Cover not available

Article published In: Languages in Contrast
Vol. 25:1 (2025) ► pp.51–82

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

Fluidic motion patterns in English and Modern Greek

A contrastive analysis of run and τρέχω

ORCiD logo with link | Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Published online: 21 November 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.22006.dal
Abstract
This paper investigates conceptual and phraseological patterns from a cross-linguistic perspective. The focus of attention is on the fluidic motion uses of the highly polysemous verbs run and τρέχω ‘run’ in English and Modern Greek respectively. They are manner of motion verbs denoting the typically human, fast movement on ground and they are frequently cited in the literature on motion event encoding; yet, their extended use to denote motion of liquids is mentioned only in passing. The study thus provides a comprehensive description of that part of the semantic network of the two verbs that relates to fluidic motion (literally and figuratively). The contrastive approach taken combines cognitive semantics (Frame Semantics, Conceptual Metaphor and Metonymy Theory) with a phraseological view of language. Convergences and divergences are identified at a conceptual and phraseological level through a twofold corpus-based study involving comparable monolingual analysis and parallel corpus investigation.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Motion verbs in English and Modern Greek
    • 2.2Methodological tools for contrastive analysis
  • 3.Fluidic motion patterns in contrast
    • 3.1Method
    • 3.2Comparable monolingual analysis of run and τρέχω
    • 3.3Shifts in translation
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (39)
References
Atkins, B. T. S. 2008. Then and now: Competence and Performance in 35 Years of Lexicography. In Practical Lexicography: A Reader, T. Fontenelle (ed.), 247–272. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Atkins, B. T. S., Rundell, M. and Sato, H. 2003. The Contribution of FrameNet to Practical Lexicography. International Journal of Lexicography 16(3): 333–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boas, H. C. 2001. Frame Semantics as a Framework for Describing Polysemy and Syntactic Structures of English and German Motion Verbs in Contrastive Computational Lexicography. Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2001 Conference (CL 2001). Lancaster, England, 29 March – 2 April 2001. 64–73.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005. Semantic Frames as Interlingual Representations for Multilingual Lexical Databases. International Journal of Lexicography 18(4): 445–478. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2017. Computational Resources: FrameNet and Constructicon. In The Cambridge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, B. Dancygier (ed.), 549–573. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2020a. A Roadmap towards Determining the Universal Status of Semantic Frames. In New Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics. Empirical and Methodological Challenges, R. Enghels, B. Defrancq and M. Jansegers (eds), 21–52. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2020b. Constructions in English Grammar. In The Handbook of English Linguistics, B. Aarts, A. McMahon and L. Hinrichs (eds), 277–297. Oxford: Wiley. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cyrus, L. (2006). Building a Resource for Studying Translation Shifts. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006). Genoa, Italy. European Language Resources Association. 1240–1245.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. A Frame-Semantic Approach to Co-Occurrence Patterns: A Lexicographic Study of English and Greek Motion Verbs. International Journal of Lexicography 31(4): 420–451. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. From Corpus Usages to Cognitively Informed Dictionary Senses: Reconstructing an MLD Entry for the Verb float. Lexicography: Journal of ASIALEX 6(2): 75–104. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2022. Motivated Patterns of Phrasal Verbs and Learner’s Dictionaries. Lexis [Online] 191. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ebeling, J. and Oksefjell Ebeling, S. 2013. Patterns in Contrast. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Enghels, R., Defrancq, B. and Jansegers, M. 2020. Reflections on the Use of Data and Methods in Contrastive Linguistics. In New Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics. Empirical and Methodological Challenges, R. Enghels, B. Defrancq and M. Jansegers (eds), 1–20. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. and Petruck, M. 2003. Framenet Glossary. International Journal of Lexicography 16(3): 359–361. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Georgakopoulos, Th. and Härtl, H. 2020. Goal Prevalence and Situation Types: An Empirical Analysis of Differences in Greek and German Motion Event Descriptions. In Contrastive Studies in Morphology and Syntax, M. Georgiafentis, G. Giannoulopoulou, M. Koliopoulou and A. Tsokoglou (eds), 262–280. London: Bloomsbury Academic. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glynn, D. 2014. The many Uses of run: Corpus Methods and Socio-Cognitive Semantics. In Corpus Methods for Semantics: Quantitative Studies in Polysemy and Synonymy, D. Glynn and A. J. Robinson (eds), 117–144. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. 2011. Meaning Arises from Words, Context, and Phrasal Constructions. Zeitschrift fur Anglistik und Amerikanistik 59(4): 317–329. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, St. Th. 2006. Corpus-Based Methods and Cognitive Semantics: The many Senses of to run. In Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics. Corpus-Based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis, St. Th. Gries and A. Stefanowitsch (eds), 57–99. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hanks, P. 2013a. Lexical Analysis: Norms and Exploitations. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2013b. English and American II: Synchronic Lexicography. In Dictionaries. An International Encyclopedia of Lexicography. Supplementary Volume: Recent Developments with Focus on Electronic and Computational Lexicography, R. H. Gouws, U. Heid, W. Schweickard and H. E. Wiegand (eds), 720–730. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2020. How Context determines Meaning. In Computational Phraseology, G. Corpas Pastor and J. P. Colson (eds), 297–309. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2022. Corpus Pattern Analysis. CPA Project Page. [URL] [last accessed 2 August 2022].
Hanks, P., Maarouf, I. E. and Oakes, M. 2018. Flexibility of Multiword Expressions and Corpus Pattern Analysis. In Multiword Expressions: Insights from a Multilingual Perspective, M. Sailer and S. Markantonatou (eds), 93–119. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horrocks, G. and Stavrou, M. 2007. Grammaticalized Aspect and Spatio-Temporal Culmination. Lingua 1171: 605–644. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M., Divjak, D. and Rakhilina, E. (2010). Aquamotion Verbs in Slavic and Germanic: A Case Study in Lexical Typology. In New Approaches to Slavic Verbs of Motion, V. Hasko and R. Perelmutter (eds), 315–341. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. 2021. Standard and Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory. In The Routledge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, W. Xu and J. Taylor (eds), 191–203. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oksefjell Ebeling, S. and Ebeling, J. 2020. Contrastive Analysis, Tertium Comparationis and Corpora. Nordic Journal of English Studies 19(1): 97–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Papafragou, A., Massey, C. and Gleitman, L. 2002. Shake, rattle, ‘n’ roll: The Representation of Motion in Language and Cognition. Cognition 841: 189–219. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. 2021. Conceptual Metonymy Theory Revisited. Some Definitional and Taxonomic Issues. In The Routledge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, W. Xu and J. Taylor (eds), 204–227. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruppenhofer, J., Ellsworth, M., Petruck, M. R. L., Johnson, C. R. and Scheffczyk, J. 2016. FrameNet II: Extended Theory and Practice. [URL] [last accessed 2 August 2022).
Sinclair, J. 1998. The Lexical Item. In Contrastive Lexical Semantics, E. Weigand (ed.), 1–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slobin, D. 1996. Two Ways to travel: Verbs of Motion in English and Spanish. In Grammatical Constructions: Their Form and Meaning, M. Shibatani and S. Thompson (eds), 195–220. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Soroli, E. and Verkerk, A. 2017. Motion Events in Greek: Methodological and Typological Issues. CogniTextes 6(1): 1–53. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Talmy, L. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I. M. and Papadopoulou, D. 2009. Aspect and the Interpretation of Motion Verbs in L2 Greek. In Representational Deficits in SLA: Studies in Honor of Roger Hawkins, N. Snape, Y. I. Leung and M. S. Smith (eds), 187–227. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue