下载掌阅APP，畅读海量书库
立即打开
This section is an overview of research related to stationary events and other macro events．
Slobin has put forward a third type of equipollently-framed languages（Slobin，2004：25，2006：5）．His third type is based on the study of dynamic motion events represented mainly by the serial-verb constructions in such languages as Niger-Congo，Hmong-Mien，Sino-Tibetan，Tai-Kadai，Mon-Khmer，（some）Austronesian．According to him，Mandarin Chinese falls into the third type（Li，2013a：143）．Talmy has responded to this proposal twice（Talmy，2012b，2016）and the final conclusion is that only the C1 C2-plus subtype of serial verb constructions（e.g.， Ta 1 pao 3 jin 4 qu 4 le ，“She／he ran in”，cf.Talmy，2016：153）in Mandarin Chinese are grouped into it（Talmy，2016：158）．But as a Chinese，we can easily see the fact that Slobin's serial-verb construction （e.g.， fei 1 chu 1，“fly exit”， Slobin，2004：8） is a Chinese dong 4 bu 4 or resultative construction，in which the first verb is the main verb and the second element is the resultative complement to the main verb．In fact，the real Chinese serial-verb constructions refer to certain other completely different type of structures．So such resultative constructions do support the claim that both English and Chinese are satellite-framed language（Talmy，2000b：222）．
The earliest typological study of stationary events is Li's（2013a） empirical investigation into the stationary motion events in Mandarin Chinese．Talmy has claimed that“Mandarin is a strongly satellite-framed language”（Talmy，2000b：272）．Li falsified this claim in the domain of stationary events representation．
But his falsification is not strong enough（cf.Li，2013a：149－153）．Although Li correctly determined the typology of Patterns Ⅲ，Ⅴ and Ⅶ，his analyses of the other six patterns were problematic（cf.2.4a－2.4i）．Firstly，he failed to provide a definite typology for Patterns Ⅰ and Ⅱ．Secondly，he grouped Patterns Ⅳ，Ⅵ，Ⅷ，and Ⅸ into verb-framed languages，but he overlooked the fact that a portion of Path is also represented outside the main verb in these patterns．It is in the adpositions around the nominal phrase．Talmy excluded prepositions from the scope of satellite（Talmy，2000b）．However，in some sentences，the Path element is partially contained in prepositions．Neither Talmy nor Li treated an adposition as a satellite．Thus，a part of the core-schema（Path）is in the adposition，but it is neither the main verb nor the satellite to the main verb．
（2.4）a．Pattern Ⅰ：V
zai
＋LNP
刀子在树干上。
Dao1-zi zai 4 shu4-gan4 shang4．
Knife lay tree trunk on
“The knife is on the trunk．”
b．Pattern Ⅱ：LNP
架子上。
Jia4-zi shang4．
Bookshelf on
“On the bookshelf．”
c．Pattern Ⅲ：VP manner ＋PP zai
绳子绑在两根柱子上。
Sheng2-zi bang3 zai 4 liang3-gen1 zhu4-zi shang4．
Rope ties two posts on
“The rope is tied on the two posts．”
d．Pattern Ⅳ：VP zai ＋NP
猫在副驾驶位。
Mao1 zai 4 fu4 jia4-shi3 wei4．
Cat exists associate driver's seat
“The cat is at the associate driver's seat．”
e．Pattern Ⅴ：PP zai ＋VP manner
在头上戴着。
Zai 4 tou2-shang4 dai4-zhe．
On head wearing
“Wearing on the head．”
f．Pattern Ⅵ：NP
天空。
Tian1 kong1．
Sky
“Sky．”
g．Pattern Ⅶ：LNP＋VP manner
头上，戴着。
Tou2-shang4，dai4-zhe．
Head on，wearing
“Put on the head．”
h．Pattern Ⅷ：VP manner ＋NP
绳子横跨山崖。
Sheng2-zi heng2 kua4 shan1-ya2．
Rope cross cliffs
“The rope crosses the cliffs．”
i．Pattern Ⅸ：VP manner
绳子在两个悬崖之间，把两个悬崖连起来。
Sheng2-zi zai 4 liang3-ge4 xuan2-ya2 zhi1-jian1，ba3 liang3-ge4 xuan2ya2 lian2 qi3-lai2．
Ropes lie between two cliffs，linking two cliffs together
“Ropes are lying between two cliffs， linking two cliffs together．”（cf.Li，2013a：147）
Li has pointed out two“systemic misunderstandings”（Li，2013a：144） in event research．The first one is concerned with the research scope．Most researchers thought“that Talmy had based his dichotomy of verb-farmed and satellite-framed languages solely on motion events，with the situation that tests of his framework have been limited to treating motion events only”（ibid．：144）．In fact，very little research has been conducted to stationary events in motion events and the other four types of macro-events（cf.Talmy，2017b）．The second misunderstanding is with methodology（Li，2013a）．Most researchers［except for Slobin（2004） and Ji，Hendriks＆ Hickmann （2011）］ thought that“Talmy had used a permissive methodology open to any form of data”（ibid．：144）．Nevertheless，Talmy has strict methodological requirements on data that the target expressions be colloquial in style， frequent in use，and pervasive in range，
In most cases，a language uses only one of these types for the verb in its most characteristic expression of Motion．Here，“characteristic”means that ① it is colloquial in style，rather than literary，stilted，and so on；② it is frequent in occurrence in speech，rather than only occasional；③ it is pervasive ，rather than limited—that is，a wide range of semantic notions are expressed in this type．（Talmy，2000b：27）
To meet Talmy's requirements，this study collects data by empirical elicitation experiments using pictures of spatial situations．
Besides the above two misunderstandings， there are other two systemic misunderstandings．
The third systemic misunderstanding is about target range of patterns． Most researchers thought that we could determine the typology of a language once and for all simply by analyzing one or two major patterns in it［this has also been criticized by Li（2017）］．The V-L and S-L are two standard typological forms obtained by Talmy through comparing complement constructions with their equivalent non-complement constructions．There are also other in-between cases in language uses，which show a mixture of the two typologies，such as the Chinese ditransitive constructions（Ren，Li＆Deng，2015）．The mixed typology of the V-L and S-L is called a Hybrid framed language （H-L）．If in all SE sentences of a language，one part of the path component is conflated in the main verb and another part in the satellite to it，then the language would be an H-L as far as representation of the SEs were concerned．
A proper answer to the typological issue of a language should be based on particular types of data．Different patterns representing the same type of events can possess quite distinct typological features．On the other hand，the same type of events usually demonstrates a relatively small number of linguistic patterns．Only by realizing both diversity and regularity of those linguistic phenomena can we achieve a precise characterization and exposition to them．
The fourth systemic misunderstanding is about the target unit of analyses．Up to now，the analyses of other types of macro-events have been made largely by Thomas Team of Beihang University．We have investigated into events of dynamic motion （Deng＆ Li，2015），state change（Ren，Li＆ Deng，2015；Du＆ Li，2015；Jia＆Li，2015），and realization（Jia＆Li，2015）．A current problem is that a few of the team members thought that the unit of analyses for the Talmyan typology can be of any type，for example，a complex verbal construction rong 2 -hua 4，“melt”（e.g.，Du＆Li，2015）．In fact，Talmy has strict requirements for the unit of analyses in language．He says，
This is because the main concern here is with the kinds of lexicalization that involve a single morpheme，and because in this way we are able to compare lexicalization patterns across languages with very different word structure．（Talmy，2000b：27）
In this study，our target unit of analyses is morpheme．And simply as a sentential intonation is taken as a super-phoneme，a constructional satellite is taken as a super morpheme．