Transcript 2 (Sep.23) - University at Albany

Why languages differ:
Variation in the
conventionalization of
constraints on inference
By: Randy J. LaPolla
City University of Hong Kong
Presented by:
Hikaru Inuzuka and
Christina Zontini
Introduction
Ostension
Communication
Inference
Hypothesis:
There is no innate language
structure and no deterministic
coding-decoding process
Rejects the idea of
a functional
difference
conceptual and
procedural
information
How Language Differs
There is no
assumption of a
universal
geneticallyencoded
grammar
we must look at
each language on
its own terms
and determine
its constraints
that each
language is seen
as a unique
entity reflecting a
unique society
Ostensive-Inferential
Communication
Ostensive Act
information
Inference:
to recognize the
intention
Exchange of
symbolic
expressions
∧
successful
determination of
the reason of the
communicator
Non-linguistic
communicatio
n
Linguistic
communicatio
n
may differ in
precision, but it
always involves
inference
regardless of the
process being
linguistic or not
Interpretation;
not simply to
decode a signal
…
Inference is
always involved in
interpretation to
figure out what the
communicator’s
intended
messages are
Degree of Explicitness=
communicator’s assumption of the hearer’s inferential abilities
and current knowledge state
knowledge the speaker assumes the hearer is able to
access in the process of an utterance,
explicit the utterance can be
Less
explicit
More
explicit
Q: Do you want something to drink?
A1: (points to soup bowl)
A2: I have soup.
A3: No. I have soup.
A4: No, because I have soup.
A5: No, since I have soup, I don’t need
anything to drink.
A6: No, I don’t want anything to drink. Since I
have soup, I don’t need
anything else to
drink right now.
How to make the interpretations
more constrained +
determinate?
“Goal of communication is
i.e., use discourse connectives;
not to decode the
Peter’s not stupid, so he can find
meaning in words but to
his own way home.
understand the speaker’s
Peter’s not stupid, after all, he can
communicative intention”
find his own way home.
(LaPolla 126)
i.e., use more explicit lexical item;
him, person <<< the teacher
The Development of Language
Structure
“Communication in the
pragmatic mode depends
largely on word order and the
lexicon alone, while
communication in the more
syntacticized mode depends
much more on conventionalized
constructions and morphology
in tightly structured
relationships” (LaPolla, p. 127)
Grammaticalization
and the fixing of
particular patterns in
language use are like
the creation of a path
through a field
The development of
grammar out of
repeated discourse
patterns then can be
seen as the fixing of
constraints on the
search for relevance
during the process of
interpretation.
4 Types of Conventionalization
1. Morphological means for constraining the
interpretation
2. Extending already available morphological
markings in new ways
3. The fixing of syntactic constrains on
interpretation
4. A type of secondary grammaticalization
Why Languages Differ
Language= unintended
byproduct of human attempts to
communicate effectively
 socio-cultural evolution
We construct and
represent the world
differently, and are
constrained by salience
and relevance of the
speaking community
conventionalization=
related to particular
environments; similar
adaptation process to
similar environments=
similarities among
conventions
Salience of mentioning certain things +
a regularly performance = convention
Bank= silver company;
silver= conventional currencies
repetitive use of you all
Borrowed words= possible new concepts +
conventions
• Chinese= feeling the
need for third person
pronoun for different
genders
• Taiwan: large plate
(western influence) for
rice, Chinese spoon to
scoop and chopsticks to
eat off the spoon
Interference of first language convention on
another language production
i.e.,
English speaker learning Chinese;
may overuse the perfective aspect marker
to replace the past tense concept to
fill the perceived gap
Learning new Language=
construe the world in a different way
How Languages Differ
From the hearer’s
point of view, we
can say that
languages differ not
so much in what can
be understood, but
in what must BE
understood.
Most languages have developed
obligatory grammatical markings that
constrain the interpretation in certain
domains to some extent.
Which
domains the
speakers of a
language will
chose to
constrain
How they will
constrain the
interpretation
2 MAJOR
ways
languages
differ
Language can differ
between cultures
in terms of how
specialized its
structures are
EXAMPLE:
A: The man dropped the melon and burst.
*In this example, because of the
grammatical constraint on conjunction
reduction in English, this sentence has to be
interpreted as saying that the man burst
after dropping the melon.
A: Pickles and ice cream are really great.
B: Pickles and ice cream is really great.
VS.
Summary
Fundamental aspect of communication=
linguistic structure <<< interaction of the
speaker + hearer
1. context constrains the interpretation of the
linguistic form
2. linguistic form that constrains the context
(constrains the creation of the context)
Grammatical forms help develop
construction of proper context, but the
INFERENCE is the basis of
communication!
Grammatic
alization;
applied to
the class
of items
Lexicalizati
on; applied
to a single
specific
item
both of
them are a
process of
conventio
nalization
Implications for Linguistic Theory
1) Languages differ in what not/to constrain
(which information to elaborate on and
what to drop)
2) constrains= result of grammaticalization;
NOT genetically hard-wired;
people’s cultural needs came first
 human language ability = NOT autonomous or
genetically programmed