Motion-event translation is the problem of preserving who moves, how they move, where they start, which path they follow, what boundary they cross and where they end. English can package manner into the verb and path into particles: run into the room, crawl out of the tunnel, slide across the floor. Other languages may prefer a path verb plus separate manner expression. Literal verb matching can therefore lose either manner or path even when the sentence sounds natural.
People searching for how to translate motion verbs, path and manner, source and goal, boundary crossing, directional particles, come/go, bring/take or motion-event typology are solving an event-packaging problem. Languages differ in whether path is encoded in the main verb, satellite, case ending, serial verb or preposition. Precision means reconstructing the complete motion scene before selecting target verbs.
This article owns the motion-event precision layer. It explains figure, ground, path, manner, source, goal, route, boundary crossing, deictic motion, caused motion, vertical motion, posture-change, path satellites, serial constructions and QA. It builds on the Verb Valency and Deixis owners without duplicating them. The central rule is: map the motion components first, then let the target language package them naturally.
Figure and Ground
The key is to identify the source relation before choosing target syntax. Motion events involve a moving figure located relative to a ground or reference object. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is swapping mover and location roles. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to label FIGURE and GROUND For example, “The child ran into the room” has child as figure and room as ground. Before release, same mover and reference object in target. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Source
A precise translation treats this as a semantic-and-grammatical mapping problem. Source identifies where motion begins. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is dropping or confusing source with path. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to mark FROM relation For example, “She walked from the station.” Before release, target start point remains station. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Goal
This becomes difficult when the target language packages the same meaning through a different construction. Goal identifies endpoint or destination. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is using a location expression that does not entail arrival when source does. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to mark TO/INTO endpoint For example, “walked to the station” heads toward station and often reaches it depending on language/context. Before release, check endpoint implication. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Path
The source wording is only the surface; the underlying event or clause relation is the invariant. Path describes the route or spatial relation traversed. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is translating manner while losing across/through/around/up/down. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to draw an arrow and spatial relation For example, “swam across the river.” Before release, target route matches. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Manner
A fluent target can still be wrong if this relation changes during restructuring. Manner tells how motion occurs—run, crawl, slide, tiptoe, stumble. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is choosing a generic move/go verb and losing manner detail. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to separate manner from path For example, “crawled into the room” includes crawling plus inward boundary crossing. Before release, target preserves manner when source foregrounds it. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Satellite-Framed Patterns
The key is to identify the source relation before choosing target syntax. English often places manner in verb and path in a particle/preposition. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is translating the verb only. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to treat verb+satellite as one motion package For example, run out, climb up, drive across. Before release, every path satellite has a target counterpart. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Verb-Framed Patterns
A precise translation treats this as a semantic-and-grammatical mapping problem. Some languages prefer path in the main verb and manner in an adjunct or participle. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is forcing an unnatural English-style manner verb plus particle. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to allow repackaging For example, a target may express ‘enter running’ rather than ‘run in’. Before release, same path and manner remain. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Boundary Crossing
This becomes difficult when the target language packages the same meaning through a different construction. Into/out of/across can encode crossing a spatial boundary rather than mere location. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is using in/out forms that describe static position. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to mark CROSS boundary For example, “ran into the house” differs from “ran in the house.” Before release, target distinguishes movement across boundary. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Route vs Goal
The source wording is only the surface; the underlying event or clause relation is the invariant. Through, past and along describe route while to/into often mark endpoints. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is turning a route landmark into destination. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to label VIA versus TO For example, “walked through the park to the station.” Before release, park remains route, station goal. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Come and Go
A fluent target can still be wrong if this relation changes during restructuring. Deictic motion selects a centre relative to speaker/addressee or discourse location. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is copying come/go verb despite different target viewpoint. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to map deictic centre For example, “come to your office” may require target go. Before release, movement path and social viewpoint both match. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Bring and Take
The key is to identify the source relation before choosing target syntax. Caused transfer verbs add an object whose motion is directed relative to a centre. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is reversing direction or losing caused-motion relation. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to map causer, theme and destination For example, bring the documents here. Before release, object ends at same destination. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Vertical Motion
A precise translation treats this as a semantic-and-grammatical mapping problem. Rise, fall, climb, descend and drop encode direction and sometimes manner/causation. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is using generic move and losing vertical path. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to draw vertical axis For example, “the balloon rose above the trees.” Before release, direction and reference level remain. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Posture and Motion
This becomes difficult when the target language packages the same meaning through a different construction. Stand up, sit down and lie down combine posture state with transition. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is translating final posture without transition or vice versa. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to mark BEFORE→AFTER posture For example, “sat down” is a change into sitting. Before release, target encodes transition when source does. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Caused Motion
The source wording is only the surface; the underlying event or clause relation is the invariant. One participant can cause another entity to move along a path. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is dropping causer or goal. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to map CAUSER→THEME→PATH/GOAL For example, “She pushed the box into the room.” Before release, same mover and cause. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Self-Propelled vs Caused Motion
A fluent target can still be wrong if this relation changes during restructuring. Walk/run differ from push/throw in who supplies motion energy and control. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is using a target verb that changes agency. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to identify mover vs causer For example, box rolled into room vs she rolled box into room. Before release, agent map. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Motion With Result
The key is to identify the source relation before choosing target syntax. Some motion expressions entail a final state or location. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is preserving path but losing result. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to write endpoint state For example, “fell asleep” is not spatial motion despite historical/metaphorical form; “ran dry” is resultative not literal running. Before release, distinguish lexicalized result constructions. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Metaphorical Motion
A precise translation treats this as a semantic-and-grammatical mapping problem. Languages extend motion verbs to time, change, argument and emotion. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is translating metaphor literally when target uses another conceptual mapping. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to identify whether event is physical or metaphorical For example, “prices climbed” means increased. Before release, target preserves change direction and register. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Motion in Instructions
This becomes difficult when the target language packages the same meaning through a different construction. Directions require operationally correct path, turns and landmarks. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is choosing elegant motion verbs that obscure route. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to prioritize path and landmarks For example, go past the bank, cross the road, turn left. Before release, simulate route. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Motion in Literature
The source wording is only the surface; the underlying event or clause relation is the invariant. Manner choice can build character, rhythm and viewpoint. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is generalising vivid movement into neutral go. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to rank manner as stylistic/semantic importance For example, staggered, crept, dashed and wandered encode different motion styles. Before release, preserve narrative effect. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Motion-Event Map
A fluent target can still be wrong if this relation changes during restructuring. A structured map makes all components auditable. In practice, this means separating the source into its functional parts before drafting. The target may use a different complementizer, non-finite form, aspectual verb, path expression, question particle or clause order. That is acceptable only when the same participant roles, event boundaries, discourse assumptions and task demands remain recoverable to the target reader.
The common failure is reviewing only main verb. This can survive ordinary proofreading because every individual target word may be grammatical and plausible. The error appears only when the reviewer asks what event completed, who controls the embedded action, what path the mover follows, or what information the question actually requests. In technical, educational, legal, research and professional contexts, such a shift can alter instructions, claims, chronology, responsibility or required responses.
A practical method is to record FIGURE / MANNER / SOURCE / PATH / GOAL / GROUND / DEIXIS / CAUSER For example, child / run / corridor / through door / garden / door / away-from-speaker / none. Before release, target map should match. This converts intuition into a repeatable check. When the source leaves something ambiguous or underspecified, preserve or flag that uncertainty instead of forcing a neat target interpretation. The goal is not to keep the source grammar visible; it is to keep the source relation intact.
Worked Examples
Worked Example 1: Run Into vs Run In
She ran into the room normally involves crossing the room boundary. She ran in the room describes running located inside the room.
A target that uses one generic locative form for both loses path structure. Mark boundary crossing explicitly before translating.
Worked Example 2: Crawl Out
The child crawled out of the tunnel contains manner (crawl), direction/path (out of), source/ground (tunnel) and endpoint outside.
A target may use a verb meaning exit plus an adverbial for crawling. That is faithful if both path and manner survive.
Worked Example 3: Come vs Go
Can I come to your office? treats the addressee’s location as deictically relevant. Some target languages naturally use their equivalent of go in the same scenario.
The visible verb can change while the motion path remains correct. Deictic viewpoint belongs to meaning, not English form.
Worked Example 4: Push the Box Into the Room
This is caused motion: the person causes the box to move and cross a boundary into a destination.
A target that simply says “move the box in the room” can lose both causation and boundary crossing. Map all components before wording.
Practical Diagnostic Workflow
Build a motion-event map for every dense motion clause: FIGURE, GROUND, SOURCE, PATH, GOAL, MANNER, DEICTIC CENTRE and CAUSER. Not every field will be filled. The purpose is to see which details are present and which are absent.
After translating, reconstruct the same map from the target. If manner disappeared, path became static location, source became goal or a spontaneous mover acquired an external causer, revise. Motion translation is especially sensitive to small prepositions, particles and verb choices.
Recovery When Meaning Has Drifted
When motion meaning drifts, identify the lost component first. If path is wrong, fix path expression; if manner vanished, add a natural manner adjunct or choose another verb; if goal/source reversed, rebuild the spatial relation before polishing style.
Then check deictic words and later references. Changing come/go can affect here/there and bring/take choices, so motion repair should be reviewed as one local coordinate system rather than isolated verbs.
Quality-Assurance Checklist
- Identify figure and ground.
- Mark source and goal.
- Preserve path.
- Preserve salient manner.
- Check boundary crossing.
- Separate route from endpoint.
- Map deictic centre.
- Distinguish self-propelled from caused motion.
- Preserve vertical direction.
- Check posture transitions.
- Identify metaphorical motion.
- Simulate route in instructions.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why can a motion verb change completely in translation?
Because languages package path and manner differently. A source manner verb plus particle may become a target path verb plus manner phrase.
What is boundary crossing?
Movement from one side of a spatial boundary to another, such as into/out of a room.
Why are come and go difficult?
They depend on deictic viewpoint, which languages choose differently.
Should manner always be preserved?
When it is semantically or stylistically relevant, yes. Some target languages express it outside the main verb.
What is caused motion?
An event where one participant causes another entity to move along a path, as in pushing a box into a room.
Can AI lose path details?
Yes. Systems often generalize vivid motion to generic move/go or omit small directional particles. Use a motion-event map.
Where This Fits in the eduKate Translation Architecture
Use Verb Valency for participant frames, Deixis and Point of View for come/go and here/there, and Lexical Aspect for event boundaries. General equivalence routes to the Master Art of Translation owner.
Final Principle
Translate the whole motion scene. Identify who moves, how, from where, along what path, across which boundary and toward what goal. Then let the target language package those components naturally.