| Literature DB >> 28676770 |
Melvin M R Ng1, Winston D Goh2, Melvin J Yap2, Chi-Shing Tse1, Wing-Chee So1.
Abstract
Spatial metaphors are used to represent and reason about time. Such metaphors are typically arranged along the sagittal axis in most languages. For example, in English, "The future lies ahead of us" and "We look back on our past." This is less straightforward for Chinese. Specifically, both the past and future can either be behind or ahead. The present study aims to explore these cross-linguistic differences by priming auditory targets (e.g., tomorrow) with either a congruent (i.e., pointing forwards) or incongruent (i.e., pointing backwards) gesture. Two groups of college-age young adult participants (English and Chinese speakers) made temporal classifications of words after watching a gestural prime. If speakers represent time along the sagittal axis, they should respond faster if the auditory target is preceded with a gesture indicating a congruent vs. incongruent spatial location. Results showed that English speakers responded faster to congruent gesture-word pairs than to incongruent pairs, mirroring spatio-temporal metaphors commonly recruited to talk about time in their native language. However, such an effect of congruency was not found for Chinese speakers. These findings suggest that while the spatio-temporal metaphors commonly recruited to talk about time help to structure the mental timelines of English speakers, the varying instances in how time is represented along the sagittal axis in Chinese may lead to a more variable mental timeline as well. In addition, our findings demonstrate that gestures may not only be a means of accessing concrete concepts in the mind, as shown in previous studies, but may be used to access abstract ones as well.Entities:
Keywords: cross-linguistic comparison; gestures; metaphor; priming; time
Year: 2017 PMID: 28676770 PMCID: PMC5477416 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00974
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1Illustration of a framework proposed by Yu (2012). (A–C) refer to the individual of interest, the person who arrived earlier at the line and the person who arrived at a later point in time.
Mean temporal characteristics and duration of the past- and future-related words.
| Temporality rating (Chinese stimuli) | 1.59 | 0.14 | 4.17 | 0.26 |
| Temporality rating (English stimuli) | 1.58 | 0.39 | 3.99 | 0.24 |
| Word duration (Chinese Stimuli; ms) | 956.36 | 165.22 | 997.68 | 106.40 |
| Word duration (English Stimuli; ms) | 853.38 | 166.27 | 821.68 | 165.16 |
| LogSUBTLWF (Chinese stimuli) | 2.58 | 0.98 | 2.80 | 0.79 |
| LogSUBTLWF (English stimuli) | 2.15 | 0.96 | 2.63 | 1.03 |
Figure 2Snapshot of the forward-pointing and backward-point gestures. The individual in the picture above is that of a research assistant employed by our lab and consent was obtained from this individual for the publication of the image.
Figure 3Basic outline of each trial. The individual in the picture above is that of a research assistant employed by our lab and consent was obtained from this individual for the publication of the image.
Figure 4Average RTs for the English group (error bars indicate 1 standard error above and below the mean).
Figure 5Average RTs for the Chinese group (error bars indicate 1 standard error above and below the mean).
Mean RTs and SE for English and Chinese groups.
| English | 1362.82 | 34.41 | 1336.47 | 32.52 |
| Chinese | 1120.79 | 24.79 | 1133.12 | 23.43 |
Results of the mixed-effects analysis for both English and Chinese groups combined.
| Subject | Intercept | 0.005020 | 0.07085 |
| Item | Intercept | 0.002124 | 0.04608 |
| Residual | 0.016637 | 0.12898 | |
| Intercept | 2.931e + 00 | 2.889e-02 | 101.454 |
| Congruency | −1.468-e03 | 3.306e-03 | −0.444 |
| Group | 1.056e-01 | 1.872e-02 | 5.644 |
| Token duration | 1.740e-04 | 2.997e-05 | 5.805 |
| Congruency*Group | −1.553e-02 | 6.612e-03 | −2.349 |
p < 0.05,
p < 0.001.
Results of the mixed-effects analysis for the English group.
| Subject | Intercept | 0.006055 | 0.07781 |
| Item | Intercept | 0.002849 | 0.05337 |
| Residual | 0.013924 | 0.11800 | |
| Intercept | 2.971e + 00 | 3.523e-02 | 84.333 |
| Congruency | −9.254-e03 | 4.183e-03 | −2.212 |
| Token duration | 1.903e-04 | 3.853e-05 | 4.938 |
p < 0.05,
p < 0.001.
Results of the mixed-effects analysis for the Chinese group.
| Subject | Intercept | 0.0038864 | 0.06234 |
| Item | Intercept | 0.0008787 | 0.02964 |
| Residual | 0.0195539 | 0.13984 | |
| Intercept | 2.931e + 00 | 4.350e-02 | 67.370 |
| Congruency | 6.269-e03 | 5.177e-03 | 1.211 |
| Token duration | 1.209e-04 | 4.272e-05 | 2.831 |
p < 0.01,
p < 0.001.