Is there a name for the practice of directly reflecting back a questioner's words, and is it really that important in Japanese?

Question

I don't really think this is 相槌; I tried searching here for "reflection" or "mirroring" as well but didn't find anything.

Let's take this example conversation:

A: ゴールデンウイークにどこかへ行きますか。

B: 観光地はその期間はいつも混んでいるんだから、東京で過ごそうと思っています。

A teacher suggested that by, adding the following, it becomes easier to understand (分かりやすくなる) but is not strictly necessary:

A: ゴールデンウイークにどこかへ行きますか。

B: 観光地はその期間はいつも混んでいるんだから、どこも行きませんよ。

東京で過ごそうと思っています。

To me, this doesn't add any extra information and just duplicates the meaning of what was already there -- in fact, it's inappropriate in many situations, such as if B actually lives in Kyoto, and is planning on spending Golden Week in Tokyo in order to avoid crowds in Kyoto.

Does this phenomenon of reflecting back exactly the same phrasing that the questioner used have a name? And is it more important than in English? It just seems unnatural to me.

To put it another way, I'm having difficulty understanding why the teacher felt it was necessary to add this phrase to the conversation. All of the other edits on this assignment (which is about practicing the 〜んだから expression) are just corrections of simple grammatical errors, which makes this one stand out as I'm sure there's lots of ways my conversations could be rewritten that are left unstated when my work is corrected.

Answer 1

Does this phenomenon of reflecting back exactly the same phrasing that the questioner used have a name?

There is a phrase オウム返し, which refers to something like saying "Spent 125 million yen!?" right after someone says "I spent 125 million yen". But 行きますか and 行きません are not "exactly the same", so you cannot use this phrase in your situation.

I'm having difficulty understanding why the teacher felt it was necessary to add this phrase to the conversation.

Your way of answering is not wrong at all, but I understand why your teacher felt it could be improved.

In general, when you are asked a question, it is preferable to give the most direct answer. For example, if someone asks you, "What time is tomorrow's flight?", it might not be wrong in reality to answer indirectly with something like "If we leave here at 8, we'll make it in time" or "I'll wake you up when it's time". But it wouldn't be surprising if someone pointed out that such an approach is not ideal, at least for writing practice. You should say "9:30" first, and then add whatever you want to. This kind of thing is a basic tip for writing clear and easy-to-understand sentences, regardless of whether you're writing in English or in Japanese.

In your case, the question is basically a yes/no question, so you could have started your response with either はい/Yes or いいえ/No, and that would be the most effective way of making your answer sound clear. Technically, starting your response with 'No' may be "redundant", but you wouldn't say that's a bad habit, would you? Likewise, saying どこにも行きません is another good option here; it answers the question directly, and it's not long enough to be called a "mirroring" at all.

Answer 2

This is not really what you asked, but the reason your teacher changed the main clause the way they did might be precisely because the way you used 〜んだから was not quite proper as I explained in my comments. The corrected sentence does sound more natural than the original in terms of the logical connection between the subordinate and main clauses. However, it sounds like you are suggesting what you are giving as an answer is very obvious and the question was a rather silly one. The final よ (in a falling intonation) also adds a tone of “Isn’t it obvious?” You probably didn’t intend that. To simply say what I think you wanted to say, the following dialogue sounds completely natural and you don’t need to repeat what the other person said.

A: ゴールデンウイークにどこかへ行きますか。

B: 観光地はその期間はいつも混んでいるので、東京で過ごそうと思っています。

I guess your teacher had to keep the first part unchanged because it was mandatory to use 〜んだから in this exercise. They should have explained it better, I would think.

---

To answer your questions, no, it's not important and I cannot think any name for such a practice.

Answer 3

I'd say it's a matter of taste. As far as I know there is no established consensus in Japanese to reflect the form used in the question when answering - especially in an informal setting.

I get the point about technicality. The "correct" answer to the question "Will you go anywhere?" might technically be "yes" or "no". But then again, if we had to follow such strict rule all the time one couldn't 話を広げる.

So IMO the teacher is being overeager here - I don't see any problems with your reply.

Answer 4

I don't think this is related to reflecting back, or any practice of Japanese language in answering questions. I feel your answer is slightly ambiguous in a way that you might be overlooking.

A: ゴールデンウイークにどこかへ行きますか。 Are you going somewhere for the Golden week?

Without context, this 行く --- I'm assuming it's similar in English --- is not restricted to being physically away from Tokyo. (unless A and B are talking about their travel plans before this conversation)

Examine the possible answers below, assuming B lives in Tokyo:

B': はい，函館に桜を見に行こうと思っています． (Making a trip)

B'': はい，美術館をいくつか訪れるつもりです． (Staying in Tokyo but visiting places)

B''': はい，友人と草野球の約束をしています (Playing baseball with friends)

B'''': 人の少ない喫茶店でもめぐろうかな．

(B''''': 行くっていうほどじゃないけど、百貨店でちょっといい食器とか見るつもり． (Not much of an activity but will be visiting stores) )

B''' could also start with a No: "いいえ，ただ友人と草野球をする約束があります", but B'' is definitely a Yes.

The point is, A is basically asking about B's plans for the Golden week. Now examine

B: 観光地はその時期はいつも混んでいるので、東京で過ごそうと思っています。 All tourist spots are crowded at that time, so I'll spend my time in Tokyo.

OK, B is going to stay in Tokyo, but is there any activity B has in mind?
どこも行きませんよ does not add much information, but it's clearer that B intends to basically stay at home, or at least has no plan.

So the phrase is not necessary but makes it easier to understand (not that it's an important practice). And no, it's never inappropriate.

Answer 5

The teacher might want you to answer with yes/no explicitly. In Japanese, negative verb forms like 行きません counts as an explicit (and non-redundant) no. いいえ and いえ count, too. Anything else requires inference thus is evading the question, technically.

In English "are you going? - I'm not going" (instead of "no, I'm not") might sound redundant, but it doesn't in Japanese (行きますか - 行きません).

It looks like echo answer is the linguistic term for this. It might be vaguely related to A-not-A question.