[Lingtyp] Motion verbs and actionality classes

[Johanna B Nichols]

This probably has nothing to do with the in-progress meaning, but note
that the one-word versions of these telic intransitive motion verbs in
English ("enter", "exit", "ascend", "descend", "pass") are all
etymologically Romance.  I think that explains the transitivity in
English.  It's intriguing that the same verbs behave as a set in two
languages but the behavior is different.

Johanna

On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 1:12 PM Sergey Loesov via Lingtyp
<lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org> wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> In Modern Western Aramaic, an endangered language spoken in Syrian Qalamoun mountains, verbs of telic intransitive motion (those for ‘enter’, ‘go out of/leave’, ‘go up/ascend’, ‘go down/descend’, ‘go past’ [German ‘vorbeigehen]’) use their denominal Resultative/Perfective form to encode the respective events in progress at the reference time, quite like static verbs of perception (‘see’, ‘hear’) or body posture (‘lie’, ‘stand’, ‘sit’). Various other dynamic intransitives (e.g., the verbs for ‘fall’ or ‘pounce’, and also ‘die’) use, quite expectedly, the denominal Imperfective for progressive situations at the reference time, while their Perfective encodes Resultative, Perfect, (past time) Evidential, etc.
>
>
> I observe a similar picture in Levantine Arabic dialects, in particular the Damascene. I wonder what is so special about basic verbs of intransitive telic motion that they behave like statives?  Have you ever seen something similar?
>
> Thank you very much,
>
> Sergey
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp