[Zgarbas]

So I've been wondering. How do certain linguistic concepts work in Japanese?

Are particles considered function words or bound derivational morphemes? Would to の, for example, be considered a free morpheme acting as a function word, or would it be a derivative morpheme in cases such as 猫のおもちゃ?

Also, in compounds in which the non-standard readings are used, do the compounds count as a combination of lexemes, or of morphemes? Would 行方 be いく＋ほう, 行＋方、or a whole new lexeme, ゆくえ？

Speaking of which, in 形容動詞　is the な part of the original morpheme and dropped during conjugation, or is the な a bound morpheme in the basic form?

When considering formal logic, how would the subtle differences between へ、に　and　で be noted?
例：公園へいく。　公園に行く。
Would both be marked as いく（ｋ、ｘ）？　Or is there a special notation in such cases?

Isn't Japanese technically breaching most Gricean maxims by default? It can be either too terse(informal) or contain too much information(敬語）, and the subtlety and/or implication required to understand what is said can rather extreme. Not to mention that meiosis can be almost as big of a breach as sarcasm sometimes.

Can epistemic modality even be properly analyzed with all the modality that is added for the sake of politeness?

And that's the random questions for today. Really looking forward to hearing some opinions on this.

Don't you mean 敬語?

警護 has little to do with linguistics I think...

In my understanding, Grice's maxims are about discourse, and explore intelligibility principles, and have nothing to do with the information, or how it is conveyed. Applying the maxims as such to a particular language is void.

Zgarbas Wrote:When considering formal logic, how would the subtle differences between へ、に　and　で be noted?
例：公園へいく。　公園に行く。
Would both be marked as いく（ｋ、ｘ）？　Or is there a special notation in such cases?

...

Can epistemic modality even be properly analyzed with all the modality that is added for the sake of politeness?

I don't know much about linguistics, so I'll skip those questions. Anyway, I don't know how formal logic is dealt with in Japanese, but I'm sure all the standard notation would apply. Keep in mind, there are roughly corresponding English equivalents to the 3 particles you mentioned. Of course, phrases like "I'm heading in the direction of the park," "I'm going to the park," and "I'm strolling in the park" can be formally symbolized. Therefore, I see no problem with formalizing 「公園へ行く」「公園に行く」and「公園で散歩している」. I'd formalize them exactly the same as their English equivalents.

As for epistemic modality, it's a matter of how the natural language is formalized. The most simple way would to just formalize the target statements and ignore the modalities introduced by politeness. However, there is the issue of whether some meaning has been lost in the formalization. In that case, the modalities stemming from politeness can be formalized. English has plenty of similar cases where modalities are introduced for politeness. Regardless, the most important principle when it comes to formalizing is to base the symbolization on actual meaning, not literal. That principle alone will solve most issues. On an even more fundamental level, however, we may ask: is epistemic modality and are modalities tied to politeness different kinds of modality?