i ..
. 9.2.
id.

. It: ‘1'.
1.., fimfiyfi. 35%.»-.. .
. . 30$ 43.

. .5 .
3.3.2.... to;

..............-....n.n .

39.55%“? .Fawmmu u...

.. .. 3 J

{imahi .....1

v i

.1, Uzi-:13: 1
.l I. our-3111.405...

1.“ g u.
'l . 1D.
.J‘l’futyi! :7
PiniszIIAi
ufifluo...§.li!.
1.5.5 .91

.. flan-ff‘cllx'. .Ill!‘

.53

.Hbryfln‘as . . \

El.
5 :1
33¢: ..
$154036:
13):! 31...:
1:... .
1 £3.55
., 4.
v.

125..
3.... I .
IX?

 

THESIS

L008
This is to certify that the
thesis entitled
THE NEW USAGE OF JAPANESE REGIONAL DIALECTS:
EMERGENCE AND MOTIVATION
presented by
CD
4...;
>- «‘9 .5:
U: U) at; Misako Matsubara
< c: H
0: ca 9’
m 9-1
—’ _C_J_ :3 i has been accepted towards fulfiilment
E of the requirements for the

 

 

Department of Linguistics and
Master's degree in Germanic, Slavic, Asian, and
African Language§____

 

__ éL/LC““ "

Major Professor’s Sigm—aiire

_3 //§L[.‘0_<§’_____ _

Date

nmlxé 2. f3

 

MESH is an affil'nmtlw ,: no", (3mIa/«oimommit‘y Omp/OL"?

- “M_‘_»

- ‘J Q -.~ - _ — _

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5/08 K:IProi/Acc&Pres/CIRC/DateDuemdd

THE NEW US AGE OF JAPANESE REGIONAL DIALECT:
EMERGENCE AND MOTIVATIONS

By

Misako Matsubara

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Linguistics and Germanic, Slavic, Asian, and African Languages

2008

ABSTRACT

THE NEW USAGE OF JAPANESE REGIONAL DIALECT WORDS:
EMERGENCE AND MOTIVATION

By

Misako Matsubara

The mixture of regional dialect words and Tokyo Japanese has been reported in
some articles (e.g., Inoue 1986a and 1986b) and a newspaper column (e.g., ‘The war of
dialect’) because Tokyo Japanese is generally considered as standard. This study
investigates whether gender, age, or both have had an effect on mixing dialect words
when speaking in Tokyo Japanese. In this thesis, “dialect” means regional dialect.

This thesis comprises two different studies. The first study determines the use of
dialect forms by the Tokyo Japanese. This is based on the blogs of two different age
groups (18-19 and over 50). The results were analyzed in terms of gender and age. The
results reveal that men use dialect words more frequently than women and that the
younger group uses these words more often than the older group. The other study was to
determine whether people in general think that the dialect forms are cute and comical,
whether people in the Kanto area use them, and who the participants think use these
forms. In total, 238 people responded to my questionnaire, and the results demonstrate
that the participants do not think that the use of dialect words is either cute or comical.
The frequency of the dialect form use is relatively low except for intensifier. Although the
use of dialect forms is found throughout the different age groups, younger people are
thought to use these forms more often than older people. Major limitations of these

studies are noted at the end.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to thank Dr. Mutsuko Endo Hudson for her
continuous support and guidance of this thesis. I am also grateful to Dr. Yen-Hwei Lin
and Dr. Suzanne Wagner for giving me insightful comments and advice. Lastly, I would
like to show my appreciation who passed around the questionnaire and the participants of
the questionnaire. Without their cooperation, I could not complete this thesis. I am also

thankful to my family and friends who kept encouraging and supporting me.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................. vi
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................ viii
Chapter 1. Introduction .......................................................................... 1
1 . 1 . General remarks .................................................................. 1
1.2. Purposes and hypotheses ........................................................ 2
1.3. Outline of the thesis .............................................................. 4
Chapter 2. Literature review ................................................................... 5
2.1. Youth language ................................................................... 5
2.1.1. Slang .................................................................. 6
2.1.2. Studies of Intensifiers ............................................... 9
2.2. The history of Japanese regional dialects ..................................... 13
2.3. The study of Japanese youth .................................................... 17
2.3.1. Kawaii (‘cute’) ....................................................... 17
2.3.2. Amae (‘dependency’) .............................................. 21
2.3.3. Characteristics of Japanese youth ................................. 22
2.4. Summary ........................................................................... 23

Chapter 3. Sample sentences of the mixture of Tokyo Japanese and dialect words. . . .. 25

Chapter 4. Study of dialect word use in blogs ................................................ 28
4.1 . Hypotheses ......................................................................... 28

4.2. Subjects ............................................................................. 28

4.3. Methodology ....................................................................... 30

4.4. Results and discussion ............................................................ 33

4.4.1. General results ........................................................ 33

4.4.2. Results of selected dialect words .................................. 34

4.4.3. Discussion ............................................................. 38

Chapter 5. Study of impressions of dialect words used in Tokyo Japanese ............... 43
5. 1. Hypotheses ........................................................................ 43

5.2. Methodology ...................................................................... 43

5.3. Results and discussion ............................................................ 45

5.3.1. Participants .......................................................... 45

5.3.2. Hypothesis 3 ......................................................... 47

5.3.3. Hypothesis 4 .......................................................... 51

5.3.4. Hypothesis 5 .......................................................... 53

5.3.5. Discussion ............................................................. 55

iv

Chapter 6. Conclusion ........................................................................... 60

6.1. Conclusion ........................................................................ 60

6.2. Limitations of the present studies .............................................. 62

Appendices ........................................................................................ 64

Appendix A. The complete list of dialect words in the blog study ......................... 64

Appendix B. The number of each dialect word used in each group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ...... 67

Appendix C. The request posted on the social networking site to recruit

participants of online questionnaire .......................................... 69

Appendix D. The questions on the questionnaire ............................................ 70
Appendix E. 1. The mean scores of the Kanto acquaintances’ impression of each

sentence ........................................................................ 79

Appendix E2. The mean scores of the Kanto SNS’s impression of each sentence 80
Appendix F. 1. The mean scores of the R1 acquaintance’s impression of each sentence 81

Appendix E2. The mean scores of the R1 SNS’s impression of each sentence ........ 82
Appendix G The mean of the use of dialect words by the Kanto acquaintance
and the Kanto SNS ............................................................ 84
Appendix H. The mean of the use of dialect words by the R1 acquaintance and
the R1 SNS ..................................................................... 84
Appendix I. l. The groups that the Kanto acquaintance and the Kanto SNS think
say this kind of sentences ................................................... 85
Appendix I. 1. The groups that the Kanto acquaintance and the Kanto SNS think
say this kind of sentences ................................................... 86
References ........................................................................................ 87

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1. The number of participants in the blog study ................................... 29
Table 4.2. The number of blog entries used in this study .................................. 30
Table 4.3. The list of variations of four English element ................................... 32
Table 4.4. The total number of dialect forms appearing in the blog study ............... 33
Table 4.5. The number of tokens of dialect forms divided by open and closed class

words ................................................................................... 33
Table 4.6. The number of total tokens of intensifiers, -ya (copula), ikan / akan (‘not

good’), and —toru / -too / -ch0ru (action in progress / resultant state) .. . . . . . .. 34
Table 4.7. The total number of tokens by gender ............................................ 35
Table 4.8. The total number of tokens by age ................................................. 35
Table 4.9. The total number of intensifiers .................................................... 35
Table 4.10. The total number of —ya (copula) ................................................ 36
Table 4.11. The total number of dame(da) (‘not good’) ................................... 36
Table 4.12. The total number of —tez'ru (action in progress / resultant state) ............. 37
Table 4.13. The total number of aho (‘stupid’) ............................................. 40
Table 4.14. The total number of ee / kakkoee / yoka (‘good / cool’) ..................... 40
Table 4.15. The frequency of Tokyo Japanese intensifiers used in the data ............ 41
Table 4.16. The frequency of dialectal intensifiers used in the data ..................... 42
Table 5.1. The number of participants by age group ....................................... 46
Table 5.2. The number of the “Kanto people” ................................................ 46
Table 5.3. The mean scores of the Kanto people’s impression of each sentence ........ 48
Table 5.4. The mean scores of survey participants in R1 ................................... 50

vi

Table 5.5. The mean of the use of dialect words by the Kanto people ..................... 52

Table 5.6. The mean of the use of dialect words by the people in Region 1 ............. 53
Table 5.7. The groups that the Kanto people think say this kind of sentences ........... 53
Table 5.8. The groups that all the participants think say this kind of sentences ......... 54

Table 5.9. Summary of comparison with the participants through personal contacts
and the participants through the social networking site ....................... 59

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1. Cute fashion without frills and ribbons .......................................... 18
Figure 2.2. Rounded kana symbols in Japanese .............................................. 19
Figure 2.3. Textbook font in Japanese ......................................................... 19
Figure 2.4. Hello Kitty ........................................................................... 20
Figure 2.5. Hello Kitty credit card ............................................................. 20
Figure 3.1. Geographic division of Japanese dialects ........................................ 26
Figure 4.1. The ratio of selected dialect words by gender .................................. 38
Figure 4.2. The ratio of selected dialect words by age ...................................... 38
Figure 5.]. Geographic division of Japanese dialects ...................................... 49

viii

Chapter 1. Introduction
1.1. General remarks

Regional dialects have been considered as substandard for a long time in Japan.
However, the use of dialect words in Tokyo Japanese by young people has been observed
although Tokyo Japanese has been generally regarded as standard in Japan. The present
study investigates the use of the mixture of Tokyo Japanese and dialect words by gender
and age, and the reasons Tokyo people mix these words in their Tokyo Japanese. One of
the examples of this mixture is a, arede yokato? ( ‘Oh, is that good ’2’). Yokato is a dialect
word that means ‘good’, and ii is the equivalent of yokato in Tokyo Japanese. Therefore,
the sentence above in Tokyo Japanese is a, arede ii ?. In this thesis, I will use “dialect” as
regional dialect, not social dialect.

Using dialect forms in Japan had been prohibited by the government in Meiji
period (1868 — 1912 AD.) in order to propagate Standard Japanese at the beginning of
twentieth century, and it ended up being stigmatized as “bad language” (Kunihiro et a1.
1999: 191). Due to the stigmatization, some people who grew up with non-standard
forms still have negative feelings on their own variety of Japanese. However, these forms
are observed in commercials, rap songs, and the names of snacks and beer as well as
printed on local souvenir products (Inoue 2007), and general attitudes to dialects seem to
be changing in positive direction (Sato and Yoneda 1999). In the last few years, dialect
forms seem to have become popular. There was a part in a popular TV program in which
celebrities spoke in their local dialects'. Books have been published showing how to mix

dialect words and Tokyo Japanese, too (e. g., Kawaii hoogen techoo).

 

l. Matthew’s BestHitTV from 2001 to 2006

Lexical innovations usually spread and disappear quickly because they are often
fad words. No one knows whether this phenomenon will be gone like fad words. It might
in fact be disappearing already. It is hoped that this study can document a part of the
linguistic change in progress, and that it will contribute to the future study in the use of

Japanese dialect words by gender and age as well as sociolinguistics in general.

1.2. Purposes and hypotheses

The purpose of this thesis is to investigate whether or not young people use the
mixture of dialect words and Tokyo Japanese and why young people in Tokyo mix two or
more different varieties of Japanese. I carried out two studies to examine five hypotheses.
The first study focuses on the frequency of dialect words used in Tokyo Japanese, and
there are two hypotheses to be tested in this study. The data were collected from blogs in
a Japanese social networking site, and the results were compared by subjects’ gender
(man and woman) and age (18-19 and over 50). The second study is mainly about the
impressions people have toward the mixture of dialect words and Tokyo Japanese, and
three hypotheses are tested in this study. The data were collected by an intemet survey I
developed and conducted.

In my first study, I address two hypotheses to examine the frequency of dialect
forms used in Tokyo Japanese by gender and age. There have been many research studies
concerning youth language, mainly slang and the use of intensifiers. When looking at the
results of youth language studies by gender, men use slang more frequently than women
(e.g., Strenstrdm et a1. 2002; Jay 1992), and women use intensifiers more frequently than

men (e.g., Tagliamonte and Roberts 2005; Macaulay 2006). In terms of age, younger

people used both the slang and the intensifiers with higher frequency than older people
(e. g., Strenstrdm et a1. 2002; Ito and Tagliamonte 2003). Based on these results, I created
the first two hypotheses below since young people are the users of this mixture of
language varieties.
Hypothesis 1: There is no gender difference in terms of the frequency of
dialect words used in Tokyo Japanese.
Hypothesis 2: Younger people mix dialect forms more frequently than do older
people in Tokyo Japanese.
In my second study, the following hypotheses are addressed to explore the
reasons behind the dialect word use:
Hypothesis 3: Dialect forms are considered to be cute and comical.
Hypothesis 4: People in Tokyo and the surrounding areas use dialect forms in
casual situations.
Hypothesis 5: Younger people are thought to use the dialect forms more than do
older people.
A series of columns The war of dialects in Yomiuri newspaper in 2006 talked about the
mixture of dialect words and Tokyo Japanese. Kazuko Miyake2 asked college students
their impressions of dialect forms, and one of the impressions given was kawaii (‘cute’)
(series #68). The author of this column also interviewed high school students, and they
said using dialect forms made the speech comical, and it also softened the tone of speech
(series #58). Therefore, Hypothesis 3 asked whether people in general also had the same

idea as high school students did. Hypothesis 4 was based on the data of Coupland (1980)

 

2. Professor of Japanese Literature and Culture at Toyo University, Japan

and Labov (2006), which illustrated that style-shifting occurred in everyday speech
depending on the contexts, and asked if the participants used dialect forms un Tokyo
Japanese in casual situations. Additionally, I asked who the participants think would use
this mixture of language (Hypothesis 5). It has been reported that the users of the mixture
of dialect words in Tokyo Japanese are young people (e. g., The war of dialect), but the

general perception might be different.

1.3. Outline of the thesis

This thesis consists of six chapters. Literature concerning youth language,
dialects in Japan, and some keywords about Japanese youth, is reviewed in Chapter 2. A
series of newspaper column The war of dialects gave actual examples of the mixture of
dialect words and Tokyo Japanese, and I cite the examples from series #58 and #68 in
Chapter 3. A Japanese map and explanations of each example are added. In Chapter 4, the
frequency of dialect words in blogs compared by gender and age is examined, and the
results are reported. Chapter 5 describes results on the online questionnaire that
investigated people’s impressions of the mixture of dialect words and Tokyo Japanese.
This Chapter includes methodology, participants, results and discussion of the online
questionnaire. Conclusion and limitations of the present studies are discussed in Chapter

6.

Chapter 2. Literature review

In this chapter I will review the literature in the following three areas: youth
language, Japanese dialects, and some keywords about Japanese youth. The literature on
youth language illustrates some characteristics of the language young people use, because
mixing dialect words and Tokyo Japanese, which is the focus of this thesis, is popularly
believed to have emerged from the speech of young people. Therefore, it seems
appropriate to review the literature on youth language in general. Studies regarding
Japanese dialects provide background information on dialects in Japan. There is a unique
desire, according to Kinsella (1995), particularly among Japanese young people, to be
“cute”, which is explained at the end of this section. This desire seems to be the

motivation for the use of dialect forms in Tokyo Japanese.

2.1. Youth language

Youth language has been one of the popular areas of sociolinguistic study by
many researchers because young people often create a variety of new words and new
usage of existing words. Tokyo young people’s mixing of dialect words and Tokyo
Japanese is a relatively new phenomenon, so there are some reports focusing on it (e.g.,
‘The war of dialects’ 2006; Inoue 1998). Slang vocabulary and a high frequency of
intensifier use are two of the features that have been identified as characteristic of youth
language in English (e.g., Strenstrom et a1. 2002; Ito and Tagliamonte 2003). Other
linguistic features that are characteristic of youth language are the use of the discourse
marker like (e.g., Romaine and Lange 1991) and quotatives (e.g., Tagliamonte and

D’Arcy 2004). In this section, I will focus on slang and the use of intensifiers.

Allen (1998: 878) defines slang as “a vocabulary that has become used and
understood with social purpose beyond the boundaries of the subgroup that originated the
lexical items or their special meanings.” According to his definition, it seems anyone,
men or women, younger or older, could potentially use slang although it is stigmatized.
The definition of “intensifier” in Collins Cobuild English Language Dictionary (1987:
760) is as follows: “a word such as very or extremely, which you can put in front of an
adjective or adverb in order to make its meaning stronger.” Intensifier use has been
explored relatively recently, and this phenomenon is similar to the dialect word use
among Tokyo Japanese because younger people use intensifiers more frequently than
older people, and this seems to be the tendency in the dialect word use in Tokyo Japanese

as well. In addition, dialect intensifiers are borrowed into Tokyo Japanese.

2.1.1. Slang

In general, semantic categories of slang range widely from drinking, drugs,
music, sports, money, to sexual and other social relations, to name a few (e.g., Allen
1998; Dumas and Lighter 1978). Slang is used not only by young people but also by
older people. In Dumas and Lighter’s study (1978: 10), the subjects characterized slang
as something that “anyone can recognize”, but “no one can define.”

Strenstrdm et al.(2002) shows that gender and age differences matter in slang use.
Strenstrom et al. (2002), based on the study of the Bergen Corpus of London Teenage
Language (COLT), uncovered that teenagers use slang more often than other age groups.
In this study, slang covers proper slang, which means words that are labeled as slang in

the dictionaries, dirty words, and taboo words. Proper slang such as man, sad, and wicked

was found more frequently than dirty words including taboo words such as crap and
bastard in terms of variation and frequency in this study. Many of the proper slang words
express either derogatory meaning or sexual connotations, whereas the large majority of
dirty words are linked to sex. This study also reports that male speakers use slang more
frequently than female speakers. Jay (1992) confirms male’s frequent use of slang over
female’s. His study concerned “dirty words”, which usually is a subcategory of slang and
which is offensive. He tape-recorded 12 college students’ conversations, six males and
six females, in various situations, and noted each slang occurrence. For example, he
wrote down who the speakers were, who the listeners were, how old they were by
estimation, and how they used slang such as “angry” or “joking”. His results reveal that
male speakers use slang words more often, and so, in terms of gender difference, the
results are the same in terms of gender as those of Strenstrdm et a1 (2002).

Why do people use slang? What is the function of slang? Some functions that are
mentioned are “solidarity” (Yonekawa 1994), “in-group marker” (Taylor 1998), and
expectation for boys to be “tough and competitive” (Strenstrom et a1. 2002). Solidarity is
one of the functions scholars mention when they talk about youth language, too (Eckert
1988; Okamoto and Sato 1992). The use of special words such as slang that make sense
only among a certain group of people can create closeness. Feelings of covert prestige
help to build solidarity (Loveday 1986). Covert prestige is a feeling some people have by
using particular linguistic forms which are looked down upon in the society or the
community. Obviously, slang provides covert prestige and helps to build solidarity.
Strenstrdm et a1. (2002) refer to the expectation for boys to be tough and competitive, a

notion applicable to many cultures. Because many slang words have been considered to

have come from male subcultural languages (Allen 1998), and these words are associated
with masculinity, Strenstrdm et a1. (2002) writes that boys are to be allowed to use slang
and dirty words more than girls. Haig (1991: 14) interviewed and analyzed junior high
and high school students in Nagoya, Japan. His results also showed that the dialect word
usage was “a covert marker of masculine speech.” Therefore, I speculate that using
stigmatized language might add toughness to the male speakers.

Another function some research states is a desire to be original. There are two
kinds of being original by young people: one is to use slang frequently compared to other
age groups (e.g., Strenstrom et a1. 2002), and the other is to create novel slang words
frequently (e.g., Yonekawa 1998). An example of the former case is the frequent slang
use. According to Strenstrom et a1. (2002), among the five age groups (IO-13, 14-16,
17-19, 20-29, and 30+), the group of 17-19 used 12.2 slang words per 1000 words, which
was the highest among these groups. The results of 10-13 and 14-16 groups were close to
those of 17-19 (10.6 and 10.7 slang words per 1000 words respectively). The age group
of 20-29 used 6.7 slang words per 1000 words, and the age group of 30+ scored only 1.7
slang words per 1000 words. Below an example of the latter case on Japanese is given,
although the ways of creating new words are not limited to this. Borrowings from other
languages (e.g., English) are common in Japanese, and different meanings are often
added to the words when they are used in Japanese. For example, kurisuchan diooru
(Christian Dior), kyasshu disupensaa (Cash Dispenser), and konpakuto disuku (Compact
Disc) all mean a person who received the grades of C and D mostly because the initial

alphabet of these words in English is all C and D.

2.1.2. Studies of Intensifiers

Regional intensifiers are used in Tokyo Japanese, and this is why I am reviewing
the literature on intensifiers. All the studies explained here but two are about the use of
intensifiers in English.

Strenstrom et a1. (2002: 139) define an intensifier as “items that amplify and
emphasize the meaning of an adjective or an adverb,” whereas some other literature (e. g.,
Ito and Tagliamonte 2003) refer only to adverbs of this kind. Very is one of the traditional
intensifiers (Tagliamonte and Roberts 2005) and was also the most frequently used
intensifier until the 19403 (Fries 1940). Although very was formerly the most frequent
intensifier, it is now competing with so and really, which have recently become very
frequent in both British and American English. Researchers study the kinds of intensifiers
preferred by age and gender as well as by location. Below are examples of studies about
intensifiers as they relate to studies of young people’s language.

Ito and Tagliamonte (2003) look at intensifier use in York, England. They
analyze the speech data of 48 subjects (eight men and eight women each in three age
groups). The data indicate that the subjects between the age of 17 and 34 use intensifiers
more frequently than other age groups (35-65 and 66+). Chiavetta (2006) interviewed 24
people, four men and four women each in three age groups (11-20, 21-32, and 33-50),
and her results indicate that the age group of 21-32 uses intensifiers more frequently than
do the other two groups. Although the youngest group of Chiavetta’s study did not score
the highest frequency, the age range between these two groups that use intensifiers the
most frequently in the two studies overlaps. It can be assumed then that those who are in

their late teens through early 303 use intensifiers frequently.

Several studies have been conducted concerning gender differences in intensifier
use. They report opposite results to slang studies: female speakers use intensifiers with
higher frequency than male speakers. Tagliamonte and Roberts (2005) analyzed the
scripts of an American television series called FRIENDS to see the change of trends in
intensifier use. FRIENDS is a comedy, and the main characters (three men and three
women) live in New York City. There are three intensifiers that were predominantly used
in this series: very, so, and really. So and really are used by female characters more often
than male characters, but both groups use very equally. Macaulay (2006) explores the
new intensifier pure in Glasgow, Scotland. He recorded the Glasgow working-class
adolescents talking with a same-sex friend in 1997, 2003, and 2004; in each of the three
time periods, girls used pure more frequently than did boys. Strenstrbm et a1. (2002)
report girls’ more frequent use of intensifiers over boys. Strenstr'dm (1999) examined the
use of five intensifiers, completely, absolutely, really, bloody, and fucking, in COLT, and
her results demonstrate that girls use intensifiers with higher frequency than boys.

Peters (1994) investigated intensifier use in letters written in the 15‘“, 17‘”, and
18th centuries. According to his study, even in those early times, women used intensifiers
more often than men. Johnson and Roen (1992) observed women’s more frequent use of
intensifiers in written peer reviews as well. Chiavetta (2006), on the other hand, provides
the opposite results. In her interviews, men used intensifiers more often than did women
in all age groups (1 1-20, 21-32, and 33-50). Unfortunately, she did not state the location
of her study and the kind of speech community her subjects belonged to in her article.
Hence, there is no clue as to the reasons why her study arrived at different results than

others.

10

All the studies discussed above are about the use of intensifiers in English.
Turning to Japanese examples, Yonekawa (1998) cited his student’s unpublished study
about the frequency of intensifiers in Osaka, the western part of Japan. Tatsuko Toyota,
the student, had 200 subjects for her questionnaire, 50 each of male college students,
female college students, male junior high school students, and female junior high school
students. There were 21 intensifiers including non-westem dialect words, and the
participants were asked to divide them into four groups depending on the frequency of
use: i.e., “often use it”, “sometimes use it”, “have heard but never used it”, and “never
heard or used it”. The results show that meccha (western dialect) is the top choice
regardless of age and gender. There was no explanation in his book whether meccha was
a traditional or a new intensifier in the western dialect. Men in both age groups chose
more intensifiers in “often use it” group than women. The intensifiers from Tokyo
Japanese were frequently used by women in both age groups.

Another study of Japanese intensifier was conducted by Akizuki3 (n.d.), whose
results can be found on his website (http://wwwl7.plala.or.jp/subculingl). His subjects
were 170 people of two age groups who lived in Sendai, the northern part of Japan, and
other cities near Sendai: the younger group is from the age of 18 to 22, and the older
group is from the age of 30 to 67. There were 11 intensifiers in the questionnaire, and the
subjects were asked to choose the frequency they used each intensifier. The choices were
“often used it”, “sometimes used it”, “have heard it but not used it”, and “have never

heard it.” Some are from Tokyo Japanese (e. g., sugoi, choo, kanari), and some are from

dialects other than Sendai (e. g., bari, gottsu). The results unveiled that both age groups

 

3. Associate Professor, Department of Human Science, Shokei Gakuin University, Japan.

11

indicated that they used intensifiers from Tokyo Japanese most often. The top three
choices of the younger group were kanari, sugoi, and sugoku, and those of the older
group were sugoku, totemo, and sugoi, all of which are from Tokyo Japanese. These
results imply that Tokyo Japanese was preferred by both age groups in this survey.

Tagliamonte and Roberts (2005) write that it seems that the intensifiers are
constantly changing in many places since each new generation adopts new intensifiers,
and the frequency of use of older intensifiers also changes. These results also demonstrate
that some older intensifiers (e.g., very) do not disappear even though new intensifiers
(e. g., so, really) keep joining the variety.

The above studies show the tendency in gender that women use intensifiers more
frequently than do men. Regarding age, it seems that the subjects of these studies from
their late teens to early 30$ make use of intensifiers most often. Furthermore, the studies
explained above illustrate different preferences by age, gender, and location. In English,
younger groups favor really whereas older groups like very better (Ito and Tagliamonte
2003). Female speakers use so and really (Strenstrom 1999; Tagliamonte and Roberts
2005). In Glasgow, Scotland, young people prefer pure (Macaulay 2006), and those in
London prefer really (Strenstrom 1999). Furthermore, two studies about the use of
Japanese intensifiers show that local variations are more frequently used than Tokyo
Japanese in Osaka (Yonekawa 1998), and people in the northern part of Japan use the
intensifiers from Tokyo Japanese more often than western dialect (Akizuki n.d.).
However, the second study on Japanese intensifiers also demonstrates that a few

intensifiers from other areas (e. g., erai, mecha) are also used in eastern Japan.

12

2.2. The history of Japanese regional dialects

Sato and Yoneda (1999) claim that Japanese dialects have undergone eradication,
rediscovery, and coexistence. Inoue (2007) uses different labels for almost the same time
period, which are eradication, description, and entertainment. The following explains
each part of the Japanese dialect changes.

In the middle of the Edo period (1603-1868 A.D.), the languages of some
regions were incomprehensible for people in other areas (Kunihiro et a1. 1999). When the
Meiji period (1868-1912 A.D.) started, the government decided to establish a standard
language as one way to promote national solidarity. Since the capital at that time was
Tokyo, at the beginning of the twentieth century, the government selected one of the
varieties spoken in Tokyo, “in particular the dialect of the Yamanote area of the city”
(Gottlieb 2005: 7) and labeled it Hyoojungo (‘Standard Language’). Radio, the primary
means of mass communication at that time, was the best tool to disseminate Standard
Japanese. However, the government realized that although Japanese people became able
to understand Standard Japanese, they were not able to speak it. Therefore, Standard
Japanese was promoted in education. Textbooks were written in Standard Japanese;
teachers and students were supposed to use Standard Japanese regardless of the regions
they lived in. At the same time, dialects were considered to be hindrances to the further
propagation of Standard Japanese, so they became stigmatized as “bad language”
(Kunihiro et a1. 1999: 191). To discourage people from using their local dialects, hoogen
fuda (‘dialect tag’) was used in school systems. For example, in Okinawa, the
southernmost prefecture of Japan, middle school students who spoke local dialects had to

hang a dialect tag around their necks until they caught someone else using local dialect

l3

words. They reported him/her to the teacher, and the tag was passed to the next person
(Shibatani 1990). Kondo (2005) describes how students dealt with the dialect tag: some
students tried making other people say a local dialect word by stepping on their foot on
purpose, and others climbed a tree not to be caught for the dialect tag . This was the time
of dialect eradication.

According to Kunihiro et a1. (1999), in the 19505 Standard Japanese began to be
called Kyootsuugo (‘Common Japanese’). The general attitude used to be that Standard
Japanese was the only variation everyone should use, but the government changed the
label to Common Japanese. It “is close to Standard Japanese in all its main features but
not as formal” (Gottlieb 2005: 7). With the value of dialects reconsidered, the label of
Common Japanese replaced Standard Japanese in the field of education (Mizutani 1990)
and Common Japanese spread nationwide later. Although Common Japanese is basically
comprehensible throughout Japan, variations of Common Japanese more or less reveal
the flavor of each region in different places. Standard Japanese and Common Japanese
now refer to the same thing. In this period, according to Sato and Yoneda (1999), people
realized that they had denied and ignored dialects, which were culturally valuable. For
example, in 1977 the Agency for Cultural Affairs began documenting dialects that were
disappearing rapidly in all the 47 prefectures. This period is called rediscovery or
description.

The last of the three time periods is called coexistence or entertainment. As a
result of the promotion of Standard Japanese education at the beginning of twentieth
century, dialects were stigmatized. Since then, dialects have been used on limited

occasions such as when the speakers of dialects talked to people from the same area (Sato

14

1996). For example, he conducted a survey of the people living in Tokyo and Aomori in
the late 19803. Aomori is located in the northernmost part of the main island, and its
dialect is known to be difficult to understand for those who live in other regions. The
results showed that 96 percent of the Aomori residents in the survey used Common
Japanese when they asked for directions in Tokyo. Some of them answered they would
not speak their Aomori dialect at all on the train in Tokyo even with other Aomori
residents. Instead, they used Common Japanese. These Aomori residents did not want
others to hear them speaking in their dialect because it was stigmatized. In contrast, since
the late 19805 it is also a time of entertainment. Dialect words were used in commercials,
rap songs, and the names of snacks and beer as well as printed on local souvenirs (e.g.,
handkerchiefs and key chains) (Inoue 2007). The subjects of the survey of Sato and
Yoneda (1999) were from 14 cities in Japan and three different age groups“, and they also
showed positive attitudes and found dialects natural and interesting when they heard them
on TV. These facts confirm that the attitudes toward dialects are changing, and that
Japanese people are ready to welcome the diversity of language variations within
Japanese.

After a few decades Common Japanese was taught all over Japan, Fumio Inoue,
a Japanese linguist proposed the term Shinhoogen (‘New Dialect’) in his 1978 paper for
the first time. The definition of New Dialect is that “it (a) is used more by younger people
than by older people; (b) is treated as stylistically low by users themselves; and (c) has

different forms from the standard language.” (Inoue 1986b: 329) For example, —jan

 

4. These 14 cities are Sapporo, Hirosaki, Sendai, Tokyo, Chiba, Kanazawa, Matsumoto, Ogaki, Kyoto,
Hiroshima, Kochi, Fukuoka, Kagoshima, and Naha. The age of the participants is high school students,
25-40, and over 60.

15

(‘isn’t it’) was originally used in the central part of Japan and came into Tokyo through
the western suburb of Tokyo (Inoue 1986a). This word, not part of Common Japanese,
was used by younger people in informal contexts. Hence, Inoue classified -jan as New
Dialect. The term New Dialect caught on gradually. Research studies have been carried
out to report language changes in various places in Japan as well as in foreign countries
(Inoue 1991).

Wakamonogo (‘Youth language’) is not a new idea but is another notion that is
applicable to the dialect word use in Tokyo Japanese, and the definition is similar to that
of the New Dialect. Yonekawa (1998: 15) defines youth language as “the words and
expressions that people from early teens to around thirty years-old use within a group.”
The youth language has several functions such as entertainment, conversation booster,
solidarity, and softening, and it is also “playful and free from norms” (Yonekawa I998:
15). Youth language is usually used in a certain period of lifetime. For example, many
college students use a group of words called kyanpasu kotoba (‘campus vocabulary’) and
gakusei go (‘students’ language’) during the years at college. The latter includes not only
the vocabulary about the campus and classes but also the vocabulary frequently used in a
college student’s life. For example, katei kyooshi (‘tutor’) and shinjirarenai (‘I cannot
believe it’) are listed as gakusei go in Nagase (1999). However, when they start working
after graduation, they cease to use kyanpasu kotoba because this vocabulary no longer fits
their working environment or new lives. Instead, they begin employing vocabulary that is

used specifically on the job and/or at the work place.

16

2.3. The study of Japanese youth

This section portrays characteristics of Japanese young people, who are the main
users of dialect words in Tokyo Japanese. First, the concept of being cute is illustrated
because the young people who provided the real data to the newspaper indicated that it
was the reason they used the dialect forms. Second, the idea of amae (‘dependency’)
further explains the importance of cuteness to Japanese society. Last, I describe yasashisa
shikoo (‘the orientation toward gentleness’) and being fun-loving as the changing

characteristics of current Japanese youth.

2.3.1. Kawaii (‘cute’)

The series of #68 of The war of dialects (2006) reports that some dialects are
considered kawaii (‘cute’) by some female high school and junior high school students in
Tokyo. This is likely the reason for young girls to mix dialect words in Tokyo Japanese.
According to Kinsella (1995: 220), kawaii means not only cute but also “childlike, sweet,
adorable, innocent, pure, simple, genuine, vulnerable, weak” and more. The implication
of kawaii also adds “trustingly reliant, helpless, unresistingly receptive of love and care”
(Lebra 2004: 88). Kawaii could be used for fluffy and frilly clothes with pastel colors and
children’s inability of doing things and speaking (Kinsella 1995). She provided three
examples of cuteness by Japanese women in their late teens and twenties: desexualized
clothing, rounded writing symbols, and goods with cute characters printed on them.

According to Kinsella (1995), in early 19903, kawaii seems to have gained new
meaning: individualization. She shows a picture of a Japanese magazine called Cutie

issued in August 1993, and several girls who were wearing cute clothing were on the

17

front cover. They do not wear frills and ribbons. Instead, their clothing embodies
rebellious, freedom-seeking, funky, desexualized, and individualistic attitude as Figure
2.1. shows below.

Figure 2.1. Cute fashion without frills and ribbons (Kinsella 1995: 231)

FORINDIPENDINIGIRIS alum-2‘
mulrlnlhu
was-mem-

_Afi/lm

fififi‘jfi‘JF‘Wv-‘A-SB".
£27W-HIMJEM

Ali-379%lflil
m—Jtix‘raib
\ 5M». 7J—flxf’fl

 

Differentiation from others was important in the 19905 (Sengoku 1996). After
Japan lost the Second World War, Japanese people worked very hard to catch up and
surpass other advanced countries, especially the United States and Great Britain. Thanks
to their hard work, the Japanese economy grew rapidly, and people become able to afford
many things. Luxury goods and clothing and oversea travels are affordable nowadays

even for college students. Now that the Japanese characterize themselves as “all

belonging to the middle class” with many people owning and doing the same things,
young people want to distinguish themselves from others (Sengoku 1996: 74-78). For
example, they look for something new that has not been introduced in magazines or that
their friends do not own yet.

One example of cuteness is the rounded kana symbols that were very popular
among young girls, shown in Figure 2.2. Compare this to the Textbook font in Figure 2.3.
When all children in elementary schools practice calligraphy as one of the required
subjects, it is usually the Textbook font that is used as the model of writing. It is reported
that young girls use this kind of rounded kana symbols when writing short letters to their
friends, and that the use of these symbols among young girls disappear when they get a
job because their colleagues as well as the employer think that it is not appropriate at

work (Yamane 1986).

Figure 2.2. Rounded kana symbols in Japanese Figure 2.3. Textbook font in Japanese
(Yamane 1986: 38)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

@letau .25 w ’2 7‘. is 15‘
éujjac s< :1 : s L
aUEI—DED‘) ‘9' it 7( fat) 0
thalzoaita 1 z: ’1‘ I: at: n
miavi’a‘mra a) 11' a .3. r» Ii
gaidbdhEtD i A t; at: is «‘2
IdDdSBUéTL r» .r r. t) 2.. n
OEEQL’QE l7: #0 i A; L’ 'C‘

 

 

Another type of example is various goods with characters pictures printed on
them. The most famous character of this kind is Hello Kitty (Figure 2.4.), and it appears

not only on the notebooks and stationery that target young girls but also on a credit card

19

(Figure 2.5.). A company called Sanrio created Hello Kitty as well as other cute
characters, and Sanrio has an amusement park in Tokyo that features Hello Kitty and
these cute characters. The examples of the credit card and the amusement park reveal that

“cuteness” seems to be important not only to girls in their teens but also to adult women.

Figure 2.4. Hello Kitty Figure 2.5. Hello Kitty credit card

   

tutti?» 7:1 - F3
(Master Card}

While young women actively “involve in cuteness” (Kinsella 1995: 243), young
men also are part of this cuteness by dressing like a young girl and writing rounded kana
symbols (Yamane 1986).

The “cuteness worship” comes into the language, too. To make their speech cute,
young women often try to sound comical because being humorous is one aspect of kawaii
(Kinsella 1995) and serves an entertainment function in youth language, which is
important (Yonekawa 1994). Dialect words are used to sound humorous. In addition, The
war of dialects #56 (2006) cites an interview with Mizuho Hidakas, who says that to use
dialect words in Tokyo Japanese is like an “accessory.” As accessories can be arranged in

various ways, dialect forms can also be used differently from their normal usage.

 

5. Associate professor of Japanese and Asian Cultures at University of Akita, Japan

20

Some books list dialect words and show how to mix them into Tokyo Japanese.
The titles of these books illustrate how the concept of kawaii is important: Chikappa
menkoi hoogen rensyuuchoo (‘A practice book of very cute dialects’) and Kawaii hoogen
techoo (‘A cute dialect handbook’). Chikappa means ‘very’, which is a dialect word used
in northern Kyuusyuu. Menkoi means ‘cute’ in the northern part of the Japanese main
island. Even the name of the editors of the former book is Kawaii nihongo de nihon o

shiawase ni suru kai (‘Group for making Japan happy with cute Japanese language’).

2.3.2. Amae (‘dependency’)

According to Noguchi (1997, cited in Lebra 2004), being kawaii is important for
Japanese women in order to be liked by Japanese men. Why is cuteness such an
important concept for the Japanese? Amae (‘dependency’) seems to play an important
role in being cute. It was first suggested by Doi (1973), a Japanese Psychiatrist. One day
his colleague said that the concept of amae seemed to be unique to Japanese, and this
conversation led him to the research on amae although this concept does exist in Western
countries as well. It initially “refers to the feelings that all normal infants at the breast
harbor toward the mother — dependence, the desire to be passively loved, the
unwillingness to be separated from the warm mother-child circle” (Doi 1973: 7). He also
explains it as “a noun of amaeru, an intransitive verb which means ‘to depend and
presume upon another’s benevolence’” (Doi 1973: 145).

This concept is not only relevant for infants. It can also be seen in the
relationships between two adults. Maynard (1990) writes that amae prevails within a

feeling of uchi (‘inner-group’). Uchi usually consists of one’s family members and close

21

people, and the feeling of uchi also takes place in parent-child-like relationships. Some of
the examples of parent-child-like relationships are a chief and a subordinate in a work
situation, and a senior and a junior in school. A subordinate and a junior in these
situations depend on the superiors for help and support (Lebra 2004), which is taken
positively, and Lebra (1976) even notes this kind of relationships are desirable. Those
who know how to solicit one’s indulgence have easier time in Japan than people who do
not (Lebra 1976) because people who can depend on others are likely to be considered as
kawaii to those who are in the parent roles.

The fact that Japanese has a specific word for this concept and that European
languages do not have a direct translation reveals its importance in the Japanese culture
(Doi 197 3). Therefore, considering the amae mentality, Japanese people place high value

on being kawaii.

2.3.3. Characteristics of Japanese youth

There are a couple of other keywords to describe Japanese young people:
yasashisa shikoo (‘orientation toward gentleness’) (Yonekawa 1994) and being
fun-loving (Sengoku 1996).

According to Yonekawa (1994), yasashisa shikoo (‘orientation toward
gentleness’) is one characteristic of youth language. Nobody wants to hurt others or be
hurt. Everyone worries about having conflicts with others, and expressing different
opinions from those of others. When young people need to say something critical, they
use different vocabulary instead of changing the whole phrase to soften the tone of their

speech, and this is a softening function of youth language (Yonekawa 1998). He also

22

points out that the reason for using a different word instead of changing the whole phrase
is due to lack of communication skills. One of the reasons is that they are young and less
experienced in life compared to adults. Also, many young people grow up without
experiencing personal interactions such as fighting, arguing, or reconciling face-to-face
because may of them are the only child and they are busy studying at after-school cram
schools (Kageyama 1999). He also states that new communication tools with technology
such as e-mail and cell phones replace direct contacts between people, and they even help
young people to form superficial relationships. Lauwereyns (2000: 2) examined the use
of hedges by Japanese people in Tokyo. She defined hedges “as expressions of
uncertainty, possibility, tentativeness, and approximation which convey a sense of
vagueness” in her dissertation. For instance, hedges in English are I think, sort of, and
perhaps. She notes that the frequent use of hedges by younger speakers could be related
to the lack of personal interactions and the forming of superficial relationships.

Sengoku (1996) introduced another youth characteristic, being fun-loving. One
example is that athletes having big competitions often answer in interviews tanoshinde
imasu (‘I am enjoying (the games/situations’). Fifty years ago, no athletes said this kind
of phrase. They used to say kuni no tameni ganbari masu (‘I will do my best for my
country’). He claims that being fun-loving in any situation is becoming important among
younger generations. Since using dialect forms in Tokyo Japanese is one way to make

conversations sound comical among young people, being fun-loving is related to it.

2.4. Summary

To know the tendency of young people’s language compared by gender and age,

23

Section 2.1. discussed the research of slang and intensifiers, which is a specialty of young
people. These studies show similar results: 1) In terms of age, younger people use both
slang and intensifiers more often than older people. 2) In terms of gender, men use more
slang than women, and women use intensifiers more frequently than men. However,
Chiavetta (2006)‘s results show that men use intensifiers more often than women.

Next, I presented a brief history of Japanese dialects in 2.2. Although Hyoojungo
(‘Standard Language’) and Kyootsuugo (‘Common Language’) are the same thing,
Standard Language education created stigma for dialects. The survey results of Sato and
Yoneda (1999) reveal that the general attitude toward dialects has been changing in a
positive direction. I also explained the concept of youth language because it looks the
mixing of dialect words and Tokyo Japanese is common in that variety.

The last section, 2.3., explained some keywords about Japanese youth because it
is they who mix dialect words and Tokyo Japanese most according to the literature. The
desire to project oneself kawaii (‘cute’) seems to be a motivation of this mixture because,
based on amae (‘dependency’), being cute is important and pervasive. In addition,
yasashisa shikoo (‘orientation toward gentleness’) and being fun-loving further explains
the characteristics of the Japanese youngster, who are the main users of mixing dialect
words and Tokyo Japanese.

Based on the above, I will construct two hypotheses in Chapter 4 to examine
whether there are differences in the dialect word use by gender and age. The concepts
introduced in the section 2.3. will be the foundations of three hypotheses in Chapter 5,
and whether a desire to sound cute and comical is important or not will be examined in

the intemet questionnaire.

24

Chapter 3. Sample sentences of the mixture of Tokyo Japanese and dialect words

Five examples are given below, taken from a series of newspaper articles entitled
Hoogen no tatakai (‘The war of dialects’) in Yomiuri newspaper (series #59 and #65,
2006). This series started on April 4‘”, 2006 and continued until September 15‘“, 2006.
The first example was said by a female high school student in Tokyo, and was collected
by the columnist. The rest were taken from text messages among college students in
Tokyo, and they were collected by Professor Kazuko Miyake at Toyo University, Japan.
Dialect words are italicized. The Tokyo Japanese version is shown in the parentheses,
with the words corresponding to the dialect words italicized. The areas where the dialect
words are originally from are indicated on the Japanese map in Figure 3.1. (Shibatani
I990).

The areas in the map filled with horizontal lines are the eastern part of Japan,
and the dotted area is considered as the western part. The area with vertical lines is called
Kyuusyuu, and people in this area use Kyuusyuu dialect. A, B, and C were added on the

map to indicate the sources of the dialect words:

(1) [by a female high school student]

tsukue tsur-oo yo. (=tsukue hakoboo yo.)
desk carry-vol6-NONPAST TQ
‘Let’s carry the desk.’

 

6. The abbreviations used for the gloss are the following:

CON conviction particle COP copula verb EXC exclamation particle
EXP explanation particle INST instrument particle NONPAST nonpast tense
PAST past tense Q question particle QUOTE quotation particle
RES resultant state TOP topic particle TQ tag question particle
Vol volitional form

25

(2) [by a male college student]

a, are-dc yoka-to? (=a, are de ii?)
Oh that-INST good-NONPAST-Q
‘Oh, is that good ?’

(3) [by a female college student]
doo shita-n? (=doo shita no?)
how do—PAST-Q
‘What happened?’

(4) [by a female college student]
Watashi-wa mata korekara jugyoo—dabe yoo.
I-TOP again from now class-COP-NONPAST CON

‘1 have a class now again.’
(=watashi wa mata kore kara jyugyoo da yoo.)

Figure 3.1. Geographic division of Japanese dialects

a

l

llllllllllmllllllll
lllimllllllu.

u
. Ill

llllill

[fill-ill
1| 1
l

 

a.
I'll"
'lllii'l
,"lllll

, “ll n

’ ’1‘
’1‘
r)

 

 

...-
.

 

a
ll

«:13.
°i W ... .33.: — :—
er%g{§_ -—— .— ‘}

 

. "I1 1'" ll if“ 7'3-
‘l l i ll ,5' .515
l. I! lillinmh fig"

.‘ "I" , .
9 ' ' l l ‘1' - . . .
' ,1 . major divrsron
subdivision ---

 

 

 

 

llii'l

ill

'.'

I
1.

 

 

26

(5) [by a male college student]

juuden yabai-n- ya no.

(battery) charge risky-EXP-COP-NONPAST TQ

‘The battery is almost gone, isn’t it?’

(=juuden yabai nda ne.)
The dictionary form of tsur-oo in example (1) is tsuru, which means ‘to carry an object
by two or more people’ in area A in the above map. Yoka-to in example (2) is mostly used
in B area. Yoka corresponds to ii (‘good’) and to is used as a question particle. In example
(3), the use of n, instead of no, at the end of the sentence is characteristic of the western
and Kyuusyuu areas. Babe in example (4) is originally from area C except Tokyo. Yana
in example (5) is generally used in the western and Kyuusyuu areas. All the examples
except (1) are well-known words from each area so that most Japanese people will
understand the sentences. Tsuru has a different meaning in Tokyo, which is to fish, and
the usage of the example (1) does not make sense unless one knows it. As these examples
show, young people in Tokyo use dialectal forms from various areas. Based on these

sentences, the dialect words used in Tokyo Japanese seem to be mainly verbs and

particles.

27

Chapter 4. Study of dialect word use in blogs
4.1. Hypotheses

The newspaper columns (‘The war of dialects’) reported on the mixture of
dialect words and Tokyo Japanese as shown in the examples in the previous chapter. The
studies reviewed in Chapter 2 show that a higher frequency of slang and intensifier use is
found among teenagers and those in their twenties. In those studies, however, men used
slang more frequently than women, and women used intensifiers more often than men.
Based on these results, the hypotheses to be tested in this study are as follows:

Hypothesis 1: There is no gender difference in terms of the frequency of

dialect words used in Tokyo Japanese.
Hypothesis 2: Younger people mix dialect forms more frequently than do older

people in Tokyo Japanese.

4.2. Subjects

The subjects in this study totaled 127, as shown in Table 4.1 below. They are all
members of a Japanese social networking site called Mixi (mixi.jp). Mixi is the biggest
social networking site in Japan, and the number of registered members exceeded ten
million as of May 2007. The users of this site can write a blog, join virtual communities,
send messages to other members, and upload photos. The subjects of the present study
were searched by gender (male and female), age (18-19, and over 50), place of birth, and
current residence. The birthplace and current residence were restricted to Tokyo except
for the group of women over 50, although it does not necessarily mean that the subjects

have been living in the same places all their lives. I had difficulty finding the subjects in

28

the group of women over 50 who were born and lived in Tokyo at that time, so I needed
to expand the areas of their birthplace and current residence to obtain data. The subjects
in the group of women over 50 are from or currently reside in Tokyo or the prefectures
near Tokyo, and they are Kanagawa, Saitama, Chiba, Gunma, Tochigi, and Ibaragi

prefectures. Table 4.1. shows the number of subjects in each of the four categories.

Table 4.1. The number of participants in the blog study

Young( 18-19) Old (over 50) Total

 

 

 

Male 40 30 70
Female 34 23 57
Total 74 53 127

The intemet is an anonymous space, and anyone can pretend to have different
identities, as other researchers have observed (e.g. Gao 2004; Huffaker and Calvert 2005).
In other words, there is a possibility that the information about the subjects of this study
does not represent to the true information. However, it was impossible for me to validate
the identity of every respondent to the present study. It should be noted that people over
50 who are members of a social networking site might be a special group. Even though
the Internet penetration rate has been growing in Japan, according to the 2006
Whitepaper for Information and Communication in Japan issued by the Ministry of
Internal Affairs and Communications, it is not as common for older people to write blogs
and participate in a social networking site as for younger people. It is, therefore, possible
that the subjects of the present study do not accurately represent the reality, especially

about older people.

29

4.3. Methodology

The data for this study were collected from January 2007 to May 2007 to
determine whether people do indeed mix dialect words in Tokyo Japanese. Some
bloggers restrict their blogs only to those who have registered each other as friends. Even
though I found many possible subjects after searching, I was not able to enter many of
these blogs. In addition, some blogs contained dialect words and some did not, so I
decided to use only the blogs that contained a dialect word. Table 4.2. shows the number

of blog entries used in this study. On average, there are 2.76 blog entries per person.

Table 4.2. The number of blog entries used in this study

Young(18-l9) Old (over 50) Total

 

 

 

Male 136 52 188
Female 125 38 163
Total 261 90 351

Next, all dialect words were identified and confirmed by Makimura (2004), Tojo
(1966), and other dialect reference books7. The list of dialect forms is provided in
Appendix A. The number of the dialect words found on the blogs was counted, and the
four most frequently used words, one of which was a category, were used for further
analysis. These four words are as the following. The word in Common Japanese is listed
first, the dialect words are written after slash, and its meaning in the parenthesis: —da /
—ya (copula), intensifiers such as totemo, sugoku / meccha, deeji (‘very’), dameda / ikan,

akan (‘not good’), and —teiru / —toru, —too, —choru (action in progress or resultant state).

 

7. Inoue and Yarimizu (2002), Kawaii hoogen de nihon o shiawase ni suru kai (Ed.). (2005), Kawaii hoogen
techoo (‘A cute dialect handbook’). (2005), Kotoba tanteidan (Eds). (2005), Kurosaki (n.d.), Matthew’s
Best hit TV (Ed.) (2005), Yamashita (2004)

30

Examples of these dialect words follow. All the examples were taken from the blog data I

collected.

(6) [by a young male subject]

Maji happii ya. =maji happi da.)
Very happy COP6-NONPAST
‘I am very happy.’

(7) [by an older male subject]

Saisho wa meccha kinchooshita naa.
At first TOP very get'nervous-PAST EXC
‘I got very nervous at first.’

(=5aisho wa sugoku kinchooshita naa.)

(8) [by a young male subject]

Kore jaa ikan to omou.

This INST(casual) not good QUOTE think-NONPAST
‘I think this is not good.’

(=kore jaa ikenai to omou.)

(9) [by a young female subject]
Barentain owat-toru. (= barentaine owatteru.)
Valentine’s day finish-RES-PAST
‘Valentine’s day is already passed.’
A list of variations of these four dialect forms is presented in Table 4.3. below.
The number of tokens of each dialect form over the total tokens was counted, and the rate

of the dialect forms over the total tokens was counted. The rate of these four dialect

words are compared by gender and age in Tables 4.6. to 4.12.

 

6. The abbreviations used for the gloss are the following:

CON conviction particle COP copula verb EXC exclamation particle
EXP explanation particle INST instrument particle NONPAST nonpast tense
PAST past tense Q question particle QUOTE quotation particle
RES resultant state TOP topic particle TQ tag question particle
Vol volitional form

31

Table 4.3. The list of variations of four English elements

 

English Non-dialectal variations Dialectal variations

Intensifiers totemo, kanari, sootoo, deeji — used in the very southern
(very/totally choo, maji(de), gattsuri, part of Kyuusyuu (Okinawa)
greatly etc.) honto(ni), riaru(ni), tera, meccha, muccha, errai, erai, messa,

futsuu(ni), kuso, yabai, honma, mechanko, mecha — used in
zettaini, sugoi (sugoku), the western part of Japan
hanpanaku, honkide, namara — used in the very northern
omoikkuso, shinuhodo, part of eastern Japan

totetsumonaku, kanpeki,

choozetsu, osoroshiku

 

 

 

Copula verb —da —ya — used in the western part of
Japan

Not good ikenai ikan / akan — used in the western
part of Japan

Action in progress/ —teiru -toru, —choru, —too — used in the

Resultant state western part of Japan

In fact, there were three dialect words that were removed from the list
intentionally. One was —ja (copula). Although it was not used frequently, its meaning is
the same as —da in Tokyo Japanese , so it was possible to be included in the list. However,
it has been used not only as copula in some dialects but also stereotypically in the
language of older people regardless of the regions (Kinsui 2003), and these usages were
hardly distinguishable from each other especially in written texts. Therefore, I decided to
remove it from the list. Another dialect word that was removed from the list was —n
(‘not’) for the same reason as —ja although —n was employed more frequently by all the
groups. The other dialect word was uchi ‘I (feminine)’. This was used very frequently by
young female members. Since this word is originally gender-biased, this word was

excluded from the analysis as well.

32

4.4. Results and Discussion
4.4.1. General results

Fifty seven different kinds of dialect forms were identified (Table 4.4.) in the
data.

Table 4.4. The total number of dialect forms appearing in the blog study

Gender Age Kinds of dialectal forms

 

 

 

Male 18-19 36
Over 50 28
Female 18-19 36
Over 50 24

Total 57 different kinds

Young people used a wider variety of dialect forms than did older people. In terms of
gender, a slight difference was found between males and females in the older groups but
no difference was observed between males and females in the younger groups. However,
only nine of the 57 kinds of the dialect words were used by all four groups. The total
number of dialect word tokens that appear in this study is 537. In addition, the number of

each dialect word used in each group is shown in Appendix B.

Table 4.5 . The number of occurrences of dialect forms divided by open and closed class
words

Gender Age Open class words Closed class words Total

 

 

 

Male 18-19 95 98 193
Over 50 46 44 90

Female 1 8- 19 107 104 211
Over 50 24 19 43

Total 272 265 537

1 divided 57 dialect forms into the categories of open and closed classes to

determine whether there is a difference, and the results are displayed in Table 4.5 . above.

33

In all groups, the number of each category is almost same. Therefore, no differences were

found either by gender or age.

4.4.2. Results of selected dialect forms

Further, four kinds of frequently used Tokyo Japanese words were selected.
These are the intensifiers (e. g., “very” and “really” ), —da (copula), dame(da) (‘not good’),
and —teiru (action in progress and resultant state). I counted all kinds of intensifiers as a
category while I looked at the specific words for the other three groups. Dialectal
variations of each Tokyo Japanese word are listed in Table 4.3. above, and sample
sentences containing these words are given above in (6) to (9) also.

The number of total tokens of these words is given in Table 4.6. Younger male
group used the dialect words the most frequently, followed by older male group and then
younger female group. These three groups employed the dialect words to a similar extent.
On the other hand, the older female group used them about half the number of times the

younger female group did.

Table 4.6. The number of total tokens of intensifiers, —ya (copula), ikan / akan (‘not
good’), and —toru / —too /—choru (action in progress / resultant state)

Gender Age Dialect words Tokyo JPN Total

 

 

 

Male 18-19 137 598 735 (18.6%)
Over 50 38 189 227 (16.7%)
Female 18- 19 102 579 681 (15%)
Over 50 18 212 230 (7.8%)
Total 295 1578 1873

Tables 4.7. and 4.8. show the results of Table 4.6. by gender and age. In terms of

gender, males used these words more often than females. As for age, the younger group

34

showed more frequent use of these words than the older group. However, the differences

between the groups in both tables are not significantly large.

Table 4.7. The total number of tokens by gender

Gender Dialect words Tokyo JPN Total

 

 

Male 175 787 962 (18.2%)
Female 120 791 911 (13.2%)
Total 295 1578 1873

Table 4.8. The total number of token by age

 

 

Age Dialect words Tokyo JPN Total
Young (18-19) 239 1177 1416 (16.9%)
Old (over 50) 56 401 457 (12.3%)
295 1578 1873

When the occurrences of four dialect words were counted separately, they

exhibited mixed results.

Table 4.9. The total number of dialectal intensifiers

Gender Age Dialect words Total Tokyo JPN Total

 

 

 

Male 18-19 63 (35.4%) 115 178
Over 50 20 (64.5%) 11 31

Female 18—19 48 (23.4%) 156 204
Over 50 13 (61.9%) 8 21

Total 144 (33.1%) 290 434

Table 4.9. shows the intensifiers as a single group though many kinds of intensifiers
appeared in this study. The young male group employed dialect words a little more than
half as often (35.4%) as the older male group (64.5%) while the older female group

employed them close to three times as often (61.9%) as the younger female group

35

(23.4%). It is also worth noting that males of both age groups used dialect words more
often than females of both age groups. As for -ya (copula), younger groups of both
genders used it more often than the older groups, but gender differences within the same

age groups were minimal (Table 4.10.).

Table 4.10. The total number of —ya (copula)

 

 

 

Gender Age - ya Tokyo JPN Total
Male 18- 19 50 (13.2%) 324 374
Over 50 6 (5.5%) 94 100

Female 18-19 47 (13%) 311 358
Over 50 3 (2%) 139 142

Total 106 (10.6%) 868 974

Concerning dame(da) (‘not good’), all groups except for the young female group
recorded frequent use of this word (Table 4.11.). Though there was not a big difference
between the male groups, the female groups revealed a huge difference. This is probably
due to the lack of tokens in older female group since the older female group had only one

token in this category.

Table 4.1 l. The total number of dame(da) (‘not good’)

 

 

 

Gender Age ikan akan ikan / akan total Tokyo JPN Total
Male 18-19 8 (44.4%) 3 (16.7%) 11 (61.1%) 7 18
Over 50 3 (50%) 1 (16.7%) 4 (66.7%) 2 6
Female 18-19 2 (28.6%) 0 2 (28.6%) 5 7
Over 50 0 l (100%) l (100%) 0 1
Total 13 (40.6%) 5 (15.6%) 18 (56.2%) 14 32

Table 4.12. shows the frequency of dialect words used for action in progress /

resultant state. It also shows that male groups used them more often than female groups.

36

The older groups displayed a big difference whereas the younger groups showed similar

results. Again, the older female group used these dialect words only once, so it is difficult

to generalize.

Table 4.12. The total number of —teiru (action in progress / resultant state)

 

 

 

—toru/—too/
Gender Age —toru —too —choru —choru total Tokyo JPN Total
Male 18-19 9 (5.5%) 0 2 (1.2%) 11 (6.8%) 152 163
Over 50 6 (6.8%) l (1.1%) O 7 (8%) 81 88
Female 18-19 6 (5.4%) O O 6 (5.4%) 106 112
Over 50 O 0 l (1.5%) l (1.5%) 65 66
Total 21 (4.9%) 1 (0.2%) 3 (0.7%) 25 (5.8%) 404 429

The next two figures demonstrate the frequency of each selected dialect word compared

by gender and age. Only slight differences are recognized except for “not good” when

compared by gender (Figure 4.1.), but “intensifier” and “not good” (Figure 4.2) showed

bigger differences. Intensifiers and “not good” were used much more often than the other

two words in dialect words shown in the following two figures.

37

Figure 4.1. The rate of selected dialect words by gender

 

 

El Male
I Female

 

 

 

 

intensifier copula not good action in
progress /
resultant state

 

 

 

Figure 4.2. The rate of selected dialect words by age

 

80

 

121 Young
I Old

%

88883

 

 

 

20
10

 

intensifier copula not good action in
progress I
res ultant state

 

 

 

4.4.3. Discussion
The results of this blog study show that, in terms of gender, men used dialect
words more frequently than women, which does not support Hypothesis 1: There is no

gender difference in terms of the frequency of dialect words used in Tokyo Japanese.

38

These results may be associated with the idea that non-standard forms assert masculinity
(Trudgill 1983; Haig 1991). Non-standard forms in Tokyo are the dialect forms from
other areas in this case, so the higher frequency by men can be explained, similar to the
results of slang vocabulary studies.

With respect to age, younger people used dialect forms more often than did older
people when the total number is compared, which is in line with Hypothesis 2: Younger
people mix dialect forms more frequently than do older people in Tokyo Japanese.
However, Figure 4.2. reveals mixed results. Looking closer at the four most frequently
used dialect forms, the older group used dialect forms of intensifiers (e.g., erai, meccha)
and ikan / akan (‘not good’) more often than the younger group. On the other hand, both
groups used —toru, -too, and —choru (action in progress / resultant state) to the same
degree, and the younger group used —ya (copula) more often than the older group. It is
fair to say that the frequency of these words in Tokyo Japanese shows the same tendency
as the slang vocabulary discussed in Chapter 2.

The results for intensifiers (e.g., erai, meccha) and ikan / akan (‘not good’) in
Figure 4.2. are unexpected. The older group used these two kinds almost twice as
frequently as the younger group. It may be because people in the older group have lived
in places other than the Kanto area. Although I could restrict the prefectures of the
participants to where they were born and currently live, there was no way to find out all
the places that they had lived in from their profile pages. It is possible that they have
retained those local varieties. There is also a possibility that they could have been
influenced by their friends, children, or colleagues at work.

Ikan and akan (‘not good’) are negative evaluation words, and it is possible that

39

the subjects of this study used dialect words instead of Tokyo Japanese to soften the
impact on the listener. Therefore, I also looked at a few other evaluation words that
appeared in this study to find out whether they demonstrated the same trend as ikan and
akan (‘not good’) (Figure 4.2.); i.e., ee / yoka (‘good’), kakkoee (‘cool’), and aho
(‘stupid’). Obviously, “good / cool” are positive evaluation words, and “stupid” is a

negative evaluation word like “not good”.

Table 4.13. The total number of aho (‘stupid’)

 

 

 

Gender Age aho Tokyo JPN Total
Male 18-19 3 (75%) l 4
Over 50 1 (100%) O 1
Female 18-19 6 (75%) 8 14
Over 50 4 (57.1%) 3 7
Total 14 (53.8%) 12 26

Table 4. 14. The total number of ee / yoka (‘good’) and kakkoee (‘cool’)

Gender Age Dialect words Total Tokyo JPN Total

 

 

 

(ee / kakkoee / yoka)
Male 18-19 8 (20.5%) 31 39
Over 50 5 (26.3%) 14 19
Female 18-19 2 (3.7%) 54 56
Over 50 1 (4.5%) 22 23
Total l6(ll.7%) 121 137

Table 4.13. shows that the subjects of this blog study used dialect forms of aho more
often than Tokyo Japanese. Though the number of tokens is small, these data show that
using dialect forms in Tokyo Japanese may soften the tone to some extent. Moreover,
Table 4.14. below illustrates the result of positive evaluation words, and that the subjects
used Tokyo Japanese more often than dialect forms this time. Since I have looked at only

three kinds of evaluation words, “not good”, “stupid”, and “good / cool”, further

40

investigation is necessary to reach a definitive conclusion.

I would also like to refer to the kinds of intensifiers appeared in the data, so it
could be a reference for the future studies of Japanese intensifiers (Tables 4.15. and 4.16.).
There were 30 different intensifiers appeared in the present study. 22 were in Tokyo
Japanese, and eight in dialect forms. Meccha (Kansai dialect) was the most frequently
used intensifier in this data. Younger groups employed wider variety of intensifiers than
older groups, and many of these intensifiers seemed newly joined to the variety (e.g.,
gattsuri and choozetsu).

Table 4.15. The frequency of Tokyo Japanese intensifiers used in the data
(YM=younger male, OM=older male, YF=younger female, OF=older female)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YM OM YF OF Total

honto(ni)8 38 3 45 1 87
maji(de) l 6 1 50 67
sugoku (sugoi) 15 22 1 38
kanari l4 3 l 7 3 37
totemo 8 3 2 l 3
choo 3 1 9 l 3
zettaini 4 1 5
riaru(ni) 4 1 5
futsuuni 4 l 5

attsuri 2 1 3
hanpanaku 2 2
yabai 2 2
sootoo 1 1 2
tera l 1 2
honkide 1 l 2
kuso 1 l
osoroshiku 1 1
shinuhodo 1 l
totetsumonaku l l
choozetsu 1 l
omoikkuso 1 1
kanpeki 1 1
Total 1 15 l 1 156 8 290

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8. This word includes honto, hontoo, hontoni, and hontooni.

41

Table 4.16 The frequency of dialectal intensifiers used in the data
(YM=younger male, OM=older male, YF=younger female, OF=older female)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YM OM YF OF Total

meccha (mecha) 50 12 33 11 106
honma l 3 7 l 1 2
messa 5 l 4 10
deeji 3 3
mechanko 2 3 l 6
erai (errai) 1 4 5
muccha l l
namara l 1
Total 63 20 48 l 3 144

 

 

42

 

Chapter 5. Study of impressions of mixing dialect forms used in Tokyo Japanese
5.1. Hypotheses

Chapter 2 showed that the perception of dialects in Japan has been changing in a
positive direction, and that Japanese youth consider dialect forms as “cute” and “funny /
comical.” This second study aims to investigate whether people think dialect forms
“cute” and “funny /comical” or not in relation to gender, age, and the frequency of their
use. The hypotheses for this study are:

Hypothesis 3: Dialect forms are considered to be cute and comical.

Hypothesis 4: People in Tokyo and the surrounding areas use dialect forms in

casual situations.
Hypothesis 5: Younger people are thought to use the dialect forms more than do

older people.

5.2. Methodology

I conducted a study regarding the impression of mixing a dialect form in Tokyo
Japanese using an online survey open to the public. I used a free survey site
(www.cfeel.to). All the questions asked are listed in Appendix C. On top of the page, the
information required by the Institutional Review Board was shown, and 30
multiple-choice questions followed. The participants were asked to give background
information such as gender, age, date of birth, place of birth, and the prefecture of their
current residence, at the end of the questionnaire.

The participants in this questionnaire were Japanese people who had lived in

Japan for at least the last three years and were still living in Japan. They also had to be at

43

least 18 years of age. The reason they had to have lived in Japan for the last three years is
that the participants might have missed encountering this linguistic phenomenon in Japan
if they lived in foreign countries.

I asked the date of birth in this study to see how effective the request I posted on
the social networking site was. To encourage as many participants as possible, my
academic adviser and I sent an e-mail to friends and acquaintances asking them to
participate in this survey. We asked them to write 99/99 as their date of birth to
distinguish them from the participants who saw the request. This way, I could separate
the answers of those with the 99/99 date of birth from others and compare whether these
two groups showed any difference. The request I actually posted on the social networking
site is in Appendix C.

As mentioned in Chapter 4, due to the anonymity of web space, the web identity
does not necessarily match the real-life identity. There is also the possibility that one
person participated in the survey multiple times. But there is no way to prevent it, and I
do not think many people would fill out the survey more than once since there is no
benefit. I tried to have as many participants as possible in order to neutralize these
disadvantages of cyber space.

The survey started June 19, 2007 and continued through August 3, 2007 at
www.cfeel.to/surveyflapanese. There were five Japanese sentences with dialect forms
mixed in, and each sentence accompanied a set of six multiple-choice questions. Each
sentence was provided with a situation followed by questions. For example, the first
question was: “While you were on a train, you heard the following sentence If **a

woman in your generation** says this, does it sound cute?” The participants were asked

to choose the closest answer from the five choices between “not cute at all” and “very
cute”. The second question asked “if **a man in your generation** says this, does it
sound cute?” with the same choices. The next two questions are whether the same
sentence sounds “funny / comical” first if a man says it, and second if a woman says it,
followed by five choices from “not funny / comical at all” to “very funny / comical.” The

fifth question asked whether the participants themselves used this kind of sentence or not.

9’ “ 9, ‘6

This was also followed by five choices: “often use it, sometimes use it, seldom use
it,” “have heard it but not used it,” and “have never heard or never used it.” The last
question asked the participants who they think says this kind of sentence from among six
choices: “men under 25,” “men between 25 and 50,” “men over 50,” “women under 25,”
“women between. 25 and 50,” and “women over 50.” The participants were asked to
select the closest answer to their impression for the first five questions, but for the last
question, the participants could select as many choices as they wanted. All the five
sentences were taken from the blog data I collected in Chapter 4, and they contained two
open class words, meccha (intensifier, Kansai dialect) in the first sentence and kakkoee
(‘cool’, Kansai dialect) in the third sentence, and three closed class words, -ya (copula,
Kansai dialect) in the second sentence, ~hen (negative, Kansai dialect) in the fourth
sentence, and —nen (assertion and explanation, Kansai dialect) in the fifth sentence. One

sentence was a mixture of Common Japanese and a dialect word, and other four were

entirely in regional dialects.

45

 

5.3. Results and discussion
5.3.1. Participants

The online survey ran for 45 days at www.efeel.to/surveyflapzmese. The total
number of answers received was 238. Of the 238 participants, 59 were men, and 179
were women. There were 105 participants who saw the request on the social networking
site whereas 133 participants were recruited from the personal contacts. Depending on
the age group, the number of participants varied widely. I regrouped participants into
three: Group 1 is from ages 18 to 29, group 2 from 30 to 39, and group 3 over 40. Table

5.1. shows the number of participants in each age group.

Table 5.1. The number of participants by age group

Age Male Female Total

 

 

l 1 8-29 33 100 l 33

2 30-39 14 45 59

3 40- 12 34 46
Total 59 179 238

The 238 people who participated in my survey were from all over Japan, therefore some
people used dialect words in the sentences of their every day speech, and some did not.
To specifically look at the impression of people in the Kanto area, which includes the
prefectures of Tokyo, Chiba, Kanagawa, Saitama, Ibaragi, Gunma, and Tochigi, I
summarized the results of people who were born in and currently live in one of the
prefectures of the Kanto area. Table 5.2. shows the number of people who were

categorized as the “Kanto people”.

46

Table 5.2. The number of the “Kanto people”

Age Male Female Total

 

 

1 18—29 9 41 50
2 30-39 6 17 23
3 40 5 1 1 16

Total 20 69 89

5.3.2. Hypothesis 3

This section provides the results of the first four questions for each sentence in
the questionnaire, which asked the impressions in terms of cuteness and comicalness. The
results of this section are compared with Hypothesis 3: Dialect forms are considered to be
cute and comical. Table 5.3. shows the mean scores of the Kanto people’s impression of
each sentence. Sentence 1 is with a dialectal intensifier, meccha (‘very’). Sentence 2
contains — ya (copula). Sentence 3 has kakkoee (‘cool’), in which -ee is particular to
Kansai dialects. Sentence 4 contains — hen (‘not’), and sentence 5 contains — nen
(‘assertion, explanation’). The first question asks whether the sentence sounds cute if **a
woman in your generation** says it. The second question asks if it is cute if **a man in
your generation** says it. The third and fourth questions ask if the sentence was comical
if **a woman in your generation** and **a man in your generation** say it. Each answer
was converted into a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 is “not cute/comical at all”, 3 is
“neutral”, and 5 is “very cute/comical”. In Table 5.3., the first column shows the age, and
“K1” means Group 1 of the Kanto people. The number in parentheses after Male/Female
shows the number of participants in each category. Sl-Ql in the next column shows the
sentence number (S1, S2, etc.) and the question number, so Sl-Q2 means it is the second
question of the first sentence. The numbers in parentheses next to means scores are

Standard Deviation.

47

Table 5.3. The mean scores of the Kanto people’s impression of each sentence

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SI-Ql Sl-Q2 Sl-Q3 S1-Q4
K1 Male (9) 2.78(1.10) 2.33(1.12) 2.56(1.01) 2.33(1.00)
Female (41) 2.93 (0.88) 2.51 (1.06) 2.56 (1.05) 2.63 (1.20)
K2 Male (6) 2.50(1.38) 1.67(1.03) 2.00 (0.89) 1.83 (0.98)
Female (17) 2.41 (0.87) 2.12 (1.05) 2.24 (0.83) 2.18 (0.95)
K3 Male (4) 3.50(1.73) 2.00(1.16) 3.50(1.92) 2.25(1.50)
Female (11) 1.64 (0.81) 1.45 (0.82) 2.55 (1.30) 2.09 (1.04)
S2-Q1 S2-Q2 s2-Q3 5204
K1 Male 3.22(1.30) 2.22(1.20) 2.63(1.30) 2.11(1.45)
Female 2.80 (1.08) 2.85 (1.01) 2.41 (1.16) 2.41 (1.10)
K2 Male 2.67(1.03) 2.00(1.10) 2.83(1.17) 2.33(1.03)
Female 2.53 (1.07) 2.35 (0.93) 2.12 (1.05) 2.12 (1.05)
K3 Male 2.75(1.26) 2.75 (0.50) 2.50(1.00) 3.00(1.00)
Female 2.55 (0.93) 2.36 (0.92) 2.18 (1.17) 1.91 (1.04)
S3-Q1 S3-Q2 S3-Q3 S3-Q4
K1 Male 2.44 (0.73) 1.89(1.05) 2.44(1.01) 2.11(0.93)
Female 2.29 (0.98) 2.49 (1.05) 2.29 (1.01) 2.68 (1.13)
K2 Male 2.83 (0.98) 2.00(1.10) 2.33(1.03) 2.17(0.75)
Female 2.00 (1.06) 2.12 (1.05) 1.94 (1.14) 2.18 (1.24)
K3 Male 2.75(1.26) 1.50 (0.58) 2.50(1.92) 1.25 (0.50)
Female 2.09 (0.94) 2.09 (0.94) 1.91 (0.94) 1.82 (0.98)
S4-Q1 54-02 54-03 54-04
Kl Male 3.33(1.32) 2.22(1.20) 2.22 (0.97) 2.22(1.20)
Female 2.66 (1.02) 2.59 (1 . 10) 2.45 (0.96) 2.48 (0.93)
K2 Male 3.00(1.27) 2.33(1.03) 2.50(0.84) 2.83(1.33)
Female 2.41 (1.18) 2.29 (1.05) 2.12 (1.05) 2.00 (0.94)
K3 Male 3.00(1.41) 1.75 (0.96) 2.25(1.89) 1.75(1.50)
Female 2.00 (1.10) 1.64 (0.81) 1.73 (1.10) 1.73 (1.10)
SS-Ql 55-02 SS-Q3 55-04
Kl Male 3.00(1.12) 2.00(123) 2.56(1.01) 2.33(1.41)
Female 2.88 (1.11) 2.85 (1.05) 2.65 (1.03) 2.75 (1.13)
K2 Male 2.67 (0.82) 1.83 (0.98) 2.83 (0.98) 2.50 (0.84)
Female 2.71 (0.96) 2.53 (0.87) 2.41 (1.00) 2.35 (1.06)
K3 Male 3.00(0.82) 2.50(129) 3.00(1.41) 2.25(1.50)
Female 2.45 (1.04) 2.27 (0.91) 2.00 (1.10) 2.00 (1.10)

 

48

Table 5.3 demonstrates that there is a general tendency for the perception of
sentences with dialect forms to be lower than 3. The Kanto people did not necessarily
consider the dialect forms to be cute or comical. Table 5.3. shows that most of the mean.
scores fell between 2 (not cute / comical) and 3 (neutral). When “a woman in your
generation** says the sentence, the mean scores tended to be slightly higher than when
**a man in your generation" says it in all three age groups and questions except for the
third sentence. The mean scores of the youngest group often were higher than other two
age groups. However, in the third sentence, the female participants of groups 1 and 2
answered that it was cuter andmore comical when **a man in your generation** says
this sentence.

According to the dialect division in Tojo (1953), the northeast part of Japan is
also the area where people do not use the western dialects. Therefore, I also analyzed my
data along Tojo’s dialect division. He divided Japan into three groups, and I call them

Region 1 (R1), Region 2 (R2), and Region 3 (R3) in this thesis. -

Figure 5.1. Geographic divisiorgflapanese dialects

:
t

liter-tw-

a . I—‘ 1
:38

1'

‘1

.1

‘f:

 

49

R1 is the area where people do not use western dialects. Although a couple of prefectures
are adjacent to R2 where the western dialects are used, and may have some influence on
it, it is not the purpose of this thesis to go into such detail. Below is a list of prefectures to
which R1 in Tojo’s map corresponds:

R1: Hakkiado, Aomori, Iwate, Miyagi, Akita, Yamagata, Fukushima, Ibaragi, Tochigi,
Gunma, Saitama, Chiba, Tokyo, Kanagawa, Niigata, Yamanashi, Nagano, Gifu,
Shizuoka, Aichi

Compared by regions, the results in Table 5.4. also demonstrate the same
tendency as those of the Kanto people. That is, in the cases where **a woman in your
generation** saying a sentence tends to be perceived as slightly cuter and more comical
than when **a man in your generation** say the same sentence. Again, in the third
sentence, which contained kakkoee (‘cool’), some of the mean scores were higher when

**a man in your generation** said the sentence than when **a woman in your

generation**says it. Most of the mean scores in Table 5.4. also fall between 2 (not cute /

comical) and 3 (neutral). The numbers in parentheses next to the means scores are

Standard Deviation.

Table 5.4. The mean scores of survey participants in R1.

 

 

 

Gender Sl-Ql 51-02 Sl-Q3 S1-Q4
R1 M(17) 2.88 (0.99) 2.47(1.13) 2.59(1.06) 2.4l(1.12)
F (76) 2.92 (0.76) 2.70 (1.11) 2.51 (1.05) 2.54 (1.19)
R2 M(8) 2.50(120) 2.25(149) 2.00(0.76) 2.00 (0.93)
F (26) 2.35 (0.89) 2.08 (0.98) 2.20 (0.91) 2.19 (1.02)
R3 M(10) 2.90(1.73) 2.00(1.05) 3.20(1.55) 2.70(1.49)
F (14) 1.79 (0.98) 1.50 (0.86) 2.57 (1.28) 2.21 (1.12)

50

Table 5.4. The mean scores of survey participants in R1 (continued)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gender S2-Ql 82-Q2 s2-Q3 52-Q4
R1 M 3.12(1.22) 2.35(1.06) 2.94(1.00) 2.41(1.23)
F 3.05 (1.09) 2.89 (1.07) 2.46 (1.11) 2.53 (1.06)
R2 M 2.50(1.07) 2.13(0.99) 2.50(1.20) 2.13(0.99)
F 2.50 (1.03) 2.46 (0.99) 2.15 (1.08) 2.12 (1.03)
R3 M 2.80(l.14) 3.00 (0.82) 2.50 (0.97) 3.00 (0.87)
F 2.50 (0.94) 2.07 (1.00) 2.14 (1.10) 2.07 (1.00)
Gender S3-Ql S3-Q2 S3-Q3 S3-Q4
R1 M 2.65(1.00) 1.94(1.09) 2.59(1.06) 2.59(1.18)
F 2.30(1.21) 2.39(1.12) 2.29(1.07) 2.66(1.11)
R2 M 2.75(089) 2.13(0.99) 2.25(104) 1.88 (0.84)
F 2.00 (0.98) 2.19 (1.02) 2.15 (1.26) 2.19 (1.27)
R3 M 2.11(1.05) 2.22(130) 2.22(130) 1.78 (0.83)
F 1.86 (0.95) 2.00 (0.96) 1.71 (0.91) 1.93 (1.07)
Gender S4-Ql S4-Q2 S4-Q3 S4-Q4
R] M 3.06(1.39) 2.24(1.15) 2.35(1.00) 2.29(1/05)
F 2.92 (1.24) 2.75 (1.16) 2.57 (1.07) 2.56 (1.04)
R2 M 2.75(1.28) 2.63(1.06) 2.50(0.76) 2.50(131)
F 2.42 (1.07) 2.35 (1 .02) 2.00 (0.98) 1.92 (0.89)
R3 M 2.56(l.24) l.78(1.09) 2.11(l.36) 1.89(1.05)
F 2.l4(1.03) 1.86(1.03) 1.93(1.21) 1.93(1.21)
Gender S5-Q1 SS-Q2 55-03 SS-Q4
R1 M 3.24(1.03) 2.29(1.21) 2.71(0.99) 2.53(1.23)
F 3.08 (1.17) 2.96 (1.08) 2.71 (1.05) 2.84 (1.14)
R2 M 2.50 (0.93) 2.00 (0.93) 2.75(O.87) 2.75(O.87)
F 2.81 (1.02) 2.58 (0.99) 2.31 (1.05) 2.31 (1.12)
R3 M 2.44(1.13) 2.22 (0.97) 2.44(124) 2.11(1.27)
F 2.50 (0.94) 2.29 (0.91) 2.00 (1.04) 2.00 (1.04)

5.3.3. Hypothesis 4

This section deals with the results of the fifth question in each sentence. It asked

whether the participants themselves used this kind of sentence. The five choices that the

9, ‘6 ,3 6‘

participants were to choose from were: “often use it, sometimes use it, seldom use

51

it,” “have heard it but not used it,” and “have never heard or never used it.” For this
question, “often use” is counted as 5 and “have never heard and never used” was counted
as 1 in the 5-point Likert scale. The results of this question will be compared with my
fourth hypothesis: People in Tokyo and the surrounding areas use dialect forms in casual
situations.

Table 5.5. provides the mean scores of the Kanto people. The mean scores of the
first sentence outscored all the other sentences in groups 1 and 2. Most of the mean
scores were between 2 (“have heard it but not used it”) and 3 (“seldom use it”). The
highest was 4.12 by the younger female group for the sentence with the dialectal
intensifier, and the lowest was 1.50 by the older male group about the same sentence. The
tendency observed here is that the younger people think they would say sentences like
this more frequently. R1 people’s scores and the tendency in Table 5.6. were similar to
those of the Kanto people in Table 5.5. Note that although 4 points out of 5 seems high, 4

in this question means “sometimes use it”.

Table 5.5. The mean of the use of dialect words by the Kanto people

Gender S 1 S2 S3 S4 S5

 

 

Kl M 3.33 2.78 2.22 2.67 2.44
F 4.12 2.73 2.66 2.48 2.48
K2 M 3.00 2.17 2.17 2.00 2.50
F 3.18 2.35 2.65 2.12 2.24
K3 M 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.67 2.25
F 2.45 2.09 2.00 1.91 2.18

52

Table 5.6 The mean of the use of dialect words by the people in Region 1

Gender S 1 S2 S3 S4 SS

 

 

 

R1 M 3.41 3.06 2.41 2.71 2.59
F 4.08 2.63 2.47 2.36 2.35
R2 M 3.14 2.38 2.38 2.13 2.50
F 3.31 2.50 2.42 2.31 2.38
R3 M 2.40 2.22 2.75 2.38 2.44
F 2.29 2.07 2.00 1.93 2.14
5.3.4. Hypothesis 5

This section concerns the results of the sixth question in each sentence, which asked
the respondents who they think uses this kind of sentences. Out of six categories, “men
under 25”, “men between 25 and 50”, “men over 50”, “women under 25”, “women
between 25 and 50”, and “women over 50”, participants could choose as many as they

wanted. My hypothesis is that younger people are thought to use the dialect forms more

than do older people.

Table 5.7. The groups that the Kanto people think say this kind of sentences

S1 18-25 26-50 51-

Male 68 16 2
Female 78 21 2

S2 18-25 26-50 51-

Male 71 5 l 28
Female 57 50 28

S3 18-25 26-50 51-

Male 62 38 10
Female 60 46 14

53

Table 5.7. The groups that the Kanto people think say this kind of sentences (continued)

S4 18-25 26-50 51-

Male 69 40 24
Female 67 38 23

S5 18-25 26-50 51-
Male 66 48 22

Female 64 48 22
Table 5.7. illustrates the number of participants who chose each group. The total of the
Kanto people is 89. In all the sentences, the younger the speakers were, the more likely
the participants thought that they would say this kind of sentences. No clear gender
difference was found in these results. However, with the first sentence, as the age level
grew older, the number of people who chose the older group decreased much more
sharply than for the other four sentences. The results from all the participants of this
question are summarized in Table 5.8. It shows the same tendency of a sharp decrease in
the number who chose the older group to say the sentence with a dialect intensifier. The

number of the total participants is 238.

Table 5.8 The groups that all the participants think say this kind of sentences

S1 18-25 26-50 51-

Male 1 79 54 6
Female 210 61 8

32 18-25 26-50 51-

Male 1 82 144 7 1
Female 169 142 72

54

Table 5.8 The groups that all the participants think say this kind of sentences (continued)

S3 18-25 26-50 51—

Male 154 106 36
Female 154 1 l 3 42

S4 18-25 26-50 51-

Male 182 136 87
Female 178 133 83

S5 1825 26-50 51-
Male 182 143 70

Female 179 144 70

5.3.5. Discussion

The results of this questionnaire study show that dialect words were not
considered as cute and comical by the Kanto people and by those in Region 1 (Tojo’s
dialect division). The results also demonstrate that younger people were likely to use
sentences with dialect forms more frequently than older groups in the Kanto area and
Region 1. The mean score of the dialectal intensifier was especially higher than the other
dialect forms. Furthermore, people in general thought that younger people would say
such sentences. To summarize, the third hypothesis was not supported by the results of
this study, but the fifth hypothesis was. The fourth hypothesis was supported with regard
to the first sentence in the questionnaire, but not supported by the results of the other four
sentences.

The results of my study regarding cuteness and comicalness contradict the
interviews mentioned in the newspaper columns The war of dialects (2006). This may be
because dialect forms are regarded cute and comical only among a small group of people,

and the people interviewed may have been from that group. The results of this

55

questionnaire show that the impression of cuteness and comicalness was not shared by
people in general. Some people may have used these forms to create solidarity, or they
could not find other words that better suited the occasion.

As shown in Tables 5.5. and 5.6., the sentence with a dialectal intensifier scored
the highest among the five sentences in all categories except for the older male group
from the Kanto area. Other dialect forms were rarely used according to the results. Based
on these results, it is possible to say that people use dialectal intensifiers not because they
are cute or comical but because they are fad words, since, regardless of gender and age,
the trend is the same. I speculate that the frequency of dialect forms used on TV has
increased in the last decade, which has had some effect on the general public’s language.
Many of the entertainment TV programs show the words and phrases that have impact
and are funny with big and bold characters like subtitles (this technique is called teroppu)
even though these words and phrases are in Japanese. Yamashita (2004) writes that
western dialect and cultures became one of the choices of the sense of values as the
Japanese economy stopped growing in the early 19905, and people began to seek
different sense of values than they used to have. He also mentions that celebrities who are
from the Kansai area began to use the dialect words that are closer to Tokyo Japanese on
TV because the real dialects may not be comprehensible to people in other regions. The
fact that Osaka, the biggest city in western Japan, is the third biggest city in Japan
according to the 2005 Population Census perhaps add hip and urban images to the
western dialect. Moreover, Long (1996) demonstrates the people in Osaka consider
Tokyo as a rival regarding the language and are unwilling to describe Tokyo Japanese as

Standard. Osaka’s linguistic pride is reflected in the behavior that the Osaka people do

56

not change their language wherever they move.

According to Yonekawa (1998), new intensifiers often become popular but soon
fade, so that people look for new intensifiers. The results in Tables 5.7 and 5.8 indicate
the possibility that intensifiers are a separate group from the other dialect forms used in
the questionnaire because the decreasing rate of the intensifier among the three age
groups is different from that of the other four dialect forms. Table 5.8 includes all the
participants including people who are not from the Kanto area, and who may use these
dialect forms on a daily basis. The fact that these people answered that they thought the
younger group would be much more likely to use a dialectal intensifier than the older
group as did people from the Kanto area, demonstrates that younger people are the most
frequent users of intensifiers regardless of whether they are dialect forms or not.

I should also like to comment on the choices of dialect forms and the sentences
in which they were used. Although I extracted sentences from the younger people’s blog
data in Chapter 4 and modified them so that they were not too gender- or age-biased, the
third sentence probably turned out not to be a good choice. The dialectal form in the
sentence 3 was kakkoee. When verbs and adjectives end with -—ee in Tokyo Japanese, it
sounds strongly masculine (Okamoto 1995). Although kakkoee appeared as a dialect
word in the questionnaire, the influence of the masculine image in Tokyo Japanese cannot
have been avoided. This is probably the reason this sentence showed a different trend
than the other sentences. That is, the mean score is mostly higher for cases when **a man
in your generation** says the sentence than when **a woman in your generation** says
the sentence.

The participants seemed to have the impression that this questionnaire was about

57

what they thought of the western dialects. Unfortunately, all five words are from the
western dialects, and there was only one sentence that clearly combined a dialect word
and Tokyo Japanese, which is the second sentence. Furthermore, the results of the second
sentence did not reveal any difference from the other four sentences. It is possible that the
four other sentences neutralized this one sentence, and the difference between the second
sentence and the others was too small for the participants to notice after getting the
. impression that they were being asked about western dialects.

I collected the data through personal contacts and the social networking site, and
compared the data of these two groups to see whether they show different tendencies or
not. The same procedures for the three hypotheses were followed, and the same kind of
Tables (Appendix E to D was produced for the purpose of comparison. In these Tables, I
call the participants through the personal contacts “acquaintances”, and those who
participated in the questionnaire through the social networking site “SNS”. A5 for
Hypothesis 3, the mean scores and Standard Deviation of each of the four answers were
calculated for the groups of “acquaintances” and “SNS” (Appendix El, E2, F1, and
F2). The frequency of using these sentences was compared between these two groups
for Hypothesis 4 (Appendix G and H). Concerning Hypothesis 5, the results of the Kanto
acquaintance and the Kanto SNS was compared as well as the results of all the
acquaintance and all the SNS (Appendix I. l. and 1.2.).

Although there were some differences in the mean scores, the same tendencies
for each hypothesis were found. For Hypothesis 3, the Kanto acquaintances, the Kanto
SNS, the R1 acquaintances, and the R1 SNS all demonstrated that l) the mean scores

were lower than 3 (“neutral”), 2) when **a woman in your generation** says the

58

sentence, the mean scores were slightly higher than when **a man in you generation**
says it, and 3) the mean scores tended to be a little higher when **a man in you
generation** says the sentence with kakkoee than when **a woman in you generation**
says it (Appendix E.1., E.2., EL, and F2). Hypothesis 4 asked the frequency of this kind
of sentences use, and the results also showed that 1) the mean scores were in between 2
(“have heard it but never used it”) and 3 (“seldom used it”), and 2) the mean score of the
sentence with a dialectal intensifier was higher than those of other four sentences
(Appendix G and H). Hypothesis 5 was about the participants think uses this kind of
sentences, and the results revealed that the participants in the both groups, regardless of
the regions they were from, thought younger people would be more likely to use this kind
of sentences (Appendix II. and 1.2.). The sharp decrease in the number who chose the
older group to say the sentence with a dialect intensifier was also observed. In summary,
the results of comparison between “acquaintances” and “SNS” showed similar results.
These results did not support Hypothesis 3 while they fully supported Hypothesis 5 and
partially Hypothesis 4 (Table 5.9). These results imply that the data from an anonymous

online questionnaire can be as trustworthy as the data from the acquaintances.

Table 5.9. Summary of comparison with “acquaintance” and “SNS”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Acquaintance SNS
Kanto R1 Kanto R1
Hypothesis 3 Not supported Not supported Not supported Not supported
Hypothesis 4 Partially Partially Partially Partially
supported supported supported supported
Hypothesis 5 Supported Supported Supported Supported

59

Chapter 6. Conclusion
I will first summarize the results of two studies I presented in this thesis along
with the hypotheses of each study. Then, conclusion will be drawn in the first section of

this chapter. The next section notes major limitations for future studies of this kind.

6.1. Conclusion
Chapter 4 discussed the frequency of dialect forms used in blogs written by
Tokyo Japanese. The data were collected from a Japanese social networking site, and the
subjects of this study were 70 men and 57 women from two age groups: 18-19 and over
50. Two hypotheses were posited for this study:
Hypothesis 1: There is no gender difference in terms of the frequency of
dialect words used in Tokyo Japanese.
Hypothesis 2: Younger people mix dialect forms more frequently than do older
people in Tokyo Japanese.
Concerning the gender difference, men used dialect forms more frequently than do
women in general (Table 4.7), and Hypothesis 1 was not supported by my data. The
results may imply that the male subjects in this study projected masculinity through the
use of dialect words. As for the age difference, Table 4.8 shows that the younger group
used dialect forms more often than the older group, which supports Hypothesis 2.
Based on an internet survey of 238 Japanese people, Chapter 5 tested the
following three hypotheses:
Hypothesis 3: Dialect forms are considered to be cute and comical.

Hypothesis 4: People in Tokyo and the surrounding areas use dialect forms in

60

casual situations.
Hypothesis 5: Younger people are thought to use the dialect forms more than do
older people.

The results of the online questionnaire did not support Hypothesis 3 because the
participants’ responses were relatively negative to both “cute” and “comical”. The
frequency of dialect word use in Tokyo Japanese varied depending on the word. The
questionnaire participants responded that they used dialectal intensifiers much more often
than other types of dialect forms. The last hypothesis, Hypothesis 5, was fully supported
by the results of this study. For all the sentences in the questionnaire, not only the
participants from the Kanto area but also those from other areas tended to choose the
younger group as the users of the sentences in which dialect forms and Tokyo Japanese
were mixed.

The results from these two studies illustrate that the use of dialect forms in
Tokyo Japanese is similar to slang since the tendency that younger people and males use
these forms more frequently than older people and females is same as that of slang as
explained in Chapter 2. The motivation to use dialect forms in Tokyo Japanese was not to
project cuteness or comicalness according to the results of the online questionnaire in
Chapter 5, but solidarity seems to play an important role. The results of the online
questionnaire also suggested that the data from the participants recruited on the websites
could be reliable. It is hoped that the results of the present study opens more possibilities

of collecting data and participants from the websites.

61

6.2. Limitations of the present studies

The two studies have some limitations. I will point out the major ones below.

First, the blog study had a very limited subject base since I only used one social
networking site for data collection. It is common for younger people to write blogs, but as
mentioned in Chapter 4, people over 50 who write blogs do not seem to be the best
representative of general population. Also, the data were collected only from the users of
dialect forms among Tokyo Japanese speakers. However, collecting data randomly from
both users and non-users of dialect forms would give a more accurate picture of actual
use.

Second, speech data may demonstrate different tendencies from written data
such as blogs. In writing, people do not have to worry about the pronunciation or accent,
so it is much easier for non-native speakers of the dialects to use them such as in blog,
e-mail, and instant messaging. Hence, it is possible that these forms are used more in
writing than speaking.

Lastly, I should have selected the sample sentences more carefully in the
questionnaire. Although each sentence contained a dialect form, most of the sentences in
the questionnaire were actually entirely in the western dialect, and I could not show the
contrast between them and sentences that mix a dialect form in Tokyo Japanese. It is
likely that participants had the impression that this questionnaire was about perception of
the western dialect rather than that of a mixture. I also could have used dialect words
from the books that show how to mix dialect words in Tokyo Japanese. Since the user of
these books are young people, using the words from these books would have provided

different results.

62

After conducting two studies, I have now realized many things I should revise.
Therefore, I would like to consider this thesis as a pilot study and have a better
questionnaire which clearly shows the mixture of dialect words and Tokyo Japanese in

the near future to find out the motivations of this mixture of language varieties.

63

Appendix A: The complete list of regional dialects in the blog study

Eastern Japan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Area Linguistic Regional Non—regional meaning
label dialect dialect
Hokkaido adjective menkoi kawaii cute
Hokkaido, adverb namara Sugoku, totemo very
Tohoku
particle ---be «3'00 let’s ---
N agano, aux verb ---zura ---desyoo implying assumption
Yamanashi,
Shizuoka
Aichi adjective umyaa oishii tasty
Western Japan
Area Linguistic Regional Non-regional meaning
label dialect dialect
Osaka noun aho baka styid
onago onnanoko, josei, woman, girlfriend,
onnanohito maid, etc.
nanbo ikura how much
sonnan sonnnakoto such a thing
Verb chau chigau to be different, wrong
yarakasu shidekasu to do something not
good
see shiro to do (Imperative)
adjective ikan ikenai, dameda not good
akan dameda, not good, not useful
yakunitatanai
ee ii, yoi good
omoroi omoshiroi funny, comical
adverb yoo yoku enough, well
donai dou how
tottoto hayaku fast, quickly
erai, errai, totemo, hidoku very
eraku
meccha sugoku very
(mecha,
muccha,
mechanko,
metameta)
honma (ni) hontoo (ni) really
particle --—ya ---da coppla verb
---de ---yo assertion

 

 

 

64

 

 

 

 

Appendix A: Western Japan (continued)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---na(a) ---ne agreement
---n ---no explanation, emotive
emphasis
—--nen ---no(da) explanation, emotive
emphasis
conjunction ---kendo ---keredo but
hona sorenara then
aux verb -—-toru ---teiru action in progress,
resultant state
—--yoru ---yagaru implying insult
---taru ---teyaru to do something
kindly
---yasu ---asobase please honorably
(V)...
negative ---hen ---(shi)nai not
phonological CooCV8 CaCCV N/A
change (ex. Koota) (ex. Katta)
othersg ---gana ---janaika ----, isn’t it?
---masse ---masuyo (a person) does / will
do
---koccha ---kotoda it is (adj) thing (lit.)
-—-desse ---desuyo it is
Shiga verb ---yansu ---masu polite form ending of
a verb
Kyoto verb dosu desu polite form ending of
Noun /A<yective
Hyoogo aux verb --- too --- teiru action in progress,
resultant state
Hiroshima particle ---noo ---ne exclamation
Yamaguchi aux verb ---choru ---teiru action in progress,
resultant state
In general verb oru iru to exist (animate)
adverb messa totemo, very
monosugoku
Aux verb ---yoru ---teiru action in progress,

resultant state

 

 

8. This rule can be applied only if the negative form of the verb contains Iw/ before -anai (e.g., kawanai,

warawanai).

9. The words that are categorized in others are the combinations of two or more categories in non-regional

dialect.

 

Kyuusyuu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

area Linguistic Regional dialect Non-regional meaning
label dialect
Fukuoka adjective yoka yoi, ii good
particle --- to -—- no explanation, emotive
emphasis
---tai ---dayo emphasis
Okinawa adverb deeji totemo,sugoku very
n general particle ---ken ---yo assertion

 

66

 

Appendix B: The number of each regional dialect used in each group

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

67

 

 

 

 

 

Linguistic Regional Non-regional YM OM YF OF Total
label dialect dialect
noun aho baka 3 1 6 4 14
onago onnanoko, josei, O 0 1 O l
onnanohuo
nanbo ikura 0 l O 0 l
sonnan sonnnakoto 0 O 1 0 l
verb chau chigau 0 0 2 0 2
yarakasu shidekasu 0 0 1 0 1
see shiro 0 O O 2 2
---yansu ---masu 0 3 2 0 5
dosu desu 0 1 0 0 1
oru iru 2 8 0 O 10
adjective ikan ikenai, dameda 8 3 2 0 l3
akan dameda, 3 l O l 5
yakunitatanai
ee ii, yoi 5 l 2 1 9
kakkoee cool, handsome l 1 O O 2
yoka yoi, ii 2 0 l 0 3
omoroi omoshiroi 1 0 2 0 3
menkoi kawaii 0 O 1 2 3
umyaa oishii l 0 0 0 1
adverb erai, errai, totemo, hidoku 1 5 0 O 6
eraku
yoo yoku 2 2 1 0 5
donai dou l 4 l 0 6
tottoto hayaku O O 0 l 1
meccha sugoku 55 12 35 I2 1 14
(mecha,
muccha,
mechanko,
metameta)
messa totemo, 5 1 4 0 10
monosugoku
namara sugoku, totemo O 0 l 0 1
deeji totemo 3 0 O 0 3
honma (ni) hontoo (ni) l 3 7 l 12
particle ---ya ---da 50 6 47 3 106
---tai ---da 2 O l O 3
---de ---yo 3 1 7 O 11
---na(a) ---ne 3 15 6 1 25
---n ---no 2 0 11 1 14
---nen ---no(da) 8 1 8 l 1 8

 

Appendix B: The number of each regional dialect used in each group (continued)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Linguistic Regional Non-regional YF Total
label dialect dialect
---noo ---ne 0 0 1 2 3
---be ---yoo 3 3 3 1 10
--- to --- no 2 0 2 l 5
conjunction ---kendo ---keredo 2 0 l 0 3
hona sorenara O l 0 0 1
aux verb ---toru ---teiru 9 6 6 0 21
--- too --- teiru O l O 0 l
---choru ---teiru 2 0 0 l 3
---yoru ---yagaru 2 l 1 2 6
--—taru ---teyaru 0 0 l O l
---yasu ---asobase O O 0 l l
---zura ---desyoo O 0 2 O 2
negative ---hen ---(shi)nai 0 2 5 1 8
phonological CooCV CaCCV 6 O 2 2 10
change (ex. Koota) (ex. Katta)
others ---gana --janaika 3 1 0 0 4
---masse ---masuyo l 0 0 l 2
---koccha ---kotoda 0 3 O 1 4
---desse ---desuyo O 2 O 0 2
Total 192 90 174 43 499

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

68

 

Appendix C: The request posted on the social networking site to recruit participants of
online questionnaire

***Japanese version***

illbbi LT. 72‘ U 730) i Vfiyl‘l‘lfifi‘ikifif‘é‘fi‘iéflifi 1.1613131}: £13
Lat.efimxoteueaeumrerya—rewotoc.eanue
:enereeanaeEw:::eaaaaLt.maememsaeac.
easeeaaaaeerweoLeenaeeatrexaacr.7V7—
t streamer l~ terrorvarmc. E315 :73,st fie In. J: 6 L < are»)
Lit.

http://www.efeel.to/survev/lapanese

***English version***

Hi, my name is Misako Matsubara. I am a Linguistic graduate student at Michigan State
University. I have created a survey about Japanese language for my MA thesis and would
like to ask you to participate in the survey! It will take about five minutes to complete. If
you are Japanese and have lived in Japan for at least the last three years, please click the
URL address below and participate in the survey.

http://www.efee|.to/survev/iapanese

69

Appendix D: The questions on the questionnaire
B$%thrw7>7—h

5.03777- b’C‘liJi-fié/uICLLl'FUDXICDLVC. IELUZI‘E57D‘EWEfi1/CB55®Tlifat<.
E5950D‘1‘5M‘ébfchtffihij'. IEfiJFEfiliJDU iii/0031‘. EEICBTEERGTICED
fciilCB§i<fiéth

1aaaahflafiufiarutaflfiflwfivn—Rt?xvfrimatiltacit
aibt.hutt“flfifi®tfi“m§9t6.:wxumbu<ficiarm?

(I) (2) (3) (4) (5)
mau<au aaumeu<au gfi ibibmbuu tremeuu

“fibmtt“flfifi®%fl“#§9t5.waumbu<EZZiTm?
(I) (2) (3) (4) (5)
mbU<HU eaumbu<au Efi iaibnmnw\ trembuu

IQ 5Htk“fififi®fifi“fl§ot5.:OIMBEL6<(:3h»fl)fi:ii9
m?

(I) (2) (3) (4) (5)
aeoe<au fiiUBbL6<uu Efi aaaaaeceu areaeceu

1d) fififc&**lglfift®%li**bi§3t5. COIIIBEL5<CIEhllllim‘lliid'm?
(I) (2) (3) (4) (5)
BEL6<A§H billfibbé<fafl né‘ié ibibfsbbéh G’C’bfibbém

1e) :04: eneunemereaz Hid/J).
a<a5 fiefio biUEbau fi<d£.fibau
HutceBHUL.fibuu

H)COiiHIéEOEfiOAEfiEitEUidfiW fiffiiébfiééHEhT<fié
L‘o

%l&25 E'JZLl'F %l$25-50fi %IE 50 ail—1.1:

111$ 25 it‘ll—1T H111 25-50 Fr": 3111*. 50 $311.11

70

Appendix D: The questions on the questionnaire (continued)

Za)'3-E$IC§D‘CI.V:5. [f5ZI/u‘tb. ifl‘BH/fiol’cd c‘:I\50)/Jil’a‘1CZT%$t/t. 357’ch
G“fififi®fifl“fl§ot5.waumbh<fiiiiim?

(I) (2) (3) (4) (5)
ebu<au 530mbu<au ER ibifimbuu trembuu

fluaate“fififiw%u“maete.coxumbu<ficzsrm7
U) (E (a M) (D
b)bl\<m\ biUifibtKHU an ibifianwbtm trenwbtm

2o Emtt“flfifiwtfi“#§ot6.COXUBEL6<(35hbfi)fi:i$9
a?

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
aeca<au eavaece<au an aasaaecau areaeceu

2m Emtt“flfifi@%fi“fl§ot5.COXHEeL6<CfiUWHUECi§Tm7
U) (E B) M) G)
aec5<au abiUBbLé<rsu are ibimb‘tlbéu tTeBeLéu

2a :oaeaaune:aereazuarm.
i<fi5 fiefii aauabau M<U£.Ebuu
Mutateaub.fibuu

2f) 203.1: 5721215 EOEl‘tOAEb‘Ei tfiilfifi'b‘? $111326 b®é$8fii§hfi€< 753
U.

$131.. 25 EDIT %1$ 25-50 if! $13 50 fiLlJ:

IP13. 25 EILJ‘F #1513 25-50 E 1113 SO fill—DU:

avenufierutenPeomuemueermezzzleminenczraact.
firstU’tlfifi’rtwfilrltm‘E—ate. Coilinsbu<rati$3nw

(I) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Woman) aaumeiwau 11.353 easement) t’C‘BZMDUH

fineattfifififio%fi“#§ete.coxumbu<acairm?

U) Q) B) M) (a
meu<au asumbu<au ER ifiibflWHW\ trembuu

71

Appendix D: The questions on the questionnaire (continued)

3Q bfltt“fl$fi@§fl“#§ot5.COXHEBL5<(JEhWE)%CX$T
733?

(I) (2) (3) (4) (5)
BEL5<EU EEUBEL6<HU Efi ifiibfibbéh thBbL5U

3m 5Htt“fi$fi®%fi“#§ot5.COIMEEL5<CHUUHUHCZETW?
(l) (2) (3) (4) (5)
86L6<HU biUBEL5<HU HE Ebibfibbéw tTBBbLéU

Ba :oaeaaune:aereaauarm.
$<E5 fiefii fiiUfibnu E<U£.Ebah
MutCtBHUL.fibuu

n):oaeaxeaoERoxemeeeeuarnfl §TM$6$®E§$EhT<EE
1‘.

$13 25 EILJ‘F $13k 25-50 E: $1113 50 $11.1:

tiff. 25 iii—1T 7115 25-50 ii? iii 50 FELLU;

4a) aimed-cute. rzna/uréueamemm thifl/J‘I’dziféibt. afar;
afieenoaufinaete.:oxemeu<n:aarm?

(I) (2) (3) (4) (5)
mbu<mu aavmbu<au RE aaaameuu trembuu

4b) Ent&**fififi®%fl**fl‘§9f:5. CODIIIZMDIK fiiii‘d’ffi?
(I) (2) (3) (4) (5)
ebu<au naumbu<au Efi iaibmbuu trembuu

4Q fifltt“flfifi®fifi“fi§ot5.COIMBBL6<(33hflt)fiii$?
m?

(I) (2) (3) (4) (5)
EEU6<EU 5E986b6<flh gfi aaaaaeceu tTBBELEU

4m bflt&“fi$fi@%fi“#§9t5.C02M86b6<CfiUWHUMCZ$9m?

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
BEL6<EU hiUEEL6<EU gfi ibififibbEU thBbLEH

72

Appendix D: The questions on the questionnaire (continued)

4@ :oaaaaune:eeeeaauarm.
a<ae fiefii biUEbau fi<d£.fibau
flutzteaub.fiban

M):oaeaxeeoeaoxemaeeeuadne areaeeoeeaenr<ea
L‘o

are 25 an? are 25-50 a are 50 an:

are 25 am an 25-50 a an so and:

Sa) gillfio‘tlwtl‘o. r§lii¢fifiéfchhhl tUfiUJh‘MCK'CéiL/fca Infarct“
lglfifiwtli**biԤ9fc5. CUJSZIwablK 13171339703?

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
7333bU<72IU fiiUb‘bledZU E‘ifi ifiifimbhh t’C‘bZMDlAlA

Sb) 35f;fc&:**151513fi03%11**79i§9t5. CUDSCIimblK l’a‘lCii'd'bX?
(l) (2) (3) (4) (5)
JD‘ibleaIU biUfJ‘bleJU ESE ibiifib‘bhfl t‘C’b/fibhh

so antefinefioaafimaete.:oxeaeca<(ash»c>a:asr
m7 '

(1) (2) (3) (4) (S)
asce<au asuaece<au an aaaaaeceu treaeceu

5d) 5373f:&**1315£fi03%l$**73‘§97:5. C02118¥1b5<(3EhILICMIlCiid'b)?
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
86b6<721th 5$UISELB<7JU fatié iiiifia‘bbéh t'C‘batsbt/éh

5a :oaeaaune:e5ceaauarm.
a<e5 fiefifi biUEbau fi<da.fibau
RutCEBEUL.Ebau

Sf) :04: iril'CéEUJE-KUDAEDi‘Ei tEU‘a‘E‘g‘VJS? éfliié b0é€851§hzT< 753
1A.

£13 25 1731.11: £13 25-50 a %li SO Elli

211$ 25 fiLLl'F 3111*. 25-50 a 11$ 50 $11.1;

73

Appendix D: The questions on the questionnaire (continued)

6) arareoeaaeazu rial).
—19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50—59 60-

7) hfifCUDEEEEI E3fliT< 7’53 IA.

8)57£f:@1$311é$flif< 7’53 M.
$1.12 111$

9) tflfiithlatEE BT97» ?

10) iREUDBlISEUIZEE BT97?) ?

Survey of Japanese Speech
This questionnaire is not asking you whether the following sentences are correct or not
but how you think about these sentences. There are no right or wrong answers. Please

answer honestly without any consultation.

1a) While you were on a train, you heard the following sentence: kinoo no sakkaa mita?

Meccha yokattayo. If **a woman in your generation** says this, does it sound
cute?

1 2 3 4 5
not cute normal very cute

1b) If **a man in your generation** says this, does it sound cute?
1 2 3 4 5
not cute normal very cute

1c) If **a woman in your generation** says this, does it sound funny/comical?

1 2 3 4 5
not funny/comical normal very funny/comical

74

Appendix D: The questions on the questionnaire (continued)

1d) If **a man in your generation** says this, does it sound funny/comical?
1 2 3 4 5
not funny/comical normal very funny/comical

1e) Do you use this kind of sentences?
often use sometimes use seldom use have heard them but not used

have never heard and never used

11) Which of the following groups do you think say this kind of sentences? Check all

groups that apply.
man under 25 man between 25-50 man over 50
woman under 25 woman between 25-50 woman over 50
2a) While you were on a train, you heard the following sentence: soo nanya.
Shirana katta. If **a woman in your generation** says this, does it sound cute?
1 2 3 4 5
not cute normal very cute

2b) If **a man in your generation** says this, does it sound cute?
1 - 2 3 4 5
not cute normal very cute

2c) If **a woman in your generation** says this, does it sound funny/comical?
1 2 3 4 5
not funny/comical normal very funny/comical

2d) If **a man in your generation** says this, does it sound funny/comical?
1 2 3 4 5
not funny/comical normal very funny/comical

2e) Do you use this kind of sentences?
often use sometimes use seldom use have heard them but not used

have never heard and never used

2f) Which of the following groups do you think say this kind of sentences? Check all

groups that apply.
man under 25 man between 25-50 man over 50
woman under 25 woman between 25-50 woman over 50

75

Appendix D: The questions 011 the questionnaire (continued)

3a) While you were on a train, you heard the following sentence: yappari Fukuyan-za
Masaharu tte kakkoee. If **a woman in your generation** says this, does it sound cute?

1 2 3 4 5
not cute normal very cute

3b) If **a man in your generation** says this, does it sound cute?
1 2 3 4 5
not cute normal very cute

3c) If **a woman in your generation** says this, does it sound funny/comical?
1 2 3 4 5
not funny/comical normal very funny/comical

3d) If **a man in your generation** says this, does it sound funny/comical?
1 2 3 4 5
not funny/comical normal very funny/comical

3e) Do you use this kind of sentences?
often use sometimes use seldom use have heard them but not used

have never heard and never used

31) Which of the following groups do you think say this kind of sentences? Check all

groups that apply.
man under 25 man between 25-50 man over 50
woman under 25 woman between 25-50 woman over 50
4a) While you were on a train, you heard the following sentence: kore yonda kedo
wake wakara hen. If **a woman in your generation** says this, does it sound cute?
1 2 3 4 5
not cute normal very cute

4b) If **a man in your generation** says this, does it sound cute?
1 2 3 4 5
not cute normal very cute

4c) If **a woman in your generation** says this, does it sound funny/comical?
l 2 3 4 5
not funny/comical normal very funny/comical

4d) If **a man in your generation** says this, does it sound funny/comical?

l 2 3 4 5
not funny/comical nomlal very funny/comical

76

Appendix D: The questions on the questionnaire (continued)
4e) Do you use this kind of sentences?
often use sometimes use seldom use have heard them but not used

have never heard and never used

4f) Which of the following groups do you think say this kind of sentences? Check all

groups that apply.
man under 25 man between 25-50 man over 50
woman under 25 woman between 25-50 woman over 50

5a) While you were on a train, you heard the following sentence: fuyu ni Okinawa ikz' tai
nen. If **a woman in your generation** says this, does it sound cute?
1 2 3 4 5

not cute normal very cute

5b) If **a man in your generation** says this, does it sound cute?
1 2 3 4 5
not cute normal very cute

5c) If **a woman in your generation** says this, does it sound funny/comical?
1 2 3 4 5
not funny/comical normal very funny/comical

5d) If **a man in your generation** says this, does it sound funny/comical?
l 2 3 4 5
not funny/comical normal very funny/comical

5e) Do you use this kind of sentences?
often use sometimes use seldom use have heard them but not used

have never heard and never used

Sf) Which of the following groups do you think say this kind of sentences? Check all

groups that apply.
man under 25 man between 25-50 man over 50
woman under 25 woman between 25-50 woman over 50

6) Please choose your age.
(This will be a pull-down style, and the choices are 10-19, 20-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59,
and 60-.)

7) Please write your birthday (mm/dd).

77

Appendix D: The questions on the questionnaire (continued)

8) Please choose your gender.
(This will be a pull-down style, and the choices are man and woman.)

9) Please choose the prefecture you were born.
(This will be a pull down style, and the choices are all the prefecture names ofJapan and
overseas.)

10) Please choose the prefecture you are currently living in. ~
(This will be a pull down style, and the choices are all the prefecture names oflapan and
overseas.)

78

Appendix E. 1. The mean scores of the Kanto acquaintances’ impression of each sentence

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Acquaintances S l-Ql S 1-Q2 S 1 -Q3 S l-Q4
K1 Male (1)10 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
Female (31) 2.84 (0.90) 2.35 (1.08) 2.48 (1.09) 2.45 (1.12)
K2 Male (1) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Female (8) 2.50 (0.93) 2.25 (0.89) 2.50 (0.76) 2.63 (0.92)
K3 Male (1) 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00
Female (5) 1.60 (0.89) 1.40 (0.89) 2.40 (1.34) 2.00 (1.00)
Acquaintances S2-Q1 S2-Q2 S2-Q3 S2-Q4
K1 Male 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
Female 2.80 (1.14) 2.84 (1.00) 2.40 (1.15) 2.29 (1.10)
K2 Male 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Female 2.80 (1.16) 2.38 (0.92) 2.60 ( 1.06) 2.63 (1.06)
K3 Male 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00
Female 2.20 (0.84) 2.00 (1.00) 1.80 (1 . 10) 1.40 (0.89)
Acquaintances S3-Ql S3-Q2 S3-Q3 S3-Q4
K1 Male 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
Female 2.29 (1.04) 2.39 (1.02) 2.32 (1.05) 2.70 (1.10)
K2 Male 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Female 2.13 (1.25) 2.38 (1.19) 2.00 (1.20) 2.50 (1.31)
K3 Male 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00
Female 2.00 (1.00) 2.00 (1.00) 1.60 (0.89) 1.40 (0.89)
Aegiaintances S4-Q1 S4-Q2 S4-Q3 S4-Q4
K1 Male 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
Female 2.55 (0.89) 2.58 (1.06) 2.43 (0.97) 2.47 (0.97)
K2 Male 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Female 3.13 (1.13) 2.75 (1.04) 2.63 (1.06) 2.38 (0.92)
K3 Male 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00
Female 1.80 (0.84) 1.60 (0.89) 1.40 (0.89) 1.40 (0.89)

 

 

10. The number in the parenthesis after gender is the number of participants in each group, and the number
in parentheses next to the mean score is Standard Deviation. S1 means the first sentence in the
questionnaire, and Q1 means the first question of each sentence. This is also applicable to Appendix E.2.,
F. l ., F2, 0. and H.

79

Appendix E. 1. The mean scores of the Kanto acquaintance’s impression of each sentence

 

 

 

 

(continued)
Acquaintances SS-Ql S5-Q2 S5-Q3 S5-Q4

Kl Male 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00

Female 2.80 (1.06) 2.77 (0.94) 2.63 (1.07) 2.70 (1.12)
K2 Male 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Female 3.25 (0.46) 3.00 (0.53) 2.88 (0.99) 2.88 (0.99)
K3 Male 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00

Female 2.40 (0.89) 2.40 (0.89) 1.60 (0.89) 1.60 (0.89)

Appendix E2. The mean scores of the Kanto SNS’s impression of each sentence

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SNS Sl-Ql 51-02 S1-Q3 Sl-Q4
Kl Male (8) 2.75(1.16) 2.25(1.16) 2.50(1.07) 2.25(1.04)
Female (10) 3.20 (3.20) 3.00 (0.94) 2.80 (0.92) 3.20 (1.32)
K2 Male (5) 2.80(1.30) 1.80(1.10) 2.20(0.84) 2.00(1.00)
Female (9) 2.33 (0.87) 2.00 (1.22) 2.00 (0.87) 1.78 (0.83)
K3 Male (4) 2.50(1.73) 2.00(1.15) 3.00(1.63) 2.50(1.73)
Female (6) 1.67 (0.82) 1.50 (0.84) 2.67 (1.37) 2.17 (1.17)
SNS SZ-Ql 52-Q2 S2-Q3 S2-Q4
K1 Male 325(139) 2.13(125) 2.57(1.40) 2.00(1.51)
Female 2.80 (0.92) 2.90 (1.10) 2.50 (1.27) 2.80 (1 .03)
K2 Male 3.00 (0.71) 2.20(1.10) 3.20(O.84) 2.60(1.30)
Female 2.33 (1.00) 2.33 (1.00) 1.67 (0.87) 1.67 (0.87)
K3 Male 3.00(0.82) 3.00 (0.00) 2.50(1.00) 3.00(1.00)
Female 2.83 (0.84) 2.67 (0.82) 2.50 (1.22) 2.33 (1.03)
SNS S3-Q1 S3-Q2 S3-Q3 S3-Q4
K1 Male 2.38 (0.74) 1.75(1.04) 2.38(1.06) 2.00(0.93)
Female 2.30 (0.82) 2.80 (1.14) 2.20 (0.92) 2.60 (1.26)
K2 Male 3.20 (0.45) 2.20(1.10) 2.60(0.89) 2.40 (0.55)
Female 1.89 (0.93) 1.89 (0.93) 1.90 (1.17) 1.90 (1.17)
K3 Male 2.25(1.50) 1.50 (0.58) 2.25(1.89) 1.25 (0.50)
Female 2.17 (0.98) 2.17 (0.98) 2.17 (0.98) 2.17 (0.98)

 

80

Appendix E2. The mean scores of the Kanto SNS’s impression of each sentence

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix E1. The mean scores of the R1 acquaintance’s impression of each sentence

(continued)

SNS S4-Q1 S4-Q2 S4-Q3 S4-Q4
K1 Male 3.38 (1.41) 2.13 (1.25) 2.13 (0.99) 2.13 (1.25)
Female 3.00 (1.33) 2.60 (1.26) 2.50 (0.97) 2.50 (0.85)
K2 Male 3.40 (0.89) 2.60 (2.60) 2.80 (0.45) 3.20 (1 . 10)
Female 1.78 (0.83) 1.89 (0.93) 1.67 (0.87) 1.67 (0.87)
K3 Male 2.75 (1.71) 1.75 (0.96) 2.00 (2.00) 1.75 (1.50)
Female 2.17 (1.33) 1.67 (0.82) 2.00 (1.26) 2.00 (1.26)

SNS SS—Ql SS-Q2 S5-(L3 SS-Q4
K1 Male 3.00 (1.20) 1.88 (1.25) 2.50 (1.07) 2.25 (1.49)
Female 3.10 (1.29) 3.10 (1.37) 2.70 (0.95) 2.90 (1.20)
K2 Male 3.00 (0.00) 2.00 (1.00) 3.20 (0.45) 2.80 (0.45)
Female 2.22 (1.09) 2.11 (0.93) 2.00 (0.87) 1.89 (0.78)
K3 Male 2.75 (1.26) 2.50 (1.29) 2.75 (1.71) 2.25 (1.50)
Female 2.50 (1.22) 2.17 (0.98) 2.33 (1.21) 2.33 (1.21)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Acquaintances S 1 -Q1 S 1-Q2 S 1-Q3 S 1-Q4
R1 Male (5) 3.40 (0.55) 3.40 (0.55) 2.40 (1.34) 2.40 (1.34)
Female (58) 2.83 (0.78) 2.57 (1.08) 2.45 (1.11) 2.43 (1.02)
R2 Male (1) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Female (13) 2.38 (0.87) 2.23 (0.83) 2.31 (0.95) 2.38 ( 1.04)
R3 Male (5) 3.20 (2.05) 2.20 (1.10) 3.20 (1.79) 2.60 (1.52)
Female (6) 2.00 (1.26) 1.67 (1.03) 2.67 (1.37) 2.33 (1.21)
Acquaintances S2-Q1 S2-Q2 S2-Q3 82-Q4
R1 Male 2.60 (0.89) 2.60 (0.89) 3.20 (0.45) 3.00 (0.00)
Female 2.97 (1.11) 2.79 (1.06) 2.40 (1.15) 2.41 (0.88)
R2 Male 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Female 2.85 (0.99) 2.69 (0.85) 2.46 (1.05) 2.46 (1 .05)
R3 Male 2.60 (1.52) 3.00 (1.22) 2.40 (1.14) 2.80 (0.84)
Female 2.00 (0.89) 1.83 (0.98) 1.83 (1.03) 1.67 (0.63)

 

81

Appendix F. 1. The mean scores of the R1 acquaintance’s impression of each sentence

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(continued)
Acquaintances S3-Q1 S3-Q2 S3-Q3 S3-Q4
R1 Male 3.20 (0.45) 2.80 (l . 10) 2.60 (0.89) 2.80 (1.10)
Female 2.22 (1.19) 2.28 (1.09) 2.33 (1.10) 2.69 (1.05)
R2 Male 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Female 2.23 (1.09) 2.46 (0.97) 2.38 (1.12) 2.46 (1.13)
R3 Male 2.00 (0.71) 2.80 (1.48) 2.20 (0.84) 2.20 (0.84)
Female 1.83 (0.98) 2.17 (0.98) 1.50 (0.84) 1.83 (1.33)
Acquaintances S4-Q1 S4-Q2 S4-Q3 S4-Q4
R1 Male 3.60 (0.55) 3.20 (0.45) 3.20 (0.45) 3.00 (0.00)
Female 2.78 (1.16) 2.72 (1.14) 2.60 (1.10) 2.58 (1.08)
R2 Male 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Female 2.92 (0.95) 2.69 (0.85) 2.31 (1.03) 2.15 (0.90)
R3 Male 2.40 (0.89) 1.80 (1.30) 2.20 (0.84) 2.00 (0.71)
Female 2.00 (0.89) 2.00 (1.26) 1.83 (1.33) 1.83 (1.33)
Acquaintances S5-Q l S5-Q2 S5-Q3 SS-Q4
R1 Male 3.60 (0.55) 3.40 (0.55) 3.20 (0.45) 3.20 (0.45)
Female 3.00 (1.16) 2.86 (1.04) 2.65 (1.08) 2.77 (1.15)
R2 Male 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00
Female 3.31 (0.63) 3.15 (0.69) 2.62 (1.12) 2.62 (1.12)
R3 Male 2.20 (1.10) 2.00 (0.71) 2.20 (0.84) 2.00 ( 1.22)
Female 2.33 (0.82) 2.17 (0.98) 1.67 (0.82) 1.67 (0.63)

 

Appendix F2. The mean scores of the R1 SNS’s impression of each sentence

 

 

 

 

SNS Sl-Ql 51-Q2 S1-Q3 S1-Q4
R1 Male (12) 2.67(1.07) 2.08(1.08) 2.67(098) 2.42(1.08)
Female (18) 3.22 (0.65) 3.11 (1.13) 2.72 (0.83) 2.89 (1.18)
R2 Male (7) 2.71(1.11) 2.43(1.51) 2.14(0.69) 2.14(090)
Female (13) 2.31(0.95) 1.92 (1.12) 2.08 (0.90) 2.00 (1.00)
R3 Male (5) 2.60(1.52) 1.80(1.10) 3.20(1.48) 2.80(1.64)
Female (8) 1.63 (0.74) 1.38 (0.74) 2.50 (1.31) 2.13 (1.13)

82

Appendix F2. The mean scores of the R1 SNS’s impression of each sentence (continued)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SNS S2-Q1 S2-Q2 52-03 82-Q4
R1 Male 333(130) 2.25(1.14) 2.82(1.l7) 2.17(1.40)
Female 3.33 (1.03) 3.22 (1.06) 2.67 (0.97) 2.89 (0.76)
R2 Male 2.71(0.95) 2.29(0.95) 2.71(1.11) 2.29(0.95)
Female 2.15(0.99) 2.23(1.09) 1.85(1.07) 1.77(0.93)
R3 Male 3.00(071) 3.00(000) 2.60(0.89) 3.25(0.96)
Female 2.88 (0.83) 2.25 (1.04) 2.38 (1.19) 2.38 (0.92)
SNS S3-Ql S3-Q2 S3-Q3 S3-Q4
R1 Male 2.42(1.08) 1.58 (0.90) 2.58(1.16) 2.50(1.24)
Female 2.56 (1.29) 2.78 (1 .17) 2.17 (0.99) 2.56 (1.34)
R2 Male 3.00 (0.58) 2.29(0.95) 2.43(0.98) 2.00(0.82)
Female 1.77 (0.83) 1.92 (1.04) 1.92 (1.38) 1.92 (1.12)
R3 Male 2.25(1.50) 1.50 (0.58) 2.25(1.89) 1.25 (0.50)
Female 1.88 (0.99) 1.88 (0.99) 1.88 (0.99) 2.00 (0.93)
SNS S4-Q1 S4-Q2 54-03 54-04
R1 Male 2.83(1.59) l.83(1.11) 2.00(0.95) 2.00(1.13)
Female 3.39 (1.42) 2.83 (1.25) 2.50 (0.99) 2.50 (0.92)
R2 Male 3.00(1.15) 2.86(0.90) 2.71(0.49) 2.71(1.07)
Fema1e 1.92 (0.95) 2.00 (1.08) 1.69 (0.85) 1.69 (0.85)
R3 Male 2.75(l.71) 1.75(0.96) 2.00(2.00) 1.75 (0.58)
Female 2.25 (1.16) 1.75 (0.89) 2.00 (1.20) 2.00 (1.20)
SNS SS-Ql 55-02 55-03 S5-Q4 ‘
R1 Male 3.08(1.16) l.83(1.11) 2.50(1.09) 2.25(1.36)
Female 3.33 (1.19) 3.28 (1.18) 2.89 (0.96) 3.06 (1.11)
R2 Male 2.71(0.76) 2.14(090) 3.00 (0.58) 3.00 (0.58)
Fema1e 2.31 (1.11) 2.00 (0.91) 2.00 (0.91) 2.00 (1.05)
R3 Male 2.75(1.26) 2.50(1.29) 2.75(1.71) 2.25(1.50)
Female 2.63 (1.06) 2.38 (0.92) 2.25 (1.16) 2.25 (1.16)

 

83

Appendix G The mean of the use of dialect words by the Kanto acquaintance and the

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kanto SNSll
Gender 81 82 S3 S4

AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS

Kl M 5. 00 3.10 3. 00 2.75 2. 00 2.25 5. 00 2.38 4. 00 2.25
F 4. 20 4.00 2. 61 3.10 2. 61 2.80 2 37 2. 8O 2. 47 2.50

K2 M 3.00 3. 00 2. 00 2.20 2. 00 2.20 2. 00 2. 00 2. 00 2.60
F 3.00 3.30 2.13 2.56 2. 75 2.56 2.13 2.11 2. 38 2.11

K3 M 1.00 2. 00 2. 00 2.33 2.00 2.00 2. 00 2.67 2.00 2.25
F 2.00 2. 80 2. 00 2.17 2.00 2.00 2. 00 1.83 2.00 2.33

Appendix H. The mean of the use of dialect words by the R1 acquaintance and the R1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5Ns'2
Gender S1 S2 S3 S4

AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS

R1 M 4.00 3.20 3.80 2.75 3. 00 2.17 3.80 2.25 3.20 2.33
F 4.00 4.30 2. 55 2.89 2. 45 2.56 2. 32 2.50 2. 35 2.33

R2 M 3. 00 3.20 2. 00 2.43 2. 00 2.43 2. 00 2.14 2. 00 2.57
F 3. 20 3.50 2. 15 2.85 2. 46 2.38 2.15 2.46 2. 31 2.46

R3 M 2.40 2.40 1.80 2.75 3.20 2.00 2.20 2.67 2.60 2.25
F 2.00 2.50 2.00 2.13 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.88 2.00 2.25

 

11. The number of participants in each group is same as in Appendix E.1. (acquaintance) and El. (SNS).
12. The number of participants in each group is same as in Appendix E.2. (acquaintance) and R2. (SNS).

84

- 3
kind of sentences1

Appendix 1.1. The groups that the Kanto acquaintance and the Kanto SNS think say this

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S1 18-25 26-50 51-
AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS
Male 38 3O ' 8 8 1 1
Female 42 36 10 1 l 1 1
82 18-25 26-50 51-
AC SNS AC SNS AC SN S
Male 44 27 28 23 16 12
Female 38 19 25 25 l6 12
S3 18-25 26-50 51-
AC SN S AC SN S AC SNS
Male 36 26 21 17 7 3
Female 34 26 24 22 8 6
S4 18-25 26-50 51-
AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS
Male 40 29 21 19 15 9
Female 39 28 1 8 20 1 3 10
S5 18-25 26-50 51-
AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS
Male 39 27 26 22 12 10
Female 37 28 23 25 1 1 11

 

 

 

 

85

13. The total number of AC (acquaintances) was 47, and the number of SN S was 42.

4

Appendix 1.2. The groups that all the acquaintance and SNS think say this kind of

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

sentencesl
S 1 18-25 26-50 51-
AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS
Male 104 75 36 18 5 1
Female 123 87 35 26 6 2
S2 18-25 26-50 51-
AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS
Male 108 74 89 55 41 30
Female 106 63 83 59 40 32
S3 18-25 26-50 51-
AC SNS AC SNS AC SNS
Male 92 62 66 4O 22 14
Female 91 63 63 50 27 l 5
84 18—25 26-50 51-
AC SN S AC SNS AC SNS
Male 108 74 82 54 54 33
Female 103 75 76 57 51 32
S5 18-25 26-50 51- '
AC SNS AC SN S AC SN S
Male 108 74 86 57 40 30
Female 83 61 40 3O

 

105 74

 

 

 

14. The number of the acquaintances is 133, and that of SNS is 105.

86

References

2005 Population Census. 2005. Retrieved on December 25, 2007,
http://www.stat.go.jp/english/datalkokusei/2005/youkei/03.htm

2006 White paper Informations and communications in Japan. 2006. Retrieved on June
22, 2007,
http://www. johotsusintokeisoumu. go. jp/whitepaper/ja/h 1 8/html/i 121 1000.htm1

Akizuki, Kotaro. n.d. Retrieved May 15, 2007, from http://www l7.plala.or.jp/subculing/

Allen, Irving Lewis. 1998. Slang: Sociology. Concise encyclopedia of pragmatics, ed.
Jacob L. Mey, 878-883. New York: Elsevier.

Chiavetta, Shellie. 2006. That was totally intense! A study of emphatic adverbial
modifiers in male and female speech. INQUIRY journal Spring: Retrieved on
May 7, 2007 from http://www.unh.edu/inquiryjoumal/O6/briefs/chiavetta.html.

Collins Cobuild English Language Dictionary. 1987. London: Collins ELT.

Coupland, Nikolas. 1980. Style-shifting in a Cardiff work-setting. Language in Society 9,
1-12.

Doi, Takeo. 1973. The anatomy of dependence. Tokyo: Kodansya International.

Dumas, Bethany K. and Jonathan Lighter. 1978. Is SLANG a word for linguists?
American Speech 53, 5-17.

Eckert, Penelope. 1988. Adolescent social structure and the spread of linguistic change.
Language in Society I 7, 183-207.

Fries, Charles Carpenter. 1940. American English grammar; the grammatical structure of
present-day American English with especial reference to social difierences or
class dialects. New York, London: D. Appleton-Century Company.

Gao, Liwei. 2004. Chinese intemet language: A study of identity construction. Doctoral
Dissertation from University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. DAI-A 65/11, p.
4176, May 2005.

Gottlieb, Nanette. 2005. Language and Society in Japan. Cambridge University Press.

Hai g, John H. 1991. A phonological difference in male-female speech among teenagers in

Nagoya. Aspects of Japanese women's language, eds. Sachiko Ide and Naomi
Hanaoka McGloin, 5-28. Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishers.

87

Hello Kitty. n.d. Retrieved December 26, 2006, from http://www.unicefusa.org/atf/cf/%
7BB35DBA70-2A32-4E25-999B-FA3A590864DB%7D/hellokitty.gif

Hello Kitty Credit card. n.d. Retrieved July 12, 2007, from
http://www.omc-card.co.jp/mb/flow/about/kitty.html.

Hoogen no tatakai [The war of dialects] . 2006, June-September. The Yomiuri Shinbun.
Huffaker, David A. and Sandra L. Calvert. 2005. Gender, identity, and language use in
teenage blogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10, article 1.

http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol lO/issue2/huffaker.html

Inoue, Fumio. 1986a. Sociolinguistic aspects of new dialect forms: language change in
progress in Tokyo. International Journal of Sociology of Language, 58, 73-89.

Inoue, Fumio. 1986b. Sociopsychological characteristics of uses of new dialect forms.
Journal of Pragmatics, 10, 327-345.

Inoue, Fumio. 1991. New dialect and standard language: Style-shift in Tokyo. Area and
Culture Studies, 42, 49-68.

Inoue, Fumio. 1998. Nihongo uocchingu [Watching Japanese]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.

Inoue, Fumio. 2007. Kawaru hoogen ugoku hyoojungo [Dialects that change, Standard
Japanese that moves]. Tokyo: Chikuma Shoboo.

Inoue, Fumio and Kanetaka Yarimizu. 2002. Atarashii nihonngo [New Japanese].
Tokyo: Tooyoo shorin.

Ito, Rika and Sali Tagliamonte. 2003. Well weird, right dodgy, very strange, really cool:
Layering and recycling in English intensifiers. Language in Society 32, 257-279.

Jay, Timothy. 1992. Cursing in America: a psycholinguistic study of dirty language in the
courts, in the movies, in the schoolyards, and on the streets. Philadelphia: John
Benjamins.

Johnson, Donna M. and Duane H. Roen. 1992. Complimenting and involvement in peer
reviews: Gender variation. Language in Society, 21, 27-57.

Kageyama, J insuke. 1999. Kuukyona jiko no jidai. [The age of the empty self]. Tokyo:
NHK books.

Kawaii hoogen de nihon o shiawase ni suru kai (ed.). 2005. Chikappa menkoi hoogen
renshuuchoo [A practice book of very cute dialects]. Tokyo: Shufu to seikatsu
sha.

88

Kawaii hoogen techoo [A cute dialect handbook]. 2005. Tokyo: Kawade syoboo shinsya.

Kinsella, Sharon. 1995. Cuties in Japan. Women, media, and consumption in Japan, eds.
Lise Skov and Brian Moeran, 220-254. Richmond, Surrey: Curzon press.

Kinsui, Satoshi. 2003. Vaacharu nihongo: Yakuwarigo no nazo [Virtual Japanese: The
mystery of language of roll]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.

Kondo, Kenichiro. 2005. Kindai Okinawa ni okeru hoogenfuda no jittai: Kinjirareta
kotoba [The Actual Condition on the Dialect Punishment Board in Modern
Okinawa]. Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters, Aichi Prefectural University, 53,
3-14.

Kotoba tanteidan (eds.). 2005. The hougen book [The dialects book]. Tokyo: Nihon
bungei sha.

Kunihiro, Tetsuya, Fumio Inoue, and Daniel Long (eds.) 1999. Sociolinguistics in
Japanese context. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Kurosaki, Yoshiaki. n.d.. Hoogen daigaku [University of Dialect]. Retrieved on May 14,
2007, from httpzllhougen.atok.com/column/doc/pc/uni backnumber6.html.

Labov, William. 2006. The social stratification of English in New York City. New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Lauwereyns, Shizuka. 2000. Hedges in Japanese spoken discourse: A comparison
between younger and older speakers. Doctoral Dissertation from Michigan State
University. DAI-A 62/01, p. 146, Jul 2001.

Lebra, Takie Sugiyama. 1976. Japanese patterns of behavior. Honolulu: University of
Hawai’i Press.

Lebra, Takie Sugiyama. 2004. The Japanese self in cultural logic. Honolulu: University
of Hawai’i Press.

Long, Daniel. 1996. The perception of “Standard” as the speech variety of a specific
region: Computer-produced composite maps of perceptual dialect regions.
Retrieved on December 15, 2007,

http://nihongo.human.metro-u.ac.jp/~1ong/papers/method.htm

Loveday, Leonard. 1986. Explorations in Japanese sociolinguistics. Philadelphia, PA:
John Benjamins.

Macaulay, Ronald. 2006. Pure grammaticalization: The development of a teenage
intensifier. Language variation and change, 18, 267-283.

89

Makimura, Shiyo. 2004. Shinpan Oosaka kotoba jiten [Encyclopedia of Osaka language:
New edition]. Tokyo: Kodansha.

Matthew’s BestHitTV (eds.) 2005. Namaritei: Hoogen kanzen masutaa bon [ Dialects:
A book to perfectly master dialects]. Tokyo: Wani books.

Maynard, Senko K. 1990. An introduction to Japanese grammar and communication
strategies. Tokyo: The Japan Times.

Mizutani, Osamu. 1990. Nihongo nandemo soodan [Consultation of anything about
Japanese]. Tokyo: Aruku.

Nagase, J iro. 1999. Kyanpasu kotoba no genzai. [The present of campus vocabulary].
Hoogen no genzai [The present of dialect], eds. Takashi Kobayashi, Koichi
Shinozaki, and Takuichiro Onishi, 314-329. Tokyo: Meiji shoin.

Okamoto, Shigeko. 1995. "Tasteless" Japanese: Less "Feminine" Speech among Young
Japanese Women. Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed
Self eds. by Kira Hall and Mary Bucholtz, 297-325. New York: Routledge.

Okamoto, Shigeko. and Sie Sato. 1992. Less feminine speech among young Japanese
females. Locating power Vol. 2: Proceedings of the second Berkeley Women and
language conference, eds. Kira Hall, Mary Bucholtz, and Birch Moonwomon,
478—488. Berkeley Women and Language Group, University of California,
Berkeley.

Peters, Hans. 1994. Degree adverbs in early modern English. Studies in early modern
English, ed. Dieter Kastovsky, 269-288. New York: Mourton De Gruyter.

Romaine, Suzanne and Deborah Lange. 1991. The use of a LIKE as a marker of reported

speech and thought: A case of grammaticalization in progress. American Speech,
66, 227-229.

Sato, Kazuyuki. 1996. Hoogen shuryuu syakai Toohoku hen: kyoosee to shite no hoogen
to hyoojungo [The society the dialects are mainly used Toohoku area version:

Dialect and common language to live close together]. Tokyo: Oofuu.

Sato, Kazuyuki and Masato Yoneda. 1999. Doonaru nihon no kotoba [Where does
Japanese language go ?]. Tokyo: Taishuukan.

Sen goku, Tamotsu. 1996. Maji no tetsugaku: heisei wakamono ron [The philosophy of
seriousness: Theory of young people in the Heisei period]. Tokyo: Kadokawa
Shoten.

Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1990. The languages of Japan. Cambridge University Press.

90

Strenstrbm, Anna-Brita. 1999. He was really gormless - She’s bloody crap: Girls, Boys,
and Intensifiers. Out of Corpora: Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson, eds.
Hilde Hasselgard and Signe Oksetjell, 69-78. Atlanta, GA: Rodopi.

Strenstrbm, Anna-Brita, Gisle Andersen, and Ingrid Kristine Hasund. 2002. Trends in
teenage talk: Corpus compilation, analysis and findings. Philadelphia: John
Benjamins.

Tagliamonte, Sali and Alex D’Arcy. 2004. He's like, she's like: The quotative system in
Canadian youth. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 8, 493—5 14.

Tagliamonte, Sali and Chris Roberts. 2005. So weird; so cool; so innovative: The use of
intensifiers in the television series FRIENDS. American Speech, 80, 280-300.

Taylor, R. L. 1998. Adolescent peer group language. Concise encyclopedia of pragmatics,
ed. J. L. Mey, 7-12. New York: Elsevier.

Tojo, Misao. 1966. Bunrui hoogen jiten [Classified regional dialetcs dictionary]. Tokyo:
Tokyoodo Shuppan.

Trudgill. Peter. 1983. On dialect: social and geographical perspectives. New York
University Press.

Yamane, Kazumasa. 1986. Hentai shoojo moji no kenkyuu: Moji no mukoo ni shoojo ga
mieru [The research on the characters of unique style used by girls: You can see

girls beyond the characters]. Tokyo: Kodansha.

Yamashita, Yoshitaka. 2004. Kansaiben koogi [Lecture of Kansai dialect]. Tokyo:
Kodansha.

Yonekawa, Akihiko. 1994. Wakamonogo towa [What is youth language?].
Nihongogaku, 13, 123-131.

Yonekawa, Akihiko. 1998. Wakamonogo o kagaku suru [To scientifically investigate
youth Language]. Tokyo: Meiji Shoin.

91

 

l“ LIBIIARIES

STATE UHIVEH

CAN

l

m
V.

.Llllllllll

1

15:3,.
4... . ..
.... . a