1/7/2024 0 Comments Double licence lettres phlo![]() These authors acknowledge, though, that manner information is often omitted in motion event descriptions where path is lexicalized in the verb. This finding weakens Levin and Rappaport Hovav’s (in press: 1) generalization that “cross languages, clauses containing descriptions of similar events are likely to include the same conceptual components (.)”. English texts translated from a Romance language also contain fewer manner-of-motion verbs than English texts translated from another Germanic language (Cappelle 2012). As the same study reveals, a clear trace of this difference is found in the much lower number of particle verbs in English texts translated from French compared to English texts translated from German. Nonetheless, one cannot deny that French and English, given their general typological nature, differ in the basic structures they put at speakers’ disposal to express change of location or change of state. venir) may represent a satellite-framed encoding strategy (cf., inter alia, Pourcel and Kopecka 2006), such verbs in a French source text trigger a particle verb as translation more readily than do non-prefixed French source verbs, as reported in Cappelle and Loock (2017).In line with the view that French prefixed verbs (e.g. In this talk, I will first argue that English and French are not as perfectly satellite-framed and verb-framed, respectively, as these languages are often assumed to be. It is especially surprising that Sapir's work is hardly ever mentioned. While Talmy is credited with the familiar typological distinction between ‘satellite-framed’ and ‘verb-framed’ languages across the world, we should not ignore Strohmeyer (1910), Sapir and Swadesh (1932), Bergh (1940, 1948), Malblanc (1944), Vinay and Darbelnet (1958) and Tesnière (1959) as precursors to systematic comparisons of motion expressions in some Germanic and Romance languages. Wide attention has been given to Leonard Talmy’s (1972, 1985, 1991, 2000) work on such differences in ‘lexicalisation patterns’ between languages. Speakers of French or Spanish typically express this information in the verb root itself. Speakers of Dutch or English often rely on a particle to express information related to the path of motion. When we want to talk about an entity moving along a path in a particular way, the language we speak nudges us into certain encoding choices. head) in the constructions expressing motion. In particular we examine issues such as serialization, and also the status of the verb (satellite vs. The data collected on two Burmese dialects will then be presented, along with new data on hitherto unknown constructions, leading us to revise previ-ous typologies of motion events. The following section will pres-ent the elicitation material developed by the Trajectory project that helps to collect comparable data on motion. After a brief review of Talmy’s typology and its evolution, we will examine some Southeast Asian constructions and means to encode motion and path that have been neglected by previous studies. This paper aims to continue and complement the cross-linguistic studies of motion event encoding initiated by Talmy’s seminal work on a semantic typol-ogy of motion events (1972, 1985), given that his classification of languages based on path encoding cannot account for some constructions found in Southeast (and East) Asian languages. When the resultative element (change of location) is a default inference, it can be lexicalized. By analysing naturally occurring constructions in their contexts, I will outline the pragmatic conditions that compensate for lexical and aspectual limitations. ![]() Previous assertions that Romance languages have poor lexical manner inventories and lack resultatives can help explain low productivity, but they do not argue against the existence of a satellite-framed encoding choice per se. The analysis of a large corpus sample of satellite-framed constructions shows that in Spanish this pattern is not only available but indeed is preferred under some circumstances. This paper provides evidence for the growing assumption that languages may in fact show both encoding options (Beavers, 2008 Beavers et al., 2010 Filipovic, 2007 Iacobini and Masini, 2006, 2007 Fortis, 2010, Croft et al., 2010, inter alia). satellite-framed patterns, represents the preferred option here for the encoding of motion events cross-linguistically, but does not cover other peripheral uses that a language may show. Talmy’s (1985, 2000) influential two-way typology, verb-framed vs. The present analysis is grounded in the belief that linguists, when describing a language, should aim for a full and comprehensive coverage.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |