1 / 29

Pirah ã: a language without complexity?

Pirah ã: a language without complexity?. Jeanette Sakel University of the West of England jeanette.sakel@uwe.ac.uk. University of Bristol 13.05.2013. The Pirahã. Pirah ã : Muran language between 350-450 people living along the Maici river, Amazonas, Brazil

rogerwest
Télécharger la présentation

Pirah ã: a language without complexity?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Pirahã: a language without complexity? Jeanette SakelUniversity of the West of Englandjeanette.sakel@uwe.ac.uk University of Bristol 13.05.2013

  2. The Pirahã • Pirahã: Muran language • between 350-450 people • living along the Maici river, Amazonas, Brazil • lifestyle: traditional - hunter-gathers • contact with the outside world for 2 centuries (ongoing contact, though not living in direct vicinity to Portuguese speakers)

  3. The Pirahã

  4. Contents • Introduction to the debate on cultural constraints & recursion • Introduction to the structure of Pirahã • Examples & discussion: • -sai • Mental verbs • Complexity? Why it isn’t necessary • Extra: [Complexity in the contact variety (Portuguese pidgin)]

  5. Recursion • Repetition of the same rule within itself – e.g. phrases within phrases (1) sentences within sentences (2): (1) John’s sister’s son’s dog. (2) John overheard that Mary said that George believed that Sally ate the entire cake!

  6. Recursion: THE one [core] characteristic of human language? Yes: according to Chomsky (e.g. Hauser, Chomsky & Fitch 2002) But: Dan Everett (2005) Pirahã has no recursion. Culture influences language Immediacy of Experience Principle (IEP) - the Pirahã only talk about what they have experienced themselves or what has happened to people they know. Pirahã has no recursion, no numbers, no color terms, etc. due to cultural influence (Dan Everett) http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/04/16/070416fa_fact_colapinto

  7. Pirahã ways of expressing the same concepts NPs in NPs: ‘John’s father’s cat’ in Pirahã = (3) John has a father, the father has a cat Sentences in sentences: ‘He said that because it is raining he is not going to hunt in the forest’ in Pirahã = (4) He said something. It is raining. I am not going to the forest.  It’s all in the discourse! Parataxis, juxtaposition.

  8. (5) a. He said that I suspected that the students were hung over. b. Hearsay perhaps the students are hung over. -so‘when’: (6) Ai ka’aí ka’ai-o abá-ti piiboí-so. DM house house-LOC stay-1 rain-DIS ‘Well, I stay in the house if/when it is raining.’

  9. The structure of Pirahã The sound system • Small vowel and consonant inventories • two tones • allophony (e.g. hi~k): ‘not’ in Pirahã can be: • Hiaba • Kaba • Intonation: various layers • Shouting • Whistling • Monotonous recital

  10. The structure of Pirahã: numerals • Hói, hoí, baágiso • Lack of numerals (Gordon 2004, Frank et al 2008): three-way distinction of ‘few’, ‘some’ and ‘many’.

  11. The structure of Pirahã: grammar • Suffixing, with synthesis in verbs. • Nominal morphology: no core cases, an oblique marker -o (location), grammatical relations are expressed by word order alone (SOV). • Complex verbal morphology (mood, aspect, interrogative markers, negation, incorporation and ‘situational’ markers), but the verb is not marked for tense or person. • Sentence particles expressing counter-expective, linked to the discourse context, etc. • Clause combinations: juxtaposition of two simple clauses. Context.

  12. Examples & discussion • A marker that has been discussed as a possible subordination marker (-sai) • Ways in which complex constructions are expressed in Pirahã (and other languages): mental verb constructions • Reasons for why languages do not ‘need’ recursion

  13. Examples & discussion: -sai:Nominalisation? Subordination? (7) Piiboi-bai-sai ti kahápi-hiaba. rain-INTENS-SAI 1 go-NEG ‘If it is raining I won’t go.’ (8) Piiboi-bai ti kahápi-hiabi-sai. rain-INTERS 1 go-NEG-SAI ‘If it is raining I won’t go.’ (9) Piiboi-bai ti kahápi-hiaba. Rain-INTENS 1 go-NEG ‘If it is raining I won’t go.’

  14. Examples & discussion: mental verbs (10) Garippíiru bog-ai-haí-híai. Brazilian.worker come-ATELIC-DOUBT-HEARSAY ‘(I heard that) the Brazilian worker has probably not come here.’ (11) Hi kagáihiai koabái-p-á-há 3 jaguar kill-PERF-REM-COMP_CERT ‘(I’m sure) he shot the jaguar’ (12) Piboi-bai hi kahápi-hiab-áagahá Rain-EMPH 3 go-NEG-OBSERV ‘It is raining; (I see) he is not going (to the forest)’

  15. From Sakel & Stapert (2010)

  16. Recursion? Why it isn’t necessary • Spoken language: less use of recursion e.g. Finnish and Japanese (Laury & Tsuyoshi 2010) (13) I was like “yeah, I’ll go” and he was like “sure” • That-omission in relative clauses (14) He bought the house (that) he viewed yesterday. • Esoteric language use vs. exoteric language use (Wray and Grace 2007)

  17. Conclusion • Complexity in Pirahã? • Not necessarily • Recursion (at the syntactic level) is not necessarily THE core feature of language • Rather: recursion appears more readily in complex settings (written language, etc.) • Pirahã = a complex, complicated language in other ways!

  18. References Everett, Daniel. (2005). Cultural constraints on grammar and cognition in Pirahã: another look at the design features of human language. Current Anthropology 76(4): 621-646. Frank, Michael; Daniel Everett; Evelina Fedorenko & Edward Gibson (2008) ‘Number as a cognitive technology: Evidence from Pirahã language and cognition’ in Cognition 108(3): 819-824. Gordon, Peter (2004) ‘Numerical cognition without words: evidence from Amazonia’ Science 306: 496-499. Hauser, Marc. D., Noam Chomsky, W. Tecumseh Fitch (2002). The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science 298: 1569-1579. Jarvis, Scott & Aneta Pavlenko (2008) Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York: Routledge. Laury, Ritva and Ono Tsuyoshi. 2010. ‘Recursion in conversation: what speakers of Finnish and Japanese know how to do’ p. 69-92 in Harry Van der Hulst (ed.) Recursion and human language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Sakel, Jeanette (Forthc.) ‘Transfer and language contact: the case of Pirahã’ to appear in J. Sakel and J. Treffers-Daller (eds.) ‘Transfer and language contact’, special issues of International Journal of Bilingualism. Sakel, Jeanette & Eugenie Stapert (2010) ‘Pirahã - in need of recursion?’ p. 3-16 in Harry van der Hulst (ed.) Recursion and human language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Wray, Alison and George W. Grace (2007) The consequences of talking to strangers: Evolutionary corollaries of socio-cultural influences on linguistic form. Lingua 117: 543–578.

  19. Fieldwork

  20. Complexity in the contact variety (Portuguese pidgin) • Language contact with Portuguese • Portuguese (a language with recursion) influencing Pirahã? • Contact theory: subordination markers & constructions are often borrowed (cf. Matras & Sakel 2007)

  21. Language contact • Widespread monolingualism among the community, even though a wealth of Portuguese loanwords exist. • A number of middle-aged men “gatekeepers” take over the role as communicators: • Basis communication • Portuguese pidgin? • The rest of the Pirahã are monolingual

  22. Aspects of the gatekeepers’ language • The Pirahã system to express quantities is replicated in the gatekeepers’ language (Sakel forthc. 2010): (15) R: Cuantos meninos tem você? how.many children have.2/3.SG you ‘How many children have you got?’ GK: MUIIITO! eeh MUITO many DM many ‘Many, many’ • = conceptual transfer from Pirahã (Jarvis & Pavlenko 2008) (Portuguese elements in CAPITALS)

  23. Examples of transfer and parataxis (16) Ee NOOOYJJJ, ee NOOOYJJJ MAAS ee. DM far DM far more DM ‘It is far, it is very far.’ (17) AGORA NO NO CAZA ai DOEE ai. now not not hunt DM ill DM ‘Now it (the dog) is not hunting; it is ill.’ • Juxtaposition of two elements to express causal, temporal and other relationships

  24. (18) Ai ai AKI his-o KEECHE |1| DM DM here sun-LOC hot KWAADO AKI his-o FRIIO |2| when(DIS) here sun-LOC cold ai kaba KEEMA ai |3| DM NEG burn DM ai MUITO BRAAKO. |4| DM very white ‘It is hot here in the sun. When it is cold here in the sun, you do not burn. (You are) very white.’

  25. Portuguese equivalent: (19) Se fizesse frio e se if make.SUBJ.IMP cold and if a sua pele nãofosse DET.F POSS.F skin NEG be.SUBJ.IMP muito branca você não queimaria. very white.F you NEG burn.COND ‘If it was cold and if your skin wasn’t very fair you would not burn.’ Pirahã expresses similar concepts with -so‘when’: (20) Ai ka’aí ka’ai-o abá-ti piiboí-so. DM house house-LOC stay-1 rain-DIS ‘Well, I stay in the house if/when it is raining.’

  26. (21) Nai, ai Pao’ai higáisai ti DM DM Dan he.said 1SG abíi-hai gaisi nó’ ai, stay-REL_CERT say there DM Pao’ai ti abíi-hái gaisi’CUANDO Dan 1SG stay-REL_CERT say when CUANDO VAI ai kaháp-ii’. when go.3SG DM leave-INTENT ‘This, thus Dan he spoke. “I will stay”. Dan, “Iwill stay there” he spoke. When he goes. “I will go”.’ (GK1)

  27. (22) Ma eu quería só CIMI mesmo. but I want.COND.1SG only CIMI itself Voce trabalha la ponte’, ne’? you work.2SG there bridge TAG Quería vir aqui, ne’? want.COND.1SG come.INF here TAG ‘But I would only want CIMI itself. You work there, at the bridge (i.e. in the other Pirahã village), right? I would want you to come here, okay?’ (GK4) [This example was recorded by Dan Everett at the Pirahã settlement at mouth of the river in 2009]

  28. Conclusion: contact variety • Portuguese on the surface, but conceptual transfer from Pirahã • In some cases: possible incipient complexity • However: much of this can be analysed in terms of pragmatics / discourse structure - not necessarily as syntactically recursive structures • Changes in the future: very likely

More Related