On the Expression of Spatial Relations in Ardesen-Laz

Kutscher, Silvia

doi:10.1349/ps1.1537-0852.a.394

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For a more detailed account on the semantics and use of the preverbs cf. Kutscher (2003Kutscher ( , 2010. another' e-'steep up' mola-'hither horizontally, in(to)' ela-'sidewards up, besides' gola-'thither horizontally, on(to)' eşǩa-'up (through) amidst' moǩo-'hither asunder, gama-'out of' hither "hook"' gola-'on(to)' goo-'on(to)' mele-'in, out of' meşǩa-'in(to) (through) amidst' mola-'in(to)' circum go-'around' projective eǩa-'behind' eZ# a-'under' ǩoZ# o-'in(to) front, aside, over' more than one entity as F or G eo-'on(to) another' ǩoşǩa-'heap-wise, into one another, amidst' oǩo-'asunder, together' non-transparent oxo-'accumulation?'…”

Section: Basic Spatial Constructions In Lazmentioning

confidence: 99%

When ‘towards’ means ‘away from’: the case of directional-ablative syncretism in the Ardeşen variety of Laz (South-Caucasian)

Kutscher¹

2010

STUF - Language Typology and Universals

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper deals with morphosyntactic and semantic characteristics of the spatial case called motative in the Ardeşen-variety of Laz. The motative can be used to mark the ground-nominal in allative as well as in ablative spatial expressions, while the ground-nominal in static spatial expressions is unmarked for case.Hence, the motative case shows a conflation of the allative with ablative spatial semantics, while at the same time excluding locative spatial meaning. Given that this kind of syncretism has been claimed to be nonexistent, the findings for Ardeşen-Laz are of special relevance for the refinement of the typology on spatial case-systems.

show abstract

Section: Basic Spatial Constructions In Lazmentioning

confidence: 99%

When ‘towards’ means ‘away from’: the case of directional-ablative syncretism in the Ardeşen variety of Laz (South-Caucasian)

Kutscher¹

2010

STUF - Language Typology and Universals

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Bleive 2022) In my earlier article on expressing static spatial relations in Chinese and Estonian (Bleive 2022), I proposed that the containment relation (picture f in Figure 1) should actually be at the beginning of the IN-ON gradient, as the most stereotypical containment relation in its core actually contains a support situation (Kolstad 1991, referred through Mandler 1992. As pointed out by Kutscher (2011), there are some languages, such as Ardeşen-Laz, which do not fit onto Bowerman and Choi's IN-ON gradient. In Ardeşen-Laz the spatial term for the situations where the apple is in the bowl (picture f in Figure 1) and where the cup is on the table (picture a) is the same.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

How do Chinese L1 learners express Estonian static spatial relations?

Bleive

2023

ERYa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this research was to find out how differences in Chinese and Estonian spatial language influence the way Chinese L1 speakers acquire the Estonian system of expressing static spatial relations. For this purpose, a picture description task was carried out by 22 native Chinese speakers.The main finding was that the Chinese L1 learners of Estonian did not use support through attachment relation (expressed by the postposition küljes) or support by the tip relation (expressed by the postposition otsas) almost at all. Instead, they used simple support relations (expressed by the adessive case or the postposition peal) similarly to their native language, which was in stark contrast with the native Estonian usage. Expressing containment relations did not pose such a problem to Chinese learners of Estonian.Another important finding was that Chinese learners of Estonian had a higher probability of using native-like logic in Estonian in choosing between support and containment relations while describing the pictures when they used case suffixes and a lower probability when they used adpositions.

show abstract

On a few instances where deictic directionals confound expectations

Bourdin

2022

Human Cognitive Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Directional deixis (DD) is characterized by a set of properties that recur across languages, e.g. the feature of goal-orientedness and the built-in asymmetry between ventive direction and itive direction. These properties define a formal and semantic space that has a core and a periphery. DD systems that are outliers with respect to any given property or properties can be shown to support, rather than call into question, the validity of DD as a self-standing descriptive category. This requires articulating an explanatory framework that reconciles the complexity at the periphery with the simplicity of the overarching logic, i.e. the fundamental imbalance between the intrinsically conjunctive semantics of ventive markers and the disjunctive semantics of their itive counterparts.

show abstract

On the Expression of Spatial Relations in Ardesen-Laz

Cited by 6 publications

References 25 publications

When ‘towards’ means ‘away from’: the case of directional-ablative syncretism in the Ardeşen variety of Laz (South-Caucasian)

When ‘towards’ means ‘away from’: the case of directional-ablative syncretism in the Ardeşen variety of Laz (South-Caucasian)

How do Chinese L1 learners express Estonian static spatial relations?

On a few instances where deictic directionals confound expectations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About