ACQUIRING AND EXPRESSING TEMPORALITY IN HEBREW: THE CASE OF A T/(M/A) LANGUAGE Ruth A. Berman –...
-
Upload
beverly-bruce -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of ACQUIRING AND EXPRESSING TEMPORALITY IN HEBREW: THE CASE OF A T/(M/A) LANGUAGE Ruth A. Berman –...
ACQUIRING AND EXPRESSING TEMPORALITY IN HEBREW:
THE CASE OF A T/(M/A) LANGUAGE
Ruth A. Berman – Tel Aviv University
Journée d’études -- Temporalité: Typologie et Acquisition
CNRS, Centre Pouchet, Paris - mars 2010
OUTLINE OF TALK
• Typological Features of Hebrew: Tense without Aspect
• Early Child Grammar: Developmental strategies
• Narratives -- Oral and Written:Anchor tense, Tense-shifting [Frogs]
Setting the narrative scene [Fable] • Later Language Development:
From Dichotomy to Diversity
HEBREW TYPOLOGY5 Tense-Modal Forms, Full/Defective Consonantal Roots,
in 3 (out of 7) binyan Verb Patterns
Pattern Root Gloss Infinitive Imperat Present Past Future
P1 pa'al
r-q-d
g-d-l
y-c-’
b-w-’
dance (Intr) grow (Intr)
go out
come
li-rkod
li-gdol
la-cet
la-vo
rekod
gdal
ce
bo
roked
@godel
yoce
ba
rakad
gadal yaca
ba
yi-rkod
yi-gdal
ye-ce
ya-vo
P3 pi'el
r-q-d
g-d-l
y-c-’
b-w-’
skip
raise
export
import
le-raked
le-gadel
le-yace le-yave
raked
gadel
yace
yave
me-raked
me-gadel
me-yace
me-yave
riked
gidel
yice
@yive
ye-raked
ye-gadel
ye-yace
ye-yave
P5 hif'il
r-q-d
g-d-l
y-c-’
b-w-’
make-dance
enlarge
take out
bring
le-harkid
le-hagdil
le-hoci
le-havi
harked
hagdel
hoce
have
ma-rkid
ma-gdil
mo-ci
me-vi
hi-rkid
hi-gdil
ho-ci
he-vi
ya-rkid
ya-gdil
yo-ci
ya-vi
INTERACTION WITH INFLECTIONAL AND DERIVATIONAL MORPHOLOGY
Inflections:Rich system of SV Agreement marking for:• Gender (Masculine > Feminine)• Person (1st > 2nd > 3rd) • Number (Singular > Plural)
Derivational Morphology:Verb-Pattern alternations expressingvalence-changing relations (causative, reflexive, reciprocal, middle voice, passive voice, etc.), e.g., šavar ~ nišbar ‘break’ Trans ~ Intransšaxav ~ hiškiv ‘lie ~ lay down’raxac ~ hitraxec ‘wash’ Trans ~ Reflexive
MULTIFUNCTIONALITY [Berman, 2000, 2004; Berman & Neeman, 1994; Berman & Nir-Sagiv, 2004]
Category Functions Examples with d-b-r ‘talk, speak’
Infinitive Orders, Prohibitions (juvenile)
(lo) ledaber!‘(not) to-speak = don’t talk!’
Extended Predicates (with Modal and Aspectual verbs)
yaxol ledaber, asur ledaber, ‘can to-speak, mustn’t to-speak’hitxil ledaber, himšix ledaber‘began to-speak. continued to-speak’
Non-finite Complements (Complex Syntax)
hu bikeš ledaber, ‘He asked to-speak’hu halax habayta ledaber ito‘He went home to-talk to-him’
Benoni: Inter-mediate’
Present-Tense (Immediate + Extended)
ani medaber(et)‘I am-talking ~ I speak (English)’
Participles (Subordinate)
hu yašav levad, medaber im acmo‘He sat alone, talking to himself’’
Resultatives (passive) ha-nose medubar‘The topic is-talked (about) = hot’
Habitual Aspect (+aux) hu lo haya medaber itanu‘He not was speaking = wouldn’t speak to us’
Category Functions Examples d-b-r ‘talk, speak’
Past Past-Tense: Perfective, Progressive, Perfect
diber = ‘talked, was talking, has/had been talking,has/ had talked’
Future (Irrealis)
Future Tense: ata tedaber ba-šavua ha-ba‘You 2nd-will-talk next week’
Imperatives nu, (te)daber kvar!‘Well, talk already = say something’
Conditional, Subjunctive im tedaber, node lexa me’od
‘If 2nd-will-talk, (we) 1st-Plur thank you very much’
MULTIFUNCTIONALITY [continued] [Berman, 2000, 2004; Berman & Neeman, 1994; Berman & Nir-Sagiv, 2004]
EARLY ACQUISITIONAL STRATEGIES: Form / Function Inflectional Variation
I. Ambiguous “bare” stems (ber,pes,sim,xabek,šon) Multifunctional l- marked Infinitives (ledaber,lišon) Non-alternation of forms
II. a. Infinitives: requests, orders b. Benoni ‘intermediate’ present tense: Reportative function, simple clauses
III. Past: Immediate change-of-state verbs Later, in narrative contexts
IV. Future: as Tense, not only Imperative
V. Infinitives: Complements in Extended Preds: carix ledaber, roce le-exol, holex li-šon
‘must to-talk, want to-eat, go(es) to-sleep’
LATER ACQUISITIONS
Derivational MorphologyValence-changing Verb Patterns: • Initial non-alternation • Favoring of “basic” P1 pattern• Some use of active transitive P3, P5 patterns• Added reliance on intransitive P2, P4 patterns• Occasional use of passive patterns
Complex Syntax: halax habayta ledaber ita‘(He) went home to-talk to her’tipes al ha-ec lexapes ta cfardéa‘(He) climbed (on) the-tree to-look-for the frog’
ORAL (“Frog Story”) NARRATIVESAges 3, 4, 5, 9, adults
• “Anchor tense” – evidence of narrative mode
• Tense-shifting – from local to global
• Background / Foreground distinctions: Past Tense ~ Benoni [Berman & Neeman, 1994]
(no Imperfective ~ Perfective)
• “Tense/Aspect shifting becomes discursively functional only once a dominant narrative tense is established in late preschool age, around 5 to 6 years” [Berman & Slobin, 1994: 601]
NARRATIVE SETTINGS (Written Fables)Sandbank, A. (2004) “Writing a narrative text:
A developmental and cross-linguistic study”
Hebrew original: štey pradot halxu ba-dérex ‘two mules went=walked on-the-way’
nos’ot masa al gaban ‘bear(ing):Fm,Pl (a) load on their backs’
Spanish original:Caminaban dos mulas
‘walked:Impfv, Pl two mules’ llevando su carga ‘carrying their load’
HEBREW STRATEGIES INRECONSTRUCTED SETTINGS
More stative than active verbs across age-groups relative to Spanish, e.g.,
• pa’am axat hayu štey pradot, hen halxu ba-ya’ar [Itay, 7;3]
‘once (there) were two mules, they walked in-the forest’
• sipurenu hu al štey pradot masa co’adotbe-mas’an [Ido, adult]
‘our tale it [-is] about two pack mules marching with their load’
ALTERNATION OF VERB h-l-x ‘go, walk’
Benoni: 1. štey pradot holxot ba-švil
‘Two mules go/are walking on the way’
Adverbs:
2. yom exad halxu štey pradot le-tiyul ‘One day went two mules for (a) walk’
Repetition:3. hem halxu ve halxu
‘They walked and walked’
VERB h-l-x ‘go, walk’ + REFLEXIVE DATIVE[thanks to Prof. Hava Shyldkrot]
Reflexive Dative: 4. štey pradot halxu lahen ‘Two mules walked to-them(selves)’ = s'en allaient
Reflexive Dative + Adverb:
5. halxu lahen štey pradot le’itan ‘’Walked to-them(selves) two mules at-leisure’
= s'en allaient lentement
Verb-Pattern Alternation: 6. štey pradot hithalxu lahen ba-derex
‘Two mules walked-to-fro to-them(selves) on-road’ = se promenaient
7. pa’am hilxu lahen štey pradot be-derex ha-melex‘Once walked-about to-them(selves) two mules on the royal road’ = s'en sont allées
RHETORICAL OPTIONS
• Alternative means of expression
• Non-grammaticized
• Hence non-obligatory
• Individual stylistic choice
• Maturely literate use of language
• Yields rich temporal texture
LATER LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT: PERSONAL-EXPERIENCE NARRATIVES Ages 9, 13, 17, adults [Berman & Nir-Sagiv, 2004]
“From Dichotomy to Divergence”
GradePast Present Other:
Irrealis,Nonfin
4th
9-10 yrs70.7 19.7 9.5
7th
12-13 yrs79.4 14.6 6.0
11th
16-17 yrs54.2 35.2 10.6
Adults20s – 30s 53.1 28.0 18.9
LATER LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENTVerb-Pattern Alternations
• Age-related increase in variety of 7 patterns: Children’s texts confined mainly to 2 or 3,
adolescents -- wider variety, adults – most• Decrease with age in basic P1 pattern (activity
verbs, transitive and intransitive), markedly in narratives and among adults
• Concomitant increase in use of two typically intransitive (change-of-state, middle voice) patterns: children – under 10%, adolescents -- 20%–25%, adults -- 1/3 of all verbs
• Reflects shift to more patient-oriented construal of events
• Effect of genre: intransitive patterns more in expository than narrative texts
LATER LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENTEXTENDED TEXTS: SUMMARY
[Berman 2008; Berman & Nir-Sagiv 2007; Reilly et al 2002]
Early Inter-Genre Distinctiveness • Narratives (Personal-experience):
Past tense, Perfective aspect
• Expository discussions:Extended Present + Irrealis (modals, future)
Subsequent ShiftsFrom temporal dichotomy to divergenceFrom agent to patient orientation From deontic to epistemic modality
NARRATIVE TEMPORALITY
• As in all domains, age-related variety of means
• Clearer distinction between “story-time” / “story-telling time”
• Setting and Coda as privileged discourse sites for background, generalizations
• Effect of genre – narrative / expository
• Effect of typology – Hebrew reliance on verb-pattern morphology
WRAP-UP
• Discourse context
• Typological imperatives
• Developmental route
DISCOURSE CONTEXT• Discourse-embedded use of language: beyond
the isolated sentence
• Parallel data-bases for cross-linguistic comparisons:
Hickmann, 2003; frog-story research, “Spencer” project, Sandbank’s fables
• Different (sub)genres ~ rhetorical modes Evaluation – personal-experience accounts
Setting and coda – in fiction, fables
Narration / description – encyclopedic texts
Expository discussion – propositional attitudes
IMPACT TARGET-LANGUAGE TYPOLOGY
[Berman, 1993; Berman & Neeman, 1994; Berman & Slobin,1994; Kupersmitt, 2006; Sandbank, 2004]
• Language-Specific Forms: Grammaticized T/M/A (English, Spanish)• Narrative Discourse Functions:
Foreground/ Background: Local / GlobalAgent-Patient OrientationIntroducing and Concluding Narratives
• Hebrew-Specific Strategies: Tense alternations -- Present vs Past Valency alternations --Verb-Pattern Morphology
Verb Semantics (Aktionsarten) halxu ~ pas’u Copulas, existentials, stative predicates
TYPOLOGY• Children – like adults – make do with and
increasingly exploit the repertoire of expressive devices available in their language
• Where distinctions not grammatically marked, hence less accessible, alternative options may be sought elsewhere, as in verb semantics (stative ~ dynamic) or voice and valency alternations
• In latter case, not grammatical imperative but rhetorical options, reflecting expressive richness in temporality as in other domains (e.g., clause-combining)
DEVELOPMENT• From “child speaker” to “native speaker”
to “proficient speaker-writer” [Slobin, 1990, 2004]
• Early emergence of different forms for marking grammatical T/M/A
• Increased bi-directional expansion of form/function relations
• Increasing variety and flexibility in using linguistic forms for “textual temporality”
• Later, school-age language: long developmental route “from emergence to mastery” [Berman, 2004]