Motion event construal within and across languages

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15210%2F25%3A73635714" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15210/25:73635714 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

—

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Motion event construal within and across languages

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

he last forty years has seen a vast amount of research on linguisticencoding of motion, a lot of it inspired by Talmy’s famous postulationof semantic typology and division of languages into Satellite-framedand Verb-framed (Talmy 1985, 1991). Widening the scope oflanguages resulted in reformulating the typology as a cline ratherthan a strict dichotomy (e.g. Slobin 2006), tested was also Slobin’sidea that motion typology has a bearing on how speakers think andwhat they pay attention to “while in the process of foprmulating orinterpreting verbal messages” about motion events (Slobin 2000). Agrowing body of research studied the impact of these dierent‘thinking for speaking’ patterns on second language acquisition(e.g. Cadierno and Ruiz 2006, Cadierno 2010, Filipović and Vidaković2010, Alonso 2013, Lewandowski and Özçaliskan 2019, HijazoGascón 2021, Calle Bocanegra 2024) and the way to deal with themin a language classroom (e.g. Calle Bocanegra 2019, 2024, Stam etal. 2021), studied was also the impact of motion typology ontranslation (e.g. Ibarretxe-Antuñano and Filipović 2013). Dierencesbetween languages from the same typological group started to bestudied in more detail (e.g. Filipović 2013, Hijazo-Gascón andIbarretxe-Antuñano 2013, Lewandowski 2021); the study Satelliteframing strategies in languages traditionally classified as Verbframed brought interesting insight into the nature of what has beencalled ‘the boundary crossing constraint’ (e.g. Pedersen 2014,Özçaliskan 2015, Calle Bocanegra 2024). The need to studyindividual constructions, especially those that cross-linguisticallydescribe the same ‘state of aairs’, has been voiced also by linguistsworking in constructional frameworks (e.g. Croft et al. 2010).In this workshop, we aim to bring together linguists interested inlinguistic encoding of motion. The topics include, but are not limitedto:1. Encoding of motion in lesser studied languages, especiallywith respect to Talmyan typology2. Lesser explored ‘Intra-typological dierences’ betweenlanguages in motion encoding (e.g. Slavic languages, but alsoothers)3. Impact of crosslinguistic dierences in motion encoding ontranslation, interpreting, or second language acquisition4. How to teach an L2 Thinking-for-Speaking about motion5. Languages, or constructions? Construction grammarapproaches to cross-linguistic variation in motion encoding6. Methodological issues related to comparing languages intheir motion encoding

Název v anglickém jazyce

Motion event construal within and across languages

Popis výsledku anglicky

he last forty years has seen a vast amount of research on linguisticencoding of motion, a lot of it inspired by Talmy’s famous postulationof semantic typology and division of languages into Satellite-framedand Verb-framed (Talmy 1985, 1991). Widening the scope oflanguages resulted in reformulating the typology as a cline ratherthan a strict dichotomy (e.g. Slobin 2006), tested was also Slobin’sidea that motion typology has a bearing on how speakers think andwhat they pay attention to “while in the process of foprmulating orinterpreting verbal messages” about motion events (Slobin 2000). Agrowing body of research studied the impact of these dierent‘thinking for speaking’ patterns on second language acquisition(e.g. Cadierno and Ruiz 2006, Cadierno 2010, Filipović and Vidaković2010, Alonso 2013, Lewandowski and Özçaliskan 2019, HijazoGascón 2021, Calle Bocanegra 2024) and the way to deal with themin a language classroom (e.g. Calle Bocanegra 2019, 2024, Stam etal. 2021), studied was also the impact of motion typology ontranslation (e.g. Ibarretxe-Antuñano and Filipović 2013). Dierencesbetween languages from the same typological group started to bestudied in more detail (e.g. Filipović 2013, Hijazo-Gascón andIbarretxe-Antuñano 2013, Lewandowski 2021); the study Satelliteframing strategies in languages traditionally classified as Verbframed brought interesting insight into the nature of what has beencalled ‘the boundary crossing constraint’ (e.g. Pedersen 2014,Özçaliskan 2015, Calle Bocanegra 2024). The need to studyindividual constructions, especially those that cross-linguisticallydescribe the same ‘state of aairs’, has been voiced also by linguistsworking in constructional frameworks (e.g. Croft et al. 2010).In this workshop, we aim to bring together linguists interested inlinguistic encoding of motion. The topics include, but are not limitedto:1. Encoding of motion in lesser studied languages, especiallywith respect to Talmyan typology2. Lesser explored ‘Intra-typological dierences’ betweenlanguages in motion encoding (e.g. Slavic languages, but alsoothers)3. Impact of crosslinguistic dierences in motion encoding ontranslation, interpreting, or second language acquisition4. How to teach an L2 Thinking-for-Speaking about motion5. Languages, or constructions? Construction grammarapproaches to cross-linguistic variation in motion encoding6. Methodological issues related to comparing languages intheir motion encoding

Druh

W - Uspořádání workshopu

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60203 - Linguistics

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2025

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Místo konání akce

Olomouc

Stát konání akce

CZ - Česká republika

Datum zahájení akce

—

Datum ukončení akce

—

Celkový počet účastníků

60

Počet zahraničních účastníků

40

Typ akce podle státní přísl. účastníků

WRD - Celosvětová akce