Scribd
Upload
15 views4 pages

Vietnamese Spatial Situation Constructions

This paper analyzes spatial situation constructions in Vietnamese, focusing on motion events and their typological characteristics as proposed by Talmy and Slobin. It finds that Vietnamese exhibits traits of both satellite-framed and verb-framed languages, encoding complex motion events through serial verb constructions. The study argues that certain non-dynamic spatial words should be classified as prepositions, contributing to the understanding of Vietnamese as an equipollently-framed language.

Uploaded by

Thanh Bình Lê
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
15 views4 pages

Vietnamese Spatial Situation Constructions

This paper analyzes spatial situation constructions in Vietnamese, focusing on motion events and their typological characteristics as proposed by Talmy and Slobin. It finds that Vietnamese exhibits traits of both satellite-framed and verb-framed languages, encoding complex motion events through serial verb constructions. The study argues that certain non-dynamic spatial words should be classified as prepositions, contributing to the understanding of Vietnamese as an equipollently-framed language.

Uploaded by

Thanh Bình Lê
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

CONSTRUCTIONS OF SPATIAL SITUATIONS IN VIETNAMESE

Hien Pham

Abstract: This paper investigates constructions which express spatial situations –


location and motion – in Vietnamese. The main aim is to achieve an understanding of
Vietnamese language specific typology of motion events in the sense of Talmy (1985)
and Slobin (2004). Three types of linguistic typology of motion events which are
proposed by Talmy with verb–framed languages and satellite–framed languages and by
Slobin with equipollently–framed languages have been examined with details using
lexical representation and predicate-argument structure approaches.

Motion events, defined as events in which an entity moves from one place to
another, are one of the earliest, most basic and most pervasive experiences in our lives.
Spatial situations, which include both location and motion, are fundamental to our
common experience. The language of space is central to grammar, e.g., spatial deixis in
pronouns and adverbs, spatial adpositions, and verbs of location, motion, contact,
application and removal. Linguistic expressions referring to relative spatial situations are
semantically and syntactically complex. Almost all of the important analytical issues in
verbal semantics start with spatial predicates of various classes. Thus a perceptive
analysis of the verbal semantics of spatial situations crosslinguistically will go a
considerable way towards an adequate model of verbal semantics.

By applying the frame of linguistic typology of motion events developed by Talmy


(1985, 2000) and others to investigate motion constructions, which pair form and
meaning, to an analysis of Vietnamese data, we see that Vietnamese exhibits
characteristics that have been associated with both satellite-framed languages such as
English and verb-framed languages such as Spanish (Talmy, 1985, 2000). Vietnamese
differs from Spanish, but patterns with English because it uses a rich range of motion
verbs (mainly manner–of–motion verbs coupled with another word which expresses
‘path’). However, Vietnamese tends to encode a complex motion event into multiple
verbal components forming serial verb constructions. On the other hand, Vietnamese

1
differs from English, but patterns with Spanish, in the light references to ground elements
and relatively rich descriptions of the physical settings in which movement takes place.
As a whole, the regular patterns of motion event expressions are consistent with the
characterization of Vietnamese as belonging to the class of equipollently-framed
languages (Slobin, 2004). However, there is a category of non-dynamic spatial words
whose syntactic category affiliation has been much debated. These words typically follow
the verb or verbal complex. This paper argues that these words are neither nouns nor
verbs but belong to the class of preposition.

References

Blake, B. J. (1994). Case. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.


Clark, M. (1978). Coverbs and case in Vietnamese. Canberra: The Australian National
University.
Comrie, B. (1976). Aspect: an introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related
problems. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Croft, W. (1991). Syntactic categories and grammatical relations: the cognitive
organization of information. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Fillmore, C. J. (1977). The case for case reopened. In P. Cole & J. M. Sadock (Eds.),
Grammatical relations (pp. 59-81). New York; London: Academic Press.
Fillmore, C. J., & Kay, P. (1993). Construction [Link] manuscript,
Berkeley: University of California.
Foley, W. A., & Van Valin, R. D. (1984). Functional syntax and universal grammar.
Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University.
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: a construction grammar approach to argument
structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2003). Constructions: a new theoretical approach to language. Trends in
Cognitive Sciences, 7(5), 219-224.
Grammont, M., & Lê, Q. T. (1911-1912). Études sur la langue annamite. Paris: MSL
XVII.
Gruber, J. S. (1976). Lexical structures in syntax and semantics. Amsterdam: North-
Holland.
Landau, B., & Zukowski, A. (2003). Objects, motions, and paths: Spatial language in
children with Williams Syndrome. Developmental neuropsychology, 23, (1&2),
105-137.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoritical prerequisites
(Vol. 1). Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.

2
Langacker, R. W. (1991). Foundations of cognitive grammar: Descriptive Application
(Vol. 2). Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
Laughren, M. (1988). Toward a lexical representation of Warlpiri verbs. In W. Wilkins
(Ed.), Syntax and semantics: Thematic Relations (Vol. 21, pp. 215-242). New
York: Academic Press.
Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: the acquisition of argument structure.
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Rappaport, M., Laughren, M., & Levin, B. (1987). Levels of lexical representation.
Cambridge, Mass.: Center for Cognitive Science, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
Slobin, D. I. (1996). Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In M.
Shibatani & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical constructions: their form and
meaning (pp. 195-219). Oxford [England]: New York: Clarendon Press; Oxford
University Press.
Slobin, D. I. (1997). Mind, code, and text. In J. Bybee, J. Haiman & S. A. Thompson
(Eds.), Essays on language function and language type: Dedicated to T. Givón
(pp. 437-467). Amsterdam/Philadelphia:: John Benjamins.
Slobin, D. I. (2000). Verbalized events: A dynamic approach to linguistic relativity and
determinism. In S. Niemeier & R. Dirven (Eds.), Evidence for linguistic relativity
(pp. 107-138). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Slobin, D. I. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the
expression of motion events. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating
events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219-257).
Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Slobin, D. I., & Hoiting, N. (1994). Reference to movement in spoken and signed
languages: Typological considerations. In Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics
Society (Vol. 20, pp. 487-505).
Starosta, S. (1988). The case for lexicase: an outline of lexicase grammatical theory.
London ; New York: Pinter Publishers.
Talmy.L. (1972). Semantic Structures in English and Atsugewi, University of California,
Berkeley.
Talmy, L. (1974). Semantics and syntax of motion. In J. P. Kimball & S. C. Summer
Linguistics Conference University of California (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (pp.
181-238). New York: Academic Press.
Talmy, L. (1983). How language structures space. In H. L. Pick, L. P. Acredolo,
Conference on Spatial Orientation & Perception University of Minnesota (Eds.),
Spatial orientation : theory, research, and application (pp. 225-282). New York:
Plenum Press.

3
Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T.
Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (pp. 36-149).
Cambridge: New York ; Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
Talmy, L. (1991). Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. In Proceedings of
the annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (Vol. 17, pp. 480-519):
Berkeley, Calif.
Talmy, L. (2000a). Toward a cognitive semantics (Vol. 1). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Talmy, L. (2000b). Toward a cognitive semantics (Vol. 2). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT
Press.

Common questions

Powered by AI

Vietnamese uses a rich range of motion verbs paired with a word that expresses ‘path’, similar to English, which categorizes it as a satellite-framed language in Talmy's typology . However, unlike English, Vietnamese often encodes complex motion events into multiple verbal components using serial verb constructions . Additionally, akin to Spanish (a verb-framed language), Vietnamese features light references to ground elements and includes detailed descriptions of the physical settings for motion, showing features of equipollently-framed languages according to Slobin's typology .

Vietnamese differs from English and Spanish in referencing ground elements because it tends to provide richer descriptions of the physical settings where movement occurs and less emphasis on the path as inherent, akin to Spanish. This characteristic is part of its classification as an equipollently-framed language where the expression of ground and manner can be conveyed through multiple, often subtly interconnected elements .

Classifying Vietnamese as an equipollently-framed language implies that it does not fit neatly into Talmy's binary typology of verb-framed and satellite-framed languages, instead sharing characteristics with both . It suggests a linguistic flexibility and complexity in how motion events are structured, requiring multiple forms to convey path and manner of motion distinctly, challenging simplistic categorizations and indicating a need for more nuanced approaches to language typology .

Serial verb constructions in Vietnamese are distinguished by the combination of multiple verbs to articulate complex motion events. These constructions pair manner verbs with other verbs or particles to express path, resulting in a detailed depiction of motion, which contrasts with languages that encapsulate such meanings within a single verb structure. This feature illustrates Vietnamese's typological uniqueness, combining elements of both satellite-framed and verb-framed language characteristics .

Vietnamese spatial expressions contribute to the broader field of verbal semantics by demonstrating the complexity and variability in how motion and location are communicated linguistically. The use of serial verb constructions and the debated classification of spatial words challenge existing verbal semantic models and necessitate more intricate frameworks that can account for various syntactic and semantic interactions, thus enriching theoretical and applied linguistic research .

The study of Vietnamese spatial constructions has enhanced our understanding by expanding the typology framework to include nuances beyond strict verb-framed and satellite-framed divisions, highlighting the richness and diversity of motion event expressions. By revealing how Vietnamese integrates multiple verbal components and detailed environmental settings, it enriches the concept of equipollently-framed languages, thus prompting a reconsideration of linguistic models to accommodate such multifaceted languages .

Vietnamese spatial constructions illustrate complexity in verbal semantics through their use of serial verb constructions to express motion and the inclusion of non-dynamic spatial words that function syntactically as a class of prepositions rather than nouns or verbs . This complexity is highlighted by the interplay of these spatial words with verbs and the detailed references to ground elements in motion events, suggesting rich semantic layering and categorization, which contribute to the nuanced typological classification as an equipollently-framed language .

Viewing Vietnamese spatial language through Slobin’s framework of equipollently-framed languages has significant theoretical implications as it challenges the dichotomy of verb-framed and satellite-framed languages. It suggests a more integrated approach to understanding motion event typologies, highlighting language-specific strategies and cognitive patterns in spatial representation. By accommodating languages like Vietnamese, this perspective necessitates broader frameworks in linguistic theory to capture the diversity and complexity of human language beyond conventional classifications .

In Vietnamese motion events, non-dynamic spatial words typically follow the verb or verbal complex and serve to detail the relational context of the motion. Their classification is significant as they straddle the line between syntax and semantics, functioning as prepositions rather than fitting neatly into traditional noun or verb categories. This highlights the nuanced syntactic roles these words play and their impact on the mapping of motion event expressions, challenging existing grammatical theories .

Vietnamese motion verbs reflect characteristics of both satellite-framed and verb-framed languages by using a varied set of manner-of-motion verbs, like satellite-framed languages, while also employing additional verbal components to denote path, echoing verb-framed language features . This dual approach enables a rich, layered representation of motion events, complicating the traditional binary typology established by Talmy .

You might also like