1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Published under the auspices of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association
  4. Volume 23, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 23, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1877-9751
  • E-ISSN: 1877-976X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper benefits two audiences: researchers studying time metaphors and those employing introspective, corpus-based, and psycholinguistic methods. It is well-suited for methodology courses and for scholars exploring how these approaches intersect. Using a case study on Ego-centered Motion Metaphors of Time (EMTs), the paper examines the methodological and ontological challenges of shifting between these paradigms. It outlines the often-implicit tenets of introspective frameworks, defines linguistic illustrations, and distinguishes among encountered, prompted, and intuited examples. It also presents an analysis of commonly cited EMTs and shows how introspective definitions converge on similar prototypical illustrations. It then compares corpus retrieval strategies across eight studies. The findings show how introspective definitions are confronted with corpus data, particularly when translating introspective input into search prompts, and how data cleansing fosters new classifications. Finally, the paper identifies the limitations of corpus-based methods and highlights the types of questions that are better addressed through psycholinguistic data.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00226.dhi
2025-08-18
2026-03-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00226.dhi
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alcaraz Carrión, D. A., & Valenzuela, J.
    (2021) Coming and going in time: A multimodal study. https://psyarxiv.com/z47r9/download?format=pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Arppe, A., Gilquin, G., Glynn, D., Hilpert, M., & Zeschel, A.
    (2010) Cognitive corpus linguistics: Five points of debate on current theory and methodology. Corpora, 5(1), 1–27. 10.3366/cor.2010.0001
     https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2010.0001 [Google Scholar]
  3. Beller, S., Bender, A., & Bannardo, G.
    (2005) Spatial frames of reference for temporal relations: A conceptual analysis in English, German, and Tongan. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 27(27). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8mm9740x
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bender, A., Beller, S., & Bennardo, G.
    (2010) Temporal frames of reference: Conceptual analysis and empirical evidence from German, English, Mandarin Chinese and Tongan. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 10(3–4), 283–307. 10.1163/156853710X531195
     https://doi.org/10.1163/156853710X531195 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bender, A., & Beller, S.
    (2014) Mapping spatial frames of reference onto time: A review of theoretical accounts and empirical findings. Cognition, 132(3), 342–382. 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.03.016
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.03.016 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bender, A., Rothe-Wulf, A., Hüther, L., & Beller, S.
    (2012) Moving forward in space and time: How strong is the conceptual link between spatial and temporal frames of reference?Frontiers in Psychology, 31. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00486. 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00486
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00486 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bennardo, G., Beller, S., & Bender, A.
    (2010) Temporal frames of reference: Conceptual analysis and empirical evidence from German, English, Mandarin Chinese and Tongan. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 10(3–4), 283–307. 10.1163/156853710X531195
     https://doi.org/10.1163/156853710X531195 [Google Scholar]
  8. Boroditsky, L.
    (2000) Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition, 75(1), 1–28. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(99)00073‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00073-6 [Google Scholar]
  9. Buckwalter, T., & Parkinson, D.
    (2010) A Frequency dictionary of Arabic: Core vocabulary for learners. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203883280
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203883280 [Google Scholar]
  10. Cifuentes-Férez, P.
    (2008) Motion in English and Spanish: A perspective from cognitive linguistics, typology and psycholinguistics (Doctoral dissertation, University of Murcia). University of Murcia.
  11. Clark, H. H.
    (1973) Space, time, semantics, and the child. InT. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive development and acquisition of language (pp.27–63). New York: Academic Press. 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑505850‑6.50008‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-505850-6.50008-6 [Google Scholar]
  12. Curry, N., Baker, P., & Brookes, G.
    (2024) Generative AI for corpus approaches to discourse studies: A critical evaluation of ChatGPT. Applied Corpus Linguistics, 4(1), 100082. 10.1016/j.acorp.2023.100082
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acorp.2023.100082 [Google Scholar]
  13. Davies, M.
    (2002–) Corpus del Español: 100 million words, 1200s–1900s. Available online atwww.english-corpora.org/bnc/
     [Google Scholar]
  14. (2004–) BYU–BNC: Based on the British National Corpus from Oxford University Press. Available online atwww.english-corpora.org/bnc/
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Deignan, A.
    (2008) Corpus linguistics and metaphor. InR. W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp.280–290). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816802.018
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.018 [Google Scholar]
  16. Dhifallah, A.
    (2024) Ego/speaker deixis: Ego-centered motion metaphors of time between Arabic and English — A comparative corpus-based study (Doctoral dissertation, University of Turku & University of Sfax). UTU Annales Series. https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-29-9769-5
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Divjak, D.
    (2015) Four challenges for usage-based linguistics. InJ. Daems, E. Zenner, K. Heylen, D. Speelman, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Change of paradigms: New paradoxes: Recontextualizing language and linguistics (pp.297–309). Berlin: De Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Divjak, D., Dąbrowska, E., & Arppe, A.
    (2016) Machine meets man: Evaluating the psychological reality of corpus-based probabilistic models. Cognitive Linguistics, 27(1), 1–33. 10.1515/cog‑2015‑0101
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2015-0101 [Google Scholar]
  19. Divjak, D., Milin, P., Ez-zizi, A., Józefowski, J., & Adam, C.
    (2021) What is learned from exposure: An error-driven approach to productivity in language. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 36(1), 60–83. 10.1080/23273798.2020.1815813
     https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2020.1815813 [Google Scholar]
  20. Duffy, S. E., & Feist, M. I.
    (2017) Power in time: The influence of power posing on metaphoric perspectives on time. Language and Cognition, 9(4), 637–647. 10.1017/langcog.2016.33
     https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2016.33 [Google Scholar]
  21. Evans, V.
    (2013) Temporal frames of reference. Cognitive Linguistics, 24(3), 393–435. 10.1515/cog‑2013‑0016
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2013-0016 [Google Scholar]
  22. Feist, M. I., & Duffy, S. E.
    (2015) Moving beyond “next Wednesday”: The interplay of lexical semantics and constructional meaning in an ambiguous metaphoric statement. Cognitive Linguistics, 261, 633–656. 10.1515/cog‑2015‑0052
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2015-0052 [Google Scholar]
  23. (2020) On the path of time: Temporal motion in typological perspective. Language and Cognition, 12(3), 444–467. 10.1017/langcog.2020.7
     https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2020.7 [Google Scholar]
  24. Galton, A.
    (2011) Time flies but space does not: Limits to the spatialisation of time. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(3), 695–703. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.002 [Google Scholar]
  25. Gentner, D., Imai, M., & Boroditsky, L.
    (2002) As time goes by: Evidence for two systems in processing space→time metaphors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 17(5), 537–565. 10.1080/01690960143000317
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960143000317 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hamdi, Hamdi S.
    (2008) Conceptual metaphors of time in English and Arabic: A comparative cognitive study (Doctoral dissertation). Université Laval.
  27. Huumo, T.
    (2017) The grammar of temporal motion: A Cognitive Grammar account of motion metaphors of time. Cognitive Linguistics, 28(1), 1–43. 10.1515/cog‑2016‑0015
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0015 [Google Scholar]
  28. Janda, L. A.
    (2018) The paradigm as a radial category. InTen lectures on Cognitive Linguistics as an empirical science (pp.300–324). Leiden: Brill. https://brill.com/downloadpdf/book/9789004363519/BP000018.pdf. 10.1163/9789004363519_011
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004363519_011 [Google Scholar]
  29. Kranjec, A.
    (2006) Extending spatial frames of reference to temporal concepts. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 28(28).
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Kumcu, A.
    (2022) Space-Time Mapping in Turkish: A Corpus-Based, Crosslinguistic Investigation. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alper-Kumcu/publication/371292433_Space-time_mapping_in_Turkish_A_corpus-based_crosslinguistic_investigation/links/647d9bbd79a7223765122f7d/Space-time-mapping-in-Turkish-A-corpus-based-crosslinguistic-investigation.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Lakoff, G.
    (1990) The Invariance Hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on image-schemas?Cognitive Linguistics, 1(1), 39–74. 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39 [Google Scholar]
  32. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
    (1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Langacker, R. W.
    (2008) Cognitive grammar a basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  34. Levinson, S. C.
    (2003) Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity (Vol.51). Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Li, H.
    (2020) Will it really happen? Disambiguating the hypothetical and real “next Wednesday’s meeting” question in Mandarin speakers. Lingua, 2371, 102806. 10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102806
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102806 [Google Scholar]
  36. McGlone, M. S., & Harding, J. L.
    (1998) Back (or forward?) to the future: The role of perspective in temporal language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(5), 1211.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. McGlone, M. S., & Pfiester, R. A.
    (2009) Does Time Fly When You’re Having Fun, or Do You?: Affect, Agency, and Embodiment in Temporal Communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 28(1), 3–31. 10.1177/0261927X08325744
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X08325744 [Google Scholar]
  38. Moore, K. E.
    (2004) Ego-based and field-based frames of reference in space to time metaphors. Language, Culture, and Mind, 151–165.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. (2011) Frames and the experiential basis of the moving time metaphor. Constructions and Frames, 3(1), 80–103. 10.1075/cf.3.1.03moo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.3.1.03moo [Google Scholar]
  40. (2014) The Spatial Language of Time: Metaphor, metonymy, and frames of reference. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.42
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.42 [Google Scholar]
  41. (2016) Elaborating time in space: The structure and function of space–motion metaphors of time. Language and Cognition, 91, 191–253. 10.1017/langcog.2016.6
     https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2016.6 [Google Scholar]
  42. (2020) Moving Time vs. Frame-relative motion: A frame-based account of the distinction between primary metaphor and fictive motion. Constructions & Frames, 12(2), 272–314. 10.1075/cf.00042.moo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00042.moo [Google Scholar]
  43. Núñez, R. E., & Sweetser, E.
    (2006) With the future behind them: Convergent evidence from Aymara language and gesture in the crosslinguistic comparison of spatial construals of time. Cognitive Science, 30(3), 401–450. 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_62
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_62 [Google Scholar]
  44. Piata, A., & Soriano, C.
    (2022) The affect bias in the metaphorical representation of anticipated events: The case of approach. Metaphor and the Social World, 12(1), 115–137. 10.1075/msw.18034.pia
     https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.18034.pia [Google Scholar]
  45. Ramscar, M., Matlock, T., & Boroditsky, L.
    (2009) Time, motion, and meaning: The experiential basis of abstract thought. The Spatial Foundations of Language and Cognition, 171, 66–82. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199553242.003.0004
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199553242.003.0004 [Google Scholar]
  46. Reali, F., & Lleras, M.
    (2017) Perspectives in motion: The case of metaphorical temporal statements in Spanish. Language and Cognition, 9(1), 172–190. 10.1017/langcog.2016.14
     https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2016.14 [Google Scholar]
  47. Romain, L., Ez-zizi, A., Milin, P., & Divjak, D.
    (2022) What makes the past perfect and the future progressive? Experiential coordinates for a learnable, context-based model of tense and aspect. Cognitive Linguistics, 33(2), 251–289. 10.1515/cog‑2021‑0006
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2021-0006 [Google Scholar]
  48. Sardinha, T. B.
    (2012) An assessment of metaphor retrieval methods. InMetaphor in use (pp.21–50). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://www.torrossa.com/gs/resourceProxy?an=5000780&publisher=FZ4850#page=32. 10.1075/hcp.38.05sar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.38.05sar [Google Scholar]
  49. Stefanowitsch, A.
    (2006) Words and their metaphors: A corpus-based approach. InA. Stefanowitsch & S. Th. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy (pp.63–105). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199895.63
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199895.63 [Google Scholar]
  50. (2020) Corpus linguistics: A guide to the methodology. Language Science Press. 10.5281/zenodo.3735822
     https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3735822 [Google Scholar]
  51. Stocker, K., & Hartmann, M.
    (2019) “Next Wednesday’s meeting has been moved forward two days”: The time-perspective question is ambiguous in Swiss German, but not in Standard German. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 781, 61–67. 10.1024/1421‑0185/a000220
     https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0185/a000220 [Google Scholar]
  52. Talmy, L.
    (2000) Toward a cognitive semantics: Concept structuring systems (Vol.11). MIT press.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Teeri, K., & Huumo, T.
    (Forthcoming). When moving ego meets moving time: Motion metaphors of time and the Finnish tulla vastaan ‘come from the opposite direction’ construction. To appear inM. Brdar & R. Brdarné Szabó Eds. Thinking and speaking about time (Human Cognitive Processing XX). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Tenbrink, T.
    (2011) Reference frames of space and time in language. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(3), 704–722. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.06.020
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.06.020 [Google Scholar]
  55. Torrent, T. T., Hoffmann, T., Almeida, A. L., & Turner, M.
    (2023) Copilots for Linguists: AI, Constructions, and Frames. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781009439190
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009439190 [Google Scholar]
  56. Tummers, J., Heylen, K., & Geeraerts, D.
    (2005) Usage-based approaches in cognitive linguistics: A technical state of the art. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(2), 225–261. 10.1515/cllt.2005.1.2.225
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt.2005.1.2.225 [Google Scholar]
  57. Valenzuela, J., & Alcaraz Carrión, D.
    (2020) Temporal Expressions in English and Spanish: Influence of Typology and Metaphorical Construal. Frontiers in Psychology, https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.543933. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.543933
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.543933 [Google Scholar]
  58. Valenzuela, M., & Alcaraz Carrión, D.
    (2020) Temporal expressions in English and Spanish: Influence of typology and metaphorical construal. Supplementary Materials. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.543933/full#supplementary-material. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.543933
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.543933 [Google Scholar]
  59. Valenzuela, J., & Castillo, R. I.
    (2022) A corpus-based look at time metaphors. InA. Piata, A. Gordejuela & D. Alcaraz Carrión (Eds.), Time representations in the perspective of human creativity (pp.15–40). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.75.01val
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.75.01val [Google Scholar]
  60. Waliński, J. T.
    (2020) Inconsistencies in Temporal Metaphors: Is Time a Phenomenon of the Third Kind?Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, 61(1), 163–181. 10.2478/slgr‑2020‑0009
     https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2020-0009 [Google Scholar]
  61. Zinken, J.
    (2010) 18 Temporal frames of reference. InV. Evans & P. Chilton (Eds.), Language cognition and space: The state of the art and new directions (pp.479–498). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 10.3138/9781845535032‑020
     https://doi.org/10.3138/9781845535032-020 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00226.dhi
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): cognitive linguistics; comparative analysis; corpus-based methods; introspective methods; linguistic illustrations; methodological transitions; psycholinguistic methods; temporal metaphors

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error