Directionality and Resultativity: The Cross-linguistic Correlation Revisited

Recent approaches to the cross-linguistic variation in the expressions of directed motion assume a tight correlation between adjectival resultative and directed motion constructions (e.g., Beck and Snyder 2001, Mateu and Rigau 2001; 2002, McIntyre 2004, Beavers et al. 2004). Beck and Snyder (2001), in particular, argue that languages that allow adjectival resultatives also allow directed motion with goal PP (or telic Path PP) based on the compounding parameter proposed by Snyder (1995; 2001). This paper, however, shows that such ‘macro’-parametric approaches to the cross-linguistic variation (in directed motion) fail when individual languages are investigated in detail. Based on Korean, Japanese, Hebrew, Czech, and Indonesian, I show that there is no necessary correlation between directed motion (i.e., goal PP) constructions and the availability of resultative phrases, and that the previous parameter approaches face challenges in explaining the facts drawn from these languages. I further show that the variation in directed motion is better explained by careful examination of individual adpositions that differ from one language (e.g., English) to another (e.g., Korean).