Modal Verbs in Bulgarian Their Lexical Specification and Interaction With

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Modal Verbs in Bulgarian Their Lexical Specification and Interaction With Modal verbs in Bulgarian Their lexical specification and interaction with tense, aspect and evidentiality Sizen Ertan Lyutfi LING4190 Master Thesis in Linguistics Department of Linguistics and Scandinavian Studies UNIVERSITY OF OSLO Spring 2021 II Abstract This thesis aims to investigate the lexical specification of the modal verbs moga and trjabva in Bulgarian, a Southeast Slavic language. Two of the main components used to describe the meaning of modals are modal force and modal flavour (von Fintel and Matthewson, 2008). Modal force describes a proposition either being possible or necessary. Modal flavour refers to the way in which something is necessary or possible, such as deontic (what can or must be the case based on rules and obligations) and epistemic (what can or must be the case based in light of what the speaker knows). In Bulgarian, the necessity and possibility modals interact with tense, aspect and evidentiality and agree with their subject in person and number. Unlike tense, aspect and evidentiality, the modal verbs in Bulgarian have not been independently investigated before. Two different studies on Bulgarian modals were conducted. In the first one, I adapt the modal questionnaire for fieldwork developed by Vander Klok (2014) to Bulgarian and describe the lexical specification of two modal verbs based on their modal force and modal flavour. Data from 19 different contexts suggests that moga is specified for possibility modal force while trjabva is specified for necessity modal force, but both are compatible with all modal flavours, similar to the English modals can and must. In the second study, I develop an online questionnaire that aimed to differentiate between judgements on speaker commitment towards utterances without a modal, with a modal in its bare form, with a modal with evidential morphology and with the modal verb in its conditional form. The goal of the study was to towards understanding if the different morphology affects the modal force component of the modal verbs. Based on the analysis of 124 responses, there was no difference in the judgements between the modal forms, however there was a significant difference between a modal and non-modal form. Based on these results, I propose a formal semantic analysis based on the standard Kratzerian framework (1981) for the Bulgarian modals moga and trjabva. In addition, I consider Condoravdi’s (2001) approach on temporality in modals with respect to Bulgarian modals’ interaction with tense and aspect. Finally, I take into consideration three different approaches to evidentiality in Bulgarian (Izvorski(1997); Smirnova(2011b) and Arregui et al.(2017)) in light of the data gathered on the modal verbs and offer new empirical data towards the theoretical frameworks on evidentiality in Bulgarian. III Acknowledgements In the work on this thesis, I had been blessed to count on so many people to provide me with academic, moral and nonetheless emotional support. First of all, I would like to thank my main thesis advisor, Jozina Vander Klok. Without her insightful comments, active engagement on my progress, constructive feedback, positive attitude and show of understanding and compassion, I do not think that this thesis would have been in the shape it is now had I had any other advisor. Secondly, I would like to thank my second thesis advisor, Sarah Magdalena Zobel, who joined the “Bulgarian project” later on, but has been a fountain of ideas and feedback. The invigorating discussions on statistics have had a huge impact on the presentation and shape of the results in the thesis and without her advanced knowledge on linguistics and statistics; I doubt that I would have been able to show what I wanted to show in the way it is shown. I want to thank all the five language consultants in the first survey for their patience, willingness and energy when helping me out for absolutely free. Furthermore, I want to thank all 124 participants in the online survey for their willingness to put 15 minutes of their times for the mere reason to help raise awareness on topics around their native language and by doing that also helping an aspiring linguist understand his own native language a bit better. I want to thank my friends Petar, Ivaylo, Aleksandra and Venci for sharing the survey further throughout their social channels and helping me reach the target answers numbers faster. I am humbled to have so many friends that motivated me to progress and provided their feedback and judgments when I needed it most. Thanks is due to Bozhidar, who was willing to discuss Bulgarian grammar with me whenever I asked him, even at 2 am. in the morning. I am also indebted to Jesper, who eagerly helped with his proof writing and formatting wizardry in Word. Finally, I would like to thank my family for the emotional support throughout the writing, believing in me and pushing me to pursue a degree in something that I am truly passionate about. IV Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Research Topic ............................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Modality ...................................................................................................................... 2 1.2.1 Modal Force ......................................................................................................... 3 1.2.2 Modal Flavour ...................................................................................................... 4 1.3 The role of da ................................................................................................................... 4 2. Background of Bulgarian Tense and Aspect system ............................................................. 7 3. Study 1: Investigation of the lexical specification of the Bulgarian modal verbs .............. 11 3.1 Methods .......................................................................................................................... 11 3.1.1 Participants .............................................................................................................. 11 3.1.2 Procedure ................................................................................................................. 11 3.2 Results and discussion .................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 20 4. Background of Bulgarian Evidentiality ............................................................................... 22 4.1 General overview of Bulgarian Evidentiality................................................................. 22 4.2 Evidentiality analysed as epistemic modality (Izvorski, 1997) ...................................... 26 4.3 Temporal interpretation of evidentials (Smirnova, 2013) .............................................. 28 4.4 Evidentiality as rooted in aspect (Arregui et al., 2017) .................................................. 29 5. Study 2: Study on the strength of listener belief in connection with modal verbs .............. 31 5.1 Degen et al. (2018) and the core idea of Study 2 ........................................................... 31 5.2 Methods .......................................................................................................................... 37 5.2.1 Participants .............................................................................................................. 37 5.2.2 Procedure ................................................................................................................. 37 5.2.3 Stimuli ..................................................................................................................... 39 5.2.4 Design ...................................................................................................................... 40 5.3 Results ............................................................................................................................ 42 V 5.4 Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 47 6. Formal analysis of the Bulgarian modals trjabva and moga ............................................... 49 6.1 Formal semantic analysis of trjabva and moga .............................................................. 49 6.2 Moga and trjabva in relation to tense and aspect ........................................................... 51 6.2.1 Restrictions to the distribution of the modal verbs .................................................. 56 6.2.2 The perfect tenses .................................................................................................... 56 6.2.3 Aspect opposition (perfective vs. imperfective) in the present tense ...................... 58 6.2.4 Past Imperfect and Past Aorist................................................................................. 59 6.2.5 Future tense and conditional form ........................................................................... 62 6.2.6 Summary of section 5.2 ........................................................................................... 64 6.3 Towards a formal analysis of temporal and evidential marking on trjabva and moga .. 65 7. Conclusion ..........................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Comparing Bulgarian and Slovak Multext-East Morphology Tagset1
    Comparing Bulgarian and Slovak Multext-East morphology tagset1 Ludmila Dimitrovaa), Radovan Garabíkb), Daniela Majchrákováb) a) Institute of Mathematics and Informatics, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria [email protected] b) Ľ. Štúr Institute of Linguistics, Slovak Academy of Sciences 813 64 Bratislava, Slovakia [email protected], http://korpus.juls.savba.sk Abstract We analyse the differences between the Bulgarian and Slovak languages Multext-East morphology specifica- tion (MTE, 2004). The differences can be caused either by inherent language dissimilarities, different ways of analysing morphology categories or just by different use of MTE design guideline. We describe all the parts of speech in detail with emphasis on analysing the tagset differences. Keywords: Bulgarian, Slovak, grammatical category, morphology specification, morphology tagset Introduction The EC project MULTEXT Multilingual Tools and Corpora produced linguistics resources and a freely available set of tools that are extensible, coherent and language-independent, for seven Western European languages: English, French, Spanish, Italian, German, Dutch, and Swedish (Ide, Veronis, 1994). The EC INCO-Copernicus project MULTEXT-East Multilingual Text Tools and Corpora for Central and Eastern European Languages is a continuation of the MULTEXT project. MULTEXT-East (MTE for short; Dimitrova et al., 1998) used methodologies and results of MULTEXT. MTE developed significant language resources for six Central and Eastern European (CEE) languages: Bulgarian,
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6 Mirativity and the Bulgarian Evidential System Elena Karagjosova Freie Universität Berlin
    Chapter 6 Mirativity and the Bulgarian evidential system Elena Karagjosova Freie Universität Berlin This paper provides an account of the Bulgarian admirative construction andits place within the Bulgarian evidential system based on (i) new observations on the morphological, temporal, and evidential properties of the admirative, (ii) a criti- cal reexamination of existing approaches to the Bulgarian evidential system, and (iii) insights from a similar mirative construction in Spanish. I argue in particular that admirative sentences are assertions based on evidence of some sort (reporta- tive, inferential, or direct) which are contrasted against the set of beliefs held by the speaker up to the point of receiving the evidence; the speaker’s past beliefs entail a proposition that clashes with the assertion, triggering belief revision and resulting in a sense of surprise. I suggest an analysis of the admirative in terms of a mirative operator that captures the evidential, temporal, aspectual, and modal properties of the construction in a compositional fashion. The analysis suggests that although mirativity and evidentiality can be seen as separate semantic cate- gories, the Bulgarian admirative represents a cross-linguistically relevant case of a mirative extension of evidential verbal forms. Keywords: mirativity, evidentiality, fake past 1 Introduction The Bulgarian evidential system is an ongoing topic of discussion both withre- spect to its interpretation and its morphological buildup. In this paper, I focus on the currently poorly understood admirative construction. The analysis I present is based on largely unacknowledged observations and data involving the mor- phological structure, the syntactic environment, and the evidential meaning of the admirative. Elena Karagjosova.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise of Bulgarian Nationalism and Russia's Influence Upon It
    University of Louisville ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository Electronic Theses and Dissertations 5-2014 The rise of Bulgarian nationalism and Russia's influence upon it. Lin Wenshuang University of Louisville Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.library.louisville.edu/etd Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Wenshuang, Lin, "The rise of Bulgarian nationalism and Russia's influence upon it." (2014). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1548. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/1548 This Doctoral Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has retained all other copyrights. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE RISE OF BULGARIAN NATIONALISM AND RUSSIA‘S INFLUENCE UPON IT by Lin Wenshuang B. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 1997 M. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 2002 A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of the University of Louisville in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Humanities University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky May 2014 Copyright © 2014 by Lin Wenshuang All Rights Reserved THE RISE OF BULGARIAN NATIONALISM AND RUSSIA‘S INFLUENCE UPON IT by Lin Wenshuang B. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 1997 M. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 2002 A Dissertation Approved on April 1, 2014 By the following Dissertation Committee __________________________________ Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Suffix Combinations in Bulgarian: Parsability and Hierarchy-Based Ordering
    Suffix Combinations in Bulgarian: Parsability and Hierarchy-Based Ordering Stela Manova Department of Slavic Studies University of Vienna Universitätscampus AAKH Spitalgasse 2, Hof 3 A-1090 Vienna Austria Phone: +43-1-4277-42806 Fax: +43-1-4277-9428 Email: [email protected] URL: http://slawistik.univie.ac.at/mitarbeiter/manova-stela/ ; http://homepage.univie.ac.at/stela.manova/ Abstract This article extends the empirical scope of the most recent approach to affix ordering, the Parsability Hypothesis (Hay 2001, 2002, 2003) or Complexity-Based Ordering (CBO) (Plag 2002; Hay and Plag 2004; Plag and Baayen 2009), to the inflecting-fusional morphological type, as represented by the South Slavic language Bulgarian. In order to account properly for the structure of the Bulgarian word, I distinguish between suffixes that are in the derivational word slot and suffixes that are in the inflectional word slot and show that inflectional suffix combinations are more easily parsable than derivational suffix combinations. Derivational suffixes participate in mirror-image combinations of AB – BA type and can be also attached recursively. The order of 12 out of the 22 derivational suffixes under scrutiny in this article is thus incompatible with CBO. With respect to recursiveness and productivity, the Bulgarian word exhibits three domains of suffixation (in order of increasing productivity): 1) a non-diminutive derivational domain, where a suffix may attach recursively on non-adjacent cycles; 2) a diminutive domain, where a suffix may attach recursively on adjacent cycles; and 3) an inflectional domain, where a suffix never attaches recursively. Overall, the results of this study conform to the last revision of the Parsability Hypothesis (Baayen et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Evidentiality and Mood: Grammatical Expressions of Epistemic Modality in Bulgarian
    Evidentiality and mood: Grammatical expressions of epistemic modality in Bulgarian DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements o the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Anastasia Smirnova, M.A. Graduate Program in Linguistics The Ohio State University 2011 Dissertation Committee: Brian Joseph, co-advisor Judith Tonhauser, co-advisor Craige Roberts Copyright by Anastasia Smirnova 2011 ABSTRACT This dissertation is a case study of two grammatical categories, evidentiality and mood. I argue that evidentiality and mood are grammatical expressions of epistemic modality and have an epistemic modal component as part of their meanings. While the empirical foundation for this work is data from Bulgarian, my analysis has a number of empirical and theoretical consequences for the previous work on evidentiality and mood in the formal semantics literature. Evidentiality is traditionally analyzed as a grammatical category that encodes information sources (Aikhenvald 2004). I show that the Bulgarian evidential has richer meaning: not only does it express information source, but also it has a temporal and a modal component. With respect to the information source, the Bulgarian evidential is compatible with a variety of evidential meanings, i.e. direct, inferential, and reportative, as long as the speaker has concrete perceivable evidence (as opposed to evidence based on a mental activity). With respect to epistemic commitment, the construction has different felicity conditions depending on the context: the speaker must be committed to the truth of the proposition in the scope of the evidential in a direct/inferential evidential context, but not in a reportative context.
    [Show full text]
  • The Morphosyntax of Clitic Doubling
    UC Santa Cruz UC Santa Cruz Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title On the Mapping from Syntax to Morphophonology Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/82m2c0fq Author Harizanov, Boris Publication Date 2014 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ ON THE MAPPING FROM SYNTAX TO MORPHOPHONOLOGY A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in LINGUISTICS by Boris Harizanov June The Dissertation of Boris Harizanov is approved: Professor Sandra Chung, Chair Professor Jorge Hankamer Professor James McCloskey Dean Tyrus Miller Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate Studies Copyright © by Boris Harizanov Contents Abbreviations vi Abstract vii Dedication ix Acknowledgments x Introduction . Overview ................................. . Theoretical background ........................ . Language background ......................... . Outline .................................. Clitic doubling . Types of clitic constructions ...................... .. Clitic doubling ......................... .. CLLD and CLRD ........................ . The status of the clitic doubled associate ............... .. Islandhood ........................... .. Case assignment ........................ .. Word order ........................... .. Summary ............................ . The status of the clitic–associate relation ............... .. Binding ............................
    [Show full text]
  • Lw/M 117 1 Macedonian
    LW/M 117 1 MACEDONIAN Contents Abbreviations.................................................................................................. 3 0 Sociolinguistic and Geolinguistic Situation..................................................... 4 0.1 Geography.......................................................................................... 4 0.2 Terminology and History......................................................................... 4 0.3 Standardization..................................................................................... 5 0.4 Status................................................................................................ 6 0.5 Dialects.............................................................................................. 6 0.5.1 Major Isoglosses................................................................................... 6 0.5.2 Vocalic Inventories ................................................................................ 6 0.5.3 Prosody............................................................................................. 7 0.5.4 Morphology ........................................................................................ 7 0.6 Number of Speakers .............................................................................. 8 1 Phonology.......................................................................................... 8 1.1 Orthography........................................................................................ 8 1.2 Phonemic Inventory and Phonotactics
    [Show full text]
  • Storytelling and Retelling in Bulgarian: a Contrastive Perspective on the Bulgarian Adaptation of MAIN
    Storytelling and retelling in Bulgarian: a contrastive perspective on the Bulgarian adaptation of MAIN Eva Meier Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Milena Kuehnast Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Bulgarian belongs to the South Slavic language group but exhibits specific linguistic features shared with the non-Slavic languages of the Balkan Sprachbund. In this paper, we discuss linguistic and cultural aspects relevant for the Bulgarian adaptation of the revised English version of The Multilingual Assessment Instrument for Narratives (LITMUS-MAIN). We address typological properties of the verbal system pertaining to a differentiated aspectual system and to a paradigm of verbal forms for narratives grammaticalized as renarrative mood in Bulgarian. Further, we consider lexical, derivational and discourse cohesive means in contrast to the English markers of involvement and perspective taking in the MAIN stories. 1 Introduction The Multilingual Assessment Instrument for Narratives (LITMUS-MAIN, hereafter MAIN) as a tool for the assessment of the comprehension and production of narratives was first developed by a multinational team in 2012 (Gagarina et al., 2012). MAIN offers four picture stories controlled for cognitive and linguistic complexity, parallelism in micro- and macrostructure, and cultural appropriateness. The instrument can be used to access listening comprehension, storytelling and retelling skills of children aged three or older. In the following years MAIN has been adapted to languages of different language families and successfully applied in studies investigating the development of narratives skills in mono- und bilingual children (Gagarina et al., 2015; Pesco & Kay-Raining Bird, 2016). The revised version of MAIN (Gagarina et al., 2019) implements insights from the manifold practical experience with the tool presenting a manual improved in terms of handling and clarity.
    [Show full text]
  • Mirativity in Korean and Bulgarian
    Third International Academic Conference of KACEES 1 Bulgaria, Korea, Central & East Europe - Humanities and Social Science 14th – 15th July, 2003Sofia University, Sofia, Bulgaria Mirativity in Korean and Bulgarian So Yong Kim, Krasimira Aleksova І. Introduction The present paper studies from a typological point of view the grammatical means for encoding a speaker’s surprise at an unexpected real fact in Korean and Bulgarian. In the first section we examine the semantics of the phenomenon and present briefly a few approaches to it. The nest part is an attempt at a typological classification of languages on the grounds of the grammatical status of mirative forms employed by the respective language(s). The main aim is to discover and demonstrate the places of Bulgarian and Korean in such a typological classification and specify the similarities and differences in the grammatical means for expressing the speaker’s astonishment. The third part focuses on the morphological patterns and types of marking specific for Bulgarian and Korean. It contains an overview of the grammatical system of the languages and some particular mirative uses. II. The semantics of mirativ forms The mirative is used to express the assessment of the knowledge background of the speaker – a fact little known to the speaker turns out to be truthful and the conclusion about the mismatch between the foreseen, expected, supposed and the real fact encites the astonishment of the speaker. The surprise expressed by the mirative forms is caused by the discrepancy between what is expected and what thing really are (see Guéncheva 1990) and as such encodes the transition of the speaker from a state of non-knowledge into a state of knowledge (see Nitsolova 1993).
    [Show full text]
  • To R:Conjugation in Bulgarian, the Citation Form of a Verb Can Terminate in -A, -Ja Or -M
    E'aazap crcunm nuK u rumep amyp a e vycrc6uu a u e Etneapun ON SOME RECENT CHANGES IN BULGARIAN CONruGATION1 Stela Manova2 (Universität Wien, Institut fi.ir Slawistik, Universitätscampus AAKH stela.manova@univie. ac.at) The present paper focuses on two topics ttrat, evidently, have not been treated in recent literature on Bulgarian verb morphology (except in Manova 2006): 1) Since publication of the Bulgarian Academy Grammar (henceforth BAG) in 1983, some verbs have changed their conjugation, i.e. verbs originally belong- ing to the e-CONJ3 have moved to the r-CONl,i.g . mämrja,(I) murmur,, mämrei, etc. according to the BAG, but mämrja, mämrii now (cf. the New Spelling Diction- ary of Bulgarian, henceforth NSDB, published in2002); and 2) Since 1983, there has been a clear tendency toward preservation ofthe stress pattern of the present in the aorist, i.e. PRES pisa, piiei etc. and AoF.pßax, pfsa, etc. rather than pisax, pisö etc, with an end-stress (cf. BAG and NSDB). This paper examines the implications of the two changes above for the or- ganization of Bulgarian verb inflection. I contend that these changes are evidence for root-based phonological organization of Bulgarian verb inflection, i.e. the pa- per confradicts the classical stem-based classification of Bulgarian (and Slavic) verbs. The paper is structured as follows: section 1 establishes the number and phonological properties of the verbs with altered conjugations; section 2 treats the stress patterns ofthe present-day paradigm ofBulgarian verbs; section 3 discusses the implications of the changes accounted for in the previous two sections and sub- sequently defines a system of inflection class assignment rules; and in section 4 conclusions are drawn.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Aspects of the Morphological Processing of Bulgarian
    Some Aspects of the Morphological Processing of Bulgarian Milena Slavcheva Linguistic Modelling Department Central Laboratory for Parallel Processing Bulgarian Academy of Sciences 25A, Acad. G. Bonchev St, 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria [email protected] Abstract linguistic and computational decision-making of each stage. This paper demonstrates the modelling Bulgarian computational morphology has de- of morphological knowledge in Bulgar- veloped as the result of local (Paskaleva et al. ian and applications of the created data 1993; Popov et al. 1998) and international activ- sets in an integrated framework for pro- ities for the compilation of sets of morphosyntac- duction and manipulation of language tic distinctions and the construction of electronic resources. The production scenario is lexicons (Dimitrova et al. 1998). The need for exemplified by the Bulgarian verb as the synchronization and standardization has lead to morphologically richest and most prob- the activities of the application to Bulgarian of lematic part-of-speech category. The internationally acknowledged guidelines for mor- definition of the set of morphosyntactic phosyntactic annotation (Slavcheva and Paskaleva specifications for verbs in the lexicon is 1997), and to the comparison of morphosyntactic described. The application of the tagset tagsets (Slavcheva 1997). in the automatic morphological analy- In this paper I demonstrate the production sce- sis of text corpora is accounted for. A nario of modelling morphological knowledge in Type Model of Bulgarian verbs handling Bulgarian and applications of the created data sets the attachment of short pronominal ele- in an integrated framework for production and ma- ments to verbs, is presented. nipulation of language resources, that is, the Bul- TreeBank framework (Simov et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Traci Lindsey Dissertation
    Bulgarian Verbs of Motion: Slavic Verbs in a Balkan Context by Traci Speed Lindsey A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Slavic Languages and Literatures in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Ronelle Alexander, Chair Professor Johanna Nichols Professor Alan Timberlake Professor Dan Slobin Spring 2011 Bulgarian Verbs of Motion: Slavic Verbs in a Balkan Context copyright 2011 by Traci Speed Lindsey Abstract Bulgarian Verbs of Motion: Slavic Verbs in a Balkan Context by Traci Speed Lindsey Doctor of Philosophy in Slavic Languages and Literatures University of California, Berkeley Professor Ronelle Alexander, Chair This study examines the motion verb system of Bulgarian, focusing both on the structure of the Bulgarian motion verb itself, and on the information typically encoded in the Bulgarian verb of motion. It then compares the Bulgarian motion verb system with the motion verb systems of two other Slavic languages, Russian and Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian (BCS). The theoretical framework is Leonard Talmy’s typological categorization of languages as either verb framed/low manner languages or satellite framed/high manner languages. The Slavic language family, like most other Indo-European languages families, is considered satellite framed and high manner: path of motion tends to be expressed by a satellite to the verb (in the form of a preposition and/or a prefix), leaving the verb root free to express manner. The expression of manner in the verb root itself results in a lower cognitive load for the processing of manner of motion, and consequently, speakers of satellite-framed languages tend to develop motion verb vocabulary around the expression of manner of motion.
    [Show full text]