Some questions that came up in my mind upon reading this thread: where would the carrier's aircraft be in Pearl? Would they be offloaded to the airfields while the carrier undergoes whatever maintenance work is needed?
How about the pilots? I assume they wouldn't be anywhere near their planes because they would all be enjoying shore leave after being stuck in a ship for weeks or months.
When I think about this more, the hypothetical loss of the US carriers at Pearl would be a very temporary advantage for Japan. The US would suffer a material loss with the sinking of the carriers but the important thing would be that there would hardly be any losses in the carrier's aircrew (if they were on shore leave as I assumed.) Material losses are easier to replace. Losses in aircrew, especially experienced aircrew, is somewhat not as easy to do so.
I also point out that if the US carriers were lost at Pearl, Japan would probably not have struck at Midway. The Japanese attack there was made after the B-25's hit Japan from the carrier Hornet. No US carriers, no B-25 attack on Japan, thus no Battle of Midway.
At Coral Sea, the absence of the US carriers might make it possible for the Japanese to carry out their invasion and reinforcement plans. But I am sure that even without carriers, the Allies would still attempt an operation to stop this with whatever long ranged aircraft available and a more vigorous use of submarines supported with surface naval craft. However, Allied losses would be very heavy.
I know that Japan didn't have the same industrial output as the US did. The strategic goal of Japan was to create a buffering defense zone that would make it very costly for the US to penetrate. Maybe the loss of the US carriers at Pearl might give Japan time to establish a better defensive zone and consolidate their conquered resources. That's a tall order and the best I can see is Japan prolonging the war through naval attrition, which Japan cannot win, especially after Germany falls.