Sequential Time construal is primary in temporal uses of Mandarin Chinese qian ‘front’ and hou ‘back’

IF 1.7 2区 文学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Language Sciences Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.langsci.2022.101511
Yongfei Yang , Chris Sinha , Luna Filipovic
{"title":"Sequential Time construal is primary in temporal uses of Mandarin Chinese qian ‘front’ and hou ‘back’","authors":"Yongfei Yang ,&nbsp;Chris Sinha ,&nbsp;Luna Filipovic","doi":"10.1016/j.langsci.2022.101511","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article addresses two previously unresolved puzzles regarding the relationship between temporal and spatial conceptualizations in Mandarin Chinese. First, apparently conflicting data have led to disagreement over whether temporal usages of the terms <em>qian</em> and <em>hou</em>, whose spatial meanings of ‘front’ and ‘back’ are often considered to be primary, are based on a canonical facing of Ego towards past or towards future. We argue that this issue can be resolved by positing invariant Sequential (S-)Time meanings of, respectively, <span>earlier</span> and <span>later</span> for these terms, with variable <span>uses</span> to refer to past and future events and perspectives in Deictic (D-)Time being secondary and contextually governed. Second, the question of which of the sagittal, vertical and lateral orientational axes are more fundamental in spatio-temporal language and cognition for Mandarin Chinese speakers has been much debated. We review these issues, propose solutions based on linguistic analysis and report five experiments to test the analysis. Our findings are consistent with our analysis of the primacy in Mandarin Chinese of the invariant S-time construal of the terms <em>qian</em> ‘front’ (=<span>earlier</span>) and <em>hou</em> ‘back’ (=<span>later</span>) over their contextually governed D-time interpretations as referring to pastness and futurity. We find also that the preferred lexicalization of temporal relations between events by Mandarin speakers involves the sagittal axis terms <em>qian</em> and <em>hou</em>, but this does not mean that this linguistic conceptualization is also imposed by speakers as a preference for the sagittal axis for non-linguistic representations of event sequences. Finally, our data indicate that the temporal meanings of <em>qian</em> and <em>hou</em> (<span>earlier</span> and <span>later</span>) are more salient for speakers than their spatial meanings (front and back) in motion event conceptualizations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51592,"journal":{"name":"Language Sciences","volume":"95 ","pages":"Article 101511"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0388000122000511","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article addresses two previously unresolved puzzles regarding the relationship between temporal and spatial conceptualizations in Mandarin Chinese. First, apparently conflicting data have led to disagreement over whether temporal usages of the terms qian and hou, whose spatial meanings of ‘front’ and ‘back’ are often considered to be primary, are based on a canonical facing of Ego towards past or towards future. We argue that this issue can be resolved by positing invariant Sequential (S-)Time meanings of, respectively, earlier and later for these terms, with variable uses to refer to past and future events and perspectives in Deictic (D-)Time being secondary and contextually governed. Second, the question of which of the sagittal, vertical and lateral orientational axes are more fundamental in spatio-temporal language and cognition for Mandarin Chinese speakers has been much debated. We review these issues, propose solutions based on linguistic analysis and report five experiments to test the analysis. Our findings are consistent with our analysis of the primacy in Mandarin Chinese of the invariant S-time construal of the terms qian ‘front’ (=earlier) and hou ‘back’ (=later) over their contextually governed D-time interpretations as referring to pastness and futurity. We find also that the preferred lexicalization of temporal relations between events by Mandarin speakers involves the sagittal axis terms qian and hou, but this does not mean that this linguistic conceptualization is also imposed by speakers as a preference for the sagittal axis for non-linguistic representations of event sequences. Finally, our data indicate that the temporal meanings of qian and hou (earlier and later) are more salient for speakers than their spatial meanings (front and back) in motion event conceptualizations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
时序时间结构是汉语前、后时态的主要结构形式
这篇文章解决了两个先前尚未解决的关于汉语时间概念化和空间概念化之间关系的难题。首先,显然相互矛盾的数据导致了人们对“前”和“后”这两个术语的时间用法是否基于自我对过去或未来的规范性面向的分歧。我们认为,这个问题可以通过对这些术语分别提出前后不变的顺序(S-)时间含义来解决,在指示(D-)时间中,用于指代过去和未来事件和观点的可变用途是次要的,并受上下文支配。其次,矢状轴、垂直轴和横向轴中的哪一个在汉语普通话使用者的时空语言和认知中更为基础的问题一直存在争议。我们回顾了这些问题,提出了基于语言分析的解决方案,并报告了五个实验来测试分析。我们的研究结果与我们的分析一致,即在汉语普通话中,前“前”(=早)和后“后”(=晚)这两个术语的不变S时间解释优先于它们在上下文中对过去和未来的解释。我们还发现,普通话使用者对事件之间的时间关系的偏好词汇化涉及矢状轴术语“前”和“后”,但这并不意味着这种语言概念化也被使用者强加为对事件序列的非语言表征的矢状轴的偏好。最后,我们的数据表明,在运动事件概念化中,前和后的时间意义对说话人来说比它们的空间意义(前和后)更显著。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Language Sciences
Language Sciences Multiple-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Language Sciences is a forum for debate, conducted so as to be of interest to the widest possible audience, on conceptual and theoretical issues in the various branches of general linguistics. The journal is also concerned with bringing to linguists attention current thinking about language within disciplines other than linguistics itself; relevant contributions from anthropologists, philosophers, psychologists and sociologists, among others, will be warmly received. In addition, the Editor is particularly keen to encourage the submission of essays on topics in the history and philosophy of language studies, and review articles discussing the import of significant recent works on language and linguistics.
期刊最新文献
Dependency distance minimization in discourse structure: universality and individuality compared with that in syntactic structure A study of visual path expressions in Mandarin Chinese from the perspective of motion event typology The etymology of opaque place names based on a cognitive and interdisciplinary method Third-way linguistics: generative and usage-based theories are both right Further semantic change of the derogatory sociomorpheme tái in Chinese gender-related Internet neologisms
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1