“…In particular, it is rare that the array of senses are spread out over two or more of those image schemas that are indicated as the most basic ones, as structuring ‘‘our experience of space’’ (Lakoff 1987: 282–283): container, source‐path‐goal, link, part‐whole, centre‐periphery, up‐down, front‐back. 1 And when it is done, as when Meex (1997) refers one meaning of German über to the source‐path‐goal schema and another to the verticality (i.e. up‐down) schema, there is no discussion of the theoretical implications.…”
There has been some reluctance among scholars to accept the possibility that the image schema structure for a polysemous word can vary from one subsense to another, one image schema dominating for one subsense and another for the other. The aim of this article is to demonstrate that this possibility does indeed exist. For the polysemous Swedish adverb or particle fram, it is shown that no less than four image schemas are primary in different subsenses, viz. the front-back schema, the centre-periphery schema, the source-path-goal schema, and the container schema. Furthermore, although these schemas also appear in backgrounded functions in other subsenses, thus securing the network, no single schema is present in all subsenses.
“…In particular, it is rare that the array of senses are spread out over two or more of those image schemas that are indicated as the most basic ones, as structuring ‘‘our experience of space’’ (Lakoff 1987: 282–283): container, source‐path‐goal, link, part‐whole, centre‐periphery, up‐down, front‐back. 1 And when it is done, as when Meex (1997) refers one meaning of German über to the source‐path‐goal schema and another to the verticality (i.e. up‐down) schema, there is no discussion of the theoretical implications.…”
There has been some reluctance among scholars to accept the possibility that the image schema structure for a polysemous word can vary from one subsense to another, one image schema dominating for one subsense and another for the other. The aim of this article is to demonstrate that this possibility does indeed exist. For the polysemous Swedish adverb or particle fram, it is shown that no less than four image schemas are primary in different subsenses, viz. the front-back schema, the centre-periphery schema, the source-path-goal schema, and the container schema. Furthermore, although these schemas also appear in backgrounded functions in other subsenses, thus securing the network, no single schema is present in all subsenses.
“…A number of semantic studies of over have been performed (Brugman 1981;Hawkins 1984;Lakoff 1987;Vandeloise 1990;Dirven 1993;Dewell 1994;Kreitzer 1997;Taylor 2002Taylor , 2003Taylor , 2012Tyler and Evans 2003;Deane 2005;Van der Gucht et al 2007). 1 Translation equivalents of over in other languages have also been examined (see Bellavia 1996, Dewell 1996, and Meex 2001 on German über, and Geeraerts 1992 on Dutch over). The studies use the framework of cognitive semantics, and their analyses are imagistic in character.…”
Dewell (1994), following Brugman (1981) and Lakoff (1987), provides a semantic analysis of over by relying more exclusively on image-schema transformations than did Brugman and Lakoff. The Brugman-Lakoff-Dewell analysis, however, can be improved by using simpler image-schemas, more natural image-schema transformations, and metaphorical extensions. A key idea adopted in the present article is to capture both trajectors and landmarks three-dimensionally and topologically. This modification brings about the elimination of unessential features such as the shape and size of the trajector and the landmark, contact/non-contact between the trajector and the landmark, and physical properties of the trajector. Its main advantage is that a central image-schema for a semicircular path provides the basis for explaining all of the senses of over using natural image-schema transformations and metaphorical extensions. The proposed image-schema transformations include: segment profiling, profiling the endpoint of access paths, the profiled peak position of the semicircular path with the constraint that the rest of the semicircular path is excluded, and the extension of the semicircular path-trajectory to an image of covering. The proposed metaphorical senses are time, means, and control. In addition, the radial category relating each sense of over is presented.
“…However, the grammaticalisation from path verbs to prepositions is not uncommon in languages. Heine and Kuteva (2002) jump-cross that-CLASS river CRSCRS 'S/He jumped over that river' (Heine and Kuteva, 2002: 102) In some articles, the term 'path preposition' is used sometimes to refer to a type of preposition carrying in themselves the meaning of direction such as across, above, between, over (Meex, 2001).…”
Section: Studies On Prepositions Derived From Path Verbs In Other Lanmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In studies on path prepositions, researchers have used the terms and methods of cognitive semantics to investigate the polysemy of path prepositions (Meex, 2001). The German path preposition über was investigated by Meex with respect to its spatial and non-spatial usages, 24 focusing on the development from spatial to non-spatial senses.…”
Section: Studies On Prepositions Derived From Path Verbs In Other Lanmentioning
Prepositions are 'small words' used to describe the relationship between other entities indicated by other words in a sentence. Well-known by their linking functions, prepositions are regarded as rather meaningless unless in context. Generally, prepositions often denote spatial or temporal relations between their complement and the element they modify, although they can also denote relations regarding means, manner, instrument, cause, purpose, and so on. In theory of semantic change, prepositions are often considered as the results of the grammaticalisation from nouns or verbs. After grammaticalisation, prepositions are often considered as having grammatical meanings rather than the lexical meanings of their nominal or verbal origins.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.