Motion verbs in the teaching and learning of FL.

1. Motion verbs in the teaching and
learning of FLs: contributions of
Cognitive Linguistics
University of the State of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)
Tânia Gastão Saliés

2. GOAL
 Discuss how Cognitive Linguistics may contribute to the
teaching and learning of foreign languages
 Case of MOTION verbs

3. Questions
 How do learners of a FL express motion events in a target
language that is typologically different from their L1?
 How should we go about teaching the expression of MOTION
in foreign language classrooms?

4. How ?
 Contrastive perspective
 Cognitive Linguistics: premisses and concepts
 Perspectivization
 Figure-ground asymmetry
 Profiling
 Categorization
 Associated pedagogical implications

5. Cognitive Linguistics
 Meaning is embodied (Lakoff, 1987): we make meaning as
we interact in and with the world.
 Ex: SOURCE - PATH – GOAL schema
subjective
reflects how we conceptualize our everyday experiences
and how we choose to frame and talk about
communicative events

6. Concepts
 Perspectivization: how we frame a communicative
event , guiding interlocutors’ attention to certain aspects
of the discourse and offseting others.
Figure-ground assymetry
(Langacker, 1990, p. 61)

7. Example
 Same discourse participants; same conceptual content;
but two meaning effects
 1) Althought the GIP has not been growing, the employment
rate is high.
 II) Although the employment rate is high, the GIP has not been
growing.
The figure-ground asymmetry makes
different discourse entities perceptually
salient

8. Profiling
 Determines the cognitive salience of aspects that are
part of a given conceptual base
 The boy kicks the glass (ACTION)
 The glass has been kicked (ACTION and PATIENT)
 The glass was broken in tiny little pieces (CHANGE OF
STATE)
 The glass is in pieces (STATE)

9. Categories
 mental structures that organize our experiences in
classes and that are part of our cognitive models
(Lakoff, 1990, p. 153)

10. categorization
 How we tag and pack different entities as members of the
same category
 Central exemplars are more representative for the
frequency with which they occur, their function and
atributes -- perceptually salient . Consequently, they are
easier to recall from memory and process.
Prototypicality

11. Intercultural effects
 CATEGORIES: the cognitive models that structure
category formation reflect how different individuals and
cultures frame reality -- expression of MOTION

12. Intercultural effects
 Cultures play differently with the figure-ground
asymmetry
 FARSI
 My book was made lost vs I lost my book
/iketabamragomkardan/
 Action is the figure (profiled)

13. MOTION VERBS
 Languages represent MOTION differently
 Portuguese, Spanish, French, Greek V-languages
 verbs signal PATH
 Subir, descer, entrar
 Additional information about MANNER OF MOTION shows separately
 Subir devagar
 Subir saltitando
 German, English, slavic and celtic languages S-languages
 Verbs signal manner of MOTION and satellites (ADvP, verb particles)
signal PATH
 To walk in - hereinkommen
 To dash in - einwerfen
 To trudge in - einschleppen

14. MOTION VERBS
 S-languages differ fromV-languages in the attention that
they throw on manner as a dimension of motion events.
 One factor that seems to influence attention to manner is
the lexicalization patterns of a given language.
 V-languages may or not signal MANNER of MOTION
 verb in the gerund
 adverbial phrase etc

15. MOTION VERBS
 Schlich er sich leise heimlich aus seinem Terrarium
 Saiu rastejando sorrateiramente do seu terrário
 He sneaked silently out of his terrarium

16. MOTION VERBS
 Although both types of languages allow specification of
the PATH by sattelites, each one shows a prototypical
construction which is easier to process and recall
 Cline: + V-languages ------ + S-languages
 Discursive-cognitive effects that emerge from
attention given to MANNER OF MOVEMENT

17. Why?
 Translation (Zweig, 1998)
 Events originally written in German, when translated to French,
lost aspects related to MANNER of MOTION
(Slobin, 2006, p. 1)
 Eine Stunde schlich ich noch um das Haus herum … (Zweig, 1998,
p. 106).
 SLEICHEN – Profiles both the action and the way of walking, trudging
 Une heure durant, je fis le tour de la maison … (Zweig, 1998, p.
107).
 FAIRE LE TOUR – profiles the action only
Zweig, S. (1998 [1922]). Der Amokläufer / Amok [Traduction d’Alzir Hella et Olivier Bournac]. Paris: Librairie Générale
Française.

18. Why?
 Spanish: […] cuando don Quijote salio de la venta…
[Quando don Quixote saiu da hospedaria]
(Don Quixote, Miguel de Cervantes)
 German: […] als don Quixote aus der Schenke ritt…
[Quando Quixote saiu da hospedaria cavalgando]
Slobin (2004) shows that the translation fromV-languages to
S- languages also confirms his hypothesis: Translators
normally add MANNER OF MOTION.

19. English An owl flew out of here [3 anos de idade]
The owl popped out [5 anos de idade]
An owl flew out of the hole in the tree [adulto]
German Da kam 'ne Eule rausgeflogen [5 anos de idade]
Weil da eine Eule plotzlich rausflattert [9 anos de idade]
French Le hibou i sort de son trou [4 anos de idade]
Y a un hibou qui sort [5 anos de idade]
Spanish Sale un buho [5 anos de idade]
Del agujero salió un buho [adulto]
Spontaneous narratives of the book
Frog, where are you?

20. These studies....
 Speakers of V-languages and S-languages profile different aspects of
the context when they describe MOTION
 According to Slobin (2004), we perceive and process faster usages
which are salient (prototypical) in our everyday use of the language.
 English and German: speakers tend to signal MANNER OF MOTION by
the choice of verb
 Romance language: speakers tend to signal PATH by the choice of verb
 Swiss German speakers seem to do it less frequently than French speakers (V-
language) – Berthele, 2004
 Prototypicality effect

21. Prototypicality effects
 The ammount of attention paid to MANNER OF
MOTION varies depending on the pattern of
lexicalization which is prototypical in the language
MANNER OF MOTION SALIENCE

22. IMPLICATIONS
 S-LANGUAGES speakers, because they signal MANNER
and MOTION together, have developed larger
inventories of verbs that profile MANNER OF MOTION
 German
 English
 These verbs express details of the type of MOTION as
opposed to more general verbs that simply signal
MOTION.

23. Examples
Level 1:
Basic category
MOTION VERBS
Level 2:
Subordinate category
MOTION VERBS
Andar (gehen)
WALK
laufen [andar correndo]
eilen [andar com muita pressa]
flitzen [andar voando]
sausen [andar tão rápido que
chega a zunir]
Saltar (springen)
JUMP
überspringen [pular por cima de algo]
tauchen [pular de cabeça em uma
situação]
hüpfen [dar pulos pequenos]
hopsen [dar pulos pequenos e
irregulares]

24. Examples
Level 1:
Basic category
MOTION VERBS
Level 2:
Subordinate category
MOTION VERBS (60 types of walk)
Andar (gehen)
WALK
1. Amble: walk easily and/or aimlessly
2. Bounce: walk energetically
3. Clump: walk heavily and/or clumsily
4. Falter: walk unsteadily
5. Lumber: walk slowly and heavily
6. Lurch: walk slowly but with sudden
movements, or furtively
7. Mince: walk delicately
8. Nip: walk briskly or lightly; also used
colloquially in the phrase “nip (on) over” to
refer to a brief walk to a certain destination,
as if on an errand

25. Examples
Level 1:
Basic category
MOTION VERBS
Level 2:
Subordinate category
MOTION VERBS
Saltar (springen)
JUMP
1. Hop : to jump with the same foot within
a short distance
2. Leap: to give a big jump, starting with
one foot and ending with the other
3. Vault: to jump over an obstacle with the
help of a stick or hand
4. Skip: to jump as if playing, with gracious
movements
5. Bound: to jump with long and vigorous
movement

26. Effects on the learning process
 Meaning nuances present in level 2 verbs (that profile
MANNER OF MOTION) ARE NOT GENERALLY
NOTICED (Schmidt, 1990;2010) by learners who speakV-
languages as their mother tongues.
 Ex. Brazilians learning German / English as a FL
 The learning process begins by basic, more central
categories which are easier to process and retrieve from
memory.
 Tendency to use verbs that signal PATH only
 Use a low number of MANNER OF MOTION verbs (level 2)
 Tendency to use level 1 verbs in any context -- generalization

27. Role of instruction: promote affordances
 Input frequency
 Cognitive salience
 Teacher
 Materials
 Usage-based models
 Prototipicality in the target language
noticing

28. Role of instruction
 Break cognitive habits (Littlemore, 2008)
 Learn new ways of categorizing
 Profiling different aspects of context as they enter the figure-
ground asymmetry
 Learn about perspectivization in the target language
(awareness raising)
 Direct the focus of attention

29. Role of instruction
 Cognitive effort is a necessary condition for a successful
learning process (Schmidt, 1984; Ellis & Robinson, 2008)
 Explicit instruction: Focus on form
 The learner needs to notice which cues are at play and why
 Attention mechanisms need to be directed to aspects of the
input which are being profiled by the usage models

30. Role of Instruction
 Explicit instruction about how de FL expresses MOTION
vs. PROTOTYPICAL usages in the L1 may contribute to
accelerate interlanguage development as it relates to the
learning and use of MOTION verbs.
 Situated linguistic exposure to models of usage is still
necessary ----- frequency
 Form-function mappings:
PATH / MANNER OF MOTION FORM

31. Pedagogical Practice
 Direct attention to aspects of the conceptual base
profiled --- by contrast with aspects profiled by L1
 Call attention to how dictionaries tend to pack in the
same bag forms that profile different aspects of the
conceptual base in the FL
 Use dictionary entries to reflect about the role of profiling in
the conceptual organization of thought by native speakers of
the FL.

32. Final remarks
 Use of MANNER OF MOTION in S-languages or PATH
followed by modifiers inV-languages seems to be part of a
development process
 Given time, linguistic exposure to usage models and practice
in situated contexts
 Such process may be accelerated by explicit instruction
as illustrated by the literature on focus on form
(Lightbown and Spada, 2013)

33. Vielen Danke!

34. References
BERMAN, Ruth; SLOBIN, D. I; Relating Events in Narrative: a Crosslinguistic Developmental Study. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc Inc., 1994.
BERTHELE, R. The typology of motion and posture verbs: a variationist account. In: Bernd Kortmann (org.), Dialectology Meets Typology. Dialect Grammar from a Cross-Linguistic
Perspective. Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 2004. Vol.153, pp 93-126.
CADIERNO, T. Learning to talk about motion in a foreign language. In: ROBINSON, P.; ELLIS N.C. (orgs.) Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. New York: Routledge, 2008. p.239-275.
CADIERNO, T.; LUND, K. Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition: motion events in a typological perspective. In: B.Van Patten; J. Williams; S. Rott e M. Overstreet (orgs.)
Form-meaning Connections in Second Language Acquisition. Mahwah, NH: Lawrence Erlbaum. 2004. p. 139-154.
CADIERNO, T.; RUIZ, L. Motion events in Spanish L2 acquisition. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, v. 4, p. 183-216, 2006.
CHOI, S; LANTOLF, J. Representation and embodiment of meaning in L2 communication: motion events in the speech and gesture of advanced L2 Korean and L2 English speakers. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, v. 30, n. 2, p. 191-224, 2008.
ELLIS, N.C. Reflections on frequency effects in language processing. Studies in second language acquisition v. 24, n.2, p.143-188, 2002.
ELLIS, N.C. The processes of second language acquisition. In: B. VanPatten, J. Williams, S. Rott, & M. Overstreet (Orgs.), Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition Mahwah, NJ. :
Erlbaum, 2004. p. 49-76.
ELLIS, N.C.; ROBINSON, P. An introduction to cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and language instruction. In: ROBINSON, P.; ELLIS N.C. (orgs.) Handbook of Cognitive
Linguistics. New York: Routledge. 2008.
EVANS, V.; GREEN, M. Cognitive Linguistics: an Introduction. New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum. 2006.
GASS, S. Integrating research areas: A framework for second language studies. Applied Linguistics v.9, p.198-217, 1988.
LAKOFF, G. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: what Categories reveal about the Mind. Paperback edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990.
LAKOFF, G. Philosophy in the Flesh: the Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. Basic Books, 1999.
LANGACKER, R. Concept, Image, and Symbol. The Cognitive Basis of Grammar, Cognitive Linguistics Research v.1, Berlin - New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1990.
LANGACKER, R.W. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, v. 1, Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987.
LANTOLF, J. P. Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford University, 2000.
LARSEN-FREEMAN, D. Language acquisition and language use from a chaos/complexitytheory perspective. In: C. Kramsch (org.): LanguageAcquisition and Language Socialization.
London: Continuum, 2002. p.33-46.
LEWANDOWSKA-TOMASZCZYK, B. Polysemy, prototypes, and radial categories. In: Dirk Geeraerts& Hubert Cuyckens (orgs.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
LIGHTBOWN, P.; SPADA, N. How Languages are Learned. Oxford Handbook for Language Teachers. 4 edição. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
LITTLEMORE, J. Applying Cognitive Linguistics to Second Language Learning and Teaching. Palgrave MacMillan, 2008.
MAC LAURY, R. E. (1995). Vantage theory. In: J.R. Taylor e R.MacLaury (Orgs.) Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World. New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1995. p. 231-276.
MAYER, M. Frog, where are you? Dial Press. 1969.

35. References
NAVARRO, S.; NICOLADIS, E. Describing motion events in adult L2 Spanish narratives. In: D. Eddington (Org.), Selected Proceedings of the 6th
Conference on the acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as first and second languages. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project,
2005. p. 102-107.
RAMIREZ, L. Manner of movement verb. Dissertação de mestrado. Universidade de Birmingham, 2006.
ROBINSON, P.; ELLIS, N.C. (orgs.). Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. New York: Routlege. 2008.
ROSH, E. Principles of categorization. In: E. Rosch and B.B. Lloyd (Orgs.), Cognition and categorization. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1978. p.27-48.
ROSH, E., E MERVIS, C.B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. CognitivePsychology, v. 7, p. 573-605.
SCHMIDT, R. Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001, p. 3-32.
SCHMIDT, R. Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. In W. M. Chan, S. Chi, K. N. Cin, J. Istanto, M. Nagami, J. W. Sew, T.
Suthiwan, & I. Walker (orgs.), Proceedings of CLaSIC 2010, Singapura: National University of Singapore, Centre for Language Studies. Dezembro.
2010.
SLOBIN, D. Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In: M.Shibatani e S.A. Thompson (Orgs), Grammatical Constructions: their
Form and Meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. p. 195-217.
SLOBIN, D. Verbalized events: a dynamic approcach to linguistic relativity and determinism. In: S. Niemeier e R. Dirven (orgs.), Evidence for
Linguistic Relativity. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2000. p. 107-138.
SLOBIN, D. How people move: discourse effects of linguistic typology. In: C.L.Moder; A. Martinovic-zic, Discourse across Languages and Cultures.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2004. V. 68. Studies in Language Companion. p.195-210.
SLOBIN, D. What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition. In: M. Hickmann e S. Robert (Orgs.)
Space in Languages: Linguistic Systems and Cognitive Categories. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2006. p. 59-81.
TALMY, L. Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms. In: T. Shoepen (org.), Language typology and semantic description. v. 3:
Grammatical categories and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1985. p. 35-149.
TALMY, L. Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000.
TAYLOR, John R. Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in linguistic theory. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.
TOMASELLO, M. Constructing a language. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press. 2003.
VAN PATTEN, B. Input processing in SLA. In: B.VanPatten (Org.), Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum, 2004. p. 1-31.
VAN PATTEN, J. WILLIAMS, S. ROTT & M. OVERSTREET (Orgs.). Form-meaning Connections in Second Language Acquisition. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum, 2004.
WITTGENSTEIN, L. Philosophical investigations. Bilíngue Alemão/Inglês. G.E.M. Anscombe e Rush Rhees (orgs.). Trad. G.E.M. Anscombe. Oxford:
Blackwell, 1958.

36. Q & A