parallelism

3° CONVEGNO
Innovazione nella didattica delle scienze nella scuola primaria e
dell’infanzia: al crocevia fra discipline scientifiche e umanistiche
La stru(ura linguis-ca delle storie: aspe4 morfosinta4ci e testuali M. Elena Favilla Dipar/mento di Educazione e scienze umane Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia Why storytelling for teaching? Stories, which rely so much on words, offer a major and constant source of life and language experience for children. Stories are mo-va-ng and memorable, rich in language experience, and inexpensive! Surely stories should be a central part of the work of all primary teachers, whether they are teaching the mother tongue or a foreign language (Wright A., storytelling with children, Oxford, 2008, Oxford University Press)\ Quali storie? Le storie da u/lizzare come strumento per la didaNca delle scienze ai bambini della scuola dell’infanzia e dei primi anni della scuola primaria, così come proposte dal gruppo di ricerca coordinato da Hans Fuchs e Federico Corni Perché la linguis/ca? le scelte teoriche, metodologiche, tema-che, operate da uno scienziato, selezionano scelte corrisponden- sul piano della forma linguis-ca; sicché quest’ul-ma si configura agli occhi dello scienziato (e va considerata da noi) come aspe3o non marginale della sua a4vità [Al/eri Biagi, 1990: 219-­‐220] Quale contributo? Un nuovo ordine di fenomeni sintaNci e una teoria sintaNca in grado di renderne conto: la sintassi dialogica La “gramma/ca del discorso” lo studio del discorso e, più precisamente, del parlato dialogico consente di comprendere fenomeni e meccanismi (rela/vi ai tradizionali diversi livelli di analisi) di cui la linguis/ca tradizionale non riesce a rendere conto o di cui finora ha reso conto in modo non soddisfacente [Calaresu in stampa] Sintassi lineare ~ sintassi dialogica in questa prospeNva recentemente è stata sodolineata l’importanza di integrare la tradizionale sintassi "lineare" (adenta ai rappor/ strudurali interni alla frase) con una sintassi "dialogica" (adenta ai rappor/ strudurali tra gli enuncia/ prodoN dai parlan/ che partecipano all’interazione) [Dubois 2014 e Calaresu in stampa] Dialogic syntax Syntax is deployed in parallel structures, invi-ng a mapping from one u(erance to another. U(erances so linked may be immediately adjacent or displaced across -me, within or across interlocutors’ turns. The resonance that arises between parallel u3erances defines a matrix of rela-onal affini-es, triggering analogies which generate an increment of inferred significance in the moment. % As one u(erance is juxtaposed to another, the structural coupling that results creates a new, higher-­‐order linguis-c structure. Within this structure, the coupled components recontextualize each other, genera-ng new affordances for meaning. % Dialogic syntax inves-gates the linguis-c, cogni-ve, and interac-onal processes involved when language users reproduce selected aspects of a prior u(erance, and when recipients respond to the parallelisms and resonances that result, drawing inferences for situated meaning. [Du Bois 2014] Resonance This mapping generates resonance, defined as “the cataly-c ac-va-on of affini-es across u(erances” u(ered within and between speakers, appearing in both prior and future context. [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353] All kind of units/levels Any aspect of language can give rise to resonance, if there is suitable structural parallelism to support the percep/on of affinity. Resonance can arise across pairs of signs, morphemes, words, phrases, clauses, construc8ons, or speech acts, and indeed across all of these levels at once within a single uderance. [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] Resonance can be created at any level of linguis8c organiza8on, including syntax, lexis, morphology, phonology, prosody, seman/cs, and pragma/cs. [Zima 2013: 40] Dialogic syntax The study of dialogic syntax draws on a broad range of analy/cal tools, including •  parallelism •  priming •  analogy •  dialogicality [Du Bois & Giora 2014] Dialogic syntax The study of dialogic syntax draws on a broad range of analy/cal tools, including •  parallelism •  priming •  analogy •  dialogicality [Du Bois & Giora 2014] Parallelism Parallelism ar/culates mappings between pairs of u<erances, based in part on their internal structure [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] Parallelism Parallelism ar/culates mappings between pairs of u<erances, based in part on their internal structure [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] Joanne: It’s kind of ^like you Ken Ken: That’s not at ^all like me Joanne Parallelism Parallelism ar/culates mappings between pairs of uderances, based in part on their internal structure [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] Parallelism Parallelism ar/culates mappings between pairs of uderances, based in part on their internal structure [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] identità morfologica
Parallelism Parallelism ar/culates mappings between pairs of uderances, based in part on their internal structure [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] selezione di pronomi
Parallelism Parallelism ar/culates mappings between pairs of uderances, based in part on their internal structure [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] nomi propri
Parallelism Parallelism ar/culates mappings between pairs of uderances, based in part on their internal structure [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] modificatori avverbiali
Parallelism Parallelism ar/culates mappings between pairs of uderances, based in part on their internal structure [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] coreferenza semantica (you/me = Ken)
Parallelism Parallelism ar/culates mappings between pairs of uderances, based in part on their internal structure [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] coreferenza semantica (you/me = Ken)
Parallelism Parallelism ar/culates mappings between pairs of uderances, based in part on their internal structure [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] funzione pragmatica: vocativo
Parallelism Parallelism ar/culates mappings between pairs of uderances, based in part on their internal structure [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] livello sintagmatico: costruzione
predicativa X is Y
Parallelism Nonostante i parallelismi su tuN ques/ livelli, gli interlocutori esprimono due significa/ oppos/: la sintassi dialogica non serve a esprimere solo ripe/zione o accordo Joanne: It’s kind of ^like you Ken Ken: That’s not at ^all like me Joanne Dialogic syntax The study of dialogic syntax draws on a broad range of analy/cal tools, including •  parallelism •  priming •  analogy •  dialogicality [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353-­‐4] Priming fenomeno in base al quale l’elaborazione di un enunciato contenente una par/colare unità (parola o strudura sintaNca) facilita l’elaborazione di un successivo enunciato contenente un’unità uguale o correlata Priming Priming sets the stage for dialogic syntax by crea/ng cogni/ve condi/ons that facilitate the selec8ve reproduc8on of recently used linguis8c forms and structures. [Du Bois 2014: 364] We have observed that speakers oxen abstract a schema from the preceding u<erances and extend it when they produce u<erances in resonance with the preceding ones. Numerous such cases demonstrate the effect of priming: speakers reuse the linguis8c resources that have been used in the immediate prior context. Past studies have shown the syntac/c priming effects in interview contexts (Weiner and Labov 1983) as well as in experimental contexts (Bock 1986; Bock and Loebell 1990), in which the most obvious example is the use of the passive construc/on. [Sakita 2006] Dialogic syntax The study of dialogic syntax draws on a broad range of analy/cal tools, including •  parallelism •  priming •  analogy •  dialogicality [Du Bois & Giora 2014] Analogy Analogy builds on structural parallelism but goes a step further by developing its consequences for meaning and form. [...] Long recognized as a cri/cal factor in language change and gramma/cal emergence, analogy demonstrably reflects general cogni8ve capaci8es. From a func/onal perspec/ve, analogy offers an essen8al bridge between language and cogni8on. [Du Bois 2014: 363-­‐4] Dialogic syntax The study of dialogic syntax draws on a broad range of analy/cal tools, including •  parallelism •  priming •  analogy •  dialogicality [Du Bois & Giora 2014] Dialogicity Dialogicality situates the use and interpreta/on of language within a discursive field already inhabited by the uderances of predecessors, genera/ng affordances for the crea/ve elabora/on of new meanings. [Du Bois & Giora 2014: 353] Dialogic syntax has been applied in studies of: • 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
stance parallelism syntac-c complementa-on adversarial talk in family arguments parliamentary debates, monas-c debates child language resonance in au-sm dialogic gesture in instruc-onal interac-on storytelling in conversa-on ritual discourse non-­‐literal uses of language (irony, play and joking) theore-cal explora-ons of the rela-on of dialogic syntax to construc-on grammar and cogni-ve grammar [Du Bois 2014: 367-­‐8] Why dialogic syntax? Dialogic syntax creates a rich environment for what we may call dialogic bootstrapping. Dialogic bootstrapping is a powerful strategy for learning language by exploi-ng the affordances of dialogic resonance. [...] For young children (Küntay and Slobin 1996), or indeed for learners of any age, a dialogic bootstrapping strategy can facilitate the targeted learning of pa3erns rendered locally salient, which emerge gramma-cized as linguis-c categories, structures, and rules. [Du Bois 2014: 367-­‐8]  the iden/cal framing “he’s s/ll” creates a resonance which allows interpre/ng “walking around” as a paradigma/c varia/on of “healthy” Through dialogic juxtaposi-on, an otherwise obscure gramma-cal equivalence (adjec-ve : verb) is made salient, and the equa-on healthy : walking around is implicated. Resonance carries analogical affordances, facilita-ng the percep-on of the second alterna-ve as categorically equivalent to the first. This equivalence is available not just to analysts, but to par-cipants. Moreover, for any child who might be listening, such resonance represents a rich opportunity for dialogic bootstrapping. [Du Bois 2014: 367-­‐8] Resonance, therefore, not only reflects conven-onalized seman-c rela-ons, but it may also, crucially, create seman-c rela-ons. Accordingly, Dialogic Syntax posits the “principle of engagement”, that “engaged forms make engaged meanings”. [Zima 2013: 40] What implica/ons for our stories? •  inser/on of dialogues in stories Dialogue in fairy tales My, the girl said, what big ears you have! The be(er to hear you with, my child. Grandma, what big eyes you have! The be(er to see you with, my dear. Goodness me, said Lidle Red Riding Hood, ust look at those large hands! The be(er to hug you with. Oh, that mouth, grandma. What a huge, gigan-c, enormous mouth! The be(er to eat you with! Dialogue in fairy tales My, the girl said, what big ears you have! The be(er to hear you with, my child. Grandma, what big eyes you have! The be(er to see you with, my dear. Goodness me, said Lidle Red Riding Hood, ust look at those large hands! The be(er to hug you with. Oh, that mouth, grandma. What a huge, gigan-c, enormous mouth! The be(er to eat you with! What implica/ons for our stories? •  inser/on of dialogues in stories What implica/ons for our stories? •  inser/on of dialogues in stories •  “deliberate” use of resonance also in monological parts to underline connec/ons and concepts What implica/ons for our stories? •  inser/on of dialogues in stories •  “deliberate” use of resonance also in monological parts to underline connec/ons and concepts •  ac/vi/es on the stories involving conversa/ons with: –  ques/ons and turns in general with resonance effects –  encourage children to ask ques/ons What implica/ons for our stories? •  inser/on of dialogues in stories •  “deliberate” use of resonance also in monological parts to underline connec/ons and concepts •  ac/vi/es on the stories involving conversa/ons with: –  ques/ons and turns in general with resonance effects –  encourage children to ask ques/ons What implica/ons for our stories? •  inser/on of dialogues in stories •  “deliberate” use of resonance also in monological parts to underline connec/ons and concepts •  ac/vi/es on the stories involving conversa/ons with: –  ques/ons and turns in general with resonance effects –  encourage children to ask ques/ons Il dialogo come genere lederario nella produzione scien/fica Il dialogo è un’arma, nelle mani di Galileo: serve alla propaganda delle sue idee e serve alla lo(a contro il “paradigma” della scienza ufficiale [Al/eri Biagi 1990: 229]. Ma è davvero solo questo? La scelta del dialogo è determinata da mo/vazioni •  este/co-­‐s/lis/che •  strategico-­‐prudenziali •  dialogo come luogo in cui –  si collocano i dubbi, –  si potenziano -­‐ adraverso il dibaNto – gli s/moli intelleduali, –  si cercano collabora/vamente quelle verità circoscride, ma “dimostrabili concludentemente” a cui l’uomo può arrivare. [Al/eri Biagi 1990: 227] Esso è dunque il “genere” che più si raccomanda come correla/vo formale di una scienza che privilegia il momento della ricerca su quello della scoperta, e quindi il momento della discussione su quello dell’acquisizione. Galileo approda così a una soluzione che gli permede di aumentare la tensione dialeNca, di sfogare la sua vena polemica, di realizzare in proprio quel gusto scenico che l’ammiratore di Ruzzante (e di Ariosto) aveva col/vato adraverso la ledura [Al/eri Biagi 1990: 226]