A Typological Study On Lexicalization Patterns Of Motion Events In Chinese

The thesis aims at studying the typological characteristics of motion events in Chinese. The focus is to investigate the continuity of lexicalization pattern whether or not the Chinese users represent motion events in different historical periods as well as the similarities and differences that contemporary Chinese and English users represent motion events in different language families under the framework by Talmy.In Toward a Cognitive Semantics (Talmy2000), Talmy proposes the motion framing theory. He identifies two language categories in the world on the basis of the lexicalization patterns of motion events:Verb-framed Language and Satellite-framed Language and classifies Chinese as a’strong Satellite-framed Language’(Talmy2000, Ⅱ:272). Talmy’s classification on language typology stimulates a great many scholars to have a further study on various languages in the world,among whom the most distinguished is Slobin, he claims Chinese as an equipollently-framed language (Slobin2004). Which language typology a language family belongs to depends on’whether the core schema is expressed by the main verb or by the satellite’(Talmy2000vol.Ⅱ:221), that is to say, Path component is performed by the core verb or by the satellite. By far, however, what Chinese typological preference hasn’t had a clear conclusion because Chinese language contains abundant compound verb phrases moreover, the complement is a verb. Simultaneously, the complemental verb can be used independently. Whether the complemental verb is the core verb or not has been debatable makes it extremly difficult to distinguish Chinese language categorization. We are not rushing to make a conclusion on Chinese typological preference. On the contrary, we are examining the typological characteristics of motion events in Chinese with the guidance of the lexicalization patterns by Talmy. Firstly, from the diachronic study, we find that Chinese typological pattern has shifted. In expressing the same semantic component, ancient Chinese commonly adopted a synthetic method that conflated Path, Manner and Cause in a single Motion verb while contemporary Chinese adopts an analytic method that the Path component is expressed by the satellites. As Talmy claims, we will make a conclusion:ancient Chinese is a Verb-framed Language while contemporary Chinese is a Saterllite-framed Language.Secondly, from the synchronic study, we demenstrate Chinese adopts a unique model of lexicalization patterns and is not’a perfect example1of a satellite-framed language, as claims by Talmy. Similarities and differences coexist between English and Chinese. Similarities:(1) they both adhere to the movability principle in the assignment of Figure and Ground;(2) they both have similar semantic conflation patterns of Motion verbs-Motion+Cause/Manner;(3) they both use satellites to express Path or direction; Differences:(1) There exists Figure and Ground reversion when the Figure element rates much higher than the Ground one in the movability hierarchy, while the semantic content remains unchanged;(2) Chinese hasn’t sufficient Motion verbs like English;(3) Chinese Path component is largely lexicalized as prepositions and complemental verbs while English Path component is largely lexicalized as adverbs and prepositions;(4) The lexicalization pattern in Chinese Path is more complicated than that in English. In Chinese, Path satellites can be made up of verbs used either in a single verb, like进jin,回hui or in a compound verb, like进来jin lai,回去qu;(5) In expressing a consecutive event, Chinese uses the lexicalization pattern of [Motion1+Motion2+Motion3+...Motionn+Path1] while in English of uses the lexicalization pattern [Motion,+Path1+Path2+Path3+...Pathn].Thirdly, Talmy’s language classification theory does some justifiability. We do not ignore, however, Chinese, as a living entity, is changing everlastingly. We can’t render it a fixed language type. Chinese should be a complex-framed language, which needs a further study of course. Our study concerning the lexicalization patterns of motion events in Chinese clearly affords a significant insight into motion expressions. I hope the observations and findings can make a contribution to Chinese language categorization and lay a foundation of the further study related.