<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>From physical to metaphorical motion: A cross-genre approach</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Rosario Caballero</string-name>
          <email>MRrio.Caballero@uclm.es</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano Universidad de Zaragoza</institution>
          ,
          <country country="ES">Spain</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha</institution>
          ,
          <country country="ES">Spain</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <fpage>155</fpage>
      <lpage>157</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Copyright © by the paper's authors. Copying permitted for private and academic purposes. In Vito Pirrelli, Claudia Marzi, Marcello Ferro (eds.): Word Structure and Word Usage. Proceedings of the NetWordS Final Conference, Pisa, March 30-April 1, 2015, published at http://ceur-ws.org</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>
        Talmy (1991, 2000) classifies languages into
verb-framed and satellite-framed types according
to whether the Path of a motion event is
lexicalized as a satellite of the main verb in the clause
or as the verb itself. Thus, in English (and other
S-languages like Dutch or Danish) verbs often
encode rich information concerning Manner,
Cause and/or Movement but need a so-called
satellite to convey the Path of motion. In
contrast, in Spanish and Romance languages in
general, verbs are mainly concerned with trajectory
or Path, and any other additional information
(Manner or Cause of motion) is expressed by
means of sentence constituents playing an
adverbial role. As a result, speakers of verb-framed
and satellite-framed languages appear to exhibit
different rhetorical styles when describing the
same motion event
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10 ref11">(Slobin, 1996, 2004)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>
        Together with dealing with real motion,
Talmy’s work has provided the starting point in
research on (a) fictive motion, i.e. the dynamic
predication of physical yet static entities such as
roads or cables, as in The road climbs over the
hill
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13 ref2 ref3 ref4">(Langacker, 1986; Matsumoto, 1996a;
Talmy, 2000; Matlock and Bergmann, in press)</xref>
        ,
and (b) metaphorical motion, i.e. the dynamic
predication of abstract entities such as the
economy, emotions, and the like as in Jealousy
snaked its way into our relationship
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">(Özçalışkan,
2003, 2004, 2005, 2007; Morris et al., 2007)</xref>
        . In
general, research on fictive and metaphorical
motion has focused on the way the speakers of
different languages typically describe motion
events in everyday, general contexts. Although
yielding interesting results for the overall
characterization of languages, this may result in a
degree of overgeneralization towards the
phenomenon at issue. This is reinforced by the way in
which the data illustrating the research claims are
often presented: the examples often appear in a
decontextualized manner, with scarce or no
mention to the characteristics of the discourse context
or event where they are used, typically, the
discourse genre where they occur). This is
unfortunate since the inclusion and description of the
context of use is critical for the study of motion
patterns –whether real, fictive or metaphorical–
and, above all, their correct interpretation.
2
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Research questions</title>
      <p>In this talk, we discuss the lexicalization patterns
of metaphorical events in genre-specific texts in
English, a satellite-framed language, and
Spanish, a verb-framed language. More concretely,
we explore whether (a) the lexicalization and
rhetorical differences between Spanish and
English discussed in the motion literature are
sustained in genres other than narratives, and (b) the
idiosyncrasy of those genres has any typological
implications and, at the same time, affects the
expressions’ creativity and expressiveness.
3</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Methodology</title>
      <p>We use a 600.000-word corpus comprising
tennis, wine and architecture reviews written in
these two languages. These genres (or genre colony
(Bhatia, 2000)) fall within reviewing practices:
their main goal is to describe and evaluate an
event (a tennis match) or an entity (wine and
buildings) for an audience that may or may not
have any previous knowledge about them, yet is
interested in having an assessment written by a
knowledgeable source. The texts were searched
by hand in order to identify the motion
constructions used in them. The unit of analysis was any
instance concerned with motion –figurative or
otherwise. A second step involved cleaning the
texts and converting them into machine readable
in order to run a concordance program and count
the verb types and number of instances (tokens)
in the three sub-corpora. After identifying the
verbs used in the three genres, they were
classified into two main groups in agreement with two
criteria. First, the semantic information of verb
involved (motion1-when the verb includes
motion information in its semantic description and
motion2-when the verb, despite not being a
motion verb per se, can be reinterpreted as such due
to the construction it is used in) and, second, the
motion elements (Path-the trajectory or course
followed by the moving object, Manner-the way
in which motion is performed) present in the
examples. Figure 1 illustrates the coding.
As far as our first goal is concerned, our results
show that the lexicalization and rhetorical
patterns described for Spanish and English are
maintained in the specific contexts explored, and
therefore, results are congruent with research
done on metaphorical motion events in general
contexts. However, the data also yield interesting
insights: metaphorical motion instances found in
specific contexts are more expressive and
abundant with regard to Manner than what is the case
in general uses of language. This is particularly
noteworthy in the Spanish data, whose
expressivity contrasts with the general tendency to omit
Manner and other details of motion events in
other contexts. For instance, examples such as
those in (1) are frequently used in our corpus:
(1a) architecture
La senda de exhibiciones de arte nurágico se
desliza entre ambas pieles del edificio
permitiendo una visualización más íntima de las obras
‘The exhibition path of nuragic art slides
between the two skins of the building allowing a
more intimate visualization of the works’
(1b) wine
En boca tiene una magnifica entrada, suave,
sabroso y equilibrado […], aunque en el paso
sobresalen rasgos vegetales y se precipita hacia un
final en el que predominan notas tostadas y
amargas
‘Smooth, tasty and balanced, it enters the mouth
powerfully […] although some vegetal notes
peek mid journey and it plunges towards a finish
where toasty and bitter notes predominate’
(1c) tennis
Murray se pasea en el ágora de Valencia
‘Murray strolls in the agora in Valencia’
This expressivity is more outstanding in the case
of English: the data from the specific corpus not
only reinforce the high expressivity and richness
of this language with regard of Manner, but add
novel verbs to those susceptible to being used in
the description of motion events in other contexts
(e.g. hobble, sally forth, waltz…), hence showing
the creativity and –almost– endless possibilities
of this language in this respect.</p>
      <p>With respect to our second goal, we found that
knowledge of the genre where the expressions
are used is critical to correctly understand and
explain metaphorical motion instances. This is
particularly salient when comparing the use of
the same verb in three different genres: indeed, a
single verb may foreground aspects of a given
situation irrelevant in a different context. For
instance, the verb tumble in (2):
(2a) architecture
A stair tumbles down from this first floor incision
onto the man-made island.
(2b) wine
The fruit shows well-ripened apples and peaches
all the way into pineapples and mangoes,
offering up a cascade of flavors that tumble across
the palate.
(2c) tennis
Andy Murray has been sent tumbling out of AO
2008 by Frenchman Tsonga
The property of tumble shared by all these
examples is ‘uncontrolled’, but this lack of control has
a different interpretation in each genre. Thus,
although in (2a) tumble suggests a certain lack of
order, the main concern of the verb is to convey
the visual force of the stair thus described, which
somehow overwhelms those gazing at it. In (2b),
the ‘uncontrolled’ property does not suggest a
certain disorder or chaos of a wine’s gustatory
properties; rather, it expresses a sensory
overflow or gustatory richness perceived by this critic
as a positive trait of a complex wine. Finally, in
(2c) the verb not only conveys Tsonga’s
convincing win, but Murray’s pain and shame when
losing to an inferior player ranking-wise.</p>
      <p>Examples like these are interesting in three
respects. First, although the information conveyed
by motion verbs may be perfectly obvious for
architects, tennis fans and wine aficionados and
critics, this may not be the case for people
outside these communities. Hence, the need to
underline the importance of bringing the notion of
acculturation to the centre of metaphor research,
i.e. the relevance of taking into account all the
factors that shape a given culture and its
characteristic genres within a broader cultural
panorama. Second, they problematize some of the
views on both fictive and metaphorical motion
discussed by cognitive scholars: (a) the trajectors
and verbs involved depart from those typically
described in fictive motion, and (b) the
constructions dealing with buildings and wines do not
comply with the unidirectional
concrete-ontoabstract quality of the metaphorical mappings
described in, for instance, the expression of
financial issues or emotions, but involve concrete
sources and targets. This suggests that fictiveness
as opposed to metaphoricity may be a question of
degree, yet this can only be ascertained by
considering all the factors underlying the use of
motion constructions in communication — from the
trajectors involved to the reasons motivating
their use. Third, while English and Spanish differ
in the expression of real motion events, their
differences are less dramatic in the expression of
figurative motion which, again, points to the
impact of culture and genre in the language use.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Acknowledgements</title>
      <p>This research has been supported by ESF Short
Visit Grants to both authors (NetWords
09-RNO089, European Science Foundation) and by the
Spanish Government (MovEsII,
FFI2013-45553C3-2-P; FFI2013-45553-C3-1-P).</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vijay</surname>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bhatia</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>1999</year>
          .
          <article-title>Integrating products, processes, purposes and participants in professional writing</article-title>
          . In C.
          <article-title>Candlin and</article-title>
          K. Hyland (eds.),
          <source>Writing: Texts, Processes and Practices</source>
          ,
          <volume>21</volume>
          -
          <fpage>40</fpage>
          . London: Longman.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ronald W Langacker</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>1986</year>
          .
          <article-title>Abstract motion</article-title>
          .
          <source>Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society</source>
          ,
          <volume>12</volume>
          :
          <fpage>455</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>471</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Yo</given-names>
            <surname>Matsumoto</surname>
          </string-name>
          . 1996a.
          <article-title>Subjective motion and English and Japanese verbs</article-title>
          .
          <source>Cognitive Linguistics</source>
          <volume>7</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>183</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>226</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Yo</given-names>
            <surname>Matsumoto</surname>
          </string-name>
          . 1996b.
          <article-title>How abstract is subjective motion? A comparison of access path expressions and coverage path expressions</article-title>
          . In A. Goldberg (ed.),
          <source>Conceptual Structure, Discourse and Language</source>
          ,
          <volume>359</volume>
          -
          <fpage>373</fpage>
          . Stanford: CSLI Publications.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Michael W. Morris</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Oliver J</given-names>
          </string-name>
          . Sheldon, Daniel R. Ames and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Maia J.</given-names>
            <surname>Young</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2007</year>
          .
          <article-title>Metaphors and the market: Consequences and preconditions of agent and object metaphors in stock market commentary</article-title>
          .
          <source>Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes</source>
          ,
          <volume>102</volume>
          :
          <fpage>174</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>192</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Şeyda</given-names>
            <surname>Özçalışkan</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2003</year>
          .
          <article-title>Metaphorical motion in crosslinguistic perspective: A comparison of English and Turkish</article-title>
          .
          <source>Metaphor and Symbol</source>
          ,
          <volume>18</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>189</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>228</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Şeyda</given-names>
            <surname>Özçalışkan</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2004</year>
          .
          <article-title>Encoding the manner, path, ground components of a metaphorical motion event</article-title>
          .
          <source>Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics</source>
          ,
          <volume>2</volume>
          :
          <fpage>73</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>102</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Şeyda</given-names>
            <surname>Özçalışkan</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2005</year>
          .
          <article-title>Metaphor meets typology: Ways of moving metaphorically in English and Turkish</article-title>
          .
          <source>Cognitive Linguistics</source>
          ,
          <volume>16</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>207</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>246</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Şeyda</given-names>
            <surname>Özçalışkan</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2007</year>
          .
          <article-title>Metaphors we move by: Children's developing understanding of metaphorical motion in typologically distinct languages</article-title>
          .
          <source>Metaphor and Symbol</source>
          ,
          <volume>22</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>147</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>168</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dan</surname>
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Slobin</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>1996</year>
          .
          <article-title>Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish</article-title>
          . In M. Shibatani and
          <string-name>
            <surname>S. A</surname>
          </string-name>
          . Thompson (eds.),
          <source>Grammatical Constructions: Their Form and Meaning</source>
          ,
          <volume>195</volume>
          -
          <fpage>219</fpage>
          . New York: Oxford University Press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dan</surname>
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Slobin</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2004</year>
          .
          <article-title>The many ways to search for a frog</article-title>
          . In S. Strömqvist and L. Verhoeven (eds.),
          <source>Relating Events in Narrative. Typological and Contextual Perspectives</source>
          ,
          <fpage>219</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>257</lpage>
          . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Leonard</given-names>
            <surname>Talmy</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>1991</year>
          .
          <article-title>Path to realization: A typology of event conflation</article-title>
          .
          <source>Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society</source>
          ,
          <volume>17</volume>
          :
          <fpage>480</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>519</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Leonard</given-names>
            <surname>Talmy</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2000</year>
          .
          <article-title>Toward a Cognitive Semantics</article-title>
          . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>