Survey validation

[philena.livejournal.com]

For my dissertation research, I'm examining whether the probability of a particular morpheme's occurrence affects its pronunciation. I'm hoping to use Russian as my study language, because Russian has many situations in which it is possible for a verb to show either singular or plural agreement (много стульев стоялИ/О за столом). In order to investigate this, however, I need to know exactly how to measure the likelihood of getting singular or plural agreement, and for that reason I've constructed a norming study. Unfortunately, I do not speak Russian natively, or even particularly well, and so I'd like some native Russian speakers to run through the surveys that I've created and point out any problem spots. (The stimuli have all been spot-checked by a Russian-speaker already, so they shouldn't be too horrible.) That is where you come in! Would the native Russian speakers among you be willing to help me prepare these surveys? You can do it in one of two ways:


1. I've created six different lists (using the AMAZING form option on Google docs). Your brains will bubble if you try to do all of them, so please just choose your favorite color and run through the sentences on it. I would also be very happy if you filled in the blanks for the sentences you find, although I'm more concerned with finding problem spots than getting pilot data. If there are problems, you can tell me in the comments below. Please be sure to mention the list color and exactly what the problem is.

red
orange
yellow
green
(dark) blue
purple



2. I need to come up with written instructions. Although I will be studying the particular form  that the verb takes, I'd rather not make people think too much about it. (I might add filler sentences where people are asked to fill in nouns or prepositions or adjectives in similar sentences, although I've not included them here.)  For that reason, I'd also like to include a word-association task in between each sentence. I've written sample instructions below. They are probably Very Bad. Could you please correct them? They do not need to sound all formal. They simply need to sound natural, so that people know what the task is.

Russian Instructions:
Вы будете видеть два типа заданий: заполнение предложений и [word-association--I have no idea how to describe this concept in Russian]. В каждом предложении заполните пропуски словами данными в скобках. Потом прочитайте следующее слово и напишите первое слово, которое появляется у Вас в голове. Например:

Стул __ (стоять) у окна
(Вы пишите): стоял


дверь
(Вы пишите:): лис

Intended Instructions:
You will see two types of task: sentence-completion and word-association. In each sentence, please fill in the blanks using the word provided in parentheses. Then read the following word and write down the first word that comes to mind. For example:

The chair __ (stand) by the window
(You write:) stood

door
(You write:) fox

Thank you very much for any help you can provide.

Comments

[oryx_and_crake]

Вы будете видеть увидите два типа заданий: заполнение предложений и словесные ассоциации. В каждом предложении заполните пропуски словами,[mind the comma] данными в скобках. Потом прочитайте следующее слово и напишите первое слово, которое появляется у Вас в голове. Например:

Стул __ (стоять) у окна
(Вы пишиете): стоял


дверь
(Вы пишиете): лис

[ingwall.livejournal.com]

Just as I was writing the same comment. :)

[alex-mashin.livejournal.com]

"Которое появляется у Вас в голове" → "которое появится у Вас в голове", but better "появившееся у Вас в голове", even better "пришедшее Вам в голову".

[philena.livejournal.com]

словесные ассоциации! Thank you! I was sifting through Wikipedia's Russian pages on psychology trying to find a reference to it, but it came to naught.

[oryx_and_crake]

Some errors in the task lists

присутсТвовать
камней
после оползня
много партизан

Also, I have an impression that you wanted to use perfective verbs, e.g. пять партизан пробилось к своим, десять писателей оказались в центре внимания. Then you need to use the infinitives for these perfectives, e.g. пробиться, оказаться, not пробиваться and оказываться.

[elvit.livejournal.com]

> Also, I have an impression that...

I guess you're right. The same with orange:
Несколько камEней (ударять) в стену после оползЕнИя > Несколько камней (ударить) в стену после оползня (or even удариться?)

[philena.livejournal.com]

Thank you very much for your comments. I was afraid aspect might crop up in this way.

1. Is this the case for all of the sentences?

2. Would it help if I gave an example showing that present tense (and therefore imperfective aspect) is fine? Would any of these sentences that seem to call for perfective aspect sound better if they were in present tense?

I'm trying to avoid using different aspects, because it might be a factor in the agreement choice and I don't want to double my list lengths in order to control for it. However, none of the previous research suggested that aspect might matter (although I believe a commenter orie further down thinks it is important), so I might be able to use whichever sounds best.

[oryx_and_crake]

1. no, just some of them
2. yes, you can do that, or you can send me the questionnaires as a Word file at oryxandcrake at yahoo ca, and I will correct them. I don't think the aspect matters that much but some examples will probably make more sense in perfective.

[philena.livejournal.com]

Thank you very much for that offer! I will send a word document in a few minutes, along with my attempt at some more elaborate instructions. It will be arriving from an aol account with the subject line "Survey validation."

[orie.livejournal.com]

In purple list

Два преподавателя __ (давать) домашнюю работу

I think it should be "Два преподавателя __ (дать) домашнюю работу". It is also the only sentence in which I feel I should use the plural form (дали), not the singular one (дало). I think it can be somehow connected with verb aspect

[philena.livejournal.com]

Thank you for this comment. Does your intuition hold if you stick with давать but use it in the present tense? (E.g, new student in the school: "How much homework is there?" Student two: "Not too much. Two teachers give homework, but the others don't." In this imperfective case, would you prefer the singular form?

[orie.livejournal.com]

In the present I'll use "дают", also a singular for

[orie.livejournal.com]

Also in the purple list

Мало профессоров __ (писать) статью

This sentence makes no sense to me, because it sounds as if very few professors were sitting and writing the same article. If it were only one article, why should there be many professors? :)

Perhaps it should be "(написать) статьи".

[ingwall.livejournal.com]

Well, that's how scientific papers are written. :)

[shvedka.livejournal.com]

Anyway "мало профессоров" cannot be used here.

[ingwall.livejournal.com]

Possibly in the context of there being too few professors among the authors. Мало расстреливаем интеллигенции профессоров статью написало! Подавайте мне статью тридцати профессоров!

[shvedka.livejournal.com]

In this case we need either ! or "слишком" :))

[philena.livejournal.com]

Thank you for your comment. As ingwall suggested, I was thinking in terms of the number of co-authors, but I guess it would be entirely possible to switch the sentence so that they're writing multiple articles.

[orie.livejournal.com]

Also in the purple list

На стройке __(нужно) два бульдозера

It is already a sentence, because "нужно" doesn't change form

[ingwall.livejournal.com]

Нужны?

[orie.livejournal.com]

В окно __ (виднеться) пять хулиганов

Should be "в окне"

[orie.livejournal.com]

Сквозь шели __ (пробиваться) мало потоков

Should be "щели"

[philena.livejournal.com]

D'oh! Thank you very much. I will fix both that and the window.

[eternal-spinach.livejournal.com]

Some suggestions for the instruction:
"Данное исследование включает в себя два типа заданий:" (the study includes two types of task)
"В каждом предложении заполните пропуск, используя слово, данное в скобках. (In each sentence, fill in the gap using the word given in parentheses)
"и напишите первое слово, которое приходит вам в голову."

And what exactly is the purpose of the word association task, if I may ask?

[philena.livejournal.com]

Thank you very much for your suggestions!

The purpose of the word-association task is two-fold. First, it is supposed to keep the subjects from thinking too hard about the form of the verb that they use to fill in the gap. If I vary whether the words are related to the sentences they've just completed, or are entirely unrelated, that might make subjects think I'm trying to do some priming thing on the word-association task, which is exactly the sort of misdirection that might keep them from thinking too hard about the verb agreement.

Second, if people respond with conjugated verbs or nouns to the word-association task, it might be interesting to see if they use singular or plural forms, and whether those singular or plural forms match (or don't match) the form of the verb that they chose. That is entirely secondary, however. The primary goal is misdirection.

[eternal-spinach.livejournal.com]

Maybe then it would make sense to add some filler sentences that require to conjugate nouns or adjectives. Or verbs, but then conjugated by tense or gender or something. I think it will work even better than the word association task alone. Although of course it's a lot of work.
And does it matter whether people use past or present tense? I think that in almost all of the sentences, if I use past tense, I would choose the singular form, but with present tense I would choose a plural form. I wonder if it's something that other people would also do!

[mousex.livejournal.com]

oh well. I'm a native Russian speaker and I study English at the Uni (i.e. I'm like your reflection :)

right. so what I wanted to say here... You know, you should definitely read about the норма - узус thing, (if you haven't heard about it yet.) I can't help thinking that you're breaking the usus in most of these sentences. It's like, all right, they make sense, but they sound awkward. No Russian would use the same set of words to communicate ideas you put in them. Or else the word order is strange, even though it's 'free' in most of Russian sentences...

take the red list for instance:
"Два журналиста __(быть) в классе" - if I understand it correctly, it must turn into "Два журналиста есть в классе", which is correct grammatically and possible theoretically BUT doesn't sound natural Russian. If you ask me, I'd say "Два журналиста находятся в классе" which is the best I can think of and sounds just fine. I know the two words are synonyms, but it really makes difference.
Again, if it's not the point, and it doesn't really matter how it sounds, then it's just fine, mostly sentences are grammatically correct.

I also wanted to say, you know, you use the много/мало thing in a somewhat strange manner. "Мало хирургов __(остаться) в больнице" - doesn't sound ok. Only "В больнице (остаться) мало хирургов" does. And it's the same with other sentences of this kind. Грузовики, авторы, спорстсмены - всё туда же.

What else... tomatoes don't blush. What you used isn't redden :)

"После оползения __ (ударять) дом десять каменей" - it's оползень. После оползня...

etc etc etc, they're all of the same kind I think :)

[philena.livejournal.com]

Thank you for your feedback. I'm aware that these sentences must sound odd--especially without any context, which is amazing for improving sentences that sound bizarre in isolation. In most of these sorts of experiments I think some degree of that is unavoidable, and I'm trying just trying to reduce the oddness as much as possible.

"Два журналиста __(быть) в классе" - if I understand it correctly, it must turn into "Два журналиста есть в классе"

Wouldn't "были/было" also work here?

I also wanted to say, you know, you use the много/мало thing in a somewhat strange manner. "Мало хирургов __(остаться) в больнице" - doesn't sound ok. Only "В больнице (остаться) мало хирургов" does. And it's the same with other sentences of this kind. Грузовики, авторы, спорстсмены - всё туда же.

I'm trying to systematically vary the specific quantifier that is used, as well as the word order. All your inverted corrections, which put the verb first, do appear on one of the other lists. Ideally I would have sentences that work equally well in either order, but evidently I failed in that.

What else... tomatoes don't blush. What you used isn't redden

Drat, really? I found that usage on gardening websites. I'm also trying to systematically vary the animacy of the subject, and it's REALLY hard to find verbs that work equally well for animate and inanimate subjects. I need here a change-of-state verb. Would бледнеть work? Can both people and inanimate masculine things do that?

I'm very grateful for your comments. If you find any other problems, I'd be very glad to know about them.

[mousex.livejournal.com]

1) The journalists
oh, the past tense sounds just fine! For some reason I didn't even think of using the past - I just didn't notice the 'rules' allowed that :)

2) The tomatoes
okay, I see... I tried to think about some verbs we use in the 'same' sense about things and people and it appears that _exactly_ the same verb indeed, may be used, but only in a figurative (and often informal) meaning if paired with a person. Most of the time the prefix changes and makes all the difference. Also, I think, colours don't work: a person can become pale (побледнеть) and I cannot imagine a vegetable getting pale.. - ? :) However, in cookery they might want to describe something in detail and use this kind of verb (like, 'wait till olives become black...') etc.

Here is what I've come up with (See for yourself):

Цветок расцвел (direct meaning, a flower is in blossom) /
девушка расцвела (figurative meaning, a girl is blooming)

Пирог подрумянился (a cake reddened – got brown?) /
девушка зарделась (a girl blushed)

техника устарела (equipment got old)/
родители состарились (parents became old)

If you wish to keep that sentence with tomatoes, say it like В саду __ (зреть) пять помидоров. (Зреть, созреть, созревать = become eatable, a universal neutral word for any kind of vegetable/fruit, the meaning is quite general)

Hope it may somehow help you :)

[mousex.livejournal.com]

Something else here...:
(the red list)

Десять пленников __ (ударять) черную собаку - use бить here. ударять is correct, but бить sounds neutral and natural

and also... someone else mentioned this, too, I think:

На стройке __(нужно) пять инженеров - already makes sense. AND I cannot define the part of speech нужно represents! It may not be even a verb... look here: http://rusforus.ru/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=3585&start=20
so I'd rather remove it at all... just in case :)

У постели __ (стоять) мало священников - strange, strange! Мало in here means 'not enough' so it sounds like 'not enough priests stood beside the bed' - not enough for what?? please use несколько which will be fine.. It reminds me of few/a few difference :) yes... I think in all the cases when you use мало it's much better to use несколько...

p.s. have you ever been to www.gramota.ru? You might find it useful! I (sometimes) do :)))

[philena.livejournal.com]

Thank you again for all your comments. I guess you're right that with мало everything sounds slightly strange. Some of the work I've read uses немало--would that be better? I'm trying to use a set of three of these "indefinite quantifiers," and I've already got "many" and "several," so it seems like "few" should fill in the gap.

"нужно" here is usually defined as a short adjective predicate (болен, виден) although I have seen them analyzed as verbs with funny conjugations. It is different from the others, but in the particular study that I'm basing this survey on, нужно is cited as an example of one of the predicate categories I'm trying to use, so I have no qualms about grabbing it.

[mousex.livejournal.com]

er... It's true, that много/мало makes a pair and много can be used with both countable/uncountable nouns and animate/inanimate objects, but мало/немало used with animate objects makes an emphatic structure and does not sound neutral, at least to me. When I count people, I say:
Там стоял один человек. Там стояло два человека. Там стояло несколько человек. Там стояла группа людей, человек 10 (20/30/50). Там было много народу/ там была толпа народа. Just logically, when I can count, I still use a number, when I'm not sure, I use some word to describe what I see.
Well, that's unfortunate, right now we have a course on Russian as foreign (for Russians) at the Uni and I just don't have an opportunity to attend the classes... probably I'd have been more useful to you, not just like 'well normally I say this... normally I say that...' amateur... :) hope it's helpful. Good luck with your study :)