Motion event typology predicts that languages can be divided into either satellite-framed, verb-framed or serial-framed languages. However, an increasing number of studies show that languages within the same type predispose their speakers to describe motion events differently. Based on the narrative behavior of 15 native speakers, we provide evidence that suggests Tunisian Arabic (TA) is an untypical verb-framed language. One the one hand, TA conflates motion and path meanings in the main verb, and native speakers adhere to the boundary-crossing constraint. On the other hand, the availability of a rich manner verb lexicon combined with the availability of mono-verbal clauses ready to be coordinated asyndetically, encourages TA speakers to attend to the manner of motion more often than reported for a typical verb-framed language (e.g., Spanish). Based on these findings, we conclude that predictions based on motion event typology are best considered as guidelines, and not as an accurate reflection of how motion meanings may be lexicalized and expressed in individual languages.
The categorization of motion verbs in THINKING-FOR-SPEAKING (TfS) research paradigm entails some theoretical problems that need to be addressed. This conclusion is motivated by the examination of motion verb types listed in Berman &Slobin (1994, p. 198) for Spanish and English narrators of 'the frog story' (Mayer, 1969). These lists show a range of semantically different verb types including verbs describing MANNER VIA MOTION (e.g., climb), CAUSE VIA MOTION (e.g., push), PATH VIA MOTION (e.g., come), SOUND-EMISSION (e.g., buzz), and ACTION (e.g., knock). We argue that in the absence of any clear theoretical framework for why, how and whether these verbs should be categorized as motion verbs, TfS research runs the risk of slipping into inconsistency.To this end, interdisciplinary insights about the behavior of motion verbs in English suggest that SEMANTIC COERCIONthe process whereby non-motion verbs are coerced into the expression of motion meaningsmerits more attention in TfS research than it currently receives. The notion of MOTIONIZATIONis offered as a first step in this direction.1 Slobin ( 2004) has proposed equipollent-framed languages as a third member to this typology. We overlook this type here for two reasons. First, it is not clear at this stage how the inclusion of this type serves the aim of this paper. Second, Talmy (2009) has raised objections against Slobin"s ( 2004) proposal. 2 E.g., Storytelling using the picture book "Frog, where are you?" (Mayer, 1969), newspaper articles, and translation materials.
Research into how a universal semantic domain like motion is narrated differently by speakers of typologically different languages (i.e., SATELLITE-FRAMED and VERB-FRAMED) led Slobin (1996a, 1996b, 2000, 2014) and his colleagues (Berman and Slobin, 2004) to make informed predictions about the influence of grammatical categories on the learning of first languages (L1) and second languages (L2): (a) Language-induced thoughts are determined by the typological characteristic of L1 (Slobin, 1996a, p. 89). (b) Language induced-thought processes develop into habits of thinking-for-speaking (TfS) (Slobin, 1996a, p. 89). (c) L1 TfS habits are difficult to change whena typologically distinct L2 is learned in adulthood (Slobin, 1996a, p. 89) Research into how motion events are expressed in different languages lent support to predictions (a) and (b) (e.g.,
A fundamental assumption in education is that the successful integration of technology in language classrooms can lead to improved teaching and learning. However, researchers often report that the implementation of technology by teaching practitioners remains much more limited than expected due to personal, institutional, and technological factors that influence teachers' decision to integrate technology. This limitation is augmented by the exigencies of a new learning ecology in which ubiquitous learning -accessing content and interaction from anywhere and at any time -is born out due to ubiquitous computing -everyday learning environments supported by mobile devices, embedded computers, and wireless networks. To address these limitations, we report on OLE -an e-tool we have created to offer teachers the opportunity to deliver technologically-infused lessons complete with warmers, formative assessments, and provisions for fun-based homework. Equally, OLE offers learners the chance to access lessons ubiquitously and to interact with teachers and peers synchronously and asynchronously.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.