Chapter published in:
Motion and Space across Languages: Theory and applications
Edited by Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano
[Human Cognitive Processing 59] 2017
► pp. 61–94

Expressing and categorizing motion in French and English

Verbal and non-verbal cognition across languages

| CNRS & University of Paris 8
| University of Mannheim
| University of Lille 3
| University of Cambridge
| CNRS & University of Paris 8
Language-specific properties influence motion expression (Slobin 2004; Talmy 2000), but it is still debated whether they also influence non-verbal spatial cognition. We compare how English and French speakers perform three tasks involving motion events: non-verbal categorization based on cartoons during a dual task (articulatory suppression); verbal categorization involving target sentences; and descriptions of motion events. Descriptions show more manner expression in English and variation in both groups as a function of event properties. However, both groups frequently choose Path as categorization criterion, particularly in verbal categorization, but language effects do show that English speakers are more sensitive to event properties. Thus, typology has a strong impact on verbal cognition but also a partial influence on non-verbal cognition that must be taken into account in future research on the relation between language and thought.
Keywords: categorization, lexicalization, Manner (of motion), Path (of motion), spatial cognition, typology
Published online: 14 August 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.59.04hic
References

References

Allen, S., Özyürek, A., Kita, S., Brown, A., Furman, R., & Ishizuka, T.
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 Scholar
Aske, J.
1989 Path predicates in English and Spanish: A closer look. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 15, 1–14. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G.
1974 Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory. Vol. 8 (47–89). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Blomberg, J., & Zlatev, J.
2009 Linguistic relativity, mediation and the categorization of motion. In J. Zlatev, M. Andrén, M. Johansson Falck, & C. Lundmark (Eds.), Studies in language and cognition (46–61). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Bohnemeyer, J., Eisenbeiss, S., & Narasimhan, B.
2001 Event triads. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (Eds.), ‘Manual’ for the field season 2001 (100–114). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
Bowerman, M., & Choi, S.
2003 Space under construction: Language-specific categorization in first language acquisition. In D. Gentner, & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (387–427). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cadierno, T.
2004 Expressing motion events in a second language: A cognitive typological perspective. In M. Achard, & S. Niemeyer (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (13–49). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 Learning to talk about motion in a foreign language. In P. Robinson, & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (239–274). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cadierno, T., & Lund, K.
2004 Cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition: Motion events in a typological framework. In B. VanPatten, J. Williams, S. Rott, & M. Overstreet (Eds.), Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition (139–154). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Carroll, M., Lambert, M., Weimar, K., Flecken, M., & von Stutterheim, C.
2012 Tracing trajectories: Motion event construal by advanced L2 French-English and L2 French-German speakers. Language, Interaction and Acquisition (LIA), 3(2), 202–230. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Choi, S.
2011 Language-specificity of motion event expressions in young Korean children. Language, Interaction and Acquisition (LIA), 2(1), 157–184. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Choi, S., & Bowerman, M.
1991 Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns. Cognition, 41(1–3), 83–121. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Choi, S., & Hattrup, K.
2012 Relative contribution of cognition/perception and language on spatial categorization. Cognitive Science, 36, 102–129. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Engemann, H.
2012 Motion event expression in bilingual first language acquisition. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Engemann, H., Hendriks, H., Hickmann, M., Soroli, E., & Vincent, C.
2015 How language impacts memory of motion events in English and French. Cognitive Processing – International Quarterly of Cognitive Science 16(supplement 1), 209–213. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Evans, N., & Levinson, S. C.
2009 The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32(5), 429–448. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Filipović, L.
2011 Speaking and remembering in one or two languages: Bilingual vs. monolingual lexicalization in memory for motion events. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15(4), 466–485. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gennari, S. P., Sloman, S. A., Malt, B. C., & Fitch, W. T.
2002 Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition, 83, 49–79. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gumperz, J. J., & Levinson, S. C.
1996 Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Harr, A.-K.
2012 The impact of language-specific factors in first language acquisition: The expression of motion in French and German. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, H., & Hickmann, M.
2011 Expressing voluntary motion in a second language: English learners of French. In V. Cook, & B. Bassetti (Eds.), Language and bilingual cognition (315–339). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Hendriks, H., Hickmann, M., & Demagny, A.-C.
2008 How English native speakers learn to express caused motion in English and French. Acquisition et Interaction en Langue Étrangère, 27, 15–41.Google Scholar
Hermer-Vazquez, L., Spelke, E. S., & Katsnelson, A. S.
1999 Sources of flexibility in human cognition: Dual task studies of space and language. Cognitive Psychology, 39, 3–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hickmann, M.
2010 Linguistic relativity in first language acquisition: Spatial language and cognition. In M. Kail, & M. Hickmann (Eds.), Language acquisition across linguistic and cognitive systems (125–146). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hickmann, M., & Robert, S.
2006 Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hickmann, M., Hendriks, H., & Champaud, C.
2009a Typological constraints on motion in French and English child language. In J. Guo, E. Lieven, S. Ervin-Tripp, N. Budwig, K. Nakamura, & Ş. Özçalışkan (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (209–224). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Hickmann, M., Taranne, P., & Bonnet, P.
2009b Motion in first language acquisition: Manner and Path in French and English child language. Journal of Child Language, 36(4), 705–741. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hickmann, M., Soroli, E., Engemann, H., Hendriks, H., & Vincent, C.
2014 Typological factors in the development of verbal and non-verbal spatial cognition: A comparison of French and English. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference in Cognitive Linguistics, University of Lancaster, Lancaster, UK, 29–31 July 2014.
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I.
2009 Path salience in motion events. In J. Guo, E. Lieven, N. Budwig, S. Ervin-Tripp, K. Nakamura, & S. Özçalışkan (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (403–414). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Ji, Y.
2009 The expression of voluntary and caused motion events in Chinese and in English: Typological and developmental perspectives. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Ji, Y., Hendriks, H., & Hickmann, M.
2011a The expression of caused motion events in Chinese and in English: Some typological issues. Linguistics, 49(5), 1041–1076. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011b Children’s expression of voluntary motion events in English and Chinese. Journal of Foreign Languages, 34(4), 2–20.Google Scholar
Lavie, N., Hirst, A., De Fockert, J., & Viding, E.
2004 Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(3), 339–354. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. C.
2003 Space in language and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. C., & Wilkins, D.
2006 Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lucy, J. A.
1992 Language diversity and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Majid, A., Bowerman, M., Kita, S., Haun, D. B., & Levinson, S. C.
2004 Can language restructure cognition? The case for space. Trends in Cognitive Science, 8, 108–114. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Newton, A. M., & De Villiers, J. G.
2007 Thinking while talking: Adults fail nonverbal false-belief reasoning. Psychological Science, 18, 574–579. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Özçalışkan, Ş.
2009 Learning to talk about spatial motion in language-specific ways. In J. Guo, E. Lieven, S. Ervin-Tripp, N. Budwig, K. Nakamura, & Ş. Özçalışkan (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (263–276). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
2015 Ways of crossing a spatial boundary in typologically distinct languages. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(2), 485–508. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, A., Hulbert, J., & Trueswell, J.
2008 Does language guide event perception? Evidence from eye movements. Cognition, 108, 155–184. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, A., Massey, C., & Gleitman, L.
2002 Shake, rattle, ’n’ roll: The representation of motion in language and cognition. Cognition, 84, 189–219. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, A., & Selimis, S.
2010 Event categorisation and language: A cross-linguistic study of motion. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 224–260. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pourcel, S.
2005 Relativism in the linguistic representation and cognitive conceptualization of motion events across verb-framed and satellite-framed languages. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Durham.Google Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A.
2002 E-Prime reference guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools Inc.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I.
1996 From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”. In J. J. Gumperz, & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2004 How people move: Discourse effects of linguistic typology. In C. L. Moder, & A. Martinovic-Zić (Eds.), Discourse across languages and cultures (195–210). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition. In M. Hickmann, & S. Robert (Eds.), Space across languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories (59–81). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I., Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I., Kopecka, A., & Majid, A.
2014 Manners of human gait: A crosslinguistic event-naming study. Cognitive Linguistics, 25, 701–741. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Soroli, E.
2011 Language and spatial cognition in French and in English: Crosslinguistic perspectives in aphasia. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Paris 8.Google Scholar
2012 Variation in spatial language and cognition: Exploring visuo-spatial thinking and speaking cross-linguistically. Cognitive Processing – International Quarterly of Cognitive Science, 13(1), 333–337. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Soroli, E., & Hickmann, M.
2010 Language and spatial representations in French and in English: Evidence from eye-movements. In G. Marotta, A. Lenci, L. Meini, & F. Rovai (Eds.), Space in language (581–597). Pisa: ETS.Google Scholar
Soroli, E., Hickmann, M., Hendriks, H., Engemann, H., & Vincent, C.
2015 Language effects on spatial cognition? Cross-linguistic evidence and eye-tracking. Paper presented at NINJAL International Symposium: Typology and Cognition in Motion Event Descriptions. Tokyo, Japan, 24–25 January 2015.
Talmy, L.
2000 Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. II: Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
von Stutterheim, C., & Nüse, R.
2003 Processes of conceptualisation in language production: Language specific perspectives and event construal. Linguistics, 41, 851–881.Google Scholar
Zhou, X., Chen, C., Zhang, H., Xue, G., & Dong, Q.
2006 Neural substrates for forward and backward recitation of numbers and the alphabet: A close examination of the role of intraparietal sulcus and perisylvian areas. Brain Research, 1099(1), 109–120. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zlatev, J., Blomberg, J., & David, C.
2010 Translocation: Language and the categorization of experience. In V. Evans (Ed.), Language, cognition, and space: The state of the art and new directions (389–418). Sheffield, UK: Equinox.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Cappelle, Bert
2020.  In Broader Perspectives on Motion Event Descriptions [Human Cognitive Processing, 69], ► pp. 235 ff. Crossref logo
HICKMANN, Maya, Henriëtte HENDRIKS, Anne-Katharina HARR & Philippe BONNET
2018. Caused motion across child languages: a comparison of English, German, and French. Journal of Child Language 45:6 ► pp. 1247 ff. Crossref logo
Soroli, Efstathia, Maya Hickmann & Henriëtte Hendriks
2019.  In The Semantics of Dynamic Space in French [Human Cognitive Processing, 66], ► pp. 250 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 december 2020. 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.