Pragmatic aspects of the spatial prepositions for learners of English language as a second language - Английский язык - Дипломные работы

Информация о документе

Цена	9000UZS
Размер	227.9KB
Покупки	0
Дата загрузки	24 Сентябрь 2019
Расширение	doc
Раздел	Дипломные работы
Предмет	Английский язык

Pragmatic aspects of the spatial prepositions for learners of English language as a second language

Купить

CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................................... CHAPTER I Syntactic and Semantic Features of English Prepositions. 1.1 Historical survey of English prepositions…………………………… 1.2 Preposition as a means to provide the sentence additional and necessary details…………………………………………………………………… 1.3 The grammatical functions of prepositions. ……………………………… CHAPTER II Reflections on the Functional Characterization of Spatial Prepositions 2.1 Spatial prepositions and their embodied meaning and cognition………….. 2.2 The nature of meaning that is embodied by means of spatial prepositions... 2.3 The Proto-scenes for spatial prepositions…………………………………. 2.4 The semantic network for spatial prepositions…………………………….. Conclusion …………

Introduction On December 10, 2012 President of the Republic of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov signed a decree “On measures to further improvement of foreign language learning system”. 1 It is noted that in the framework of the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On education” and the National Program for Training in the country, a comprehensive foreign languages’ teaching system, aimed at creating harmoniously developed, highly educated, modern-thinking young generation, further integration of the country to the world community, has been created. During the years of independence, over 51.7 thousand teachers of foreign languages graduated from universities, English, German and French multimedia tutorials and textbooks for 5-9 grades of secondary schools, electronic resources for learning English

Actuality of the QP: This paper has great actuality in explaining the importance of space and spatial experience for both language and thought by means of spatial prepositions. By examining the nature of human spatio-physical experience we explore conceptualization of spatial relations that is reflected in the English language. By explaining the semantics of spatial prepositions this paper has an important actuality for extending the role of preposition in the exploration of spatial and non- spatial concepts. This work provides a detailed analysis of the range of meanings associated with English spatial prepositions, and argues for the foundational role of experience in the development of meaning in general and word meaning in particular. Investigations of the QP : This problem was investi

-to show the actuality of the meaning in context that is expressed by means of spatial prepositions; -to investigate the role of spatial prepositions in conceptualization of reality; We use the semantic and pragmatic observation methods in this research. Using a cognitive linguistics perspective, this paper provides the most comprehensive theoretical analysis of the semantics of English prepositions. Methodological basis of this paper is based on a decree of President of the Republic of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov which signed on December 10, 2012, “On measures to further improvement of foreign language learning system”. Theoritical basis of the research is based on the cognitive linguists’ approaches to the semantics of spatial prepositions such as Brugman, Lakkof, Herskovits and Kreitzer. S

CHAPTER I Syntactic and Semantic Features of English Prepositions . 1.3. Historical Survey of English Prepositions. When it comes to the diachronic study of English prepositions, it must be conceded that, until recently historical linguists have neglected their study. With an exception of a chapter in Mitchell´s two volume Old English Syntax and another chapter in Mustanoja´s Middle English Syntax , there is no comprehensive survey of prepositions in Old or Middle English. 2 As a syntactic work, Mitchell´s book has a strong formal bias, dealing predominantly with the preposition-case relation. Mustanoja, on the other hand, focuses predominantly on semantics. The majority of other handbooks and grammars of Old and Middle English restrict themselves to enumerating only a selected number o

+ mang in ge+mang and on+ge+mang . The most productive, however, is the suffix + ward which occur since the Old English period in connection with some prepositions and in this way forms compound forms. The Old English attestations include æfterweard , inwardre , fromweardan , toweard , upweard , utweard . The prepositions with suffix + ward increased in number during the Middle English period and certain new forms like onward or untoward appeared in this period. In the course of the Early Modern English period, most of these forms were decreasing and the only remnants of this process that can be found in Present-day English are the prepositions toward and towards . Even though most prepositions formed according to the pattern preposition + ward disappeared, new prepositions were formed by

new loan preposition are monomorphemic (e.g. fro , maugre , pur , sans , countre etc.). Some of the Middle English prepositions, however, retained their clearly identifiable compound morphological structure (e.g. in+to , to+ward , with+in , for+by , for+with , for+to , on+under , ou+taken , up+ward etc.). Complex prepositions, which consist of two- or three-word combinations acting as a single unit, appeared only since the Late Middle English period (e.g. by means of , by virtue of , by way of) . Most of them have the pattern - simple preposition + noun + simple preposition. It was during the Modern English period that we saw the greatest expansion of this category which remains productive until nowadays. The syntax of English preposition can be studied on two levels - phrase level and c

development, have always been central to the English lexicon. According to the corpus data 3 , the following prepositions occur among the fifty most frequently used English words: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Old English on t o mid In f or o f at be after o fer Middle English of t o i n For b e o n by with a t Early Modern English of t o i n For w ith b y at from o n Modern English of i n t o For w ith o n b y a t from This definition is far from being linguistically correct, since already in the Old English period, there sometimes occured postposed prepositions. Aelfric´s definition, as well as the term foresetnyss itself, imitates the Latin original by Donatus Aelius. The Anglo-Saxon term for a preposition is derived from the Latin term praepositio , the morpheme for meaning “ before ” , the roo

the influence of Latin grammars in the first 150 years of English grammar writing is concerned with Vorlat. The oldest study of English prepositions is represented right at the beginning of English grammar writing by William Bullokar´s 4 Brief Grammar for English , the first English grammar written in English. Bullokar defines prepositions as “ a part of speech properly used prepositively. First of all, it is interesting to observe that Bullokar takes notice of the fact that prepositions can occur postpostively, an important syntactic property commonly disregarded by later grammarians. Except for syntactic definition, Bullokar focuses on morphological aspect of prepositions as well. Bullokar´s grammar did not miss word-formative aspect of English prepositions as well. He notes that some

spatial (denoting location or direction), temporal (denoting position in time), or relations expressing comparison, content, agent, instrument, means, cause, purpose, reference, etc. Most common prepositions are highly polysemous (they have various different meanings).In many cases a primary, spatial meaning becomes extended to non-spatial uses by metaphorical or other processes. Because of the variety of meanings, a single preposition often has many possible equivalents in another language, depending on the exact context in which it is used; this can cause significant difficulties in foreign language learning. Usage can also vary between dialects of the same language (for example American English has on the weekend, where British English has at the weekend ). In some contexts (as in the c

directional prepositions as well, but this is less common. Directional prepositional phrases combine mostly with verbs that indicate movement . Jay is going into her bedroom. Directional meanings can be further divided into telic and atelic. Telic prepositional phrases imply movement all the way to the endpoint: She ran to the fence while atelic ones do not: She ran towards the fence . Static meanings can be further divided into projective and non-projective meanings are those whose understanding requires knowledge of the perspective or point of view. For example the meaning of ‘behind the rock’ is likely to depend on the position of the speaker (projective) whereas the meaning of ‘on the desk’ is not (non-projective).Sometimes the interpretation is ambiguous as in ‘behind the house’ , whi

phrase perform seven primary grammatical functions within sentence in the English language. The seven primary functions of prepositions and prepositional phrases are as follows: The first primary grammatical function that prepositions perform is prepositional phrase head. A prepositional phrase consists of a preposition plus another phrase or clause that functions as prepositional complement. For example, following italicized prepositions function as prepositional phrase heads: in the library, after reading the book for whatever will repair the leak. The second primary grammatical function that prepositional phrases perform is the noun phrase modifier. A noun phrase modifier is a word, phrase or clause that modifies or describes a noun including a noun phrase. For example the following ita

The sixth primary grammatical function that prepositional phrases perform is the adjunct adverbial. An adjunct adverbial is a word, phrase or clause that modifies an entire clause by providing additional information about time, place, manner, condition, purpose, reason, result, and concession. For example, the following italicized prepositional phrases function as adjunct adverbials: The children waited in line. She failed the test because of her illness. The couple is walking their dog along the beach. The seventh primary grammatical function that prepositional phrase perform is the disjunct adverbial. A disjunct adverbial provides additional information to frame an entire clause. For example, the following italicized prepositional phrases function as disjunct adverbials: In my opinion,

and guidance regarding how the reminder of the sentence fits together. There are several important rules when using prepositions in the context of a sentence. These rules relate to how prepositions can be used, which prepositions can be used, when, and where prepositions have to go in the sentence. Preposition is a word that explains the time, space or logical relationship between the other parts of the sentence. In other words, it links all the other words together, so the reader can understand how the pieces of the sentence fit. There are hundreds of prepositions in the English language. CHAPTER II Reflections on the Functional Characterization of Spatial Prepositions 2.1. Spatial prepositions and their embodied meaning and cognition. Prepositions are considered as two or three place pre

classifies prepositions as relational expressions because they express how the conceptualizer configurates the parts which constitute a spatial scene with respect to each other. Thus prepositions express how the speaker establishes a cognitive link between two or three parts of spatial scene in the particular cognitive domain. These conventions yield one part as the new part which is standing out as the foreground from an already known-part establishing the background, which functions as a location. In this partitioning the foreground figure receives prominence, because in a particular cognitive domain it is mobile or more movable in relation to its location which usually is more stationary. Langacker has introduced the terms of trajector and landmark for these old gestalt- psychological d

are expressions like ( Jill is in the garage ) in which the trajector is a participant and the landmark is a local setting (or location) rather than a global one. With respect to the distance scale, ranging from a human agent at one extreme to an all- encompassing setting at the other the trajector tends to lay toward the former pole, and the landmark toward the middle not the opposite extreme. In clauses that specify static location, the trajector is canonically either a person or a movable physical object ‘ She is on the porch’ . In this case the participant role it instantiates is a mere shadow of the role it has in the agent-patient archetype central to the active realm. There is first a single participant event coded by a simple intransitive clause for example: She stood up . While th

to it (beside), its general neighbourhood (near) etc. In this way a set of prepositions provides a highly flexible means of using an object to locate another entity. Thus three major entities, each with a different function, figure in the conceptual characterization of a spatial preposition. This conceptual characterization of prepositions is indicative of their intermediate status, which has several dimensions. First, as noted earlier, they are intermediate in terms of grammatical category, where noun and verb represent a maximal opposition. Finally prepositions have intermediate status with respect to the distance scale, and the active circumstantial realms. Indeed, spatial prepositions are themselves subject to grammaticization involving semantic attenuation, giving rise to uses that ar

array of non-spatial meanings. We do so through a study of English spatial particles, an important subset of which is prepositions. There seem to be three basic problems for the semantics of prepositions; 1. Prepositions offer a considerable variability of context-independent interpretations i. e, the individual preposition can express a wide range of relations and this is true even if the analysis is restricted to the spatial uses of the individual preposition. The heterogeneity of possible interpretations for the individual preposition poses serious problems for all ‘abstractionist’ theories of word meaning that is, for instance, for theories that start from the assumption that word meanings should be defined in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions for their adequate use; or that

conceptualize certain extra linguistic situations in one way or the other, and thus to choose one preposition or another. The semantic theory for spatial prepositions should be capable of accounting for all three phenomena mentioned so far in an adequate and natural way. In particular, it should be able to explain the whole range of context-dependent meanings. If we accept that a preposition expresses a relation between two arguments, these arguments will naturally play the central part in these processes. It is at this point that the spatial properties of the argument objects, i.e., the spatial properties of the located object and the reference object, have to be taken into account and with them the principles of object conceptualization and categorization relevant for the use of the indi

an implied norm or normality or a contextually rendered orientation resolve vague relational concepts. It may, for example, depend on the proportion between trajector. In the cognitive paradigm prepositions are generally considered ideal for the study of lexicalization patterns for the following reasons: -prepositions establish a nearly closed class of units, the meaning of which is mentally represented in terms of highly abstract, i.e., simplified properties; prepositions originally are spatial predicates and concrete space is better accessible than its abstract derivate; -according to the strong hypothesis we defend all-semantic extension at some time has originated from spatial senses and therefore the study of our conceptual means to structure concrete space at the same time supplies u

Heine has observed that finding a satisfactory solution to the problem of how to represent the multiple meanings associated with a single linguistic form is both a central and a controversial issue for linguistic theory. The position taken on this question affects not only how we model the semantics of individual lexical items and the architecture of the mental lexicon, but also the rest of one’s model of language. The lexicon represents a pivotal interface between syntax, semantics and pragmatics; the representation of the semantic component of lexical items has crucial implications not only for a theory of word meaning but also for a theory of sentence-level meaning construction. Such issues bear on the interaction between words and the human conceptual system. In this work we take up th

there.’ This was inevitably followed by the question, ‘Where would the world be if they hadn’t done their jobs properly?’ This text might strike contemporary readers as a little unusual. References to lines from old war songs and needle-pointed mottoes hanging on the wall belong to a bygone era and anecdotes relying on them are likely to be somewhat vague. However, what is even more striking about the text is exactly what typical native speakers of English are likely to find unremarkable, namely the numerous, very different interpretations assigned to the single word, over . In this short text, over has four distinct interpretations – over A can be paraphrased by ‘again’, over B by ‘above’, over C by ‘finished’ and over D by ‘in some other place’. For us, the fundamental question that text

associated with it; 7 thus, many of the uses now conventionally associated with the form at one point represented novel uses. Finally, the homonymy approach fails to explain the ubiquity of the pheno menon. Every spatial preposition of English demonstrates multiple senses. More over, careful examination of spatial prepositions as a word class reveals regular patterns of meanings across the individual members of the class. For instance, all spatial prepositions whose primary senses have a distinct goal sense share a clearly defined set of properties. As the homonymy approach fails to recognize that distinct meanings may be motivated and, hence, at some level systematically related, we are forced to conclude that it is inadequate. An alternative approach, monosemy, has been advocated by Char

distinguished. Some of the interpretations associated with a particular form must be due to distinct meanings paired with the words themselves. A polysemy approach suggests that the meanings associated with a spatial preposition such as over are related in some fashion . Our account of polysemy holds that a linguistic form is paired at the conceptual level, not with a single meaning, but rather with a network of distinct but related meanings. Therefore, the meanings associated with a particular form constitute a semantic network. Whereas the meaning of moving from one side of an obstacle to the other in sen tences of the following kind: The cat jumped over the wall , is a situated on-line interpretation, constructed for the purpose of local understanding in context. Figure2.1. Possible tra

Figure 2.2 Trajectory paths potentially coded by over. Figure 2.2 shows that over can be associated with several potential spatial configurations holding between the object in focus and the locating, backgrounded object. Jane marched up the stairs. > Jane marched down the stair. In sentences such as these, information provided by the spatial preposition clearly affects the interpretation of the trajectory. Theorists who assume that meaning must (predominantly) come from the sentential elements (i.e., from language) must also assume that it is the spatial preposition which codes the trajectory. In a situation in which there is contact between the TR and LM, as in a sentence such as Sam crawled over the wall , the specifically mentioned LM provides the overall shape as well as the beginning

conceptualiza tion grounded in spatio-physical experience. This analysis allows us to avoid the problems encountered with a more fully specified lexical representation while revealing the systematic semantic relations among the many meanings of individual English spatial preposition. We claimed that a subset of in terpretations represent those meanings which must be stored in memory, and hence are permanently available. These meanings we termed senses. We also suggested that some meanings associated with words must be due to prag matic inferencing, context and background knowledge. These meanings, we suggested, are constructed on-line in the moment of speaking and listening. In attempting to distinguish between the meaning contributed by language and the meaning due to world knowledge and

The proto-scene associated with over involved a spatial configuration in which the TR is located higher than the LM. According to the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), the earliest meaning associated with the form over relates to higher than, or above. The OED relates over to the Old Teutonic preposition and adverb ufa , ‘above’, a cognate of the Sanskrit upari ‘higher’. The form over derives from an earlier form be-ufan , which was a comparative form of above . Figure 2.3 The proto-scene for over This proto-scene for over is diagrammed in figure 2.3. In this figure, the TR is repre - sented by the shaded sphere and the LM by the thick horizontal line. The area conceptualized as proximal to the LM is delimited by the dashed line. There are two claims that bear more thorough investigation re

comparative form of above . In Gothic, be + fan was interpreted roughly as ‘being in an up position’. Thus, over and above has long been closely associated semantically. Many previous accounts have suggested that over and above are synonyms, both of which designate a TR that is higher than a LM. For instance, Lakoff states that the Higher-than Sense of over ‘is roughly equivalent in mean ing to above ’. In attempting to tease apart the meanings of the two prepositions, Brugman and Kreitzer 9 argued that above is typically interpreted as indicating a less specific location than over . Figure 2.4 Proto-scene for above We suggest that the linguistic evidence supports the conclusion that it is the functional element that distinguishes these two prepositions. Recall that the functional element

The divisions of the vertical axis higher than the LM represented by over and above are mirrored by under and below when the TR is conceptualized as being lower than the LM. Parallel to over , the proto-scene for under denotes a conceptual spatial-functional relation between a TR and a LM, in which the TR is lower than and yet proximal to the LM. Parallel to above , the proto- scene associated with below denotes a relation in that the TR is lower than and distal with respect to the LM, and hence the possibility of contact between the TR–LM is (largely) precluded. Figure 2.5 provides the proto-scene for under , while figure 2.6 gives the proto-scene for below .

Figure 2.5 Proto-scene for under Figure 2.6 Proto-scene for below In figures 2.5 and 2.6, the LM is designated by the bold line, the TR by the shaded sphere and the region experienced and conceptualized as within reach of the LM by the dashed line. Hence, the region of potential contact is between the LM and the dashed line. In figure 2.6, the TR is outside this region and hence the TR and LM are not in potential contact with respect to one another. Proto-scene for up The proto-scene for up denotes a relation in which the TR is directed towards the top of an oriented LM. Thus, the LM is conceptually partitioned and construed as having a top and bottom; what counts as top is determined by the LM. The TR is also conceptualized as being oriented; in this case, the asymmetry arises as a resul

Figure 2.7 Proto-scene for up In figure 2.7 the ‘stick-person’ represents the asymmetrical LM; the head or ‘top’ is in focus and hence highlighted, which is represented by the shaded sphere, constituting the TR. The TR is represented by the dark sphere. The orientation of the TR is represented by the direction of the arrow emerging from the sphere. Proto-scene for down Having considered up in some detail, we will now consider down , which with up constitutes a contrast pair. A number of the patterns found with up are inversely reflected with down . Proto-scene for down is given in figure 2.8 Figure 2.8 Proto-scene for down In figure 2.8 the ‘head’ is unshaded while the ‘legs’ are in bold. This high lighting reflects the view that for down , the bottom half of the human form is profiled. I

In this section we examine the proto-scenes and several senses associated with to and for two spatial prepositions which involve oriented TRs. These prepositions are particularly interesting for several reasons. Teasing out the precise differences and offering a descriptively adequate representation of the proto-scenes emphasizes the importance of the notions of construal and highlighting, as well as the importance of the functional element. We have seen that English spatial prepositions may in particular contexts appear to be near synonyms, while in other contexts they are clearly distinct, for example over versus above and under versus below . In certain contexts, to and for also seem to share a high degree of semantic overlap. Figure 2.9 Proto-scene for to Figure 2.10 Proto-scene for fo

with the proto-scene is that the LM constitutes the primary goal. Figure 2.10 represents the proto-scene associated with for . The shaded sphere represents the TR. The arrow represents the orientation. The vertical line rep resents the LM. Note that the LM is represented with a dashed line, reflecting the view that it is not profiled. Proto-scene for “ in front of” In the proto-scene for in front of , the LM is oriented, due either to possess ing inherent front/back asymmetry or to being conceptualized such that it has front/back asymmetry. The TR, however, is not oriented. In the proto-scene for in front of , the TR is located at the ‘front’ of the LM, that is, the LM is oriented towards the TR. Figure 2.11 Proto-scene for in front of The proto-scene for in front of is given in figure 2.1

English and meant ‘located at the front of’. Fore is related to Sanskrit puras w hich is glossed as ‘at first, in advance and the related preposition puristat which is glossed as ‘before’ and ‘in the presence of. Both the TR and the LM are oriented. The elongated sphere in figure 2.12 represents the LM; the smaller sphere represents the TR. Figure 2.12 Proto-scene for before 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 TR and LM being so aligned is that the TR and the LM will encounter other entities se quentially. Proto-scene for behind The interactive consequence of a TR located at the back of a front/back oriented LM is

The proto-scene for behind is diagrammed in figure 2.13.As with the proto- scene posited for in front of and before , the small shaded sphere represents the TR. The larger elongated sphere represents the LM. The arrow indicates the orientation of the LM, such that the TR is situated at the back of the LM, and hence is positioned behind with respect to the LM. The functional element denoted by behind relates to lack of perceptual access and lack of surety about the location of the TR. Proto-scene for after After de rives from a comparative form of af , which was apparent in Old English and meant ‘off’ or ‘away’. Hence, the comparative ‘af + ter’ meant ‘farther off’ or ‘farther away’. Figure 2.14 Proto-scene for after The proto-scene for after is presented in figure 2.14. The larger, oriente

The proto-scene for in is given in figure 2.15. The LM is designated by the bold lines while the TR is designated by the shaded sphere. Proto-scene for into The English spatial preposition in no longer relates to orientation, but simply location within a bounded LM, the spatial preposition into does relate to orientation into mediates a spatial relation in which the TR is located on the exterior of a bounded LM and is oriented towards the LM. Spatial preposition into has a functional component of goal associated with it, such that the LM constitutes the TR’s objective. The proto-scene for into is diagrammed in figure 2.16. In the diagram the arrow signals that the TR is oriented with re spect to the bounded LM. Figure 2.16 Proto-scene for into Proto-scene for out

Positing that out involves the exterior element of a bounded LM and a func - tional element of non-containment predicts that many of the senses associated with out will involve opposing inferences from those arising with in and the functional element of containment. The spatial relation designated by out is one in which the TR is not contained by the bounded LM. However, in our everyday interaction with ob jects and our environment, it is evident that many TRs that are not contained by LMs at one time were. Figure 2.17 Proto-scene for out We diagram the proto-scene for out in figure 2.17. The shaded sphere repre - sents the TR while the dashed square represents the covert bounded LM. The LM is covert in the sense that it is not profiled by out . A consequence of this is that out seldom fu

Figure 2.18 Proto-scene for of The spatial relation denoted by of in examples such as these therefore involves a part-whole designation, with the TR being a specified part of the LM. The designation of the spatial elements of the synchronic primary sense for of is diagrammed as our proto-scene in figure 2.18. The spatial part-whole relation designated by of is captured by virtue of the TR, the sphere, emerging from the LM, the square. Proto-scene for through It designates a spatial relation in which the TR is held to occupy a contiguous series of spatial points with respect to a LM, which has an interior structural element, such that these points are located on the exterior side of the LM co incident with the entrance point, within the LM and on the exterior side of the LM opposite to the

2.4. The semantic network for spatial prepositions An equally thorny problem is the question of what counts as the primary sense associated with a polysemy network. In previous studies of semantic networks it has been assumed that there is a single primary sense associated with a spa tial preposition, and that the other senses are derived from this primary sense in a principled way. How ever, one of the problems has been in deciding which is the primary sense, and even how ‘primariness’ should be defined. It is to this issue which we now turn. In particular, Lakoff argued that lexical categories and polysemy networks could be thought of in terms of being structured with respect to prototypical meanings. 11 On this view, the distinct meanings or senses associated with a particular word, su

‘above’ (OED). Spatial prepositions are involved in at least two types of composite lexical units – compound forms, such as overcoat , and verb preposition forms, such as look over as in Would you look over this letter and get it back to me as soon as possible? Our examination of English spatial prepositions has revealed that many different senses in a semantic network can participate in these composite lexical units; however, there are some senses which do not participate. We suggest that participation in composite forms cannot directly determine which sense is primary, but failure to participate can be taken as suggestive that particular sense is probably not primary in the network. Within the entire group of spatial prepositions, certain clusters of prepositions ap pear to form composit

a dark sphere or node in the network; the proto-scene occupies a central position which indicates its status as the primary sense. When a complex conceptualization gives rise to multiple senses, we term the set of senses a cluster of senses. A cluster of senses is depicted in our paper of a semantic network by an open circle. A single distinct sense is represented by a shaded sphere. Figure 2.20 The semantic network for over The five distinct senses in the A-B-C Trajectory Cluster (On-the-other-side-of, Above-and-beyond (Excess I), Completion, Transfer and Temporal) all derive from reanalysis of the complex conceptualization. This complex conceptualization,

although profiling a sequentially evolving process, during reanalysis is subject to conceptualization in summary format. The On-the-other-side-of Sense has come to be associated with certain uses of over which are not derivable from context. Consider the following sentence: Arlington is over the Potomac River from Georgetown. Notice in this sentence that the verb is , fails to indicate any sense of motion. In our model for over , it is the verb that typically codes for motion and hence prompts for a trajectory. Thus, the lack of motion coded by is , in turn, results in failure to prompt for a trajectory. If there is no trajectory, there is no beginning or end point. Hence, there is no principled way of deriving an On-the-other- side-of Sense from this sentential context. Nevertheless, nati

comes from sentences such as the following in which the sense cannot be derived from context: Your article is over the page limit. Note that in this sentence, over cannot felicitously be interpreted as physically ‘higher than’. Rather the interpretation seems to be that there is an established or targeted number of pages for the article and that the actual number of pages went beyond (i.e., exceeded) that target. The Completion Sense (2.C) We suggest that the Completion Sense associated with over has arisen as a result of the implicature of completion being reanalysed as distinct from the complex conceptualization. Once reanalysis has taken place, the final location resulting from motion correlates with the completion of motion, and the distinct sense comes to be associated with the form o

are illustrative: The festival will take place over the weekend. Their friendship has remained strong over the years. In each of these examples the TR is conceptualized as being manifested through time, and hence co-occurring with the temporal LM, the weekend and the years , respectively. For this reason we term this the Temporal Sense. In order to understand how this sense is likely to have derived, consider the following: The boy walked over the hill. The Covering Sense (3) All the senses and interpretations we have examined so far have assumed that the TR is smaller than the LM. However, there are instances in the real world in which the object that is in focus is larger or perceived to be larger than the locating object. Such a situation is described in the following sentences: The tab

The Focus-of-attention Sense (4 A) The following sentences illustrate what we call the Focus-of-attention Sense. Notice that in these sentences over can be paraphrased by about: a) The little boy cried over his broken toy . b) The little boy cried about his broken toy. This sense is closely related to the Examining Sense from which it derives. In the Examining Sense, the vantage point is that of the TR, while the LM is physically below and proximal to the TR. We further posited that the TR must be construed as directing attention toward the LM. Once this sense has been instantiated in memory, non-physical TRs and LMs can be denoted by this sense, as evidenced by the following: She thought over the problem. The vertical elevation or Up Cluster (5) Four distinct senses fall under this cluste

The buyer offered Matt $1,000 over the amount he was asking for his house. Over-and-above (Excess II) Sense (5.A.1) The Over-and-above (Excess II) Sense is closely related to the More Sense. It adds an interpretation of ‘too much’ to the more construal. We believe that a likely origin for this sense involved reanalyzing scenes involving containment, such as those described in the following: The heavy rains caused the river to flow over its banks. When the amount of liquid or cereal which has been placed in the container is such that its level is higher than but within reach of the top of the LM, then the amount constitutes more than the container can hold. Lou kept pouring the cereal into the bowl until it spilled over and onto the counter. Control Sense (5.B) The third experiential correl

The Reflexive Sense (6) Spatial reflexivity is the phenomenon whereby a single entity that occupies multiple posi tions is conceptualized such that two salient positions occupied by the entity are integrated into a TR–LM spatial configuration. A spatial preposition such as over is then utilized to mediate a spatial relation between the two positions, even though the same entity cannot simultaneously occupy two distinct spatial positions in the world. Consider the following example: The fence fell over . In the sentence that is presented above TR, that is, the initial (upright) position of the fence is distin guished from the final position, in which the fence is lying horizontally on the ground. The Repetition Sense (6.A) The Repetition Sense adds an iterative meaning component to the use

Figure 2.21 The semantic network for above The Up Cluster (2) In this cluster, inferences of this kind, relating to the TR being up relative to the LM, give rise to two distinct senses, the More Sense and the Superior Sense. The More Sense (2.A) Evidence for establishment of a distinct sense comes from uses of above in which there is no objective sense of physicality or of vertical elevation. Consider the following: The price of that stock is now above $20. In this sentence, both the TR, the price of that stock , and the LM, $20 , represent non-physical entities or concepts. Both over and above has developed More Sense. However, the uses of each of these prepositions in their More Sense are constrained by their representa tive proto-scenes. For instance, we commonly find expressions such

often the one who will win in physical combat. Moreover, the person who is left standing, in the ver tically up position, is the winner in many physical contests. The implicature of superiority, which comes from being vertically elevated, has been convention alized in the semantic network associated with above . Consider the following example that evidences the Superior Sense: Nancy’s intellectual prowess is well above the other judges in her district The interpretation of this sentence is that Nancy is a superior judge, not that her intellectual prowess is located physically higher than the other judges. More over, in this use of above , the concept of great distance seems to be highlighted, which is consistent with the proto-scene we have posited for above . Consider the following exampl

distance Sense. To give an immediate indication of what this involves, consider the following: The nearest bridge is about half a mile above the falls. This sentence does not mean that the bridge is located vertically above the waterfalls such that it is half a mile up in the air. Rather, the conventional reading associated with this sentence is that the TR, the bridge , is located half a mile distant upstream from the LM, the falls . The semantic networks for under . Accordingly, the patterns found with over are to some extent repeated with under . The semantic networks for under is given in figure 2.22. Figure 2.22 Semantic networks for under The Down Cluster (2) This cluster represents the mirror of the Up Cluster for over . Owing to experi ential correlation, a TR that is lower than th

The Less Sense (2.A) Evidence that less is a distinct sense in the semantic network comes from sentences in which the TR and LM cannot be construed as being physically lower than the TR: The government decided to exempt incomes under $4.000. In this sentence, we do not conventionally understand that there is a spatial relation that holds between incomes higher than $4,000 and those lower than $4,000. Rather, under has a conventional meaning of less than. Unless there were a distinct sense instantiated in memory, there would be no way of predict ing this non- spatial reading. The Control Sense (2.B) The second sense deriving from the Down Cluster is the Control Sense. An important insight offered by the principled polysemy approach is that both over and under , which are traditionally rep r

second element. If the intervening element is opaque, the inevitable consequence is that the second element is obscured. By way of illustration consider the following: My diary is somewhere under all this paperwork. In this example the TR, my diary , is physically lower than the LM, all this paperwork . The interpretation of the sentence is that the papers are covering the diary and obscuring it from the speaker’s line of vision. Further evidence that the Covering Sense constitutes a distinct sense comes from the following examples. As these relate to non-physical entities, there is no contextually available means of predicting a reading of Covering: He hid his yawn under a cough. The Non-existence Sense (4) A salient aspect of human experience is death. In many cultures, and traditionally

contrast partner, below denotes a con ceptual spatial relation in which there is no possibility of contact between the TR and the LM. The senses associated with the semantic net work for below closely mirror those associated with above . The Down Cluster (2) Below has two distinct senses subsumed under the Down Cluster. These are the Less Sense and the Inferior Sense. The Less Sense (2.A) In this sense, below denotes a relation in which the TR constitutes less vis-a`-vis the LM. Evidence for this sense comes from example such as the following: The temperature dropped below freezing. The Inferior Sense A consequence of being lower and hence having less quantity is that one is in a disadvantaged position, and hence an inferior situation. By way of illustration, consider the following: I don’

number of forms crucially involve conceptualizing either the TR or the LM (or both) as being oriented. The notion of orientation of the TR or the LM is not new. For instance, even traditional accounts represent the prepositions to and from diagrammatically with arrows pointing towards or away from a particular location. Although they do not explicitly discuss the notion of orientation, it is implicit in these ‘arrow’ characterizations. The semantics of up The semantics of up is particularly complex. However, in the ensuing we will primarily limit ourselves to a discussion of the proto-scene and one cluster of senses. In particular, the analysis provides an elegant illustration of the way in which experiential correlations based on the proto-scene can give rise to meanings or senses that, i

them, but rather due to their pervasive and recurring corre lation in experience. It is often the case that an increase in vertical elevation correlates with an increase in quantity. This association causes up , which hence implicates more, to give rise to a conventionalized More Sense. Consider following example: The maid plumped up the cushions. The Improvement Sense A consequence of obtaining a greater quan tity, or more of something, is that it often implicates improvement or betterment. For instance, obtaining more food entails being less hungry, a desirable situa tion. Equally, obtaining more money for a particular job implicates a superior standard of living. Owing to the use of up in contexts in which an implicature of improvement or betterment occurs, up has developed a convention

reflected with down . The following example illustrates the semantic network for down : The stone plunged down the well-shaft. In contrast with up , we suggest that the functional element associated with down is that of negative value. . We experience positions described by down as being negative precisely because they correlate with limited access, or vis ibility, or loss of control or vulnerability. It is in this sense that the functional element associated with down is described as being a negative value. The Less Sense The Less Sense derives from the independently moti vated correlation between quantity and vertical elevation. As down implicates smaller quantity, this implicature has come to be conventionally associated with the semantic network for down : The amount of water in the Po

The semantics of ‘to’ Indeed, many previous analyses have assumed that path is an inherent part of the basic meaning associated with to . However, a path – in the sense of a series of spatially contiguous locations mediating a starting point and an end point – is not explicitly coded by to , as illustrated by the following in which only orientation is apparent: The clock tower faces to the east. The Locational Sense In this sense to denote a relation in which the TR is located with respect to the LM, but the TR is not oriented towards the LM: In this picture, Diana is standing to my left. The Contact Sense In this sense, to denote contact between the TR and LM as illustrated by the following: The poster portrayed a young woman with her finger to her lips. The Contact Sense meets the criter

The Event Sense In this sense, to denote a relation between a particu lar TR and an event brought about by the TR. The event facilitated or undertaken by the TR is coded by the LM. Consider some examples which are illustrative of this sense: The captain went to the boaters’ rescue. The semantics of ‘for’ In contrast to the semantics of to – where a number of senses were related to direction, attaining a particular target or goal, and contact – the preponderance of senses associated with for are primarily concerned with motives, intentions and purposes, reflect ing the more intentional character of the functional element associated with the proto-scene. The senses we have selected for presentation here are illustrative of this difference. The Purpose Sense In this sense, the LM, which is cl

Jean looked everywhere for her glasses and suddenly realized they were on the counter, right in front of her all the time. In this sentence, when the TR, the glasses , is recognized as being in an ‘in front of’ position in relation to the LM, Jean , they are perceptually accessible to the LM and, as a result, their location is confirmed. As such, we posit that the functional element associated with in front of is that of perceptual accessibility. The Priority Sense Having considered the proto-scene for in front of , we will consider one other sense associated with this spatial preposition. The purpose of doing so is to make the point that experiential correlation and pragmatic strengthening represent powerful phenomena in the development of additional, non-spatial senses be coming associa

Rather Than : I’d throw out those ratty clothes before I’d wear them. Location : The hot steaming soup was placed on the table before him. Access To : The world was all before them where to choose (Milton) . The Location Sense Some sentences employing before do not necessarily involve an in tandem alignment and do not have a sequential interpretation. These uses of before appear to be (nearly) synonymous in interpretation with the proto-scene associated with in front of. The rabbi performed the ritual before the congregation. The Priority Sense Like in front of , before has a Priority Sense associated with it. In this sense before denotes a non-spatial relation between two entities in which the notion of being more privileged or more important in some way is signaled. Consider some example

The Lack of Priority Sense Like in front of , behind also has a sense that relates to priority. As behind forms a contrast pair with in front of , this sense relates to a lack of priority, and hence a concomitant lack of importance or being privileged. Consider an illustrative example: The president placed environmental welfare behind all other items in his legislative program. In this sentence a non-spatial relation is designated in which the TR, environ mental welfare , is less privileged or lacks importance of other items on the legislative agenda. The semantics of after After shares semantic space with behind , but the etymological origins of the two prepositions are very different and continue to constrain their use. After de rives from a comparative form of af , which was apparent in

to orientation of the TR, in front of, behind, before and after all involve orientation of the LM. The prepositions before and after add the additional element of the TR, as well as the LM, being oriented. A number of spatial prepositions appear to mediate relations in which the dimen sions of the LM are essentially irrelevant. We will explore a set of spatial prepositions, in , into , out , and through , which are sensitive to certain dimensions of the LM, namely the dimensions which collectively give rise to the notion of boundedness. By way of example, consider the following: Turn right at George Street and go three blocks. 13 Consistent with the view of embodied experience articulated throughout this work, the way in which humans experience and interact with bounded LMs has functional

In each of these examples, the TR remains located for an extended period, for a particular purpose and/or due to a volitional act or event. In sum, a commonly occurring consequence of a TR being located within a bounded LM is that the TR is located with surety. The State Sense Through recurring instances of a particular emotional state being experienced in a specific locale, the correlation between location and emotional and/or physical state becomes established. This correlation gives rise to conceptual associations such that we conceptualize and hence lexicalize states in terms of location. The spatial preposition in can be employed with certain states which are concep tualized as constraining the TR or posing difficulty in leaving, for example She looked peaceful in death ; They’re alwa

bounded LM referred to as the governor’s office(s). Hence, the loca tion can stand metonymically for the activity. The Perceptual Accessibility Sense A consequence of the experiencer and vantage point being located within a bounded LM is that TR(s) and interior environment contained by the LM are available to the experiencer (and hence vantage point) by virtue of his or her sense-perceptory apparatus. Hence, due to the frequently co- occurring experiences of the construer being located within the bounded LM and the resulting perceptual accessibility of the interior bounded space and the TR to the construer, in has developed a Perceptual Accessibility Sense. Consider some examples: I have it in view. I have him in sight . In the sentences above in denotes a relation between TR and sense-per

The Disappearance Sense The nature of many physical entities with an interior is that they are made of opaque substances and thus the boundary of the LM often obstructs the observer’s view of the interior and hence the contents. We suggest that due to the tight correlation between LMs with interiors and occlusion, in has come to be reanalyzed as having a distinct Disappearance Sense, as evidenced by the examples given below: The wine quickly soaked in . Millie rubbed in the lotion . The reason for thinking that examples such as these evidence a distinct Dis - appearance Sense relates to our two criteria for determining whether a sense is distinct or not. The Shape As Boundary Sense In the Shape As Boundary Sense, the TR constitutes part of a delimited configuration forming a shape. Conside

There’s a bad accident in the roadway with traffic backed up to the Wilson Bridge. In these sentences there is a Blockage meaning associated with in . That is, in does not relate to containment but rather to a constraint on movement. The Reflexive Sense In her study of verb-preposition constructions Lindner noticed that some spatial prepositions have a reflexive meaning element associated with them. In is such a spatial preposition. Consider some illustrative examples of the Reflexive Sense associated with in : The walls of the sandcastle fell in . The house caved in . The semantics of out We suggest that the primary meaning associated with out designates a spatial relation in which the TR is exterior to a bounded LM. The functional element we have posited for in is containment, which is

available has given rise to a No More Sense becoming associated with out , as evidenced by the following: A: Have we got any milk left? B: No, we’re (all) out! The conventional reading associated with out is that there is no more of the TR, here the milk . The Completion Sense In this sense there is a meaning of completion associated with out , as evidenced by the following: This jacket needs to dry out before you wear it again. In this sentence out adds a meaning of completion. Hence, in each of these examples out can be paraphrased by the lexeme completely . In this sense, out designates the end point of a process, drying and thawing respectively. The Vantage Point is Interior Cluster With the proto-scene for out and the extended senses discussed so far, we have assumed the default, ‘off

this sense of lack of visibility has become conventionally associated with out is illustrated in the following: He switched the light out . A light, when no longer visible, can be described as being out even when no bounded LM is involved in the interpretation. After all, the light is not physically located out , with respect to a particular bounded LM. The Vantage Point is Exterior Cluster This way of viewing a spatial scene has given rise to a number of distinct senses associated with out . We will consider two: the Visibility Sense and the Knowing Sense. The Visibility Sense In spatial scenes in which the vantage point is exterior to the bounded LM, it follows that if the TR is also exterior then the TR is often visible . This common scene gives rise to out having devel oped a Visibilit

The syrup spread out. In this example, the LM is identical to the TR. The boundary of the LM is defined by the outer limits of the original position occupied by the LM. The semantics for of Of has a number of distinct senses associated with it. Interestingly of has two distinct ‘source’ senses associated with it. Consider therefore the following sentence: This wine is a product of Italy. The second ‘source’ sense relating to of concerns the manufacturing process itself, in which a particular entity is ‘transformed’ into another. Consider the following sentence: This carving is made of oak. In this example the LM, oak , does not designate a physical location, but rather a material which is used to fashion a product, namely a carving. This sense associated with of we term the Material Source

The Temporal Sense An extended action, comprising a number of se quential components, correlates with the passage of time. Owing to this tight and ubiquitous correlation, through has developed a Temporal Sense. Consider an example: John will be gone from June through August. The On-the-other-side-of Sense The result of the motion is arriving at a particular location. When a person completes the action of walking through a field, it is impossible not to be on the other side of the field from where he or she started: Once she passed through the doorway at the end of the dark hallway she found herself in a sunny enclosed porch . The normal interpretation of this sentence is that the TR moves along the hall way, the LM, passes beyond the hallway, which is bounded by the doorway, and ends up on

In this sentence, two means of escape, neither particularly inviting, involve ‘creating’ a path through a particular bounded LM. The Cause Sense The final sense that we will deal with is the Cause Sense. In this sense through mediates a relation between a situation or state, the TR, and a particular process, the LM, which motivates the TR. Consider the following example: The accused murderer’s wife was able to remain loyal through her conviction of his innocence. In this sentence a particular activity, ‘remaining loyal’, is caused, that is, moti vated, by an on-going conviction, manifesting itself in tangible demonstrations, such as, for instance, visiting him in jail. Conclusion Having studied the semantics of English prepositions and analyzing their syntactic and semantic features we ca

prepositions don’t stand alone. They work in groups of words that we call prepositional phrases. Prepositions, in the form of prepositional phrases, provide specific information in sentence for the reader. 2. As for the nature of meaning that is embodied by means of spatial prepositions they have numerous meanings associated with them. These meanings are called senses. Some meanings associated with prepositions must be due to pragmatic inferencing, context, and background knowledge. These meanings have profound consequences for a theory of word meaning construction, and perhaps most crucially, for an understanding of the relationship between language, thought, and the nature of reality. Through an examination of semantics of a range of English spatial prepositions such as over, up, down, i

There are number of reasons for choosing spatial prepositions. Perhaps most importantly the variety and complexity of the numerous different meanings associated with even a single spatial preposition represents a significant descriptive challenge. But also important is the relatively transparent experiental basis of spatial prepositions. The meanings of this set of words are clearly grounded at some level in our spatio-physical interaction with the world. Investigating the meanings associated with spatial prepositions will offer fundamental insights, into the relation between language, mental representation and human experience. The various meanings associated with spatial prepositions are related in systematic and highly motivated ways. Within the study of linguistic semantics, both in t

interpreted in context, its precise interpretation is affected by the context in which the preposition occurs. (This context includes the inevitable inferences involved in establishing an overall interpretation for the utterance.) Meaning, of a sentence or a preposition, thus arises from how the linguistic unit is used by speakers in the course of communica tion. When spatial prepositions are used in the description of recurring situations, the inferences which arise in connection with their contextualized use are also recurrent; these regularly occurring inferences often become associated with the spatial preposition through a process which, we label prag matic strengthening. Thus, language is a continually evolving, organic system, and a preposition (a preposition and its semantic networ

language learning system”. December 10, 2012. 4. Andrea Tyler and Vyvyan Evans “The Semantics of English Prepositions (Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition)” Cambridge University press 2003. 5. Barnhart, Robert. Barnhart Concise Dictionary of Etymology: The Origins of American English Words . New York: Harper Collins.1988 6. Bietel Dinara, Raymond Gibbs, and Paul Sanders “The embodied approach to the polysemy of the spatial preposition on In Polysemy in Cognitive Linguistics : Selected Papers from the Fifth International Cognitive Linguistics Conference ” Amsterdam 1997. 7. Bloomfield, Leonard “ Language “New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 1933 8. Bolinger Dwight” The Phrasal Verb in English” Harvard Uni versity Press.1971 9. Bowerman Melissa. “Learning how to structure space

18. Dirven Rene “Dividing up physical and mental space into conceptual categories by means of English prepositions” 1993. 19. Faunconnier Gilles “Mental Spaces” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1994. 20. Frisson S, Dominiek Sandra, Frank Brisard “The Construal of Space in Language and Thought” Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter 1996. 21. Green Georgia “Pragmatics and Natural Understanding” Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum 1989. 22. Heine Bernd “Cognitive Foundations of Grammar” . Oxford: Oxford University Press 1997. 23. Herskovits Annette “Language and Spatial Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Study of the Prepositions in English” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1986. 24. Jackendof Ray “Semantics and Cognition” Cambridge MA: MIT Press 1983. 25. Lakoff George “The Contemporary Theory of Metapho

33. Wierzbicka Anna “The Semantics of Grammar” . Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1990. 34. Wilson Paul and Richard Anderson “Reading Comprehension: From Research to Practice” . Hillsdale,NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1986.

Купить