Jean-Michel Fortis (Université Paris 7, France) & Alice Vittrant (Université Aix-Marseille, France)

On the morphosyntax of path-expressing constructions: Toward a typology

ABSTRACT : This paper discusses Talmy’s typology of motion events and provides an outline of our own approach. In the first part, we present Talmy’s typology, its origin and evolution, the various objections which have been raised against it, and some data which, in current typological work, have been recognized marginally or not at all. In the second part, we describe our own approach, with a double goal in sight: first, of overcoming the difficulties met by current proposals, and, next, of providing an inventory of constructions used in the encoding of path. This inventory is given in an appendix.

1. Introduction

With the expansion of cognitive linguistics, the last thirty years have witnessed a new interest in the linguistic expression of spatial relations, and the role of space in the cognitive structuring of language. Within this broader field of interest, and in the wake of Talmy’s most influential papers on the matter (TALMY 1985, 1991), a number of researchers have turned their attention to one central domain of investigation, namely, the typology of the linguistic expression of motion events. In applying Talmy’s descriptive tools, difficulties have been encountered, as we shall see. The first goal of the paper is to present the evolution which led from Talmy’s very first proposal (1972) to the later versions of his theory, and to describe the difficulties it encountered. An historical presentation is desirable for the reason that some of the problems raised by Talmy’s typology have grown out of its evolution or are best understood in this evolutive context. This overview is followed by a survey of the problems which, in reaction to Talmy’s proposal, have been aired in the literature. Next, we turn to data that have received little consideration and deviate somewhat from the typical cases that the initial theory was designed to handle. The last part of the paper is devoted to the principles of our own approach.1

1 This paper sums up an aspect of the work done in the Trajectoire Group (http://www.ddl.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/trajectoire/), a research project supported by the French Fédération de Recherche en Typologie et Universaux Linguistiques. We take this opportunity to thank our colleagues of the Trajectoire Group for all the enriching discussions we had with them and for their friendship. They contributed many of the data presented below, which come mostly from material elicited with visual stimuli (video-clips, cf. ISHIBASHI, KOPECKA & VUILLERMET 2006). Special thanks go to our colleague Diana Lewis (Aix-Marseille University) who proofread the paper.

2. Talmy’s typology

2.1. Origin of Talmy’s typology

Talmy’s analysis of motion events was first presented in his dissertation (1972), a comparative study of English and Atsugewi (a polysynthetic language of California). In this study, close to generative semantics, surface sentences are derived from a universal deep structure which associates a semantic structure of 4 elements with a syntactic structure whose nodes bear the labels of traditional parts of speech (i.e. N, V, P). The semantic structure decomposes a spatial situation (a translatory situation) into a spatial relation (a directional) between a located or moving object (a figure) and a locating object (the ground). The relation is either static or dynamic, two features captured by semantic primitives, respectively BELOC (for ‘locative be’) and MOVE. Both primitives fall under the fourth component of the structure, the motive. The partitioning of a translatory situation into this set of elements, with their corresponding syntactic categories, is called a translatory structure (see fig. 1; semantic components are in capitals).

Fig. 1: the translatory structure ap. Talmy (1972: 13).

Semantic components are rearranged so as to fit the lexicalization and grammatical patterns of a language. For example, the English verb rain is derived by the adjunction of the Figure RAIN to the Motive MOVE, and the merging of these two components into the surface verb. This adjunction is shown in fig. 2.

Fig. 2: example of an adjunction (conflation) in Talmy (1972).

COMPONENTS : F: Figure M: Motive D: Directional G: Ground

N(F) V(M) P(D) N(G)

Stranslatory(sT)

MOVE / BELOC

N(Fig) V(Mot) P(Dir) N(Ground)

Stranslatory

N V

RAIN MOVE … into the bedroom

> it rained into the bedroom

The merging of semantic components is called conflation, a process akin to the transformation of predicate raising in generative semantics (MCCAWLEY 1976 [1968]). In English, the Motive (M) typically conflates with an external Manner (m) component and yields an Mm verb. An example can be found in (1), where the verb float results from a conflation of MOVE and AFLOAT in a translatory structure paraphrasable as ‘the bottle moved afloat into the cave’.

(1) The bottle floated into the cave.

Russian provides many examples of a similar pattern. In on v-bežal v dom (‘he in-ran into the house’), the Manner component RUNNING has been merged into the verb. While English and Russian widely use Mm verbs in the context of translatory structures, this is not so in Spanish. If expressed at all, manner of motion is specified in a “peripheral” component, for instance a gerundive (Talmy 1972: 289):

(2) La botella salió de la cueva flotando.

In (2), a Directional is conflated with the Motive, yielding an MD verb with the meaning of ‘go-out’ (but note that direction is also indicated by de).

Talmy speculates that English, German and Russian are parallel on a deep level. That is, in he walked into the house, walk would really contain a deep element similar to the Russian preverb v. The following table illustrates the parallelism of the three languages (adapted from Talmy 1972: 269-72). The underlined components are labelled satellites.

languages deep level surface level English he walked TO IN TO IN the house

he walked into the house

German er ging TO IN TO IN haus

er ging ins haus hinein

Russian on bežal TO IN TO IN dom on v-bežal v dom

Note that the English surface form into is a satellite and a preposition at the same time (a satellite-preposition). The reason for this, in addition to the above parallelism, is that the deletion of the PP leaves a satellite behind it (he walked into it > he walked in).

To sum up, Talmy’s initial typology of translatory structures draws a line between prominently MD languages like Spanish and prominently Mm languages like English, German and Russian. In the latter class, Directional components are typically expressed in satellites and adpositions. When a satellite does not surface, it is merged in the adposition.

2.2. The intermediary stage: Talmy (1985)

In the next version of Talmy’s theory, constructions that describe motion events (= translatory situations) are classified according to whether they lexicalize path, the new term for ‘directional’, in a verb or in a satellite (or possibly in both): “Path appears in the verb root in “verb-framed” languages such as Spanish, and it appears in the satellite in “satellite-framed” languages such as English and Atsugewi.” (TALMY 2000 [1985]: 117-8). Further, satellite is defined as follows: “It is the grammatical category of any constituent other than a noun-phrase or prepositional phrase complement that is in a sister relation to the verb root.” Examples include English verb particles, Latin, Russian and German verb prefixes, Chinese verb complements, and Atsugewi affixes. According to the above definition, a preposition like into is not a satellite. The consequence is that Talmy’s arch-example the bottle floated into the cave cannot be classified, being neither verb-framed nor satellite-framed. Yet, it is clear that for Talmy (1985) sentences like the bottle floated into the cave are characteristic of satellite-framed languages (see also IMBERT ET AL. 2011 for a discussion). Unless it is admitted that into and its kin are satellite-prepositions, a claim that was endorsed in the first theory (1972) but is now incompatible with the definition of satellite, there seems to be some incoherence.

2.3. Further evolution

In Talmy’s latest view on the fundamental structure of clauses, the conceptual organization of the motion event structure is generalized to events which are not purely spatial (TALMY 2000 [1991]). Some components of the basic translatory structure / motion event frame, now termed the framing event, are renamed accordingly: the semantic primitives MOVE and BE give way to the general notion of activating process, and directionals fall under a more abstract concept of relation, labelled association function.

External components formerly moved into adjunction with the translatory structure are now parts of co-events. For example, in he walked into it, a manner co-event ‘he walked’ is merged with ‘he moved into it’. A framing event has four

[Figural entity Activating process Association function Ground entity]

core schema FRAMING EVENT

CO-EVENT

characteristics (TALMY 2000 [1991]: 219): it determines the temporal-aspectual course of an event, is domain-specific (e.g. space), determines the argument structure of the macro-event, and is the informational focus.

This generalization of the translatory structure makes it possible to apply the verb-framed / satellite-framed dichotomy beyond the domain of motion events, for example to temporal and aspectual relations. Thus, Spanish lexicalizes aspectual relations in verbs when German assigns them to satellites : cf. acabo de comer vs ich habe gerade gegessen (TALMY 2000 [1991]: 234). Another benefit of this generalization is to stave off the potential objection that the verb of a motion event clause may have no spatial MOVE nor BELOC component. Indeed, it would be counter-intuitive to analyze wollen in (3) as containing a spatial component:

(3) Meine Eltern wollen zu den Amisch (…) Ich will aber nicht ins Mittelalter. ‘My parents want <to move> to the Amish (…) but I don’t want <to go back> to the Middle-Ages.’ (internet)

3. The notion of path

In Talmy’s theory path is not a primitive concept but is itself complex. The three core components of path are the vector, the conformation and the deictic (TALMY 2000 [1985]: 53-4). The vector specifies a relation with respect to a ground, and this relation may be either static or dynamic (i.e. evolving through time). Five fundamental types of vectors are recognized. These types correspond to the fundamental relations AT, FROM, VIA, ALONG and TO. In this paper, dynamic vectors will be said to differ by their polarities, that is, by their being source-oriented (FROM), median-oriented (VIA, ALONG) or goal-oriented (TO). The conformation locates a figure with respect to spatial properties of a ground, such as its front, top, inside etc. For example, in describes a figure as located at a point which is of the inside of an enclosure (ibid.: 55), and into, therefore, specifies both a vector (TO) and a (final) conformation (IN).2 Similarly, the front of a computer or the left wing of a house are spatial parts which may specify the conformation of a figure with the ground in a motion event: he sat down in front of the computer, he went into the left wing of the house. Finally, the deictic component situates the vector with respect to a point of view. This component most often reduces to only two types, venitive (in or toward the vicinity of a speaker), or andative (away from her). A third type is occasionally found in languages which have transverse deixis, i.e. in which motion across the field of vision is lexicalized (OZANNE-RIVIERE 1997; DIESSEL 1999).

2 This topological analysis of in is disputable. Vandeloise (1986, 2005) shows it is inadequate and emphasizes the relevance of functional features, for example the capacity for the ground to control the movement of the figure.

Two other less fundamental components may be present: the direction and the contour of the path. The contour is the shape of the path. It is properly the shape of a path if a path is specified in the utterance. Being dependent on this specification, which is the proper object of our typology, it will be left out of account here. In Talmy’s view, the direction apparently refers to the relation of the vector to a secondary reference objects. For example, in the bike is on the east side of the church, the cardinal direction is a secondary reference object which, in relation to the primary ground church, specifies the direction in which the bike is to be searched (TALMY 1983). In Levinson’s framework, perhaps to be preferred for its systematicity, direction would refer to angular specifications given with respect to reference frames (LEVINSON 2003: 66ff).

Our own definition of path relies on Talmy’s distinction between vector and conformation. There are grounds for making this distinction. For example, languages with spatial case systems are found to encode vectorial features and distinguish them, when in possession of richer inventories, from conformation. Hungarian cases, for instance, cross two dimensions: the relations of location, goal and source, and topological notions such as IN and ON (HJELMSLEV 1935-7, CREISSELS 2008; for an extensive discussion see STOLZ 1992). Another ground for distinguishing vector and conformation is that, in some languages, adpositions solely specify the conformation component, and do not conflate it with the vector (an illustration will be provided in section 6.5).

Likewise, since the deictic localization of a figure with respect to a viewpoint specifies the initial, final and sometimes median locations (in case of transverse deixis) of a figure in motion, deixis must be considered as a component of path. Indeed, deixis is a major parameter of path encoding in many languages (VITTRANT to appear 2; VOISIN 2014: 136f), sometimes coexpressed with other spatio-temporal features such as the boundedness and visibility of an area, and the time relation of the deictic motion to another event or to the speech situation (FORTIS & FAGARD 2010 for a survey).

Finally, one last semantic feature should be mentioned. Some forms, like go, state that a change of place occurs, while other forms, like move, encode, as Talmy puts it, the “fact of motion”. We shall consider that a change of place is by itself an indication that a figure has traced a path and encodes the existence of a path. In this paper this feature is called translocation3, and will be differentiated from the fact of motion itself (i.e. Talmy’s MOVE), which does not imply a change of place.

Thus, the notion of path adopted here includes the following semantic components: 1. Translocation; 2. Vector; 3. Direction; 4. Deixis. Conformation is not in the list: although information that is related to conformation is obviously

3 This term is borrowed from Levinson & Wilkins (2006).

important in determining the path of a figure (whether, e.g., it ends up inside or on top of a ground), we have chosen to defer it to another branch of typological systematics. In simpler words, it seems best to defer the study of conformation to a typology of the spatial parts of objects, and of localization with respect to spatial parts. This typology has already been significantly advanced by Levinson and his coworkers (LEVINSON 2003, LEVINSON ET AL. 2003). Note however that vector and conformation may be expressed in the same form, in which case this form is taken to encode a path component and must be included in our typological description. In section 6.5 below, it is claimed that French dans, in addition to a conformation, encodes a vector (TO) in dynamic contexts.

The following and admittedly artificial example illustrates the previously discussed components, including the conformation:

(4) he went away and left in- to the left wing. figure translocation deixis direction conformation vector conformation

In- and the left wing provide information on the final location of the figure and therefore specify path components. What they refer to is part of what the speaker thinks is the objective path of the figure. Consequently, our working definition of path is narrower than its “objective” meaning (i.e. ‘any feature of the motion event related to the location of the figure during this motion event’). In the typology to be proposed below, constructions will be characterized by functional loci that encode a path component, in the narrow sense of path defined here.4

4. The problems of Talmy’s typology

Having expounded the origins of Talmy’s typology and its evolution, we can now turn to the difficulties that arise. In addition to the definition of satellite, several difficulties are involved: the first concerns the fact that Talmy’s typology is based on notions, verb and satellite, that belong to different planes. The second is that the verb- / satellite-framed distinction is too broad to accommodate the typological complexity of languages, and fails to account for languages with serial verbs. And finally, some constructions are either problematic or little taken into account. We will deal with these questions in turn.

4.1. On the hybridity of Talmy’s typology

4 A more thorough discussion of the notion of path can be found in Grinevald (2011).

The verb- / satellite-framed distinction takes as criterial the fact that path is expressed in a verb or in a satellite. While a verb is a lexical category, a satellite is a functional one (IMBERT, GRINEVALD & SŐRÉS 2011). By functional is meant here that a path satellite is the conjunction of a role, that of specifying path, and of a morphosyntactic position (i.e. being in a sister relation to a verb root).

This hybrid character of the typology poses two problems. First, Talmy obviously associates the verb with the clausal head. However, not all clausal heads are verbs. The following examples are cases in point:

Russian (5) Ja domoj , lit. ‘I home’, i.e. ‘I’m going home’. (6) Ja k vam , lit. ‘I to you’, i.e. ‘I’ll go to your place’. Spoken Indonesian (HAGÈGE 2010: 247) (7) mǝreka kǝ bioskop. 3PL towards movies ‘They are going to the movies.’

While these cases seem to be rather marginal, the second problem poses a more serious challenge. It was brought out by Matsumoto (2003) in the context of a discussion on Japanese complex predicates. Matsumoto points out that, since nonhead verbs of a Japanese complex predicate belong to the sphere of the verbal head, they may be regarded as satellites. If this is so, opposing verbs and satellites is inappropriate for the reason that satellites can be verbs. Matsumoto suggests that the relevant distinction should be univocally functional, i.e. should oppose languages which express path in the head and languages which specify it in a nonhead locus. We will come back to this suggestion, which will be partly retained in our own proposal (cf. infra). Before coming to this proposal, however, we will provisionally stick to the traditional terminology.

4.2. On classifying languages

The objection has been raised that the V- / S-framed dichotomy is too rigid to accommodate languages that display both types of constructions (cf. BEAVERS ET AL., 2010; CROFT ET AL., 2010). For instance, French and Italian are both predominantly V-framed, but they show signs of S-framing too. First, in French, Spanish and Italian, a class of motion verbs appears to enter constructions characteristic of satellite-framed languages withtout requiring prepositions such as jusqu’à or fino (see e.g. FOLLI 2008, BEAVERS ET AL. 2010 and FORTIS & FAGARD 2010, part 3 for an overview). French also has a few prefixed verbs which are a vestige of Latin (KOPECKA 2006). Further, manner of motion verbs may be

“coerced” into constructions characteristic of S-framed languages, provided that a preposition which forces a dynamic interpretation, like jusqu’à or depuis, is used. (9) is from French, but counterparts can be found in other V-framed languages (FORTIS 2007):

(8) * Il a marché à Orléans. [cannot be allative] / * Il a marché d’Orléans.

(9) Il a marché jusqu’à Orléans. / Il a marché depuis Orléans.

Lastly, Italian is in the process of developing S-framed constructions with satellites like via ‘away’, dentro ‘in’, fuori ‘out’, su ‘up’ and giù ‘down’ (IACOBINI & MASINI 2006, who call these constructions Verb Particle Constructions, VPCs). According to Iacobini and Masini, S-framed constructions compete with V-framed patterns to the point of becoming a major lexicalization pattern of motion events. Thus, besides salire / scendere, Italian has andare su / giù, ‘go up / down’, besides entrare / uscire it has andare dentro / fuori ‘go in / out’ etc. VPCs may have received additional strength from a Germanic influence, as would be testified by the fact that they are more frequent in Northern dialects (IACOBINI & MASINI 2009).

The typological complexity of Romance has been recognized by Talmy in a revised version of his 1985 paper. This time, Spanish is described as a dual system, or, to borrow Talmy’s terms, as a split or complementary system of conflation (TALMY 2000 [1985]: 65). A close category is that of parallel systems, where V-framed and S-framed constructions may alternatively describe the same event (pragmatic considerations aside, of course). According to Talmy, Greek belongs to this last category (TALMY 2000 [1985]: 65; cf. also SCHAEFER & GAINES 1997, for another language, Shona, apparently fitting this category).

To sum up, French and other Romance languages appear to be typologically complex. They may all be described as split systems, but the risk is that many languages will fall into this category, thereby rendering the typology close to vacuous. We need a typology which does justice to the diversity of path-coding strategies and can identify dominant patterns differentiating languages.

4.3. Multiple framing

CROFT ET AL. (2010) call “double framing” a construction in which the path component of a motion event is redundantly expressed. In the French and Russian examples below, upward direction and motion out of an enclosed space are expressed twice:

French

(10) elle est montée en haut. Lit. ‘She ascended up.’ [path in V and path in S] Russian (11) ja vy-bežal iz doma. I out-ran from house.GEN 'I ran out of the house.' [path in S and path in PREP]

Does the existence of multiply framed constructions jeopardize Talmy’s typology? While V-framing and S-framing are inaccurate descriptions for these examples, multiple framing does not single out an homogeneous category either. French and Russian are typologically different, since French has many path verbs whereas Russian is a case of a very dominantly S-framed language (the only path verb we know of being vozvraschatsya / vernutsya ‘go back’). A fine-grained approach is needed to capture this difference.

4.4. Serializing languages

Languages with serial verb constructions (SVCs) have motivated the introduction of a new category by Slobin, namely that of equipollently-framed languages (formerly complex verb-framed languages in SLOBIN & HOITING 1994). Two justifications are cited in favor of this new category (SLOBIN 2004: 228): (1) the coexistence of V-framed and S-framed constructions in the very same language, for example of S-framed constructions such as ‘fly out’ and of the use of path verbs like ‘exit’ in Mandarin ; (2) the equal significance of manner and path verbs for the purpose of describing motion events. Manifestations of this significance are the frequent expression of manner, and the coexpression of manner and path in serialized verbs of equal verbal status (cf. e.g. ZLATEV & YANGKLANG 2004). Two distinct problems are involved here. First, the new category of equipollently-framed languages registers the fact that at least some languages with SVCs are typologically complex, i.e. that they have both V-framed and S-framed constructions. Second, languages of this category have a special kind of construction in which manner and path are both expressed in verbs, and possibly have other properties which do not square with the V-framed / S-framed dichotomy (ZLATEV & YANGKLANG 2004). The first problem is not new: we have already encountered it in our discussion of “split systems”. Whether all languages with SVCs are split systems is another matter. For instance, Lambert-Bretière (2009) argues that Fon is really an S-framed language, on the ground that path verbs of SVCs may occur out of the scope of an aspectual marker, sometimes cannot be used alone, and make up a restricted class. The second question pertains to the existence of constructions where manner and path are coexpressed in verbs of equal status. Since in such constructions path is expressed in a verb, they are a

subtype of V-framed constructions. It is best, therefore, to reserve the terms equipollent and equipollenty-framed to a kind of V-framed construction, namely that in which a nonpath verb and a path verb of equal verbal status are serialized.

A language with SVCs may therefore be complex in more ways than one: it may have S-framed, non-equipollent V-framed and E-framed constructions, or a subset thereof. For example, from the data presented in Zlatev & Yangklang (2004) and Warotamasikkhadit (1998, cited in HAGÈGE 2010), we gather that Thai has all three constructions. On the other hand, the discussion in Ameka and Essegbey (2006) seems to support the view that Ewe has non-equipollent V-framed and equipollently-framed constructions, but ignores S-framing. In view of this diversity of serializing languages, it is ill-advised to assign them to one single class of equipollently-framed languages. The term itself was used ambiguously to refer to the typological complexity of serializing languages and to a class of constructions. We recommend that its use be restricted to a subtype of V-framed constructions.

5. Other phenomena

The preceding sections dealt with those issues that have been commonly discussed in the literature on the typology of motion events. Other issues might not have received all due consideration, or have not been integrated into the typology of motion events. The phenomena of concern will be examined now.

5.1. Constructional semantics

In Dutch word order may differentiate a “lative” interpretation, involving a change of place, from a locative one (ex. from SINHA & KUTEVA 1995: 173; see also VAN STADEN ET AL. 2006):

(12) de jongen loopt het bos in. the boy walks the woods in ‘The boy walks into the woods’ [illative interpretation path: boy enters woods] (13) de jongen loopt in het bos. the boy walks in the woods ‘The boy walks in the woods’ [non-lative: activity takes place in woods]

Whether the Figure changes place or not depends on the construction of the path satellite in the sentence. We suggest that cases in which grammatical relations (such as the direct object) help specify the path of the figure form the new class of C-framed patterns. Further, the possible role of transitivity in the expression of path brings us to the case of sentences of the kind illustrated below. In Tenny’s terms

(TENNY 1994), in such instances, the ground appears to measure out the motion of the figure, and defines the temporal extent of the event.

(14) elle a dégringolé l’escalier. ‘She tumbled down the stairs.’ (15) Susan walked the Appalachian Trail in sixty days. (TENNY 1994) (16) kodomo-ga yamamiti-o arui-te i-masu. child-NOM mountain path-ACC walk-CVB PROG-HON ‘The child walks the mountain path.’ (Japanese; ISHIBASHI p.c.)

In all three cases, the transitive construction can be contrasted with a prepositional construction which does not convey the “measuring out” reading. For instance, (14) can be contrasted with elle a dégringolé dans l’escalier, which does not force the reading that she tumbled all the way down the stairs. In our inventory of constructions, the transitive construction is analyzed as specifying a path component in these sentences. We have therefore tagged them as C-framed.

5.2. Applicatives

Applicatives pose a new sort of problem. It is very questionable to argue that their semantic import is spatial. On the other hand, they do contribute to specifying the path of a figure in an appropriate context. For instance, in the Zulu example (18), the applicative morpheme el- specifies that a complement marked as locative is the goal of the motion event (TAYLOR 1996: 298; see GRÉGOIRE 1998 and GERDTS 2004 for similar examples in other languages). The goal interpretation requires an appropriate context: the locative marker -ni characterizes the complement as spatial, rather than benefactive (compare with (19)), while the applicative morpheme properly marks this complement as allative.

(17) umfana ugijime esikole-ni. boy he.ran school-LOC ‘The boy ran in the school.’ [no translocation] (18) umfana ugijimele esikole-ni. boy he.ran.APPL school-LOC ‘The boy ran to school.’ (19) umfana ugijimele isikolo. boy he.ran.APPL school ‘The boy ran for the school.’

Without the applicative morpheme, the verb ‘run’ cannot have an allative complement. The only alternative strategy is to supplement ‘run’ with a translocative verb ‘go’, as in (20):

(20) umfana wagijima waya esikole-ni. boy he.ran he.went school-LOC ‘The boy ran and went to school.’

In some languages, applicatives may have an additional function, that of reversing the polarity (i.e. source, median or goal orientation) of a directional complement. For instance, in the Tswana example (21; non-phonological spelling), the complement of the source-oriented verb ‘leave’ must be interpreted as non-source (i.e. as goal) when an applicative is used. Lacking the applicative, the complement obligatorily refers to a source (Creissels 1998: 133).

(21) o tlaa boa / boela Gaborone. s3:1 FUT leave / leave.APPL Gaborone ‘he left Gaborone / left for Gaborone.’

Since applicatives specify the path component of a motion event and are distinct from the verbal root, Beavers et al. (2010) classify them as satellites. We will follow their suggestion here. It is clear, however, that the action of the applicative is supplemented by a locative marker in Zulu, and by a path verb in the Tswana example. Lacking a specifically spatial meaning, these applicative morphemes are interpretable only with the support of spatial forms.

5.3. Voice

A number of languages have voices which assign a range of relatively specific related thematic roles to the subject argument. Among these languages, some have voices associated with locative subjects, as is the case for the Malagasy “circumstantial voice” and the locative voice of Philippine languages. However, these locative forms merely index the subject argument as locative, without imparting a dynamic interpretation on the verbal base. The case we wish to discuss here is different for the reason that the voice involved entails that the verbal base refers to a motion. This pattern is found in Tagalog.

In Tagalog, a subject argument is interpreted as undergoing a transfer when the verb is in a special form that we will designate as the conveyance voice (following HIMMELMANN, e.g. 2005). For instance, in (22), the subject argument ang lambanog is understood as being transferred to a goal. In the present case, this goal (bote ‘bottle’) is incorporated in the verb, of which it makes up the base.

(22) i-binote niya ang lambanog. CV-PFV.bottle 3SG.GEN NOM coconut wine (lit.) ‘the coconut wine was transferred into a bottle by her / him.’ ‘S/he bottled the coconut wine.’

The conveyance voice is not restricted to motion events: the subject argument may refer to an object changing possession, to an information being communicated and transmitted, to an object brought in comparison to a standard etc. (FORTIS 2003). A case may be made, however, that spatial semantics is central for this voice. In our inventory of constructions, the strategy found in the Tagalog conveyance voice will be listed in the family of S-framed constructions.

5.4. Arguments and nouns

So far, the description of motion and path by nominal arguments has been left out of the typology. For example, in (23), the noun Ausdehnung specifies a path radiating from the boundaries of the cities:

German (internet) (23) die zunehmende Ausdehnung der the.NOM.FEM.SG increasing.NOM.FEM.SG extension the.GEN.FEM.PL Städte in die Agrargebiete … cities.GEN.FEM.PL in the.ACC.N.PL agricultural zones.ACC.N.PL ‘The increasing extension of cities into agricultural zones…’

In (24) the notion of a path directed toward a goal is conveyed by the joint use of the noun and of the preposition à.

(24) L’acheminement à l’aéroport se fait par une navette. (lit.) ‘The transfer to the airport is done by a shuttle.’

Fortis (2007) shows that French nouns of motion have different degrees of dynamicity: with unmarked prepositions like à / de / dans, some necessarily specify that a change of place occurs (acheminement), some never do (promenade), and some are ambiguous (voyage, déplacement). Only in the first class is it clearly implied that a translocation occurs. Translocation being an aspect of what is analyzed here as path, nouns of this class used in an appropriate context are therefore unambiguous instances of framing in nominal arguments. We shall also speak of A-framed constructions.

Further, nouns may have satellites. For example, in the Tagalog example (25),

the deverbal noun paglalakbay (“gerundive” ap. Schachter & Otanes 1972) is followed by the path satellite patimog ‘soutward’:

(25) pinagpa-tuloy nang gang ang paglalakbay patimog. pag.CAUS.PERF-continue GEN gang NOM trip southward ‘The gang resumed its trip southward.’ (internet)

Patimog forces a lative interpretation on paglalakbay which, lacking any explicit qualification, does not convey a translocation but travel within a location (cf. paglalakbay + generic prep. sa = ‘travel within’). This construction exemplifies yet another case in which path is encoded in a satellite of a noun that is an argument and not a head.

5.5. Argumental indices

We suggest the term argumental indices for forms which identify an argument and coexpress its spatial role (source, goal, median). Recognition of this type of form stems from French Sign Languages (FSL), from which a simple example may be drawn. Suppose a signer designates a locus 1 in her signing space, then a locus 2, and proceeds thereafter to join the two loci by a sign ‘walk’ going from locus 1 to locus 2, with the resulting meaning ‘X walks from place 1 to place 2’. The loci 1 and 2 are cross-referenced in the verb, from which their referents get their spatial roles (source and goal). How can this strategy be integrated into the typology of motion events? Note that the sign for ‘walk’ does not obligatorily coexpress argumental indices. In other words, ‘walk’ and ‘walk from… to…’ are expressed by different signs. If ‘walk’ and ‘walk from…to…’ are signed differently, we should analyze the features in which ‘walk from…to…’ differs from ‘walk’ as bearing the semantics of the spatial roles. This formal distinction coexpressed with the verb but still recognizably distinct from the verb root (‘walk’) is closer to the notion of satellite than to anything else. This satellite being coexpressed in the verb, we must accordingly modify the definition of satellite given above and state that a satellite is the category of any constituent other than a noun-phrase or prepositional phrase complement that is in a sister relation to the root of the verb or is simultaneously coexpressed with this root. This definition is not final. For reasons explained in section 6.2, in the final definition, clausal head will be substituted for verb.

5.6. Multiclausal strategies

The present paper is limited to the encoding of motion events on the clause level. This limitation leaves aside cases in which the sequencing of clauses serves to express various stages of the same event, and various relations to one or more grounds. Although this strategy falls out of our scope, a few words on what is alluded to are in order. Observe for example (26). The two clauses were uttered in succession and are functionally equivalent to the more compact ‘the girl walked from the tree’ (cited in IMBERT, GRINEVALD & SŐRES 2011: 106).

Huastec (KONDIC 2011) (26)a. bel-ej juun i txithan. walk-ASP a INDF girl ‘The girl was walking.’ b. kub-at wik tin akan i te’. stand-ASP PST at foot INDF tree ‘(she) had stood at the foot of a tree.’

Imbert et al. (2011) hypothesize that event sequencing might represent an early stage of a grammaticalization process culminating in S-framed constructions in which one verb has lost its full verbal status or has become a non-verbal satellite. Ese Ejja (Tacanan, Bolivia) offers instances of the same strategy. In (27), the first clause is functionally equivalent to an indication of the source of the motion event:

(27) eta'a-jo neki kwaji-kwaji-jaasowa-ani river-LOC stand run-run-go.up-PRS (lit.) ‘He stands at the river, he goes up running’ i.e. ‘he runs up from the river’ (VUILLERMET, field notes, p.c.).

This way of expressing a relation to a source dispenses with any explicit description of the relation itself. There is therefore the possibility that the specification of a path be left entirely to inferences based on sequenced events, with no path encoding form at all. Insufficient attention has been paid to this multiclausal strategy, its possibly systematic use in some languages, and its role in diachrony. The topic will not be pursued here beyond these brief indications.

6. Our approach: On classifying constructions

Typological complexity, exemplified in “split systems” strongly suggests that we describe first the various constructions that a language has at its disposal in order to express path. Only once this is done can we turn to a classification of languages. In this view, the typological status of a language is defined by the constructions

available to the language. What follows lays out the principles of our approach to the typology of path-expressing constructions.

6.1. Head vs verb

The arguments put forward by Matsumoto and the problems associated with the hybrid character of Talmy’s typology militate in favor of substituting head for verb. Japanese offers good illustrations of the benefit gained by this substitution. In (28), the verbal head expresses a change of place away from the speaker, and the converb ‘walk’ is a verbal satellite of the verb.

(28) Ken-wa gakkoo-ni arui-te it-ta. Ken-TOP school-to walk-CVB go-PST ‘Ken went to school walking.’ (SHIBATANI 2003)

In Japanese, path verbs occupy the head position unless a marked postposition like made ‘up to’, similar to French jusqu’à, makes it possible to use a manner verb in this position (Fortis 2007; Beavers et al. 2010):

(29) (watasi-wa) *hasi-ni // hasi-made oyoi-da. I-TOP bridge-at/to // bridge-up to swim-TAM ‘(I) swam * to the bridge // up to the bridge.’ (ISHIBASHI, p.c.)

In other words, Japanese appears to be predominantly H-framed, and the clausal head is normally a finite verb. Our classification thus makes room for constructions in which the head is not necessarily a verb. In (7), repeated here as (30), the head is a prepositional phrase:

(30) mǝreka kǝ bioskop. 3PL towards movies ‘They are going to the movies.’

6.2. A definition of satellite

In the restrictive definition of satellite first proposed by Talmy, adpositions and cases are lexical and morphological categories which are distinct from that of satellite. In this paper, elements which specify a relation between an argument and a head are said to have the function of relator. Thus, in (31), we shall say that the construction is relator-framed (R-framed), whereas it is H-framed in (30):

(31) The bottle floated into the cave. R‐framed

Had we not distinguished functions and parts of speech, we might have characterized both (30) and (31) as “adposition-framed”, an unfortunate decision since the syntactic structures of the sentences are different.

The definition proposed above for verbal satellites will be modified, taking into account the fact that we speak of clausal heads, not of verbs: a satellite is any constituent other than a noun-phrase or prepositional phrase complement that is in a sister relation to the root of the head constituent or is simultaneously coexpressed with this root. “Sister relation” applies to preverbs, applicatives and voice markers, argumental indices (see section 5.5), constituents of multipartite stems (e.g. in Atsugewi, see Appendix, ex. 9), non-finite verbs in complex predicates, particles and adverbs like home in go home. This definition can be extended to argumental satellites, i.e. satellites of nouns in argument position.

6.3. Loci of path components

The basic idea of Talmy’s typology was to correlate language types with their privileged locus of path encoding. Our own proposal is faithful to this idea, except for the revisions suggested above. A path encoding construction is labelled according to the locus or loci where path is encoded. (32) gives a few illustrations of constructions with one (a), two (b) and three (c) path-encoding loci.

(32) a. H‐framed she left the hotel. b. SR-framed chłopiec wy-biegł z morza na plażę. boy.NOM.MASC out-run.PRF from sea.GEN.N on beach.ACC.FEM (litt.) ‘The ran out of the sea onto the beach.’ (Polish, KOPECKA, p.c.) c. HSR-framed onnanohito-ga dookutu-no naka-kara de-te iki-masi-ta. woman-NOM cave-GEN inside-ABL exit-CVB go-POL-PST ‘The woman uh exited from the inside of the cave away from me.’ (Japanese, ISHIBASHI, p.c.)

Leaving aside C-framed patterns, four types of locus are available: H, S, R, A. One type of locus may be filled up more than once, as is illustrated by the Polish example (32)b. Theoretically, the number of possible combinations of 1 to 4 loci is

15. The table below shows these possibilities.

1 locus (4 possibilities)

2 loci (6 combinations)

3 loci (4 combinations)

4 loci (1 combination)

H HS HSR HSRA

S HR HSA

R HA HRA

A SR SRA

SA

RA

These combinations correspond to families of constructions. We have not found instances of all the possible families of constructions. The inventory in the appendix lists 11. In this inventory, each subtype (i.e. each construction that is a member of a given family) is characterized by a morphosyntactic structure. For example, within the family of H-framed constructions, symmetrical (“equipollent”) and asymmetrical serial verbs define two different subtypes. In the symmetrical (or equipollent) subtype, verbs of equal status are coordinated (see line 3). In the asymmetrical subtype, verbs of unequal status are serialized (see line 2). Each time, a subtype is identified by its differentia. Thus, the Burmese serialized construction illustrated in the appendix (line 2, example 2) is labelled according to its family (H-framed) and its differentia (asymmetrical), and is tagged as “H-framed asymmetrical”.

6.4. C-framing

C-framing refers to the expression of path in a construction (e.g. transitive) independently of the path encoding constituents. Theoretically, in addition to the bare C-framed pattern, combining each of the above families with a C-framed pattern would yield 16 potential C-framed patterns. Again, the number of constructions we identify is far below this mark since only 4 are listed in the inventory.

6.5. Directional complements

Languages show interesting differences in the way they use relators to express path components. First, in some languages, path verbs take only one directional complement which, being of the same polarity as the verb, need not be marked as source, median or goal. For example, observe that the directional complements of the Swahili verbs below have no relator:

(33) ni-li-enda Leipzig. (34) ni-na-fika Leipzig. s1:1-PST-go to Leipzig s1:1-PRS-arrive Leipzig ‘I went to Leipzig.’ ‘I am arriving in Leipzig.’ (OMBUYA, p.c.)

In both instances, the complement Leipzig inherits its polarity from the verb. Further, a path verb does not have more than one directional complement. Specifying more than one polarity requires that verbs be cooordinated:

(34) ni-li-toka busta-ni ni-ka-enda barabara-ni. s1:1-PST-leave garden-LOC s1:1-SEQ-go street-LOC ‘I left the garden and went to the street’, i.e. ‘I went from the garden into the street.’ (OMBUYA, p.c.)

Creissels (2006) notes that in Subsaharian languages which do not formally distinguish source, median and goal, a verb may not govern complements of more than one polarity. To circumvent this restriction, the solution is again to coordinate verbs, like in the Tswana example below:

(35) monna o dule motse-ng a ya noke-ng. the man s3:1 leave.PRF 3village-LOC s3:1.SEQ go 9river-LOC ‘The man went from the village to the river.’

H-framed constructions of the kind exemplified here are radical, since no other path component is expressed outside of the head. We shall say that languages of this class make systematic use of radical H-framed constructions with verbal heads.

In languages which use relators with path verbs, relators may be static or dynamic, or both. For example, the ball rolled under the table may refer to a stiuation in which the ball is under the table while it moves, or to a situation in which the ball moves toward the table and ends up below it. In such cases can a vector be assigned to the relator or not? Note that prepositions like English under, over, French dans, sous etc., which can be used in static and dynamic contexts alike, are goal-oriented. In Jean est entré dans la piscine (lit. ‘John entered in the swimming pool’), in cannot be used to refer to the source of John’s motion. This observation suggests that dans is a goal-oriented preposition in dynamic contexts, and therefore that Jean est entré dans la piscine is an instance of multiple framing (i.e. HR-framing).

It is interesting to note that this situation is not universal. In Jakaltek, prepositions do not seem to have any polarity, in other words they can refer to any vector. In the following examples, the same preposition ul ‘in’ is used for a ground that is goal in (36) and source in (37) (GRINEVALD 2011). Note also that the deictic suffix is centrifugal in (36) and centripetal in (37):

(36) a’-ok-toj q’ap kamixhe y-ul te’ kaxha. move-in-DX CL/cloth shirt its-in CL/wood chest ‘Put the shirt in the chest! (37) a’-el-tij q’ap kamixhe y-ul te’ kaxha. move-out-DX CL/cloth shirt its-in CL/wood chest ‘Take the shirt out of the chest!’

In these examples, the vector appears to be expressed in the verb and in the satellite closest to the verbal base, while its direction is indicated by the final deictic suffix. The role of the prepositions seems to be confined to describing the conformation, i.e. the relation of the figure to parts of the ground. The same observations have been made about another Mayan language by Lehmann (1992), who shows that in Yucatec the vector (“die lokale Orientierung”, in his terms) is encoded in the verb, not in prepositions. In our inventory, adpositions describing conformations to the exclusion of vectors do not fall under the R-framing strategy.

7. Conclusion

What precedes is an attempt at understanding the theoretical origins of Talmy’s typology, and at overcoming the problems which ensue. The difficulties posed by the hybrid character of this typology encouraged us to adopt a uniformly functional perspective: this is, to define constructions by functional positions (“loci”). Further, because languages instantiate more than one path encoding construction and are thus typologically complex, an inventory of the constructions found in our sample and in the literature was proposed as a preliminary stage to a proper classification of languages. The typological profile of a language can then be defined as the set of constructions found in this language, wieghted by their relative frequency and prominence. An inventory which accords with the principles laid out in part 6 is proposed.

This typology, it is expected, will be revised and enriched as it becomes more inclusive and extends to cases that have escaped our attention. Some issues are still insufficiently studied: in particular, the diachrony of path encoding categories (but see IMBERT ET AL. 2011), the typological evolution of individual languages

(KOPECKA 2009), the nominal encoding of path components, and strategies of encoding which may systematically be above the clause level in some languages.

Abbreviations

1, 2, 3, 4: nominal class (cf. Bantu) ACC: accusative ADN: adnominal (case and / or adposition). ALL: allative AOR: aorist APPL: applicative ART: article ASP: aspect B: base C: construction CAUS: causative CL: classifier COMP- DIR: no directional complement COMP+ DIR : directional complement (adposition, particle, adverb) CV: conveyance voice CVB: converb DAT: dative DEF: definite DAT: dative DIATH: voice marker DIM: diminutive DX : deictic EMPH: emphatic FUT: future GEN: genitive HON: honorific IA : argumental index IMP: imperfect INCL: inclusive INDF: indefinite LNK: linker LOC: locative

N: neuter NEUT: neutral NN: noun NOM: nominative OBL: oblique OPT: optative PART: participle PFV: perfective PL: plural POT: potential / future. PROG: progressive PST: past R: relator REAL: realis S1:X, S2:X, S3:X: 1st person subject of nominal class X, 2nd person subject of nominal class X etc. S: satellite S&Vi: affix of associated motion (‘go thither / come hither and do’ or ‘do and go thither / come hither’) SEQ: consecutive SG: singular ST : stem SUJ: subject TAM : tense / aspect / mood TOP: topic marker -VMAN +VPATH: verbs of unequal status +VMAN +VPATH: verbs of equal status VMAN: path verb V_

MOT: verb having no motional component VPATH: manner of motion verb

APPENDIX

family head sphere (H & S)

argument sphere (A, R, SA)

differentia illustrated in

H

1 VPATH COMP-DIR radical Swahili1

2 (-VMAN) -VMAN +VPATH

COMP-DIR asymmetrical Burmese2

3 +VMAN +VPATH COMP-DIR equipollent Mandarin3

4 ADN COMP- DIR adnominal Indonesian4

S

1 S-VMAN COMP- DIR affixed German5

2 VMAN S COMP- DIR phrasal English6

3 (+VMAN) +VMAN -VPATH

COMP- DIR asymmetrical Thai7

4 +V-MOV COMP- DIR coerced German8

5 +VST—VSTPATH COMP- DIR multipartite Atsugewi9

6 B-DIATH COMP-DIR diathetic Tagalog10

7 VMAN-APPL COMP-DIR applicative Zulu11

A 1 N COMP- DIR — English, Japanese12

R 1 +V-MOV COMP+ DIR coerced German13

2 VMAN COMP+ DIR English14

HS

1 VPATH S Ø / COMP- DIR phrasal English15

2 +VPATH -VMAN -

VPATH Ø / COMP- DIR generic Jaminjung16

3 VPATH-APPL COMP-DIR applicative Tswana17

4 VPATH -IA COMP- DIR indexed LSF18

HR 1 +VPATH COMP+ DIR multiple English, Ancient Greek19

2 (-VMAN) -VMAN +VPATH

COMP+ DIR asymmetrical Japanese20

AR 1 NN COMP+ DIR — Japanese, French21

AS 1 NN SA — Tagalog22

SR 1 +VMAN -VPATH COMP+ DIR asymmetrical Fon23

2 S-VMAN COMP+ DIR affixed Polish24

3 S-S-VMAN COMP+ DIR multi-affixed Ancient Greek25

4 Vi-PATh –

S&ViPATH

COMP+ DIR associated motion

Ese Ejja26

5 (-VMAN) -VPATH +VFACT

COMP+ DIR factive Japanese27

HSR

1 +VPATH -VMAN -

VPATH COMP+ DIR generic Jaminjung28

2 S-VPATH COMP+ DIR affixed Ancient Greek29

3 S-S-VPATH COMP+ DIR multi-affixed Ancient Greek30

4 (-VMAN) -VPATH +VPATH

COMP+ DIR asymmetrical Japanese31

5 ViPATH –

S&ViPATH

COMP+ DIR associated motion

Ese Ejja32

ARS 1 NN SA… COMP+ DIR

— German33

C 1 VMAN COMP- DIR — English34

CH 1 -VMAN +VPATH NACC COMP- DIR — Japanese35

1 Swahili (OMBUYA, p.c.)

ni-li-toka busta-ni ni-ka-enda barabar-ni. s1:1-PST-leave garden-LOC s1:1-SEQ-go street-LOC (lit.) ‘I left the garden and went into the street.’

2 Burmese (VITTRANT, to appear 1) kaɔN2le3 laN3-ʃaɔʔ     θwa3-Tɛ2.

woman-DIM road-walk go.DX=REAL ‘A young woman walks away [from the DC].’

3 Mandarin (TALMY 2009: 398) tā zǒu jìn le gōng-yuán. s/he walk enter PRF park ‘S/he walked into the park.’ 4 Indonesian (HAGÈGE 2010: 247)

mǝreka kǝ bioskop. 3PL toward movies ‘They (are going) to the movies.’

5 German (internet) auf der Suche nach diesem Laden haben wir on the search after this shop have we die ganze Stadt durch-laufen. the entire town through-run

(lit.) ‘In search of this shop, we ran through the whole town.’ 6 English he climbed down. 7 Thai (WAROTAMASIKKHADIT 1988: 7, in HAGÈGE 2010: 169)

khǎw rîiprɔɔn dǝǝn jàak raw pay. 3SG hurry walk leave 1PL go ‘He hurriedly walked away from us.’

8 German ich muß hin-ein. I must DX-in ‘I must go in.’

9 Atsugewi (TALMY 1972: 56s) ˀw-uh-qput- ićt -a

3SG.SBJ-freebody-dirt-aliquid-TAM ‘Something dirty fell into a liquid.’ [Talmy’s gloss ‘freebody’ stands for an entity in free fall or flying; ‘aliquid’ is for ‘(into a) liquid element’ and is analyzed as a satellite; Talmy 1972: 44]

10 Tagalog i-binote niya ang lambanog. CV-PFV.bottle 2SG.GEN NOM coconut wine ‘S/he bottled the coconut wine.’ 11 Zulu (TAYLOR 1996) umfana ugijimele esikole-ni. boy he.ran.APPL school-LOC ‘The boy ran to school.’ 12 English a party was held to celebrate Mark's leaving the ship. Japanese (ISHIBASHI, p.c.)

(…) iwa-no mae-no tuuka si-masi-ta. stone-GEN in front of-GEN passing by do-CVB-PST

(litt.) ‘(...) (il) a fait un passage devant une pierre.’ 13 German

meine Eltern wollen zu den Amisch (…) Ich will aber nicht ins Mittelalter.

‘My parents want <to move> to the Amish (…) but I don’t want <to go back> to the Middle-Ages.’

14 English I walked from the station up to the hotel. 15 English

he went up. 16 Jaminjung (SCHULTZE-BERNDT 2006: 83) jalig-malang yugung walig ga-jga-ny-nu. child-GIVEN run.CVB around.CVB 3SG-go-PST-3SG.OBL ‘The child ran around for him.’

[jga ‘go’ is a “generic” verb; according to Schultze-Berndt (2000, 2006), Jaminjung only has 35 verbs, all of generic meaning. Further specification is brought by converbs]

17 Tswana (CREISSELS 1998: 133) o tlaa bo-ela Gaborone. s1 FUT leave-APPL Gaborone ‘He went leave from / to Gaborone.’ 18 French Sign Language (RISLER, p.c.)

sign at place of argument x in signing space – sign at place of argument y in signing space - sign of verb GO from place of x to place of y. ‘go from x to y.’

19 Ancient Greek kníse: d’ ouranòn hîken helissoméne: perì kapnôi. smell LNK sky.ACC go.IMP eddying around smoke.DAT ‘The savour went up to heaven, eddying amid the smoke.’ (HOMER, Iliad I.317)

English

The first time a train went from New York to Chicago was in 1902. 20 Japanese (SHIBATANI 2003) Ken-wa gakkoo-ni arui-te it-ta. Ken-TOP school-to walk-CVB go-PST ‘Ken went to school walking.’ 21 Japanese Taroo-wa Kyooto-kara shuppatsu shi-ta. Taro-TOP Kyoto-ABL départ faire-PST ‘Taro left Kyoto.’ French

l’acheminement à l’aéroport se fait par une navette. (lit.) ‘The transfer to the airport is done by a shuttle.’

22 Tagalog pinagpa-tuloy nang gang ang paglalakbay patimog. pag.CAUS.PERF-continue GEN gang NOM trip southward ‘The gang resumed its trip southward.’

23 Fon (LAMBERT-BRETIÈRE 2009: 14) cùkú ɔ lɔ tɔn sín xɔ ɔ mɛ. dog DEF jump exit from room DEF in

‘The dog jumped out of the room.’ [Lambert-Bretière argues that tɔn ‘exit’ is less verbal than lɔ ‘jump’]

24 Polish (KOPECKA, p. c.): chłopiec wy-biegł z morza na plażę. boy.NOM out-run.PRF from sea.GEN on beach.ACC (litt.) ‘The boy ran out of the sea onto the beach.’

25 Ancient Greek (IMBERT 2010) toi homòn lékhos eis-ana-baínoi. 2SG.DAT same.ACC bed.ACC to-up-walk.OPT.PRS.3SG ‘(A woman that) shall go up into thy bed.’ (HOMER, Iliad VIII.291)

26 Ese Ejja (VUILLERMET, p.c., suffixes of associated motion) ixya-ki-kwe! ixya-wa-kwe! eat-S&VI-IMP eat- S&vi -IMP (litt.) ‘Go and eat!’ (lit.) ‘Come and eat!’ 27 Japanese (MORITA 2009: 102)

sensei ga kyooshitsu-to ofisu-no aida-o teacher NOM classroom-and office-GEN between-ACC nando-mo iki-ki shi-ta. several times-EMPH go.CVB-come.CVB do-PST ‘The teacher went back and forth several times between the classroom and his office.’

28 Jaminjung (SCHULTZE-BERNDT 2006 : 93) bunburr yurru-w-ijga yagbali-bina buru. take.off.multiply 1PL.INCL-POT-GO place-ALL return ‘Let’s all take off to go back to the camp.’

29 Ancient Greek (IMBERT, p.c.) énth’ hé: g’ eis-elthoûsa. there she LNK to-go.PART.AOR.NOM ‘Therein she entered.’ (HOMER, Iliad XIV.169) 30 Ancient Greek (IMBERT, p.c.)

keînon mèn dè: ne:usìn epi-pro-ée:ka thoê:isin yon.masc.ACC LNK LNK ship.DAT.PL at-forth-send.AOR.1SG swift.DAT.PL eltheîn eis Akhilê:a. go.INF to Achilles.ACC ‘Yon man have I verily sent forth to the swift ships, to go to Achilles.’

31 Japanese (ISHIBASHI, p.c.) onnanohito-ga dookutu-no naka-kara de-te iki-masi-ta. woman-NOM cave-GEN inside-ABL exit-CVB go-POLI-PST ‘The woman uh exited from the inside of the cave away from me.’

32 Ese Ejja (VUILLERMET, p.c.) xani-asixe dobi-ki-ani. cave-to go.in- S&VI-PRS ‘(The child) goes into the cave.’

33 German die zunehmende Ausdehnung der Städte in the increasing extension the.GEN.PL cities in die Agrargebiete …

‘The increasing extension of cities into agricultural zones…’

34 Dutch (SINHA & KUTEVA 1995: 173) de jongen loopt het bos in. the boy walks the woods in ‘The boy walks into the woods’ 35 Japanese (MORITA 2009: 237) Taroo-ga Omekaidoo-o hashit-te it-ta. Taro-NOM Ome road-ACC run-CVB go-PST (lit.) ‘Taro went the road running’, i.e. ‘Taro ran across the road’.

References AMEKA, FELIX K. & ESSEGBEY, JAMES (2006): Elements of the grammar of space of Ewe, in LEVINSON, STEPHEN C. & WILKINS, DAVID (eds) Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 359-99. BEAVERS, JOHN, LEVIN, BETH & THAM, SHIAO WEI (2010): The typology of motion expressions revisited, in Journal of Linguistics 46, 331-377. CREISSELS, DENIS (1998): La problématique du circonstant dans une langue où il existe une forme applicative du verbe (sur l'exemple tswana), in: RÉMI-GUIRAUD, SYLVIANNE & ROMAN, ANDRÉ (éd.), Autour du circonstant. Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon, 115-37. CREISSELS, DENIS (2006): Encoding the distinction between location, source and direction: a typological study, in HICKMANN, MAYA & ROBERT, STÉPHANE (eds), 2006, Space in languages, Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 19-28. CREISSELS, DENIS (2008): Spatial cases, in: MALCHUKOV, ANDREJ & SPENCER, ANDREW (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case. Oxford, Oxford University Press: 609-625. CROFT, WILLIAM, BARÐDAL, JÓHANNA, HOLLMANN, WILLEM, SOTIROVA, VIOLETA & TAOKA, CHIAKI (2010): Revisiting Talmy’s typological classification of complex events, in: Boas, Hans (ed.), Contrastive construction grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 201-35. FOLLI, RAFFAELLA (2008): Complex PPs in Italian. In Asbury, Anna, Jakub Dotlacil, Berit Gehrke and Rick Nouwen (eds.), Syntax and Semantics of Spatial P. Amsterdam, Benjamins : 197-220. FORTIS, JEAN-MICHEL (2003): Voix et relations spatiales en tagalog, in: Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris, volume XCVIII, fasc. 1, 455-484. FORTIS, JEAN-MICHEL (2007): Les fonctions de jusqu’à, in: Modèles Linguistiques, 27(2), 137-154. FORTIS, JEAN-MICHEL & FAGARD, BENJAMIN (2010): Space in language. Course material, Leipzig Summer School on Linguistic Typology, August 2010, http://htl.linguist.univ-paris-diderot.fr/jmfortis.htm GERDTS, DONNA B. (2004): Halkomelem Directional Applicatives, Papers for the 39th International Conference on Salish and Neighboring Languages, UBCWPL, 14, 189-199. GRÉGOIRE, CLAIRE (1998): L’expression du lieu dans les langues africaines, in: Faits de Langues, 11-12, 285-303. GRINEVALD, COLETTE (2011): The expression of path in Jakaltek Popti (Mayan) : When directionals do it all, in GUTIERREZ-BRAVO, RODRIGO, MIKKELSEN, LINE & POTSDAM, ERIC (eds), Representing Language: Essays in honor of Judith Aissen. UCSC (Calif.): Linguistics Research Center, 89-104. GRINEVALD, COLETTE (2011): On constructing a working typology of the expression of path, in: Faits de Langue. Les Cahiers 3, 43-70. HAGÈGE, CLAUDE (2010): Adpositions. Oxford: Oxford University Press. HIMMELMANN, NIKOLAUS (2005): Tagalog, in ADELAAR, K. ALEXANDER & HIMMELMANN, NIKOLAUS, P. (eds), The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar. London: Routledge - Curzon, 350-376.

HJELMSLEV, LOUIS (1935-7) [1972]: La catégorie des cas. Copenhague: Universitetsforlager I Aarhus [reprinted in HJELMSLEV, LOUIS (1972): La catégorie des cas. München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag]. IACOBINI C. & MASINI F. (2006): The emergence of verb-particle constructions in Italian locative and actional meanings, in : Morphology 16, 155-188. IACOBINI, CLAUDIO (2009): The role of dialects in the emergence of Italian phrasal verbs, in: Morphology 19-1, 15-44. IMBERT, CAROLINE (2010): Multiple preverbation in Homeric Greek: A typological insight, in: CogniTextes, Volume 4 | 2010, uploaded March 2011, accessed December 2013. URL : http://cognitextes.revues.org/387 IMBERT, CAROLINE, GRINEVALD, COLETTE & SÖRES, ANNA (2011): Pour une catégorie de 'satellite' de Trajectoire dans une approche fonctionnelle-typologique, in: Faits de Langue. Les Cahiers 3, 99-116. ISHIBASHI, MIYUKI, KOPECKA, ANETTA & VUILLERMET, MARINE (2006): Trajectoire: matériel visuel pour l’élicitation des données linguistiques (DVD). Lyon, Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage (CNRS / Université Lyon 2) - Fédération de Recherche en Typologie et Universaux Linguistiques, CRNS, France. KONDIC, ANA (2011): Encoding Trajectory: South Eastern Huastec (Maya, Mexico), Handout, Lyon: Conference AFLICO IV. KOPECKA, ANETTA (2006): The semantic structure of motion verbs in French: Typological perspectives, in: Hickmann, Maya & Robert, Stéphane (eds), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 83-101. KOPECKA, ANETTA (2009): Continuity and change in the representation of motion events in French, in: GUO, JIANSHENG, LIEVEN, ELENA, BUDWIG, NANCY, ERVIN-TRIPP, SUSAN, NAKAMURA, KEIKO & ÖZÇALIŞKAN, ŞEYDA (eds), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin. New York / London: Psychology Press, 415-426. LAMBERT-BRETIÈRE, RENÉE (2009): Serializing languages as satellite-framed, in: Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 7, 1–29. LEHMANN, CHRISTIAN (1992): Yukatekische lokale Relatoren in typologischer Perspektive, in: Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 45, 626-641. LEVINSON, STEPHEN C. (2003): Space in language and cognition: explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. LEVINSON, STEPHEN C., MEIRA, SÉRGIO & THE LANGUAGE AND COGNITION GROUP (2003): ‘Natural concepts ‘ in the spatial topological domain – adpositional meanings in crosslinguistic perspective: an exercise in cognitive typology, in: Language, 79(3), 485-516. MATSUMOTO, YO (2003): Typologies of lexicalization patterns and event integration : clarifications and reformulations, in: CHIBA, SHUJI ET AL. (eds), Empirical and theoretical investigations into language: a festschrift for Masaru Kajita. Tokyo: Kaitakusha, 403-418. MORITA, TAKAHIRO (2009): La catégorisation des verbes de déplacement en japonais et en français. Dissertation, Paris: E.H.E.S.S. OZANNE-RIVIERE, François (1997): Systèmes d’orientation: Quelques exemples austronésiens, in: Fuchs, Catherine & Robert, Stéphane (eds), Diversité des langues et représentations cognitives. Paris: Ophrys. SCHACHTER, PAUL & OTANES, FE T. (1972): Tagalog Reference Grammar. Berkeley - Los Angeles – London: University of California Press. SCHAEFER, RONALD P. & GAINES, RICHARD (1997): Toward a typology of directional motion for African languages, in: Studies in African Linguistics, 26(2), 193-220. SCHULTZE-BERNDT, EVA (2000): Simple and complex verbs in Jaminjung. A study of event categorisation in an Australian language. Nijmegen: University of Nijmegen. SCHULTZE-BERNDT, EVA (2006): Sketch of a Jaminjung grammar of space, in: LEVINSON, STEPHEN C. & WILKINS, DAVID, Grammars of Space: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 63-114 SHIBATANI, MASAYOSHI (2003): Directional verbs in Japanese, in: SHAY, ERIN & SEIBERT, UWE, Motion, direction and location in languages – in honor of Zygmunt Frajzyngier. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 259-286.

SINHA, CHRIS & KUTEVA, TANIA (1995): Distributed spatial semantics, in: Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 18, 167-199. SLOBIN, DAN I. (2004): The many ways to search for a frog : linguistic typology and the expression of motion events, in: STRÖMQVIST, SVEN & VERHOEVEN, LUDO (eds), Relating events in narratives (vol. 2): typological and contextual perspectives. Mahwah (New Jersey): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 219-257. SLOBIN, DAN I. & HOITING, NINI (1994): Reference to movement in spoken and signed languages : typological considerations, in: Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 20 : 487-505. STOLZ, THOMAS (1992): Lokalkasussysteme. Aspekte einer strukturellen Dynamik. Wilhelmsfeld: Egert. TALMY LEONARD (1972): Semantic structures in English and Atsugewi. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. TALMY, LEONARD (1983): How language structures space, in: Pick, Herbert & Acredolo, Linda (eds), Spatial orientation : theory, research and application. New York: Plenum Press, 225-282 [reprinted in: TALMY, LEONARD (2000): Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 1, 177-254]. TALMY, LEONARD (1985): Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical form, in: SHOPEN, TIMOTHY (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. Vol. 3. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 57-149 [reprinted in : TALMY, LEONARD (2000): Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol.2, Cambridge (Mass.): M.I.T. Press, 21-146]. TALMY, LEONARD (1991): Path to realization: a typology of event conflation. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 17: 480-520. [reprinted as A typology of event integration, in: TALMY, LEONARD (2000): Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol.2, Cambridge (Mass.): M.I.T. Press 213-287]. TALMY, LEONARD (2009): Main verb properties and equipollent framing, in: GUO, JIANSHENG, LIEVEN, ELENA, BUDWIG, NANCY, ERVIN-TRIPP, SUSAN, NAKAMURA, KEIKO & ÖZÇALIŞKAN, ŞEYDA (2009): Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language. Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin. New York – London, Psychology Press, 389-402. TAYLOR, JOHN R. (1996): The syntax and semantics of locativised nouns, in: Zulu, in: Pütz, Martin et Dirven René (eds), The construal of space in language and thought. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 287-305. TENNY, CAROL L. (1994): Aspectual Roles and the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Dordrecht / Boston / London: Kluwer Academic Publishers. VANDELOISE, CLAUDE (1986): L'espace en français, Paris, Seuil [Eng. tr. (1991): Spatial Prepositions: A case study from French. Chicago: University of Chicago Press]. VANDELOISE, CLAUDE (2005): Force and function in the acquisition of the preposition in, in: CARLSON, LAURA & VAN DER ZEE, EMILE, Functional features in language and space. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 219-231. VAN STADEN, MIRIAM, BOWERMAN, MELISSA & VERHELST, MARIET (2006): Some properties of spatial description in Dutch, in: LEVINSON, STEPHEN C. & WILKINS, DAVID (eds) Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 475-511. VITTRANT, ALICE (to appear 1): Expressing Motion: Contribution of Southeast Asian languages - with reference to East Asian Languages, in: ENFIELD, NICK & COMRIE, BERNARD (eds), Mainland Southeast Asian languages : State of the art. VITTRANT, ALICE (to appear 2): Contraintes linguistiques, cognitives et culturelles dans l’expression d’événements de trajectoire, in: Actes du colloque international “Langage, Discours, Evénements”, Limoges: Lambert-Lucas. VOISIN, SYLVIE (2014): Expressions de trajectoire dans quelques langues atlantiques (groupe Nord), in: Faits de Langues 42 : 131-152. WAROTAMASIKKHADIT, UDOM (1988): There are no prepositions in Thai, in: BAMROONGRAKS, CHOLTICHA, KHANITTANAN, WILAIWAN, PERMCHAROEN, LADDAWAN ET AL. (eds), Proceedings of the International Symposium on Languages and Linguistics (Thammasat University, August 1988). Bangkok: Thammasat University Press, 70-76. ZLATEV, JORDAN & YANGKLANG, PEERAPAT (2004): A third way to travel: The place of Thai in motion-event typology, in: STRÖMQVIST, SVEN & VERHOEVEN, LUDO (eds), Relating events in

narratives (vol. 2): typological and contextual perspectives. Mahwah (New Jersey): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 159-190.