Path and Manner Saliency in Polish in Contrast with Russian : A Cognitive Linguistic Study [1 ed.] 9789004360358, 9789004360334

Citation preview

Path and Manner Saliency in Polish in Contrast with Russian

Brill’s Studies in Language, Cognition and Culture Series Editors Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (Cairns Institute, James Cook University) R.M.W. Dixon (Cairns Institute, James Cook University) N.J. Enfield (University of Sydney)

VOLUME 15

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/bslc

Path and Manner Saliency in Polish in Contrast with Russian A Cognitive Linguistic Study By

Joanna Łozińska

LEIDEN | BOSTON

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Łozińska, Joanna, author. Title: Path and manner saliency in Polish in contrast with Russian : a  cognitive linguistic study / by Joanna Lozinska. Description: Leiden ; Boston Brill, [2018] | Series: Brill’s studies in  language, cognition and culture; volume 15 | Includes bibliographical  references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2017051002 (print) | LCCN 2017058131 (ebook) | ISBN  9789004360358 (E-book) | ISBN 9789004360334 (hardback : alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Polish language—Grammar, Comparative—Russian. | Russian  language—Grammar, Comparative—Polish. | Motion in language. | Cognitive  grammar. | Comparative linguistics Classification: LCC PG6099 (ebook) | LCC PG6099 .L69 2018 (print) | DDC  491.8/55—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017051002

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface. issn 1879-5412 isbn 978-90-04-36033-4 (hardback) isbn 978-90-04-36035-8 (e-book) Copyright 2018 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Rodopi, Brill Sense and Hotei Publishing. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

To Nina and Kuba, with love

∵

Contents Acknowledgements xI List of Figures and Tables xii Introduction 1

PART 1 1 Theoretical Assumptions of Cognitive Linguistics 9 1.1 Linguistic Meaning in Cognitive Grammar 9 1.1.1 Encyclopedic Meaning of Motion Verbs 11 1.2 Construal 14 1.3 Langacker’s Approach to the Verb Schema 16 1.4 Deixis of Motion Verbs 21 1.5 Viewpoint and Perspective in Spatial Language 25 2 About Motion 29 2.1 A Conceptual Typology of Motion 29 2.1.1 Motion Event 29 2.1.1.1 The Semantic Component of Path 30 2.1.1.2 Satellite- and Verb-Framed Languages 35 2.1.1.3 Typological Shift 37 2.1.1.4 “Thinking for Speaking” Hypothesis 38 2.1.2 Pourcel’s Conceptual Typology 39 2.1.3 Zlatev’s Holistic Spatial Semantics 40 2.2 A Taxonomy of Motion 41 2.2.1 Translational vs. Self-Contained Motion 41 2.2.2 Bounded vs. Unbounded Motion 42 2.2.3 Self-Propelled vs. Caused Motion 43 2.2.4 Spatial Frames of Reference 44 2.2.5 Factive vs. Fictive Motion 46 3 Path and Manner Coded in Motion Verbs and Verbal Prefixes 49 3.1 Introduction 49 3.2 Image Schemas and their Combinations 49 3.3 Image Schematic Approach to the Prefixation of Motion Verbs 54 3.4 Spatial Prefixes in Polish and Russian 58

viii

Contents

3.4.1 Lexicalization of Perlative Motion in Polish and Russian 63 3.4.2 Lexicalization of Ablative Motion in Polish and Russian 64 3.5 Prepositional Phrases 66 3.6 The Semantic Component of Manner 69 3.6.1 Manner Component Included in Motion Verbs: A Cross-Linguistic Account 70 3.7 Force Dynamics of Motion Verbs 74 3.8 Conclusions 77

PART 2 4 Lexicalization of Manner and Path in Polish 81 4.1 Introduction 81 4.2 Data Analysis 82 4.2.1 Method 82 4.2.2 Criteria for the Selection of Motion Verbs 82 4.2.3 Results: Types of Motion Verbs and their Frequencies 85 4.2.4 Description of Lexicalization Patterns 88 4.3 Lexicalization of Manner 90 4.3.1 Motion Verbs of Manner 90 4.3.2 Axiological Aspect of Motion Verbs 96 4.3.3 Lexicalization of Manner Outside the Verb 98 4.3.3.1 Subordination of Manner 100 4.4 Lexicalization of the Path 102 4.4.1 Motion Verbs of Path 102 4.4.2 Lexicalization of the Path Outside the Verb 104 4.4.2.1 Motion In and Out of a Container 105 4.4.2.2 Deictic Motion 109 4.4.2.3 Motion Along the Path 112 4.4.2.4 Factors Contributing to the Frequency of the Use of Prefixes 117 4.5 Force Dynamics of Polish Motion Verbs 119 4.6 Vertical motion 121 4.7 Conclusions 123 5 Lexicalization of Manner and Path in Polish and Russian. A Comparative Study of Translated Texts 125 5.1 Introduction 125

Contents

ix

5.2 Why Study Translated Texts? 125 5.3 Focus of the Analysis 126 5.4 Method 127 5.5 Results: Types and Tokens of Polish and Russian Motion Verbs 128 5.6 Findings 131 5.6.1 The Comparison of Semantic Components Conflated in Polish and Russian Motion Verbs 131 5.7 Rendering Specific Spatial Situations in Polish and Russian 133 5.7.1 Escape Verbs in Polish and Russian 133 5.7.2 Moving Back Verbs in Polish and Russian 136 5.7.3 Recede Verbs in Polish and Russian 137 5.7.4 Return Verbs in Polish and Russian 138 5.7.5 Approach Verbs in Polish and Russian 139 5.7.6 Ascend Verbs in Polish and Russian 140 5.7.7 Enter/Exit Verbs 141 5.8 Conflation of Manner in the Verb 143 5.9 Conflation of Path in the Verb 146 5.10 Path Lexicalization Outside the Verb 149 5.10.1 Motion Into and Out of a Container 150 5.10.2 Motion Towards and Away from the Speaker 154 5.11 Force Dynamics of Polish and Russian Motion Verbs— a comparison 158 5.12 Lexicalization of Motion Along a Vertical Scale 160 5.13 Conclusions 163 6 Elicitation Tasks 164 6.1 Study 1: Access to the Mental Lexicon of Motion Verbs 165 6.1.1 Introduction 165 6.1.2 Method 166 6.1.3 Results 167 6.1.3.1 The Polish Data 167 6.1.3.2 The Russian data 167 6.1.4 Findings 170 6.2 Study 2: Descriptions of Motion Events 172 6.2.1 Introduction 172 6.2.2 Method 173 6.2.2.1 Procedure 174 6.2.2.2 Subjects 175 6.2.2.3 Stimuli 175

x

Contents

6.2.3 Findings 175 6.2.3.1 Length of Descriptions 175 6.2.3.2 Expression of Manner and Path in the Verb 177 6.2.4 Description of Lexicalization Patterns 181 6.2.4.1 Lexicalization of Manner 181 6.2.4.2 Lexicalization of Path Outside the Verb 186 6.3 Conclusions 196 7 Conclusions and General Discussion 198 Appendix 203 Bibliography 217 Author Index 228 Subject Index 230 Verb Index 231

Acknowledgements I would like to express my gratitude to the coordinators of Aurora Mundus Programme for the unique opportunity to stay in Russia and for their professional help in organizing the mobility period. I thank Brill’s two anonymous reviewers for comments and criticism, in particular all corrections and comments concerning the Russian language. Special thanks to John Kendal for proofreading and critical remarks. All faults and shortcomings remain mine.

List of Figures and Tables Figures 1.1 Viewing arrangement (after Verhagen 2007: 59) 15 1.2 Profiling spatial relations by the verbs to come and to arrive (after Langacker 2008: 69) 18 1.3 Profiling of things and relationships (Langacker 2006: 119) 19 1.4 Representation of go (after Langacker 1991b: 6) 20 1.5 Sequential scanning (after Langacker 2013: 110) 20 1.6 Construals of the deictic verbs come and go (after Radden and Dirven 2007: 25) 22 2.1 Perfective and Imperfective verbs (after Langacker 2008: 153) 43 3.1 Image schema for the verb to enter (Langacker 2008: 33) 52 3.2 The source-path-goal schema combined with the containment schema 52 3.3 A force-dynamic pattern (after Talmy 2000a: 415) 76 4.1 Tokens of motion verbs of manner (black bars) and path (white bars) in Polish in percentages 88 4.2 Types of motion verbs of manner (black bar) and path (white bar) in Polish in percentages 89 4.3 Central image schema of the prefix prze- 113 4.4 Elaboration of the central image schema of the prefix prze- 114 5.1 Proportions of manner (black bars) and path (white bars) components in Polish and Russian motion verbs obtained in the token analysis— translation data 132 5.2 Proportions of manner (black bars) and path (white bars) components in Polish and Russian motion verbs obtained in the type analysis— translation data 133 6.1 Lexical access: Mean for motion verbs per speaker with split into manner (black bars) and path (white bars) verbs 170 6.2 Proportions of manner (black bars) and path (white bars) components in Polish and Russian motion verbs obtained in the token analysis 179 6.3 Proportions of manner (black bars) and path (white bars) components in Polish and Russian motion verbs obtained in the type analysis 180

List Of Figures And Tables

xiii

Tables 3.1 Polish and Russian unidirectional and non-directional motion verbs 54 4.1 Types and tokens of the most frequent verbs in the analysed data 85 4.2 Frequency of occurrence of modifying expressions of manner 99 4.3 Semantic components expressed by modifying expressions 101 4.4 Cline of motion verb prefixation 104 4.5 Frequency of prepositional phrase types with prefixes w- and wy- 108 4.6 Frequency of prepositional phrase types with prefixes przy- and po- 111 4.7 Frequency of prepositional phrase types with prefixes prze- 116 5.1 Polish verbs of motion in The Master and Margarita and Mr Blot’s Academy 128 5.2 Russian verbs of motion in The Master and Margarita and Mr Blot’s Academy 130 5.3 Horizontal (black bars) and vertical (white bars) relations coded by Polish and Russian Path verbs (in percentages) 149 5.4 Lexicalization of motion along the vertical pane in Polish and Russian verbs 161 6.1 Lexical access: the most common motion verbs—Polish data 168 6.2 Lexical access: the most common motion verbs—Russian data 169 6.3 Variables controlled in the sequence of video-clips. 175 6.4 The most common motion verbs appearing in the Polish data— elicitation task 2 178 6.5 The most common motion verbs appearing in the Russian data— elicitation task 2 178 6.6 Semantic components of manner expressed by modifying expressions in Russian 185 6.7 Inward motion: prefixes used in Polish and Russian descriptions 187 6.8 Outward motion: prefixes used in Polish and Russian descriptions 189 6.9 Going towards and entering the zoo: prefixes used in Polish and Russian descriptions 192

Introduction Motion, is an all-pervasive human experience. As Langacker (1987a: 166) puts it, “motion of physical objects through space is fundamental to our experience, so an explicit analysis of its conceptualization is important for linguistic semantics”. The commonality of motion experience is reflected in the languages of the world, which are rich in descriptions of spatial situations. The components of motion that are commonly lexicalized by natural languages are, first and foremost, the encoding of the information how motion takes place, which is the manner of motion, and secondly the path that the moving object follows. The lexicalization patterns of these two components of motion will be the focus of the present study. It must be stressed here, however, that the conceptualization of space found in most natural languages is different from the way in which physicists understand the motion or position of objects in space. Instead of a precise positioning of an object (hereinafter: the figure) by means of Euclidean geometry, the locating of the figure in space is performed by relating its position to some other object (hereinafter: the ground). Moreover, locating objects in space is a matter of a construal imposed on reality by the speaking person. To illustrate, in the present work the phrase poszedł do kuchni ‘he went to the kitchen’ will be understood as the conceptualization of horizontal motion although the kitchen may have been upstairs. The theoretical framework adopted here will be that of cognitive linguistics (e.g. Talmy 2000a, 2000b). Out of the existing variants of construction grammar found in cognitive linguistics, for example Construction Grammar by Kay and Fillmore (1999), the construction grammars of Lakoff (1987) and Goldberg (1995, 2010), Langacker’s Cognitive Grammar (1987a, 1991a) will constitute the main theoretical foundation for the present study. Croft and Cruse (2004 : 1) recapitulate the basic assumptions of a cognitive linguistic approach to language in the form of three major hypotheses. First, language is no longer viewed as an autonomous cognitive faculty, which is opposed to generative grammar’s stand. This basically means that the study of language may reveal human cognitive processes. Thus, in the course my analysis I shall attempt to uncover cognitive processes governing language use as well as the influence of the native language on the space conceptualization of its users. The second hypothesis is that grammar is conceptualization, which stands in opposition to truth-conditional semantics. The revealed lexicalization patterns, which are the result of a construal imposed on a given spatial situation by the speaker, will be treated as a reflection of the conceptualizing

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���8 | doi ��.��63/9789004360358_002

2

Introduction

of reality. Finally, one major principle of cognitive linguistics is that knowledge of language emerges from language use. Thus, the present study is cognitive in nature since various types of corpora of linguistic data constitute the basis of the linguistic analysis. More specifically, my research encompasses the lexicalization of motion events in modern Polish novels, comparison of translations of descriptions of spatial situations from Polish into Russian and from Russian into Polish, and finally two types of production tasks performed by native speakers of the two languages. Although this work is a contrastive analysis of the lexicalization of motion events in Polish and Russian, the Polish language is its main focus and the Russian data are introduced to contrast with the Polish base. The contrastive analysis has been carried out in the hope that comparing Polish and Russian ways of lexicalizing motion events will contribute to our knowledge about coding motion events in the two languages. Although Polish and Russian are closely related and belong not only to the same family of languages but also to the same category of satellite-framed languages (Talmy 2000b), my assumption is that there are subtle differences between the ways of lexicalizing path and manner of motion in the two languages. Similarities, on the other hand, may also contribute to our noticing important linguistic tendencies in both languages. In general, languages, despite belonging to the same verb-framed or satellite-framed typological category, are placed on the manner-salience and path-salience clines closer or further from the edges formed by the languages in which either manner or path would theoretically be lexicalized exclusively in the verb. Since languages within one typological group exhibit differences in the distribution of path and manner between specific surface elements, the present work is an attempt to locate the two languages under study on these clines. The cross-linguistic research on the lexicalization of motion events has to date mainly concentrated on contrasting languages representing satelliteand verb-framed languages since the differences between the two groups are expected to be significant. Inter-typological comparative studies of variations in coding motion events have been carried out by, for example, Slobin (1996b, 2004) of English, Turkish and Spanish, Cardini (2008) of Italian and English, Özçalışkan and Slobin (2003) of Turkish and English, Kopecka (2004) of French and Polish, or Fargard et al. (2013) of six typologically varied languages, to mention just a few. However, motion is also expressed differently in closely related languages (Talmy 1985). Nevertheless, fewer studies concern the intra-­typological analysis of lexicalization of motion. Examples of comparative intra-­typological studies encompass research by Filipović (2007)

Introduction

3

on Serbo-Croatian and English, and Hasko (2010) on Russian and English. However, to the best of my knowledge, no comparative research has been done with regard to the intra-typological comparison of the lexicalization patterns of path and manner of motion between Polish and Russian, or between any other Slavic languages1. Although the two languages have been classified by Talmy (1985, 2000b) as demonstrating the same type of lexicalization patterns of motion events, my assumption is that a more detailed analysis will reveal important differences in this respect. The present work is not an attempt to draw conclusions about the similarities and differences between the two languages under study on the basis exhaustive lists of motion verbs, as has already been done on numerous occasions (e.g., Levin 1993 for English, Cardini 2008 for Italian). As stated by Berthele (2013), the typological status of a particular language should be determined empirically on the basis of corpora studies and not via introspection or genealogical inheritance. The choice of methods for the present study has been chiefly dictated by the major assumption of cognitive linguistics that meaning emerges from the context of use. Language use is dependent on a number of factors, such as the knowledge of the participants of the discourse, as well as the linguistic and extra-linguistic context, which in Cognitive Grammar is understood as “the physical, mental, social and cultural circumstances” (Langacker 2001: 145). One more advantage of a corpus of data collected via the study of literary texts and elicitation tasks, instead of, for example dictionary search (e.g., Slobin 1997, Filipović 2007), is the inclusion into the analysis of the most commonly used verbs (including colloquial and vulgar instances) instead of rare or obsolete occurrences, which might be found almost exclusively in dictionaries. As noted by Zlatev (2007: 323), language can be analyzed not only on the normative level (i.e., how we think we should speak), but also as actual behaviour (i.e., how we actually speak). To illustrate the difference between the results obtained by means of dictionary search and by the elicitation of data from respondents, let me refer to the results of two kinds of research carried out applying these different methods. On the basis of dictionary entries Dukhovny and Kaushanskaya (1998) report that Russian and English lexicons are equally saturated with 1  In 1986 Leonore Grenoble devoted her PhD dissertation to motion verbs in Russian and Polish. However, she did not focus on the lexicalization of path and manner, but mainly on the linguistic phenomena of determinate and indeterminate verbs and the perfectivity vs. imperfectivity distinction. Moreover, cross-linguistic studies of motion verbs coding the sematic domains of rotation and aquamotion in satellite-framed languages were carried out by Rakhilina (2010) and Koptjevskaja-Tamm et al. (2010) respectively.

4

Introduction

manner-of-motion verbs. However, when the language is used in context, i.e. in story-telling tasks, the use of English and Russian manner-of-motion verbs amounts to 30% and 100% respectively (Slobin 2004). The difference is thus dramatic and shows the importance of taking into consideration the context of use in cross-linguistic studies. It also indicates that Talmy’s (2000b) two-way typology is a coarse-grained distinction and that languages should rather be placed on a continuum of manner-salience, ranging from satellite-framed languages, which are believed to be highly manner-salient, to verb-framed languages, which are considered as less manner-salient. Talmy (2000b: 22) distinguishes two directions in the study of lexicalization patterns. The first is to keep a particular semantic entity constant and observe the surface elements that express it. The second is to keep one selected surface entity constant and to investigate what semantic elements are coded by this particular lexical item. As the title of the present work suggests, the present study will follow the first direction since it will focus on a variety of surface elements used for lexicalizing semantic components of path and manner of motion. However, since in satellite-framed languages it is the verb and the verbal prefix that are the typical surface elements used for coding the semantic components of manner and path mentioned in the title of this work, the analysis will mainly focus on these elements. Finally, the motivation for undertaking the comparative study of the lexicalization patterns in Russian and Polish was the assumption that the languages will exhibit language patterns substantial enough to describe the typological principles they embody. The specific aims of the present study are as follows: i.

to uncover the distribution of path and manner information in the verb and outside the verb in the Polish constructions coding motion events; ii. to determine and compare the semantic components conflated in the Polish and Russian motion verbs; iii. to uncover the preferences in the two languages for coding specific manner information as well as to compare the levels of granularity of the manner and path information coded in the verb and outside it; iv. to place Polish and Russian languages on the continuum of the salience of the manner of motion; v. to trace the cognitive processes that are reflected in the lexicalization patterns, as well as to consider the influence of the lexicalization patterns of a given language on the perceptual and attentional biases of its users. The book consists of seven chapters. The first three provide a general theoretical background for the present study. Chapter One introduces the basic

Introduction

5

assumptions of Ronald Langacker’s Cognitive Grammar (1987a, 1991a, 1991b, 2000, 2001) that directly relate to the study of lexicalization patterns of translational motion. By means of such aspects of construal as viewpoint, perspective and deixis the chapter accounts for the ways in which verbs in general, and motion verbs in particular render spatial relations. In Chapter Two the conceptual typologies of motion, in particular Talmy’s (2000b) theory of a motion event as well as various types of motion, will be presented. Chapter Three includes the theory of image schemas (Lakoff 1987, Johnson 1987) along with their axiological implications (Krzeszowski 1993, 1997). This account is followed by the presentation of the ways in which path is lexicalized in Polish and Russian. The last three chapters will be devoted to the analysis of spatial language in the Polish language, with the focus on motion verbs and verbal prefixes. More specifically, Chapter Four will discuss the lexicalization patterns of the semantic components of path and manner of motion in the Polish language. In general, the aim of Chapters Five and Six is to draw a comparison between manner and path coding in Polish and Russian in order to place the languages on the manner-saliency continuum. Each of the studies presented in Chapters Four, Five and Six is based on a different type of data. The analysis of Polish presented in Chapter Four draws on a randomized sample of descriptions of motion events taken from modern crime stories. Chapter Five considers the difference between Polish and Russian on the basis of selected spatial situations included in two novels and their translated versions. The last of the analytical chapters, Chapter Six presents the analysis of data coming from two types of elicitation tasks, namely a task checking the ease of lexical access to motion verbs and a story-telling task. Finally, Chapter Seven presents conclusions and a general discussion.

PART 1

∵

Chapter 1

Theoretical Assumptions of Cognitive Linguistics Chapter 1 sets out to present the basic assumptions of cognitive linguistics that seek to account for the ways in which verbs in general, and motion verbs in particular, lexicalize spatial relations. A major reason for choosing cognitive linguistics as the framework for the present analysis is, first of all, the fact that this theory treats language in its real use as the most reliable basis for its description. Secondly, it offers a subjectivist view of linguistic meaning, which means that as speakers we not only code the situation that is being perceived but also our own relation to this situation. The presentation of some specific notions (such as image schemas underlying translational motion) will, however, be postponed to be described in greater detail in a separate chapter (Chapter 3) since these notions are particularly relevant to the analysis of motion verbs. 1.1

Linguistic Meaning in Cognitive Grammar

Studies carried out in the framework of cognitive linguistics are, like the present study, frequently based on corpus data and derived from actual language. In other words, cognitive grammar adopts a “bottom-up” approach to linguistic structure. Thus, specific utterances become the basis for analyzing and drawing conclusions about linguistic structure as well as underlying cognitive mechanisms. The “bottom-up” approach towards language structure results from one of the basic tenets of cognitive linguistics, namely that linguistic knowledge emerges from actual language use through the processes known as “entrenchment” and “schematization”. Entrenchment is a process that enables acquisition of a language. It is based on the human capacity to easily or automatically elicit even complex structures that have been encountered many times. Through repetition, linguistic expressions become gradually entrenched. In this way complex structures become ‘pre-packed’ assemblies, “no longer requiring conscious attention to (their) parts or their arrangement” (Langacker 1999: 93). These easily retrievable assemblies are called “units”. A unit is understood as any phonological, semantic or symbolic structure that has been thoroughly mastered by a sufficient number of users of a given language (Langacker 1988: 11).

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���8 | doi ��.��63/9789004360358_003

10

Chapter 1

Subsequently, the commonality inherent in multiple experiences leads to the process known as “schematization”, which means that the process of language acquisition relies on the abstraction of more and more schematic units. Such structures portray situations with less precision and in a progressively more coarse-grained manner than those that are more specific. Nevertheless, the more schematic mental representations grasp regularities observed in everyday language use. Adopting a usage-based approach to how we use language necessitates an “encyclopedic” view of meaning. In this view a linguistic form can only be understood and characterized against the specific cultural norms and processes of the language users. Thus, the understanding of a linguistic term presupposes knowledge of the world on the part of a speaker (Taylor 1995: 81). This knowledge, called encyclopedic, is defined as “[t]he structured body of nonlinguistic knowledge to which a linguistic unit such as a word potentially provides access” (Evans 2007: 72). In this way, cognitive linguistics rejects the distinction between linguistic and extra-linguistic knowledge and, in consequence, between semantics and pragmatics. Instead cognitive grammar posits a gradation of notions lying on a scale ranging from the indisputably semantic to the indisputably pragmatic. Individuals may differ in the scope of their knowledge as evoked by a specific linguistic item. The relevant background information referring to a word’s meaning is treated as a network of shared, conventionalized and idealized knowledge (Taylor 1995: 83). Langacker (1999: 4) argues that: [a] lexical item is not thought of as incorporating a fixed, limited, and uniquely linguistic semantic representation, but rather as providing access to indefinitely many conceptions and conceptual systems, which it evokes in a flexible, open-ended, context-dependent manner. To exemplify situations in which the assumption of encyclopedic knowledge is a prerequisite for the analysis of linguistic phenomena, let us discuss the issue of “compositionality of meaning”. According to Langacker (1999: 94), this concept “involves the integration of two or more component structures to form a composite structure”. The frequently discussed expressions safe beach and safe child illustrate the phenomenon. The former refers to a beach where no harm will happen while the latter means that the child will not be harmed. Although the sense of the adjective safe differs considerably in the two instances, the same frame scenario of ‘danger’ is evoked by the two expressions.

Theoretical Assumptions Of Cognitive Linguistics

11

Fauconnier and Turner (2002) argue that understanding such expressions as safe beach and safe child requires some background knowledge on the part of the conceptualizer. Thus, from the viewpoint of cognitive grammar, the speaker’s knowledge is encyclopedic as opposed to the dictionary knowledge. As the brief discussion of the expressions safe beach and safe child shows, the full compositionality is empirically false since a word’s meaning does not correspond to a fixed set of semantic values and may diverge from its predicted value (Langacker 1999: 111–113). Instead, words may be thought of as points of access to encyclopedic knowledge providing access to particular parts of a semantic potential (Evans 2007: 73). The activated part of this semantic potential depends on the linguistic and extra-linguistic context. To summarize, the discussion of compositionality of meaning has led us to the next tenet of cognitive linguistics, namely to the claim that linguistic meaning is encyclopedic. In cognitive linguistics a word’s meaning is treated as encyclopedic in scope. Finally, it should be mentioned that an encyclopedic view of meaning does not imply that all facets of our knowledge are equally involved in the semantic description of a given linguistic item. While some of these facets are central to the understanding of a given expression, others are marginal. To illustrate, in certain contexts ‘in’ and ‘out’ may mean,‘invisible’ and ‘visible’ respectively, which emerges from the common human experience that an object inserted in another may become invisible and that an object removed from inside another may become visible (Langacker 1987a: 157). In a specific context, this part of our knowledge becomes essential for understanding these expressions. Against this background the next section will discuss the ways in which motion verbs may activate specific parts of the speaker’s encyclopedic knowledge. 1.1.1 Encyclopedic Meaning of Motion Verbs The understanding of motion verbs, as of other linguistic items, requires extralinguistic knowledge, which is not directly coded in linguistic expressions. The verb to drive may serve to illustrate this. As Tenny (1995: 33) puts it, “[o]ne cannot know the full meaning of the verb drive without knowing something about culture, technology and even history; all things which cannot be completely analyzed into discrete compositional elements of linguistic analysis”. Thus, the same word may mean something different to people of different cultures, origin or education. As discussed in the previous section, a given lexical item serves as a point of access to the speaker’s encyclopedic knowledge. Each linguistic form encodes a number of distinct lexical concepts, which are called its lexical profile. This notion is discussed by Evans (2007: 124) on the basis of the verb to fly.

12

Chapter 1

We may distinguish four lexical concepts for the verb to fly (glossed in small capitals). (1) The plane/bird is flying in the sky [self-propelled aerodynamic motion] (2) The pilot is flying the plane in the sky [operation of entity capable of aerodynamic motion] (3) The child is flying the kite (in the breeze) [control of light-weight entity] (4) The flag is flying (in the breeze) [suspension of light-weight object] Moreover, the assumption of the encyclopedic view of meaning entails the recognition of the essential role of both linguistic and extra-linguistic context. Context evokes a certain amount of the speaker’s knowledge of the world, and in consequence a certain semantic potential of linguistic forms, which is why language in cognitive linguistics is studied in its real use. To illustrate the role of the context and, in consequence, the role of the language user’s knowledge in shaping the separate senses of a lexical item, we can consider the English motion verb to climb. First of all, we note that the verb is special since it belongs to a relatively small group of verbs that code both manner and path. In general, verbs of motion tend to designate only one of those components (Talmy 1985). As Goldberg (2010: 47) notes, manner of motion and direction of motion are independent and are rarely coded in one item. Thus, in its prototypical sense to climb violates a constraint that manner and path do not co-occur. Taylor (1995: 106–107) individuates a number of discrete senses of the verb to climb. The first one, illustrated in (5), involves the prototypical sense of the upward movement in a clambering manner. (5) The boy climbed the tree. In (5), to climb describes the complex locomotion from a lower to a higher position by means of motor movement of limbs since this type of motion is typically predicted for animate entities. This sense of the word, involving the semantic components of upward path and the use of body parts, is that most frequently given by native speakers of English as illustrating the meaning of to climb and, consequently, it is treated as the central sense of the word (Taylor 1995: 106). In (6), however, the manner of motion is different. Since locomotives cannot clamber, motion proceeds by the turning of wheels.

Theoretical Assumptions Of Cognitive Linguistics

13

(6) The locomotive climbed the mountainside. Moreover, the similarities between motion in (5) and (6) also involve the fact that in both spatial situations the profiled motion is self-propelled and in both instances the moving figure is in contact with the surface on which it is moving. Furthermore, motion in both situations proceeds rather slowly and with difficulty. However, in (7), none of the described components of meaning other than upward vertical motion is present. (7) The plane climbed to 30,000 feet. Thus, in (5), (6) and (7), various senses of the verb to climb are evoked against the language user’s background knowledge about human beings and vehicles respectively, and the activated knowledge largely depends on the context of use. The encyclopedic view of meaning bears on the present investigation in a number of ways. To illustrate this we can look at a few uses of Polish verbs found in the novels examined in Chapter 4. The verbs of motion iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’, ciec ‘to trickle’, ‘to stream’, or lecieć ‘to fly’ are considered to express solely manner information without the information about the path. However, three sentences with the three mentioned unprefixed verbs from the corpus indicate that this is not always so: (8) a. Szedł, szedł i szedł, przystanął na chwilę przed murem (…)[DębŁ] ‘He walked, walked and walked, he stopped for a moment in front of the wall (…)’ b. (…) piana cieknie po spodniach, więc ściera ją rękawem.[Orb] ‘(…) foam is trickling down the trousers, so he rubs it off with his sleeve.’ c. (…) wystawił twarz ku zachmurzonemu niebu, skąd bardzo wolno leciał biały puch.[Kraj] ‘(…) he exposed his face towards the clouded sky, from where white fluff was falling (lit. flying) very slowly.’



The verbs in (8) do not directly code the path of movement and neither is it specified by the prefix nor by the accompanying prepositional phrase. Nevertheless, the path of movement is easily inferred by the reader: in (8a) the motion is horizontal and in (8b) and (8c) it is downward. To infer this

14

Chapter 1

knowledge, however, the reader must rely on their world knowledge about the canonical direction of walking (in 8a), trickling (in 8b) and snowing (8c). As Langacker (1987a: 405) observes, the language user does not dwell on the anomaly of the use of the verb ‘to fly’, which developmentally was predicated of birds, for the description of motion of inanimate objects as in (8c). Instead, he interprets “the component structures in such a way that the overall expression is compositional and semantically well-formed”. As the above considerations show, lexical items evoke parts of encyclopedic meaning, the understanding of which depends on the context as well as on the individual’s knowledge. The contextual meaning may, however, become conventionalized through its repeated use (Langacker 1987a: 158) and linked to a certain context. 1.2 Construal As discussed in the previous section, the same spatial situation may be categorized in various ways. Different ways of viewing of a particular situation depend not only on the individual’s world knowledge and specific interpretation, but also on the speaker’s choices, as well as the structure of the language used. Speaker’s choices may refer to such matters as attention, selection, figure/ground organization, viewpoint and level of schematicity (Langacker 1987a: 138). As Langacker puts it, humans have a mental ability to “construe a conceived situation in alternate ways—by means of alternate images—for purposes of thought or expression” (1987a: 110). Thus, “construal” is a term used for describing various ways of viewing one particular situation with respect to a number of parameters. Langacker (1987a: 487–488) defines the construal relationship as ‘‘[t]he relationship between a speaker (or hearer) and a situation that he conceptualizes and portrays, involving focal adjustments and imagery”. Before I proceed to the description of these construal phenomena, let me stress that different construals imposed on a given scene depend not only on a speaker’s choice but also on the linguistic means available in a given language. This observation is of particular relevance here since the present work focuses on how the motion verbs of two languages are used for the description of spatial situations. The language used for the description of a spatial situation may, to a large extent, impose the way space is conceptually structured and the speakers must adjust to the semantic cuts marked by their language. To illustrate, speakers of English have to differentiate between ‘in/on’ categories while users of Korean have to discriminate between ‘tight/loose’ relations between objects (Hespos

Theoretical Assumptions Of Cognitive Linguistics

15

and Spelke 2007). The most radical differences between languages concerning the lexicalization of motion events have been observed between satellite- and verb-framed languages. However, as mentioned in Introduction, significant intra-typological variations are expected to exist as well. As we have seen, construals vary along a number of dimensions. Figure 1.1 portrays two types of construal relationships. The horizontal relation concerns the imposition of structure on the conceptualized situation and involves such notions as force-dynamics (for the theory force dynamics of motion verbs see 3.7) or attention. The speaker (and also the hearer, who reconstructs the speaker’s intent) structures the scene in a specific manner by choosing focal settings and in this way establishes a construal relationship between himself and the structured scene (Langacker 1987a: 128). The vertical relation, on the other hand, pertains to the relation between the viewer and the object of conceptualization. It refers to such aspects of construal as deixis (see 1.4) and viewpoint (see 1.5).

Object of conceptualization:

Subject of conceptualization:

V

Figure 1.1 Viewing arrangement (after Verhagen 2007: 59).

If the meaning of a linguistic expression depends on the construal, then it should be characterized not only in terms of the conceptualization of its objective content, but also in terms of how the content relates to the speaker. One important aspect of construal is the viewing arrangement, which is the relation of the ground to the construed scene. There are basically two distinct kinds of viewing arrangement. First, the ground, which in Langacker’s terms is the speaker, the hearer and the speech event in which they participate, may function with maximal subjectivity. This means that the viewer (i.e., the conceptualizer) and the object of perception (i.e., conception) are totally distinct. In this case, the role of the

16

Chapter 1

viewer is maximally subjective since he functions solely as the subject of perception and attention is focused exclusively on the object of perception and conception. In this situation the object of perception and conception is totally objective and remains in the observer’s locus of viewing attention. This type of relation between the ground and the object of conception is called the optimal viewing arrangement, although in real language use it almost never occurs. Secondly, the egocentric viewing arrangement involves “an expansion of the objective scene beyond the region of perceptual optimality to include the observer and his immediate surroundings” (Langacker 1987a: 130). Thus, in this situation the ground is the focused object of attention, which is construed with maximal objectivity. In his later work Langacker (2000: 298) proposes a modification of the understanding of subjectification to the effect that “the subjective component is there all along, being immanent in the objective conception, and simply remains behind when the latter fades away”. Thus, the speaker, or some other facet of the ground, is always minimally present in the meaning of an expression. The examples in which the speaker is not explicitly profiled but in some way relates the profiled situation to the ground are expressions like tomorrow, which evoke the time of speaking as a temporal point of reference, or as axiologically charged expressions that betray the speaker’s attitude to the profiled relation or entity. To summarize, the two viewing arrangements, namely the optimal and the egocentric, are at opposite extremes, although the ground does not need to be explicitly mentioned to be, at least to some degree, the object of attention. Even when the ground is unprofiled and offstage, it may be construed, to a certain degree, objectively. As I shall argue later some degree of the conceptualizer’s objective construal is coded in the roots of motion verbs and motivates their use in certain contexts. 1.3

Langacker’s Approach to the Verb Schema

As mentioned before, according to the assumptions of cognitive grammar the speaker’s linguistic knowledge emerges from language use. Grammatical patterns are viewed as schemas of various levels of abstractness extracted by speakers from more specific expressions of greater granularity. The lowerlevel schemas share the same structure as the extracted, more abstract schema. A schema provides less information and is compatible with a broader range of options than its instantiations. According to Langacker (1987a: 132) expressions in general are to some degree schematic since it is always possible

Theoretical Assumptions Of Cognitive Linguistics

17

to make them more precise. Thus, schematicity is a matter of degree. Let us now proceed to the schema of the verb, the central focus of the present work. Langacker’s account of verbs is a universally valid, as opposed to languagespecific, semantic characterization, and is based on categorization by prototypes and on schemas. The idea of categorization by prototypes assumes that membership of a given category is determined by the instance’s resemblance to the prototype. Overt physical actions, or in other words, energetic interactions, are the prototypes for verbs. Resemblance is established on the basis of human judgement and is not a matter of necessary and sufficient conditions. A schema may be defined as “an abstract template representing the commonality of the structures it categorizes, which thus elaborate or instantiate it” (Langacker 1987b: 54). As for the schematicity of motion verbs, the verb to walk bears a schematic relation to a number of English motion verbs which denote kinds of walking (after Ungerer and Schmid 2006: 104). walk … limp hobble amble stroll wander stride strut march pace stamp

Specific characteristics ‘lamely, unevenly, usually because one leg has been hurt’ ‘in an awkward way, like rocking from one side to the other’ ‘at an easy gentle rate, in a way suggested by an ambling horse’ ‘slowly and leisurely’ ‘around without a fixed course’ ‘with long steps’ ‘in a proud way, with pompous, erect gait’ ‘with a regular, esp. forceful step’ ‘with even steps’ ‘pushing (one’s foot) down heavily’

Since a schema differs from its instantiation in its level of specificity and detail, the verb to march, besides the general meaning of the verb to walk, includes the semantic component specifying the kind of steps. Highly specific motion verbs which describe spatial situations in finegrained detail carry the information about the manner of motion (e.g., to wander), or about the path (e.g., to fall) or both (e.g., to climb). Verbs of lesser specificity describe movement in a coarse-grained manner. They reveal only rough features of the described situation. As Verhagen (2007: 51) notes, some of the most common verbs are highly schematic (e.g., English be, have, do, and make) and they characterize situations without the details of the specific state or process involved. Thus, for some schematic Polish verbs of motion, such

18

Chapter 1

as ruszać się ‘to move oneself’, przemieszczać się ‘to move from one place to another’, it is impossible to distinguish anything more than the motion component of meaning. As far as Russian verbs of this type are concerned, the most frequently mentioned in this respect are dvigat’sja ‘to move, to advance’ and peremeščat’sja ‘to move, to transfer’, which although not stylistically neutral are claimed to express only motion (cf. Rakhilina 2004: 1). As mentioned above, profiling refers to the dimension of construal, which is characterized “as what the expression is conceived as designating or referring to within its base (its conceptual referent)” (Langacker 2008: 66). As Radden (1996) notes, motion verbs that conflate the component of the path typically profile its parts. While such verbs as to arrive or to reach profile the goal of movement, to leave and to depart profile the source and to move or to pass profile the middle of the path. We can illustrate the notion of profiling by means of the verbs to come and to arrive. (a)

(b)

come tr

arrive tr

loc

loc

Figure 1.2 Profiling spatial relations by the verbs to come and to arrive (after Langacker 2008: 69).

Both verbs in Figure 1.2 evoke the conception of a figure moving along a spatial path to a goal. However, while to come profiles the full motion event, to arrive designates only the part of the path in which the trajector reaches the goal. In cognitive grammar, linguistic expressions profile either things or relations. Verbs are the linguistic items that profile processes, which are complex relationships. The verb is viewed as “a symbolic expression whose semantic pole designates a process” (Langacker 1987a: 244). As for motion verbs, the verb to go profiles a process, which is a series of relational configurations followed sequentially through conceived time. The conceptualization of a process follows the temporal evolution of a situation. This means that time and space are two domains in the matrix of this verb (Langacker 1988: 61). What differentiates the verb from other categories is the fact that it corresponds to temporal relations in contrast to nouns, prepositions, adjectives or adverbs, which describe atemporal relations. Figure 1.3a shows that the verb to throw profiles a process while nouns (in 1.3b and 1.3c) profile things. Thus, an expression may

19

Theoretical Assumptions Of Cognitive Linguistics

profile either a thing or a relationship. What must be stressed here, however, is that the semantic content evoked by the verb and two nouns presented in Figure 1.3 is the same. What is different are the elements of this semantic content that are profiled. (a) throw (V)

(b) thrower (N)

(c) throw (N)

Figure 1.3 Profiling of things and relationships (Langacker 2006: 119).

To sum up, although the three lexical items in Figure 1.3 evoke the same semantic content, the noun thrower (Figure 1.3b) restricts its profile to the agent. The profile of the noun may also shift to an abstract thing, namely to one instance of the event designated by the verb (as shown in Figure 1.3c). Finally, the verb to throw profiles the relationship in which an agent induces an object to move along some extended path (Langacker 2006: 119). Generally speaking, Langacker (1987b: 68) divides the meanings of linguistic expressions into nominal and relational predications. The former correspond to nouns, and the latter to verbs. As shown in Figure 1.3, nominal and relational predications do not need to differ in their semantic content but rather in the construal they impose on the profiled relation. While relational predications profile interconnections between entities, nominal predications profile the region established by a set of conceived entities. In every relational predication there are two participants. One of them, the trajector (in Talmian terms the figure), is singled out and its location is construed in relation to the other ­entity—the landmark (in Talmian terms the ground). Figure 1.4 presents the relation between the trajector and the landmark in the schema of the verb to go. The heavy lines in Figure 1.4 indicate profiling, or foregrounding, of entities and relations. In this case what is profiled is the relation between the trajector and the landmark along with its evolution through time. Moreover, relational predications profile either processes or atemporal relations. Processes correspond to the class of verbs while atemporal relations to prepositions, adjectives or adverbs. The fact that verbs profile processes does not mean that they alone profile configurations in a temporal domain. Other forms like, for example, before also profile relations involving time. A process profiled by a verb is understood as a relationship followed sequentially through conceived time.

20

Chapter 1

SPACE

tr

lm

TIME Figure 1.4 Representation of go (after Langacker 1991b: 6).

This leads us to the notions of sequential scanning and conceived time that are crucial for the characterization of verbs and differentiation of them from other linguistic forms. Sequential scanning is opposed to its alternative mode of cognitive processing, namely summary scanning. Summary scanning has been defined as “additive, each set contributing something to a single configuration all facets of which are conceived as coexistent and simultaneously available” (Langacker 1987a: 145). It is, however, typical of atemporal relations coded by, for example, prepositions and will not be discussed further at this point. In turn, sequential scanning, which is presented in Figure 1.5, is mental “ tracking an event as it unfolds through time, that is, scanning sequentially through it along the temporal axis” (Langacker 2013: 111).

t1

t2

t3

t4

t5

T1

T2

T3

T4

T5

Figure 1.5 Sequential scanning (after Langacker 2013: 110).

Theoretical Assumptions Of Cognitive Linguistics

21

Sequential scanning is a mode of processing events as they happen in real time, in other words when we directly observe some event. Series of separate, minimally different, transformations are observed non-cumulatively in a serial manner (Langacker 1997: 250). The second notion indispensable for the semantic characterization of verbs is “conceived time” as opposed to “processing time”. The former may be understood as the time needed to track a relationship while the latter is the duration of the event itself. Figure 1.5 above represents conceived time (marked with t), which is the time that is the object of conception, and processing time (marked with T), which is the time when the tracking of the activity occurs. We can imagine that Figure 1.5 presents a ball rolling down an incline. The whole event is conceived as occurring during the temporal interval t1–t5 and the processing time in the interval T1–T5. In this case, the conceived time equals the processing time when the observation occurs. “If a relationship develops through time, the most natural way of apprehending it is to track it through time in this manner” (Langacker 2013: 111). To conclude, the cognitive human abilities underlying the schema for verbs involve the capacity for apprehending relations and tracking them as they unfold in time (Langacker 2013: 108). 1.4

Deixis of Motion Verbs

According to Lyons (1977: 637), deixis is “the location and identification of persons, objects, events, processes and activities being talked about or referred to, in relation to the spatiotemporal context created and sustained by the act of utterance and the participation in it”. In every language grammaticalized sets of deictic expressions are frequently used. In Polish these are, for example, the prefixes przy- and po-, which code motion to and away from the speaker respectively. In order to account for the deictic uses of linguistic expressions, the analysis of language is not sufficient. It is also necessary to know something about the interactional situation in which the utterances are produced. Interpreting them depends on a number of factors, such as the time and place of their occurrence, the identities of the speaker and the addressee(s) as well as objects and events in the situational context (Lyons 1981: 170). In cognitive grammar all these facets are referred to as “the ground”. A deictic expression includes reference to some ground element, which means that this facet of the ground becomes, to a certain extent, objectified. As for the deictic senses of verbs, lexical items like to stand, to calculate and to hear are considered to be non-deictic as such; however, their finite forms like

22

Chapter 1

is standing are epistemically grounded, hence deictic. Their deictic character emerges from the fact that they locate the designated process in relation to the ground, most typically to the time of speaking. On the other hand, the default senses of two English verbs, namely to come and to go, are considered deictic since they presuppose a reference point equated with some element of the ground (Langacker 1987a: 126–127). Obviously, it is possible to construe another time and place as the deictic centre. As Croft and Cruse (2004: 60) show, it is possible to distinguish two layers of conceptualization displayed by deictic elements. One of them relates to the situation of the speech act participants, and the other displaces the actual interlocutors to another time and place. The shift of the deictic centre to the moving figure is illustrated in (9a) and (9b), where the spatial situations are construed with a deictic centre at a place and time in the narrative. The purpose of the use of narrative present in (9c) is to bring the event closer to the listener. (9) a. He was coming up the steps. There was a broad smile on his face. b. He was going up the steps. There was a wad of bubblegum on the seat of his pants. c. He comes up behind me, I stop suddenly, and he runs into me. (after Croft and Cruse 2004: 60) The deictic shift, or in other words a change of the viewpoint, is illustrated in Figure 1.6, which shows two speaker-centred and one hearer-centred construals. The circles in bold indicate the deictic centres and the letters “S” and “H” indicate the speaker and the hearer respectively. speaker’s viewpoint come (5a)

S

go (5b)

S

hearer’s viewpoint go (6a)

H

S

come (6b)

H

Figure 1.6 Construals of the deictic verbs come and go (after Radden and Dirven 2007: 25).

English to come and to go are exceptions among English verbs, which in general rarely convey information about the viewpoint. In Polish and Russian there are no equivalents of to come and to go among unprefixed verbs of motion since the viewpoint information is chiefly carried by verbal prefixes.

Theoretical Assumptions Of Cognitive Linguistics

23

In Polish there seems to be one exception concerning the non-deictic character of unprefixed motion verbs. The verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ in the imperative has two unprefixed deictic forms. The indeterminate form in the imperative—Chodź! ‘come’, when not accompanied by any other ground reference, always codes motion towards the speaker while the determinate form—Idź! ‘go’ designates motion away from the speaker. In the 1st person plural (speaker-inclusive) the most natural form is Chodźmy! while 2nd person plural (speaker-exclusive) is Idźcie!. In Russian the same verb codes both of these relations, which is shown in (10). (10) Idi sjuda! / Idi tuda! ‘come here/ go there’ (after Grenoble 1995: 369) All in all, in Polish and in Russian, the deictic content may be added either by prefixes, mainly przy-/ pri- and po-/ po- as in (11) (but, as we shall see, also wy-/ vy- and w-/ v- ), or outside the verb by means of other lexical items, as in the Polish example (12). (11) Poszedł do szkoły na ósmą. ‘He went to school to be there at eight.’ (12) Szedł tu dwie godziny. ‘He walked here for two hours.’ Motion verbs potentially focus the attention of the listener on the source or goal of the complex source-path-goal schema (as described by Lakoff 1987: 275, Johnson 1987: 113–117). Fillmore (1971: 52) illustrates different points of focus of the verbs to come and to go by means of the following sentences: (13) a. He came home around midnight. b. He went home around midnight. In (13a), the person reached the goal of movement at midnight, while in 13b the person left the source of movement at the specified time and started motion along the path. As Radden (1996: 426) argues, the difference results from different construals of the situation as a process. While in (13a) the final part of movement including its endpoint is profiled, in (13b) what is profiled is the starting point.

24

Chapter 1

Fillmore (1971) describes the conditions for the use of the verb to come and to go. The conditions concern the semantic rules governing the English verbs, but, as I will exemplify with Polish sentences, they may also be successfully prescribed for the usages of the Polish verbs przyjść ‘to come’ and pójść ‘to go’, or, more generally, all Polish motion verbs prefixed by przy- and po-. Fillmore (1971: 286) sets the conditions for the use of to come by saying that “it indicates the location of either the speaker or the addressee at either coding time or reference time, or toward the location of the home base of either the speaker or the hearer at reference time”. The first two usages of the verb to come, referring to the speaker’s location at coding time (e.g. Przyjdź tu ‘Come here’) and the speaker’s location at reference time (Przyjdź tu o zmierzchu ‘Please come here at dawn’) are canonical since the speaker typically occupies the deictic centre and has adopted an egocentric worldview. Such uses provide the prototypical, deictic sense of the English verb to come (Radden 1996: 429) or the Polish przyjść. When the speaker assumes the addressee’s point of view at either coding or reference time, which is the case in sentences Zaraz tam przyjdę ‘I will come there right away’ or Przyjdę do kina o 8.00 ‘I will come to the cinema at 8 pm’ with the assumption that the addressee is there at the moment of speaking or will be at the cinema at 8 pm. As Radden (1996: 430) notes, the usages of the verb to come involving the home base of either the speaker or the addressee mentioned in Fillmore’s definition should not be treated as separate conditions since they result from the metonymic transfer from person to place. Such usages are exemplified by the following Polish sentences: Przyszedł do mnie ale mnie nie zastał ‘He came over to my place, but I wasn’t at home’, and Przyszedłem wczoraj do ciebie ale cię nie było. ‘I came over to your place, but you weren’t at home’. Finally we shall consider the situation when canonically deictic verbs are used in a third-person narrative. Fillmore (1971: 286) states that to come may also indicate motion toward a place taken to be the subject of the narrative, or toward the location of the central character at reference time, as in Przyjechał do pracy i włączył computer, ‘He came to work and switched on his computer’. In contrast, the verb to go is characterized by Fillmore (1971: 274) as indicating “motion toward a location which is different from the speaker’s location at coding time”, as in He went to school or in Polish Poszedł do szkoły. However, in the third-person narrative the deictic centre does not necessarily denote the location of the speaker. It may be shifted to the figure’s location or to a salient place. Lyons (1977: 579) calls the shift of attention from the speaker’s deictic centre to the figure’s location “deictic projection”.

Theoretical Assumptions Of Cognitive Linguistics

1.5

25

Viewpoint and Perspective in Spatial Language

Language reflects the fact that we always observe the world from a given point of view, which is why the viewpoint is physically grounded. Human beings are, however, capable of assuming various points of view on a given situation, which is why choosing a particular viewpoint is a matter of construal. Geeraerts (2006) even claims that meaning is perspectival in that it is not an objective reflection of the world but construes it in a particular way. Thus, the same position of an object can be rendered in various ways betraying the place of the speaker’s viewpoint. To illustrate, two sentences describing the location of a bicycle, namely It’s behind the house and It’s in front of the house are not contradictory if we assume that they embody two different perspectives. On the other hand, the physical viewpoint may constrain the ways of accessing perspectival construals, which is a reason for evident cross-linguistic differences in this respect. Various linguistic items, such as demonstratives and possessives, are markers of viewpoint (e.g., Rybarczyk 2015) or connectives and evidential markers (e.g., Dancygier and Sweetser 2000, 2005). Some motion verbs also have the potential to present the described scene from a particular viewpoint. As Radden (1996: 431) notes, the verb in the sentence The men came into the house describes the event from a viewpoint located inside the house while in the sentence The men went into the house the viewpoint is placed outside the house. The term viewpoint covers both the “deictic” viewpoint of one of the speech participants as well as the mental viewpoint adopted by the narrator (Radden 1996: 431). The English verbs to come and to go are synonymous as far as the objective structure of the scene is concerned. What is different is the place from which the scene is viewed. To illustrate, two sentences John went to Los Angeles and John came to Los Angeles describe the same motion event but what differs is the viewpoint from which the scene is described: it is either viewed from the source or from the goal of movement (deLancey 1982: 168). Grenoble (1998: 48) analyses the differences in meaning between two Russian sentences differing in the verbal prefixes. (14) S etoj trost’ju on odnaždy pojehal/ prijehal v Leningrad. ‘One day he went to/ came to Leningrad with this cane’ Although either verb is acceptable in this context, each of them carries a slightly different meaning. Since the prefix po- profiles the source of motion, the sentence with pojehal ‘away-went using a vehicle’ implies that the figure departed for Leningrad. On the other hand, the prefix pri- profiles the goal and the sentence with prijehal ‘to-went using a vehicle’ marks the arrival. Thus, the same

26

Chapter 1

motion situation is coded from different points of view. As Grenoble stresses (1998: 48), such deictic shifts are possible in 3rd person narrative texts since discourse of this kind has no inherent deictic centre, in contrast to spontaneous conversations, which have clearly a determined ground. It should be noted here that the terms a ‘viewer’s perspective’ and ‘a full deictic centre’ do not mean the same. To illustrate, the English verb to come involves a deictic centre since the goal of movement involves the speaker. It is strange to say Come there since the verb come as well as here and there involve full deictic centres. On the other hand, the verb to arrive evokes a viewer’s perspective, which is not necessarily the deictic centre. The only perspective involved is that of the point of arrival. Thus, it is perfectly correct to say She arrives there. (Sweetser 2012: 11). Moreover, the deictic center may be stationary or moveable, which leads us directly to the notion of “perspectival modes”1. These are processes of construal, which means that they are different ways of structuring a given situation. According to Talmy (2000a: 68) perspectival modes form a schematic system that “establishes a conceptual perspective point from which the entity is cognitively regarded”. There are two perspectival modes, which differ in location and distance, scope of attention and in perspectival motility. Dewell (2011: 31) clearly explains the perspectival modes by saying that they determine where you are standing when you look at something, which direction you are looking in, and whether you are stationary or moving. First, the two modes differ in the location of the perspective point occupied within the referent scene. The figure’s path with respect to some ground object may additionally be characterized as moving away from the speaker’s viewpoint. However, as Talmy (2000a: 68) notes, the concept of a ‘deictic center’ may cover any location within a referent scene to which an addressee is directed to project his imaginal perspective. The notion of perspectival motility, which boils down to the question whether the perspective point is stationary or moving, is of particular importance in the present analysis. Talmy (2000a: 70) states that the stationary perspective point aligns with the distal perspective and the moving perspective point with the proximal one. In other words, the distal perspective denotes further distance from the viewed entity, and the proximal perspective indicates the opposite. These conceptual alignments are linked to the scope of attention. Logically, a distal perspective correlates with a broader scope of attention, which leads to the apparently reduced size of entities, coarser structuring and less detail, while a proximal perspective correlates with narrower scope of attention, 1  The theory and analysis of perspectival modes included in the present book is an abbreviated version of my recent article (Łozińska 2017a).

Theoretical Assumptions Of Cognitive Linguistics

27

which involves apparently bigger size, finer structuring and greater detail of the viewed entity (Talmy 2000a: 70). To recap, the synoptic perspectival mode consists in “the adoption of a stationary distal perspective point with global scope of attention”. On the other hand, the sequential perspectival mode consists in “the adoption of a moving proximal perspective point with local scope of attention” (Talmy 2000a: 70). Talmy exemplifies the two modes with the following sentences: (15) a. There are some houses in the valley. b. There is a house every now and then through the valley. (after Talmy 2000a: 71) Both sentences construe an objectively static situation but in two different ways. In (15a), an example of the synoptic perspectival mode, a static scene is construed from a stationary perspective. The synoptic mode is invoked by such surface elements as the plural noun or the static preposition in. On the other hand, in (15b), an instance of the sequential mode, there are such grammatical forms as, singular noun or the motion preposition through. In this case, the perspective point is motile. Moreover, Talmy (2000a: 72) argues that the sequential perspectival mode has an additional application “within the temporal domain to a succession of events or to the continuation of a single event” and exemplifies it with sentence (16), which portrays the sequentiality of events. (16) I shopped at the store, and then I went home. (after Talmy 2000a: 74) As I argue elsewhere (Łozińska 2017a), he sequential and synoptic perspectival modes may be applied to two semantically distinct spatial situations coded in Polish by the prefix po-. Situations where the viewpoint is static and the conceptualizer does not follow the moving figure will be treated in the present analysis as instances of synoptic perspectival mode. In such sentences there is no sequence of motion verbs, which would describe the phases of the figure’s motion. Let us analyse two pairs of Polish sentences (from the National Corpus of the Polish Language, PELCRA) that call for the synoptic mode. (17) a.  I poszedł sobie. Nawet nie zapytał, czy umiem sama podnieść się na nogi … (Wolna Trybuna) ‘And he went away. He had not even asked if I could stand on my feet.’ b. (…) zostawił mnie w spokoju i poszedł w swoją stronę. (Wolna Trybuna) ‘(…) he left me alone and went away his own way.’

28

Chapter 1

In (17a and b) the figures’ motion away from the sources is construed synoptically from a stationary perspective. The perspective point, which does not change its location, is situated at the source and the whole scene is viewed from this point. The conceptualizer’s attention is focused only on the source of the path and its initial part until the moment the figure is out of the region of interactive focus. As mentioned above, the synoptic perspectival mode is connected with a wider scope of attention. Consequently, this leads to a less detailed knowledge about the moving figure as well as its future actions. In (17a and b) the conceptualizer’s attention stays at the source of movement and focuses on the situation there. Such narratives are devoid of any further descriptions of the figure or its future actions. Motion events in (18a and b) below are different in this respect. (18) a. Poszedł do kuchenki i jadł chleb, pił mleko. Potem odkrył w kieszeni pudełko papierosów i wyrzucił je do śmieci. (Początek) ‘He went to the kitchen, ate bread and drank milk. Later he found a packet of cigarettes in his pocket and threw it away.’ b. Natychmiast zerwał się z łóżka, rozprostował kości i poszedł do łazienki. Zanim umył zęby, długo spoglądał w lustro … (Czwarte niebo) ‘He immediately sprang up to his feet, stretched and went to the bathroom. He brushed his teeth and gazed in the mirror for a long time.’



In the above sentences, the conceptualizer moves his attention along a horizontal path in order to stay focused on the moving figure. Thus, the conceptualizer’s attention is concentrated on the consecutive locations on the path, in particular on the source and goal. These parts of the path are profiled and elaborated on in greater detail than in sentences that call for synoptic mode. Moreover, descriptions of the figure’s further actions are provided. Thus, in (18a), we find out that in the kitchen there was a dustbin and that the man ate bread and drank milk while (18b) provides the information that in the bathroom there was a mirror and that the man brushed his teeth, etc. In other words, the conceptualizer assumes “a moving proximal perspective point with local scope of attention on elements of the schema taken in sequence” (Talmy 2000a: 269). Synoptic and sequential perspectival modes are called for in sentences containing motion verbs prefixed by a number of other prefixes than po-, for example by the prefix wy-. The immovable and moveable points of view as well as the two types of attention involved in the synoptic and sequential perspectival modes correspond to various senses of prefixed motion verbs, which will be shown in Chapter 6 in the presentation of the uses of deictic prefixes.

Chapter 2

About Motion The chapter will discuss the theoretical background for my analysis of lexicalization patterns of motion events with a chief focus on ways of coding spatial situations in Slavic languages. The discussion will, first of all, encompass conceptual typologies of motion, and in particular Talmy’s theory of a motion event. Secondly, various types of motion will be described. 2.1

A Conceptual Typology of Motion

The present section examines three linguistic approaches to motion, which in different ways categorize lexicalization patterns in the domain of motion. It will first discuss Talmy’s theory of motion event1 with its division into satellite- and verb-framed lexicalization patterns (Talmy 1985, 2000a, 2000b). This will be followed by a description of Slobin’s (1996a) “thinking-for-speaking” hypothesis, which points to the reflection of a type of language in the cognition of its speakers. Next, Pourcel’s (2010) conceptual typology of motion situations will be presented, which considerably differs from that of Talmy. The section will be concluded with an account of Zlatev’s (2007) approach to motion called Holistic Spatial Semantics. The last two approaches to motion typology will be presented in less detail than Talmy’s since they do not directly apply to the analysis of motion events presented in the analytical parts of this book. They are mentioned here since they bring to the fore patterns unaccounted for in Talmy’s typology. 2.1.1 Motion Event Spontaneous motion of animate and inanimate entities which change their location is the focus of interest of the present study. The term for this type of motion is “translational”. As opposed to self-contained motion, it has been defined as “change through time in the location of some entity” (Langacker 1987a: 1  For the sake of simplicity, I follow the convention of not capitalizing notions connected with motion events. Note, however, that when citing Talmy (2000a, 2000b) I shall follow his use of capital letters for these notions, e.g. Motion event, Path, Figure, Ground, Motion.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���8 | doi ��.��63/9789004360358_004

30

Chapter 2

167) or “motion in which the location of the Figure changes in the time period under consideration” (Talmy 2000b: 25). According to Fillmore (1971: 52) we may say of something that it has moved “if it is at the location at one time and at another location at another time”. All three definitions rest on the concepts of location and time. In Talmy’s terms a motion event encompasses not only situations that involve motion but also stationary ones. In the latter case, motion equals zero. In this way Talmy includes static spatial situations as instances of motion events. Thus, motion, as one of four basic components of a motion event, refers to the presence of motion or its locatedness (Talmy 2000b: 25). Besides the fact of motion, Talmy operates with three other basic components of a motion event: “figure”, “ground” and “path”. The notions of figure and ground were introduced to the theory of linguistics by Talmy (1972). The figure is defined as “a moving or conceptually movable object whose path or site is at issue”, while the ground is “a reference frame, or a reference object stationary within the reference frame, with respect to which the figure’s path or site are characterized” (Talmy 2000b: 26). The figure and the ground also differ in the degree of attention typically given to them. One element—the figure—is the focus of attention. It is perceived as a prominent coherent element, distinguished from the rest of what is in the field of vision—the ground. Finally, the path is defined by Talmy (2000b: 25) as the path followed or the site occupied by the figure with respect to the ground. 2.1.1.1 The Semantic Component of Path The path has a special status among the four components since it is the core of a motion event. What this basically means is that it is the only element that must be coded in the descriptions of motion events in all languages. While both the figure and the ground are physical objects, the path has an association function, which means that it relates the figural entity to the ground entity (Talmy 2000b: 218). It should be noted that path is not a simplex constituent but contains several components. The three basic ones are the vector, the conformation and the deixis. All of them are relevant to the analysis of motion verbs. Thus, vector “comprises the basic types of arrival, traversal, and departure that a Figural schema can execute with respect to a Ground schema” (Talmy 2000b: 53). Possible vectors are, for example, move to, move from, move fromto, move via, move along, move alength. The conformation is defined as “a geometric complex that relates the fundamental Ground schema within a Motion-aspect formula to the schema for a full Ground object” (Talmy 2000b: 54). Examples of conformations are enclosures, lines and planes. Finally, deixis

About Motion

31

involves two member notions, namely ‘toward the speaker’ and ‘in a direction other than toward the speaker’. The information about source, path and goal corresponds to the vector, while the conformation is the geometric schema for the full ground object. Each language possesses its own system of conformations, which in English can be a point, an interior or a surface. English, as well as other IndoEuropean languages, possesses a vast range of spatial terms that derive their meaning from the combination of the schematic minimal path information and the information about the place (i.e. conformation). To illustrate, the English preposition into derives its meaning from combining the minimal path information—end with the information about the place—interior (Zlatev 2007: 331). Zlatev (2007: 332) exemplifies the notions of the vector and the conformation for the English language with the following sentences in (1). (1)

a. John went out of the room. Conformation: interior Vector: beginning b. John went through the room. Conformation: interior Vector: middle c. John went into the room. Conformation: interior Vector: end d. John is in the room. Conformation: interior Vector: zero

In the above sentences, the conformation remains the same (i.e. interior). What changes is the vector. In Slavic languages, the values for the categories of the conformation and the vector are expressed via a combination of verbal prefix (in these languages the most typical satellite to the verb), preposition and case marker. Let us see how the combination of prefixes, prepositions and noun cases render various vectors in Polish. (2) a. Jan wy-szedł z pokoju. Conformation: interior Vector: beginning ‘Jan out-walked from the room.’ b. Jan prze-szedł przez pokój. Conformation: interior Vector: middle ‘Jan through-walked through the room.’ c. Jan w-szedł do pokoju. Conformation: interior Vector: end ‘Jan in-walked into the room.’ d. Jan jest w pokoju. Conformation: interior Vector: zero ‘Jan is in the room.’

32

Chapter 2

The set of sentences in (3) show the lexicalization patterns in Polish when the vector stays the same, and what changes is the conformation. (3) a. Jan wy-szedł z pokoju. Conformation: interior Vector: beginning ‘Jan out-walked from the room’

b. Jan od-szedł (dwa kroki) od lampy. Conformation: a point Vector: beginning ‘Jan away-walked (two steps) from the lamp’

c. Jan po-szedł z placu., Wróbel od-leciał z parapetu. Conformation: surface Vector: beginning ‘Jan away-walked from the square’, ‘A sparrow away-flew from the windowsill’ Thus, in Polish various vectors and conformations are lexicalized by means of relatively complex prefix-preposition combinations. Besides motion, figure, ground and path, which are the basic or internal components of a motion event, Talmy (2000b) distinguishes two more components. They are called co-events and involve manner and cause of motion. These components are considered to be external to a motion event since they often have a relation manner or cause relation to the event (Talmy 2000b: 25). Manner concerns the way the figure does something while cause refers to what the agent or instrument do to the figure. (4a–d) illustrate how all the internal and external components are rendered (after Talmy 2000b: 26): (4)

a. The pencil rolled off the table. b. The pencil blew off the table. c. The pencil lay on the table. d. The pencil stuck on the table.

(4a) and (4b) present spatial situations of translational motion while in (4c) and (4d) motion equals zero. In all four sentences, the pencil functions as the figure, and the table is the ground. It is an object which functions as a reference point with respect to which the figures’ path in (4a) and (4b) or site in (4c) and (4d) are characterized. Off and on render the paths (or a path and a site respectively). Finally, the verbs rolled and lay express the manner of motion while blew and stuck its cause. However, besides manner and cause of motion, the

About Motion

33

verb roots may conflate other semantic components in the verb. These typically present three typologically valid lexicalization patterns. First, the verb may conflate the motion component and co-event, which is either the manner or cause. In (5), the verbs contain information about the fact of self-agentive motion as well as about the manner in which this motion occurs. (5) I ran/ limped/ jumped/ stumbled/ rushed/ groped my way down the stairs. (after Talmy 2000b: 28) The conflation of motion and co-event in the verb root raises the question of whether the these two components are conceptually separable. Talmy (2000b: 36–37) admits that manner cannot exist in isolation independently of motion, although, cognitively, it is real since the linguistic structures of languages show that their speakers conceptualize it as a separate event. To illustrate, a complex instance of the motion of a ball bouncing down a hallway, in (6a), is cognitively perceived and conceptualized as a composite of two distinct patterns of simple motion: namely motion along a straight horizontal line and motion up and down along a vertical line. The conceptual separability of the manner of motion from the fact of motion is less obvious in the case of the verb rolled, where the component of rotation is not wholly independent of the translational motion but must correlate with it. (6) a. The ball bounced/ rolled down the hall. The motion complex in (6a) is analysed in (6b). It consists of pure translation expressed by the verb MOVE, and a co-event of manner representing oscillatory or self-contained motion. Self-contained motion in isolation is expressed in (6c). (6) b. [the ball MOVED down the hall] WITH-THE-MANNER-OF [the ball bounced/ rolled] c. The ball bounced up and down on the same floor tile. /The log rolled over and over in the water. (after Talmy 2000b: 36) The second group of typologically distinct verbs is constituted by verbs that contain the semantic components of motion and path. In languages where most verbs belong to this type, the concept of manner or cause is expressed not by the verb but peripherally by means of adverbial or gerundive constituents,

34

Chapter 2

the use of which in some languages (e.g. in Spanish) may form awkward and syntactically heavy constructions. Sentence (7) illustrates how path may be rendered by the verb in Spanish. (7) La botella entró a la cueva ( flotando). ‘The bottle entered the cave (floating).’ (after Talmy 2000b: 49) This type of sentences also appears in English but is not very frequent and belongs rather to formal register. English verbs conflating the path are mainly of Romance origin. Finally, the third category comprises verbs that, besides the fact of motion, include the semantic component of the figure. Verbs of this kind carry information about various features of the moving or located objects and materials. To rain, to snow or to spit are examples of verbs representing this pattern. In English, the path may be rendered by means of such path verbs as enter or exit as well as by verbal satellites. These are lexical elements that also code the path of motion. They have been defined as “the grammatical category of any constituent other than a noun-phrase complement that is in a sister relation to the verb root” (Talmy 2000b: 102). Cross-linguistically, satellites to the verb include such forms as particles, prefixes, affixes or verb complements. In English, for instance, satellites may be free words or bound affixes, such as over in The engine started over and mis- in The engine misfired. Satellites are not, however, the only closed-class elements that render the path. For example, in Polish and Russian the path is typically expressed by the combination of satellites and prepositional phrases. In these languages, contrary to English, it is easy to distinguish satellites from prepositions since prefixes are bound to the verb and prepositions are easily omissible and accompany a noun governing its case (Talmy 2000b: 105). English, however, positions satellite and preposition next to each other. Although they may be difficult to distinguish from each other, they differ in their properties: satellites are in construction with the verb while prepositions are attached syntactically to nouns. Moreover, a well-known sentence from Talmy (2000b: 107) shows that English satellites receive different stress from prepositions. In the sentence You come right back down out from up in there (stressed words underlined) out is a satellite. Most languages possess a characteristic place for the lexicalization of the path. Since the path, as an obligatory element, is a schematic core of a motion event, the place of its lexicalization decides whether this language belongs to the category of satellite- or verb-framed languages.

About Motion

35

2.1.1.2 Satellite- and Verb-Framed Languages The motion event is presumably conceptually universal, although languages lexicalize it differently. Moreover, it is possible to distinguish various patterns of this lexicalization. Thus, Talmy (2000b) divides languages into two typological categories, namely satellite- and verb-framed languages. In each of these categories the four components of a motion event are mapped differently within the syntactic structure of a given language. As mentioned in the previous section, the path is an obligatory component of a motion event and the surface element in which it is most predominantly coded decides to which category a given language belongs. Verb-framed languages characteristically map the path onto the main verb. They include Romance languages, Semitic, Japanese, Korean, Turkish, Tamil, Polynesian, Bantu, some branches of Mayan, Nez Perce, and Caddo. Sentences (8) and (9) illustrate the way in which motion into and out of a container are rendered in Spanish. In both sentences the verbs express the path while the manner components are expressed peripherally in gerunds. Both examples come from Talmy (2000b: 49) (8) La botella entró a la cueva ( flotando). The bottle MOVED-in to the cave (floating). ‘The bottle floated into the cave’ (9) La botella salió de la cueva ( flotando). The bottle MOVED-out from the cave (floating). ‘The bottle floated out of the cave, (floating).’ In satellite-framed languages, on the other hand, the path is rendered by a satellite to the verb. The verbs of satellite-framed languages most commonly conflate the fact of motion and manner in which it occurs or its cause. The group of satellite-framed languages contains most Indo-European languages (apart from Romance), Finno-Ugric, Chinese, Ojibwa, and Warlbiri. Polish and Russian, as Slavic languages, are typical representatives of this typological category. Their verbal prefixes are examples of satellites, the function of which is mainly to express the path of motion. In (10) and (11), the Russian verb bežat’ ‘to run’, besides the fact of motion, involves the semantic component of manner, while the verbal prefixes v- and vy-, in combination with prepositions, code the path into and out of a container respectively. (10) Ja vbežal (v dom). ‘I ran in (-to the house).’

36

Chapter 2

(11) Ja vybežal (iz doma). ‘I ran out (of the house).’ Nevertheless, Talmy’s two-category typology has been shown to be problematic, especially as far as so-called serial-verb languages are concerned. In these languages two or more verbs are used to describe the same motion event. An example of the lexicalization of a motion event in Thai is shown in (12), where the first verb expresses the manner of motion, the second the path and the third carries the deictic information. (12) chán dɘɘn khǎam thanŏn khâw paj naj sŭan I walk cross road enter go in park ‘I walked across the road and into the park’ (after Zlatev and Yangklang 2004: 160) Some languages, which Talmy classified as satellite-framed, e.g. Chinese or Lahu, have been shown to be serializing. Serial-verb languages include such language families as Niger-Congo, Hmong-Mien, Sino-Tibetan, Tai-Kadai, Mon-Khmer and Austronesian (cf. Zlatev and Yangklang 2004: 160). This type of languages is referred to as equipollently-framed. Finally, the division of languages into satellite- and verb-framed is not clearcut. To illustrate, in English there are a number of verbs that conflate motion and path, for example: enter, exit, ascend, descend, pass, cross, traverse, circle, return, arrive, advance, join or separate. However, these lexical items, which are mainly borrowings from Romance languages, are less colloquial and less frequently used than those that conflate manner. Thus, instead of a strict dichotomy, the languages of the world form a continuum on which the languages are placed closer or further from the verb-framed or satellite-framed poles. In particular, the studies of intra-typological differences (e.g. Filipović 2007, Hasko 2010) contribute to the understanding of the real nature of lexicalization patterns. Besides the fact that being a satellite-framed or verb-framed language is a matter of degree, diachronic studies show that a language’s place on the continuum is subject to change as well. As a language develops, it may move along the cline. Although Polish and Russian are typically satellite-framed languages, not in all instances of coding spatial relations is the path rendered outside the verb. To illustrate, Polish path verbs include, for example, wrócić ‘to return’ or skręcić ‘to turn’ or in Russian kružit’ ‘to circle’ or napravljat’sja ‘to direct oneself’. Such verbs are devoid of manner information. Other verbs may conflate both path and manner

About Motion

37

information, for example, Polish runąć ‘to fall forcefully’, which denotes both downward as well as forceful movement or Russian pjatit’sja ‘to step back’, which includes information about the motor movement of body parts as well movement backward. 2.1.1.3 Typological Shift Languages may undergo a typological shift in their lexicalization of motion events. To illustrate, Latin, classical Greek, and Proto-Germanic languages presumably used to be satellite-framed. In those languages the fact of motion and the path were conflated in the main verb root and verbal prefixes were verbal satellites rendering the path. Due to phonological changes as a result of which verbal prefixes became less distinct from verbs, the three languages did not maintain the inherited pattern. Germanic and Greek developed a new set of path satellites while the languages that emerged from Latin developed a system of path-conflating verbs. Thus, some languages remained satellite-framed and others evolved into a verb-framed type (Talmy 2000b: 118). One of the differences between satellite- and verb-framed languages lies in the sizes of their manner and path verb lexicons. Satellite-framed languages possess relatively larger manner-verb and smaller path-verb lexicons than verb-framed languages. Verkerk (2014, 2015), who traced the diachronic changes of motion verbs in 21 Indo-European languages, points to the evolution of motion verbs as the major reason for the different sizes of path- and mannerverb lexicons in satellite- and verb-framed languages. Her study of word formation patterns in 21 languages has shown the tendency of languages to evolve towards the verb-framed pole. Verkerk (2014, 2015) points out that the lexicalization of the prefix-verb combination is an important source of path verbs in many languages. To illustrate, Latin verbs which used to code manner such as scandere ‘to mount’ or venir ‘to come’ merged with satellites de- and re- and formed the French path verbs descendre ‘to descend’ and revenir ‘to return’. In all Balto-Slavic languages recent fossilization of prefix-verb combinations has given rise to the formation of new path verbs. According to Verkerk (2014: 270–271) among Polish verbs the following have emerged as a result of a preverb-verb combination: dostać ‘to get’, dotrzeć ‘to get’, oddalić ‘to go away’, opuścić ‘to leave’, porzucić ‘to abandon’, przeprawiać ‘to cross’, przybyć ‘to arrive’, wybrać się ‘to set out’, następować ‘to follow’, zbaczać ‘go around’, zbliżać się ‘approach’. As for Russian, the path verbs distinguished by Verkerk (2014) include peresekat’ ‘ to cross’, podnimat’sja ‘to go up’, vozvrašat’sja ‘to return’, blizit’sja ‘to approach’, ogibat’ ‘go round’, spustit’sja ‘to go down’.

38

Chapter 2

Verkerk’s analysis (2014) has omitted some verbs (e.g. Polish uciekać ‘to escape’) and erroneously treated verbs like zbliżać się ‘approach’ as a prefix-verb combination (cf. Kopecka 2010). Nevertheless, the comparison of the number of types of path verbs created as a result of a prefix-verb merge revealed in Verkerk’s analysis (2014) shows that the process has been more productive in Polish than in Russian and resulted in 11 types of path verbs, while only 6 verb types of this kind have been formed in Russian. 2.1.1.4 “Thinking for Speaking” Hypothesis Talmy’s typology shows that languages differ in their lexicalization of motion events. Since language and thought are inseparable, Slobin (1996a: 70) argues that the differences in the lexicalization patterns between languages lead their speakers to having distinct world-views. The semantic content that must be expressed in a given language directs its speakers’ attention to these particular dimensions of experience, and in consequence the subjective orientation of the world imposed by a language “affects the ways in which we think while we are speaking” (Slobin 1996a: 91). The dichotomy into satellite-framed and verb-framed languages has been used to study the issue of linguistic relativity. Slobin’s “thinking for speaking” hypothesis assumes that the conventional construal patterns of a given language influence the thought processes of its users. Slobin (1997: 439) assumes that the lexicalization patterns of a given language influence the ways in which speakers focus on the components of a motion event, which is reflected in the lexical choice and the syntax of narrative discourse. Thus, speakers of satellite-framed languages are obliged by the structure of their language to encode the manner of motion. The lexicons of manner verbs tend to be richer in satellite framed languages and in consequence, their speakers make more fine-grained manner distinctions. To illustrate, in English all the verbs jump, skip, bounce, gambol, spring, leap correspond to one French verb bondir. Thus, the expression of manner in English is more fine-grained than in French. Moreover, speakers of verb-framed languages code manner only when it is at issue and otherwise do not mention it. As a consequence, they are less sensitive to it and the mental imagery of satellite-framed language speakers is richer in manner-of-motion information when compared with that of verbframed language speakers. This claim is supported by studies carried out by Slobin (2003), in which English and Spanish speakers were asked to report the same event. The speakers of English (where manner is obligatorily coded in the verb) tended to code the manner of movement while the speakers of Spanish (where the verbs typically include the path) concentrated on the physical surrounding of the scene (Slobin 2003: 172). Thus, languages not only differ in the

About Motion

39

type of information included in the verbs (e.g. path and manner) but also in the level of its schematicity. According to the “thinking for speaking” hypothesis language differences are reflected in the way we think about the world. Manner of motion is not, however, the only component of a motion event which receives a different degree of attention from users of satellite- and verbframed languages. Contrary to expectations, Sobin’s research (1997, 2004) on path descriptions in novels and elicited narratives shows that the descriptions of motion situations provided by speakers of satellite-framed languages are richer in path elaborations outside the verb than those wh produced by speakers of verb-framed languages. Let us now proceed to a brief discussion of Pourcel’s typology of motion (2010), which differs from Talmy’s account (2000b) both in the semantic component on which the typology is based as well as in the differentiated categories. 2.1.2 Pourcel’s Conceptual Typology In contrast to Talmy, Pourcel (2010) proposes that motion situations should be described not on the basis of existing language patterns, but of conceptual categories, i.e. on the ways our minds categorize motion, in an attempt “to avoid linguacentric analyses of experiential domains” (Pourcel 2010: 447). Since conceptual categories are independent of linguistic or cultural conditioning, they are assumed to be universal for speakers of all languages rather than to be language- or culture-specific. For this reason linguistic studies should be based on the conceptual reality of motion, which means conceptually real categories, rather than on solely linguistically-defined parameters such as path and manner (Pourcel 2010: 420). Cognitive data coming from categorization tasks lead Pourcel to the conclusion that it is the figure of motion that is the most central element of motion typology since its physical properties determine such schematic variables as paths, manner, causality, agency or intentionality. Pourcel (2010) distinguishes certain types of motion based on figure characteristics, for example, the distinction between activities and events, caused and self-motion events, or animal and human motion, to name just a few. Let me briefly discuss the first of the above-mentioned distinctions and see how they refer to the characteristics of the moving figure. Activities (illustrated in 13a) differ from events (in 13b) as far as directionality of motion is concerned. While activities lack directionality, events entail a change in location, which is why they necessitate directionality. (13) a. Helen is jogging. b. Helen jogged to the store. (after Pourcel 2010: 423)

40

Chapter 2

According to Pourcel (2010: 423), the path of motion is not salient in respect of activities since no change of location is specified. In the case of events, on the other hand, the path is salient since they code goal-directed motion. By the same token, Pourcel claims that manner is salient in activities and non-salient in events. Nevertheless, as Capelle and Declerck (2005: 892) rightly note, “the path need not be expressed overtly or even referred to indirectly if doing so would be irrelevant to the message conveyed. But even when no (aspect of a) path is explicitly coded in a motion event, the existence of a path is understood”, which means that from the conceptual and not purely linguistic point of view, no one would assume that in (13a) Helen’s motion is not motion along some specific path. Moreover, Pourcel (2010) does not, as she promises, base the distinction between activities and events on the figure’s characteristics. Whereas Pourcel’s call for the need to discover a unified, system of study of motion independent of any language seems reasonable, her conceptual typology seems to be insufficient for cross-linguistic studies. 2.1.3 Zlatev’s Holistic Spatial Semantics Similarly to the conceptual typology described in the previous section, Zlatev’s (1997, 2003) theory of Holistic Spatial Semantics was designed to maximize the reliability of cross-linguistic comparison. This theory aimed at determining the semantic contribution of each element in the description of a spatial situation in relation to the meaning of the whole utterance. The advantage of Zlatev’s approach is that it is not limited to a particular linguistic form, form class or grammatical notion (Zlatev 2003: 305). It takes into account semantic categories that are thought to emerge through sensorimotor interaction in everyday experience. Those semantic categories, in contrast to linguistic categories, are schematic and socially shared. Zlatev (2003: 310) explains the difference between semantic and linguistic categories by saying that “semantic categories have their basis in categories of sensorimotor experience, but are not sensorimotor themselves. The latter are perceptually rich and languageindependent while the semantic ones are schematic and language-dependent”. The mappings between the semantic categories and the utterance units are not one-to-one (Zlatev 2003: 307). On one hand, similarly to Talmy’s theory of a motion event, a linguistic item (e.g. the verb) conflates more than one semantic component (e.g. the fact of motion and the path). On the other hand, a single semantic unit may correspond to a number of utterance units. The holistic approach to the analysis of motion verbs and verbal prefixes will be adopted in the present study since the context in which a given lexical item is used will be vital for its analysis. The use of motion verbs in the

About Motion

41

utterances embedded in discourse and social practices will be the main unit of analysis, and in consequence motion verbs and prefixes will not be studied as isolated lexical items. However, Talmy’s approach to the semantics of motion verbs, relying on the conflation patterns of motion verbs (i.e., mapping of more than one semantic unit to a single word) has been found to be more adequate for the present analysis than Zlatev’s Holistic Spatial Semantics, in which the semantic categories and the utterance units are not constrained. 2.2

A Taxonomy of Motion

We are constantly in motion and the objects around us move all the time. We shiver when going to work on a cold day. We throw a ball and it flies through the air. Moreover, we frequently use spatial terminology to talk metaphorically about abstract things such as, for example, emotions or science, and even static situations may be described by means of verbs of motion, or other locative terms. To illustrate, in Polish descriptions of winding but, obviously, immovable roads, as in (14), often involve the word wić się ‘to writhe’, which is typically reserved for the movements of a snake. (14) Główna droga wije się poprzez doliny i przełęcze (…) [Rąkowski Polska egzotyczna] ‘The main road winds through valleys and mountain passes (…)’ All the situations described in the previous paragraph involve motion, although each of them involves a different type. The present section discusses these different types and presents the main body of research on motion carried out in the vein of cognitive linguistics. First, the distinction into factive and fictive motion will be presented, which will be followed by a discussion of caused and self-propelled motion. The section will be concluded with the presentation of various types of frames of reference used in different languages for the description of motion as well as the location of objects. 2.2.1 Translational vs. Self-Contained Motion Talmy (2000b) differentiates between translational and self-contained motion. Translational motion includes spatial situations in which objects’ basic locations shift from one point to another while self-contained motion refers to objects that remain in the same basic or ‛average’ locations. Instances of selfcontained motion generally involve oscillation, rotation, expansion, wiggling, local wandering or resting (Talmy 2000b: 35). In other words, self-contained

42

Chapter 2

motion, as opposed to translational motion, refers to the figure’s movement without change of location. However, this distinction into translational and self-contained motion becomes problematic when we consider such motion verbs of manner as float and kick, which can code both translational and self-contained motion, as in (15) and (16) respectively. (15) He kicked the ball over the wall. (16) He kicked the wall. Talmy views this variation as a case of polysemy, where the translational and locative senses of the verb to kick are involved. Kick1 refers to the foot’s impact on the wall (as in 16), but does not suggest that the wall move, which is particularly evident when the object (the wall in this case) is fixed in place. Kick2, on the other hand, also incorporates this basic meaning together with the object’s motion (as in 15) (Talmy 2000b: 31–32). 2.2.2 Bounded vs. Unbounded Motion Another aspectual dimension of motion situations is boundedness or telicity (from the Greek telos meaning ‘end’). Bounded motion refers to a situation when the figure either departs from the source of motion, passes a specified path, arrives at a goal or to a combination of these spatial situations. Unbounded (or atelic) motion, on the other hand, may last indefinitely since it either involves only the direction of movement as in Mary walked along the beach. or non-directional motion situations, as in Mary jogged in the morning. The notion of boundedness is particularly relevant for the characterization of Slavic verbs of motion. These verbs are inherently either perfective or imperfective, which is determined by the boundedness or unboundedness of the process that they profile. Langacker (1987a, 2008) describes the contrast between perfective and imperfective verbs as parallel to that between countable and uncountable nouns. Perfective verbs share properties with discrete solid objects and imperfective verbs with fluid substances. The perfective/ imperfective contrast hinges mainly on whether the profiled process is bounded within the immediate temporal scope. Immediate scope (IS) is understood here as the portion of conceptual content invoked by a particular expression. It is bounded if there is some limit to the set of constitutive entities, which is illustrated in Figure 2.1. To illustrate, verbs like fall, jump or kick profile relations with a beginning and an end (Figure 2.1a), while others like have, know or doubt (Figure 2.1b)

43

About Motion (a) Perfective Verb ms is t

(b) Imperfective Verb ms is t

Figure 2.1 Perfective and Imperfective verbs (after Langacker 2008: 153).

profile stable relations of indefinite duration. The relations profiled by perfectives have their beginning and end put on stage for focused viewing, which is not the case with imperfectives (Langacker 2008: 147). 2.2.3 Self-Propelled vs. Caused Motion Self-propelled motion is spontaneous, which means it is not brought about by an external force. In Polish and Russian this type of motion is expressed mostly by intransitive verbs and less so by reflexive verbs. In the latter case, motion is conceptualized as caused when “one causes oneself to move in the same way as one causes the motion of an object” (Radden and Dirven 2007: 291). Contrary to self-propelled motion, caused motion is most typically expressed by means of transitive verbs and refers to events in which an external force changes the location of an object. The external force may cause motion of things to a goal, as in (17a) or away from a source, as in (17b). (17) a. Santa Claus puts sweets in children’s stockings. b. The storm blew the roof off the police station. (after Radden and Dirven 2007: 192) Non-motion verbs may also be used in a caused-motion schema, which is illustrated in (18). The intransitive verb to sneeze functions here as an ordinary motion verb, such as to push. (18) Fred sneezed the napkin right off the table. As argued by Dirven and Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (2010: 29), there is a conceptual causal link between two successive events [(Fred sneeze) → (the napkin is off the table)]. Dirven and Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (2010) apply Langacker’s (1987a) notions of full compositionality, partial compositionality and non-compositionality to the extended caused-motion construction. In the case of non-compositional

44

Chapter 2

construction, the knowledge system is evoked to which “neither of its components provides direct access, [but] the component structures motivate and highlight selected facets of the composite meaning” (Langacker 1987a: 453). Dirven and Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (2010) argue that the two events [(Fred sneeze) → (the napkin is off the table)] are causally connected since it is a part of the speaker’s knowledge that sneezing may cause light objects to move. In this way a conceptual link between the two events is established. With the repeated use of a given expression, it acquires decontextualized meaning and becomes entrenched. To summarize, the major difference between translational and selfcontained motion is that in the case of the former moving objects change their position in relation to the frame of reference while the latter form of movement does not entail this change. Since translational motion is in the focus of the present study, let us proceed to the description of the basic kinds of spatial frames of reference. 2.2.4 Spatial Frames of Reference The discussion of translational motion undertaken in the present work requires an understanding of various types of spatial frames of reference, by means of which objects are located in space. According to Zlatev (2007: 328) a frame of reference (FoR) “defines one or more reference points, and possibly also a coordinate system of axes and angles. Depending on the types of the reference points and coordinates different types of FoR can be defined”. Zlatev views the role of spatial frames of reference as crucial in distinguishing translocative motion, which is a notion similar to Talmy’s translational motion. Translocative motion situations involve “the continuous change of an object’s average position according to a spatial frame of reference” (Zlatev et al. 2010: 394). Levinson (2003) distinguishes three types of frames of reference: viewercentered, object-centered and environment-centered, which are alternate la­ bels for ‘relative’, ‘intrinsic’ and ‘extrinsic’ respectively. Depending on the nature of the frame of reference, the figure is located by means of reference points and axes characteristic of a given frame. In the viewer-centered frame of reference, the figure is located in relation to a specified viewpoint. The viewpoint may be the location of the speaker, the addressee or a third party, which is why this frame of reference should not be called deictic. The intrinsic frame in turn involves the ground, which has an ‘intrinsic’ orientation. The intrinsic features of the ground involve such notions as front, back, top or bottom. The features of objects which become the basis of

About Motion

45

the coordinate system vary cross-culturally. While in English assigning facets to objects is largely functional, for example, the front of a TV is the side we attend to, in Tzeltal it is based on the object’s shape (Levinson 1999: 140). Finally, the extrinsic frame of reference relies on the external reference points, frequently connected with geocentric orientation or directions provided by gravity. Thus, a scenario of a man located in front of a house would be described intrinsically as The man is in front of the house. The extrinsic description, which commonly involves canonical directions, would be The man is north of the house. The relative frame would be the most complex one since it would involve not only the position of the house but also that of the speaker. The relative description of the scene could be, for example, The man is to the left of the house, which means to my left (see Levinson (1999: 139) for the graphic representation of the canonical examples of the three linguistic frames of reference). There are sets of distinct linguistic expressions associated with each of the mentioned frames. To illustrate, the terms characteristic of the relative frame include terms specifying the speaker’s position such as here, this or that. The intrinsic system in English is indicated by such linguistic terms as front/ back/sides, the ‘extrinsic’ frame of reference, which is used in many nonEuropean languages, includes such characteristic labels as north, east, south, west. Interestingly, some languages do not use the left/ right/ front/back system of spatial relations at all and almost exclusively rely on the cardinal system of directions (Levinson 1999: 109). Moreover, it is possible to use the same term deictically and non-deictically. For example the word front in The tent is in front of the boulder is used deictically. Since the boulder has no front, one must know the location of the speaker and their orientation with respect to the boulder to locate the tent. On the other hand, in My pack is in front of the tent the term front may have an intrinsic meaning with respect to the tent’s sides. A tent, similarly to a person, may have a front and back in relation to which objects such as a pack may be located. The location of the speaker is irrelevant in this situation (Tversky 1999: 466). When a translator assumes a frame of reference that is different from that assumed in the original version, this may result in a different interpretation of the location of the described objects. Let us compare the deictic and intrinsic senses of the terms left and right, which appear in a sentence from The Master and Margarita and its translations into Polish and English in (19). While the Russian and English versions make use of the intrinsic frame and place the groups of soldiers in relation to Pilate, the Polish version adopts a relative frame of reference and the groups of soldiers are placed in relation to

46

Chapter 2

the viewer’s left and right. In other words, in this particular case the interpretation of the soldiers’ position depends on whether the speaker adopts their viewpoint or Pilate’s. Let me note that the difference in translation is treated here as the translator’s inaccuracy and not a language tendency for assuming a specific perspective. (19) a.  Tłum zalałby także pomost i ową pustą przestrzeń, gdyby nie powstrzymywał go potrójny kordon sebastyjskich żołnierzy na lewo od Piłata i potrójny kordon żołnierzy i turejskiej kohorty sojuszniczej na prawo odeń. b. Ona zalila by i samyj pomost, i to očiŝennoe prostranstvo, esli by trojnoj rjad sebastijskih soldat po levuju ruku Pilata i soldat iturejskoj vspomogatel’noj kogorty po pravuju—ne deržal ee. c. The mob would have poured on to the platform and the passage too if there had not been two triple rows of soldiers, one from the Sebastian cohort on Pilate’s left and on his right another from the Ituraean auxiliary cohort, to keep it clear. Assuming a specific perspective depends on a number of factors. Obviously, it predominantly depends on the spatial terms available in a given language as well as linguistic conventions. As Levinson (2003: 38) notes, “even the most closely related languages (and even dialects within them) will differ in the details of the underlying coordinate systems and their geometry, the preferential interpretation of ambiguous lexemes, presumptive origins of the coordinates etc.”. The choice of a perspective by a speaker also depends on a number of cognitive and social factors. Despite the predominant human tendency to view the world from one’s own perspective, assuming a different viewpoint may be driven by the need to understand the position of other people or to see scenes from novel points of view (cf. Tversky 1999). Moreover, the place of living may determine the predominant frame of reference used by the inhabitants. To illustrate, inhabitants of small islands tend to assume the environmentcentered (also called extrinsic or cardinal) frame of reference, and organize space according to cardinal directions: West, East, North and South. These reference points are independent of the position assumed by the speaker or the hearer (Heine 1997: 12). 2.2.5 Factive vs. Fictive Motion The use of locative expressions is usually extended to the description of other domains. The phenomena of using spatial vocabulary for non-spatial domains

About Motion

47

include fictive motion and conceptual spatial metaphor (which falls beyond the scope of the present study and will not be discussed further). The term “fictive motion” was coined by Talmy (2000a), but the terminology in the literature for fictive motion encompasses such terms as subjective motion (Langacker 1990, Matsumoto 1996) and abstract motion (Matlock 2010). All these terms describe slightly different but closely related phenomena. Talmy (2000a: 100) uses the term factive as referring to situations which include more veridical motion than those that exemplify fictive ones. The term ‘veridical’ is used instead of the term ‘true’ in order to indicate that factive and fictive differ motion only in the degree of objectivity with which they describe reality. In Talmy’s terms, fictive motion refers to situations where a motion verb is used for descriptions of situations which do not include any explicit motion or change of state. (20a) and (20b) exemplify how static situations are lexicalized by means of motion verbs in English. (20c), in turn, contains a prepositional phrase that describes a spatial path. As Langacker (1987a: 170–171) argues, on intuitive grounds some kind of motion is involved in the descriptions of fictive motion. The position of a fire in (20c) is specified by means of the description of the path one would have to follow to reach its place. Although motion along the path is purely hypothetical, the speaker moves subjectively along the described path. (20) a. The mountain range goes from Canada to Mexico. (after Talmy 2000a: 104) b. The fence runs along the property line. (after Matlock 2004: 1389) c. There was a fire last night across the river, through the canyon, and over the mountain. (after Langacker 1987a: 170) As already mentioned, Langacker uses the term “subjective motion” which captures yet one more important feature of this type of construal. Langacker views abstract subjective motion as the product of converting under subjectification objective physical motion. As a result, objective change through conceived time is changed to subjective change through processing time (Langacker 1991a: 217–218). To illustrate the difference between subjective and objective motion, let us analyse two uses of the motion verb to rise. (21) a. The balloon rose slowly. b. The hill gently rises from the bank of the river. (after Langacker 1991a: 217)

48

Chapter 2

In (21a) the figure moves objectively along the path while in (21b) the conceptualizer moves subjectively along an upward path. The conceptualizer imposes directionality on the, otherwise, static relationship. Moreover, (21a) describes objective motion in conceived time while (21b) codes subjective scanning through perceived time. Fictive differs from factive motion only in the lack of motion, while mental stimulation in the two cases is the same, which has been confirmed in a number of experimental studies, mainly by Matlock (2004, 2010). She has shown that “the conceptualizer (the speaker or listener) takes a perspective in the scene and mentally simulates ‘movement’ or ‘visual scanning’ along the Figure” (Matlock 2004: 1390).

Chapter 3

Path and Manner Coded in Motion Verbs and Verbal Prefixes 3.1 Introduction Polish and Russian motion verbs typically involve three conceptual layers. The first is the manner of motion, which in both languages is typically lexicalized by the root of the verb, which is traditionally understood as a form of the verb without any prefixes and suffixes. Thus, in verbs like Polish latać ‘to fly’ or Russian letat’ ‘to fly’, the root carries information about how motion is performed. Secondly, a verbal suffix added to the root denotes either unidirectional or non-directional motion. Finally, a prefix added to the verb typically carries path information. The following sections will discuss these three conceptual layers of Polish and Russian motion verbs in the following order. First, I shall present a general discussion of image schemas along with their axiological aspect. This will be followed by the presentation of the ways in which path is lexicalized in Polish and Russian. The discussion will touch upon unidirectional and non-directional verbs of motion in both languages since this distinction is indispensable for the understanding of how image schemas underlie lexicalization patterns. Finally, the ways of lexicalizing the manner of motion in Polish and Russian along with a description of previous attempts to classify the manner of motion in various languages expressed by the motion verbs will be set out. 3.2

Image Schemas and their Combinations

Complicated routine actions that are performed on an everyday basis require the coordination of a number of simpler experiential patterns. Our everyday interaction with the world, with people and objects, is organized by means of structures called image schemas. In cognitive linguistics the notion of image schemas was developed by Johnson (1987) and Lakoff (1987). Johnson defines an image schema as “a recurring dynamic pattern of our perceptual interactions and motor programs that gives coherence and structure to our experience” (Johnson 1987:xiv), without which “our experience would be chaotic and incomprehensible” (Johnson 1987:xxxvi). In other words, image schemas © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���8 | doi ��.��63/9789004360358_005

50

Chapter 3

are abstract patterns of meaningful structures that emerge through our bodily movements, manipulation of objects, and the perceptual interactions that organize our experience. It needs to be stressed here that schemas form gestalts, which basically means that although they can be broken into parts, only their integrity assures their meaning and unique character. While Johnson (1987) regards image schemas as deriving from our bodily experience, Regier (1996) looks for their sources in the structure of the human brain. The two hypotheses are not mutually exclusive when we take into consideration the fact that the way we function on an everyday basis is conditioned by the way our brains work. In general, image schemas are preconceptual structures underlying the conceptualization of space that is reflected in our ways of talking about spatial relations. As mentioned, image schemas are abstract, which means that they are not rigid or fixed patterns in our thinking. They change when applied to a particular situation. In other words, our spatial and temporal experiences are structured by image schemas, which become the basis for reasoning and for talking about the world. Despite the fact that image schemas structure our experience independently of the language we speak (Dodge and Lakoff 2005: 60), the analysis of the way we talk about everyday activities may give us an idea about the nature of these patterns. Image schemas are dynamic patterns by means of which we organize our experience. They are also flexible since, as mentioned above, they can take on a number of instantiations. Gibbs (2006: 91) also points out the abstract nature of image schemas by saying: “image schemas are more abstract than ordinary visual mental images and consist of dynamic spatial patterns that underlie the spatial relations and movement found in actual concrete images”. Despite the great variety of spatial language cross-linguistically, in all languages the diverse spatial terms can be analysed by means of image schemas. This universality has been noted by Dodge and Lakoff (2005: 57–58), who state that there is a set of universal primitives that combined in different ways account for the diversity and complexity of spatial relations expressed by various languages. For example, the English preposition into evokes a combination of source-path-goal and container, exemplifying how lexical items relate to image schemas. The most important primitive image schemas, as listed by Johnson (1987: 126), are as follows: container, balance, compulsion, blockage, counter force, restraint removal, enablement, attraction, mass-count, path, link, center-periphery, cycle, near-far, scale, part-whole, merging, splitting, full-empty, matching, superimposition, iteration, contact, process, surface, object,

Path and manner coded in Polish

51

collection. Nevertheless, the exact number of possible structures of this kind cannot be fixed. These image schemas are primitive in the sense that they cannot be divided into yet simpler gestalts. However, in order to account for the complexity and diversity of human experience, they can be combined. The image schemas that most accurately describe translational motion are the complex source-path-goal combined with the container schema and the schema of manner. Source-path-goal is one of the most thoroughly studied image schemas (e.g. Lakoff 1987, Johnson 1987, Dodge and Lakoff 2005). Its description is especially valid here since the present study concerns translational motion. A typical image schema consists of parts that are interrelated. The basic sourcepath-goal schema consists of: source, path and goal. Johnson (1987: 275) also adds direction as a fourth component of this schema. The relation between these parts is a force vector moving from source to goal. The source-pathgoal schema underlies such various kinds of experience as walking from one place to another, throwing a ball, or giving a present (Johnson 1987: 28). The components of image schemas may be of various kinds, for example, the source and goal may have deictic reference or may be containers. Thus, as Cienki (1995: 9) rightly notes, in human experience image schemas do not usually occur independently but are grouped. These groups are experienced together and form gestalts or wholes. In consequence, primitive image schemas underlying most of our complicated everyday experience are combined and form groups or chains of image schematic patterns. To illustrate, the experience of going to the library fits the following sequence of image schemas: source-path-goal—container—collection—part-whole— transfer—iteration. The library is the goal, at the same time as it is the container, which has an inside and an outside (Oakley 2007: 217). Dodge and Lakoff (2005: 64) illustrate the combination of SOURCE-PATHGOAL and container schemas by means of two sentences: (1) a. Harry sauntered into the room. b. Harry sauntered out of the room. The source-path-goal schema underlies the change in location in both sentences. However, in (1a) the interior of the room is the goal of movement, which is indicated by the preposition into, while in (1b) the interior of the room is the source of movement, which is marked by out of. Thus, the room has an interior (an enclosed space), boundaries (the walls), an exterior (the surrounding area) and a portal (an opening which allows for motion between interior and exterior). All these elements are typical of entities that are schematically

52

Chapter 3

understood as containers. In consequence, both spatial situations expressed in (1) combine the source-path-goal and container schemas, but in a different order. While the source-path-goal schema naturally consists of the three elements mentioned in its name, the structural elements of the container schema include interior, boundary and exterior. Next, the complex source-path-goal schema may also combine with the surface schema. This combination underlies such instances of translational motion in which the GOAL (or, less frequently, the source) is conceptualized as a surface. Figure 3.1 (after Langacker 2008: 33) shows the concept ENTER as a combination of the image schemas of an object, source-path-goal, and container-content. Source-Path-Goal

Object

Container-Content

ENTER

Figure 3.1 Image schema for the verb to enter (Langacker 2008: 33).

As for verbal prefixes, Figure 3.2 presents the combination of source-pathgoal and container schemas coded in Polish and Russian by means of the prefixes wy- or vy- respectively in such motion events as Chłopiec wyszedł z domu ‘A boy walked out of the house’. lm

tr Figure 3.2 The source-path-goal schema combined with the containment schema.

Path and manner coded in Polish

53

The theory of image schemas has contributed largely to the studies of polysemy, semantic change and grammaticalization and has been widely used in literary and textual analysis (cf. Oakley 2007). Image schemas, as will be shown in Section 3.2.1, have also proved useful in the analysis of Russian unidirectional and non-directional motion verbs and the spatial senses of verbal prefixes (Nesset 2007, 2008). For the purpose of the present analysis it is important to mention one more feature of image schemas, one that accounts for the emotive meaning of some motion verbs. Krzeszowski (1993: 310) claims that all image schemas that are grounded in our bodily experience must incorporate an additional axiological plus-minus parameter. Depending on the context, image schemas may have either positive or negative connotations. Krzeszowski (1993, 1997) acknowledges the role of emotions in determining information processing. He claims that since man is a valuating human being, it is obvious that “[v]aluations constitute an aspect of all categorizations, and categorizations directly manifest themselves in language. This establishes a direct link between values and language“ (1997: 15). Let us see what axiological load is connected with two basic image schemas that typically underlie translational motion, namely source-path-goal and container schemas. The Source-path-goal schema has a number of axiological implications. Most importantly, since reaching the goal is the purpose of moving along the path, coordinated and purposeful motion is valued positively, and by the same token being inactive or performing aimless uncoordinated motion is valued negatively. Thus, the plus pole of the schema is centered at the goal and the minus is diffused elsewhere. While the goal is always associated with something good, the path may have either positive or negative implications. If it is straight and facilitates arrival at the desired goal, it is valued positively, and if it is crooked, it is assessed negatively. This is why words like straight have a positive charge in contrast to such words as curved or devious (Krzeszowski 1997: 125). The container schema, which in turn is typically combined with the path schema at either end as the source or, more frequently, as the goal of movement, is connected and motivated by the experience of being in a container and getting out of it. There may be contradictory values assigned to this experience and they all depend on a number of factors. For instance, being in is valued positively as long as the container is positively evaluated. If the container is charged negatively (e.g. prison), being in also has a negative value (Krzeszowski 1993: 317).

54 3.3

Chapter 3

Image Schematic Approach to the Prefixation of Motion Verbs

The previous section discussed the theory of image schemas from the perspective of cognitive linguistics. We shall now consider how this theory might be useful in accounting for the semantics of the prefixation of motion verbs in Polish and Russian. However, before doing this, a distinction into nondirectional (or indeterminate) and unidirectional (or determinate) verbs of motion needs to be laid out. Forsyth (1970) made a distinction between Russian determinate and indeterminate verbs (also called unidirectional and non-directional). Since this differentiation is also valid for Polish, Table 3.1 presents examples of intransitive non-directional and unidirectional forms of verbs that lexicalize motion in Russian and in Polish (cf. Grenoble 1986, Kagan 2007, Hasko 2010, Sikora 2013). Unidirectional and non-directional verbs of motion are morphologically related although there are no productive rules for their derivation. Let me note that in most cases (apart from the verbs iść/ chodzić; idti/ hodit) the pairs have the same verb root and differ in suffixes. Judging from the phonetic form, some Polish verbs seem to have close phonetically equivalents in Russian. However, the meaning of these linguistic items differs, for example the non-directional/unidirectional Polish pair leźć/ łazić has the meaning ‘to creep, to drag one’s feet’, while the main meaning of Russian lezt’/lazit’ is ‘to climb’ but also ‘to wander, to loiter’. Table 3.1

Polish and Russian unidirectional and non-directional motion verbs

Unidirectional verb (Pl/ Ru)

Non-directional verb (Pl/ Ru)

Translation

iść/ idti jechać/ jehat’ biec/ bežat’ lecieć/ letet’ płynąć/ plyt’ pełznąć/ polzti leźć/ lezt’

chodzić/ hodit jeździć/ jezdit’ biegać/ begat’ latać/ letat’ pływać/ plavat’ pełzać/ polzat’ łazić/ lazit’

gnać/ gnat’

gonić/ gonjat’

‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ ‘to drive’ ‘to run’ ‘to fly’ ‘to swim’ ‘to creep’ [Pl] ‘to loiter’/ [Ru] ‘to climb’, ‘to loiter’ ‘to speed’

Path and manner coded in Polish

55

The differences in meaning between unidirectional and non-directional verbs of motion are connected with the presence or absence of the path information respectively. The path expressed by means of unidirectional verbs is, in contrast to verbal prefixes, highly schematic, which means it is a “coarse-grained representation providing relatively little detail” (Langacker 1991a: 552). The schematic path, to some extent, corresponds to the path component differentiated by Talmy (2000b), namely the vector. Unidirectional verbs describe motion in one direction towards a goal, while non-directional ones do not include this information. Thus, a unidirectional verb, such as chodzić [Pl]/ hodit’ [Ru] ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’, codes solely the manner of motion, i.e. on foot at normal speed in an unspecified direction, while its unidirectional counterpart iść [Pl]/ idti [Ru], apart from this specific manner of motion, also includes the information about direction towards a goal. Nesset (2007: 64–66) discusses four basic types of different uses of Russian unidirectional and non-directional verbs. Let us see how they relate to the uses of Polish verbs of motion. All Russian examples come from Nesset (2007), while the Polish examples have been selected from the National Corpus of the Polish Language (http://www.nkjp.uni.lodz.pl/). First, in both languages unidirectional verbs are reserved for coding motion in one direction towards a goal, as illustrated in Sentences in (2). (2) a. Poetomu on bežit v kino, čtoby v temnote otdyšat’sja [Izmajlov] (after Nesset 2007: 65) ‘So he runs to the cinema in order to gain breath in the dark.’ b. Kelner biegnie do stolika na prawo. [Miłość na Krymie] ‘The waiter is running to the table to the right.’ The second type of spatial situation, in which the figure moves not only along a path to the goal but also back, is lexicalized differently in the two languages. This type of spatial information is rendered in Russian by non-directional verbs of motion while in Polish it is the prefixed unidirectional verbs that encode such relations. This difference between Polish and Russian is reflected in Sentences (3a) and (3b). (3) a. Včera on hodil w kino i dolžen byl pokazat’ mestnym, kak odevajutsja normal’nye ljudi. [Bolmat] (after Nesset 2007: 65) ‘Yesterday he went to the cinema and had to show the local people how to dress.’

56

Chapter 3

b. Sebastian Bach tylko raz poszedł do kina i, gdy zgasło światło, natychmiast uciekł. [Polityka] ‘Sebastian Bach only once went to the cinema and, when the lights went out, he immediately escaped.’ The information about the path of motion included in the prefix in such contexts is in most cases completed by prepositional phrases. Although the study of prepositional phrases is beyond the scope of the present study, they need to be mentioned here to fully account for the uses of unidirectional and nondirectional motion verbs. Let me note that Polish and Russian prepositional phrases can be divided into locational phrases (e.g. na stole ‘on the table’, w kieszeni ‘in the pocket’), and accusative phrases (e.g. na stół ‘onto the table’, w kieszeń ‘into the pocket’). In both Polish and Russian a number of prepositions, for example na/ na ‘on’, ‘onto’ or w/ v ‘in’, ‘into’ respectively, may take either the locative or accusative case (for the account of these so called “twoway prepositions”, see Smith 1993). Locative prepositional phrases usually code static situations or non-directed motion (as in 4a), while accusative phrases usually code unidirectional motion (as in 4b). Thus, when movement to a particular goal is performed repeatedly, nondirectional verbs of motion with accusative prepositional phrases are used. In (4a) the non-directional motion verb latać ‘to fly’ along with the locative prepositional phrase w kosmosie ‘in space’ denotes non-directed motion, while in (4b) the same verb with an accusative prepositional phrase w kosmos ‘into space’ is used for coding repeated directed motion into space, which is conceptualized as a container. (4) a. Gołym okiem ich nie widać ani nawet przez lornetkę, bo latają w kosmosie. (Opowiadania i donosy by Sławomir Mrożek) ‘Naked eye cannot see them or even through binoculars, because they fly in space.’ b. Po co ludzie latają w kosmos? (Onet: rozmowy) ‘Why do people fly into space?’ Moreover, Nikitina (2010) notices that locative prepositional phrases in some contexts may appear with both unidirectional and non-directional motion verbs and she illustrates the claim with Sentences in (5). Nevertheless, it should be noted that the locative prepositional phrase used with a unidirectional verb does not code the goal of motion but carries the information about the setting of the action.

Path and manner coded in Polish

57

(5) a. Letit v sinem nebe, legkij, kak vol’naja ptica. flies.ipfv.unidir in blue.loc sky.loc light as free bird ‘[He] flies in the blue sky as light as a free bird’ (after Nikitina 2010: 269) b. Lastočki tabunkami letajut v poljah. swallows little.herds.instr fly.ipfv.non-dir. in fields.loc ‘Swallows fly in the fields in small herds ‘ (after Nikitina 2010: 269) Coming back to the uses of Polish and Russian motion verbs, in both languages movement with no particular direction is lexicalized by means of non-directional verbs, as in (6). (6) a. Izvestno, čto on mnogo ezdit po Evrope i pobyval daže v Amerike. [Rosijskaja muzykal’naja gazeta] (after Nesset 2007: 65) ‘It is known that he travels a lot around Europe, and he was even in America.’ b. Dużo jeździł, głównie do Niemiec, do Szwajcarii, do Hiszpanii (…) [Urząd] ‘He traveled a lot, mainly to Germany, Switzerland, Spain (…)’



Finally, the ability to move, which, of course, is not connected with any direction of movement, is expressed in both Polish and Russian by the nondirectional verbs of movement, as exemplified by Sentences in (7). (7) a. On zabyl, čto on ne umeet plavat’, i, estestvenno, utonul. [Amurskij Meridian] (after Nesset 2007: 66) ‘He forgot that he cannot swim and naturally he drowned.’ b. Potrafi wejść do głębokiej wody wiedząc, że nie umie pływać. [Osiedle prominentów] ‘He can walk into deep water knowing that he cannot swim.’



To summarize, the lexicalization patterns of unidirectional and non-directional verbs of movement in Polish and Russian exhibit a number of similarities. The two languages structure the following spatial situations in the same way: motion along a path towards a goal, movement with no particular direction and the ability to move. The only difference in rendering spatial situations by means of unidirectional and non-directional verbs concerns motion towards a goal and back to a starting point.

58

Chapter 3

As already mentioned, unidirectional verbs code directional motion while non-directional verbs are devoid of this information. Spatial prefixes may be added to unidirectional or non-directional verbs, which in both cases completely changes the path information of the verbs. To illustrate, let us consider the meanings of the Polish unprefixed non-directional verb pływać ‘to swim’. (8) a. Statki pływały po morzu. ‘Ships sailed on the ocean’ b. Statki wpływały do portu. ‘Ships sailed into the harbour’ Sentence (8a) profiles a non-completable activity of non-directional motion, while in sentence (8b) the prefixed verb carries the path information added by the prefix w-, denoting motion into a harbour, which is schematically conceptualized as a container. The situation is quite similar with unidirectional verbs of motion. Let us recall that verbs like iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’, biec ‘to run’ or lecieć ‘to fly’ contain highly schematic information about the path, or more precisely, about the coordinated directional motion. However, the path information included in them completely changes when they are prefixed. According to Nesset (2008: 24), the prefixation of unidirectional verbs of motion leads to the neutralization of the directionality contrast. In other words, when spatial prefixes, such as w-/v-, are added to them, the information about the path included in the unprefixed verb is overridden by the path information carried by the prefix. In consequence, prefixed non-directional and unidirectional verbs such as wpływać and wpłynąć (‘in-swim’) differ in aspect but do not differ in the path information carried by them. Let us now turn to a more detailed description of the main component of the motion event, namely the path, and the ways in which this information is rendered by verbal prefixes in the two languages. 3.4

Spatial Prefixes in Polish and Russian

In Polish there are seventeen verbal prefixes: do-, na-, nad-, o-, ob-, od-, po-, pod-, prze-, przy-, roz-, u-, w-, wy-, wz-, z-, and za-, which is eight fewer than in Russian. Most of them have lexical or near-lexical counterparts in Russian.

Path and manner coded in Polish

59

The remaining eight prefixes include: voz-, iz-, nedo-, niz-, pre-, pred-, pro-, and so- (see Ludwig 1995 for a comparison of Polish and Russian systems prefixes). The present section is not an attempt to provide a comprehensive comparison between the Polish and Russian systems of prefixes (the accounts of these are thoroughly presented by Przybylska (2006) for Polish and Muravyova (1986) for Russian). My aim here is to underscore the relevant differences in the lexicalization patterns that will be reflected in the data examined in the analytical part of this book. Polish and Russian possess the same means of lexicalizing path, which is coded in a verbal prefix and/or a prepositional phrase. Frequently the prefix, which in Talmy’s theory of motion event is classified as a satellite to the verb, and preposition perform the same function. For example, in wleźć do [Pl] ‘in-creep into’ or vlezt’ v [Ru] both the prefixes w-/v- and the prepositions do and v code movement into a container. However, satellites should be distinguished from prepositions. In Slavic languages satellites are bound prefixally to the verb, while prepositions are accompanied by the following nouns (Talmy 2000b: 106). Talmy (2000b: 102) defines a satellite to the verb as “the grammatical category of any constituent other than a noun-phrase complement that is in a sister relation to the verb root”. As the lexicalization of motion by means of verbs and their bound forms, namely prefixes, are the focus of the present study, prepositions will be treated only marginally (see Przybylska 2002 for a unified account of selected Polish prepositions). Talmy (2000b) shows the overlap of satellites with verb prefixes by enumerating the whole range of Russian prefixes and prepositions which typically accompany them, as in (9). In the description of prefix-path combinations, the symbol >, which is placed after a preposition, points toward its nominal object. This symbol together with ← encloses the whole expression that specifies the path. Parentheses mark the portion that can be omitted. F and G stand for the figure and the ground. (9)

F … ←v- v+ACC> ‘into’ F … ← vy- iz + GEN> ‘out of’ F … ←pere- čerez + ACC> ‘across’ F … ←pod- pod + ACC> ‘to under’ F … ←pod- k + DAT> ‘up to’ F … ←ob- ob + ACC> ‘to against’ F … ←ot- ot + GEN> ‘of a ways from’ F … ←na- na + ACC> ‘onto’

60

Chapter 3

F … ←s- s + GEN> ‘off of’ F … ←pro- mimo + GEN> ‘past’ F … ←za- za + ACC> ‘to behind/ beyond’ F … ←pri- k + DAT> ‘into arrival at’ F … ←do- do + GEN> ‘all the way to’ F … ←iz- iz + GEN> ‘(issuing) forth from’

(after Talmy 2000b: 105–106) Prepositions typically mark the path, while verbal prefixes may serve various additional functions. One of the primary functions of Polish verbal prefixes is to indicate perfectivity (e.g. Dąbrowska 1996, Wróbel 1998). To illustrate, following Bacz (2005: 93), the prefix za- with the verb pisać (imp.) ‘write’, ‘write something down’ has the perfectivizing function. The prefixed verb zapisać in (10a) is perfective. The perfectivizing function of the prefix is counteracted by the imperfectivizing function of the stem suffix –ywa-, which is shown in (10b) In (10c) the verb is perfective again due to the addition of the second prefix po-. (10) a. zapisać (prf) za-write ‘cover something with writing’; b. zapisywać (się) (imp) ‘write something’, ‘write things down’/‘register several times/ down’ c. pozapisywać (się) (prf) ‘write things down’, ‘ write down a limited number of things’/ ‘register for a limited number of activities’ The perfectivizing function of the Russian prefix za- is exemplified by Talmy (2000b: 122) with the sentence Kapli doždja zapadali odna za drugoj. ‘Drops of rain started to fall one after another’. Since the cognitive account of the imperfective-perfective distinction of motion verbs varies from the traditional analysis, let me briefly discuss Janda’s (2007) approach to Slavic aspect. Janda (2007) rejects the traditional binary opposition of perfective and imperfective verb forms. What she proposes is a cluster model consisting of three or more related verbal forms differing in the kind of aspect. Let me summarize how this approach applies to motion verbs. As mentioned above, motion verbs are exceptional since they are the only instances in the Polish and Russian verb systems that have unidirectional and non-directional forms. Conceptually, unidirectional and non-directional verbs correspond to completable vs. non-completable motion situations. In other words, spatial motion, which may potentially be completed, is expressed by

Path and manner coded in Polish

61

means of unidirectional verbs, which inherently express direction while nondirectional verbs, which lack this information, describe non-completable actions. A situation is completable “if it has a goal that can be fulfilled, and thus naturally ends in a change of state” while the non-completable situations “describe things that one does for a time and then stops doing without reaching a goal or producing a change of state” (Janda 2007: 615). The distinction between completable vs. non-completable situations corresponds to the telic vs atelic contrast. As Arkadiev (2014: 385) notes “perfectivization applies to verbs denoting telic processes and signals that the terminal point of such a process has been achieved”. Unidirectional and non-directional motion verbs differ in the type of perfectives that they form. Unidirectional motion verbs form Natural Perfectives and Specialized Perfectives while non-directional ones only Specialized Perfectives. Natural Perfectives “describe the logical completion of the corresponding Imperfective Activity” while Specialized Perfectives provide enough new semantic content to motivate the further derivation of corresponding Imperfectives (Janda 2007: 609). Thus, the unidirectional Polish verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’, which inherently profiles directional motion towards a goal, has in its cluster Natural Perfective pójść ‘away-walk’ and Specialized Perfectives, for example wejść ‘in-walk’, wyjść ‘out-walk’ or przyjść ‘to-walk’. The difference between Natural Perfectives (in the case of motion verbs these are forms prefixed by po-) and Specialized Perfectives (motion verbs prefixed by, for example w-/ v-, wy-/ vy- or przy-/ pri-) is that Natural Perfectives do not form Secondary Imperfectives while Specialized Perfectives do. Thus, such forms as the imperfective pochodzić ‘away-walk’ denoting deictic motion in one direction do not exist, but wychodzić, wchodzić and przychodzić do. Moreover, the non-directional verb chodzić ‘to walk’ has in its cluster Complex Acts (pochodzić ‘to walk for a while’) and Single Acts (schodzić ‘to walk around’, as in the sentence Schodził całe miasto za pomarańczami. ‘He walked around all town (to buy) oranges.). Besides rendering the verb perfective, prefixes also carry a number of additional meanings, of which the spatial meanings are the most prototypical and transparent. The prefix za- is one of the most productive (for the semantic network of the prefix za-, see Tabakowska (2003) and of its Russian equivalent, see Braginsky (2008)). Another function of prefixes is marking various points of view assumed by the speaker, which is exemplified in the following Russian sentences differing only in the prefixes used (after Pavlenko 2010: 50).

62

Chapter 3

(11) a. on pošel v magazin ‘he away-went to the shop’ b. on ušel v magazin ‘he away-went to the shop’ c. on vyšel v magazin ‘he out-went to the shop’ d. on vošel v magazin ‘he in-went to the shop’ In the first two sentences, the speaker’s viewpoint is placed at the source of movement. In Sentence (11a), however, the beginning of the action is stressed while Sentence (11b) stresses the figure’s absence. Sentence (11c) underscores the fact that the situation is viewed from inside the house. Not all uses of this prefix are, however, deictic, which is exemplified in (11d) The spatial situation described here may involve the viewer’s viewpoint placed either inside the shop or outside it (see Apresjan 1986). Pavlenko (2010: 50) shows how much meaning is carried by the prefix by translating the Russian verb ehat’ ‘to drive’ accompanied by various prepositional phrases into English. The expressions in (12) code various spatial situations by means of the same verb and preposition and differ only in the verbal prefix. The translation shows that the same verb with different prefixes and the same preposition requires a variety of verbs in translation. (12) zaehat’ k domu priehat’ k domu pod’’ehat’ k domu vyehat’ k domu s’’ehat’ k domu s’’ezdit’ k domu

‘to drive (and stop) by the house for a moment’ ‘to arrive to the house [by transportation]’ ‘to approach the house [by transportation]’ ‘to be driving the final stretch toward the house’ ‘to arrive to the house below [top–down motion]’ ‘to drive/ride to the house and back’

Finally, when talking about the expression of path, it may occasionally be coded in Polish and Russian verbs of motion. These are non-manner verbs like Polish ruszyć ‘to move’, wrócić ‘to return’ or zbliżyć się ‘to approach’ and Russian pribyt’ ‘to arrive’, podnjat’sja ‘to ascend’ or spustit’sja ‘to descend’. In the present study they will be referred to as path verbs. Although the systems of Polish and Russian prefixes are in general very close in sound and meaning, there are significant differences. To illustrate, let

Path and manner coded in Polish

63

me note some differences in the ways of lexicalizing perlative and ablative motion in the two languages. The discussed differences will be reflected in the data analysed in the further chapters. 3.4.1 Lexicalization of Perlative Motion in Polish and Russian In Polish perlative motion, which prototypically is motion across some ground object or in relation to a ground object located on the path, is commonly expressed by the prefix prze-, which profiles a broad range of spatial relations between the figure and the ground. In Russian, on the other hand, there are two prefixes that are used for coding this type of relation, namely pere- and pro-. Thus, as Bańkowski (2000: 811) notes, it is difficult for a Polish speaker to distinguish when the Polish motion verb przejechać should be translated into Russian as pereehat’ or as proehat’. Muravyova (1986: 222) lists five senses of the Russian pro-. First of all, it codes the relation of the figure’s motion through a space conceptualized as a container as in My prošli čerez les ‘We through-went through a forest’. Secondly, the prefix profiles movement past some ground, which may be a person or an object e.g. Samolet proletel nad nami. ‘An airplane through-flew above us’. Moreover, the lexicalization of movement forward by means of pro- may be accompanied by the indication of the covered distance, as in My proehali dve ostanovki i vyšli iz avtobusa. ‘We through-drove two stops and went out of the bus’. Next, the prefix may code movement towards a destination or into a room, which is exemplified in On prošel k sebe v kabinet. ‘He through-went to his study’. Finally, pro- codes movement beyond one’s destination, which is illustrated in V avtobuse ja zacitalsja i proehal svoju ostanovku. ‘I was reading on the bus and through-drove my stop’. On the other hand, the prefix pere- displays a single basic spatial sense, which refers to crossing a boundary during motion across a surface, as in the following sentences: My pereehali granicu. ‘We through-drove across the border’ or My perešli ulicu. ‘We through-walked across a street’. To summarize, the major difference between the two languages emerges from the fact that Russian distinguished between motion through a container, which is lexicalized by means of the prefix pro- and border-crossing in the course of motion on a surface coded by the prefix pere-. This distinction does not exist in Polish, where one prefix prze- is used for coding all these relations1. A more detailed image-schematic account of the vast array of uses of the Polish prefix prze- based on the analysis of corpus data will be included in Section 4.4.2. 1  Diachronically Polish prefix prze- is a contamination of two distinct Proto-Slavic prefixes prĕ- and pro- (Przybylska 2006: 194).

64

Chapter 3

3.4.2 Lexicalization of Ablative Motion in Polish and Russian In Polish the ablative deictic motion away from the speaker is expressed by motion verbs prefixed by po-. In Russian two prefixes code this type of motion, namely po- and u-. The two Russian prefixes make a distinction between two construals of motion that cannot be lexically distinguished in Polish. First of all, the Russian prefix u- stresses the absence of a given person or object from a certain place (e.g. Oni uehali iz Vladivostoka ‘They far-away-drove out of Vladivostok’) while the prefix po- indicates the beginning of a unidirectional movement (e.g. On vstal i pošel k vyhodu ‘He stood up and away-went towards the entrance’). Additionally, Russian motion verbs prefixed by po- cannot be modified by adverbial phrases expressing the duration of the action (e.g. dva goda ‘two years’, tri dnja ‘three days’) nor by adverbial phrases describing the distance covered (e.g. neskol’ko šagov ‘a few steps’, piat’ kilometrov ‘five kilometers’) (Muravyova 1986: 220, 223). In this respect Polish and Russian motion verbs prefixed by po- are similar since they do not profile the onset nor the termination of the activity, which is why sentences like *Poszedł dwa dni ‘He away-went two days’ or ?Poszedł pięć kilometrów ‘He away-went five kilometers’ sound incorrect or awkward. On the other hand, the case for the Russian prefix u- is different since motion verbs prefixed by this item may be modified by adverbials referring to the time or the distance covered. Describing the differences in the spatial situations lexicalized by means of two Russian prefixes po- and u-, Israeli (2002: 109) notes, first of all, that the prefix u- may stress the figure’s absence. This is illustrated in (13), where the second clause describes the situation after the figure’s departure and the conceptualizer’s attention does not follow the moving figure. (13) Utrom ja ušla iz doma, i deti ostalis’ odni. ‘In the morning I left home and the children were left alone.’ Similarly, in Tolstoy’s short story, the first sentence (14a) stresses the absence of the figure and Sentence (14b), which follows (14a), refers to the situation at the source of movement after the figure’s departure. (14) a. Odnaždy krest’jane ušli na rabotu v pole. ‘Once the peasant left for work in the field.’ b. V odnoj izbe ostalis’ babuška i troe vnučat. ‘In one house there remained a grandmother and three grandchildren.’ (after Israeli 2002: 110–111)

Path and manner coded in Polish

65

On the other hand, according to Israeli (2002: 112–113), Russian motion verbs prefixed by po- most commonly profile not the source (as the prefixes u- and vy- commonly do), but the goal or the path of movement, as illustrated in (15a) and (15b) respectively. (15) a. Skoro ja poedu na Sever. (Israeli 2002: 112–113) ‘Soon I will go to the North.’ b. Ja vstal, podnjal čemodan i pošel po allee. (Israeli 2002: 112–113) ‘I got up, picked up the suitcase and went along the alley.’ In both Russian and Polish structures with po-prefixed motion verbs accompanied by prepositional phrases referring to the Source are infrequent. When they occur, either the Source tends to be negatively charged or the moving figure’s presence is portrayed as not desired at the source of motion. (16) a. Oleg podnjalsja i pošel iz kvartiry, stupaja po gazetam. (Israeli 2002: 112–113) ‘Oleg got up and started to go from the apartment, stepping on newspapers.’ b. Niechby sobie raz poszedł z naszej budy i nigdy już nie wracał. (Czarne okna) ‘Let him once go away from our school and never come back.



However, it should be stressed here that motion verbs prefixed by po- profile only the deictic character of the source of movement (Nesset 2007, 2008, Łozińska 2017b) and not, as claimed by Israeli (2002), either the source, path or the goal of movement. These occur only with prepositional phrases describing individual parts of the source-path-goal schema. Moreover, the welldocumented human tendency to pay attention to the goal of movement, may be reflected in the linguistic material analysed by Israeli (2002), where a vast majority of prepositional phrases accompanying motion verbs prefixed by poreferred to the goal. A number of experiments have revealed the non-linguistic goal bias (e.g. Zheng and Goldin-Meadow 2002, Lakusta and Landau 2005) that exists from early childhood. Mandler’s developmental studies (2005) have shown that the concept of goal matures relatively early. The high frequency of use of the Russian unidirectional verb idti ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ is considered to have been caused by the fact that its main function is to code

66

Chapter 3

goal-oriented movement (Majsak and Rakhilina 1999). The tendency to pay attention to the goal of motion and, at the same time, to code it linguistically may also have contributed to the significantly larger number of instances of coding the goal of movement noted by Israeli (2002). The differences between meanings of the Russian prefixes u- and po- may be explained by Lindner’s (1983) notion of a viewpoint-defined region of interactive focus. What is stressed in (16a) is the figure’s departure from the Source of movement and the initial part of its motion. Verbs of motion prefixed by pocode situations in which it is still possible to catch up with the person who has left. Following Lindner’s definition of a viewpoint-defined region of interactive focus (1983), the moving figure within this region may still be accessible, existing, known and visible. On the other hand, when the prefix u- accompanies a motion verb, as in (14a), the absence of the figure is stressed; it becomes imperceptible, inaccessible or forgotten. It is outside the region of interactive focus. As mentioned earlier, Polish lacks this lexical distinction between the beginning of motion when the figure is still within the region of interactive focus and the situation in which the figure is already beyond reach, i.e. outside that region. How the differences in the lexicalization of these spatial situations are reflected in the translation of literary works as well as in the data elicited from respondents will be shown in Chapter 5 and Chapter 6 respectively. Here I shall proceed to a brief discussion of prepositional phrases accompanying motion verbs in the two languages. 3.5

Prepositional Phrases

The study of prepositional phrases, the function of which is to describe the path and the ground, falls outside the scope of the present analysis and constitutes a subject for separate research. However, since the elaboration of ground descriptions included in the prepositional phrase is closely connected with the accompanying verbal prefix, let me limit the discussion of the expression of the ground by means of prepositional phrases in Polish and Russian to only one issue. In both Russian and Polish it is possible to describe the figure’s complex trajectory by breaking it down into simpler components and describing them by means of a series of prepositional phrases. In Polish and Russian the path of motion is typically rendered by a prefix and a prepositional phrase combination. While only one prefix can accompany a verb, prepositional phrases may be stacked to express a complicated path consisting of several segments. Let us

Path and manner coded in Polish

67

illustrate it with two examples coming from Dostoevsky’s Brothers Karamazov (after Slobin 2008: 209). (17) Štabs-kapitan stremitel’no kinulsja čerez seni v izbu k hozjaevam … ‘The junior captain quickly dashed, through the entry-way, into the hut, to the owners …’ However, although the description of such complex paths by means of a series of prepositional phrases following one verb is theoretically possible, it is common neither in narrative nor in colloquial language. Instead, complex paths are typically expressed by a series of prefixed verbs, each followed by a prepositional phrase, as in (18). (18) … on obežal bol’šim krjukom, čerez pereulok, dom Fedora Pavloviča, probežal Dmitrovskuju ulicu, perebežal potom mostik i prjamo popal v uedinennyj pereulok … ‘… he ran around in a big detour, through/past the lane, the house of Fyodor Pavlovich, ran along Dmitrovsky Street, then ran across the little bridge and fell directly into the secluded lane …’ (Dostoevsky Brothers Karamazov after Slobin 2008: 209) Thus, Polish and Russian display stricter constraints than, for example, English on how much path information can be combined with a single verb. These constraints are morphological since the path information carried by the prefix limits the range of prepositional phrases that can accompany the verb. The role of syntax and morphology in coercing speakers of a given language into attending to some aspects of motion events more than speakers of a different in this respect language has been demonstrated by Filipović (2007) on the basis of a comparative study between Serbo-Croatian and English. Rendering complex paths by means of a string of satellites, exemplified by Talmy’s famous example quoted in (19), or a series of prepositional phrases is typical of some satellite-framed languages, but not Slavic ones. Although Sentence (20) comes from a literary work and can hardly be recognized as ‘characteristic’, it shows that in the English language it is possible to associate a vast number of grounds and paths with only two manner verbs, namely plunge and tilt. (19) Come right back down out from up in there! (Talmy 1985: 102)

68

Chapter 3

(20) There is in the Midlands a single-line tramway system which boldly leaves the country town and plunges off into the black, industrial countryside, uphill and down dale, through the long, ugly villages of workmen’s houses, over canals and railways, past churches perched high and nobly over the smoke and shadows, through stark, grimy cold little market-places, tilting away in a rush past cinemas and shops down to the hollow where the collieries are … (D.H. Lawrence, Tickets, Please after Slobin 2008: 207). To show how the lexicalization pattern of motion in Polish differs from English, let us see the above passage in translation into Polish by Janina Sujkowska2. (21) Ze stolicy jednego z hrabstw w środkowej Anglii wybiega jednotorowa linia tramwajowa i rzuca się z impetem w czarną przemysłową okolicę, to pędząc pod górę, to sunąc w dolinę. W oknach wozów migają brzydkie osiedla robotnicze zagłębia, kanały, wstęgi kolei żelaznej, wyniosłe kościoły, górujące nad dymem i mrokiem, małe, bardzo brudne miasteczka, kina, sklepy, kopalnie i wioski … (D.H. Lawrence, Bilety, proszę!, translation: Janina Sujkowska) The beginning of the description of motion in Polish includes as many as four motion verbs: wybiegać ‘out-run’, rzucać się ‘to dash’, pędzić ‘to speed’, sunąć ‘to slide’, each accompanied by only one prepositional phrase describing the ground. The first sentence fictively describes motion referring to a tram line as actually moving in relation to the stationary surroundings. The rest of the description of the tram’s motion is rendered from the perspective of an observer who is located in the tram. The tram in the description is stationary and the surroundings are represented as moving in relation to it. This specific fictive effect is called the observer-based type of frame-relative motion (cf. Talmy 2000a: 131). Slobin (1996b: 201) divided path descriptions into ‘minus-ground clauses’, which include bare verbs or verbs with satellites indicating direction of movement, and ‘plus-ground clauses’, which additionally have one or more prepositional phrases. When referring to the structure of the Russian language, such path elaborations as in (22) were treated as rendering complex paths. Slobin (2005b: 313) comments on the strategy of ground description in (22) as follows: “the psycholinguistic ease of “packaging” a number of path components in a single clause engenders a “narrative habit” of path elaboration in satelliteframed speakers”. 2  From the selection of short stories Kobieta i paw. 1971. transl. Janina Sujkowska.

Path and manner coded in Polish

69

(22) Iz-za kamnja olen’ vyskočil. ‘from-behind (a) rock (a) deer out-jumped’ (Slobin 2005b: 312) In the above example, however, the prefix and prepositional phrase do not code a complex path consisting of a number subtrajectories. Besides its perfectivizing function the prefix vy-, , carries other kinds of information about the figure’s motion. First of all, it denotes the directionality of movement. Other meanings are based on inferences, for example, becoming visible when entering the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus, as in (6). It is not, however, a separate subtrajectory. Thus, as Slobin has noted elsewhere (2005a), speakers of Slavic languages, similarly to speakers of verb-framed ones, are obliged to use separate verbs for individual path segments. Let me now proceed to the description of schematic manner of motion and the surface elements that typically code it. 3.6

The Semantic Component of Manner

The schematic structures that are applicable in the case of spatial relations do not concern manner. However, verbs include the manner information at various levels of schematicity, which is why we may speak of the manner schema. Manner, which is the way the figure follows its path, is an important element of the schema theory. Satellite-framed languages are rich in motion verbs of manner. English in particular seems to have a large repertoire of manner verbs (cf. Levin 1993: 263–270). Over time, more lexical elements of this kind have been added. Only in the nineteenth century the following intransitive verbs of goal-directed human motion were added to the English lexicon: barge, career, clomp, cruise, dawdle, dodder, drag oneself, drift, flop, gambol, goose-step, hike, hustle, leapfrog, lunge, lurch, meander, mosey, pounce, promenade, race, sashay, scurry, skedaddle, skitter, slither, slog, slosh, smash, sprint, stampede, tromp, twist, waltz, wiggle, worm, zip (Slobin 2004: 235). As a result of this on-going process, the English language is becoming even more manner salient. Various verbs of manner, for example, differ in their variants of the basic walking gait (e.g., walk, march, saunter) or in the pace of movement (e.g., walk, run, speed). The image schema of manner involves several schematic structural elements, such as mover, gait, speed, effort, and part of body (Dodge and Lakoff 2005: 68). Since the elements of the schema of manner are schematic, it is impossible to specify precisely what kind of motion constitutes walking and what constitutes marching. Thus, verbs like walk, run, or speed do not specify the exact speed of the figure’s motion. The manner expressed by motion verbs is schematically conveyed and not quantified. Similarly to the tendencies exhibited across languages to code the path information either in the verb or in

70

Chapter 3

the satellite, the schematic information encoded in motion verbs may also vary cross-linguistically. Finally, let me briefly touch upon Langacker’s understanding of manner of motion. Langacker (1987a: 268) subsumes manner under the notion of a trajectory (which in the present work, following Talmy, is referred to as the path). In his view, the verb walk has a complex trajectory consisting of two subtrajectories: the first refers to the figure’s movement of legs relative to one another and the second to the figure’s motion through space in relation to its surroundings. Manner Component Included in Motion Verbs: A Cross-Linguistic Account Manner is a cross-linguistically diverse and complex concept. This term is very general in scope, and encompasses such notions as gait, velocity, the figure’s psychological and physical state, the speaker’s attitude towards the figure, etc. Moreover, one verb may include a number of semantic components of manner, thus making more finely-grained distinctions. The classification of motion verbs is complicated by the great variety of semantic components included in motion verbs as well as various degrees of schematicity of motion profiled by them. This leads to the conclusion that “different types of manner are of course not clearly distinguishable” (Radden and Dirven 2007: 292). The complexity of manner components included in verbs of motion explains the lack of a unified and universal model for its analysis. The present section summarizes previous attempts to classify the semantic components of manner included in motion verbs, which were either inspiring for my study or were found to introduce a novel approach to the classification of verbs. The classifications of the manner of motion that will be presented in greater detail here include the classifications proposed by Levin (1993), IbarretxeAntuñano (2006), Cardini (2008) and Pourcel (2010). Levin’s (1993) work concerned the classification of English verb types, Ibarretxe-Antuñano (2006) classified Basque sound symbolic words for motion, and Cardini (2008) concentrated on Italian motion verbs. Finally, Pourcel’s (2010) typology is included here since it takes the figure’s features as one of the criteria for classification. Levin (1993: 263–270) hypothesized that the verb’s meaning determines its syntactic behavior. First, she differentiated verbs of inherently directed motion, which include such English lexical items as: advance, arrive, ascend, come, depart, descend, enter, escape, exit, fall, flee, go, leave, plunge, recede, return, rise. The meanings of these verbs include a specification of the direction of motion, even in the absence of a directional complement. Some of these verbs have deictic reference. According to Levin (1993: 264), none of these verbs specifies the manner of motion. Since both Polish and Russian belong to the satellite-framed 3.6.1

Path and manner coded in Polish

71

type, they are assumed to have a narrow range of path verbs. These verbs include, for example, padać ‘fall’, cofać się ‘retreat’ and uciekać ‘escape’ in Polish or otdaljat’sja ‘to move away’ or padat’ ‘to fall’ in Russian. Contrary to Levin’s assertion made about English verbs, Polish and Russian path verbs may simultaneously conflate manner, which will be shown in the analytical chapters of the present work. The second class of verbs distinguished by Levin (1993: 264) are motion verbs of manner, which describe motion typically involving displacement, but not inherent direction. All of them have meanings which include the type or the means of motion. Depending on the specific manner or means, motion verbs of manner are further subdivided into: a.

b.

c.

Roll verbs include bounce, drift, drop, float, glide, move, roll, slide, swing. These verbs specify various manners of motion typical of inanimate entities. The figure does not necessarily control its motion and in the absence of a prepositional phrase, none of these verbs indicates the path of motion. Polish verbs of this type include reflexive toczyć się ‘roll’ or ślizgać się ‘slide’. Run verbs in Levin’s (1993) account include as many as 133 types of motion verbs, for example: bolt, bounce, bound, clamber, climb, crawl, creep, dart, dash, float, fly, gallop, goosestep, hike, hop, hurry, jump, leap, march, promenade, race, run, rush, shuffle, skip, sleepwalk, stroll, swim, tiptoe, tramp, waddle, walk, etc. Most of these verbs describe ways of moving of animate entities, although some of them may also refer to inanimate entities. Further, no specific direction of motion is implied unless they occur with an explicit directional phrase. This rich category of verbs is represented by such Polish verbs as iść ‘to walk’, biegać ‘to run’ or pływać ‘to swim’. Verbs That Are Not Vehicle Names: cruise, drive, fly, oar, paddle, pedal, ride, row, sail, tack, etc. Verbs from this group refer to motion with the use of a vehicle but are not related to the name of a vehicle. In the case of these verbs, similarly to the previous class, no specific direction of motion is implied unless an explicit directional phrase is present. Polish verbs from this class include such verbs as jechać ‘to drive’ or żeglować ‘to sail’, however the group of these Polish verbs is not large.

The above classification encompasses only the categories that are relevant for the present analysis of Polish and Russian motion verbs. For instance, a category of leave verbs distinguished by Levin (1993), such as abandon, desert, leave, has been omitted here since this kind of verbs are typically transitive and fall

72

Chapter 3

outside the scope of the present analysis. The same applies to other categories, such as ‘Chase Verbs’ or ‘Accompany Verbs’. Some classes of verbs distinguished by Levin (1993) have also been omitted since in general English makes more finely grained distinctions of manner lexicalized in the verb. For instance, such categories as ‘Verbs that are Vehicle Names’, represented by such English verbs as balloon, boat, coach or ferry, do not exist in Polish or Russian. The next classification of the lexicalized semantic components of manner of motion that will be briefly outlined here was undertaken by IbarretxeAntuñano (2006). She provides a list of finely grained manner categories that, to some extent, coincide with Levin’s classification or make the classification more detailed. In her analysis, Ibarretxe-Antuñano (2006) has distinguished, first of all, the semantic category of motor pattern, which denotes different body positions for performing motion. Moreover, the categories that were not taken into account by Levin (1993) include smooth motion (with no obstacle, e.g., to swing, to rock, to roll); obstructed motion (with some impediment or obstacle, e.g., to crash, to bump, to run into); furtive motion (with hidden purpose or secretive motion, e.g., to creep), forced motion (requiring an effort to be performed, e.g., to drag); rate (speed of motion, which may be fast or slow) and inner state of the figure (referring to its physical or psychological state). What is more, as Ibarretxe-Antuñano (2006: 507) rightly points out, a single lexical item may conflate more than one semantic component. For example, the English verb limp can be analysed as motor pattern-run and forced motion requiring effort from the moving entity. Since manner may also be conflated with the semantic component of path, there are verbs, such as the verb climb, which, in a specific context of use, conflates the upward movement, motor pattern-walk and forced motion. As the next example of manner classification, let me present Cardini’s (2008) analysis of the semantic components of manner coded in Italian motion verbs. The semantic components distinguished in his analysis are similar to those discussed by Levin (1993) and Ibarretxe-Antuñano (2006), but they are grouped into three large categories. The first one includes verbs conflating the semantic component referring to the aspects of motion directly connected with the input material perceived by our senses. Thus, these verbs’ meanings indicate either the physical characteristics of the figure or of the underlying surface. The most typical verbs of this type are, for example, to roll, to bounce, or to slide. The second type of verbs belonging to this category are those that include information about body movements propelling humans and animals into a translational motion, for example, to walk or to trot. Finally, this category encompasses verbs that carry information about vehicles used for translational motion, such as to cycle or to canoe and about the sound associated with

Path and manner coded in Polish

73

translational motion, such as to rattle or to whistle. The second broad category involves verbs carrying information about aspects of motion evoking fundamental concepts. These include: speed, energy/force, weight, effort, continuity, steadiness, and involve such verbs as to speed or to trudge. Finally, the third group of verbs conflates aspects of motion denoting the emotional state of the figure. Thus, such verbs as to hurry or to sneak reveal the figure’s attitude or mental state while moving. Let me note that I have found the three classifications of types of manner by Cardini (2008) the most exhaustive and inspiring of those cited for the present analysis. On their basis Chapter 4 proposes a list of semantic categories of manner typically coded in Polish verbs of motion. The semantic component that has not been distinguished in the verb classifications by Levin (1993), Ibarretxe-Antuñano (2006) or Cardini (2008) is the speaker’s (usually negative) attitude either towards the moving figure or towards the fact that motion takes place. There are verbs in Polish, such as szlajać się ‘to loaf about’ or szwendać się ‘to loiter’ or Russian šljat’sja ‘to loaf about’, which clearly show the speaker’s negative assessment of the perceived movement. What is more, a large number of verbs encapsulate a few semantic components, both those referring to path and those referring to manner of motion. To illustrate, the verb stomp ‘to tread heavily, noisily, typically in order to show anger’ combines visual perception, fundamental concepts, hearing perception, and emotional attitude (Cardini 2008: 546). Although Polish is a satellite-framed language and the manner of motion is typically conflated in the verb, there are situations where it is only inferred, which is illustrated in (23). (23) a. W 2012 Maria pojechała do Stanów. ‘In 2012 Maria away-drove to the States.’ Sentence (23) is acceptable and easily understandable, although the coded manner of motion may erroneously suggest that Maria went to the States by car, bicycle or some other wheeled vehicle, which is suggested by the verb jechać ‘to go by a vehicle’. To code the information that the motion was carried out by means of a plane the verb lecieć ‘to fly’ should be used. The type of transportation is, however, easily inferred by the hearer, who assumes that Maria used the currently customary way of crossing the ocean (i.e., that she went to the States by plane). A less inferrable manner of motion, for example by ship, would be more likely to be coded in the description (Papafragou et al. 2006:B79). This leads us directly to the notion of encyclopaedic meaning, which is recognized in cognitive linguistics.

74

Chapter 3

The last classification of manner of motion that needs to be mentioned here is that made by Pourcel (2010). This classification is of particular importance since it is not based on intuitive grounds but on the results of a categorization task, which makes it conceptually valid. Interestingly, Pourcel (2010) views the figure as the central component of a motion event. Figures, which naturally differ in the features determining motion that can be performed by them, constitute the basis for this conceptual typology of motion. Pourcel (2010) convincingly argues that these various features determine the types of motion performed by figures. Some features may enable figures to move in a certain way while others may constrain their movement. Pourcel (2010) takes into consideration not only physical features typical of humans, animals, objects or natural elements but also existential ones. For instance, fictional characters may perform types of motion that are not possible for real human beings. In the present study this type of motion will be represented by the fictional and thus extraordinary characters from the book Mr Blot’s Academy, which will be analysed in Chapter 5. To recap, Pourcel’s (2010: 444) typology, which is based on conceptual categories such as the figures’ animacy, agency, artificiality and physicality, distinguishes the following distinct types of motion: real –life, (in)animate, fictional, (a)telic, (non-)default, self-motion and causal motion. Let us now turn to the theory of force dynamic as developed by Talmy (1988, 2000a) since combining the force concepts with image schemas will provide the basic tools for analyzing the properties of motion verbs in the following chapters. The information included in motion verbs is connected with forces that are not only physical in nature but also social or emotional. 3.7

Force Dynamics of Motion Verbs

Force is an indispensable element of every motion schema. As already pointed out, a schema is a gestalt, and thus without force there would be no motion. The element of force is described by Johnson (1987) as gestalts of force and by Talmy (2000a) as a force-dynamic schema. The two approaches will be discussed in greater detail here since they are useful in the analysis of motion verbs. Thus, the study of motion verbs brings together spatial relations such as location, movement, direction and the abstract domain of force dynamics, which is primarily concerned with causation, control and interaction (Zwarts 2010: 193). The study of spatial relations exclusively by means of geometric notions

Path and manner coded in Polish

75

does not fully capture the meaning of lexical items used to describe space if the forces exerted by the participants in the motion events are not taken into consideration. Force-dynamic relations in the domain of space have been researched by Zwarts (2010), who studied English and Dutch prepositions, and by Jackendoff (1987) and Croft (1991), who dealt with verbs. Johnson (1987) differentiates seven basic image schematic gestalts for force, which not only describe basic forceful interactions but may also become the basis for extensions, transformations and elaborations, to describe non-spatial domains. The first of the two types of force image-schemas differentiated by Johnson (1987: 45–48) is called compulsion. It involves the activity of a force that has magnitude, moves along a path and has a direction, for example, a wind or crowd hindering a pedestrian movement. In this case, the moving figure exerts force to overcome the counterforce. The second kind of force gestalt is called blockage, which involves a force vector encountering a barrier and then taking any number of possible directions, for example when a crawling baby encounters some obstacle. Again, we can see that it is the baby that exerts force and the obstacle only blocks it until some alternative way is found. As described at the beginning of this discussion, the combination of source-path-goal schema and the schema of containment or surface underlie translational motion. Simple spatial image-schemas, as Cienki (1995: 8) notes, such as object or surface frequently coincide with force-dynamic schemas such as blockage or constraint removal. Moreover, Johnson (1987) distinguishes such force image schemas as impact, continuous steady force, intermittent force, or diminishing force. All these forces share a number of characteristics, four of which are important for the analysis of translational motion. First, the forces are always experienced in interaction of entities. Secondly, they usually involve motion of some kind that has a directionality. This directionality is most typically (or prototypically) expressed by a single path of motion. Next, forces have sources, which may be sources of energy, and, finally, they are directed towards targets or goals (Johnson 1987: 43–44). According to Talmy (2000a: 12) force dynamics “pertains to the linguistic representation of force interactions and causal relations occurring between certain entities within the structured situation”. This semantic category concerns the ways in which entities interact with respect to force. Talmy (1988: 49) introduces such force dynamic distinctions as the exertion of force, resistance to force, the overcoming of the resistance and the blockage of the force along with the removal of this blockage, all of which are useful in the description of interactions between entities.

76

Chapter 3

One entity exerting force receives focal attention while the second force entity has some effect on the first. The first entity’s force is either effectively overcome by the force of the second entity or not. The focal force entity is designated as the Agonist and the opposing force element as the Antagonist. Talmy (2000a: 415) presents four basic force-dynamic patterns, one of which underlies translational motion. In Figure 3.3 the Agonist is indicated by a circle and the Antagonist by the concave shape. The arrow denotes the intrinsic force tendency of the Agonist toward action. The + sign marks the stronger entity. In the case of translational motion, the force interactions occur between the moving figure, the ground and/ or the surface of the path. Here I shal consider two types of forces. The first appears in a situation in which, during translational motion, the typically inanimate ground exerts counter force on the moving figure in the direction opposite to the figure’s movement. The ground is usually conceptualized as a container, which is either the source or the goal of movement and resists the figure’s motion. The second spatial situation involving the interaction of forces, involves the figure and the path that may naturally oppose the figure’s motion, as in the sentence The ball kept rolling despite the stiff grass, where the ball’s motion is impeded by the grass.

F igure 3.3 A force-dynamic pattern (after Talmy 2000a: 415).

Thus, in the case of translational motion, the Agonist corresponds to the animate or inanimate figure that voluntarily or involuntarily moves from the source towards the goal. The Antagonist, on the other hand, corresponds either to the source or to the goal that exerts some counterforce to impede or to block the figure’s movement. The path may also take on the role of the Antagonist that, for example, by means of excessive (or slighter than expected) friction influences the figure’s motion. As Talmy (2000a: 416) notes, certain force dynamic concepts have their closed-class representation. In Polish the closed-class elements that convey the

77

Path and manner coded in Polish

idea of exertion of force by the Agonist and of counterforce by the Antagonist are the verbal prefixes and prepositions. However, the semantics of motion verbs also reflects this force-dynamic opposition (see Sections 4.5 and 5.11). The role of force dynamics in the semantics of motion verbs has been noted by, for example, Borillo (2007), who distinguishes various degrees of force exerted by the moving figure expressed by French intransitive verbs. Among other categories, she distinguishes so-called strong verbs, which express rapid motion caused by a strong force. In this category of verbs she includes such verbs as: se précipiter, foncer ‘to dash’, se ruer ‘to rush’, bondir ‘to leap’, se jeter ‘to throw oneself’. Moreover, Borillo (2007: 60) argues that this type of forceful movement connects with intensive feelings on the part of animate figures. .

3.8 Conclusions The chapter has presented the theory of image schemas. In Polish the sourcepath-goal schema seldom appears in its complete form. Instead, it is split into two parts: the source-path subschema or the path-goal subschema. A goal may, in turn, be conceptualized as a container, a surface or a point. The theory of image schemas has been applied to the prefixation of Polish and Russian motion verbs. Next, the ways of expressing path (by means of prefixes and prepositional phrases) and manner of motion (mainly by means of manner verbs) in the two languages have been discussed. Moreover, such aspects of motion verbs as coding axiological values or force dynamics have also been found useful for the further discussion of the lexicalization patterns of motion events.

PART 2

∵

Chapter 4

Lexicalization of Manner and Path in Polish 4.1 Introduction The present chapter deals with the lexicalization patterns of motion events found in Polish narratives. Since the verb is the major lexical element which codes motion, the semantic components of motion verbs will be the focus of interest along with the spatial information conveyed by verbal prefixes accompanying these verbs. Besides the lexicalization patterns of manner and path by means of verbs and prefixes, cognitive mechanisms underlying the use of these two elements will be an important concern. In particular, we shall be looking at the roles of such phenomena as image schemas, axiology and the force dynamic schema in the use of motion verbs and verbal prefixes. The analysis is in the vein of cognitive linguistics, which means that the scope of the study cannot be limited to the analysis of the texts in isolation from the mental activities behind, both the production of the texts and their reception or interpretation. As Talmy (2000b: 418) stresses, we can speak of a narrative work only if “there is a mind that has assembled it and a mind that perceives and cognizes it”. Narratives are cognitively produced and experienced. They are situated within a larger context, which encompasses the cognitive systems of the producer and the experiencer. These systems involve their cultures, values, affective states, etc. (Talmy 2000b: 417). Consequently, the analysis of narratives may be expected to contribute to a better understanding of human cognition. Chapter 2 described two major typologically different groups of languages. Satellite-framed and verb-framed languages differ in the places (or surface elements as Talmy (2000b) calls them) to which the semantic content of manner and path is assigned. Due to the relatively little work done on the verbal semantic component of manner as well as to the considerable variety of motion verbs in languages, there is no unified model for the description of manner, and various sets of semantic components have been proposed by researchers. My analysis is an attempt to approach motion verbs by identifying semantic components conflated in them. The semantic component of the path, both if conflated in the verb or outside it in the accompanying prefix, will also be treated below.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���8 | doi ��.��63/9789004360358_006

82 4.2

Chapter 4

Data Analysis

4.2.1 Method The sample of material examined includes 10 Polish crime stories, all written within the last 20 years. The genre of crime stories was chosen since narratives of this type are vivid and dynamic and may therefore be expected to be rich in descriptions of literal motion (for the full list of the titles of novels examined, see the Appendix). Each book was randomly opened 10 times and the first five instances of a description of motion events were selected for the analysis. This procedure resulted in 500 sentences coding descriptions of literal motion. Since only translational motion is our concern here, the selected descriptions of motion events include only intransitive motion verbs that meet a set of criteria described in the following section. The analysis involves both qualitative (i.e., type) and quantitative (i.e., token) analysis of the Polish verbs of motion and of the prefixes accompanying them. 4.2.2 Criteria for the Selection of Motion Verbs To start with we need to specify by what criteria a given verb will be considered a motion verb. First of all, verbs taken into consideration in the present research will denote translational motion. As mentioned in Section 2.2.1, Talmy (2000b) distinguishes between translational and self-contained motion. In his terms, translational motion is motion “in which the location of the Figure changes in the time period under consideration” (Talmy 2000b: 25). Thus, the description of spontaneous motion performed by both animate and inanimate entities will be taken into consideration. On the other hand, self-contained motion, like rotation, oscillation or dilation as well as motion brought about by external agents will fall outside our scope. Verbs like to tremble or to kneel can hardly be used in the descriptions of spatial movement involving the path since sentences like I am quivering/ trembling towards/ into the room are unusual (Cardini 2008: 540).1 However, verbs denoting aimless motion, which in Polish is lexicalized by such items as krążyć ‘to circle’, tułać się ‘to wander’ will fall within the scope of analysis since they code translational motion, for example in sentences like Krążył po mieście cały wieczór ‘He circled around the city all night’. Thus, the data selected for the analysis 1  As Cardini (2008:540) rightly observes, verbs denoting self-contained motion must be excluded from the analysis of motion events for one obvious reason. According to Talmy’s theory (2000b) the motion event has four basic components: figure, ground, path and motion. The analysis of motion events where motion and path equal zero is problematic.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

83

contain clauses expressing non-directional motion where the place of motion or its direction may be specified solely by the accompanying prepositional phrase. One of the main aims of the two following chapters (Chapters 5 and 6) will be to compare the relative size of the Polish domain of motion verbs with that of Russian. To make the comparison reliable we need a set of criteria for both languages by which it will be possible to determine what will be considered a motion verb. The features will all be semantic except for reference to a verb’s intransitivity. As already mentioned, the verbs taken into consideration must be intransitive. This criterion has already been used in the previous studies of verbs of motion in other languages (e.g., Cardini 2008, Slobin 2005b). The criterion will exclude the uses of verbs where the main semantic concern falls on the purpose of movement rather than movement itself. To illustrate, the verb gnać ‘to rush’ will be classified as a motion verb in its intransitive use (e.g., Gnał przez miasto z dużą predkością. ‘He rushed through the city at great speed’) and its transitive use will not be included in the list of motion verbs (e.g., Gnał stado przez łąkę.’ ‘He chased a herd across a meadow’). However, reflexive forms of verbs consisting of a motion verb and a reflexive pronoun (się [Pol], sebja [Rus]) generally code translational motion along a path. This type of motion verbs accompanied by the reflexive pronoun is widely used in the two languages and the chief role of such verbs is to describe voluntary change of the figure’s position in space. For example, reflexive motion verbs in Polish include udać się ‘to start moving’ or włóczyć się ‘to gallivant’, and in Russian mčat’sja ‘to speed’ or karabkat’sja ‘to climb’, ‘to clamber’. It should be stressed here that verbs the meaning of which refers to the beginning or end of motion, such as Polish wyruszyć ‘to set off’ or dotrzeć ‘to arrive’ or Russian brosit’sja ‘to dash’ or udrat’ ‘to escape’ will not be excluded from the analysis. This is because the analysed data will also include the uses of prefixed motion verbs, which—when prefixed—profile either the beginning or end of movement (e.g., Polish przyjść ‘to come’ or dojść ‘to reach’). Apart from the requirement of intransitivity, the verbs included in the list of motion verbs need to meet a semantic condition: the roots of selected verbs must express a change of location. The root of a verb is understood here as the dictionary form devoid of prefixes and suffixes. Thus, verbs denoting the termination of movement in consequence of various types of collision, e.g. zderzyć się ‘to crash’, will not be taken into consideration. Moreover, some verbs acquire the semantic component of motion through the accompanying prefix or prepositional phrase, as in (1).

84

Chapter 4

(1) (…) ktoś się do niej przysiadł i usiłował nawiązać rozmowę. [Czub]2 ‘(…) someone sat down next to her and tried to start a conversation.’ The verb siedzieć ‘to sit’ without the prefix przy- and the prepositional phrase do niej ‘to her’ does not code motion in space. Instances of such verbs will therefore not be analysed. To summarize, verbs selected for the analysis will be intransitive and have a root that contains a motion component. Some Polish verbs of motion have two imperfective forms differing not only in morphology but also in meaning. The two forms are called either determinate and indeterminate or unidirectional and non-directional verbs (for the discussion of different uses of these verbs see Chapter 3). Suffice it to recall here that the major difference between unidirectional and non-directional verbs is that the former include the information about schematic directionality while the latter denote activities that are repeated, habitual or unspecified for space or time. Unidirectional and non-directional verbs coding directional and non-directional motion respectively which are semantically related (e.g. iść ‘det. to move on foot, to walk’ and chodzić ‘indet. to move on, to walk’, płynąć ‘det. to swim’ and pływać ‘indet. to swim’, jechać ‘det. to go by car or some other vehicle’ and jeździć ‘indet. to go by car or some other vehicle’) are counted as instances of a single type of motion verb since both of them code the same manner of motion. Moreover, since the analysis seeks to assess the lexical variety of motion verbs, a verb’s prefixed variations are also counted as instances of the same verb (e.g. kroczyć ‘to stride’, w-kroczyć ‘to in-stride’, etc.). In this, as in the following chapters, which present the analysis of data derived from translated creative fiction as well as from elicitation tasks, the terms “type” and “token” of a verb will be used. According to the basic tenets of Cognitive Grammar, the term ‘type’ refers to a verb’s minimal semantic function. At higher levels of organization, i.e. in a finite clause, it designates a grounded instance of that clause. As Langacker (2002: 7) notes “[t]he essential property of a finite clause is that it not only profiles a process type in question but indicates the status of its instance vis-à-vis the Ground.” In Langacker’s terms the Ground, contrary to the Talmian term ground adopted in this book, denotes the speech event and its participants. Thus, the analysis of the results of the study of motion verbs and verbal satellites will not only encompass their types but also finite clauses designating instances of these types, which takes 2  The abbreviations in square brackets refer to the names of the authors of the novels examined and are explained in the Appendix.

85

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

into consideration the participants in a speech act as well as the situational context. The term “token” denotes all instances of types of a verb in specific contexts. 4.2.3 Results: Types of Motion Verbs and their Frequencies Analysis of the text samples revealed 57 types of motion verbs. As many as 23 of them were, however, encountered only once. At the other end of the frequency spectrum there is the most commonly used verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’, which with 187 tokens, constitutes as many as 37% of all the registered tokens of verbs used in the lexicalization of motion events. The verb is a hypernym which describes many fine-grained distinctions of manner. The tokens of the top 11 motion verbs added together represent 80% of all selected tokens. The most frequently used (>2%) along with the number of their tokens in percentages are presented in Table 4.1 (for the full list of verbs, see the Appendix). Table 4.1

Types and tokens of the most frequent verbs in the analysed data

Verb type

1. chodzić/ iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ 2. jeździć/ jechać ‘to move in a wheeled vehicle’ 3. ruszać/ ruszyć ‘to start to move’ 4. wracać/ wrócić ‘to return’ 5. skakać/ skoczyć ‘to jump’ 6. padać/ paść ‘to fall’ 7. biegać/ biec ‘to run’ 8. skręcać/ skręcić ‘to turn’ 9. toczyć się ‘to roll’ 10. sunąć ‘to glide, to slide’ 11. latać/ lecieć ‘to fly’, ‘to move quickly’ Total

Number of tokens

Percentage

Semantic component

187

37%

Manner

64

13%

Manner

28 23 19 19 14 12 10 9 9

6% 5% 4% 4% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2%

Path Path Manner Path Manner Path Manner Manner Manner

394

86

Chapter 4

As the last column of the above table shows, the verbs found in the texts examined fall into two major categories: i. ii.

manner verbs, e.g., iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’, biec ‘to run’ or pełznąć ‘to creep’; path verbs, e.g., krążyć ‘to circle’, cofnąć się ‘to step back’ or wrócić ‘to return’.

Other researchers (for example, Özçalışkan 2005, Kopecka 2010) typically differentiate a third category of motion verbs, namely neutral verbs. It is claimed that these verbs do not indicate path or manner information but solely the motion component. In the present analysis, however, the category of neutral verbs has not been distinguished. Admittedly, it would be difficult to differentiate any semantic component, other than motion, in such verbs as, for example, przemieszczać się ‘to move’, but these verbs proved to be so infrequent that they were not found in the data examined in the present chapter. Another observation that can be made about the selected motion verbs lexicalizing the path component is that most of them are diachronically composed of a path prefix fused with a verb stem. At the same time, they are morphologically perceived as wholes although the semantic component of the path originally brought in by a prefix is still distinctively present in their meaning. In Sentence (2) the verb profiles the final part of the path and the goal with the time reference for arrival at the goal of motion. (2) Dotarł do domu o ósmej. ‘He reached home at 8.’ The path information is unquestionably contributed by the prefix. Other verbs of this kind are, for example, udać się ‘to start moving’, wtargnąć ‘to burst in’ or przedrzeć się ‘to break through’. Since these verbs designate either the Source of movement or the middle part of motion between Source and Goal, they carry the information about the path. The information does not concern the shape of the path, as is the case of, for example, the verb krążyć ‘to circle’. Instead these verbs carry information on which part of the path the figure moves. While the path prefix frequently retains the spatial meaning, which is still transparent to native speakers, the verb happens to be no longer independent of the prefix or, on its own, in no way relates to motion. Another kind of verb expressing path includes morphologically complex verbs that have been formed in the process of acquiring a prefix by non-verbal elements related to distance. Such verbs include oddalić się ‘to move away’ or

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

87

zbliżyć się ‘to approach’. Processes of this kind make languages move along the manner-saliency cline towards the pole of low-manner-salient languages, in which manner is subordinated to path. The process of this typological shift has been noted for a number of Indo-European languages. This direction of typological shift has been brought about by, among other things, phonological changes as a result of which the path prefixes became less distinct from verb roots (Talmy 2000b: 118). Slobin (2004: 28) reports the process of fusion of path prefixes with motion verbs in Latin. In respect of Slavic languages the fusion of prefixes with verbs of motion into an inseparable whole has been noted by Speed (2015), and for Polish in particular by Kopecka (2010). In turn, the process of moving along the typological cline by the French language has been described by Kopecka (2009), who claims that “French has shifted from a satellite- to a verb-framed pattern through the loss of productivity of verb prefixes” (2009: 416). One of the linguistic phenomena identified as responsible for this process is the shift of some originally unprefixed verbs of motion toward the verb-framed pattern. French verbs that have moved in this direction and become path verbs are, for example, arriver ‘to arrive’ and s’éloigner ‘to move away’, which before the fusion corresponded to the following prefix-verb forms: a-river ‘toward-sail along and -éloigner ‘away-move’ respectively. On the other hand, verbs like affluer ‘to flow toward’ and déferler ‘to spread out’ have moved towards the hybrid pattern, which means that nowadays they conflate both manner and path. All of these verbs existed in Old French in their unprefixed forms and expressed atelic relations. After fusion, they either lost the semantic component of manner or, as in the case of hybrid verbs, retained it and now also convey telic paths. The Polish words formed through verbal prefixation may be classified, in Dressler’s terminology (1985), as “partially semantically transparent”. The semantic transparency between form and meaning is a matter of degree and ranges from semantically transparent to semantically opaque. In the Polish path verbs of motion, such as podążać ‘to follow’, wtargnąć ‘to burst in’ or zbliżać się ‘to approach’, although there is a formal link between the simple form and the derived form, the relation between form and meaning is not clearly distinguishable. The same process of word formation in French has been noted by Kopecka (2006: 94), who points out that despite the formal link that can be established between the lexical base and the prefixed verb, the meaning of these partially transparent verbs is not predictable from the meaning of their parts. Such partially transparent verbs are interpreted as a whole in the present analysis. Finally, 11 verbs found in the text samples were distinguished as involving both manner and path components. Examples of these are dźwigać się ‘to rise

88

Chapter 4

with difficulty’ and runąć ‘to fall with a crash’, both of which code vertical motion together with information about the manner in which this motion happens. Since only a few instances of verbs of this kind have been found in the corpus with only a few tokens of use, they do not constitute a separate category in this study. 4.2.4 Description of Lexicalization Patterns Polish is included in the Talmian category of satellite-framed languages, which does not necessarily mean that all motion verbs express manner. Since there are intra-typological differences in this respect and languages rather form a continuum ranging from high-manner saliency to low-manner saliency, let us see what proportion of Polish verbs include the semantic component of manner in relation to those that express the path. Neutral verbs were not accounted for in the data examined and the few verbs that were considered to include the two components were counted twice: as a manner and as a path verb. Of 500 analysed tokens of verbs, 376 expressed the manner of motion and 139 described the path (let us recall that ten semantically complex verbs that included the components of path and manner were counted twice). The proportion between the numbers of tokens of path and manner verbs is visualized in Figure 4.1, which clearly shows that although the verb is a typical way of expressing the manner of motion in Polish, the relatively high number of tokens 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Manner verbs

Path verbs

Figure 4.1 Tokens of motion verbs of manner (black bars) and path (white bars) in Polish in percentages.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

89

of path verbs indicates that it is by no means a 100% manner-salient language. What is more, the fact that many of the path verbs have entered the Polish lexicon via a merge of a prefix with a verb is reponsible for its move along the manner-saliency cline towards verb-framed languages. In turn, the proportion of the types of manner verbs to path verbs is depicted in Figure 4.2 below. Comparison between the two graphs above leads to yet one more important conclusion. The proportion between the percentages of the tokens of manner and path verbs is 74% to 26% respectively while the respective numbers for the types of these verbs are 65% vs. 35%. Although the difference is not dramatic, let us recall that one of the basic tenets of cognitive linguistics is that meaning is usage-based, which means that the language in its real use is the source of knowledge about both its nature and its speakers’ cognitive mechanisms when they use it. The studies of linguistic forms appearing in real language production (e.g., in literary narratives or in the course of elicitation tasks) are of particular value since, as Radden and Dirven (2007: XII) state, they show “the speaker’s reasons for choosing one alternative over the other”. Thus, these are not the forms or strategies potentially offered by a given language but the forms actually chosen by speakers to convey a particular meaning that in cognitive linguistics constitute the basis for a language description. In consequence, the proportion of the tokens of the verbs, which indicates the frequencies of their real use, is a better indicator of the characteristic patterns of the lexicalization of motion events in a language than the proportion of the types. 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Manner verbs Path verbs Figure 4.2 Types of motion verbs of manner (black bar) and path (white bar) in Polish in percentages.

90

Chapter 4

Let us now proceed to a more detailed analysis of the lexicalization of manner in Polish. The lists of all types of verbs observed in the novels examined in Polish and Russian along with the number of tokens are provided in the Appendix. Let me recall that the criteria for the selection of motion verbs from the corpora concerned the verb roots, which is why all selected verbs expressed the fact of motion. The division of verbs presented below runs along the lines of two semantic components included in them, namely the manner and the path. 4.3

Lexicalization of Manner

4.3.1 Motion Verbs of Manner The first large group of verbs distinguished in the analysed corpus are those that simultaneously express the fact of motion and a co-event, namely the manner. The manner of motion will be simply understood as the expression of how the figure moves. Polish is a satellite-framed language and, as expected, the vast majority of verbs found in the corpus belong to this particular category. This large group of lexical items will be further subdivided depending on the type of manner conflated in the verb root. Some verbs may appear as examples in more than one group, which means that their verb root conflates more than one of the semantic components distinguished. The first group of these verbs involves various types of pedestrian motion and other types of body movement. – Motor pattern of body parts The most frequent manner verbs of motion found in the corpus code manner in general while more specific indications of manner are far less frequent. Pedestrian motion is the manner of motion that is the most frequently coded in the analysed corpus by means of such verbs as iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ and biec ‘to run’. In total these common verbs describe as many as 40% of all motion situations (37% uses of iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ and 3% of biec ‘to run’). Other verbs in this category include such verbs as łazić ‘to creep’, kroczyć ‘to stride’, wędrować ‘to wander’, człapać ‘to shuffle’, snuć się ‘to wander about’, or drałować ‘to walk a long distance’. Besides coding the semantic component of motion and motor pattern of body parts, all of them describe other features of motion, the figure’s attitude or the speaker’s attitude towards the figure. These semantic components will be discussed in separate sections. However, the verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ merits a separate section.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

91

– The verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ The verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ describes the canonical way of moving by animate entities and constitutes 37% of the vebs of motion observed in the corpus. Although it is so frequently used, the information about the manner of motion expressed by this verb is often backgrounded. In general when the verb is used, the manner of motion is simply not important because other aspects of the situation are more relevant. Since Polish speakers are forced to code the manner of motion, due to the very narrow choice of infrequent path verbs, the verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ is the most frequently chosen when the manner of motion does not need to be stressed. A component of meaning may be foregrounded or semantically backgrounded depending on the linguistic representation given to it. When a semantic element is conflated in the verb root, it becomes an incidental piece of information and is backgrounded. On the other hand, when it is expressed outside the verb, it emerges into the foreground of attention (Talmy 1985: 122). The manner of motion expressed by the verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ may be backgrounded to such an extent that it is even possible to repeat the manner information in a modifying phrase in order to foreground it, as in (3). (3) Z powrotem pójdziesz sobie na piechotę, stary hitlerowcu.[Kraj] ‘You will go back on foot, you old Nazi.’ Another strategy for stressing the motor pattern is the use of manner-neutral verbs with manner expressed peripherally by means of such adverbial expressions as pieszo ‘on foot’ or biegiem ‘running’. In such sentences, the verb codes the path or other features of motion. In (4a) and (4b), the components of motion and path are included in the path verbs minąć ‘to pass by’ and ruszyć ‘to start moving’ while in (4c) the verb posuwać się ‘to move forward’ implies the figure’s difficulty in moving, although in this particular case it does not refer to the type of the figure’s contact with the ground. (4) a. Znów minęła je biegiem jakaś zaaferowana siostra.[Szym] ‘Again an embarrassed nun passed them running.’ b. Ruszył szybkim krokiem pod górę i wszedł na teren domu wczasowego.  [Czub] ‘He walked up at a quick pace and entered the resort’s premises’

92

Chapter 4

c. Stawiając niezręczne i płochliwe kroki, posuwał się z wolna naprzód.  [Brzechwa, Academy of Mr Blot] ‘Stepping awkwardly and timidly, he moved slowly forward.’



The description of a motion situation with the manner of motion foregrounded in this way is more vivid and dynamic than when manner is conflated in the main verb. Moreover, this type of construction has one further advantage, namely, it permits packing an additional component such as path or contact with the ground in the verb. Thus, as exemplified in Sentence (3) , the verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ loses its primary sense in some contexts and the idea of canonical animate motion is often expressed peripherally. The highly schematic meaning of the verb iść and its semantic bleaching may be due to its frequent use in a variety of contexts. This phenomenon has been noted for other languages, for example by di Meola (2003) for German or Rakhilina (2004) for Russian. Di Meola (2003) describes a variety of contexts in which the German word gehen ‘to go’, ‘to walk’ is used. Many of the findings are also valid for the Polish verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ and, to a considerable extent they account for a large number of tokens of this verb in the analysed data. First of all, sentences with the verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ may form the answers to questions about the manner of motion but also about the activity performed at the Goal. To illustrate, the sentence Poszła do kina. ‘She went to the cinema’ may be an answer to a question about the means of transport (Jak się dostała do kina? ‘How did she get to the cinema?’) as well as to a question about the way of spending the evening (Co robiła wczoraj? ‘What did she do yesterday?’). Thus, the conceptualizer’s attention in sentences with the verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ prefixed by po- is frequently focused not on the act of reaching the Goal of movement but on the activity performed at the Goal. This is due to the metonymic transfer motion to the goal for activity at the goal. Other examples of metonymic transfer, where the movement is understood as the activity typically performed at this place, besides the already mentioned iść do kina ‘to go to the cinema’(to watch a film), involve such expressions as iść do restauracji ‘go to a restaurant’ (to have a meal), or iść do łóżka ‘to go to bed’ (to have sex). This leads us to another frequent use of the verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’, which is a partly grammaticalized form appearing in structures with infinitives such as iść siedzieć ‘to go to sit’ meaning going to prison, iść spać ‘to go to sleep’ or iść się uczyć ‘to go to learn’, where the lexical meaning of the verb is replaced by a functional meaning. In such contexts, the verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ does not function as a lexical item but as

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

93

an auxiliary (Sikora 2013: 124). For this reason the verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ accompanied by infinitives was not considered a typical motion verb and was excluded from the scope of analysis. Moreover, it is important to note that the reading of the sentence Poszła do kina. ‘She went to the cinema.’ does not necessarily imply that she actually walked there. She may well have driven to the cinema or have gone by bus. To sum up, the variety of the uses of the verb ‘go’ accounts for its frequency of occurrence in the data as well as for its weak semantic content. On the other hand, the Russian verb idti ‘to move on foot’ is called by Rakhilina (2004) a “generalized” verb of motion. Though the prototypical uses of idti ‘to move on foot’ describe animate motion, in Russian this verb may also apply to vehicles, dust, snow, water or blood. The major motivation for the use of this unidirectional verb in such a variety of contexts found by Rakhilina (2004) is Goal-oriented motion. The use of the Polish verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’, however, is not motivated to such an extent by the Goal-oriented motion as its Russian equivalent, since it is not frequently used with inanimate figures. The verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ is, to a large extent, restricted to animate motion. In Polish Goal-directed motion is expressed by a variety of (prefixed or unprefixed) unidirectional verbs (as in 5), which include highly schematic path of motion, or by path verbs (as in 6). (5) Chcecie lecieć do Afryki sterowcem? [Pil] ‘Do you want to go to Africa by airship.’ (6) Wrócił do komory z pochodnią. [Zag] ‘He returned to the chamber with a torch.’ – Velocity Expressing different degrees of velocity by Polish motion verbs may be illustrated by three sentences coming from the description of a fight between characters. The path of motion in the three instances stays the same and in all instances it is expressed by the prefix wy- and preposition zza ‘from behind’. The sentences differ in the types of manner verbs. (7) a. Wyszedł zza stołu i stanął przed dziewczyną. [Zag] ‘He came out from behind the table and stood in front of the girl.’ b. Wyskoczyła zza ławy i huknęła Nicetasa w ucho. ‘She jumped out from behind the bench and hit Nicetas’ ear.’

[Zag]

94

Chapter 4

d. Wypadł zza stołu i chwiejnym krokiem dopłynął do człowieczka z bliznami na gębie. [Zag] ‘He fell from behind the table and staggering swam to the little man with scars on his face.’



The three verbs used in the above sentences, namely iść ‘to move on foot’, skoczyć ‘to jump’, and paść ‘to fall’ describe different speeds of the described motion. In these contexts, the verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ is the most neutral as far as the speed of motion is concerned, skoczyć ‘to jump’ denotes a quick and abrupt action, while paść ‘to fall’ the most rapid change. The verb paść ‘to fall’ gives the impression of smooth involuntary action since this verb is typically used with inanimate entities moved downwards by gravity. The use of this verb for voluntary motion gives the impression that the moving figure is so overwhelmed with emotions (e.g. anger) that its motion does not depend on its will and is caused by some external force. Examples of other verbs expressing various degrees of velocity found in the data are: brnąć ‘to wade’, pędzić ‘to speed’, mknąć ‘to rush’, (w)lec się ‘to drag oneself’, rzucić się ‘to dash’, pruć ‘to speed’, prysnąć ‘to fleed’, ‘to escape quickly’. Frequently the verb also implies the reason for high or low velocity of the figure’s motion connected with the figure’s state (as in 8), whether emotional or physical, or the type of the ground (as in 9). (8) Zwlókł się z trudem i poszedł do “atelier”. [Kraj] ‘He dragged himself with difficulty and went to the “atelier” ’. (9) Brnął przez piasek, starając się nie nadepnąć na czyjąś stopę lub rękę. [Czub] ‘He waded through the sand, trying not to step on someone’s foot or hand.’ The next broad category distinguished in the present analysis involves verbs that include the semantic components of specific manner of movement connected with either physical or psychological (including emotional) features of the figure. – The figure’s psychological and physical features Polish verbs typically code the manner of movement, which in turn is frequently determined by the figure’s psychological state, as in (10a) and (10b), or

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

95

by its physical properties, such as shape or typical way of moving, as in (10c) or (10d). (10) a. (…) i zły jak diabli poczłapał w stronę przystanku po drugiej stronie mostu (…)  [Ćwirl] ‘(…) and angry as hell he shuffled towards the bus stop on the other side of the bridge (…)’ b. Skórzewski powlókł się noga za nogą. ‘Skórzewski shuffled his feet.’

[Pil]

c. (…) na bruk posypały się niewielkie, skurczone i wyschnięte larwy jakichś owadów. [Pil] ‘(…) small, shrunken and shrivelled larvae of some insects spilt on the pavement.’



d. Po kilku minutach wytoczył się wózek. ‘After a few minutes, a trolley rolled out.’

[DębR]

Thus, the figure’s tiredness and fatigue is reflected in the verbs człapać ‘to shuffle’ and wlec się ‘to drag oneself’ while the round shape of the figure (or part of the figure that has contact with the ground) is expressed in the verb toczyć się ‘to roll’. This type of verbs also includes turlać się ‘to roll’, which indicates the round shape of the usually inanimate figure. As discussed in the previous section, the semantic components of manner conflated in the verbs may overlap, since tiredness and fatigue may entail low speed of the figure’s motion. We shall now consider the next semantic feature coded by some Polish verb roots: the medium of motion. – Medium Some motion verbs of manner carry information about the vehicle or the environment in which the figure moves. Such verbs, apart from the frequently used verb jechać ‘to go by a vehicle’, include płynąć ‘to swim’ or lecieć ‘to fly’. The Sentences in (11) illustrate the use of these verbs in the data. (11) a. (…) gdyby położył się, popłynąłby z nurtem, zanurzając się powoli. [Orb] (…) if he lay down, he would flow with the current, immersing slowly.’

96

Chapter 4

b. Przejechali przez most na Ślęzie, kiedy w końcu Mock zebrał myśli. [Kraj] ‘They had crossed the bridge on the Ślęzie when finally Mock collected his thoughts.’ Compared with English Polish is relatively poor in motion verbs coding vehicles. Basically, it is the verb jechać ‘to go by a vehicle’ that lexicalizes this manner of motion. For the sake of comparison, let us mention that Levin (1993) distinguished as many as 39 English verbs of motion which are vehicle names. – Contact with the surface Information about the contact between the figure and the ground is included in such verbs as ślizgać się ‘to glide’, or sunąć ‘to glide’, ‘to slide’. These verbs indicate the degree of friction between the surfaces in contact, and what is predominantly coded is a degree of friction higher or lower than average or expected. This leads us directly to the notion of force-dynamic schema, which will be discussed in Section 4.5 below. (12) a. (…) kiedy Forstner pośliznął się na kałuży krwi pokrywającej podłogę salonki, Mock parsknął śmiechem.[Kraj] ‘(…) when Forstner slipped on a puddle of blood covering the floor of the salon, Mock burst out laughing.’ b. Przeciwnik osunął się po ścianie. [Pil] ‘The opponent slid down the wall.’ 4.3.2 Axiological Aspect of Motion Verbs The next kind of information conflated in the manner verbs is not so closely connected with the objective features of the components of motion event, but rather reflects the speaker’s attitude towards the figure’s motion, the goal of motion or towards the figure as such3. To illustrate, the verb used in Sentence (13) clearly shows the speaker’s negative attitude towards the figure through metaphorical extension: a person is a round object. (13) Z bramy przelotowej koło sklepu wytoczył się pijany medyk (…)  [Kraj] ‘From the thoroughfare gate near the store rolled out the drunk medic (…)’ 3  For a more detailed account of the axiology of Polish motion verbs see Łozińska and Góralczyk 2017).

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

97

Toczyć się ‘to roll oneself’ when used to describe the motion of human beings is negative, and implies the obesity or intoxication of the moving figure. In consequence, the described movement is either clumsy, uncontrolled or uncoordinated. The negative attitude is most chiefly expressed by two, rather colloquial and extremely negative verbs szwendać się ‘to loiter’, and even more strongly szlajać się ‘to loiter’. The negative evaluation may be connected either with the fact that the motion is uncoordinated or aimless, as in (14a). Moreover, moving around may be considered to be a waste of time (as in 14a) or it may be connected with the negative load assigned to the Goal of movement itself, as in (14b). (14) a. Długo szwendałem się po dzielnicy (…) [Pil] ‘I loitered for a long time around the district (…)’ b. (…) lepiej, jeśli odwiedzi wiekową Gawędzinę, niż miałaby się szlajać po cyrkach albo jarmarkach. [Szym] ‘(…) it will be better if she visits old Gawedzina instead of loitering around circuses or fairs.’ Let us note here that the aim of the figure’s motion along the path is reaching the Goal. Thus, verbs which in most contexts are also negatively charged are włóczyć się ‘to gallivant’, leźć ‘to trudge’, ‘to lumber along’ and pętać się ‘to hang around’ included in (15), all of which denote aimless, thoughtless or uncoordinated movement, which does not lead directly to the goal. (15) a. (…) a że Miętus nie pracował, miał całe dnie, by łazić z czworonogiem samopas (…) [Orb] ‘(…) and since Mietus did not work, he had the whole day to walk around with his dog without supervision (…)’ b. Wiem, że wczoraj zapętałeś się do Ramiszewskiego. ‘I know that yesterday you wandered to Ramiszewski.’

[DębR]

c. (…) nie trzeba było włóczyć się po okolicy bez kapelusza na głowie (…) [Pil] ‘(…) you shouldn’t have roamed around without your hat on (…)’ To recap, such verbs as szlajać się ‘to loiter’, pętać się ‘to hang around’, włóczyć się ‘to roam about’ are axiologically negatively charged in the studied contexts. The negative value results either from some negative load assigned to one part

98

Chapter 4

of the complex source-path-goal schema, or, if aimless, from uncoordinated motion not leading directly to some positively charged Goal. Polish does not seem to be as rich in positively charged motion verbs as in motion verbs that express the speaker’s negative attitude to the profiled spatial situation. Verbs which express the speaker’s positive assessment of the profiled motion event include stąpać ‘to tread’ or unosić się ‘to rise’. In Sentence (16) the speaker’s positive evaluation is assigned to the figure’s light and proud way of moving. (16) (…) teraz zamierzała iść jak niezwyciężona bohaterka, która stąpa po trupach swoich wrogów (…) [Szym] ‘(…) Now she was going to walk like an invincible heroine, who is stepping over the dead bodies of her enemies (…)’ Interestingly, axiologically charged motion verbs constitute the conceptual connection of motion and emotion on the part of the speaker. Moreover, such nuances as evaluation and subjective description of the figure’s motion are relatively frequently coded in the roots of Polish verbs of motion. From the viewpoint of Cognitive Grammar, the motion verbs that are emotionally charged and betray the speaker’s attitude construe the speaker, to some extent, objectively. Although he is unprofiled, implicit and offstage, he does not remain maximally subjective since his emotions or attitude towards the profiled spatial situation are in a way put on stage. To the best of my knowledge, this semantic component of Polish motion verbs has not been distinguished in any of the analyses of motion verbs so far. 4.3.3 Lexicalization of Manner Outside the Verb Although the majority of Polish motion verbs express the manner of motion rather than the path, the verb is obviously not the only lexical item used for coding manner information. Other lexical elements or phrases accompany verbs either compensating for the lack of manner information in the case of path verbs or enhancing the granularity of manner in the case of manner verbs. Modifying expressions are mainly adverbs (e.g. ostrożnie ‘carefully’), or nominal and prepositional expressions (e.g. autobusem ‘by bus’, na czworakach ‘on all fours’). In total in 9% of constructions lexicalizing motion events, the modifying expressions accompanied the verb adding or specifying the manner of motion. The manner of motion was added in the case of path verbs and further specified in the case of manner verbs. In order to discover the strategies of rendering manner of motion in Polish, the percentages of constructions with

99

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

path verbs and those with manner verbs modified by manner expressions were calculated. The first observation is that the results presented in Table 4.2 do not show any significant differences between manner and path verbs in this respect. What is more, when we take into account the fact that the path verb ruszyć ‘to start to move’ is customarily modified by adverbials and that it contributes heavily to the frequency of modification of path verbs shown in Table 4.2, we may conclude that information about the manner of motion rarely accompanies Polish path verbs. Modifying expressions of manner accompanied manner verbs slightly more frequently than path verbs although the difference shown in Table 4.2 is insignificant (only 1%). The results suggest that although the descriptions of motion events coded by means of path verbs are devoid of manner information, there is no need for compensating for it by means of adverbials. Since manner is not the Core of the motion event, it is not compulsorily encoded, and obviously, as Table 4.2 shows, in most uses of path verbs it is omitted. Interestingly, the verb ruszyć ‘to start moving’, which was included in the category of path verbs since it profiles the onset of motion, was the most frequently modified motion verb of all. As many as 40% of instances of its use were accompanied by modifying expressions describing manner. These included phrases such as: ruszyć z rykiem silnika ‘to start with the roar of the engine’, ruszyć biegiem ‘start moving by running’ or ruszył długim ślizgiem ‘to start with a long slide’. As already mentioned, besides this particular lexical item, there is no significant difference between the numbers of manner and path verbs modified by additional descriptions of manner. However, the function of these expressions in the two cases seems to be different. Let us look at two instances of the use of modifying expressions describing manner. Table 4.2 Frequency of occurrence of modifying expressions of manner Verb type

No. of tokens

No. of modifying expressions describing manner

Percentage of clauses with modifying expressions describing manner

manner verbs path verbs Total

376 139 515

42 14 57

11% 10% 11%

100 (17) a. (…) skręcając w prawo, pobiegł pędem przez trawy (…) ‘(…) turning right, he ran speeding through the grass (…)’

Chapter 4

[Zag] [Zag]

b. (…) sunął teraz za uciekającym na czworakach dziennikarzem (…)  [Wro] ‘(…) now he was following a fleeing on all fours journalist (…)’ In (17a) the expression accompanies a manner verb and further specifies the manner of motion included in the verb, in this way making the description of manner more fine-grained. In the case of Sentence (17b), the modifying expression is the only element carrying the manner information. The function of modifying expressions accompanying path verbs may be to compensate for the lack of manner information included in the verb or for its foregrounding. There is no unified model for the description of manner in the lexicalization of motion events, probably owing to its complexity and crosslinguistic variety. However, there have been attempts to divide the lexical items expressing manner into groups which would be universal in crosslinguistic analysis (e.g. Snell-Hornby 1983, Slobin et al. 2014). The categories of modifying expressions found in the analysed corpus convey basically the same type of information about the manner of motion as verb roots discussed in the previous sections. However, new categories are worth mentioning. For example, the category of manner expressions referring to the sound accompanying motion is particularly well represented by manner modifiers. Polish verb roots have not hitherto been noted for this semantic component4. Thus, the vast number of expressions denoting the sound produced while moving may be accounted for by the fact that this semantic component is not easily codable in Polish verb roots. The categories of modifying expressions of manner and their instantiations are shown in Table 4.3. 4.3.3.1 Subordination of Manner The use of subordinate manner-verb constructions is another strategy for rendering the manner of motion outside the verb, as in (18).

4  However, verbs describing sound emitted during motion the roots of which do not conflate the semantic component of motion might occasionally be used for encoding motion relations, for example, świsnąć ‘to whistle’, as in Kula świsnęła mu koło ucha ‘A bullet whistled past his ear’.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

101

Table 4.3 Semantic components expressed by modifying expressions Semantic component of manner

Examples of manner modifiers

Motor pattern

na piechotę ‘on foot’, prawie biegiem ‘almost running’; chyżo ‘swiftly’, powoli ‘slowly’, szybkim krokiem ‘briskly’, gwałtownie ‘sharply’; stukając obcasami ‘tapping with heels’, z rykiem silnika ‘with the roar of the engine’, z piskiem opon ‘with the tires’ squealing’, bez pukania ‘without knocking’, cicho, poskrzypując oficerkami ‘softly creaking with his boots’, szurając sandałami ‘shuffling with sandals’, z głośnym plaśnięciem ‘with a loud plop’, bezszelestnie ‘silently’; samochodem ‘by car’, rowerem ‘by bicycle’; długim ślizgiem ‘with a long glide’; cięzko sapiąc ‘puffing hard’; demonstracyjnie ‘demonstratively’, w panice ‘in a panic’, obojętnie ‘indifferently’, w zamyśleniu ‘deep in thoughts’, z wahaniem ‘hesitantly’, ostentacyjnie ‘ostentatiously’, ostrożnie ‘carefully’; niespodziewanie ‘unexpectedly’.

Velocity Sound

Medium Contact with the ground Figure’s physical condition Figure’s attitude

Attitude towards the figure or its movement

(18) a. Klucząc w podziemiach, skręcał tyle razy, że zatracił już poczucie przestrzeni. [Zag] ‘Weaving in the underground, he turned so many times that he lost the sense of space.’ b.  Nie znoszę wchodzić po schodach, ale uwielbiam po nic zbiegać, zeskakując po kilka stopni. [Orb] ‘I hate climbing stairs, but I love running down, jumping down a few steps.’

102

Chapter 4

Let us now discuss the reasons for the use of modifying expressions in a sentence. Modifying expressions accompanying manner verbs may, first of all, add information about the manner of motion in situations when the lexicon of the language lacks an appropriate manner verb. Secondly, they make the distinctions of manner already included in the verb more fine-grained. Finally, coding the manner of motion in a modifying expression foregrounds or reinforces the semantic content already included in the verb. Consequently, the most frequently used verbs, like iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’, which are the least expressive manner verbs tend to be modified more often than expressive verbs, such as galopować ‘to gallop’, which seem to provide sufficiently detailed information about the manner. 4.4

Lexicalization of the Path

4.4.1 Motion Verbs of Path In the Polish language, which is satellite-framed, verbal prefixes (in Talmian terms constituting the closed set of satellites) are grammatical forms which most typically code the path. Much less frequently the characteristics of the path are indicated by the verb. For example, in (19a) and (19b) the verbs krążyć ‘to circle’ and wrócić ‘to return’ not only involve the semantic component of motion but also indicate the path. In (19a), the figure made a circle around the ground and in (19b) made a round trip. The manner of motion in the two instances is not specified. It is either irrelevant or needs to be inferred from the context. (19) a. Krążył jak wściekły pies wokół stołu.[Kraj] ‘He circled like a crazy dog around the table’ b. (…) obradowaliśmy aż cztery dni i jakiś czas temu wróciłem.[DębŁ] ‘(…) (we) debated as many as four days and some time ago I came back.’ We can now turn to the types and tokens of Path verbs selected in the novels examined. There are 23 types of Path verbs noted in the analysed data, five of which are prototypically used to code vertical relations. Taking into consideration the generally acknowledged low frequency of coding vertical relations (e.g. Naigles et al. 1998, Filipović 2007), the number of types of Polish path verbs used for coding these relations seems relatively high.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

103

The most frequent path verb is the verb ruszyć ‘to start to move’. In Kopecka’s study (2010: 245) this particular verb was considered to be neutral with respect to the expression of manner or path. However, according to the definition in PWN Dictionary, ruszyć means «to start moving in some direction, start walking or driving somewhere»5. On this basis, one may conclude that the verb profiles the onset and the initial part of the path, which is why in the present study it has been included in the category of path verbs. Other motion verbs prototypically coding horizontal relations can be divided into those that designate the position of the figure in relation to the ground, such as wrócić ‘to return’, uciec ‘to escape’, cofnąć się ‘to move back’ or zbliżyć się ‘to approach’, and those that denote the shape of the path covered by the moving figure. The last type of verbs is not frequently noted in the Polish data, and the verbs included in this category are krążyć ‘to circle’ and (s)kręcić ‘to turn’. Both refer solely to circular motion. The first observation to make here is that in Polish there are few motion verbs that describe the shape of path. For the sake of comparison, English makes use of such semantically complex verbs as to slalom, to spiral, to wind, to zigzag, to circle, to turn to name just a few (cf. van der Zee et al. 2010, Nikanne and van der Zee 2010). These verbs, as argued by van der Zee et al. (2010: 96), express more fine-grained representation of the path. For example, in (20), in a single clause the global direction of a moving figure in relation to a ground object is expressed as well as the slalom-like shape of the path (20) The skier slalomed down the mountain. (after van der Zee et al. 2010: 96) As already mentioned, Polish verbs rarely make such fine-grained path distinctions, and shape of the path is typically elaborated on in accompanying phrases like zygzakiem ‘in a zigzag manner’, wężykiem ‘in a winding manner’, slalomem ‘in a slalom manner’, etc. This strategy for compensating for the shape-of-path description is exemplified in (21). (21) (…) polecieliśmy nad morzem daleko na zachód, tam wdarliśmy się w głąb lądu, a teraz poruszaliśmy się dziwnym zygzakiem (…) [Pil] ‘(…) We flew over the sea far to the west, there we forced our way inland, and now we were moving in a strange zigzag (…)’

5  Translation mine.

104

Chapter 4

The next section will discuss some of the ways in which the path is lexicalized outside the verb by means of verbal prefixes. 4.4.2 Lexicalization of the Path Outside the Verb The path, which the Talmian theory of motion event regards as the core of the motion event, is a compulsory element of expressions describing movement. The previous section dealt with the lexicalization of the semantic component of the path in the open-class set of verbs. Let us now proceed to the analysis of the path description by means of closed-class lexical items, namely verbal prefixes, classified by Talmy (2000b: 103) as satellites. The meaning of verbal prefixes as well as the cognitive mechanisms behind their use will be discussed since as proposed in cognitive linguistics (Janda et al. 2013, Dąbrowska 1996), verbal prefixes are not semantically empty, vague in meaning, or mere aspectual markers. Table 4.4 below shows the most frequent types of prefixes appearing in the novels examined, with the number of tokens and verb types with which they occurred. Table 4.4 Cline of motion verb prefixation Type of prefix

Number of tokens

Number of verb types occurring with the prefix

w-/ wepowyprzeprzypodz-/ sdoodonadrozuTotal

   69 (24%)    47 (16%)    38 (13%)    31 (11%)    31 (11%) 28 19 12 7 6 2 1 1 292

13 11 9 12 4 4 6 9 4 2 2 1 1 78

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

105

As the above table shows, the most common prefixes are: first of all, those that typically code movement into and out of a container (w- and wy-), those that most commonly code deictic motion (po- and przy-) and the prefix that prototypically designates motion across a surface (the prefix prze-). After these most frequently appearing prefixes (marked in bold in the table) have been discussed in greater detail, cognitive factors which most likely contribute to the high frequency of the five prefixes will be outlined. 4.4.2.1 Motion In and Out of a Container The prefixes w- and wy- belong to the most frequently encountered in the analysed data (24% and 13% of the total occurrences respectively). Prototypically motion verbs prefixed by these prefixes in combination with prepositional phrases code relations of entering or leaving a container. A combination of the source-path-goal and container image schemas underlies motion into and out of a container. However, the two directions involve these image schemas being combined in a different way: with the container as the Source in one case and the Goal in the other. Thus, for motion out of a container, the figure starts its movement at a point located in the interior and follows the path until the container’s boundary is crossed. For the the spatial situation of entering, a point situated inside a container is the Goal of movement. The figure follows its path until it crosses the boundary of a container. It should be stressed here that what speakers say does not always literally correspond with what they have in mind. Due to the constraints of human verbal interaction, speakers need to make decisions about what to encode linguistically. They must rely on their listeners making epistemic inferences on the basis of their knowledge of the world as well as of other words in a given sentence. Inferences may be defined as “cognitive operations in which conclusions are drawn from a set of premises” (Radden and Dirven 2007: 21). Image schemas, which underlie translational motion, are the sources of a number of inferences on the listener’s part. That being the case, the basic source-path-goal schema combined with the container image schema generates at least two inferences for the discussed prefixes, which motivate various interpretations of these lexical items according to context. The first inference is spatial and emerges from the relation of containment. The figure that moves out of a container enters an open, unconfined space, and the figure that moves into a container enters a confined space. When entered, a container may exert some extra force against the figure’s motion, which may impede it or totally block it. Overcoming this resistance requires some effort by the figure. When exiting a container, the figure’s

106

Chapter 4

motion may be impeded by the container exerting counterforce and preventing the figure from leaving. The second inference is deictic and is based on the location of the conceptualizer’s viewpoint. If the viewpoint is located inside a container, the figure that moves inside it comes into the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus, becomes accessible, visible or manageable. If the viewpoint is placed outside a container, the figure leaving an enclosed space moves into the region of interactive focus. Naturally, the reverse spatial situation, namely when the viewpoint is placed inside a container and the figure leaves it, entails the figure’s leaving the region of interactive focus. Thus, both of the discussed prefixes may be used deictically to code relations of the figure entering (or leaving) the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus, and the choice of the prefix depends on the viewpoint assumed by the conceptualizer. This, however, concerns only situations where there are two adjacent containers and the lexicalization of entering (or exiting) is a matter of construal. In such spatial situations, the choice of the prefix depends on the place of the viewpoint. This use of the prefixes wy- and w- is called deictic by Apresjan (1986). It is also worth mentioning here that the patterns of inference may be understood literally as well as metaphorically. An image schema may be projected on abstract domains. In this way an open space may be conceptualized only metaphorically as a container. To illustrate, in Sentence (22), the outside atmospheric conditions of the windstorm, fog and rain are conceptualized in their entirety as a container that is entered by the figure. Nevertheless, the same spatial situation could have been coded by the prefix wy-, entailing a changed location of the viewpoint. (22) Völinger (…) otworzył drzwi szynku i wszedł w wichurę, deszcz i mgłę. [Kraj] ‘Völinger (…) opened the door of the tap-room and in-went into the windstorm, rain and fog.’ By the same token, the choice between w- and wy- in situations where only one container is involved does not depend on the place of viewpoint. Since the schematic container consists of an interior, boundary and exterior, the viewpoint may be placed either inside or outside the container. Polish lacks the equivalents of the English verbs to come and to go, which is why the two construals of the same situation of entering a schematic container with the viewpoint inside and outside it, reflected in sentences The men came into the house, and The men went into the house. are not possible.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

107

As a rule the context in which a prefixed verb is used betrays the location of a viewpoint. The situation of entering a schematic container is always coded by a motion verb prefixed by w- and leaving by wy-, irrespective of the place of the viewpoint. Nevertheless, in most cases the place of the viewpoint (either inside or outside the container) may be inferred from the context and, more specifically, from the distribution of attention in the discourse. In this sense, these uses of the prefixes w- and wy- may be considered to carry some deictic information. To illustrate, let us analyse two instances of the figure’s entering a container. Sentence (23a) is preceded and followed by a description of a situation in the pub, which means that the viewpoint is placed inside and the figure enters the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus. When the viewpoint is placed outside the container, as in (23b), the figure entering a container becomes invisible and inaccessible to the conceptualizer. In such situations, the continuation of the description of events does not revolve around the figure. (23) a. Do lokalu wszedł niewysoki domokrążca z pudłem towarów. [Kraj] ‘A small travelling salesman came into the bar a box of goods.’ b. Mały wszedł do samochodu i zatrzasnął za sobą drzwi. [Orb] ‘Little went into the car and slammed the door behind him.’ When it comes to the prefix w-, Sentences (23a) and (23b) show how the context in which this prefix is used indicates the location of the viewpoint. As already mentioned, the use of the prefix wy- frequently codes the relation of the figure’s entering the region of interactive focus, which is based on the second inference mentioned above. This claim is clearly illustrated by sentences in which the prefix combines with other prepositions than those marking container relations (e.g., do ’to’ or z ‘from’). The common preposition used for coding the relation of the figure’s coming into sight is zza ‘from behind’, as is illustrated in (24). We note that the prefix wy- in these sentences does not indicate leaving a container but solely entering the region of interactive focus, i.e. coming into view. The analysis of the data shows that becoming visible is frequently the predominant motivation for the use of this prefix. (24) a. Wyszedł zza stołu i stanął przed dziewczyną. [Zag] ‘He came from behind the table and stood in front of the girl.’ b. Zza pleców zakonnicy wynurzył się niewysoki mężczyzna (…).[Wro] ‘A small man emerged from behind the nun’s back (…)’

108

Chapter 4

On the other hand, the prefix w- used in particular contexts codes relations of leaving the region of interactive focus and becoming inaccessible or invisible to the conceptualizer. The situation in which the figure goes behind a barrier that separates it from the conceptualizer and makes it (at least partially invisible) is illustrated by Sentence (25). (25) Odwzajemnij jej uśmiech i wszedł za ladę (…) [Czub] ‘He smiled back at her and in-went behind the counter.’ The last factor contributing to the frequent use of the discussed prefixes to be noted here is that the prefixes wy- and w- along with accompanying prepositional phrases are frequently used for coding the Goal of movement. Table 4.6 shows the frequency of the types of prepositional phrases found in the data with w- and wy-, divided into those that code the Source, Path and Goal of movement. The prepositional phrases coding the Goal of movement include w ‘in’, pod ‘under’, do ‘into’, na ‘onto’ and przed ‘in front of’. The preposition coding the path is przez ‘across’, ‘through’, and finally the prepositions that designate the Source of movement include z ‘from’ and zza ‘from behind’. Table 4.5 also shows the percentage of prefixes not used with any prepositional phrases (marked as ‘No PP’). Table 4.5 Frequency of prepositional phrase types with prefixes w- and wy-

Prefix

No PP

Source

Path

Goal

wwy-

12% 28%

0% 44%

11% 0%

77% 28%

The above table shows that the prefix w- is predominantly used for coding the Goal of movement. While this finding could be expected, the observation that the prefix wy- is relatively often used for this purpose comes as a surprise. The major conclusion arising from the results presented above is that the natural human tendency for coding the Goal of movement, called the Goal bias, is one of the major factors contributing to the frequent use of both prefixes. Finally, the fact that the w- is commonly used for coding upward motion may theoretically have contributed to the frequency of its use. However,

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

109

instances of vertical motion are few and far between and cannot have been a significant factor contributing to the frequent use of this prefix. The lexicalization patterns of vertical motion will be dealt with in greater detail in Section 4.6. To summarize, the prefixes wy- and w- prototypically code motion into and out of a container. Nevertheless, the analysis of the data from the narrative texts reveals a number of other semantic features, most of which are based on inferences. This means that the prefixes wy- and w- are not always simple inverses since their various uses may be motivated by different inferences. 4.4.2.2 Deictic Motion The second most frequently coded type of motion events found in the data is motion away or towards the speaker, coded most typically by the verbs prefixed by po- and przy- respectively (although as shown in the previous section, the prefixes w- and wy- also have deictic senses). The number of tokens of motion verbs prefixed by po- and przy- is not as high as that for w- and wy-, but much higher than the number of tokens of other prefixes further down the cline and constitutes respectively 11% and 13% of the total uses of prefixed verbs. The image schema underlying these structures is source-path-goal. In the case of motion away from the speaker (the prefix po-), the Source is the deictic centre, and in the case of motion toward the speaker (the prefix przy-) it is the Goal that carries deictic information. There are a number of inferences generated by the combination of image schemas underlying the uses of each of the discussed prefixes. Depending on the context of use of the prefix po-, the source-path-goal schema generates one or more of the following inferences. i. ii.

The figure has initiated motion from the deictic Source and is still moving. The figure is still in the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus. The figure has initiated motion away from the deictic Source and the conceptualizer has no way of knowing whether it is still moving or not. The figure has left the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus. This spatial situation is exemplified by Sentence (26), in which the trajectory of the bullet disappears.

(26) Pocisk poleciał dwieście kroków i zniknął w falach … [Zag] ‘The bullet away-flew 200 steps and disappeared in the waves …’

110

Chapter 4

iii. The figure has initiated motion away from the deictic Source and is no longer present there. To illustrate, the motivation for the use of the prefix po- in (27) is not the description of the maid’s motion, but stressing the fact that she is not at the Source of movement. (27) Nie widziałem, żeby panna Susanne gdzieś wychodziła, jej służąca poszła przed godziną … [Kraj] ‘I did not see Miss Susanne going out, her maid away-went an hour ago …’ iv.

The conceptualizer’s attention follows the figure’s motion from the deictic centre along the path to the Goal of motion. In the case of this inference, the figure’s activities at the Goal of movement are usually traced, as they are in (28). This use of the prefix po- involves a shift of deictic centre.

(28) Pewnego dnia poszedł jak zwykle po gazetę. Poprosił o „Dziennik Polski” i (…) [DębŁ] ‘One day he away-went as usual (to buy) a newspaper. He asked for “Polish Daily” and (…)’ v.

The speaker assumes that the figure’s motion is intentional and Goaldirected. In Sentence (29), although the Goal of motion is not even stated, the use of the po- verb implies that the motion was Goal-oriented and that the figure reached the Goal.

(29) Poszła i jej nie przyjęli. [Czub] ‘She away-went but they did not receive her.’ In turn, the main inference generated by the source-path-goal for the prefix przy- is that the figure has terminated motion at the deictic Goal and/or has entered the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus. Table 4.6 below shows percentages of prepositional phrases accompanying the prefixes przy- and po- as well as the percentage of instances not followed by a prepositional phrase. Table 4.6 shows similar percentages for both prefixes regarding use of with Source, Path, Goal prepositional phrases as well as with no prepositional phrase. They are predominantly accompanied by prepositional phrases coding the Goal of motion (50% for each of the prefixes), which again is connected with the human Goal bias. While the prefix przy- inherently profiles the Goal of movement, po- is frequently described as chiefly profiling the deictic Source (see the discussion in Section 3.4.3). Although the prefix po- unquestionably

111

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish Table 4.6 Frequency of prepositional phrase types with prefixes przy- and poPrefix

No PP

Source

Path

Goal

przypo-

42% 45%

0% 2.5%

8% 2.5%

50% 50%

profiles the deictic Source of motion, when it is used with prepositional phrases, in as many as half of all instances it involves in its profile the whole path including the Goal of motion. In Sentence (30), the time reference (i.e., the previous day) actually encompasses a period of time longer than the described motion. (30) Niestety, poszła poprzedniego dnia do profesorowej Cybulskiej (…) [Szym] ‘Unfortunatelly, she away-went the previous day to professor Cybulski’s wife (…)’ Close to half of the przy- and po- instances (42% vs. 45% respectively) were not accompanied by any prepositional phrase. This result is, to a large extent, due to a clear deictic component demonstrated by these prefixed verbs. First of all, the prepositional phrase is absent since the relation of the figure to the ground may be inferred from the situational context. Secondly, the figure’s entering the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus (profiled by przy-) or leaving it (profiled by po-) is coded by the prefixed verb. Thus, the result of the action is underscored rather than the figure’s motion itself. In other words, the purpose of such phrases as Poszedł gdzieś ‘(He) has gone somewhere’ is to indicate that he is not here and not to describe the figure’s motion itself. As I discuss elsewhere (Łozińska 2017a), the uses of the po- and przy- prefixes, depending on the context of their appearance, fall into two categories according to the type of the conceptualizer’s focus on the figure. In the first type, the conceptualizer’s viewpoint is stationary and the conceptualizer’s attention focuses on the moving figure until it leaves the region of interactive focus. In the second type, the location of the perspective moves and the conceptualizer’s attention concentrates on the moving figure until it reaches the Goal. Thus the two Sentences in (31) code movement away from the deictic centre by means of po-, while, in both of them the conceptualizer’s attention is distributed differently.

112 (31) a. Z powrotem pójdziesz sobie na piechotę, stary hitlerowcu. ‘You will go back away on foot, you old Nazi.’

Chapter 4

[Kraj]

b. Poszedł więc jeszcze (…) i kupił ostatni egzemplarz powieści (…) [Orb] ‘(he) went and bought the last copy of the novel (…)’



In Sentence (31a), the figure’s motion away from the Source is construed from a stationary perspective. The perspective point, which does not change its location, is situated at the Source of movement and the whole scene is viewed from this point. The conceptualizer’s attention focuses only on the Source of the path and its initial part until the moment when the figure is out of the region of interactive focus. Consequently, this leads to a less detailed knowledge about the moving figure and its future actions. The lack of interest in the moving figure is indicated by the use of the word sobie ‘yourself’, which stresses the conceptualizer’s negative or indifferent attitude towards the figure. The use of the prefixed motion verb in (31b) is different in this respect. Here the conceptualizer moves his attention along the path and retains a focus on the moving figure. Thus, the second perspective entails a larger scope of attention. The conceptualizer’s attention highlights two locations along the path, the Source and Goal. These parts of the path are profiled and elaborated on with greater detail than in the sentences where the conceptualizer’s attention is stationary. In other words, the conceptualizer assumes “a moving proximal perspective point with local scope of attention on elements of the schema taken in sequence” (Talmy 2000a: 269). To sum up, the sentences with motion verbs prefixed by po- fall into two categories. The first includes situations in which the conceptualizer’s attention remains at the Source of movement and does not follow the figure. In consequence, subsequently described events typically also take place at the Source of movement. The second concerns the spatial situations om which the conceptualizer’s attention follows the motion and traces the figure’s actions (for more details see Łozińska 2017a). 4.4.2.3 Motion Along the Path Prze- is a path prefix coding the relation between the figure and the ground object which is neither the Goal nor the Source but in some way relates to the path. As Table 4.5 above shows, the prefix occurs frequently and constitutes 11% of the total number of prefix use in the analysed data. The high frequency may be due to the fact that it is used to lexicalize various spatial situations, which although related are distinct. For the sake of comparison, Russian makes

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

113

use of two verbal prefixes to profile the spatial relations that in Polish are profiled by the single prefix prze- (for the comparison between Polish and Russian in this respect see Section 3.4.2). Thus, in general the prefix prze- designates a wide spectrum of spatial relations of boundary-crossing, as exemplified in (32). Boundary-crossing coded by prze- may be a part of motion through an open space across a surface, or through a container. Moreover, an open space may be metaphorically conceptualized as a container. (32) Kula przeszła przez przednią szybę i czoło siedzącego za kierownica towarzysza. ‘The bullet through-went through the windshield and the forehead of the companion sitting behind the wheel.’ The relation of boundary-crossing is schematically represented in Figure 4.3. Each of the elements of the schema may be further modified and elaborated on in various ways giving rise to a number of elaborations (also called inferences here) of the central image schema. G F

Figure 4.3 Central image schema of the prefix prze-.

What is more, the prefix prze- may code a relation of proximity in which the figure passes by some ground object. The schematic representation of this relation is depicted in Figure 4.4. The circle around the ground denotes the region of interactive focus between the figure and the ground, which shows that the element of boundary-crossing is also present in this subschema. Since the prefix prze- covers such a wide range of uses, it generates a vast number of inferences, some of which may even contradict one another. Moreover, in the case of prze-, the ground is frequently the path of motion. Consequently, various structural features of the ground may also give rise to all sorts of inferences.

114

Chapter 4

F

G

Figure 4.4 Elaboration of the central image schema of the prefix prze-.

Many of the uses of prze- found in the data are motivated by inferences connected with the crossing relation, which is schematically depicted in Figure 4.3. Each of the inferences where listeners must rely on their world knowledge, or in other words the central schema’s elaborations, will be exemplified with clauses derived from the analysed data. The last two inferences connected with facilitating or impeding motion are connected with the notion of force dynamics, which will be discussed separately in Section 4.5. i.

The path is delineated by the shape of the ground, as in (33), or it may only partly coincide with the ground, as illustrated by (34).

(33) Lesik wolno przejechał wzdłuż otoczonego biało-czerwoną taśmą parkanu. [Wro] ‘Lesik slowly drove along the fence surrounded with a red and white tape.’ (34) (…) pasażer przesunął się na środek kanapy. [Kraj] ‘(…) the passenger moved to the centre of the couch.’ ii.

The path covered by the moving figure is equated with the covered distance, which is shown in (35).

(35) (…) trzeba przejść pieszo albo przejechać tramwajem ładnych parę kilometrów.[Ćwirl] ‘One must go on foot or go by tram quite a few kilometers.’ iii. The ground, which may be a surface that is being crossed or penetrated, enables the figure to move and influences the ease of motion. This inference

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

115

mainly refers to situations in which the ground is a medium, such as water and air, as in (36), or exerts a counterforce lower than expected, as in (37). (36) Nieśmiało prześlizgują się po taflach sadzawek. [Orb] ‘They shyly slide on the surfaces of the ponds.’ (37) Przeleciał przez drzwi wejściowe, jakby zrobiono je z gęstej mgły.[Orb] ‘(He) flew through the front door as if it was made ​​of dense fog.’ iv. The ground, which may be a crossed surface or a pe n etrated ground conceptualized as a container, exerts counterforce aga i nst the figure’s movement. As Przybylska (2006: 145) notes, this infere nce adds to the prefix prze- a new semantic feature ‘to overcome a barrier on the path’. The issue of counterforce exerted by the ground will be elaborated on in Section 4.5. Next, the relation of proximity, depicted in Figure 4.4, generates the following two inferences: v.

vi.

The ground object which is passed by is missed or overlooked. This inference mainly involves transitive verbs used in such expressions as przejechać przystanek ‘to miss a bus stop’, przejść właściwy dom ‘to go past the right house’. When the figure is close to the ground, it comes into the region of interactive focus, which means it is available and accessible, as in (38), where a cleric was close enough to a person in need be able to help.

(38) (…) ruszył z pomocą przechodzący tamtędy duchowny.[Wro] ‘(…) a cleric passing that way dashed to help.’ The prefix prze- profiles the trajectory of movement along the path, which is reflected in the kind of prepositional phrases that typically accompany it. Table 4.7 shows the percentages of prepositional phrases following motion verbs prefixed by prze- as well as the percentage of these verbs unaccompanied by prepositional phrases (marked as No PP).

116

Chapter 4

Table 4.7 Frequency of prepositional phrase types with prefixes prze-

Prefix

No PP

Source

Path

Goal

prze-

29%

0%

55%

16%

We see that the prefix prze- is a typical path prefix, which means that the conceptualizer’s attention focuses on the path of motion rather than the Source or Goal. 55% of prepositional phrases (involving such prepositions as przez ‘through’, nad ‘over’, pod ‘under’, po ‘along’, między ‘between’, ‘among’) that follow motion verbs prefixed by prze- further specify the path and the relation between the figure and the ground. As the discussion of the central schema elaborations above has indicated, the ground of the prze- schema is frequently the path itself or is located on the path. 29% of the instances of motion verbs with prze- were not accompanied by a prepositional phrase. In such cases the ground is left unspecified, as in (39) and (40), and then the prefix has a deictic reference since the speaker’s vantage point is by default inferred as the ground. (39) (…) otworzyłem okiennice, posprzątałem, przejechała pryskarka empeo6 i na tym koniec wydarzeń.[DębŁ] ‘(…) I opened the shutters, cleaned up, a street sprinkler empeo drove by and that is the end of the events.’ (40) Przejedzie drugi pociąg, to zobaczycie. [Orb] ‘The second train will pass by, and you will see.’ In the analysed data only 16% of the prepositional phrases collocating motion verbs prefixed by prze- refer to the Goal of movement in spite of the strong Goal bias noted in the use of other prefixes. Prepositional phrases most commonly used to profile the Goal of movement involve do ‘to’, ‘into’, which codes Goal as a container and na ‘on’, ‘onto’, which profiles the Goal as a surface.

6  “Empeo” colloquially refers to MPO (Miejskie Przedsiębiorstwo Oczyszczania), which is a city clearing company in Warsaw.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

117

4.4.2.4 Factors Contributing to the Frequency of the Use of Prefixes The analysis of the data discussed in the previous sections points to three major cognitive factors contributing to the frequency of use of prefixes and one linguistic factor, which is connected with the range of spatial relations coded by a given linguistic item. The three cognitive factors motivating the use of verbal prefixes that were distinguished in the analysis are: 1) the tendency to code the Goal of motion, called Goal bias, 2) coding deictic relations, and 3) related human early maturing concept of a container. Let us briefly summarize each of these factors. The first is the Goal bias. The descriptions of motion events included in the analysed narratives are in general lexicalized as Goal-oriented. Human non-linguistic Goal bias, which is commonly reflected in language, is a wellstudied phenomenon. For example, on the basis of experimental data, Lakusta and Landau (2005) reported an asymmetry between coding the Source and Goal of motion by various groups of respondents, including children, adults and patients with Williams syndrome. Moreover, Regier and Zheng (2007) found that Goal bias exists across the languages of the world including such different types of languages as Arabic, which is verb-framed; Chinese, which is equipollently-framed; and English, which is satellite-framed. Thus, Goal bias has been shown to exist independently of the respondents’ language abilities or the spoken language. Consequently, the most frequent uses of prefixes are predominantly those coding the Goal of movement. In Polish, while w- and przy- inherently profile the Goal of movement, po- and wy- in combination with prepositional phrases also mark it in a large proportion of uses (50% and 28%respectively). The first two most frequent prefixes, namely w- and po-, as well as the third one przy- typically collocate with the prefix do ‘to’, ‘into’ and code the Goal of movement, as in Sentences (41). (41) a. Gliński wszedł do budynku Poczty Głównej i przyspieszył kroku. [Wro] ‘Gliński in-went in the building of the Main Post Office and quickened his pace.’ b. Polecieli do swojej kolonii dostarczyć jej pomoc. [Pili] ‘They along-flew to their colony to provide her with help.’ c. Psiak przybiegł do niego.[Orb] ‘The dog to-ran up to him.’

118

Chapter 4

This leads to the conclusion that one of the main forces driving the lexicalization patterns of spatial vocabulary in Polish is a strong Goal bias, reflecting an innate human tendency to code the Goal of movement rather than its Source. This frequently observed phenomenon is expressed in the linguistic asymmetry between the frequency of the spatial vocabulary used for encoding the Goal and that which lexicalizes the trajectory or the Source of movement. For example, Verspoor et al. (1999: 98) argue that for human beings the Goal is usually more important than the Source. Since we tend to be far more interested in the Goal when human action is involved, Goal is more salient than Source and, in consequence, is more frequently lexicalized. The second cognitive factor contributing to the frequency of Polish prefixes is the concept of containment, to which human beings seem to be particularly sensitive. This sensitivity, which means the ease of perceiving and conceptualizing, is reflected in the frequency of the production of lexical items coding this relation. From the developmental point of view, the concept of containment and support are the earliest to mature. Developmental non-linguistic studies report that children show sensitivity to containment relations as early as at the age of six months (Casasola et al. 2003). The tendency for coding containment relations is reflected in the high percentage of the use of w- and wy- prefixes, which prototypically code motion into and out of a container. The possibility to mark deictic relations is the next powerful factor influencing the frequency of the discussed prefixes. The influence of the semantic component of deixis on the frequency of a given item has been noted in the studies of spatial expressions in other languages. To illustrate, Filipović (2007: 113) established a cline of Serbo-Croatian prefixed manner verbs. She found that the uses of motion verbs prefixed by the Serbo-Croatian od- and do- significantly outnumbered those of all other prefixed verbs. Since these prefixes code deictic relations, this result rightly led Filipović (2007: 116) to the conclusion that deixis is an important factor driving the lexicalization process of spatial relations. The prefixes w- and wy-, although they seem to code the opposite relations of entering and leaving a container, frequently code the deictic situation of the figure’s coming into the conceptualizer’s view (or in Lindner’s terminology region of interactive focus), with the difference that the prefix wy- is used in this sense when the viewpoint is outside a container and w- when it is inside. Let me note that in the deictic uses of prefixes, the type of the construal of the profiled spatial situations is different. The speaker is not explicitly profiled but his vantage point and his line of sight are evoked and in this way he becomes, to some extent, objectively construed.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

119

The last factor contributing to the frequency of use of a prefix revealed in the above analysis is connected with the language-specific semantic categories. For example, the prefix prze-, which diachronically emerged on the basis of two semantically distinct Proto-Slavic forms prĕ- and pro-, is used to code a wide range of spatial relations. As discussed in Section 3.4.2, other languages, even as closely related as Polish and Russian cut across spatial categories in dissimilar ways, which results in varying granularity of the semantic distinctions. Let us now turn to the discussion of the role of force in the ways spatial situations are structured in Polish. 4.5

Force Dynamics of Polish Motion Verbs

As shown in the previous sections, the image schematic approach to verbal prefixes helps to account for a number of intricacies in their meaning. The theory of image schemas, however, does not explain the more finely grained distinctions in spatial situations, such as motion into and out of a container or motion along a surface. Some more sophisticated facets of these situations, which refer to the counterforce exerted by the ground or the path, are analysed below on the basis of the theory of force dynamics developed by Talmy (1988, 2000a). To illustrate, the inward movement of the figure may be inhibited by the counterforce of the ground or may be facilitated by the ground. Here are the two possible situations as far as an added ease or difficulty of motion is concerned: i. ii.

the situation in which the figure smoothly follows the path, easily enters or leaves the ground, without the necessity of exerting any extra force; the situation in which the ground resists the figure’s motion into or out of its interior or in which the path exerts some counterforce against the figure’s motion, e.g. by means of increased friction. In these situations two types of forces are involved: by the figure when entering or leaving the ground or following the path, which in Talmy’s terms is called ‘positive force dynamics’; and by the ground or the path in resisting the figure’s movement, which is ‘negative force dynamics’.7

7  For the lexicalization patterns of these two spatial situations, see also Ibarretxe-Antuñano (2003).

120

Chapter 4

In Polish, ease or impediment of motion is expressed by the combination of a verb, a verbal prefix and/or prepositional phrase. Verbs that typically denote forceful motion (further called forceful verbs) include such lexical items as przebrnąć ‘wade through’, przedrzeć się ‘break through’, przebić się ’break through’ or przepchnąć się ‘push through’. Examples of verbs coding forceful motion into the ground, which is usually either a container or is conceptualized as a container, include wedrzeć się ‘break in’, wbić się ‘break in’, wcisnąć się ‘squeeze in’, przecisnąć się ‘squeeze through’. On the other hand, impeded motion out of a container is expressed by verbs like wyrwać się ‘break out’, or wydrzeć się ‘break out’. It noteworthy that diachronically all of these verbs were formed in the process of lexicalization of non-motion verbs with prefixes w-, wy- or prze- and their unprefixed forms do not relate to motion. Nowadays, as partially lexicalized wholes, they constitute a large group of verbs conflating the semantic component of path. Sentences in (42) illustrate the use of forceful verbs denoting impeded motion. (42) a. Porucznik przebił się przez tłumek graczy (…). [Ćwirl] ‘The lieutenant broke through the crowd of players (…)’ b. Ostry słoneczny promień przedarł się poprzez szparę między dwiema zasłonami (…) [Ćwirl] ‘A sharp sunray burst through the gap between the two curtains (…)’ c. (…) Pater niespodziewanie wyrwał się z uścisku i odwrócił. [Czub] ‘(…) Pater unexpectedly pulled away from the hug and turned.’ We shall now proceed to the description of impeded motion by means of verbal prefix and prepositional phrase. As Przybylska (2002: 243) notes, the dynamic relations of entering a container are typically expressed by do ‘to’, ‘into’. Thus, free, unimpeded motion into a container is lexicalized by the prefixpreposition combination w- and do, which constitutes a prevalent pattern of motion into a container, as in (43). (43) Bez pukania wszedł do gabinetu Ciechowskiego. [Czub] ‘Without knocking he in-went Ciechowski’s office.’ However, a figure’s motion into a container that puts up some resistance may be conceptualized as a combination of the prefix w- and the preposition w ’in’, ‘into’, as in the sentences in (44).

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

121

(44) a. Jego korpulentna żona wcisnęła się w suknię koloru bladoróżowego … [Szym] ‘His corpulent wife squeezed into a pale pink dress (…)’ b. Wbiła się w górną część pnia tuż pod iglastymi gałęziami (…) [Zag] ‘It flew into the upper part of the stem just below the conifer branches …’ Containers that are easy to enter are loose and those requiring some extra force to be penetrated are tight. This distinction in Polish may be marked by the use of the prepositions do and w respectively. 4.6

Vertical motion

In the present section the patterns of lexicalization of vertical motion will be treated separately since the previous studies show that other languages have displayed a variety of linguistic patterns in this respect. The effects of event structure on the typological pattern of a language were already noted in research on Spanish (Naigles et al.1998) and Russian (Iakovleva 2012). Naigles et al. (1998) pointed out that in Spanish the lexicalization of motion along the vertical axis differs from that along the horizontal one since Spanish speakers when talking about vertical paths tend to code the manner of motion rather than the path, which is contrary to the pattern predicted for verb-framed languages. Similarly, Russian does not use the usual satellite pattern across all kinds of event structures (Iakovleva 2012: 235). The common pattern of including manner of motion in the verb holds for motion along a horizontal but not along a vertical plane. Thus, besides the cross-linguistic differences as far as the typology of motion events is concerned, there are within one language various lexicalization patterns depending on the event type. Let us then concentrate on the ways in which motion along the vertical axis is rendered in Polish. As reported by previous research on spatial language (e.g. Filipović 2007, Naigles et al. 1998), the lexicalization of vertical of motion is much less developed across languages and in general less commonly lexicalized. The present study confirms this finding for the Polish language. Of 500 instances of sentences coding motion events, only 32 instances, a mere 6%, of vertical motion were noted. Let us see whether Polish shows any typological variation in this respect.

122

Chapter 4

Upward motion (noted 11 times in the analysed data) is coded 4 times by manner verbs, namely iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ (3), and jechać ‘to go by a vehicle’(1). All the remaining 7 verbs include the semantic component of path: piąć się ‘to climb using limbs’ (3), drapać się ‘to climb using limbs’ (2), unieść się ‘to move upwards’ (1), or dźwignąć się ‘to lift one’s body with difficulty’ (1). As for downward motion, 21 instances in the data render this relation. Most commonly, the descriptions of these events include the path verb paść ‘to fall’ (10), and the following manner verbs: iść ‘to go’, ‘to walk’ (3), toczyć się ‘to roll’ (2), jechać ‘to go by a vehicle’(2), płynąć ‘to swim’ (1), and biec ‘to run’ (1), ciec ‘to flow’(2). It should be stressed that an equal proportion of manner and path verbs are used for coding vertical motion in Polish, namely 50% of each. This shows that the lexicalization of motion along the vertical plane differs considerably from the horizontal motion. Moreover, most of the path verbs used for lexicalization of motion along the vertical plane, for example such frequent verbs as piąć się ‘to climb using limbs’ or paść ‘to fall’, are not merges of prefixes and verbs that previously functioned as independent prefixes and manner verbs. As for prefixes accompanying manner verbs, the most frequent ones that express the vertical path are: s-/z- for downward motion , and w- for upward motion accompanied by various prepositional phrases. Typically, when a prefix accompanies a path verb, it further specifies the path: for example, paść ‘to fall’ profiles downward motion while wpaść ‘to in-fall’ typically downward motion into a container. However, occasionally prefixes accompanying path verbs may also be used to specify the manner of motion. To illustrate, motion described in (45a) is felt to be slower and less dynamic than that in (45b). Thus, the prefixes u- and o- here do not designate the path, as is usually the case, but specify the manner of motion. (45) a. (…) stoją leniwie w miejscu lub opadają bardzo powoli (…) ‘(…) (they) stand idly or fall very slowly (…)’

[DębŁ]

b. (…) potknął się jednak o oparcie fotela i całym ciężarem ciała upadł na podłogę. [Ćwirl] ‘(…) (he) stumbled over the back of the seat and with his full weight fell to the floor.’



Unfortunately, the analysed sample of the descriptions of vertical motion in Polish is not large enough to be representative and to form a basis for any categorical conclusions. However, it seems that motion situations along the vertical scale are rendered in as many as 50% of cases by means of verbs conflating the path. In the present work, the lexicalization patterns of vertical motion will

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish

123

be taken up again when I discuss the differences between structuring of motion in Polish and Russian. The lexicalization of vertical motion in Polish needs further research as it seems to display different characteristic patterns from the lexicalization of horizontal relations, especially because cross-linguistic studies so far have largely concentrated on horizontal relations. 4.7 Conclusions Let me summarize the major conclusions emerging from this analysis. Although Polish is a satellite-framed language, as many as 35% of all verbs examined include the semantic component of path. The results are similar for occurrence of these verbs (i.e., token analysis). The token analysis revealed that path verbs account for 23% of all motion verbs. We noted that the usage-based approach to language assumed in cognitive linguistics gives primacy to token analysis as the more reliable basis for language description. What is more, the analysis of the lexicalization patterns of vertical motion points even more strongly to the tendency of Polish motion verbs to conflate the path component, which is present in almost a half of all motion verbs coding these relations. The large number of motion verbs conflating the path component found in actual usage shows that Polish allows for much greater coding flexibility than is indicated by the typology of motion events characterizing this language as exclusively satellite-framed. Moreover, the morphological structure of a majority of path verbs found in the selected novels indicates that they have been formed in the process of a prefix-verb merge. This suggests that the Polish language is moving in the direction of verb-framed languages, where it is predominantly the verb that carries the path information. In a more fine-grained analysis of the manner component included in verbs of motion we found that the motor movement of body parts is the most frequently lexicalized manner category. However, the most frequent verb in this category, namely iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ is highly schematic, both when it comes to the manner and the path of motion. Such expressions as iść na piechotę ‘to go on foot’ confirm the semantic bleaching of the word. We have seen that iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ is not the only highly schematic motion verb of manner. Although, to a large extent, Polish obliges its speakers to use manner verbs, the most frequently used are so general in this respect that the exact manner information must be inferred from general knowledge pertaining to the figure and its habitual manner of motion or to the characteristics of the ground. For example, the verb jechać ‘to move in a

124

Chapter 4

wheeled vehicle’ is so general that it includes motion by all vehicles and skiing, skating, and in some contexts even flying (e.g. pojechać do Stanów ‘to drive to the States’). Schematic verbs like iść ‘to move on foot’, jechać ‘to move by a wheeled vehicle’ encode coarse-grained distinctions of manner of motion. The main reason for this may be the fact of their immense potential for coding encompasses varied, sometimes seemingly distinct, types of manner. This observation and the fact that among the 12 most frequently used motion verbs there are 4 path verbs indicate that assigning Polish to the satellite-framed category of languages is an oversimplification since it extensively uses other typological patterns. Moreover, my findings, on a line with other studies of cross-linguistic lexicalization patterns (e.g., Filipović 2007, 2013, Pourcel and Kopecka 2005), suggest that instead of the dichotomy between satellite- and verb-framed languages, the differences in the lexicalization of motion events should be viewed as a continuum. We have noted that many manner-specific motion verbs are infrequently used for yet one more reason. Namely, the morphology of the Polish language prevents the combination of these verbs with spatial prefixes without restrictions. This particularly concerns the manner verbs that express more semantically complex ways of moving. Such verbs as wędrować ‘to wander’ or drałować ‘to walk a long distance’, which include specific information on the bipedal motion, cannot be freely prefixed in order to express the path as well (for the discussion of a language’s morphological constraints on the expression of motion see Filipović 2013). Thus, in many cases the strategies for expressing both manner and path are the following: either a semantically poorer verb of motion is chosen and the path is expressed in the prefix or a more manner-specific verb is used and the path is expressed peripherally. The qualitative and quantitative analysis of the use of prefixes has revealed the chief factors determining the choice of specific lexical items for coding spatial relations. The nature of these factors is both language-specific and cognitive. The motion-coding strategies that are available to speakers of a given language impose certain linguistic restrictions (as in the case of the prefix prze-, which has a vast range of uses) but at the same time speakers of a given language have at their disposal a number of alternative choices and strategies for the description of motion events. The choices are determined by cognitive factors that, as shown above, mainly include Goal bias, a tendency to code egocentric relations along with sensitivity to motion into and out of a container.

Chapter 5

Lexicalization of Manner and Path in Polish and Russian. A Comparative Study of Translated Texts 5.1 Introduction The present chapter discusses the lexicalization patterns of motion events in Polish and Russian, with a focus on the semantic components of path and manner. The differences and similarities are discussed with departure in comparisons of descriptions of motion events included in two novels (one originally written in Polish and the other in Russian) and their translated versions. The advantage of this type of study is that the semantic content conveyed by the analysed instances remains to a large extent the same but the ways of its rendering in the two languages differ. The corpus data provide a perfect basis for comparing the lexicalization patterns in the two languages but also for noting a given language’s characteristic ways of expressing path and manner of motion. The structure of the present chapter is as follows: first, I shall present a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the verbs of motion in the corpora, with a special emphasis on the semantic components of path and manner involved in the selected verbs. This will be followed by an attempt to account for any possible differences in the Polish and Russian versions of the novels in rendering spatial situations. Although it is the verb that is the focus of the present study, the ways of expressing the path and manner of motion outside the verb, mainly by means of verbal prefixes and adverbial phrases respectively, will also be discussed. 5.2

Why Study Translated Texts?

Comparing the translations of motion events has been undertaken on numerous occasions, notably by Slobin (1997, 2005a, 2008), but also IbarretxeAntuñano (2003) or Ibarretxe-Antuñano and Filipović (2013), to name just a few. Major differences in rendering spatial events are expected to be connected with either the loss or gain of the information about the path or manner, or with coding this information in some alternative ways than in the original

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���8 | doi ��.��63/9789004360358_007

126

Chapter 5

language version. The assumption is that by means of studying the translation of sentences coding motion events, it will be possible to compare not only the size of Polish and Russian lexicons of motion verbs, but also to trace the type of semantic components included in motion verbs in the two languages as well as the levels of granularity of manner and path distinctions included in the verbs. The use of parallel corpora has one major advantage over other methods of corpus studies. They comprise a finite set of sentences that express more or less equivalent semantic content. Corpora which consist of pairs of sentences possessing nearly identical semantic content are particularly valuable for comparative linguistic studies. The corpora analysed in the present chapter will be aligned at sentence level. The pairs of sentences will consist of an original and its translation. However, the fact that one of the sentences in a pair has been created through translation raises some methodological problems. Translated texts are usually treated as linguistic data that are inferior to the original text due to the interference from the original. Some patterns uncommon for a given language may be accommodated from the original text. Von Waldenfels (2012: 265) proposes a strategy for dealing with the problem of possible interference. The strategy consists in supplementing the parallel corpus study with a study of a comparable corpus. In other words, to avoid drawing conclusions about a language solely on the basis of a translated text, original texts should be included in the scope of the analysis as well. Thus, the decision to choose two books for the analysis, one written originally in Polish and the other in Russian, was made in order to diminish the interference effect. Finally, researching parallel corpora based solely on novels limits the study to the formal written register. To avoid drawing conclusions about differences between the two languages under study solely on the basis of one type of data, the next chapter will focus on lexicalization patterns of motion events existing in colloquial everyday language. 5.3

Focus of the Analysis

As Slobin (2004: 236) rightly points out, languages cannot be compared on the basis of the presence or absence of the semantic component of path in coding a motion event since it is the Core of a motion event and it must be present in the description of a spatial situation. Languages may only differ in the degree of elaboration of path. In her comparative study of lexicalization of motion events in a number of languages Ibarretxe-Antuñano (2009: 410) notes that there are high-path-salient and low-path-salient languages, which means that the degree of elaboration of path differs cross-linguistically. This author (2009:

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

127

411) proposes a cline of path salience of the studied languages and suggests that the degree of path salience depends on, among other factors, the size of the motion verb lexicon. Most cross-linguistic motion event research has hitherto concerned typologically different languages (i.e., satellite- vs. verb-framed discussed in Section 2.1) where the differences between the ways of expressing paths and manners of movement are expected to be most striking. The present study goes a step further. I believe that there is more to discover about the pattern of lexicalization of motion events than just determining whether the information on manner and path is habitually expressed in the verb root or the satellite. The assumption here is that the intra-typological study of languages even so closely related as Polish and Russian will reveal subtle but important differences in coding path and manner of motion. More specifically, the aims of this study of the original versions of the two novels and their translations are threefold: i.

to establish the language preference for lexicalization of motion events by means of manner-conflating as opposed to path-conflating verbs. On the basis of the results, it will be possible to locate the two languages on the manner- and path-saliency scales; ii. to compare the semantic components of motion verbs in the two languages, both as the type of information they carry as well as the level of granularity of manner and path components are concerned; iii. to describe the alternative to the verb means of rendering spatial information and to compare the ways in which they express motion in the languages under study. 5.4 Method

In order to compare the lexicalization patterns in Polish and Russian, two literary texts were chosen, one originally written in Polish and one in Russian. The two novels, Mr Blot’s Academy by Jan Brzechwa (translated into Russian by Irena Lewandowska and Witold Dąbrowski) and The Master and Margarita by Mikhail Bulgakov (translated into Polish by M. Landmon) are lively stories, full of descriptions of characters’ actions, which is why I assumed that they would be rich in the lexicalization of motion events. Moreover, the novel Mr Blot’s Academy, which presents fictional characters, was selected for the present analysis since fictional characters commonly present various characteristics pertaining to humans and animals. The analysis of the lexicalization of motion

128

Chapter 5

performed by fictional characters is a unique opportunity since they present a scope of motion types that is absent from descriptions of motion performed by real characters (Pourcel 2010: 431). 250 instances of motion events were randomly selected from each of the novels and subsequently the translated counterpart was found for each of the instances. 500 pairs of sentences obtained in this way constitute the database for the present analysis 5.5

Results: Types and Tokens of Polish and Russian Motion Verbs

Table 5.1 presents the most frequent (>1%) types and tokens of Polish motion verbs found in the two scrutinized novels (for the full list of motion verbs see the Appendix). For each motion verb the semantic component included in it is indicated. Table 5.1

Polish verbs of motion in The Master and Margarita and Mr Blot’s Academy

Verb type

1. chodzić/ iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ 2. biegać/ biec ‘to run’ 3. jeździć/ jechać ‘to go in a wheeled vehicle’ 4. padać/ paść ‘to fall’ 5. skakać/ skoczyć ‘to jump’ 6. wracać/ wrócić ‘to return’ 7. zbliżać się/ zbliżyć się ‘to approach’ 8. ruszać/ ruszyć ‘to start to move’ 9. uciekać/ uciec ‘to escape’ 10. unosić się/ unieść się ‘to move up’ 11. latać/ lecieć ‘to fly’ 12. pływać/ płynąć ‘to swim’ 13. udawać się/ udać się ‘to go to’ 14. fruwać/ frunąć ‘to fly (about birds)’

Number Percentage Semantic components of tokens of manner and path

145

28 %

Manner

51 37

10 % 7%

Manner Manner

31 25 23 19

6% 5% 4% 4%

Path Manner Path Path

16 12 12 11 10 10 8

3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1%

Path Path Path Manner Manner Path Manner

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

Verb type

15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

rzucać się/ rzucić się ‘to dash’ zrywać się/ zerwać się ‘to leap up’ mknąć ‘to speed’ dostawać się/ dostać się ‘to get to’ sunąć ‘to glide, to slide’

129

Number Percentage Semantic components of tokens of manner and path

8 8 8 7 7

1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

Manner+Path Manner+Path Manner Path Manner

Before proceeding to the comparison of the Polish data with the Russian counterparts, it should be noted that the types of Polish motion verbs found in the process of scrutinizing originals and their translations do not significantly differ from the verbs discussed in the previous chapter. First of all, the numbers of the types of the selected motion verbs by means of the two methods are close. While 57 types of motion verbs were found in the analysed crime stories presented in Table 4.1 in Chapter 4, in The Master and Margarita and Mr Blot’s Academy and their translated versions 61 types of verbs appeared. The most frequent types in both sets include iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’, jechać ‘to go in a wheeled vehicle, ruszyć ‘to start to move’, wrócić ‘to return’, skoczyć ‘to jump’, paść ‘to fall’, biec ‘to run’. This finding suggests that well-balanced translation data are not inferior to a randomized sample coming solely from narratives written originally in a given language. The most striking difference between the first most frequent verb types selected from the two sources concerns the verb unieść się ‘to rise’, which appeared in the analysis of the literary texts in Chapter 4 much less frequently than in the data analysed in the present study. This is because the language of Mr Blot’ Academy is in general rich in spatial terms coding upward vertical movement since for the fictional characters—Mr Blot as well as his disciples—flying is a daily routine. Thus, although the translation data adequately reflects the lexicalization patterns existing in a given language, the collection of the verb types coming from the analysis of ten crime stories presented in the previous chapter should be considered as more representative of the Polish language system of motion verbs since it is based on more diverse data. The diversity emerges both from the variety of authors as well as from the variety of topics touched upon in the texts examined. In turn, Table 5.2 shows the most frequent types of motion verbs found in the Russian versions of The Master and Margarita and Mr Blot’s Academy with

130

Chapter 5

the semantic components conflated in them. The full list of selected motion verbs is included in the Appendix. Let me note that not only are the unidirectional and non-directional pairs of verbs (e.g. Russian idti/ hodit’) treated as instances of one type but also perfective and imperfective verbs with the same root (e.g. Russian vozvraŝat’sja/ vernut’sja) are counted together. The semantics of each Russian verb were discussed with a native speaker. Table 5.2 Russian verbs of motion in The Master and Margarita and Mr Blot’s Academy Verb type

Number Percentage Semantic components of tokens of manner and path

1. hodit’ / idti ‘to move on foot’, ‘to 150 walk’ 2. ezdit’ /ehat’ ‘to go in a wheeled 45 vehicle’ 3. begat’/ bežat’ ‘to run’ 41 4. skakat’ ‘to jump’ 30 5. vozvraŝat’sja/ vernut’sja ‘to 22 return’ 6. letat’/ letet’ ‘to fly’ 19 7. nosit’sja ‘to scamper about’ 18 8. brosat’sja/ brosit’sja ‘to dash’ 12 9. padat’/ (u)past’ ‘to fall’ 12 10. dvigat’sja/ dvinut’sja ‘to move’ 11 10 11. približat’sja/ priblizit’sja ‘to approach’ 12. puskat’sja/ pustit’sja ‘to start 9 moving’ 13. prygat’ /prygnut’ ‘to jump’ 8 14. katat’sja/ katit’sja ‘to go by a 7 wheeled vehicle’, ‘to roll’ 15. lazit’/ lezt’ ‘to climb’ 7 16. pokidat’/ pokinut’ ‘to leave’ 7 17. vryvat’sja/ vorvat’sja ‘to burst in’ 7 18. napravljat’sja/ napravit’sja ‘to 6 direct oneself’ 19. otpravit’sja/ otpravljat’sja ‘to 6 start moving somewhere’

29%

Manner

9%

Manner

8% 6% 4%

Manner Manner Path

4% 5% 2% 2% 2% 2%

Manner Manner Path+Manner Path 0 Path

2%

Path

2% 1%

Manner Manner

1% 1% 1% 1%

Path+Manner Path Path+Manner Path

1%

Path

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

131

5.6 Findings The Comparison of Semantic Components Conflated in Polish and Russian Motion Verbs In Cognitive Grammar meaning is inseparable from the context of use, which is why the study of lexical items in texts is a valuable source of knowledge about the meaning of such items. The analysis of the comparative data from translated texts not only gives us an insight into the sizes of verb lexicons in Polish and Russian and into the semantic information coded in motion verbs but also reveals the ways of rendering specific semantic content in the language in question. However, it is only the specific context of use that may show the nuances of the verbs’ meanings. One of the advantages of studying texts with their translation is that we may see how the same semantic content (in the case of the present study, the same motion events) is lexicalized by means of verbs. The assumption is that the patterns in the distribution of manner and path information between the verb and the satellite will determine the place of a given language on the cline of verb-framed and satellite-framed languages. The first question has to do with the sizes of the motion verbs lexicons in the two languages. The numbers of types of motion verbs used in the texts of the two novels in Polish and Russian are virtually equal. As Tables 5.1 and 5.2 in the Appendix show, in the Polish versions of the novels 61 types of motion verbs were identified while 56 types were found in the Russian versions. Thus, as far as the repertoire of verbs coding motion events is concerned the languages seem astonishingly similar. The second question has to do with the proportion of path verbs to manner verbs of motion in the two languages. Let us recall that this is an important question since the surface element lexicalizing the path, which is the core of motion event in Talmy’s terms (2000b), decides the position of Polish and Russian on the path-salience and manner-salience continuum. Figure 5.1 presents the proportions of path to manner verbs counted on the basis of full lists of verbs included in the Appendix. A small number of verbs, both in Polish and Russian were classified as containing the components of both path and manner, such as Polish piąć się ‘to climb using limbs’ or Russian valit’sja ‘fall down forcefully’. Since these verbs, contain two semantic components, they were counted twice, both as path and as manner verbs. The first conclusion emerging from looking at Figure 5.1 is that in both languages the prevalence of manner verbs over path verbs is noticeable. The observation accords with my preliminary assumptions since both languages are satellite-framed, which means that it is the verb that most typically codes the path of motion. However, the analysis of motion verbs suggests a clear typological difference. Russian lexicalizes motion making manner distinctions 5.6.1

132

Chapter 5

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Polish

Russian

Figure 5.1 Proportions of manner (black bars) and path (white bars) components in Polish and Russian motion verbs obtained in the token analysis—translation data.

by means of verbs more frequently than Polish since the number of tokens of verbs coding manner selected from the novels is significantly higher than the number recorded in the Polish data (chi2=7.064, p-value < .001). This indicates that Polish lexicalizes motion situations by means of path verbs more frequently than Russian. We can now move on to the results showing the proportions between the numbers of types of path and manner verbs in the two languages. The difference between the proportions of manner and path verbs in the two languages obtained in the type analysis were not statistically significant. However, it needs to be stressed that the lack of difference probably comes from the low sample size. In fact the proportions expressed in percentage in the type analysis were close to those coming from the tokens analysis, where the bigger sample size made the difference significant. Thus, the results of the verb type analysis accord with the results of the token analysis. This leads to the conclusion that Russian is more “satellite-framed”, or, in other words, more manner-salient than Polish. Polish, on the other hand, is further away from the satellite-framed pole on the cline of manner-saliency and consequently closer to the verb-framed languages. Nevertheless, this claim is general and based solely on numbers. It does not explain where the difference in the semantic components of Polish and Russian verbs comes from. In order to see how the same semantic content is rendered in alternative ways in

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

133

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Polish

Russian

Figure 5.2 Proportions of manner (black bars) and path (white bars) components in Polish and Russian motion verbs obtained in the type analysis—translation data.

the two languages, we shall now look at specific instances of the use of motion verbs of the two languages taken from The Master and Margarita and Mr Blot’s Academy. My assumption is that the instances such as those quoted in the following section account for the discrepancy between the semantics of Polish and Russian verbs, shown in Figures 5.1 and 5.2. Specific spatial relations, namely those of escaping, moving back, receding, returning, approaching, ascending, entering and exiting will be dealt with separately in the following section. 5.7

Rendering Specific Spatial Situations in Polish and Russian

5.7.1 Escape Verbs in Polish and Russian In Polish motion events involving escape by the moving entity are most commonly lexicalized by means of the verb uciec ‘to escape’, which has been classified as a path verb. On one occasion, the informal word zwiać ‘inf. to escape quickly’ appears, which is considered to involve both path and manner information. The path taken by the moving figure is directed away from some danger or threat. The manner of motion in the case of the verb uciec ‘to escape’ is not specified, and in the case of the verb zwiać ‘inf. to escape quickly’ the semantic component of manner refers to the speed of motion. Let us have a

134

Chapter 5

look at the comparative data from the two novels to see how this particular spatial relation is rendered in Russian. In in the quoted examples, due to their complexity, only the verbs and verbal prefixes are translated. (1) a. Zarazem ogarnął Berlioza strach nieuzasadniony, ale tak okropny, że zapragnął uciec (‘to escape’) z Patriarszych Prudów, gdzie go oczy poniosą. b. Krome togo, Berlioza ohvatil neobosnovannyj, no stol’ sil’nyj strah, čto emu zahotelos’ totčas že bežat’ (‘to run’) s Patriarših bez ogljadki. (M&M1) ‘Berlioz was seized by a fear that was groundless but so powerful that he had an immediate impulse to run away from Patriarch’s Ponds without looking back.’2 (2) a.  Prezes po prostu uciekł (‘escaped’) ze swojego mieszkania do mieszczącego się tuż przy bramie biura, ale kiedy zobaczył, że i tam na niego czatują, uciekł i stamtąd. b. Nikanor Ivanovič prosto sbežal (‘away-ran’) iz svoej kvartiry v pomeŝenie upravlenija u vorot, no kogda uvidel on, čto i tam ego podkaraulivajut, ubežal (‘away-ran’) i ottuda. (M&M) ‘(…) Nikanor Ivanovich simply ran out of his flat by the main entrance, only to run away again when he found them lying in wait for him outside.’ (3) a. Przy pierwszej sposobności ucieknę (‘will escape’). b. Pri pervoj že vozmožnosti ja sbegu (‘will away-run’). (Ac3) ‘On the first occasion I will run away’4 (4) a. Przestraszyłem się psa, który wpadł mi pod nogi, i uciekłem (‘escaped’) przed nim na drugą stronę ulicy. b. Metnuvšajasja mne pod nogi sobaka ispugala menja, i ja perebežal (‘across-ran’) ot nee na druguju storonu. (M&M)

1  The abbreviation M&M stands for The Master and Margarita. 2  The English sentences come from the English version of The Master and Margarita translated by Michael Glenny. 3  The abbreviation (Ac) stands for Mr Blot’s Academy. 4  Translation of the sentences from Mr Blot’s Academy is mine.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

135

‘A dog which ran between my legs frightened me, and to get away from it I crossed to the other side.’ (5) a. Regent nader zręcznie wprasował się do autobusu, który na pełnym gazie pędził w kierunku placu Arbackiego, i umknął (‘escaped’). b. Regent s velikoj lovkost’ju na hodu vvintilsja v avtobus, letjaŝij k arbatskoj ploŝadi, i uskol’znul (‘away-slid’). (M&M) ‘With great agility the choirmaster jumped on board a moving bus bound for Arbat Square and vanished.’ (6) a. (…) pozostali zaś goście pozrywali się z miejsc i zaczęli uciekać (‘to escape’) drzwiami i oknami. (Ac) b. … ostal’nye gosti vskočili s mest i brosilis’ (‘dashed’) kto v dver’, kto v okno. ‘(…) the rest of the guests sprang to their feet and started to run away through the door and windows.’ Only on one occasion does the Polish verb refer to the manner of motion. The verb zwiać ‘inf. to escape quickly’, however, is colloquial and rare and appears only once in the analysed data. In none of the remaining Polish examples is the manner of motion specified and the rendered spatial situation of escape may involve any type of biological motor movement (e.g. walking or running), any type of vehicle, or any velocity. In the Russian equivalents, this spatial situation is rendered by means of a prefixed manner verb where the path leading away from the ground is expressed by the prefix. In Sentences (1b), (2b) and (3b), the situation of escaping is lexicalized by means of the word bežat’ ‘to run’, which carries the information about the type of motor movement of body parts. In (5b), the verb is prefixed by u-, which denotes ablative movement, while in (3b) and (4b) other types of the path are profiled by means of prefixes s- and pere- respectively. As shown in (5b) and (6b), the spatial situation of escape in Russian may also be coded by such manner-of-motion verbs as skol’zit’ ‘to slide’, which profiles the figure’s contact with the surface and brosit’sja ‘to dash’, which carries the information about the speed of motion. Thus, speakers of Russian systematically differentiate between the manner of motion when speaking about the spatial situation of escape, which is not the case in Polish. Moreover, besides the specification of the manner of motion, the Russian language also allows for coding the path in the accompanying prefix. In neither of the Polish examples (apart from one instance in the two novels) is the manner of motion away from danger specified.

136

Chapter 5

5.7.2 Moving Back Verbs in Polish and Russian The spatial situation of moving back in Polish is most commonly lexicalized by means of the path verb cofnąć się ‘to move back’, ‘to withdraw’. In Russian, the equivalent sentences solely include manner-of-motion verbs. In (7b), the verb pjatit’sja ‘to step back’ appears, which may only refer to the leg motion of animate entities. Other verbs used in the Russian versions of the novels involve otšatnut’sja ‘to step back’ in (8b) and otstupit’ ‘to step back’ in (9b) and both refer to the movement of body parts. In the last two examples the verb roots denote the motor movement of legs and both are accompanied by the prefix ot-, denoting the direction of movement away from some point. (7) a. Berlioz aż się cofnął (‘withdrew’), ale uspokoiła go myśl, że jest to po prostu głupi zbieg okoliczności (…) b. Mihail Aleksandrovič tak i popjatilsja (‘away-stepped’), no utešil sebja tem soobraženiem, čto èto glupoe sovpadenie (…)(M&M) ‘Mikhail Alexandrovich stopped, but dismissed it as a ridiculous coincidence.’ (8) a. (…) nieoczekiwanie zaczął krzyczeć Piłat, a krzyczał głosem tak strasznym, że Jeszua, aż się cofnął (‘withdrew’) (…) b. (…) zakričal Pilat takim strašnym golosom, čto Iešua otšatnulsja (‘awaystepped’) (…)(M&M) ‘Pilate suddenly shouted in a voice so terrible that Yeshua staggered back.’ (9) a. Pochyla się nad Iwanem i całuje go w czoło, a Iwan lgnie do niej i wpatruje się w jej oczy, ale ona cofa się, cofa (‘withdraws’) i wraz ze swym towarzyszem odchodzi ku księżycowi … b. Ona naklonjaetsja k Ivanu i celuet ego v lob, i Ivan tjanetsja k nej i vsmatrivaetsja v ee glaza, no ona otstupaet, otstupaet (‘away-steps’) i uhodit vmeste so svoim sputnikom k lune (…)(M&M) ‘She leans over Ivan and kisses him on the forehead and Ivan strains towards her to look into her eyes, but she draws back, draws back and walks away towards the moon with her companion.’ To summarize, the spatial relation of moving back, which in Polish is rendered by one frequent word cofnąć się ‘to retreat’, carrying solely the path information, is expressed in Russian by a number of prefixed manner verbs which specify the type of movement, usually that of body parts.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

137

5.7.3 Recede Verbs in Polish and Russian The next type of a spatial relation that is coded differently in the two languages refers to the figure’s ablative motion away from the ground. In Polish, it is rendered by means of a frequently used verb oddalić się ‘to recede’, while in Russian this particular spatial relation is expressed in a number of ways. For example, in (10b), it is the expression ostavlennyj pozadi ‘left behind’, which expresses the idea of the increasing distance between the figure and the ground. In examples (11b) and (12b), the common verb denoting bipedal motion of human beings, namely idti ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’, is used while in (13b) we meet the verb otstupit’ ‘to step back’, which also codes the movement of body parts. In the Russian examples, the path is rendered by ablative prefixes u- and ot-, which accompany manner verbs. The verb in (14b) used to denote the moving away situation, namely otlučit’sja ‘to become absent’, ‘to move away’, stresses the absence of the figure, but, similarly to the Polish oddalić się ‘to recede’, does not express the manner of movement. (10) a. (…) wydawało się mistrzowi, że słowa Małgorzaty szemrzą tak samo, jak szemrał i szeptał strumień, od którego się oddalali (‘receded’) (…) b. (…) masteru kazalos’, čto slova Margarity strujatsja tak že, kak struilsja i šeptal ostavlennyj pozadi (‘left behind’) ručej (…)(M&M) ‘Margarita’s words seemed to him to flow like the whispering stream behind them.’ (11) a. (…) odprowadzając wzrokiem oddalającą się (‘receding’) pośpiesznie kobietę. b.  (…) provožaja vzgljadom pospešno uhodjaŝuju (‘away-walking’) ženŝinu. (M&M) ‘(…) watching the woman as she hurried out.’ (12) a. Potem może pani robić, co pani chce, ale proszę nie oddalać się (‘to recede’) od telefonu. b. Dal’še delajte, čto hotite, no ne othodite (‘away-walk’) ot telefona (M&M) ‘After that you can do what you like, but don’t go far from the telephone.’ (13) a. Rozkaz, procuratorze—powiedział Afraniusz zaczął się oddalać (‘to recede’) wśród ukłonów b. Slušaju, prokurator,—otvetil Afranij i stal otstupat’ (‘away-step’) i klanjat’sja. (M&M) ‘‘Very good. Procurator’, replied Arthanius and bowed himself out.’

138

Chapter 5

(14) a. Trafiła precyzyjnie na właściwe miejsce, jakby się nigdzie nie oddalała (‘receded’). b. Sela na svoe mesto, kak budto nikuda i ne otlučalas’ (‘away-vanished’). (M&M) ‘(…) the cat popped the head back on its neck, where it sat as neatly as if head and body had never been parted.’ Similarly to the previously discussed spatial situations, there is a strong tendency in Polish to express movement away from the figure by means of a path verb, namely oddalić się ‘to recede’, while in Russian a number of various motion verbs, a great majority of which code the manner of motion, are used to express this concept. 5.7.4 Return Verbs in Polish and Russian The next semantic concept the lexicalization of which contributes to a higher saliency of manner conflated in Russian verbs will be that of returning. In Polish this spatial relation is most frequently rendered by means of the path verb wracać ‘to return’, which solely codes the path of motion. In Russian although the path verb vernut’sja ‘to return’ exists, it is not used as frequently as its Polish counterpart. To illustrate, in (15) the Russian equivalent of the Polish wracać ‘to return’ is idti ‘to go’, ‘to walk’ and the path is expressed by the word obratno ‘back’. In (16b) and (17b) the return relation is expressed by the typical manner verbs bežat’ ‘to run’ and letat’ ‘to fly’ respectively. (15) a. Odprowadziłbym cię, ale nie mam już siły, by wracać (‘to return’) samotnie, boję się. b. Ja provodil by tebja, no ja uže ne v silah idti odin obratno (‘to walk back’), ja bojus’. (M&M) ‘I’d see you out, but I don’t trust myself to come back alone, I’m afraid.’ (16) a. Poczekaj chwilę, zaraz do ciebie wrócę (‘will return’). (Ac) b. Podoždi, ja sejčas sbegaju (‘down-run’). ‘Wait a minute, I will be back soon.’ (17) a. Moje oko wraca (‘returns’) z księżyca. b. Moj glaz letit (‘flies’) s Luny! (Ac) ‘My eye is coming back from the moon.’

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

139

The path in the Russian examples presented above is rendered either by the prefix s- (in 16b where it codes downward movement), described peripherally (in 15b) or entirely omitted (as in 17b). To sum up, it appears that in Russian there is a strong tendency to code the manner-of-motion information in the verb, while the path is coded in the prefix, prepositional phrases or other expressions such as obratno ‘back’. On the other hand, although the manner of motion is missing in the Polish verbs, it is not compensated for peripherally, which suggests that, unlike the path, it is not an indispensable component of a motion event. 5.7.5 Approach Verbs in Polish and Russian The Polish verb zbliżyć się ‘to approach’ codes solely the path of motion towards a point without specifying the manner of motion. On many occasions, in the Russian language versions it directly corresponds to the path verb približat’sja ‘to approach’. However, the tendency of the Russian language to code the manner of motion in the verb in the spatial situations of approaching is visible in the following pairs of sentences. (18) a. Jeden z konwojujących legionistów stuknął kopią o posadzkę, podał ją sąsiadowi, zbliżył się (‘approached’) i zdjął więźniowi pęta. b. Odin iz konvojnyh legionerov stuknul kop’em, peredal ego drugomu, podošel (‘near-walked’) i snjal verevki s arestanta. (M&M) ‘One of the legionary escorts tapped the ground with his lance, gave it to his neighbour, approached and removed the prisoner’s bonds.’ (19) a. Następnie zbliżył się (‘approached’) do szafy (…)(Ac) b. Pan Kljaksa podošel (‘near-walked’) k škafu. ‘Next he approached the wardrobe.’ (20) a. Ala wyprzedziła drugą kohortę legionu Błyskawic, przebyła jeszcze kilometr i pierwsza zbliżyła się (‘approached’) do podnóża Nagiej Góry. b. Ala obognala vtoruju kogortu molnienosnogo legiona i pervaja podošla (‘near-walked’) (…) (M&M) ‘After about a kilometre the ala overtook the second cohort of the lightning legion and having gone a further kilometre arrived first at the foot of mount Golgotha.’ (21) a. Jeździec zbliżał się (‘approached’) do południowej bramy Jeruszalaim. b. Vsadnik pod’ezžal (‘near-rode’) k južnym vorotam Eršalaima. (M&M) ‘He had not far to go before he rode up to the southern gate of Jerusalem.’

140

Chapter 5

In all of the above Russian equivalents, the manner-of-motion verbs are used. Besides idti ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ in Sentences (18b), (19b), and (20b), there appears another manner verb which codes the approach relation, namely ehat’ ‘to ride’, ‘to go by a vehicle’, in (21b). The path in all instances is rendered by the prefix pod-. 5.7.6 Ascend Verbs in Polish and Russian As already mentioned, Brzechwa’s book entitled Mr Blot’s Academy is rich in expressions coding vertical relations due to the characters’ extraordinary ways of moving in space. In the Polish version the most frequently used verbs for coding the upward movement is the path verbs unieść się ‘to rise’ and wzbić się ‘to rise’. In all instances, the verb used in the Russian translations is letat’ ‘to fly’, coding the manner of motion of body parts in the air, which is illustrated by the following sentences. (22) a. (…) wydąłem policzki i uniosłem się (‘rose’) w górę. (Ac) b. Ja nadul ŝeki i vzletel (‘up-flew’). ‘I blew my cheeks and moved up.’ (23) a. W ten sposób pan Blot nie tylko wjeżdża po poręczy, ale może również unosić się (‘to rise’) swobodnie w górę (…)(Ac) b. On možet ne tol’ko v’’ezžat’ po perilam, no i letat’ (‘to fly’), kogda èto emu byvaet nužno (…) ‘In this way Mr Blot can not only go up on the hand railing, but he can also float freely up.’ (24) a. (…) wzbił się (‘rose’) on niezmiernie wysoko, a następnie spadł nie na boisko, lecz przeleciał przez mur i dostał się w ten sposób na teren jednej z sąsiednich bajek. (Ac) b. (…) vzletel (‘up-flew’) očen’ vysoko i upal ne na ploŝadku, a po tu storonu ogrady, v kakuju-to sosednjuju skazku. ‘(…) he flew incredibly high and did not fall on the ground but got over the fence on the premise of one of neighbouring tales.’ The path in the Russian examples is either coded by means of the prefix v-, or entirely omitted. In this way, Russian prefixed motion verbs include both the information about the path and the manner of motion. Let us note again that, similarly to the lexicalization patterns of horizontal motion, in the Polish data there is no tendency towards compensating in the verb for the missing

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

141

information about the manner of motion. Instead the Polish versions include such expressions as w górę ‘up’ (in (22) and (23)), which do not appear in the Russian equivalents. These expressions seem to further elaborate on the path of motion already specified in the verb or even repeat it as in the case of the expression unieść się w górę ‘to rise up’. 5.7.7 Enter/Exit Verbs In Polish the frequently used verb dostać się ‘to get to’ lexicalizes the spatial situation of arriving somewhere, usually a point within a place conceptualized as a container, without specifying the manner of motion. The Russian equivalent of this Polish verb in (25b) and (26b) is the prefixed verb idti ‘to go’, ‘to walk’, which specifies the motor movement of body parts. In (27b) the gerund form of the verb rvat’sja ‘to dash’ specifies the velocity or high energy of motion. (25) a. Chce się pan stąd wydostać (‘to get out’)? b. Vy želaete ujti (‘away-walk’) otsjuda? (M&M) ‘You want to leave here?’ (26) a. Już przed miesiącem ściągnąłem jej cały pęk kluczy, uzyskując w ten sposób możność przedostawania (‘getting to’) się na wspólny nasz balkon b. Ja staŝil u nee mesjac tomu nazad svjazku ključej i, takim obrazom, polu- čil vozmožnost’ vyhodit’ (‘out-walk’) na obŝij balkon. (M&M) ‘A month ago I took this bunch of keys from her, which has given me the freedom of the balcony. It stretches along the whole floor, so that I can call on my neighbours whenever I feel like it.’ (27) a. Kiedy wydostał się (‘got out’) na ulicę, dziko rozejrzał się dokoła b. Vyrvavšis’ (‘out-dashed’) iz podvorotni, bufetčik dikovato ogljanulsja. (M&M) ‘Once in the street he stared wildly round as if looking for something’. In the present section, it has been well-documented with specific examples that such spatial situations as escaping, moving back, receding, returning, approaching, ascending, entering and exiting exhibit repeatedly different patterns of lexicalization of manner and path information in Polish and Russian. Additionally, other less systematic patterns of the differences in the lexicalization of motion also exist as illustrated by Sentences (28) and (29). In these

142

Chapter 5

cases, motion verbs in the Polish sentences express the path (i.e., dotrzeć ‘to arrive’, podążać ‘to follow’) while the same spatial situations in the Russian examples are expressed by verbs coding manner of motion (i.e., idti ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ and šestvovat’ ‘to march’). (28) a. (…) przedzierając się przez gąszcze drzew, dotarliśmy (‘reached’) do muru bajek. (Ac) b. (…) probralis’ čerez zarosli maliny i vyšli (‘out-walked’) k ograde. ‘breaking through the dense forest, we reached the fairy tales’ wall.’ (29) a. (…) wraz z owym ognikiem podąża (‘follows’) w stronę restauracji biała zjawa. b.  (…) vmeste s ogonečkom šestvuet (‘marches’) k restoranu beloe prividenie. (M&M) ‘the nickering light was accompanied by a white apparition.’ To summarize, the analysis of the semantic components included in the Polish and Russian motion verbs has shown a significantly higher number of path verbs in the Polish data. This leads to the conclusion that Russian is a more manner-salient language and is closer to the high end of satelliteframed languages on the typological continuum than Polish. In particular, the analysis of the lexicalization patterns of such semantic concepts as escaping, receding, returning, approaching, ascending, exiting, entering and others showed that the spatial concepts in the two languages are, to some extent, carved up differently. This is particularly surprising in consideration of the fact that the two languages are so closely related and belong to the same typological group of satellite-framed languages. To illustrate, when Polish places the spatial situations of escape from danger in a single spatial category by means of a single verb uciec ‘to escape’, Russian groups together the situations where movement is performed on foot by means of the verbs idti ‘to go’, ‘to walk’ and biežat’ ‘to run’. On the basis of the above sentences we may conclude that spatial situations that are coded in Russian by means of the manner verb idti ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ accompanied by various combinations of prefixes and prepositional phrases, in Polish are rendered by a vast variety of path verbs such as: dotrzeć ‘to reach’, (wy)dostać się ‘to get out’, ’to get to’, zbliżyć się ‘to approach’, oddalić się ‘to move back’. In turn, the verb biežat’ ‘to run’ corresponds to wrócić ‘to return’, ucieć ‘to escape’ in the quoted instances.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

143

It is also worth mentioning that while Russian sentences in the analysed examples convey information both about the manner of motion and the path, in none of the discussed Polish equivalent sentences is the manner of motion compensated for periphrastically. On the contrary, some of the analysed Polish sentences include expressions further elaborating on the path of motion, which is completely missing in the Russian counterparts. 5.8

Conflation of Manner in the Verb

In Chapter 4, we distinguished a number of kinds of manner components conflated in Polish verbs. The aim of the present section is to draw a comparison between the semantic components of manner included in Polish and Russian verbs. More specifically, I will try to determine which semantic components of manner are more likely to be lexicalized by Russian verbs in comparison with Polish. By the same token, the analysis will reveal to what types of manner the speakers of Polish and Russian must pay attention in order to talk about motion in their native language. Secondly, my aim is to determine the levels of granularity of manner expressed by motion verbs in the two languages. A number of problems were encountered in the process of determining what semantic components are included in the meaning of a verb. Some verbs, such as the Russian verb karabkat’sja ‘to climb with difficulty using limbs’ were considered to include as many as three semantic components (path, movement of body parts and effort), and on the other hand, in the case of the Russian hypernym verb putešestvovat’ ‘to travel’ no semantic component of manner or path was distinguished. When more than one semantic component was identified, a verb was included in all relevant semantic categories. In the process of the analysis of Polish and Russian verbs of movement, the following semantic categories of manner were singled out: velocity, motor pattern of body parts, medium (divided into water, air, and conveyance), contact with surface, forced motion requiring some effort, the figure’s physical and emotional state and the speaker’s attitude towards the figure. Let me discuss the lexicalization of each identified semantic component of manner. The richest category of verbs coding the motor movement of body parts included 14 types of motion verbs: iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ (145), biec ‘to run’ (51), (ws)piąć się ‘to climb’ (3), cwałować ‘to gallop’ (1), czołgać się ‘to crawl’ (1), skakać ‘to jump’ (25), kroczyć ‘to step’ (4), wędrować ‘to wander’ (4), łazić ‘to creep’ (2), pełznąć ‘to crawl’ (2), stąpać ‘to tread’ (2), spacerować ‘to walk for pleasure’ (1), kuśtykać ‘to limp’ (1), maszerować ‘to march’ (1).

144

Chapter 5

The Russian data were also rich in the manner verbs, including idti ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ (150), bežat ’to run’ (41), skakat’ (30), lazit’ ‘to climb’ (7), šagnut’ (1), polzat’ (3), prygnut’ (8), karabkat’sja udrat’ ‘to escape’ (2), ‘to climb with difficulty’ (1), pjatit’sja ‘to step back’ (1), brodit’ ‘to wander’ (2), vorvat’sja ‘to burst’ (7), stupit’ ‘to step’ (1), probirat’sja ‘to wade’ (4), guliat’ ‘to walk for pleasure’ (3), šatnut’sja ‘to stagger’(3). The next kind of manner of motion frequently lexicalized in both languages is velocity. Verbs that are considered to express the speed of motion include those that convey information about high or low velocity. In the analysed data the information about the speed of motion in Polish is conveyed by the following 7 types of verbs: rzucić się ‘to dash’ (8), zerwać się ‘to start moving fast’ (8), mknąć ‘to speed’ (8), runąć ‘to fall forcefully’ (2), pędzić ‘to speed’ (1), śmignąć ‘to whisk’ (1), zwiać ‘to escape quickly’ (1). The total number of occurrences amounts to 21. On the other hand, the Russian motion verbs coding this semantic component include 9 types, of which the total number of uses is 50.The category includes the following verbs: nosit’sja ‘to scamper about’ (25), brosit’sja ‘to dart’ (12), (vo)rvat’sja ‘to burst’ (7), kinut’sja ‘ to dart’ (5), mčat’sja ‘to speed’ (5), gonjat’sja ’to chase, to hunt’ (4), brodit’ ‘to wander’ (2) , pospešit’ ‘to hasten’ (1), metnut’sja ‘to start speeding’ (1). As regards less frequent kinds of manner of motion in both languages, we distinguished the categories of medium, contact with the surface, forced motion, the figure’s physical and mental state, the speaker’s attitude towards the figure. Let me present the list of verbs that code these relations in the texts examined. In Polish these categories are represented by the following verbs. Medium (68): 19% – water: płynąć ‘to swim’ (10), nurzać się ‘to wallow’ (1); – air: lecieć ‘to fly’ (11), szybować ‘to soar’ (1), frunąć ‘to fly (about birds)’ (8); – conveyance: jechać ‘to go by a vehicle’ (37); Contact with the surface (13) 4%: sunąć ‘to glide, to slide’ (7), ślizgać się ‘to glide’ (4), toczyć się ‘to roll’ (2); Forced motion requiring some effort (10) 3%: dźwigać się ‘to move up with difficulty’ (2), wtargnąć ‘to burst into’ (1), (we) drzeć się ‘to break through’ (4), (prze)bijać się ‘to break through’ (1), (prze) dzierać się ‘to wade’ (1), brnąć ‘to wade’ (1).

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

145

Figure’s physical and emotional state (7): snuć się ‘to wander about’ (2), spacerować ‘to walk for pleasure’ (1), miotać się ‘to toss’ (1), buszować ‘to rummage’ (1), sypać się ‘to sprinkle’ (2). Attitude towards the figure (2): łazić ‘to creep’ (2). Furtive motion (2): (w)kraść się ‘to sneak in’ (2). The manner components conflated in the Russian verbs of motion (besides the motor movement of body parts and velocity which have been mentioned above) are as follows: Medium (77) 15%: – water: plavat’ (3), – air: letat’ ‘to fly’ (19), porhat’ (1), parít’ ‘to hover over’ (1) – conveyance: ehat’ ‘to go by a vehicle’ (45), katat’sja ‘to ride’ (7), tronut’sja ‘to start to drive’ (1). Contact with the surface (1): skol’zit’ ‘to slide’ (1). Forced motion requiring some effort (9): karabkat’sja ‘to climb with difficulty’ (1), taskat’sja ‘hang around‘ (3), probirat’sja ‘to wade’ (4), vvintit’sja ‘to squeeze, screw in’ (1). Figure’s physical and emotional state (4): guliat’ ‘to walk for pleasure’ (3); sypat’sja ‘to spill’ (1). Attitude towards the figure (2): sovat’sja ‘to tamper’ (2). Generally speaking, in both languages the most abundant groups of manner verbs are those that code the velocity and motor movement of body parts. In Russian the two categories are more prevalent than in Polish although the analysis of the semantic components of manner included in the verbs of the two languages revealed no statistically significant differences. Both languages

146

Chapter 5

exhibit a preference for coding the motor movement of body parts. The groups of verbs coding this semantic component were the largest in respect of the number of types and tokens of verbs for both Polish and Russian. The second largest group of verbs included those which coded the velocity of motion, which was either in general faster than the usual or expected velocity (e.g., pędzić ‘to speed’ or mčat’sja ‘to speed’) or slower. Thus, the overall percentages of the types of semantic components were approximately equal, which means that the speakers of the two languages tend to code the same types of manner with roughly the same frequency. This, however, does not mean that in individual pairs of sentences the verbs used code the same type of information. To illustrate, in the pairs of sentences below, the Polish verbs: pędzić ‘to speed’, zerwać się ‘to dash’, mknąć ‘to speed’, code the velocity of motion, and the verb ślizgać się ‘to slide’ in (33a) describes the figure’s contact with the surface while all Russian verbs, namely bežat’ ‘to run’, skakat’ ‘to jump’, letet’ ‘to fly’ and polzat’ ‘to crawl’ code the motor movement of body parts. (30) a. Goniec popędził (‘away-speeded’) po lekarza. (M&M) b. Kur’er pobežal (‘away-ran’) za vračom. ‘An usher ran for the doctor.’ (31) a. Na to wezwanie zrywamy (‘spring’) się wszyscy z łóżek i ubieramy się jak najprędzej (…)(Ac) b. My vskakivaem (‘in-jump’) s posteli i pospešno odevaemsja (…) ‘On this call we all jump up out of bed and dress as soon as possible (…)’ (32) a. Następnie pomknął (‘away-sped’) do sypialni, powrócił (…) b. Posle ètogo on sletal (‘to-and-back-flew’) s nim v spal’nju i vernulsja (…) (M&M) ‘This done, he flew into the bedroom and returned (…)’ (33) a. (…) paczka sama wśliznęła (‘in-slid’) mu się do teczki. b. (…) pačka sama vpolzla (‘in-crawled’) k nemu v portfel’(…)(M&M) (…) the package jumped into his briefcase of its own accord (…) 5.9

Conflation of Path in the Verb

The analysis of the two novels and their translations revealed 30 types of Polish and Russian 31 path verbs. The path lexicons are comparable and show no

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

147

intra-typological variation. Lists of path verbs observed in the data for both languages are provided below (with the number of tokens in brackets). Some verbs, like Polish (ws)pinać się ‘to climb using limbs’ or Russian karabkat’sja ‘to climb with difficulty using limbs’, appear both in the analysis of manner and path verbs since they contain both components. Polish path verbs (30 types/ 187 tokens): paść ‘to fall’ (31), wrócić ‘to return’ (23), zbliżyć się ‘to approach’ (19), ruszyć ‘to start to move’ (16), uciec ‘to escape’ (12), unosić/ wznosić się ‘to move up’ (12), udać się ‘to go to’ (10), rzucić się ‘to dash’ (8), zerwać się ‘to start moving forcefully’ (8), dostać się ‘to get to’ (7), przybyć ‘to arrive’ (5), wedrzeć się ‘to burst in’ (4), przybliżyć się ‘to approach’ (3) (ws)piąć się ‘to climb’ (3), cofnąć się ‘to move back’ (3), dźwignąć się ‘to move up with difficulty’ (2), kierować się ‘to head for’ (2), (s)kręcić ‘to turn’ (2), podążyć ‘to move in the direction’ (2), runąć ‘to fall forcefully’ (2), wzbić się ‘to ascend’ (2), dotrzeć ‘to reach’ (1), drapać się ‘to climb’, ‘to scramble’ (2), (wz)bić się ‘to go up fast’ (2), wkraść się ‘to enter stealthily’, krążyć ‘to circle’ (1), (prze)bić się ‘to break through’ (1), (prze)dzierać się ‘to wade’ (1), zagłębić się ‘to move into’ (1), zwiać ‘colloquial to escape’ (1), oddalić się ‘to move away’ (1); Russian path verbs (31 types/ 154 tokens): vernut’sja ‘to return’ (22), brosit’sja ‘to dash’ (12), past’ ‘to fall’ (12), dvínut’sja ‘to start moving’ (11), približat’sja ‘to approach’ (10), puskat’sja ‘to start moving’ (9), lezt’ ‘to climb using limbs’ (7), pokinut’ ‘to leave’ (7), vorvat’sja ‘to burst in’ (7), podnjat’sja ‘to rise’ (6), napravit’sja‘to direct oneself’ (6), otpravit’sja ‘to start moving somewhere’ (6), kinut’sja ‘to dash’ (5), valit’sja ‘to fall forcefully’ (5), probirat’sja ‘to break through’ (4), stremit’sja ‘move towards’ (4), udalitsja ‘to move away’ (3), pribyvat’ ‘to arrive’ (2), snizit’sja ‘to move down’ (2), udrat’ ‘to escape’ (2), sovat’ sja ‘to slide in’ (2), čertit’ ‘draw a line when moving’ (1), dostignut’ ‘to reach’ (1), karábkat’sja ‘to climb with difficulty using limbs’ (1), kružit’ ‘to circle’ (1), otdaljat’sja ‘to move away’ (1), pjatit’sja ‘to step back’ (1), tronut’sja ‘to start to move’ (1), vertet’sja (1), vraŝat’sja ‘to return’ (1), vvintit’sja ‘to screw in’ (1). Although the sizes of the type sets of path verbs in the two languages are almost the same, the above data show that the descriptions of motion events in Polish include path verbs much more frequently than the Russian des­ criptions. Of 525 verbs used for spatial situations, the Polish versions contained 187 of tokens of verbs coding the semantic component of path, while the 509 Russian instances of motion description contained 154 verbs with the path component. This amounts to 36% of the total number of

148

Chapter 5

instances of spatial descriptions by means of path verbs in Polish when compared with 27% in Russian. This discrepancy in the quantitative analysis of path verbs suggests a significant difference in encoding the path of motion in the verb between the two languages. Moreover, as already noted, this difference in the proportion of manner verbs to path verbs indicates that Russian is a more manner-salient language, or in other words “more satellite-framed” than Polish. The approximately equal number of types of path verbs may be explained on the basis of Özçalışkan’s finding (2004), who notes that the range of possible directions of motion is quite small compared with the range of potential manners of motion. When comparing the sizes of the sets of path verbs of a verb-framed language (Turkish) and a satellite-verb framed one (English), Özçalışkan (2004) expected to find differences in the number of verbs lexicalizing path, which would confirm the typological classification. Contrary to her expectations, the sizes of this type of lexicon were comparable. This led to the conclusion that path verbs form a relatively closed lexical category that does not allow much elaboration to speakers of any language (Özçalışkan 2004: 85). These are the higher rates of use that are the indicators of typological affinity. The last issue that will be touched upon in the discussion of path verbs is their role in the lexicalization of vertical movement. The possible path encoded in the motion verbs may relate to the basic directions: up (e.g. unosić/ wznosić się ‘to move up’), down (e.g. paść ‘to fall’) while forward and back or may code the shape of the path of movement. Moreover, the path component may carry more specific information about the features of the source or goal. Two questions that arise are: i. how many of the above listed path verbs typically code vertical relations, and ii. how does the proportion of path verbs coding vertical relations relate to the rest of path verbs in each language. Table 5.3 below shows the proportions of tokens coding these specific directions in Polish and Russian. Before moving to the conclusions emerging after scrutinizing Table 5.3, let us recall the fact that to date vertical spatial relations, in general, have not been of centre interest in spatial research since they are relatively infrequently coded in comparison with horizontal relations. The analysis of the Polish lexicalization patterns presented in the previous chapter revealed that only 6% of all coded situations refer to motion along the vertical scale. Thus the fact that out of 188 tokens of Polish path verbs, 56 code vertical relations (30%), and in Russian 32 out of 154 (20%) indicates that in both languages, there is a strong tendency to code these relations by means of path

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

149

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Polish

Russian

Table 5.3 Horizontal (black bars) and vertical (white bars) relations coded by Polish and Russian Path verbs (in percentages).

verbs. Secondly, it is the Polish language that more frequently than Russian codes vertical relations by means of path verbs. 5.10

Path Lexicalization Outside the Verb

Since the manner of motion is not a component of a motion event that must be compulsorily lexicalized, where the semantic content expressed in both languages is similar, no significant differences in coding manner outside the verb are expected in the analysis of the translated texts. The discussion of this issue will be postponed to the next chapter, which will deal with spontaneous speech, in which the tendencies to code the manner of motion outside the verb may be expected to be more prominent. Instead, in the present section we shall look at the patterns of path coding outside the verb in the two languages. As already shown, in Polish and Russian information about the path is not typically included in the motion verb. Apart from a relatively small number of path verbs and unidirectional verbs with highly schematic path, these are verbal prefixes and prepositions that carry this type of semantic content. Since verbs of motion are in the focus of the present analysis, the following

150

Chapter 5

subsections will concentrate on the most common verbal prefixes accompanying motion verbs and the spatial information carried by them. Let me note that the study of prepositions that also code the path of motion, falls beyond the scope of the present study. In the following analysis of the spatial senses of verbal prefixes, the main emphasis is placed on the differences between Polish and Russian in the conceptualization of spatial relations. I shall concentrate, first, on the lexicalization of relations that are structured by the combination of the source-path-goal schema with the container as the source or the goal. This combination of schemas is coded by the prefixes wy-/vy-5 and w-/v- respectively. Secondly, I shall analyse linguistic realization of the relations structured by the sourcepath-goal schema with deictic reference. These spatial situations are rendered by the prefixes po-/po-, u- and przy-/pri-. 5.10.1 Motion Into and Out of a Container In Polish and Russian motion into and out of a container is lexicalized by means of two prefixes w-/ v- and wy-/ vy- respectively. Container here is understood schematically as an enclosure consisting of such elements as interior, boundary and exterior. Enclosed spaces like rooms and buildings are examples of containers while more schematic or metaphorical containers may be exemplified by forests or shadows. As already noted by Apresjan (1986: 22–23), in Russian there are two uses of the prefixes v- and vy-: one is non-deictic and the other deictic. When the prefixes denote the relation of exiting an enclosed space into an open area or vice versa, the use of the prefix does not depend on the position of a potential observer and is, therefore, non-deictic, as in (34). (34) Ivan vyšel iż doma i medlenno pobrel po ulice. ‘Ivan exited from the house and slowly started to stroll down the street.’ (after Apresjan 1986: 22) In Sentence (34), the choice of the prefix does not depend on the position assumed by the observer, which is logical: since only one container is involved no matter where the observer’s viewpoint is placed, the situation of leaving a container cannot be described as entering, and vice versa. On the other hand, when there are two adjacent enclosed spaces, which, for example, share a wall like rooms in an apartment, the use of a different prefix may involve a change in the perspective from which a scene is viewed 5  Whenever I refer to pairs of prefixes separated with a slash (e.g. wy-/ vy-), the first lexical item is Polish and the second Russian.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

151

by a potential observer. Such uses of the prefixes according to Apresjan (1986: 22–24) are deictic. With the deictic uses of the prefixes, the viewpoint may be located either inside the container, that is the source of motion or in the second container, which is the goal. To illustrate, the situation when the viewpoint is located at the source is exemplified in Sentence (35a). In (35b), the viewpoint is situated outside the container. Both sentences come from the National Corpus of the Polish Language (Pelcra) (35) a.  Opowiada o tacie, że wyszedł (‘out-walked’) do pracy, ale wróci. [Polityka] ‘He is talking about his father that he went to work but will be back.’ b. Gdy wchodził na drugie piętro, z mieszkania Kaźmierskiej wyszedł (‘outwalked’) jakiś facet z wędką. [Czwarte niebo] ‘When he was walking to the second floor, a guy with a fishing rod went of the Kazmierska’s apartment.’



In the analysed sentences taken from literary works and their translation, the viewpoint is located outside the container since the observer continues to follow the figure’s activities after its leaving the spaces which are conceptualized as containers. However, in Sentences (36)–(39), the same motion events are coded in Polish and Rusian by means of two different prefixes. What is worth noticing is that these spatial situations are construed differently though not as far as the position of the viewpoint is concerned. What is different is the part of the profiled part of the path. In all spatial situations described in the analysed sentences, there are two adjacent spaces, which are enclosures or are conceptualized as enclosures. In all Russian examples the prefix vy- is used, which profiles the figure as leaving a closed space and coming into the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus. Grenoble (1995: 372) claims, when analyzing the Russian version of Sentence (36), that the verb vyšel ‘out-went’ places the viewpoint inside the room from which the figure’s motion began. However, if the viewpoint were located in the room from which the figure went out, it would be impossible for the conceptualizer to follow the figure’s further activities. Polish verbs in Sentences (36)–(39), on the other hand, are prefixed by w-, which typically profiles the figure’s entering an enclosed space. My assumption is that in both situations, when the described motion is lexicalized by means of the prefix w- in Polish and vy- in Russian, the observer is located outside the enclosed space from which motion began. What is different, however, is that in

152

Chapter 5

the case of the Russian prefix vy-, the source of motion is profiled while Polish w- profiles the goal of movement. One of the inferences of the Russian prefix vy- and the Polish prefix w-, which undoubtedly motivates their use in the analysed examples, is the figure’s coming into the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus. The selected examples suggest that as far as entering and exiting situations are concerned, the Russian language shows a preference for coding the source of movement and Polish the goal. Moreover, the repeated pattern in different lexicalization of this type of spatial situations in the two versions suggests that in Russian it is the prefix vy- that most typically codes the relation of the figure’s entering the region of interactive focus while in Polish it is the prefix w- that is most commonly used for this purpose. The scope of the analysis is, however, too narrow, as based on only two novels, to make any categorical judgements in this respect. Let us then turn to the specific examples that show the differences in these lexicalization patterns between Polish and Russian. In the Russian sentence in (36b), a man’s motion is conceptualized as leaving the mirror. In the Polish version in (36a), the same event is construed differently, namely as entering the room where the viewpoint is located. In order to do this, the translator added the phrase do pokoju ‘to room’ to indicate the goal of movement. In this way, the path in the Polish version is described in a greater detail. (36) a. Wprost z trema, z tafli lustra wszedł (‘in-walked’) do pokoju mały, o nieprawdopodobnie szerokich barach osobnik (…) b. Prjamo iz zerkala trjumo vyšel (‘out-walked’) malen’kij, no neobyknovenno širokoplečij (…) (M&M) ‘Straight from the full-length mirror stepped a short but unusually broad-shouldered man (…)’ In turn, Sentences (37) and (38) are different from the previous examples since the goal of the described movement is not an enclosed but an open space, namely a stage and a verandah respectively. What seems to be decisive as for the use of the prefixes w-/vy- in this context is that the goal of movement is placed on a surface that has clearly delineated boundaries. Such places as a stage or a verandah are conceptualized as a surface, which is implied by the use of the preposition na ‘on’), but they are small, limited and clearly distinct from their surroundings. Motion leading to large spaces, such as, for example a broad street cannot be lexicalized in Polish by the prefix w-. In all instances quoted below, although the goals of motion are in both languages conceptualized as surfaces, in Russian it is the relation of leaving a container that is specified while in Polish it is entering the stage that is profiled.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

153

(37) a. Wjechał (‘in-rode’) na scenę Varietes na najzwyklejszym dwukołowym rowerze (…) b. Vyehal (’out-rode’) na scenu Var’ete na obyknovennom dvuhkolesnom velosipede (…)(M&M) ‘A little man (…) pedaled on to the Variety stage on a bicycle.’ (38) a. Wszedł (‘in-walked’) na werandę piękny czarnooki mężczyzna (…) b. Vyšel (‘out-walked’) na verandu černoglazyj krasavec (…)(M&M) ‘On to the verandah strode a handsome, black-eyed man (…)’ (39) a.  Na wysokim metalowym maszcie, u szczytu którego było siodełko, wjechała (‘in-rode’) na jednym kole pulchna blondyna w trykocie (…) b. Na vysokoj metalličeskoj mačte s sedlom naverhu i s odnim kolesom vyehala (‘out-rode’) polnaja blondinka (…)(M&M) ‘Next a fat blonde girl, (…), came in riding a long metal pole with a saddle on the top (…)’ The preference for coding the relations of leaving an enclosed space rather than entering in Russian, is also reflected in the pairs of sentences under (40), (41) and (42). In the Polish versions, what is coded is a deictic motion towards the speaker coded by the prefix przy- (as in (40a)), reaching the goal indicated by the path verb dotrzeć ‘to reach’ (as in (41a)), or moving away from the deictic center marked by the prefix po- (as in (42a)). In Russian equivalents all these relations are conceptualized as leaving an enclosed space and becoming visible. All Russian instances include the prefix vy-. (40) a. Piłat dodał jeszcze, że sam przyjdzie (‘will to-walk’) do ogrodu za chwilę i wszedł do pałacu (…). b. Pilat dobavil, čto on totčas vyjdet (‘will out-walk’) i sam, i udalilsja vnutr’ dworca (…).(M&M) ‘Pilate added that he would himself shortly return to join them in the garden (…)’ (41) a. (…) przedzierając się przez gąszcze drzew, dotarliśmy ‘reached’ do muru bajek. (Ac) b. (…) probralis’ čerez zarosli maliny i vyšli ‘out-walked’ k ograde. ‘breaking through the dense forest, we reached the fairy tales’ wall.’ (42) a. (…) narzuciliśmy sobie płaszcze i świecąc latarkami, pobiegliśmy (‘awayran’) do parku. (Ac)

154

Chapter 5

b. My, nakinuv plaŝi, vybežali (‘out-ran’) vo dvor. ‘We put on our coats and with flashlights we ran to the park.’ It should also be noted that as far as the non-deictic uses of the verbs prefixed by w-/ v- and wy-/ vy are concerned, when only one container is involved, there are no differences in the conceptualization of the relations of moving into and out of an enclosed space. It means that the described spatial relations are profiled in the same way in the two languages. When it comes to the deictic uses of the discussed prefixes, the analysis of the two versions of the novels examined shows remarkable differences and language-dependent tendencies. The conclusion that arises is that Russian, in contrast to Polish, shows preference for coding the relations of leaving a container rather than entering. Nevertheless, the inference of the Polish w- and the Russian vy- in this context is the same and refers to the figure’s becoming visible and, in this way, accessible to the conceptualizer. Let us proceed to the comparison of the lexicalization patterns of deictic motion in the two languages. 5.10.2 Motion Towards and Away from the Speaker As noted in Chapter 3, Russian makes a systematic distinction between two construals of the ablative (i.e. away from the speaker) motion of the figure. We have seen that in Russian the spatial situations in which a figure that by moving away becomes invisible, visually inaccessible or distant for the speaker is lexicalized by means of the prefix u-. According to Lindner’s (1983) terminology, in spatial situations where movement is lexicalized by motion verbs prefixed by u-, the figure leaves the region of interactive focus. On the other hand, the Russian prefix po- may profile two spatial situations. First, those in which only the onset of motion is profiled and in which the moving figure is available to the conceptualizer, existing and visible. Secondly, those in which the figure leaves the region of interactive focus and becomes inaccessible to the conceptualizer. This particular lexical distinction does not exist in Polish, which lexicalizes all these situations of movement away from the deictic source by means of the prefix po-. Let us see how this particular difference in the lexicalization patterns between the two languages is reflected in the translation from Russian into Polish and from Polish into Russian. The analysed data have been divided into two sets. In the first, the figure’s motion is rendered in Russian by the verb prefixed by po- and in the second by the prefix u-. In all instances the Polish versions include motion verbs prefixed by po-. Interestingly, the data provided below form a kind of continuum ranging from situations where the conceptualizer’s attention stays at the source

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

155

of movement to the situations where the attention follows the figure to the goal. It should be stressed that although in Sentences (43) and (44), motion away from the source is lexicalized in both languages by the prefix po-, they differ as far as the described spatial situations are concerned. In Sentences (43) and (44), the conceptualizer’s attention follows the moving figure and the subsequent events take place at the goal of movement. (43) a. Skorzystałem z tego, wypuściłem złapanego szczygła i cicho stąpając na palcach, pobiegłem (‘away-ran’) do Akademii. (Ac) b. Ja potihon’ku vstal, vypustil popavšego v silki ŝegla i na cypočkah pobežal (‘away-ran’) v Akademiju. ‘Taking advantage of that, I let the captured goldfinch go and quietly tiptoeing, I ran to the Academy.’ (44) a. Gdy Mateusz zadzwonił na obiad, wszyscy chłopcy pobiegli (‘away-ran’) do jadalni, gdzie Alfred i drugi Antoni krzątali się już dookoła stołu (…) (Ac) b. Kogda razdalsja zvonok k obedu, rebjata pobežali (‘away-ran’) v stolovuju, gde Al’fred i Antonij davno postavili pribory (…) ‘When Matthew rang for lunch, all the boys ran into the dining-room, where Alfred and second Antoni were already bustling around the table.’ In Sentence (45), on the other hand, the narrator’s attention does not follow the moving figure and the subsequent events take place at the source of movement. The moving figures do not entirely leave the region of interactive focus since it is known they are not far away and will promptly return to the source. The figures’ staying in the region of interactive focus accounts for the use of the Russian prefix po-. (45) a. Małżonka pobiegła (‘away-ran’) do przedpokoju (…). W tym momencie do stołowego weszło dwóch obywateli, a z nimi nie wiedzieć czemu śmiertelnie pobladła żona prezesa. b. Supruga pobežala (‘away-ran’) v perednjuju, (…) i v ètu minutu v stolovuju vošli dvoe graždan, a s nimi počemu-to očen’ blednaja Pelageja Antonovna. (M&M) ‘His wife ran into the hall (…). At that moment two men came into the dining-room, followed by a very pale Pelagea Antonovna.’

156

Chapter 5

The availability of the moving figure, or in other words the fact that the conceptualizer’s attention is still focused on it may be confirmed by the fact that we are given information about the figure’s path. Sentences (46) and (47) include the information that Stepa shouted while running and Mr Blot was showing the way while riding a bike. Sentence (48), on the other hand, informs the reader about the manner in which the bound man’s movement was performed, namely ‘noiselessly’. (46) a. Stiopa przeprosił gościa, że musi na chwilę go opuścić, i tak jak był, w skarpetkach, pobiegł (‘away-ran’) do przedpokoju do telefonu. Po drodze krzyknął w kierunku kuchni: – Grunia! b. Stepa poprosil u gostja razrešenija na minutu otlučit’sja i, kak byl v noskah, pobežal (‘away-ran’) v perednjuju k telefonu. Po doroge on kriknul v napravlenii kuhni: –Grunja! (M&M) ‘Stepa excused himself for a moment and ran to the telephone in the hall, on the way he shouted towards the kitchen : ‘Grunya!’ (47) a. Gdy stały się już tak duże jak rower, pan Kleks wsiadł na nie i pojechał ‘away-rode’ naprzód wskazując nam drogę. b. Pensne stalo rasti. Kogda ono dostiglo razmerov nastojaŝego velosipeda, pan Kljaksa vskočil na nego i poehal ‘away-rode’ vperedi, ukazyvaja dorogu. ‘When they have become as big as a bicycle, Mr Blot sat on them and rode forward showing us the way.’ (48) a. Ciężkie buciory Marka załomotały po mozaice, związany poszedł ‘awaywalked’ za nim bezgłośnie. b. Prostučali tjaželye sapogi Marka po mozaike, svjazannyj pošel ‘awaywalked’ za nim besšumno. (M&M) ‘Mark’s heavy boots resounded on the mosaic, the bound man followed him noiselessly.’ Both in Russian and in Polish sentences with motion verbs prefixed by po- may also denote the figure’s leaving the region of interactive focus, although the figure’s absence does not seem to be stressed as it is in sentences where motion is lexicalized by means of u-prefixed verbs in Russian. In such cases the subsequent events take place at the source of movement and the conceptualizer’s attention does not follow the moving figure, as in (49) and (50). (49) a. Zaś podejrzany konsultant przybrał wyniosły wyraz twarzy, odwrócił się i poszedł (‘away-walked’) sobie.

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

157

b. (…) professor sdelal nadmennoe lico, povernulsja i pošel (‘away-walked’) ot Ivana proč’ (M&M) ‘The dubious professor put on a haughty look, turned and walked away from Ivan.’ (50) a. I nie słuchając dłużej, Berlioz pobiegł (‘away-ran’) dalej. b. I, ničego ne slušaja bolee, Berlioz pobežal (‘away-ran’) dal’še. (M&M) ‘Without waiting to hear any more, Berlioz ran on.’ We shall now turn to situations in which the figure’s motion is in Russian rendered by by u- prefixed verbs, which most commonly stress the absence of the figure. Moreover, in all of the analysed instances the conceptualizer’s attention stays at the source of movement and does not follow the moving figure. To illustrate, in Sentence (51) the interpreter stresses Likhodeyev’s absence by repeating the motion verb twice and by adding the phrase only devils (or God in the English translation) know where he is. (51) a. Ależ on już pojechał, pojechał (‘away-drove’)! – krzyczał tłumacz. – On, wie pan, jest już w podróży! Jest już diabli wiedzą gdzie! b. Da on uže uehal, uehal (‘far-away-drove’)! – zakričal perevodčik, – on, znaete li, už katit! Už on čert znaet gde! (M&M) ‘He’s already gone,’ cried the interpreter. ‘ he’s on his way there. God knows where he is by now.’ In the next example, in which the Russian motion verb idti ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ is prefixed by u-, the absence of two dwarfs is stressed by the comment that they have not returned, and this is the reason why the fairy tale cannot be continued. This motivates the use of the Russian prefix u-. (52) a. Otóż dwaj spośród nich poszli (‘away-walked’) wczoraj do lasu i nie wrócili. (Ac) b. Včera dva bogatyrja ušli (‘far-away-walked’) v les i ne vernulis’. ‘Two of them went to the forest and they haven’t returned.’ As for Sentence (53), the reader’s attention obviously does not follow journalists and events connected with them. The subsequent events take place at the source of the journalists’ movement, namely at Dom Griboyedova, which again accounts for the use of the Russian prefix u-. In the Polish version, the use of the prefix roz- denotes dispersed movement in various directions.

158

Chapter 5

(53) a. (…) jazzband się rozszedł, dziennikarze rozjechali (‘in-many-directionsdrove’) się do swoich redakcji (…) b. (…) džaz razošelsja, neskol’ko žurnalistov uehali (‘far-away-drove’) v svoi redakcji (…)(M&M) ‘(…) the band went home and a few journalists left for their newspaper offices (…)’ Finally, in Example (54), similarly to the previous sentences, the reader follows the cat’s movement, which is rendered by the verb ukatit’ ‘far-away-rode’, until he is no longer visible. The actions that follow, namely Ivan’s chase after the professor, take place at the source of the cat’s motion. (54) a. (…) wskoczył na tylny zderzak ostatniego, łapą objął sterczącą nad zderzakiem gumową rurę i pojechał (‘away-drove’). b. (…) kot vskočil na zadnjuju dugu poslednego, lapoj vcepilsja v kakuju-to kišku, vyhodjaŝuju iz stenki, i ukatil (‘far away-rode’). (M&M) (…) the cat jumped on to the coupling-hook of the last car, latched its paw round a pipe sticking out of one of the windows and sailed away.’ Having analysed a few instances of lexicalization of motion events by means of Russian motion verbs prefixed by u-, let me stress again that in all instances the conceptualizer’s attention remained at the source of motion, which was the place where the events that followed took place. Thus, the Russian instances of lexicalization of ablative motion fall into two distinct categories. First, these are spatial situations where the conceptualizer’s attention remains at the source of movement and the figure leaves the region of interactive focus. These situations tend to be profiled by the prefix u-. Secondly, situations in which the attention follows the figure’s path of movement and the figure stays in the region of interactive focus, are coded by po-. In Polish, however, in contrast to Russian, both situations are rendered by the same prefix and consequently, there is no lexical differentiation between the two situations. 5.11

Force Dynamics of Polish and Russian Motion Verbs - a comparison

In Section 3.6, the theory of force dynamics was laid out and its application to French intransitive verbs of motion carried out by Borillo (2007) was discussed. On this basis, the next dimension of motion expressed by Polish and Russian verbs, namely the nature of the interaction between the participants

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

159

of the motion event will be discussed. The semantic component of positive or negative force exerted by the ground or the path in relation to the figure’s motion may be lexicalized by a combination of prefix and prepositional phrase as well as in the verb itself. There are spatial situations when a source that is conceptualized as a container exerts a counterforce and hinders the figure’s motion as if trying to prevent it from leaving the source. However, much more frequently what is profiled are the situations when the counterforce is exerted by the goal into which the figure’s motion is directed. The goal is also frequently understood as a container, as exemplified in Sentences (55)–(58). The verbs used in the quoted sentences, namely Polish rzucić się ‘to dash’, wedrzeć się ‘to break into’, wcisnąć się ‘to squeeze in’ and Russian brosit’sja ‘to dash’, may be called strong verbs since they denote much effort and energy exerted by the moving figure. (55) a. (…) głową naprzód rzucił się (‘dashed’) w zasłonięte okno (…) b. (…) i golovoju vpered on brosilsja (‘dashed’) v štoru (…)(M&M) ‘And he threw himself head first at the shuttered window (…)’ (56) a. Powszechny podziw wywołał mężczyzna, który wdarł się (‘burst in’) na scenę. b. Obŝee izumlenie vyzval mužčina, zatesavšijsja (‘squeezed in’) na scenu. (M&M) ‘To everybody’s astonishment, a lone man climbed on to the stage.’ (57) a. (…) cudzoziemiec zwinnie wcisnął (‘in-squeezed’) się pomiędzy nich (…) b. (…) inostranec lovko uselsja (‘sat down’) meždu nimi (…)(M&M) ‘(…) he adroitly placed himself between them (…)’ (58) a. Wtedy wdarł się (‘broke into’) tam kocur i zaczął pomagać. b. Tut vorvalsja (‘burst in’) kot i stal pomogat’. (M&M) ‘The cat busied itself with helping.’ When it comes to the force exerted by the path, motion verbs may also include information about the figure’s extra effort to overcome this force. The Sentences in (59) include motion verbs coding this type of interaction between the figure and the path. Movement along the path, which in this case is densely overgrown, is lexicalized in Polish by the verb przedrzeć się ‘to break through’ and in Russian by probrat’sja ‘to break through’, ‘to squeeze in’.

160

Chapter 5

(59) a. (…) przedzierając się przez gąszcze drzew, dotarliśmy (‘reached’) do muru bajek. (Ac) b. (…) probralis’ čerez zarosli maliny i vyšli (‘out-walked’) k ograde. ‘breaking through the dense forest, we reached the fairy tales’ wall.’ Motion verbs also code the force interactions when the Antagonist exerts a counterforce lower than expected. In Sentence (60), this type of relation is expressed by the Polish verb ślizgać się ‘to slide’, which describes the figure’s contact with the path while in Russian it is the motion verb polzat’ ‘to crawl’ coding the motor movement of body parts that profiles this relation. However, the animate movement assigned to an inanimate object in the Russian version is also a strategy for conveying metaphorically the information about the ease of the package’s motion. (60) a. (…) paczka sama wśliznęła ‘in-slid’ mu się do teczki. b. (…) pačka sama vpolzla ‘in-crawled’ k nemu v portfel’(…)(M&M) ‘(…) the package jumped into his briefcase of its own accord (…)’ The last dimension of lexicalization of motion to be touched upon in our analysis of translated texts will be verticality. 5.12

Lexicalization of Motion Along a Vertical Scale

The analysis of the lexicalization patterns of motion along a vertical scale in Polish presented in the previous chapter revealed, first of all, the low number of instances coding this type of motion and secondly, the typological discrepancy between coding the horizontal and vertical motion situations. However, the conclusions drawn in the previous chapter were tentative due to the small sample of analysed instances. Let us now check how vertical relations are rendered in Polish and Russian versions of The Master and Margarita and Mr Blot’s Academy. The frequency of instances coding vertical motion relative to horizontal motion in The Master and Margarita (6%) is identical with the proportion established in the analysis of spatial language in Polish novels. As already mentioned, the descriptions of vertical movement in Mr Blot’s Academy, due to its characters’ extraordinary way of moving of, is overrepresented and appears twice more frequently than in other sources. This type of motion constitutes 12% of all spatial relations. Previous studies of lexicalization patterns have concentrated mainly on horizontal relations. However, the types of motion verbs used for encoding

161

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

vertical motion and the frequency of their use seem to exhibit typological variety. This has been suggested by Naigles et al. (1998) for Spanish and Iakovleva (2012) for Russian. Filipović (2007: 128) notes an interesting fact concerning Serbo-Croatian verbs coding vertical relations. Namely, most of the verbs that seem to be prefixed by s-, which in Serbo-Croatian typically codes downward motion, cannot be defined as prefixed verbs because the unprefixed form does not exist. This leads Filipović (2007: 129) to the conclusion that many verbs indicating downward movement begin with s-, but this s- is not (or no longer) a prefix. Let us check what types of verbs with what frequency are used in Polish and Russian in this respect and whether the typical satellite-framed pattern of coding the path in the verb holds for expressing vertical motion in the data discussed here. Table 5.4 presents the proportions of manner-conflating to path-conflating verbs used for coding motion along a vertical scale in the data selected from the two novels. Table 5.4 Lexicalization of motion along the vertical pane in Polish and Russian verbs Polish verbs

No. of tokens

Semantic component

Russian verbs

paść ‘to fall’

16

Path

8

Path

6

Manner

(u)past’ ‘to 11 fall’ podnjat’sja ‘to 6 rise’ letat’ ‘to fly’ 5

2 2

5 4

Manner Manner

3

Path

3

Path+Manner

1

Manner idti ‘to go’ Path+Manner ehat’ ‘to go by a vehicle’ Manner spuskat’sja ‘to move down’ Path+Manner valit’sja ‘to fall down forcefully’ Manner bežat’ ‘to run’

1

Manner

1

Manner

1

Manner

unosić się ‘to rise’ iść ‘to go’, ‘to walk’ biec ‘to run’ wzbić się ‘to rise fast’ jechać ‘to go by a vehicle’ drapać się ‘to climb using limbs’ sunąć ‘to glide, to slide’ lecieć ‘to fly’

2 1

polzat’ ‘to crawl’

No. of tokens

Semantic component

Path Path Manner

162

Chapter 5

Table 5.4 Lexicalization of motion along the vertical pane in Polish and Russian verbs (cont.) Polish verbs

toczyć się ‘to roll’ frunąć ‘to fly about birds’ Total: 11 types

No. of tokens

Semantic component

Russian verbs

No. of tokens

1

Manner

parit’ ‘to glide’ 1

1

Manner

katat’sja ‘to go 1 by a vehicle’ 41 27 Path verbs/ 12 types 41 tokens 17 Manner tokens verbs

Semantic component

Manner Manner 23 Path verbs/ 21 Manner verbs

Table 5.4 shows that in both Polish and Rusian, motion along the vertical scale is in more than 50% of noted instances coded by verbs conflating path components. Thus, there is a significant discrepancy between the types of verbs used for coding spatial relations in general (i.e., horizontal and vertical) and those that are used for description of motion solely along the vertical scale. This shows that the shift towards the satellite-framed pole of the cline of Russian and Polish is most visible in the lexicalization of horizontal relations. As many as 61% of instances of vertical motion in Polish and 52% in Russian are coded by means of path verbs. Thus, the pattern of the lexicalization of vertical motion is not satellite-framed. However, when the verbs that are typically used for coding vertical relations are analysed more closely, it becomes apparent that most of them emerged in the process of fossilization of a prefix and a verb. In Table 5.4 the examples of fossilization include such Polish verbs as wzbić się ‘to rise fast’, unosić się ‘to rise’ or Russian podnjat’sja ‘to rise’ and spuskat’sja ‘to move down’. This process mainly concerned those verbs which typically code vertical relations for at least two reasons. First of all, vertical motion happens basically only in two directions, leading to a small diversity of prefixes. Secondly, the small variety of prefixes appearing with certain verbs leads to a high frequency of the use of the prefix-verb combination. These two situations enhance the fossilization process (cf. Section 2.1.1.3).

Lexicalization Of Manner And Path In Polish And Russian

163

5.13 Conclusions In the present chapter I have investigated, first of all, how the Polish and Russian translators deal with the task of translating path and manner information. The analysis of the translated texts has revealed some important differences between the two languages in this respect. To the best of my knowledge, no research comparing the lexicalization patterns of motion in Polish and Russian has been done so far. However, on the basis of the previous studies of Polish and Russian lexicalization patterns dealt with separately (Kopecka 2010, Slobin 2005a, Hasko 2010), two hypotheses have been proposed. Firstly, it was expected that the lexicon of Russian manner verbs of motion will be richer than the corressponding Polish lexicon. Secondly, it was assumed that the manner-of-motion verbs would be used more frequently in Russian than in Polish. The comparison of the translations from Polish into Russian and from Russian into Polish has confirmed the two hypotheses. This finding has led to the conclusion that Russian is a more manner-salient language than Polish. It should be noted, however, that this conclusion is based solely on the analysis of literary texts and their translation. Polish, on the other hand, makes more frequent use of verbs conflating the path of motion. Interestingly, many of the frequent path verbs, such as przybyć ‘to arrive’, dotrzeć ‘to reach’, przybliżyć się ‘to approach’ were formed from etymologically independent and semantically transparent prefixes and verb forms. This leads to the conclusion that the Polish language moves along the cline of manner of salience towards the verb-framed pole. This process is most visible in the lexicalization patterns of vertical motion in both languages. As far as the semantic component of manner coded outside the verbs is concerned, in the Polish versions of the texts examined information about the manner of motion is either omitted on numerous occasions or the description of the manner of motion is simplified. Incidentally, this trend has so far been noted only for translations from satellite-framed into verb-framed languages and vice versa (e.g., Slobin 2005a). However, to date there has been only a limited number of studies comparing translations within the group of satellite-framed languages (e.g., Filipović 1999) and no cross-linguistic studies concerning Slavic languages.

Chapter 6

Elicitation Tasks The use of various stimuli and methodologies in the study of lexicalization patterns as well as the varying context of use may affect the results of linguistic analyses (Naigles et al. 1998). In Chapter 4 modern crime fiction constituted the basis for revealing the ways spatial situations are rendered in Polish. In Chapter 5 the lexicalization patterns of motion events in Polish were compared to those existing in the Russian language by juxtaposing the descriptions of motion events found in two novels and their translations. In the present chapter the data used for the analysis will be obtained by means of two elicitation tasks carried out among Polish and Russian native speakers. The chapter describes two kinds of study based on elicitation tasks. The general aim of the first is to see whether the specific preference for including the manner component in the verb, which was revealed in the analyses discussed in the previous chapters, is reflected in the readily available mental lexicon of native speakers. In other words, whether the lexicalization patterns of motion events existing in a given language influence the degree of mental accessibility of motion verbs by its speakers. The second study concentrates on the ways of rendering spatial situations of translational motion by native speakers of the two languages under analysis. Spoken colloquial language used on an everyday basis is considered to be the most characteristic form of a given language. Although the situation of data elicitation is not a natural one, my assumption is that elicitation data are much closer to spoken colloquial language as far as register is concerned than the data analysed in the two previous chapters. The data obtained in the process of elicitation tasks will be compared with the results gathered in the course of the analysis of literary texts as well as their translations. My assumption is that the conclusions drawn on the basis of the analysis of data received by means of various methods will be more reliable and will be based on fairly solid grounds. Moreover, the results of the present study may contribute to our understanding of the human cognitive processes connected with the production of spatial language. This connection may be of two kinds: the language may be viewed as being influenced by the cognitive processes of its speakers but also as influencing the speakers’ ways of conceptualizing spatial relations. Obviously, in the case of such closely related languages as Polish and Russian, the differences in the conceptualization of motion events cannot be

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���8 | doi ��.��63/9789004360358_008

Elicitation Tasks

165

expected to be as significant as those between, for example, a satellite- and a verb-framed language. Section 6.1 presents the study of mental access to the lexicons of motion verbs in the two language groups, while 6.2 describes the analysis of the lexicalization patterns of motion events included in the descriptions of video clips by Polish and Russian respondents. 6.1

Study 1: Access to the Mental Lexicon of Motion Verbs

6.1.1 Introduction According to Slobin’s (1996a) “thinking for speaking” hypothesis speakers of a more manner-salient language will list more manner verbs within a limited span of time since the necessity to make specific semantic distinctions in the domain of manner when they speak their native language trains them to distinguish more manner types and recall more manner verbs. His studies (2004) have confirmed this assumption since English respondents listed far more manner verbs than French ones, as far as both the types and tokens of the verbs are concerned. English informants listed verbs that expressed highly fine-grained distinctions of manner, some of which were non-existent in French. The results of Slobin’s experiment showed that the concepts coded by the language were readily accessible to its speakers. The aim of the first elicitation task presented in this work is to study the mental lexicons of motion verbs of Polish and Russian native speakers. Previous research of this kind has been carried out by, as already mentioned, Slobin (2004: 164–5) on French and English, Ibarretxe-Antuñano (2004: 324) on Basque and English, and Cardini (2008: 551–560) on Italian and English. It should be pointed out that these studies concerned the differences in the lexicalization patterns of motion events between verb-framed languages and English, which is the best studied satellite-language. Since the languages compared in the three studies always belonged to opposing types as far as the lexicalization of the path and manner components of motion events is concerned, the revealed differences were striking and clearly showed that the manner of motion concepts were more readily available to speakers of satellite-framed languages. Nevertheless, assuming that the intra-typological differences between languages are also significant, the present study aims to analyse the types and tokens of motion verbs easily accessible mentally to adult speakers of Polish and Russian. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first study of the mental lexicons of motion verbs available to Polish and Russian speakers.

166

Chapter 6

The data analysis of the lexicalization of motion in Polish and Russian presented in the previous chapter has shown a statistically significant discrepancy between the two languages with respect to the frequency of occurrence of types of motion verbs. Although Polish and Russian are closely related and both belong to the category of satellite-framed languages, the types of verbs used for rendering spatial situations differed in the semantic components included in motion verbs. Let us recall that the differences concerned, first of all, the relative numbers of the verbs that express the path, which is the core schema of a motion event in Talmy’s typology (2000b), compared to verbs that include the semantic components of manner. Secondly, some differences in the types of manner expressed by motion events in the two languages were indicated. Thus, as Slobin (2006: 70) rightly notes, “it is not satellite-framing alone that accounts for the rate of use of manner verbs; morphosyntactic structure and lexical availability also contribute to a language’s ‘rhetorical style’ ”. According to Slobin (2003), the fact that some terms are conceptually articulated in the minds of speakers is the result of a greater frequency of use. In other words, more frequently used units become entrenched and are mentally accessible to a speaker. Entrenchment of a given unit is a matter of degree since “[e]very use of a structure has a positive impact on its degree of entrenchment, whereas extended periods of its disuse have a negative impact” (Langacker 1987a: 59). Thus, the frequency of activation of a given item determines the level of its entrenchment. A speaker’s previous experience with a specific notion manifests itself in its psychological primacy (Langacker 1987a: 380). The assumption here is that motion verbs retrieved in the experiment are entrenched enough to become stable units in the speakers’ mental lexicons. In the present section I shall be looking at the lexical availability of motion verbs in Polish and Russian. The aims of this section are as follows: i.

to compare the sizes of verb lexicons (taking into consideration both types and tokens of verbs) that are easily accessible to native speakers of the two languages within a two-minute frame; ii. to check what proportions of the verbs that are easily retrieved from memory are manner verbs or path verbs; iii. to compare the semantic components conflated in the verbs that are easily available to the speakers of the two languages. 6.1.2 Method This comparative study involved two groups of respondents—Polish and Russian. Both groups consisted of philology students, aged 20 (Russian students) and 22–23 (Polish students). In each group there were 33 respondents.

Elicitation Tasks

167

The students were asked to write down all motion verbs they could think of in the span of two minutes. The same criteria for the selection of verbs for the analysis were applied as in the study of literary texts presented in Chapter 4 and the comparison of the translation data discussed in Chapter 5. In a nutshell, the selected verbs were intransitive and had a root the primary meaning of which referred to translational motion. Furthermore there was no distinction made between unidirectional and non-directional forms of one verb (both forms were counted as one type of a verb). Lexical items that did not fulfil the above criteria were excluded from the analysis. 6.1.3 Results 6.1.3.1 The Polish Data Polish respondents came up with as many as 79 types of verbs which fulfilled the above-mentioned criteria. This result significantly outnumbers the sizes of the sets of data collected in the process of crime story analysis (Chapter 4) and in the study of translations (Chapter 5). The discrepancy may have been caused to some extent by the fact that the lexicon of retrieved verbs (see the Appendix) includes both vulgar words (e.g. spierdalać ‘vulg. to escape’) as well as one slang item (kopytkować ‘to hoof it’1). This type of vocabulary has been included in the data since the respondents’ active lexicons of verbs were measured and active lexicon is understood as the set of lexical items used on an everyday basis. Table 6.1 shows the thirty most frequently appearing verbs (see Appendix for the full list of verbs). The total number of the tokens of Polish retrieved verbs is 410, which gives the mean number of 12,4 per respondent. Sixty-four tokens of path verbs were noted, which constituted 15% of the total number of retrieved verbs as opposed to manner verbs, which with 348 instances constituted 85%. Verbs conflating both manner and path components have been counted twice. 6.1.3.2 The Russian data Table 6.2, in turn, presents the results of the same elicitation task obtained from Russian respondents (see Appendix for the full list of verbs). The total number of tokens of verbs produced by the Russian respondents is 460, which gives a mean of 14 verbs per respondent. The Russian verbs conflating manner appeared 407 times, constituting 88% of the total verb use, while those conflating the path, with 85 instances, amounted to 15%. 1  The verb exists only in recent youth slang and was unknown to the author before carrying out the elicitation task.

168

Chapter 6

Table 6.1

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

Lexical access: the most common motion verbs—Polish data

Type of verb

Number of tokens

Semantic components

biegać /biec ‘to run’ chodzić/ iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ jeździć/ jechać ‘to go in a wheeled vehicle’ skakać/ skoczyć ‘to jump’ lecieć/ latać ‘to fly’ pływać/ płynąć ‘to swim’, ‘to go by ship, boat’ ruszać/ ruszyć ‘to start to move’ pełzać/ pełznąć ‘to creep’ galopować ‘to gallop’ turlać się ‘to roll’ truchtać ‘to trot’ uciekać/ uciec ‘to escape’ czołgać się ‘to crawl’ pędzić ‘to speed’ spacerować ‘to walk’ fruwać/ frunąć ‘to fly (about birds)’ gonić ‘to speed’,’to race’ skradać się ‘to sneak’ (s)kręcać/ (s)kręcić ‘to turn’ maszerować ‘to march’ pedałować ‘to pedal’ kopytkować ‘to hoof it’ padać/paść ‘to fall’ stąpać/ stąpnąć ‘to tread’ ślizgać się/ śliznąć się ‘to glide’ wracać/ wrócić ‘to return’ dreptać ‘to mince’ kicać/ kicnąć ‘to hop’ kłusować ‘to trot’ szybować ‘to glide’

30 29 26 26 22 19 17 14 13 11 9 9 8 8 8 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4

Manner Manner Manner Manner Manner Manner Path Manner Manner Manner Manner Path Manner Manner Manner Manner Manner Manner Path Manner Manner Manner Path Manner Manner Path Manner Manner Manner Manner

169

Elicitation Tasks Table 6.2 Lexical access: the most common motion verbs—Russian data

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

Type of verb

Number of tokens

Semantic components

begat’/ bežat’ ‘to run’ hodit’ /idti ‘to move on foot’ plavat’ /plyt’ ‘to swim’ letat’/ letet’ ‘to fly’ dvigat’sja/ dvinut’sja ‘to move’ prygat’ /prygnut’ ‘to jump’ ezdit’ /ehat’ ‘to go in a wheeled vehicle’ skakat’ ‘to gallop’ gonjat’sja / gnat’sja ‘, ‘to speed’ nosit’sja ‘to scamper about’ polzat’/ polzti ‘to crawl’ šagat’/ šagnut’ ‘to step’ mčat’sja ‘to speed’ guljat’ ‘to stroll’ podnimat’sja/ podnjat’sja ‘to rise’ karabkat’sja ‘to climb with difficulty using limbs’ peremeŝat’sja/ peremestit’sja ‘to move’ krast’sja ‘to sneak’ vzbirat’sja/ vzobrat’sja ‘to move up’ plestis’ ‘to limp, to walk slowly’ probirat’sja/ probrat’sja ‘to break thtrough’ puskat’sja/ pustit’sja ‘to start moving’ šestvovat’ ‘to tread’ skol’zit’/ skol’znut’ ‘to slide’ taskat’sja/ taŝit’sja ‘to lump’ topat’ ‘to stamp’ lazit’/ lezt’ ‘to climb’ marširovat’ ‘to march’ parit’ ‘to glide’ stremit’sja ‘to move forward’

33 32 32 28 27 26 24 20 19 18 17 13 12 10 8 8

Manner Manner Manner Manner 0 Manner Manner Manner Manner Manner Manner Manner Manner Manner Path Path+Manner

6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4

0 Path Path Manner Path Path Path Manner Manner Manner Path+Manner Manner Path Path

170

Chapter 6

6.1.4 Findings The first finding emerging from the results is that the Russian group produced a greater number of verb tokens than the Polish group. An average Russian respondent listed 14 while a Polish one 12,4 types of motion verbs. Although the difference is small and statistically insignificant, it may be treated as the first indicator that Russian speakers have, at least to some extent, a greater access to a mental lexicon of motion verbs. However, since the major concern of the present work is the lexicalization of manner and path components included in motion verbs, let us see how Polish and Russian data differ in this respect. Figure 6.1 presents the percentages of path and manner verbs produced by the Polish and Russian respondents in the lexical access task. 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Polish

Russian

Figure 6.1 Lexical access: Mean for motion verbs per speaker with split into manner (black bars) and path (white bars) verbs.

As the above figure shows, the Russian data are richer in verb tokens including the semantic component of manner than the Polish data (chi2=2.859, 0.005 < p-value < .001). Thus, the results indicate a greater manner-of-motion salience for the Russian speakers. Although the sample of the analysed data was not large, the result approaches significance.

Elicitation Tasks

171

The fact that the Russian speakers came up with a larger number of manner verbs is presumably the result of the fact that their language is more saturated with manner verbs of motion. Let us recall that from the usage-based point of view, it is the frequency with which a given item occurs that determines the level of its entrenchment. Consequently, the higher frequency of manner verbs (i.e., their tokens) used on an everyday basis may be seen as the reason why the Russian respondents retrieved more manner verbs. As shown by Özçalışkan and Slobin (2003), speakers of satellite-framed languages, who are exposed to a vast array of manner verbs existing in their native language, become more sensitive to the manner categories. In other words, speakers of more manner-salient languages are trained to make more finegrained distinctions in the domain of manner. However, as the study described in the previous chapter has shown, it is mainly the frequency of use and not the types of verbs functioning in a given language that more clearly indicates a language preference for lexicalizing motion events by means of manner or path verbs. Thus, it is the frequency with which a given item occurs that may be assumed to have the greatest impact on ease of access to the mental lexicon. There is yet another reason why speakers of a high-manner salient languages are sensitive to the subtle manner categories. Namely, manner coding in satellite-framed languages is relatively easy and does not result in “heavy” constructions with subordinate elements, such as gerunds or adverbial expressions, as it is in verb-framed languages. Instead of such complicated expressions of manner offered by verb-framed languages as ‘exit flying’ or ‘exit with a flap of the wings’, the structure of Germanic languages allows for such phrases as ‘fly out’ and Slavic for ‘out-fly’. As Slobin (2006: 62) notes, “this apparently trivial processing factor of relative “cost” of encoding manner has widespread consequences for both the lexicon and discourse patterns of a language, with probable effects on cognition”. To summarize, as the study of the description of motion events presented in the previous chapter has shown, the Russian language possesses a wider array of manner-of-motion verbs used with a greater frequency than Polish. This means that Russian speakers are trained to attend to manner distinctions when using their language. According to Slobin’s ‘thinking for speaking’ hypothesis, using a particular language activates language characteristic thought processes. The differences in the types and tokens of motion verbs obtained in the discussed lexical access task support Slobin’s claim about the influence of the lexicon and discourse patterns of Polish and Russian on the cognition of the speakers of these languages.

172 6.2

Chapter 6

Study 2: Descriptions of Motion Events

6.2.1 Introduction In order to analyse the lexicalization patterns of the two components of motion event in colloquial language, namely the path and the manner of motion, an elicitation task was carried out among Russian and Polish respondents. The aim was to study the respondents’ natural flow of language, which, besides the limitation of the time span given for the description of a given spatial situation, was not in any other way constrained by the researcher. In the course of the experiment descriptions from Polish and Russian speakers were elicited in response to motion situations presented in short film extracts. Thus, the responses obtained from the two language groups were descriptions of the same motion events. While the previous study addressed the sizes of the repertoires of motion verbs readily available in the respondents’ mental lexicons and the proportions of manner and path components included in them, the aim of Study 2 is to check whether the sizes of the mental lexicon (as indicated by types and tokens of elicited motion verbs) established in Study 1 are reflected in the speakers’ descriptions of motion events seen on the screen. In other words, the aim is to check whether the study of the real use of everyday language supports the claims made on the basis of the study of narrative texts and their translations as well as on the basis of retrieved lexicons of motion verbs. The hypotheses are as follows: i. The Russian descriptions of spatial situations will include more types (and tokens) of manner verbs than the Polish descriptions. Correspondingly, Polish speakers will use more verbs conflating the path component. ii. Russian will be richer in the descriptions of the ground. The second hypothesis is based on Slobin’s (2005b) claim that the descriptions of motion events in satellite-framed languages typically include more ground elements indicating the manner of motion. Since Russian is a more mannersalient language than Polish, its speakers may be expected to code the ground information more readily than the Polish respondents. Nevertheless, besides pinpointing the differences between the two languages under study in an attempt to place them on the manner-saliency continuum, a general aim of the study is to discover characteristic lexicalization patterns of motion in the two languages. Thus, besides the analysis of the semantic components included in motion verbs used by the two sets of respondents, the path and manner information expressed by the speakers outside the verb will also be discussed.

Elicitation Tasks

173

6.2.2 Method For the purpose of analysis, naturalistic and controlled language data were collected. The method of eliciting narratives offers a number of advantages. First of all, it was shown that the output referring to displaced time and space elicited by, for example, videos is more complex than spontaneous speech (Doughty and Long 2000), which means in practice that in a short span of time large corpuses of data can be obtained. It is of particular importance in the present study which primarily concerns the sizes of the repertoire of manner verbs of motion. Tannen (1982) also points out that written short stories create maximum effect with fewest words. When comparing oral and written narratives, she states that oral strategies make maximal use of context and in written narratives “maximal background information and connective tissue are made explicit” (Tannen 1982: 3). The method chosen for the study determined the type of language that became the object of the analysis. The data obtained by means of elicitation tasks were close to everyday and colloquial speech. The sets of data gathered by means of a variety of methods offer a possibility to compare the language of literary texts studied in the two previous chapters with the language of everyday speech. The prediction was that the analysis of spoken language discussed in the present chapter would be the most informative source about the most characteristic patterns of lexicalization of motion in Polish and Russian. The prediction was made on the grounds of Talmy’s (1985) statement that typological differences and a language preference for one of the types for the verb (i.e., manner verbs, path verbs and verbs lexicalizing the fact of motion together with the figure) are revealed in its most characteristic expression of motion. ‘Characteristic’ means that: “(i.) It is colloquial in style, rather than literary, stilted, etc. (ii.) It is frequent in occurrence in speech, rather than only occasional. (iii.) It is pervasive, rather than limited, that is, a wide range of semantic notions are expressed in this type” (Talmy 1985: 62). Thus, the findings resulting from the elicited data will be treated as the most accurate characterization of the lexicalization patters of the two languages under study. The data obtained in the process of elicitation tasks are of different kind from those analysed by, for example, Smith (2003), who concentrated on the analysis of Russian and Danish versions of technical texts taken from an encyclopaedia and a textbook. On the basis of the studies carried out by means of this method, Smith (2003) came to the conclusion that Russian is a less prototypical manner language than Danish. He even ventured to say that Russian is a manner language “which is in the process of switching over to a Path oriented

174

Chapter 6

approach” (Smith 2003: 77). Comparing Danish and Russian technical texts, he established that 82% of the Danish verb tokens were manner verbs, which was the case for only 33% of Russian verb tokens. In turn, 46% of the verb tokens found in the Russian texts were considered to be path verbs, which was the case only for 5% of Danish verbs (Smith 2003: 81). However, the next significant difference between the present and Smith’s study is the fact that the present work concentrates solely on translational motion while Smith (2003) mainly included instances of caused motion in his analysis. Thus, the present study differs from Smith’s (2003) in two important respects: the source of the analysed data (technical vs. colloquial) and the kind of the studied motion (caused vs. translational), which is why Smith’s findings cannot be predictive as far as the results of the present study are concerned. As for other linguistic research based on elicitation tasks, a great number of studies concerning cross-linguistic differences in the lexicalization of motion events have been based on pictures included in the book Frog, Where Are You (Mayer 1969). However, the use of the Frog stories has a few drawbacks. First of all, pictures are by nature static so respondents must infer motion, which is the essential and basic component of motion verbs. Moreover, the spatial situations presented in the book are limited in number. Since the book has been used in numerous studies (e.g., Berman and Slobin 1994, Cardini 2008), the narrative context of the limited number of motion events in the story may impose constraints leading to a biased picture of the spatial relations in the studied languages or even erroneous conclusions concerning the way language typologies are manifested. The present study makes use of stimuli designed for the purpose of discovering the nature of the lexicalization differences between Polish and Russian. As opposed to the studies presented in the two previous chapters, the spatial situations appeared in a non-narrative context, which meant that respondents were presented with isolated single motion events. My assumption is that, besides introducing a new set of spatial situations to the cross-linguistic research of motion events, the descriptions of cartoon excerpts will result in the retrieval of spontaneous and colloquial data. 6.2.2.1 Procedure The respondents belonging to the same language group were all questioned together. The participants watched a series of short video-clips. After each clip a dark screen appeared for a minute. During this time the respondents were asked to describe the scene. The instruction was: Opisz co się wydarzyło/ Opiši, čto proizošlo ‘Describe what has happened’. In order to avoid the effect of

Elicitation Tasks

175

tiredness, the stimuli were divided into two equal sets (6 video-clips in each) and the subjects were interviewed on two consecutive days. The respondents received no further instructions and gave their responses in writing. 6.2.2.2 Subjects The experiment was run on 20 Polish and 20 Russian native speakers of both sexes between 20 and 22 years of age. The trials were conducted at two universities (one in Olsztyn, Poland and the other in Kaliningrad, Russia). All of them were philology students. 6.2.2.3 Stimuli As opposed to the studies presented in the two previous chapters, dynamic stimuli (namely video-clips) were selected and presented to native speakers of the two languages. More specifically, the elicitation tool consisted of two sets of six short episodes each (ranging in length from 6 to 30 seconds) clipped from the Polish cartoon Reksio. The selected extracts presented 12 colour dynamic instances of common motion events involving translational motion. The clips were selected for controlling five different variables, which are summarized in Table 6.3. Table 6.3 Variables controlled in the sequence of video-clips Concepts

Variables

Figure Manner Path

a dog, a boy, poultry (a goose, a cock, etc.) walking, running, jumping, flying, skating; Goal (e.g. inside), Source (outside), Path (along), boundary and non-boundary crossing, up and down place (a kennel, a henhouse, a zoo), object (a tree, a fence), person (a boy) away from the camera-observer, towards the camera-observer

Ground Deixis

6.2.3 Findings 6.2.3.1 Length of Descriptions The narrations elicited from the respondents differed in length since no constraints were imposed on the respondents’ answers in this respect.

176

Chapter 6

Consequently, the number of verbs per description varied considerably from person to person as well as between the two language groups. What is of interest here is the average length of an utterance in each language group since it may indicate the language preference for coding more details of a described spatial scene. In order to reliably compare the average lengths of the utterances produced by speakers of the two languages, the procedure of controlling for the length effects outlined by Berman and Slobin (1994) (used for the description of lexicalization patterns displayed by a variety of languages) was adopted. In this approach the analysed unit was a clause, which is understood as any unit containing a unified predication. The verb in the unit might be finite or nonfinite, e.g., running through the woods, taken by surprise or was angry. Nevertheless, modal and aspectual verbs were not considered to form separate clauses and were counted with accompanying verbs, e.g., wants to climb the tree, goes to look or started running. All additional comments or digressions, such as That’s all I’ve got to say were not taken into consideration. The same analytic method was also used by Cardini (2008) for the juxtaposition of Italian and English verb lexicons. This method makes it possible to assess the relative length and complexity of a description of a motion event in various languages. In order to estimate the relative length of the utterances in a language, all clauses containing a unified predication were divided by the number of all descriptions (the number of student multiplied by the number of video-clips) registered for a single language group. The results for the Polish and Russian groups were 1,7 and 3,4 respectively. In other words, the Russian respondents were far more verbose than the Polish respondents and produced utterances that were twice as long. However, it should be stressed is that longer utterances did not entail the use of a significantly larger number of tokens of motion verbs. Since the major element of the video clips was a moving figure, it naturally attracted the viewer’s attention. Thus, in the overwhelming majority both Polish and Russian utterances contained descriptions of motion of the moving figure. However, the Russian respondents described the events seen on the screen in a more detailed way by adding information concerning the behaviour of other participants in the scenes, the scenery or their own comments. Given that motion verbs are not the only way of rendering the path and manner of motion, we may state that the Russian respondents included this type of information more frequently than the Polish ones. As a way of illustration, let us compare a Russian and a Polish description of the same event.

Elicitation Tasks

177

(1) Sobaka otkryvaet dver’ i vypuskaet petuha i kuricu iz kurjatnika. Ptički vedut sebja očen’ vysokomerno—vypjačivajut grud’ i zadirajut. Čto im sdelala sobaka—poka neizvestno.  [Ru] ‘A dog is opening the door and lets out a cock and a hen out of the henhouse. The birds are very arrogant—stick out their chests and provoke. What the dog did to them—is still unknown.’ (2) Reksio wypuszcza ptaki z kurnika. [Pl] ‘Rex lets some birds out of the henhouse.’ Although the Russian description includes as many as five verbs and the Polish utterance only one, according to the adopted criteria in none of them there are motion verbs. Thus, on the basis of a comparison of the above utterances, it becomes clear that a larger number of clauses in an utterance does not need to entail an increase in the number of types and tokens of motion verbs. It suffices to mention here that the length of the utterances contributes to the richness of the description of manner outside the verb, which will be discussed at a later point. The exact reasons why the Russian students who took part in the experiment described the events seen on the screen by means of a far larger number of clauses, or in other words, produced far longer utterances, remain unclear. My assumption is that the differences in the schooling systems may have contributed, as one possible factor, to this discrepancy. From the early stages of their education Polish students, contrary to Russian students, have been trained to give short clear answers and solve tests. In Poland there is no longer an emphasis on larger pieces of writing. Instead concise and informative texts are valued in the Polish schooling system. Another factor that may have partly contributed to the richness of the Russian descriptions of the presented video clips may be the fact that, due to the manner-saliency of their native language, Russian speakers tend to include more details concerning the manner of motion outside the verb. This issue will be discussed in a greater detail in a separate subsection. 6.2.3.2 Expression of Manner and Path in the Verb Tables 6.4 and 6.5 below present the most frequent motion verbs that appeared in the elicited data. Full lists of verbs are included in the Appendix. The Polish respondents produced overall 26 motion verbs with a total of 214 tokens.

178

Chapter 6

Table 6.4 The most common motion verbs appearing in the Polish data—elicitation task 2 Types of motion verbs

1.

chodzić/ iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ 2. jeździć/ jechać ‘to go in a wheeled vehicle’ 3. skakać/ skoczyć ‘to jump’ 4. latać/ lecieć ‘to fly’ 5. padać/ paść ‘to fall’ 6. pływać/ płynąć ‘to swim’ 7. (wy/prze)wracać się/ (wy/prze) wrócić się ‘to fall’ 8. uciekać/ uciec ‘to escape’ 9. biegać/ biec ‘to run’ 10. galopować ‘to gallop’ 11. wspinać się/ wspiąć się ‘to climb’

Number of tokens

Percentage Semantic component

61

29%

Manner

49

24%

Manner

16 13 9 9 8

7% 6% 4% 4% 4%

Manner Manner Path Manner Manner+Path

8 5 5 5

4% 2% 2% 2%

Path Manner Manner Manner+Path

The Russian respondents came up with 26 types of motion verbs, which were used a total of 193 times. Table 6.5 The most common motion verbs appearing in the Russian data—elicitation task 2

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Types of motion verbs

Numer of tokens

Percentage

Semantic component

hodit’/ idti ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ begat’/ bežat’ ‘to run’ katat’sja/ katit’sja ‘to go in a wheeled vehicle’, ‘to roll’ padat’/ (u)past’ ‘to fall’ plavat’ /plyt’ ‘to swim’ prygat’ /prygnut’ ‘to jump’

57

30%

Manner

20 15

10% 8%

Manner Manner

14 13 13

7% 7% 7%

Path Manner Manner

179

Elicitation Tasks

Types of motion verbs

7. 8. 9.

lazit’/ lezt’ ‘to climb’ podnimat’sja/ podnjat’sja ‘to rise’ ezdit’ /ehat’ ‘to go in a wheeled vehicle’ 10. guljat’ ‘to walk’

Numer of tokens

Percentage

Semantic component

11 9 8

6% 5% 4%

Path+Manner Path Manner

5

3%

Manner

The juxtaposition of the types and tokens of motion verbs used in books and their translations (one from Polish into Russian and one from Russian into Polish) presented in the previous chapter as well as an elicitation experiment the aim of which was to measure the lexical access to verbs of motion in the two languages discussed in the previous section pointed to the higher manner-of-motion saliency of the Russian language when compared with Polish. Figures 6.2 and 6.3 below juxtapose the percentages of verb tokens and

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Polish

Russian

Figure 6.2 Proportions of manner (black bars) and path (white bars) components in Polish and Russian motion verbs obtained in the token analysis.

180

Chapter 6

70 60 50 40

Manner verbs

30

Path verbs

20 10 0

Polish

Russian

Figure 6.3 Proportions of manner (black bars) and path (white bars) components in Polish and Russian motion verbs obtained in the type analysis.

verb types respectively included in the descriptions of spatial situations presented in the video clips. Talmy points to the lexicalization patterns of colloquial, everyday speech as the most indicative as far as the typological categorization of languages is concerned. Figure 6.2 shows a significantly higher number of tokens of path verbs used by both Polish and Russian respondents in the elicitation task than of manner verbs. Moreover, there is a statistically significant difference between the two languages in this respect (chi2=32.46, p-value < .001). To a very limited degree the results presented in Figure 6.3, which are based on the verb types analysis, also reflect this tendency. Although they are not statistically significant (chi2=0.792, p-value > .001) due to the small data sample, their similarity to the token analysis supports the claims made about language tendencies on the basis of the token analysis. When compared to the results of the analysis of narratives presented in Chapter 5, the discrepancy between the use of Polish path and manner verb tokens shown in Table 6.2 is more evident. On the grounds of Talmy’s claim that the informal language more than the language of narratives reflects the most characteristic expression of motion for a given language, we may conclude that the findings based on the present analysis are more reliable, and the difference between Polish and Russian in the use of path and manner verbs is more pronounced than was shown in the previous chapter.

Elicitation Tasks

181

The analysis of the elicitation data has revealed, to a greater extent than the study of narratives in the previous chapter, that Russian is a more manner-salient language than Polish. Russian respondents more frequently coded manner of motion by means of verbs than Polish speakers, who relatively frequently relied on path verbs. The following section will be devoted to the semantic component of manner conflated in the most frequent verbs in the elicited descriptions. 6.2.4 Description of Lexicalization Patterns Let us now proceed to a qualitative description of the manner and path components by the respondents. The discussion of the lexicalization of each semantic component within the verb will be followed by the description of the ways of rendering path and manner outside it. 6.2.4.1 Lexicalization of Manner Conflation of Manner in the Verb As Tables 6.4 and 6.5 show, in both languages semantically light verbs are the most frequently used for the description of the spatial situations presented in the short videos. Those verbs, besides motion, conflate only one more semantic component, which most commonly refers to the canonical manner of movement. In both tables the most frequently used motion verb is iść or idti ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’. Besides coding the most canonical motor movement of body parts, as a unidirectional verb it is commonly used for coding directed motion towards the Goal (see Rakhilina 2004 for the analysis of the Russian idti). Thus, a vast majority of the recorded uses of iść/ idti ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ coded the canonical way of animate motion towards a specified direction, as in (3). (3) Pies idzie z chłopcem do zoo.   [Pl] ‘A dog is going with a boy to the zoo’ In Polish and Russian the verb ‘to go’ has a weak semantic content, and it is, most commonly, used when the manner of motion is irrelevant but motion itself and the path expressed by the accompanying prefix are important, as in (4) where actually motion out of water is crucial and may be performed in various ways. In (5) again the path of motion is the most crucial information and although the verb iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ normally expresses the manner of motion, in this context this information is hardly intended since the boys actually swam to the prohibited depth.

182

Chapter 6

(4) Wszyscy bawią się w wodzie, lecz ratownik każe im wyjść (‘out-walk’). [Pl] ‘Everybody is playing in the water, but the lifeguard tells them to go out.’ (5) Chłopcy chcą wejść (‘in-walk’) na niedozwoloną głębokość (…) ‘The boys want to go into forbidden depth (…)’

[Pl]

Occasionally, the manner of motion is expressed in the main clause by means of semantically light verbs, and further specified in modifying clauses by means of more specific motion verbs, as in (6) or by adding information in using a path verb, as in (7) or a prefixed verb, as in (8). (6) Reksio skacząc idzie na spacer.  [Pl] ‘Rex skipping is going for a walk.’ (7) Reksio biegnie, podążając za strażakiem.  [Pl] ‘Rex is running, following a firefighter.’ (8) Reksio z chłopcem weszli na teren zoo, przechodząc przez bramę.  [Pl] ‘Rex went with the boy into the zoo, going through the gate.’ Typically, the manner of motion included in these motion verbs in both languages refers to the movement of body parts (e.g. biegać/ bežat’ ‘to run’ or skakać/ prygat’ ‘to jump’), vehicle (jechać/ ehat’ ‘to go in a wheeled vehicle’), or the medium of motion (pływać/ plavat’ ‘to swim’, or latać/ letat’ ‘to fly’). Nevertheless, the directionality of motion coded by the Russian unidirectional idti reported by Rakhilina (2004) does not seem to be as prominent in the Polish equivalent, which should constitute the basis for further corpus-based research. Expression of Manner Outside the Verb In Polish and Russian there are basically the same ways of coding manner outside the verb. Besides the manner component included in the verb, the manner information may be expressed by adverbials, descriptions of the internal state or physical condition of a moving entity or features of the physical setting (the ground) that could influence the manner of motion. The use of these means of expressing manner is not constrained by the lexicalization patterns of either language, and thus they are equally accessible to speakers of Polish and Russian. As mentioned above, the Polish and Russian descriptions differ considerably in length. This has been found to have no influence on the number of

Elicitation Tasks

183

types and tokens of motion verbs, although the concision of Polish utterances entailed much fewer additional means of manner description. Let us proceed first to the analysis of manner expression outside the verb and then to the quantitative assessment of this phenomenon in Polish and Russian. First, adverbials that indicate the manner of motion are the most typical ways of coding this information and in the elicited data they include such Polish expressions as w popłochu ‘in panic’, zwiewnie ‘ethereally’ and uprzejmie ‘kindly’ or the Russian words bystro ‘fast’ and veselo ‘cheerfully’, as in (9). (9) Mal’čik blondin i sobaka bystro i veselo idut i prihodjat v zoopark.  [Ru] ‘A blond boy and a dog are walking quickly and cheerfully, and are coming to the zoo.’ Adjectives are the next means of manner expression in Polish and Russian. Özçalışkan and Slobin (2003) note that the manner of motion can be inferred from the description of internal state or physical condition of the moving figure. Adjectives describing the physical or mental state of the figure which appeared in the data frequently refer to the figure’s way of moving. Our encyclopedic knowledge helps us to associate certain mental states with particular kinds of behaviour, including the manner of motion. The adjective szalony ‘crazy’ used in (10) actually refers to the dog’s behaviour and not its mental health. Thus, the description of the manner of movement is achieved via metonymy mental state for behaviour. Besides, the use of the adjective szalony ‘crazy’ is actually the only lexically available way of describing this particular manner of moving in Polish since the adverb szalenie ‘crazily’ cannot be used to describe motion. The Russian adjective važnyj ‘important’ in (11) is used to the same effect. (10) Szalony Reksio wpada do beczki.  [Pl] ‘Crazy Reksio falls into a barrel.’ (11) I tut prišel važnyj gus’ (…) [Ru] ‘And here came a pompous goose (…)’ Thus, the use of adjectives describing the figure frequently makes it possible to infer the figure’s manner of motion. Next, the description of the path and surroundings of the moving figure may also constitute an element portraying the manner of motion. To illustrate, in sentences (12) and (13), a Russian and a Polish respondent mentioned trembling of the ground to indicate how forceful the gallop was.

184

Chapter 6

(12) Sudja po zvukam i tomu, kak podprygivaet budka, mimo probegaet stado slonov (…)  [Ru] ‘Judging by the sounds and how the kennel shakes, a herd of elephants is running past.’ (13) Chłopcy przejechali konno (na jednym koniu) obok budy Reksia, wprawiając budę i Reksia w niej w ‘podskoki’.  [Pl] ‘The boys were riding a horse (one horse) past Rex’s kennel, making the kennel and Rex inside jump.’ Finally, the elicited data included a few instances of simile, the aim of which was to give a better idea how the motion was performed. For example, (14) includes a reference to the behaviour of a famous singer to describe the figure’s motion. (14) Dviženija ego pohoži na Kirkorova na koncerte.  [Ru] ‘His movements are similar to Kirkorov’s at a concert.’ Having reviewed the possible ways of expressing manner outside the verb, let us proceed to the comparison of its expression outside the verb found in the Polish and Russian data elicited in Study 2. 6.2.4.2 Coding Manner Outside the Verb—A Comparison Instances of the description of manner outside the verb by Russian respondents significantly outnumber those included in Polish narratives. While Polish speakers referred to the manner of motion only five times using the following phrases: w popłochu ‘in panic’, zwiewnie ‘ethereally’, skaczącym ruchem ‘in a jumping manner’, szalony ‘crazy’ and uprzejmie ‘kindly’, Russian speakers coded motion as many as 18 times. The lexical items and phrases which appeared in the Russian data are included in Table 6.6. On the basis of this substantial discrepancy one may conclude that the Russian speakers pay more attention to the manner dimension of motion events than the Polish respondents. The expressions referring to the manner of motion either further specify the manner of motion, in most cases, already signalled in the manner-of-motion verb, as in (15) or occasionally, they accompany a path verb. (15) Sobaka neumelo kataetsja na rolikah.  [Ru] ‘The dog is awkwardly rollerblading’

185

Elicitation Tasks Table 6.6 Semantic components of manner expressed by modifying expressions in Russian Semantic component of manner

Examples of manner modifiers

Kind of body movements

pohoži na Kirkorova na koncerte ‘similar to Kirkorov’s (movements) at a concert’, vpripryžku ‘by skipping’; bystro ‘fast’; gordelivo ‘proudly’, gordo ‘proudly’, veselo ‘cheerfully’, važnyj ‘pretentious’, ispuganno ‘with fear’, s radostnoj mordočkoj ‘with a cheerful muzzle’, osobo naglyj ‘exceptionally bold’; s pohval’nym uporstvom ‘with praiseworthy stubbornness’, neumelo ‘awkardly’, nelepo ‘in a silly way’, smešno ‘in a funny way’, neobyčnym sposobom ‘in an unusual way’, ne vpolne udačno ‘not quite skilfully’; kak Diogen v molodosti ‘like Diogenes in his youth’, bezuspešno ‘unsuccessfully’, slovno armjanskaja svad’ba ‘like the Armenian wedding’.

Velocity Figure’s attitude

Attitude towards the figure or its movement

Other

Speakers of verb-framed languages do not have the possibility to encode the manner-of-motion information in the verb, which would suggest that they more frequently than speakers of satellite-framed languages use the opportunities offered by other lexical means than verbs to convey this type of information. The comparative studies performed so far, however, suggest otherwise. Previous research on satellite- and verb-framed languages has shown that although in satellite-framed languages the manner distinctions are already made in the verb, their speakers frequently additionally specify manner by means of adverbials or gerunds. Özçalışkan and Slobin’s (2003) comparative study of lexicalization patterns of literal motion in Turkish and English has shown that speakers of satellite-framed languages still made use of lexical means of manner encoding outside the verb significantly more frequently than their verbframed counterparts. The same tendency was noted for metaphorical language as well (Özçalışkan 2004).

186

Chapter 6

Although Polish and Russian are both satellite-framed, the analyses of translated texts and elicited data has shown beyond doubt that the manner distinctions coded in Russian verbs are more fine-grained and more frequently coded than in Polish. In consequence, Russian must be categorized as a more manner-salient language or even a more satellite-framed language than Polish. Thus, my assumption is that Russian speakers influenced by the structure of their language are more sensitive to manner or more trained to code it in their speech. This explains why the Russian data are much richer in manner coding both in the verb and outside it. 6.2.4.2 Lexicalization of Path Outside the Verb Motion Into and Out of a Container The short videos shown to the respondents presented a number of situations of a figure entering or leaving various containers such as a barrel, a burrow, a kennel or a henhouse. However, not all of them were coded by the respondents as entering or leaving a container since some descriptions concentrated on other aspects of the presented episodes. To illustrate, the motion situation of firefighters jumping into a barrel was frequently described as escaping, hiding or avoiding a crash with a running dog. The fact that in both languages the same situation is rendered either by means of motion verbs prefixed by w-/v- (e.g., (16)) or alternatively the verb ‘to hide’, as in (17) and (18), supports the inference for this prefix, discussed in Chapter 4. The inference may be explained by the fact that entering a container results in the figure’s leaving the conceptualizer’s visual field and becoming (e.g., visually) inaccessible. (16) Reksio usiadł na gaśnicy i zaczął zbliżać się w kierunku dwóch strażaków, którzy wskoczyli do beczki (…)  [Pl] ‘Rex sat on the fire extinguisher and began to approach two firefighters, who in-jumped into a barrel (…) (17) Reksio zbliża się do policjantów. Oni chowają się do beczki.  [Pl] ‘Rex is approaching the policemen. They are hiding in the barrel.’ (18) Dva rabočih prjačutsja ot nego v bočku s vodoj.  [Ru] ‘Two workers are hiding from him in a barrel of water.’ Similarly, motion verbs prefixed wy-/vy- code situations of the figure leaving a container, as a result of which they become accessible to the conceptualizer. The use of the word ‘to appear’ interchangeably with motion verbs prefixed by wy-/ vy- in both languages for coding the same situations underpins this conclusion.

187

Elicitation Tasks

In order to see what strategies the respondents used for the description of specific motion events, let us move on to two episodes presenting the same situations of entering a container in both languages. One of them depicts two firefighters moving into a barrel and the other presents a fox moving into a barrow. Table 6.7 shows the percentages of unprefixed motion verbs, and specific prefixes accompanying motion verbs used in the description of inward motion in the two motion situations. Table 6.7 Inward motion: prefixes used in Polish and Russian descriptions

unprefixed verbs w-/v-

Polish

Russian

0% 100%

40% 60%

The analysis of the data describing inward motion reveals contrasting tendencies in the two languages concerning the use of unprefixed determined verbs of motion. In the Russian data, the situation of entering or leaving a container is described in 40% of cases by means of unprefixed unidirectional motion verbs which introduce the manner of motion and as well as the direction of movement, as exemplified in (19) and (20). (19) (…) odin iz nih lezet v bočku s vodoj (…)  [Ru] ‘one of them is climbing into a barrel with water’ (20) Dva mužika prygnuli v bočku.  [Ru] ‘Two men jumped into the barrel’ The same tendency towards frequent coding of inward motion by means of unprefixed verbs has been noted for another Slavic language, namely Czech, by Shull (2003). However, the Polish data are considerably different in this respect. The data show that the Polish respondents never use the strategy of rendering spatial situations involving crossing the boundary of a container by means of unprefixed unidirectional verbs. All Polish motion verbs used for this purpose were prefixed by w-, as exemplified in (21) and (22). (21) Strażacy w popłochu uciekają przed goniącym ich Reksiem i wskakują do beczki.  [Pl]

188

Chapter 6

‘Firefighters in panic flee from Rex who is chasing them and jump into the barrel’

(22) Lis z workiem wskoczył do nory.  [Pl] ‘A fox with a bag jumped into the burrow.’ Thus, when referring to the relation of entering a physical container, the Polish respondents always used motion verbs prefixed by w- (100%) while the Russian responses included verbs prefixed by v- (60%) and unprefixed unidirectional verbs (40%). However, the analysis of the description of an episode presenting a boy walking into the water points at yet one more difference in the lexicalization of inward motion between the two languages. In both languages water (in a lake) was conceptualized as a container. However, while in Polish the situation was invariably rendered by means of motion verbs prefixed by w-, the Russian respondents made a distinction between movement into a container by means of the prefix v- and movement (too) deep into a container using the prefix za-. This distinction was not made by Polish speakers since the Polish language does not offer a prefix that would code the relation of entering deeply into a container. Sentence (23) exemplifies how the Russian respondents described excessive (e.g., forbidden or dangerous) inward motion by means of the prefix za-. (23) (…) zalez v vodu sam i poterjal plavki (…)  [Ru] ‘(…) (he) far-went into the water and lost his swimming trunks (…)’ The sense of the Russian prefix za- connected with a long, or even excessively long, path is also present in sentences like (24), which do not code motion into a container. On the other hand, Polish respondents in this particular case, by choosing the prefix wy-, conceptualize leaving the safe or permitted area as exiting a container, as exemplified in (25). (24) Odin iz rebjat zaplyvaet za bujek.  [Ru] ‘One of the children is swimming beyond a buoy’ (25) Chłopcy wypływają zbyt daleko i ratownik ostrzegł ich gwizdkiem. [Pl] ‘The boys are swimming too far and a lifeguard warned them with a whistle.’ As for leaving the container, in the descriptions of the episodes the respondents of both groups predominantly relied on the prefixes wy/ vy- in this

189

Elicitation Tasks

respect, albeit the use of unprefixed motion verbs in the Russian data was three times more frequent than in the Polish utterances. The results are shown in Table 6.8. Table 6.8 Outward motion: prefixes used in Polish and Russian descriptions

unprefixed verbs wy-/vy-

Polish

Russian

6% 94%

18% 82%

The examples of unprefixed motion verbs include such sentences as (26) in Polish or (27) in Russian. (26) Strażak skacze z dzieckiem z okna i razem lądują na trampolinie. [Pl] ‘A firefighter is jumping from a window with a child and they are landing on the trampoline.’ (27) Požarnyj spasaet ryžego rebenka, prygaet s nim sverhu vniz.  [Ru] ‘A firefighter rescues a redheaded child jumping down with him.’ The high frequency of the prefixes wy-/vy- noted in the Polish and Russian data may have been caused to a large extent by an inference for this prefix described in the previous chapter connected with the appearance of a figure. In both languages, as already noted, the prefixes wy-/vy- code the relation of a figure entering the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus. The second factor contributing to the frequent use of these prefixes is the circumstance that, contrary to the use of w-/v- discussed earlier, they usually appear at the beginning of a narrative and code the first subtrajectory of a more complex path. As already discussed, in both languages, this is a sequence of motion verbs accompanied by various prefixes that typically code complex trajectories and not a series of prepositional phrases stacked together, as shown by examples from the elicited data in (28) and (29). (28) Reksio wyszedł z budy, ziewnął, przeciągnął się i poszedł ulicą.  [Pl] ‘Rex went out of his kennel, yawned, stretched, and went down the street.’

190

Chapter 6

(29) Pes vyšel iz budki, zevnul, pobežal guljat’.  [Ru] ‘The dog came out of the booth, yawned, ran off for a walk.’ The above sentences indicate that Polish and Russian are different from English as far as rendering complex paths is concerned and are closer to verbframed languages in this respect. To break a complex trajectory into simpler sub-trajectories, there is a need for the use of a number of prefixed motion verbs. This form of path description has been noted for verb-framed languages since the speakers of verb-framed languages must encode many components of an extended trajectory in separate verbs (Slobin 1997: 463). To summarize, besides the most obvious use of coding the relation of movement into and out of a container, the prefixes w-/v- and wy-/ vy- have a number of other senses that motivate the frequency of their use. Depending on the context, they code the relations of entering and leaving the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus. More specifically, w-/ v- are frequently used for expressing hiding behind objects and wy-/ vy- exiting from behind them. Finally, the prefixes wy-/ vy- are commonly the first component of the description of complex trajectories. Incidentally, both prefixes can designate upward movement. These senses will , however, be taken up for discussion at a later point. Deictic Motion As discussed in Section 3.4.3, the prefix po- prototypically codes the relation of deictic motion away from the speaker and profiles the initial part of the trajectory. Let us also recall that although the prefix codes the deictic Source of motion with the initial part of the trajectory, motion events described by means of verbs prefixed by po- are usually Goal-oriented (cf. Chapter 3 for the discussion of an image schematic approach to spatial senses of prefixes). In the episodes shown to the respondents there was a spatial situation involving two figures (a dog and a boy) moving away from the observer and finally entering a container (the zoo). Both Polish and Russian respondents in the great majority of cases described it using motion verbs prefixed by the deictic po-. Sentences (30) and (31) are typical examples of the description of motion away from the speaker. (30) Pies poszedł do zoo z chłopcem.  [Pl] ‘The dog went to the zoo with the boy.’ (31) Pes s mal’čikom-blondinom pošel v zoopark.  [Ru] ‘The dog with a boy—the blond went to the zoo.’

Elicitation Tasks

191

However, in the descriptions of other episodes, the prefix po- was frequently used not prototypically, namely without the deictic component. On many occasions it coded initiating a new trajectory or resuming motion after a break (e.g., after a fall), as in (32). Moreover, as Shull (2003: 149) rightly notes, a new trajectory may not result from the start of motion but also from a change of terrain or manner or direction of motion. In such uses of the prefix, profiling the initial part of the trajectory is the primary sense of the prefix, which is devoid of deictic information, as confirmed by the examples from the Russian data below. (32) Ne vpolne udačno, no važno, čto vstal i poehal dal’še.  [Ru] ‘Not entirely successfully, but it is important that (he) stood up and went further.’ (33) Spasatel’ posvistel i mal’čik poplyl obratno.  [Ru] ‘The lifeguard whistled, and the boy swam back.’ What is more, the general function of prefixed motion verbs is to break down larger motion events into subevents in order to further refine the description of the specific trajectories, as is exemplified in (34). (34) Reksio wyszedł z budy, rozejrzał się around, po czym poszedł na kwadrat do ziomeczków.  [Pl] ‘Rex went out of his kennel, he looked around, and then went to the square to his friends.’ In Russian, although they typically profile the initial part of the path, motion verbs prefixed by po-, may also be Goal-oriented. In certain contexts, the choice between the prefixes po- and u- depends on whether the speaker knows the direction of the figure’s movement or not. Let us recall, that one of the inferences of the Russian prefix po- is the assumption that the figure has an intention of reaching the goal. Thus, all Russian instances of prefixation of verbs coding Goal-oriented motion included the prefix po-, not u-, as in (35). (35) Mal’čik pošel s sobakoj v zoopark.  [Ru] ‘The boy went with the dog to the zoo.’ On the other hand, motion verbs prefixed by u- frequently denoted motion in a direction unknown to the speaker without specifying the Goal of motion, as illustrated by (36) and (37).

192

Chapter 6

(36) On pytaetsja dognat’ sobaku, kotoraja ubegaet ot nego po ètoj že lestnice.  [Ru] ‘He is trying to catch up with the dog that runs away from him on the same ladder.’ (37) Gusjata bryzgajut iz kormuški na vzroslogo gusja i ubegajut.  [Ru] ‘Goslings splash an adult goose with water from the feeders and run away.’ In Polish motion away from the deictic centre, towards a Goal either known or unknown to the speaker, is lexicalized by means of po-, as in (38). This sentence is an example of motion in an unknown direction out of the conceptualizer’s region of interactive focus, which is stressed by the use of the word gdzieś ‘somewhere’. (38) Reksio wyszedł z budy i gdzieś pobiegł.  [Pl] ‘Rex went out of his kennel and ran somewhere’ Thus, depending on the construal of a given situation, in particular the perspective assumed by the conceptualizer, the same spatial situation may be rendered by means of various prefixes. Let us now, instead of focusing on the way a single prefix is used for coding motion, concentrate on the various construals of one specific motion event, namely a situation of a boy and a dog entering a zoo. Table 6.9 shows the percentages of the prefixes appearing in Polish and Russian descriptions of this episode as well as the percentage of unprefixed unidirectional verbs. Table 6.9 Going towards and entering the zoo: prefixes used in Polish and Russian descriptions

unprefixed verbs po-/ poprzy-/ priw-/v-

Polish

Russian

41% 24% 11% 24%

47% 37% 1% 5%

As the above table shows, coding the deictic motion away from the speaker towards a known goal is most frequently performed by means of the prefix

Elicitation Tasks

193

po- in both languages. In the discussed episode the respondents did not see the initiation of movement, and therefore the inference of deictic motion away from the speaker was the motivation for the use of the prefix po- in both languages. However, as Table 6.9 shows, the use of unprefixed unidirectional verbs is the most frequent strategy for rendering the discussed spatial situation in both sets of the elicited data. Although the analysis of the narration of other motion situations also indicates that the first clauses in the description of motion events by both Polish and Russian respondents contain unprefixed unidirectional forms, unprefixed motion verbs most commonly ‘compete’ with verbs prefixed by po-, and their primary function is to indicate the basic manner and the direction of motion. The reason for this is (as discussed in Chapter 3) that Polish and Russian imperfective unidirectional verbs contain highly schematic information about directed motion. The po- is the only prefix that does not carry any information about the path and in this respect is very close to unprefixed motion verbs. Thus, when added to verbs of motion, it does not impose its own path information on a given verb as other prefixes do. It solely adds deictic character to the movement’s source. This explains why in both sets of narratives, the unprefixed unidirectional verbs and those prefixed by po- are used in the same contexts for describing the same kinds of motion situations. Another reason why unprefixed unidirectional verbs are so commonly used instead of verbs prefixed by po- is the fact that those prefixed motion verbs do not have imperfective forms (cf. Chapter 3), which is why they cannot be used in the present tense, and in such contexts they are normally replaced by their unprefixed counterparts. Thus, respondents who formulated their descriptions in the present tense were obliged to use unprefixed verbs. The same tendency in Russian and Czech speakers for starting narratives with unprefixed unidirectional verbs of motion was noted by Shull (2003: 91), who states that in this way respondents using these two Slavic languages initiated their narratives by making “a generalized statement of what is happening at the moment without initially treating the motion as defining a specific trajectory in relation to a source or goal”. As the results presented in Table 6.9 indicate, the tendency to start a narrative with unprefixed unidirectional verbs of motion is equally strong in Polish and Russian. 41% of the Polish and 47% of the Russian respondents began their narratives with such sentences, as exemplfied in (39) and (40). (39) Reksio idzie z chłopczykiem na wycieczkę do zoo.  [Pl] ‘Rex is going with a boy for a trip to the zoo.

194

Chapter 6

(40) Mal’čik s sobakoj idut v zoopark.  [Ru] ‘A boy with a dog are going to the zoo.’ By way of comparison, we note that, as Tables 6.7 and 6.8 show, unprefixed motion verbs are much less frequently used for coding the relations of motion into and out of a container than motion verbs prefixed by w-/ v- and wy-/ vy-. As pointed out in the discussion of the image schematic approach to prefixes, w-/v- and wy-/ vy- impose their schematic path on the prefixed verbs, which is why unprefixed unidirectional verbs and verbs prefixed by w-/ v- and wy-/ vycannot be used interchangeably. Finally, let us proceed to the prefixes przy-/ pri-, which are primarily used to code the deictic relation of approaching the speaker or other deictic centre. The prefixes code the final part of the trajectory and arriving at the deictic goal. In the elicited descriptions of motion events there were no instances where the respondents would treat their own vantage point as the deictic centre. Instead it was transferred to the place where the conceptualizer’s attention focused, as illustrated in (41). (41) Kaczki piją wodę z koryta. Przychodzi kaczor, przegania je i zaczyna się kąpać w korycie. [Pl] ‘Ducks are drinking water from a trough. A drake comes, chases them and begins to bathe in the trough.’ The inference of the prefix przy- connected with the figure’s entering the conceptualizer’s interactive focus becomes clear when we compare this sentence with (42). The word pojawia się ‘appears’ is used in the same context as the prefixed motion verb przychodzi ‘comes’ and basically carries the same meaning. (42) Dwie kaczki piją wodę z poidła, pojawiła się inna kaczka, przegoniła kaczki, aby zażyć kąpieli w poidle. [Pl] ‘Two ducks are drinking water from a drinking trough, another duck appears and chases ducks to swim in the drinking trough.’ Finally, in none of the Russian descriptions of the spatial situations of going and entering the zoo is the prefix u- used, probably because the goal is known and visible on the screen.

Elicitation Tasks

195

6.2.4.2.3 Motion Across a Surface I shall now briefly refer to the use of the prze-/ pro- prefixes, which were not well represented in the elicited data, probably because the presented stimuli did not contain spatial situations eliciting this particular lexical item. As discussed in Section 3.4.2, in the Polish language the prefix prze- codes the figure’s motion across a surface. Although Russian makes a systematic distinction between two kinds motion across a surface by means of the prefixes pro- and pere-, the Russian respondents only used the prefix pro- in the elicited data. As discussed in Chapter 3, the prefixes prze-/ pro- may code proximity relations between the figure and the ground (as in (43)), as well as contact relations (as in (44)). (43) Reksio przejechał na gaśnicy zmuszając strażaków do ukrycia się w beczce z wodą. ‘Rex prze-went on the fire extinguisher making the firefighters hide in a barrel with water.’ [Pl] (44) Reksio z chłopcem weszli na teren zoo, przechodząc przez bramę. ‘Rex went with the boy into the zoo, going through the gate.’

[Pl]

The last type of the direction of motion to be discussed here is that along the vertical scale. Vertical Motion As already noted in the discussion of the lexicalization patterns of vertical motion presented in Chapter 5, the path verbs that are most frequently used in both languages to code vertical motion are wznosić się ‘to rise’, podnimat’sja ‘to rise’ and padać ‘to fall’, padat’ ‘to fall’. Let us see how motion along the vertical scale is rendered in the elicitation data. We have noted that the primary reason for the tendency of coding vertical relations by means of path verbs is the fossilization of prefix and verb combinations used for coding verticality. As a result, the verbs that were created in this process include the semantic components of both manner and path, or have become entirely path verbs. The prefixed verbs that have undergone the fossilization process are primarily those that are used for the description of vertical relations since the possible directions of vertical movement are limited, which entails high frequency of use. Moreover, this type of motion, as shown in Chapter 5 this type of motion is not frequently coded (only 6% of the total instances of the description of motion events found in the narratives).

196

Chapter 6

The tendency to describe vertical motion by means of path verbs rather than by manner verbs is found in both languages, as in (45) and (46). (45) Sobaka kataetsja na rolikah i padaet.  [Ru] ‘The dog is going on roller skates and falls.’ (46) Reksio i strażak wspinają się po drabinie.  [Pl] ‘Rex and a firefighter are climbing a ladder.’ In Polish the spatial situation of upward movement is mainly coded by the verbs piąć się and (w)drapywać. Besides the information about the movement of body parts these verbs also conflate the semantic component of the upward direction. Semantically less complex (first-tier) verbs (i.e., iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ and biec ‘to run’) appeared occasionally, and when they were used the information about the upward path needed to be inferred from the context, and more specifically from the canonical position of the ground (e.g. a ladder), as in (47) or (48). (47) Reksio wchodzi po drabinie za strażakiem. [Pl] ‘Rex is going up a ladder following a firefighter’ (48) Reksio biegnie, podąża za strażakiem. Znajduje się na drabinie.[Pl] ‘Rex is running, following a firefighter. He is on a ladder.’ If the manner of motion is coded, the information about the upward path is generally not expressed, which is caused by the constraints of the language since in Polish the verb commonly used in this situation either codes upward movement or specific manner of motion. The respondent’s dilemma as to which semantic element needs to be expressed is evident in Sentence (49). (49) Reksio wspina się po drabinie, raczej biegnie po drabinie.[Pl] ‘Rex is climbing a ladder, rather running on the ladder.’ 6.3 Conclusions The findings of the two experimental studies discussed in the present chapter indicate that Russian is a more manner-salient language, or in other words a more satellite-framed one. First of all, the study of the access to the mental lexicon of motion verbs possessed by Polish and Russian speakers, although comparable in size, has shown that Russian motion verbs retrieved from

Elicitation Tasks

197

memory within a two-minute time span code the manner of motion more frequently than a corresponding set of Polish verbs. This finding, similarly to the results of the study of translated texts discussed in Chapter 5, suggests that Russian speakers have a greater access to the mental lexicon of manner verbs and, by the same token, the speakers of Polish to the lexicon of motion verbs of path. The differences in the the mental lexicons of Polish and Russian speakers have been explained by the varying characteristics of their native languages with respect to the tendency to code the manner and path components in the motion verbs. Moreover, the fact that the Russian speakers came up with a greater number of manner verbs in the first elicitation tasks confirms Slobin’s (1996a) “thinking for speaking” hypothesis, which states that speaking a given language influences the thought processes of its speakers at the time of using the language. The conclusion that Russian is a more manner-salient language has also been confirmed by the data coming from the second elicitation task, in which the respondents were asked to describe motion situations. Here the Russian respondents made use of a higher number of manner verbs. Furthermore, when describing the presented video clips the Russian speakers, in spite of the fact that they more frequently than their Polish counterparts coded the manner of motion in the verb, referred to the manner of motion peripherally (i.e., outside the verb) three times more often than the Polish respondents. This finding also suggests a higher manner-saliency in the Russian language since the tendency frequently to code the manner of motion peripherally has been noted for satellite-framed languages (Özçalışkan and Slobin 2003), in which much attention is paid to manner distinctions, both in and outside the verb. Although the two languages under study are closely related and both are satellite-framed, the two studies carried out with Polish and Russian respondents pointed to a statistically significantly lower manner-saliency in the motion domain indicated by the linguistic behaviour of the Polish respondents, when compared with the Russian respondents. It is noteworthy that the linguistic data discussed in the present chapter, which come from elicitation tasks, provide additional evidence for the greater manner-saliency of the Russian language found in the previous chapter devoted to the analysis of translated narratives. However, on the basis of Talmy’s (1985) claim already discussed in the theoretical section of the present chapter stating that colloquial language exhibits the most characteristic expression of motion in a language, the results of the analysis of elicitation data are treated as the most indicative. Consequently, these results more adequately describe a language’s characteristic lexicalization patterns. What is more, everyday colloquial language is, to a large extent, poorer in loan words which makes this kind of data particularly valuable for the study of typical lexicalization patterns.

Chapter 7

Conclusions and General Discussion The aim of this work has been to provide an empirical, usage-based account and discussion of the ways in which motion events are described in Polish, contrasting Polish usage with that of Russian. The chief focus has been on typological issues in the expression of motion events, mainly in the light of Talmy’s (2000b) theory of motion event. The study has been based on data derived from a wide variety of sources, namely modern novels, translated texts and elicitation tasks. The assumption is that corpus-based analysis of two kinds of data (i.e., selected descriptions of motion verbs in narrative fiction and compared translations of the same texts) and experimentation can function as complementary research methods. On this basis the study has demonstrated that, although traditionally classified as a typically satellite-framed language, Polish, besides coding the manner of motion in the verb, also uses verb-framed typological patterns to express motion. This means that, more frequently than indicated by existing typologies, it is the verb that conflates the path while the manner of motion, if coded, is expressed peripherally. Moreover, some manner-of-motion verbs have been shown to be so semantically bleached that in many contexts they do not seem to express the manner component, which needs to be added peripherally. In other words, this study suggests that in Polish there are patterns of lexicalization of motion unaccounted for by the current typological distinctions classifying the language as satellite-framed. Moreover, when contrasted, the Polish language has turned out to be less manner-salient than Russian, both as regards the expression of manner in the main verb and when the peripheral description of manner in an adjunct is taken into account. The speakers’ readiness to express manner outside the verb has mainly been noted in the elicitation task (see Elicitation Study 2). We note that on the basis of a cognitive-linguistic usage-based approach to meaning, the results of spontaneous speech are considered to be the most valuable basis for linguistic generalizations since they most reliably reflect existing language tendencies. The analysis of the Polish and Russian utterances has revealed more frequent peripheral manner coding in Russian when compared with Polish. What is more, two important findings of the study need to be stressed here. First of all, it is the lexicalization pattern of vertical motion that most vividly displays the verb-framed typological pattern for expressing motion in the two

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���8 | doi ��.��63/9789004360358_009

Conclusions And General Discussion

199

languages under study. Secondly, a diachronic analysis of a number of Polish verbs of motion indicates the language’s gradual shift towards the verb-framed pole. In other words, Polish has become less and less manner-salient. This change becomes particularly evident when motion verbs coding verticality are examined. A third important contribution made by this book is that it provides evidence that the expression of manner in Polish relies, to a large extent, on the contextual distribution of motion information, and in particular on the encyclopaedic knowledge of its speakers. This concerns, for example, moving figures, their habitual manners of motion or the ground along with the conditions for motion it provides. The knowledge also includes any inferential information that may be entailed by the use of locative terms. The role of inferences appears most vividly from the analysis of Polish and Russian verbal prefixes accompanying verbs of motion (see Chapter 6). Overall, this study has shown the complexity of the ways in which motion is encoded in Polish as well as in Russian. In the light of the data presented, it may be concluded that neither Talmy’s (1985, 2000b) typology nor the mannersaliency cline proposed by Slobin (2004) are able to make accurate predictions for the intricacies found in language patterns for the expression of motion. Nevertheless, these typologies have proved to be valuable since they have triggered more comprehensive studies and provided tools needed for cross-linguistic comparison. Before proceeding to the final summary of my research, I need first to refer to the aims of the study enumerated in the Introduction. i.

The analysis of the path and manner information in the descriptions of motion events in Polish has revealed a number of strategies for rendering path and manner information. The predominant strategies, namely the use of the most frequent motion verbs iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ and jechać ‘to move by means of a vehicle’, render semantically bleached information concerning the manner of motion. Moreover, the frequent use of path verbs indicates that stating that Polish is a satellite-framed framed language gives a too simplistic picture of the lexicalization of motion in this language. The typological dichotomy outlined by Talmy (2000a) paves the way to many linguistic studies, but at the same time it may benefit from intra-typological research like that presented in this book.

ii.

In both Russian and Polish the most frequent semantic components conflated in motion verbs are those referring to the movement of body parts. Nevertheless, the Russian language tends to render the manner-of-motion

200

Chapter 7

in a more fine-grained fashion, which is revealed both in the number of types and frequencies of use of manner verbs. On this basis Russian has been classified as more satellite-framed or more manner-salient than Polish. iii. Although each of the three parts of the analysis presented in this book was carried out by means of a different method, the results obtained in each case have revealed the same cognitive processes motivating the use of locative terms in the lexicalization patterns analysed. First of all, in both languages the high percentage of deictic uses of motion verbs pointed to the speakers’ strong egocentric bias since frequently it was the speaker’s vantage point that was taken as a reference point in respect of which motion was conceptualized. Moreover, the three kinds of investigation unquestionably revealed a strong goal bias, which is the natural human tendency to focus on and, in consequence, linguistically code the goal of motion. This tendency has been noted both in the analysis of path verbs in the two languages as well as the study of verbal prefixes. Furthermore the goal bias coincides with human sensitivity to containment relations. This is indicated by the high number of locative terms denoting motion towards a goal that is (or is conceptualized as) a container. What is more, our analysis has revealed attentional patterns involved in the conceptualization of translational motion. There are two major types of perspectival modes called for by the lexicalization patterns of ablative motion, namely the synoptic and the sequential (see Section 1.5). In this respect, Lindner’s notion of the region of interactive focus (1983) proved indispensable when seeking to account for the type of attention focused on the moving figure: on one hand, when the figure is within and, on the other, outside this region. Here the difference between Polish and Russian emerges from the fact that while Polish lexical means do not allow for distinguishing between these two relations, the semantics of the two Russian prefixes po- and u- enable its speakers to make relatively systematic distinctions in this respect. Finally, in each part of the present study a specific speaker’s assessment of the lexicalized motion has been distinguished as a manner category conflated in a number of selected verbs. By revealing the speaker’s attitude towards the described motion situation, the speaker, although offstage and unprofiled, becomes to some degree objectified. To be more specific, the negative (much less frequently the positive) charge is more often assigned to either the goal of motion, the figure itself or to the manner of performing the described motion. The objectification of the speaker has not been distinguished in the categorizations

Conclusions And General Discussion

201

of the manner of motion in previous studies of motion verbs. This should suggest that it is a characteristic of Slavic languages, which are outstandingly rich in this particular kind of manner when compared with such extensively studied satellite-framed language as English. iv. Polish and Russian are so closely related that probably it would be extremely difficult to indicate experimentally any considerable influence from the lexicalization patterns of these languages on the perceptual and attentional biases of their speakers. However, on the basis of the results of Elicitation Study 1 (see Chapter 6), it may be concluded that due to the more fine-grained distinctions of the manner of motion coded in Russian verbs, speakers of this language have easier access to the mental lexicon of these verbs. Moreover, as far as attentional biases are concerned, the fact that Russian makes a lexical distinction between the figure’s motion within and outside the region of interactive focus (see Chapter 3) may cause its speakers to pay closer attention to this distinction than is the case for speakers of Polish. However, whether this is so or not would require further research based on well designed experiments. Two lines for further research into spatial terms in general, and motion verbs in particular emerge. First of all, the task for the future is to test out nontranslational types of motion. The study of fictive, caused motion or metaphorical motion would give a full picture of space lexicalization in Polish and perhaps also contribute to the understanding of the place of Polish on the manner-saliency continuum in relation to other languages. Secondly, the underrepresented lexicalization of vertical motion in the previous linguistic studies calls for further investigation of this domain since the results of the present study suggest that the patterns for coding motion along the vertical scale differ considerably from those that describe horizontal motion indicating a more rapid shift of these patterns towards the verb-framed pole than those for coding horizontal relations.

Appendix

Chapter 4

List of scrutinized Polish novels, and abbreviations used in the book Czubaj, Mariusz and Marek Krajewski. Róże cmentarne [Czub] Ćwirlej, Jan. Ręczna robota [Ćwir] Dębski, Łukasz. Café Szafe [DębŁ] Dębski, Rafał. Labirynt von Brauna [DębR] Krajewski, Marek. Koniec świata w Breslau [Kraj] Orbitowski, Łukasz. Wigilijne psy [Orb] Pilipiuk, Andrzej. Czerwona gorączka [Pil] Szymiczkowa, Maryla. Tajemnica domu Helców [Szym] Wroński, Marcin. Officium secretum: pies pański [Wro] Zagańczyk, Mieszko. Czarna ikona [Zag]

Table 4.1

Types and tokens of the most frequent verbs in the analysed data

Verb type

1. chodzić/ iść ‘to move on foot’, ‘to walk’ 2. jeździć/ jechać ‘to go in a wheeled vehicle’ 3. ruszać/ ruszyć ‘to start moving’ 4. wracać/ wrócić ‘to return’ 5. skakać/ skoczyć ‘to jump’ 6. padać/ paść ‘to fall’ 7. biegać/ biec ‘to run’ 8. skręcać/ skręcić ‘to turn’ 9. toczyć się ‘to roll’ 10. sunąć ‘to glide’, ‘to slide’ 11. latać/ lecieć ‘to fly’, ‘to move quickly’ 12. uciekać/ uciec ‘to escape’ 13. cofać się/ cofnąć się ‘to move back’ 14. pływać/ płynąć ‘to swim’, ‘to go by ship, boat’

Number of Percentage Semantic tokens component

187 64

37% 13%

Manner Manner

28 23 19 19 14 12 10 9 9 7 7 7

6% 5% 4% 4% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1%

Path Path Manner Path Manner Path Manner Manner Manner Path Path Manner

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���8 | doi ��.��63/9789004360358_010

204

Appendix

Table 4.1

15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46.

Types and tokens of the most frequent verbs in the analysed data (cont.)

Verb type

Number of Percentage Semantic tokens component

zbliżać się/ zbliżyć się ‘to approach’ łazić ‘to creep’ docierać/ dotrzeć ‘to reach’ przybywać/ przybyć ‘to arrive’ pędzić ‘to speed’ unosić się/ unieść się ‘to carry oneself’ piąć się ‘to climb’ mknąć ‘to rush’ kroczyć ‘to stride’ wlec się ‘to drag oneself’ rzucać się/ rzucić się ‘to dash’ drapać się ‘to climb’, ‘to scramble’ wędrować ‘to wander’ krążyć ‘to circle’ runąć ‘to fall forcefully’ ślizgać się/ śliznąć się ‘to glide’ pętać się ‘to hang around’ ciec ‘to flow’, ‘to stream’ człapać ‘to shuffle’ podążać/ podążyć ‘to direct oneself to’ dryfować ‘to drift’ udawać się/ udać się ‘to go to’ lać się ‘to flow’ snuć się ‘to wander about’ pruć ‘to speed’ spierdalać/ spierdolić ‘vulgar to escape quickly’ wtargnąć ‘to burst into’ pryskać/ prysnąć ‘inf. to fleed, to escape quickly’ nurzać się ‘to wallow’ włóczyć się ‘to rove’ zrywać się/ zerwać się ‘to leap up’ dźwigać się/ dźwignąć się ‘to rise with difficulty’

5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1

1%