Cover not available

In:The Semantics of Dynamic Space in French: Descriptive, experimental and formal studies on motion expression
Edited by Michel Aurnague and Dejan Stosic
[Human Cognitive Processing 66] 2019
► pp. 67–107

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

French motion verbs

Insights into the status of locative PPs

 | Lattice, CNRS, ENS & Université Paris 3 Sorbonne Nouvelle, PSL & USPC, France
Published online: 29 July 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.66.02sar
Abstract
This chapter deals with the syntactic status of locative constituents combining with motion verbs in French. It aims at answering the following questions: are locative PPs arguments or adjuncts? To which extent does the semantic structure of motion verbs determine the obligatory or optional presence of locative constituent?
In the first part of the chapter, I discuss the general assumption that Manner and Path cannot be encoded in the same verb. This restriction intersects with the two-way typological division between Verb framed languages and Satellite framed languages. As an alternative view of motion description, I present the classification criteria, proposed by Aurnague (2011), which provides new tools to rethink motion beyond the classical opposition between Manner and Path. Relying on a corpus study, I systematically apply a series of syntactic tests to the main classes of motion verbs. I show that locative PPs are tied to the verb to several degrees and that the semantic structure of verbs strongly impacts their syntactic properties.
Article outline
  • 1.Motion event
    • 1.1Path verbs vs. Manner of motion verbs
    • 1.2Semantic components of a motion event
    • 1.3Satellite-framed vs. verb-framed languages
  • 2.Spatial criteria for motion event classification
    • 2.1The relational nature of space in motion events
    • 2.2Classification of French motion verbs: Aurnague’s (2011) criteria
  • 3.Semantic structure of French Motion verbs
    • 3.1Change of placement verbs (courir ‘run’)
    • 3.2Class of change of relation only (sauter ‘jump’)
    • 3.3Class of change of relation and change of placement (aller ‘go’)
    • 3.4Path defined as a set of independent features
    • 3.5Manner defined as a set of independent features
  • 4.Argument/adjunct distinction in French: How locative PPs are special
    • 4.1Syntactic criteria
    • 4.2Syntactic tests and pragmatic constraints
  • 5.Methodology
  • 6.Argument structure of motion verbs and usage-based exploration of preferred constructions
    • 6.1Final change of relation and change of placement verbs
      • 6.1.1Final change of relation and change of placement verb with integrated prior motion: The case of aller ‘go’
      • 6.1.2Final change of relation and change of placement verb with presupposed prior motion: The case of arriver ‘arrive’
    • 6.2Independent vs. extended initial change of relation and change of placement verbs: partir ‘leave’ vs. s’enfuir ‘run away’
    • 6.3Initial vs. final verbs of inclusion/containment type with change of relation and change of placement: sortir ‘exit’ vs. entrer ‘enter’
    • 6.4First conclusion
  • 7.Change of placement verbs
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
References (66)
References
Asher, N., & Sablayrolles, P. (1996). A typology and discourse semantics for motion verbs and spatial PPs in French. In J. Pustejovsky & B. Boguraev (Eds.), Lexical semantics. The Problem of Polysemy (pp. 163–209). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aske, J. (1989). Path predicates in English and Spanish: a closer look. In K. Hall, M. Meacham & R. Shapiro (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 1–14). Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aurnague, M., & Stosic, D. (2002). La préposition par et l’expression du déplacement: vers une caractérisation sémantique et cognitive de la notion de “trajet”. Cahiers de Lexicologie, 81, 113–139.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Mugimenduzko joskera batzuen oinarri semantikoez: frantsesaren adibidea. Gogoa, 14, 27–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bally, C. (1932) [1965] Linguistique générale et linguistique française. Paris, Librairie Ernest Leroux. (2ème édition: 1965, Berne. Francke)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beavers, J., Levin, B., & Tham, S. W. (2010). The typology of motion expressions revisited. Journal of Linguistics, 46, 331–377. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beliën, M. (2008). Constructions, constraints and construal: adpositions in Dutch. Utrecht: LOT Dissertations.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bergh, L. (1948). Moyens d’exprimer en français l’idée de direction. Göteborg: Rundqvists Boktryckeri.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blinkenberg, A. (1960). Le problème de la transitivité en Français moderne. Essai syntactico-sémantique, Copenhague 1960, 1 vol. 366 p. [Historisk-filosofiske Meddelelser udgivet af Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab Bind 38, nr 1] Munksgaard Publisher, Kövenhavn, Denmark.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bonami, O. (1999). Les constructions du verbe : le cas des groupes prépositionnels argumentaux. Analyse syntaxique, sémantique et lexicale. PhD Dissertation, Université Paris 8.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boons, J.-P. (1987). La notion sémantique de déplacement dans une classification syntaxique des verbes locatifs. Langue Française, 76, 5–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Borillo, A. (1998). L’espace et son expression en français. Paris : Ophrys.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bourdin, P. (1997). On goal bias across languages: modal, configurational and orientational parameters. In B. Palek (Ed.), Proceedings of LP ‘96: Typology, prototypes, item orderings and universals (pp. 185–218). Prague, August 20–22, 1996.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carlier, A. (2005). L’argument davidsonien : un critère de distinction entre les prédicats ‘stage level’ et les prédicats ‘individual level’? Travaux de linguistique, 50, 13–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carlier, A. & Sarda, L. (2010). Le complément de la localisation spatiale: entre argument et adjoint. In F. Neveu, V. Muni Toke, T. Klingler, J. Durand, L. Mondada & S. Prévost (Eds.), Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française– CMLF 2010 (pp. 2057–2073). Paris, 2010, Institut de Linguistique Française. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(Forthc). Spatial Location in French: optional arguments and obligatory adjuncts.
Croft, W., Barðdal, J., Hollmann, W., Sotirova, V. & Taoka, C. (2010). Revising Talmy’s typological classification of complex event constructions. In H. C. Boas (Ed.) Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar (pp. 201–235). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dowty, D. (1991). Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection. Language, 67(3), 547–619. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, Ch. (1986). Pragmatically Controlled Zero Anaphor, Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (1986), 95–107. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, Ch. & Kay, P. (1995). Construction Grammar. ms. distributed by CSLI Publications, Stanford.
Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fong, V. & Poulain, C. (1998). Locating linguistic variation in semantic templates. In J. P. Koenig (Ed.), Discourse and cognition: bridging the gap (pp. 29–39). Stanford, CA: CSLI,.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. & Ackerman F. (2001). The pragmatics of obligatory adjuncts. Language, 77(4), 798–814. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: a construction grammar approach to argument structure, Coll. Cognitive theory of language and culture 1 vol. (XI–265 p.). Chicago; London: the University of Chicago Press, cop.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. (2005). Constructions, Lexical Semantics, and the Correspondence Principle: Accounting for Generalizations and Subregularities in the Realization of Arguments. In N. Erteschik-Shir & T. Rapoport (Ed.), The Syntax of Aspect: Deriving Thematic and Aspectual Interpretation (pp. 215–286). Oxford: University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goyens, M., Lamiroy, B. & Melis, L. (2002), Movement and Repositioning of the Preposition a in French. Lingvisticae Investigationes, 25(2), 275–310.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huumo, T. (2014). Path Settings: How dynamic conceptualization permits the use of path expressions as setting adverbials. In L. Sarda, S. Carter-Thomas, B. Fagard, M. Charolles (Eds), Adverbials in Use: From predicative to discourse functions (pp. 73–100). Corpora and Language in Use. Presses universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. & A. Hijazo-Gascón (Eds) (2015). New Horizons in the Study of Motion: Bringing Together Applied and Theoretical Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ikegami, Y. (1984). ‘Source’ vs ‘Goal’: a case of linguistic dissymmetry. In R. Dirven & G. Radden (Eds.), Concepts of Case (pp. 122–146). Tübingen: Günter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kopecka, A. (2009). L’expression du déplacement en français: l’interaction des facteurs sémantiques, aspectuels et pragmatiques dans la construction du sens spatial. Langages, 173, 54–75. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kopecka, A., & Ishibashi, M. (2011). L’(a-)symétrie dans l’expression de la Source et du But : perspective translinguistique. Faits de Langues– Les Cahiers, 3, 131–149.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krifka, M. (1998). The origins of telicity. In S. Rothstein (Ed.), Events and Grammar (pp. 197–235). Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy book series (SLAP, volume 70) Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Ross, J. (1976). Is deep structure necessary? In J. D. McCawley (Ed.), Syntax and semantics, 7 (pp. 159–164).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakusta, L. & Landau, B. (2005). Starting at the end: The importance of goals in spatial language. Cognition, 96, 1–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K. & Lemoine, K. (2005). Definite null objects in (spoken) French: A Construction-Grammar account. In M. Fried & H. C. Boas (Eds.), Grammatical Constructions: Back to the roots (pp. 13–55). John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laur, D. (1991). Sémantique du déplacement et de la localisation en français: une étude des verbes, des prépositions et de leurs relations dans la phrase simple. PhD dissertation. Université Toulouse 2.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1993). La relation entre le verbe et la préposition dans la sémantique du déplacement. Langages, 110, 47–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lazard, G. (1994). L’actance. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Legendre, G. & Sorace, A. (2003). Auxiliaires et intransitivité en français et dans les langues romanes. In D. Godard (Ed.), Les langues romanes: problèmes de la phrase simple (pp. 185–233). Paris: Editions du CNRS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levin, B. & Rappaport Hovav, M. (1996). Unaccusativity: At the syntax-semantics interface. Cambridge Ms: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Lexicalized Meaning and Manner/Result Complementarity’. In B. Arsenijević, B. Gehrke, & R. Marín, (Eds.), Subatomic Semantics of Event Predicates (pp. 49–70), Springer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). Lexicalization Patterns. In R. Truswell, (Ed.), Oxford Handbook of Event Structure, (pp. 395–425), Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Melis, L. (1983). Etude sur la classification et la systématique des compléments circonstanciels en français moderne. Presses universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moline, E. & Stosic, D. (2016). L’expression de la manière en français. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nichols, J. (1986). Head-marking and dependent-marking grammar. Language, 62, 56–119. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M. & Levin B. (2010). Reflections on Manner/Result Complementarity. In E. Doron, M. Rappaport Hovav & I. Sichel (Eds.), Syntax, Lexical Semantics, and Event Structure (pp. 21–38). Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Regier, T., & Zheng, M. (2007). Attention to endpoints: a cross-linguistic constraint on spatial meaning. Cognitive Science, 31, 705–719. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sarda, L. (1999). Contribution à l’étude de la sémantique de l’espace et du temps: analyse des verbes de déplacement transitifs directs du français. PhD Dissertation, Toulouse: Université Toulouse 2.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Semantics of French Direct Transitive Motion Verbs. In T. Eniko Németh (Ed.), Cognition in Language Use (pp. 388–404), Selected Papers from the Seventh International Pragmatics Conference, Vol 1, International Pragmatics Association. Antwerp: Belgium.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slobin D., (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”. In J. Gumperz & S. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking Linguistic Relativity (pp. 271–323). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slobin, D. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds). Relating events in narrative: Vol. 2. Typological and contextual perspectives, (pp. 219–257). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slobin, D. & Hoiting, N. (1994). Reference to movement in spoken and signed languages: typological considerations. In S. Gahl, A. Dolbey & C. Johnson (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 487–505). Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stosic, D. (2002). Par et à travers dans l’expression des relations spatiales: comparaison entre le français et le serbo-croate. PhD dissertation, Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). The prepositions par and à travers and the categorization of spatial entities in French. In M. Aurnague, M. Hickmann & L. Vieu (Eds.), The categorization of spatial entities in language and cognition (pp. 71–91). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009a). La notion de « manière » dans la sémantique de l’espace. Langages, 175, 103–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009b). Comparaison du sens spatial des prépositions à travers en français et kroz en serbe, Langages, 173, 15–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (1972). Semantic structures in English and Atsugewi. Ph.D dissertation, Department of Linguistics, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1985). Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (vol. 3): grammatical categories and the lexicon (pp. 57–143). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000a). Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Vol. 1. The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000b). Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Vol. 2. The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tesnière, L. (1959). Eléments de syntaxe structurale. Paris, Klincksieck. [Translation: Elements of structural syntax. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2015].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vailati, E. (2014). Leibniz and Clarke: A Study of Their Correspondence. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vandeloise, C. (1987). La préposition à et le principe d’anticipation. Langue française, 76, 77–111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vinay, J-P., & Darbelnet, J. (1958). Stylistique comparée du français et de l’anglais. Paris: Didier, Montréal: Beauchemin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zlatev, J., Blomberg, J. & David, C. (2010). Translocation: language and the categorization of experience. In V. Evans (Ed.), Language, cognition, and space: the state of the art and new directions (pp. 389–418). London: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Wiesinger, Evelyn
2025. Language contact and creolization. In Constructions in Contact 3 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 40], ► pp. 111 ff. DOI logo
Kou, Xinyan & Jill Hohenstein
2024. Manner, result, and intention: implications for event typology from a cognitive account of verb semantics based on fulfilment types. Language and Cognition 16:4 ► pp. 1053 ff. DOI logo
Lena, Ludovica
2024. Encoding indefinite human reference without indefinite pronouns: the case of Chinese presentationals. Folia Linguistica 58:3 ► pp. 659 ff. DOI logo
Bourdin, Philippe
2022. On a few instances where deictic directionals confound expectations. In Neglected Aspects of Motion Events Description [Human Cognitive Processing, 72], ► pp. 95 ff. DOI logo
Gerwien, Johannes & Christiane von Stutterheim
2022. Conceptual Blending Across Ontological Domains—References to Time and Space in Motion Events by Tunisian Arabic Speakers of L2 German. Frontiers in Communication 7 DOI logo
Sarda, Laure & Benjamin Fagard
2022. Introduction: The description of motion events. In Neglected Aspects of Motion Events Description [Human Cognitive Processing, 72], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Kopecka, Anetta & Marine Vuillermet
2021. Source-Goal (a)symmetries across languages. Studies in Language 45:1 ► pp. 2 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue