The Link Between Spatial Metaphor and Body Movements in Mandarin and English
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Pointing, swaying, and walking towards tomorrow: The link between spatial metaphor and body movements in Mandarin and English A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics by Keyi Sun University of Canterbury 2016 To My Parents, my wife Ni Zhou and our cat. Abstract English and Mandarin use different linguistic metaphors to encode time. English uses the sagittal dimension (with the future as front as in looking forward), whereas Mandarin tends to use both the vertical (with future as down: `lower week' means next week and the sagittal dimension (with future as back: `back day' means the day after tomorrow). Existing studies have shown that English speakers conceptualize time both sagittally and transversally, whereas Mandarin speakers conceive time both sagittally and vertically. It has been suggested that the different temporal directions on the sagittal dimension between the two languages are likely to be caused by the different emphases of temporal models: Moving Ego model vs. Moving Time model. The future is associated with front in the Moving Ego model; whereas the future is associated with back in the Moving Time model. While a large amount of literature has focused on differences across the two languages in terms of using different dimensions, very little has looked at differences that exist within dimensions. This paper examines the explicit and implicit associations between time and direction held by speakers of these languages. I tested how language and overtly embedded spatial information (spatio-temporal metaphor) can affect people's perception of time across three groups of speakers: English and Mandarin monolinguals, and Mandarin-English bilinguals. By using quantitative data that were collected from three experiments: 1. testing how people point directions, 2. testing body sway directions and 3. testing walking speeds, we found that: Experiment 1 (a pointing task) showed that English monolinguals asso- ciated the future with front and up; the overt encoding of metaphor has a significant effect in Mandarin (the future as front and up unless the overt cue `back' and `lower' appears) but not in English; and bilinguals showed intermediate tendencies, which were significantly different from English and Mandarin monolinguals, suggesting that the knowledge of one language could affect how the bilinguals process temporal information in the other language. The association between up and the future from all the groups is new and unexpected, which needs to be further tested in future studies. Experiment 2 (a body-sway experiment) showed that the differences be- tween swaying forward and swaying backward were mostly consistent with temporal directions in both English and Mandarin during thinking (replicating results for English from Miles, Nind, & Macrae, 2010), talking and listening. English speakers swayed more forward for the future than for the past when thinking and talking about personal lives, which was consistent with the Moving Ego model. However, they swayed more backward for the future (later) than for the past (earlier) when listening to stories, which was inconsistent with the Moving Ego model. Bilinguals in the Mandarin con- dition swayed more forward for the past than for the future when thinking and talking about personal lives and listening to stories, which was consis- tent with the dominant temporal direction in Mandarin (the Moving Time model). However, when in the English condition, they swayed more forward for the future than for the past during listening, which was consistent with the Moving Ego model, and they swayed more backward for the future than for the past during listening and talking, suggesting a persistence of impact from their native language. Moreover, overt spatial information in Mandarin such as front and back in temporal phrases had immediate effects on bilin- guals' body sway directions during perception: they swayed more forward when they heard front, and more back when they heard back. Part of the results (e.g., English monolinguals) from the story listening part are incon- sistent with existing studies and theories. Given that the stories were not designed as minimal pairs, these results from the listening part should be treated as preliminary results and should be interpreted with caution. Experiment 3 (a walking experiment) showed that temporal information only affected English monolinguals' walking speeds, and their walking speeds when listening to stories were inconsistent with the Moving Ego model. How- ever, bilinguals walked faster when listening to English stimuli than when lis- tening to Mandarin stimuli. Given the fact that the English stimuli had more stressed words than the Mandarin stimuli, it was speculated that the rhythm of auditory stimuli might have resulted in the different speeds between En- glish and Mandarin. Nevertheless, these results were also collected from the stories that were used in the body sway experiment, and they also should be treated as prelimiary results and should be interpreted with caution. The current study tested cross-linguistic influences on the perception of temporal information from an embodied point of view. It found that both spatial information that is embedded in temporal information and the lan- guage that is used to express the information could affect how people conceive time. The processing of temporal information in different languages, includ- ing thinking and talking about one's life in the past and in the future, were found to be accompanied by body sway to different directions consistent with the direction of time in the corresponding language. These results replicated existing work (e.g., Miles, Nind, & Macrae, 2010) and further explored body sway patterns during metaphorical thinking. Table of Contents List of Figures vii List of Tables xi Acknowledgments xix Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Chapter 2: Background 5 2.1 Metaphors and Conceptual Metaphor Theory . .6 2.2 Spatio-Temporal Metaphors and Embodied Experience and Time . 10 2.2.1 Embodied Cognition . 11 2.2.2 Spatio-Temporal Metaphors and Embodied Cognition . 13 2.3 The Relationship between Time and Space . 14 2.3.1 Extension, Linearity, Directionality and Transience of Space-Time . 16 2.3.2 The Relationship between Linearity and Directionality of Time in Language and Perception . 17 2.4 Spatio-Temporal Metaphors in English and Mandarin . 23 2.4.1 The Relationship between Space and Time in English . 25 2.4.2 The Relationship between Space and Time in Mandarin 26 2.4.3 An Alternative View of Spatio-Temporal Metaphors in Mandarin . 28 2.5 The Issue of Comparative Analyses between Mandarin and English Speakers on Temporal Perception . 29 2.5.1 Linguistic Relativity . 29 2.5.2 The Issue of Linguistic Relativity in Spatio-temporal Metaphors . 31 2.6 The First Research Question . 33 2.7 Gesture Study and Temporal Gesture . 35 2.7.1 The Definition of Gesture . 35 2.7.2 The Connection between Gesture and Speech Production 36 2.7.3 Conceptual Metaphor, Embodied Cognition and Gesture 36 2.7.4 Gesticulation . 37 2.7.5 Temporal Gestures . 39 2.7.6 Explicit Tasks vs. Implicit Tasks . 41 2.8 Processing Temporal Information in Body Movements . 42 2.9 The Second Research Question . 45 2.10 Perceived Body Movements and the Perception of Time . 48 2.11 The Third Research Question . 49 2.12 The Effect of Spatio-Temporal Metaphoric Language on Per- ception of Time . 50 2.13 The Last Research Question . 52 Chapter 3: Explicit Associations between Time and Space in English and Mandarin 56 3.1 Hypotheses . 68 3.2 Methodology . 72 3.3 Results . 80 3.3.1 Choice of Using Different Dimensions . 81 3.3.2 Results from the Sagittal Dimension . 85 3.3.3 Results from the Vertical Dimension . 97 3.3.4 Results from the Transverse Dimension . 109 3.3.5 Correlation between the Sagittal and Vertical Dimensions115 3.4 Discussion . 117 Chapter 4: Implicit Associations between Temporal Direc- tion and Body Movements 123 4.1 Background . 123 4.1.1 Body Movements and Perceiving Temporal Information 124 4.1.2 Body Movements and Producing Temporal Information 126 4.1.3 Body Movements and the Moving Ego Model . 127 4.1.4 Testing Different Tasks . 128 ii 4.2 The First Body Sway Experiment . 130 4.2.1 Hypotheses . 130 4.2.2 Methodology . 133 4.2.3 Results . 141 4.3 The Second Body Sway Experiment . 162 4.3.1 Hypotheses . 162 4.3.2 Methodology . 162 4.3.3 Results . 169 4.4 Overall Discussion . 180 4.4.1 Summary of the results . 180 4.4.2 The Production Task . 181 4.4.3 The First Perception Task . 183 4.4.4 The Second Perception Task . 184 4.4.5 Differences between Tasks . 185 Chapter 5: Walking while Listening to Temporal Informa- tion 188 5.1 Hypotheses . 190 5.2 Methodology . 191 5.3 Results . 196 5.4 Discussion . 202 Chapter 6: Overall Discussion and Conclusion 207 6.1 Answering the Questions . 207 6.2 Differences between Experiments . 223 6.3 The Current Findings' Relationship to CMT and Embodied Cognition . 226 6.4 Limitations of the Current Study . 229 6.5 Contribution of the Current Study . 230 6.6 Conclusion . 233 References . 236 Appendix A: Regression Models 255 A.1 Mixed Effect Logistic Regression Models in the Pointing Ex- periment . 255 iii A.2 Mixed Effect Linear Models in the Body-sway Experiment . 260 A.3 Mixed Effect Linear Models in the Walking Experiment . 261 Appendix B: Experimental Materials 263 B.1 Word List for the Pointing Experiment . 263 B.2 Stories . 265 B.3 Experimental Instruction in the First Perception Task and the Production Task . 274 B.3.1 Auditory Instruction before the First Perception Task . 274 B.3.2 Auditory Instruction between Stories in the First Per- ception Task .