13

Historically where did all of these different forms arise, and when are they used? I noticed that だ and である both have their place in different 文法形, what is the difference in their meaning? I know that in things like 論文 as well as, apparently, on Wikipedia である is used, but I really don't know why.

  • Related: [Where does です come from?](http://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/11074/3097) – Darius Jahandarie Jul 20 '13 at 01:25
  • To add to the confusion, and to give some perspective, Japanese has accumulated even more copulas over its history, eg なり(=に+あり), たり(と+あり). Today, these sound archaic. – blutorange Aug 19 '13 at 04:30

1 Answers1

10

だ is a reduced form of である, which is itself a reduction of にてある (the particle で was originally にて). です is a reduced form of であります. As far as we can tell, the copular verb ('to be X') in Japonic has pretty much always been locative particle + ある. In Old Japanese it was なり (a reduction of にあり, back when あり was the 終止形), and in the Ryukyuan languages it tends to be something similar to ya- (probably にあり minus the n instead of the i). Pretty much all of Japanese has since replaced the に with で, but depending on where you are である can be reduced to any of だ, や or じゃ.

である tends to sound more formal and literary than だ/です. My guess is that its usefulness derives from the fact that sounds neither informal (like だ would be) nor deferential (like です would be), and is thus a useful alternative when 'talking to nobody', as it were - you'd use it when writing some sort of impersonal work (non-fiction or maybe third-person-narrator fiction), you'd never use it when speaking.

Sjiveru
  • 7,607
  • 24
  • 34
  • 1
    cool - does this mean でござる/ございます was never involved in the history of the coupla except as a polite alternative? – jlptnone Jul 19 '13 at 18:52
  • Pretty much. でござる's always just been the humble version of である, done the same way as ある>ござる. It never became more common than it otherwise would have been. – Sjiveru Jul 19 '13 at 20:21
  • 1
    Another difference between である and だ/です that the former retains more of its verbal properties and can be used as a 連体形 . For example, you can say 「ご本人であることの確認書類」, but not *「ご本人(だ・です)ことの確認書類」 – blutorange Jul 19 '13 at 21:52
  • 3
    Also, I've seen different theories about the history of です, would anybody have any credible sources (recent papers?) The 日本国語大辞典　considers it a contraction of でさうらふ(候)->でさう or でござります, kojien as well. Daijisen says 「で候」「でおはす」「でございます」「であります」など諸説ある Or I wonder, has it origin been lost in the mist of time, and perhaps all these words contributed to the contraction です? – blutorange Jul 19 '13 at 22:00
  • 2
    There are a number of theories for the origins of です, but we don't know for sure which is correct. –  Jul 19 '13 at 22:00
  • であります seems to me to be the most likely to reduce to です (でございます might get there with more and bigger steps, but I'd expect something like でそ from でさうらふ - でおはす might work, though), and です's relationship with だ is nearly identical to あります's with ある (and somewhat different from ござる's with ある). I could be wrong, though. – Sjiveru Jul 20 '13 at 23:15
  • 1
    "you'd never use (である) when speaking"?? People do use it in speaking if not in casual chitchat. –  Feb 12 '14 at 06:01
  • @blutorange, sorry to add to the confusion but when you say that "you can say 「ご本人であることの確認書類」, but not *「ご本人(だ・です)ことの確認書類」" because である can be used as a 連体形 which is not the case with だ・です but according to wikipedia (http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8A%A9%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E_%28%E5%9B%BD%E6%96%87%E6%B3%95%29) the 連体形 of だ・です is respectively な・です so is it possible to say : 「ご本人 **な** ことの確認書類」? As far as I know it's not possible to use です in place of な here but I don't know why ? – 永劫回帰 Jul 22 '14 at 13:34
  • @Lyle - Those two particular cases in that article are only with the sentence-final の, のに and ので (and です basically only with ので). It's not possible to say that sentence, because excepting the above case, な is the 連体形 of 形容動詞 only, never nouns. It's really very rare to see polite forms as 連体形 anyway, and ですので is about the only modern example I can think of that isn't fossilised - you're only supposed to use polite forms in main clauses, and 連体形 verbs are not main verbs (except maybe in borderline cases like with ので, which are probably actively undergoing reanalysis). – Sjiveru Jul 23 '14 at 14:35