This paper provides a new perspective on the options available to languages for encoding directed motion events. Talmy (2000) introduces an influential two-way typology, proposing that languages adopt either verb-or satellite-framed encoding of motion events. This typology is augmented by Slobin (2004b) and Zlatev & Yangklang (2004) with a third class of equipollently-framed languages. We propose that the observed options can instead be attributed to : (i) the motion-independent morphological,

more »

... exical, and syntactic resources languages make available for encoding manner and path of motion, (ii) the role of the verb as the single clause-obligatory lexical category that can encode either manner or path, and (iii) extra-grammatical factors that yield preferences for certain options. Our approach accommodates the growing recognition that most languages straddle more than one of the previously proposed typological categories : a language may show both verb-and satelliteframed patterns, or if it allows equipollent-framing, even all three patterns. We further show that even purported verb-framed languages may not only allow but actually prefer satellite-framed patterns when appropriate contextual support is available, a situation unexpected if a two-or three-way typology is assumed. Finally, we explain the appeal of previously proposed two-and three-way typologies : they capture the encoding options predicted to be preferred once certain external factors are recognized, including complexity of expression and biases in lexical inventories. [2] More accurately, Talmy's division is based on where the CORE SCHEMA is encoded, a broad semantic category that includes path, result, aspect, and other notions that may shape the temporal structure of the event (and to some degree argument structure; see Talmy 2000; 278ff.).