Even abstract motion influences the understanding of time

Metaphor and Symbol

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 260-271

  Matlock, Teenie ^a   Holmes, Kevin J ^b   Srinivasan, Mahesh ^c   Ramscar, Michael ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 80053474878     PISSN: 10926488     EISSN: 15327868     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10926488.2011.609065     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Boroditsky, L. (2000). Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition, 75, 1-28.
2. Boroditsky, L. & Ramscar, M. (2002). The roles of body and mind in abstract thought. Psychological Science, 13, 185-188.
3. Cantlon, J. F., Platt, M. L., & Brannon, E. M. (2009). Beyond the number domain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 83-91.
4. Casarotti, M., Michielin, M., Zorzi, M., & Umiltà, C. (2006). Temporal order judgment reveals how number magnitude affects visuospatial attention. Cognition, 102, 101-117.
5. Casasanto, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2008). Time in the mind: Using space to think about time. Cognition, 106, 579-593.
6. Clark, H. H. (1973). Space, time, semantics, and the child. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
7. Dehaene, S. (1997). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. Oxford, UK Oxford University Press.
8. Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371-396.
9. Dobel, C., Diesendruck, G., & Bolte, J. (2007). How writing system and age influence spatial representation of actions: a developmental cross-linguistic study. Psychological Science, 18, 161-174.
10. Evans, V. (2004). The structure of time: Language, meaning and temporal cognition. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
11. Fagard, J., & Damen, R. (2003). The effects of reading-writing direction on the asymmetry of space perception and directional tendencies: a comparison between French and Tunisian children. Laterality, 8, 39-52.
12. Fischer, M. H., Castel, A. D., Dodd, M. D., & Pratt, J. (2003). Perceiving numbers causes spatial shifts of attention. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 555-556.
13. Fischer, M. H., Dewulf, N., & Hill, R. L. (2005). Designing bar graphs: Orientation matters. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 953-962.
14. Fuhrman, O., & Boroditsky, L. (2010). Cross-cultural differences in mental representations of time: Evidence from an implicit nonlinguistic task. Cognitive Science, 34, 1430-1451.
15. Gentner, D. (2001). Spatial metaphors in temporal reasoning. In M. Gattis (Ed.), Spatial schemas and abstract thought (pp. 203-222). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Gevers, W., Reynvoet, B., & Fias, W. (2003). The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized. Cognition, 87, B87-B95.
17. Gibbs, R. W. (1994). The poetics of mind: figurative thought, language, and understanding. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
18. Gibbs, R. W. (2006). Embodiment and cognitive science. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
19. Gibbs, R. W., & Matlock, T. (2008). Metaphor, imagination and simulation. Psycholinguistic evidence. In R. W. Gibbs Jr., (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 161-176). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
20. Holmes, K. J., & Lourenco, S. F. (in press). Common spatial organization of number and emotional expression: A mental magnitude line. Brain and Cognition.
21. Jackendoff, R. (1983). Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
23. Knops, A., Viarouge, A., & Dehaene, S. (2009). Dynamic representations underlying symbolic and nonsymbolic calculation: Evidence from the operational momentum effect. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71, 803-821.
24. Kövecses, Z. (2000). Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
25. Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in culture: Universality and variation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
26. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
27. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York, NY: Perseus Books.
28. Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R. E. (2001). Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. New York, NY: Basic Books.
29. Langacker, R. W. (1986). Abstract motion. Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 455-471.
30. Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol, 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
31. Loetscher, T., Bockisch, C. J., & Brugger, P. (2008). Looking for the answer: The mind's eye in number space. Neuroscience, 151, 725-729.
32. Loetscher, T., Bockisch, C. J., Nicholls, M. E. R., & Brugger, P. (2010). Eye position predicts what number you have in mind. Current Biology, 20, R264-R265.
33. Lourenco, S. F. & Longo, M. R. (2010). General magnitude representation in human infants. Psychological Science, 21, 873-881.
34. Maglio, P. P., & Matlock, T. (1999). The conceptual structure of information space. In A. Munro, K. Höök, & D. Benyon (Eds.), Social navigation of information space (pp. 155-173). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
35. Matlock, T. (2004a). The conceptual motivation of fictive motion. In G. Radden & R. Dirven (Eds.), Motivation in grammar. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
36. Matlock, T. (2004b). Fictive motion as cognitive simulation. Memory & Cognition, 32, 1389-1400.
37. Matlock, T. (2010). Abstract motion is no longer abstract. Language and Cognition, 2, 243-260.
38. Matlock, T., Ramscar, M., & Boroditsky, L. (2005). On the experiential link between spatial and temporal language. Cognitive Science, 29, 655-664.
39. Matsumoto, Y. (1996). Subjective motion and English and Japanese verbs. Cognitive Linguistics 7, 183-226.
40. McCrink, K., Dehaene, S., & Dehaene-Lambertz, G. (2007). Moving along the number line: Operational momentum in nonsymbolic arithmetic. Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 1324-1333.
41. 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, 1211-1223.
42. Moore, K. E. (2006). Space-to-time mappings and temporal concepts. Cognitive Linguistics, 17, 199-244.
43. Núñez, R. E., Motz, B. A., & Teuscher, U. (2006). Time after time: The psychological reality of the ego-and time reference-point distinction in metaphorical construals of time., 21, 133-146.
44. Núñez, R. E., & Sweetser, E. 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, 39, 401-450.
45. Pinhas, M., & Fischer, M. H. (2008). Mental movements without magnitude? A study of spatial biases in symbolic arithmetic. Cognition, 109, 408-415.
46. Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. New York, NY: Norton.
47. Radden, G. (1997.) Time is space. In B. Smieja & T. Tasch (Eds.), Human contact through language and linguistics (pp. 147-166). Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang.
48. Radden, G. (2006). Where time meets space. In R. Benczes & S. Csábi (Eds.), The metaphors of sixty: Papers presented on the occasion of the 60th birthday of Zoltán Kövecses (pp. 210-226). Budapest, Hungary: Eötvös Loránd University.
49. Ramscar, M., Matlock, T., & Dye, M. (2010). Running down the clock: the role of expectation in our understanding of time and motion. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 589-615.
50. Richardson, D. C., & Matlock, T. (2007). The integration of figurative language and static depictions: An eye movement study of fictive motion. Cognition, 102, 129-138.
51. Schwarz, W., & Keus, I. M. (2004). Moving the eyes along the mental number line: Comparing SNARC effects with saccadic and manual responses. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 651-664.
52. Shaki, S., & Fischer, M. H. (2008). Reading space into numbers - a cross-linguistic comparison of the SNARC effect. Cognition, 108, 590-599.
53. Srinivasan, M., & Carey, S. (2010). The long and the short of it: On the nature and origin of functional overlap between representations of space and time. Cognition, 116, 217-241.
54. Talmy, L. (2000). Towards a cognitive semantics, Volume I: Conceptual structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
55. Teuscher, U., McQuire, M., Collins, J., & Coulson, S. (2008). Congruity effects in time and space: Behavioral and ERP measures. Cognitive Science, 32, 563-578.
56. Torralbo, A., Santiago, J., & Lupiáñez, J. (2006). Flexible conceptual projection of time onto spatial frames of reference. Cognitive Science, 30, 745-757.
57. Traugott, E. (1978). On the expression of spatiotemporal relations in language. In J. H. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals in human language: Word structure, Vol. 3 (pp. 369-400). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
58. Walsh, V. (2003). A theory of magnitude: Common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 483-488.
59. Xuan, B., Zhang, D., He, S., & Chen, X. (2007). Larger stimuli are judged to last longer. Journal of Vision, 7(10), 1-5.
60. Zorzi, M., Priftis, K., Meneghello, F., Marenzi, R., & Umiltà, C. (2006). The spatial representation of numerical and non-numerical sequences: Evidence from neglect. Neuropsychologia, 44, 1061-1067.