Luận văn thạc sĩ VNU ULIS a study of space – time conceptual metaphor in english

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST – GRADUATE STUDIES
*****************

NGUYỄN THỊ PHƯƠNG NHUNG

A STUDY OF SPACE – TIME CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR IN ENGLISH
Nghiên cứu ẩn dụ ý niệm khơng gian – thời gian trong tiếng Anh
(Chương trình loại 1)

M.A. Minor Programme Thesis

Field: Linguistics
Code: 60220201

HÀ NỘI – 2018

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST – GRADUATE STUDIES
*****************

NGUYỄN THỊ PHƯƠNG NHUNG

A STUDY OF SPACE – TIME CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR IN ENGLISH
Nghiên cứu ẩn dụ ý niệm khơng gian – thời gian trong tiếng Anh
(Chương trình loại 1)

M.A. Minor Programme Thesis

Field: Linguistics
Code: 60220201
Supervisor: Prof. Nguyễn Hòa

HÀ NỘI – 2018

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the thesis entitled “A study of Space-time Conceptual
Metaphor in English” is the result of my own research for the Degree of Master
at the University of Languages and International Studies (ULIS), Viet Nam
National University, and this thesis has not been submitted for any other degrees.
I also accept all the requirement of ULIS relating to the retention and use of M.A
Graduation Thesis deposited in the library.
Hanoi, 2017

Nguyen Thi Phuong Nhung

i

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

On completion of this thesis, I am indebted to many people.
First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere thanks to Prof.
Nguyễn Hoà for helping me complete this study. This paper would not be
finished without his valuable advice, guidance and support. His useful
suggestions and valuable critical feedback encouraged me during the process of
conducting this study.
Much gratitude also go to all my lecturers and officers from Faculty of
Post-Graduate Studies, University of Languages and International Studies,
Vietnam National University, who facilitated the best possible conditions during
my whole course of studying.
I also would like to show my warmest thanks to my friends who
encouraged and assisted me a lot. At the same time, their valuable comments and
criticism are extremely important and helpful during the process of writing this
paper.
Last but not least, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my
parents and my brothers for their love, care and encouragement.

Hanoi, 2017

Nguyen Thi Phuong Nhung

ii

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


ABSTRACT

This study investigates into the space - time conceptual metaphor in
English, which the abstract domain of time gets its relational structure from the

more concrete domain of space through metaphorical mappings. The research
focuses on two spatial prepositions before and behind in the light of cognitive
perspective. Hence, the meanings of these two particles are clarified through the
analysed image schemas and two moving models. The spatial orientation has an
important impact on human thought and our understanding of time as the
domains of space and time do share conceptual structure, thus how people
conceptualize spatial information affects people’s thinking of temporal
information. It is suggested that the spatial models of before, behind are also
useful to the mappings between space and time, from which the ego-moving and
time-moving models of before, behind are developed. From the analysis and
discussion based on data source, limitations and recommendations for further
studies were included in this research.

iii

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ............................................................................................................. i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................ii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................. iii
LIST OF ABBRIVIATIONS ......................................................................................... iv
LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES ....................................................................................... v
PART A: INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
1. Rationale for the research ............................................................................ 1
2. Aims of the research .................................................................................... 1
3. Research question ........................................................................................ 2
4. Data source .................................................................................................. 2
5. Scope of the research ................................................................................... 2

6. Significance of the research......................................................................... 2
7. Organization of the research ........................................................................ 2
PART B: DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................... 4
Chapter 1 - LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................ 4
1.1.

Definition of term (key constructs)....................................................... 4

1.2.

Theoretical background ........................................................................ 5

1.2.1.

The conceptual nature of meaning .................................................... 5

1.2.2.

Metaphor: .......................................................................................... 6

1.3.

Conceptual metaphor Time as Space: .................................................. 7

Chapter 2 – METHODOLOGY ....................................................................... 10
2.1. Research method .................................................................................... 10
2.2. How to determine distinct senses........................................................... 11
Chapter 3 – ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ................................................ 14

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add

3.1. Analysis.................................................................................................. 14
3.2. Discussion .............................................................................................. 30
PART C: CONCLUSION............................................................................................. 34
1. Summary.................................................................................................... 34
2. Implication ................................................................................................. 34
3. Limitations and suggestions for further studies. ....................................... 35
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 37

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


LIST OF ABBRIVIATIONS

Eg: Example
Fig: Figure
LM: Landmarks
TR: Trajector

iv

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES

Fig. 1: Image schema of before in Eg. 1 ......................................................... 14
Fig. 2: Image schema of before in Eg. 2 .......................................................... 15
Fig. 3: Image schema of before in Eg. 3 .......................................................... 16

Fig. 4: Image schema of before in Eg. 4 .......................................................... 16
Fig. 5: Image schema of before in Eg. 5 .......................................................... 12
Fig. 6: Image schema of before in Eg. 6 .......................................................... 18
Fig. 7: Image schema of before in Eg. 7 .......................................................... 18
Fig. 8: Image schema of behind in Eg. 8 ......................................................... 10
Fig. 9: Image schema of behind in Eg. 9 ......................................................... 20
Fig. 10: Image schema of behind in Eg. 10 ..................................................... 21
Fig. 11: Image schema of behind in Eg. 11 ..................................................... 21
Fig. 12: Ego-moving and Object-moving models ............................................ 22
Table 1: Space-time correspondences in English ............................................ 24
Fig. 13: Image schema of Ego-moving model from space to time ................. 25
Fig. 14: Image schema of Time-moving model from space to time ............... 26
Table 2: Examples of Ego-moving and Time-moving metaphors with
preposition 'before, behind' ............................................................................. 27
Fig. 15: Ego-moving model of before from space to time .............................. 27
Fig. 16: Ego-moving model of behind from space to time ............................. 28
Fig. 17: Time-moving model of before from space to time ............................ 29
Fig. 18: Time-moving model of behind from space to time ........................... 30

v

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


PART A: INTRODUCTION
In this part, the researcher will present the rationale of the study, the aims,
the research questions, the data source, the scope, the significance, and the
organization of the study.
1. Rationale for the research
Many researches have shown that people often talk about time in terms of

space. Spatial expressions used here can be verbs (as we approach the end of the
year, the coming month) or prepositions (in the days ahead of us, the worst is
behind us). That people rely on the domain of space to conceptualize time such
as: we are handing in our MA thesis before time, approaching the viva voce, or
falling behind schedule means they are using space-time conceptual metaphor
(metaphor Time as Space). Playing an important role in conceptualizing time as
space, the spatial prepositions (in, on, at, before, ahead of, behind, etc.) have
been subject to many linguistic studies and thesis. Of these, ‘in, on, at’ have
been discussed in lots of articles and studies, while ‘before, behind’ have
received less linguists and researchers’ attention. When people stand between
the worst days and the best days, can it be said that “the best day is before them”
or “the best day is behind them”? How can people determine which statement is
the best appropriate?. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to investigate
two spatial prepositions ‘before, behind’ in detail that how they reason time from
cognitive perspective.
2. Aims of the research
The study is carried out to discover another aspect of metaphor Time as
Space in which the spatial schemas of two spatial prepositions ‘before, behind’
are clarified. Moreover, the research explores how these spatial schemas affect
time conceptualization. From those analysis, the mechanism the temporal
statements using these spatial prepositions are interpreted.

1

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


3. Research question
The Research Question is: ‘How do the spatial prepositions before,
behind conceptualize time?’, which is clarified through three sub-questions:

➢ What are the spatial schemas of before, behind?
➢ How do these spatial schemas affect time reasoning?
➢ By which mechanism the temporal statements using these spatial
prepositions are interpreted?
4. Data source
The data in this study is collected from English books and stories
which two prepositions before and behind sometimes appear and are used as
spatial and temporal particles.
5. Scope of the research
Many studies have been done in the field of metaphor Time as Space.
The subjects also vary from verbs to prepositions. Within the limit of
researcher’s personal ability and source of reference materials, this study
focuses on two spatial prepositions: before, behind used as expressions of time.
6. Significance of the research
The research has significance on improving the understanding about
cognitive linguistics in general and conceptual metaphor in particular, raising
people’s awareness of the time reasoning, helping to figure out how people
perceive the time when they use spatial expression, promoting knowledge
about the certain subjects of the metaphor Time as Space, discovering and
obtaining the motion models of specifically spatial-temporal expressions
(before, behind). Besides, the research is also a useful material source for
further studies, a necessary supplementary document for learning and
teaching English prepositions.
7. Organization of the research
The study consists of three main parts:
2

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add

Part I: Introduction, presents the rationale of the study, the objectives,
the scope, the method, the significance and the organization of the study.
Part II: Development, includes three chapters:
Chapter 1: Literature Review, reviews the theories of metaphor,
conceptual metaphor Time as Space, and related previous studies on the
metaphor Time as Space.
Chapter 2: Methodology, describes the research method. Moreover, this
chapter gives detailed theoretical framework on metaphor Time as Space
and shows two models for conceptualizing time.
Chapter 3: Analysis and discussion, analyzes meaning network of two
particles before and behind; analyzes two conceptual models of two
prepositions behind, before, followed by discussion of findings.
Part III: Conclusion, gives the summary of the research, its implications,
limitations and suggestions for further studies.

3

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


PART B: DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 1 - LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter is divided into three major sections. The first section
provides definition of some key terms. The second section represents the
theoretical background to nature of meaning, metaphor and conceptual metaphor.
The third section focuses on related previous studies on conceptual metaphor
Time as Space.
1.1.

Definition of term (key constructs)

Concept: The general idea or meaning which is associated with a word or
symbol in a person’s mind. (“Longman dictionary of Language teaching and
applied linguistics” (1992))
Conceptualization (Construal): The way in which people perceive,
comprehend, and interpret the word around them. (“Longman dictionary of
Language teaching and applied linguistics” (1992))
Conceptual metaphor: The understanding of one range of concepts (the target
domain) in term of another (the source domain). (“Longman dictionary of
Language teaching and applied linguistics” (1992))
Time-moving system: A time-line is conceived of as a river or conveyor belt on
which events are moving from the future to the past. (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980)
Ego-moving system: Ego or the observer’s context progresses along the timeline (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980)
Image Schema: An image schema is a recurring structure within our cognitive
processes which establishes patterns of understanding and reasoning (Mark
Johnson, 1987). Image schemas are formed from our bodily interactions, from
linguistic experience, and from historical context. An image schema is a
generalized, primitive mental abstraction used in reasoning to associate percepts
with concepts.

4

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


Landmark (LM): entity with respect to which some other entity moves
Trajector (TR): entity that moves with respect to a (relatively) stationary
landmark.
The notions of trajectory and landmark date back to the Gestalt
psychology distinction between figure and ground. Foregrounded parts in a

scene or in a conceptual domain are call figure, and those which are downplayed
are term ground. Cognitive linguists like Talmy (1978), Fillmore (1985), and
Langacker (1987) have applied these notions to the description of language. This
has yielded a parallelism between figure and trajectory on the one hand, and
between ground and landmark on the other. Thus, the TR is the profiled or
highlighted entity, while the LM merely acts as a reference point for the TR. It
usually happens that the LM is bigger in size and it gets a relative fixity of
location, as opposed to the TR.
1.2.

Theoretical background

1.2.1. The conceptual nature of meaning
Words constitute lexical forms that are conventionally paired with
meanings, and that these form-meaning pairings are stored in a mental dictionary
or lexicon. The meanings of this set of words are clearly grounded at some level
in our spatio-physical interaction with the world. The various meanings
associated with spatial particles are related in systematic and highly motivated
ways. In other words, we advance a polysemy approach to word meaning,
arguing that the multiple, distinct meanings associated with the same lexical
form are often related. We suggest that the distinct but related senses associated
with a single spatial particle constitute a semantic network organized with
respect to a primary sense. It has been widely assumed that meaning derives
from the fact that language refers directly to the world. The means whereby
language ‘matches up’ with the world has relied on the notion of truth.
According to the cognitive scientist Gilles Fauconnier, when language
expressions reflect objective events and situations, as they often do, they do not
5

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add

reflect them directly, but rather through elaborate human cognitive constructions
and construals’. Jackendoff has also supported that one of the most important
insights to emerge from the work on perception is that our perceptions of the
world are determined largely by conceptual organization being imposed on
senseperceptory input. That is, what we directly experience is not an objectively
real world. Rather, what we experience as everyday reality is mediated and
shaped by human conceptual organization to which we necessarily and
unconsciously subject sense-perceptory input.
In general, the patterns and organization we perceive as reality do not in
fact exist independently of the world itself, but are largely the result of our
cognitive processing. It is we who perceive it to be of something. This is
instructive as it demonstrates that although there is a world of sense-perceptory
information out there, what we in fact perceive is determined by how we
unconsciously organize and hence make sense of the input.
1.2.2. Metaphor:
Metaphor is said to play an important role in our conceptual structuring
processes. In particular, it is noticed that certain experiential metaphors which
base on the feeling of spatial relations are available in people’s conceptual
system. In recent years another opinion has shown that metaphor plays a crucial
role in the acquisition of new conceptual structure (Lakoff and Johnson 1980;
Martin 1990). From this, language is considered as metaphorical in nature;
besides, metaphor is offered a main role in the development of conceptual
structure. Lakoff and Johnson (1980) have convinced that people’s conceptual
network is basically structured by core metaphors; for example, that abstract
concepts like feeling, are metaphorically structured by concrete spatial concepts
such as orientation (e.g., happiness is up and sadness is down).

6

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


1.3.

Conceptual metaphor Time as Space:
Given by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson (in Metaphors We live by),

conceptual metaphor theory represents a well-developed theory from the
research method of cognitive linguistics. This theory is an approach to
conceptual organization and structure which has been influential in cognitive
science. That the concept generating is motivated by conceptual metaphors
forms the central idea of conceptual metaphor theory. Conceptual metaphors
map inferential structure between two distinct conceptual domain (time and
space, for instance). This kind of metaphor allows people to structure or perceive
one more abstract domain (time) in terms of a more concrete domain (space)
(Lakoff and Johnson, 1980, Lakoff 2000). This certain relationship can be
expressed as ‘Time is Space’ that time as the motion of objects, and time as a
‘passage’.
With respect to this metaphor, scholars have come to a general conclusion
that there is a difference between moving-time and moving-ego metaphors
(Clark, 1973; Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Genter, 2001; Evans, 2003). In the first
one, it is not the observer, but the temporal events that move from future to past
while with moving-ego, the observer stands in the time-line and moves to the
fixed future time events.
Beside some veteran linguists such as George Lakoff, Mark Johnson and
Vyvyan Evans, Günter Radden has obtained significant achievements in
cognition field. The study ‘The Metaphor TIME AS SPACE across Languages’
by Gunter is carried out across many languages such as English, French, Chinese,

Italian and German, in which time is investigated with six dimensions:
dimensionality of time, orientation of the time-line, shape of time-line, position
of times relative to the observer, sequences of time units and motion of time. It is
noticeable here that the motion of time is conceptualized in the moving-time and
moving-ego models according to whether time or observer moves in time-line.
7

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


However, that the motion model of certain verbs and prepositions used in
metaphor time as space is not discussed in detail.
Lera Boroditsky with the article Metaphoric structuring: understanding
time through spatial metaphors from the Journal Cognition also reaches an
agreement on the above ideas. The linguist again proves that the space and time
domains have the same conceptual structure in language through three
experiments. However, the author claims that thinking about time does not
always need spatial schemas when frequent mappings between space and time
have been kept in the domain of time. The article mentions many spatial
expressions such as in front of, ahead, behind, up, down, before, forward.
However, prepositions before and behind have not been put on focus yet.
In general, metaphors are adopted for describing abstract ideas difficult to
perceive through our senses - such as time, love, life, ideas, theories, morality,
mind, anger, fear, politics, society, communication, God and religion. A target
domain of a metaphor is characterized by a number of source domains, as has
been widely accepted by researchers working on metaphor like Lakoff &
Johnson (1980) and Kövecses (1991). Kövecses (2000, 82) asserts that ‘a source
domain contributes not randomly selected but predetermined conceptual
materials agreed upon by a community of speakers to the range of target
domains to which it applies.’ Metaphor is not merely a decorative device of

language, not related to the human thought and culture. Rather, metaphor is a
central signal that represents the peculiarity of language and culture. Time is one
of the most abstract but essential concept in our human life, and each culture has
developed different sets of metaphor for the reference of time.
Following the seminal work of Lakoff and Johnson (1980), cognitive
semanticists claim it is well established in principle that space is used
symbolically in the thought processes and languages of most, if not all, people,
and that orientational metaphors are widespread in languages, generating related
phrases and expressions. Grounded in our experiences of interaction with the
8

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


world, we understand, for example, that growth is often linked to health and
strength.
From the studies reviewed, there is a call for further investigations on the
certain spatial expressions such as before, behind and their roles in time
conceptualization.

9

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


Chapter 2 – METHODOLOGY
In this chapter, the research method chosen to conduct the study and the
metaphor Time as Space in general are described.
2.1. Research method
Firstly, the researcher analyzes the meaning network of each spatial

preposition (before, behind); Secondly, the researcher analyzes how these
particles are used to express time; depends on the spatial schemas to find out the
temporal schemas (Ego-moving and Time-moving). Finally, the researcher
analyzes two temporal schemas (Ego-moving and Time-moving)
Lakoff and Johnson (1980:3) state that: "…metaphor is pervasive in
everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. Our ordinary
conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally
metaphorical in nature."
The theoretical assumptions on which the present paper is based are
derived from the conceptual theory of metaphor initially developed by Lakoff
and Johnson. In its broadest sense, the cognitive approach claims that metaphors
are pervasive in conventional language and thought.
Metaphor is a device with the capacity to structure our conceptual system,
providing, at the same time, a particular understanding of the world and a way to
make sense of our experience. From this point, metaphor is defined by Lakoff
and Nunez (2000:5) as "the mechanism by which the abstract is comprehended
in terms of the concrete."
Lakoff and Johnson believe that the metaphors people use provide
information on how they understand things. They note that a person's
communication is a key source to indicating how that person thinks. Not only do
metaphors provide a window for people to see another's person conceptual
system, metaphors also shape people's conceptual systems. Metaphors also
10

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


"govern our everyday functioning, down to the most mundane details. Our
concepts structure what we perceive, how we get around the world, and how we
relate to other people ".

Thus, metaphors play a key role in people's communication and
conceptualization. A case illustrating what it means for a concept to be
metaphorical and for such a concept to structure an everyday activity, is the
conceptual metaphor TIME AS SPACE. English has many everyday expressions
that are grounded on conceptualizing the domain of time in terms of the domain
of space, such as “Look how far we have come. We cannot turn back now”.
Thus, metaphor involves understanding one domain of experience, time,
in terms of a very different domain of experience, space. "Technically, the
metaphor can be understood as a mapping from a source domain (in this case,
space) to a target domain (in this case, time)".
2.2. How to determine distinct senses
There are many different approaches of how best to model a meaning
network, which is to some extent subjective. Tyler and Evans (1999) suggested
two criteria for determining whether a particular instance of a spatial particle
counts as a distinct sense. First, to be counted as distinct, a sense must contain
additional meaning not apparent in any other senses associated with a particular
form, which means that a distinct sense must involve non-spatial meaning or a
different configuration between the TR and LM than found in the proto-scene.
Second, there must be instances of the sense that are context independent, that is,
in which the distinct sense could not be inferred from another sense and the
context in which it occurs. In order to see how this would work let’s consider the
following sentences:
(1) We were walking behind you.
(2) The road is behind the house

11

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add

In the first sentence behind designates a spatial relation in which the TR,
coded by we, is located at the back of the LM (you). In the second sentence,
behind also designates a spatial relationship in which the TR, the road, is located
at the back of the LM (the house). Thus, neither of the uses of behind in these
two sentences adds additional meaning with respect to each other. It can be seen
that the same basic TR–LM configuration holds in both and no additional nonspatial meaning is prompted for by one and not the other. These two examples of
behind have failed one of the two assessments and cannot be treated as two
distinct senses.
Besides, there are also examples that do appear to constitute a distinct
sense:
(3) The president placed environmental welfare behind all other items in
his legislative programme.
In this sentence a non-spatial relation designated by behind, in which the
TR, environmental welfare is less important than other items/problems on the
legislative agenda. Thus, the meaning of behind appears to be that a lack of
priority and importance represents an additional meaning not apparent in
examples such as those in (1) and (2). The fact that the usage in (3) brings
additional meaning meets the first assessment criterion for whether this instance
counts as a distinct sense.
In terms of the second, we must establish whether the lack of priority
meaning can be derived from context. If it can be, then this instance would fail
the second assessment criterion and so could not be a distinct sense. Assuming
that behind involves a sense that involves a unique configuration between a TR
and LM and that this configuration involves some sense of the TR being more
important than the LM, we see no way that the lack of importance meaning
component associated with behind in (3) can be derived from context. The TR,
environmental welfare, is not important as the LM, other items. As all other
12

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add

items in legislative programme are typically more important /privileged than
environmental welfare, and the president usually pays more attention to other
issues than environment welfare.
Such an inference is not possible in the example in (1) and (2) as the
spatial relation holding between the TR and the LM is one which would
normally be coded by front/back (i.e., we are walking at the back of you) rather
than by less important. In short, unless we already know that behind has a lack
of priority meaning associated with it, there is no ready contextual means of
deriving this meaning in sentences such as (3) and. From this, we conclude that
the lack of priority meaning associated with behind in (3) constitutes a distinct
sense.
The two assessment criteria may be shown to exclude senses that are
legitimately instantiated in the language user’s mental lexicon and hence would
have to be adjusted. This methodology predicts many of the findings which have
already come to light, and hence represents a reasonable approximation for
assessing where the line should be drawn between what counts as a distinct
sense conventionalized in semantic memory and a contextual inference,
produced on-line for the purpose of local understanding. The methodology
provides a rigorous and relatively consistent way of making judgements as to
whether a sense is distinct or not, and provides methodology which can be used
in an inter-subjective way.

13

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


Chapter 3 – ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the answers to the following questions:
What are the spatial schemas of before, behind?
How do these spatial schemas affect time reasoning?
By which mechanism the temporal statements using these spatial
prepositions are interpreted?
3.1. Analysis
Our conceptualization of front versus back references the human body in
which the primary organs of the perception are located in the front of the head,
the researcher begins this chapter by demonstrating that spatial particles
typically have numerous meanings associated with them. It is claimed that a
subset of interpretations represents those meanings which must be stored in
memory, and hence are permanently available, which are termed senses.
3.1.1. Meaning network and image schema of ‘before’
The spatial particle before relates historically to Old English
beforen/bifuran, glossed as ‘be front’ or ‘ahead’. Fore was a separate preposition
in Old English and meant ‘located at the front of’. Before involves an in tandem
configuration developing a ‘located at the front of’ meaning. In English, we find
evidence for two competing senses, the Location Sense (involving a TR and an
oriented LM) and the In Advance Of Sense involving an in tandem
configuration). Consider the following examples:
(Eg. 1) A reached the finish line before B.

F
C

B

A

Fig. 1: Image schema of before in Eg. 1

14

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


home

(Eg. 2) Hannah arrived home before George.

Tony

George

Hannah

Fig. 2: Image schema of before in Eg. 2
A recurring consequence of two animate, oriented entities being in an in
tandem alignment and in motion is that the one in the advance position will
encounter other entities first. An unavoidable consequence of the two entities
being so aligned is that they will encounter other entities sequentially. For
instance, in a race, with three runners, A, B and C, runner A finishes first, runner
B second and runner C third. In such a case, by virtue of A being located in front
of runners B and C, A is sequenced prior to both B and C, and arrives at (or
encounters) the finish line prior to, or in advance of, B and C. The tight
correlation between location and sequence in scenes involving an in tandem
alignment has resulted in the strong implicature of sequentiality becoming
associated with before.
Similarly, a recurring consequence of two static entities being in an in
tandem alignment is that a person approaching the static entities would
encounter them sequentially. So, if three people, Tony, George, Hannah, are

standing in line, one behind the other, and a fourth person, Katherine,
approaches from the front of the line, Katherine will encounter the three in
sequential order.

Katherine

Tony

George

Hannah

15

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


Moreover, when we are in motion, we encounter static entities which are
aligned but not necessarily inherently oriented. However, as we approach these
objects, we often perceive the side nearest to us as most salient and thus assign
the near side a functional orientation of front. Thus, we experience two aligned
but unoriented objects, such as lamp posts, as being in an in tandem alignment as
we encounter them. It is inevitable that we encounter such aligned objects in
sequence. Under such a construal, before is licensed. We hypothesize that with
use the implicature of sequence associated with before has gained in salience
such that before can be used to denote any set of ordered entities, as in the
following:
(Eg. 3) B is before C in the alphabet

A

B

D

C

Fig. 3: Image schema of before in Eg. 3

Friday

Thursday
day

Tuesday

Wednesday
day

(Eg. 4) Thursday is always before Friday

Figure 4: Image schema of before in Eg. 4
It is worth highlighting the fact that sequences are temporally framed
relations, either because the event itself correlates with the passage of time, or
because the processing required to relate two discrete units in a sequence, as in
two letters in the alphabet, correlates with the passage of time. Therefore, a
16

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add