依據語言共性與差異性（Linguistic universals and diversity），以及薩丕爾－沃爾夫假說（The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis），語言之間存在的差異會影響語言使用者的認知。本研究探討漢語與英語使用者對於運動事件（motion events）的認知是否與兩種語言之不同類型有關。實驗一以”The Hobbit”之英文本及繁體中文譯本第六章為材料，進行敘述句之比較分析，藉以探究中文之語言類型是否與英文不同。結果發現：英文可歸類為satellite-framed language，而中文之方法動詞（manner verb）與路徑動詞（path verb）的比率大致相等，可歸類為equipollently-framed language。實驗二與實驗三以無文字繪本圖片及數位短片作為材料，實驗二採用圖片與短片再認記憶，實驗三採用圖片與短片相似度判斷，探討語言種類（漢語、英語）、是否有語言登錄（看到每一張圖片或短片時，用口語進行描述）、和是否有記憶干擾（看完所有圖片和短片之後進行一項視覺空間的作業）等，對於再認記憶和相似度判斷的影響。刺激圖片和短片與目標圖片和短片的差異分兩種：一種是運動事件的方法不同（走、跑）、一種是運動事件的路徑不同（進、出）。結果發現：再認記憶的表現並未受到這些因素的影響，相似度判斷的表現只受到是否有語言登錄的影響，沒有語言登錄的情況下，受試者將不同運動方法的圖片及短片視為相似之比率，比在有語言登錄的情況下所反應出來的高；漢語受試者比英語受試者較傾向將不同運動方法的圖片和短片視為相似。此外，實驗二、三中受試者對圖片和短片所做的口語描述，經過分析顯示：漢語傾向為satellite-或equipollently-framed language，英語傾向為satellite-framed language。
　　總結而言，英語受試者的認知表現（再認記憶與相似度判斷）似乎與英語做為satellite-framed language的語言類型無關。漢語受試者的認知表現則似乎比較符合漢語做為equipollently-framed language的語言類型。

According to the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, the difference between languages affects the cognition of speakers. This study investigated whether the different linguistic types of Chinese and English might be related to their speakers’ perception of a motion event. Experiment 1 analyzed Chapter Six of “The Hobbit” (both English and its Chinese translation) with respect to the narration of motion events. Results showed that English belongs to the satellite-framed language, and Chinese the equipollently-framed language. Experiment 2 (recognition memory) and Experiment 3 (similarity judgement) used line drawings and short films as materials to examine the effects of linguistic types (Chinese and English), verbal encoding (participants described the drawings or the films while watching them), and memory distraction (participants took a distractor task after watching all drawings and short films) on recognition and similarity judgement of the drawings and films. When the drawings and films were different, they differed either in the manner or in the path of the pictured motion. Results showed that recognition memory was not affected by any of the variables; however, similarity judgement was affected by verbal encoding. Participants were more likely to judge two drawings or short films of a motion event with different manners as similar when they had verbally encoded the event than when they had not. Analysis of the verbal descriptions in Experiments 2 and 3 showed that Chinese belongs to satellite- or equipollently-framed language, and English belongs to satellite-framed language. In conclusion, English speakers’ perception of a motion event did not seem to bear a clear relationship with the linguistic type (satellite-framed language) of the language. But the Chinese speakers’ perception of a motion event better conformed to the linguistic type (equipollently-framed language) of Chinese.

Ash, R. (1999). The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis. Retrieved November 13, 2005, from http://www.angelfire.com/journal/worldtour99/sapirwhorf.html

Berman, R. A., & Slobin, D. I. (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Billman, D., Swilley, A., & Krych, M. (2000). Path and manner priming: Verb production and event recognition. Proceedings of the 22nd annual conference of the cognitive science society. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Campbell, L. (1997). The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis. Retrieved November 13, 2005, from http://venus.va.com.au/suggestion/sapir.html

Chandler, D. (1994). The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis. Retrieved November 13, 2005, from http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/short/whorf.html

Chen, L., & Guo, J. (2005). Mixing of language typology types in speech: Ways of expressing motion events in Mandarin Chinese ‘frog’ story narratives. Paper presented at the meeting of the 9th International Pragmatics Conference, Riva del Garda, Italy.

Choi, S., & Bowerman, M. (1991). Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns. Cognition, 41, 83-121.

Clark, H. H., & Clark, E. V. (1977). Psychology and Language: An introduction to psycholinguistics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Erbaugh, M. S. (2001). The Chinese pear stories-Narratives across seven Chinese dialects. Retrieved October 17, 2004, from http://www.pearstories.org/

Gennari, S. P., Sloman, S. A., Malt, B. C., & Fitch, W. T. (2002). Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition, 83, 49-79.

Guo, J., & Chen, L. (2005). Learning to express motion events in an Equipollently-framed language: A study of Mandarin Chinese children’s “Frog Stories”. Paper presented at the meeting of the 10th International Congress for the Study of Child Language, Berlin, Germany.

Kelly, M. K., Miller, K. F., Fang, G., & Feng, G. (1999). When days are numbered: Calendar structure and the development of calendar processing in English and Chinese. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 73, 289-314.

Mayer, M. (1969). Frog, where are you? New York, NY: Dial Books Press.

Papafragou, A., Massey, C., & Gleitman, L. (2002). Shake, rattle, ‘n’ roll: The representation of motion in language and cognition. Cognition, 84, 189-219.

Patel, A. D., & Daniele, J. R. (2003). An empirical comparison of rhythm in language and music. Cognition, 87, B35-B45.

Slobin, D. I. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”. In J. J. Gumperz & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70-96). Cambridge University Press.

Slobin, D. I. (2004). Relating narrative events in translation. In D. Ravid & H. B. Shyldkrot (Eds.), Perspectives on language and language development: Essays in honor of Ruth A. Berman. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Slobin, D. I. (2004). Research overview. Retrieved October 17, 2004, from http://ihd.berkeley.edu/slobres.pdf

Slobin, D. I. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Vol. 2. Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219-257). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Tai, J. H-Y. (2003). Cognitive relativism: Resultative construction in Chinese. Language and Linguistics, 4(2), 301-316.

Talmy, L. (2000b). Toward a cognitive semantics, vol.2: Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Tolkien, J. R. R. (1937). The Hobbit or there and back again. London: George Allen & Unwin. [Traditional Chinese transl. 朱學恆（2001）。魔戒前傳-哈比人歷險記。台北：聯經。]

Whorf, B. L., & Carroll, J. B. (Eds.). (1956). Language, thought, and reality. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Zhang, S., & Schmitt, B. (1998). Language-dependent classification: The mental representation of classifiers in cognition, memory, and ad evaluations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 4(4), 375-385.

Zheng, M., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2002). Thought before language: How deaf and hearing children express motion events across cultures. Cognition, 85, 145-175.