5 Reads
What is this page?
This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.
Publications (51)
17 Reads
2 Reads
7 Reads
58 Reads
92 Reads
10 Reads
·
2 Citations
20 Reads
12 Reads
The goal of this survey is to discover the differences in language sensitivity and ways of thinking between Japanese and Americans. Thank you for taking time to cooperate with us by answering the following questions. 1 Gender: Male Female 2 Age: years old 3 Mother Tongue: 4 Second Language: 5 Number of years spent studying second language: years. I. Suppose that you are a college student who comes across a university by the name of Gifu University. (The university that you attend may or may not be Gifu University.) At a student meeting, a decision has been made to make a T-shirt with the university's name on it. The following 4 T-shirts were nominated for candidacy. Note that all 4 versions (kanji, hiragana, katakana, and Roman letters) mean Gifu University. On the following scale of 1 to 5, please express to what degree you would like to wear each T-shirt. (Please circle the number that is most appropriate.)[figure][figure][table][table]
7 Reads
This paper investigates the Nominative/Genitive alternation based on a statistical survey, and provides some interesting findings. First, a very large number of native speakers of Japanese do not allow Genitive Subject in a complex NP. Second, two varieties of Japanese are observed with respect to the Nominative/Genitive alternation : (1) a variety that does not allow Genitive Subject in the configuration in which the Nominative/Genitive alternation has been considered to be potentially possible, and (2) a variety that allows Genitive Subject in the same configuration, but keeps the transitivity restriction. Third, variety (2) does not allow the Nominative/Genitive alternation when the verb is a pseudo-transitive that has Object marked Dative. Fourth, variety (2) does not allow the Nominative/Genitive alternation in a comparative clause. Fifth, for speakers of variety (2), adjacency between the verb and Genitive Subject has no effect on the Nominative/Genitive alternation. Keywords : nominative, genitive, case alternation, Japanese, transitivity
Citations (4)
... The second column from the left shows the tendency consistent with the results of the UEEs, when using another ESL test, the Paul Nation Vocabulary Test (PNVT) (Nation, 2001), which is a widely used test in ESL research (r00.81 and n0159) (Kasai, Maki, & Niinuma, 2005). Also, the same tendency was observed in the surveys with other ESL tests and other populations: (1) the College Scholastic Achievement Test (CSAT) (English Part) 2005 taken by Korean university freshmen, which is a common Korean UEE (The Korea Institute of Curriculum & Evaluation (KICE), 2007) (r00.61 and n0155) (Maki, Kasai, Goto, Lee, et al., 2006); (2) the PNVT taken by Chinese university freshmen in 2005 (r00.70 and n 0549) (Maki, Bai, Kasai, Goto, & Hashimoto, 2007); and (3) the Shinken-Examination (English part) in 2005, which is a mock examination for the Japanese UEEs, taken by second grade high school students (r00.63 and n 0135) (Maki, Morita, et al., 2007). The significance level was again set at 0.05. ...
- Citing Article
- Full-text available
... The second column from the left shows the tendency consistent with the results of the UEEs, when using another ESL test, the Paul Nation Vocabulary Test (PNVT) (Nation, 2001), which is a widely used test in ESL research (r00.81 and n0159) (Kasai, Maki, & Niinuma, 2005). Also, the same tendency was observed in the surveys with other ESL tests and other populations: (1) the College Scholastic Achievement Test (CSAT) (English Part) 2005 taken by Korean university freshmen, which is a common Korean UEE (The Korea Institute of Curriculum & Evaluation (KICE), 2007) (r00.61 and n0155) (Maki, Kasai, Goto, Lee, et al., 2006); (2) the PNVT taken by Chinese university freshmen in 2005 (r00.70 and n 0549) (Maki, Bai, Kasai, Goto, & Hashimoto, 2007); and (3) the Shinken-Examination (English part) in 2005, which is a mock examination for the Japanese UEEs, taken by second grade high school students (r00.63 and n 0135) (Maki, Morita, et al., 2007). The significance level was again set at 0.05. ...
- Citing Article
... While the C-based analysis is intriguing in itself, it is faced with some problems. First, Maki et al. (2003) and Maki and Uchibori (2005) claim that NGC does require a noun, on the grounds that each of Hiraiwa's examples has the counterpart where a noun is overtly expressed. In other words, they claim that the noun required for NGC is merely omitted in (19). ...
- Citing Article
... Although the levels and types of tests differed, Japanese language proficiency of the participants was ascertained to be sufficiently high for their participation in this experiment. Their Japanese proficiency was verified just before the MRI experiment with the Minimal Test (M-Test; 84 ) to certify that they were able to complete the task. At this stage, one non-native participant was excluded due to low score (lower than 2SD from the average within the non-native group) on the Japanese proficiency test. ...
- Citing Article