Efstathia Soroli

Variation in spatial language and cognition: exploring visuo-spatial thinking and speaking cross-linguistically

Languages differ strikingly in how they encode spatial information. This variability is realized with spatial semantic elements mapped across languages in very different ways onto lexical/syntactic structures. For example, satellite-framed languages (e.g., English) express Manner in the verb and Path in satellites, while verb-framed languages (e.g., French) lexicalize Path in the verb, leaving Manner implicit or peripheral. Some languages are harder to classify into these categories, rather presenting equipollentlyframed systems, such as Chinese (serial-verb constructions) or Greek (parallel verb- and satellite-framed structures in equally frequent contexts). Such properties seem to have implications not only on the formulation/articulation levels, but also on the conceptualization level, thereby reviving questions concerning the language–thought interface. The present study investigates the relative impact of language-independent and language-specific factors on spatial representations across three typologically different languages (English–French–Greek) combining a variety of complementary tasks (production, non-verbal, and verbal categorization). The findings show that typological properties of languages can have an impact on both linguistic and non-linguistic organization of spatial information, open new perspectives for the investigation of conceptualization, and contribute more generally to the debate concerning the universal and language-specific dimensions of cognition.

How language impacts memory of motion events in English and French

Abstract This paper examines whether cross-linguistic differences in motion encoding affect event processing, specifically memory performance. We compared speakers of two languages which differ strikingly in how they habitually encode Manner and Path of motion (Talmy in Toward a cognitive semantics: typology and process in concept structuring, 2nd edn, vol 2. MIT Press, Cambridge, 2000). We tested French and English adult native speakers across three tasks that recruited and/or suppressed verbal processing to different extents: verbal event descriptions elicited on the basis of dynamic motion stimuli, a verbal memory task testing the impact of prior verbalisation on target recognition, and a non-verbal memory task, using a dual-task paradigm to suppress internal verbalisation. Results showed significant group differences in the verbal description task, which mirrored expected typological tendencies. English speakers more frequently expressed both Manner and Path information than French speakers, who produced more descriptions encoding either Path or Manner alone. However, these differences in linguistic encoding did not significantly affect speakers’ memory performance in the memory recognition tasks, neither in the verbal nor in the non-verbal condition. The findings contribute to current debates regarding the conditions under which language effects occur and the relative weight of language-specific and universal constraints on spatial cognition.

Event processing in agrammatic aphasia: does language guide visual processing and similarity judgments?

Background: The widespread idea that people with agrammatic aphasia (PWA) have a selective vulnerability in morphosyntactic processing (Bradley, Garrett, & Zurif, 1980), irrespective of language, has been questioned by many crosslinguistic studies (e.g., Soroli, Sahraoui, & Sacchett, 2012). Researchers show that “same”-syndrome people with aphasia perform very differently from one language to another (Bates, Wulfeck, & MacWhinney, 1991). In the domain of motion events, languages vary morphosyntactically (Talmy, 2000): some (mostly Romance, i.e., French) invite speakers to lexicalize Path information leaving Manner optional, whereas others (Germanic, i.e., English) systematically privilege Manner verbs together with Path adjuncts. Aims: The question of whether such crosslinguistic differences have deep effects on cognitive processing (e.g., visual attention/categorization) has recently become of great interest for aphasia (Soroli, 2011). The aim of this study is to collect online and offline indications of how spatial processing operates and to investigate the role typological (language-related) vs. language-independent (universal/syndrome-related) factors play in agrammatic aphasia. Method and procedure: Twenty English, twenty French and two PWA (1 of each language) were tested in three eye tracking experiments: (I) a nonverbal similarity judgment; (II) a verbal similarity judgment; and (III) a production experiment. In Experiment I, participants saw a target video showing a motion event performed in a certain Manner and along a certain Path (a). The target was then followed by two variants: one Manner-congruent (b) and one Path-congruent (c). Participants had to choose the variant that looked most like the target. Experiment II was exactly the same, except that the target video was replaced by a sentence. In Experiment III, participants were asked to describe the video clips.