[Lingtyp] fieldwork on deixis

[Anna Margetts]

I would recommend the elicitation tool designed by David Wilkins,
especially for distinguishing person-based from distance-based
demonstrative systems.

Wilkins, David. 1999a. The 1999 demonstrative questionnaire: “this” and “
that” in comparative perspective. In David Wilkins, ed.
*Manual for the 1999 field season*. Version 1.0. Nijmegen, MPI for
Pycholinguistics. 1-24.



The questionnaire should be downloadable from the website of the MPI in
Nijmegen. This entire book is discussing cross-linguistic
work with this elicitation tool:

Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-42428-8 — Demonstratives in
Cross-Linguistic Perspective Edited by Stephen Levinson , Sarah Cutfield ,
Michael Dunn , Nick Enfield , Sergio Meira , David Wilkins


Regards,

Anna

On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 04:34, Jessica Katiuscia Ivani <
jivani at isfas.uni-kiel.de> wrote:

> Dear Michael,
> you can use lego blocks to create different scenarios and let the speakers
> describe the contexts and the spatial relations between the tokens. Robert
> Schikowski (University of Zürich) has used this method for Chintang
> (Tibeto-Burman), I attach a picture of one of his models. You can find
> information about the methodology and further inspiration on this
> <https://www.clrp.uzh.ch/downloads/Dirksmeyer2008.pdf> MA thesis by Tyko
> Dirksmeyer.
> I have also used lego blocks during my fieldwork experiences (on Dravidian
> and Tibeto-Burman), in addition to other materials, and they have been
> extremely useful.
> Best,
> Jessica
>
>
>
>
> On 25. Feb 2020, at 17:36, Michael Daniel <misha.daniel at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> my students are going to do a field study to collect basic information on
> the use of three deictic pronouns in Rutul, Lezgic, East Caucasian; and
> would like to ask for advice. This is a system of three demonstratives, but
> we are not sure whether this is a person- or distance-oriented system or
> something else. None of them speaks the language (while they have a fairly
> good understanding of Rutul grammatical system). The corpus is by far not
> big enough to provide evidence (as is probably often the case with
> demonstratives). Grammaticality and appropriateness judgments in artificial
> settings are not consistent.
>
> Can you indicate successful field / experimental studies that deal with
> this and are specific about their protocol and experiment design? Among
> other options, we were considering using David P. Wilkins questionnaire
> <http://fieldmanuals.mpi.nl/download/1999_The_1999_demonstrative_questionnaire_this_that.pdf>,
> but it does not provide guidelines on best practices of how to apply it
> (apparently, that was the author's intention). We have some ideas, but
> wanted to ask - and discuss these ideas - with anyone who has experience in
> using this or another questionnaire on deictic pronouns. We would also be
> grateful for additional references in the literature.
>
> You may as well reply to my personal email, with copies to the students
> (in the copy above),
>
> Michael Daniel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200226/21d63151/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: photo_2020-02-25_18-10-11.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 159064 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200226/21d63151/attachment.jpg>