Diego Collados Grammar of the Japanese Language | Page 6

mai coto
GERUND IN DI
Present aguru [jibun] aguenu [jibun] Future ague? [jibun] aguru mai [jibun]
GERUND IN DO
---- aguete ague[~i]de
GERUND IN DUM
Present aguru tame aguenu tame Future ague? tame aguru mai tame
SUPINE IN TUM
---- ague ni ----
SUPINE IN TU
---- ague ----
PARTICIPLE
Present aguru fito aguenu fito Preterit agueta fito aguenando fito Future ague? fito aguru mai fito
The forms treated separately are:
THE CONDITIONAL
Present agueba aguez[~u]ba Preterit agueta raba aguenanda raba Future ague? naraba aguru mai naraba
THE POTENTIAL
Present aguru ró aguenu coto mo arózu Preterit aguet?u ró aguenanzzu ró Future ague?zu ró aguru mail coto mo arózu
{11}
The Structure of Collado's and Rodriguez' Descriptions Contrasted
In every section of his description, Collado is indebted to the material presented by Rodriguez in his Arte da Lingoa de Iapam. The structure of the Ars Grammaticae, however, follows a much more simplistic design than that of the Arte. As a consequence Collado found it necessary to assemble his data from various sections of Rodriguez' description. In the paragraphs which follow we will briefly sketch the structural relation between these two grammars.
As he clearly states in his title to the main portion of the grammar Collado bases his description on the Introductiones of Antonio Lebriya, and more specifically upon that portion of the great Latin grammar which dealt with the parts of speech. Further, he limits himself to the spoken language rather than attempting, as does Rodriguez, an integrated treatment of both the spoken and written grammars.
Under these influences Collado's grammar takes on the following form:
A Prologue (including the phonology) 3-5 The Body of the Grammar (by parts of speech) 6-61 A Brief Syntax 61-66 A Treatment of the Arithmetic 66-74 A Note on the Written Language 74-75
In contrast Rodriguez' Arte, prepared under the influence of Alvarez' Institutiones, develops its description over the span of three books which treat both the spoken and written grammar in progressively greater detail. Thus:
The Introduction iii-v
BOOK I
The Declensions 1-2v The Conjugations 2v-54 The Parts of Speech (Rudimenta) 55-80v
BOOK II
The Syntax of the Parts of Speech 83-168 Styles, Pronunciation, Poetics, etc. 168-184
BOOK III
The Written Language 184v-206v Names, Titles, etc. 206v-212v The Arithmetic 212v-239
{12}
Given these differing formats[10] it is clear that Collado is unable to cope adequately with the more complex aspects of the grammar, specifically those syntactic constructions to which Rodriguez devotes almost an entire book.
An analysis of Collado's description and a listing of the portions of Rodriguez' grammar from which material was taken yields the following:
Collado Rodriguez
Phonology (3-5) {Parts of Speech (55-58) {Book III (173-179v)
Nouns (6-13) {Declensions (1-2v) {Parts of Speech (59-61)
Adjectives (9-11, 32-33) {Declensions (2-2v) {Conjugations (47-52) {Parts of Speech (61-67)
Pronouns (13-18) {Declensions (2v) {Parts of Speech (67-68)
Verbs (18-49) {Conjugations (6v-54v) {Parts of Speech (69-73) {Syntax (83v-112v)
Adverbs (49-57) {Parts of Speech (73v-77) {Syntax (113-125)
Prepositions (57-59) {Parts of Speech (73-73v) {Syntax (140-148v)
Conjunctions (59-60) {Parts of Speech (76-76v) {Syntax (130-137)
Exclamations (60-61) {Parts of Speech (76-76v) {Syntax (125-130)
Syntax (61-66) Book II (83-168)
Arithmetic (66-75) Book III (212v-239)
Written Language (74-75) Book III (184v-206v)
Two aspects of Japanese were not able to be described with any degree of satisfaction by Collado; the adjectives (adjectiva) and the prepositions (praepositio). His difficulties, attributable to the basic structural difference between Latin and Japanese, were compounded by the fact that Rodriguez too was unable to find a satisfactory solution to their description.
With respect to the adjectives, Collado attempts to deal with their functions in the manner appropriate to Latin, that is as a sub-class of {13} nouns (pp. 9-11). He also recognizes their formal similarity to the verb and treats them briefly as a sub-class of the substantive verb (pp. 32-33), but his heavy reliance upon the semantic categories of Latin does not permit him to follow Rodriguez who is able more clearly to recognize their formal as well as their functional distinctiveness.
Concerning prepositions, Collado was confronted with an all but insurmountable taxonomic problem. Here too Rodriguez was unable to develop a completely satisfactory descriptive framework. In the Arte the term posposi??o is used for those particles which function in a manner similar to the Latin prepositions; e.g., tameni, taixite, and tomoni (cf. 73-73v and 140-148v); the term artigo is used for those particles having the functions of the inflectional endings of Latin; e.g., ga, ye, and ni (cf. 1-2, 78, and 137-140); and the general term particula is used to cover the broad spectrum of particles that include adverbs, conjunctions, and exclamations, as well as those otherwise unaccounted for elements which end phrases, clauses, and sentences; e.g., no, nite, and yo (cf. 77-78 and 144-154v).
Collado, rather than attempting to refine the system suggested by Rodriguez, follows the Arte in listing as praepositio those elements which translate the Latin prepositions (pp. 57-59) but uses the term particula to cover all the other particles of the language.
This tendency of Collado's to retreat from the challenging problems left unresolved by Rodriguez constitutes the greatest weakness of his