Motion verbs and memory for motion events

References

• Allen, S., Özyürek, A., Kita, S., Brown, A., Furman, R., Ishizuka, T., & Fujii, M. (2007). Language-specific and universal influences in children’s syntactic packaging of manner and path: A comparison of English, Japanese, and Turkish. Cognition, 102(1), 16–48. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.12.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allport, D. A., Antonis, B., & Reynolds, P. (1972). On the division of attention: A disproof of the single channel hypothesis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24(2), 225–235. doi: 10.1080/00335557243000102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antes, J. R., & Kristjanson, A. F. (1993). Effects of capacity demands on picture viewing. Perception & Psychophysics, 54(6), 808–813. doi: 10.3758/BF03211805
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Archambault, A., O’Donnell, C., & Schyns, P. (1999). Blind to object changes: When learning the same object at different levels of categorization modifies its perception. Psychological Science, 10(3), 249–255. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Athanasopoulos, P., & Bylund, E. (2013). Does grammatical aspect affect motion event cognition? A cross-linguistic comparison of English and Swedish speakers. Cognitive Science, 37, 286–309. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Athanasopoulos, P., Bylund, E., Montero-Melis, G., Damjanovic, L., Schartner, A., Kibbe, A., … Thierry, G. (2015). Two languages, two minds. Psychological Science, 26(4), 518–526. doi: 10.1177/0956797614567509
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berthele, R. (2013). Disentangling manner and path: Evidence from varieties of German and Romance. In J. Goschler & A. Stefanowitsch (Eds.), Variation and change in the encoding of motion events (pp. 55–75). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Berthele, R. (2017). When bilinguals forget their manners: Language dominance and motion event descriptions in French and German. In Vigo International Journal for Applied Linguistics, 14, 39–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosse, S., & Papafragou, A. (2018). Does language affect memory for object position? A crosslinguistic comparison. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 18(4), 1–30. doi:10.1080/13875868.2018.1440396
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowerman, M. (1996). Learning how to structure space for language: A cross-linguistic perspective. In P. Bloom, M. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. Garrett (Eds.), Language and space (pp. 385–436). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bowerman, M., & Choi, S. (2001). Shaping meanings for language: Universal and language-specific in the acquisition of semantic categories. In M. Bowerman & S. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 475–511). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1993). Linguistic and nonlinguistic coding of spatial arrays: Explorations in Mayan cognition (Working Paper No. 24). Cognitive Anthropology Research Group, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.
   Google Scholar
• Bunger, A., Papafragou, A., & Trueswell, J. C. (2013). Event structure influences language production: Evidence from structural priming in motion event description. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(3), 299–323. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2013.04.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunger, A., Skordos, D., Trueswell, J. C., & Papafragou, A. (2016). How children and adults encode causative events cross-linguistically: Implications for language production and attention. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(8), 1015–1037. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2016.1175649
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunger, A., Skordos, D., Trueswell, J. C., & Papafragou, A. (under review). How children attend to events before speaking: Crosslinguistic evidence from the motion domain.
   Google Scholar
• Bunger, A., Trueswell, J. C., & Papafragou, A. (2012). The relation between event apprehension and utterance formulation in children: Evidence from linguistic omissions. Cognition, 122(2), 135–149. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.10.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carmichael, L., Hogan, H. P., & Walter, A. A. (1932). An experimental study of the effect of language on the reproduction of visually perceived form. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15(1), 73–86. doi: 10.1037/h0072671
   Google Scholar
• Casasola, M., & Cohen, L. B. (2002). Infant categorization of containment, support and tight-fit spatial relationships. Developmental Science, 5(2), 247–264. doi: 10.1111/1467-7687.00226
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dessalegn, B., & Landau, B. (2008). More than meets the eye. Psychological Science, 19(2), 189–195. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02066.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dessalegn, B., & Landau, B. (2013). Interaction between language and vision: It’s momentary, abstract, and it develops. Cognition, 127(3), 331–344. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.02.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durso, F. T., & Johnson, M. K. (1980). The effects of orienting tasks on recognition, recall, and modality confusion of pictures and words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(4), 416–429. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90294-7
   Google Scholar
• Durst-Andersen, P., Smith, V., & Thomsen, O. N. (2013). Towards a cognitive-semiotic typology of motion verbs. In C. Paradis, J. Hudson, & U. Magnusson (Eds.), The Construal of spatial meaning: Windows into conceptual space (pp. 118–143). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fazio, L. K., & Marsh, E. J. (2010). Correcting false memories. Psychological Science, 21(6), 801–803. doi: 10.1177/0956797610371341
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feist, M., & Gentner, D. (2007). Spatial language influences memory for spatial scenes. Memory & Cognition, 35(2), 283–296. doi: 10.3758/BF03193449
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filipović, L. (2011). Speaking and remembering in one or two languages: Bilingual vs. Monolingual lexicalization and memory for motion events. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15(4), 466–485. doi: 10.1177/1367006911403062
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Firestone, C., & Scholl, B. J. (2016). Cognition does not affect perception: Evaluating the evidence for ‘top-down’ effects. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, e229, 1–77. doi:10.1017/S0140525X15000965
   Google Scholar
• Flecken, M., Athanasopoulos, P., Kuipers, J. R., & Thierry, G. (2015). On the road to somewhere: Brain potentials reflect language effects on motion event perception. Cognition, 141, 41–51. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.04.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flecken, M., & van Bergen, G. (2019). Can the English stand the bottle like the Dutch? Effects of relational categories on object perception. Cognitive Neuropsychology. doi:10.1080/02643294.2019.1607272
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frank, M. C., Fedorenko, E., Lai, P., Saxe, R., & Gibson, E. (2012). Verbal interference suppresses exact numerical representation. Cognitive Psychology, 64(1-2), 74–92. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.10.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gennari, S., Sloman, S., Malt, B., & Fitch, W. (2002). Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition, 83(1), 49–79. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00166-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gentner, D., & Bowerman, M. (2009). Why some spatial semantic categories are harder to learn than others: The typological prevalence hypothesis. Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin, 465–480.
   Google Scholar
• Georgakopoulos, T., Härtl, H., & Sioupi, A. (2019). Goal realization. Languages in Contrast, 19, 280–309. doi: 10.1075/lic.17010.geo
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerwien, J., & von Stutterheim, C. (2018). Event segmentation: Cross-linguistic differences in verbal and non-verbal tasks. Cognition, 180, 225–237. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.07.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gleitman, L., & Papafragou, A. (2005). Language and thought. In K. Holyoak & R. Morrison (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and reasoning (pp. 633–661). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haun, D. B., Call, J., Janzen, G., & Levinson, S. C. (2006). Evolutionary psychology of spatial representations in the hominidae. Current Biology, 16(17), 1736–1740. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2006.07.049
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haun, D. B., Rapold, C. J., Janzen, G., & Levinson, S. C. (2011). Plasticity of human spatial cognition: Spatial language and cognition covary across cultures. Cognition, 119(1), 70–80. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.12.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hespos, S. J., & Spelke, E. S. (2004). Conceptual precursors to language. Nature, 430(6998), 453–456. doi: 10.1038/nature02634
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ji, Y., Hendriks, H., & Hickmann, M. (2011). How children express caused motion events in Chinese and English: Universal and language-specific influences. Lingua. International Review of General Linguistics. Revue internationale De Linguistique Generale, 121, 1796–1819. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2011.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kersten, A. W., Meissner, C. A., Lechuga, J., Schwartz, B. L., Albrechtsen, J. S., & Iglesias, A. (2010). English speakers attend more strongly than Spanish speakers to manner of motion when classifying novel objects and events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(4), 638–653. doi: 10.1037/a0020507
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landau, B., Dessalegn, B., & Goldberg, A. M. (2010). Language and space: Momentary interactions. In P. Chilton & V. Evans (Eds.), Language, cognition and space: The state of the art and new directions (pp. 51–78). London: Equinox.
   Google Scholar
• Landau, B., Johannes, K., Skordos, D., & Papafragou, A. (2017). Containment and support: Core and complexity in spatial language learning. Cognitive Science, 41(S4), 748–779. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12389
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• La Tourrette, A., & Waxman, S. (2018). The power of a name: Labeling changes infants’ memory for individual objects. Talk at the 43rd Annual Boston Conference on Language Development, Boston, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Le Guen, O. (2011). Speech and gesture in spatial language and cognition among the Yucatec Mayas. Cognitive Science, 35(5), 905–938. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01183.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levinson, S. C. (2003). Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levinson, S. C., & Wilkins, D. P. (2006). Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity (Vol. 6). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Li, P., Abarbanell, L., Gleitman, L., & Papafragou, A. (2011). Spatial reasoning in Tenejapan Mayans. Cognition, 120(1), 33–53. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.02.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, P., & Gleitman, L. (2002). Turning the tables: Language and spatial reasoning. Cognition, 83(3), 265–294. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00009-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loftus, E. F. (1975). Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive Psychology, 7(4), 560–572. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90023-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loftus, E. F. (1979). The malleability of memory. American Scientist, 67(3), 312–320. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/27849223
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loftus, G. R. (1972). Eye fixations and recognition memory for pictures. Cognitive Psychology, 3(4), 525–551. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(72)90021-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loftus, E. F., Miller, D. G., & Burns, H. J. (1978). Semantic integration of verbal information into a visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4(1), 19–31. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.4.1.19
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Loftus, E. F., & Palmer, J. C. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13(5), 585–589. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80011-3
   Google Scholar
• Lucy, J. (1996). The scope of linguistic relativity: An analysis and review of empirical research. In J. Gumperz & S. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 37–69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G. (2008). From chair to “chair:” A representational shift account of object labeling effects on memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137(2), 348–369. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.137.2.348
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maguire, M. J., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Imai, M., Haryu, E., Vanegas, S., … Sanchez-Davis, B. (2010). A developmental shift from similar to language-specific strategies in verb acquisition: A comparison of English, Spanish, and Japanese. Cognition, 114(3), 299–319. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.10.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majid, A., Bowerman, M., Kita, S., Haun, D., & Levinson, S. (2004). Can language restructure cognition? The case for space. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(3), 108–114. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.01.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCloskey, M., & Zaragosa, M. (1985). Misleading post-event information and memory for events: Arguments and evidence against memory impairment hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114(1), 1–16. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.114.1.1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonough, L., Choi, S., & Mandler, J. M. (2003). Understanding spatial relations: Flexible infants, lexical adults. Cognitive Psychology, 46(3), 229–259. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0285(02)00514-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montero-Melis, G., & Bylund, E. (2017). Getting the ball rolling: The cross-linguistic conceptualization of caused motion. Language and Cognition, 1, 1–27. doi:10.1017/langcog.2016.22
   Google Scholar
• Naigles, L. R., Eisenberg, A. R., Kako, E. T., Highter, M., & McGraw, N. (1998). Speaking of motion: Verb use in English and Spanish. Language and Cognitive Processes, 13, 521–549. doi: 10.1080/016909698386429
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naigles, L. R., & Terrazas, P. (1998). Motion-verb generalizations in English and Spanish: Influences of language and syntax. Psychological Science, 9(5), 363–369. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norbury, H. M., Waxman, S. R., & Song, H. (2008). Tight and loose are not created equal: An asymmetry underlying the representation of fit in English and Korean speakers. Cognition, 109(3), 316–325. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.019
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oh, K. (2003). Language, cognition, and development: Motion events in English and Korean (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, Berkeley.
   Google Scholar
• Özçalışkan, Ş, & Slobin, D. I. (1999). Learning how to search for the frog: Expression of manner of motion in English, Spanish, and Turkish. In A. Greenhill, H. Littlefield, & C. Tano (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Boston University conference on language development (pp. 541–552). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
   Google Scholar
• Özçalışkan, Ş, & Slobin, D. I. (2003). Codability effects on the expression of manner of motion in Turkish and English. In A. S. Özsoy, M. Nakipoglu-Demiralp, E. Erguvanlı-Taylan, & A. AksuKoç (Eds.), Studies in Turkish linguistics (pp. 259–270). Istanbul: Bogazici University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Özyürek, A., Allen, S., Furman, R., Kita, S., Brown, A., & Ishizuka, T. (2008). Development of cross-linguistic variation in speech and gesture: Motion events in English and Turkish. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1040–1054. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.44.4.1040
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and language. In S. J. Segal (Ed.), Imagery (pp. 7–32). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Papafragou, A., Hulbert, J., & Trueswell, J. (2008). Does language guide event perception? Evidence from eye movements. Cognition, 108(1), 155–184. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.02.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papafragou, A., Massey, C., & Gleitman, L. (2002). Shake, rattle, ‘n’ roll: The representation of motion in language and cognition. Cognition, 84(2), 189–219. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00046-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papafragou, A., Massey, C., & Gleitman, L. (2006). When English proposes what Greek presupposes: The cross-linguistic encoding of motion events. Cognition, 98(3), B75–B87. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.05.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papafragou, A., & Selimis, S. (2010). Lexical and structural biases in the acquisition of motion verbs. Language Learning and Development, 6(2), 87–115. doi: 10.1080/15475440903352781
   Google Scholar
• Pederson, E., Danziger, E., Wilkins, D., Levinson, S., Kita, S., & Senft, G. (1998). Semantic typology and spatial conceptualization. Language, 74(3), 557–589. doi: 10.1353/lan.1998.0074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pruden, S. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Maguire, M. J., & Meyer, M. A. (2004). Foundations of verb learning: Infants form categories of path and manner in motion events. In A. Brugos, L. Micciulla, & C. E. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Boston University conference on language development (pp. 461–472). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pulverman, R., Sootsman, J. L., Golinkoff, R. M., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2003). The role of lexical knowledge in nonlinguistic event processing: English-speaking infants’ attention to manner and path. In B. Beachley, A. Brown, & F. Conlin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University conference on language development (pp. 662–673). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
   Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/
   Google Scholar
• Rowe, E. J., & Rogers, T. B. (1975). Effects of concurrent auditory shadowing on free recall and recognition of pictures and words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1(4), 415–422. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.1.4.415
   Google Scholar
• Selimis, S., & Katis, D. (2010). The emergence of nonliterality in spontaneous child speech: The case of Greek and English motion verbs. In S. Rice & J. Newman (Eds.), Empirical and experimental methods in cognitive/functional research (pp. 127–142). Stanford, CA: CSLI.
   Google Scholar
• Skordos, D., & Papafragou, A. (2014). Lexical, syntactic, and semantic-geometric factors in the acquisition of motion predicates. Developmental Psychology, 50(7), 1985–1998. doi: 10.1037/a0036970
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slobin, D. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”. In J. Gumperz & S. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Slobin, D. I. (2003). Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 157–191). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Slobin, D. I. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Vol. 2. Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219–257). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Talmy, L. (1975). Semantics and syntax of motion. In J. P. Kimball (Ed.), Syntax and semantics (vol. 4) (pp. 181–238). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Volume 3: Grammatical categories and the lexicon (pp. 57–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Talmy, L. (1991). Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: General Session and Parasession on The Grammar of Event Structure, 17(1), 480–519. doi:10.3765/bls.v17i0.1620
   Google Scholar
• Trueswell, J. C., & Papafragou, A. (2010). Perceiving and remembering events cross linguistically: Evidence from dual-task paradigms. Journal of Memory and Language, 63(1), 64–82. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2010.02.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ünal, E., Pinto, A., Bunger, A., & Papafragou, A. (2016). Monitoring sources of event memories: A cross-linguistic investigation. Journal of Memory and Language, 87, 157–176. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2015.10.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, J. M., Horowitz, T. S., & Michod, K. O. (2007). Is visual attention required for robust picture memory? Vision Research, 47(7), 955–964. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2006.11.025
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yun, H., & Choi, S. (2018). Spatial semantics, cognition, and their interaction: A comparative study of spatial categorization in English and Korean. Cognitive Science, 42(6), 1736–1776. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12622
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar