@article{oai:repository.ninjal.ac.jp:00000483,
 author = {井上, 優 and INOUE, Masaru},
 issue = {1},
 journal = {国立国語研究所論集, NINJAL Research Papers},
 month = {May},
 note = {麗澤大学, Reitaku University, 日本語のシタは,完成相過去を表す場合とパーフェクト相現在を表す場合があると言われることがある。その際,「シタ-シナカッタ」,「シタ-シテイナイ」という対応する否定形式の違いが根拠とされる。しかし,この見方は次の理由で適切ではない。(1)パーフェクト相現在を表すとされる「シタ」の意味はパーフェクト相現在を表す「シテイル」と異なる。(2)対応する否定形式の意味から肯定形式の意味を逆算するのは妥当ではない。(3)「シタ-シテイナイ」という対応は,肯定形式と否定形式が文脈上対をなす見かけ上の対立にすぎない。(4)「シタ-シテイナイ」という対応は,シタの動的叙述性(出来事全体をその前後を含む時間の流れの中に位置づけるという意味的性質)の強さの反映であり,シタのパーフェクト性の反映ではない。シタは発話時以前における出来事の実現を表し,シタの二義性とされるものは,出来事実現の有無を述べるか,出来事実現のタイミングを述べるかという文レベルの意味の違いである。, The ta-form of dynamic verbs (V-ta) has two negative forms: V-nakatta 'did not V' and V-tei-nai 'has not V-ed'. This is normally considered as evidence supporting the claim that V-ta is semantically ambiguous: V-ta whose negative form is V-nakatta expresses past perfective, while V-ta whose negative form is V-tei-nai expresses present perfect. I show that this claim is incorrect for the following reasons. (i) The meaning of V-ta, which is said to express present perfect, is different from that of V-teiru as a present perfect form in Japanese. (ii) It is implausible to determine the meaning of V-ta based on the meaning of the corresponding negative form. (iii) The opposition of V-ta (affirmative) / V-tei-nai (negative) is realized at a pragmatic or contextual level rather than a semantic or logical level and therefore it cannot be evidence for the semantic ambiguity of V-ta. (iv) It is the semantic property of V-ta which can be called "high dynamicity of event description" that establishes the contextual opposition between V-ta (affirmative) and V-tei-nai (negative). The so-called semantic ambiguity of V-ta is merely the difference between sentences which specify whether or not the event occurred and those which specify whether or not the event belongs to the past., application/pdf},
 pages = {21--34},
 title = {動的述語のシタの二義性について},
 year = {2011},
 yomi = {イノウエ, マサル}
}