Cover not available
Article published In:
Languages in Contrast
Vol. 15:2 (2015) ► pp.181–207

Satellite-framed patterns in Romance languages

A corpus-based study

| Universidad Pablo de Olavide (Spain)
The present analysis is grounded in the belief that linguists, when describing a language, should aim for a full and comprehensive coverage. Talmy’s (1985, 2000) influential two-way typology, verb-framed vs. satellite-framed patterns, represents the preferred option here for the encoding of motion events cross-linguistically, but does not cover other peripheral uses that a language may show. This paper provides evidence for the growing assumption that languages may in fact show both encoding options (Beavers, 2008; Beavers et al., 2010; Filipovic, 2007; Iacobini and Masini, 2006, 2007; Fortis, 2010, Croft et al., 2010, inter alia). The analysis of a large corpus sample of satellite-framed constructions shows that in Spanish this pattern is not only available but indeed is preferred under some circumstances. Previous assertions that Romance languages have poor lexical manner inventories and lack resultatives can help explain low productivity, but they do not argue against the existence of a satellite-framed encoding choice per se. By analysing naturally occurring constructions in their contexts, I will outline the pragmatic conditions that compensate for lexical and aspectual limitations. When the resultative element (change of location) is a default inference, it can be lexicalized.
Keywords: motion events, Talmy, Satellite-Framed, Verb-Framed, Spanish, Romance
Published online: 19 November 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.15.2.02mar
References (41)
Aske, J. 1989. “Path Predicates in English and Spanish: A Closer Look”. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society . Berkeley, 18-20 February 1989. Berkeley Linguistics Society. 1–14.
Beavers, J. 2008. “On the Nature of Goal Marking and Delimitation: Evidence from Japanese”. Journal of Linguistics 44(2):283–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beavers, J., Levin, B. and Tham, S.W. 2010. “The Typology of Motion Expressions Revisited”. Journal of Linguistics 46(2):331–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carter, R. 1988. “Compositionality and Polysemy”. In On Linking: Papers by Richard Carter, B. Levin and C. Tenny (eds), 167–204. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W., Bar, J., Hollmann, W., Sotirova V. and Taoka, C. 2010. “Revising Talmy’s Typological Classification of Complex Event Constructions”. In Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar, H. Boas (ed), 201–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cuartero Otal, J. 2006. “¿Cuántas Cláses de Verbos de Desplazamiento se Distinguen en Español?” Rilce 221:13–36.Google Scholar
Cummins, S. 1996. “Movement and Direction in French and English”. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 151:31–54.Google Scholar
Fábregas, A. 2007. “An Exhaustive Lexicalisation Account of Directional Complements”, Tromsø Working Papers on Language and Linguistics 34(2):165–199.Google Scholar
Folli, R. 2008. “Complex PPs in Italian”. In Syntax and Semantics of Spatial P, A. Asbury, J. Dotlacil, B. Gehrke and R. Nouwen (eds), 197–221. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Folli, R. and Ramchand, G. 2005. “Prepositions and Results in Italian and English: An Analysis from Event Decomposition”. In Perspectives on Aspect, H. Verkuyl, H. De Swart and A. van Hout (eds), 81–105. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fortis, J.M. 2010. “Space in Language. Part III: The Typology of Motion Events”. DGfS-CNRS Summer School on Linguistic Typology. University of Leipzig, 14-28 August 2010. Available at [URL] [last accessed 19 June 2013].
Frawley, W. 1992. Linguistic Semantics. Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.Google Scholar
Iacobini, C. and Masini, F. 2007. “Verb-Particle Constructions and Prefixed Verbs in Italian: Typology, Diachrony and Semantics”. On-line Proceedings of the Fifth Mediterranean Morphology Meeting MMM5 . Fréjus, 15-18 September 2005. 157–184.
. 2006. “The Emergence of Verb-Particle Constructions in Italian: Locative and Actional Meanings”. Morphology 16(2):155–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iacobini, C. and Vergaro, C. 2010. “The Role of Inference in the Directional Reading of Manner of Motion Verbs: Evidence from Italian and English”. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Intercultural Pragmatics. Madrid 15-17 November, 2010. Available at [URL] [last accessed 15 August 2013].
Jackendoff, R. 1990. Semantic Structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1995. “Babe Ruth homored his way into the hearts of America”. Syntax and Semantics 261:155–178.Google Scholar
Jones, M.A. 1996. Foundations of French Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kopecka, A. 2009. “L’expression du déplacement en Français: L’interaction des Facteurs Sémantiques, Aspectuels et Pragmatiques dans la Construction du Sens Spatial”. Langages 1731:54–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, B. 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations. Chicago: Chicago Univerity Press.Google Scholar
Levin, B. and Rappaport Hovav, M. 1995. Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Martínez Vázquez, M. 2001. “Delimited Events in English and Spanish”. Estudios Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense 91:31–59.Google Scholar
. 2013. “Intralinguistic Variation in The Expression of Motion Events in English and Spanish”. Lingue e Linguaggi 91:143–156.Google Scholar
Mateu, J. 2011. “Conflation and Incorporation Processes in Resultative Constructions”. In Telicity, Change, and State: A Cross-Categorial View of Event Structure, V. Demonte and L. McNally (eds), 252–278. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, Y. 2003. “Typologies of Lexicalization Patterns and Event Integration: Clarifications and Reformulations”. In Empirical and Theoretical Investigations into Language: A Festschrift for Masaru Kajita, Shuji Chiba, et al. (eds), 403–418. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
Mora Gutiérrez, J.P. 1998. “Directed Motion in English and Spanish”. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Seville, Spain.
Morera, Marcial (1999) “El Arabismo Español hasta: su Evolución Formal y Semántica”. Verba 261:81–95.Google Scholar
Papafragou, A., Massey, C. and Gleitman, L. 2006. “When English Proposes What Greek Presupposes: the Cross-Linguistic Encoding of Motion Events”. Cognition 981:75–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pourcel, S. and Kopecka, A. 2006. “Motion Events in French: Typological Intricacies”. Ms., University of Sussex, Brighton and Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen. Available at [URL] [last accessed 17 November 2012].
Real Academia Española: Banco de datos (CREA) [online]. Corpus de Referencia del Español Actual. Available at [URL] [last accessed 24 December 2012]
Slobin, D.I. 1996. “Two Ways to Travel: Verbs of Motion in English and Spanish”. In Grammatical Constructions: their Form and Meaning, M. Shibatani and S.A. Thompson (eds), 195–220. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
. 1997. “Mind, Code, and Text”. In Essays on Language Function and Language Type: Dedicated to T. Givón, J. Bybee, J. Haiman and S.A. Thompson (eds), 437–467. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D.I. and Hoiting, N. 1994. “Reference to Movement in Spoken and Signed Languages: Typological Considerations”. Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society . Berkeley, 18-20 February 1994. Berkeley Linguistics Society. 487–505.
Stringer, D. 2002. “Predication of Path in French and Japanese”. Durham Working Papers in Linguistics 81:153–166.Google Scholar
. 2003. “Acquisitional Evidence for a Universal Syntax of Directional PPs.” Proceedings from ACL-SIGSEM Workshop: The Linguistic Dimensions of Prepositions and their Use in Computational Linguistics Formalisms and Applications . Toulouse, September 2003. IRIT. 44–55.
Talmy, L. 1985. “Lexicalization Patterns: Semantic Structure in Lexical Forms”. In Language Typology and Lexical Description: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, T. Shoepen (ed), 36–149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tenny, C. 1994. Aspectual Roles and the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yoneyama, M. 1986. “Motion Verbs in Conceptual Semantics”. Bulletin of the Faculty of Humanities 221:1–15.Google Scholar
Zwarts, J. 2005. “Prepositional Aspect and the Algebra of Paths”. Linguistics and Philosophy 281:739–779. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Lewandowski, Wojciech & Şeyda Özçalışkan
2024. Metaphorical events in translation: Does language type matter?. Lingua 298 ► pp. 103654 ff. DOI logo
Chen, Shujun & Lihuan Wu
2023. Variable motion encoding within Chinese: a usage-based perspective. Language and Cognition 15:3 ► pp. 480 ff. DOI logo
McNally, Louise & Alexandra Anna Spalek
2022. Grammatically relevant aspects of meaning and verbal polysemy. Linguistics 60:6 ► pp. 1943 ff. DOI logo
Melzi, Gigliana, Verónica Mesalles, Margaret Caspe & Nydia Prishker
2022. Spatial language during a household task with bilingual Latine families. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 80 ► pp. 101409 ff. DOI logo
Montero-Melis, Guillermo
2021. Consistency in Motion Event Encoding Across Languages. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
Lewandowski, Wojciech & Jaume Mateu
2020. Motion events again: Delimiting constructional patterns. Lingua 247 ► pp. 102956 ff. DOI logo
Wiesinger, Evelyn
2020. ¿Esto se echa para atrás? An approach to verb-particle constructions in European Spanish based on a corpus study of [V para atrás]. Romanica Olomucensia 32:1 ► pp. 201 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 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.