074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 133
ARTICLE
FIRST LANGUAGE Copyright © 2007 SAGE Publications (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore) www.sagepublications.com Vol 27(2): 133–158 (200705) DOI: 10.1177/0142723707074794
The expression of temporal relations in Thai children’s narratives Heather Winskel, University of Western Sydney ABSTRACT The acquisition of temporal relations in the narratives of Thai children (aged 4 years, 6 years and 9 years) and of adults as control was investigated. Narratives were elicited using the ‘frog story’. Results revealed common and languagespecific developmental patterns: (1) a developmental progression from relating events at a local to a more global level; (2) use of fewer forms that have a broader range of functions in the younger children; (3) acquisition of least restricted forms prior to more restricted forms; (4) qualified support for the acquisition of sequentiality prior to simultaneity. In the youngest children there was a greater reliance on usage of grammatical aspect; subsequently, as children acquired the ability to use bi-referential reference, temporal connectives played a more significant role. Eventually mature narrators are able to use a combination of explicit and implicit linguistic devices. KEYWORDS Acquisition; language; narrative; temporal relations; Thai
INTRODUCTION Narrative can be divided into two major components: the chronologically ordered events which form the foreground, actual story line or temporal skeleton of the narrative, and the supportive or additional information which forms the background to
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 134
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
the story line and does not itself narrate the main events (Hopper, 1979; Labov & Waletzky, 1968). Grammatical aspect (or viewpoint aspect or just aspect) plays an important role in expressing temporal relations in narrative as it is one of the principal means for marking the distinction between foreground and background in narrative (Chan, 1996; Hopper, 1979). There are two main aspectual categories, perfective (bounded) and imperfective (unbounded) aspect. The verbs in the foreground clauses of narrative tend to be telic (events that have inherent endpoints) and take perfective aspect, whereas the verbs in the background clauses are usually atelic (events that do not have inherent endpoints) and take imperfective aspect (Chan, 1996; Hopper, 1979; Li & Shirai, 2000). Additional principal means of encoding temporal relations in narrative are through temporal connectives. Sequential connectives (e.g., then, after) sequence events in the foreground or storyline, whereas simultaneous connectives, (e.g., when, while) relate events either in the foreground, background or across background and foreground. Thai, a Sino-Tibetan language, has a rich array of imperfective and perfective aspectual morphemes, but they are not morphologically grammaticalized on the verb, and usage in general is optional and not obligatory. These particular aspectual characteristics of Thai form an interesting comparison with languages previously studied. The aim of the present study was to investigate the linguistic strategies that Thai narrators aged 4 years, 6 years, 9 years and adults use to express temporal relations, both sequential and simultaneous but with a particular emphasis on simultaneous relations, depicted in the frog story (Mayer, 1967) in order to delineate what patterns are common with other languages previously studied, and what are more particular or specific to Thai. First, I will briefly review research on language-specific patterns in expressing temporal relations in speakers of languages with different aspectual systems, and then review more general background information about temporal-aspectual systems prior to outlining the specific research aims and predictions of the current study.
Language-specific and typological patterns used to express temporal relations Speakers of a language share a common rhetorical style or pattern when expressing temporal relations, which is comprised of both common or language-general patterns in development, presumed to be determined by universal cognitive determinants, and language-specific patterns, which are shaped by the characteristics of the input language (e.g., Berman & Slobin, 1994; Hickmann, 2003, 2004). Narrators from different languages select different linguistic devices to express temporal relations dependent on the rhetorical options available within the particular language and presumably the salience and ease of access of devices available to encode the relevant semantic distinctions, with obligatory or habitually used linguistic categories more readily accessible and salient to the young language learner (Hickmann, 2003; Slobin, 1996, 2003). Spanish, Turkish and English have obligatory, grammaticalized aspectual marking, and narrators tend to express the overlapping temporal relations depicted in the frog story picture book using the aspectual forms in the language, whereas in German and Hebrew, which do not have obligatory grammaticalized aspect, narrators tend not to express the temporal distinctions depicted, even though there are 134
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 135
WINSKEL: TEMPORAL RELATIONS IN THAI CHILDREN’S NARRATIVES
alternative means of expression (Berman & Slobin, 1994). These characteristic patterns are also evident in the youngest children studied, the 3-year-olds. Furthermore, German and Hebrew narrators do not tend to ‘compensate’ by using temporal connectives, whereas Turkish and English narrators use temporal connectives as well as aspectual morphemes to mark the temporal distinctions depicted, and the acquisition of temporal connectives is relatively early in comparison with German and Hebrew. In Spanish, which has a morphologically rich aspectual system, temporal connectives are not used to such a great extent, as it is thought to be somewhat unnecessary or redundant (Slobin, 1996). Another crosslinguistic study conducted on Polish, English and Finnish reveals language-specific patterns of aspectual usage and acquisition dependent on both the obligatoriness and the transparency of the aspectual expressions (Weist, Kaczmarek & Wysocka, 1993). In Polish the imperfective-perfective contrast is obligatory and the morphological coding is transparent; consequently aspectual contrasts are used early and extensively, whereas in Finnish the means of coding aspect is opaque as it involves ‘a complex diffuse network of mechanisms’, and acquisition is delayed (Weist et al., 1993: 80). As aspectual marking is not obligatory in Finnish, situation aspect, i.e., the intrinsic aspect of the verb and its predicate, carries the discourse functional load. In addition, Finnish children use aspectual verb phrases earlier than English and Polish children, presumably as an alternative ‘compensatory’ linguistic strategy for coding temporal relations. A similar ‘compensatory’ mechanism occurs in Mandarin Chinese which has optional, non-obligatory aspectual marking; and narrators tend to utilize temporal connectives and adverbials to mark temporal overlaps in discourse to a greater extent than in the other languages studied – French, English and German (Hickmann, 2003). The acquisition of temporal connectives was also observed earlier in Mandarin Chinese children than in the European languages. Verb semantics and verb choice are particularly important when explicit aspectual marking is not present as illustrated by Mandarin Chinese and Finnish, as it influences ‘the interpretation of temporal relations and of grounding relations among the situations denoted in the discourse’ (Hickmann, 2003: 83). In summary, it can be seen that different patterns of usage and acquisition in coding temporal relations are exhibited by speakers of different languages, dependent on what rhetorical options are available in the particular language, the obligatoriness and salience of marking, and the degree of transparency of the marking available.
General background literature on the acquisition of temporal-aspectual expressions In languages such as Thai, Mandarin Chinese and Finnish where grammatical aspect is not obligatory, situation aspect appears to play a more prominent role in the expression of temporal relations in narrative. Situation aspect has been classified by Vendler (1967) into four main semantic predicate types: state, activity, accomplishment, achievement. These can be characterized in terms of the following prop erties: durative or punctual, atelic or telic, dynamic or static, as summarized in Table 1 State and activity predicates are both durative and atelic, but activities also have the intrinsic property of being dynamic. Accomplishments are durative and telic, i.e., 135
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 136
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
Table 1 Properties of the four categories of situation aspect
Predicate type
Property 1
Property 2
Property 3
Examples
State Activity Accomplishment
static dynamic dynamic
atelic atelic telic
durative durative durative
Achievement
dynamic
telic
punctual
want, have play, run run to the pond, climb up the hill find, break, fall
have a natural inherent endpoint. In contrast achievements are telic and punctual or instantaneous, but do not have duration (Andersen, 1991). Research on many different languages has indicated that use of grammatical or viewpoint aspect is closely linked to situation aspect type. Perfective morphemes occur more frequently with telic predicates than with atelic predicates, and imperfective morphemes occur more frequently with atelic predicates (Andersen & Shirai, 1994; Hickmann, 1997). However, the strength of this relationship varies somewhat with age. Young children appear initially to associate past perfective morphemes with achievements (telic and punctual) and imperfective morphemes with atelic, durative activities (Andersen & Shirai, 1996; Hickmann, 1997, 2003), whereas children as young as 3;6–4;6 are able to take different perspectives on events described by the same verb; for example, English children use the progressive with run to give an ongoing action of running and use it as an accomplishment in to run away (Weist et al., 1993). In relation to the patterns or trends that emerge in the acquisition of language, the underlying conceptual complexity of temporal terms plays a major role (Keller-Cohen, 1981; Slobin, 1985; Weist, Atanassova, Wysocka & Pawlak, 1999) in conjunction with language-specific factors (Shirai, 1998; Slobin, 1996). One measure of conceptual complexity is the number of referent elements that are required to establish the location of a primary event in time (Weist et al., 1999). Young children first use a monoreferential system of reference, i.e., the speech time is the sole point of reference, e.g., ‘I play with Sammy.’ Within this system children subsequently juxtapose two independent clauses, which express events in their order of occurrence, e.g., ‘We eat. We go play.’ Children then add a bi-referential dimension to their linguistic system (reference to two points or events in time) by linguistically relating two clauses with temporal conjunctions or adverbials, e.g., ‘When I go to Sammy’s house we get biscuits and a drink’, and both sequential reference using connectives such as then, before or after, and simultaneous reference using connectives such as while, at the same time or when, involve bi-referential referencing. The transition from a monoreferential to bi-referential system occurs at about 4 to 5 years of age (Weist, Lyytinen, Wysocka & Atanassova, 1997; Weist et al., 1999). Multifunctional, least restricted connectives such as and are the first connectives to be used in the construction of compound sentences in English, Italian, German and Turkish (Bloom, Lahey, Lifter & Fiess, 1980; Clancy, Jacobsen & Silva, 1976; Clark, 136
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 137
WINSKEL: TEMPORAL RELATIONS IN THAI CHILDREN’S NARRATIVES
1970; Hood, Lahey, Lifter & Bloom, 1978). According to Hickmann (2003) and serves as an all-purpose cohesive device for connecting successive utterances and expresses a more general semantic relationship of linkage or connectivity. Initially, these types of devices appear to act as discourse fillers in young children; later they mark temporal relations between events and, finally, mature speakers will select the term as one out of a range of devices available to them for narrative cohesion (Berman, 1996). The adverb also is commonly used in the frog story texts of the youngest German, Spanish, Hebrew, French and Turkish children and appears to act as a ‘precursor’ for expressing the co-occurrence or overlap of two events (Berman & Slobin, 1994). These ‘precursors’ are used much less by older children as new, more function-specific forms partially replace the functions previously served by these old forms. The connective when is the first subordinating conjunction to emerge in development, and as it is less restricted in its usage it is acquired prior to while (in Spanish, English and Turkish: Aksu-Koç & von Stutterheim, 1994; in English, German, Italian and Turkish: Clancy et al., 1976; in English: Silva, 1991). A while-clause must be combined with a durative predicate that occurs over an interval of time, and it can not be combined with a non-durative or punctual predicate, whereas when can occur with both clause types. The notion represented by while is present in English and Turkish narratives at age 3, but not in Spanish, German or Hebrew at that age. Both Spanish and Hebrew use one form; cuando and kshe, respectively, to encode both when- and while-type notions initially. In Spanish the construction using mientras ‘while’ is more complex as the complementizer que is required, which may contribute to it being acquired later (Mueller Gathercole, pers. comm., 11 June 2004.). German waährend which encodes simultaneity of ‘state and x’ does not emerge until 9 years. Hence, there are also language-specific differences and different patterns of emergence of temporal connectives. Silva (1991) examined the use of the co-temporal connectives when, while and as in the narratives of English children and adults. The temporal connective when seems to serve a broader range of functions in children than in adults. She found that children used both punctual and durative predicates with when clauses, whereas adults generally selected punctual predicates, and as other devices are acquired, i.e., while and as, some of the previous functions served by when are replaced by these new terms. The connective as is the most specific and also the last to be acquired by English children. Hence, it appears that as new terms enter the child’s semantic domain, there is a shift or reorganization of functions served by previously acquired linguistic forms as the mapping of the semantic space changes. Sequentiality is signalled by the sequential ordering of two events or actions, i.e., x then y, whereas simultaneity or the overlap of two events or actions has the general shared meaning of ‘during the time that’, i.e., event x overlaps with event y (Bennett & Partee, 1972). The actual expression of simultaneity is more complex than conveyed by that definition as: (1) the degree of overlap between events can vary, and (2) a simultaneous relationship can hold between events or states in the foreground, or in the background or across foreground and background (Aarssen, 2001; Aksu-Koç & von Stutterheim, 1994; Hopper, 1979). In addition, simultaneity is not often expressed unequivocally through explicit linguistic devices, but is inferred from a range of linguistic devices and contextual cues. Research has generally supported the view 137
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 138
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
that simultaneity is more conceptually complex than sequentiality, which is reflected in the order of acquisition (e.g., Aarssen, 2001; Bamberg, 1986; Feagans, 1980; KellerCohen, 1981; Weist et al., 1997; Winskel, 2003). Recently, Morgan (2002) has also found that in a language which uses a different modality, sign language, there is a relatively late acquisition of the expression of simultaneity in narrative. However, it is important to note that there are different types and expressions of simultaneity, which are expected to be acquired at different stages of development. Previous research has indicated that temporal adverbials meaning meanwhile or in the meantime appear to be relatively late to emerge in the older narrators, the 9-yearolds and adults, in all languages except Hebrew, in which it occurs in 5-year-olds (AksuKoç & von Stutterheim, 1994). According to Aksu-Koç & von Stutterheim (1994) these terms are late to emerge as they have not only a temporal function but also a discourse organizational function, i.e., they indicate beginnings of new episodes and foreground events. Late acquisition is characterized by increased lexical diversity in the range of forms employed within a particular semantic system, and consequently a greater variety of temporal expressions is used by older speakers. In addition, there is a gradual progression from cohesion primarily at the local level to a more global organizational level of discourse (Hickmann, 2004). Eventually proficient narrators are able to ‘coordinate various components into a single system’ as they have acquired ‘a rich array of rhetorical options’ (Berman, 1998: 608). In summary, crosslinguistic research has indicated some common or shared patterns in the acquisition of temporal relations in narrative: (1) there is a gradual overall progression in the organization of narrative from relating events at a local level to relating larger chunks of information at a more global level with age (Berman, 1998; Hickmann, 2004); (2) younger children use fewer expressive options in expressing temporal relations than older children and adults do, and forms used serve a broader range of functions in the younger children than in the older children or adults (Berman & Slobin, 1994; Silva, 1991); (3) least restricted forms are acquired prior to more restricted forms, e.g., and is acquired prior to before or after, and new functions are first expressed by old forms, for example, ‘precursors’ such as also or multifunctional connectives such as and are gradually replaced by more function-specific terms such as when or while (Aksu-Koç & von Stutterheim, 1994; Berman & Slobin, 1994).
The Thai temporal aspectual system Thai does not have aspect or tense morphologically grammaticalized on the verb. However, this function is realized through separate morphemes. In order to refer to temporal events and relations that do not coincide with the speech time and occur prior or subsequent to the speech time, a combination of temporal adverbials, lexical terms and auxiliaries in conjunction with grammatical and situation aspect are used. Thai has imperfective and perfective aspect markers that are not obligatory, so sentences often appear without aspect markers. The actual number of aspect markers in Thai is somewhat contentious, ranging from 8 to at least 17 aspect markers (Kanchanawan, 1978; Koenig & Muansuwan, in press; Schmidt, 1992; Thepkanjana, 1986). There are two imperfective markers kam0laŋ0 and ju:1.1 138
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 139
The preverbal imperfective marker kam0laŋ0 signifies ‘the process of doing something’, and postverbal ju:1 signifies ‘the continuation of an event’ which means ‘stay/live’ if used as a lexical verb (Burusphat, 1991). While kam0laŋ0 is more limited to the progressive meaning and restricts its usage to dynamic verbs, ju:1 has evolved into a more general imperfective aspect marker which includes stative meaning (Meepoe, 1998). Hence the two imperfective markers have distinctive though overlapping, aspectual meanings. Imperfective aspect can also be implied by adverbs such as jaŋ0 ‘still’, reduplication of the adverb, e.g., rɯaj2 rɯaj2 ‘continually’, khɔj2 khɔj2 ‘gradually’, and through intrinsic aspect of the verb, which can all give an ongoing interpretation to the clause. The resultative verbs set1 or tçop1 meaning ‘finish’ give a perfective reading to the clause or sentence. There is some controversy as to whether the morpheme lε:w3 ‘already’ in verb-phrase final position is a perfective or perfect marker (Boonyatispark, 1983; Burusphat, 1991; Howard, 2000; Schmidt, 1992; Scovel, 1970). Its function appears to vary dependent on the context. The preverbal anterior marker daj2 can also be used to imply past reference. As explicit viewpoint is optional in most clauses, Thai, similar to Mandarin Chinese, has a zero viewpoint morpheme (Smith & Erbaugh, 2005). Zeromarked clauses have a consistent default interpretation, i.e., telic predicates (achievements and accomplishments) are taken as bounded (perfective) and drive the story line, whereas atelic predicates (activities and states) are taken as unbounded (imperfective) and support or give background to the storyline. Additional means of encoding simultaneity are through the usage of temporal connectives. The main connectives, which can encode simultaneity in Thai narrative are the connectives phɔ:0 and mɯa2 both having a when type function, kha1na1 thi:2 ‘while’, the adverb ra1wa:ŋ0 ‘during’, and adverbial phrase phɔ:0 di:0 ‘just at that time’. The term phɔ:0 di:0 generally means ‘just enough’, and when used in a temporal context it means ‘just at that time’ or ‘just then’. The connective phɔ:0 ‘when’ is more informal and colloquial in usage than mɯa2 ‘when’. The term kha1na1 thi:2 means ‘during this time’ or ‘while’ and kha1na1 nan3 means ‘during that time’ and indicates retrospection. The construction kha1na1diaw0kan0 has a meaning similar to ‘meanwhile’. The temporal term while is unambiguous in its simultaneous interpretation. However, the interpretation of when is somewhat ambiguous and open to interpretation, as it can give either a simultaneous or successive interpretation dependent on the aspect of the verb and its predicate in conjunction with world knowledge (Moens & Steedman, 1986). Even though the interpretation of devices which have a ‘when’ type function, i.e. phɔ:0 and mɯa2 are somewhat ambiguous, in Table 3 they are classified as simultaneous connectives, as events they relate temporally either overlap or at least are closely aligned. The multifunctional, coordinating conjunction lε3 ‘and’ can theoretically express a simultaneous or successive relationship between its two clauses. As noted above, simultaneity can be expressed using additional implicit devices, which can indirectly contribute to signalling a simultaneous relation. As in other languages previously studied, relative clauses and causal conjunctions can indirectly imply the co-occurrence of two events or actions, e.g., ‘The dog runs because the bees chase him.’ In addition, there are other implicit means of expressing simultaneity, which rely on lexical verbal semantics. For example, if the subordinate or main clause 139
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 140
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
contains a durative perceptual, cognitive, affective verb or a verb of position, the events are likely to be interpreted as overlapping, e.g., The boy watches, the dog runs away or The boy sits, the owl flies away. (Table 3, to be discussed in the Results section, provides an overview of the main linguistic devices that can be used to express or imply simultaneity in Thai narrative.) Sequentiality can be inferred from juxtaposition of two clauses or by explicit usage of sequential temporal connectives e.g., lε:w3 kɔ:2 ‘then’, laŋ4tça:k1 ‘after’, or kɔ:n1 ‘before. The particle kɔ:2 is a commonly used, multifunctional device, which is used to signal cohesion or clause linkage and plays an important cohesive role in Thai narrative. It generally signals a sequential meaning, but can also give a simultaneous meaning, particularly when combined with a temporal connective, but interpretation is also dependent on the context. Perfective aspect morphemes serve an important function in the storyline as they signal the completion of a previous action. In Thai, similar to Mandarin Chinese, as viewpoint aspect is infrequent, unmarked telic clauses are the norm and sequence the story line in narrative (Smith & Erbaugh, 2005). In the frog story, achievements which are punctual and telic are particularly important in moving the story line, e.g., escape from the jar, break the jar, fall into the pond, and find the frog. Hence in Thai, narrative advances with both bounded, perfective aspect markers and with telic predicates in conjunction with explicit temporal adverbials, and does not advance with imperfective aspect markers and atelic predicates. There are additional linguistic devices which can imply sequentiality as listed in Table 4.
The present study The present study aims to examine the pattern of usage of linguistic devices used to express temporal relations in Thai children of 4 years, 6 years, 9 years and adults, and how the function and use of these devices changes with age and changes as other co-temporal devices enter the child’s semantic domain. Furthermore, this study investigates to what extent the common or language-general patterns found in previous crosslinguistic studies are also found in the acquisition of Thai, viz.: (1) there is a gradual progression in the organization of narrative from relating events at a local level to relating events at a more global level with age (Hickmann, 2004); (2) younger children use fewer expressive forms, and forms used serve a broader range of functions in the younger children than in the older children or adults (Berman & Slobin, 1994; Silva, 1991); (3) least restricted forms are acquired prior to more restricted forms (Aksu-Koç & von Stutterheim, 1994; Berman & Slobin, 1994); and (4) sequentiality is acquired prior to simultaneity. Research on Mandarin Chinese has revealed that narrators compensate for the optional nature of aspectual morphemes by using temporal connectives. Furthermore, temporal connectives in Mandarin Chinese are acquired relatively early (Hickmann, 2003). Based on shared typological characteristics of Thai and Mandarin Chinese, it can be predicted that a similar pattern will be exhibited by Thai narrators, and that verb semantics and verb choice will play an important role in the expression of temporal relations in Thai (Smith & Erbaugh, 2005).
140
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 141
WINSKEL: TEMPORAL RELATIONS IN THAI CHILDREN’S NARRATIVES
These research questions will be investigated by examining the linguistic devices Thai narrators use to express temporal relations when narrating the frog story (Mayer, 1967). In order to make a more detailed comparison of the various linguistic devices used, an analysis of the linguistic means of encoding the temporal contours depicted in Pictures 2 and 12 of the frog story will also be conducted, as these frames provide ‘more controlled windows’ into how narrators express overlapping relations (Strömqvist & Verhoeven, 2004: 8). Then the language-general and language-specific research questions outlined above will be examined in relation to the available data.
METHOD Data The Thai narratives used in the present study were drawn from the CHILDES database (MacWhinney, 2000) and consisted of 10 participants from the following age groups: 4-year-olds (mean age, M 4;0; range 3;6–4;4; SD 0.22 ), 6-year-olds (M 5;11; range 5;6 –6;4; SD 0.29), 9-year-olds (M 9;2; range 8;7–9;7; SD 0.31) and adults. Narratives were collected by researchers at the Center for Research in Speech and Language Processing (CRSLP) at Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok (Zlatev & Yangklang, 2003). The children’s data were collected from three Bangkok schools with families from predominantly middle-class socio-economic backgrounds, and the adult data were collected from students at Chulalongkorn University. The 4-year-old children were pre-school children, whereas the 6-year-olds were in Grade 1, and the 9-year-olds were in Grades 3 and 4. The data have been transcribed into CHAT format and are available from the CHILDES database. Table 2 gives the mean number of clauses and words, with standard deviations, in the transcripts of each age group. An analysis of variance revealed a significant difference between age group for mean number of words (F(1, 3) 21.98, p 0.001) and mean number of clauses (F(1, 3) 15.72, p 0.001). Tukey post-hoc analysis revealed that the 4-year-olds and 6-year-olds were not significantly different in terms of the number of words or clauses produced; the 4-year-olds were significantly different from the 9-year-olds, and the adults produced significantly more words and clauses than the children. Narratives were collected by the widely used method for eliciting crosslinguistic data, based on the book Frog, where are you? by Mercer Mayer (1967). First, the Table 2 The mean number of clauses and words (and SDs) used for the narratives by each age group (N 10 for each group)
4 years Clauses Mean no. words
42.7 (9.6) 252.2 (56.3)
6 years
9 years
61.9 (19.5) 326.9 (123.5)
75.7 (24.4) 460.7 (167.9)
Adults 121.0 (41.9) 846.4 (283.7)
141
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 142
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
child was shown the frog story book and allowed to scan through it by him/herself for about 5 minutes. Then the following instructions were given in Thai: ‘This story is about a boy, his dog, and a frog. I’ll let you take a look at the pictures of the story, first. Then, I will ask you to tell me the story, picture by picture.’ The child then told the story while referring to the pictures. The Thai interviewer encouraged the child to tell the story using a minimum number of prompts. For further details of data collection procedure, see Zlatev & Yangklang (2003).
Analysis The transcripts were analysed for the different linguistic devices used to express temporal relations, including simultaneity and sequentiality. The frequency of temporal expressions in the different age groups was calculated with the aid of CLAN software. The different situation aspect types used with imperfective and perfective aspect markers and with temporal connectives with a when and while type function, were classified according to Table 1 for the different age groups. The classification system outlined below was used to classify verbs and their predicates into states, activities, accomplishments and achievements (adapted from Cholchitha, 2005). States are not dynamic and continue, e.g., mi:0 ‘have’, ru:3 ‘know’, ju:1 ‘is’. Activities are dynamic, atelic and durative, e.g., bin0 ‘fly’, waj2 na:m3 ‘swim’, wiŋ2 ‘run’. Accomplishments have duration but also have an endpoint, e.g., ao0 raŋ0 peuŋ2 ?ork1 ma:0 ‘get the bee hive honey out’, pi:n0 ton2 maj3 ‘climb the tree’. Achievements are telic, instantaneous and do not have duration, e.g., ma:0 ‘come’, tç:0 ‘meet’, tok1 ‘fall. In addition the expressions used to refer to the overlaps depicted in Pictures 2 and 12 of the frog story were analysed in detail. Both the situations depicted in Picture 2 are ongoing, i.e., Picture 2 shows ‘the boy and dog sleeping while the frog is escaping’, whereas in Picture 12 there is a punctual event of ‘the boy falling’ coinciding with the ongoing situation of ‘the bees chasing the dog’. Temporal relations, both simultaneous and sequential relations were targeted as well as other related relational terms.
RESULTS Linguistic devices used by Thai narrators to express temporal relations Table 3 shows the distribution of linguistic devices that were used to express or imply simultaneity in the Thai narratives. The temporal connectives and adverbials phɔ:0 ‘when’, mɯa2 ‘when’, kha1na1 ‘while’ constructions, ra1wa:ŋ0 ‘during’ and phɔ:0 di:0 ‘just at that time’ have been categorized as simultaneous connectives, as they commonly convey a simultaneous relationship. Simultaneous connectives are classified based on Hickmann’s (2003: 288) definition as ‘one situation is in the temporal region of another, thereby indicating an explicit or potential relation of partial or total overlap, or merely a vague relation of close temporal proximity’.
142
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 143
WINSKEL: TEMPORAL RELATIONS IN THAI CHILDREN’S NARRATIVES
Table 3 Distribution of linguistic devices used by the 4 age groups to express or imply simultaneity in the Thai narratives*
Imperfective aspect morphemes kam0laŋ0 ju:1 Total Simultaneous connectives Conjunctions: phɔ:0 ‘when’ mɯa2 ‘when’ kha1na1 ‘while’ constructions Adverbials: ra1wa:ŋ0 ‘during’ phɔ:0di:0 ‘just at that time’ Total Additional devices Coordinating conjunction lε3 ‘and’ Adverbs duaj2 ‘also’ jaŋ0 ‘still’ Reduplication of adverb Causal connective phr ɔ3 (wa:2) because’, implying co-occurrence of two actions. Relative clauses implying co-occurrence of two actions
4 years
6 years
9 years
Adults
15/6 (3.3) 14/7 (3.1) 29 (6.3)
12/4 (1.9) 9/5 (1.5) 21 (3.4)
14/8 (1.8) 23/5 (3.0) 37 (4.9)
8/5 (0.7) 17/7 (1.4) 23 (1.9)
3/2 (0.7) 0 0
40/8 (6.5) 0 0
20/5 (2.6) 11/5 (1.5) 5/2 (0.7)
12/5 (1) 13/7 (1.1) 6/5 (0.5)
0 1/1 (0.1) 3 (0.7)
0 0 40 (6.5)
2/1 (0.3) 2/2 (0.3) 38 (5.0)
4/3 (0.3) 0 35 (2.9)
44/5 (9.6)
35/4 (5.7)
86/10 (11.4)
55/10 (4.6)
5/5(1.1) 0 1/1 (0.2)
10/5 (1.6) 0 0
1/1 (0.1) 4/4 (0.5) 3/3 (0.4)
5/3 (0.4) 0 0
1/1 (0.2)
2/2 (0.3)
0
12/6 (1)
0
0
12/6 (1.6)
23/9 (1.9)
*The first figure in each column gives the absolute number of occurrences of that particular form in the data of a given age group. The second figure indicates the number of narrators who used the form. The number in brackets gives the percentage that the form occurs per total number of clauses per age group.
Table 4 shows the distribution of linguistic devices that were used to express or imply sequentiality in Thai. The connectives lε:w3kɔ:2 ‘then’, laŋ4tça:k1 ‘after’ and kɔ:n1 ‘before, prior’ have been classified as sequential connectives, as their primary function is to convey either the prior or subsequent occurrence of two events or actions. Other linguistic devices are listed which also imply the notion of sequentiality. The occurrence and usage of these different linguistic devices will now be discussed in relation to the different age groups.
143
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 144
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
Table 4 Distribution of linguistic devices used by the 4 age groups to express or imply sequentiality in the Thai narratives*
4 years
6 years
9 years
Adults
Sequential connectives 0 0 15/2 (2) 11/3(0.9) laŋ4tça:k1 ‘after’ 32/6 (7) 45/6 (7.3) 18/3 (2.4) 44/9 (3.6) lε:w3kɔ:2 ‘then’ 3/2 (0.7) 0 2/2 (0.3) 8/4 (0.7) kɔ:n1’before, prior’ Total 35 (7.6) 45 (7.3) 35 (4.6) 63 (5.2) Additional devices kɔ:2 discourse linker or filler 219/10 (47.9) 316/10 (51.1) 222/10 (29.3) 320/10 (26.5) tçɯŋ0 ‘so, therefore, consequently’ 0 0 56/6 (7.4) 18/7 (1.5) tham0haj2/haj2 ‘make or cause’ 0 2/2 (0.3) 15/5 (2) 16/9 (1.3) 0 5/1 (0.8) 12/6 (1.6) 19/7 (1.6) tçon0 ‘until’ 0 0 8/5 (1.1) 48/8 (4) tε:1 ‘but’ tha:2 ‘if’ 0 0 2/1 (0.3) 4/6 (0.3) 0 0 10/3 (1.3) 11/7 (0.9) phɯa2 ‘in order to’ Aspectual morphemes 11/6 (2.4) 12/7 (1.9) 10/6 (1.3) 18/8 (1.5) lε:w3 ‘already’ daj2 anterior marker 1/1 (0.2) 2/2 (0.3) 65/9 (8.6) 52/10 (3.6) set1 ‘finished, completed’ 1/1 (0.2) 11/4 (2.2) 5/4 (0.7) 0 *The first figure in each column gives the absolute number of occurrences of that particular form in the data of a given age group. The second figure indicates the number of narrators that used that form. The number in brackets gives the percentage that the form occurs per total number of clauses per age group
Patterns of use in the 4-year-olds In the narratives of the 4-year-old children a descriptive, mono-referential referencing of events (i.e., the speech time is the sole point of reference) is commonly used, e.g., (1)
mi:0 dek1 have child ‘There’s a child’
(child 4b, 4;0)
However, there are also examples of bi-referential referencing (reference to two points or events in time) emerging in this age group, as indicated by usage of the connectives kɔ:n1 ‘before’, lε:w3 kɔ:2 ‘then’ (example 2) and phɔ:0 ‘when’ (refer to Tables 3 and 4). 144
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 145
WINSKEL: TEMPORAL RELATIONS IN THAI CHILDREN’S NARRATIVES
(2)
dek1 kɔ:2 khɯn2 kɔ:n2 hin4 lε:w3 kɔ:2 bɔ:k1 wa:2 mi:0 nok3 hu:k2 ma:0 kat1 tçik1 (child 4b, 4;0) child then ascend rock then say that have owl come bite peck ‘The child climbs the rock then says that there is an owl coming to peck (him/her)’
The particle kɔ:2, is used initially in mono-referential utterances and precedes the verb in a single clause utterance as illustrated in example 3a. Subsequently, it is used in bi-referential utterances to link two actions as illustrated in example 3b (Burusphat, 1991). (3a)
(3b)
ma:4 kɔ:2 kra1do:t1 dog then jump ‘The dog jumps’ khon0 loŋ0 ma:0 kɔ:2 wiŋ2 lγj0 person descend come then run away ‘The person comes down then runs away’
(child 4b, 3;11)
(child 4c, 4;4)
Although there is relatively early usage of the temporal connective kɔ:n1 ‘before’ by the 4-year-olds as it was used by two children (see Table 4), a common strategy employed by the youngest age group to refer to temporal relations depicted is to sequentially juxtapose actions or events without a temporal connective. In example 4, two activities are juxtaposed next to an achievement to refer to coinciding events depicted in the frog story. The temporal relation between the events is not explicitly expressed and is somewhat ambiguous or open to interpretation. The ability to express temporal relations using explicit linguistic devices takes time to develop. (4)
dek1 nɔ:n0 kop1 nɔ:n0 kop1 kra1do:d1 (child 4b, 3;11) child lie down frog lie down frog jump ‘The child lies down (sleeps) the frog lies down (sleeps) the frog jumps’
It can be seen from Table 3 that the imperfective aspect markers ju:1 and kam0laŋ0 are used by over half of the 4-year-olds, which makes an utterance temporally unbounded by giving the event duration. As shown in example 5, the aspect markers kam0laŋ0 and ju:1 are used in juxtaposed utterances to refer to two overlapping events depicted in the frog story. Again the two ongoing activities are juxtaposed without an explicit temporal connective. (5)
lε:w3 mi:0 dek1 kam0laŋ0 nɔ:n0 mi:0 kop1 waj2 na:m3 ju:1 (child 4i, 3;11) then have child impfv sleep have frog swim impfv ‘Then there’s a child lying down (sleeping) there’s a frog swimming’
It can be seen from Table 5 that, as expected, imperfective morphemes are associated more with atelic events than telic events, which is also evident in the youngest children. In contrast, lε:w3 is not associated more with telic than atelic predicates in 145
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 146
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
the youngest children, whereas in the older age groups it is, and occurs most frequently with achievements, whose inherent semantics is congruent with a perfective function and hence suggests that lε:w3 is serving a perfective foregrounding function in the older narrators within the context of the frog story (Howard, 2000). In the youngest children kam0laŋ0 is used with activities, accomplishments and achievements, whereas ju:1 is reserved more for use with atelic activities and states and not with telic events, which indicates that the children are sensitive to the difference in function and usage of these two imperfective morphemes. This delineation in function is less clear-cut in the older narrators as they also use ju:1 with telic events. Furthermore, the youngest children use imperfective markers with different verb types, e.g., kam0laŋ0 khaw2 paj0 ‘enter’ (an achievement), kam0laŋ0 ao0 raŋ0 peuŋ2 ?ork1 ma:0 ‘is taking the bee hive off’ (an accomplishment), kam0laŋ0 lε:n2 ‘playing’ (an activity), and are able to take a different perspective on events described by the same verb; for example, wiŋ2 ‘run’ is used with the progressive to give an ongoing action of ‘running’, e.g., kam0laŋ0 wiŋ2, or used as an accomplishment in, e.g., wiŋ2 ni:4 ‘run to escape’ or wiŋ2 l;y0 ‘run away’. The temporal connective phɔ:0 ‘when’ is used by two children to relate two events temporally (child 4a at age 4;4, and child 4h at 3;6). One of the children uses it with the activity ‘sleep’ of two of the protagonists and with the achievement Table 5 The number of imperfective (unbounded) aspectual morphemes kam0laŋ0 and ju:1 and perfective (bounded) aspectual morphemes lε:w3 occurring with situation aspect in the 4 age groups
Atelic
4 years kam0laŋ0 ju:1 lε:w3 6 years kam0laŋ0 ju:1 lε:w3 9 years kam0laŋ0 ju:1 lε:w3 Adults kam0laŋ0 ju:1 lε:w3
146
Telic
State
Activity
Accomplishment
Achievement
8 8 1
4
3
6 3
2
3
1
2
1 2
9 8
10
1 9 1
9 9 1
2 1
2 4 8
1 2
4 12 3
2 1
2 3 13
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 147
WINSKEL: TEMPORAL RELATIONS IN THAI CHILDREN’S NARRATIVES
‘emerges out from’ of the frog, which places the exiting event within the duration of the activity as illustrated in example 6a. (6a)
phɔ:0 dek1 nɔ:n0 lap1 kap1 ma:4 nɔn0 lap1 kop1 kɔ:2 phlo:1 khɯn2 ma:0 tça:k1 khuat1 lo:4 (child 4h, 3;6) when child sleep and dog sleep frog then emerge ascend come from bottle ‘When the child sleeps and the dog sleeps, the frog emerges out from the bottle’
In the second example (6b), phɔ:0 ‘when’ is combined with two telic events to signal a closely aligned temporal relationship between the two events. (6b)
*phɔ:0 nok3 hu:k2 ?ɔ:k1 ma:0 phɯŋ2 ?ɔ:k1 ma:0 pen0 fu:ŋ4 (child 4a. 4;4). When owl exit come bee exit come is swarm ‘When the owl comes out the bees come out in a swarm’
One of these children also used phɔ:0 di:0 ‘just at that time or just when’ to signal the co-occurrence of two achievements in the foreground (6c). (6c)
*phɔ:0 di:0 nok3 hu:k2 ?ɔ:k1 ma:0 lj0 dek1 tok1 ton2 maj3 (child 4h, 3;6) Just at that time owl exit come then child fall tree ‘Just at that time when the owl comes out, the child falls from the tree’
The connective lε3 ‘and’ is commonly used in this age group and frequently occurs at the beginning of an utterance and acts as a discourse filler, as in example 7a. It also appears to be used to some extent to relate or link events temporally as illustrated in example 7b. (7a)
(7b)
lε3 dek1 kɔ:2 riak2 (child 4i, 3;11) and child then shout and the child then shouts dek1 paj0 tç:0 kop1 lε3 loŋ0 ma:0 khɔj2 khɔj2 loŋ0 lε3 hen4 lu:k2 kop1 sip1 tua0 (child 4b, 4;0) child go meet frog and descend come slow slow descend and see children frog ten animals ‘The child goes to meet the frog and comes down very slowly and sees ten baby frogs’
Another mechanism used for expressing the co-occurrence of events is duaj2 ‘also’ used by five children in this age group. In this group, it is used to add an action to a protagonist as illustrated in example 8a, to indicate two protagonists doing the same action in example 8b, and the co-occurrence of two protagonists doing two different actions in example 8c. 147
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 148
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
(8a)
dek1 kɔ:2 mi:0 dek1 kɔ:2 du:0 duaj2 (child 4c, 4;4) child then have child aux watch also ‘There’s a child. The child watches also’ (8b) mi:0 dek1 hen4 ju:1 lε3 ma:4 hen4 duaj2 (child 4i, 3;11) have child see impfv and dog see also ‘There’s a child seeing (looking) and a dog sees (looks) also’ (8c) dek1 kɔ:2 wiŋ2 paj0 rɔ:p2 rɔ:p2 ko:n2 hin4 mi:0 nok3 hu:k2 loj0 paj0 duaj2 (child 4b, 3;11) child then run go round round rock have owl float go also ‘The boy runs round and round the rock, there’s (an) owl floats past also’
Patterns of use in the 6-year-olds All the forms that the youngest children use are also present among the narratives of the 6-year-olds. In this age group, it is apparent that there is a corresponding decline in the usage of a mono-referential referencing as usage of a bi-referential referencing system increases, which is indicated by the increased usage of connectives, although the connectives used are limited in variety (Tables 3 and 4). The main temporal connective used by this age group is phɔ0 ‘when’. In addition, the sequential connective lε:w3 kɔ:2 ‘then’ is used frequently by over half the 6-year-olds. In comparison with the 4-year-olds, the use of lε3 ‘and’ declines. As previously stated, the most noticeable difference between the 4-year-olds and 6-year-olds is the emergence of phɔ:0 ‘when’, which is used to relate temporal events (40 occurrences by 8 children); with mainly telic but some atelic predicates in the subordinate clause (see Table 6). The connective phɔ:0 ‘when’ is used often in conjunction with kɔ:2 meaning ‘also’ in this context, which introduces the main clause (see examples 9a–9c). In the frog story narratives, this construction is mainly used with telic events to introduce new information and so temporally relate and advance events in the foreground (example 9b), but is also used in conjunction with kɔ:2 to indicate two protagonists doing the same action as illustrated in example 9a, and has a similar function as previously served by duaj2 in the 4-year-olds in example 8b. (9a)
phɔ0 khaw3 tɯn1 ma:4 kɔ:2 tɯn1 when he wake dog also wake ‘When he wakes, the dog wakes also’
(child 6i, 6;0)
In example 9b, the aspectual verb set1 ‘finished, completed’ is used to give a perfective reading to the subordinate clause, which is a common device used in conjunction with phɔ0 ‘when’ by this age group to sequence events in the foreground or storyline. (9b)
phɔ:0 dek1 ta1ko:n0 set1 su1nak3 kɔ:2 kra1do:d1 loŋ0 paj0 (child 6a, 6;2) when child shout finish dog then jump descend go ‘When the child finished shouting the dog jumps down’
When phɔ:0 ‘when’ is combined with an atelic activity in the subordinate clause, it can give a simultaneous ‘while’ type interpretation, as illustrated in example 9c. 148
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 149
WINSKEL: TEMPORAL RELATIONS IN THAI CHILDREN’S NARRATIVES
(9c)
phɔ:0 dek1 no:n0 lap1 kop1 kɔ:2 ε:p0 ni:4 paj0 when child sleep frog then sneak escape go ‘When the child sleeps the frog escapes’
(child 6d, 6;0)
The usage of the term duaj2 ‘also’ to signal the co-occurrence of events reaches a peak in this age group (see Table 3).
Patterns of use in the 9-year-olds The emergence of a range of connectives both sequential and simultaneous is a very significant development in the 9-year-old age group (refer to Tables 3 and 4), e.g., mɯa2 ‘when’, kha1na1 thi:2 ‘while’, laŋ4tça:k1 ‘after’, tçon0 ‘until’, causal constructions tçɯŋ0 ‘so’, tham0 haj2, ‘to cause’, tε:1 ‘but’ and phɯa2 ‘in order to’. The emergence of relative clauses and temporal adverbials, such as kha1na1diaw0kan0 ‘meanwhile’ or ‘in the meantime’ or kha1na1diaw0kap1nan0 ‘during that time’ that relate events at a more global discourse level are noticeable in the 9-year-olds. In addition, there is an increase in usage and variety of temporal adverbials used, e.g., tɔ:n mɯt3 ‘when dark’, kan0 kraŋ3 nɯŋ1 na:n0 ma:0 lε:w3 ‘once a long time ago’, which gives a reference time to the events described. There is a noticeable increase in use of the anterior marker daj2 ‘get to, have an opportunity’, which is used to refer to past events and gives a perfective, completed reading (Burusphat, 1991). It was used only twice in the 6-year-old age group, but is used widely by the 9-year-old children (65 times) and adults (52 times). In the 9-year-old group the overt distinction between ‘when’ and ‘while’ functions is separately expressed through the terms phɔ:0 and mɯa2 both meaning ‘when’, as illustrated in example 10a and kha1na1 thi:2 ‘while’ in example 10b. (10a) mɯa3 khaw3 lap1 kop1 daj2 ?ɔ:k1 tça:k1 khuat1 lo:4 lε3 ni:4 paj0 (child 9a, 8;7) when he sleep frog ant. Marker exit from bottle and escape go ‘When he is asleep, the frog came out of the bottle and escaped’ (10b) khɯ:n0 nɯŋ1 kha1na1 thi:2 lok3ki:2 lε3 su1nak3 khoŋ4 khaw3 lap1 kop1 noj3 (child 9f, 9;3) night one while Lokki and dog of he sleep frog little ‘One night while Lokki and his dog sleep, the little frog daj2 lop1 ni:4?ɔ:k1 tça:k1 khuat1 kε:w2 thi:2 lok3ki:2 khaŋ4 aw0 waj3 ant. Marker escape exit from bottle glass which Lokki lock put escaped from the glass bottle, which Lokki (had) fastened (him) in’ In these examples the anterior marker daj2 gives a past reading to the subsequent action of ‘the frog escaping from the bottle’, which signals that the event is embedded within the time span of the previous activity ‘sleep’ in examples 10a–10b. As other alternative linguistic devices become available to the 9-year-old children, use of the term phɔ:0 ‘when’ declines in comparison with the 6-year-olds (refer to Table 3). In summary, similar strategies are used in the 9-year-olds as in the 6-year-old age group, but in addition a large variety of other linguistic strategies, in particular a 149
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 150
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
range of connectives, are used either to explicitly or implicitly signal temporal relations in the 9-year-old group.
Patterns of use in the adults It is noticeable that the adults use a wide range of different forms or expressive devices, both explicit and implicit, to encode temporal relations in narrative (Tables 3 and 4). Particularly noticeable are the frequently used connectives tçon0 ‘until’ and tε:1 ‘but’. The connective phɔ:0 is used less in adults than in the 6- and 9-year-old children and appears to be replaced to some extent by other forms, such as mɯa3 ‘when’, kha1na1 thi:2 ‘while’, ra1wa:ŋ0 ‘during’, etc.
Patterns of use of ‘simultaneous’ connectives with situation aspect The pattern of usage of phɔ:0 ‘when’ varies in relation to situation aspect in children and adults, as illustrated by Table 6, which shows the usage of when and while with situation aspect or aspectual predicate type in the different age groups. Children used phɔ:0 ‘when’ with both telic and atelic predicates, as illustrated by examples 6a and 6b, whereas adults selected only telic predicates with this connective.
Table 6 Linguistic devices used to express ‘when-’ and ‘while-type’ functions combined with situation aspect in the different age groups
State 4 years: ‘when’ constructions phɔ:0 ‘when’ phɔ:0 di:0 ‘just at that time’ 6 years: phɔ:0 ‘when’ 9 years: ‘when’ constructions phɔ:0 ‘when’ phɔ:0 di:0 ‘just at that time’ mɯa2 ‘when’ 9 years: ‘while-type’ constructions kha1na1 thi:2/nan3 ‘while’ kha1na1diaw0kan0 ‘meanwhile’ Adults: ‘when’ constructions phɔ:0 ‘when’ mɯa2 ‘when’ Adults: ‘while-type’ constructions kha1na1 thi:2/nan3 ‘while’ kha1na1diaw0kan0 ‘meanwhile’
150
Activity
Accomplishment
Achievement
9
4
2 1 26
6 1 6
2
12 1 8
1
9 6
1
1 1
3 1
2
4 3 2
1
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 151
WINSKEL: TEMPORAL RELATIONS IN THAI CHILDREN’S NARRATIVES
Patterns of use for Pictures 2 and 12 In order to examine in more detail the linguistic strategies and patterns employed by Thai narrators to express temporal relations, the linguistic devices used to express the overlapping temporal events depicted in Picture 2 (the boy and dog sleeping while the frog is escaping) and Picture 12 (the boy falling and the bees chasing the dog) of the frog story were examined. From Table 7 it can be seen that usage patterns vary with age and that different rhetorical choices are selected dependent on the situation or actions depicted, i.e., whether the narrator is referring to the events depicted in Picture 2 or Picture 12. The youngest children rely on imperfective aspectual markers, in particular, for expressing the events in Picture 2 (40%). This reliance on aspectual usage is also reflected in the overall data of the 4-year-olds (see Table 3).
Table 7 The percentage* of Thai narrators from each age group using different linguistic strategies to encode the simultaneous relations depicted in Pictures 2 (P2) and 12 (P12)
4 years
6 years
9 years
Adults
Linguistic strategies†
Imperfective aspect marker Simultaneous connective Causal connective construction Verb serialization Relative clause
P2
P12
P2
P12
P2
P12
P2
P12
40
10
20
10
0
0
20
10
10
20
40
20
60
40
50
20
0 0 0
10 0 0
0 0 0
10 50 0
0 0 0
0 80 10
10 0 0
30 60 0
of children in an age group (N 10) using each device. of linguistic strategies used: (a) Causal connective construction: ma:4 kɔ:2 1;:j0 wiŋ2 phrɔ3 wa:2 phɯŋ2 laj2 ta:m0 ma:4 The dog runs because the bees chase the dog (b) Verb serialization: phɯŋ 2 kɔ:2 bin0 ta:m0 su1nak3 The bees fly after the dog. (c) Relative clause: ma:4 kɔ:2 thi:2 phɯŋ2 tça1 laj2 toj1 nan3 kɔ:2 wiŋ2 pha:n1 na:2 dek1 tçhaj0 bop1 ma:0 The dog which the bees chase to sting, runs past in front of the boy Bob *Percentage †Examples
As simultaneous temporal connectives become available to children they incorporate this additional strategy into their linguistic repertoire. The 9-year-olds do not use imperfective aspect morphemes at all for either Picture 2 or 12, but they do use simultaneous connectives the most. For Picture 12 ‘the bees chasing the dog’, the older narrators, the 6-, 9-year-olds and adults, use a verb serialization strategy 151
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 152
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
which presupposes two events or actions e.g., bin0 ta:m0 ‘fly follow’ meaning ‘fly after’ in English, in conjunction with causal connectives to express the temporal relations depicted. In general, the older narrators – the 9-year-olds and adults – use a greater variety of linguistic strategies, including relative clauses and causal connectives, either to explicitly express or indirectly imply the temporal relations depicted (Tables 3 and 7).
DISCUSSION In the current study the linguistic strategies used to express temporal relations by Thai children and adults was examined with the aim of delineating what patterns are language-general or common with other languages previously studied, and what are more particular or specific to Thai. First, in order to explain the acquisition patterns observed, the overriding themes which drive or at least strongly influence narrative development in children crosslinguistically will be considered. There is a gradual progression in the organization of narrative from relating events at a local level to relating larger chunks of information at a more global level with age (Hickmann, 2004). This trend is also reflected in the current data. In the youngest age group, the 4-yearolds use primarily a mono-referential reference system and there is a gradual transition to using a bi-referential temporal reference system with a limited number of connectives, i.e., lε:w3 kɔ:2 ‘then’, phɔ:0 ‘when’, kɔ:n1 ‘before’. In the 6-year-olds a bi-referential referencing system is widely used; this is indicated by the dramatic increase in use of the temporal connective phɔ:0 ‘when’, which is predominantly used to temporally relate adjacent events in the foreground, with some linkage of foreground and background events at a local level. Eventually, other devices occur only in older speakers, 9-year-olds and adults, i.e., temporal adverbials such as kha1na1diaw0kan0 ‘meanwhile’ or ‘in the meantime’ or kha1na1diaw0kap1nan0 ‘during that time’ that relate events at a more global discourse level (Aksu-Koç & von Stutterheim, 1994; Dasinger & Toupin, 1994). Other common or universal trends can also be observed in the current data. The youngest children, the 4-year-olds, use fewer expressive options in expressing temporal relations than older children and adults; the forms they use serve a broader range of functions than in the older children or adults, and they tend to acquire least restricted forms prior to more restricted forms (Berman & Slobin, 1994; Silva, 1991). This can be seen in the 4-year-old narratives, as illustrated by the limited number of temporal devices used to express or imply simultaneity, i.e., phɔ:0 ‘when’, phɔ:0 di:0 ‘at the same time’. As in other languages, duaj2 ‘also’ was used by the youngest age group to refer to co-occurring events (Aksu-Koç & von Stutterheim, 1994; Berman & Slobin, 1994). It acts as an early means of signalling the co-occurrence of two events or actions, and its function is retained in adults, as well as the use of a wide range of additional devices. The multifunctional connective lε3 ‘and’ is commonly used by the youngest Thai age group, and has been found to be the first connective used in many other languages, e.g., English, Italian, German and Turkish (Bloom et al., 1980; Clancy et al., 1976; Clark, 1970; Hood et al., 1978). As in other languages its function changes with 152
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 153
WINSKEL: TEMPORAL RELATIONS IN THAI CHILDREN’S NARRATIVES
age (Hickmann, 2003). In Thai, lε3 ‘and’ is used initially by the youngest children at the beginning of an utterance as a discourse filler; subsequently, in the older children it temporally connects successive utterances with either a sequential or simultaneous interpretation. This pattern in usage concurs with research conducted on other languages (Berman, 1998). Use of lε3 ‘and’ reaches a maximum in the 9-year-old age group, then declines in the adults. The connective lε:w3 kɔ:2 ‘then’ is acquired relatively early, as it is less restricted than other more specific sequential connectives, and is the most frequently used connective in the youngest age group. The connective. kɔ:n1 ‘before’ was used in the youngest age group and prior to laŋ4tça:k1 ‘after. Another frequently used, multifunctional discourse linking device in Thai is the particle kɔ:2, which is used to signal cohesion or clause linkage in Thai narrative. It is commonly used in the younger age groups and occurs in 50% of clauses. It is used initially in mono-referential utterances by the youngest children, and then subsequently in bi-referential utterances to mark a temporal relationship between the preceding main event and the following event. It is commonly used in conjunction with temporal connectives to signal both sequential and simultaneous temporal relations. In 9-year-olds this function appears to decline and be replaced to some extent by use of the anterior marker daj2, which also often co-occurs with temporal connectives, and gives an anterior reading to the event. In the Thai data, as predicted from previous crosslinguistic research (Aksu-Koç & von Stutterheim, 1994; Clancy et al., 1976; Silva, 1991), phɔ:0 ‘when’ is acquired relatively early but declines as other devices for encoding corresponding, overlapping functions emerge. The pattern of usage of phɔ:0 ‘when’ varies in relation to the aspect of the subordinate predicate used in children and adults (Table 6). Children used phɔ:0 ‘when’ with both telic and atelic predicates, whereas adults selected only telic predicates with this connective. Hence, it appears that phɔ:0 ‘when’ serves a broader range of functions in children than in adults, which concurs with Silva’s (1991) results on the acquisition of when in English. It appears that as other devices are acquired, e.g., mɯa2 ‘when’, kha1na1 thi:2/nan3 ‘while’, ra1wa:ŋ0 ‘during’ and other implicit devices such as relative clauses and causal constructions, some of the functions previously served by this connective are replaced. Hence, these findings support the premise that as new terms enter the child’s semantic domain, there is a shift or reorganization of functions served by previously acquired linguistic forms as the mapping of the semantic space changes. It was predicted that, due to the greater, relative conceptual complexity of the expression of simultaneity (represented by phɔ:0 ‘when’, mɯa2 ‘when’, kha1na1 constructions ‘while’, ra1wa:ŋ0 ‘during’, phɔ:0 di:0 ‘just at that time’) in comparison with sequentiality (represented by lε:w3 kɔ:2 ‘then’, laŋ4tça:k1 ‘after’, kɔ:n1 ‘before’), there would be evidence of later acquisition of the expression of simultaneous relations in Thai. This is based on the premise that the degree of overlap between events in simultaneous relations varies and is often not expressed unequivocally through explicit linguistic devices (Aarssen, 2001; Aksu-Koç & von Stutterheim, 1994; Hopper, 1979). If we examine Tables 3 and 4 it can be seen that the connectives encoding sequentiality as represented by the sequential connectives lε:w3 kɔ:2 ‘then’ (32) and kɔ:n1 ‘before’ (3) are used on 35 occasions by the 4-year-olds, whereas simultaneous connectives, phɔ:0 ‘when’ and phɔ:0 di:0 ‘just at that time’ are used by them on only 4 occasions. 153
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 154
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
However, the proportions of sequential and simultaneous connectives represented in narratives of the older children are similar (6-year-olds: 45 sequential and 45 simultaneous; 9-year-olds: 35 sequential and 38 simultaneous), but in adults more explicitly sequential (63) than simultaneous (35) connectives are used. Hence, it appears that, at least initially, young children use more expressions that explicitly convey sequentiality than simultaneity when retelling the frog story. Furthermore, simultaneous expressions kha1na1 thi:2/nan3 ‘while’ and ra1wa:ŋ0 ‘during’ emerge relatively late in Thai (in the 9-year-olds), which gives additional support for a relatively late acquisition of the linguistic expression of simultaneity. However, it is important to qualify this result as it specifically relates to narrative which is characterized by having chronologically ordered sequential events. As coding temporal relations in narrative is an essential discourse function in languages in general, speakers have to utilize what devices are available in their particular language to code this function. If they have obligatory aspectual marking, they tend to use those forms extensively from an early age (Weist et al., 1993). In Thai, even though imperfective aspect markers are not obligatory, they are relatively transparent invariant morphemes, and are used relatively frequently by the youngest Thai children, who are also sensitive to the different usage patterns of the two imperfective markers. The youngest children are reliant on aspectual markers as they have only limited access to other temporal devices that can serve a comparable function, or this could also be due to the general tendency of young children to give descriptions rather than chronologically ordered narratives to this type of task (Berman & Slobin, 1994). We further speculated that as aspectual marking is not obligatory in Thai there would be alternative ‘compensatory’ usage of other devices, in particular temporal connectives and situation aspect to express overlapping temporal relations (Hickmann, 2003; Smith & Erbaugh, 2005). First, if we examine Table 3, it can be seen that results are not clear-cut, as the 6-year-olds do rely on the temporal connective phɔ:0 ‘when’ to express temporal relations, and the 9-year-olds use a range of additional temporal connectives (phɔ:0 ‘when’, mɯa2 ‘when’, kha1na1thi:2/nan2 ‘while’, kha1na1diaw0kan0 ‘meanwhile’, ra1wa:ŋ0 ‘during’, phɔ:0 di:0 ‘just at that time’), but usage of temporal connectives declines in the adults. This pattern of usage of temporal connectives across age in Thai diverges from the results found by Hickmann (2003) for Mandarin Chinese, as usage was found to increase with age. Based on the results for Mandarin Chinese, it was also predicted that in Thai there would also be relatively early acquisition of temporal connectives, phɔ:0 ‘when’ and kha1na1 thi:2 ‘while’, as the two languages share typological characteristics. Qualified support for this was obtained: the temporal connectives phɔ:0 di:0 ‘just at that time’ and phɔ:0 ‘when’ were used relatively early (by the 4-year-olds), but mɯa2 ‘when’ and kha1na1 thi:2 ‘while’ were relatively late to emerge, in the 9-year-olds’ narratives. However, additional pragmatic factors need to be considered, as phɔ:0 di:0 ‘just at that time’ and phɔ:0 ‘when’ are more informal and colloquial in usage than mɯa2 ‘when’. Furthermore, the expression kha1na1 thi:2 ‘while’ is not only more formal but also more complex as it is composed of two morphemes. As Thai children acquire the ability to use bi-referential referencing, temporal connectives play a more significant role in the expression of temporal relations in narratives. Initially, there is reliance on the temporal connective phɔ:0 ‘when’. However, as 154
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 155
WINSKEL: TEMPORAL RELATIONS IN THAI CHILDREN’S NARRATIVES
additional temporal connectives enter the child’s semantic domain, there is a shift or reorganization of functions served by these forms. In more mature narrators other rhetorical options, for example, connectives that relate events at a more global level, become available, and use of temporal connectives such as phɔ:0 ‘when’ declines. Eventually, narrators use a combination of both explicit and implicit means to express complex temporal relations in Thai narratives as they have acquired ‘a rich array of rhetorical options’ (Berman, 1998: 608). In conclusion, language acquisition within a semantic domain is a dynamic evolving system which is influenced by both cognitive conceptual development and languagespecific factors: the choices available within a specific language for packaging information; usage patterns and input frequency; obligatoriness and perceptual salience; and degree of uniformity or transparency of form-function relations (Shirai, Slobin & Weist, 1998). Thai has imperfective aspect that is not obligatory in usage but is relatively transparent as invariant morphemes are used, and consequently the youngest children in the current study use these aspectual morphemes to express temporal relations. In the older children temporal connectives as well as aspectual morphemes are used to mark the temporal distinctions depicted. In addition, in the older narrators, the 9-year-olds and adults, other more implicit linguistic strategies are used to express temporal relations. In sum, it appears that different rhetorical options are selected dependent on age and the linguistic options available in a particular language to express temporal events or situations, with grammaticalized or obligatory and transparent expressions more salient to the young language learner and more likely to be used from an early age and, in turn, more diffuse and opaque expressions acquired relatively late. In order to directly compare temporal usage patterns in typologically distinct languages, including languages such as Thai with non-obligatory aspectual usage, and answer some of the issues and questions raised in the current study, a more systematic crosslinguistic study needs to be conducted in the future.
NOTE 1.
Tones are marked in the Thai examples cited in this paper as follows: 0 mid, 1 low, 2 falling, 3 high, 4 rising. This system is based on the one developed at the Linguistics Research Unit (LRU) of Chulalongkorn University (Luksaneeyanawin, 1993). IPA transcription is used for the transcription of all other Thai text.
REFERENCES Aarssen, J. (2001). Development of temporal relations in narratives by Turkish-Dutch bilingual children. In L. Verhoeven & S. Strömqvist (Eds), Narrative development in a multilingual context (pp. 209–231). Amsterdam: John Benjamin. Aksu-Koç, A. & von Stutterheim, J. (1994). Temporal relations in narrative: Simultaneity. In R. A. Berman & D. I. Slobin (Eds), Different ways of relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
155
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 156
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
Andersen, R. W. (1991). Developmental sequences: The emergence of aspect marking in second language acquisition. In T. Huebner & C. A. Ferguson (Eds), Crosscurrents in second language acquisition and linguistic theories. Amsterdam: John Benjamin. Andersen, R. W. & Shirai, Y. (1994). Discourse motivations for some cognitive acquisition principles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 133–156. Andersen, R. W. & Shirai, Y. (1996). Primacy of aspect in first and second language acquisition: The pidgin/creole connection. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 527–570). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Bamberg, M. G. W. (1986). A functional approach to the acquisition to anaphoric relationships. Linguistics, 24(1/2), 227–284. Bennett, M. & Partee, B. (1972). Toward the logic of tense and aspect in English. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club. Berman, R. A. (1996). Form and function in developing narrative abilities. In D. I. Slobin, J. Gerhardt, A. Kyratzis & G. Jiansheng (Eds), Social interaction, social context and language: Essays in honor of Susan Ervin-Tripp (pp. 343–367). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Berman, R. A. (1998). Typological perspectives on connectivity. In N. Dittmar & Z. Penner (Eds), Issues in the theory of language acquisition (pp. 203–224). Bern, Germany: European Academic Publishers. Berman, R. A. & Slobin, D. I. (Eds) (1994). Different ways of relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Bloom, L., Lahey, M., Lifter, K. & Fiess, K. (1980). Complex sentences: Acquisition of syntactic connectives and the semantic relations they encode. Journal of Child Language 7, 235–261. Boonyatispark, T. (1983). A study of aspect in Thai. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of London. Burusphat, S. (1991). The structure of Thai narrative. Dallas, TX: The Summer Institute of Linguistics. Chan, Y.-C. (1996). A semantic and cross-linguistic study of imperfective aspect in narrative discourse. Research Papers in Linguistics and Literature, 5, 49–68. Cholchitha, S. (2005). Temporal information in Thai. Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Texas. at Austin Clancy, P., Jacobsen, T. & Silva, M. (1976). The acquisition of conjunction: A cross-linguistic study. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 12, 71–80. Clark, E. V. (1970). How young children describe events in time. In G. B. Flores d’Arcais & W. J. M. Levelt (Eds), Advances in psycholinguistics. New York: Elsevier. Dasinger, L. & Toupin, C. (1994). The development of relative clause functions in narrative. In R. A. Berman & D. I. Slobin (Eds), Different ways of relating events in narratives: A cross-linguistic developmental study (pp. 457–514). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Feagans, L. (1980). Children’s understanding of some temporal terms denoting order, duration and simultaneity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 9, 41–57. Hickmann, M. (1997). Information status and grounding in children’s narratives: A crosslinguistic perspective. In J. Costermans & M. Fayol (Eds), Processing interclausal relationships: Studies in the production and comprehension of text. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Hickmann, M. (2003). Children’s discourse: Person. space and time across languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hickmann, M. (2004). Coherence, cohesion, and context. Some comparative perspectives in narrative. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Hood, L., Lahey, M., Lifter, K. & Bloom, L. (1978). Observational descriptive methodology in studying child language: Preliminary results on the development of complex sentences.
156
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 157
WINSKEL: TEMPORAL RELATIONS IN THAI CHILDREN’S NARRATIVES In G. P. Sackett (Ed.), Observing behaviour, Vol. 1, Theory and application in mental retardation. Baltimore: University Park Press. Hopper, P. J. (1979). Aspect and foregrounding in discourse. In T. Givon (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics 12: Discourse and Syntax (pp. 213–241). New York: Academic Press. Howard, K. (2000). The notion of current relevance in the Thai perfect. Linguistics, 38(2), 373–407. Kanchanawan, N. (1978). Expression for time in the Thai verb and its application to Thai-English machine translation. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin. Keller-Cohen, D. (1981). Elicited imitation in lexical development: Evidence from a study of temporal reference. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 10(3), 273–288. Koenig, J. P. & Muansuwan, N. (in press). The syntax of aspect in Thai. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. Labov, W. & Waletzky, J. (1968). Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience. In J. Helm (Ed.), Essays on the verbal and visual arts. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Li, P. & Shirai, Y. (2000). The acquisition of lexical and grammatical aspect. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Luksaneeyanawin, S. (1993). Speech computing and speech technology in Thailand. Proceedings of the Symposium on Natural Language Processing in Thailand, Chulalongkorn University, 17–21 March, 276–321. MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Mayer, M. (1967). Frog where are you? New York: Dial Press. Meepoe, T. A. (1998). The interaction between lexical aspect and progressive imperfective in Thai: A discourse analysis of kamlaŋ and yùu. Journal of Language and Linguistics, 16(2), 56–66. Moens, M. & Steedman, M. J. (1986). Temporal information and natural language processing. (Edinburgh Research Papers in Cognitive Science: Research Paper EUCCS/RP-2). Edinburgh: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh University. Morgan, G. (2002). Children’s encoding of simultaneity in British Sign Language narratives. Sign Language and Linguistics, 5(2), 131–165. Schmidt, T. P. (1992). A non-linear analysis of aspect in Thai narrative discourse. In K. L. Adams & T. J. Hudak (Eds), Papers from the second annual meeting of the SouthEast Asian Linguistics Society. (pp. 327–342). Tempe, Arizona: Arizona State University. Scovel, T. (1970). A grammar of time in Thai. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Michigan. Shirai, Y. (1998). The emergence of tense-aspect morphology in Japanese: Universal predisposition? First Language, 18, 281–309. Shirai, Y., Slobin, D. I. & Weist, R. E. (1998). Introduction to Special Issue ‘The acquisition of tense-aspect morphology’. First Language, 18, 245–253. Silva, M. N. (1991). Simultaneity in children’s narratives: The case of when, while and as. Journal of Child Language, 18, 641–662. Slobin, D. I. (1985). Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, Vol. II: The data (pp. 1157–1256). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Slobin, D. I. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”. In J. J. Gumperz & S. C. Levinson (Eds), Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Slobin, D. I. (2003). Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic rela- tivity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds), Language in mind: Advances in the investigation of language and thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
157
074794_FLA_133-158.qxd
FIRST LANGUAGE
2/2/07
2:08 PM
Page 158
VOLUME 27 ISSUE 2
Smith, C. S. & Erbaugh, M. (2005). Temporal interpretation in Mandarin Chinese, Linguistics, 43(4), 713–756. Strömqvist, S. & Verhoeven, L. (2004). Typological and contextual perspectives on narrative development. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Thepkanjana, K. (1986). Serial verb constructions in Thai. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Michigan. Vendler, Z. (1967). Verbs and times. Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. Weist, R. M., Atanassova, M., Wysocka, J. & Pawlak, A. (1999). Spatial and temporal systems in child language and thought: A cross-linguistic study. First Language, 19, 267–311. Weist, R. M., Kaczmarek, A. & Wysocka, J. (1993). The function of aspectual configurations in the conversational and narrative discourse of Finnish, Polish and American children. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics, 27, 79–106. Weist, R. M., Lyytinen, P., Wysocka, J. & Atanassova, M. (1997). The interaction of language and thought in children’s language acquisition: A crosslinguistic study. Journal of Child Language, 24, 81–121. Winskel, H. (2003). An investigation into the acquisition of temporal event sequencing: A cross-linguistic study using an elicited imitation task. First Language, 23, 65–95. Zlatev, J. & Yangklang, P. (2003). Frog stories in Thai: Transcription and computerised analysis of 50 Thai narratives from 5 age groups [from CHILDES database].
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Dr Heather Winskel MARCS Auditory Laboratories, University of Western Sydney, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South, NSW 1797, Australia. E:
[email protected]
158
