Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-8p85h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-17T16:02:29.931Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variable motion encoding within Chinese: a usage-based perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 May 2023

Shujun Chen  and
Lihuan Wu
Shujun Chen
Affiliation:
Faculty of English Language and Culture, Center for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Guangzhou, China
Lihuan Wu*
Affiliation:
School of Foreign Languages, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai, China
*
Corresponding author: Lihuan Wu; Email: wulihuan@ecust.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Languages differ considerably in the way they encode motion. Previous research on motion encoding has paid much attention to inter-typological variation (i.e., variation between language types) and intra-typological variation (i.e., variation within language types), but less focus on intra-linguistic variation (i.e., variation within particular languages). To fill this niche, the current study compares actual motion and metaphorical motion in Standard Mandarin Chinese with a corpus-based approach. We ask whether the typological properties in actual motion extend to metaphorical motion. The results indicate that the answer is negative. The typological properties including lexicalization patterns and the distribution of semantic components vary by both event type (actual motion vs. metaphorical motion) and genre (fiction vs. non-fiction) within Chinese. The intra-linguistic variation can be explained by additional factors – the pragmatic context and the structural property of Chinese. These findings support a constructional proposal of the motion event typology, which is a more nuanced typology that expands the binary distinction between V-languages and S-languages. In this proposal, the consideration of the scalar dimension enables more explicit descriptions of variation within languages (shift left- or rightward on the scale) and more accurate explanations for these phenomena.

Keywords

Actual motionconstruction grammarintra-linguistic variationmetaphorical motionmotion event typology

Information

Type
Article
Information
Language and Cognition , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , September 2023 , pp. 480 - 502
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allen, S., Özyürek, A., Kita, S., Brown, A., Furman, R., Ishizuka, T., & Fujii, M. (2007). Language-specific and universal influences in children’s syntactic packaging of manner and path: A comparison of English, Japanese and Turkish. Cognition, 102(1), 16–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aske, J. (1989). Path predicates in English and Spanish: A closer look. In Proceedings of the 15th annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (Vol. 15, pp. 1–14). Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Beavers, J., Levin, B., & Tham, S. (2010). The typology of motion expressions revisited. Journal of Linguistics, 46(3), 331–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berman, R., & Slobin, D. I. (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Caballero, R. (2017). Metaphorical motion constructions across specialized genres. In Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (Ed.), Motion and space across languages (pp. 229–256). John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.59.10cabCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caballero, R., & Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2015). From physical to metaphorical motion: A cross-genre approach. In Pirrelli, V., Marzi, C., & Ferro, M. (Eds.), NetWordS 2015: Word knowledge and word usage: Representations and processes in the mental lexicon (pp. 155–157). Scuola Normale Superiore.Google Scholar
Chen, L., & Guo, J. (2009). Motion events in Chinese novels: Evidence for an equipollently framed language. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(9), 1749–1766.10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chu, C. (2004). Event conceptualization and grammatical realization: The case of motion in Mandarin Chinese [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Croft, W., Barðdal, J., Hollmann, W. B., Sotirova, V., & Taoka, C. (2010). Revising Talmy’s typological classification of complex event constructions. In Boas, H. (Ed.), Contrastive studies in construction grammar (pp. 201–235). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, D. N. (2007). Xiandai hanyu fenlei da cidian [Dictionary of classification of modern Chinese]. Shanghai Lexicographical Publishing House.Google Scholar
Fábregas, A. (2007). The exhaustive lexicalization principle. Nordlyd: Tromsø Working Papers in Linguistics, 43, 165–199.Google Scholar
Fagard, B., Stosic, D., & Cerruti, M. (2017). Within-type variation in satellite-framed languages: The case of Serbian. STUF – Language Typology and Universals, 70(4), 637–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feist, M., & Duffy, S. (2020). On the path of time: Temporal motion in typological perspective. Language and Cognition, 12(3), 444–467.10.1017/langcog.2020.7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filipović, L. (2007). Talking about motion: A crosslinguistic investigation of lexicalization patterns. John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folli, R., & Ramchand, G. (2005). Prepositions and results in Italian and English: An analysis from event decomposition. In Verkuyl, H., de Swart, H., & van Hout, A. (Eds.), Perspectives on aspect (pp. 81–105). Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gennari, S. P., Sloman, S. A., Malt, B. C., & Fitch, W. (2002). Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition, 83(1), 49–79.10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00166-4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Goschler, J., & Stefanowitsch, A. (2013). Variation and change in the encoding of motion events. John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, D. F. (1994). Xiandai hanyu dongci fenlei cidian [Dictionary of classification of modern Chinese verbs]. Jilin Education Press.Google Scholar
Han, D. W. (2007). A cognitive study of metaphors of motion verbs in English and Chinese [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Northeast Normal University.Google Scholar
Han, M. T. T. (2011). Verbs of motion and their lexicalization patterns in English and Vietnamese: A perspective from cognitive semantics. VNU Journal of Science, Foreign Language, 27, 107–114.Google Scholar
Hendriks, H., & Hickmann, M. (2015). Finding one’s path into another language: On the expression of boundary crossing by English learners of French. The Modern Language Journal, 99, 14–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickmann, M., Taranne, P., & Bonnet, P. (2009). Motion in first language acquisition: Manner and path in French and English child language. Journal of Child Language, 36(4), 705–741.10.1017/S0305000908009215CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hsiao, H-c. S. (2009). Motion event descriptions and manner-of-motion verbs in Mandarin [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. The State University of New York.Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2004). Language typologies in our language use: The case of Basque motion events in adult oral narratives. Cognitive Linguistics, 15(3), 317–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2009). Path salience in motion events. In Guo, J. S., Lieven, E., Budwig, N., Ervin-Tripp, S., Nakamura, K., & Özçalışkan, Ş. (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 403–414). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Ji, Y., Hendriks, H., & Hickmann, M. (2011). The expression of caused motion events in Chinese and in English: Some typological issues. Linguistics, 49(5), 1041–1077.10.1515/ling.2011.029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh. Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lamarre, C. (2003). Hanyu kongjian weiyi shijian de yuyan biaoda-jianlun shuqushi de ji ge wenti [Linguistic encoding of motion events in Chinese: Several issues on verb-directional constructions]. Xiandai zhongguoyu yanjiu [Studies on Modern Chinese Language], 5, 1–18.Google Scholar
Lewandowski, W. (2021). Variable motion event encoding within languages and language types: A usage-based perspective. Language and Cognition, 13(1), 34–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewandowski, W., & Mateu, J. (2016). Thinking for translating and intra-typological variation in satellite-framed languages. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 14(1), 185–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewandowski, W., & Mateu, J. (2020). Motion events again: Delimiting constructional patterns. Lingua, 247, 1–25.10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewandowski, W., & Özçalışkan, Ş. (2018). How event perspective influences speech and co-speech gestures about motion. Journal of Pragmatics, 128, 22–29.10.1016/j.pragma.2018.03.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewandowski, W., & Özçalışkan, Ş. (2021). How language type influences patterns of motion expression in bilingual speakers. Second Language Research, 37(1), 27–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, F. (1993). A diachronic study of V–V compound in Chinese [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. State University of New York at Buffalo.Google Scholar
Li, F. (1997). Cross-linguistic lexicalization patterns: Diachronic evidence from verb–complement compounds in Chinese. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 3, 229–252.Google Scholar
Lin, J. X. (2019). Encoding motion events in Mandarin Chinese: A cognitive functional study. John Benjamins.10.1075/scld.11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Y. (2013). Xiandai hanyu yundong shijian biaoda moshi yanjiu [A study on the expression of motion event in Mandarin Chinese] [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Nankai University.Google Scholar
Martínez-Vázquez, M. (2015). Satellite-framed patterns in Romance languages: A corpus-based study. Languages in Contrast, 15(2), 181–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McEnery, A., & Xiao, Z. (2003). Lancaster Corpus of Mandarin Chinese. Published by the European Language Resources Association (Catalogue No. W0039) and the Oxford Text Archive (Catalogue No. 2474).Google Scholar
Naigles, L. R., Eisenberg, A. R., Kako, E. T., Highter, M., & McGraw, N. (1998). Speaking of motion: Verb use in English and Spanish. Language and Cognitive Processes, 13(5), 521–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nikitina, T. (2008). Pragmatic factors and variation in the expression of spatial goals: The case of into and in. In Ashbury, A., Dotlačil, J., Gehrke, B., & Nouwen, R. (Eds.), Syntax and semantics of spatial P (pp. 175–209). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özçalışkan, Ş. (2004). Typological variation in encoding the manner, path, and ground components of a metaphorical motion event. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 2(1), 73–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özçalışkan, Ş. (2005). Metaphor meets typology: Ways of moving metaphorically in English and Turkish. Cognitive Linguistics, 16(1), 297–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özçalışkan, Ş. (2015). Ways of crossing a spatial boundary in typologically distinct languages. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 485–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özçalışkan, Ş., & Slobin, D. I. (2003). Codability effects on the expression of manner of motion in English and Turkish. In Özsoy, A. S., Akar, D., Nakipoglu-Demiralp, M., Taylan, E. E., & Aksu-Koç, A. (Eds.), Studies in Turkish linguistics (pp. 259–270). Bogaziçi University Press.Google Scholar
Peyraube, A. (2006). Motion events in Chinese: A diachronic study of directional complements. In Hickmann, M. & Robert, S. (Eds.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories (pp. 121–138). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39.10.1080/10926480709336752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (2010). Reflections on manner/result complementarity. In Doron, E., Hovav, M. R., & Sichel, I. (Eds.), Syntax, lexical semantics, and event structure (pp. 21–38). Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohde, A. (2001). Analyzing path: The interplay of verbs, prepositions, and constructional semantics [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Rice University.Google Scholar
Shen, J. X. (2003). Xiandai hanyu dongbu jiegou de leixingxue kaocha [The resultative construction in Chinese: A typological perspective]. Shijie hanyu jiaoxue [Chinese Teaching in the World], 3, 17–23.Google Scholar
Shi, W. L. (2011). Hanyu yundong shijian cihua leixing de lishi zhuanyi [The pattern shift of the motion event integration in Chinese: A typological study based on morpho-syntactic features]. Zhongguo yuwen [Studies of the Chinese Language], 6, 483–498.Google Scholar
Shi, W. L. (2014). Hanyu yundong shijian cihua leixing de lishi kaocha [A historical study of lexicalization patterns of motion events in Chinese]. Commercial Press.Google Scholar
Shi, W. L., & Wu, Y. (2014). Which way to move: The evolution of motion expressions in Chinese. Linguistics, 52(5), 1237–1292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, W. L., Yang, W., & Su, H. (2018). The typological change of motion expressions in Chinese revisited: motion events in Old Chinese and its Modern Chinese translation. Studies in Language, 42, 847–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1996). Two ways to travel: verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In Shibatani, M. & Thompson, S. A. (Eds.), Essays in semantics (pp. 195–217). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1997). Mind, code, and text. In Bybee, J., Haiman, J., & Thompson, S. A. (Eds.), Essays on language function and language type: Dedicated to T. Givón (pp. 437–467). Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (2000). Verbalized events: A dynamic approach to linguistic relativity and determinism. In Niemeier, S. & Dirven, R. (Eds.), Evidence for linguistic relativity (pp. 107–138). Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In Strömqvist, S. & Verhoeven, L. (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219–257). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (2006). What makes manner of motion salient? In Hickmann, M. & Robert, S. (Eds.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories (pp. 59–81). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I., & Hoiting, N. (1994). Reference to movement in spoken and signed languages: Typological considerations. In Proceedings of the 20th annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society (Vol. 20, pp. 487–505). Berkeley Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Strömqvist, S., & Verhoeven, L. (2004). Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L. (1978). Figure and ground in complex sentences. In Greenberg, J. H., Ferguson, C. A., & Moravcsik, E. (Eds.), Universals of human language IV (pp. 627–649). Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In Shopen, T. (Ed.), Language typology and semantic description: Grammatical categories and the lexicon (pp. 36–149). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000a). Toward a cognitive semantics I. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000b). Toward a cognitive semantics II. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (2009). Main verb properties and equipollent framing. In Guo, J. S., Lieven, E., Budwig, N., Ervin-Tripp, S., Nakamura, K., & Özçalışkan, Ş. (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 389–402). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Zlatev, J., & Yangklang, P. (2004). A third way to travel: The place of Thai in motion-event typology. In Strömqvist, S. & Verhoeven, L. (Eds.), Relating events in narrative, Volume 2: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 159–190). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar