Languages in Contact - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Languages in Contact PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 73341-NzdkM



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Languages in Contact

Description:

shift with carry over of vocabulary (e.g. pygmy technical vocabulary) ... pygmy special vocabulary ... in problems in client hunter group, pygmies, Aasax) ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:169
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 49
Provided by: Mous95
Learn more at: http://www.ohll.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Languages in Contact


1
Languages in Contact
  • Maarten MousLeiden University

2
Structure of talk
  • why talk about language contact here
  • historical linguistics
  • models for language contact
  • linking results of language contact to prior
    socio-linguistic situations
  • prehistoric contact

3
Aim Purpose
  • Essential knowledge for other disciplines
  • Results and developments in contact language
    research
  • (Im)possibility of predicting contact situation
    from linguistic outcome
  • Added value of combined effort

4
Linguistics-Genetics
  • The link between linguistics and genetics is the
    speaker. Speakers speak different languages,
    shift to another language, become member of a
    different speech community. This is one obvious
    reason why the issue of language contact is
    important for this conference.
  • The linguistic genetic tree is an abstraction
    that has filtered out the admixture part of the
    linguistic history. 15

5
what to correlate to
  • speech community (multilingualism everybody
    belongs to several)
  • ?
  • ethnic unit relevance varies, not constant,
    multiple (clan affiliations)

6
Community
  • speakers community
  • ethnic community tribe-clan caste
  • economic community
  • geography of settlement
  • what do we compare?

7
Historical linguistics
  • study of language change
  • basis is reconstruction of language change
    through the comparative method
  • added result is a genetic tree of related
    languages not central aim and an abstraction
  • contact linguistics deals with the influence of
    other languages on change

8
Historical linguistics2
  • Contact linguistics presumes the comparative
    method and does not aim at questioning it
  • contact linguistics adds to a fuller
    understanding of the linguistics history
    comparative method shows only part of the story
    and may give wrong impression of neat split15
  • scientific robustness of regular sound change in
    comparative method is absent in contact
    linguistics

9
comparative method
  • strong in sound laws
  • lexicon reconstruction issue of conservative
    basic vocabulary (sometimes precisely unstable
    what is basic?)
  • morphology (word structure) most resistant to
    language induced change levelling
    grammaticalization (lexical signgtgrammar sign
    can it predict?
  • syntax difficult, often linked to typology,
    fossilised in morphology

10
Dating by glottochronology
  • retention rate as measure for time depth based on
    percentage of cognate forms in standard list of
    basic vocabulary of related languages
  • heavily criticised for premise that change is
    constant over time. E.g. Blust showed important
    variation in change within branches of
    Austronesian.6
  • retention rate different across vocabulary
  • look-a-like rather than cognate form

11
Starostins modification25
  • exclude borrowings (chance mutations)
  • variable factor over time (words become more
    stable with age)
  • etymological roots from texts in stead of basic
    word list
  • newly calibrated value for factor
  • only works when one knows linguistic history
  • evaluation still problematic for revolutions of
    language change (quite common)

12
Factors affecting rate of change
  • literacy (more borrowings)
  • existence of a standard
  • size of language community (more tolerance to
    variation quicker spread of change)
  • attitude of speakers (blocks recognizable
    borrowings)

13
  • language mixture
  • processes of transfer
  • sociolinguistic situation
  • demographic situation

14
restrictions on borrowability
  • Moravcsik (1978)
  • Heath (1978)
  • Matras (2000)

15
Proposed restrictionsCampbell (1993)
  • structural-compatibility requirement
    (counter-examples)
  • fit with innovation possibilities of the
    borrowing language (counter-examples)
  • grammatical gaps tend to be filled by borrowings
    (but not all)
  • morphological borrowing as replacement (but not
    all)
  • free standing grammatical forms are more easily
    borrowed than bound morphemes (but cases of
    borrowed bound morpheme replacing free standing)
  • borrowability according to ranking of categories
  • principle of functional load if embedded in
    system then not easily borrowed
  • etc

16
Everything can be borrowed
  • Both Campbell7 and Thomason27 hold the view that
    all proposed constraints in borrowing are nothing
    but tendencies. There are always exceptions
  • Interpretation of counter-examples sometimes open
    for dispute. Mixed language Maa as example of
    borrowing of Bantu grammar29 is no longer valid
    counterexample if one accepts that language shift
    took place.
  • distinction between concept and content is
    needed. emergence of a noun class system through
    contact has been proposed but no Bantu noun class
    system (with the typical markers) has ever
    happened.

17
Thomason
  • anything is possible
  • implicational/chronological scales
  • ordinary processes extra-ordinary results

18
Heath (1978)
  • Arnhemland, Australia Diffusion of bound
    grammatical morphemes is a problem for genetic
    grouping but in some language groups still
    possible, depending on (accidental) structural
    properties of languages concerned.

19
Basic vocabulary
  • in certain circumstances prone to change
    language/register creation for identity or
    fear/respect
  • stable vocabulary Leipzig project to establish
    it empirically lists on basis of retained items
    in various families (Lohr 1999)
  • can be different across language family

20
Shift
  • complete shift (very common)
  • shift with effect of original language on
    recognizable community with effect on language
    as a whole
  • shift with carry over of vocabulary (e.g. pygmy
    technical vocabulary)
  • arrested shift, u-turn when too late,
    re-borrowing of original vocabulary

21
Van Coetsem framevan Coetsem 1988,2000, Winford
2003
  • Differences in stability across language
    components (grammar more stable than lexicon)
  • Recipient language agentivity (borrowing)
  • Source language agentivity (imposition)
  • Linguistic dominance (not social) in bilingualism

22
contact situations
  • Recipient L agentivity A?B
  • Source L agentivity A?B
  • Agents / Agentivity
  • imitation / adaptation
  • 1 borrowing
  • 2 imposition
  • processes in individual

23
Examples
  • RecL activity, borrowing, extreme case Media
    Lengua Quechua with every lexeme borrowed from
    Spanish
  • SourceL activity structures of dominant language
    in recipient language. Dominant language can be
    the new language influencing the language which
    is in process of being abandoned in cognitive and
    grammatical structure. Asia Minor Greek (RL)
    Turkish (SL) dominant. (and RL activity when
    speaking T)

24
  • transfer of structure under RL activity differs
    from transfer of structure under SL activity
  • RL close to lexicon function words, derivation
  • SL conceptualization, categories, structure
  • result of adaptation in RL activity can be
    similar to that in SL activity, e.g.
    pronunciation of English borrowings in Hindi and
    Hindi pronunciation of English

25
second language acquisition
  • most studies on formal learning
  • few on informal learning at ages 9, 16
  • few on learning strategies
  • are there restrictions on vocabulary if gt3
    languages are acquired?

26
Individual Community
  • Model refers to the mind of the individual
  • Essential is language as social construct
  • establishment of the norm(variation is larger
    when various SLs)

27
reconstructing past contact situations
  • Assumption contact situations in the past are
    not different from those now
  • If all things equal the simplest wins
  • Propose scenario to explain present outcome

28
problems with the scenario game
  • limits of imagination
  • never are all other things equal

29
Proposed correlations socio-history language
change
  • Guy11-Ross23 based on Van Coetsem

30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
Additions by Reh21
  • If only migration as cause for contact
  • Added factors
  • Intensity of contact
  • Linguistic heterogeneity of community

34
Other factors
  • identifiable group after migration
  • degree of bilingualism
  • language attitude
  • size of group
  • prestige

35
Comparable situations
  • Northern Songhay
  • Mozambican Swahili
  • Pygmies
  • Creole studies
  • etc

36
languages of pygmies10
  • speak different languages
  • which probably were once language of their patron
  • also speak language of patron
  • pygmy special vocabulary
  • patrons and their language are link and obstacle
    to outside world (forest pygmies have better
    knowledge of languages of wider communication)

37
Creole languages
  • study link socio-history and outcome of language
    change
  • similar sociolinguistic situations for a number
    of them
  • similar outcome
  • separate field of study

38
Mixed Languages5
  • grammar and (basic) lexicon not from the same
    source
  • originate in new communities of systematic mixed
    marriage mothers grammar with fathers lexicon
  • originate as extended argot of itinerant and
    other groups who maintain identity under
    pressure grammar of dominant language, deviant
    lexicon
  • note the genetic difference for the two scenarios

39
Contact situations
  • multilingualism in the city,
  • re-settlements,
  • migration,
  • seasonal work,
  • etc., etc.

40
gene flow (and language contact)
  • expulsion (ostracism as punishment)
  • occasional sex (e.g. ritual outside group)
  • ritual expert (high status, founder of group)
  • marriage pattern (e.g. women from outside)
  • war (women from outside)
  • refugees (e.g. masters in problems in client
    hunter group, pygmies, Aasax)

41
contact situations in prehistoric times
  • symbiosis of hunters - farmers / cattle people
  • agriculture / cattle stratification in limited
    area (East Turkana)
  • reconstitution of bands of hunters
  • war
  • marriage outside group
  • expulsion

42
hunter-cattle
  • Dorobo
  • division of labour across gender
  • speech patterns in settlement
  • ethnic diversity
  • imbalance in power

43
hunting and speech
  • gender division
  • ways of hunting individual / cooperating groups
  • short / long hunting expeditions
  • traps and ownership
  • special communication during hunt

44
Dixons Rise Fall9
  • punctuation versus equilibrium
  • In situations/periods of punctuation languages
    diverge quickly enough for the tree model to be
    valid
  • In situations of equilibrium, contact is main
    force for change
  • Situations of equilibrium are characterised by
    equality (in size, prestige)
  • Periods of punctuation have external causes (e.g.
    development of agriculture)

45
Dixon2
  • External causes can be linked to archaeology,
    history of climate, etc.
  • provides model for Australia
  • addresses pre-reconstruction period

46
Dixon3
  • can linguistic history still be traced
  • punctuation and equilibrium kind of linguistic
    events are simultaneous in same area. For example
    the Bantu languages are similar due to recent
    spread and common ancestor, yet the equality
    properties and the linguistic diffusion are valid
    for Bantu
  • Africa must have had many situations of
    punctuation over the last millennia but also
    diffusion

47
(No Transcript)
48
Time gap
  • beginning of human language
  • estimate of oldest families 10,000 years
  • divergence in (linguistic) genetic variation in
    Africa (gt100,000) and in the recently inhabited
    areas of Papua (50,000) and Americas (20,000)
  • consequences of time gap no linguistic knowledge
    about the period most language families in
    Africa must have disappeared can we extrapolate
    knowledge about human language to earlier
    periods?

49
References
  • Aikhenvald, Alexandra and R.M.W. Dixon (eds)
    2001. Areal Diffusion and Genetic Inheritance.
    Problems in Comparative Linguistics. Cambridge
    CUP.
  • Aikhenvald, Alexandra and R.M.W. Dixon 2001.
    Introduction. In Aikhenvald, Alexandra and R.M.W.
    Dixon (eds), 1-26.
  • Andersen, Henning 1988. Center and periphery
    adoption, diffusion, and spread. In Historical
    Dialectology Regional and Social, ed. by Jacek
    Fisiak. Berlin Mouton de Gruyter, pp.39-83.
  • Bakker, Peter and Maarten Mous (eds.) 1994. Mixed
    languages 15 case studies in language
    intertwining. (Studies in Language and Language
    Use, 13.) Amsterdam IFOTT.
  • Bakker, Peter. 1997. "A language of our own" The
    genesis of Michif, the mixed Cree-French language
    of the Canadian Métis. (Oxford Studies in
    Anthropological Linguistics, 10.) New York
    Oxford University Press.
  • Blust, Robert 2000. Why lexicostatistics doesnt
    work the universal constant hypothesis and the
    Austronesian languages. In Time Depth in
    historical Linguistics ed. by Renfrew e.a. Vol 2,
    pp.311-331.
  • Campbell, Lyle 1993. On proposed universals of
    grammatical borrowing. In Historical linguistics
    1989 Papers from the 9th international
    conference on historical linguistics, Rutgers
    university, 14-18 August 1989, ed. by Henk
    Aertsen and Robert J. Jeffers. Amsterdam John
    Benjamins, pp. 91-109.
  • Coetsem, Frans van 2000. A general and unified
    theory of the transmission process in language
    contact. Heidelberg C. Winter Verlag.
  • Dixon, R.M.W. 1997. The rise and fall of
    languages. Cambridge Cambridge University Press.
  • Duke, Daniel Joseph 2001. Aka as a contact
    language sociolinguistic and grammatical
    evidence. MA University of Texas at Arlington.
  • Guy, Gregory R. 1990. The sociolinguistic types
    of language change. Diachronica 7 47-67.
  • Heath, Jeffrey 1978. Linguistic diffusion in
    Arnhem land. Canberra Australian Institute of
    Aboriginal Studies.
  • Lohr, Marisa 1999. Methods for the Genetic
    Classification of Languages. PhD thesis,
    University of Cambridge.
  • Matras, Yaron 2000. How predictable is
    contact-induced change in grammar? In Time Depth
    in historical Linguistics, ed. by Renfrew e.a.
    Vol 2, pp. 563-584.
  • McMahon, April Language, Time and Human
    Histories. Antwerp Papers in Linguistics 106
    Language and Revolution/Language and Time
    156-170.
  • Muysken, Pieter 1997. Code-switching processes
    Alternation, insertion, congruent lexicalization.
    In Martin Pütz (ed.) Language choices
    Conditions, constraints, and consequences,
    pp.361-380. Amsterdam John Benjamins.

50
References 2
  • Myers-Scotton, Carol 1993a. Duelling languages
    Grammatical structure in codeswitching. Oxford
    Oxford University Press.
  • Myers-Scotton, Carol 1993b. Social motivations
    for codeswitching Evidence from Africa. Oxford
    Oxford University Press.
  • Myers-Scotton, Carol 2002. Contact linguistics
    bilingual encounters and grammatical outcomes.
    Oxford Oxford University Press.
  • Nurse, Derek 2000. Inheritance, contact, and
    change in two East African languages. Cologne
    Rüdiger Köppe.
  • Reh, Mechthild 1995. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen
    der Rekonstruirbarkeit von Soziohistorie aus
    Sprachdaten am Beispiel der Kadugli-Krongo
    (Nuba-Berge, Sudan) Hamburg Ms..
  • Renfrew, Colin, April McMahon and Larry Trask
    (eds) 2000. Time depth in historical linguistics.
    Cambridge The McDonald Institute for
    Archaeological Research.
  • Ross, Malcolm D. 1991. Refining Guys
    sociolinguistic types of language change.
    Diachronica 8119-129.
  • Ross, Malcolm D. 1996. Contact-induced change and
    the comparative method Cases from Papua New
    Guinea. In Mark Durie and Malcolm Ross (eds.) The
    comparative method reviewed Regularity and
    irregularity in language change, pp. 180-217. New
    York Oxford University Press.
  • Starostin, Sergei Comparative-historical
    linguistics and lexicostatistics In Time Depth in
    historical Linguistics, ed. by Renfrew e.a. Vol
    1., pp.223-259.
  • Thomason, Sarah G. 1995. Language mixture
    Ordinary processes, extraordinary results. In
    Carmen Silva-Corvalán (ed.) Spanish in four
    continents Studies in language contact and
    bilingualism, pp. 15-23. Washington DC
    Georgetown University Press.
  • Thomason, Sarah G. 2001. Language Contact An
    introduction. Edinburgh Edinburgh University
    Press.
  • Thomason, Sarah G. and Terrence Kaufman 1988.
    Language contact, creolization, and genetic
    linguistics. Berkeley University of California
    Press.
  • Thomason, Sarah Grey 1998. On reconstructing past
    contact situations. In The life of language
    papers in linguistics in honor of William Bright,
    ed. by Jane H. Hill, P.J. Mistry and Lylel
    Campbell. Berlin Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 153-168.
  • Winford, Donald 1997. Creole formation in the
    context of contact linguistics. Journal of Pidgin
    and Creole Languages 12131-151.
  • Winford, Donald 2003. Contact-induced changes -
    Classification and Processes. OSUWPL 57, Summer
    2003, 129-50.
  • Winter, Jürgen-Christoph 1979. Language shift
    among the Aasáx, a hunter-gatherer tribe in
    Tanzania A historical and sociolinguistic
    case-study. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika
    (SUGIA) 1175-204.
  • Orr, Robert A. 1999. Evolutionary Biology and
    Historical Linguistics (Review of Dixon 1997).
    Diachronica 16 123-157.
About PowerShow.com