Presentation 20.6.06 Language and the Mind PS Prof. R.Hickey SS 06

Presentation 20.6.06Language and the Mind PS Prof. R.HickeySS 06 Anna Dorow, Marlene Kralemann, Lina Brammen, Ines Kempken, Irina Gawenda, Thomas Demmler and Jennifer Gest

Presenters ▪ Marlene → development of the verb phrase ▪ Anna → language contact ▪ Jennifer→ language change ▪ Ines → mentalese ▪ Irina → language organs and grammar genes ▪ Lina → cognitive development ▪ Thomas → deixis

Part 1 Marlene

The development of the verb phrase Focus on: discussion & synthesis of available research on the development of the VP in children acquiring languages Marlene Kralemann

Definition: VP • The term verb phrase isused to summarize the range of auxiliaries, modals and inflections which signal temporal, aspectual or modal meaning • VP differs in its extension from the whole predicate phrase, e.g. in Chomsky

VP development • Catalogue of forms used • Detailed account of how the forms are used and misused by a child • Comparing children's and adults´ use of VP in the same situation • Every child has an individual development, it is possible to see parallels between their developments • No possibility to say when a form has been acquired or when the development has stopped

VP development • 2;0-2;1: most important change is the number of verbs used • 2;2: first auxiliaries appear won't, can't • Will turns up in questions & as a response to questions • 2;4: more irregular past tense is used, first regular past tenses are noticed, present tense appears; be with –ing is used; correct temporal clauses • 3;6-3;10: modal formslike should, would, could and the perfect are used

Catalogue of forms • The development of forms is relatively unsystematic • Forms are apparently learned individually and separately, e.g. negative & positive will • Their first appearances are often restricted to repetitions of the same sentence • The syntactic environment tend to be restricted, particularly the modal forms, which are dependent on question-response sequences and tied to immediate action or inaction

Catalogue of forms • Progressive and past tenses vary and are used with increasing frequency over the period considered • Connection between the differentiation of past tense and future tense forms & the development of temporal adverbials and interrogatives

Some features of the three main VP systems: 1. tense • Development of past tense: • regular: variously/-t/-d/-ed • irregular: by vowel change, vowel change and suffix, suppletion, no change • Questions: When does it appear? When is it acquired? How is it used?

Some features of the three main VP systems: 2. aspect • Progressive: the suffix –ing is the first, or at least a very early, verb marking to appear in the child's speech • Reasons: • its salience = it is a suffix coded as a separate syllable • its regularity = there are no irregular progressive forms • Perfect: period of time that stretches backwards into earlier time

Some features of the three main VP systems: 3. mood • Modal auxiliaries play an important part in VPs for the child • A third of all VP forms used by children up to 3;6 contain modals can, will • Range of meanings: possibility, necessity, permission, obligation, ability, volition can, can't, will, will´t, shall • Relevant: question-response framework, questions are not request for information but preliminaries to activity

Conclusion • Development of VP: guideline for future research • 1. any work on the VP must concern function as well as form • 2. forms cannot necessarily be taken at their face value

Part 2 Anna

LanguageContact Anna Dorow Grundstudium LN

Language Contact - Overview • Introduction • Lexical borrowing • Structural borrowing • Convergence • Conclusion

Language Contact – Introduction • Linguistic changes are not onlyinternally motivated. • Bilingualism or multilingualism means linguistic contact: Elements are transferred from one L to another L . • We will examine the effects of this transference.

Language Contact – Lexical borrowing 1 • Borrowing = mixing of languages • Most common motive for borrowing is necessity(Bloomfield: cultural borrowing). • One group of speakers borrows an object or concept from another, and its name tends to come along too. • Lexical borrowing requires only very restricted bilingualism. The borrowing speaker must understand or believe he understands the meaning of the items he is learning. • Cultural borrowing into English: apartheid (Afrikaans) pyjamas (Hindi) banana (Wolof via Spanish)

Language Contact – Lexical borrowing 2 • Different phases of loans reflect the importance of particular semantic fields. 6th-7th century – religious field Renaissance – literary field 17th-18th century – scientific field • 2nd major motivation for borrowing is social: • Although cultural borrowing is frequently bidirectional, borrowings generally move from the more to the less prestigious language.

Language Contact – Lexical borrowing 3 • Borrowings are concentrated in the fields where the more prestigious speakers wield the greatest influence. Leech – doctor – physician Ask – question – interrogate (Germanic – French – Latin/Greek) • This provides a useful source of euphemisms.

Language Contact – Lexical borrowing 4 • Sometimes speakers of the recipient L feel that their L is overwhelmed: • The Académie Francaise parcage – parking campisme – camping • English Academy (Inkhorn Controversy) resulted from the new technology of printing, loans= `inkhorn terms´ • However, those attempts to save one's language are not accepted very well.

Language Contact – Lexical borrowing 5 • Basic vocabulary is rarely affected by borrowing (always in situations where non L is more prestigious than the other L). • The majority of loanwords are nouns. • Two ways of LB depending on the degree of integration into one's own system: • Adoption or importation (words in donorlanguage form) • Adaption or substitution(nativising the form, fit into patterns of the borrowing language) • Phonic substitution • Grammatical • May involve a new meaning (calque/loan translation) • Strategies

Language Contact – Structural borrowing 1 • Under the impression of outside languages the lexicon is most easily affected, followed by the phonology, morphology and finally the syntax. • It seems likely that the extent and type of structural borrowings, will depend largely on rather unpredictable social attitudes. • In cases of light or moderate structural borrowing the features borrowed are those that fit typologically into the borrowing language.

Language Contact – Structural borrowing 2 • In terms of Phonology widespread borrowing may introduce new phonemes into the borrowing language or alter the distribution of existing ones. • Morphological material can also be borrowed, but it seems easier to borrow derivational affixes than inflectional ones. • Situations with more widespread bilingualism may be adjuvant to much more widespread structural borrowing.

Language Contact – Structural borrowing 3 • Hierarchy of types of borrowing (Thomason and Kaufmann 1988): • Borrowing only of non-basic vocabulary • Slight structural borrowing • Intense structural borrowing(Dravidian language Brahui) • even more widespread structural borrowing (language Mbugu): • So much borrowing that L becomes `nongenetic` • languages can no longer be regarded as related to the rest of their previous language family • `language mixing` (Thomason and Kaufmann) • Normally, alteration of the second language, not a mixing of languages.

Language Contact – Convergence 1 • Definitions: • Contact-induced change different from borrowing. • In some sense the inverse of borrowing. • Convergence only occurs in cases of: • widespread and stable bilingualism and • socially equal perceived languages • Has its greatest effects on: • syntax and morphology, rarely involves lexical items. • Convergence is mutual. • Not always possible to identify the source of a particular feature.

Language Contact – Convergence 2 • Takes place in a convergence area, linguistic area or Sprachbund: • Includes languages belonging to more than one family but • Showing traits in common which are found not to belong to the other members of one of the families • Occurs where • communication between linguistic groups is essential and • all, or the majority of speakers must learn and use two or more languages • Individuals have two or more grammars • each with its own lexicon • and its own set of rules, but They retain their own words and morphemes.

Language Contact – Convergence 3 • In extreme cases of convergence • the grammar becomes similar and • there is just one set of syntactic rules, but • two sets of lexical items. • This leads to • ultimate intertranslatability • children learn second and further languages only by learning further sets of vocabulary and by performing direct morpheme-for-morpheme translation • faciliating of language acquisition and communication

Language Contact – Convergence 4 • Kupwar (in India) • Involving a small community (3,000 inhabitants) • Intertranslatability has virtually been achieved • Each of the languages acts as a model for some structural changes, while maintaining their own lexical items • In each case the source of innovation is clear

Language Contact – Convergence 5 • The Indian linguistic area • Just less than ¾ are Indo-European • ¼ are Dravidian • A small minority are Munda • A general `Indianisation` has occurred (Emeneau, 1956) • Gradual convergence among these families • Many of the convergence features are non-lexical (phonology features: retroflex consonants and affrication, syntax features) • The languages form a geographical band • Although the source and direction of innovation is not clear, • There are enough innovations to justify Emeneau`s assertation that India is a single linguistic area.

Language Contact – Convergence 6 • The Balkans • Innovation crossing linguistic and political boundaries • Some transfer of lexical items (mainly from Greek and Turkish) • Spread of linguistic patterns rather than units • Each language uses its own lexical material • Hard to establish the source of Balkanism • The particular combination of features, and the fact that they are not characteristic of non-Balkan languages from the same families, establishes the existence of a Balkan convergence area • Alternative Explanations (Substrate theory, Genetic factors) • Often the source and direction of innovation is not clear. • Incomplete explanations are a way of life for historical linguists, but we do ourselves no favours by rejecting them and substituting even less complete ones which are unfalsifiable!

Language Contact – Conclusion • Language contact and bilingualism may transfer linguistic units and patterns from one system to another. • The more stable and prolonged such contact is, the more likely the resulting influence is • to be grammatical as well as lexical • mutual rather than unidirectional (distinguishing convergence from borrowing). • All cases of linguistic contact may be modified by social factors: • Languages equal in prestige are likely to show mutual influence. • Languages less prestigious are more likely to borrow from a more prestigious one.

Part 3 Jennifer

Contents by Jennifer Gest GS/LN ● What is a pidgin? ● theories of origin ● pidgin structure ● What is a creole? ● morphology ● syntax ● similarities and differences ● conclusion

What is a pidgin? def.:“a pidgin is a contact language, developed in a situation where different groups of people require some means of communication but lack any common language.” Popular def.: “pidgins and creoles are inferior, haphazard, broken, bastardized versions of older, longer established languages.” Romaine(1988) : “ a pidgin represents a language which has been stripped of everything but the rare essentials necessary for communication.”

Theories of origin There are 5 theories which are most popular among linguists : 1. Nautical jargon : assumes that pidgins derived from the lingua franca used by the crews of ships through trading → might explain some similarities in pidgins 2. Independent parallel development : pidgins are similar in structure because they are restructurings of similar languages with European= superstrate language and African= substrate language

Theories of origin 3. substratum theory : in a pidgin the superstrate language contributes the vocabulary the substrate languages the grammar 4. monogenesis theory : all current pidgins are descended ultimately from Sabir ( a fifteenth- century proto pidgin

Theories of origin 5. baby talk/ foreigner talk : both relatepidgin origin to second language acquisition; indigenous people learned an imperfect version of the superstrate languages methods : - simplification → simplify the language to be understood ( like in motherese); → initiated by superstrate speakers

Pidgin structure ▪ Each word in a pidgin has a couple of meanings e.g. Cameroon Pidgin: two words for animals bif → edible bushbif → sth. that is likely to eat you e.g. Tok Pisin: gras → grass ; but also sth. which grows somewhere gras bilong het → grass belong head - “hair” gras bilong maus → grass belong mouth – “moustache” gras bilong pisin → grass belong bird – “feathers” gras bilong solwara → grass belong saltwater - “seaweed”

Pidgin structure ▪ Words are multifunctional - acting as nouns, verbs and adjectives ▪ there is no compounding - complex ideas require a good deal of circomulation Tok Pisin: lilik brum bilong klinim tit - “ toothbrush” bikpela box yu faitim i singaut - “ piano”

Pidgin structure ▪ rarely exhibit inflectional morphology; no marking for gender, case, number and tense Yimas Pidgin: kundammin – “two” or manba – “many” → marking plurality after the noun namban – “towards” → marking the indirect object Tok Pisin: lacks inflections for number pik - “pig”/ “pigs” tripela pik – “three pigs” planti pik – “many pigs”

What is a creole? def.: a pidgin becomes a creole when it acquires native speakers creolisation is the inverse of pidginisation: while pidginisation involves reduction and simplification, creolisation is typical for expansion and elaboration

Morphology creolised Tok Pisin: - Speakers use -ol to indicate plurality pidgin Tok Pisin: forms periphrastic causative constructions - uses mekim→ Yu mekim sam wara boil – you make some some water boil creolised Tok Pisin: shortens the construction - with suffix -imon the main verb → Yu boilim wara

Syntax ▪ while pidgins lack sentence-embedding and have only main clauses, creoles develop embedded subordinate clauses creolised Tok Pisinuses olsem – “that” pidginTok Pisin: Mi no save. Ol I wokim dispela haus. creoleTok Pisin : Mi no save olsem ol I wokim dispela haus. - “ I didn´t know that they built this house.”

Syntax ▪creoles have no syntactic difference between statements and questions although they have question words Guyanese creole wisaid - “which side”= where wa mek – “what makes” = why Haitian creole ki koté – “which side” = where Tok Pisin wanem – “what name” = what

similarities anddifferences ▪ Romaine says that ‘normal’ languages have approximately 25-30,000 lexical items ▪ Tok Pisin has around 1,500 ▪ pidgin and creole examples: Guyanese creole, Hawaiian creole, Papiamentu, Seychelles creole, Haitian creole, Lesser Antillean creole, Saramaccan, Sranan, Jamaican creole, Mauritian creole, Crioulo, Tok Pisin, Trinidadian creole, Lamso, Cameroon pidgin, Yimas pidgin, pidgin Zulu, Fanagalo, Bislama, Beach-la-Mar

Conclusion ▪ hard to find out when a pidgin becomes a creole ▪ jagons are the basis → pidgins when more complex → creoles most complex+ native language

Part 4 Ines

Mentalese Ines Kempken (Hauptstudium TN)

Presentation 20.6.06 Language and the Mind PS Prof. R.Hickey SS 06