LISSIM 6

June 1-15, 2012@ Kangra

Selected Essays

Pro-Drop/ Null Subject Parameter in Kannada

Sindhu Herur Subramanya

M.A. Linguistics

English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad.

Currently in the final semester of my master’s degree in linguistics, I have chosen to work on the aspect of empty categories and more specifically on the pro-drop or null-subject parameter for my M.A. dissertation. The pro-drop parameter has been extensively researched, however, research in pro-drop as a feature in understanding the process of language acquisition especially in Indian languages has not been sufficiently explored. Given that in urban India, children today, especially those with educated parents, are exposed to English from their infancy along with their native language, and English being an obligatory-pro language while most Indian languages are pro-drop languages, creates a situation conducive to understand how children acquire these varying rules.

I’m working with certain basic assumptions such as the ones stated here:

1.      Null-subject or the subject-drop or pro-drop as they are referred to, is not a neat binary in the world’s languages, but a continuum. When we consider a language as a pro-drop or a non-drop language, it comes along with a bundle of features. Certain languages may allow a restricted pro-drop (only in certain contexts) while other languages maybe more generous.

2.      Also, what are the implicational universals in syntax that characterise a language’s stand on the pro-drop phenomenon? For example, how is pro-drop correlated to the inflection system of a language, it’s that (complementiser) feature, dummy/expletive subjects etc.

3.      Based on the subset principle (Angluin 1978, Berwick 1985, Manzini and Wexler 1987), moving from a true pro-drop language (like Kannada) to an obligatory pro-language like English should pose problems.

In my study I am looking at Kannada and English and their language specific properties related to the pro-drop phenomenon. The study focuses on infants exposed to Kannada as their native language since birth along with their very early exposure to English. By this, I mean to observe the effects of a language like English to which the child is exposed to even before entering a pre-school (which children start going to typically around the age of 3;5-4 years). Thus in such an environment, where a child is exposed to two very different languages in terms of the typology of the null-subject parameter, it will be interesting to study how, if at all, parameter-resetting takes place.

Using act out tasks and picture description tasks, here is a sample of some of the aspects I’m looking into:

        i.            Dummy/expletive subjects

Sl no

English

Kannada

a.

It rained.

Maɭe bantu.

rain  come-pst-3rd person sg neutral.

b.

It fell.

(The book fell)

(book) bittu.

(book) fall- pst-3rd person sg neutral.

c.

It came running.

(The dog came running)

(naayi)  ooɖi       bantu.

 (dog)   running   come-pst-3rd person sg neutral.

 

       ii.            Intransitives

Sl no

English

Kannada

a.

She’s sleeping.

malkontaa yiddale

sleep  taa-continuous/gerundive marker   yiddale -is-present, 3rd  person sg, fem.

b.

I’m eating.

tintaa yidini.

eat taa-continuous/gerundive marker  yidini-am-present, 1 person sing

 

      iii.            Yes-No questions

Sl no

English

Kannada

a.

Q: Is the doggie sleeping?

A: Yes, (the) doggie is sleeping.

Q: doggie malkontaa yidiya?

doggie  malkon-sleep-taa-ing yidi-is ya-question marker

A: malkontaa yide.

malkon-sleep  taa-ing  yide-is, present, 3rd  person sg neutral

b.

Q: You want chocolate?

A: Yes, I want chocolate.

Q: chocolate bekaa?

    (You) chocolate bek-want aa-question maker?

A: bekuu.

     (I) want- present, 1st person, sg

 

In the above context, my interest in psycholinguistics and language acquisition studies is strongly based on syntax and over-lapping areas such as discourse and semantics. The ensuing linguistics summer school in the Himalayas, LISSIM 6, is opportune to interact with the best minds in syntax and semantics. I’m reading Larry L. LaFond’s thesis (University of South Carolina) on ‘The pro-drop parameter in second language acquisition revisited: a developmental account’ and it provides for a optimality theory explanation to this phenomenon. I wish to apply the OT syntax framework in this area and continue my research through my M.Phil and PhD. David Pesetsky’s paper on ‘Acquiring language’ with Ken Wexler and Victoria Fromkin in Science [276: 1177a-1178a. (1997)] is of particular interest to me. Jonathan Bobaljik’s work in the area of morpho-syntax is of interest to me as I wish to understand to what extent agreement and tense features help in licensing pro-drop.

This being my entry phase in research endeavour, I hope for an opportunity like this not only to learn and interact but also to refine my thinking through expert guidance.

Conferences like the one I was part of organising in January 2012 in EFLU on complex predicates gave me a platform to interact with Gillian Ramchand, Probal Dasgupta, Tanmoy Bhattacharya and Utpal Lahiri. The discussions that followed the conference made me realise many things, for example, the kind of flux a notion like parameters was in. The summer school on cognition at NIAS (National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore) which I attended last year also gave me perspective. I worked with a group of young minds from all over the country on spatial prepositions. We were introduced to the latest concepts such as embodied cognition which is an interesting intersection between cognition and language. Hence, I firmly believe that it becomes crucial to engage in such interactions to become a good researcher and academician.

-         

For enquiries, write to secretary@fosssil.in

bullet Skype Interview
bullet Interview List
bullet Latest News
bullet LISSIM 6 Page
bullet Home