Article published in:
Languages in Contrast
Vol. 22:1 (2022) ► pp. 136–159

Grammatical and cognitive factors shaping the conceptualization of motion events

A cross-linguistic investigation of language production and memory performance

| Kassel University , Germany
Motion event construal gives insight into the nature of the linguistic and conceptual representations underlying the encoding of events. Studies show that event descriptions differ cross-linguistically due to, amongst other factors, the absence or presence of grammatical aspect. While speakers of aspect languages generally focus on the process, speakers of non-aspect languages tend to perceive the event holistically and focus on endpoints. This investigation examines visual endpoint salience as a further factor that shapes event encoding. Thus, in this model, grammatical aspect is seen as a part of a more complex system of factors that determine event construal. The analyses, which cover German speakers, English speakers, and German-speaking learners of English, involve linguistic production data and results from memory performance tests. The findings show that the focus on endpoints increases for salient stimuli. While German speakers and learners of English show a tendency to focus on endpoints, a clear preference for focusing on the process can be observed in English speakers. Verbalizing endpoints correlates with the ability to remember them in a memorization task. The implications of these outcomes are discussed in the context of two factors which shape event encoding: grammatical aspect and endpoint salience.
Keywords: motion events, grammatical aspect, visual endpoint salience, English/German
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.State of the art
  • 3.Current study
    • 3.1Research questions
    • 3.2Participants
    • 3.3Material
    • 3.4Procedure
    • 3.5Data coding and analysis
    • 3.6Results
      • 3.6.1Language production data
      • 3.6.2Memorization task data analysis
    • 3.7Discussion
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 07 December 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.21005.zay
References
Athanasopoulos, P. and Bylund, E.
2012 Does Grammatical Aspect Affect Motion Event Cognition? A Cross-Linguistic Comparison of English and Swedish Speakers. Cognitive Science 37(2): 286–309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Attardo, S.
2000 Irony as Relevant Inappropriateness. Journal of Pragmatics 32(6): 793–826. CrossrefGoogle 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
Bernabeu, P. and Tillman, R.
2019 More Refined Typology and Design in Linguistic Relativity: The Case of Motion Event Encoding. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics 8(2): 163–171. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bylund, E., Athanasopoulos, P. and Oostendorp, M.
2013 Motion Event Cognition and Grammatical Aspect: Evidence from Afrikaans. Linguistics 51(5): 929–955. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cardini, F.
2010 Evidence against Whorfian Effects in Motion Conceptualisation. Journal of Pragmatics 421: 1442–1459. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chen, T., Xu, M., Tu, J., Wang, H. and Niu, X.
2018 Relationship between Omnibus and Post-hoc Tests: An Investigation of Performance of the F Test in ANOVA. Shanghai Arch Psychiatry 30(1): 60–64.Google Scholar
Do, M. L., Papafragou, A. and Trueswell, J.
2020 Cognitive and Pragmatic Factors in Language Production: Evidence from Source-Goal Motion Events. Cognition 2051: 1–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Engemann, H., Hendriks, H., Hickmann, M., Soroli, E. and Vincent, C.
2015 How Language Impacts Memory of Motion Events in English and French. Cognitive Processing 16(1): 209–213. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Feinmann, D.
2019 Language and Thought in the Motion Domain: Methodological Considerations and New Empirical Evidence. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 49(1): 1–29. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Filipović, L.
2009 Motion Events in Eyewitness Interviews, Translation and Memory: Typological and Psycholinguistic Perspectives. Language and Linguistics Compass 3(1): 300–313. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 Speaking and Remembering in one or two Languages: Bilingual vs. Monolingual Lexicalization and Memory for Motion Events. International Journal of Bilingualism 15(4): 466–485. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Filipović, L. and Geva, S.
2012 Language-Specific Effects on Lexicalization and Memory of Motion Events. In Space and Time in Languages and Cultures: Language, Culture, and Cognition, L. Filipović and K. M. Jaszczolt (eds), 269–282. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Flecken, M.
(ed.) 2010 Event Conceptualization in Language Production of Early Bilinguals. Nijmegen: Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Flecken, M., Carroll, M., Weimar, K. and von Stutterheim, C.
2015 Driving along the Road or Heading for the Village? Conceptual Differences Underlying Motion Event Encoding in French, German, and French–German L2 Users. The Modern Language Journal 99(S1): 100–122. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Flecken, M., von Stutterheim, C. and Carroll, M.
2014 Grammatical Aspect Influences Motion Event Perception: Evidence from a Cross-Linguistic Non-Verbal Recognition Task. Language and Cognition 6(1): 45–78.Google Scholar
Georgakopoulos, T. and Härtl, H.
2020 Goal Prevalence and Situation Types: An Empirical Analysis of Differences in Greek and German Motion Event Descriptions. In Theoretical Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics. Morphological and Syntactic Perspectives, M. Georgiafentis, G. Giannoulopoulou, M. Koliopoulou and A. Tsokoglou (eds), 262–280. London: Bloomsbury Academic. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Georgakopoulos, T., Härtl, H. and Sioupi, A.
2019 Goal Realization: An Empirically Based Comparison between English, German and Greek. Languages in Contrast 19(2): 280–309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, Z. and Bock, K.
2000 What the Eyes Say about Speaking. Psychological Science 111: 274–279. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hsu, J. C.
(ed.) 1996 Multiple Comparisons: Theory and Methods. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Johanson, M. and Papafragou, A.
2010 Universality and Language Specificity in the Acquisition of Path Vocabulary. Paper presented at the 34th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (BUCLD 34). Boston University, USA 6–8 November 2009.Google Scholar
Lakusta, L. and DiFabrizio, S.
2017 And, the Winner is… A Visual Preference for Endpoints over Starting Points in Infants’ Motion Event Representations. Infancy 22(3): 323–343. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakusta, L. and Landau, B.
2012 Language and Memory for Motion Events: Origins of the Asymmetry between Source and Goal Paths. Cognitive Science 36(3): 517–544. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005 Starting at the End: The Importance of Goals in Spatial Language. Cognition 96(1): 1–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakusta, L., Wagner, L., O’Hearn, K. and Landau, B.
2007 Conceptual Foundations of Spatial Language: Evidence for a Goal Bias in Infants. Language Learning and Development 3(3): 179–197. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R.
(ed.) 2008 Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Liao, Y., Flecken, M., Dijkstra, K. and Zwaan, R. A.
2019 Going Places in Dutch and Mandarin Chinese: Conceptualising the Path of Motion Cross-Linguistically. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 35(4): 498–520. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mertins, B.
(ed.) 2018 Sprache und Kognition: Ereigniskonzeptualisierung im Deutschen und Tschechischen. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, A. S. and Van der Meulen, F. F.
2000 Phonological Priming Effects on Speech Onset Latencies and Viewing Times in Object Naming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 7(2): 314–319. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, A., Massey, C. and Gleitman, L.
2002 Shake, Rattle, ‘n’ Roll: The Representation of Motion in Language and Cognition. Cognition 84(2): 189–219. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Purschke, C.
2014 “I Remember it like it was Interesting”: Zur Theorie von Salienz und Pertinenz. Linguistik Online 66(4/14): 31–50. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rácz, P.
2012 Operationalising Salience: Definite Article Reduction in the North of England. English Language and Linguistics 16(1): 57–79. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Regier, T. and Zheng, M.
2007 Attention to Endpoints: A Cross-Linguistic Constraint on Spatial Meaning. Cognitive Science 31(4): 705–719. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Skordos, D., Bunger, A., Richards, C., Selimis, S., Trueswell, J. and Papafragou, A.
2019 Motion Verbs and Memory for Motion Events. Cognitive Neuropsychology 37(5–6): 254–270. CrossrefGoogle 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
Stefanowitsch, A. and Rohde, A.
2004 The Goal Bias in the Encoding of Motion Events. In Studies in Linguistic Motivation, G. Radden and K.-U. Panther (eds), 249–268. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Talmy, L.
(ed.) 2000 Toward a Cognitive Semantics, Vol. II: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Von Stutterheim, C.
2003 Linguistic Structure and Information Organisation: The Case of very Advanced Learners. EuroSLA Yearbook 3(1): 183–206. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Von Stutterheim, C. and Lambert, M.
2005 Cross-Linguistic Analysis of Temporal Perspectives in Text Production. In The Structure of Learner Varieties, H. Hendriks (ed.), 203–230. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Von Stutterheim, C. and Nüse, R.
2003 Processes of Conceptualization in Language Production: Language-Specific Perspectives and Event Construal. Linguistics 41(5): 851–881. CrossrefGoogle Scholar