Motion Encoding in Russian and English: Moving Beyond Talmy's Typology
Motion Encoding in Russian and English: Moving Beyond Talmy's Typology
复制标题
俄语和英语的运动编码：超越塔尔米的类型学
DOI：
10.1111/modl.12177
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Maria Volynsky
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Pavlenko;Maria Volynsky
本研究的目的是双重的。第一，我们将证明塔尔米（Talmy，1985、1991、2000）将俄语和英语归为卫星框架语言的运动类型学在语言学上可能是合理的，但从心理语言学的角度来看是不够的。第二，我们认为，类型学的缺陷可能是运动认知中语言效应研究中得出的不确定结果的原因。该研究考察了使用图画书《青蛙，你在哪里？》引发的叙事中动作的词汇化。 （Mayer，1969）来自说俄语的 L1 使用者（n = 31）、说英语的 L1 使用者（n = 38）和俄英双语者（n = 30）。所有双语者都将故事讲了两次，每种语言各一次，并被细分为早期、儿童和晚期双语者，以控制第二语境中的到达年龄 (AoA) 和居住时间 (LoR) 对第二语言表现的综合影响。对四个运动动词语料库（俄语、英语、俄语双语、英语双语）的定量和定性分析表明，俄语母语使用者以更细粒度的方式分割运动事件，并对运动事件的方式、方向性和时空轮廓进行编码的频率明显高于母语英语使用者。双语者在两种语言中都遵循语言特定的词汇化模式，但晚期双语者在第二英语中表现出词汇多样性的减少。这些发现与两种语言运动成分编码的强制性、有界性和复杂性的差异有关。我们认为，运动编码的这些维度可以在教学环境中以及超越塔尔米类型学的未来语言和运动认知研究中进行富有成效的探索。 [作者摘要]
The aim of the present study is twofold. One, we will show that Talmy's (1985, 1991, 2000) motion typology that groups Russian and English together as satellite-framed languages may be justified on linguistic grounds but is inadequate from a psycholinguistic point of view. Two, we will argue that the shortcomings of the typology may account for inconclusive findings in research on language effects in motion cognition. The study examined lexicalization of motion in narratives elicited with the use of a picture book Frog, where are you? (Mayer, 1969) from L1 speakers of Russian ( n = 31), L1 speakers of English ( n = 38), and Russian-English bilinguals ( n = 30). All bilinguals told the story twice, once in each language, and were subdivided into early, childhood, and late bilinguals in order to control for combined effects of the Age of Arrival (AoA) and Length of Residence (LoR) in the L2 context on L2 performance. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of the four motion verb corpora (L1 Russian, L1 English, Bilingual L1 Russian, Bilingual L2 English) revealed that L1 Russian speakers segment motion events in a more fine-grained way and encode the manner, directionality, and spatiotemporal contours of motion events significantly more frequently than speakers of L1 English. Bilinguals followed language-specific lexicalization patterns in both languages but late bilinguals displayed reduced lexical diversity in L2 English. These findings were linked to differences in obligatoriness, boundedness, and complexity of encoding of motion components in the two languages. We argue that these dimensions of motion encoding can be productively explored in instructional contexts and in future studies of language and motion cognition that go beyond Talmy's typology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]