The Language JigSaw

Using a game to teach language structures

Roberto ZamparelliLuca Ducceschi

Language, Interaction & Computation Lab, CIMEC, University of Trento

MUSE Fablab

Linguistics as a science

• Despite the fact that linguistics is a science, it is not adequately represented in school curricula, and it is not familiar to the general public.

• People are aware that languages differ, but mostly at the lexical level (phonology, morphology), or as a reflex of sociological factors (e.g. immigrations, minorities).

Science communication

• «hard sciences»: communication to a wider audience obtained through the esistence of literature and models for scientific divulgation.

• In science and natural history museums: hands-on models that illustrate scientific phenomena, or the functioning of technological devices.

The brain is underrepresented in science museums. Language is represented only in its socio-anthropological dimension.

Atheme WP6 - Rovereto

• Our Goal: creating a physical model of (some aspects of) syntax, for use in schools and science museums.– Increase awareness of linguistic structures– Stimulate a problem-solving approach to language– Visualize the structural difference between

multiple languages– Function as reference point for L2 teaching

Previous models

• Researcher’s Night 2011: The «Language Game»

Language Game (2011)

• A physical puzzle game• Syntactic relations expressed by puzzle piece

connections• Root / Suffix distinction.• Very simple set of rules• Goal: «Build the largest structure»• Limited to Italian

Bidimensional, steel, laser-cut set of pieces (around 120 pieces).

The Language JigSaw (2015)

Goals: • Expand the original language game, within the

context of the Atheme project, overcoming the limits of the original model.

• Evaluate the new model’s effectiveness for in-class instruction.

• Propose the model for science fairs and ultimately, science museums.

Grammatical category

Argument structure

Head

Specific goals for a syntax model1. Multiple levels of complexity, for different

age groups 2. It should be possible to compare multiple

languages3. Not too many pieces, easy to recognize4. It should illustrate non-trivial syntactic

phenomena5. It should have a ludic aspect6. Sturdy & cheap to build

Specific goals for a syntax modelMultiple levels of complexity, for different age groups.• We are focusing on the most complex model,

first. Simplification is easier (we hope).• A complex model: – Allows within-system feedback (ungrammatical

structures cannot be constructed)– Allows a wider range of constructions– Allows a wider range of lexical choices per

construction (for meaningful sentences)

Example for Lexicon: Scrabble

It should be possible to compare multiple languages.• We are working on 3 languages:– Italian (no interr. inversion, clitics, pro, [D N Adj PP]

order, Case in pronouns)– English (aux interr. inversion in main clauses, [D Adj

N PP])– German (V2 in main clauses, SOV order in

embedded, Case on Det, etc.)

– It should be extensible to other Romance/Germanic

Not too many pieces, and easy to recognize.

Trade off: many meanings, too many piecesSolution: • Color-code the various grammatical categories• Add a ribbon to place multiple words on the

same head• Give up on treating morphological alternations

(e.g. strong/weak declension)• Add matching symbols to individual words

Color coding

Solution:

Use a ribbon, so that multiple, related words can fit onto the same piece.

Remaining problems:• Tacky! • Tree hard to read• Ribbon material and

movement still problematic.

• Selector parts still hard to associate to heads

It should illustrate non-trivial syntactic phenomena (1)• Some features are hard-wired in the model:– Number must must match for subject/verb,

Det/Adj/N; Structural Case (Nom/Acc)– Modal/Aux verbs select the correct verb forms

(infinitive, participial, gerundive)– Interrogative C only allows Wh- in Spec.

• Other features are obtained via feature matching + rules.– Gender matching ( , , )

The game: the initial state

• A playing team has a range of pieces. The team enters them on the board as monocromatic words (frame+head+selector)

• CP root must be on top (even if «empty»)• All words must be connected• No sentence is acceptable if there are «open»

selectors.

The game: scorekeeping

• Like in scrabble each piece has a score.• Highest scores are given to pieces like Wh-, V2

selectors, which introduce features that force the team to carry out movements.

• You could have various ways of challenging the opposing team (e.g. randomly changing one of their words)

• There could be piece trading

• Head movement: Obtained from a combination of up ( ) and down ( , ) arrows on words in specific languages

Head-movement is head-swapping– C-interr and Vfin-Aux exchange in English– C-root and Vfin exchange in German (V2)– Neg and Aux exchange in English, German,

1. John has not slept2. Gianni non ha dormito3. Johan hat geschlafen nicht

– Adj and N swap in Italian but not English• A tall boy / Un ragazzo alto

Adj – N inversion

Phrasal movement

• Phrasal movement is obtained by having Wh- frames (and V2 selectors) obligatorily introducing traces below them.

• The only way to complete the game is to insert the trace in the head of one of the arguments.

• But then the argument must be placed elsewhere.

• The only possible position is the Wh- frame.

Head directionality

• The word ribbon can slip to the other side of the head.

• Word that are written become straight when passed to the other side.

• German verbs are all written upside down. So they force the player to flip the whole head.

• As a result, words that selected to the right now select to the left.

upside down

Head directionality

Linguistic limits

Lots…1. Since there are is no feature transmission,

agreement forces a multiplication of the pieces (unless it is done by rules, like gender)

2. Cases different from nominative/accusative.3. Long-distance licensing (NPI, subjunctive)4. Morphology …

Playability limits

1. Connection between selectors and heads2. Adjuncts (connected via the right-side plug)3. Extensors (overlapping squares)4. Getting the ribbons right5. Word clattering6. Too difficult? Age level?7. Why not all in software? Software module?…

Thanks!