Diachronic Contrast Of Linguistic Representation And Spatialization Between Chinese And English Temporal Words

Time is one of the basic categories of human cognition,which can be expressed at two linguistic levels: lexicon and grammar.In view of the fact that previous studies on grammar have been relatively rich,while diachronic and contrastive studies on lexicon have been weak to some extent,Chinese and English temporal words are therefore explored by means of diachronic and synchronic,quantitative and qualitative,also contrastive and other research methods under the guidance of “time-moving” and “ego-moving” metaphors.In order to further improve the contrastive study of Chinese and English time categories,enhance people's understanding of their nature and rules,as well as promote Chinese and English language teaching and translation practice,six chapters are presented to explore the following three issues: 1)the diachronic similarities and differences between Chinese and English temporal words in linguistic representation;2)the diachronic similarities and differences between them concerning spatialization;3)cognitive motivations for those similar and different points.The study finds that Chinese and English temporal words are largely different and marginally similar in linguistic representation and spatialization,which can be interpreted cognitively.Their similarities include two points: 1)specific time-domain preferences exist in both Chinese and English temporal words and the development of those words with semantic accuracy presents an increasing trend,opposite to those with semantic vagueness;2)both of them are characterized by the spatialization hierarchy,and the horizontal timeline which is preferred shows a gradual decrease,contrary to the vertical timeline.Their differences,however,consist of five points: 1)the overall diachronic development of representation fluctuates greatly in Chinese and English temporal words,with the former showing the “W-shaped” trend and the latter the “M-shaped” trend;2)Chinese is past-oriented while English is future-oriented in terms of the time-domain reference,also semantically,the former is vagueness-oriented while the latter is accuracy-oriented;3)the spatialization degree of Chinese temporal words is high and develops steadily,but that of English temporal words is low and rises constantly;4)the spatialization type of Chinese temporal words is diachronically unstable,whereas that of English temporal words is stable;5)Chinese belongs to the “horizontally and vertically mixed language”,but English to the “horizontal language”.Cognitive motivations are found behind the above findings.The similarities of linguistic representation and spatialization in question lie in the essential universality of Chinese and English spatiotemporal thinking.As two basic human thinking modes of time,“time-moving” and “egomoving” metaphors influence the time-domain and time-line orientations of Chinese and English temporal words.The construal degree of spatial concepts of these two nations maps the spatialization hierarchy of them.Meanwhile,the increasingly accurate demand of spatial thinking has a profound effect on the semantic and time-line development of them.Their differences,nevertheless,are motivated by the negotiation and competition of the cognitive model preference under the comprehensive but different effects of geographical,cultural and orthographic reference systems,and the spatiality-temporality preference of Chinese and English.More specifically,the static nature of “travelling schema” determines the past orientation and semantic vagueness of Chinese temporal words,while the dynamic nature of “flowing schema” facilitates the future orientation and semantic accuracy of English temporal words.The vertical temporal cognition in Chinese is obviously stronger than that in English due to the deep effect of “sun schema”.Additionally,cognitive subjects' choices of different cognitive models in different periods play a decisive role in the dynamics of Chinese and English temporal words' diachronic development.Moreover,the discrepancies in the spatialization degree and types between them are primarily the result of the trait of spatiality in Chinese and that of temporality in English.