日本語 形式名詞「ことㆍものㆍの」用法 比較에 關한 硏究

Abstract

In general, bound nouns are defined as the nouns which can't be used without modifying elements because they belong to nouns but they cannot used independently and have no specific meanings. The characteristics of these bound nouns are as follows: First, bound nouns can't be used by itself. Second, sentences can be formed only if adjectival modifiers come before bound nouns. Third, bound nouns which have the meaning as free nouns keep the meaning inside. The meaning and usage of the bound nouns, 「koto」「mono」「no」 were largely divided into the meaning and usage as free nouns and those as bound nouns. First, as the former case, 「koto」 meant an event or a situation which occurs in our daily life, and 「mono」 meant an unchangeable object, goods or material, as a free noun, respectively. Next, the latter could be subdivided into two kinds again: one was the usage of substituting for free nouns, and the other was the usage of nominalizing the antecedent phrases or clauses by adjectival modifiers. In the usage of substituting for free nouns, 「koto」 was used in expressing abstract facts and it meant ①expressible contents, meaning, cause ②a phase, a phenomenon, an event in the world ③contents, a fact about an object ④a situation, condition ⑤behavior, an action, etc. 「mono」 was used in expressing the object that are specific and can be taken hold of sensuously or a thing and it meant ①a thing, goods ②the contents of words(kotoba), writings or sentences ③reason, sense ④property ⑤a person ⑥a monster, departed soul, a ghost, etc. In the usage of nominalizing the antecedent phrases or clauses by adjectival modifiers, 「koto」 changed the antecedent modifier into the substantives, which could signify every kind of case. And 「no」 as well as 「koto」 had the usage of nominalizing the antecedent phrases or clauses, but it gave no meaning to adjectival modifiers. Comparing the usage of the bound nouns 「koto」「mono」「no」 with each other, we could elicit the following: First, in the case of 「koto」 and 「mono」, the object of 「koto」 was expressed as a concept like an action, a process, a change, a state, an attribute represented by a verb or an adjective, and 「koto」 was general and expressed the contents of speech, knowledge, and the object grasped by thought, while 「mono」 was individual and it was grasped by sense and mental process. Second, in the case of 「koto」 and 「no」, if the predicate of the main clause was a verb which means 「transmission」, 「will」, 「thought」, only 「koto」 was permissible, and if it was a verb which means 「perception」,「specific action」, only 「no」 was permissible, and also if it was a verb which means 「recognition」, both 「koto」 and 「no」 was permissible. Third, in the comparison of 「mono」 and 「no」, 「mono」 and 「no」 were used separately according to the contents that could be general or selective and individual. Finally, examining the precedent and subsequent elements of the bound nouns 「koto」「mono」「no」, the following was found: the precedent elements included i-adjectives, na-adjectives, verbs, adjectival modifiers, postpositions, auxiliaries, etc. and the subsequent ones included verbs, case postpositions, conjunctive postpositions, supplementary postpositions, ending postpositions, subjunctive expressions, etc.