Abstract
The semantics of German ‘touch’ verbs include corresponding motor concepts. These seem to result from experiences and learning from subjective bodily actions and interactions with the environment during language acquisition (cf. Bailey 1997). When we learn a new action word, we often do so embedded in a particular motor context (cf. Bailey et al. 1997; Bergen et al. 2004). In this pilot study, we investigate how the motor concepts of German hand-related ‘touch’-verb variants ([an]fassen, [an]greifen, [an]langen, cf. VWB: 38–39, 40, 42) – which are often considered to be true synonyms – are applied by speakers from Austria, Germany and Switzerland. The empirical study draws on research into cognitive semantics (Pulvermüller 2005; Steels & Belpaeme 2005; Barsalou 2008; Evans 2009) and motor cognition (Bailey et al. 1997; Marocco et al. 2010) and aims at adding a variationist linguistic component to the existing research (cf. Fink in prep.). By use of a stimulus response experiment with 25 native speakers from the three countries, we will show a) that the three verb variants differ in terms of motor concepts and therefore are no true synonyms and b) that the motor concepts for each verb differ between speakers of German in Austria, Germany and Switzerland.
Acknowledgements
We thank Andrea Kleene and Christina Schrödl for their constructive feedback and Abigail Prohaska for language corrections. Of course, the responsibility for all remaining errors is ours. / Funded by: Marietta Blau scholarship, Österreichisches Bundesministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Wirtschaft (BMWFW).
References
AdA=Elspaß, Stephan & Robert Möller. 2003ff. Atlas zur deutschen Alltagssprache (AdA). http://www.atlas-alltagssprache.de (accessed 11 February 2016).Search in Google Scholar
Bailey, David R. 1997. When push comes to shove: a computational model of the role of motor control in the acquisition of action verbs. Berkeley, CA: University of California dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Bailey, David, Jerome Feldman, Srini Narayanan & George Lakoff. 1997. Modeling embodied lexical development. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 19–24, eds. Michael G. Shafto & Pat Langley. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar
Barsalou, Lawrence W. 2008. Grounded cognition. Annual Reviews of Psychology 59: 617–645.10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639Search in Google Scholar
Bergen, Benjamin, Nancy Chang & Shweta Narayanan. 2004. Simulated Action in an Embodied Construction Grammar. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 108–113, eds. Kenneth Forbus, Dedre Gentner & Terry Regier. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar
Clyne, Michael. 1992. Introduction: Pluricentric Languages. Differing Norms in Different Nations. In Pluricentric Languages. Differing Norms in Different Nations (Contributions to the sociology of language. 62), 1–9, ed. Michael Clyne. Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110888140Search in Google Scholar
Dittmar, Norbert. 2004. Umgangssprache – Nonstandard / Vernacular – Nonstandard. In An international handbook of the science of language and society. (Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft. 3.1), 251–262, eds. Ulrich Ammon, Norbert Dittmar, Klaus J. Mattheier & Peter Trudgill. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Duden. 2009. Die Grammatik. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.Search in Google Scholar
Duden Online Wörterbuch. http://www.duden.de/woerterbuch (accessed 25 December 2015).Search in Google Scholar
Dürscheid, Christa, Stephan Elspaß & Arne Ziegler. 2015. Variantengrammatik des Standarddeutschen. Konzeption, methodische Fragen, Fallanalysen. In Standarddeutsch im 21. Jahrhundert – Theoretische und empirische Ansätze mit einem Fokus auf Österreich, 207–235, eds. Alexandra Lenz & Manfred M. Glauninger. Vienna: Vienna University Press.10.14220/9783737003377.207Search in Google Scholar
Evans, Vyvyan. 2009. Semantic representation in LCCM Theory. In New Directions in Cognitive Linguistics, 27–55, eds. Vyvyan Evans & Stephanie Pourcel. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.24.06evaSearch in Google Scholar
Fink, Juliane. In preparation. Grasping Things and Grasping Ideas. An Embodied Cognition Perspective on Language Dynamics. Vienna: University of Vienna ongoing dissertation project.Search in Google Scholar
Fink, Juliane, Andreas Gellan & Andrea Kleene. 2016. Neuerungen in der Zweitauflage des Variantenwörterbuchs des Deutschen (VWB). In Bayerisch-österreichische Varietäten zu Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts – Dynamik, Struktur, Funktion (ZDL-Beihefte), eds. Alexandra Lenz, Ludwig M. Breuer, Manfred M. Glauninger & Tim Kallenborn. Stuttgart: Steiner.Search in Google Scholar
Glauninger, Manfred M. 2003. Das Deutsche als genetisch-inhärent plurizentrische Sprache. In Mehr Sprache – mehrsprachig – mit Deutsch. Didaktische und politische Perspektiven, 29–30, eds. Günther Schneider & Monika Clalüna. München: Iudicium.Search in Google Scholar
Glauninger, Manfred M. 2012. Zur Metasoziosemiose des ›Wienerischen‹. Aspekte einer funktionalen Sprachvariationstheorie. In Verschwommene Dialekte (Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik. 42, Lili-Heft 166), 110–118, eds. Rita Franceschini & Christian Schwarz. Stuttgart/Weimar: Metzler.10.1007/BF03379866Search in Google Scholar
Habacher, Almuth. 2015. Nonstandard-Lexik in österreichischen „Qualitätstageszeitungen“. Eine soziolinguistisch fundierte pragmatische Analyse. Saarbrücken: Akademikerverlag.Search in Google Scholar
Kellermeier-Rehbein, Birte. 2014. Plurizentrik. Einführung in die nationalen Varietäten des Deutschen. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.Search in Google Scholar
Marocco, Davide, Angelo Cangelosi, Kerstin Fischer & Tony Belpaeme. 2010. Grounding action words in the sensorimotor interaction with the world: experiments with a simulated iCub humanoid robot. Frontiers in Neurorobotics 4/7. http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnbot.2010.00007/full (accessed 11 February 2016).10.3389/fnbot.2010.00007Search in Google Scholar
Mathôt, Sebastiaan, Daniel Schreij & Jan Theeuwes. 2012. OpenSesame: An opensource, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behavior Research Methods 44: 314–324.10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7Search in Google Scholar
Menge, Heinz H. 1982. Was ist Umgangssprache? Vorschläge zur Behandlung einer lästigen Frage. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 49: 52–63.Search in Google Scholar
Muhr, Rudolf. 2008. The pragmatics of a pluricentric language: A comparison between Austrian German and German German. In A focus on regional varieties in pluricentric languages (Pragmatics & beyond 178), 211–244, ed. Klaus P. Schneider Klaus. Amsterdam (a.o.): Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.178.10muhSearch in Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, Friedemann. 2005. Brain mechanisms linking language and action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 6/7: 576–582.10.1038/nrn1706Search in Google Scholar
Scheuringer, Hermann. 1996. Das Deutsche als pluriareale Sprache: Ein Beitrag gegen staatlich begrenzte Horizonte in der Diskussion um die deutsche Sprache in Österreich. Die Unterrichtspraxis / Teaching German 29: 147–153.10.2307/3531824Search in Google Scholar
Steels, Luc & Tony Belpaeme. 2005. Coordinating perceptually grounded categories through language: a case study for colour. Behavioral Brain Science 28: 469–489.10.1017/S0140525X05000087Search in Google Scholar
Stickel, Gerhard (ed.). 1997. Varietäten des Deutschen. Regional- und Umgangssprachen (Institut für deutsche Sprache. Jahrbuch 1996). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110622560Search in Google Scholar
VWB=Ammon, Ulrich, Hans Bickel, Jakob Ebner, Ruth Esterhammer, Markus Gasser, Lorenz Hofer, Birte Kellermeier-Rehbein, Heinrich Löffler, Doris Mangott, Hans Moser, Robert Schläpfer, Michael Schloßmacher, Regula Schmidlin, Regula & Günter Vallaster. 2004. Variantenwörterbuch des Deutschen. Die Standardsprache in Österreich, der Schweiz und Deutschland sowie in Liechtenstein, Luxemburg, Ostbelgien und Südtirol. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110905816Search in Google Scholar
Warga, Muriel. 2008. Requesting in German as a pluricentric language. In Variational Pragmatics. A focus on regional varieties in pluricentric languages (Pragmatics & beyond 178), 245–268, ed. Klaus P. Schneider. Amsterdam (a.o.): Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.178.11warSearch in Google Scholar
Wiesinger, Peter. 1983. Die Einteilung der deutschen Dialekte. In Dialektologie. Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung (Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft. 1.2), 807–900, eds. Werner Besch, Ulrich Knoop, Wolfgang Putschke & Herbert E. Wiegand. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110203332.807Search in Google Scholar
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
