Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

No Evidence of L1 Path Encoding Strategies in the L2 in Advanced Bulgarian Speakers of Norwegian

2012; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 12; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/13875868.2012.658931

1573-9252

Mila Vulchanova, Liliana Martínez, Rik Eshuis, Kjersti Faldet Listhaug,

Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

Abstract This article has two aims: we first test the applicability of Talmy's typology for describing the cross-linguistic encoding of directed motion with Norwegian and Bulgarian. Theoretically, these languages belong to the same group of satellite-framed languages. However, we show that they differ in their preferred strategies. Norwegian prefers an elaborate prepositional inventory and Bulgarian employs a rich verbal lexicon. We also test whether Bulgarian L2 speakers of Norwegian follow the L1 strategy in describing directed motion. We find no evidence of transfer in L2 speaker responses, which suggests target language thinking-for-speaking patterns. Keywords: spatial languagemotionpathpath functionsmapping between semantics and syntaxacquisition of spatial categoriesL1 transfer into L2 Notes 1Transitive prepositions take DP complements (alternatively PPs or infinitive constructions), intransitive prepositions do not take complements. The latter are in line with Talmy's original definition of satellite: Han løp ut “He ran out” (CitationFaarlund et al., 1997). 2 Forlate can only be combined with a direct object denoting source and not with a PP: Han forlot huset. (“He left the house.”). Nå takes either a direct object denoting the goal of motion (Hun når hotellet uten problemer. “She reaches the hotel without problems.”), or a PP headed by prepositions encoding goal-directed paths (nå fram til “reach to”, nå igjen “catch up with”). 3A similar point is made by CitationSlobin (2005) about the status of prefixed verbs in Serbian/ Croatian. 4Of the L2 group, 3.4% of the responses contained such errors. Almost 3/4 of these can be attributed to two participants. 5Not included in the expressions extracted in the present coding scheme. 6The latter are phrasal verbs or, according the Norwegian tradition, ‘particle verbs,’ where the particle does not have a spatial meaning on its own, and the meaning of the construction is not compositional, i.e., not equal to the sum of the meanings of the verb and the particle. Therefore we consider them as a single verblike unit when the encoding of direction is concerned. 7See note 5. *The percentage of coded responses is significantly different between levels of Path Direction (Mixed model ANOVA: F(1, 51) = 53.68, p < .001), with divergence situations eliciting fewer valid responses than convergence situations. Other factors show no effect on the number of valid responses (all p < .05).