. Pairs that have semantic rifts between transitive and intransitive (semantic rifts imply more differences that are attributable to the transitivity differen·ce) use the passive forms to take on the role usually played by intransitive verbs. Where there exist no semantic rifts in pairs, differences between intransitive and passive sentences are concerned with the semantic notion of 'volition' and 'aspect'. For the area of 'volition', two kinds of intransitive sentences had to be distinguished: agentive and non-agentive sentences. Passive sentences are found to negate volition in their subjects when their corresponding agentive intransitive sentences imply the volition of the subject. In the case of non-agentive intransitive sentences and their passive sentences, the presence of the notion of volition is somehow reversed; the non-agentive sentences simply ignore the concept of volition, while the passive sentences connote the volition of an agent, which may be expressed by an oblique case. In the area of 'aspect', the aspectual differences in te-iru form between intransitive and passive sentences is shown. In their te-iru form, it is discovered that passive sentences can denote the aspect not only of the original transitive sentences but also of the corresponding intransitive sentences. This is to say that if a transitive sentence is continuative and the corresponding intransitive sentence resultative, its passive sentence denotes both continuative and resultative. Show more