In:Thinking and Speaking About Time: A cognitive linguistic approach
Edited by Rita Brdar-Szabó and Mario Brdar
[Human Cognitive Processing 81] 2026
► pp. 197–222
Chapter 7When Moving Ego meets Moving Time in Finnish
Published online: 27 January 2026
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.81.07tee
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.81.07tee
Abstract
The Finnish construction tulla
vastaan ‘come from the opposite direction’ combines the
deictic motion verb tulla ‘come’ with the spatial
gram vastaan ‘in the opposite direction’. The
construction indicates a spatial or a temporal relation where Figure
and Ground move toward each other. In the temporal use, Figure is a
temporal entity and Ground is the Ego experiencing time. We argue
that semantically and grammatically, the nearest spatial equivalent
of the temporal use combines fictive motion by Figure with actual
motion by Ground (‘We walked until a river came from the
opposite direction’). We also argue that the temporal use
constitutes a counterexample to the received view that Ego and a
temporal entity cannot both be construed as moving
Keywords: fictive motion, Figure, Ground, metaphor, temporal relation
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Theoretical background
- 2.1Syntactic and semantic features of the tulla vastaan construction
- 2.2Factive and fictive motion within motion metaphors of time
- 3.Data and methods
- 4.Spatial uses of the tulla vastaan
construction
- 4.1The factive schema: Two factive movers
- 4.2The fictive schema: One fictive and one factive mover
- 5.Temporal uses of the tulla vastaan construction
- 6.Discussion and conclusions
- Data sources
Acknowledgements Notes Glossary References
References (33)
Chesterman, A. 1991. On
definiteness. A study with special reference to English and
Finnish. Cambridge Studies in
Linguistics
56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
City Digital
Group 2022. City
Digital Group Provides Online Technologies for Digital
Leaders and Online Services Reaching Millions of Users Every
Week. [URL]. (Accessed 17.12.2022.)
Clark, H. H. 1973. Space,
time, semantics, and the
child. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive
development and acquisition of
language (27–63). New York: Academic Press.
Dhifallah, A. 2024. EGO/Speaker
deixis: Ego-centered motion metaphors of time between Arabic
and English — A comparative corpus-based
study. Annales Universitatis
Turkuensis, series B, 671,
Humaniora. Turku: University of Turku. [URL]
Duong, B. 2021. Fictive
motion. Some models in cognitive
linguistics. Cogent Arts
&
Humanities, 8(1), 1–33.
Hakulinen, A., Vilkuna, M., Korhonen, R., Koivisto, V., Heinonen, T. R., & Alho, I. 2004. Iso
suomen
kielioppi. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
Huumo, T. 2003. Incremental
existence. The world according to the Finnish existential
sentence. Linguistics, 41(3), 461–493.
2017. The
grammar of temporal motion. A Cognitive Grammar account of
motion metaphors of
time. Cognitive
Linguistics, 28(1), 1–43.
2023a. The
Finnish existential clause: Aspect, case marking and
quantification of the S
argument. In L. Sarda, & L. Lena (Eds.), Existential
constructions across languages: Forms, meanings and
functions (216–240). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
2023b. Toward
a Cognitive Grammar account of the Finnish partitive
case. In M. Jaakola & T. Onikki-Rantajääskö (Eds.), The
Finnish case system: Cognitive Linguistic perspectives.
Studia Fennica
Linguistica 23, (41–75). Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
2024. Why
partitive? Possible motivations for the partitive complement
of Finnic
adpositions. Journal of
Estonian and Finno-Ugric
Linguistics 15(1), (55–100).
Huumo, T., & Helasvuo, M.-L. 2015. On
the subject of subject in
Finnish. In M.-L. Helasvuo, & T. Huumo (Eds.), Subjects
in constructions: canonical and
non-canonical (13–41). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Karsikas, E. 2004. Tuli
huikean avara suo, ja sen kainalosta hyppäsi taivaille
karmea vuori. Spatiaalisen sijainnin
ilmaiseminen fiktiivisenä
liikkeenä. Sananjalka, 46, 7–39.
KS = Kielitoimiston
sanakirja. 2022. [Online.] Kotimaisten
kielten keskuksen verkkojulkaisuja
35. Helsinki: Kotimaisten kielten keskus. [URL]. (Accessed 6.2.2023.)
Laitinen, L. 2006. Zero
person in Finnish: A grammatical resource for construing
human
reference. In M.-L.- Helasvuo & L. Campbell (Eds.), Grammar
from the human perspective: Case, space, and person in
Finnish. Current issues in linguistic
theory 277 (209–231). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
1999. Philosophy
in the flesh. The embodied mind and its challenge to Western
thought. New York: Basic Books.
McGlone, M. S. & Harding, J. L. 1998. Back
(or forward?) to the future. The role of perspective in
temporal language
comprehension. Journal of
Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and
Cognition 24(5), 1211–1223.
Moore, K. E. 2000. Spatial
experience and temporal metaphors in Wolof. Point of view,
conceptual mapping, and linguistic
practice. Unpublished
doctoral
dissertation. University of California, Berkeley.
2014a. Spatial
Language of Time. Metaphor, metonymy, and frames of
reference. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
2014b. The
two-Mover hypothesis and the significance of “direction of
motion” in temporal
metaphors. Review of
Cognitive
Linguistics 12(2), 375–409.
2017. Elaborating
time in space: the structure and function of space-motion
metaphors of time. Language
and
Cognition 9 (2), 191–253.
2020. Moving
Time vs. Frame-relative motion. A frame-based account of the
distinction between primary metaphor and fictive
motion. Constructions and
Frames, 12(2) 272–314.
Nuñez, R. 1999. Could
the future taste purple? Reclaiming mind, body and
cognition. In Rafael Nuñez & Walter J. Freeman (Eds), Reclaiming
cognition. The primacy of action, intention and
emotion (41–60). Thorverton: Imprint Academic.
Núñez, R. & Sweetser, E. 2006. With
the future behind them. Convergent evidence from Aymara
language and gesture in the crosslinguistic comparison of
spatial construals of
time. Cognitive
Science 30(3), 401–450.
SES = Suomen
etymologinen
sanakirja 2022. Kotimaisten
kielten keskuksen verkkojulkaisuja
72. Helsinki: Kotimaisten kielten keskus. [URL]. (Accessed 17.2.2022.)
Suomi24. 2022. Keskustelut. [URL] (Accessed 17.12.2022.)
Svorou, S. 1994. The
grammar of
space. 5. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Talmy, L. 1975. Figure
and ground in complex
sentences. Proceedings of the
First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics
Society, 419–430.
