Advertisement

Cognitive Processing

, Volume 16, Supplement 1, pp 153–157 | Cite as

Non-actual motion: phenomenological analysis and linguistic evidence

  • Johan Blomberg
  • Jordan Zlatev
Short Report
  • 238 Downloads

Abstract

Sentences with motion verbs describing static situations have been seen as evidence that language and cognition are geared toward dynamism and change (Talmy in Toward a cognitive semantics, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2000; Langacker in Concept, image, and symbol: the cognitive basis of grammar, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin and New York, 1990). Different concepts have been used in the literature, e.g., fictive motion, subjective motion and abstract motion to denote this. Based on phenomenological analysis, we reinterpret such concepts as reflecting different motivations for the use of such constructions (Blomberg and Zlatev in Phenom Cogn Sci 13(3):395–418, 2014). To highlight the multifaceted character of the phenomenon, we propose the concept non-actual motion (NAM), which we argue is more compatible with the situated cognition approach than explanations such as “mental simulation” (e.g., Matlock in Studies in linguistic motivation, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, 2004). We investigate the expression of NAM by means of a picture-based elicitation task with speakers of Swedish, French and Thai. Pictures represented figures that either afford human motion or not (±afford); crossed with this, the figure extended either across the picture from a third-person perspective (3 pp) or from a first-person perspective (1 pp). All picture types elicited NAM-sentences with the combination [+afford, 1 pp] producing most NAM-sentences in all three languages. NAM-descriptions also conformed to language-specific patterns for the expression of actual motion. We conclude that NAM shows interaction between pre-linguistic motivations and language-specific conventions.

Keywords

Fictive motion Non-actual motion Mental simulation Phenomenology Linguistic conventions 

References

  1. Blomberg, J. (2014) Motion in language and experience—actual and non-actual motion in Swedish, French and Thai. Published PhD Thesis, Lund UniversityGoogle Scholar
  2. Blomberg J. The expression of non-actual motion in Swedish, French and Thai. Cognit Linguist (accepted) Google Scholar
  3. Blomberg J, Zlatev J (2014) Actual and non-actual motion: why experientialist semantics needs phenomenology (and vice versa). Phenom Cogn Sci 13(3):395–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coseriu E (1985) Linguistic competence: What is it really? Mod Lang Rev 80(4):xxv–xxxvCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ekström J (2015) The expression of non-actual motion in Swedish sign language. BA Thesis, Lund UniversityGoogle Scholar
  6. Gallagher S, Zahavi D (2008) The phenomenological mind. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Gibson JJ (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin, BostonGoogle Scholar
  8. Langacker RW (1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 1: theoretical prerequisites. Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  9. Langacker RW (1990) Concept, image, and symbol: the cognitive basis of grammar. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin and New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Matlock T (2004) The conceptual motivation of fictive motion. In: Radden G, Panther K-U (eds) Studies in linguistic motivation. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 221–248Google Scholar
  11. Matlock T (2010) Abstract motion is no longer abstract. Lang Cognit 2(2):243–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Matsumoto Y (1996) Subjective motion in English and Japanese. Cognit Linguist 7(2):183–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Merleau-Ponty M (1962) Phenomenology of perception. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Richardson D, Matlock T (2007) The integration of figurative language and static depictions: an eye movement study of fictive motion. Cognition 102(1):129–138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Slobin DI (2004) The many ways to search for a frog: linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In: Strömqvist S, Verhoeven L (eds) Relating events in narrative: typological and contextual perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 219–257Google Scholar
  16. Talmy L (2000) Toward a cognitive semantics, vol 1. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Varela FJ, Thompson E, Rosch E (1991) The embodied mind: cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Marta Olivetti Belardinelli and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyLund UniversityLundSweden
  2. 2.Division of Cognitive Semiotics, Centre for Languages and LiteratureLund UniversityLundSweden

Personalised recommendations