Verbs of motion and their lexicalization patterns an English-Vietnamese comparative study from cognitive approach

1

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HA NOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

MAI THỊ THU HÂN

VERBS OF MOTION AND THEIR LEXICALIZATION PATTERNS
AN ENGLISH-VIETNAMESE COMPARATIVE STUDY FROM
COGNITIVE APPROACH
(Động từ vận động và các mô hình từ vựng hoá của chúng
Nghiên cứu so sánh Anh Việt từ góc độ ngôn ngữ học tri nhận)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 602215

Hanoi - 2010


2

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HA NOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

MAI THỊ THU HÂN

VERBS OF MOTION AND THEIR LEXICALIZATION PATTERNS

AN ENGLISH-VIETNAMESE COMPARATIVE STUDY FROM
COGNITIVE APPROACH
(Động từ vận động và các mô hình từ vựng hoá của chúng
Nghiên cứu so sánh Anh Việt từ góc độ ngôn ngữ học tri nhận)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 602215

Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Trần Hữu Mạnh

Hanoi - 2010

DECLARATION


6

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABSTRACT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
LIST OF TABLES AND DIAGRAMS

PART 1. INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale

1

2. Aims of the study

1

3. Scope of the study

2

4. Research questions

2

5. Contribution of the study

2

6. Methodology

3

7. Design of the study

3

PART 2: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: VERBS OF MOTION IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE
1.1 Verbs of motion and their classification

4

1.2 The syntactic and semantic features of English motion verbs

4

1.3 The syntactic and semantic features of Vietnamese motion verbs

6

1.4 The similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese motion verbs

9

1.5 Summary

10

CHAPTER 2: COGNITIVE SEMANTICS AND THE THEORY OF
LEXICALIZATION PATTERNS
2.1 An overview of Cognitive Linguistics and Cognitive Semantics

11

2.1.1 Cognitive Linguistics and the key concepts

11

2.1.2 Cognitive semantics and its main tenets

12

2.1.3 Figure and Ground

12

2.2 The theory of lexicalization patterns
2.2.1 What is lexicalization?

14
14


7
2.2.2 The motion event

14

2.2.3 Satellites

17

2.2.4 A two-way typology of motion event

17
17

2.3 Summary

CHAPTER 3: A COMPARISON OF LEXICALIZATION PATTERNS OF

ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE MOTION VERBS
3.1 Introduction

18

3.2 Lexicalization patterns of English and Vietnamese motion verbs

18

3.2.1 Lexicalization pattern 1: Motion + Co-event

18

3.2.2 Lexicalization pattern 2: Motion + Path

25

3.2.3 Lexicalization pattern 3: Motion + Figure

30

3.2.4 Other minor patterns

31

3.3 Split and parallel system of conflation

32

3.4 The parallel pattern of conflation in Vietnamese?

32

3.5 Summary

33

CHAPTER 4: AN EMPIRICAL COMPARISON OF MOTION VERBS AND
THEIR LEXICALIZATION PATTERNS IN A SPECIFIC NOVEL TEXT–
APPLICATIONS FOR TRANSLATORS AND LANGUAGE TEACHERS
4.1 Introduction

34

4.2 A comparative analysis on the motion verbs and lexicalization patterns of

34

motion verbs in the chapter ‘The Battle of Hogwarts’ and its Vietnamese version
4.3 Applications for translators and language teachers

40

4.4 Summary

41

PART 3: CONCLUSIONS
1. Major findings

42

2. Limitations and suggestions for further study

43

REFERENCES

45

APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Beth Levin (1993)‘s classification of motion verbs in English and
the Vietnamese equivalents


8

Appendix 2: Motion verbs in English (Chapter 31: The Battle of Hogwarts)
[iii] Appendix 3: Motion verbs in Vietnamese (Chương 31: Chiến trường
Hogwarts)
Appendix 4: Analysis of sample motion verbs in chapter 31: The Battle of
Hogwarts and the Vietnamese version
Appendix 5: A table of contrast between basic English and Vietnamese motion
verbs
Appendix 6: Chapter 31: The Battle of Hogwarts (Motion scene 2)
Appendix 7: Chương 31: Chiến trường Hogwarts


9

LIST OF ABREVIATIONS

A:

Adjuncts

C:

Complement

CLs:

Cognitive Linguistics

Loc:

Locative

O:

Object

O d:

Direct Object

Oi:

Indirect Object

O-loc:

Locative Object

Part:

Particle(s)

Po:

Object Predicative

S:

Subject

S-language:

Satellite-framed languages

SVCs:

Serial verb constructions

V:

Verb

V-language:

Verb-framed languages


10

LIST OF TABLES AND DIAGRAMS

Diagram 3.1: Co-event conflated in the Motion verb (adapted from
Talmy, 2000b: 28)

Table 1.1: Path verbs and Directional complement verbs in Vietnamese

Table 4.1: Lexicalization patterns of English and Vietnamese motion
verbs in chapter 31 ‗The Battle of Hogwarts‘


11

PART 1: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale
Motion verbs - ‗the verbs that describe movement are first learned, most frequently
used and conceptually dominant‘ (Miller & Johnson-Laird (1977:527). Cognitive semantics
classifies motion verbs based on the sort of semantic information which their verb roots
characteristically encode. In general, motion verbs, both transitive and intransitive, typically
express only one of the three semantic entities route, manner, or shape, and the general
tendency for analysing motion verbs is to separate manner verbs from path verbs. Talmy‘s
(2000) work distinguishes two different types of languages, i.e., satellite-framed and verbframed languages, according to the way the different elements of a motion scene are
mapped onto linguistic elements. English, as a satellite-framed language, expresses the core
component of motion, i.e., Path or the trajectory of motion, in satellites (e.g., up, down) or
in prepositional phrases (e.g., into/out of the house), leaving the verb slot free to encode

Manner-of-motion.
Relying on the basic assumption that languages vary typologically in terms of how
they map lexical syntactic elements onto semantic domains, Talmy (2000) deeply investigated
the regular associations (lexicalization patterns) among meaning components and the verb,
providing a cross-linguistic study of lexicalization patterns connected with the expression of
motion. He was mainly interested in evidencing typologies, i.e. small number of patterns
exhibited by groups of languages, and universals, i.e. single patterns shared crosslinguistically. According to Talmy, some languages lexicalize in the verb the manner or the
cause of motion, other languages lexicalize the path, and finally in a few languages the figure
or object that moves is worth mentioning.
This theoretical framework arises in me as to whether there are any similarities and
differences between English and Vietnamese motion verbs, how lexicalization patterns are
cross-linguistically applied to analyzing English and Vietnamese motion verbs, and what
might be the lexicalization patterns of Vietnamese motion verbs. These questions are the
strong motivations that inspire me to carry out this small research with a view to uncovering
the notions of motion verbs and applications of lexicalization patterns in both English and
Vietnamese.

2. Aims of the study: The paper aims to
(i) Examine, in some depths, the main concepts of cognitive semantics, its main
concepts and tenets, the theory of lexicalization patterns with its typological and universal
principles across languages.


12
(ii) Provide an insight into the analysis of motion verbs in English and Vietnamese and
set this as the basis for the English and Vietnamese comparison of lexicalization patterns of
motion verbs.
(iii) Find out and compare the lexicalization patterns of motion verbs in English and
Vietnamese; based on which to discover some similarities and differences between English
and Vietnamese lexicalization patterns of motion verbs.

(iv) Apply the theory of lexicalization patterns to analyzing motion verbs in an
English novelist text and its Vietnamese version with the aim to confirm the results of the
preceding parts.

3. Scope of the study
This study essentially adop Leonard Talmy (2000)‘s theory of lexicalization patterns
of motion verbs and some notions proposed in Talmy-related studies by Slobin (1996, 2004,
2006).
Furthermore, the study explores the meaning-surface relations between the semantic
elements like Motion, Manner, Cause, Path, Figure… and the verbs of motion as the surface
element chosen. The direction of the study will be to hold ‗verbs of motion‘ as constant
selected surface entity and then observe which semantic entities namely Figure, Ground,
Manner, Cause, Motion, Path are variously expressed in it.
In addition, because of the limited scope, we mainly focus on the first three
lexicalization patterns among Talmy‘s eight patterns as they are more representative. For the
rest five patterns, we just do the job of recognition rather than go further into their details.

4. Research questions
(i) What are the similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese motion
verbs?
(ii) What are the lexicalization patterns of English and Vietnamese motion verbs?
How are these lexicalization patterns similar and different?
(iii) What are the similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese motion
verbs and their lexicalization patterns used in the chapter ‗The Battle of Hogwarts‘ in the
novel ‗Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows‘ and the Vietnamese version?

5. Contribution of the study
The study hopes to explore the main concepts of cognitive semantics and
lexicalization patterns of verbs of motion with typological and universal principles embedded
in them. It is hoped that the results of the study will partly contribute to the development of

cognitive semantics in general, and their lexicalization patterns of verbs of motions in


13
particular. In addition, all the cognitive underpinnings of these patterns are expected to be
uncovered, and the similarities and differences are hoped to be drawn. The study, then, will
bring in practical benefits to language teachers, translators and those who are in favour of it.

6. Methodology of the study:
This study uses a combination of some different methods:
The strategic method chosen is the descriptive and analytical which seeks to describe
and explain the phenomenon. Contrastive Analysis is also used in this research. For
comparison, we will describe motion verbs and their lexicalization patterns in the two
languages under the same theoretical framework and then find out the similarities and
differences. The data used for the study e.g. examples or illustrations, are cited from the
reliable resources provided by famous scholars or from real life situations. It is hoped that
valuable conclusions will be reached by deductive reasoning.
Together with these methods, we also use the quantitative procedures that are based on
data, facts and features to examine motion verbs and their lexicalization patterns used in a novel
and its translated version in the mother tongue. Given this method of inductive reasoning, we
expect to reach a confirmation for the conclusions drawn out. Supporting techniques such as
reference to the publication, consultation with the supervisor, discussion with colleagues, and
personal observations are also of great significance.

7. Design of the study: The study is divided into three main parts presented as follows:
Part 1: Introduction, which states the reasons, reveals the aims, narrows the scope,
identifies the research questions and presents the significance, methodology as well as the
organization of the study.
Part 2, including four chapters, reports on the main contents of the study. Chapter 1 is
concerned with exploring the similarities and differences of motion verbs in English and

Vietnamese. Chapter 2 is dedicated to examining some main concepts of cognitive semantics
and the theory of lexicalization patterns. Chapter 3 deals with the comparative analysis of
Talmy‘s lexicalization patterns of English and Vietnamese motion verbs. The last chapter is
toward applying the typology of English and Vietnamese motion verbs in a specific novel text
to confirm the conclusions revealed. Given the conclusions, this part indicates possible
implications for language teaching and translation, hopefully providing an alternative method
of analyzing an aspect of language from a different point of view.
Part 3, the last part of the study, is the conclusion which summarizes what has been
done, what has not been covered, accompanied by suggestions for further study. There are
also appendixes where supplemental materials and list of reference books are provided.


14

PART 2: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: VERBS OF MOTION IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE
1.1 What is a verb of motion?
Verbs are semantically defined, i.e., as ‗words that designate actions (kiss, run),
processes (grow, change), experiences (know), or states of being (be, have)‘. (Delahunty,
1994: 117). The semantic function of a verb is to describe a motion, an act, occurrence, or
mode of being. A verb of motion, as its name suggests, is simply a verb that will take agents
from one place to another (e.g. go, walk, swim, run …). Van Valin (1997: 109) argues that
‗for motion verbs, we need to present the motion plus the change of location over time‘.
The English verbs of motion tend to incorporate certain specific kinds of semantic
features or components such as Manner (run, slide, fly), Cause (blow, pull, kick), or Path
(enter, rise, follow).
1.2 Classification of English and Vietnamese motion verbs
English language enhances the different classifications of motion verbs from the
different points of view. We are especially interested in the contributions of Beth Levin
(1993)‘s classification. With regard to transitive and intransitive motion verbs, Levin (1993:

263-270) proposed the following seven verb classes (See Appendix 1):
a. Inherently directed motion: arrive, come, … The meanings of these verbs include a
specification of the direction of motion. E.g The convict escaped the police.
b. Leave verbs: abandon, desert, leave, etc. These verbs do not specify Manner of
motion; they just indicate that motion away from a location has taken place. E.g. We
abandoned the area.
c. Manner of motion: including Roll verbs (bounce, float, move, ...) and Run verbs
(bounce, float, jump, ...). Roll verbs specify manners of motion characteristic of inanimate
entities, and Run verbs describe manners in which animate entities can move.
d. Manner of motion using a vehicle: including Vehicle name verbs (bike, cycle, ...), and
Verbs not associated with vehicle names (fly, row …). Verbs that are vehicle names mean
roughly ‗go using the vehicle named by the noun‘. E.g. They skated along the canal/across the
lake. Verbs that are not vehicle names denote motion using a vehicle but the vehicle name
does not coincide with the verb. For instance, fly implies an aircraft.
e. Waltz verbs: dance, foxtrot, tango, tapdance, waltz, etc. These verbs mean roughly
‗perform the dance‘. E.g They waltzed across/into/through the room.


15
f. Accompany verbs: accompany, guide, lead, etc. These verbs relate to one person
taking another from one place to another. E.g Jackie accompanied Rose to the store.
g. Chase verbs: chase, follow, pursue, shadow, tail, track, trail, etc. These verbs are
typically transitive, with the chaser as subject and the person being chased as object. E.g
Jackie chased the thief.
Some famous Vietnamese linguists such as Diệp Quang Ban (2003, 2004), Nguyễn
Tài Cẩn (2004), Lý Toàn Thắng (2005), Đinh Văn Đức (1986), Nguyễn Lai (1990), Nguyễn
Kim Thản (1977) who have done research into verbs and motion verbs all divide motion
verbs into two main types: verbs of movement such as chạy, bay, bò, leo, trượt, lướt … and
directional verbs such as ra, vào, lên, xuống … . However, these linguists tend to pay more
attention to the latter verb group because of its special syntactic and semantic characteristics.

In this study, we will explore the similarities and differences of basic English and Vietnamese
motion verbs based on the seven motion-verb groups taken from Beth Levin‘s classification
and their Vietnamese equivalents.
1.3 The syntactic and semantic features of English verbs of motion
Late traditional grammar classifies verbs into seven major semantic domains: activity
verbs, communication verbs, mental verbs, causative verbs, occurrence verbs, existence verbs and
aspectual verbs. (Biber, 1999: 360). Verbs of motion, which primarily denote actions, fall into the
group of activity verbs. Examples are come, go, leave, move, run, etc…
(1) They ran through a green paddy field.
Verbs of motion, are the head alone in the verb phrase or head of the verbal predicate
and take a subject with the semantic role of Agent. According to Biber (1999), every verb can
occur with specific patterns of clause elements which contain a subject and can also include
additional adverbials. In the book ‗Longman grammar of spoken and written English‘, he
proposes five valency patterns for single-word lexical verbs: Intransitive, Monotransitive,
Ditransitive, Complex transitive and Copular. Generally speaking, motion verbs should be
grouped into the following types:
 Intransitive: Intransitive motion verbs occur in the SV pattern with no object or predicative
complement. For example:
(2) Most people (S) came (V).
However, this type can occur with optional adverbials (in the form of a prepositional
phrase) as in:
(3) They (S) went (V) to Holyhead and onto Dublin (A).
 Transitive: In terms of transitive verbs, motion verbs fall into the following types:


16
- Mono-transitive: Mono-transitive motion verbs occur with a single direct object in the
pattern SVOd.

(4) Then you (S) should move (V) any obstacles (Od) before.

- Complex transitive: Complex transitive motion verbs occur with a direct noun phrase
followed by an obligatory adverbial in the pattern SVOdA (as in 5) or by an object predicative
SVOPo (in most cases adjective as in 6)
(5) He (S) led (V) me (O) to the storehouse (A-obligatory).
(6) He (S) hit (V) the cat (O) dead (Po).
Semantically, the English verbs tend to conflate certain specific kinds of semantic
components. Manner and path are two important aspects of verb representation that are
systematically conflated in motion. In this regard, manner-of-motion verbs refer to the way in
which a figure carries out a motion; whereas path-of-motion verbs refer to the trajectory over
which a figure moves, typically, with respect to another reference object. English intransitive
manner verbs in general do not encode information about any specific direction of motion unless
they combine with an explicit directional phrase. In the sentence ‗He walks across the road’, walk
is the motion verb, which goes with the preposition across which denotes the transversal path. In
these cases, the verbs of motion appear to conflate the manner of motion and the prepositions or
particles incorporate the path or direction of the verbs.
However, English also has a handful of Path verbs, which denote the path of motion
such as descend, ascend, exit, leave …. These verbs exist to a very limited extent as Latinate
borrowings. They are mute about any specification of the manner in which the movement is
carried out; but they include a specification of direction of motion, even in the absence of an
overt directional complement, i.e. He entered.
Traditionally, both English transitive and intransitive motion verbs need a locativeObject as in He entered the house or He ran into the garden. In addition, Tyler, A. & Evans,
V. (2003) state that English particles are spatial oriented; and these spatial particles have
numerous meanings associated with them. People often assign spatial particles based on the
geometry of a visual scene. In English, spatial orientation means the location of an object in
relation to another object from the point of view of the speaker, with respect to the orientation
of the object itself or with respect to the actual direction of the motion of the object. The
English particles which complement Path to the main motion verb are likely to encode some
semantic information like goal in (7), source in (8), via in (9) and direction in (10):
(7) He ran to the store.

(8) I ran from the store.
(9) I slid the sleeve over the valve.
(10) I slid the coupling nut forward.


17
As understood, English particles can be either spatially-located (above, below, over, in, on,
under, underneath, at) or directionally-oriented (to, toward, onto, into, by, over, past…).
1.4 The syntactic and semantic features of Vietnamese motion verbs
Our notion of motion verbs focuses mainly on the viewpoints proposed by Nguyễn Lai
(1990), Diệp Quang Ban (2004), Nguyễn Tài Cẩn (2004), Nguyễn Kim Thản (1977) and
some other studies on Vietnamese verbs by Nguyễn Đình Hoà (1979), Sophana Srichampa
(1997) and Henry Beecher (2004). According to these grammarians, Vietnamese verbs
directly express motions of the entities, including actions and states. Motion verbs (including
directional verbs) take an object or predicative complement. In these cases, they are often
transitive verbs with the subject taking the semantic roles of Agent. As seen in Appendix 1,
classified as transitive, Vietnamese motion verbs can be mono-transitive (with a direct object)
or complex transitive (with a direct noun phrase followed by an object complement). For
example:
(11)

Mono-transitive:

Anh ấy (S) kéo (V) tôi (O).

(12)

Complex-transitive:

Anh ta (S) dẫn (V) tôi (O) ra vườn (A-obligatory).

(He pulled me).

He led me to the garden.
As intransitive verbs, Vietnamese motion verbs can occur without any object or verb
complement like in Tôi chạy or take an optional adverbial like ‗vào nhà‘ in Tôi chạy vào nhà
(I ran into the house).
Vietnamese motion verbs are mainly manner-of-motion verbs which go together with
another word which expresses ‗path‘ or the trajectory of Motion such as chạy, bay, bò, trèo,
lướt, thổi … The verbs are used to express the Manner i.e Hắn chạy rất nhanh and Cause of
the Motion i.e. Gió thổi đổ cây. All these associative elements associate with each other to
constitute a motion event.
Interestingly, Vietnamese tends to appear in the form of serial verb constructions.
With regard to this matter, in the study ‗Serial verb constructions in Vietnamese’, Srichampa,
S. (1997) defines serial verb constructions (SVCs) as a sequence of verbs occurring together
with non-overt object and/or non-overt subject; the sentence with non-overt subject is claimed
to be an infinitival clause which is the adjunct of the main clause. For example:
(13) Bà ngã lăn ra đất.

(Grandma fell roll on the ground)

In (13), there are two verbs in the sentence: ‗ngã’ and ‗lăn’. The non-overt subject of the
infinitival clause (lăn ra đất) is controlled by the subject of the main clause, that is ‗Bà‘.
Another linguist on Asian languages, Beecher, H. (2004: 1) identifies three prominent
variety of SVCs:


18
(i) Activity-Goal:

Tôi đi ăn cơm. (I went to eat rice)
Tôi đến tìm em. (I came to look for you)

(ii) Resultative:

Gió thổi đổ cây. (The wind blew down the trees)
Quân đội ta đánh thắng giặc Mỹ xâm lược.
(Our army has defeated the American invaders)

(iii) Motion-Path:

Tôi rơi vào một cái lỗ. (I fall into a hole)

As summarized by Trần Hữu Mạnh (2007:116), Vietnamese grammarians consider the
first verb in a series the main verb, and other elements following the main verbs are postmodifiers. In (i), (ii) and (iii), the second verb conveys the Purpose or goal, the Result and the
Path of the main verb respectively.
The Motion-Path SVCs often consist of a manner verb indicating movement and
change of location which can be combined with directional verbs ra, vào, lên, xuống, sang,
qua, về, lại, đi, đến as in chạy ra (run out), đi vào (come in/into), trèo lên (climb up), nhảy
xuống (jump down)… At this point, Nguyễn Kim Thản (1977: 79) confirms that these
directional verbs are originally full verbs but when they are placed after another verb, they
bleach their full meanings and grammatical features, and become functional words denoting
directional meanings. He states that this word group only acts as ‗grammatical tool‘ that adds
directional meaning to the main verbs and calls them ‗phó động từ phương hướng‘. Đinh Văn
Đức (1986), Diệp Quang Ban (2004) agrees that these verbs are not full directional verbs any
more, but become ‗từ phụ‘ (complement word) encoding Path of the preceding motion verb.
Nguyễn Lai (1990) considers these words ‗trạng-giới từ‘ (prepositional adverbs) which
connect the main verb and its complement and confine in themselves two semantic meanings
of motion verbs: Motion and Direction.
In our sense, these directional verbs take the role of a complement to the main verb and

act as the ‗directional complement verbs‘. In this regard, the information of motion in a
sentence consists of three semantic elements: Motion, Manner and Direction. For example:
(14) Xe đã

chạy

qua

Motion + Manner

Direction

cầu.

When placed after a manner verb, the directional complement verbs can not be left out,
as if they are omitted, the sentence is grammatically incorrect. It is clear that (14) cannot be
transferred into ‗Xe đã chạy cầu’. These directional complement verbs, therefore, are dependent
to the main verbs.
Interestingly, in Vietnamese, these directional complement verbs can function as the
main verbs which encode path-of-motion verbs in themselves. These path verbs carry two
semantic meanings and often require an Olocative: Motion and Direction of Motion:


19
(15) Xe đã

qua

cầu. (The car ran across the bridge)

Motion + Direction
Regarding motion verbs, we present here a list of main path verbs which may function
as both full verbs and directional complement verbs conveying the meanings of prepositions in
Vietnamese:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Path verbs/ Directional
complement verbs
qua/sang
về
vào
ra
lên
xuống
lại
đến/tới
đi

Full verbs (in English)
to cross/get (over), pass
to come/go back

to enter
to exit
to ascend
to descend
to arrive
to reach
to go

Preposition
meaning
across
back
in(to)
out (of)
up
down
at
at
off/away

Table 1.1: Path verbs and directional complement verbs in Vietnamese

In Vietnamese, both path verbs and directional complement verbs in Vietnamese are
categorized according to spatial orientation. The path-of-motion verbs and the motion verbs
which take path complement verbs may be followed by either the source (Lan bước ra khỏi nhà/
Lan ra khỏi nhà), or the direction (Thằng cu Bé chạy về nhà/Thằng cu Bé về nhà) or the
destination of the action (Hắn đi tới nhà cụ Bá/ Hắn tới nhà cụ Bá). In addition, these verbs
denote more semantic meanings in Vietnamese. For example, ‗ra’ (go/come out) goes from a
narrow point and moves to a wider point. It refers to direction, not personal relations. The
schema for this verb may be diagrammed as follows:

Ra

hẹp (narrow)

rộng (wide)

These verbs in Vietnamese have wider usages especially when there is an implication
of geographic direction of movement. Vietnam is divided into three regions: the North, the
Centre and the South. So, the direction from a ‗northern province‘ to a ‗southern province‘ is
vào (come/go in), movement in the opposite direction with the verb ra (come/go out). For
example, a person in Hanoi (in the North) will say:
(16)

Mai tớ sẽ đi vào Huế.

- I will go to Huế tomorrow.

Mai tớ sẽ đi lên Sa Pa/ Lạng Sơn

- I will go to Lạng Sơn tomorrow.

Mai tớ sẽ đi sang Lào.

- I will go to Laos tomorrow.

Mai tớ sẽ đi xuống Ninh Bình.

- I will go to Ninh Bình tomorrow.

20
As it can be seen, the directional complement verbs are much more specific in
denoting Path in Vietnamese. The English preposition ‗to‘ is used to replace its Vietnamese
counterparts ‗vào, lên, sang, đến, xuống‘. The diversity in geographic direction of movement
in (16) can be represented in the following schema:
Sapa
Lạng Sơn

Laos

Ninh Bình
Huế
One more different thing lies in the semantic description of manner. In English
manner verbs, manner category is encoded in the verbs themselves. Not to run parallel with
this, Vietnamese tends to use more neutral motion verbs plus an adjunct adding manner
information to the main motion verbs. For example, English verbs amble, backpack, meander,
inch, limp, mince … express different ways of walking, and they are translated into
Vietnamese as đi nước kiệu, đi lang thang, đi lần lần, đi khập khiễng, đi õng ẹo, … (see
Appendix 1).
1.5 Similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese verbs of motion
Taking English and Vietnamese verbs of motion into comparison, the study finds out
the following main similarities and differences on valency patterns and verb meanings.

 Similarities:
1. English and Vietnamese motion verbs both fall into the group of activity verbs. They take the
semantic role of describing motion and are the head in the verb phrases.
2. Both English and Vietnamese motion verbs are transitive and intransitive verbs. They
appear mostly in the patterns of SV and SVO. They can be used either as simple verbs (oneword verbs) in I cross the road or as compound verbs in I rode across the road or Tôi chạy
vào nhà.

3. Vietnamese motion verbs pattern with English equivalents in that many of them are
manner-of-motion verbs which couple with another word to express the path of motion.


21
4. English and Vietnamese verbs of motion both have a group of verbs that incorporate the path or
direction of the verbs. They are: cross, arrive, come, go, ascend, descend, enter, exit … in English
and vào, ra, lên, xuống, đến, đi, về, qua, lại … in Vietnamese.
5. English particles and Vietnamese counterparts are spatially oriented.

 Differences
1. Besides the common SV pattern, Vietnamese motion verbs tend to encode a complex motion
event forming serial verb constructions. There are three formations of SVCs: Activity-Goal,
Resultative and Motion-Path SVCs. These formations are hardly seen in English. The typical
formation of motion verbs in English is Verb-particle constructions.
2. Vietnamese uses path complement verbs to encode the Path of Motion (Vmanner/cause +
Directional Complement verbs) whereas in English, the path of motion is incorporated in the
particles (Vmanner/cause + particles).
3. In English, the Latin-derived path-incorporating verbs such as ascend, descend, enter, exit …
are only directional full verbs. The Vietnamese counterparts of these words are categorized as
both full verbs encoding the Path of the motion, and ‗directional complement verbs‘ which
stand after motion verbs and convey prepositional meanings.
4. Both path verbs and directional complement verbs in Vietnamese are spatially oriented.
Vietnamese path verbs encode Motion and Path, and at the same time, they convey the spatial
scope of the located object (vào- enter- goes from a wide point to a narrow point). In English,
the spatial meaning is often encoded in the spatial particles.
5. Manner information is more often encoded in English motion verbs themselves and in
adjuncts in Vietnamese.
1.6 Summary
This chapter provides an interesting insight into English verbs of motion and a precise

comparison to Vietnamese equivalents. In this chapter, the syntactic and semantic features of
motion verbs are also explored and some similarities and differences between English and
Vietnamese verbs of motion have been drawn out as the basis for further comparison.

CHAPTER 2
COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS AND THE THEORY OF LEXICALIZATION PATTERNS

2.1 An overview of Cognitive Linguistics and Cognitive Semantics
2.1.1 Cognitive Linguistics and the key concepts
In the eighties, a new approach to the study of language began to develop: Cognitive
Linguistics (CL). This school of linguistics was born as a reaction against formal approaches


22
to language, such as Noam Chomsky‘s Generative Grammar (e.g., 1957, 1965). The birth of
Cognitive Linguistics is also rooted in the emergence of the second generation of Cognitive
Science in the 1970s, which studies the human mind.
Cognitive linguistics […] is an approach to language
that is based on our experience of the world and the
way we perceive and conceptualize it.
(Ungerer & Schmid, 1997: x)

CL emphasizes that the study of language is the study of language use (Fauconier,
2000) because language is an integral part of cognition which reflects the interaction of social,
cultural, psychological, communicative and functional cognitive development and mental
processing. The followings are the key concepts in CLs:
 Conceptualization: Conceptualization refers to the ways people perceive things or
situations. One thing or situation can be conceptualized in different ways, resulting in
different linguistic expressions. Langacker (1991:2) claims that ‗meaning is equated with
conceptualization‘.

 Embodiment: The meaning of language is embodied, that is, the speaker/writer‘s bodily
experience triggers the linguistic expressions. People perceive things or event differently, and
thus, language used by us is a description of human perception of reality.
 Experience: Experience refers to the perception people hold of the world around them.
What we perceived from the world is stored in our mind and turned into knowledge. This
experience is then expressed through languages. The experience of each person may be
different, resulting in different linguistic expressions, depending on the different interpretation
of the event or situation.
 Construal: This term refers to the ways people perceive an event or situation in the reality,
which then become knowledge. Cognitive Linguistics claims that one given situation or
event in the external world can be ‗construed‘ in many ways and those different ways of
encoding a situation constitute different conceptualizations.
 Frame: Charles J. Fillmore (1982) develops a theory of frame semantics which argues that
speakers/readers would not understand words without accessing the entire knowledge relating
to that word. In other words, a word activates a frame of semantic knowledge relating to
specific concept to which it refers.
 Perspectives: Perspectives include ‗orientation‘, ‗vantage point‘, ‗directionality‘,
subjectivity‘, etc. The external world (reality) is perceived differently by different people
from different standpoints due to their differences in their perspective viewpoint. Then,
different concepts are produced in the perceivers, leading to different construals which result
in different linguistic expressions.


23

2.1.2 Cognitive semantics and its main tenets
Cognitive Semantics consider linguistic meaning as a manifestation of conceptual
structure, which emerges from bodily experience. According to Gardenfors (1995), meanings
can not stand apart from the people who use and create them because all linguistic expressions
must come from and be activated by our mind and brains. Cognitive semanticists are guided by

four central assumptions or tenets as summarised by Evans & Green (2006: 157):
a. Conceptual structure is embodied. Our conceptual system arises from our bodily
experiences and is meaningful by virtue of its grounding in these experiences. From this
assumption it follows that any theory of conceptual structure should be consonant with the
ways in which we experience the world around us.
b. Semantic structure is conceptual structure. The meanings conventionally associated with
words and other linguistics units (bound morphemes, constructions, etc) can be equated with
concepts. This is not to say that semantic structure and conceptual structure are identical:
linguistic concepts are only a subset of the possible concepts in the mind of the speaker.
c. Meaning representation is encyclopaedic; words do not represent ‗neatly packaged
bundles of meaning […] but serve as points of access to vast repositories of knowledge‘
(Evans & Green, 2006: 160). In order to understand the meaning of a given utterance, we
draw on our encyclopaedic knowledge relating to the specific situation depicted by the
utterance to construct its meaning.
d. Meaning construction is conceptualisation. Meaning is not fixed but a matter of construal
and conventionalisation. ‗Meaning construction is […] a dynamic process whereby linguistic
units serve as prompts for an array of conceptual operations and the recruitment of background
knowledge. It follows from this view that meaning is a process rather than a discrete ‗thing‘ that
can be ‗packaged‘ by language.‘ (Evans & Green, 2006: 162).
2.1.3 Figure and Ground
The terms ‗Figure‘ and ‗Ground‘ stemmed from Gestalt psychology, but it was Talmy
who gave an easy-to-understand conceptualization of them in language. In volume I of
Toward a Cognitive Semantics (2000), Talmy proposes that in language, there exist two
fundamental cognitive functions: Figure and Ground (2000: 311). This pair of concepts can
be of two objects relating to each other in space in an event of motion or location, and
represented by nominals in a single clause; or of the two events relating to each other in a
temporal, causal, or other type of situation, and represented by the main and subordinate
clauses of a complex sentence. Talmy (2000: 312) draws some specific characterizations of
Figure and Ground in linguistic usage:

24
The Figure is a moving or conceptually movable entity whose
path, site or orientation is conceived as a variable, the
particular value of which is the relevant issue.
The

Ground

is

a

reference

entity,

one

that

has

a

stationary setting relative to a reference frame, with
respect to which the Figure’s path, site or orientation is
characterized.

With regard to the linguistic representation of Figure and Ground, Talmy (2000a: 334)

proposes an order of precedence regarding their occurrence in syntactic structures. The
principle states:
‘In their basic form, the Figure has syntactic precedence
over the Ground’.

This precedence order is determined by the general human conceptualization of the
Figure and Ground in a motion event (Figure- the moving entity and Ground- the stationary
setting). Specifically, Talmy points out:
For nominals in a single clause, this precedence consists
of expression along a case hierarchy. In a non-agentive
clause, the Figure is subject and the Ground is (oblique)
object.

In

an

agentive

clause,

where

the

Agent

is

subject, the Figure is direct object and the Ground is

oblique object.

With regard to Figure and Ground in single sentences, Talmy (2000) presented a list of
‗definitional and associated characteristics‘ as under:
Figure
Definitional
Has unknown spatial
characteristics (or temporal)
properties to be
determined
Associated
 movable
characteristics  smaller
 geometrically
simpler in its
treatment
 more recently on the
scene/ in awareness
 of greater
concern/relevance
 less immediately
perceivable
 more salient, once
perceived

Ground
Acts as a reference
entity, having known
properties that can
characterize the

Figure’s unknowns.
 more permanently
located
 larger
 geometrically more
complex in its treatment
 more familiar/ expected
 of lesser
concern/relevance
 more immediately
perceivable
 more back grounded,
once Figure is perceived


25
 more dependent

 more independent
(Talmy, 2000:315)

The Figure and Ground relation is most obviously seen in sentences with prepositional
phrases. In the sentence ‗The pen rolled off the table’, the Figure is ‗the pen’, a movable object,
the primary one and whose path and site set on the stationary ‗table’ - the Ground, a reference
entity, the second object for ‗the pen’ to move. It can be seen that the relevance of cognitivesemantic categories shows up in relation to a semantic event of motion and location; that is, an
event conceptualized as involving one physical object moving or located with respect to
another.
2.2 The theory of lexicalization patterns
2.2.1 What is lexicalization?
Lexicalization is one of those terms which linguists do not use in the same way and

Lipka (1990: 95) argues that there is no single, correct definition of the term. Lipka puts
lexicalization more succinctly:
…I would like to define lexicalization as the phenomenon
that a complex lexeme once coined tends to become a single
complete lexical unit, a simple lexeme. Through this process
it loses the character of a syntagma to a greater or lesser
degree. (c.f. Lipka 1981b: 120).

(cited in Ogechi, 2006).
Leech (1974:226), Lipka (1977) and Lyons (1977:535) regard lexicalization as the
result of the addition of semantic information and the result of the loss of semantic
information (cited in Bauer, 1983:56). For example, understand provides an instance of
lexicalization due to the loss of semantic information since in current English, it contains
none of the meaning of under and none of the meaning of stand.
In my understanding, new concepts that are given lexical form become part of the
lexicon of a language and the process of establishing a new unit in any specific lexicon is
commonly referred to as lexicalization. In other words, lexicalization is the process by which
concepts are encoded in words.
In volume II of Toward a Cognitive Semantics (2000), Leonard Talmy delves into
the exploration of the systematic relations in language between meaning and overt linguistic
forms, in other words, into the process of lexicalization (Talmy, 2000b: 24):
Lexicalization is involved where a particular meaning
component is found to be in regular association with a
particular morpheme.


26
Talmy‘s basic assumption is that we can isolate elements or components separately
within the domain of meaning and within the domain of linguistic expression. As illustrated,
an English motion verb (surface element) can encode distinct types of semantic information:

Manner (e.g., hop), Cause (e.g., kick) and Path (e.g., exit, enter). On the other hand, the Path
element may be encoded in English by verbs and by prepositions (e.g., out, into), that is, by
two different linguistic elements. Talmy (2000b) claims that some characteristics of
lexicalization is to associate a particular meaning component with a particular morpheme.
Generally, there are three processes in a word‘s lexicalization: lexicalization, deletion (or
zero), and interpretation.
2.2.2 The Motion Event
So far, there have been some interesting cognitive approaches to motion
conceptualization. Fillmore (1985) developed a theory of Frame Semantics in which he
specifies the four basic components of the motion frame: some entity (Theme) starts out in
one place (Source) and ends up in some other place (Goal), having covered some space
between the two (Path). For example:
(1) The policeman rushed
Theme

Motion

away from the door, and toward the crowd.
Path

Source

Path

Goal

Langacker (1987) characterizes motion in terms of a sequenced transformation of
component states situated in time. Specifically, motion is defined as a mover m’s successive
occupation of location l1 at the time moment t1, occupying location l2 at the moment t2,
location l3 at moment t3, and location ln at moment tn. Langacker's framework relies on the

general concepts of mover (trajector), time (moment and sequence), and
location, together with the conceptualizer (cf. Langacker 1987: 145, 166-8).
According to Jackendoff (1990), the general conceptual structure of motion contains a
set of abstract categories such as Thing, Event, State, Action, Place, and Path in an
organization that he calls ‗a function-argument‘ with basic 'conceptual functions' include GO,
STAY, FROM, TO, VIA, LET, CAUSE. For example, the 'motion' sentence The train went
from NY to LA can be analyzed as follows (Jackendoff, 1996: 108):
[FROM ([NY])]
[Event GO ([Thing TRAIN], Path TO ( [LA] ) )]
The most fully specified treatment of motion, however, can be seen in ‗Motion Event‘
proposed by Talmy (2000). In volume II, 2000, Toward a cognitive semantics, Talmy
classifies motion into two types, based on the types of motion found in motion events:
translational motion and self-contained motion. In Talmy‘s (2000b:35) words, ‗[i]n
translational motion, an object‘s basic location shifts from one point to another in space. In


27
self-contained Motion, an object keeps its same, or ―average,‖ location. Self-contained
Motion generally consists of oscillation, rotation, dilation (expansion and contraction),
wiggle, local wander, or rest‘. Let us consider examples:
(15) Ray entered the room = translational motion
(16) The butterfly hovered over the flower = self-contained motion
According to Talmy, an event is a portion of reality which has been delimited or
bounded by the human mind. Moreover, an event can be conceptualised as having a particular
type of internal structure and degree of complexity. Talmy considers a situation containing
motion and the continuation of a stationary location alike as a motion event. He developed an
analysis of basic motion events with four basic semantic components: (i) Figure: the entity
that is moving or located; (ii) Ground: the entity which acts as a spatial reference point for the
motion/location of the figure; (iii) Path: the path of motion of the figure and (iv) Manner: the
manner of motion by which the figure moves along the path (Talmy, 2000b: 25).

In addition, Talmy proposes that he component of Motion (with capital M) refers to the
presence per se of motion or locatedness in the event […]. In addition to these internal
components, a Motion event can be associated with an external Co-event that most often bears
the relation of Manner or of Cause to it. Let us illustrate it with the following example:
(17) Potter walked quietly down the stairs.
Potter is the Figure, the stairs is the Ground and down is the Path. The verb, to walk
expresses simultaneously the fact of Motion (framing event) and the Manner of motion
(Co-event).
With reference to Motion event, Slobin (2004) thinks that Talmy‘s semantic
components are too general. He broke these elements into more fine-grained categories:
• Figure (the moving object):

- Individual or group

- Type: human, animal, bird, etc
- Posture: change of posture at beginning or
end of path
• Ground (entity or entities that the Figure is moving in relation
to)
- Source: initial location
- Goal: final location
- Milestone: location passed along path
- Linear substrate: bridge, etc
- Medium, terrain: field, river, etc
-

Non-solid

darkness, etc

environment:

air,

fog,

storm,


28
• Path (the trajectory of the Figure): -

Direction

of

movement:

forward, up, north, etc
- Deixis: direction with regard to viewpoint
of narrator
- Contour: curved path, zigzag, etc
• Manner (the way in which motion is performed).
- Motor pattern required to execute movement
- Force dynamics
- Rate
-

Means

of

conveyance:

by

animal,

car,

airplane, etc
• Cause (what originates the motion itself)
(cited in Ferez (2008: 112))

Talmy (2000) compares the coding of the two semantic components of the motion
event - manner and path - across languages and developed a three-way typology of how
manner and path are expressed. Talmy‘s original typological classification was defined in
terms of what semantic component is incorporated, in the main verb. He distinguished three
types: manner-incorporating, path-incorporating and ground-incorporating.
The manner-incorporating type expresses manner in the main verb. An example of a
manner-incorporating language, according to Talmy‘s typological classification, is English, i.e He
went into the house, The bottle floated into the cave. Vietnamese also appears to be grouped into
this type, i.e. Nó chạy vào nhà. In these examples, the manner is expressed by the main verb (in
boldface), and the path is expressed by an element other than a verb (in italics), which Talmy calls
a satellite of the main verb.
The path-incorporating type expresses path instead of manner in the main verb. Many
Vietnamese motion verbs are of this type, like in Anh Êy và o nhà (He enters the house), or
Cô ấy đến hôm qua. (She came yesterday) in which the path is expressed by the verbs (in
boldface).
The ground-incorporating type expresses salient properties of the ground in the main

verb such as shape and consistency. An example of a ground-incorporating language
according to Talmy‘s typology is Atsugewi (Talmy 2000: 24), translated into English as:
‗Runny icky material [e.g. guts] are lying on the ground.‘
2.2.3 Satellites
The path is expressed in English by a category which Talmy calls satellite. According
to Talmy (2000b):