Cover not available

Article published In: Selected Papers from Constructionist Approaches to Language Pedagogy 4
Edited by Thorsten Piske and Thomas Herbst
[Pedagogical Linguistics 7:1] 2026
► pp. 189–219

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

From spatial to abstract

Cross-linguistic convergence and divergence in prepositional use

 | University of Erlangen-Nuremberg
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Open Access publication of this article was funded through a Transformative Agreement with Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg.

Published online: 14 November 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pl.25005.fok
Abstract
This contribution focuses on how abstract relations are expressed using the German preposition auf in the pattern NP1 + auf + NP2 (e.g. die Hoffnung auf etwas) and compares these expressions with their equivalents in English, Polish and Ukrainian. The qualitative analysis of the dictionary and corpus data identified 71 abstract nouns governing the preposition auf and their cross-linguistic equivalents, which revealed both convergence and divergence in the metaphorical extension of spatial prepositions to abstract domains. About 22% of the data revealed common patterns across the four languages in semantic domains such as aggression, cognition/communication, control and shopping behaviour. These shared expressions imply a shared reliance on common image schemas.
However, significant variability emerges in prepositional usage, with Polish and Ukrainian often omitting prepositions in favor of genitive case marking, which reflects alternative morphosyntactic strategies. The findings support Langacker’s (Langacker, R. W. (1984). Active zones. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 101, 172–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, (2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) view that meaning is conceptualization shaped by linguistic convention.
By highlighting cross-linguistic similarities and differences in prepositional usage, the study offers theoretical implications for language pedagogy, particularly in teaching spatial and abstract prepositional meanings across languages.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methodology
  • 3.Main results
    • 3.1Spatial senses of auf and equivalents in English, Polish, Ukrainian
      • 3.1.1Static use of auf and the equivalents in English, Polish, Ukrainian
      • 3.1.2Dynamic use of auf and the equivalents in English, Polish, Ukrainian
    • 3.2Abstract senses of auf and equivalents in English, Polish, Ukrainian
      • 3.2.1Cross-linguistic convergence of German NP1+auf+NP2 pattern
      • 3.2.2Cross-linguistic divergence in German NP1+auf+NP2 pattern
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Pedagogical implications
  • 6.Limitations and directions for future research
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Dictionaries
  • Corpora
References (56)
References
Almuoseb, A. (2016). A lexical-semantic analysis of the English prepositions at, on, and in and their conceptual mapping onto Arabic. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, 4(1), 211–234. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boieblan, M. (2022). Enhancing English spatial prepositions acquisition among Spanish learners of English as L2 through an embodied approach. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 61(4), 1391–1420. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cienki, A. J. (1989). Spatial cognition and the semantics of prepositions in English, Polish, and Russian. Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cho, K. (2010). Fostering the acquisition of English prepositions by Japanese learners with networks and prototypes. In: De Knop, Sabine / Boers, Frank/ De Rycker, Antoon (eds.): Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 259–275. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2001). Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deane, P. D. (1993). At, by, to, and past: An essay in multimodal image theory. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 191, 112–124. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. (2021). English Prepositions: Their Meanings and Uses. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faulhaber, S. (2011). Verb valency patterns: A challenge for semantics-based accounts. Berlin, Germany, & New York, NY: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Golonka, J. (2002). Ihre Meinung dazu, oder: Wie denken Sie darüber? Zur Vererbung verbaler Valenzmerkmale in Nominalphrasen des Deutschen und des Polnischen. Institut für Deutsche Sprache. MannheimGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. (2010). Framework-free grammatical theory. Theoretical Linguistics, 36(1), 77–84.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Helbig, G., & Buscha, J. (1996). Deutsche Grammatik. Langenscheidt.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, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lam, Y. (2018). The Acquisition of Prepositional Meanings in L2 Spanish. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics / Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquée, 21(1), 1–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lindstromberg, S. (2010). English Prepositions Explained. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1984). Active zones. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 101, 172–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites (Vol. 1). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1991). Foundations of cognitive grammar: Descriptive application (Vol. 2). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Littlemore, J., & Low, G. (2006). Figurative thinking and foreign language learning. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mandler, J. M. (2004). The foundations of mind: Origins of conceptual thought. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mkhitaryan, Y. (2019). A cross-linguistic study of some space prepositions in English and their counterparts in Armenian. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 2(6), 193–200. [URL]
Nacey, S., & Graedler, A.-L. (2015). Prepositions in Norwegian English learners’ writing: Patterns and challenges. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 1(2), 231–259.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Niemeier, S. (2017). Task-based grammar teaching of English. Where cognitive grammar and task-based language teaching meet. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oczko, A. (2023). Linguistic conceptualization of spatial prepositions: Romanian ’în’ and Polish ’w’ — A comparative approach. Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai. Philologia, 681, 91–105. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Orlenko, O. (2014). Conceptualization of spatial relations: Over vs над, через. Linguistic Studies, 291, 88–94.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sáez, C. (2022). Cross-linguistic interference in preposition use among Spanish learners of English. Applied Linguistics Review.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmitz, R. (1964). Formale Ausdrücke und ihre Funktionen. München: Max Hueber Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seilhamer, M. (2011). The prepositions verbs associate with: a corpus-based investigation of collocation in prepositional verbs. NUCB Journal of Language, Culture and Communication, 13(1), 21–43.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics: Typology and process in concept structuring. MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tyler, A. (2012). Cognitive linguistics and second language learning: Theoretical basics and experimental evidence. 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, England: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Spatial prepositions: A cognitive linguistic perspective. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zeschel, A. (2019). Zum Bedeutungsgehalt von Präpositionalobjekten: Eine musterbasierte Analyse verbaler Argumentstrukturen mit der Präposition vor. In D. Czicza, V. Dekalo, & G. Diewald (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik VI: Varianz in der konstruktionalen Schematizität (pp. 39–77). Tübingen, Germany: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmitz, J. (1964). Der Gebrauch der deutschen Präpositionen. Hueber.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dictionaries
Bańko, Mirosław. (2000). Inny słownik języka polskiego. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cambridge University Press. German-English dictionary. Retrieved [November-December 2023], from [URL]
Digitales Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache (DWDS). Retrieved [November-December 2023], from [URL]
Langenscheidt. (2019). Langenscheidt Großwörterbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache (3rd ed.) Langenscheidt.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langenscheidt. Deutsch-Englisch Wörterbuch. Retrieved [November-December 2023], from [URL]
Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Retrieved [November-December 2023], from [URL]
PONS. Deutsch-Polnisch Übersetzung. Retrieved [November-December 2023], from [URL]
Куньч, З. (2005). Універсальний словник української мови. Навчальна книга — Богдан.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corpora
British National Corpus (BNC). [URL]
Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). [URL]
Digitales Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache (DWDS). [URL]
MOVA.info. [URL]
Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego (NKJP). [URL]
Sketch Engine. [URL]
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue