ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

1

Monique LambertChristiane von StutterheimMary CarrollMonique Flecken

University of Heidelberg Université Paris VIII

Empirical approaches to aspect:Language systems and learner languages

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

2

Your analysis of the English present perfect is by far the best. You just don't use it properly.

Personal communication between Dan Slobin and Wolfgang Klein

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

3

The problemAspectual categories are extremely hard to acquire in a second language. Even at very advanced stages we find on the side of the learner- inconsistent usage- absence of native-like intuitions

Aspect hypothesis for L2 acquisition:Progressive aspect is related to inherent atelicity

on the side of the native speaker- no explicit knowledge

What exactly is this knowledge?

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

4

The progressive: a point in question

Context: what is Peter doing in the kitchen?.• Peter is baking a cake• Peter ist dabei einen Kuchen zu machen.• Piet is een coekje aan het maken.• Pierre est en train de faire un gâteau.• Pietro sta facendo una tortaContext : Can you see Peter over there ? Where is he going?• Peter is walking to the station.• ?Peter ist dabei zum Bahnhof zu gehen. (inchoative reading?)• ?Piet is naar de station aan het lopen.• *Pierre est en train d’aller à la gare.• Pietro sta andando a la stazione.

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

5

How do we know?

Bergljot Behrends (University of Oslo)

Abassia BouhaousNatascha SahonenkoBarbara SchmiedtováTakara BaumbachXingyu Zhu

Ginés CarpenaRenate DelucchiNaoko TomitaSilvia Natale

The multilingual research group

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

6

The state of research

We have legions of studies on temporal categories and we still cannot answer basic questions when learners want to understand and manage e.g. the English or Japanese aspectual system. If the semantic descriptions of tense/aspect-forms were as straightforward as suggested by many theoretical accounts then this should provide the basis for using these forms appropriately.

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

7

The question

In acquiring a second language we not only acquire new forms and new functions. We also have to acquire knowledge as to how grammatical categories are put to use.

In the case of aspect: what are the principles that a native speaker relies on when selecting a particular temporal perspective?

Very few studies have addressed this question crosslinguistically.

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

8

Question cont.

Theoretical accounts do not explain different constraints across languages in the use of one semantic operation (e.g progressiveness). They do not explain differences within one verb type (e.g. Vendler accomplishment / achievement) as being subjected to one aspectual operation.

They do not explain principles underlying optional marking.

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

9

Goals of the comparative study How can we describe the differences between languages

within what is described as one aspectual category in current theories?

How can we theoretically account for developing systems and the optionality of aspectual marking at a given stage?

How can we describe the principles of use of aspectual forms?

How and to what extent do second language learners discover structure and function of aspectual systems?

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

10

Empirical approach to language use: the basic idea

Speakers see the same real world scene, they are introduced to the verbal task under the same temporal perspective.This allows for a systematic variation of event features potentially relevant for temporal perspective taking and selection of aspectual marking.

(Elicitation instruction Say what is happening/what happens/happened has no impact.)

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

11

The levels of event construal

External world: the stimulus

perceptual filter selective attention

Conceptual representation

cognitive filter

information selection, perspective taking

Verbal representation

Empirical methods

eye trackingchronometry

chronometrymemoryverbal product

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

12

Scenes

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010Scenes

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

14

Scenes

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

15

Design of the studyvariables: language, situation type

Languages investigated:Adult speakers L1 (similar education, aged between 20 - 30) of:

Germanic (German, Dutch, Norwegian, English), Romance (French, Italian, Spanish), Slavic (Russian, Czech, Polish, Bulgarian), Arabic (Modern Standard, Algerian Arabic), Japanese, Chinese

Adult speakers L2 (matched for sociocultural background), (very) advanced:L1 English/Russian/Czech

GermanDutch

L2 GermanEnglish/Japanese/ItalianFrench

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

16

Design of the studyvariables: language, situation type

Situation types investigated:Motion events - with endpoint reached (somebody is walking to a house)- with endpoint not reached (somebody is walking on a road)

Causative action(somebody is knitting a scarf)

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

17

Type of Data

Language production audio-taped, transcribed (Speech onset time Eye tracking Memory performance)

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

18

Range of languages

Differences of aspectual systems with respect to the degree of grammaticalisation

emerging lexical onlyfully grammaticalized

e.g. English, Japanese, Russian

Italian, Dutch

German, NorwegianFrench(high individual variation)

L2 speakers

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

19

Hypothesis: Attractor factors for progressive

aspecttype of situation

Locomotion (spatial orientation) walk, causative action (with affected / effected object) paint a picture vs. build a model airplane, activity (swim, surf)

relevant features of situations +/- endpoint of situation bake a cake vs. walk on a lawn +/- endpoint reached a man walks into a house vs. a man

walks towards a house +/- homogeneity knitting a scarf vs. tidying up a roomMaterial: 40 /80 videoclips, critical items, control items,

presented in randomised order

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

20

Results: fully grammaticalised vs. lexical

Use of aspectual on-goingness marker in the given task across all situation types (present tense):

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

21

Developing systems: the role of transition points

Situations with a qualified resultant state (building a monument; moulding a vase; painting a picture; knitting a scarf) (20 speakers per language ;10 situations)

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

22

39,70% 37,30% 37,30%

12,20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Spanish Italian Dutch FrenchRate of occurrence of the progressive

Developing systems: the role of transition points

Situations without an inherent boundarysurfing, jogging, kicking a football, swimming; (20 speakers; 10 situations)

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

23

Developing systems: the role of transition pointsmotion events; figure underway; endpoint not reached

(20 speakers 10 situations)

42,00% 41,70%

0,00% 3,90%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Spanish Italian Dutch FrenchRate of occurrence of the progressive

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

24

Situation and aspect: general tendency

A progressive perspective is more likely to be selected in situations with an inherent transition point and a qualified resultant state, compared to those which do not show a temporal property of this kind.

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

25

Developing systems: the role of homogeneity

Situations with a qualified resultant state and homogeneous subevents(moulding a vase; knitting a scarf) (20 speakers per language ;5 situations)

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

26

Situation and aspectgeneral tendency

The main attractor factors for progressive aspect are situations with a qualified second state and a first state with a dynamic action and homogeneous subevents.The relevance of this type of situation for view point selection may lie in the fact that it delivers a measure for progression toward a qualified resultant state that can be expected to come about (the moulded vase, for example).

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

27

Summary of empirical findings Crosslinguistic patterns are rooted in a limited set of

temporal categories. Critical for PROG/IMPERF is the contrast of states and

with this some point in time (boundary, closure, transition point; homogenous, dynamic, durative, first state).

Major attractor/emerging systems: 2-state situations with change of quality resulting in a tangible second state

Locomotion implies specific constraints across languages.

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

28

Conclusion: Systems

The empirical result show the relevance of preferences in language use. The selection among options in perspective taking is not arbitrary but guided by deeply rooted principles mediated through grammar. These draw on universal notional categories (such as quality of entities, delimitation, temporal phase) to form language specific clusters of related temporal features. These clusters are conceptually dominant and provide a language specific basis for temporal perspective taking

principles of use

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

29

Implications for learning Aspect requires perspective taking.

Languages differ with respect to the options at a fine grained level.

At text level these options are constrained by principles of information organisation.

Learning problems

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

30

The acquisition of aspect in L2Learning task:

- forms- functions- principles of use, i.e. which context licenses/requires a

particular grammatical operation

Previous research:Studies in SSLA focus on earlier phases of the

acquisition of aspect and form-function relations.

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

31

Empirical study : very advanced L2 speakers

Same material as for the L1: Generally similar results as the L1 speakers for:

German –> EnglishItalian –> FrenchGerman –> Japanese

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

32

Empirical study : very advanced L2 speakers

Problems arise- at text level (language specific principles of

perspective taking cf. Tomita)- when speakers are distracted by

- time pressure- inappropriate perspective introduction

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

33

L1 German/French – L2 English text production

Use of progressive aspect in film renarrations• L1 Englishand he hears the water again but suddenly he’s pushed up into the air by one of these towers (completion)that comes up out of the groundand he’s up on top of this tower (state: it is now the case)and he’s looking around for the water (progressive; ongoing event)L1 German Englishso he ends up at the summit of the rocks and is just trying to look around to see what's happening

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010L1 German/French – L2

English text productioncombination of phasal segmentation with holistic perspectives

L1 German and falls downlike always he is never hurtand then he walks up to the waterand the water is dripping on a huge stone plate

L1 French he starts digging a holeeventually falls into it

and is covered with the sandhe is trying to get out of itbut he can’tand he falls

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010L1 German/French – L2

English text productionlack of anaphoric situation for events presented

under an ongoing perspectiveL1 German there is no water in him

he consists of sandthen he is still searching for water

L1 French and he starts diggingand the ground is suddenly openinghe suddenly watches little holes in the ground

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

36

Conclusion: L2 acquisition

In order to decide when the one or the other perspective has to be selected, world knowledge has to be combined with language concepts (like in the case of spatial prepositions).

For the L2 learner there are no formal indicators which help to discover the principles of use.

Under processing aspects L2 syntactic knowledge is less automated.

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

37

Bibliography

Binnick, Robert I. (2006). Aspect and Aspectuality. In Bas Aarts & April McMahon (Eds.), Handbook of English Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. S.244-68.

Klein, W. (1992). The present perfect puzzle, Language 68, 525-552.

Klein, Wolfgang (1994). Time in Language. London: Routledge.Tomita, Naoko (2008). Der Informationsaufbau in Erzählungen.

(Japanisch, Deutsch, Englisch). München: Iudicium.

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

38

Time argument structures (W. Klein)

Temporal structure of a 1-state situationThe situation in the external world is a person who sleeps Entity 1 person = e1-----------------|-------------------------|----------------------------

prestate course of activity post state not specifiedno spec. homogeneous

for e1 subintervals

Temporal structure of a 2-state situation with an unqualified second stateThe situation in the external world is a person who walks up to a houseEntity 1 person = e1, entity 2 house/goal e2 -----------------|-------------------------|----------------------------prestate course of activity goal reached, end of activity no spec. homogeneous no resultant state qualifiedfor e1, e2 subintervals only e1 at loc e2

e1 active

ICLC 6thFU Berlin, 30.9. – 2.10.2010

39

Time argument structures (W. Klein)Temporal structure of a 2-state situation with effected objectThe situation in the external world is a person who bakes a cake

Entity 1 person = e1, entity 2 cake = e2

-----------------|-------------------------|----------------------------prestate course of activity resultant stateno spec. not homogeneous

for e1, e2 subintervalse1 active e2 exits

e2 emerges no spec. for e1