Cover not available
Part of
Caused Accompanied Motion: Bringing and taking events in a cross-linguistic perspective
Edited by Anna Margetts, Sonja Riesberg and Birgit Hellwig
[Typological Studies in Language 134] 2022
► pp. 147–185

Directed caused accompanied motion events in Saliba-Logea

 | Monash University
This chapter describes the encoding of directed caused accompanied motion events (‘directed CAM’) in Saliba-Logea, an Oceanic language of Papua New Guinea. The description is based on analysing patterns in spoken language data. Saliba-Logea expressions of directed CAM are generally morphosyntactically complex and meaning components are frequently distributed across more than one verb. In such multi-verb constructions, one verb expresses caused motion, the other directionality. In Saliba-Logea the most common expressions of directed CAM events include information about the manner of caused motion in constructions with verbs like ‘carry’, ‘drag’ or ‘guide’.
Keywords: Austronesian, lexical semantics, caused motion, accompanied motion, event representation, three-participant events, manner, bring
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Database and methodology
  • 3.Grammatical background
    • 3.1Directional constructions
      • 3.1.1Directional suffixes
      • 3.1.2Compound directional verbs
      • 3.1.3Free directional verbs
    • 3.2Spatial postpositions
    • 3.3Benefactive constructions
    • 3.4Valence-changing devices
    • 3.5Accompaniment expressions
  • 4.Manner-of-caused-motion verbs in directed CAM expressions
    • 4.1carry verbs
    • 4.2drag, pull and push verbs
    • 4.3guide and lead verbs
    • 4.4transport verbs
    • 4.5Comparison of manner-of-caused-motion verbs
  • 5.Manner-neutral expressions of directed CAM events
    • 5.1Hai ‘get’
    • 5.2Direction + caused motion constructions
  • 6.Other construction types
  • 7.Frequencies of directed CAM expressions
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 25 May 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.134.06mar
References (37)
References
Arnold, J. E. (2008). Reference production: Production-internal and addressee-oriented processes. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(4), 495–527. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bohnemeyer, J., Enfield, N. J., Essegbey, J., Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I., Kita, S., Lüpke, F., & Ameka, F. K. (2007). Principles of event segmentation in language: The case of motion events. Language, 83(3), 495–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bohnemeyer, J., Enfield, N. J., Essegbey, J., & Kita, S. (2010). The macro-event property: The segmentation of causal chains. In J. Bohnemeyer & E. Pederson (Eds.), Event representation in language and cognition (pp. 43–67). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bohnemeyer, J., & Pederson, E. (2010). Event representation in language and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. (1982). The semantics of giving. In R. M. W. Dixon (Ed.), Where have all the adjectives gone? And other essays in semantics and syntax (pp. 117–140). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992). A new approach to English grammar, on semantic principles. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dryer, M. S. (1986). Primary objects, secondary objects, and antidative. Language, 62(4), 808–845. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hockett, C. F. (1990). Bring, take, come, and go. Journal of English Linguistics 23(1–2). 239–244.Google Scholar
Ikegami, Y. (1987). ‘Source’ and ‘goal’: A case of linguistic dissymmetry. In R. Dirven & G. Radden (Eds.), Concepts of case (pp. 122–146). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Kopecka, A. (2012). Semantic granularity of placement and removal expressions in Polish. In A. Kopecka & B. Narasimhan (Eds.), Typological studies in language (Vol. 100, pp. 327–348). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kopecka, A., Ishibashi, M., & Vuillermet, M. (Eds.). (2021). Source-goal asymmetries across languages. Studies in Language, 45(1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakusta, L., & Landau, B. (2005). Starting at the end: The importance of goals in spatial language. Cognition, 96(1), 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakusta, L., Wagner, L., O’Hearn, K., & Landau, B. (2007). Conceptual foundations of spatial language: Evidence for a goal bias in infants. Language Learning and Development, 3(3), 179–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lynch, J., Ross, M., & Crowley, T. (2002). The Oceanic languages. London: Curzon Press.Google Scholar
Margetts, A. (1999). Valence and transitivity in Saliba: An Oceanic language of Papua New Guinea (Doctoral dissertation, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics). Retrieved from DOI logo
(2002). The linguistic encoding of three-participant events in Saliba. Studies in Language, 26(3), 613–636. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004a). Core-layer serialization in Saliba. Complex Verbs and Serialization in Oceanic Languages, 69–89.Google Scholar
(2004b). From implicature to construction: Emergence of a benefactive construction in Oceanic. Oceanic Linguistics, 43(2), 445–468. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005). Positional slots in Saliba complex verbs. Oceanic Linguistics, 44(1), 65–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007a). Close and remote objects in a language with a single transitive suffix. In J. Siegel, J. Lynch, & D. Eades (Eds.), Language description, history and development: Linguistic indulgence in memory of Terry Crowley (pp. 69–78). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007b). Three-participant events in Oceanic languages. Oceanic Linguistics, 46(1), 71–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). Learning verbs without boots and straps? The problem of “give” in Saliba. In M. Bowerman & P. Brown (Eds.), Cross-linguistic perspectives on argument structure: Implications for learnability (pp. 111–137). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2011). Transitivity in Saliba-Logea. Studies in Language, 35(3), 650–675. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Margetts, A., Haude, K., Himmelmann, N. P., Jung, D., Riesberg, S., Schnell, S., Seifart, F., Sheppard, H., & Wegener, C. (2022). Cross-linguistic patterns in the lexicalization of BRING and TAKE. Studies in Language.
Narasimhan, B., Kopecka, A., Bowerman, M., Gullberg, M., & Majid, A. (2012). Putting and taking events: A crosslinguistic perspective. In A. Kopecka & B. Narasimhan (Eds.), Events of putting and taking: A crosslinguistic perspective (pp. 1–20). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pawley, A. (1986). A reanalysis of Fijian transitive constructions. Te Reo, 29, 81–112.Google Scholar
Regier, T., & Zheng, M. (2007). Attention to endpoints: A cross-linguistic constraint on spatial meaning. Cognitive Science, 31(4), 705–719. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross, M. (1988). Proto Oceanic and the Austronesian languages of western Melanesia. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
(2004). Demonstratives, local nouns and directionals in Oceanic languages: A diachronic perspective. In G. Senft (Ed.), Deixis and demonstratives in Oceanic languages (pp. 175–204). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Song, J. J. (1997). The history of Micronesian possessive classifiers and benefactive marking in Oceanic languages. Oceanic Linguistics, 36(1), 29–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998). Benefactive marking in Oceanic languages: From possessive classifiers to benefactive marking. In A. Siewierska & J. J. Song (Eds.), Case, typology and grammar (pp. 247–276). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Staden, M., & Narasimhan, B. (2012). Granularity in the cross-linguistic encoding of motion and location. In M. Vulchanova & E. van der Zee (Eds.), Motion encoding in language and space (pp. 134–148). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Staden, M., & Reesink, G. P. (2008). Serial verb constructions in a linguistic area. In G. Senft (Ed.), Serial verb constructions in Austronesian and Papuan languages (pp. 17–54). Canberra: Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Vulchanova, M., & van der Zee, E. (Eds.). (2012). Motion encoding in language and space. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, D. P. & Hill, D. (1995). When “go” means “come”: Questioning the basicness of basic motion verbs. Cognitive linguistics 6(2/3). 209–259. DOI logo
Wittenburg, P., Brugman, H., Russel, A., Klassmann, A., & Sloetjes, H. (2006). ELAN: A professional framework for multimodality research. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’06). European Language Resources Association (ELRA), Genoa, Italy. Retrieved from [URL]
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Willoughby, L., R. T. Smith & T. Johnston
2024. The GeSCA repository: Gesture and Sign Corpus of Australia. Australian Journal of Linguistics 44:2-3 ► pp. 220 ff. DOI logo
Margetts, Anna, Katharina Haude, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann, Dagmar Jung, Sonja Riesberg, Stefan Schnell, Frank Seifart, Harriet Sheppard & Claudia Wegener
2022. Cross-linguistic patterns in the lexicalisation of bring and take. Studies in Language 46:4 ► pp. 934 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 november 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.