In:Aspectuality across Languages: Event construal in speech and gesture
Edited by Alan Cienki and Olga K. Iriskhanova
[Human Cognitive Processing 62] 2018
► pp. v–x
Get fulltext
This article is available free of charge.
Published online: 25 October 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.62.toc
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.62.toc
Table of contents
Editors and contributorsxi
Acknowledgmentsxiii
List of tables and figuresxv
Prefacexvii
IntroductionAspect and event structure as topics in linguistic and psychological research (Cienki, Iriskhanova)1
1.Introduction1
2.Semantics approached from the perspective of conceptualization and mental simulation2
3.Beyond language – visible action expressing conceptualization2
4.The main research questions3
Chapter 1.Aspect through the lens of event construal7
1.On events and aspect7
1.1Events: An historical and philosophical overview7
1.1.1Events as phenomena on the levels of cognition, language, and communication (Iriskhanova)7
1.1.2Various approaches to the study of events in philosophy (Iriskhanova)10
1.1.3Various approaches to the study of events in linguistics (Iriskhanova)15
1.1.4Studying the internal structure of event construal: Points in common from philosophy and linguistics (Iriskhanova)20
1.1.5Recent cognitive linguistic approaches (Cienki)21
1.1.5.1Background on construal in cognitive linguistics21
1.1.5.2Imaging systems in language24
1.1.5.3Construal in cognitive grammar25
1.1.5.4Looking ahead26
1.2Aspect across traditions: Main lines of research (Iriskhanova, Morgenstern, Müller, Richter)27
1.2.1Aspect – Aktionsart – Vid – Aspectuality27
1.2.2Early studies of aspect in French, German, and Russian linguistics31
1.2.3Present-day studies of aspect: Some specific issues34
1.2.4Present-day studies of aspect: Points of convergence40
1.2.4.1The influence of Anglo-American theories of aspect: Blurring grammatical and lexical aspect40
1.2.4.2Using conceptual boundaries44
1.2.5Conclusion47
2.Background on talk-based multimodal communication49
2.1Thinking for speaking and gesturing (Cienki)49
2.1.1Linguistic relativity hypothesis49
2.1.2Thinking for speaking50
2.2Gestures as movement51
2.2.1Visual and proprioceptive modalities51
2.2.1.1Gestures derive from imagistic thinking (Boutet)51
2.2.1.2Visual perception of gestures (Boutet)52
2.2.1.3The importance of proprioception (Boutet)52
2.2.1.4‘Gain control’ (Becker)53
2.2.2Gestures as motion events (Müller)54
2.2.3Introducing the notion of boundary schemas (Müller)56
2.3Summing up: Aspect as amodal or as modality-dependent (Boutet, Morgenstern, Cienki)58
Chapter 2.Researching aspect in multimodal communication: Consequences for data and methods61
1.Introduction (Cienki)61
2.Choice of data and method of elicitation for the production studies (Cienki, Becker)62
3.Categories used for the analysis of event construal in spoken language (Cienki)66
4.Categories used for the analysis of event construal in gesture67
4.1Features for the gesture phases: Determining the unit of analysis (Boutet, Müller)67
4.2Pulse of effort as a kinesiological criterion (Boutet)68
4.3Bounded and unbounded schemas (Boutet, Müller)70
5.Bringing it all together: Annotation and coding (Boutet, Morgenstern)72
5.1Choice of Controlled Vocabulary73
5.2Choice of the type of template and hierarchy74
Chapter 3.Speakers’ verbal expression of event construal: Quantitative and qualitative analyses77
1.Introduction: Construal of events in spoken discourse (Iriskhanova)77
1.1Basic features of narrative discourse77
1.2Basic features of spoken narratives78
1.3Some preliminary remarks on the textual data80
2.The French speakers’ verbal expression of event construal (Morgenstern, Boutet, Debras)81
2.1Background on the uses of tenses in narratives81
2.2Quantitative analyses82
2.3Qualitative analyses83
2.3.1Difference between the passé composé and the imparfait
83
2.3.2Use of the present tense in narratives85
2.3.3Alternation between imparfait, présent simple, and passé composé
87
2.4Concluding remarks90
3.The German speakers’ verbal expression of event construal (Müller)90
3.1Introduction: Specifics of aspectual event construal in tense forms in spoken German91
3.2Quantitative analyses: Use of Präteritum and Perfekt in spoken German as compared to French use of imparfait and passé composé
93
3.3Qualitative analyses: The use of Präteritum and Perfekt in spoken German94
3.4Discussion94
4.The Russian speakers’ verbal expression of event construal (Denisova, Iriskhanova)95
4.1Introducing general specifics of tense and aspect use in spoken Russian narratives95
4.2Quantitative analysis: General results for Russian verbs97
4.3Qualitative analyses of Russian verbs98
4.3.1Some preliminary remarks on the specifics of Russian spoken narratives98
4.3.2Tense and aspect as related to the specifics of spoken narratives99
4.3.3Semantic features of verbs as related to the specifics of spoken narratives101
4.3.4Structural features of verbs as related to the specifics of spoken narratives102
4.4Concluding remarks104
5.Summary (Iriskhanova)104
Chapter 4.Speakers’ gestural expression of event construal: Quantitative and qualitative analyses107
1.Introduction (Boutet, Morgenstern, Cienki)107
1.1Choice of the coding protocol for gesture analysis107
1.2Inter-coder reliability109
1.3Category-specific particularities110
1.4Summing up112
2.The French speakers’ gestural expression of event construal (Boutet, Morgenstern)113
2.1Introduction: Hypothesis for French113
2.2Boundary schemas in French gestures114
2.2.1Quantitative results114
2.2.2Qualitative analyses116
2.2.3Counterexamples: The role of lexical aspect and the multi-functionality of gestures119
2.3Conclusion122
3.German (Müller)123
3.1Introduction: Hypothesis for German123
3.2Results of boundary schema analysis for German123
3.2.1Quantitative results123
3.2.2Qualitative analyses127
3.2.2.1Use of bounded gestures with Perfekt and unbounded gestures with Präteritum (German Examples (1) and (2))127
3.2.2.2Some reasons for the distribution of bounded and unbounded gestures with the Präteritum (German Examples (3) and (4))128
3.3Discussion: German as a complex case130
4.Russian (Denisova, Iriskhanova, Cienki)132
4.1Introduction: Hypothesis for Russian132
4.2Results of boundary schema analysis for Russian132
4.2.1Quantitative results132
4.2.2Additional factors analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively134
4.2.2.1Preliminary analysis134
4.2.2.2In-depth analysis135
4.2.2.3Results and discussion137
4.3Conclusion141
5.Summary (Cienki, Müller)142
Chapter 5.Looking ahead: Kinesiological analysis (Boutet,Morgenstern,Cienki)143
1.Initial main concepts144
1.1Segments144
1.2Degrees of freedom144
2.A kinesiological view of gesture146
2.1Intrinsically multiple frames of reference146
2.2A geometry associated with space148
2.3Dynamics148
3.Movement (motor) control from a kinesiological perspective149
3.1Velocity in relation to shape149
3.2The opposition of phase law149
3.3The principle of isochrony150
3.4Codman’s paradox150
3.5Types of movement transfer151
3.6Discussion152
4.Case study: Kinesiological analysis of the French gesture data152
4.1Propagation of flow and perfectivity153
4.2Number and type of segments and perfectivity154
4.3Qualitative analyses156
5.Discussion157
Chapter 6.Comprehension of event construal from multimodal communication (Becker,Gonzalez-Marquez)161
1.Approaches in psychology161
1.1Psychology as a way of knowing161
1.2Theories in cognitive psychology162
1.2.1Situation models in discourse processing163
1.2.1.1Event Indexing Model163
1.2.1.2Dynamic view164
1.2.2Event segmentation theory165
2.Background to the comprehension experiment166
2.1Introduction to the comprehension experiment167
2.2Hypotheses168
3.Methods168
3.1Participants168
3.2Materials169
3.2.1Language background169
3.2.2Video clips169
3.2.3Program171
3.3Procedure172
4.Results172
4.1Reporting of results172
4.2French173
4.3German174
4.4Russian174
4.5Interim summary174
4.6Combined analyses174
5.Discussion of combined analyses176
6.Conclusion176
7.Afterword: The need for interdisciplinary collaboration177
ConclusionAspectuality and the expression of event construal as variably multimodal (Cienki, Iriskhanova)179
References185
Appendix A.The two-part consent form used in the production study, which was translated into French, German, and Russian205
Appendix B.The conversation prompts as provided in each language207
Appendix C.Illustration of the categories used for controlled vocabulary in ELAN for verb coding, taking the Russian verbal data as an example209
Appendix D.Transliteration conventions used for Russian (Cyrillic to Latin alphabet)211
Index213
