Adverbial Adjectives in Japanese: The Case of Material Property1 2.

Ryo IMOTO

1. Introduction.

Functions of Japanese adjective are mainly divided into two: predication and modification. Following
the previous literatures, we can see adverbial-use of adjective, which is a part of modification, is not marginal,
rather than predication-use. Nitta (2002) pointed out that the adjectives in corpus data show that attribute
adjectives, which are exceed in number of the corpus data, appear as modification-use. Also, Kawabata
(1983) emphasized the importance of the modification-use of adjectives.
Japanese adjectives with adverbial form work at various semantic levels of a sentence such as manner
adverb as in (1), degree-modifier as in (2), and evaluative modifier as in (3):

(1) haya-ku hashi-ru

3
fast-ADVR run-PRS “to run fast”,
(2) hido-ku tsukare-ru
extreme-ADVR become tired-PRS “to be extremely tired”,
(3) mezurashi-ku oko-ru
rare-ADVR get angry-PRS “to get angry rarely”.

In this article, I pick up several cases that adverbial adjectives modify material properties of modifiee as
follows4:

(4) Kami o kuro-ku some-ru

hair-ACC black-ADVR dye-PRS “to dye the hair black”
(5) Ninjin o naname-ni kir-u
sausage-ACC diagonal-ADVR cut-PRS “to cut a sausage diagonally”
(6) Sairen ga ketatamashi-ku na-ru

1
This article is the unpublished translated version of Imoto, Ryo (2009) “Keiyooshi-renyoo-kei-ni-yoru Fukushi-teki
Shushoku-kankei” In Kokubungaku: Kaisyaku-to Kansyo (Japanese Literature: interpretations and appreciation), Vol.74, No.7,
Gyosei Publishing: Tokyo. This is a commercial magazine, not an academic journal. Hence, its discussion style might be unlike
the common style of English academic working papers.
2
This article was partially supported by the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, Grant-in-Aid for Scientific
Research, “Descriptive study of semantic coercion in adverbial modification in Japanese” (principal investigator: Ryo Imoto,
2008-2009, Project No. 20720118).
3
Abbreviations are based on Croft (2001).
4
Although there are two types of adjectives, ordinary adjectives (haya-ku “rapidly”) and adjectival noun (yooki-ni “merrily”),
the previous literatures about modifying relation from the structural/constructional point of view have been treated them as
same category. Also, adverbial modifying relation can be made with PP (NP + adverbial particle “-ni” such as S-ji-ni mage-ru
“bend into S-shaped”).

1
 siren-NOM noisy/loud-ADVR ring-PRS “a siren rings noisily”

In these examples, the adjectives play a role as adverb on syntax, but describe the material properties of
each object on semantics; the color of the hair is black, the angle of crack on the sausage is diagonal, and the
sound of the siren is noisy/loud. It shows that there is no coherency between the syntactic character and the
semantic reference in adverbial modification. In this article, I discuss Japanese adverbial adjectives and point
out the effectiveness to introduce some primitive semantic categories to distinguish and classify the various
adverbial modifications, and to fully understand the grammatical/semantic nature of adverbial modification
of Japanese adjectives.

2. The Fundamental Principle of Adverbial Modification.

Kato (2003) pointed out that term “modification” has three different notions in it; Semantic modification,
Structural modification, and Functional modification. Then he commented that the confusion among these
three notions misleads researchers to misunderstand that modifications are not easy to capture. Following his
view, we must distinguish the fact that adverbial adjectives make modifying relations with matrix verbs
(Structural modification) from the fact that adjectives modify the meanings of matrix verbs (Semantic
modification)5.

2.1. The Structural Relation: Modifier, Modified Constituent, and Modifiee.

In this article, I call an adjective “modifier” when it makes an adverbial modifying relation as adverbial
constituent, and call its counterpart “modified constituent”. In this sense, they are syntactic/structural element.
See the following examples:

(7) Dancer ga utsukushi-ku ma-u

dancer-NOM beautiful-ADVR dance-PRS “a dancer dances beautifully”
(8) Zookin o tsuyo-ku shibo-ru
floor cloth-ACC hard/strong-ADVR wring-PRS “to wring a floor cloth hard”
(9) Fuusen o ooki-ku fukuramase-ru
balloon-ACC big-ADVR inflate-PRS “to inflate a balloon big”
(10) Kami o kuro-ku some-ru
hair-ACC black-ADVR dye-PRS “to dye the hair black”

In (7)(8), modifiers utukushi-ku/tsuyo-ku (beautifully/strongly) have modifying relations with each

matrix verbs ma-u/shibo-ru(to dance/to wring), and specify the manners of actions like “the way of dancing

5
Functional modification that Kato pointed out is the relation on dependency.

2
is beautiful/the way of wringing is hard/strong” respectively. It is so called “adverbial relation of manner of
action (Nitta 2002, Yazawa 2000)”. On the other hand, in (9)(10), modifiers ooki-ku/kuro-ku (bigly/blackly)
are interpreted as specifying the states of each objects fuusen/kami (balloon/hair) denoted by each nouns like
“the balloon is big/the hair is black” respectively, having modifying relations with each verbs with the
adverbial form. It means that their modified constituents are not the matrix verbs, but the matrix VPs, that
contain argument NPs. It is also required from the fundamental principle of semantic modification discussed
in the following section.

2.2. Semantic Relation: Restrictive Modification and Semantic Categories.

In adverbial relations of property modification, a matrix VP structurally plays as modified constituent,

adverbials as modifying constituent, and at the same time, the adverbials semantically restrict meanings
contained in VP. At the latter, it is generally called a restrictive modification. We call the meanings or notions
that semantically restricted by adverbials “modifiee(s)”. We use the term “modifiee” for a semantic element,
and “modifier” too. Notice that adverbials are semantic elements when we use it for them.
Moreover, let us introduce the semantic primitives [MATERIAL-ENTITY (MAT, in short)],
[MOTION] and [EVENT]. They are semantic primitives, then written with capitals and square brackets.
Notice that these three notions are dependent on syntactic categories; for example, “sooseeji (sausage), kami
(hair), fuusen (balloon)” are [MAT], “chuugaeri (somersault), shindoo (vibration), kaiten (rotation)” are
[MOTION], and “jishin (earthquake), shussha (appearing for work), hoomuran (homerun)” are [EVENT]
respectively, but all of them are nouns. When adjectives restrict these three notions, the modified meanings
are differed respectively as follows:

(11) Naga-i sooseeji, naga-i kami, ooki-i fuusen

“a long sausage”, “long hair”, “a big balloon”
[property of MAT (=material property)]
(12) Utukushi-i chuugaeri, komaka-i shindoo subaya-I suteppu
“a beautiful somersault”, “minute vibration” “quick steps”
[property of MOTION]
(13) Naga-i kaigi oso-i shussha oshi-i intai
“a long meeting”, “a late appearing for work” “a regrettable retirement”
[property of EVENT]

Verb hashiru (to run) entails various kinds of properties such as [SPEED], [SPATIAL
CONFIGURATION] or [MANNER-of-MOTION] of running. Further, [SPEED] contains various values of
speed such as [FAST], [50mph], [LOW], or [LOW-SPEED], etc. It means that a semantic property [SPEED]
is a set that contains those members within itself. Standing the point of view, we can understand what is

3
restrictive modification in haya-ku hashiru (to run fast) in this way: it is a semantic operation to modifiee
[SPEED] in modified constituent hashiru, to exclude the members in [SPEED] except for [FAST], which is
the semantic value that haya-ku has. Then, the member of [SPEED] of hashi-ru modified by haya-ku is
nothing but [FAST], and the [SPEED] becomes a singleton. Hence, we can understand that a restrictive
modification is a relation between a semantic category (set) and its values (members) 6. Taking the restrictive
modification like this, we can exclude examples of ill-formed modification as follows:

(14) ?? shiro-ku hashi-ru

white-ADVR run-PRS “?? to run whitely”
(15) ?? oishi-ku ne-ru
delicious-ADVR sleep-PRS “?? to sleep deliciously”
(16) ?? hiku-i pen
low-INFL7 pen “?? a low pen”

The reason why shiro-ku hashi-ru (to run whitely) results in ungrammatical is due to their semantic
incompatibility; semantic category [COLOR] is not entailed in its modified constituent “run”. For a
well-formed modifying relation, the semantic entailment between a semantic value of modifiee and semantic
category that contains it as its member is required.
Considering the notion of three semantic primitives shown above is effective to clarify the facts of
modifications.

3. Adverbial Modification of Material Property.

One of the representative types of adverbial modification of material property is so-called Resultative
adverbial modification (modification of resultant state) 8. Also there are Adverbial modification of state
during the process of the event and Adverbial modification of psychological state of agent. I will exemplify
them below.

3.1 Adverbial Modification of Resultant State.

6
This point of view to the restrictive modification is slight different from conventional analysis, which treats the restrictiveness
as like “there is x that is included in [RUN] AND in [FAST]”. In short, the conventional analysis regards the relation as the one
between semantic categories, but mine is not, as the one between a semantic category (set) and its values (member). I take the
latter view because I emphasize predictability of semantically incompatible cases as in (14)-(16). With the conventional view,
there is no way to exclude these ungrammatical cases.
7
Japanese adjectives modify nouns with inflectional form; see Uehara (1998), Croft (2001).
8
In Japanese, there is still controversy about resultative construction whether the pre-verbal constituent is a secondary
predicate or an adverbial. There is a certain difference between English and Japanese as for resultative expression: Japanese
does not allow the type of resultative construction like “John hammered the metal flat” or “the joggers ran the pavement thin”,
rather allow the case like “John made the cake delicious”.

4
 At resultative adverbial modification, a modifier specifies a change-of-state of the object of the matrix
VP so that it modifies the way of state-change (Yazawa2000, Nitta2002 among others).

(17) Fuusen o ooki-ku fukuramase-ru

balloon-ACC big-ADVR inflate-PRS “to inflate a balloon big” (=(9))
(18) Harigane o maru-ku mage-ru
wire-ACC round-ADVR bend-PRS “to bend a wire into round”
(19) Kabe o aka-ku nu-ru
wall-ACC red-ADVR paint-PRS “to paint a wall red”

Verbs in (17)~(19), fukuramase-ru (to inflate), mage-ru (to bend) and nu-ru (to paint) are the verbs of
change of state, precisely saying, change of [SIZE/SHAPE/COLOR] of the each objects. And they entail the
each objects fuusen (balloon), harigane (wire) and kabe (wall) undergo the change of their state. Then, each
adverbials ooki-ku (big), maru-ku (round) and aka-ku (red) restrictively specify the resultant states. For
example, in (18), the resultant state [SHAPE] that the VP entails is restrictively specified to [ROUND] by
modifier. This is testified with a paraphrase “the wire become round by bending it.” Also, this semantic
modifying relation can be applied to the verbs of creation like the following examples9:

(20) Pirafu o yawaraka-ku tak-u

pilaf-ACC soft-ADVR cook-PRS “to make a softly-cooked pilaf”
(21) Koohii o ko-ku ire-ru
coffee-ACC thick-ADVR make-PRS “to make strong-coffee”.

In Japanese, resultative adverbial modifications require verbs of change of state or verbs of creation as
the modified constituent, verbs that do not entail changes of state of the objects as see in the following
examples:

(22) ?? harigane o maru-ku tsumam-u

wire-ACC round-ADVR pinch-PRS “ ?? to pinch a wire round”
(23) ?? odeko o aka-ku kosur-u
forehead-ACC red-ADVR rub “ ?? to rub the forehead red”

(22)(23) are the cases of semantic incompatibility between lexical meaning of the matrix verb and
modifier; the matrix verbs “tsumam-u (to pinch)” and “kosur-u (to rub)”do not entail the change of

9
In the cases of the verbs of creation, they do not pass the paraphrase test (? The pilaf become soft by cooking it), but it is due
to the test frame itself, not the essential problem.

5
[SHAPE/COLOR], then resultative adverbial modifications are not made. It shows that the modifiee in this
type of modifying relation is [RESULTANT STATE]; [SHAPE/COLOR] etc. are regarded as it.
Similarly, semantic incompatibility between [RESULTANT STATE] and semantic category that the
adverbial holds does not permit a grammatical modifying relation as follows:

(24) ?? harigane o aka-ku mage-ru

wire-ACC red-ADVR bend “ ?? to bend a wire red”
(25) ?? kabe o hiku-ku nu-ru
wall-ACC low-ADVR paint “ ?? to paint a wall low”

In (24), the matrix verb mage-ru “to bend” does not entail the change of [COLOR], but [SHAPE], then
there is semantic compatibility between the verb and the adverbial. Same as in (25), the verb entails the
change of [COLOR], but the adverbial denotes a property [SPATIAL POSITION].
These examples above exemplify that Japanese resultative adverbial modifying relation is based on the
fundamental principle of restrictive modification. In other words, this relation requires three conditions; (i)
the modified matrix verbs entail changes of state, (ii) the modifiee denote [RESULTANT STATE]. Then,
adjectives as modifier have a tendency to denote material properties in due to the required conditions that
adjectives should denote semantic categories that each objects hold.
From the view that the resultative adverbial modifying relation specifies a property of argument noun,
some researchers regard this relation as secondary predication or certain specific construction, and the
adverbials as secondary predicate (see Ono2007). In this article, however, I regard it as adverbial modifying
relation with some reasons; there is a semantic restriction as mentioned above; there are other adverbial
modifying relations that denote a property of an argument in Japanese. Also, for rich and appropriate
description of Japanese adverbial relations, we should keep our perspective wide, not only based on the
conventional syntactic analysis (see IMOTO 2009 for further discussion).
This point of view takes advantage when we consider a similar case as follows:

(26) Keeki o chiisa-ku kit-ta. (cf. Washio 1997)

Cake-ACC small-ADVR cut-PST “Mary cut the cake small.”
(27) Kutsuhimo o kata-ku musub-u
Shoelace-ACC hard-ADVR knot-PRS “to knot a shoelace hard”
(28) Sooseeji o naname-ni kir-u
Sausage-ACC diagonal-ADVR cut-PRS “to cut a sausage diagonally”

Although, they seem to be resultative modifications same as (17)~(19), the sentence (26), it does not
mean that the cake became small by cutting. Similarly, in (27) and (28), the shoelace does not become tight,
nor the sausage becomes diagonal. Rather, things that become small/hard/diagonal are “a piece cut out of the

6
cake”, “a knot on the shoelace”, and “a scar/section on the sausage” respectively; they are not the objects that
undergo the changes of state entailed by the verbs. In that sense, these cases are not regarded as the resultative
construction (see Ono 2007 and Washio 1997). Washio called these cases “spurious resultatives”, and
concluded them to be manner adverbs. However, their modifiees are [property of MAT], not [property of
MOTION], unlike the ordinary manner adverbs such as “subaya-ku (quickly)”, “hageshi-ku (fiercely)” or
“sewashina-ku (hurriedly)”. Then, we should not bungle them up. Standing on the descriptive framework of
Japanese adverbial structures, it is more important and effective to organize them into a transparent system
that clarify the differences and similarities among different types of adverbial modifying relations than to
judge which is the genuine resultative or not; the genuine/spurious judgment just leads us to the goal line of
the analysis, not the deeper consideration or fully understanding of the grammatical nature of Japanese
adverbials.
The objects of modifiees, such as a piece cut out of the cake, a knot of the shoelace and a scar on the
sausage, in spurious resultatives are not the ones of verbs of change of state. They are so to say “the material
entities/traces of changes of state on the theme; I call them “traces of events”. There is no syntactic
constituent in the sentences. Rather, they would not be interpreted without the relevant adverbial modifying
relations. At section 2.2, I pointed out that a semantic entailment between a semantic value as modifiee and
semantic category that contains the value is required for a well-formed modifying relation. If it is true, the
fact that these spurious resultative cases are grammatical seems to be strange. For an appropriate account for
it, there is an analysis from the semantic coercion: on the spurious resultative, there occurs a semantic
mismatch between a modifiee and the modifier (or semantic restriction on the semantic entailment of
modified constituent). Then, a semantic coercion is invoked to solve the semantic mismatch on the sentence,
and the modifiee is re-interpreted the event as the creation-event of the trace from the change of state event
(see Ono 2007, Imoto 2009). As result, the sentence has interpretation that the piece cut out of the cake is
small, not that the whole of the cake undergoes the change of state by cutting.
Considering resultative modifications is neither to judge whether a sentence is genuine resultative or not,
nor to easily conclude that the others are all manner adverb. Rather, it leads us to inquire the reason why
adjectives of material property can modify VP as adverbial modifier even with semantic mismatches.

3.2 Adverbial Modification of State during the Process of Events.

There are other types of adverbial modification involving material properties in Japanese. The one is the
case as follows:

(29) harigane ga ao-ku moe-ru

wire-NOM blue-ADVR burn-PRS “A wire burns bluely”

7
 This is the case that Yazawa (1983/2000) found, so-called “adverbial modification of state during the
process of event”. The modifier denotes the material property of the argument during the process of the event
denoted by the matrix verb, not at the resultative state. Notice that the material property modified by the
adverbial is not left behind after the process. Being blue of the wire does not last after burning. Moreover,
even so, modifiee is still material property, then it should be distinguish from manner modification such as
“hageshi-ku moe-ru (to burn fiercely)”.
This type of modifying relation requires verbs of emission of light/visual image/sound as modified
constituent as following examples.

(30) keihou ga ketatamashi-ku narihibik-u

alarm-NOM furious-ADVR clang-PRS “An alarms clanged furiously.”
(31) buzaa ga kandaka-ku nar-u
buzzer-NOM shiril-ADVR ring-PRS “A buzzer rang shrilly.”
(32) sukuriin ni kare no kao ga shiro-ku utsur-u
screen-LOC he-GEN face-NOM white-ADVR reflect-PRS
“His face reflects on the screen whitely.”

It means that this type of modification also requires the semantic restriction like resultative modification.

3.3 Adverbial Modification of Psychological State of Agent.

Another type of adverbial modification involving material properties is about psychological state of
agent (Špica 2005) as following examples:

(33) Tanaka-san wa hookokusyo o omoshiro-ku yon-da (Špica 2005)

Mr. Tanaka-TOP report-ACC interesting-ADVR read-PST
“Mr. Tanaka read the report interestingly.”
(34) Taro wa tuna-sando o oishi-ku tabe-ta (ibid.)
Taro-TOP tuna sandwich-ACC delicious-ADVR eat-PST
“Taro ate a tuna sandwich deliciously.”
(35) Choosatai no taiken o tanoshi-ku kik-u
Investigation team-GEN experience-ACC joyfully-ADVR listen-PRS
“to listen to the talk about the investigation team’s experience joyfully”
(36) Buchoo wa shinjin no purezen o tanomoshi-ku kii-ta
Chief director-TOP freshman-GEN presentation-ACC reliable-ADVR listen-PST
“The chief director listened to the freshman’s presentation reliably.”

8
 The adverbials in the examples above, “omoshiro-ku (interestingly), oishi-ku (deliciously), tanoshi-ku
(joyfully), tanomoshi-ku (reliably)” denote psychological state that the agents hold during each events.
Interestingly, the readings of psychological states can be paraphrased like “The report was interesting for
Mr.Tanaka”, not like “Mr. Tanaka was interesting”. Also “The tuna sand is delicious for Taro”, not like
“Taro was delicious” neither. The agents have psychological states and the themes have material properties to
be appreciated by the agent respectively. The agents and the themes have dual thematic roles respectively.
Kawabata (1983/2004) argued that adjectives in modification have the same as the ones in predication by
them even with inverse structures. We may regard the psychological state during an event as a kind of
material property as in an adverbial modification of state during the process of event in 3.2. However, it
seems to have another semantic restriction, as can be seen in the following examples:

(37) ? Taro wa tuna-sando o mazu-ku tabe-ta

Taro-TOP tuna sandwich-ACC unpalatable-ADVR eat-PST
“Taro ate a tuna sandwich unpalatably.”
(38) ? Choosatai no taiken o tsumarana-ku kik-u
Investigation team-GEN experience-ACC joyfully-ADVR listen-PRS
“to listen to the talk about the investigation team’s talk boringly.”

Also, more importantly, matrix verbs that can make this relation are limited only to action verbs such as
tabe-ru (to eat), kik-u (to listen), and yom-u (to read); neither the verbs of change of state, verbs of emission,
nor motion verbs. We need the further consideration and description about this case.
Although we have just begun to investigate these cases, it is obvious that we should not bundle them up
subtypes of manner adverbs, even if trying minute classifications as much as possible. What we concern is
not to expand the definition of manner adverb and enrich the subtypes. It will make the manner adverb a big
trash can that is hard to handle any more. Rather, we should observe and organize the fact of adverbial
relation involving material properties with introducing the frameworks of semantic primitives, lexical classes
or aspectual structures of matrix verbs, and modifying mechanism with semantic coercion10. Again,
expanding the manner adverbs is not a good way to organize the Japanese grammar.

3.4 The New Case: “The road dried white”.

Finally, I show several interesting examples relevant to the current discussion (see also Imoto 2009)11.

10
Imoto (2003) proposed the alternative analysis to conventional analysis of Nitta’s (1983/2002) or Yazawa’s (1983/2000),
introducing a cross-classification with three features: Resultativeness as lexical aspectuality, Materialness as semantic
primitives, and Argument-ness as syntactic constituent.
11
The quoted corpus data are from “100 Selections of Shincho Library (CD-ROM)” and “Newspaper Article Data of Mainichi
Shimbun 2003 (CD version)”.

9
 (39) … michi wa shiro-ku kawai-te-i-ta.
road-TOP white-ADVR dry-CONN-be-PST12
“The road had dried whitely.”
(40) …gen no ookata wa aka-ku sabi-tsuk-i,…
string-GEN almost-TOP red-ADVR rust over-CONN
“Almost of the strings rusted redly.”
(41) …bougo-tessen mo ao-guro-ku yake-te-i-ta.
Protective barrier-too bluish black-ADVR burn-CONN-be-PST
“The protective barrier had burnt bluish-blackly”

(39) can be paraphrased as “the road had become white by drying”, (40) as “the string became red by
rusting over”, and (41) as “the guard barrier had become bluish black by burning” respectively, that are
resultative readings. However, “kawa-ku (to dry), sabitsuk-u (to rust over), yake-ru (to burn)” never be the
verbs of change of [COLOR]: they do not entail [COLOR]. As pointed out at 3.1, the resultative modifying
relation requires semantic restriction between modifiee that the matrix verb holds and the modifier that the
adverbial holds. Then, an appropriate account is required for this case13. We need the further research, let me
suggest out a point of issue at present. The principle of restrictive modification and semantic entailment
pointed in section 2, and the mechanism of semantic coercion pointed in the discussion about the spurious
resultative in section 3.1. Shortly, the color adjectives in the examples above are not genuine color adjectives
[WHITE, RED, BLUISH BLACK], but a kind of material property such as [WHITE AS RESULTANT
STATE OF ROAD-DRYING], or [RED AS RESULTANT STATE OF STRING-RUSTING] and
[BLUISH-BLACK AS RESULTANT STATE OF BARRIER-BURNING]14. They can be re-interpreted as
the members entailed in the semantic categories of each verbs of change of state by semantic coercion.

4. Final Remarks.

In this article, I have shown some issues on adverbial modifying relation with material properties. We
can summarize the characters as followings.
First, there is a gap between syntax and semantics: syntactically, it is an adverbial structure, but
semantically, it denotes material property that nouns entail. Principally saying, a property of Motion/Event
cannot remain after the event ends. Then, a denotation of resultant state can be regarded as a pretense of a
result of event.

12
V-te-i-ru (te is connective particle, i-ru is stative verb as “be”) form is an aspectual marker for denoting progressive,
resultative, iterative, habitual or perfect.
13
Niikawa (1997) had noticed this case, but did not reach a convincing discussion on its anomaly.
14
Not only semantic coercion, but also Pustejovsky’s (1995) “co-composition” in the Generative Lexicon might be involved
with this case.

10
 Secondly, modified material properties that occur on the argument nouns realize with occurrence of each
events. Even if modifiees are material properties, they are inseparable from aspectuality and temporality of
events.
We can find a pretense of an event as a material property and an indivisibility of material property from
event on an adverbial modifying relation. They are mutual. This mutuality is the foundation to make
adjectives of material property possible to work as adverbials that modify verbs. This nature corresponds to
the recent view of cognitive semantic approach, which insists that human’s recognition of properties and
kinesthetic ability are reciprocal15.
From the point of view of semantic compatibility on modifying relation, there are many cases with
material properties to be observed. For further research, we should pursue the richer description and better
organization within the framework of the principle of modification and semantic primitives, without too
much concerns about the conventional classification of adverbs16.

References
FUKADA, Chie, and Koichiro NAKAMOTO (2008) Conceptualization and Meaning (Gainen-ka-to Imi-no Sekai).
Tokyo: Kenkyusha Publishing.
IMOTO, Ryo (2003) Adverbial Relations in Japanese (Gendai Nihongo-ni-okeru Fukushiteki Shushoku Kankei-no
Kenkyu). unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Tsukuba University.
IMOTO, Ryo (2009) Modification and Coercion in Japanese Resultative Construction
(Nihongo-kekka-koobun-ni-okeru Gentei-to-kyosei). In, ONO, Naoyuki (ed.) The Typology of Resultative
Construction (Kekka-koobun-no typology). 267-313. Tokyo: Hitsuji Syobo Publishing.
KATO, Shigehiro (2003) Pragmatic Approach to the Structures of Modification in Japanese
(Nihongo-shuushoku-koozoo-no Goyooron-teki-kenkyu) . Tokyo: Hitsuji Syobo Publishing.
KAWABATA, Yoshiaki (1983) The Condition of Adverbs: from the View of Organization of Modal Adverbs
(Fukushi-no Jooken: Johoo-fukushi-soshiki-kara). In, WATANABE, Minoru (eds.) The Study of Adverbials
(Fuku-yoogo-no Kenkyu). 1-34. Tokyo: Meiji Shoin.
KAWABATA, Yoshiaki (2004) Grammar and Meaning (Bumpoo-to-imi). In, ONOE, Keisuke (eds.) Asakura Series
of Grammar, Vol.6: Grammar II. 58-80. Tokyo: Asakura Publishing.
NIIKAWA, Tadashi (1996) The Meaning and Function of Adverbs: the case of Resultative Adverbs (Fukushi-no
Imi-toKinoo: Kekka-fukushi-o Megutte). The Science of Language (Kotoba-no Kagaku), Vol.7, 61-80.
Tokyo: Mugi Shoboo Publishing.
NITTA, Yoshio (1983) On around of Resultative Adverbs: from the framework of Lexico-syntax
(Kekka-fukushi-to sono-shuuhen: goiron-teki-toogoron-no Shisei-kara). In, WATANABE, Minoru (eds.)
The Study of Adverbials (Fuku-yoogo-no Kenkyu). 117-136. Tokyo: Meiji Shoin.
NITTA, Yoshio (2002) The Aspects of Adverbial Expressions. (Fukushi-teki Hyoogen-no Shosoo). Tokyo: Hitsuji
Syobo Publishing.
ONO, Naoyuki ed. (2007) New Perspectives of the Study of Resultatives (Kekka-koobun-kenkyu-no Shin-shiten).
Tokyo: Hitsuji Syobo Publishing.
ŠPICA, Dragana (2005) Psych-adverbials. Journal of Japanese Grammar, Vol.5, No.1. The Society of Japanese
Grammar. 212-222.
YAZAWA, Makoto (1983) Regulation of Adverbial Modifiers of Material Property: Analysis from Co-occurrences
and Word Orders (Joota-shushoku-seibun-no Seiri: Hi-shushoku-seibun-to-no Koou-oyobi

15
This notion is called “affordance (of environment)” in ecological psychology. See Fukada and Nakamoto (2008).
16
The other point of this issue is such as the scale structure of adjectives on resultative construction. See Ono (2007).

11
 Shutugen-ichi-kara-no Koosatsu)., Japanese and Japanese Literature (Nihongo-to Nihon-Bungaku).
Vol.3, 30-39. Tsukuba Academic Society of Japanese Language and Literature.
YAZAWA, Makoto (2000) The Aspects of Adverbial modifications (Fukushi-teki-shushoku-no Shosoo). In, NITTA,
Yoshio, Masayoshi SHIBATANI, Shinjiroo MURAKI, and Makoto YAZAWA, The Skeletal Structure of
Grammar (Bun-no Kokkaku). Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten Publishers.
WASHIO, Ryuichi (1997) Resultatives, Compositionality and Language Variation. Journal of East Asian
Linguistics, Vol.6, No.1. 1-49.

For this translated version:

CROFT, William (2001) Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. New York:
Oxford University Press.
IWATA, Seizi (2006) “Argument Resultatives and Adjunct Resultatives in a Lexical Constructional Account: The
Case of Resultatives with Adjectival Result Phrases”, Language Sciences, 28, pp.449-496.
PUSTEJOVSKY, James (1995) “The Generative Lexicon”, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
UEHARA, Satoshi (1998) Syntactic Categories in Japanese: A Cognitive and Typological Introduction. Tokyo:
Kurosio Publishers.

12