Cover not available

Article published In: Cognitive Linguistic Studies
Vol. 12:1 (2025) ► pp.186–208

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Image-schema transformations, radial category, 3D topological structure, and subjectification

A cognitive semantic analysis of around

ORCiD logo with link | Tokyo University of Science
Published online: 2 June 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.00133.mor
Abstract
This paper explores the polysemy of the preposition around from a cognitive perspective. The purpose of this paper is: (i) to show that in cognitive semantics of around, the trajectors (TRs), landmarks (LMs), and image-schemas are captured three-dimensionally and topologically; (ii) to show that in the senses of around, a circular path sense is central, and other senses are formed from the central circular path sense via image-schema transformations and domain shift; (iii) to show that the image-schema transformations include: disposing the TR along the circular path and excluding motion; mental scanning of the circular path; the TR entering the inside of the LM, (which is termed ‘LM-internal TRs’ in this paper); and segment profiling; (iv) to present the radial category relating each sense of around; and (v) to show that the sense of ‘LM-internal TRs’ of around can be subjectified diachronically.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.A semantic analysis of around
    • 2.1Sense A: Circular path — the central image-schema
    • 2.2Sense B: The ‘circular static state’ sense
    • 2.3Sense C: Mental scanning of the circular path
    • 2.4Sense D: LM-internal TR
    • 2.5Sense E: Segment profiling
      • 2.5.1Sense E1: Profiled arc path
      • 2.5.2Sense E2: Profiled endpoint of the arc path
      • 2.5.3Sense E3: Profiled endpoint of the access path
    • 2.6Sense F: The ‘approximately’ sense
  • 3.Radial category in around
  • 4.Subjectification of sense D
    • 4.1Subjectification
    • 4.2Subjectification of around in sense D
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
  • Data
References (51)
References
Anderson, J. R. (2010). Cognitive psychology and its implications (7th ed.). New York: Worth Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2015). Language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cruse, D. A. (2011). Meaning in language: An introduction to semantics and pragmatics (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deane, P. (2005). Multimodal spatial representations: On the semantic unity of over. In B. Hampe (Ed.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 235–284). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dewell, R. B. (1994). Over again: Image-schema transformations in semantic analysis. Cognitive Linguistics, 5(4), 351–380. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Moving around: The role of the conceptualizer in semantic interpretation. Cognitive Linguistics, 18(3), 383–415. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. (2021). English prepositions: Their meanings and uses. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Downs, R. M., & Stea, D. (1973). Image and environment: Cognitive mapping and spatial behavior. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ekberg, L. (2001). Transformations on the path-schema and a minimal lexicon. Studia Linguistica, 55(3), 301–323. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, V. (2019). Cognitive linguistics: A complete guide. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D. (2010). Theories of lexical semantics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, P. J., & Traugott, E. C. (2003). Grammaticalization (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, M., & Lakoff, G. (2002). Why cognitive linguistics requires embodied realism. Cognitive Linguistics, 13(3), 245–263. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Explaining embodied cognition results. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4(4), 773–785. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1990). Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1999). Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (2002). A communicative grammar of English (3rd ed.). London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lindstromberg, S. (2010). English prepositions explained (revised edition). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matlock, T. (2004). Fictive motion as cognitive simulation. Memory & Cognition, 321, 1389–1400. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matlock, T., Ramscar, M., & Boroditsky, L. (2005). On the experiential link between spatial and temporal language. Cognitive Science, 29(4), 655–664. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matsumoto, Y. (1997). Idohyogen no kakucho: Shukanteki idohyogen [An extension of motion expressions: subjective motion expressions]. In S. Tanaka & Y. Matsumoto (Eds.), Kukan to ido no hyogen [Expressions of space and motion] (pp. 207–228). Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mori, S. (2019). A cognitive analysis of the preposition OVER: Image-schema transformations and metaphorical extensions. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue Canadienne de Linguistique, 64(3), 444–474. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peña Cervel, M. S., & Ruiz de Medoza Ibáñez, F. J. (2009). The metonymic and metaphoric grounding of two image-schema transformations. In K.-U. Panther, L. L. Thornburg & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (pp. 339–361). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Richardson, J. T. E. (1999). Imagery. London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roth, I., & Frisby, J. P. (1986). Perception and representation: A cognitive approach. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schulze, R. (1993). The meaning of (a)round: A study of English preposition. In R. A. Geiger & B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Eds.), Conceptualizations and mental processing in language (pp. 399–432). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smith, E. E., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Fredrickson, B. L., & Loftus, G. R. (2003). Atkinson & Hilgard’s introduction to psychology (14th ed.). London: Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (1996). Fictive motion in language and ‘ception’. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (Eds.), Language and space (pp. 211–276). Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). Fictive motion in language and ‘ception’. In L. Talmy (Ed.), Toward a cognitive semantics: Volume 1: Concept structuring systems (pp. 99–175). Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taylor, J. R. (2002). Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). Linguistic categorization (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). The mental corpus: How language is represented in the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thagard, P. (1996). Mind: Introduction to cognitive science. London: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C. (1989). On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language, 65(1), 31–55. [URL]
(1995). Subjectification in grammaticalisation. In D. Stein & S. Wright (Eds.), Subjectivity and subjectification (pp. 31–54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). From subjectification to intersubjectification. In R. Hickey (Ed.), Motives for Language change (pp. 124–139). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: A reassessment. In K. Davidse, L. Vandelanotte, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization (pp. 29–71). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Intersubjectification and clause periphery. In L. Brems, L. Ghesquière & F. Van de Velde (Eds.), Intersubjectivity and intersubjectification in grammar and discourse: Theoretical and descriptive advances (pp. 7–27). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C., & Dasher, R. B. (2002). Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2003). The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilcox, S., & Palermo, D. S. (1975). “In”, “on”, and “under” revisited. Cognition, 3(3), 245–254. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zlatev, J. (2003). Polysemy or generality? Mu. In H. Cuyckens, R. Dirven & J. R. Taylor (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics (pp. 447–494). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Data
Longman dictionary of contemporary English [LDCE] (6th ed.). (2014). London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary [OALD] (10th ed.). (2020). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oxford English dictionary [OED] (2nd ed.). (1989). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue