Cover not available
Part of
Corpus-based Approaches to Construction Grammar
Edited by Jiyoung Yoon and Stefan Th. Gries
[Constructional Approaches to Language 19] 2016
► pp. 105–144

Spanish constructions of directed motion – a quantitative study

Typological variation and framing strategy

In typological studies of expressions of motion events, there is a need for a quantitative methodology that assesses and qualifies inter- and intra-linguistic variation. The article reports on a large corpus study of the use of Spanish motion verbs in constructions of telic motion. Verb associations with the constructional V-slot were measured by using collostructional methodology (Stefanowitsch and Gries, 2003). Six categories of construction-specific variation were identified. The corpus data and broad evidence from other semantic domains suggest that the encoding of Spanish argument structure is verb-driven and that verb constraints versus schematicity is a typological parameter. The study concludes that Spanish is a verb-framing language rather than a verbframed language (cf. Talmy, 2000), which explains the substantial variation observed.
Published online: 8 September 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.19.05ped
References (65)
References
Aske, J. (1989). Path predicates in English and Spanish: A closer look. In K. Hall, M. Meacham, & R. Shapiro (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifteenth annual meeting of the berkeley linguistics society (pp. 1–14). Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Barlow, M. (2011). Corpus linguistics and theoretical linguistics. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16(1), 3–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barlow, M., & Kemmer, S. (Eds.) (2000). Usage based models of language. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Beavers, J., Levin, B., & Shiao Wei, T. (2010). The typology of motion expressions revisited. Journal of Linguistics, 46(3), 1–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berman, R.A., & Slobin, D.I. (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Boas, H.C. (2003). A constructional approach to resultatives. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
. (2010). The syntax–lexicon continuum in construction grammar. A case study of English communication verbs. Belgian journal of linguistics, 24(1), 54–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (1985). Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2006). From usage to grammar: The minds response to repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2007). Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cifuentes Ferez, P. (2010). The semantics of the English and the Spanish motion verb lexicons. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 8(2), 233–271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, M. (2002). Corpus del Español. [URL]
Croft, W. (2001). Radical construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., Barddal, J., Hollmann, W., Sotirova, V., & Taoka, C. (2010). Revising talmy’s typological classification of complex event constructions. In H.C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive construction grammar (pp. 201–35). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fanego, T. (2012). Motion events in English: The emergence and diachrony of manner salience from old English to late modern English. Folia linguistica historica, 33, 29–85.Google Scholar
Gennari, S.P., Sloman, S.A., Malt, B.C., & Fitch, W.T. (2002). Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition, 83, 49–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A.E. (1995). Constructions. A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. (2006). Constructions at work. The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.E., & Jackendoff, R. (2004). The English resultative as a family of constructions. Language, 80, 532–568. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. Th. (2010). Corpus linguistics and theoretical linguistics. A love–hate relationship? Not necessarily… International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(3), 327–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2003). Entering in Spanish: Conceptual and semantic properties of entrar en/a . Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 1, 29–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2004a). Language typologies in our language use: The case of Basque motion events in adult oral narratives. Cognitive Linguistics, 15(3), 317–349. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2004b). Motion events in Basque narratives. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 89–111). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
. (2009). Path salience in motion events. In J. Guo, E. Lieven, N. Budwig, S. Ervin-Tripp, K. Nakamura, & S. Őzçalişkan (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 403–414). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (1990). Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. (1997). The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R.W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol. I. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. (1988). A usage-based model. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics (pp. 127–161). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, B., & Rappaport Hovav, M. (1995). Unaccusativity: At the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Masini, F. (2005). Multi-word expressions between syntax and the lexicon: The case of Italian verb-particle constructions. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 18, 145–173.Google Scholar
. (2008). Verbi sintagmatici e ordine delle parole. In M. Cini (Ed.), I verbi sintagmatici in italiano e nelle varietà dialettali. Stato dell’arte e prospettive di ricerca. (Spazi comunicativi – Kommunikative Räume, Vol. 3) (pp. 83–102). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Martínez Vázquez, M. (2001). Delimited events in English and Spanish. Estudios Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense, 9, 31–59.Google Scholar
. (Ed.). (2003). Gramática de Construcciones. Contrastes entre el inglés y el español. Universidad de Huelva.Google Scholar
Mateu Fontanals, J. (2000). Path and telicity in idiomatic constructions. A lexical-syntactic approach to the Way-construction. Paper presented at the 2000 ESSLLI Workshop on Paths and Telicity in Event Structure . University of Birmingham.
Mateu Fontanals, J., & Rigau, G. (2002). A minimalist account of conflation processes: Parametric variation at the lexicon-syntax interface. In D.A. Alexiadou (Ed.), Theoretical approaches to universals (pp. 211–236). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morimoto, Y. (2008). Grammar of “manner of motion” verbs in English and Spanish: between lexicon and syntax. In N. Delbecque & B. Cornillie (Eds.), Trends in linguistics, studies and monographs: On interpreting construction schemas: From action and motion to transitivity and causality (pp. 287–305). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Narasimhan, B. (2003). Motion events and the lexicon: A case study of Hindi. Lingua, 113(2), 123–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, J. (2009a). The construction of macro-events. A typological perspective. In C. Butler & J.M. Arista (Eds.), Deconstructing constructions (pp. 25–62). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2009b). Lexical and constructional organization of argument structure. A contrastive analysis. In J. Zlatev, M. Andrén, M. Johansson Falck, & C. Lundmark (Eds.), Studies in language and cognition (pp. 230–245). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
. (2013). The way-construction and cross-linguistic variation in syntax. Implications for typological theory. In C. Paradis, J. Hudson, & U. Magnusson (Eds.), The construal of spatial meaning, windows into conceptual space (pp. 236–262). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2014). Variable type framing in Spanish constructions of directed motion. In H.C. Boas & F.G. García (Eds.), Romance perspectives on construction grammar (pp. 269–304). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Simone, R. (1996). Esistono verbi sintagmatici in italiano? Cuadernos de Filología Italiana, 3, 47–61. Servicio de publicaciones UCM.Google Scholar
Slobin, D.I. (1996a). From ‘thought and language’ to ‘thinking for speaking’. In J.J. Gumperz & S.C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 195–217). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. (1996b). Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In M. Shibatani & S.A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning (pp. 195–219). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. (1997). Mind, code, and text. In J. Bybee, J. Haiman, & S.A. Thompson (Eds.), Essays on language function and language type: Dedicated to T. Givón (pp. 437–467). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1998). Coding of motion events in narrative texts. Departments of Psychology and Linguistics. University of California at Berkeley.Google Scholar
. (2000). Verbalized events: A dynamic approach to linguistic relativity and determinism. In S. Niemeier & R. Dirven (Eds.), Evidence for linguistic relativity (pp. 107–138). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative. Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219–257). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
. (2006). What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition. In M. Hickmann & S. Robert (Eds.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories (pp. 59–81). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2008). Relations between paths of motion and paths of vision: A crosslinguistic and developmental exploration. In V.C. Mueller-Gathercole (Ed.), Routes to language: Studies in honor of Melissa Bowerman (pp. 197–221). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Slobin, D.I., & Hoiting, N. (1994). Reference to movement in spoken and signed languages: typological considerations. In S. Gahl, A. Dolbey, & C. Johnson (Eds.), Proceedings of the twentieth annual meeting of the Berkeley linguistic society (pp. 487–505). Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Snyder, W. (2001). On the nature of syntactic variation: Evidence from complex predicates and complex word-formation. Language, 77(2), 324–342. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Son, M. (2007). Directionality and resultativity: The cross-linguistic correlation revisited. Nordlyd: Tromsø Working Papers in Linguistics, 34(2), 126–164. University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway. [URL]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S. Th. (2003). Collostructions: Investigating the interaction between words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8(2), 209–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2005). Covarying collexemes. Corpus linguistics and linguistic theory, 1(1), 1–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description vol. 3: Grammatical categories and the lexicon (pp. 57–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. (1987). Lexicalization patterns: Typologies and universals (Berkeley Cognitive Science Report 47). Berkeley: Cognitive Science Program, University of California.Google Scholar
. (1991). Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. In L.A. Sutton, C. Johnson, & R. Shields (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventeenth annual Berkeley linguistics society (pp. 480–519). Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics, Vol. 1–2. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tesnière, L. (1959). Eléments de syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language. A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Zlatev, J., & Yangklang, P. (2004). A third way to travel: The place of Thai (and other serial verb languages) in motion event typology. In S. Stromqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 159–190). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Wiesinger, Evelyn
2020. ¿Esto se echa para atrás? An approach to verb-particle constructions in European Spanish based on a corpus study of [V para atrás]. Romanica Olomucensia 32:1 ► pp. 201 ff. DOI logo
Wiesinger, Evelyn
2021. The Spanish verb-particle construction [V para atrás]. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30], ► pp. 140 ff. DOI logo
Pedersen, Johan
2019. Verb-based vs. schema-based constructions and their variability: On the Spanish transitive directed-motion construction in a contrastive perspective. Linguistics 57:3 ► pp. 473 ff. DOI logo
Wiliński, Jarosław
2017. On the Brink of-Noun vs. On the Verge of-Noun: a Distinctive-Collexeme Analysis. Research in Language 15:4 ► pp. 425 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.