著者

乾 亮一

出版者

一般財団法人 日本英文学会

雑誌

英文学研究 (ISSN:00393649)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.26, no.2, pp.261-276, 1949

---

(i) The grammatical terms, in some cases, have different names, and where things are not called by their right names, some difficulties or ambiguities cannot be avoided. The so-called 'Cognate Object' is one of them. In the first place, the true function or functions of the Cognate object must be made clear. Laying undue stress on the name of Cognate object (and accordingly on its governing verb), grammarians, one and all, are accustomed to explain that noun as one which 'repeats the meaning of the verb' (H. Sweet), 'repeats the meaning of the verb ..., states the result or effect of activity' (H. Poutsma), 'repeats and explains more fully the idea experssed by the verb' (G. O. Curme), or as one which falls under the head of 'a subdivision under the object of result' (O. Jespersen), etc. These grammatical definitions, however, cannot afford even to serve the lexical exposition that it is 'used adverbially' (P.O.D., C.O.D., N.E.D.). Some examples in OE and in early Mod. E do show us that the Cognate object was not always in the accusative case, but sometimes in the instrumental, and sometimes in the dative. Taking this historical fact into consideration, the adverbial function of the object may be considered of original or inherent nature, which cannot be disregarded at the present time when the case forms of nouns have been levelled. But the function in question, I should think, leaves something essential yet to be clarified. How should the following examples be expounded 'resultantly or effectually' or 'adverbially'?-'Mr. Stoyte smiled to himself, a smile of triumphant self-satisfaction' (A. Huxley) | He smiled at Ed, the strange, wondering smile, again' (J. Steinbeck). Cf. He stood there and waited, suspended' (D. H. Lawrence) | 'He had stepped out of his own shadow, a live quivering creature' (J. Galsworthy). In the Cognate expression, I would venture to assert, the verb, being subservient to the object noun, is in reality a kind of 'Form-word' (or 'Empty-word'), adding nothing significant to the noun in which something characteristic of the 'Predicative' is predominant. Cf. 'She didn't die dead (J. Steinbeck) | Where the blackbird sings the latest, Where the hawthorn blooms the sweetest, ... (J. Hogg). (ii) In the second place, the question naturally arises why this cognate has come into more and more frequent use? To this query, so far as my conjecture is concerned, five points of answer may be given mainly from syntaco-stylistic points of view. (iii) Thirdly, the endeavour is made to show how this syntactic idiom has been influencing on the Japanese language. There were, or have been in that language a native expression identical with the. Cognate which, curiously enough, have no designation whatever in Japanese grammar. The difference of its usage between the two languages is this :-In English, as a general rule, the 'Full (or Modified) object' prevails, while in Japanese the 'Inane (or unmodified) object' is indigenous. The 'Full (or modified) object', being on the increase in Japanese, can be said to be a sort of translation loan-phrase from English (and other Western languages). This foreign influence, however, has not yet found its way in the colloquial or conversational Japanese. Another noteworthy difference is that a similar expression native to our mother tongue can we find in such stereotyped phrases as 'owarai ni warau' (=laugh a hearty laugh), 'otokonaki ni naku' (=weep manly tears), 'hitonemuri ni nemuru' (=sleep an undisturbed sleep), etc., which seems to be equivalent to OE Cognate object in the instrumental or in the dative.