Luận văn meanings of english prepositions over above under and below and their equivalent expressions in vietnamese

However cognitive linguistics CL offers an altomative perspective, suggesting that the many distinct meanings associated with a particular preposition are related in Tn fact, aller crit

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOL UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES

pO TUAN LONG

MEANINGS OF ENGLISH PREPOSITIONS “OVER, ABOVE, UNDER,

AND BELOW” AND THEIR EQUIVALENT EXPRESSIONS IN

VIETNAMESE: A STUDY UN THE LIGHT OF PRINCIPLED

POLYSEMY

NGU NGHIA GIGI TU TIENG ANH “OVER, UNDER, ABOVE,

TRONG TIENG VIỆT

MLA Major Thesis Major: English Linguistics Code: 60220201

ILA NOI - 2016

VIETNAM NATIONAT UNIVERSITY, HANOT UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES

BO TUAN LONG

MEANINGS OF ENGLISH PREPOSITIONS “OVER, ABOVE, UNDER

AND BELOW” AND THEIR EQUIVALENT EXPRESSIONS IN

VIETNAMESE: A STUDY IN ‘THE LIGHT OF PRINCIPLED

POLYSEMY

NGỮ NGHĨA GIOI TU TIENG ANIL “OVER, UNDER, ABOVE,

BELOW” VA PHUONG TIEN BIEU DAT TUONG BUONG

TRONG TIENG VIET

M.A Major Thesis Major: Rnglish Linguistics

Code: 60220201

‘Thesis Advisor: Assoc Prof Dr LAM QUAN

HA NOI — 2016

Signature

Đỗ Tuân Long

core from which other extended senses develop Que framework offering such

kind of semantic network is Principled Polysemy introduced by ‘Tyler and Evans

in 2003 This study focuses on providing additional information for the meanings

of the four English prepositions over, above, under, below beside works presented

by Iyler and Lvans Comparative and contrastive methods were exploited to

analyze data from three sources namely “Gone with the Wind”, “Vanity Fair” and

721 articles of contemporary topics on BBC and CNN ‘The results show that over

has two online meanings, under possesses one meaning not analyzed by two framework founders Particularly over in cerlain cases means hecause of (reason)

and by (a means to do something), under is uscd to denote a situation or state that

someone or something is experiencing Additionally, praphic illustrations for

extended senses of three prepositions above, under, below were added, which

facilitates leamers to better construe the semantics of the prepositions ‘The

Vietnamese equivalenis for those prepositions are presented systematically in the

order of their appearances in the semantic networks, which makes learners’ reference to those spatial markers more conveniently

vi

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS

First and foremost, T would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Assoc.Prof.Dr Lam Quang Đông for transferring me his specialized knowledge, his inspiring me the love in linguistics as well as his valuable suggestions, advice

and correction during my the thesis throughout

T also take this opportunity to thank all my lecturers in the Department of Graduate Studies al University of Languages and International Studies, Vielam National University, Hanoi for many of their interesting, lectures, which have

surely contribuled to the foundation of my thesis

Finally, I would like to show my deep gratitude to my family, especially my wife for her support, encouragement and understanding, without which my theis would not have been accomplished

Hanoi, November 2016

Do Tuan Long

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale of the study

2 Objectives of the siudy

3.1.2 New findings for the meanings of under 31

viii

1 Graphic illustrations for extended senses of above 2.2 Graphic illustrations for extended senses of under

3.2.3 Graphic illustrations for extended senses of below

3 Research question 3

3.3.1 Potential Vietnamese equivalents of aver

3.3.2 Potential Vietnamese equivalents of above

3.3.3 Viemamese equivalents of under

3.3.4, Vietnamese equivalents of below

3.4, Chapter summary

PART C: CONCLUSION

1 Recapitulation

2 Challenges and limitations

3 Orientations to further research

University of Languages and Intemational Studies,

Vietnam National University, Hanoi

List of tables

Table 1.1: Schemas proposed by Lakoff (1987) for over besides the central schema

‘Table 1.2: Analysis of “British Ambassador in hot water over joke”

Table 3.1: Paraphrases of (3.1) and (3.2)

‘Table 3.2: Summarized information of over

Table 3.3: Summarized information of above

'Table 3.4: Summarized information of under

Table 3.5: Stunmarized information of below

xi

Central image schema

The semantic network for over The semantic network for under

The Rubi

s vase The proto-scene of aver The scmantic network for above

The More Sense of above

The Superior Sense of above The Next-one-up Sense of above The Topographical-distance Sense of above The Less Sense of under

‘The Control Sense of under The Covering Sense of under

The Non-Existence Sense of under Figure 3.10: Semantic network for below

Figure 3.11> The acourate semantic network for below

Figure 3.12: The Less Sense of below

Figure 3.13: ‘he Inferior Sense of below

Figure 3.14 The Next-one-dlownu Sense of below

Figure 3.15: The Topographical-distance Sense of below

xi

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale of the study

English prepositions are not easy for leamers to acquire, and this is an obstacle

for those who want to leara English successfully Perhaps, one reasom is thal if ts

difficult to characterize the scmantics of prepositions Take the two following, sentences as an example (Tyler and Evans 2003:65)

(1.1) The picture is over the mantle

(1.2) The picture is above the mantle

Tn fact, both sentences denote 4 configuration im which the Trajector (TR - the

picture) is higher than the Landmark (LM - the mantle), and it is impossible to decide if there is a contact between the LM and the TR [lowever, another

example posed by Tyler and Evans (2003) indicates something different The

sentence (1.3) “Mary hung her jacket over the back of the chair.” is interpreted differently from the sentence (1 4) “Mary hung her jacket above the back of the chair” Tis universally known thal when humans pul.a cloth or anylhing clse on the back of the chair, that thing should be higher and in contact with the back of

the chair In the sentence (1.3) the preposition over denotes what humans often

percoptualize, the jacket is highor and in contact with the back of the chair Yet, the meaning of sentence (1.4) is different; the jacket is higher and in no contact

with the back of the chair

Furthermore, prepositions tend to develop a complex set of extended meanings, for example, under has developed at least 9 meanings’, many of which do not appear to be systematically related Tyler ct al (2011) reviewed that although linguists have long been aware that prepositions develop complex polysemy

networks, the meaning networks surrounding spatial markers (and the systematic processes of meaning extension from which they result) have only become the

' Oxford Nictionary (8° Fdition, Cambridge University Press)

1

foci of linguistic inquiry in the last 20 years ‘The best descriptive grammars and dictionaries present the multiple meanings of prepositions as largely arbitrary

Three waditional linguisis (Bloomfickd, 1933, Frank, 1972, Chamsky, 1995)

represented the semantics of English prepositions as arbitrary As a result,

memonzalion has been often suggested as the best stralegy However cognitive

linguistics (CL) offers an altomative perspective, suggesting that the many distinct meanings associated with a particular preposition are related in

Tn fact, aller criticizing previous approaches 1o the semantics of English

prepositions (i.e monosemy and homonymy) and Lakoff’s account to over, ‘I'yler

and Evans developed Principled Polysemy framework, which was described to

BI the gaps thal other scholars Ieave

Though the framework could explain clearly and (for the most part) convincingly

how new meanings developed from esiablished ones on the basis of experiential

correlations, three weak points of the framework still exist First, local and online construction of meaning (e.g over and under’s) was not fully analyzed as stated

by Tyler and Evans Additionally, graphic illustrations for extended senses of the other prepositions were not provided, which to some extent makes it difficult for

readers to construe the semantic extension from spatial to non-spatial, Last but

not least, ‘Thora (2004) pointed out that the research results introduced by ‘Tyler and Evans (2003) were somewhat vague as they claimed to use their native sense

of language to investigate English prepositions’ semantics Scopus linguistics was

nel in use lo collect dala; hence, il needs revising lo confirm the results

The context discussed above inspired me to conduct a study for my M.A thesis

entitled Meanings of English prepositions "over, above, under md below" and

tạ

their equivalent expressions in Vietnamese: A study in the light of Principled

Potysemy

2 Objectives of the study

As mentioned in the previous part, [his thesis aims al Gilling out the gaps that

Tylor and Evans loft in analyzing the semantics of the four prepositions First, we wish to find out the local and online construction meaning of over and under in the Tight of Principled Polysomy beside works dono by Tyler and Evans Tn addition, basing on the analysis of the data collected with reference to the

theoretical Cramework Principled Polysemy, we will provide graphic iMustrations

for extended senses of above, under and below The third objective is to discover potential Vietnamese equivalents for those spatial particles, which to some extent

may facilitate the acquisition of those spatial languages Those objectives are

realized via the following research questions

3 Research questions

This study is conducted to provide answers to [hree research questions:

1 What are the new findings for the meanings of the four prepositions besides those presented by Tyler and Evans in the light of Principled Polysemy?

2 What are graphic illustrations for each extended sense of the four

prepositions in the light of Principled Polysemy?

3 What are potential Vietnamese equivalents of those prepositions?

4, Structure of the thesis

‘The thesis consists of three main parts In the first part - Introduction — the

rationale, objectives of the thesis and three research questions are presented The

second part is Thesis Development which consisis of three chapters: (1) Literature Review and Theoretical Background, (2) Research Methodology and

(3) Findings and Discussion In the first part, | will cary out a literature review

on different approaches to the semantics of English prepositions and then provide theoretical background (or the study The second part presents the methods to conduet the study and then research results will be presented in the third chapter The last part is Conclusion in which T summarize the research results and point out the rescarch’s limitations and oricntations to further study.

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

Chapter 1: LITERATURE REVIEW & THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

In this part, | will first conduct a literature review on different approaches (ie Full-specification and Principled Polysemy) to the semantics of English prepositions, and then analyze the theoretical background for my research study

1.1 Lilerature Review

Bloomfield, Frank and Chomsky advocated different ways to construe spatial markers in English However, what the three authors supported is different from that advocated by cognitive linguists Numerous studies (Brugman and Lakoff

(1988); Dewell (1994); Coventry and Garrod (2004); Herskovits (1986), Kreitzer (1997); Lindner (1981), Lindstromborg (1997), Sinha ard Kuleva (1995), Tran

Quang Hai (2001) have been conducted more or less in light of Lakoff’s theory,

so il is appropridle to review his approach to the semaniics of English

prepositions Tran Quang Hai (2001) compared and contrasted the semantics and pragmatics of locative prepositions in both Linglish and Viemamese to find out the similarities and differences In this study, only prototypical meanings of locative prepositions were analyzed, extended senses were neglected

1.1.1 Full-specification Approach

Lakoff took over as a case study in English prepositions and his analysis is sometimes described as the full-specification approach to lexical semantics The core point in lis theory is that the senses associated with prepositions like over, which are groimded in spatial experience, are structured in terms of image- schemas Lakoll supposed thal an image schema combining elements of both

ABOVE and ACROSS prototypical sense of over The distinct senses associated

with over are structured with respect to this image - schema which provides the

category with its prototype structure, In sum, Lakoff claims that the schemas

5

which are different from the central schema are considered to represent distinct senses associated with over According to this model of word meaning, the

central schema for over has at least six dislincl and closcly relaled variarts (see

Figure 1.1), each of which is stored in semantic memory

Figure 1.1: Central image schema (adopted frum Lakoff, 1987:423)

Given the range of senses over is associated with in addition to the ABOVE- ACROSS s misc (summarised in Table 1.1), this model resulls in a polentially vast

proliferation of senses for each lexical item

Arove scheina The TR is located above the The helicopter is hurvering

CINEEINH schema “The TR is covering the LMT The board is over the hole REFLEXIVE schema The TR is eflenive: the TRis The fence fell voer

simultaneously the TR and the

LM ‘The final tocation of the

TR is understood with respect

to its starling position

EXCESS schema When over is employed a5 a The hath overflowed

prefiy it can indicate ‘excess?

of TR relative to LM

REPETITION Quer is used as an adverb to After receiving w poor

schema indicate a process that is grade, the student started

{again}

Table 1.1 Schemas proposed by Lakoff (1987) for over besides the central

schema

According to Lakoff, over has, at the very least, several dozen distinct senses Although the number of senses is not problematic per se, the absence of clear methodological principles for establishing the distinc senses is problematic There are two main problems; (1) a failure to distinguish between polysemy and vaguenes

and (2) unconstrained methodology Tyler and Evans indicated that

Lakoff denied the role of context in meaning altogether Particularly, Tyler and

livans (2003) argue that the examples in (1) do not represent distinct senses of

over (one specifying contacl and one specifying lack af contact)

la ‘The bird flew over the wall

b Sam climbed over the wail

Tostead, Tyler and Evans suppose that the interpretation of over with respecl to

contact or lack of contact derives from the integration of over with the other

elements in the sentence Our knowledge about birds (they can fly) and people

(they varmol), provides us will le inference Ural lirds do not come into conlaet

with walls when crossing over them while people do In other words, the

linguistic context together with encyclopedic knowledge provides the details

relating to the presence or absence of contact According to Tyler and Evans, over here is vague with respect to contact Tyler and Evans argue that while Lakoff's

position on polyscmy as a conceptual plenomenan is correct, il is also important

to take into account the crucial role of context in word meaning

Lakoffs approach has also been blamed on a lack of methodological constraints In other words, Lakoff provides no principled criteria for determining, what counts as a distinct sense This means that the polysemy account presented

for over (or whatever lexical item we might apply the approach to) results purely

from the intuitions (and perhaps also the imagination) of the analyst rather than actually representing the way a particular category is represented in the mind of the language user This problem has been discussed in some detail by Sandra and

Rice (1995) and by Sandra (1998) {cited in Evans, 2006:342]

1.1.2 Principled Polysemy Framework

The framework Principled Polysemy first introduced im the book "The

Semantics of English Prepositions” in 2003 is used to analyze the meanings of certain English prepositions and present them in semantic networks

Tn fact, the frarnework is bunt upon works by Lakoll and Claudia Brugman and

as part of cognitive lexical semantics; it is based on the following premises or

assumptions (cited in Evans, 2006)

(1) Words and their senses represent conceptual categories, which have much in common with non-linguistic conceptual categories It follows that linguistic

calegories have prototype struclure

(2) Word meanings are typically polysemous, being structured with respect to a central prototype (or prototypes) Lexical categories therefore form radial categories which can be modelled as a radiating lattice structure

(3) Radial categories, particularly meaning extensions from the prototype, are

motivated by general cognitive mechanisms including metaphor and image

schema transformation

(A) The senses that constitute radial categories are stored rather than generated

By analyzing the semantics of Rnglish prepostlions, Tyler and Evans mean that

a proposition (or a word) has prototypical meaning and then from this meaning other extensions occur So, it is necessary first to identify the prototypical

meaning of a preposition and present other meaning extensions in a semantic

network for that preposition According to ‘I'yler and vans, prototypical meaning

of a word needs to have four following characteristics: (1) earliest attested meaning; (2) predominance in the semantic network, (3) relations to other prepositions; and (4) ease of predicting sense extensions

After finding the prototypical meaning of a preposition, it is crucial to decide

whether a particular sense of a preposition counts as a distinct sense and can therefore be established as a case of polysemy Founders of the framework

provided two criteria: (1) for a sense to count as distinct, it must involve a

meaning that is not purely spatial in nature, and/or a spatial configuration holding

between the TR and 1M thal is dislinet from the other senses conventionally

associated with that preposition; and (2) there must also be instances of the sense

that are conlext-independent: instances in which the distinct sense could not be

inferred from another sense and the context in which it occurs

‘the framework Principled Polysemy is the fundamental basement in this study

because it could successfully explain

how new meanings develop from established ones on the basis of

experiential correlations Accounting for such processes in language

without simply relying on the often too vague concept of "metaphorical

extension” which has frequently been claimed to be responsible for the

usage of similar forms in different domains 1s a major achievement

Furthermore, the nation of "contrast set" is very useful in accomting for

the relationships of prepositions to each other, which are often not

sufficiently explained by opposing features ‘I's, the basic approach

is both innovative and convincing (From Thora, T (2004, para 11)

Review of The Semantics of English Prepositions (Retrieved trom

http: //linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfim?SublD-18309 on 20

June 2015]

Tn the following part, we will presen and then comment or: works done by

‘Tyler and Hvans ‘I'o the best of our knowledge, ‘l'yler and Hvans left two gaps in analyzing the semantics of aver, above, under, below in the light of Principled Polyscmy The first ane is the semantic gap in the meanings of over and under

‘Tyler and Livans (2003:80) took over as a case study to shed light on the analysis

of other prepositions They provided a semantic network for over with one central

meaning and fifteen extended meanings:

s

$.Á.I Over-and-above (exeess II)

Figure 1.2: ‘The semantic network for Over (Tyler and Evans, 2003:80)

After analyzing data collected, we realize that over in the following sentence could not be categorized in any of the senses

1.2 British Ambassador in hot water ever joke

The above cxample is « headline on BRC, and there is no verb The complete sentence, as understood by readers, is “British Ambassador is in hot water over joke” We can analyze the structure of the sentence like in the following table

“Over joke” is treated

something new because it necds analyving to understand

the meaning of the whole sentence

10

British Ambassador is in hot water over joke

Table 1.2: Analysis of “British Ambassador in hot water over joke”

Normally, over may denote a spatial-physical configuration between a LM and

a TR in the above sentence; but in fact there is no such configuration So in this case, over denole a non-spalial meaning, In order to understand the non-spatial meaning of over, we consulted several dictionaries”, however, the answer yields

nolhing The semantic network for over proposed by Tyler and Evans did not give

us any clues to trace the meaning, of over in this case

Additionally, speakers of English may find it familiar to utter sentences like

“We heard it over the radio” (Oxford Dictionary) Over in this case denotes a means of telecommunication by which the speaker(s) heard about something, The meaning of over in this case could not be seen via the network of Tyler and

Evans

Furthermore, we suppose that none of the five senses of under proposed by Tyler and vans could be used to explain the meaning of under in the following sentence from BBC

1.3 Urban Capital has sold 220 of 250 units currently under construction

Tu fact, under construction refers to 4 slale or situation that a sold unit af Urban

Capital is experiencing

? Oxford Dictionary Online, Cambridge Dictionary Online, Merriam Webster Dictionary

H

2.A Less 3.B Côntral

2 Dawn

L Proto-seen:

e

3 Covering 4, Non-existence

Figure 1.3: The semantic network for Under (Tyler and Evans, 2003:124)

The second gap is 4 lack of graphic ilustrations for cach extended sense of above, under, below, which may make it harder for readers to construe

Additionally, the iustration of the semantic network for below is nol accurate

because Up cluster cannot be associated with below The above-mentioned gaps will be bridged via the answers to research questions in the chapter 3

1,2 Theoretical Background

This study is conducted in the light of Cognitive Linguistics (CT.), and Contrastive Analysis (CA) Hence, it is necessary to revise theoretical assumptions of CL on the Principled Polysemy framework, and principles in contrasting English and Victnamese

1.2.1 Important tenets of Principled Polysemy Framework in the light of

Langacker, one of the founders of cognitive linguistics and the author of Cognitive Grammar (2008), supposes that “all constructs validly posited for grammatical description (cg notions such as “noun,” “subject,” or “past participle”) must in some way be meaningful” (p 5} This view 1s fundamentally

opposed to the braditional linguistics theory which treals grammar as autonomous

rules fice of a semantic component

In accordance with the cognitive linguistics view, it is well purposeful to analyve (he meanings of prepositions in English which is often regarded as a grammatical morpheme Oue thing worth taking into consideration is that Adele Goldberg, the author of Constructional Grammar (2006), argues that grammatical

construction Ibal is stringed with lexical items and/or lexemes, creales ifs own

meaning as a whole ‘his view is contrastive to the traditional approach that each

word with its own meaning is plugged in together to make up the meaning of

phrases or sentences

| A spatial scene can be construed in different ways

Tn cognitive linguistics, construal refers to how au individual perceives a scene;

and in the study of prepositions, we are interested in describing a spatial scene composing a TR and LM Gestalt psychologists have illustrated the human ability

to construc a spalial scone involving two enlilies, a TR and LM, in many different ways Ihe way of viewing a scene is subjective and different because it is done oma personal level Moreover, the semantics of a language certainly have impacts

on the way we construe a scene, too Generally a human tends to view a scene by foregrounding the focus entity (TR), and by backerounding the reference entity

(LM) Yet, if the items are switched around of the foregrounding, a different

construal will surcly emerge The well-kuown Rubin's vase (or sometimes known,

as the Rubin face) example, which was developed by the Danish psychologist

Ragar Rubin, proves thal a human brain makes figure or ground distinctions when

13

viewing the same picture and depending on which is focused upon, two different

images emerge

Figure 1.4: The Rubin's vase

Another way to obtain a different construal is by having different perspectives which were mentioned by Langacker (2002) first, to have a different orientation;

and second, lo have a different “vanlage point.” How an individual human being

assigns the orientation of an entity is a subjective matter For example, “left” and

“tight” can be determined by the orientation of the speaker the hearer, or even some other viewer

‘The foregrounding/backgrounding (e.g., whether or not an entity is in focus, or

inghlighicd), change of orientation, or change of vantage pom will give rise Lo a

different meaning and thus will be a great tool to explain the meaning extension Forthcoming analysis of English spatial prepositions will also demonstrate how

English operates the lexicons of their language resulting in a different construal of

a spatial scene

= Meaning is conceptual in nature

Cognitive Jinguisis describe meaning in terms of concepluslization, and the meanings associated with a lexeme are instantiated in semantic memory as a

conceptual representation, called an image-schema, rather than as discrete

semantic features formal linguists have argued for (Lakoff, 1987; Johnson, 1987)

‘tyler and Livans (2003) explain that despite the ability to construe any spatial

scene in dillerenl ways, we can goncralive the meaning of a Iexome, og, a

14

preposition, in terms of a highly abstract and schematic representation of the spatial relation between the TR and LM, called a proto-scene A proto-scene, as defined by Tyler and Rvans, is the unique spatial configuration that represenis an idealized mental representation across the recurring spatial scenes associated with

a particular spatial particle (p 52) Tn other words, the prolo-scene is an

“abstracted mental representation” that “result]s| in an idealized spatio-functional

configuration” (p 66)

Furthermore, Tyler and Ryans describe thai “|a|s prolo-scenes are idealized,

they do not contain detailed information about the nature of either the TR or the

LM, nor detailed metric information conceming notions such as the exact shape

of the LM or the degree of contacl between the TR and LM” (Evans & Tyler,

2005, p 9) In Eigure 1.2, the bold horizontal line refers to the LM while the

representation What is important to note, however, is a conceptual relation

between the idealized elements (represented as a schematic TR and schematic

LM, rather than with a picture of birds or flowers, for instance) of real world experience.

[ Prepositions are polysemous: Primary sense gives rise to extended senses

Cognitive linguists suppose that any lexical item, including grammatical

imarkers (¢ , propositions, past tense, delerminers), has a range of similar and

related multiple associated meanings ‘This view of form and meaning relation is a

contrasting observalion froin both homonymy and monosemy

The polysemy approach assumes that a word has more than one meaning and advocates systemic relatedness in extending meanings of the same form In other words, this approach supports thal a word is a complex category with a central meaning (or primary sense), and multiple extended meanings which are related in systematic and principled ways Additionally, meaning extension create distinct

meanings Uhal are understood to be entrenched in ou memory rather than

pragmatically inferred on-line as the monosemy account claims ‘Ihe analysis of a

preposition in cognitive linguistics often presents a semantic network (a meaning

map) of a given lexical stern (or a grarumatical construction) in hope of showing

the relatedness of each of the different senses involved in one linguistic form and

to caplure the way in which other dist senses may have derived from the

ptimary sense and help the reader see that connection

The semantic network does not list multiple meanings arbitrarily as if they are random seis, it clearly presenis the meaning differences in a systematic way showing the relatedness with the primary sense or the previous sense from which the new sense has derived from (oftentimes with schematic diagrams) It should

be noted that such meaning maps have shown to be a very effective teaching medium Ilence, those maps serve as a basis to promote the leaming of prepositions by ESL leamers (see Tyler, 2011 for the application to teaching inalcrials), Similar lo all cognitive linguistics principles on calcgorization, a semantic network suggests that there is a fuzzy boundary between extended

meanings, rather than absolute division

16

7 Meaning of spatial language should be understood with the functions as well

as the geametric information

Vandeloise (1991, 1994) and Herskovits (1986, 1988) showed that humans construe the meaning of spatial particles not just with information from geomelric-spatial relations, but also via an understanding of the functions Chal each spatial scene carries It turns out that functional elements, which are humanly meaningful consequences of two entities being in a particular spatio- physical configuration with respecl to one another (vg., containment, orienting toward a goal, etc.), are also critical not only in construing semantic extension but also revealing overlapping semantic characteristics among spatial markers whose geometric configurations are quite disparate ‘lus, the notion that the primary sense of a spatial marker also involves a functional element has led to many studies on extensive polysemy networks including those by Tyler and Evans (2001a, 3003) Tyler and livans offered a definition of a functional element as meaningful consequences of having specific spatial relations between entities in the world and argued that those consequences to a human being are an integral part of understanding each preposition They (2003) also discussed that multiple meanings of a phonological form (¢.g English preposition over has al least 15 distinct meanings, including an On the Other Side Scnse and a FinislyCompleted Sense) are not randomly developed, or in other words, those meaning are not

unrelated ones, Cognitive linguists rather would argue thal ther

is a reason why the identical phonological form over has eventually derived many multiple meanings diachronically

1.2.2 Principles of contrasting English and Vietnamese

In reference to Le Quang Thicut (2005) and Nguyen Thien Giap (2012), four main principles in contrasting two languages (Linglish and Vietnamese in this case) are mentioned as follows

Principle 1: All Linguistic components must be described adequately Contrasting should be conducted if and only if a complete description is available

Principle 2: When contrasting linguistic componenis, (hose comporienta must be analyzed in context as a whole and the communicative functions

Principle 3: Linguistic components of two languages must be described via one

method

Principle 4: ‘Ihe types of languages must be taken into consideration

Basiry ơn the [our above principles, a three-step procedure is suggested whon contrasting two languages

Step 1: Describe or find out a version that fits the contrastive purpose Regarding

the act of contrasting the original work and its translaled version, a very first step

is to find out a translated work by a reputable transtator

Step 2: Identify what can be contrasted, or in other words, find out which can be equivalent to which

Step 3: “ontrast and find out the potential equivalents

From such prior analysis, we will clearly present the application of comparative

and contrastive method in the next chapter

1.2.3 Principles of semantic extension from spatial to non-spatial

In order to explain the non-spatial meanings of the prepositions and provide

graphic illustrations (or extonded senses of the preposilions, we based on the

principles of semantic extension from spatial to non-spatial, which is mentioned

atempL lo communicate the new meaning of that item i! and only if the listener

has a reasonable chance of understanding the new meaning This understanding presumably would come from inferences arising from the situated use of the

18

lexical item (context of the utterance) [lence it is reasonable to say that extended meanings of a spatial marker (a preposition) first arose from contextualized uses

and infererces thal were derivable from context, With repetition, the mfcrences

became independently associated with the lexical farm, e.g over and under, as

additional, distinct senses

C Metaphorical thinking

Following the notions of embodied experience discussed above, the basic insight is thal humans regularly think and talk about internal, offer more abstract experience (such as emotions, thought processes, and states) in terms of our experience with the external, physico-spatial world Conceptualizations of

Tecuming experiences with the world become entrenched in human memory and

form foundational patterns for further conceptualization (Mandler, 1992; 2004)

This is thinking metaphorically a common, universal cognitive process

Humans regularly observe the recurrent eo-oecwrence of lwo distinct phenomena With repeated exposures, the two distinct but co-occurring phenomena become strongly ass

ciated in memory such that we conceplualize

and talk about one in terms of the other For example, beginning in infaney, the child experiences a sense of well-being when she is held and fed Thus, physical yroximily becomes associated with love and intimacy Laler, people who are good friends or important family members are often in close physical proximity The result is that we form cognitive associations between two the separate phenomena such that we can use language about physical proximity to describe emotional intimacy, as in: My sister and I are very close Grady talks about this

as primary metaphor or experiential correlation (Grady, 1997, 1999; Lakoff &

Johnsen, 1999)

| Reat world force dynamics

Asa defaull, speakers assume thal all clernonts in a conceptual spalial scene arc subject to real-world force dynamics, such as assumptions about motion along a

19

path or that objects are subject to gravity (Lalmy, 1988; 2000) When interpreting a novel, contextualized use of a lexical item, speakers assume that

real world forse dynamics are in effect

1.3 Chapter summary

In this chapter, we have presented six theories of meaning and word moaning

analysis and then analyzed five important tenets of cognitive linguistics in

Principled Polysemy Framework which served as a basis for Principled Polysemy ‘the core value of the framework is the four characteristics of

protolypical meaning of a word and two crileria that inake a sense (of a werd) Lo

count as distuict In order to explain the semantic extension from spatial to non- spatial, we presented three principles supported by cognitive Linguists (Mandler,

Grady and Lakoff & Johnson) We also showed the principles when comparing

and contrasting in one way from Hnglish to Vietnamese in the last part of the chapter, we criticized the full-specification approach advocated by Lakoff whose problems lie in a Tack of methodological constraints and gaps that Tyler and

vans left which are to be filled in chapter 3.

CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

530 sentences in which 282 sentences contain over, 215 with under, 31 with above and only 3 sentences with below The second novel was written by Margaret Milchell (an Aincrican author), first published im 1936 From this work,

we could collect in total 678 sentences in which 322 sentences contain over, 72

sentences having above, 16 sentences with below and 268 sentences with under

The second source is 721 sentences of different articles on BBC and CNN of contemporary topics (we started collecting data in May 2015) We could collect

200 sentences with over, 170 wilh below, 171 wilh under, 180 wilh above In

total, we have 1929 sentences to analyze One important reason to choose these

two novels is that they were written by two authors who spoke American and British English which may show how language was used in the past Contemporary English is shown via articles of BBC and CNN

Two lranslated works of Vanity Fair and Gone with the Wind were translated

Tran Khiêm and Dương Tuong respectively Both translated works were published by Literature Publishing House The information about Tran Khiem as a.tanslater is very limiled, but pethaps his translalion in Vanity Fair is welcomed

by lots of readers because of the fact that the publishing house ranks it third in their advertisement for classic novels’ Duong Tuong, on the other hand, is a

renowned translator in Vietnam and has won many prizes for his contribution to

Ý hpZReww nxiywvanhoc.cơm/productfc-72TÌ94E.196BEE948309620thuy36R192RA94RFt liml

21

introducing foreign literature to Vietnam ‘though Duong tuong admitted some faulty details in translation (in other works, not in Gone with the Wind), his competence in translation cannot be denied

2.2, Research methods

In order to answer the research questions, a sumber of methods wore oxploited

First, we analyzed data collected in the light of Principled Polysemy, and then

check the resulis wilh whal was presented by Tyler and Evans We applied sleps instructed by the two authors to first construe the context of the sentence and then

the meaning of the preposition We then categorized the senses of the preposition

in the semantic network proposed by Tyler and Evans We take two following sentences from Vanity Fair as examples The first one denotes a spatial relation,

but the second one contains a non-spatial relation between participants

2.1 ‘Over Mrs, Flamingo’s crimson silk gown,” said good-natured Mrs Sedley

2.2 And he handed her over the letter

The [isl senlence is an answer to a question of lovation In this sentence, the TR

is hidden while the LM is “Mrs Flamingo’s crimson silk gown” In this case the

TR is construed to be higher than the I.M, and of course this is reflected in the

proto-scene of over as supposed by Tylor and Evans

Llowever, there is no spatial relation in the sentence (2.2) Llence, over in this case docs nol denote the profotypieal meaning Reading the sentenec, we can paraphrase it as follows:

2.2" [le handed the letter over to her

This sentence cannot be interpreted figuratively The TR is she (her is used to be grammatically correct), and the LM is he Reading the sentence, we see that there

is a transfer in the control of the letter between two human participants, fe and she Reconsidsring the senses of over advocated by Tyler and Evans, we categorize aver in this case as having a Transfer Sense If we found some “off-

frame” sentences, we carefully reanalyzed them and recommended the semantic gaps that Principled Polysemy might leave

Addilionally, the descriptive method was uscd to provide the graphic illustrations for extended senses of the three prepositions above, under, below In

the light of Principled Polysemy, we found the relation between the TR and LM

in cach sentence and generalized spatial configuration that cach sense of the prepositions denotes Additionally, the method also proves workable in order to

analyze the “online construction meaning” of over and under In fact, aller

collecting data, we analyzed the meaning of each preposition in the light of Principled Polysemy to decide if a sense counts as distinctive Ilowever, some

senses advocated by Tyler and Evans have nol been illustrated via our dala We

consulted several lecturers from Division of ‘'ranstating and Interpreting, ULIS VNU and a US expert working for ULIS to check if Tyler and Evans's sentences are accepted (hough the two authors claimed thal their nalive sense of language

was used to oreate the illustrative sentences

Furthermore, the comparative and contraslive method is also used The method

is also used to compare the meanings and functions of each preposition in the original classic works with their Vietnamese translated works Basing on this, we could find some translated versions of cach preposition, Tn the light of the framework and translation equivalence theory, we found some equivalents and translated versions of those prepositions It is noted that translated versions are accepted in Vietnamese, but im fact they may not be equivalents ‘tyler and Evans did give distinct senses of the four prepositions in context, so we suppose that we

would again interpret the contexts of the sentences inchiding four prepositions in

toms of {function as well as ways of construing the spatial configuration IL Whe translated words and the original ones denote the same configuration as well as function, they are equivalents If nal, they are asere variants used al the

translators’ discretion.

Finally, a questionnaire containing various translated versions of the prepositions was used The questionnaire was designed with 15 multiple choice questions Aller consnlling sore experls [rom the Division ol’ Translating and

Interpreting, we translated 15 sentences containing the prepositions Prepositions

were (ranslaled differently while the other parts are the same im Vielnamess The

respondents wore asked to choose the options which wore the most appropriately translated Most of the chosen sentences to translate denote local and online

construction meaning of over We had 30 lecturers from the Faculty of Fryslish

(ULIS-VNU") complete the questionnaire

py of Languages and Intemational Studies - Vietnam National University, Hanoi

24

CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Research question 1

It 1s reaffirmed that fyler and livans did use the framework Principled

Polysemy to not only analyze the semantics of over, above, below, under but a

wide range of English prepositions

We analyzed the semantics of the four prepositions in the light of Principled

Polysemy The results from such analysis for above and below yield nothing new

Llowever, when analyzing the semantics of over and under, ‘I'yler and Evans

could not show that ever possesses at least two other online meanings, ie

Because of and by, wider has onc online meaning which denotes that someone or something is experiencing a state or situation Hence, the researcher will bridge

those gaps via answering research question 1

3.1.1 New findings for the meanings of over

3.1.1.1 Over means because of

Back to the sentence we posed in the literature review, we have the following: 1.5, British Ambassador in hot water over joke

The phrase “British Ambassador in hot water” signifies that the Ambassador was

in touble One question immediately emerging is “What causes him such a problem?” Hence, it is reasonable to understand the context of the article whose title is “British Ambassador in hot water over joke” on BBC After reading the

text, we sce that it is the joke made by the British Ambassador that caused him

trouble Actually when reading the text from BBC in details the joke that the Ambassador told about Islam made Fgyplian angry and he had lo apologize Thus, over in above sentence can be paraphrased as “because of” or “duc to”, The sentence can be paraphrased as follows “British Ambassador is in hot water because of his joke.” Two following sentences can be good paraphrases of (1 5)

25

“It is the joke that made the British Ambassador in trouble” or “I'he joke is the reason why the British Ambassador was in trouble.”

Tn short, over in this case docs nol denote a spatial meaning, bul a non-spatial one whose paraphrase is "because of”

Similarly we analyze two following sentences

3.1, France teachers strike over government reforms

3.2, Hrench teachers strike over change plans

Oneg again, (3.1) and (3.2) are headlines on BBC Tn the two above sentences,

“strike” is used as a verb Generally speaking, in Westen countries, a stnke may occur when the citizens are not happy with the policy of the authorities, or in other words, someone or a group of people strike when a thing or a policy does harm to their benefits Perhaps, in order to understand the meaning of (3.1) and (3.2), it is necessary to read two articles because of encyclopedic knowledge mentioned above Tn above sentences, “government reforms” and “change plans” are reasons for the strike of French teachers The following table provides

paraphrases for the sentences

3.1 France teachers strike over government reforms Paraphrase | Francetcachers strike because of governmentrofonns

Paraphrase | Vrench teachers strike — because of change plans

Table 3.1: Paraphrases of (3.1) and (3.2) Additionally, we can also paraphrase the sentence (3.1) as “It is the government reforms that make the l'rance teachers strike” or “I'he government reforms are the reasons why (he France icachers strike.” Sentence (3.2) cari be paraphrased as “TL

is the change plans that make the French teachers strike” or “Change plans are the reasons why the French teachers strike.”

26

So far, four sentences in which aver means because of have been analyzed ‘Ihe structure of the four sentences is Subject — Verb — Cver — Noun phrase Due to

the fact thal ever means because of, the structure of such sentences can be

paraphrased as “Noun phrase (subject) (to) be reason why Subject Verb.”

Olher sentences from BBC which have the same senlence structure (subject —

verb — over — noun phrase) are found

3.3 The US has charged six Chinese nationals over the alleged theft of technology used in mobile phones

3.4 Sri Lanka cricket officials removed over harassment claims

3.5 Toyota and Nissan also said they would be recalling 6.5 million vehicles over

the sume issue [issue: foulty airbay]

3.6 She faces up to 10 years in prison if found guilty of dereliction of duty over

her vole in a controversial rice subsidy scheme

3.7 Penalties were also handed to Lazio, AC Milan, Fiorentina and Reggina aver

attempis to influence refereeing appointments

Tn sentence (3.3), the noun phrase after over denotes a crime, the clause “The 1S

has charged six Chinese nationals” denotes a state of affair Encyclopedic knowledge tells us that the govemmment would charge someone because of their crime Henee, basing on the moaning of surounded words and phrases, it is reasonable to conclude that the meaning of over in (3.3) is because of,

(3.4) is a headline on BBC, thus there is no need for a complete sentence The whole sentence, as construed by readers, is “Sn Lanka cricket officials were removed over harassment claims.” The phrase “Sri Lanka cricket officials removed” denotes a state of affair in which some authorities were sacked The phrase “harassmont claims” refers to a kind of chargeable crime Encyclopedic imowledge shows that someone is sacked because of their wrongdoings Hence, it

is gucssed thal over mcans because of A quick look al the article tells us that

tạ t9

what is supposed is correct Harassment claims are reasons why Sri Lanka cricket officials were sacked

The same occurs with serence (3.5) in which over means because of Reading

the article, we see that the issue is the faulty airbag in the products by Toyota and

Nissan It is this mistake that forces two cranufacturing comparnes lo recall their

products

Sentence (3.6) seems to be more complex, but if omitting the phrase “if found guilly of derctiction of duty” and consulting the whole article, we have the following sentence (3.6b)

3.66 Former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra faces up to 10 years in prison

over her role in a controversial rice subsidy scheme

In this sentence, the clause “Wormer Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra faces up

to 10 years in prison” refers to a difficult situation for the former prime minister,

“her role” refers to the mervention and direction of Yingluck in the ries subsidy

scheme which caused a heated debate in Thai politics a couple of years ago rom

such aralysis of the mearing of other components in the senlence, we can

conclude that over also means because of in this sentence

The phrase “attempts to influence refereeing appointments” in sentence (3.7) relers lo a prohibited action in football regulation, and certainly if a club violates,

it will be punished Reading the sentence and using encyclopedic knowledge, we know that Lazio, AC Milan, Fiorentina and Reggina are names of four football clubs in Italy ‘The first clause “Penalties were also handed to Lazio, AC Milan, Fiorentina and Reggina” denotes a state of affair that four football clubs were

punished because of their wrongdoings in reference to the regulation of football

So far, the sentence (3.7) can be understood as Lolluws

3.7b Four football clubs are punished over wrongdoings

Thus, il can be concluded that over in this sonlsnce also means because of

One more example was found in an 1UL''S® book published in January 2008

3.8 Bloch also believed that the first war — likely fought near the ancient city of Rassall on the Jordan River — coukl have been fought over the city’s precious supplies of the mineral

Tn order Lo easily construe the meaning of over, we simplify the sentence structure

by consulting the whole text and exploiting encyclopedic knowledge We have following sentence (3.8b)

3.8b The first war occurred over the supplies of sal

Generally, human beings would say “A war occurs when/ why/ how and where” The phrase “the supplies of salt” does not denote time, manner and location, but

reason Thus the sentence 2.9b can be rewntlen as “The first war occurred

because of the supplies of salt”

So far, we have analyzed nine sentences (one in the literature review) in which

over mncans because of The sentence structure of those ones 1s “Subjeel — Verb —

over — Noun phrase”

Tis te lo decide if over m the wine above situations has created a distinct

sense in the light of Principled Polysemy There are two criteria for a sense to count as distinct: (1} for a sense to count as distinct, it must involve a meaning that is not purely spatial in nature, and/or a spatial conliguralion holding between the trajectory ('R) and landmark (LM) that is distinct from the other senses conventionally associated with that preposition: and (2) there must alsa be instances of the sense that are context-imdependent: instances in which the distinct sense could not be inferred from another sense and the context in which it occurs

Regarding the first criterion, it is seen that no sense of 15 senses of over denotes

“because of” and more importantly, no senlence in the nine above-analyzed

“Intemational English Langunge Testing System, co-owned by University of Cambridge ESOL, British

Council and TP Education

29

sentences denotes a spatial configuration between aI’ and LM, so criterion 1 is fulfilled

However, the second enterion im tenns of conlext-independence, over im lhe

above sentences cannot satisfy In general, these verbs “strike, remove, charge, recall or fight” must be entailed by # cause Partioularly, people say “strike because of something”, “somobedy is removed from office because of something

or their wrongdoings”, “charge somebody because of something or their

Reggina over attempts to influence refereeing appointments”, we must base on

context to interpret to the meaning of over The phrase “Attempts to influence relerecing appointments” denoles a negative thought in the mind of football [ans and undoubtedly, this action deserves some forms of penalties

Tn short, hecause of is an online meaning of aver in the light of Principled

Polysemy

3.1.2 Over means by (refers to a means to do something)

Another frequent use of over is also reflected in the sentence (3.9)

3.9 She wouldn't tell me aver the phone (Oxlord Dielionary)

In this sentence, there is no spatial configuration between TR and LM, and of

course to construe this sentence, we must make use of context Two people were

having a conversation, and thore is something shared between them Perhaps both speakers are mentioning a state of affair We can give more details to the sentence

as follows

A: Would Mary tell you about her secret?

B: She wouldn't tell me over the phone

30