What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition

Languages differ considerably in the attention that they pay to manner as a dimension of motion events. One factor that seems to influence attention to manner is a language’s lexicalization pattern. Following Talmy’s well-known dichotomy of verb-framed and satellite-framed languages, the latter type provides more readily accessible constructions that include path and manner in compact form. In this chapter it is proposed that the dichotomy be expanded to included an “equipollent” type, in which both path and manner receive equal weight. Furthermore, other factors also contribute to the degree of “manner salience” of a particular language. In particular, language-specific morphosyntax, the availability of ideophones, and the availability of motion-related lexical categories (such as posture verbs) are three sorts of factors that interact with lexicalization patterns in influencing manner salience. It is proposed that linguistically-expressed manner salience can influence attention to details of experienced motion events as well as mental imagery formed on the basis of reception of motion event descriptions in speech or writing.

[1]  D. Slobin.  How people move: Discourse effects of linguistic typology , 2004 .

[2]  Leonard Talmy,et al.  (1) Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms; and , 1987 .

[3]  Eva Schultze-Berndt,et al.  Simple and complex verbs in Jaminjung. A study of event categorisation in an Australian language. , 2000 .

[4]  小原 京子.  Linguistic encodings of motion events in Japanese and English: A preliminary look , 2002 .

[5]  Dan I. Slobin,et al.  Codability Effects on the Expression of Manner of Motion in Turkish and English , 2003 .

[6]  K. Chung,et al.  The contemporary theory of metaphor: A perspective from Chinese By Ning Yu (review) , 2015 .

[7]  Felix K. Ameka,et al.  Ideophones and the nature of the adjective word class in Ewe , 2001 .

[8]  Leonard Talmy,et al.  Typology and Process in Concept Structuring , 2000 .

[9]  Penelope Brown,et al.  Position and motion in Tzeltal frog stories: The acquisition of narrative style , 2004 .

[10]  M. Bowerman.  What Shapes Children's Grammars? , 1985 .

[11]  Leonard Talmy,et al.  Path to Realization: A Typology of Event Conflation , 1991 .

[12]  Sven Strömqvist,et al.  Relating events in narrative : typological and contextual perspectives , 2004 .

[13]  Dan I. Slobin,et al.  Climb up vs. ascend climbing: Lexicalization Choices in Expressing Motion Events with Manner and Path Components , 2000 .

[14]  A. Malblanc.  Pour une stylistique comparée du français et de l'allemand : Essai de représentation linguistique comparée , 1944 .

[15]  Scott Delancey.  Argument Structure of Klamath Bipartite Stems , 2000 .

[16]  Shoko Hamano.  The sound-symbolic system of Japanese , 2000 .

[17]  Dan I. Slobin,et al.  Linguistic representations of motion events: What is signifier and what is signified? , 2005 .

[18]  Sotaro Kita,et al.  Japanese Enter/Exit Verbs Without Motion Semantics , 1999 .

[19]  D. Slobin.  Mind, Code and Text , 1997 .

[20]  R. Dirven,et al.  Evidence for linguistic relativity , 2000 .

[21]  L. Talmy.  Toward a Cognitive Semantics: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring , 2000 .

[22]  Susan Duncan,et al.  Growth points in thinking-for-speaking , 1998 .

[23]  D. Slobin.  Verbalized events: A dynamic approach to linguistic relativity and determinism , 2000 .

[24]  Sven Strömqvist,et al.  Relating events in narrative. vol. 2, typological and contextual perspectives , 2004 .

[25]  Hong Gao,et al.  The Physical Foundation of the Patterning of Physical Action Verbs : A Study of Chinese Verbs , 2001 .

[26]  Dan I. Slobin,et al.  The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events , 2004 .

[27]  S. Ozçalişkan.  In a caravanserai with two doors I am walking day and night: Metaphors of death and life in Turkish , 2003 .

[28]  Ning Yu,et al.  The contemporary theory of metaphor , 1998 .

[29]  C. T. Msimang,et al.  The ideophone in Zulu , 2001 .

[30]  D. Slobin,et al.  The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition , 2000 .

[31]  A. McCabe.  Relating events in narrative: a crosslinguistic developmental study , 1996, Journal of Child Language.

[32]  Dan I. Slobin,et al.  Reference to Movement in Spoken and Signed Languages: Typological Considerations , 1994 .

[33]  Sotaro Kita,et al.  Expressing manner and path in English and Turkish: Differences in speech, gesture, and conceptualization , 2020, Proceedings of the Twenty First Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.

[34]  Mercer Mayer,et al.  Frog, Where Are You? , 1969 .

[35]  J. Zlatev,et al.  A third way to travel: The place of Thai in motion event typology. , 2004 .

[36]  Michael Tanangkingsing,et al.  Reference to Motion Events in Six Western Austronesian Languages: Toward a Semantic Typology , 2005 .

[37]  Jon Aske,et al.  Path Predicates in English and Spanish: A Closer Look , 1989 .

[38]  R. P. Schaefer.  Ideophonic adverbs and manner gaps in Emai , 2001 .

[39]  Juan Pablo Mora Gutiérrez.  Directed Motion in English and Spanish. , 2001 .

[40]  H. Aoki.  Nez Perce Grammar , 1970 .

[41]  L. Talmy.  Toward a Cognitive Semantics , 2003 .

[42]  SOTARO KITA,et al.  Two-dimensional semantic analysis of Japanese mimetics , 1997 .

[43]  S. Levinson,et al.  Rethinking Linguistic Relativity , 1991, Current Anthropology.

[44]  C. Rubino,et al.  Iconic morphology and word formation in Ilocano , 2001 .

[45]  Yukiko Sugiyama.  Not All Verb-Framed Languages are Created Equal: The Case of Japanese , 2005 .

[46]  I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano.  Language typologies in our language use: The case of Basque motion events in adult oral narratives , 2004 .

[47]  D. Slobin.  LANGUAGE AND THOUGHT ONLINE: COGNITIVE CONSEQUENCES OF LINGUISTIC RELATIVITY , 2003 .