* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINGUIST List logo Eastern Michigan University Wayne State University *
* People & Organizations * Jobs * Calls & Conferences * Publications * Language Resources * Text & Computer Tools * Teaching & Learning * Mailing Lists * Search *
* *
LINGUIST List 22.408

Sun Jan 23 2011

Qs: Semantics: Verbs as Motion Events

Editor for this issue: Danielle St. Jean <daniellelinguistlist.org>

We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.

In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have taken the trouble to respond to the query.

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.cfm.
        1.     Neda Azkia , Semantics: Verbs as Motion Events

Message 1: Semantics: Verbs as Motion Events
Date: 19-Jan-2011
From: Neda Azkia <n_azkiayahoo.com>
Subject: Semantics: Verbs as Motion Events
E-mail this message to a friend

I am Ph.D. student of linguistics and my thesis is focused on "Motion in
Persian". I am compiling my data now, but the problem is the exact
criteria of choosing the motion events. And the other question is on the
conflation of concepts.

For example the verb 'blow' is for 'wind,' so we can say that the figure
concept 'wind' has been conflated in this verb. However, I have seen
that in some theses they consider this verb to be a conflation of motion
and cause.

1. What are the criteria of choosing a verb as a motion event? I've read
Talmy's definition but I couldn't find the borderline in between. For
example some say that 'rain' is not a motion event but Talmy considers
it as a motion verb.

2. Paula Ferez considered the verb 'blow' with conflation of motion and
cause. But the question is the conflation of figure (wind) in this surface
element? Don't you think that the figure is conflated in this expression?

If anyone can point me towards sources with describing the criteria of
choosing motion events and/or information on the conflation of
concepts, I would be most grateful.

Many thanks,

Linguistic Field(s): Semantics

Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Page Updated: 23-Jan-2011

Supported in part by the National Science Foundation       About LINGUIST    |   Contact Us       ILIT Logo
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.