1 / 50

Transparency in language

Transparency in language. Kees Hengeveld Sterre Leufkens. Introduction. Scarcity of transparent languages versus learnability of transparent languages Is there any systematicity in the degrees if transparency that languages display?

badu
Download Presentation

Transparency in language

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. Transparency in language Kees Hengeveld Sterre Leufkens

  2. Introduction • Scarcity of transparent languages versus learnability of transparent languages • Is there any systematicity in the degrees if transparency that languages display? • Which types of features are more likely to be transparent? • Can languages be ranked systematically in terms of their degree of transparency and, hence, learnability?

  3. Contents 1. Transparency 2. Transparency and FDG 3. Transparent and non-transparent features 4. The sample 5. The data 6. Results 7. Conclusions

  4. 1. Transparency

  5. Transparency Turkish el-ler-im-de hand-PL-1.SG.POSS-LOC ‘in my hands’ Mastered before the age of two

  6. Transparency Dutch de bal DEF.COMM ball(COMM) het paard DEF.NEUT horse(NEUT) Not completely mastered at the age of seven

  7. Transparency: overgeneralization Dutch ikkoop-te < ikkocht I buy-PST.SG I buy.PST.SG “I buyed” ‘I bought’ Turkish overgeneralization impossible

  8. Transparency ≠ simplicity Turkish Koş-uş-tur-ul-a-ma-dı-y-sa-lar. run-RECIPR-CAUS-PASS-ABIL-NEG-PST.VIS-y-COND-PL ‘If they haven’t been made available for our service.’ Dutch verbal system with tense, number, person

  9. 2. Transparency and FDG

  10. Interactions between levels Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level Phonological Level

  11. Relations between Levels Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level Phonological Level

  12. Relations between Levels Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level Phonological Level

  13. Relations between Levels Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level Phonological Level

  14. Relations within Levels Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level: Form X → Form Y Phonological Level

  15. Relations within Levels Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level Phonological Level: Form X → Form Y

  16. Relations between and within Levels Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level: Form X → Form Y Phonological Level: Form X → Form Y

  17. 3. (Non-)transparent features

  18. Interpersonal - Representational Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level Phonological Level

  19. Apposition One Interpersonal unit maps onto more than one representational unit Peter, my brother, is ill.

  20. Interpersonal/Representational - Morphosyntactic Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level Phonological Level

  21. Grammatical relations Pragmatic/semantic alignment system Acehnese Lȏn teungöh=lȏn=jak. 1 M=1.A=go ‘I am going.’ Gopnyan galak=geuh that. 3.POL happy=3.POL.U very ‘He is very happy.’

  22. Discontinuity Pragmatic/semantic units map onto a single morphosyntactic unit English The guy who is going to fix my lock has arrived. The guy has arrived who is going to fix my lock.

  23. Stem alternation Wambon en- ande- na- eat(basic stem) eat(PAST/FUT/IMP.PL stem) eat(IMP.SG stem) Spanish cab-erquepo *cabo fit-INF I.fitI.fit

  24. Interpersonal/Representational/Morphosyntactic - Phonological Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level Phonological Level

  25. Phonological and morphosyntactic phrasing do not run parallel Acehnese [Ureueng='nyan] [ka=geu=jak='woe] [ba'roe] person=DEM INCH=3=go=return yesterday ‘That person returned yesterday.’ Dutch [Ik] [wou] [dat [hij] [kwam]]. ['kʋɑu] ['dɑti] ['kʋɑm] I want.PST COMP he come.PST ‘I wish he would come.’

  26. Phonological weight influences morphosyntactic placement Spanish Lo=ví. 3.SG.ACC=see.PRF.PST.IND.3.SG ‘I saw him.’ Ví a tu vecino. see.PRF.PST.IND.3.SG OBJ 2.SG.POSS neighbour ‘I saw you neighbour.’

  27. Within the Morphosyntactic Level Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level: Form X → Form Y Phonological Level

  28. Expletive elements Tagalog Marami-ngpera. lot-LNK money ‘There is a lot of money.’ “A lot of money”

  29. Grammatical gender Spanish casa ‘house’ is arbitrarily assigned to the class of feminine nouns árbol ‘tree’ is arbitrarily assigned to the class of masculine nouns

  30. Agreement Spanish la-ø casa-ø viej-a-ø DEF.F-SG house(F)-SG old-F-SG ‘the old house’ el árbol-ø viej-o-ø DEF.M.SG tree(M)-SG old-M-SG ‘the old tree’

  31. Within the phonological level Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level Phonological Level: Form X → Form Y

  32. Phonological adaptations Quechua nasal assimilation: tayta-n=paq ‘father-3.POSS=PURP’ ‘for his father’ -> taytampaq Spanish diphtongization: dormir ‘sleep’ duerme ‘sleeps’ Dutch degemination: pakkans ‘chance to be caught’ -> pakans Turkish vowel harmony: gel-miș ‘come-RES’ gör-müș ‘see-RES’

  33. 4. The sample

  34. 5. The data

  35. The data (unsorted)

  36. 6. Results

  37. The data (sorted)

  38. The transparency hierarchy Apposition/Phonological adaptations ⊂ Grammatical relations ⊂ Morphologically based stem alternation ⊂ Phonological weight influences morphosyntactic placement ⊂ Discontinuous constituents ⊂ Grammatical agreement (phrasal) ⊂ Grammatical agreement (clausal) ⊂ Grammatical gender/Nominal expletives

  39. The data (sorted)

  40. Counterexample: Bininj Gun-Wok discontinuity Ngakngakbogenga-rrabu-gurrme grey-crowned.babbler two 3-egg-lay.NPST ‘Grey-crowned babblers lay two eggs.’

  41. Counterexample: Sri Lanka Malay displacement Se=ppeoorangthuuvapadaanà-biilang 1.SG=POSS man old PL PST-say kithangpada Malaysia=dering 1.PL PL Malaysia=ABL anà-dhaathangkatha. PST-come QUOT ‘My elders said that we had come from Malaysia.’

  42. Tranparent and non-transparent features

  43. Highly non-transparent features Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level: Form X → Form Y Phonological Level 44

  44. Weakly non-transparent features Interpersonal Level Representational Level Morphosyntactic Level Phonological Level: Form X → Form Y 45

  45. Transparentand non-transparentlanguages

  46. 7. Conclusions

  47. Conclusions • The notion of transparency is a useful parameter in systematically characterizing languages as to the overall design of their grammars. • The transparencyhierarchycaptures the differencesbetweenlanguages as totheirdegrees of transparency.

  48. Conclusions • Purelymorphosyntacticallymotivated non-transparent features are the onesthatlanguages are most resistent to. • Giventhattransparentstructures are easiertolearn, the transparencyhierarchyalsopredictsthatthere are differences in the degrees of learnability of languages.

  49. thispresentation is accessible at www.keeshengeveld.nl

More Related