Defining Typology of Ardelani Dialect of Kurdish Languagebased on Talmy Model on Motion Events

Document Type : Original Research

Authors
Arsalan Golfam 1
Asrin Parang 2
Mohammad Dabir Moghaddam 3
Alieh Kurd Zafaranlou Kambouziya 4
1 Faculty Member, Linguistics Department, Tarbiat Modares University, Iran
2 2PhD of Linguistics, Tarbiat Modares University, Iran
3 3Faculty Member, Linguistics Department, Allameh Tabatabaee University, Iran
4 4Faculty Member, Linguistics Department, Tarbiat Modares University, Iran
Abstract
This paper investigates the conflation of “Path” conceptual semantic in Motion events in the Central-Kurdish (Sorani) Language, Ardelani Dialect, in light of Talmy notions in this regard. According to Talmy, in each Motion event, four main elements i.e. “Figure”, “Ground”, “Path” and “Motion” are involved. These conceptual meanings can be lexicalized either on “Verb Root” or on “Satellite”. By considering a conceptual meaning like “Path” and investigating the surface element that shows it, we can define the typology of languages as “Verb-Framed” or “Satellite-Framed”. In this paper, after analyzing sample sentences containing “Path” concept, in addition to showing the way this concept is lexicalized in Kurdish, we would define typology of Ardelani dialect among Indo-European languages. Data used in this paper is a selection of 23 sentences extracted from a corpus of 890 sentences containing Motion event that have lexicalized Path concept. These sentences have been produced by 18 different native Ardelani speakers in three different groups.

Keywords

Subjects

[1] Acedo V. Matellan and J. Mateu, (2008). “ThePath from Satellite framed Indo-European to Verb Framed Romance: A Lexical Syntactic Account”. Paper presented at the Diachronic Generative Syntax Conference.
[2] Azkia N., (2011). Motion in Persian Language: A cognitive and Typology Approach. PhD Thesis. Islamic Azad Universtiy, Science and Research Branch, Tehran [In Persian].
[3] Azkia N. and F. Sasani, (2012). Lexicalization in Motion Verbs in Persian: New Model. Language and Linguistics. Year 8, No. 1, pp. 83-103 [In Persian].
[4] Babai H., (2011). “Lexicalization of Motion Event in Persian”. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 157-162.
[5] Berthele R., (2004). “The Typology of Motion and Posture Verbs: a Variationist Aaccount”. In: Bernd Kortmann (ed.): Dialectology meets Typology. Dialect Grammar from a Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Berlin/New York (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 153), 93-126.
[6] Croft W., (2012). Verbs: Aspect and Causal Structure. Oxford University Press.
[7] Feiz P.. “Travelling through space in Persian and English: A comparative analysis of motion events in elicited narratives”. Language Sciences 33: 401-416.2011.
[8] Hamedi Z. Shirvan and S.H., Sharifi, (2014). “A Typological Analysis of Satellite in Motion Events of Persian Language”. Language Researches. Period 5. No. 2, pp. 71-89. [In Persian].
[9] Hickmann M., and H. Hendriks, (2010). “Typological constraints on the acquisition of spatial language in French and English”. Cognitive Linguistics, vol. 21(2), pp. 189-215.
[10] Iacobini C. and B. Fagard, (2012). “A Diachronic Approach to Variation and Change in the Typology of Motion Event Expression”. Cahiers de Faits de langue, 3, pp.151-172.
[11] Ibarretxe-Antunano I., (2008). “Path Salience in Motion Events”. In: Guo, J. et al. (Eds.), Crosslinguistic Approaches to the Psychology of Language: Research in the Tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin. Psychology Press: New York.
[12] Levin B. and Rappaprt-Hovav, (2005). Argument Realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[13] Matsumoto Yo., (2003). “Typologies of lexicalization patterns and event integration: Clarifications and reformulations”. In Shuji Chiba et al. (ed.), Empirical and theoretical investigations into language: A festschrift for Masaru Kajita (pp. 403-418). Tokyo: Kaitakusha.
[14] Mesgar M. Khoee, (2013). Lexicalization of Motion in Persian Language: A Cognitive Approach. PHD Thesis. Human Science and Cultural Studies Research Centre.
[15] Ozcaliskan S. and D. I. Slobin, (2000). “Climb up vs. ascend climbing: lexicalization choices in expressing motion events with manner and Path components”. In: Catherine-Howell, S., Fish, S.A., Lucas, T.K. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, vol. 2. Cascadilla Press, Somerville, MA, pp. 558–570.
[16] Ozcalışkan S. and D. I. Slobin, (2003). “Codability effects on the expression of manner of motion in English and Turkish”. In Sumru Özsoy, Didar Akar, Mine Nakipoğlu, H. Demiralp, Eser Erguvanlı, H. Taylan and Ayhan Aksu, H. Koc (eds.), Studies in: Turkish linguistics: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Turkish Linguistics (259-270). Istanbul: Boğaziçi University Press.
[17] Özçalişkan S., (2004). “Typological Variation in Encoding the Manner, Path, and Ground Components of a Metaphorical Motion Event”. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, pp. 73-102.
[18] Poshtvan H., F. Haghbin and A. Afrashi, (2005). “Lexicalization of motion events in speech of Persian speaking children in a cognitive approach”. Language Researchs. Period 6, No. 3, pp 19-43 [In Persian].
[19] Pourcel S. and A. Kopecka, (2005). “Motion expression in French: Typological diversity”. Durham and Newcastle working papers in linguistics 11, pp. 139-153.2005.
[20] Sachs A., (2010). “Motion Events. In Seri: Applying Talmy’s Typologies”, MA Dissertation. University of North Dakota.
[21] Saidi D.I., (2007). “Typology of Motion Event in Tunisian Arabic”. Laboratoire Dynamique Du Langage, Université Lumière Lyon.
[22] Slobin D.I., (2004). “The many ways to search for a frog”. In S. Strömqvist and L. Verhoeven (Eds.) Relating Events in Narrative: Vol. 2. Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219-257). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[23] Sugiyama Y., (2005). “Not all Verb-framed Languages Are Created Equal: The case of Japanese”. In Rebecca T. cover and Ynui Kim (eds.), Proceedings of the Thirty-first Annual Meeting of the Berkely Linguistics Society, General session and Parasession on prosodic variation and change (pp. 299-310).
[24] Talmy L., (2000a). Toward a Cognitive Semantics, volume I: Concept structuring systems. i-viii, 1-565. Cambridge: MIT Press.
[25] Talmy L., (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics, Volume II: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring. i-viii, 1-495. Cambridge: MIT Press.
[26] Talmy L., (2007). Lexical Typologies. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon (pp. 66-168). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[27] Talmy L., (2008). “Main verb properties and equipollent framing”. In: Guo, Jian-Sheng, et. al. eds. Crosslinguistic Approaches to the Psychology of 29 Language: Research in the Tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[28] Verkerk A., (2014). The Evolutionary Dynamics of Motion Event Encoding. Ipskamp Drukkers: Enschede, The Netherlands.
[29] Zolfaghari E., (2011). “A Fuzzy Approach to Motion Verbs in Persian Language”. 4th International Conference of Iranian Languages. Sweden. Uppsala, pp. 48-51.
The International Journal of Humanities
Volume 26, Issue 4
December 2019
Pages 16-29