VIEWS: 6 PAGES: 44 POSTED ON: 1/25/2012
Linguistics meets HUHL Teaching Gyanam Mahajan UCLA General profile of a H-U HL Linguistic Profile of a H-U HL Aims and Goals Reality check Some suggestions HS Is Brown Voice brown? HL Home Input Lx HLx ABCD or FOB Frequency of usage Domains of usage Weekend schools OCs Grandparents living with HL Regular travel to SA The H-U Learner “non-heritage” (monolingual or other non-SA HL) Hindi-Urdu exposure Other Indo-Aryan language exposure (e.g. Gujarati, Punjabi, Marathi, Bengali) Dravidian language exposure AustroAsiatic or TibetoBurman Fijian Hindi, Guyanese Hindi South Africa, Kenya or Nigeria Middle East Input HLx Input HL2 Input Linguistic Area L Input SA English Input Bollywood Multilingual, multicultural exposure at home for H-U And BOLLYWOOD The idealized HLS Abstract away from specific differences so that we can make some generalizations Proficiency? Video.mp4 NS, HS, L2 Proficiency – what does it mean? “I think that, like, she is, I mean, y’know, yeah!” NL – not “learned” L2 relies heavily on “learning” and the learning is linear What about HL? Non-linear acquisition for HL (certain domains, certain areas of linguistic knowledge and certain lacunae Linguistic Profile Phonetics and Phonology Retroflexion Prosodic system (e.g. no schwa in open syllables – especially relevant as they learn to read Hindi or Urdu script) Simple sentences WO fine PP, adjective NP, embedded clause WO, Correlatives Floating aspiration - Can hear the aspiration and are aware of it but random attachment to any appropriate segment (gadhaa vs. ghadaa) - Sequence of segment and h is converted into an aspirated segment (dhaii for dahii) Different subject types - Problem with sub+ne and problem with object agreement - Sub+ko is fine but problem with object agreement Subject types Regular subject 1 Regular subject 2 Dative subjects Ergative subjects Nominative subjects 1. john lambaa thaa John tall was 2. Mary lambii thii Mary tall was 3. John tairtaa thaa John used to swim 4. Mary tairtii thii Mary used to swim Nom -Acc 1. john kelaa khaataa thaa John used to eat a banana 2. mary kelaa khaatii thii Mary used to eat a banana 3. John kelaa khaa rahaa thaa John was eating a b. 4. Mary kelaa khaa rahii thii Mary was eating a b. Dative Subjects 1. John ko kelaa miltaa thaa John used to find banana(s) 2. John ko bukhaar thaa John had a fever 3. John ko biimaarii thii John had a sickness 4. Mary ko kelaa khaanaa paRtaa thaa Mary used to be forced to eat a b. Perfect 1. John tairaa John swam 2. Mary tairii Mary swam 3. John Delhi pahuNcaa John arrived in Delhi 4. Mary Delhi pahuNcii Mary arrived in Delhi 5. John giraa John fell 6. Mary girii Mary fell 7. John ko kelaa milaa John found/got/received a b. 8. Mary ko kelaa milaa Mary “ 9. John ko billii milii John found/got/recd. a cat 10. Mary ko billii milii “ Ergative John ne kelaa khaayaa thaa John erg banana eat+PERF past John had eaten a banana Mary ne kelaa khaayaa thaa Mary erg banana eat+PERF past Mary had eaten a banana Object Agreement John ne roTii khaayii thii John erg tortilla eat+PERF past John had eaten a tortilla (fem.) Mary ne roTii khaayii thii Mary erg tortilla (fem) eat +PERF past Mary had eaten a tortilla (fem.) Non-Overt Object John ne khaayaa John erg eat+PERF John ate Mary ne bahut paRhaa Mary erg a lot read Mary read a lot HL tremendous problems with ergative subjects Rarely any problems with sub+ko (never produce * maiN kelaa caahiye I banana want Transitive and Intransitive Ergative A binary dichotomy for transitivity does not work : Dative verbs are “+transitive” Non-overt objects “+transitive” Imperfect could be “+transitive” Hopper and Thompson (1980) HIGH LOW A. Participants 2 or more, A and 1 participant B. Kinesis O non-action C. Aspect action atelic D. Punctuality telic non-punctual E. Volitionality punctual non-volitional F. Affirmation volitional negative G. Mode affirmative irrealis H. Agency realis A low in potency I. Affectedness of O A high in potency O not affected J. Individuation O totally affected O non-individuated of O O highly Dative Subjects Recipient Experiencer Non-Volitional Non-action Non-agentive Afflicted Affected LOW TRANSITIVITY Nominative subjects One participant Volitional Imperfect LOW transitivity Ergative subject PERFECT – act/event completed Agentive (similar to a by-phrase) Two participants Affected Object HIGH transitivity Prototypical transitive events Erg sub dative dative One participant nom Two participants, Imperfect nom HinUrdu scale: Low -------------------------------- High One participant ---- non-volitional ----two participant----action; perfect; O affected What is HL? Dominant language interference Markedness – unmarked forms – teleologically motivated pidgins as languages HomeInput HL instruction ?? The learner (caution: HL may not know why they want to take your class; credit or non-credit) The parents (may or may not value an HL class) The Instructor (may have irrelevant pet topics, strange reasons and weird agendas) The Administration – may not value the HL class, brown students are all NS of H-U; may actually look for an instructor who can teach Thai and Indonesian or have a Nepali NS teach Hindi H-U is the new French Increase in number of total students – big increase in heritage and non-SA heritage students (the Slumdog Effect) Lack of funding University level class Within an HL class – what to teach and practical vs. language teaching (taxi stand kahaaN hai vs. yataayaat kaa saadhan kahaaN milegaa) similar to Scintillate scintillate dimunitive asteroid How I speculate as to your identity Overt Instruction Cross language similarity reduces impact of memorization Helps both Heritage language learners and others Avoid translation method (more conceptual) meta-language teaching (University level students) Efficiently fix some HL errors Structure and Ambiguity The chickens are ready to eat. Structure and meaning Flying planes can be dangerous. What are you teaching? And why?
Pages to are hidden for
"Transitivity and Perfectivity in HINDI-URDU"Please download to view full document