Cover not available
Article published In:
Languages in Contrast
Vol. 19:2 (2019) ► pp.280–309

Goal realization

An empirically based comparison between English, German and Greek

ORCID logo | University of Liège (Belgium)
| University of Kassel (Germany)
| Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Drawing upon recent insights into the role of Goal preference as reflector of cross-linguistic differences, this paper investigates the factors affecting the realization of Goals in motion event descriptions. In particular, it examines the interplay between the lexicalization pattern of a language, on the one hand, and grammatical viewpoint aspect, on the other – factors which have commonly been treated in isolation. In so doing, three typologically distinct languages were examined: English, German and Greek. The empirical basis of this paper includes: (a) a corpus study, in which we examined the distribution of Goals in a small set of verbs, and (b) an experimental verbalization study, from which we elicited descriptions of different motion event types. While the former does not give a clear picture concerning the cross-linguistic differences in Goal prominence, the latter indicates that lexicalization pattern assumes a more prominent role than grammatical viewpoint aspect in affecting Goal realization.
Keywords: Goals of motion, lexicalization patterns, grammatical viewpoint aspect, corpus data, language production, English/German/Greek
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Goal realization from a cross-linguistic perspective
    • 2.1Aspect in English, German and Greek
    • 2.2The effect of grammatical aspect on Goal realization
    • 2.3Lexicalization patterns
    • 2.4Goal preference across languages: The effect of the lexicalization pattern
  • 3.Corpus data: A pilot study
  • 4.The verbalization study
    • 4.1Method and Material
      • Participants
      • Stimuli
      • Procedure
      • Analysis of the event descriptions
    • 4.2Results and discussion
      • 4.2.1Differences in lexicalization pattern
      • 4.2.2Lexicalization pattern and grammatical viewpoint aspect as factors
      • 4.2.3Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 10 September 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.17010.geo
References (63)
References
Abraham, W. 2007. Absent Arguments on the Absentive: An Exercise in Silent Syntax. Grammatical Category or Just Pragmatic Inference? Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik 451: 3–16.Google Scholar
Anthonissen, L., De Wit, A. and Mortelmans, T. 2016. Aspect Meets Modality: A Semantic Analysis of the German Am-Progressive. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 28(1): 1–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Antonopoulou, E. 1987. Prototype Theory and the Meaning of Verbs, with Special Reference to Modern Greek Verbs of Motion. PhD Thesis, SOAS, University of London.Google Scholar
Athanasopoulos, P. and Bylund, E. 2013. Does Grammatical Aspect Affect Motion Event Cognition? A Cross-Linguistic Comparison of English and Swedish Speakers. Cognitive Science 371: 286–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Athanasopoulos, P., Damjanovic, L., Burnand, J. and Bylund, E. 2015. Learning to Think in a Second Language: Effects of Proficiency and Length of Exposure in English Learners of German. The Modern Language Journal 991 (Supplement):138–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Binnick, R. I. 2006. Aspect and Aspectuality. In The Handbook of English Linguistics, B. Aarts and A. McMahon (eds), 244–268. Oxford: Blackwell-Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bassea-Bezantakou, C. 1992. Simasiologikes Theories tor Rimaton Kiniseos tis Neas Ellinikis Glossas [A semantic analysis of motion verbs in Modern Greek]. Kardamitsa: Athens.Google Scholar
Beavers, J., Levin, B. and Tham, W. S. 2010. The Typology of Motion Expressions Revisited. Linguistics 461: 331–377.Google Scholar
Bepperling, S. and Härtl, H. 2013. Ereigniskonzeptualisierung im Zweitspracherwerb – Thinking for Speaking im Vergleich von Muttersprachlern und Lernern. Zeitschrift für Semiotik 35(1–2): 159–191.Google Scholar
Berman, A. R. and Slobin, D.I. (eds). 1994. Relating Events in Narrative: A Crosslinguistic Developmental Study. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Berthele, R. 2006. Ort und Weg: Die sprachliche Raumreferenz in Varietäten des Deutschen, Rätoromanischen und Französischen. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017. When bilinguals forget their manners. Language dominance and motion event descriptions in French and German. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 141: 39–70.Google Scholar
Berthele, R. and Stocker, L. 2017. The Effect of Language Mode on Motion Event Descriptions in German-French Bilinguals. Language and Cognition 9(4):648–676. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boroditsky, L., Schmidt, A. L. and Webb, P. 2003. Sex, Syntax, and Semantics. In Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, D. Gentner and S. Goldin-Meadow (eds), 61–79. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bertinetto, P. M., Ebert, K. and de Groot, C. 2000. The Progressive in Europe. In Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, Ö. Dahl (ed), 517–558. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bybee, L. J., Perkins, R. and Pagliuca, W. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. 1976. Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W., Barðdal, J., Hollmann, W., Sotirova, V. and Taoka, C. 2010. Revising Talmy’s typological classification of complex event constructions. In Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language 10], H. C. Boas (ed.), 201–235. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ebert, K. 2000. Progressive Markers in Germanic Languages. In Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, Ö. Dahl (ed), 605–653. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Filipović, L. 2007. Talking about motion: A crosslinguistic investigation of lexicalization patterns. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flecken, M., von Stutterheim, C. and Carroll, M. 2014. Grammatical Aspect Influences Motion Event Perception: Findings from a cross-linguistic nonverbal recognition task. Language and Cognition 6(1):45–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Georgakopoulos, T., & Sioupi, A. 2015. Framing the Difference between Sources and Goals in Change of Possession Events: A Corpus-based Study in German and Modern Greek. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 31:105–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giannakidou, A. 2003. A Puzzle about until and the Present Perfect. In Perfect Explorations, A. Alexiadou, M. Rachert and A. von Stechow (eds), 101–133. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goschler, J. 2013. Motion events in Turkish-German contact varieties. In Variation and Change in the Encoding of Motion Events, J. Goschler & A. Stefanowitsch (eds.), 115–131. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goutsos, D. 2010. The Corpus of Greek Texts: A Reference Corpus for Modern Greek. Corpora 5(1):29–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herweg, M. 1990. Zeitaspekte: Die Bedeutung von Tempus, Aspekt und temporalen Konjunktionen. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag GmbH. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holton, D., Mackridge, P. and Philippaki-Warburton, I. 1997. Greek: A Comprehensive Reference Grammar of the Modern Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Horrocks, G. and Stavrou, M. 2007. Grammaticalized Aspect and Spatio-Temporal Culmination. Lingua 1171:605–644. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johanson, M. and Papafragou, A. 2010. Universality and Variation in the Acquisition of Path Vocabulary. Proceedings from the 34th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Available at [URL] [last accessed 17 April 2018].
Kitis, E. and Tsangalidis, A. 2005. Expressivity as an Option of Tense-Aspect in Language: The Case of Modern Greek Imperfective Past. In Trends of Linguistics. Reviewing Linguistic Thought. Converging Trends for the 21st Century, S. Marmaridou, K. Nikiforidou & E. Antonopoulou (eds), 143–162. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kouklakis, G., Mikros, G., Markopoulos, G. and Koutsis, I. 2007. Corpus Manager: A Tool for Multilingual Corpus Analysis. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference (CL2007), D. Matthew, P. Rayson, S. Hunston and P. Danielsson (eds). Birmingham, UK. Available at [URL] [last accessed 17 April 2018].
Kupietz, M., Belica, C., Keibel, H. and Witt, A. 2010. The German Reference Corpus DEREKO: A primordial sample for linguistic research. In Proceedings of the 7th conference on International Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2010), N. Calzolari (ed.), 1848–1854. Valletta, Malta: ELRA.Google Scholar
Lang, E. 2011. Deutsch – typologisch. Institut für deutsche Sprache und Linguistik. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. Materialsammlung.Google Scholar
Levin, B. 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lübbe, A. and Rapp, I. 2011. Aspekt, Temporalität und Argumentstruktur bei attributiven Partizipien des Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 30(2):259–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malt, C. B., Steven, A. S. and Gennari, P. S. 2003. Speaking versus Thinking about Objects and Actions. In Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, D. Gentner and S. Goldin-Meadow (eds), 81–111. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Moser, A. 1994. Aktionsart and Aspects of Verb [Pion kai Apopsis tou Rimatos]. Parousia Monograph Series 30. Athens: Parousia.Google Scholar
Özçalışkan, Ş. and Slobin, D.I. 2000. Climb up vs. Ascend Climbing: Lexicalization Choices in Expressing Motion Events with Manner and Path Components. Proceedings of the Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development 24 (Vol. II1). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. 558–570.Google Scholar
Papafragou, A., Massey, C. and Gleitman, L. 2002. Shake, Rattle, ’n’ Roll: The Representation of Motion in Language and Cognition. Cognition 841:189–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006. When English Proposes what Greek Presupposes: The Cross-linguistic Encoding of Motion Events. Cognition 981: B75–B87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, A. and Selimis, S. 2010. Event Categorisation and Language: A Cross-linguistic Study of Motion. Language and Cognitive Processes 251: 224–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, A., Hulbert, J. and Trueswell, J. 2008. Does Language Guide Event Perception?: Evidence from Eye Movements. Cognition 1081:155–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmiédtova, B. 2011. Do L2 Speakers Think in the L1 when Speaking in the L2?. VIAL, International Journal of Applied Linguistics 81:138–179.Google Scholar
Schmiédtova, B. and Flecken, M. 2008. Aspectual Concepts across Languages: Some Considerations for Second Language Learning. In Cognitive Approaches to Pedagogical Grammar, S. de Knop and T. de Rycker (eds), 357–384. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schmiedtová, B., von Stutterheim, C. and Carroll, M. 2011. Language-specific Patterns in Event Construal of Advanced Second Language Speakers. In Thinking and Speaking in two Languages, A. Pavlenko (ed), 66–107. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selimis, S. 2007. Glosiki Kodikopiisi tu Eniologikou Pediu tis Kinisis: Kirioleksia ke Metafora sta Elinika Pedion ke Enilikon [Linguistic Coding of the Concept of Motion: Literal and Metaphorical Expressions in Adult and Child Greek]. PhD Thesis, University of Athens.Google Scholar
Selimis, S. and Katis, D. 2010. Motion Descriptions in English and Greek: A Cross-typological Developmental Study of Conversations and Narratives. Linguistik Online 421:57–76.Google Scholar
Sioupi, A. 2014. Aspektdistinktionen im Vergleich. Deutsch/Englisch – Griechisch. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Slobin, D.I. 1996a. From ‘Thought and Language’ to ‘Thinking for Speaking’. In Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, J. J. Gumperz and S. C. Levinson (eds), 70–96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. 1996b. Two Ways to Travel: Verbs of Motion in English and Spanish. In Grammatical constructions: Their Form and Meaning, S. Thompson and M. Shibatani (eds), 195–219. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D.I. 2003. Language and Thought Online: Cognitive Consequences of Linguistic Relativity. In Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, D. Gentner and S. Goldin-Meadow (eds), 157–192. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2004. The many Ways to Search for a Frog: Linguistic Typology and the Expression of Motion Events. In Relating Events in Narrative: Typological and Contextual Perspectives, S. Strömqvist and L. Verhoeven (eds), 219–257. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Smith, C. 1991/1997. The Parameter of Aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soroli, E. 2012. Variation in Spatial Language and Cognition: Exploring Visuo-spatial Thinking and Speaking Cross-linguistically. Cognitive Processing 131: 333–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soroli, E. and Verkerk, A. 2017. Motion Events in Greek: Methodological and Typological Issues. CogniTextes 6(1): 1–53.Google Scholar
von Stutterheim, C., Carroll, M. and Klein, W. 2009. New perspectives in Analyzing Aspectual Distinctions across Languages. In The Expression of Time, W. Klein and P. Li (eds), 195–216. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
von Stutterheim, C., Andermann, M., Carroll, M., Flecken, M. and Schmiedtová, B. 2012. How Grammaticized Concepts Shape Event Conceptualization in Language Production: Insights from Linguistic Analysis, Eye Tracking Data, and Memory Performance. Linguistics 50(4): 833–867. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Stutterheim, C. and Nüse, R. 2003. Processes of Conceptualisation in Language Production. Linguistics 41(5):851–881.Google Scholar
von Stutterheim, C., Nüse, R. and Murcia-Serra, J. 2003. Crosslinguistic Differences in the Conceptualization of Events. In Information structure in a Cross-linguistic Perspective, H. Hasselgard, S. Johansson, B. Behrens & C. Fabricius-Hansen (eds), 179–198. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
von Stutterheim, C., Bouhaous, A. and Carroll, M. 2017. From Time to Space: The Impact of Aspectual Categories on the Construal of Motion Events: The Case of Tunisian Arabic and Modern Standard Arabic. Linguistics 55(1): 207–249. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics, Vol. II: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Vigliocco, G., Vinson, P. D., Paganelli, F. and Dworzynski, K. 2005. Grammatical Gender Effects on Cognition: Implications for Language Learning and Language Use. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 134(4): 501–520. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vogel, P. M. 2007. Anna ist essen! Neue Überlegungen zum Absentiv. In Kopulaverben und Kopulasätze: Intersprachliche and Intrasprachliche Aspekte, L. Geist & B. Rothstein (eds), 253–284. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Taremaa, Piia & Anetta Kopecka
2023. Speed and space: semantic asymmetries in motion descriptions in Estonian. Cognitive Linguistics 34:1 ► pp. 35 ff. DOI logo
Zaychenko, Katharina
2022. Grammatical and cognitive factors shaping the conceptualization of motion events. Languages in Contrast 22:1 ► pp. 136 ff. DOI logo
Bunger, Ann, Dimitrios Skordos, John C. Trueswell & Anna Papafragou
2021. How children attend to events before speaking: crosslinguistic evidence from the motion domain. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 6:1 DOI logo
Kopecka, Anetta & Marine Vuillermet
2021. Source-Goal (a)symmetries across languages. Studies in Language 45:1 ► pp. 2 ff. DOI logo
Liao, Yiyun, Monique Flecken, Katinka Dijkstra & Rolf A. Zwaan
2020. Going places in Dutch and mandarin Chinese: conceptualising the path of motion cross-linguistically. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 35:4 ► pp. 498 ff. DOI logo
Skordos, Dimitrios, Ann Bunger, Catherine Richards, Stathis Selimis, John Trueswell & Anna Papafragou
2020. Motion verbs and memory for motion events. Cognitive Neuropsychology 37:5-6 ► pp. 254 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 august 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.