The purpose of this paper is to categorically define the auxiliary tari which, when combined with nominals, has been believed to express 'assertion' in classical Japanese. It has been pointed out that traditionally, in comparison with the similar auxiliary nari, tari has more restrictions on style and more constraints on preceding nouns. The question of what this historically undoubted fact actually means, however, has remained unexplained up to now. This is the reason the present study has been undertaken, to present a new perspective on the categorical definition of tari, based upon the following four observations: (1) Tari is never permitted to be linked with a proper noun nor a pronoun, and it never occurs in response to a question. These points tari has in common with the auxiliary nite-ari. (2) There is a stylistic difference between tari and nite-ari. Tari is a kanbun-kundoku (a style of Japanese used for reading Chinese texts) word, while nite-ari is a wabun (native Japanese style) word. Therefore, tari is complementary not to nari, but to niteari. (3) Tari and nite-ari are words which express 'existence' rather than 'assertion'. (4) Tari did not experience a process of grammaticalization, whereas nite-ari did, in the course of Medieval Japanese. This seems to account for the decline of tari thereafter.
View full abstract