A functional perspective toward a more holistic analysis of a grammatical phenomenon is demonstrated in terms of the problems surrounding the grammatical voice. Both the current and the traditional definitions of voice are critically examined with the conclusions that they are inadequate one way or another. Current definitions largely focus on the active-passive opposition, and tend to ignore the active-middle opposition that entails a conceptual/meaning opposition, which appears to be more fundamental. Traditional definitions tend to ignore impersonal passives that are fairly widely distributed. A functional principle, the “principle of maximization of contrast”, is offered in order to account for both synchronic distributions of different types of voice and the historical development of the middle voice domain and the passive voice from the middle voice.

In the Seoul dialect of Korean, the pronunciation of vowels differs depending on the age of speakers. In general, the vowel system of speakers over sixty years of age consists of the nine vowels /i, e, ɛ, a, ɔ, o, u, ɨ, ə/, all of which demonstrate a quantitative opposition in the word-initial syllable. In contrast, younger people have a simpler vowel system which consists of seven vowels, /i, e, a, o, u, ɨ, ʌ/, with no word-initial quantitative opposition. In order to clarify the processes of vowel change responsible for the variation observed in the Seoul dialect, I investigated the vowels of eighteen informants native to the mid-town area of Seoul. Dividing the informants into seven groups, the following vowel changes can be argued to have occurred. In basic vocabulary items the vowel [əː] in groups [1] and [2] changed phonemically into [ɨː] in groups [3] and [4], but in literary words, [əː] was borrowed from older people’s pronunciation. The vowel [ɔː] appeared in the vowel system of group [5] due to the influence of the written language, as well as due to analogical changes in conjugating forms. In group [6], [ɨː] and [əː] merged into [ɔː] due to increasing influence of the written language as well as analogical changes in conjugating forms. In group [7], long vowels shortened, and accordingly, [ɔː] changed into [ʌ], with loss of lip- rounding. With respect to the front vowels [e] and [ɛ], group [1] and [2] show a clear distinction in initial syllables and in non-initial syllables after a morpheme boundary, while most informants of the other groups show an unstable distinc- tion even in initial syllables. In summary, the vowel changes occurred very gradually in each age group due to the linguistic influence of elderly groups as well as interference from the written language and analogical change. This is why the different vowel systems can exist synchronically within the same speech community.

The present paper aims to elucidate the reason why the notion of subject appeared in medieval Europe but not in other parts of the world, and the linguistic motivation for the emergence of this syntactic category in Europe and its absence elsewhere.

The appearance of the subject in the west European grammar was linguistically conditioned by the development of strict SVO word order combined with characteristic morphological attrition. Thus, the subject as a syntactic category is really a historical product in a relatively limited linguistic area which comprises those languages once called ‘Standard Average European’ by B. J. Whorf. These languages share the typologically unique feature known as ‘dummy subject’ and are described as ‘non-pro-drop’ languages. In short, the subject of these languages has resulted from the coalescence of three quite different linguistic functions which are usually grammaticalized separately ― discourse topic, morphological case marking, and semantic agent ― into a purely syntactic category.

The subject, in conclusion, cannot be a part of the theory of syntax as a universal category. It is a complex and heterogeneous concept encountered only in a limited number of languages. Therefore, any syntactic theory based exclusively on the study of such languages needs to be thoroughly reexamined if it claims to be universal in any sense. Rather, we must reappraise the old grammatical traditions, radically different from that of the west European school, in order to found a theory of universal grammar in the true sense.

This paper presents systemizations of deictic systems for the linguistic expression of person, space, and time in various languages, primarily based on hierarchies of tests for the presence, absence or underspecification of features. Deixis of person is often defined according to specifications for the deictic center ([±Speaker]) and for the relationship to the communicative event ([±Participant]). Deixis of space, often expressed in demonstratives, can be defined within the dimension of person (as above) or by specifications for spatial distance (e.g., [±Near], [±Far]). Some languages employ combinations of these two dimensions to distinguish meanings of demonstratives. Deixis of time takes the “speaking present” ([±SP]) as its primary distinction. It is further proposed that specifications for the feature of “reality” account for the future ([–R]) and present ([+R]), where the past is neutral for “reality”: [±R]. Time is typically expressed according to either the orientation whereby time moves through space (e.g., the Japanese rai-rai syuu ‘come-come week’), or that whereby ego moves through time (e.g., the English week after next), systematizable as a specification of direction from the future to the past (moving-time type) or from the past to the future (moving-ego type).

This paper examines the cognitive basis of linguistic expressions. It is shown that our ability to construe the same situation in different ways (cognitive aspect) is reflected in language use. Particular focus is given to the tendency of Japanese to focus on the point at which an event occurred (point-like cognition) compared to the tendency of English to focus on the continuing resultant state of an event (line-like cognition). Our cognitive abilities of extrapolation and complementation, perceiving something as a remnant of the results of a previous event (e.g., perceiving a shape as a square with a missing corner), are shown to be reflected in a diverse range of linguistic expressions including motion verbs used in the sense of ‘extent’. Finally, it is shown that metaphorical cognition is at work behind our linguistic expression of abstract objects. Metaphorical expres- sions related to the mind and emotions are shown to differ between Japanese and English.