Event conceptualisation and aspect in L2 English and Persian: An application of the Heidelberg-Paris model

SND-ID: snd1120-1. Version: 1.0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5878/wz3s-wt38

Citation

Creator/Principal investigator(s)

Somaje Abdollahian Barough - Stockholm University

Research principal

Stockholm University - Department of English rorId

Description

The data have been used in an investigation for a PhD thesis in English Linguistics on similarities and differences in the use of the progressive aspect in two different language systems, English and Persian, both of which have the grammaticalised progressive. It is an application of the Heidelberg-Paris model of investigation into the impact of the progressive aspect on event conceptualisation. It builds on an analysis of single event descriptions at sentence level and re-narrations of a film clip at discourse level, as presented in von Stutterheim and Lambert (2005) DOI: 10.1515/9783110909593.203; Carroll and Lambert (2006: 54–73) http://libris.kb.se/bib/10266700; and von Stutterheim, Andermann, Carroll, Flecken & Schmiedtová (2012) DOI: 10.1515/ling-2012-0026.
However, there are system-based typological differences between these two language systems due to the absence/presence of the imperfective-perfective categories, respectively. Thus, in addition to the description of the status of the progressive aspect in English and Persian and its impact on event conceptualisation, an impor

... Show more..
The data have been used in an investigation for a PhD thesis in English Linguistics on similarities and differences in the use of the progressive aspect in two different language systems, English and Persian, both of which have the grammaticalised progressive. It is an application of the Heidelberg-Paris model of investigation into the impact of the progressive aspect on event conceptualisation. It builds on an analysis of single event descriptions at sentence level and re-narrations of a film clip at discourse level, as presented in von Stutterheim and Lambert (2005) DOI: 10.1515/9783110909593.203; Carroll and Lambert (2006: 54–73) http://libris.kb.se/bib/10266700; and von Stutterheim, Andermann, Carroll, Flecken & Schmiedtová (2012) DOI: 10.1515/ling-2012-0026.
However, there are system-based typological differences between these two language systems due to the absence/presence of the imperfective-perfective categories, respectively. Thus, in addition to the description of the status of the progressive aspect in English and Persian and its impact on event conceptualisation, an important part of the investigation is the analysis of the L2 English speakers’ language production as the progressives in the first languages, L1s, exhibit differences in their principles of use due to the typological differences. The question of importance in the L2 context concerns the way they conceptualise ongoing events when the language systems are different, i.e. whether their language production is conceptually driven by their first language Persian.

The data consist of two data sets as the study includes two linguistic experiments, Experiment 1 and Experiment 2. The data for both experiments were collected by email. Separate forms of instructions, and language background questions were prepared for the six different informant groups, i.e. three speaker groups and two experimental tasks, as well as a Nelson English test https://www.worldcat.org/isbn/9780175551972 on the proficiency of English for Experiment 2 was selected and modified for the L2 English speaker group.
Nelson English tests are published in Fowler, W.S. & Coe, N. (1976). Nelson English tests. Middlesex: Nelson and Sons. The test battery provides tests for all levels of proficiency. The graded tests are compiled in ten sets from elementary to very advanced level. Each set includes four graded tests, i.e. A, B, C, and D, resulting in 40 separate tests, each with 50 multiple-choice questions. The test entitled 250C was selected for this project. It belongs to the slot 19 out of the 40 slots of the total battery. The multiple-choice questions were checked with a native English professional and 5 inadequate questions relevant for pronunciation were omitted. In addition, a few modifications of the grammar questions were made, aiming at including questions that involve a contrast for the Persian L2 English learner with respect to the grammars of the two languages. The omissions and modifications provide an appropriate grammar test for very advanced Iranian learners of L2 English who have learnt the language in a classroom setting.
The data set collected from the informants are characterised as follows: The data from Experiment 1 functions as the basis for the description of the progressive aspect in English, Persian and L2 English, while the data from Experiment 2 is the basis for the analysis of its use in a long stretch of discourse/language production for the three speaker groups. The parameters selected for the investigation comprised, first, phasal decomposition, which involves the use of the progressive in unrelated single motion events and narratives, and uses of begin/start in narratives. Second, granularity in narratives, which relates to the overall amount of language production in narratives. Third, event boundedness (encoded in the use of 2-state verbs and 1-state verbs with an endpoint adjunct) partly in single motion events and partly in temporal shift in narratives. Temporal shift is defined as follows: Events in the narrative which are bounded shift the time line via a right boundary; events with a left boundary also shift the time line, even if they are unbounded. Fourth, left boundary comprising the use of begin/start and try in narratives. Finally, temporal structuring, which involves the use of bounded versus unbounded events preceding the temporal adverbial then in narratives (The tests are described in the documentation files aspectL2English_Persian_Exp2Chi-square-tests-in-SPSS.docx and aspectL2English_Persian_Exp2Chi-square-tests-in-SPSS.rtf).
In both experiments the participants watched a video, one relevant for single event descriptions, the other relevant for re-narration of a series of events. Thus, two different videos with stimuli for the different kinds of experimental tasks were used. For Experiment 1, a video of 63 short film clips presenting unrelated single events was provided by Professor Christiane von Stutterheim, Heidelberg University Language & Cognition (HULC) Lab, at Heidelberg University, German, https://www.hulclab.eu/. For Experiment 2, an animation called Quest produced by Thomas Stellmach 1996 was used. It is available online at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTyev6OaThg. Both stimuli have been used in the previous investigations on different languages by the research groups associated with the HULC Lab.
The informants were asked to describe the events seen in the stimuli videos, to record their language production and send it to the researcher. For Experiment 2, most part of the L1 English data were provided by Prof. von Stutterheim, Heidelberg University, making available 34 re-narrations of the film Quest in English. 24 of them were selected for the present investigation. The project used six different informant groups, i.e. fully separate groups for the two experiments.
The data from single event descriptions in Experiment 1 were analysed quantitatively in Excel. The re-narrations of Experiment 2 were coded in NVivo 10 (2014) providing frequencies of various parametrical features (Ltd, Nv. (2014). NVivo QSR International Pty Ltd, Version 10. Doncaster, Australia: QSR International). The numbers from NVivo 10 were analysed statistically in Excel and SPSS (2017). The tools are appropriate for this research. Excel suits well for the smaller data load in Experiment 1 while NVivo 10 is practical for the large amount of data and parameters in Experiment 2. Notably, NVivo 10 enabled the analysis of the three data sets to take place in the same manner once the categories of analysis and parameters had been defined under different nodes. As the results were to be extracted in the same fashion from each data set, the L1 English data received from the Heidelberg for Experiment 2 were re-analysed according to the criteria employed in this project. Yet, the analysis in the project conforms to the criteria used earlier in the model. Show less..
Method and outcome

Sampling procedure

Snowball method: those participants who did the experimental linguistic task were asked to introduce new participants that would be appropriate for the study.

Time period(s) investigated

2010-08-01 – 2013-07-31

Data format / data structure

Data collection
Language resources

Resource type

Language description

Language description type

Other

Encoding levels

Syntax, Other

Theoretic model

The original linguistic relativity theory, as presented by Benjamin Lee Whorf (1897–1941) in Language, thought and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf (1956), edited by J. B. Carroll.

Task

Analysis

Original source

Carroll, M. & Lambert, M. (2006): Reorganizing principles of information structure in advanced L2s: French and German learners of English. In: Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics (2006): Educating for advanced foreign language capacities: constructs, curriculum, instruction, assessment. (pp. 54-73). ISBN: 978-1-58901-118-2 (pbk).

Slobin, D. I. (1991). Learning to think for speaking: Native language, cognition, and rhetorical style. Pragmatics, 1(1), 7–25. DOI: 10.1075/prag.1.1

Slobin, D. I. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking.” In J. J. Gumperz & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 0521448905.

Slobin, D. I. (2003). Thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 157–191). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ISBN: 0-262-07243-2 (inb).

Stellmach, Thomas (1996): Quest [animation]. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTyev6OaThg

Von Stutterheim, Christiane (n/a): Video of 63 short film clips presenting unrelated single events. Heidelberg University Language & Cognition (HULC) Lab. https://www.hulclab.eu/

Von Stutterheim, C., & Lambert, M. (2005). Crosslinguistic analysis of temporal perspectives in text production. In: H. Hendriks (Ed.), The structure of learner varieties (pp. 203–230). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: 10.1515/9783110909593.203

Von Stutterheim, C., Andermann, M., Carroll, M., Flecken, M., & Schmiedtová, B. (2012). How grammaticized concepts shape event conceptualization in language production: Insights from linguistic analysis, eye tracking data, and memory performance. Linguistics, 50(4), 833–867. DOI: 10.1515/ling-2012-0026

Whorf, Benjamin Lee (1956): Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. http://libris.kb.se/bib/449449

Text part

  • Language

    • English (eng)

      Persian l2 english (other)

    • Persian (fas)

      Persian l2 english (other)

    More..
  • Modality

    Spoken Language

Video part

  • Link to other media

    Video:

  • Description of video content

    Experiment 1: A 63-clip video shows short unrelated everyday events to be retold in one single sentence responding to the task question "what is happening"., Experiment 2: The main events in the speechless animation film are related to a sandy creature, a sandman, who is in quest of water and leaves the sand world in which he lives. He wanders through other worlds made of paper, stone, iron, and machines following the sound of dripping water he continuously hears. In the end he manages to reach the water despite the tragic situations that threaten him along his way. The different worlds of the film divide it into different episodes, or scenes, marked in the film as separate by means of a black screen indicating the beginning of a new episode. The scenes related to the paper and stone worlds are analysed. They are the second and third scenes of the video. The first scene about a paper world was omitted, like in the Heidelberg-Paris studies, due to idiosyncrasy in language production. It indicates that participants need time to get used to the task.
Geographic coverage

Geographic spread

Geographic location: Iran, Islamic Republic of, United Kingdom, United States, Sweden

Administrative information

Responsible department/unit

Department of English

Topic and keywords

Research area

General language studies and linguistics (Standard för svensk indelning av forskningsämnen 2011)

Specific languages (Standard för svensk indelning av forskningsämnen 2011)

Publications

Abdollahian Barough, S. (2019). Event conceptualisation and aspect in L2 English and Persian: An application of the Heidelberg-Paris model. (PhD thesis). Stockholm University, Department of English.

If you have published anything based on these data, please notify us with a reference to your publication(s). If you are responsible for the catalogue entry, you can update the metadata/data description in DORIS.

Published: 2019-09-04
Last updated: 2019-11-07