WORD ORDER AND PARTICLES ti - Stanford University

.' .I.

I n P a p e r s and Reports on C h i l d Language Development, 1977, Vol. 13.

WORD ORDER AND PARTICLES IN THE ACQUISITIONOF JAPANESE'

Kenji Hakuta Department of Psychology and S o c i a l R e l a t i o n s

Harvard University

S e v e r a l i n v e s t i g a t o r s (Bever, 1970, d e V i l l i e r s ti d e V i l l i e r s , 1973, Maratsos, 1974) have studied t h e comprehension of reversible a c t i v e and passive sentences i n English-speaking children. Reversible a c t i v e and p a s s i v e s e n t e n c e s r e f e r t o s e n t e n c e s such as "The h o r s e k i s s e d t h e cow" and "The h o r s e w a s k i s s e d by t h e cow", where t h e meaning u n d e r l y i n g t h e s e n t e n c e cannot b e determined on t h e b a s i s of l e x i c a l i t e m s a l o n e .

For English-speaking children, the following p i c t u r e of development

emerges: up u n t i l about age 4, c h i l d r e n do v e i l above chance level i n acting out reversible active sentences, but only at about chance for p a s s i v e s , suggesting t h a t t h e y p e r c e i v e t h e two s e n t e n c e s t o be a t l e a s t d i f f e r e n t . At about age 4, t h e s e c h i l d r e n s y s t e m a t i c a l l y m i s i n t e r p r e t p a s s i v e s e n t e n c e s , choosing t h e f i r s t noun as a g e n t . For example, "The frog was k i s s e d by t h e snake" is i n t e r p r e t e d as t h e f r o g kissing t h e

snake. A t t h i s point i n development, t h e i r performance on reversible p a s s i v e s drops below,chance. Beyond t h i s p o i n t , c h i l d r e n begin c o r r e c t l y interpreting the passivss;

Presumably, t h i s p e r i o d of s y s t e m a t i c r e v e r s a l s of p a s s i v e s is due t o t h e c h i l d o v e r g e n e r a l i z i n g the s t r a t e g y "Any Noun-Verb-Noun sequence within a potential internal unit i n the surface structure corresponds ,to ( 'agent-action-patient']'' (Bever, 1970). This paper r e p o r t s a c r i t i c a l test of t h e g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of t h e s e r e s u l t s t o o t h e r languages. Specifically, I w i l l describe an experiment on the comprehension of r e v e r s i b l e a c t i v e and p a s s i v e s e n t e n c e s i n J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n . The discussion section of the paper w i l l introduce r e s u l t s from production, as w e l l as some i n c i d e n t a l f i n d i n g s from a second experiment which s u g g e s t some i n t e r e s t i n g q u a l i f i c a t i o n s on t h e g e n e r a l i t y of t h e f i r s t experiment.

Q

Unlike E n g l i s h , where word o r d e r is f i x e d , J a p a n e s e is a language w i t h a r e l a t i v e l y f r e e word o r d e r . The b a s i c o r d e r of elements i n a simple s e n t e n c e i n Japanese i s Subject-Object-Verb (SOV). The o r d e r of t h e s u b j e c t and t h e o b j e c t , however, can b e interzhanged, t o y i e l d ObjectSubject-Verb (OSV). This is p o s s i b l e because J a p a n e s e h a s postposed p a r t i c l e s t h a t mark grammatical r o l e . The o n l y t r u e c o n s t r a i n t as t o word o r d e r i n Japanese is t h a t t h e main v e r b of t h e s e n t e n c e be i n s e n t e n c e - f i n a l p o s i t i o n (Kuno, 1973).

Since t h e SGV and OSV order apply to both a c t i v e and passive sentences,

t h i s r e s u l t s i n 4 sentence types: SOV/active, OSV/active, SOV/passive,

and OSV/passive. Table 1 l i s t s an example f o r each of t h e s e f o u r sentence

types, presented a s an amalgam of English conrent words and Japanese

'Is p a r t i c l e s . S e n e e w e (11, G I W F E - e a TIGER-o LICKED-active, is e q u i v a l e n t

to the English sentence

giraffe l i c k e d t h e t i g e r " . The -Emarking

on GIRAFFE i n d i c a t . e s t h a t i t i s t h e s u b j e c t of t h e s e n t e n c e , and t h e

p a r t i c l e --0 on T I G E R signals t h e f a z t t h a t i t is the o b j e c t o f t h e s e n t e n c e .

All markings on verbs are postposed, and t h e r e i's a marking for t h e active

voice, p a s t t e n s e on t h e v e r b , Sentence ( 2 ) , TIGER-o GIRAFFE-ga LICKED-

active, i s simply s e n t e n c e (1) w i t h t h e two nouns reversed. The two

sentences mean t h e sane t h i n g , and which o r d e r is p r e f e r r e d a p p e a r s t o be

governed by t o p i c of d i s c o u r s e . Sentence ( 3 1 , TIGER-ga GIRAFFE-ni'LICKED-

p a s s i v e , i s t h e SOV/passive form. The p a r t i c l e -Eonce a g a i n marks t h e

grammatical s u b j e c t of t h e s e n t e n c e , t h e p a r t i c l e - n i marks t h e o b j e c t ,

and t h e r e is a p a s s i v e marking on t h e v e r b . S e n t e n z (4) i s s e n t e n c e (3)

r e v e r s e d . The r i g h t hand column of Table 1 i n d i c a t e s t h e o r d e r of t h e

s e m a n t i c r o l e s of t h e two nouns i n each s e n t e n c e . Note t h a t t h e s u b j e c t

-e marker

is t h e a g e n t i n t h e a c t i v e s e n t e n c e s , b u t p a t i e n t i n p a s s i v e s .

What s o r t s of p r e d i c t i o n s might b e made about J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n ' s

comprehension of t h e s e f o u r s e n t e n c e t y p e s ? One p o s s i b i l i t y is t h a t word

o r d e r is what t h e c h i l d r e n pay a t t e n t i o n t o , and t h a t t h e y follow a s t r a t e g y similar t o t h e one proposed by Bever f o r English, except t h a t in

t h e case of J a p a n e s e , t h e s t r a t e g y should r e a d "Any Noun-Noun-Verb sequence w l t h i n a p o t e n t i a l u n i t in t h e s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e corresponds t o AgentPatient-Action". This would p r e d i c t t h a t s e n t e n c e s (1) and (4), t h a t i s , SOV/active and OSV/passive, should be easy, since they both have Agent-

Patient-Verb o r d e r . It would a l s o p r e d i c t t h a t s e n t e n c e s (2) and ( 3 ) ,

namely, OSV/active and SOVfpassive, should be d i f f i c u l t , since they both

have Patient-Agent-Action o r d e r . We might a l s o expect a p e r i o d of systematic reversals, as i n t h e English f i n d i n g s .

Another p o s s i b i l i t y is t h a t word o r d e r p l a y s no r o l e a t all, but r a t h e r t h a t what the c h i l d r e n pay a t t e n t i o n t o is t h e i n f o r m a t i o n sign a l l e d by t h e p a r t i c l e s . If t h i s were t h e case, t h e r e should b e no d i f f e r e n c e between t h e two a c t i v e s e n t e n c e s , n o r would t h e r e be any d i f f e r e n c e between t h e two p a s s i v e s e n t e n c e s . These p a i r s are i d e n t i c a l with respect t o p a r t i c l e s , and d i f f e r only with respect t o order.

There are s e v e r a l s t u d i e s which have been conducted i n J a p a n e s e a l o n g similar l i n e s , b u t none of them has e x p l i c i t l y compared t h e f o u r

l o g i c a l l y p o s s i b l e t y p e s mentioned above. Yamanaka (1972, r e p o r t e d i n Murata, 1972) used a picture-cued comprehension procedure and t e s t e d corrprehension of r e v e r s i b l e and n o n - r e v e r s i b l e a c t i v e s and p a s s i v e s , b u t only i n t h e SOV order. Her r e s u l t s are somewhat puzzling. Only a t age 5

d i d h e r s u b j e c t s perform b e t t e r than chance on any of t h e s y n t a c t i c types. Her c o n c l u s i o n was t h a t p a r t i c l e s seem t o c o n f r o n t t h e J a p a n e s e c h i l d w i t h a r a t h e r d i f f i c u l t l e a r n i n g t a s k . Hayashibe (1975), however, o b t a i n e d

somewhat more encouraging r e s u l t s . Using an act-out comprehension proc e d u r e , he looked a t SOV and OSV o r d e r s , b u t only f o r a c t i v e s . His s u b j e c t s were between 3 and 6 y e a r s o l d . He grouped his s u b j e c t s a c c o r d i n g t o e r r o r r a t e s , and showed t h a t t h e group with t h e lowest e r r o r r a t e had t h e h i g h e s t meail age. N e v e r t h e l e s s , from his t a b l e s i t i s p o s s i b l e t o i n f e r t h a t from about age 4 on, the children appear t o be responding t o the contrast contained i n particles,

SUBJECTS: Subjects were 48 c h i l d r e n , 24 boys and 24 g i r l s , between the ages of 2;3 and 6 ; 2 , from a p u b l i c day c a r e center i n Tokyo. Subjects were i n i t i a l l y selected by age group'(2;3-3;2', 3 ; 3 - 4 ; 2 , 4;3-5;2, 5;3-6;2),

with 6 boys and 6 g i r l s f o r each group. For p u r p o s e s of analysis, s u b j e c t s were l a t e r grouped a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r mean l e n g t h in morphemes of t h e i r

utterances i n an elicited production task (see below). They w i l l be c a l l e d Group I-IV (Group I: less t h a n 6.9; Group 11: 7 . 0 - 7 . 9 ; Group 111: 8.0-8.9; Group I V : 9.W). Number of s u b j e c t s w a s 15, 1 2 , 13, and 8 for

Groups I through IV, r e s p e c t i v e l y . Mean a g e s f o r t h e s e aroups were 3;6, 3;9, 5;1, and 5;4. Spearman rank o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n , c o r r e c t e d f o r t i e s , between age and mean l e n g t h of production w a s +.64.

MATERIALS AND PROCEDURE: Two s e t s of sentences, each set c o n t a i n i n g 3 r e p l i c a t i o n s of e a c h of t h e four s e n t e n c e t y p e s from T a b l e 1, were c r e a t e d . The second s e t c o n t a i n e d t h e same l e x i c a l items a s t h e f i r s t set, b u t w i t h t h e two nouns r e v e r s e d . S u b j e c t s were randomly a s s i g n e d t o e i t h e r s e t . W i t h i n each s e t , o r d e r of p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e 1 2 s e n t e n c e s was randomized. To t e s t f o r comprehension, s u b j e c t s were r e q u i r e d t o act o u t t h e s e n t e n c e s u s i n g t o y a n i m a l s . The a n i m a l s were: a l l i g a t o r , g o r i l l a , camel,panda, b e a r , cow, p i g , h o r s e , e l e p h a n t , g i r a f f e , t i g e r , f r o g , s n d t u r t l e . The v e r b s used were: k e t t a ( k i c k e d ) , nameta ( l i c k e d ) ,

b u t t a ( h i t ) , k i s u s h i t a ( k i s s e d ) , and kusugutta ( t i c k l e d ) . Each s u b j e c t w a s t e s t e d i n d i v i d u a l l y i n a s e p a r a t e room in t h e day c a r e c e n t e r . One experimenter presented t h e sentences and w a s t h e primary i n t e r a c t o r with the s u b j e c t , w h i l e a second e x p e r i m e n t e r coded t h e c h i l d ' s r e s p o n s e . In o r d e r t o f a m i l i a r i z e t h e s u b j e c t w i t h materials, each animal was i n t r o -

duced i n d i v i d u a l l y and t h e c h i l d w a s asked t o name i t . A puppet was t h e n i n t r o d u c e d . The s u b j e c t w a s t o l d t h a t t h e game w a s t o a c t o u t on a wooden "stage" what t h e puppet s a i d . Three simple warm-up s e n t e n c e s were g i v e n . None of the s u b j e c t s t e s t e d c o u l d not understand t h e d i r e c t i o n s . The 12 s e n t e n c e s immediately followed. Only t h e r e l e v a n t a n i m a l s were p l a c e d on the s t a g e f o r each s e n t e n c e . The e n t i r e p r o c e d u r e l a s t e d a b o u t 15 minutes.

For t h e production task, which always followed immediately a f t e r t h e

comprehension t a s k , s u b j e c t s were i n t r o d u c e d t o 'a puppet w i t h r e d e y e s , who c o u l d n o t see. Then t h e s u b j e c t was shown a " t e l e v i s i o n " , a p o r t a b l e s l i d e viewer, and asked t o d e s c r i b e f o r the puppet what s / h e saw. There a w e r e two warm-up s l i d e s , followed by 16 s l i d e s of a n i m a l s performing v a r i o u s a c t i o n s . The c h i l d ' s u t t e r a n c e s were r e c o r d e d and l a t e r t r a n s c r i b e d .

The procedure lasted about 10 minutes.

SCORING: S u b j e c t s ' r e s p o n s e s t o t h e comprehension t a s k was s c o r e d as e i t h e r c o r r e c t o r wrong, and r e v e r s a l s were noted. P r o d u c t i o n was o r i g i n a l l y for t h e purpose of obtaining utterance length alone, but the d a t a were later s c o r e d f o r whether -9o r -2 were s u p p l i e d . Furthermore, t h e ordering of s u b j e c t and object was scored.

RESULTS: The results a r e d e p i c t e d g r a p h i c a l l y in F i g u r e 1. A f i v e way a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e was c a r r i e d o u t on t h e d a t a . O f t h e two between . s u b j e c t v a r i a b l e s (Group, Sex), o n l y Group w a s s i g n i f i c a n t , F(3,40)=10.549, p ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download