Manner, result, and intention: implications for event typology from a cognitive account of verb semantics based on fulfilment types

IF 1.1 3区 心理学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Xinyan Kou, Jill Hohenstein
{"title":"Manner, result, and intention: implications for event typology from a cognitive account of verb semantics based on fulfilment types","authors":"Xinyan Kou, Jill Hohenstein","doi":"10.1017/langcog.2023.72","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Verb semantics has been widely approached as a dichotomy of manner and result. However, from a cognitive perspective, manner and result are often linked by intention, as captured by the ‘fulfilment type’ property formulated in the Realisation event domain in Talmy’s event integration theory. The four ‘fulfilment types’ (intrinsic-, moot-, implied-, and attained-fulfilment) indicate different degrees of result certainty in verbs. This study investigates whether manner/result complementarity is cognitively less dichotomous and more nuanced, as the four fulfilment types in verbs could indicate more than two mental representations of verbs. Through two psycholinguistic experiments, we examine whether fulfilment types influence the cognitive salience of manner and result in novel verb meaning interpretation (Experiment 1) and the semantic relatedness between English verbs with different fulfilment types (Experiment 2). Our results demonstrate that manner and result in the mental lexicon act less like a dichotomy but more like a cline. This blur between manner and result verb statuses has consequences for a language’s typological stance in the Realisation domain and implications for how Talmyan event research should be extended beyond well-studied Motion.</p>","PeriodicalId":45880,"journal":{"name":"Language and Cognition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2023.72","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Verb semantics has been widely approached as a dichotomy of manner and result. However, from a cognitive perspective, manner and result are often linked by intention, as captured by the ‘fulfilment type’ property formulated in the Realisation event domain in Talmy’s event integration theory. The four ‘fulfilment types’ (intrinsic-, moot-, implied-, and attained-fulfilment) indicate different degrees of result certainty in verbs. This study investigates whether manner/result complementarity is cognitively less dichotomous and more nuanced, as the four fulfilment types in verbs could indicate more than two mental representations of verbs. Through two psycholinguistic experiments, we examine whether fulfilment types influence the cognitive salience of manner and result in novel verb meaning interpretation (Experiment 1) and the semantic relatedness between English verbs with different fulfilment types (Experiment 2). Our results demonstrate that manner and result in the mental lexicon act less like a dichotomy but more like a cline. This blur between manner and result verb statuses has consequences for a language’s typological stance in the Realisation domain and implications for how Talmyan event research should be extended beyond well-studied Motion.

方式、结果和意图:基于履行类型的动词语义认知解释对事件类型学的影响
动词语义学被广泛地视为方式和结果的二分法。然而,从认知的角度来看,方式和结果往往是由意图联系在一起的,正如塔尔米的事件整合理论中在 "实现 "事件域中提出的 "实现类型 "属性所捕捉到的那样。四种 "实现类型"(内在实现、模拟实现、隐含实现和达到实现)表示动词中不同程度的结果确定性。本研究探讨了方式/结果互补性在认知上是否不那么二分,而是更加细致入微,因为动词中的四种实现类型可能表示动词的两种以上心理表征。通过两个心理语言学实验,我们考察了履行类型是否会影响新动词意义解释中方式和结果的认知显著性(实验 1),以及具有不同履行类型的英语动词之间的语义相关性(实验 2)。我们的研究结果表明,方式和结果在心理词典中的作用不像二分法,而更像一条主线。这种方式和结果动词状态之间的模糊性对语言在 "实现 "领域的类型学立场产生了影响,并对如何将塔尔米安事件研究扩展到研究充分的动作之外产生了影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信