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. 217–246
Fictive motion in French
Where do the data lead?
Published online: 29 July 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.66.06cap
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.66.06cap
Abstract
This chapter reports the results of a corpus study on fictive motion (the use of motion verbs to describe motionless scenes) in French, carried out to investigate some proposals made by Langacker, Matlock, Matsumoto, and Talmy regarding this topic. The 589 attested utterances collected show that fictive motion involves more verbs and entities than is generally assumed. The suggested explanations draw on Aurnague’s semantic analysis of motion verbs and Vandeloise’s account of the meaning of spatial markers in terms of force dynamics and functional properties. The phenomenon is also analyzed in its discursive context, with a presentation of some properties of the “discourse mode” in which fictive motion expressions appear.
Keywords: corpus study, discourse mode, motion verbs
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Theoretical framework and constitution of the corpus
- 2.1Definition
- 2.2Semantics of motion verbs
- 2.3The corpus
- 3.Fictive motion at the sentential level
- 3.1The manner condition
- 3.2Duration and speed
- 3.3Instrumentality
- 3.4Properties of the path
- 3.5The exception of migration paths
- 4.Fictive motion in discourse
- 5.Conclusion
Acknowledgments Notes References
References (40)
Aurnague, M. (2000). Entrer par la petite porte, passer par des chemins de traverse: À propos de la préposition par et de la notion de “trajet”. Carnets de Grammaire, 7.
(2011). How motion verbs are spatial: The spatial foundations of intransitive motion verbs in French. Lingvisticæ Investigationes, 34(1), 1–34.
Blomberg, J., & Zlatev J. (2014). Actual and non-actual motion: Why experimentalist semantics needs phenomenology (and vice versa). Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 13(3), 395–418.
(2015). Non-actual motion: Phenomenological analysis and linguistic evidence. Cognitive Processing, 16(Suppl. 1), 153–157.
Boons, J.-P. (1987). La notion sémantique de déplacement dans une classification syntaxique des verbes locatifs. Langue Française 76(1), 5–40.
Boons, J.-P., Guillet, A., & Leclère, C. (1976). La structure des phrases simples en français: Constructions intransitives. Genève & Paris: Droz.
Cappelli, F. (2013). Etude du mouvement fictif à travers un corpus d’exemples du français: Perspective sémantique du lexique au discours. PhD dissertation. Toulouse: Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail.
Cappelli, G. (2012). Travelling in space: Spatial representation in English and Italian tourism discourse. Textus, 25(1), 19–35.
Cornish, F. (2001). L’inversion “locative” en français, italien et anglais: Propriétés syntaxiques, sémantiques et discursives. Cahiers de Grammaire, 26, 101–123.
Demi, S. (2009). The Geometry of fictive motion and location in English and Italian. PhD dissertation. Pisa: University of Pisa.
Emirkanian, L. (2008). Sémantique du verbe monter: Proposition d’un noyau de sens. In B. Habert, B. Laks, & J. Durand (Eds.), Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française – CMLF’08 (pp. 2009–2020). Paris: Institut de Linguistique Française.
Fuchs, C., & Fournier, N. (2003). Du rôle cadratif des compléments localisants initiaux selon la position du sujet nominal. Travaux de linguistique, 47(2), 79–109.
Guillet A. & Leclère C., (1992). La structure des phrases simples en français: Les constructions transitives locatives. Genève: Droz.
Honda, A. (1994). From spatial cognition to semantic structure: The role of subjective motion in cognition and language. English Linguistics, 11, 197–219.
Langacker, R. W. (1986). Abstract motion. In Proceedings of the 12th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 455–471). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
(2005). Dynamicity, fictivity, and scanning. The imaginative basis of logic and linguistic meaning. In D. Pecher & R. A. Zwaan (Eds.), Grounding cognition. The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking (pp. 164–197). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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. Toulouse: Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail.
Le Pesant, D. (2012). Critères syntaxiques pour une classification sémantique des verbes de localisation. Филолошки Преглед, 39(1), 37–52.
Lebas, F., & Cadiot, P. (2003). Monter et la construction extrinsèque du référent. Langages, 150(2), 9–30.
Levinson, S. C. (1996). Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: Cross-linguistic evidence. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (Eds.), Language and space (pp. 109–169). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mani, I., & Pustejovsky, J. (2012). Interpreting motion. Grounded representations for spatial language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(2004b). The conceptual motivation of fictive motion. In G. Radden, & K.-U. Panther (Eds.) Studies in linguistic motivation (pp. 221–248). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Matlock, T., & Bergmann, T. (2015). Fictive motion. In E. Dabrowska, & D. Divjak, (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 546–562). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Matsumoto, Y. (1996a). Subjective-change expressions in Japanese and their cognitive and linguistic bases. In G. Fauconnier, & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Spaces, worlds, and grammar (pp. 124–156). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Nordhal, H. (1977). Assez avez alé: Estre et avoir comme auxiliaires du verbe aler en ancien français. Revue Romane, XII(1), 54–67.
Rojo, A., & Valenzuela, J. (2003). Fictive motion in English and Spanish. International Journal of English Studies, 3(2), 123–149.
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 de Toulouse-Le Mirail.
Stosic, D. (2009). La notion de “manière” dans la sémantique de l’espace. Langages, 175(3), 103–121.
Talmy, L. (1996). Fictive motion in language and “ception”. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (Eds.), Language and space (pp. 211–276). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Taylor, H. A., & Tversky, B. (1996). Perspective in spatial descriptions. Journal of Memory & Language, 35, 371–391.
Tversky, B. (1996). Spatial perspective in descriptions. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (Eds.), Language and space (pp. 463–491). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vandeloise, C. (2003). Containment, support and linguistic relativity. In R. Dirven, & J. T. H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical linguistics (pp. 393–425). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Aurnague, Michel, F. Neveu, S. Prévost, A. Montébran, A. Steuckardt, G. Bergounioux, G. Merminod & G. Philippe
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.
