This dissertation investigates the semantic and syntactic nature of what I refer to as `adverbs of evaluation' in Japanese. This includes evaluative adverbs (1), which are a kind of subject-oriented adverbs, and what I call `stupid adverbs' (2), which are a kind of speaker-oriented adverbs.(1) Kare-wa {kimyooni-mo/igaini-mo} sarusa-o odotta. he-TOP {oddly-mo/surprisingly-mo} salsa-ACC danced `{Oddly/Surprisingly}, he danced salsa.'(2) Kare-wa {orokani-mo/shinsetsuni-mo} sono-ko-ni hanashikaketa. he-TOP {stupidly-mo/kindly-mo} that-child-DAT spoke.to `{Stupidly/Kindly}, he spoke to the child.'It has been observed that these adverbs show semantically interesting characteristics that are not shared by predicate adverbs (such as manner adverbs) when they interact with operators such as negation, question, and imperatives (Greenbaum 1969, Quirk et al. 1972, Bellert 1977, Sawada 1978, Nakau 1980, Bonami & Godard 2008, Mayol & Castroviejo 2013). However, the formal analysis of adverbs of evaluation is still under debate. I propose that adverbs of evaluation are (semi-)propositional modifiers, which appear above tense and are associated with non-at-issue conditional meanings.In chapter 2, I show that (i) evaluative adverbs in Japanese cannot be in the scope of predicate negation, (ii) they can appear in questions, but they cannot be in the scope of the question operator, and (iii) they cannot appear in imperatives, but they can appear in sentences with deontic modals. I adopt Bonami & Godard's (2008) idea that evaluative adverbs are associated with non-at-issue meanings that have a conditional form. I propose a revised version of their conditional account, and argue that evaluative adverbs are propositional modifiers which take an argument p of type with the conditional meaning `in the speaker's opinion, if p is true, then it is ADJ that p'.In chapter 3, I extend the revised conditional account to stupid adverbs in Japanese. Stupid adverbs are similar to evaluative adverbs in that (i) they cannot be under the scope of predicate negation, and (ii) they can appear in questions, but they cannot be in the scope of the question operator. However, they can appear in imperatives under a certain condition. I propose that stupid adverbs are semi-propositional modifiers which take an argument P of type ; and the subject x with the conditional meaning `in the speaker's opinion, if P(x) is true, x is ADJ for P'. I also argue that the conditional account can only be applied to stupid adverbs, but not to the other kind of subject-oriented adverbs, which I call `reluctant adverbs' such as iyaiya `reluctantly' and itotekini `intentionally'. This explains why reluctant adverbs are different from stupid adverbs in that (i) they can be under the scope of predicate negation, (ii) they can be in the scope of a question operator, (iii) they can appear in imperatives without any restriction, and (iv) they show ambiguity in passive sentences. I suggest that reluctant adverbs are more like manner modifiers,that is, predicate modifiers without any conditional meaning that appear below tense.In chapter 4, I consider the relation between adverbs of evaluation and their correspondingpredicate adverbs such as (3) and (4).(3) Kare-wa {kimyooni/igaini umaku} sarusa-o odotta. he-TOP {oddly/surprisingly well} salsa-ACC danced `He danced salsa {oddly/surprisingly well}.'(4) Kare-wa {orokani/shinsetsuni} furumatta. he-TOP {stupidly/kindly} behaved `He behaved {stupidly/kindly}.'I discuss three possible approaches, (i) deriving predicate adverbial meanings from adverbs of evaluation, (ii) deriving evaluative meanings from predicate adverbs, and (iii) a lexical ambiguity approach, and point out some key questions for future research.
Read
