Monitoring Modality vs. Typology

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Monitoring Modality vs. Typology"

Ira Christopher Shields
8 years ago
Views:

1 Monitoring in Spoken German and German Sign Language: The Interaction of Typology and Modality NISL - Workshop on Nonmanuals in Sign Languages Frankfurt, 4. April 2009 Helen Leuninger & Eva Waleschkowski Institute for Cognitive Linguistics Goethe-University Frankfurt/Main, Germany Seite 1

2 Contents Project Monitor component Data: slip repairs & a-repairs Conclusions Seite 2

3 The Project (funded by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) Language production errors and their repairs in dependence on the modality: German Sign Language vs. Spoken German Research question: Which aspects of language production are modality-dependent and which are modality-independent? Collaborators: Helen Leuninger (supervisor), Annette Hohenberger, Daniela Happ (deaf), Elke Menges (deaf), Eva Waleschkowski Seite 3

Spoken German Research question: Which aspects of language production are modality-dependent and which

4 The Project Method: Elicitation of slips of the hand and tongue in a semi-naturalistic setting: picture story telling task Cognitive stress conditions: unordered pictures, time pressure, cumulative repetition Subjects were audio and/or videotaped Digitization of slip sequences in audio and video format Categorization of the data according to the main criteria: Type of slip: anticipation, perseveration, substituion, blend, exchange, and fusion Affected unit: phonological feature, segment, morpheme, word, and phrase Locus of repair: before word, within word, after word, and delayed Seite 4

and video format Categorization of the data according to the main criteria: Type of slip: anticipation, perseveration, substituion, blend, exchange,

5 Some slips: blend (ICH)-HABE-MICH-GETÄUSCHT+α-neg ICH-HABE-MICH-GETÄUSCHT / DAS-STIMMT-α-neg I have erred / that s not right comparable to the following slip of the tongue: stiehste (das) stimmt/siehst e that s corright that s correct/all right Seite 5

s not right comparable to the following slip of the tongue:

6 Some slips: semantic substitution/stranding of a facial expression error: repair: pensively SUCHEN search pensively ÜBERLEGEN ponder Seite 6

7 Types of self-repair (1) Slip repairs are corrections of Errors occurring at the semantic, syntactic, lexical, or phonological level (formulator) First a brow// er, yellow and green disc (Levelt & Cutler, 1983) A unut// unit from the yellow dot (Levelt 1983) A-repairs are corrections of Conceptual errors inappropriate utterances (in terms of style, specifity, completeness) We start in the middle with// in the middle of the paper with a blue disc. (Levelt 1983) Seite 7

the yellow dot (Levelt 1983) A-repairs are corrections of Conceptual errors inappropriate utterances (in terms of

8 Types of self-repair (2) Overt self-repairs: 1. incorrect utterance (error) 2. interruption (cut-off point), possibly followed by a delay (editing phase) 3. repair proper: revision error editing repair First a brown// er, yellow and green disc cut-off point Covert self-repairs: no overt error or observable repair evidence: interruption of utterance in terms of hesitation, repetition, or editing expressions (e.g.: eh, I mean, ) Seite 8

repair proper: revision error editing repair First a brown// er, yellow and green disc cut-off point Covert

9 Levelt s Self-Monitoring Theory (Levelt 1989) CONCEPTUALIZER MONITOR conceptual loop FORMULATOR grammatical encoding phonological encoding SPEECH COMPREHENSION internal loop ARTICULATOR Audible speech external loop Seite 9

grammatical encoding phonological encoding SPEECH

10 Levelt s Self-Monitoring Theory Speakers/signers do not only produce language, they constantly supervise their output. The monitor is located in the conceptualizer. Three loops: conceptual loop intercepts conceptual errors ( a-repair) internal loop intercepts slips external loop intercepts slips The internal and the external loop send information back to the monitor via the speech/sign comprehension system. Main Interruption Rule: Stop the flow of speech immediately upon detecting (Levelt, 1989) Seite 10

Three loops: conceptual loop intercepts conceptual errors ( a-repair) internal loop intercepts slips external loop intercepts

11 Distribution of Loci of repair in DGS and DLS , ,9 19,3 DLS DGS 15 13, ,9 3,7 0 0 before word within word after word delayed other Seite 11

12 Self-repairing in DGS An example Repair: cut-off point before word error: repair: G-handshape// Vater (onset) father G-handshape//VATER MUTTER (G-Hand) Seite 12

13 Self-repairing in DGS An example FATHER DAUGTHER BOY comparable to the following slip of the tonge : geziehen, gezogen und gedruckt, gedrückt drawed, drawn and printed, pushed Seite 13

14 Compounding free morpheme KENNEN know free morpheme ALLE everyone compound: BERÜHMT famous Seite 14

15 Compounding free morpheme KENNEN know free morpheme ALLE everyone Compound formation rules: 1. Hierarchy: highest sign first 2. Reduction of syllable structure 3. Maintenance of movement direction compound: BERÜHMT famous Seite 15

16 Self-repairing in DGS An example Repair: cut-off point within word (between two reduplicated syllables) Example from DGS: METALL 1.syllable //GLAS 2.syllable CL λ:rectangular metal glass Two constructed examples from DLS: chiplem person gackoo person chichi/plemplem gaga/cuckoo Seite 16

17 Results: Ratio of repairs in DGS and DLS DGS DLS Slips Repairs 44,2% 51% Seite 17

18 Results: Ratio slip repairs vs. A-repairs DGS DLS Slip repairs 35% 35% A-Repair 65% 65% Seite 18

19 Results: Editing in slip repairs vs. A-repairs DGS Slip repairs A-Repairs Editing 4% 0% DLS Slip repairs A-Repairs Editing 15% 6% Seite 19

20 Editing types in slip repairs in DGS and DLS DGS manual expressions headshake raised eyebrows frozen form DLS äh linguistic material pause/ hesitation repetition of error (81%) 10 (14%) 3 1 Seite 20

form 15 2 9 1 3 DLS äh linguistic material pause/

21 What happens? BOY APPLE// PEAR EAT Seite 21

22 Prosodic marking of the repair Video einfügen hn NO, BOY// (headshake) GIRL TEA DRINK Seite 22

23 A-repairs in DGS specifications FRÜH// 9 UHR (early//at nine o clock) [discourse topic drop a MÖBEL b HINEINTRAGEN] 1 //[ZWEI MÄNNER a discourse topic drop b HINEINTRAGEN] 2 (Two men) carry the furniture// two men carry (the furniture) T(ISCH)// SCHREIBTISCH (table// desk) Reduction of ambiguity Pro SITZT, SWIMMING POOL A SITZT AM-A (He/she) sits (there), he/she sits at the swimmingpool) Seite 23

24 A-repairs / code switching To the left of it a blanc, or a white crossing point (Levelt, 1989, 481) SCHUH CzechSign //SCHUH GermanSign (shoe) EIN SCH(UH) CzechSign //SCHUH GermanSign Seite 24

25 Conclusions Sequence: slip + repair 1) adapted to word formation Typology 2) adapted to syllabicity constraint Typology 3) locus of repair: different distributions for DGS and DLS, visibility of transitional movements Modality Editing: 1) rarity of editing expressions in repairs Modality 2) prominence of non-manual editings Modality Seite 25

26 Conclusions Typology/Modality Perfection of language Language is well designed for interaction with the systems that are internal to the mind. given that the language is essentially an information system, the information it stores must be accessible to those systems, that s the only condition (Chomsky, 2002) Seite 26

27 References Chomsky, Noam (2002). An interview on minimalism. In: Andrea Belletti & Luigi Rizzi (eds.) Noam Chomsky. On naturand language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Leuninger, Helen, Hohenberger, Annette, Waleschkowski, Eva, Menges Elke & Happ, Daniela (2004): The impact of modality on language production: Evidence from slips of the tongue and hand. In: Thomas Pechmann & Christopher Habel (eds.): Multidisciplinary approaches to language production. Berlin: de Gruyter, Leuninger, Helen (2006): Sign languages: Representation, processing, and interface conditions. In: Conxita Lleó (ed.): Interfaces in multilingualism. Acquisition and representation. Amsterdam: Benjamins, Leuninger, Helen, Hohenberger, Annette & Waleschkowski, Eva (2007): Sign Language: Typology vs. modality. In: Carson T. Schütze & Victor S.Ferreira (eds.): The state of the art in speech error research. Proceedings of the LSA Institute Workshop. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics Vol. 53, A comprehensive study on German Sign Language: Happ, Daniela & Vorköper, Marc-Oliver (2006): Deutsche Gebärdensprache. Ein Lehrund Arbeitsbuch. Frankfurt am Main: Fachhochschulverlag Levelt, Willem J. M. (1989). Speaking. From intention to articulation, Cambridge, MIT Press. Seite 27

28 Thanks for your attention! Seite 28

A System for Labeling Self-Repairs in Speech 1

A System for Labeling Self-Repairs in Speech 1 John Bear, John Dowding, Elizabeth Shriberg, Patti Price 1. Introduction This document outlines a system for labeling self-repairs in spontaneous speech.