Pragmatics l:L.7-25International Pragmatics Association

LEARNING TO THINK FOR SPEAKING: NATTVELANGUAGE, COGNITION, AND RHETORICAL STYLB

Dan I. Slobin

What does one learn when one acquires the grammar of a language? Most chi ld

language researchers would probably say that one learns systems of grammatical mor-

phology and synbactic constructions, as described in terms of the researcher's preferred

grammat ica l model . I t would be noted that grammat ica l forms re la te to semant ic ent i -

t ies and pragmatic functions, and, depending on the theory, various roles would be al lol-

ted to semant ics and pragmat ics in the learner 's const ruct ion o f the gran lmar .

Here I wish to propose that the chi ld acquires more than a system of grammatical

forms and semant ic /communicabive funct ions. In acqui r ing the grammar o f a par t icu lar

language, the ch i ld comes to adopt a par t icu lar f ramework for schemat iz ing erper ience.

That is to say, the grammabical system also expresses meanings. These meanings are of

a general sort, in contrast with the specif ic contents of lexical i tems. Grammatical

meanings apply across al l possible lexical contents, putt ing the specif ic confent of any

part icular sentence into a framework of bemporal and spatial relat ions, modali ty, voice,

i l locutionary force, and so forth.

Much recent work in the emerging f ield of cognit iue l inguist ics is concerned with the

conceptua l s ide o f grammar. [n an impor tant paper on the semant ics o f grammar, under

the t i t le o f "The re la t ion o f grammar to cogni t ion, " Leonard Ta lmy proposes that :

The grammat ica l spec i f ica t ions in a sentence. . . prov ide a conceptua l f rame-

work, or , imagis t ica l ly , a ske le ta l s t ructure or scaf fo ld ing, [or the conceptua l

maber ia l that is lex ica l ly spec i f ied.

Compar ing a number o f languages, Ta lmy conc ludes that , un iversa l ly , grammar expresses

a restr icted set of general notions that make up what he cal ls t t the basic schematic frame-

work for conceptua l organizat ion wi th in the cogni t ive domain o f language." Th is is a

f ramework for locat ing ob jects and events in space and t ime, l rom g iven perspect ive

poin ts , and wi th g iven force-dynamic contours o f events .

A lbhough languages exh ib i t great d ivers i ty wi th in these broad out l ines, Ta lmy has

succeeded in drawing out the cogni t ive un i ty thab under l ies cross l ingu is t ic d ivers i ty . H is

work points to a universal set of conceptual systems that are basic to human cognit ion,

and spec ia l ized for verba l express ion by means of grammat ica l dev ices. Here, however , I

w ish to focus on the d iuers i ty wi th in that un i ty , rabher than on the cognib ive un iversa ls .

Br ie f ly , I want to propose that a spec ia l k ind o f th ink ing is ca l led in to p lay, on- l ine, in

the process of speak ing in a par t icu lar language.

For a lmost two centur ies-go ing back to the work o f Wi lhe lm von Humboldt in bhe

1820s-anthropolog ica l ly -or iented l ingu is ts have asked whebher l ingu is t ic d ivers i ty impl ies

8 Dan I. Slobin

cogni t ive d ivers i ty . Von Humboldt , l i ke Benjamin Lee Whor f in our century ,upon language as the format ive ins t rument o f thought . Both von Humboldt andwere concerned wi th the re lab ion of language to wor ld-u ieu. In a character is t ic

looked

Whorfpassage

f rom von Humbo ld t , he s fa tes (1836 /1988 , p . 60 ) :

There res ides in every language a character is t ic wor ld-u iew. As the ind iv idua lsound s tands between man and the ob ject , so the ent i re language s teps inbetween h im and the nature that operates, both inward ly and outward ly , uponhim. Man l ives pr imar i ly w i th ob jecbs, [but ] he actua l ly does soexc lus ive ly as language presenfs bhem to h im.

And as who r f pu t i t i n 1940 (1956 , p .221 ) , i n t he sb ronges r r e rms :

Users o f markedly d i f le renb grammars are po inbed by the i r grammars bowardsdifferent Lypes of observations and dif ferent evaluations of external ly similaracts o f observabion, and hence are not equiva lent as observers but must ar r iveat somewhat d i f ferent v iew of the wor ld .

Such a doctr ine of l inguist ic determinism,, along with the facts oI l inguist ic relat iuity,impl ies that ch i ldren who learn d i f le rent languages end up wi th d i f ferent conceptua l s t ruc-tures.

Another tradit ion in anbhropological l inguist ics takes a less determinist ic approachin the face o[ l ingu is t ic d ivers i ty . Franz Boas, in h is 1911 inbroduct ion to the Handbookof American Indian Languages, catalogued a great diversity of obl igatory grammaticalcategories across languages. For example, he discussed the English sentence, The man issdcfr, and noted that in Siouan one would have to indicate, grammatical ly, whether theman is moving or at rest l in Kwakiut l one would have to indicate whether the man inquestion is visible or non-visible to the speaker, and near to speaker, hearer, or a thirdperson; whereas in Esk imo one would s imply say 'man s ick ' , w i th no ind icat ion o fdefiniteness, tense, visibi l i ty, or location. To remove Boas's examples from the realm ofbhe exot ic , note that in Spanish one has to ind icate whether the man is temporar i ly orchron ica l ly s ick ; that in many European languages one cannot ind icate def in i teness apar tfrom gender; and so on. What Boas made of such diversity, however, is dif ferent fromthe sugges t i ons o f von Humbo ld t and who r f ( l g l r / r g66 , pp . 3g -39 ) :

The few examples that I have given here i l lustrate that many of thecategories which we are incl ined to consider as essential may be absent inforeign languages, and that other categories may occur as substi tutes.

When we consider for a momenb what this implies, i t wi l l be recognizedthat in each language on ly a par t o f the complete concept that we have inmind is expressed, and that each language has a pecul iar tendency to selectthis or that aspect of the mental image which is conveyed by the expression ofthe thought .

While von Humboldt and Whorf held that concepts have no existence independentof language, Boas suggests that there is ar rcomplete concept , f rex is t ing in the mind in theform of a rrmental image." The obl igatory grammatical categories of each languageapparently sample from a universal form of menbal representation, independent of anypar t icu lar language. On th is v iew, the ch i ld 's task is to determine whichr raspects o f themenbal imagerr are rea l ized in the form of grammat ica l mark ing in the nat ive language.

Leaming to think for speaking

Was Boas r i gh t? Wha t wou ld a ' r comp le te concep tn o r ' tmen ta l imagen be l i ke?Consider the two pictures below. These conle from the middle of a picture storybookwibhout words. t We have g iven th is book to ch i ldren and adul ts in a number o flanguages, and I w i l l be rev iewing sorne o[ our resu l ts in deta i l . For now, jusL look a t thetwo p ic tures. They present a pa i r o f events that you can unders tand immediate ly , prob-ab ly wibhouf ta lk ing to yourse l f a t a l l : someth ing happens to the boy and somebhinghappens to the dog; an owl and some bees are involved; the location is among brees.

t^,'a.,1,,,o'<al

I.

,t.

{S \(--(lr, L

l i . ' . t

4:xt

t<, i/-,

Luti'

.u):

rv,,l:

I r"(\

- - r From_Frog,_where are you? by Mercer Mayer . Copyr ight ,e , 1969 by MercerY"yg.. Reproduced by permission of the publisher,

- OLt Books foi Young

Readers.

10 Dan I. Slobin

Examine Lhe evenbs o f t he second p i c tu re . Wha t g rammat i ca l ca tego r i es a re imp l i c i t ?

Consider two languages of the cross l ingu is t ic s tudy that I w i l l be repor t ing here, Engl ishand Spanish. [ f you speak Engl ish, i t w i l l be ev idenb to you that the act iv i ty o f the dog\s durat iue, or extended in b ime, in compar ison wi th the acr iv i ty o f the boy. In narra f ivemode, you might say: t tThe boy fe l l f rom the t ree and bhe dog utas running away f romthe bees. f ' Engl ish marks progress iue aspect on the verb, and i t seems thab rh is aspect

co r responds t o a r r obv ious t empora l componen t o f t he ' r co rnp lebe concepb t ro r f rmen ta l

image." I f you speak Spanish, you, too, w i l l recognize the durat iv iby o f runn ing, because

Spanish a lso has progress ive aspect , as wel l as imper fecb ive aspect . Bub you might a lsonote that the fa l l ing o f the boy is punctua l or comple led, s ince your language cont rastsper fect ive wi th imper fect ive aspect . However , what i f you speak a language that has nogrammat ica l mark ing of per fect ive/ imper fect ive or o f progress ive, such as German, orHebrew-to p ick two more languages f rom our cross l ingu is t ic s tudy based on these p ic-

tures. Boas would presumably have suggested thab you are aware of the d i f ferences in

ternpora l contour between fa l l ing and running, but s imply have no need to mark themgrammat ica l ly in your language.

So far so good-but le t us probe the second p icbure a b i t fur ther . Cons ider bhe owlas an observer . In an Engl ish narra t ive we might say: I 'The owl saw fhat the boy fe l l . r l

Or : f f The owl saw that the dog was running. " The d is t inc t ion between fe l l and was run-n ing, I have suggested, is c lear ly i l inn the p ic ture. But whab about the ou l 's see ing?

Note that , in both cases, in Engl ish we say ' rThe owl sau) . t t But see ing musf have

different temporal contours boo. And indeed, in Spanish the seeing is perfect ive in the

first instance, imperfecbive in the second:

(1r ) E l b .uho u io que e l n ino se cay6. the owl saw-PFV that the boy REFL fe l l -PFV [5yrs . l

( l b ) E I buho ue ia que e l pe r ro co r r i a . t he ow l saw- IPFV tha t t he dog ran - IPFV [5 y r s . ]

Th is wi l l be ev ident to Spanish-speak ing readers , as i t is to Spanish-speak ing preschoolers

in our s tudy- in lac t , these two sentences come f rom a s tory to ld by a 5-year-o ld . But do

Engl ish speakers sense thaL seeing can be per fect ive or imper fect ive? Is th is parb o f ourr rmenta l image" or "complet ,e concept r r? I ra ther doubt i t .

Let me take you once s tep fur ther , th is t in re in to a less fami l ia r l ingu isb ic ter ra in .

Suppose you have seen on ly bhe second p ic ture, and have been asked bo descr ibe i t as apast event . Descr ipb ions in Engl ish and Spanish would probably be bhe same as in the

s i tuat ion in which both p ic tures are presented. However , th is is not the case in

Turk ish-another language in our sample because in thab language you are ob l iged to

choose between two past - tense in f lec t ions, one for wi tnessed and one for non-wi tnessed

events . I f the second p ic ture were to be presented a lone, we would wi tness the dog run-ning, but we could only infer thaf bhe boy fel l at an earl ier point in t ime. As a conse-quence, d i f ferent past tenses would appear on the two verbs:

(2^) Kopek kag- iyor -du. dog was-running-WITNESSED.PAST

(2b) Qocuk d i iE mi ie . boy fe I I -NONWITNESSED.PAST

Turk ish preschoolers are carefu l to make such d is t inc t ions. In Engl ish one could say, o f

course, someth ing l ike : " l t seems that the boy fe l l ' r or t t Apparent ly Lhe boy fe l l . " We do

have avai lable optional lexical means for expressing notions bhab l ie outside of the set of

ob l igatory grammat ica l d isb inct ions in a language. But I th ink we would be hard-pressed

Leaming to think for speaking L1

to c la im that everybhing about th is p ic ture that cou ld be grammat ica l ly encoded in a l l o fthe languages of the wor ld is impl ic i t ly present when we look at the p icbure.

The Turk ish ev ident ia l in f lec t ions a lso demonst rabe that much of grammar does notdeal w i th menta l images or perce ivab le rea l i ty a t a l l . Rather , much of grammar marksd is t inc t ions that are re levant to d iscourse. When I speak Turk ish, I must qual i fy mypast - tense s ta tements by te l l ing you someth ing about bhe source of my ev idence. Furbh-ermore, when I present a s i tuat ion to you \n any language, I take a grammat ic ized po in tof uieu. For example, in English I might say, rrThe bees are chasing the dogil or rtThe

dog is being chased by bhe bees. 'r Neibher of bhese viewpoints- act ive or passive-is in thepercept. Active and passive constructions serve to organize the f low of information inconnected discourse. Thus, even within a single language, grammar provides a set ofoptions for schemabizing experience for bhe purposes of verbal expression. Any utteranceis mul t ip ly determined by what I have seen or exper ienced, my communicat ive purpose intel l ing you about i t , and the dist inct ions that are embodied in my grammar.

How, then, does the chi ld know what al l of these grammatical forms are about?Melissa Bowerman (1989) has suggested thab bhe grammar of the native language guidesthe chi ld in discovering the notions that are relevant for speaking. Leonard Talmy (1987)has suggested that these notions are drawn from a l imited set of cognit ive schematiza-t ions of experience, presumably innabe. Steven Pinker (1989) has suggesbed that chi ldrenknow in advance what aspects of experience are l ikely to be grammaticized (the "Gram-matical ly Relevant Subsystemt'), and that they use such knowledge to rtbootstraprt them-selves into syntax. I bhink that al l of these suggestions are in the r ight direct ion, yet weare very far from understanding how English-speaking chi ldren come to notice thatevents are in progress, how Turkish-speaking chi ldren come to notice that speakers com-municate the source of bheir evidence, and so forth.

I do not propose bo solve bhis problem here. Having raised i t , I wish bo pub ib in thebackground, and s imply asser t that each language t ra ins the ch i ld to a t tend to a par t icu-lar set o f d is t inc t ions in the course of the acquis i t ion o f grammar. The purpose of theresearch I w i l l p resent to you here is to demonsbrabe that , by age 3 or 4 , ch i ldren whohave learned dif ferent native languages provide cri t ical ly dif ferent descript ions of the pic-tures in our s torybook.

In making th is c la im, I w ish to present a new vers ion of the von Humboldt -Whor fposit ion on l inguist ic relat ivi ty and deferminism. Recall that those theorists were con-cerned to relate language Lo world-uiew. The classic posit ion thus seeks bo relate twostat ic ent ib ies : language and thought . Language is the to ta l i ty o f s t ructures descr ibed byI ingu is ts . But what is " thought t ror r rwor ld-v iew"? The hypobhes is has a lways run in tot rouble in a t tempts to defermine the menta l s t ructures that under l ie percept ion, reason-ing, and habi tua l behav ior -as measured outs ide of bhe contexts o f verba l behav ior . Ihave a more cautious, but more manageable formulation-one that seeks to relabe twodynamic ent ib ies : ' r th ink ing" and t 'speak ing. r ' We wi l l p robably never succeed in demon-sbrating bhe effects of grammar on world-view or nonl inguist ic behavior. But there is aspec ia l k ind o f th ink ing that is in t imate ly t ied to language-namely , the th ink ing that iscarr ied out, on-l ine, in Lhe process of speaking. I bel ieve that this is the sort of relat ionthat Boas had in mind when he wrote about select ing aspects of mental images bhat are"conveyed by the erpress ion of the thought . "

72 Dan I. Slobin

You may have not iced thab I have not yet ment ioned the name of Edward Sapi r ,

which usual ly appears in re ferences to bhe ' rWhor f -Sapi r hypofhes is . " Sapi r somet imes

took the s t rong v iew assoc ia ted wi th Whor f , bub somet imes he suggested the more cau-

t ious vers ion that gu ides my own research. For ex i rmple, in an ear ly formulat ion, in

L924, Sapi r , l i ke Boas, po in ted to the ro le o f language in the e tpress ion of thought (1958,

p . 1 5 2 ) :

[The forms of each language] estab l ish a def in i te re la t iona l fee l ing or a t t i tude

towards a l l poss ib le contents o f express ion and, through them, towards a l l pos-

s ib le contents o f exper ience, in so far , o f course, as erper ience is capable o f

erpress ion in l ingu is t ic terms- [emphasis added -DIS]

In my own formulat ion: The express ion of exper ience in l ingu is t ic terms consbi tu tes

" th ink ing for speak ing"-a spec ia l form of thoughb that is mobi l ized for communicat ion.

Whatever e f fecbs grammar may or may not have outs ide of the act o f speak ing, the sor t

o f menta l ac t iv i ty that goes on whi le formulat ing u t terances is not t r iv ia l or obv ious, and

deserves our a t fent ion. We encounter the contents o f the mind in a spec ia l way when

they are be ing accessed for use. That is , the act iv i ty o f th ink ing takes on a par t icu lar

qual i ty when i t is employed in the act iv iby o f speak ing. In the evanescent t ime l rame of

const ruct ing u t terances in d iscourse one f i ts one 's thoughts in to ava i lab le I ingu is t ic

f rames. "Th ink ing for speak ingrr invo lves p ick ing those character is t ics o f ob jects and

events that (a) f i t some conceptual izat ion of the event, and (b) are readi ly encodable in

the language. I propose that , in acqui r ing a nat iue language, the ch i ld learns par t icu lar

uays of thinking lor speaking.

How can this proposal be investigated? One way is to compare Lhe ways in which

speakers of dif ferent languages depict the same events in words. This approach is ' wel l

known bo s tudents o f t rans la t ion, and there is a large and fasc inat ing l i te ra ture showing

that t rans la t ions o f the same text cannot he lp but add or remove nuances in accord wi th

the character is t ics o f the g iven language. In formal ly , we have a l ready encountered these

issues in cons ider ing var ious descr ip t ions o f the two p ic tures in severa l languages, and in

Boas 's Amer ican Ind ian brans la t ions o f The man is s ick . We cannot ask monol ingual

ch i ldren to car ry out t rans la t ions o f a tex t , but we can ask ch i ldren in d i f ferent counbr ies

to te l l s tor ies bo the same p ic tures, and see i f the i r s tor ies d i f fer cons is tent ly , depending

on the language that they are speaking. This is the method we have been using in Berke-

ley , in co l laborat ion wi th researchers in a number o f count r ies , us ing fhe p ic ture s tory-

book, Frog, where are you? (Mayer , 1969) . For the purposes of my present argument , I

wi l l compare chi ldren's descript ions of several scenes in several languages, focusing on

express ions of bempora l and spat ia l re la t ions. Our f ind ings suggest thab preschoolers do,

indeed, g ive ev idence of language-spec i f ic pat terns o f th ink ing for speak ing, and that such

pat terns have impl icat ions for fhe development o f rhetor ica l s ty le in each of the

languages.

The s tudy was p lanned together wi th Dr . Ruth Berman of Te l -Av iv Univers i ty in

Israel. Table 1 l ists the various researchers and languages involved. Here I wi l l make

only a few comparisons of four of these languages, in several episodes from stories told by

preschoolers and 9-year-o lds. I w i l l be repor t ing on f ind ings f rom Engl ish, German,

Hebrew, and Spanish.

Leaming to think for speaking

Table I

CROSSL INGUIST IC STUDY OF ' NARRATIVE DEVELOPMENT

( l0- 12 sub jec ts /sample)

Engl ish: ages 3, 4 , 5 , 9 , adu l t (L isa Das inger , V i rg in ia Marchman,

Tanya Renner , Cec i le Toupin : Univers i ty o f Cal i forn ia , Berke ley)

German: ages 3, 5 , 9 , adu l t (Michael Bamberg: Clark Univers i ty ;

Chr is t iane von Stutberhe im, Univers i t i t He ide lberg)

Heb rew : ages 3 , 4 , 5 , 7 ,9 , 11 , adu l t (Ru th Be rman : Te l -Av i v Un i ve rs i t y )

Ice landic : ages 3, 4 , 5 , 9 , adu l t (Hrafnh i ldur Ragnarsdot t i r , Reyk jav ik)

Japanese: ages 3, 4 , 5 ,7 , 9 , adu l t (Ke iko Nakamura: Univers i ty o f

Cali fornia, Berkeley)

Mandar in : ages 3, 4 , 5 , 7 , 9 , adu lb (Guo J iansheng: Univers i ty o f

Cali fornia, Berkeley)

Russ ian: ages 4, 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10, adul t (Yana Ani lov ich: Univers iby

of Cal i forn ia , Berke ley)

Spanish: ages 3, 4 , 6 , 7 ,9 , adu l t (Eugenia Sebast idn: Univers idad

Autdnoma, Madr id ; Aura Bocaz (Chi le , Argent ina) : Univers idad

de Chi le , Sant iago)

Turk ish: ages 3, 4 , 5 , 7 , 9 , adu l t (Ayhan Aksu-Kog: Bo[az ig i

Univers i tes i , Is tanbul ; Ay l in K i in tay, Univers i ty o f Cal i forn ia ,

Berkeley)

First let me raise the issue of rhetorical style. When you have read many of these

stories in various languages, you begin to get a feel ing for typical characterist ics of style

in each language. This can be made clear even by comparing translat ions inbo English. I

wi l l focus on the Lwo pictures bhat we have already examined, along with the seven fol-

lowing pictures in bhe Appendix. Afber the boy fal ls from bhe tree, he accidental ly gets

entangled in the anblers of a deer, with bhe result that the boy and dog fal l inbo some

water . The lwo fo l lowing segment ,s are representat ive o f 5-year-o ld narra t ives. One is in

Engl ish, and the other is an Engl ish t rans la t ion o f a Spanish s tory , where I have used the

progress ive to ind icate the imper fect ive, which has no Engl ish equiva lent , in order to

render the vers ion su i tab le in Engl ish:

(3a) F i rs t Vers ion: The boy looked in a ho le in the t ree. An owl came out that threw

the boy. And the dog, the bees were chas ing h im. The boy h id behind a rock and

the owl f lew away. A deer that was behind the boy when he c l imbed. . . And he

s l ipped on top of the- the deer , whi le the deer was running. The dog went f i rs t . He

threw them down where there was a r iver . Then he fe l l seabed.

(3b) Second vers ion: And the boy looked in the bree. And then the boy fe l l out , and

the owl was f lying, and the dog was being chased by the bees. And then the boy gol

up on some rocks, and bhe owl f lew away. And the boy was cal l ing for his frog on

bhe rocks. And a deer . . . the boy gob caughb on the deer 's anblers . And then bhe

deer car r ied h im over a c l i f f and threw h im over the c l i f f in to a pond. And the boy

and the dog fe l l , and they sp lashed in some water .

We can be reasonably sure bhab the menta l images, and unders tanding of the events , are

roughly the same for these two ch i ldren. Yet , to the pract iced eye, i t is ev ident that the

13

74 Dan L Slobin

f i rs t vers ion is Spanish and the second Engl ish. What are some of the sa l ient character is -

t ics of these two languages, as ref lected in our narrat, ives?2

The two vers ions are s imi lar in the i r t reatment ,s o f nrovemenb bhrough t ime. Bobhnarrat ives mark some events as be ing in progress. [n the f i rs t , compare: threut vs . wererunning; in the second, fe l l vs . was f l .y ing. (Recal l that these past progress ives in thet rans la t ions were rea l ly past imper fect ives in the Spanish or ig ina l . ) Engl ish and Spanishboth have aspectua l mark ing of durab iv i ty , and 5-year-o lds note th is d is t inc t ion. As wewi l l see la ter , th is feature is lack ing in German and Hebrew narra t ives.

The two vers ions d i f fer , however , in the i r t reatmenb of locabion and movementthrough space. In the f i rs t vers ion, t ra jec tor ies are not h igh ly e laborated threw the boy,s l ipped on top of the deer , threw down. The second vers ion depic ts more deta i led t ra jec-tories: fel l out, carr ied over a cl i f f , thre.u ouer the cl i f f into a pond, splashed in some

water . By conbrast , the f i rs t vers ion has re lab ive c lauses that depic t s ta t ic locat ive

conf igurat ions, which are lack ing in bhe second: a deer that was behind the boy, wherethere was a r iuer . There is a lso an encoding of the s ta t ic end po in t o f the fa l l : fe l lsea ted .

Note also that while the second version has no relat ive clauses, i t has passive con-s t ruct ions, was be ing chased, got caught .

These cues are suff icient to identi fy the f irst version as Spanish and the second as

English. The l inguist ic characterist ics of these two narrat ive segments are typical of ourpreschool narrat ives in bhe two languages. In brief, where English al lows for elaboratedtrajectories of motion, Spanish has simple verbs of change of location, supplemenLed by

more elaborated descript ions of stat ic locations of objects. And with regard to the syn-

tax of non-canonical clauses, Spanish preschoolers make frequent use of.relat ive clauses,and English-speaking preschoolers make frequent use of passives-but for dif ferent pur-poses, of course. Spanish relat ive clauses f i l l in locative and circumstantial detai l in cases

where Engl ish may not have need for such deta i l , as I w i l l d iscuss la ter wi th some addi -

t ional examples. English passives perform the same narrat ive function as Spanish word-order var ia t ion. I have g iven a le f t d is locat ion in the Spanish vers ion: The dog, the bees

were chas ing h im. Th is was rea l ly a s tandard ob ject - f ronf ing word order in Spanish:

(4) Le perseguian a l per ro las au ispas. CLITIC.PRO chased OBJECT+the dog the bees

[5 yrs . ]

Th is cor responds in funct ion to bhe Engl ish pass ive, The dog was be ing chased by the

bees. Preschoolers in both languages can manipu la te word order to top ica l ize a pat ient ,

although the construction types dif fer.

I want to argue fhat these systemat ic cont rasts between Spanish and Engl ish re f lec tdif ferent patterns of thinking for speaking-dif ferent on-l ine organization of the f low ofin format ion and af tent ion to the par t icu lar deta i ls thab rece ive l ingu is t ic express ion.

These pat terns ho ld up in quant i ta t ive analys is o f our narra t ives, and show st r ik ing

2 The or ig ina l Spanish of the f i rs t vers ion is as fo l lows: E l n ino mi r6 por unagujero del drbol. Sal i6 un loro que le t iro al nino. Y le persegu{an al perro lasauispas. E l n i io se escondi6 det rds de una p iedra y se uo l6 e l buho. (Jn c ieruoque estaba det rds a l n ino como se subi6 . . . Y se t ropezo enc ima de la- de l c ieruo,mient ras e l c ierao corr [a . Pr imero iba e l per ro . Le t i raron abajo en donde unr io . Luego se cay6 sentado.

Leaming to think for speaking

conbrasts with languages of dif ferenb types.

Consider , aga in , the scene in which the boy fa l ls f rom the t ree and the bees chase

the dog. Here we have two s imul taneous evenbs, one PUNCTUAL, COMPLETED and

the ofher NON-PUNCTUAL, DURATIVE. As we have scene, Engl ish a l lows for an

opposit ion between an aspectual ly neutral verb form and a progressive, with the neutral

form taking on a default punctual value, given bhe lexical meaning of the verb fal l . The

descr ipb ion in our 5-year-o ld example is typ ica l :

( 5 ) The bog f e l l ou t . . . and t he dog was be ing chased by t he bees . [ 5 y r s . ]

The ear l ies t aspectua l cont rast in our data for th is scene is g iven by a ch i ld o f 3 ;8 :

(6) F/e 's [dog] running through there, and he [boy] fe l l o f . [3 ;8 yrs . ]

In Spanish, the prefer red vers ion is to mark the punctua l i ty o f fa l l ing by use of aperfecbive verb form, contrasting i t ei ther wibh an imperfective or a gerundive expression,

as in the fol lowing 5-year-old examples:

(7" ) Se eay6 e l n ino y le perseguian a l per ro las au ispas. 'The boy fe l l -PFV and the

bees chased- IPFV the dog. ' [5 yrs . ]

(7b) ^9e czy6 . . . y e l per ro sa l i6 cor r iendo. 'He fe l l -PFV . . . and the dog came-out -

PFV running. ' [5 yrs . ]

As in Bnglish, bhis aspectual contrasb is marked

Our earl iest Spanish example comes from a chi ld

(8) .9e cay5. . . . E l per ro estd cor r iendo. 'He

vrs . l

Spanish, by providing a perfect ive, in addit ion to imperfective and progressive, thus

makes i t possible to grammatical ly mark both poles of the durative-nondurative dist inc-t ion, whereas the Bnglish progressive provides expl icib marking only of the durative pole.

German and Hebrew lack d is t inc t ive mark ing o[ e i ther po le o f the aspectua l con-

t rast . Hebrew has no grammabic ized aspect a t a l l . Verbs are s imply in f lec ted for past ,

present , or fu ture bense. German has a s imple past and a per fecb. Nei ther language hasgrammat ica l mark ing of e i ther progress ive or imper fect ive. A l though German- and

Hebrew-speakers must be aware, in some nonl ingu is t ic sense, thab the tempora l conbours

o[ the two evenbs d i f fer , they genera l ly do not d is t ingu ish bhem grammat ica l ly , us ing the

same tense for both verbs. The fol lowing examples from 5-year-olds are typical:

(9) German: Der Junge f6 l l t uom Baum runter . . . und d ie B ienen gehen h in ter dem

Hund her . 'The boy fa l ls down f rom the t ree . . . and the bees go af ter the dog. ' [5yrs . ]

(10) Hebrew: Hu nafa l ue hakeleu barax. 'He fe l l and the dog ran-away. ' [5 yrs . ]

I have g iven examples f rom 5-year-o lds, but i t i s impor tant to note that the

language-specif ic patterns hold across al l ages, from 3 to 9, and adults. In German and

Hebrew the tendency is to maintain the same tense-aspect form for both clauses, while in

Spanish and English the bendency is bo dif ferentiabe the bwo. This trend is summarized

numer ica l ly in Table 2 .

15

by the youngest chi ldren in our sample.

o f 3 ;4 :

fe l l -PFV. . . . The dog is running. ' [ f ;+

t6 Dan I. Slobin

Tab le 2

PERCENTAGF] OF NARRATORS USING SAMF] TF]NSE/ASPECT FORMF O R ' F A L L ' A N D ' R [ , N ' C L A U S B S I N S C E N E 1

Preschoo l ( 3 -5 ) Schoo l ( 9 )

Hebrew

German

Eng l i sh

Span i sh

7 l54

2623

r0080

2 2r8

787 l

Adu l t

637 8

3 30

OVERALL

q'7L '

2 l

Consider bhese f igures in the l ighb of th ink ing for speak ing. I f the f igures for

Hebrew and German were un i formly L007a, and for Engl ish and Spanish 07o, we couldonly conc lude that speakers s t r ic t ly adhere to the formal cont rasts prov ided by the i rlanguage, and i t would not be poss ib le to separate th ink ing f rom speak ing. But bhe dev i -a t ions f rom these ext remes ind icate that o ther opt ions are poss ib le .

Some Hebrew speakers t ry to cont rast bhe two events by present ing the f i rs t in thepast tense and the second in bhe present , thereby recru i t ing a tense d i f ference to mark theaspectua l con l rast COMPLETED-ONGOING. For example:

(11) Hebrew: Hayeled nafa l . . . ue hakeleu boreax. 'The boy fe l l . . . and the dog runs-

away. ' [5 yrs . ]

Note that th is opt ion is used about 707o of the t ime by preschoolers and adul t r , *h i l "school -age ch i ldren (9-year-o lds) fo l low the language most tenac ious ly in not a t tempt ingany aspectua l d is t inc t ion. ( l might ment ion, in pass ing, that 9-year-o ld s tor ies , acrosslanguages, tend to be the most s tereotyped and cons is tent wi th nat ive language pat terns.

Th is may wel l be an ef fec t o f school ing. )

German presents a s imi lar p ic ture to Hebrew. There are sor le a t tempts to mark the

two verbs d i f ferent ly , espec ia l ly in preschool nar rab ives. The f i rs t evenb is somet imes put

in the per fect , thereby c los ing i t o f f as a resu l tant s ta te wi th regard bo bhe second evenbin bhe present tense. For example:

(12) German: Der is t uom Baum runtergefa l len und der Hund l iu f t schnel l weg. 'He

has fa l len down l rom the t ree and the dog runs away qu ick ly . ' [5 yrs . ]

I t is in terest ing that fhe bendency in German is to mark bhe f i rs t evenb as completed,ra ther than to e laborate the second as ongoing. Only two narra tors in our to ta l sampleof 48 made any at lempb bo mark the second event as prot racted in f ime:

(13a )German : E r r ann te schne l l e r und imrne r schne l l e r . 'He ran l as te r and eve r f as te r . '

[ 9 y r s . ]

( 13b )German : De r Hund renn t r enn t r e .nn t . ' The dog runs runs runs . ' [ adu l t ]

ln { 'ac t , bhroughout the narra t ives, i t i s genera l ly the case that when German speak-ers choose bo take an aspectua l perspect ive, bhey tend to or ienb to some mark ing ofboundedness. I t is in t r igu ing that , in bhe h is tory o f German, there have been var iousat tempts to grammat ic ize not ions o f boundedness or terminat ive aspect . Engl ish, by con-t rast , has gone in z d i f ferent h isbor ica l d i rec t ion among the Germanic languages,

Learning to think for speaking

grammat ic iz ing the progress ive. And we f ind that our Engl ish-speak ing narra t ives tendto mark durat iv i ty more than t ,er rn inat ion in the i r descr ip t ions. The re la t ions betweendiachrony and ch i ld language would requi re a separate paper . But I would l ike to po in t

out , in pass ing, bhaf pers is tence of a grammat ic ized not ion over t ime in the h is tory o f alanguage prov ides anobher sor t o f c r ib ica l ev idence that grammacica l d is t inc t ions mayt ra in ch i ldren bo atbend to par t icu lar r tcontenbs oI express ion, " to use Sapi r 's term. Thatis bo say, speakers-and hence languages become accustomed bo mainta in grammat ica l

marking of part icular senrantic features.

To re turn to the fa tes o f the boy and bhe dog: ib is impor tant for my argumenbthat bhe f igures in Table 2 are not al l l00s and 0s. The deviat ions from the overal l ten-dencies of each language type show that ib is, indeed, possible to bry bo mark aspectualnotions l ike TERMINATIVE and DURATIVE if they are not part of the regular system

o[ verb morphology in one's language. And, on the other hand, the occasional lack ofaspectual dist inct ions between the two clauses in Spanish and English shows that one is

not compelled to make use of the ful l array of dist inct ions avai lable in verbal morphol-ogy. But what is mosl s t r ik ing in Table 2 is the f ind ing that speakers so rare ly make useof options that dif fer from the norm. Overal l , Hebrew and German speakers atternpt toelaborate aspectual dist inct ions about one-fourbh of the t ime, while Spanish and Englishspeakers fai l Lo mark aspectual disbinct ions about one-fourth of the bime. Such tenden-cies appear repeatedly, throughout our crossl inguist ic study of narrat ive, clearly point ing

to dif ferenb types of thinking for speaking. Speakers of al l ages, across languages, cer-

tainly know, in some nonlinguist ic sense, that the boy's fal l ing is punctual and completed

with regard to the simultaneous, ongoing chasing and running of bees and dog. But theygeneral ly do not seem to be incl ined to express any more of this knowledge l inguist ical lythan f i ts the avai lable dist inct ions in the language. I t is str iking that chi ldren as young

as 3 a l ready show a sens i t iv i ty to the r r rhetor ica l s lant r r o f the i r par t icu lar nat ivelanguage.

In comparing languages in terms of aspect we f ind dif ferences in terms of the

number and k inds of d isb inct ions that are marked. The four languages we have con-

s idered can be put on a cont inuum wibh regard to r ichness of aspectua l in f lec t ion:

GRAMMATICAL ASPBCT

Hebrew: I )one

German: per fect

Engl ish: per fect , progress ive

Spanish: per fect , progress ive, imper fect ive/per fect ive

When deal ing wi th a cont inuum of th is sor t , we ask whether there is any sor t o f "com-pensat ionr t for miss ing grammat ica l categor ies in a language, or whether they are gen-

era l ly ignored in th ink ing for speak ing. Our data-across a number o f s tory ep isodes and

languages-suggest that categories that are nob grammaticized in the native language aregeneral ly ignored, whereas those that are grammaticized are al l expressed by chi ldren asyoung as 3.

However, languages do not only dif fer from one another in the presence or absenceof a grammatical category. They also dif fer in the ways in which they al locate grammati-

ca l resources bo common semanbic domains. Again , i t w i l l be most usefu l to begin wi th

17

18 Dan I. Slobin

a compar ison between Engl ish and Spanish. These two language represenb oppos i te po les

of a typo log ica l d is t inc t ion wi th regard to the verba l express ion of change of locat ion.

That is , they d i f fer c r i t ica l ly in lex ica l izat ion pat terns for verbs o f mot ion. Cons ider one

o[ the senbences we encountered ear l ie r , in an Engl ish 5-year-o ld s tory :

(14) And then the deer car r ied h im over a c l i f f and threw h im over the c l i f f in to a

pond. [5 yrs . ]

As Leonard Ta lmy (1985) has shown in deta i led analyses of lex ica l izat ion pat terns, the

verb in Engl ish encodes some change of locat ion in a par t icu lar manner- " throw, t 't ' ca r r y , " ' r r un , " e t c . - l eav ing i t t o t r sa te l l i t es f ' o f t he ve rb t o encode d i r ec t i ona l i t y - i n

Engl ish, verb par t ic les and prepos i t ions. Engl ish a l lows for qu i te e laborated use of sate l -

l i tes to spec i fy path wi th a s ing le verb roob. The fo l lowing sentence sounds per fecb ly nor-

mal to nat ive speakers :

(15) The b i rd f lew down f rom out o f the ho le in the t ree.

The verb s imply spec i f ies mot ion in a par t icu lar manner , and the sate l l i tes spec i fy the

t ra jectory : . down- f rom-out -o f .

Spanish verbs o f mot ion encode e i ther d i rect iona l iLy-ent rar 'enter ' , sa l i r 'ex i t ' ,

sub i r ' ascend ' , ba ja r ' descend ' , e t c . - o r manne r -oo la r ' f l , y ' , co r re r , ' r un ' . Bu t one canno t

compact ly express manner and d i rect iona l i ty in compound express ions as in Engl ish,

because a co l lec t ion o f path sate l l i tes cannot be accumulated. The c losest Spanish

approx imat ion to5) w) would be someth ing l ike :

(16) EI pd jaro sa l i6 de l agu jero de l , i rbo l uo lando hac ia abajo . 'The b i rd ex i ted o f the

hole of the tree f lying towards below.'

Note that Spanish prepos i t ions, by cont rast to Engl ish, prov ide min imal locat ive

spec i f ica t ion: de occurs tw ice in example (16) . In de l agu jero 'o f the ho le ' i t rece ives the

meaning 'out -o f ' f rom the assoc ia ted verb sa/ i r 'ex i t ' , wh i le \n de l drbo l 'o f the t ree ' i t

rece ives the meaning ' in ' f rom genera l wor ld knowledge about re la t ions between ho les and

trees. When world knowledge is not suff icient, the Spanish-speaker is often required to

prov ide a s ta t ic r rskebchi l o f the re levant components o f scene, so thab the apropr ia te t ra-jec tory can be in fer red. As we wi l l see, th is accounts , in par t , for the f lower ing of re la t ive

c lauses in Spanish. For example, in Engl ish one might say:

(17) The boy put the f rog down in to a jar .

A Spanish-speaker might say:

(18) EI n ino met i6 Ia rana en e l f rasco que habia abajo . 'The boy inser ted the f rog en

[ : i t /on] the jar that was be low. '

The ve rb me te r ' i nse rb ' imp l i es bha t t he p ropos i t i on en i s t o be i n te rp rebed as ' i n ' ; and

the re la t ive c lause, que habia abajo ' that was be low' , impl ies the d i rect iona l i ty o f inser-

b ion. Thus in Spanish the t ra jectory 'down- inbo ' must be in fer red f rom a combinat ion o [

path-verb and a s ta t ic descr ip t ion o f the locabion of lhe goal - the jar , whi le in Engl ish

the stabic location of the goal- located in the jar-must be inferred from bhe path-

descr ip t ion, down in to .

This is a systematic dif lerence between the two languages. English tends to assert

trajectories, leaving resultant locative states to be inferred; Spanish tends to assert loca-

t ions and d i rect ions, leav ing t ra jector ies to be in [er red. Th is systemat ic d i f ference has

effects on the grammar of discourse. I have already menbioned the Spanish use of

Learning to think for speaking 19

locative relat ive clauses. Another effect is in bhe use of Spanish part iciples, which are fre-quenb at the youngest ages. We have a l ready encountered one typ ica l example in thef i rs [ nar rab ive f ragment , where the 5-year-o ld narra tor sa id that the boy ' fe l l seabed ' :

( t g ) Se cay6 sen tado . ' (He ) f e l l sea ted . ' [ 5 y r s . ]

Th is ch i ld is t ry ing to take a perspect ive that inc ludes bobh mot ion and endstate . More

lyp ica l ly , we f ind c lauses in which the on ly lex ica l verb is a parb ic ip le . For example,

where English-speakers tend to say The boy cl imbed the tree, leaving the boy's end-stabe

impl ic i t , Spanish speakers o f ten say the unt ran la tab le E/ n ino estd sub ido en e l drbo l'The boy is c l imbed-PART in bhe t ree ' .

(20a)Engl ish: Asser t t ra jec tory , imply end-s ta te . The boy c l imbed the t ree.

207b)Spanish: Asser t end-s ta te , imply t ra jec tory . E l n ino estd sub ido en e l , i rbo l .'The boy is c l imb-PART en l : in1on] the t ree. ' [ : the boy is in a s ta te o f hav ing

c l imbed the t ree l

The languages incl ine towards dif ferent patlerns in what is asserted and what is implied.

Thus, at many poinbs in our narrat ives, English-speakers assert act ions, implying results,

whereas Spanish-speakers assert results, implying actions. These dif ferences come to have

an effect on overal l rhetorical style. English narrators devote somewhat more narrat ive

attention to descript ions of processes, while Spanish narrators tend to provide more

descript ions of states. In making this proposal, houeuer, let me remind you that I am

talking about thinking for speaking only. I am making no claims about how mil l ions ol

Spanish- and English-speakers conceiue of l i fe or act in the uorld.

In our small sample of narrat ives to the Frog, where are you? picture-book, there

are some suggestive dif ferences by age and language with respect to the issues of location

and motion thab I have been brief ly reviewing. First let us consider the issue of verbs of

motion and their satel l i tes. The analysis can be enriched by adding German and Hebrew,

s ince German patberns i tse l f l i ke Engl ish- wi th undi rected verbs o f mot ion and a r ich and

differenbiated col lect ion of locative part icles and preposit ions; and Hebrew patterns i tself

l i ke Spanish wi th d i rect iona l verbs and a smal l co l lecb ion of po lysemous prepos ib ions.

There are three ep isodes in the s tory in which someone fa l ls or is thrown downward.

We have seen two of them-the fal l from bhe tree and the fal l from the cl i f f ; and in mycalcu la t ions I have added a th i rd , in which the dog fa l ls f rom a window. I have l is ted a l l

o [ the verbs used to descr ibe these scenes (main ly vers ions of ' fa l l ' and ' throw' ) in

Engl ish, German, Spanish, and Hebrew. For each verb, I noted whether i t occurred

alone, or wi th some k ind of locat ive addi t ion-a par t ic le or prepos i t iona l phrase ind icat -

ing downward direct ion, source, or goal of motion. In Table 3 you see the f igures for 3-,

5- , and 9-year-o lds, g iv ing the percentages of such descr ip t ions that had a bare verb wi thno locabive e laborat ion.

20 Dan I. Slobin

Tab le 3 : PERCENTAGES OF DOWNWARD MOTIONAg"

rJ

DESCRIPTIONS WITH BARE VERB

Engl ish

German

Span i sh

Hebrew

3

41 5

686 8

2 72

371 q

I

1 30

5445

Fi rs t cons ider the 3-year-o lds. [ t is a l ready ev ident that Engl ish and German fornr one

group, and Spanish and Hebrew another . Recal l that , in compar ing languages accord ing

to aspect , i t was Engl ish and Spanish that formed one group, and German and Hebrew

another. I t is clear that, for psycholinguist ic purposes, typological dif ferences between

languages must be considered separately for each semantic domain. The ways in which a

language deals with issues of t ime may be quite dif ferenb from its treatment of space,

which casts some doubt on Whorf 's grand overal l conception of language and world-view.

Table 3 shows that English and German 3-year-olds hardly ever use a verb of

motion without some locative elaboration, whereas Spanish and Hebrew 3-year-olds use

bare verbs of motion about two-thirds of the t ime. This clear dif ference in narrat ive stra-

tegy holds up across age as well . Although there are dif ferent developmental patterns, at

each of the three ages the dif ference between the two types of languages is maintained.

The most interesting developmental pattern is seen in Spanish. Here there id a U-

shaped curve, with 5-year-olds providing relat ively more locative elaboration than either

3- or 9-year-olds. Some chi ldren of this age seem to be groping for more detai led descrip-

t ion o f t ra jec tor ies , us ing Engl ish/German const ruct ion types that are redundant in

Spanish. For example:

(2 la)Se cay6 dent ro d ,e un agujero. ' (He) fe l l ins ide of a ho le . ' [5 yrs . ] [ :S" cayo en

un agujero. ' (He) fe l l en a ho le . ' ]

( 2 l b ) Se cay6 enc ima de l agua . ' (He ) f e l l on t op o f t he wa te r . ' [ 5 y r s . ] [ :S " cay6 a l

agua. ' (He) fe l l a the water . ' ]

And some ch i ldren add a locat ive adverb, aba jo 'down' or 'downward ' , as in :

(Z lc) Le t i r6 abajo . ' (H") threw h im down(ward) . ' [5 yrs . ]

These can be looked upon as abtempts to compensate for an apparent gap in Spanish

grammar. But bhey are d i f ferenb f rom the atbempts a t compensat ion that we encountered

with regard to verbal aspect. There we found a few, rare instances of German and

Hebrew at tempts to odd d is t inc t ions o f punctua l i ty or durat iv i ty that are not marked

grammat ica l ly in bhe language. But here we have at tempts bo be more exp l ic i t , us ing

too ls that are par t o f the grammar.

Interestingly, these attempts disappear after age 5 in Spanish. They seem to be

rep laced by the use of ex tended s ta t ic locat ive descr ip t ions, which make i t poss ib le to

in fer t ra jec tor ies f rom the combinat ion o f a mot ion verb and the descr ip t ion o f a scene.

The fo l lowing 9-year-o ld example is typ ica l :

Leaming to think for speaking 21

(22) E l c ieruo le l leu6 hasta un s i t io , donde debajo habia un r io . Entonces e l c ieruo t i r6a l per ro y a l n ino a l r io . Y despu, ls , cayeron. 'The deer took h im unt i l a p lace,

where be low there was a r iver . Then bhe deer bhrew the dog and the boy to ther iver . And then, they fe l l . ' [9 yrs . ]

Table 4 summar izes the use of e laborated locat ive descr ip t ions in narra t ing the fa l l f romthe cl i f f .

Table 4: PBRCENTACEELABORATION

OI.' NARRATORSIN DESCRIBING

5

80

80

PROVIDING EXTENDED LOCATIVETHE FALL FROM THB CLIFF

Ag"

English

German

Spanish

Hebrew

I

8t 7

4242

First compare English and Spanish: I t is evident that this pattern of extended locativeelaboration develops between ages 5 and g in Spanish, but not in English. Comparablenarrat ions by English 9-year-olds present compacb phrases with verbs of motion and loca-t ive satel l i tes, but with no scene-sett ing descript ions, such as:

(23a).9o the deer ran auay with him and dropped him off a cl i fr in the water. And they

lel l in the water. [9 yrs.]

(z3b)And the deer ran with the boy on his antlers. So the dog was chasing the deer, andthe deer just stopped, and the boy and the dog lel l ofr ol a cl i f f inlo a suamp. [9Y T S . ]

German 9-year-o lds are s t r ik ing ly s imi lar to Amer icans, wi th l i t t le s ta t ic scene-set t ingand compact verba l const ruct ions that sketch out a t ra jec tory . For example:

\24) Der Hi rsch nahm den Jungen auf se in Geweih und schmiB ihn den Abhang h inuntergenau ins Wasser. 'The deer took the boy on his antlers and hurled him down fromthe c l i f f r ight in to the water . ' [9 yrs . ]

F ina l ly , to complete the p ic ture, 9-year-o ld Is rae l is are s t r ik ing ly s imi lar to Span-as can be seen from the fol lowing Hebrew example:

Ve ha 'ay i l n i tha l , ve hu h i t r i l la ru ts . Ve hakeleu ra ts ararau, ue hu h ig ia lemacokshe mi tarat haya b i tsa, ue hu atsar , ue hayeled ue hakeleu naf lu lab i tsa beyarad.'And the deer was s tar t led, and he began to run. And the dog ran af ter h im, and hereached a c l i f f thab had a swamp underneath, and he s topped, and the boy and bhedog fe l l to the swamp together . [9 yrs . ]

To reburn to my overa l l theme once again , these two types of languages seem tohave impor tant consequences wibh regard bo th ink ing for speak ing. In th is ins tance, theunavai lab i l iby o f a par t icu lar grammat ica l dev ice a system of locat ive par t ic les re la ted toverbs-has rather large potential consequences for narrabive organization. Spanish- andHebrew-speak ing ch i ldren develop procedures of scene-setb ing, in which a vaguely

iards,

(25 )

22 Dan I. Slobin

spec i f ied change of locat ion becomes in terpretab le in context . One grammat ica l dev ice

which serves th is funct ion is re la t ive c lauses, and we f ind that Spanish- and Hebrew-

speakers use re la t ive c lauses far more f requent ly than Engl ish- and German-speakers-

This is a l ready ev ident a t age 3, ind icat ing ear ly development o f a narraL ive s ty le in

which descr ipb ion and qual i f ica t ion are inrpor tant .

Of course, I must be caut ious in making large genera l izat ions l rom a ra ther smal l

sample o f s tor ies to ld to a s ing le p icbure-book in severa l count r ies . I would l ike to com-

ment , though, that the pat terns we have found in Spain seem to ho ld up in comparable

data gathered by Aura Bocaz in Chile and Argentina, and that the Bnglish patterns are

repeated in several dif ferent American samples. Much more needs to be done even with

lhe Frog, where are you? p ic ture book in the remain ing languages in our sample, le t

alone necessary addit ions of other speech genres and languages.

I am conv inced, however , that the events o f th is l i t t le p ic ture book are exper ienced

differently by speakers of dif ferent languages--iz the process of making a uerbal ized story

out o f them. For example, there is noth ing in the p ic tures themselves that leads Engl ish

speakers to verbal ly express whether an event is in progress or Spanish speakers to note

whether i t has been completed; to encourage Germanic speakers to formulate e laborate

descript ions of trajectories; to make Hebrew speakers indif ferent to conceiving of events

as durab ive or bounded in t ime. (And, i f we went on to examine our Russ ian and Turk ish

stories, we would f ind an indif ference to indicating the definiteness of story

parbicipants-a category readi ly marked by our English, German, and Spanish narrators.)

I suggest that, in acquir ing each of these languages, chi ldren are guided by the set of

grammaticized dist inct ions in the language to attend to such features of events while

speaking.

There is, however, something dissatisfying in l imit ing ourselves to evidence that is

so bound up with the acquisit ion and use of native languages. In conclusion, I would l ike

to point to another type of evidence that seems bo support my proposal that the ways in

which learn ing a language as a ch i ld const ra ins one 's sens i t iv i ty to what Sapi r ca l led ' r the

possible contents of experience as expressed in l inguist ic terms. "

Cons ider the smal l co l lec t ion o f l ingu is t ica l ly encoded perspect ives that we have

been examining: temporal contours of events marked by aspecbual forms, movement and

trajectories in space, indication of definiteness of part icipants mentioned in connected

discourse. These are precisely the sorts of things bhat make i t so hard to master the

grammar o f a second language. For example, i t i s very hard for Engl ish-speakers to

grasp the Spanish per fect ive/ imper fect ive d is t inc t ion that is lack ing in our nat ive

language. [n fact, we seem never to ful ly master this system in Spanish. By contrast, we

have l i t t le dif f iculty in f iguring out how to use the Spanish progressive and perfect, or the

Spanish def in i te and indef in ibe ar t ic les-s ince we have a l ready learne<l how bo make dec i -

s ions aboub the l ingu is t , ic express ion o[ bhese not ions in Engl ish. But Lhere is noth ing

inherent ly easy or hard abouL any of these Spanish d is t inc t ions. For example, nat ive

French speakers have no t rouble wi th the Spanish imper fect ive, s ince they have a s imi lar

category in French; but the progressive and perfect pose problems to them, since these

are not French ways of looking at events. Turkish speakers have dif f iculty with definibe

and indefinite art icles in learning to speak Spanish, English, and German, since there are

no definite art icles in Turkish. German speakers of English use the progressive where

they should use s imple present , a l though Turks do not make th is er ror in Engl ish, s ince

Leaming to think for speaking 23

Turkish uses progressive aspect and German does nob. Spanish learners of English object

that we make too many obscure dist inct ions with our large col lect ion of locative preposi-

t ions and part icles. And so on. In brief, each native language has trained i ts speakers to

pay dif ferenb kinds of attenbion to events and experiences when talking about them. This

braining is carr ied out in chi ldhood and is excepbionally resistant to restructuring in adult

second-language acquisibion.

Much of value could be learned from a systematic study of those systems in part icu-

lar second languages that speakers of part icular f i rst languages f ind especial ly dif f icult to

master. I think thab these systems--including the ones we have considered here-have

someth ing impor tant in common: they cannot be exper ienced d i rect ly in our perceptua l ,

sensorimotor, and practical deal ings with the world. I would guess, for example, that i f

your language lacked a plural marker, you would not have unsurmountable dif f iculty in

learning to mark the category of plural i ty in a second language, since this concept is evi-

dent to the nonlinguist ic mind and eye. Or i f your language lacked an instrumental

marker i t should not be dif f icult to learn to add a grammabical inf lect ion to nouns that

name objects manipu la ted as ins t ruments . P lura l i ty and manipu la t ion are not ions that

are obvious to the senses. Bub there is nobhing in everyday sensorimotor interactions

with the world that changes when you describe an event as ttShe went to worktt or i lShe

has gone to work,rt or when you refer bo the same object in successive utterances as "ocarrf and tt the car.t t Dist inct ion of aspect, definiteness, voice, and the l ike, are par excel-

lence, dist inct ions that can only be learned through language, and have no other use

except to be expressed in language. And, further, once our minds have been trained in

taking part icular points of view for the purposes of speaking, i t is exceptional ly dif f icult

to be retrained.

It is interesting that Wilhelm von Humboldt anticipated these questions as well . He

wro te (1836 /1988 , p . 60 ) :

To learn a foreign language should therefore be to acquire a new standpoint in

lhe world-view hitherto possessed, and in fact to a certain extent this is so,

since every language contains the whole conceptual fabric and mode of presen-

tabion of a port ion of mankind. But because we always carry over, more or

less, our own world-view, and even our own language-view, this outcome is not

pure ly and complebely exper ienced.

I f we subst , i tu te Humboldt 's term, t twor ld-v iew," wi th my proposed term, r r th ink ing for

speaking," we have here a powerful statemenb about the role of language in what Sapir

cal led those rrcontenbs of experience [that are] capable of expression in l inguist ic terms.r l

Conclusion

In sum, we can on ly fa lk and unders land one another in terms of a par t icu lar

language. The language or languages that we learn in chi ldhood are not neutral coding

systems of an objective real i ty. Rather, each one is a subjective orientat ion to the world

of human experience, and this orientat ion affects the ways in which ue think while we are

speaking.

24 Dan I. Slobin

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S

The or ig ina l s tudy ( "A cross l ingu isb ic invest igat ion o f the developmenb of tempora l i ty in

narrab ive") was des igned by Dan I . S lob in , in co l laborat ion wi th Ruth A. Berman, Te l

Av i v Un i ve rs i t y , I s rae l , us i ng a me thod deve loped by M ichae l Bamberg (1987 ) . The da ta

were gathered, analyzed, and d iscussed in co l laborat ion wi th : Ayhan Aksu Kog (Bo$az ig i

Univers i tes i , ls tanbul ) , Michael Bamberg (Clark Univers i ty ) , Aura Bocaz (Univers idad de

Sant iago, Chi le) , L isa Das inger (Univers i ty o f Cal i forn ia , Berke ley) , Bsther Dromi (Te l

Av iv Univers i ty ) , Jane Edwards (Univers i ty o f Cal i forn ia , Berke ley) , V i rg in ia Marchman

(Univers i ty o f Cal i forn ia , Berke ley) , Yoni Ne 'eman (Te l Av iv Univers i ty ) , Tanya Renner

(Univers i ty o f Cal i forn ia , Berke ley) , Eugenia Sebast idn (Univers idad Autc inoma, Madr id) ,

Chr is t iane von Sbut terhe im (Univers i t i t He ide lberg) , and Ceci le Toupin (Univers i ty o f

Cal i forn ia , Berke ley) . The s tudy was suppor ted by the U.S. - ls rae l B inat iona l Sc ienceFoundation (Crant 2732182), the Linguist ics Program o[ the National Science Foundation(Grant BNS-8520008) , the S loan Foundat ion Program in Cogni t ive Sc ience ( Ins t i tu te o f

Cogni t ive Stud ies, Univers i ty o f Cal i forn ia , Berke ley) , the Max-Planck- [nst i tu t f i i r

Psychol ingu is t ik (Ni jmegen, The Nether lands) , and the Inst i tu te o f Human Development

(Univers i ty o f Cal i forn ia , Berke ley) . Addi t iona l Spanish data were gathered in Chi le and

Argent ina, f rom adul ts and ch i ldren aged 3- l l , by Aura Bocaz, wi th suppor t f rom GrantH2643-8712 from Universidad de Chile. Versions of this paper were presented as a

Plenary Address to bhe In ternat iona l Pragmat ics Conference (Barce lona, Ju ly 9-13, 1990)

and to the Fif th lnternational Congress for the Study of Child Language (Budapest, July

l5-20, 1990). I thank both organizations for the opportuniby to prepare and present this

work. (A recent repor t on par t o f ther f f rog-s tory pro ject ' r appears in the preceding issue

of th is journa l , where Bamberg and Marchman exp lore the l ingu is t ic encoding of , ep isode

boundar ies. )

REFBRENCES

Bamberg, M. G. W. (1987) . The acquis i t ion o f nar ra t iae: Learn ing to use language.

Berl in: lVfouton de Cruyter.

Bamberg, M. , & Marchman, V. (1990) . What ho lds a narra t ive together? The l ingu is t ic

encoding of ep isode boundar ies. IPrA Papers in Pragmat ics , 4( l l2 ) , pp. 58-121.

Boas, F. (1911) . In t roduct ion to Handbook of Amer ican [nd ian Languages. Bul le t in 40,

Par t I , Bureau of Amer ican Ethnology. Washington, D.C. : Government Pr in t ing

Of f ice. [Repr in ted in P. Holder (Ed. ) , (1966) . F . Boas [n t roduct ion to Handbook of

Amer ican Ind ian Languages / J . W. Powel l , Ind ian l ingu is t ic fami l ies oJ Amer ica

North of Merico. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.]

Bowerman, M. (1989) . Learn ing a semant ic system: What ro le do cogni t ive pred ispos i -

t ions p lay? In M. L . R ice k R. L . Sch ie f fe lbusch (Eds. ) , The teachabi l i ty o f

l anguage (pp . t 33 -169 ) . Ba l t imo re : Pau l H . B rookes .

Mayer , M. (1969) . Frog, where are you? New York: D ia l Press.

P inke r , S . ( 1989 ) . Lea rnab i l i t y and cogn i t i on : The acqu i s i t i on o f a rgumen t s t r uc tu re .

Cambr idge, MA: MIT Press.

Sap i r , E . ( 1924 ) . The g rammar ian and h i s l anguage . Amer i can Mercu ry , l , 149 -155 .

[Repr in ted in D. G. Mandelbaum (Ed. ) , (1958) . Se lected wr i t ings o f Edward Sapi r

in language, cu l ture and personal i ty . Berke ley/Los Angeles: Univers iby o f

Leaming to think for speaking 25

Cal i forn ia Press. ]

Ta lmy, L . (1987) . The re la t ion o f grammar to cogni t ion. In B. Ruczka-Ostyn (Ed. ) ,

Topics on cogni t iue l ingu is i tcs . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Von Humboldt , W. (1988) . On language: The d iuers i ty o f human language-s t ructure and

i ts in f l .uence on the menta l deuelopment o f manking. (Trans la t ion by P. Heath o f

Uber d ie Versch iedenhei t des menschl ichen Sprachbaues und ihren Ein f lu$ aud d iegeis t ige Entwicke lung des Menschengeschlechts (1836) . ) Cambr idge: Cambr idge

Universiby Press.

Whor f , B. L . (1940) . L ingu is t ics as an exact

80-83. [Repr in ted in J . B. Carro l l (Ed. )

Selected writ ings of Benjamin Lee Whorf.

and John Wi lev & Sons. l

sc ience. Technology Reuiew, 43, 61-63,(1956) . Language, thought , and rea l i ty :

New York: Technology Press of M. l .T .