Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-dwq4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-28T07:29:03.209Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Elaborating time in space: the structure and function of space–motion metaphors of time

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 May 2016

KEVIN EZRA MOORE
KEVIN EZRA MOORE*
Affiliation:
San José State University
*
†Address for correspondence: e-mail: kevin.moore@sjsu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper studies the principles according to which spatial and motion concepts metaphorically structure temporal concepts in some languages. There are two types of space–motion metaphor of time, distinguished by whether or not the metaphor is structured by a person’s perspective. “Christmas is approaching” and “We are approaching Christmas” are perspectival. “New Year’s follows Christmas” is not. This contrast in deixis and frame of reference is linguistically relevant whether the contrast has to do with imagination or external reality. Study of experiential motivations and analysis into primary metaphors helps reveal the particular ways spatial and motion concepts function in each type of metaphor. One focus is accounting for the contrasting temporal meanings that words for in-front and behind can have. For example, “Ahead of us” is later than Now, while “ahead of Christmas” is earlier than Christmas. We find that the temporal ‘directions’ expressed in the contrasting frames of reference are not opposites. Rather, they are motivated by different kinds of temporal experience. This project investigates the fundamental spatial relations that structure temporal concepts; for example co-location vs. separation. But since motion involves time, purely spatial structure is limited. Conceptual blending analysis reveals that the source and target frames of the perspectival metaphors share an aspectual – i.e., temporal – generic structure. Thus a dichotomy between ‘space’ and ‘time’ is of limited utility in describing space–motion metaphors of time. Instead, the analysis has to deal with the specific spatial and temporal concepts that function in each metaphor.

Keywords

spacetimesemanticsprimary metaphorblendingconceptual structuredeixisviewpointframes of referenceexperiential motivationmental spaces
Type
Research Article
Information
Language and Cognition , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , June 2017 , pp. 191 - 253
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © UK Cognitive Linguistics Association 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

I would like to thank Kyoko Hirose, Yukio Hirose, Tuomas Huumo, Takashi Shizawa, Chris Sinha, Karen Sullivan, Eve Sweetser, and Len Talmy for very helpful discussions.

References

references

Allan, Keith (1995). The anthropocentricity of the English word(s) back . Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 11–31.Google Scholar
Bender, Andrea, & Beller, Sieghard (2014). Mapping spatial frames of reference onto time: a review of theoretical accounts and empirical findings. Cognition, 132, 342–382.Google Scholar
Bender, Andrea, Beller, Sieghard, & Bennardo, Giovanni (2010). Temporal frames of reference: conceptual analysis and empirical evidence from German, English, Mandarin Chinese, and Tongan. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 10, 283–307.Google Scholar
Bender, Andrea, Rothe-Wulf, Annelie, Hüther, Lisa, & Beller, Sieghard (2012). Moving forward in space and time: How strong is the conceptual link between spatial and temporal frames of reference? Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1–11.Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar (2001). Deictic transposition and referential practice in Belhare. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 10, 224–247.Google Scholar
Bohnemeyer, Jürgen (1998). Temporal reference from a radical pragmatics perspective: why Yucatec does not need to express ‘after’ and ‘before’. Cognitive Linguistics, 9, 239–282.Google Scholar
Bohnemeyer, Jürgen, & O’Meara, Carolyn (2012). Vectors and frames of reference: evidence from Seri and Yucatec. In Filipović, L. & Jaszczolt, K. M. (Eds.), Space and time in languages and cultures: language, culture, and cognition (pp. 217–249). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Boroditsky, Lera, & Ramscar, Michael (2002). The roles of body and mind in abstract thought. Psychological Science, 13, 185–189.Google Scholar
Bottini, Roberto, & Casasanto, Daniel (2013). Space and time in the child’s mind: metaphoric or ATOMic? Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bühler, Karl (1990 [1934]). Theory of language: the representational function of language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casad, Eugene H. (2012). From space to time: a cognitive analysis of the Cora locative system and its temporal extensions (Human Cognitive Processing 39). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Casasanto, Daniel, & Bottini, Roberto (2010). Can mirror-reading reverse the flow of time? In Hölscher, Christoph, Shipley, Thomas F., Belardinelli, Marta Olivetti, Bateman, John A., & Newcombe, Nora S. (Eds.), Spatial Cognition VII (pp. 335–345). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Casasanto, Daniel, & Jasmin, Kyle (2012). The hands of time: temporal gestures in English speakers. Cognitive Linguistics, 23, 643–674.Google Scholar
Chang, Nancy, Gildea, Daniel, & Narayanan, Srini (1998). A dynamic model of aspectual composition. In Gernsbacher, M. A. & Derry, S. J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 226–231). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V. (1974). Normal states and evaluative viewpoints. Language, 50, 316–332.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert (1973). Space, time, semantics, and the child. In Moore, T. E. (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language (pp. 27–63). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Cooperrider, Kensy, & Núñez, Rafael (2009). Across time, across the body: transversal temporal gestures. Gesture, 9, 181–206.Google Scholar
Dancygier, Barbara, & Sweetser, Eve (2014). Figurative language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Danziger, Eve (2010). Deixis, gesture, and cognition in spatial frame of reference typology. Studies in Language, 34, 167–185.Google Scholar
Davies, Mark (2008). The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 520 million words, 1990–present. Online: <http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/>..>Google Scholar
Dewell, Robert (2007). Why Monday comes before Tuesday: the role of a non-deictic conceptualizer. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 25, 291–301.Google Scholar
Duffy, Sarah E., & Feist, Michele I. (2014). Individual differences in the interpretation of ambiguous statements about time. Cognitive Linguistics, 25, 29–54.Google Scholar
Einstein, Albert (1961). Relativity: the special and the general theory (trans. Lawson, Robert W.). New York: Three Rivers Press.Google Scholar
Emanatian, Michele (1992). Chagga ‘come’ and ‘go’: metaphor and the development of tense-aspect. Studies in Language, 16, 1–33.Google Scholar
Emmorey, Karen (2001). Space on hand: the exploitation of signing space to illustrate abstract thought. In Gattis, Merideth (ed.), Spatial schemas and abstract thought (pp. 147–174). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth (1999). Space and time. In Allwood, J. & Gärdenfors, P. (Eds.), Cognitive semantics: meaning and cognition (pp. 131–152). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Evans, Vyvyan (2003). The structure of time: language, meaning and temporal cognition. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Evans, Vyvyan. (2013). Language and time: a cognitive linguistics approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles. (1997). Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles, & Turner, Mark (2002). The way we think: conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles (1982). Towards a descriptive framework for spatial deixis. In Jarvella, R. & Klein, W. (Eds.), Speech, place, and action: studies in deixis and related topics (pp. 31–59). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles (1985). Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, 6, 222–254.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles. (1997 [1971]). Lectures on deixis. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles, & Baker, Collin (2010). A frames approach to semantic analysis. In Heine, B. & Narrog, H. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis (pp. 313–339). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fleischman, Suzanne (1982). The future in thought and language: diachronic evidence from Romance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fraisse, Paul (1963). The psychology of time. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Fuhrman, O., & Boroditsky, L. (2010). Cross-cultural differences in mental representations of time: evidence from an implicit non-linguistic task. Cognitive Science, 34, 1430–1451.Google Scholar
Galton, Antony (2011). Time flies but space does not: limits to the spatialization of time. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 695–703.Google Scholar
Gentner, Dedre (2001). Spatial metaphors in temporal reasoning. In Gattis, Meredith (Ed.), Spatial schemas and abstract thought (pp. 203–222). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gentner, Dedre, Imai, M., & Boroditsky, L. (2002). As time goes by: evidence for two systems in processing space → time metaphors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 17, 537–65.Google Scholar
Grady, Joseph (1997). Foundations of meaning: primary metaphors and primary scenes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California at Berkeley.Google Scholar
Grady, Joseph (1999). A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor: correlation vs. resemblance. In Gibbs, Raymond & Steen, Gerard (Eds.), Metaphor in cognitive linguistics (pp. 79–100). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Grady, Joseph (2005). Primary metaphors as inputs to conceptual integration. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1595–1614.Google Scholar
Grady, Joseph (2008). ‘Superschemas’ and the grammar of metaphorical mappings. In Tyler, A., Kim, Y., & Takada, M. (Eds.), Language in the context of use (pp. 339–360). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grady, Joseph, & Johnson, Christopher (2002). Converging evidence for the notions of subscene and primary scene . In Dirven, René & Pörings, Ralf (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 533–554). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hanks, William (1990). Referential practice: language and lived space among the Maya. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin (1997). From space to time: temporal adverbials in the world’s languages. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Haviland, John (1996). Projections, transpositions, and relativity. In Gumperz, J. & Levinson, S. (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 269–323). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hirose, Yukio (2013). Temporal metaphors and subjectivity: a contrastive study of Japanese and English from the perspective of the Three-Tier Model of Language Use. Paper presented at the University of Tsukuba, Japan, 25 July.Google Scholar
Hutchins, Edwin (2005). Material anchors for conceptual blends. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1555–1577.Google Scholar
Huumo, Tuomas (2013). Many ways of moving along a path: What distinguishes prepositional and postpositional uses of Finnish path adpositions? Lingua, 133, 319–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huumo, Tuomas (2015). Temporal frames of reference and the locative case marking of the Finnish adposition ete- ‘in front of/ahead’. Lingua, 164, 45–67.Google Scholar
James, William (1891). Principles of psychology, Vol. 1. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Janda, Laura (2004). A metaphor in search of a source domain: the categories of Slavic aspect. Cognitive Linguistics, 15, 471–527.Google Scholar
Kranjec, Alexander (2006). Extending spatial frames of reference to temporal concepts. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 447–452). July 2006, Vancouver, BC. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Ortony, Andrew (Ed.), Metaphor and thought, 2nd ed. (pp. 202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, & Johnson, Mark (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, & Johnson, Mark (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, & Turner, Mark (1989). More than cool reason: a field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar, 1 . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald (1991). Foundations of cognitive grammar, 2 . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald (2005). Dynamicity, fictivity, and scanning: the imaginative basis of logic and linguistic meaning. In Pecher, D. & Zwaan, R. (Eds.), Grounding cognition: the role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking (pp. 164–197). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald (2008). Cognitive Grammar: a basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald (2012). Linguistic manifestations of the space–time (dis)analogy. In Filipović, Luna & Jaszczolt, Kasia M. (Eds.), Space and time in languages and cultures: language, culture, and cognition (pp. 191–215). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Google Scholar
Le Guen, Olivier, & Pool Balam, Lorena Ildefonsa (2012). No metaphorical timeline in gesture and cognition among Yucatec Mayas. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1–15.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen (2003). Space in language and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGlone, Matthew, & Harding, Jennifer (1998). Back (or forward?) to the future: the role of perspective in temporal language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24, 1211–1223.Google Scholar
McTaggart, J. (1908). The unreality of time. Mind: A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy, 17, 456–473.Google Scholar
Moore, Kevin Ezra (2000). Spatial experience and temporal metaphors in Wolof: point of view, conceptual mapping, and linguistic practice. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Moore, Kevin Ezra (2004). Ego-based and field-based frames of reference in space to time metaphors. In Achard, Michel & Kemmer, Suzanne (Eds.), Language, culture, and mind (pp. 151–165). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Moore, Kevin Ezra (2006). Space-to-time mappings and temporal concepts. Cognitive Linguistics, 17, 199–244.Google Scholar
Moore, Kevin Ezra (2011). Ego-perspective and field-based frames of reference: temporal meanings of front in Japanese, Wolof, and Aymara. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 759–776.Google Scholar
Moore, Kevin Ezra (2012). Do left and right have temporal meaning? A commentary on ‘Generational differences in the orientation of time in Cantonese speakers as a function of changes in the direction of Chinese writing’ by H. de Sousa (2012). Frontiers in Cultural Psychology, 3, 255. Online <doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00255>.Google Scholar
Moore, Kevin Ezra (2014a). The spatial language of time: metaphor, metonymy and frames of reference. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Moore, Kevin Ezra (2014b). The two-Mover hypothesis and the significance of ‘direction of motion’ in temporal metaphors. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 12, 375–409.Google Scholar
Núñez, Rafael, & Cooperrider, Kensy (2013). The tangle of space and time in human cognition. Trends in Cognitive Science, 17, 220–229.Google Scholar
Núñez, Rafael, & Cornejo, Carlos (2012). Facing the sunrise: cultural worldview underlying intrinsic-based encoding of absolute frames of reference in Aymara. Cognitive Science, 36, 965–991.Google Scholar
Núñez, Rafael, & Sweetser, Eve (2006). With the future behind them: convergent evidence from Aymara language and gesture in the crosslinguistic comparison of spatial construals of time. Cognitive Science, 30, 401–450.Google Scholar
Özçaliskan, Seyda (2002). Metaphors we move by: a crosslinguistic-developmental analysis of metaphorical motion events in English and Turkish. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
Radden, Günter (2001). Time as space . University of Hamburg, Department of British and American Studies: Cognitive Linguistics: Explorations, Applications, Research.Google Scholar
Radden, Günter (2011). Spatial time in the West and the East. In Brdar, Mario, Omazić, Maria, Takač, Višnja Pavičić, Gradečak-Erdelijić, Tanja, & Bulijan, Gabrijela (Eds.), Space and time in language (pp. 1–40). Frankfut am Mein: Peter Lang GmbH.Google Scholar
Schmidt, Goran, & Marija, Omazić (2011). Time metaphors in English and Croatian: A corpus-based study. In Brdar, Mario, Omazić, Maria, Takač, Višnja Pavičić, Gradečak-Erdelijić, Tanja, & Bulijan, Gabrijela (Eds.), Space and time in language (pp. 235–246). Frankfut am Mein: Peter Lang GmbH.Google Scholar
Shinohara, Kazuko (1999). Epistemology of space and time. Japan: Kwansei Gakuin University Press.Google Scholar
Shinohara, Kazuko, & Matsunaka, Yoshihiro (2010). Frames of reference, effects of motion, and lexical meanings of Japanese front/back terms. In Evans, V. & Chilton, P. (Eds.), Language, cognition, and space: state of the art and new directions (pp. 293–315). London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Shinohara, Kazuko, & Pardeshi, Prashant (2011). The more in front, the later: the role of positional terms in time metaphors. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 749–758.Google Scholar
Sinha, Chris, & Enrique, Bernárdez, (2015). Space, time, and space-time: metaphors, maps and fusions. In Sharifian, F. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and culture (pp. 309–324). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Svorou, Soteria (1994). The grammar of space. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve (1988). Grammaticalization and semantic bleaching. In Axmaker, Shelley, Jaisser, Annie, & Singmaster, Helen (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 389–405). Online: <http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/bls/proceedings.html>.Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve (1996). Changes in figures and changes in grounds: a note on change predicates, mental spaces, and scalar norms. Cognitive Studies [Bulletin of the Japanese Cognitive Science Society], 3, 75–86.Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve (1997). Role and individual interpretations of change predicates. In Nuyts, J. & Pederson, E. (Eds.), Language and conceptualization (pp. 116–136). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics: volume 1, concept structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, John R. (1987). Tense and metaphorizations of time in Zulu. In Lörscher, W. & Schulze, R. (Eds.), Perspectives on language in performance: studies in linguistics, literary criticism, and language teaching and learning, to honour Werner Hüllen on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday (pp. 214–229). Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Tenbrink, Thora (2007). Space, time, and the use of language: an investigation of relationships. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Tenbrink, Thora (2011). Reference frames of space and time in language. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 704–722.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (1975). Spatial expressions of tense and temporal sequencing: a contribution to the study of semantic fields. Semiotica, 15, 207–230.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (1978). On the expression of spatio-temporal relations in language. In Greenberg, J. H., Ferguson, C. A., & Moravcsik, E. (Eds.), Universals of human language 3 (pp. 369–400). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Walsh, V. (2003). A theory of magnitude: common cortical metrics of time, space, and quantity. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 483–488.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1953). Philosophical investigations. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Yamaguchi, Toshiko (2012). The semantic change of ato ‘later, behind’ in Japanese: from the Peircean sign to metonymy. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 13, 72–109.Google Scholar
Yu, Ning (1998). The contemporary Theory of Metaphor: a perspective from Chinese. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Yu, Ning (2012). The metaphorical orientation of time in Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 1335–1354.Google Scholar
Zinken, Jörg (2010). Temporal frames of reference. In Evans, V. & Chilton, P. (Eds.), Language, cognition, and space: state of the art and new directions (pp. 479–498). London: Equinox.Google Scholar