DOI: https://doi.org/10.11649/cs.2015.008

Force Dynamics of Verb Complementation

Jacek Woźny

Abstract


Force Dynamics of Verb Complementation

The concepts of motion and force are both extensively discussed in cognitive linguistics literature. But they are discussed separately. The first usually in the context of ‘motion situations’ (Talmy, Slobin, Zlatev), the other as part of the Force Dynamics framework, which was developed by Talmy. The aim of this paper is twofold: first, to argue that the concepts of force and motion should not be isolated but considered as two inseparable parts of force-motion events. The second goal is to prove that the modified Force Dynamics (force-motion) framework can be used for precise characterization of the verb complementation patterns. To this end, a random sample of 50 sentences containing the verb ‘went’ is analyzed, demonstrating the differences between the categories of intensive and intransitive complementation with respect to the linguistically coded parameters of force and motion.


Keywords


verb complementation; Force Dynamics; motion situations

Full Text:

PDF (in English)

References


Boye, K. (2001). The force-dynamic core meaning of Danish modal verbs. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 33(1), 19–66. http://doi.org/10.1080/03740463.2001.10412194

Brandt, P. (1992). La charpente modale du sens: Pour une simio-linguistique morphogenitique et dynamique. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Champagne, A., Klopfer, L., & Anderson, J. (1980). Factors influencing the learning of classical mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 48(12), 1074–1079. http://doi.org/10.1119/1.12290

Da Silva, A. S. (2003). Image schemas and category coherence: The case of the Portuguese verb deixar. In H. Cuyckens, R. Dirven, & J. R. Taylor (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics (2003rd ed., Vol. 23, pp. 281–322). Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Retrieved from http://www.degruyter.com/view/books/9783110219074/9783110219074.281/9783110219074.281.xml

diSessa, A. A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G. Forman & P. Pufall (Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age (pp. 49–70). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2–3), 105–225. http://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.1985.9649008

diSessa, A. A. (1996). What do ``just plain folk'' know about physics? In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The handbook of education and human development: New models of learning, teaching, and schooling (pp. 709–730). Oxford: Blackwell.

Halloun, I. A. & Hestenes, D. (1985). The initial knowledge state of college physics students. American Journal of Physics, 53(11), 1043–1056. http://doi.org/10.1119/1.14030

Hammer, D. (1995). Student inquiry in a physics class discussion. Cognition and Instruction, 13(3), 401–430. http://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1303_3

Jackendoff, R. (1990). Semantic structures. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination and reason. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Kuźniak, M. & Woźny, J. (2014). Linguistic force dynamics and physics. Warsaw Studies in Language and Literature, 17, 145–160.

Lakoff, G. (n.d.). Conceptual Metaphor Home Page. Retrieved 29 October 2012, from http://cogsci.berkeley.edu/lakoff/sources/

Lakoff, G. & Núñez, R. (2000). Where Mathematics Comes From How the Embodied Mind Brings Mathematics into Being. New York: Basic Books.

Larkin, J., McDermott, J., Simon, D. P., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems. Science, 208(4450), 1335–1342. http://doi.org/10.1126/science.208.4450.1335

McCloskey, M. (1983). Naive theories of motion. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 299–324). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Reed, M. (n.d.). Lavender and Old Lace. Retrieved 13 April 2014, from http://www.publicbookshelf.com/romance/lavender-lace/garden-4

Shakespeare, W. (n.d.). Merchant of Venice (Act 3, Scene I). Retrieved 1 May 2014, from http://shakespeare.mit.edu/merchant/merchant.3.1.html

Slobin, D. I. (2003). Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind (pp. 157–192). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Sweetser, E. (1982). A proposal for uniting deontic and epistemic modals. In Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley, Calif.: Berkeley Linguistics Society.

Sweetser, E. (1991). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Talmy, L. (1976). Semantic causative types: The grammar of causative constructions. In M. Shibatani (Ed.), Syntax and semantics (pp. 43–116). New York: Academic Press.

Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalisation patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (pp. 57–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Talmy, L. (1988). Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12(1), 49–100. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1201_2

Talmy, L. (2000). Toward cognitive semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Vandenberghe, W. (2002). Instigative setting-constructions: Force dynamic research on ‘new’ types of agency. Leuvense Bijdragen, 90, 365–390.

Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Woźny, J. (2010). The prototype of the linguistic force Dynamics schema. Anglica Wratislaviensia, 48, 135–148.

Woźny, J. (2013). Force-motion schemas in metaphors of motion. Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, 130, 351–368.

Zlatev, J. (2007). Spatial semantics. In H. Cuyckens & D. Geeraerts (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 318–350). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zlatev, J., Blomberg, J., & David, C. (2010). Translocation, language and the categorization of experience. In V. Evans & P. Chilton (Eds.), Language, space and cognition (pp. 389–418). London: Equinox.

Zlatev, J., Blomberg, J., & Magnusson, U. (2012). Metaphor and subjective experience: A study of motion-emotion metaphors in English, Swedish, Bulgarian, and Thai. In A. Foolen, U. M. Lüdtke, T. P. Racine, & J. Zlatev (Eds.), Moving ourselves, moving Others: Motion and emotion in intersubjectivity, consciousness and language (pp. 423–450). London: Equinox. (Consciousness & Emotion Book Series, 6). Retrieved from https://benjamins.com/catalog/ceb.6.17zla




Copyright (c) 2015 Jacek Woźny

License URL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/pl/