A study on meanings of the english prepstion “ in “ and its VietNamese equivalents from a cognitive semantic perspctive

Hà Cẩm Tâm Năm bảo vệ: 2009 Abstract: This thesis is aimed at analyzing meanings of the English preposition in and investigating its potential Vietnamese equivalents based on the theo

cognitive semantic perspctive

Nguyễn Thị Khánh Vân

Trường Đại học Ngoại Ngữ Luận văn ThS Chuyên ngành:English Linguistics; Mã số: 60 22 15

Người hướng dẫn: Dr Hà Cẩm Tâm

Năm bảo vệ: 2009

Abstract: This thesis is aimed at analyzing meanings of the English preposition in and

investigating its potential Vietnamese equivalents based on the theoretical framework of

cognitive semantics The present analysis posits that meanings of in are not arbitrary; rather

they are systematically related in a network Specifically, from the central schema

designating prototypical meaning of in, other meanings occurs by means of image-schema

transformations and metaphorical mappings from spatial domains to non-spatial and abstract

domains In addition, it is interesting to note that in can correspond to not only prepositions

but also other non-prepositional expressions in Vietnamese The emphasis put here is that although spatial cognition exists in any language, there are differences in strategies of spatial conceptualization employed by people using each language Accordingly, our findings are supposed to be really beneficial, on the one hand, to teaching, learning and translating English prepositions; on the other, to better understanding socio-cultural beliefs associated with the use of language

Keywords: Tiếng Anh; Tiếng Việt; Giới từ; Ngữ nghĩa học tri nhận

Content:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Declaration ……… i

Acknowledgements ……… ii

Abstract ……… iii

Abbreviations and Symbols ……… iv

Table of Contents ……… v

INTRODUCTION ……… 1

1 Statement of the Problem ……… 1

2 Aims of the Study ……… 3

3 Scope of the Study ……… 3

4 Significance of the Study ……… 3

5 Research Questions ……… 4

6 Design of the Study ……… 4

DEVELOPMENT ……… 5

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL PRELIMINARIES ……… 5

1.1 A Brief Overview of Cognitive Linguistics ……… 5

1.2 A Brief Overview of Cognitive Semantics ……… 6

1.3 Spatial Prepositions ……… 7

1.3.1 Definition of Spatial Prepositions ……… 7

1.3.2 Syntactic Perspectives on Spatial Prepositions 8

1.3.3 Semantic Perspectives on Spatial Prepositions ……… 8

1.4 Cognitive Semantics Approach to Spatial Prepositions ……… 9

1.4.1 Experiential Realism, Image Schemas and Spatial Prepositions…… 9

1.4.2 Metaphor and Spatial Prepositions ……… 11

1.4.3 Prototype, Radial Category and Spatial Prepositions ……… 12

1.4.5 Polysemy and Spatial Prepositions ……… 13

1.4.6 Perspective and Subjectivity ……… 14

CHAPTER 2: THE STUDY ………. 16

2.1 Research Questions ……… 16

2.2 Methodology ……… 16

2.3 Data ……… 17

2.4 Analytical Framework ……… 18

2.5 Data Analysis, Findings and Discussion ……… 19

2.5.1 Meanings of the English Preposition “in” ……… 19

2.5.1.1 Prototypical Schema for “in”……… 19

2.5.1.2 Non-prototypical Meanings of „in‟……… 20

2.5.1.3 Metaphorical Extensions ……… 22

2.4.1.3.1 Metaphorical extension of the enclosure prototype ……… 22

2.4.1.3.2 Metaphorical extension of the inclusion sense ……… 25

2.4.1.3.3 Metaphorical extension of the medium sense ……… 26

2.5.1.4 Radial Category of “in” ……… 27

2.5.1.5 Summary ……… 27

2.5.2 The English Preposition “in” and its Vietnamese Equivalents …… 28

2.5.2.1 “in” in English corresponds to “trong” in Vietnamese ……. 29

2.5.2.2 “in” in English corresponds to “ngoài” in Vietnamese … 30

2.5.2.3 “in” in English corresponds to “trên” in Vietnamese 31

2.5.2.4 “in” in English corresponds to “dưới” in Vietnamese …… 32

2.5.2.5 “in” in English corresponds to “ở” in Vietnamese ……… 33

2.5.2.6 “in” in English corresponds to “trước” in Vietnamese … 33

2.5.2.7 “in” in English corresponds to “sau” in Vietnamese …… 34

2.5.2.8 “in” in English corresponds to “bên” in Vietnamese …… 35

2.5.2.9 “in” in English corresponds to “bằng” in Vietnamese …… 36

2.5.2.10 “in” in English corresponds to “về” in Vietnamese …… 36

2.4.2.11 “in” in English corresponds to “vào” in Vietnamese …… 37

2.5.2.12 “in” in English corresponds to other Vietnamese Non-prepositional Expressions……… 37

2.5.2.3 Summary ……… 39

2.5.3 Similarities and Differences between English and Vietnamese Spatial Cognition ………

2.5.3.1 Similarities ………

2.5.3.2 Differences ………

40

40

40

CONCLUSION ……… 42

1 Conclusions ……… 42

2 Pedagogical Implications ……… 43

3 Limitations of the Research and Suggestions for Further Research ……… 45

REFERENCES ……… APPENDIX ………

46

I

INTRODUCTION

1 Statement of the problem

There is a well-established fact that learners of English as a Foreign Language more often than not confront a great many difficulties in actively mastering the language As a general rule, they seemingly hold the view that English notional categories, namely nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs are crucial, hence striving to learn as many of them as possible, and that such functional categories as prepositions are of minor significance because they are limited in number and their meanings are not important to the meaning of the whole sentence What is more, the traditional view considers that all the senses of a preposition are highly arbitrary and are not related to one another As a matter of fact, both dictionaries and grammars provide long lists of unrelated senses for each preposition and its possible uses in different contexts In other words, EFL learners resort to a great many linguistic materials whose authors have made monumental efforts to describe this type of words on the grounds of only functions and positions other than semantic factors contributing to determining their choices in use For the above reasons, prepositions are generally troublesome to the learners for whom English is a foreign/second language (Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman, 1999) Boers and Demecheleer (1998) argue that prepositions are difficult for ESL/EFL learners because they have literal as well as

figurative meanings For instance, we say, we are at the hospital; or we visit a friend who

is in the hospital, or we lie in bed but on the couch

Actually, much work has been done in the last decades to find a relationship between the different senses of English prepositions Cognitive Linguistics has paid great attention to polysemy, and specifically to the meaning of prepositions (Lindner, 1982; Vandeloise, 1991; Pütz & Dirven, 1996; Tyler & Evans, 2003) Interestingly, cognitive linguists, especially cognitive semanticists have been making momentous contribution to explaining polysemy in terms of radial categories (Lakoff, 1987) and therefore consider that the meaning of a polysemous word can be seen as a big semantic network of related senses Furthermore, it now seems evident that there is a highly schematic common core to all the related senses of a preposition, which all derive from a primary spatial schema or

proto-scene (Tyler & Evans, 2003) to other non-spatial, abstract senses “by means of

generalization or specialization of meaning or by metonymic or metaphoric transfer” (Cuyckens & Radden, 2002)

It is also worth noting that cognitive semantics is concerned with investigating the relationship between experience, the conceptual system, and the semantic structure encoded by language (Lakoff, 1987) To put it plainly, cognitive semanticists have employed language as the lens through which these cognitive phenomena can be investigated As fas as spatial prepositions are concerned, cross-language research in cognitive semantics has shown that although spatial cognition exists in any language, there are differences in strategies of spatial conceptualization employed by people using each language In other words, it is evident that human experiences with space are held to be identical, since human beings are endowed with the same biological features and can be exposed to similar experiences with the environment The linguistic encoding of spatial concepts in different languages is, however, different (Choi & Bowerman, 1991; Levinson, 2001)

The preposition in represents one of the most typical spatial prepositions in English

Vietnamese EFL learners in general and those at the Military Science Academy in

particular are almost not sure when in is acceptably used Additionally, it can be observed

that they just tend to apply straightforward correspondence to prepositions in their mother

tongue; for instance, English preposition in means trong in Vietnamese, on means trên, for means cho, to name just a few – irrespective of complements that are attached to the

prepositions, and they think the job is done Apparently, the magnitude of this error is so enormous that it may delay the fluent native-like mastery of the target language

Accordingly, it is essential to grasp the related meanings of the English preposition in

within the framework of cognitive semantics and in this way immensely understand what native English speakers conceptualize spatial relations of the physical world objects and how they map from these spatial domains to non-spatial domains via metaphor and metonymy Moreover, how this preposition can be translated in to Vietnamese when they are in different collocations have so far not been thoroughly investigated The present thesis hopes to contribute to the on-going research into how different languages express the various spatial relations that can hold between entities in the world Last but not least, teachers can apply appropriate teaching methods to help students master the meanings of prepositions Besides indispensable roles of the teachers in the students’ learning achievements, students should be provided with suitable learning strategies to better language competence as well as cross-cultural awareness

For all the above-mentioned reasons, it is strongly desirable for the author to conduct this thesis

2 Aims of the study

The current thesis aims at

- uncovering a semantic description of the English preposition in in light of cognitive

semantics

- investigating potential Vietnamese equivalents of the English preposition in

- embarking on pedagogical implications for teaching, learning and translating

English prepositions

3 Scope of the study

The study is limited to investigating senses of the English preposition in and their

Vietnamese equivalents within cognitive semantic theoretical framework Not only prototypical but also derived meanings of the preposition motivated from image-schema transformations and metaphorical conceptual mappings will be taken into account This

investigation is based on my manual corpus of 681 in-examples in form of (NP) + in + NP and NP + V + in + NP, where in functions as a preposition, to the exlusion of others where

in plays the role of an adverb or an affix The data were collected from three sources,

namely, the English versions of Vanity Fair by Thackeray, W M., Jane Eyre by Brontë, C., and English-Vietnamese translation course books for third and fourth- year English majors

at the MSA Vietnamese equivalents of those 681 in-occurrences were also identified and grouped in terms of frequency and percentage to explore differences and similarities between English and Vietnamese spatial conceptualization and cognition

4 Significance of the study

This thesis, to some extent, enumerates strong evidence in cognitive semantics that

the typically English preposition in possesses numerous but related senses, suggesting that

the use of a particular word reflects the way in which native English speakers conceptualize the physical world basing on their experience Additionally, the thesis takes

a comparative stance and looks for cross-linguistic equivalents Potential Vietnamese equivalents of this preposition investigated in the current study will probably construe how Vietnamese people convey spatial meanings The thesis hopes to contribute to the overall stock of cognitive semantic studies on prepositions from a cross-linguistic perspective The findings of the study, as a result, will substantially contribute to language teaching and

learning English as well as English-Vietnamese translation The results and data may also

be useful for lexicographers when compiling new general and specialized dictionaries

5 Research questions

The following questions are proposed in the current research:

- What meanings are conveyed by the English preposition in from a cognitive

semantic perspective?

- What are Vietnamese equivalents of the English preposition in?

This study in turn, hopes to contribute to enriching pedagogical proposals for teaching English prepositions and translation of prepositions to English major students at the MSA

6 Design of the study

The present paper is organized in four main parts The INTRODUCTION part is devoted to presenting statement of the problem, aims of the study, scope of the study, significance of the study, research questions and organization of the study The DEVELOPMENT part is subdivided into two chapters: CHAPTER 1 discusses the general theoretical background of the study and CHAPTER 2, the backbone of the thesis, comprises the methods of the study, data collection, analytical framework, data analysis, findings and discussion The CONCLUSION part demonstrates the conclusions of this piece of research, pedagogical implications, and suggestions for further studies References are also included

REFERENCES

In Vietnamese

1 Nguyễn Đức Dân (1988), Lôgích của từ nối trong tiếng Việt và các ngôn ngữ Đông Nam

Á, Nxb Khoa học Xã hội, Hà Nội

2 Đào Thản (1983), “Cứ liệu từ vựng ngữ nghĩa tiếng Việt về mối quan hệ không gian

thời gian”, Ngôn ngữ (3)

3 Lý Toàn Thắng (1994), “Ngôn ngữ và sự tri nhận không gian”, Ngôn ngữ (4)

4 Lý Toàn Thắng (2005), Ngôn ngữ học tri nhận, từ lý thuyết đại cương đến thực tiễn

tiếng Việt, Nxb Khoa học Xã Hội, Hà Nội

5 Lý Toàn Thắng (2006), Hai hình thức phản ánh và hai cách nhìn không gian trong ngôn

ngữ Retrieved November 26th, 2008, from http://www.hcmussh.edu.vn/

6 Trần Ngọc Thêm (2004), Tìm về bản sắc văn hoá Việt Nam, Nxb Tổng hợp, Tp Hồ Chí

Minh

7 Nguyễn Đức Tồn (2002), Tìm hiểu đặc trưng văn hoá dân tộc của ngôn ngữ và tư duy

ở người Việt, Nxb Đại học Quốc gia, Hà Nội

In English

8 Barcelona, A (2003), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A Cognitive

Perspective, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter

9 Boers, F (1996), Spatial Prepositions and Metaphor: A Cognitive Semantic Journey

along the Up-Down and the Front-Back Dimensions, Tubingen: Gunter Narr

Verlag

10 Boers, F & Demecheleer, M (1998), „A cognitive semantic approach to teaching

prepositions‟, in ELT Journal, 52(3):197-204

11 Celce-Murcia, M & Larsen-Freeman, D (1999), The Grammar Book: An ESL/EFL

Teacher's Course, Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle Publishing Company

12 Cuyckens, H (1993), “The Dutch Spatial Preposition “in”: A Cognitive Semantic

Analysis”, in Zelinsky-Wibbelt, C (ed.) The Semantics of Prepositions, Berlin:

Mouton de Gruyter

13 Cuyckens, H & G Radden (2002), Perspectives on Prepositions Tübingen: Niemeyer

14 Cienki, A J (1989), Spatial Cognition and the Semantics of Prepositions in English,

Polish and Russian, Munchen: Verlag Otto Sagner

15 Croft, W & Cruse, A (2004), Cognitive Linguistics Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

16 Evans, V (2006), „Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning-construction.‟

Cognitive Linguistics, 17: 4, 491-534

17 Evans, V and Green, M (2006), Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction Edinburgh:

Edinburgh University Press

18 Finegan, E (2004), Language: Its Structure and Use Boston: Wardsworth

19 Geeraerts, D (1999), Cognitive Linguistics: Foundations, Scope, and Methodology,

Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter

20 Geeraerts, D & Cuyckens (2007), Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, Oxford:

Oxford University Press

21 Herskovits, A (1986), Language and Spatial Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Study of

the Prepositions in English, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

22 James, C (1980), Contrastive Analysis, London: Longman

23 Johnson, M (1987), The Body in the Mind, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press

24 Lakoff, G (1987), Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal

about the Mind, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press

25 Lakoff, G & Johnson, M (1980), Metaphors We Live By, Chicago: University of

Chicago Press

26 Lakoff, G & Johnson, M (1999), Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its

Challenge to Western Thought, New York: Basic Books

27 Langacker, R W (1987), Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume I: Theoretical

Prerequisites, Stanford: Stanford University Press

28 Langacker, R W (1990), Concept, Image, and Symbol, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter

29 Langacker, R W (1991a), Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume II, Stanford:

Stanford University Press

30 Langacker, R W (1999), Grammar and Conceptualization, Berlin: Muton de Gruyter

31 Levinson, S (2001), Space in Language and Cognition: Explorations in Cognitive

Diversity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

32 Lindstromberg, S (1998), English Prepositions Explained, Amsterdam: John

Benjamins Publishing Company