1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. International Journal of Language and Culture
  4. Volume 12, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 12, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2214-3157
  • E-ISSN: 2214-3165
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Self-referential solitude speech invokes diverse conceptions of its speakers in different languages. In unvocalized solitude speech, the speakers are conceptualized as hearing their other selves in Ainu, as directing the speech to their other selves in English, and as holding the speech content in mind rather than directing the speech to themselves in Japanese and Korean. These four languages further differ in the range of pronominal reference to the thinking and speaking self in solitude speech. Ainu prefers second-person self-reference in unvocalized speech, not in vocalized speech, English and Korean encourage or tolerate second-person self-reference in both vocalized and unvocalized speech, and Japanese disfavors second-person self-reference in both types of speech. These cross-linguistic similarities and differences can reflect socio-cultural assumptions and worldviews of the relevant linguistic communities. We explore some relations between each language’s (dis)preference for solitude speakers’ split-self conception and assumptions/worldviews that encourage or discourage that conception.

© 2025 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ijolc.00071.izu
2026-02-05
2026-02-12

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ijolc.00071.izu
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Asai, T.
    (1969) Ainugo no bunpo: Ainugo Ishikari hogen bunpo no gairyaku [An Ainu grammar: A grammatical overview of the Ishikari dialect]. InAinu Bunka Hozon Taisaku Kyogikai (Ed.), Ainu Minzokushi [Ainu ethnography] (pp.771–800). Tokyo: Daiichi Hoki.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Chiri, M.
    (1973) Chiri Mashiho Chosakushuu 3: Seikatsushi minzokugaku hen [Collected works of Mashiho Chiri 3: the ethnography and ethnology volume]. Tokyo: Heibonsha.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Gim, H.
    (2014) Painman ssi nongdamdo jalahasine11. Seoul: Saieonseu Bugseu.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Goffman, E.
    (1978) Response cries. Language, 541, 787–815. 10.2307/413235
     https://doi.org/10.2307/413235 [Google Scholar]
  5. Gweon, I.
    (2019) Dudeuryeora! Ggumi Yeollilgeosida. Seoul: Haengbog Eneoji.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Haiman, J.
    (1998) Talk is cheap: Sarcasm, alienation, and the evolution of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780195115246.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195115246.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  7. Hammarström, H., Forkel, R., Haspelmath, M., & Bank, S.
    (Eds.) (2024) Glottolog 5.1. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Hasegawa, Y.
    (2010) Soliloquy in Japanese and English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.202
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.202 [Google Scholar]
  9. Izutsu, K., & Izutsu, M. N.
    (2016) Viewpoint fusion for realism enhancement in Ainu and Japanese narratives. InB. Dancygier, W. Lu, & A. Verhagen (Eds.), Viewpoint and the fabric of meaning: Form and use of viewpoint tools across languages and modalities (pp.93–124). Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110365467‑005
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110365467-005 [Google Scholar]
  10. (2021) Presentation followed by negotiation: Final pragmatic particle sequencing in Ainu. InD. Van Olmen & J. Šinkūnienė (Eds), Pragmatic markers and peripheries (pp.77–109). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.325.03izu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.325.03izu [Google Scholar]
  11. Izutsu, M. N., & Izutsu, K.
    (2019) Why is Twitter so popular in Japan?: Linguistic devices for monologization. Internet Pragmatics, 2(2), 260–289. 10.1075/ip.00030.izu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00030.izu [Google Scholar]
  12. Izutsu, M. N., Kim, Y.-T., & Izutsu, K.
    (2022) Response cries or response statements?: A cross-linguistic analysis of interjectional expressions in Japanese and English. Contrastive Pragmatics, 3(2), 194–221. 10.1163/26660393‑bja10038
     https://doi.org/10.1163/26660393-bja10038 [Google Scholar]
  13. Kayano, S.
    (1988) Kamuiyukara to mukashibanashi [Kamuy yukar and old tales]. Tokyo: Shogakukan.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. (1990) Kayano Shigeru Ainugo Kaiwa: Shokyuhen [Shigeru Kayano’s Ainu conversation: basic]. Akan: Kamuy Turano Kyokai.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. (1996) Kayano Shigeru no Ainugo Jiten [Shigeru Kayano’s Ainu language dictionary]. Tokyo: Sanseido.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. (1998a) Kayano Shigeru no Ainu Shinwa Shusei [Shigeru Kayano’s compilation of Ainu myths] 1: Kamuy Yukar 1. Tokyo: Heibonsha.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. (1998b) Kayano Shigeru no Ainu Shinwa Shusei [Shigeru Kayano’s compilation of Ainu myths] 4: Uwepeker1. Tokyo: Heibonsha.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. (2000) Ainu Saijiki: Nibutani no Kurashi to Kokoro [An Ainu table of annual events: life and heart of Nibutani]. Tokyo: Heibonsha.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Kindaichi, K.
    (1931) Ainu Jojishi Yukara no Kenkyu [A study of the Ainu epic Yukara], vol.11. Tokyo: Toyo Bunko.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Koguma, T., Izutsu, K., & Kim, Y.
    (2020) Monologic deixis: Two distinct conceptions behind reflexive speech event. Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the Pragmatics Society of Japan151, 169–176.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Koguma, T., & Izutsu, K.
    (2022) What’s my name in absolute solitude?: The essence of monologic selves in Japanese. Studies of Language and Culture, 261, 19–31.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Leech, G., & Short, M.
    (2007[1981]) Style in fiction: A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose (2nd. ed). Harlow: PPEARSON/Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Maynard, S. K.
    (1993a) Kaiwabunseki [Conversation Analysis]. Tokyo: Kurosio.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. (1993b) Discourse modality: Subjectivity, motion and voice in the Japanese language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.24
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.24 [Google Scholar]
  25. Pascual, E.
    (2006) Fictive interaction within the sentence: A communicative type of fictivity in grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 171, 245–267. 10.1515/COG.2006.006
     https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2006.006 [Google Scholar]
  26. Pascual, E., & Sandler, S.
    (Eds.) (2016) The conversation frame: Forms and functions of fictive interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.55
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.55 [Google Scholar]
  27. Rhee, S., & Koo, H. J.
    (2017) Audience-blind sentence-enders in Korean: A discourse-pragmatic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 1201, 101–121. 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.09.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  28. Searle, J.
    (1979) Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511609213
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609213 [Google Scholar]
  29. Shibatani, M.
    (1990) The languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Sokolov, A. N.
    (1972) Inner speech and thought. New York: Plenum Press. 10.1007/978‑1‑4684‑1914‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-1914-6 [Google Scholar]
  31. Talmy, L.
    (1988) Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 121, 49–100. 10.1207/s15516709cog1201_2
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1201_2 [Google Scholar]
  32. (2000) Toward a Cognitive Semantics, volume 1: Concept structuring systems. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Tamura, S.
    (1996) Ainugo Saru hogen jiten [An Ainu language dictionary of the Saru dialect]. Tokyo: Sofukan.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. (1997[1988]) Ainugo [The Ainu language]. InT. Kamei, R. Kono, & E. Chino (Eds.), Gengogaku daijiten serekushon [An encyclopedia of linguistics: Selection], (pp.1–88). Tokyo: Sanseido.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Thom, K. D.
    (2001) Becoming an ironman: First encounters with the ultimate endurance event. Halcottsville: Breakaway Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Ueda, T.
    (1995) Futari no chichi [Two fathers]. Ainugo akaibu. National Ainu Museum.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. (1999a) Kibori no okami [Carved wooden wolf]. Ainugo Akaibu. National Ainu Museum.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. (1999b) Ezomatsu to macho [Yezo spruce and malevolent deity of bird]. Ainugo Akaibu. National Ainu Museum.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Van der Auwera, J.
    (2012) From contrastive linguistics to linguistic typology. Languages in Contrast, 121, 69–86. 10.1075/lic.12.1.05auw
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.12.1.05auw [Google Scholar]
  40. Wolfson, N.
    (1978) A feature of performed narrative: The conversational historical present. Language in Society, 71, 215–237. 10.1017/S0047404500005534
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500005534 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ijolc.00071.izu
Loading
When to prefer split-self conceptions
International Journal of Language and Culture 12, 118 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1075/ijolc.00071.izu
/content/journals/10.1075/ijolc.00071.izu
/content/journals/10.1075/ijolc.00071.izu
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): directive force; mental solitude; reporting verb; self-reference; split-self

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error