1887
Volume 2, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2542-3851
  • E-ISSN: 2542-386X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Across the countries of the world, Japan can rightly claim to be a great “Twitter nation” (Akimoto 2011). Japanese people like to tweet anytime and anywhere. Although the popularity of Twitter in Japan is often associated with the large information capacity of Japanese character sets (Wagner 2013), Neubig and Duh (2013) prove that this is not necessarily the case. Our research compares two sets of data (300 tweets for each) posted by Japanese and Americans, and demonstrates that Japanese tweets contain more monologic features, or show a higher degree of monologicity, than Americans’ tweets. Also, more than 60% of the sentence-ending forms in the Japanese tweets do not encode explicit addressee orientation. The study reveals that it is not the Japanese unique character sets, but the grammatical devices for monologization that linguistically allow Japanese users to enjoy the fullest benefits of online anonymity and addressee underspecification provided by Twitter.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00030.izu
2019-07-16
2019-12-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Akimoto, Akky
    2011 “Japan, the Twitter nation.” The Japan Times, 18May 2011 https://www.​japantimes.co.jp/life/2011/05/18/digital/japan-the-twitter-nation/#.Wadv47JJbIU (accessed10 October 2016).
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ameka, Felix
    1992 “Interjections: The universal yet neglected part of speech.” Journal of Pragmatics18: 101–108. 10.1016/0378‑2166(92)90048‑G
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(92)90048-G [Google Scholar]
  3. Barker, Valerie, and Hiroshi Ota
    2011 “Mixi diary versus Facebook photos: Social networking site use among Japanese and Caucasian American females.” Journal of Intercultural Communication Research40(1): 39–63. 10.1080/17475759.2011.558321
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2011.558321 [Google Scholar]
  4. Barnlund, Dean C.
    1975The Public and Private Self in Japan and the United States. Tokyo: Simul Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Benveniste, Emile
    1971Problems in General Linguistics. Coral Gables: University of Miami Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bovee, Nicholas, and Robert Cvitkovic
    2010 “Anonymity in computer-mediated communication in Japanese and Western contexts: Comparisons and critiques.” Cyber University Bulletin2: 41–52.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Cheng, Changhao
    1987 “Shuujoshi: Hanashite-to kikite-no ninshiki-no gyappu-o umeru-tameno bunsetsuji [Sentence-final particles: Sentential affixes for filling a cognitive gap between speaker and addressee].” Nihongogaku [Japanese Linguistics] 6(10): 93–109.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Clark, Herbert H., and Susan E. Brennan
    1991 “Grounding in communication.” InPerspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, ed. byLauren B. Resnick, John M. Levine, and Stephanie D. Teasley, 127–149. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. 10.1037/10096‑006
    https://doi.org/10.1037/10096-006 [Google Scholar]
  9. Fetzer, Anita, and Kerstin Fischer
    (eds) 2007Lexical Markers of Common Grounds. Oxford: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Goffman, Erving
    1978 “Response cries.” Language54(4): 787–815. 10.2307/413235
    https://doi.org/10.2307/413235 [Google Scholar]
  11. Gudykunst, William B., and Tsukasa Nishida
    1994Bridging Japanese/North American Differences. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Haegeman, Liliane
    2013 “The syntax of registers: Diary subject omission and the privilege of the root.” Lingua130: 88–110. 10.1016/j.lingua.2013.01.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.01.005 [Google Scholar]
  13. Hall, Edward T.
    1976Beyond Culture. New York: Anchor Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Harada, Yohei
    2010Chikagoro-no Wakamono-wa Naze Damena-no-ka [Why Young People Nowadays Suck]. Tokyo: Kobunsha.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hasegawa, Yoko
    2010Soliloquy in Japanese and English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.202
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.202 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2015Japanese: A Linguistic Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139507127
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139507127 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hirose, Yukio
    1995 “Direct and indirect speech as quotations of public and private expression.” Lingua95: 223–238. 10.1016/0024‑3841(94)00006‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(94)00006-8 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hirose, Yukio, and Yoko Hasegawa
    2010Nihongo-kara Mita Nihonjin: Shutaisei-no Gengogaku [Japanese People Viewed from the Japanese Language: Linguistics of Subjectivity]. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hofstede, Geert
    1984Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values (abridged edn.). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Ikeda, Hideki
    2011 “Shuujoshi ‘yo, ne, na, ka’-no kumiawase: Shutsugenhindo-kara kangaeru [The combination of sentence-final particles ‘yo, ne, na, ka’: A frequency account].” Journal of the International Exchange Support Center, Niigata University7: 12–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Ikegami, Yoshihiko
    2008 “Subjective construal as a ‘fashion of speaking’ in Japanese.” InCurrent Trends in Contrastive Linguistics: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives, ed. byMaría de los Ángeles Gómez González, J. Lachlan Mackenzie, and Elsa M. González Álvarez, 227–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sfsl.60.14ike
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sfsl.60.14ike [Google Scholar]
  22. Iori, Isao, Shino Takanashi, Kumiko Nakanishi, and Toshihiro Yamada
    2001Chuujookyuu-o Oshieru Hito-notameno Nihongo Bunpoo Handobukku [Handbook of Japanese Grammar for Teachers of Intermediate and Advanced Learners]. Tokyo: 3A Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Izutsu, Mitsuko Narita, and Katsunobu Izutsu
    2015 “Cancellation, confirmation, and establishment: Three facets of grounding marked by Japanese final particles.” Paper presented at the14th International Pragmatics Conference, Antwerp, 27 July 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kimura, Tadamasa
    2012Dejitaru Neitibu-no Jidai [The Age of Digital Natives]. Tokyo: Heibonsha.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Kubozono, Haruo, and Takeru Honma
    2002Onsetsu-to Moora [Syllables and Moras]. Tokyo: Kenkyusha.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Langacker, Ronald W.
    1985 “Observations and speculations on subjectivity.” InIconicity in Syntax, ed. byJohn Haiman, 109–150. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.6.07lan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.6.07lan [Google Scholar]
  27. 1990 “Subjectification.” Cognitive Linguistics1(1): 5–38. 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.5
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.5 [Google Scholar]
  28. Lim, Young-shin, and Roselyn J. Lee-Won
    2017 “When retweets persuade: The persuasive effects of dialogic retweeting and the role of social presence in organizations’ Twitter-based communication.” Telematics and Informatics34(5): 422–433. 10.1016/j.tele.2016.09.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  29. Ma, Yingrui
    2014 “Gimonbun-no bunmatsu hyoogen-no shiyoo-nikansuru ichi koosatsu [A study on the usage of sentence-final expressions in interrogative sentences].” Research Journal of Graduate Students of Letters, Hokkaido University14: 173–186.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Macromill
    Macromill 2017 “Soosharu media-no riyoo jookyoo choosa & burogu soosharu bukkumaaku yuuzaa purofairu bunseki [Research on the use of social media & the profile analysis of blog and social bookmarking users].” https://www.macromill.com/contact/files/report/n054_3mcdez.pdf (accessed1 September 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Marwick, Alice E., and danah boyd
    2010 “I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience.” New Media & Society13(1): 114–33. 10.1177/1461444810365313
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313 [Google Scholar]
  32. Maynard, Senko K.
    1993aKaiwabunseki [Conversation Analysis]. Tokyo: Kurosio.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 1993bDiscourse Modality: Subjectivity, Emotion and Voice in the Japanese Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.24
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.24 [Google Scholar]
  34. Miyazaki, Kazuhito
    2002 “Shuujoshi ne-to na [Sentence-final particles ne and na].” Handai Nihongo Kenkyu14: 1–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Morio, Hiroaki, and Christopher Buchholz
    2009 “How anonymous are you online? Examining online social behaviors from a cross-cultural perspective.” AI and Society23 (2): 297–307. 10.1007/s00146‑007‑0143‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-007-0143-0 [Google Scholar]
  36. Morita, Yoshiyuki
    2007Joshi-Jodooshi-no Jiten [A Dictionary of Final Particles and Auxiliaries]. Tokyo: Tokyodo Shuppan.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Moriyama, Takuro
    1989 “Bun-no imi-to intoneeshon [Sentence meaning and intonation].” InNihongo-to Nihongo Kyooiku, Vol. 1. Nihongogaku Yoosetsu [Japanese and Japanese Language Education, Vol. 1: An Outline of Japanese Linguistics], ed. byYutaka Miyaji, 172–196. Tokyo: Meijishoin.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. 1997 “Hitorigoto-o megutte [On monologies].” InNihongo Bunpoo: Taikei-to Hoohoo [Japanese Grammar: The System and Methodology], ed. byYoshiaki Kawabata, and Yoshio Nitta, 173–188. Tokyo: Kurosio.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Neubig, Graham, and Kevin Duh
    2013 “How much is said in a tweet? A multilingual, information-theoretic perspective.” InAnalyzing Microtext: Papers from the 2013 AAAI Spring Symposium, ed. by Eduard Hovy, Vita Markman, Craig Martell, and David Uthus, 32–39. Palo Alto: The AAAI Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Nitta, Yoshio
    1991Nihongo-no Modaritii-to Ninshoo [Modality and Person in Japanese]. Tokyo: Hituzi.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Noda, Harumi
    2014 “Gijidokuwa-to yomite-ishiki [Quasi-monologues and addressee-consciousness].” InHanashikotoba-to Kakikotoba-no Setten [The Interface between Spoken and Written Language: Synchronic and Diachronic Approaches], ed. byKei Ishiguro, and Yukihiro Hashimoto, 57–74. Tokyo: Hituzi.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Nübling, Damaris
    2004 “Die prototypische Interjektion: Ein Definitionsvorschlag [The prototypical interjection: Suggestion for a definition].” Zeitschrift für Semiotik [Journal of Semiotics] 26(1–2): 11–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Ohbuchi, Ken-Ichi, and Yumi Takahashi
    1994 “Cultural styles in conflict management in Japanese and Americans: Passivity, convertness, and effectiveness of strategies.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology24: 1345–1366. 10.1111/j.1559‑1816.1994.tb01553.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb01553.x [Google Scholar]
  44. Onodera, Noriko O.
    2004Japanese Discourse Markers: Synchronic and Diachronic Discourse Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.132
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.132 [Google Scholar]
  45. Peddinti, Sai Teja, Keith W. Ross, and Justin Cappos
    2014 “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog: A twitter case study of anonymity in social networks.” InProceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Online Social Networks, 83–94. New York: ACM.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Poblete, Barbara, Ruth Garcia, Marcelo Mendoza, and Alejandro Jaimes
    2011 “Do all birds tweet the same?: Characterizing Twitter around the world.” InProceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, ed. byBettina Berendt, Arjen de Vries, Wenfei Fan, Craig Macdonald, Iadh Ounis, and Ian Ruthven, 1025–1030. New York: ACM.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik
    1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Rosen, Aliza
    2017 “Tweeting made easier.” Twitter Blog, 7November 2017 https://blog.twitter.com/official/en_us/topics/product/2017/tweetingmadeeasier.html (accessed28 November 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Shinmura, Izuru
    (ed.) 2008Kojien [Kojien Japanese Dictionary] (6th edn.). Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Stange, Ulrike
    2016Emotive Interjections in British English: A Corpus-Based Study on Variation in Acquisition, Function and Usage. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.75
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.75 [Google Scholar]
  51. Tabuchi, Hiroko
    2011 “Facebook wins relatively few friends in Japan.” The New York Times, 9January 2011 www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/technology/10facebook.html?mcubz=1 (accessed26 March 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Taira, Kazuhiro
    2017 “Torampu daitooryoo-wa tsuittaa-de nani-o ioo-to shitekita-no-ka [What has President Trump tried to say on Twitter?].” Huffpost Japan, 24January 2017 https://www.huffingtonpost.jp/kazuhiro-taira/trump-twitter_b_14327466.html (accessed20 April 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Takahashi, Toshie
    2014 “Youth, social media and connectivity in Japan.” InThe Language of Social Media, ed. byPhilip Seargeant, and Caroline Tagg, 186–207. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137029317_9
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137029317_9 [Google Scholar]
  54. Thomson, Robert, Naoya Ito, Hinako Suda, Fangyu Lin, Yafei Liu, Ryo Hayasaka, Ryuzo Isochi, and Zian Wang
    2012 “Trusting tweets: The Fukushima disaster and information source credibility on Twitter.” InProceedings of the 9th International ISCRAM Conference, ed. byLeon Rothkrantz, Jozef Ristvej, and Zeno Franco, 1–10. Vancouver: Simon Fraser University.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Tomasello, Michael
    1999The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Triandis, Harry C.
    1995Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    2010 “Dialogic contexts as motivations for syntactic change.” InStudies in the History of the English Language V: Variation and Change in English Grammar and Lexicon: Contemporary Approaches, ed. byRobert A. Cloutier, Anne Marie Hamilton-Brehm, and William A. Kretzschmar, Jr., 11–27. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110220339.1.11
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110220339.1.11 [Google Scholar]
  58. Tsuda, Daisuke
    2009Tsuittaa Shakairon [The Sociology of Twitter]. Tokyo: Yosensha.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Uehara, Satoshi, and Satoko Fukushima
    2004 “Shizen danwa-niokeru ‘hadaka-no bunmatsu keishiki’-no kinoo-to yoohoo [The functions and usages of ‘naked sentence-ending forms’ in natural discourse].” Sekai-no Nihongo Kyooiku [Japanese Language Education around the Globe] 14: 109–123.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. van der Auwera, Johan, Nina Dobrushina, and Valentin Goussev
    2013 “Imperative-hortative systems.” InThe World Atlas of Language Structures Online, ed. byMatthew S. Dryer, and Martin Haspelmath. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. wals.info/chapter/72 (accessed23 November 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Verhagen, Arie
    2007Constructions of Intersubjectivity: Discourse, Syntax, and Cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226702.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226702.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  62. Wagner, Kurt
    2013 “Twitter’s top 5 accounts are all in Japan – Here’s why.” MashableAsia, 22October 2013 mashable.com/2013/10/22/japan-loves-twitter/#JuyPtFT0Gaq2 (accessed10 October, 2016).
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Wang, Shaojung Sharon
    2016 “To tweet or not to tweet: Factors affecting the intensity of Twitter usage in Japan and the online and offline sociocultural norms.” International Journal of Communication10: 2637–2660.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Washi, Rumi
    1997 “Shuujoshi-to hatsuwa ruikei: Tookyoogo shuujoshi ‘wa’- to ‘na’- no danwa-niokeru hataraki [Final particles and speech types: The discourse functions of final particles ‘wa’ and ‘na’ in the Tokyo dialect].” Nihongo Nihonbunka Kenkyu [Studies in Japanese Language and Culture] 7: 65–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. we are social
    we are social 2015 “Digital, social & mobile in 2015.” wearesocial.com/uk/special-reports/digital-social-mobile-worldwide-2015 (accessed15 October 2016).
  66. we are social
    we are social 2017 “Digital in 2017: Global overview.” https://wearesocial.com/special-reports/digital-in-2017-global-overview (accessed26 August 2017).
  67. Webb, Helena, Marina Jirotka, Bernd Carsten Stahl, William Housley, Adam Edwards, Matthew Williams, Rob Procter, Omer Rana, and Pete Burnap
    2017 “The ethical challenges of publishing Twitter data for research dissemination.” InProceedings of the 2017 ACM on Web Science Conference, 339–348. New York: ACM. 10.1145/3091478.3091489
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3091478.3091489 [Google Scholar]
  68. Yudkin, Marcia
    2001Internet Marketing for Less Than $500/Year: How to Attract Customers and Clients Online without Spending a Fortune (2nd edn.). Gulf Breeze: Maximum Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Zwicky, Arnold M.
    1974 “Hey, Whatsyourname!” InPapers of the Tenth Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistics Society, ed. byMichael La Galy, Robert A. Fox, and Anthony Bruck, 787–801. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00030.izu
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00030.izu
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): addressee underspecification , anonymity , dialogicity , English , Japanese , monologicity and Twitter
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