Holistic spatial semantics and post-Talmian motion event typology: A case study of Thai and Telugu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Holistic spatial semantics and post-Talmian motion event typology : A case study of Thai and Telugu. / Naidu, Viswanatha; Zlatev, Jordan; van de Weijer, Joost; Devylder, Simon; Duggirala, Vasanta ; Blomberg, Johan.

In: Cognitive Semiotics, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2018, p. 1-27.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Holistic spatial semantics and post-Talmian motion event typology

T2 - A case study of Thai and Telugu

AU - Naidu, Viswanatha

AU - Zlatev, Jordan

AU - van de Weijer, Joost

AU - Devylder, Simon

AU - Duggirala, Vasanta

AU - Blomberg, Johan

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Leonard Talmy’s influential binary motion event typology has encountered four main challenges: (a) additional language types; (b) extensive “type-internal” variation; (c) the role of other relevant form classes than verbs and “satellites;” and (d) alternative definitions of key semantic concepts like Motion, Path and Manner. After reviewing these issues, we show that the theory of Holistic Spatial Semantics provides analytical tools for their resolution. In support, we present an analysis of motion event descriptions by speakers of two languages that are troublesome for the original typology: Thai (Tai-Kadai) and Telugu (Dravidian), based on the Frog-story elicitation procedure. Despite some apparently similar typological features, the motion event descriptions in the two languages were found to be significantly different. The Telugu participants used very few verbs in contrast to extensive case marking to express Path and nominals to express Region and Landmark, while the Thai speakers relied largely on serial verbs for expressing Path and on prepositions for expressing Region. Combined with previous research in the field, our findings imply (at least) four different clusters of languages in motion event typology with Telugu and Thai as representative of two such clusters, languages like French and Spanish representing a third cluster, and Swedish and English a fourth. This also implies that many other languages like Italian, Bulgarian, and Basque will appear as “mixed languages,” positioned between two or three of these clusters.

AB - Leonard Talmy’s influential binary motion event typology has encountered four main challenges: (a) additional language types; (b) extensive “type-internal” variation; (c) the role of other relevant form classes than verbs and “satellites;” and (d) alternative definitions of key semantic concepts like Motion, Path and Manner. After reviewing these issues, we show that the theory of Holistic Spatial Semantics provides analytical tools for their resolution. In support, we present an analysis of motion event descriptions by speakers of two languages that are troublesome for the original typology: Thai (Tai-Kadai) and Telugu (Dravidian), based on the Frog-story elicitation procedure. Despite some apparently similar typological features, the motion event descriptions in the two languages were found to be significantly different. The Telugu participants used very few verbs in contrast to extensive case marking to express Path and nominals to express Region and Landmark, while the Thai speakers relied largely on serial verbs for expressing Path and on prepositions for expressing Region. Combined with previous research in the field, our findings imply (at least) four different clusters of languages in motion event typology with Telugu and Thai as representative of two such clusters, languages like French and Spanish representing a third cluster, and Swedish and English a fourth. This also implies that many other languages like Italian, Bulgarian, and Basque will appear as “mixed languages,” positioned between two or three of these clusters.

KW - semantic typology

KW - path

KW - composition

KW - distribution;

KW - conflation

KW - case marking

KW - verbs

KW - covert expression

U2 - 10.1515/cogsem-2018-2002

DO - 10.1515/cogsem-2018-2002

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 1

EP - 27

JO - Cognitive Semiotics

JF - Cognitive Semiotics

SN - 2235-2066

IS - 2

ER -