Co-occurrence of TMA Markers

20 See Shlonsky (2010) for overview of Cartography within syntactic theory.

129

with the overt past tense marker yielding a past progressive interpretation as exemplified in (80) – (84):

80) Mii did a fiid im. (ALA 2;07)

1SG PAST PROG feed 3SG

“I was feeding him.”

81) Mi did a sliip. (COL 2;01)

1SG PAST PROG sleep

“I was sleeping.”

82) Yo ben a jraiv i van? (KEM 2;11) 2SG PAST PROG drive DET van

“Were you driving the van?”

83) We im daa go? (RJU 2;07)

where 3SG PAST~PROG go

“Where was he going?”

84) Mi wehn a ron wid Lietn an a jap. (SHU 2;11) 1SG PAST PROG run with Leighton and 1SG drop

“I was running with Leighton and I fell.”

Table 29 provides detail of the individual production of the co-occurrence of the past tense marker and progressive aspectual marker.

130

Table 29: Co-occurrence of Overt Tense with Progressive Aspect

We observed that the first utterance where a past tense marker was combined with a progressive marker is attested in COL’s production at 25 months of age. This is his only sporadic combination yielding the past progressive. ALA is next in producing this combination at 30 months of age followed by SHU at approximately 30 and half months, RJU at 31 and half months and finally KEM at 35 months of age. The combination is yet to be

131

attested in the speech of TYA. The data reveals much individual variation with regards to the age of production and the frequency of this combination. However it should be noted that the production of this combination is 100% consistent with the cartographic hierarchy of the target system, in that the Tense marker is always realized before the Progressive marker. At no time did the children produce a combination where the Progressive marker was situated above the Tense marker.

In line with the discussion of phases presented above, Table 30 reveals that in Phase 1 (MLU

< 2.5) no utterances were produced where the past morpheme was combined with the progressive aspect marker yielding a past-progressive reading while at phase 2 only 2 combinations were attested. We see the increase of these utterances at Phase 3 where MLU is over 3.5. At this phase the combination of the past with the progressive marker is more common for most children except for COL, whose only sporadic combination was in Phase 2 and TYA who is yet to start combining markers.

PHASES COL ALA RJU TYA KEM SHU TOTAL

PHASE 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

PHASE 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 2

PHASE 3 0 13 5 0 6 12 36

Table 30: Distribution of Co-occurrences of the Past and Progressive Marker

A closer analysis of the data reveals that other combinations of TMA markers were evident in the children’s production. Past tense was seen to co-occur with ability modal (85); the necessity modal co-occurred with progressive aspect (86); retrospective aspect co-occurred with completive aspect (87) and progressive aspect (88); and epistemic modal co-occurred with the obligation modal (89).

132

85) Im did kyahn waak. (RJU 2;08)

3SG PAST ABL~NEG walk

“He couldn’t walk.”

86) Ø mos a riid. (RJU 2;08)

Ø NEC PROG read

“She must be reading.”

87) Ø jos don bied. (COL 2;00)

Ø RETRO COMP bathe

“I just finished having a bath.”

88) Ø jos a kum bak. (RJU 2;04) Ø RETRO PROG come back

“He is just coming back.”

89) A wuda afi get som jakit. (ALA, 2;10) 1SG EPIS OBL get some jacket

“I would have to get some jacket.”

As demonstrated in the examples above, the first combination of TMA markers was within the aspectual zone. At 2;00 the retrospective aspectual marker was combined with the completive marker in COL’s production, and at 2;04 it was combined with the progressive marker in RJU’s dataset. Apart from the inter-zonal combinations resulting in the production

133

of the past progressive marker as discussed above, we note the introduction of combinations of other markers from different TMA zones in the speech of RJU: past tense was combined with ability modal, and necessity modal was combined with progressive aspect. Both combinations were produced at 2;08. Another intra-zonal combination was observed in the modal zone in the speech of ALA: the epistemic modal was combined with the obligatory modal at 2;10.

Due to the scarcity of co-occurrence of markers in the same phrase within the TMA zone, the data does not lend itself to a discussion on the relative sequence in which the combinations were produced. Apart from the co-occurrence of the past and progressive markers, other combinations are only sporadically attested. Nonetheless, in examining the combinations we note that they were all target-consistent. Recall the TMA zone in the target is as follows:

Epistemic modal > Past tense; Future tense > Necessity modal > Obligation modal >

Ability/permission modal > Retrospective aspect > Progressive aspect > Prospective aspect

> Completive aspect. The children’s production reveals that the combined markers all followed the order of the clausal hierarchy attested in the target language. At no time was a marker which is situated lower in the TMA zone seen to occur before a higher element. The following hierarchical development was demonstrated:

90) i. Past tense > progressive aspect (80 - 84) ii. Past tense > ability/permission modal (85) iii. Necessity modal > progressive aspect (86) iv. Retrospective aspect > completive aspect (87) v. Retrospective aspect > progressive aspect (88) vi. Epestemic modal > obligatory modal (89)

134

The attested sequences outlined in (90) above confirm that children acquiring JC do not entertain the possibility of target-inconsistent orders in their development of TMA, while the possibility of other target inconsistencies, such as omissions, are evident. This target-consistent hierarchical development provides evidence that the child is knowledgeable of the rules governing combinations from an early age. Structures that are high in the clause are correctly combined with structures located in a lower domain. The target-consistent combination of structures attested at different clausal levels call for a full competence approach to the development of the cartographic sequence.

We now examine the distribution of the markers in comparison to their distribution in the adult language.