Email this article 
Narrative strategy formation in the bilinguals’ stories in Russian: corpus study
- Authors: Shishkov M.S.1,2
-
Affiliations:
- Shanghai International Studies University
- Saint Petersburg State University
- Issue: Vol 21, No 3 (2023): Linguistic and linguodidactic issues of bilingualism
- Pages: 321-340
- Section: Key Issues of Russian Language Research
- URL: https://journals.rudn.ru/russian-language-studies/article/view/36382
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2618-8163-2023-21-3-321-340
- EDN: https://elibrary.ru/SGSQVB
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
The lexical parameters of oral stories of two generations of Russian-German bilinguals and the function of lexical means in the narrative strategy implementation are describes. Through addressing the oral narrative this study is included in the range of modern works considering the features of text generation by bilinguals. The relevance of the study lies both in the material and in the chosen methods of analysis. The aim of the study is to identify the degree of the narrative strategy formation at the lexical level among representatives of two generations of Russian-German bilinguals in comparison with monolingual Russian native speakers. The research material is a corpus of experimentally collected oral stories (47 texts) of German-Russian bilinguals. M. Mayer’s book “Frog, where are you?” was used as a stimulus for subjects. The test subjects were representatives of 22 families: children - 26 people aged 8 to 19 years, parents - 21 people aged 30 to 55 years. To compare the characteristics of the corpora, the similar corpus of oral stories of monolinguals (42 stories) was involved. Quantitative and statistical analysis, corpus analysis, thematic and semantic analysis of vocabulary, elements of structural analysis of narrative were used. The novelty of the study is the corpus analysis identification of lexical parameters of narrative strategies used by two generations of bilinguals. The analysis showed that the degree of lexical skills development in the implementation of narrative strategies in bilinguals is lower than in monolinguals in both age groups, despite the statistical similarity of the texts of both corpora. This concerns, first of all, the completeness and uniformity of the lexical expression of the mandatory components of the narrative stimulated by the material, and the relations between them in the text. At the same time, the general trend of narrative creation was in line with expectations. The identified parameters can be further methodically interpreted in order to prepare educational materials for bilinguals.
Full Text
Table 1
Lexical diversity metrics of bilinguals’ and monolinguals’ narratives subcorpora
Metrics | Subcorpora of narratives | ||||
Bilinguals | Monolinguals | ||||
Parents | Children | Children under 13 years | Parents | Children | |
Type-Token Ratio (TTR) | 0.25 | 0.21 | 0.28 | 0.25 | 0.21 |
Root Type-Token Ratio (RTTR) | 19.97 | 13.79 | 13.28 | 24.43 | 14.14 |
Corrected Type-Token Ratio (CTTR) | 14.12 | 9.75 | 9.39 | 17.28 | 10.00 |
Moving Average Type-Token Ratio (MATTR) | 0.84 | 0.77 | 0.78 | 0.85 | 0.79 |
Mean Segmental Type-Token Ratio (MSTTR) | 0.84 | 0.78 | 0.77 | 0.85 | 0.79 |
Table 2
Readability metrics of bilinguals’ and monolinguals’ narratives subcorpora
Metrics | Subcorpora of narratives | ||||
Bilinguals | Monolinguals | ||||
Parents | Children | Children under 13 years | Parents | Children | |
Flesch ‒ Kincaid Test | 3.68 | 2.49 | 1.93 | 3.10 | 1.42 |
Flesch Reading Ease Scale | 72.31 | 79.39 | 79.68 | 69.98 | 78.74 |
SMOG index | 9.14 | 7.58 | 7.53 | 9.05 | 6.54 |
Table 3
Narrative quality estimate of children’s stories subcorpora
N-grams | Narrative components | Bilingual children | Monolingual children | ||
Completeness index | Uniformity index | Completeness index | Uniformity index | ||
Unigrams | Actors | 3.77 | 53.86 | 4.21 | 46.78 |
Place | 2.23 | 37.17 | 3.26 | 36.22 | |
Time | 2.61 | 32.63 | 3.74 | 37.40 | |
Starting point of the plot | 1.35 | 45.00 | 2.48 | 41.33 | |
Plot actions | 6.23 | 36.65 | 8.29 | 41.45 | |
Details | 0.15 | 15.00 | 0.13 | 13.00 | |
Assessment and decision-making | 0.46 | 23.00 | 0.83 | 27.67 | |
Emotions expression | 0.27 | 13.50 | 0.35 | 17.50 | |
Events sequence | 1.04 | 34.67 | 0.30 | 15.00 | |
Plot points | 2.85 | 35.63 | 4.69 | 46.90 | |
Plot point characters | 1.23 | 41.00 | 2.16 | 21.60 | |
Characterization | 0.62 | 62.00 | 0.52 | 52.00 | |
Description of the result | 0.57 | 28.50 | 0.78 | 39.00 | |
Modality | 0.53 | 17.67 | 0.56 | 14.00 | |
Bigrams | Sequence of events | 0.96 | 32.00 | 1.14 | 38.00 |
Assessment and decision-making | 0.19 | 19.00 | 0.60 | 20.00 | |
Direction of movement | 1.07 | 26.75 | 2.95 | 49.17 | |
Characterization | 0.27 | 27.00 | 0.43 | 43.00 | |
Expression of definiteness | 1.27 | 25.40 | 0.48 | 24.00 | |
Expression of time | 0.23 | 23.00 | 0.87 | 29.00 | |
Expression of modality | 0.34 | 17.00 | 0.17 | 17.00 | |
| Total index | 28.24 | 646.40 | 38.94 | 670.02 |
Table 4
Narrative quality estimate of parents’ stories subcorpora
N-граммы | Narrative components | Bilingual parents | Monolingual parents | ||
Completeness index | Uniformity index | Completeness index | Uniformity index | ||
Униграммы | Actors | 4.09 | 45.44 | 5.74 | 47.83 |
Place | 3.49 | 26.85 | 4.15 | 46.11 | |
Time | 5.00 | 35.71 | 6.33 | 45.21 | |
Starting point of the plot | 1.99 | 39.80 | 2.68 | 53.60 | |
Plot actions | 8.39 | 34.96 | 13.11 | 44.36 | |
Details | 0.72 | 36.00 | 1.52 | 30.40 | |
Assessment and decision-making | 1.57 | 31.40 | 2.32 | 46.40 | |
Emotions expression | 0.96 | 24.00 | 2.05 | 29.29 | |
Events sequence | 0.38 | 38.00 | 1.16 | 29.00 | |
Plot points | 4.32 | 39.27 | 6.12 | 43.71 | |
Plot point characters | 2.54 | 28.22 | 3.78 | 34.36 | |
Characterization | 3.04 | 60.80 | 4.58 | 57.25 | |
Description of the result | 2.44 | 48.80 | 2.36 | 47.20 | |
Modality | 1.19 | 23.80 | 2.43 | 30.38 | |
Биграммы | Sequence of events | 0.14 | 14.00 | 0.21 | 21.00 |
Assessment and decision-making | 0.75 | 18.75 | 1.89 | 47.25 | |
Direction of movement | 2.19 | 31.29 | 3.00 | 42.86 | |
Characterization | 0.91 | 30.33 | 1.90 | 63.33 | |
Expression of definiteness | 1.00 | 33.33 | 1.85 | 37.00 | |
Expression of time | 0.77 | 25.67 | 1.00 | 50.00 | |
Expression of modality | 1.14 | 38.00 | 0.95 | 31.67 | |
| Total index | 47.02 | 704.43 | 69.13 | 878.22 |
Figure 1. Breadth of the narrative components
Figure 2. Unification of the narrative components
About the authors
Maxim S. Shishkov
Shanghai International Studies University; Saint Petersburg State University
Author for correspondence.
Email: max-shishkov@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3629-2602
Candidate of Philology, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the School of Russian and Eurasian Studies, Shanghai International Studies University
550 Dalian (W.) Rd, Shanghai, 200083, People's Republic of China; 7-9 Universitetskaya Naberezhnaya, St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian FederationReferences
- Aktan-Erciyes, A. (2020). Effects of second language on motion event lexicalization: Comparison of bilingual and monolingual children’s frog story narratives. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(3), 1127–1145. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.803576
- Anstatt, T. (2010). Cognitive strategies of bilinguals: Solutions of lexical problems of Russian bilingual children and youth. In B. Norman (Ed.), Slavic Languages in Light of cognitive Linguistics (pp. 217–230). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
- Bergelson, M.B., Dragoi, O.V., Akinina, Yu.S., & Shitova, N.M. (2014). Narrative strategies: Norm and pathology. In V.A. Plungyan (Ed.), Language. Constants. Variables: In Memory of Alexander E. Kibrik (pp. 75–85). St. Petersburg: Aleteiya Publ. (In Russ.)
- Boykova, S.E. (2020). Experiment with the images containing a recurring character: Bilingual narrative analysis. Litera, (10), 37–50. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-8698.2020.10.33904
- Eismont, P.M. (2017). Acquisition of locative and temporal expressions as narrative units. Proceedings of the Scientific Session of Saint Petersburg State University of Aerospace Instrumentation (part 3, pp. 180–184). St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University. (In Russ.)
- Eismont, P.M. (2022). A cartoon or a series of pictures? The problem of choosing an experimental technique. Proceedings of 49th International Philological Conference in Memory of Professor Ludmila Verbitskaya (1936–2019) (pp. 314–332). St. Petersburg: SUAI Publ. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/9785288062353.19
- Fedorova, O.V. (2016). Psycholinguistic studies of discourse in field linguistics. Socioand Psycholinguistic Studies, (4), 7–18. (In Russ.)
- Flesch, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32(3), 221–233. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057532
- Hoel, T. (2016). Young readers' narratives based on a picture book: Model readers and empirical readers. Preschool Education Today, (10), 66–80. (In Russ.)
- Ivanenko, A.A., & Vyrenkova, A.S. (2021) Describing complex plot fragments by Russian-speaking monolinguals and bilinguals with dominant German. Problems of the Ontolinguistics – 2021: Language System of a Child in the Situation of Monoand Polylinguism: Proceedings of the Annual International Scientific Conference (pp. 128–134). St. Petersburg: Izd-vo VVM Publ. (In Russ.)
- Kincaid, J.P., Fishburne, R.P. Jr., Rogers, R.L., & Chissom B.S. (1975). Derivation of new readability formulas (Automated readability index, Fog count and Flesch reading ease formula) for navy enlisted personnel (vol. 56). Retrieved October 23, 2022, from https://stars.library.ucf.edu/istlibrary/56
- Lyashevskaya, O.N. (2016). Readability indices as a measure of text complexity assessment: Report at the seminar of the NUG. (In Russ.) Retrieved October 23, 2022, from https://ling.hse.ru/data/2016/12/15/1111563794/Readability %20talk.pdf
- Mayer, M. (1969). Frog, where are you? New York: Dial Books for Young Readers.
- McLaughlin, H. (1969). SMOG grading – a new readability formula. Journal of Reading, 12(8), 639–646.
- Pavlenko, A. (2009). Verbs of motion in L1 Russian of Russian – English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(1), 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728909990198
- Protassova, E.Yu. (2021). Dynamics of stories of bilingual children: Problems and practice. Preschool Education Today, (5), 28–37. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24412/1997-9657-2021-5107-28-37
- Protassova, E.Yu., Petrovskaya, V.V., & Ovchinnikova, A.V. (2011). Description of images by Finnish-Russian bilinguals. In S.N. Tseitlin & M.B. Eliseyeva (Eds.), The Path to Language: Monolingualism and Bilingualism (pp. 282–293). Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskikh Kul'tur Publ. (In Russ.)
- Reilly, J., Losh, M., Bellugi, U., & Wulfeck, B. (2004). “Frog, where are you?” Narratives in children with specific language impairment, early focal brain injury, and Williams syndrome. Brain and Language, 88(2), 229–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00101-9
- Sevastyanova, A.M. (2021) Functioning of the verbs of motion in the speech of Russian-speaking preschool children (based on the picture stories). Problems of the Ontolinguistics – 2021: Language System of a Child in the Situation of Monoand Polylinguism: Proceedings of the Annual International Scientific Conference (pp. 128–134). St. Petersburg: Izd-vo VVM Publ. (In Russ.)
- Shishkov, M.S. (2022). Lexical portrait of an oral story: A corpus study of speech of two generations of native speakers of Russian. Nauchnyi Dialog, 11(10), 121–138. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2022-11-10-121-138
- Sobolev, A.A., Fedotova, A.M., Kurtukova, A.V., Romanov, A.S., & Shelupanov, A.A. (2022). Methodology to determine the age of the text’s author based on readability and lexical diversity metrics. Reports of the Tomsk State University of Control Systems and Radio Electronics, 25(2), 45–52. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21293/1818-0442-2022-25-2-45-52
- Solnyshkina, M.I., & Kiselnikov, A.S. (2015). Text complexity: Study phases in Russian linguistics. Tomsk State University Journal of Philology, (6), 86–99. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17223/19986645/38/7
- Yureva, N.M. (2017). Interactive approach to studying narrative formation in speech ontogenesis. Philology. Theory & Practice, (12‒2), 178–181. (In Russ.)
- Yurieva, N.M. (2016). The mechanisms of oral narrative in child language: Cognitive approach. Journal of Psycholinguistics, (29), 285–298. (In Russ.)
- Zakharova, E.Yu., & Savina, O.Yu. (2020) Lexical diversity measures’ review and classification. Tyumen State University Herald. Humanities Research. Humanitates, 6(1), 20–34. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21684/2411-197X-2020-6-1-20-34
Supplementary files
