Metaphors—Space and Time

November 18, 2008

Presented by: Kathryn Lawrence

Using some slides from Daniel Casasanto

Main question in Casanto’s 2006 paper:“People may talk about time in terms of space, but how can we know if people really think about time in terms of space?”

• Many factors effect subjective experience of time

• Time is abstract, no related sense

Casanto, 2006

Abstract thought• What selection pressures could have resulted in

abstract thought (e.g. composing symphonies, creating calculus)?

• Exaptation—”Recycling old structures for new uses,”– Ancestral circuits as a “scaffolding whose slots are filled with

symbols for more abstract concerns” – Are we just co-opting the structure from concepts grounded

in physical experience? (same language)

• Gruber’s Thematic Relations Hypothesis– “The psychological claim behind [Gruber’s] linguistic

discovery is that the mind does not manufacture abstract concepts out of thin air…it adapts machinery that is already there.”

Casanto, 2006

Boroditsky evidence that spatial schemas are used to think about time

• Priming participants to adopt a spatial frame of reference helps them interpret sentences with an analogous temporal frame of reference – 2 ways of thinking about time: Ego-moving (We

passed the deadline.) vs. time-moving (The deadline passed.)

– For space:

ego-moving vs.

object-moving

Boroditsky, 2000

Spatial primes asymmetrically influence temporal judgments

• These results parallel the asymmetry in linguistic metaphors.

Boroditsky, 2000

Boroditsky’s further research

• Comparison between English speakers (horizontal time) and Mandarin speakers (vertical time)– Differential priming speeds responses

• What this work suggests– People think about time in terms of space– People who use different temporal metaphors think about

time differently• But…they were linguistically process time and space

during the experiment, couldn’t this be a thinking for speaking effect (only supporting the Shallow View).

• So, what about when people aren’t thinking for the purpose of speaking?

Casanto et al. Experiments

Casanto, 2006

• Aim: To test “The Deep View”

• Can we devise nonlinguistic experiments to test whether people think metaphorically?

• Do people who use different metaphors think differently?

• How does language cause these differences?

• Beyond space and time?

The Plan1. Can we devise nonlinguistic experiments to test

whether people think metaphorically?

2. Do people who use different metaphors think differently?

3. How does language cause these differences?

4. Beyond space and time?

200275350425500575650725800

X1-5 seconds

9 X 9 design

Fully Crossed

Interdependent

Independent

Asymmetrically Dependent

(*as in language)

Effect of space on time

Effect of time on space

Target time

Target time

Target timeTarget space

Target space

Target space

Est

imat

ed s

pace

Est

imat

ed s

pace

Est

imat

ed s

pace

Est

imat

ed ti

me

Est

imat

ed ti

me

Est

imat

ed ti

me

How are space and time related in our minds?

TIMESPACE

Independent

TIMESPACE

Interdependent

TIMESPACE

Asymmetric

How are space and time related in our minds?

**People use spatial metaphors for time (more than the other way around).

Effect of Space on Time

y = 0.63x + 2503R2 = 0.94

2400

2500

2600

2700

2800

2900

3000

3100

3200

200 275 350 425 500 575 650 725 800Target Displacement (pixels)

Es

tim

ate

d D

ura

tio

n (

mill

ise

co

nd

s)

Rep

orte

d du

ratio

n (m

secs

)

Actual displacement in pixels

Effect of Time on Space

y = 0.003x + 440R2 = 0.05

370

380

390

400

410

420

430

440

450

460

470

480

490

500

1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000Target Duration (milliseconds)

Es

tim

ate

d D

isp

lac

em

en

t (p

ixe

ls)

Rep

orte

d di

spla

cem

ent

(pix

els)

Actual duration in milliseconds

r2r2

(Casasanto & Boroditsky, 2003)

Lengths of same duration judged longer when of longer physical length

Accuracy is approximately equal, but Cross-dimensional interference is asymmetric

Modifications to the original experiment

• #2—Told Space/Time prior to seeing growth (can selectively attend)

• #3—Constant temporal frame of reference (to match constant spatial frame)

• #4—Playing a tone (visual and auditory duration both accessible)

• #5—Moving dot (cannot get a full glance of length right before end of trial)

• #6—Stationary line (Is spatial change just a heuristic given its usual relation?)

(Casasanto & Boroditsky, 2003)

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

a. Growing Lines

b. SelectiveAttention

c. Temporal

Frame

d. Concurrent

Tone

e. Moving Dot

f. Stationary

Lines

r square

d

Effect of Distance on Time Estimation

Effect of Time on Distance Estimation

*** ***

***

***

***

***

nsns

ns ns

ns

ns

Effect of space on time

Effect of time on space

(Casasanto & Boroditsky, 2003)

Importance of spatial representations for temporal

thinking

The Plan1. Can we devise nonlinguistic experiments to test

whether people think metaphorically?

2. Do people who use different metaphors think differently?

3. How does language cause these differences?

4. Beyond space and time?

How English and Greek describe events: Distance vs. Quantity Metaphors

1e. long night1g. megali nychta (big night)

2e. long relationship2g. megali schesi (big relationship)

3e. long party3g. parti pou kratise poli (party that lasts much)

4e. long meeting4g. synantisi pou diekese poli (meeting that lasts much)

Deep View Speakers of different languages will perform differently on non-linguistic tasks in a way that corresponds to the differences in the semantics of language

(Casasanto, et al., 2004)

Natural expressions for ‘long time’ vs. ‘much time’ elicited:Google search (exact matches, sites in that language)

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

French English Indonesian Italian Greek Spanish

Pro

port

ion

of M

etap

hors

in L

angu

age Distance Metaphors

Quantity Metaphors

(Casasanto, et al., 2004)

Can these patterns means different effects for how language influences estimate duration?

Distance interference:

estimate duration of a line growing

Quantity interference:

estimate duration of a container filling

Length affects time estimate

Fullness affects time estimate?

(Casasanto, et al., 2004)

y = 1.80x + 2124

r2 = 0.98, p<.0012300

2400

2500

2600

2700

2800

2900

3000

3100

200 250 300 350 400

Target Dispalcement (pixels)

Est

imat

ed D

ura

tio

n (

mill

isec

on

ds)

y = 0.09x + 3065

R2 = 0.005, ns2500

2600

2700

2800

2900

3000

3100

3200

3300

200 250 300 350 400

Target Fullness (pixels)

Est

imat

ed D

ura

tio

n (

mill

isec

on

ds)

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

English Indonesian Greek Spanish

Slo

pe

Growing lines

Filling tanks

How behavior differs.

Growing lines

Filling tanks

Later—Confirmed not just vertical difference

Growing lines

Filling tanks

How behavior differs.How languages differ.

Distance metaphors

Quantity metaphors

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

English Indonesian Greek Spanish

Slo

pe

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

English Indonesian Greek Spanish

Pro

port

ion

of M

etap

hors

in L

angu

age

(Casasanto, et al., 2004)

The Plan1. Can we devise nonlinguistic experiments to test

whether people think metaphorically?

2. Do people who use different metaphors think differently?

3. How does language cause these differences?

4. Beyond space and time?

Why would people think about time in terms of space?

• Associations between time and movement/accumulation make sense– The more time passes, the further something goes

or the more it fills up

• May be initially established pre-linguistically• Strengthening as people habitually invoke the

conceptual mapping through language?• Training experiments—Distance or Volume

– Presented some physical judgments and some duration judgments for 30 minutes

(Casasanto, 2005)

Results after training English speakers

*

(Casasanto, 2005)

Effect of Quantity Interference on Time Estimation

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

Distance TrainedEnglish

UntrainedEnglish

Quantity TrainedEnglish

Slo

pe

(Eff

ect

of

Fu

llnes

s L

eve

l on

Du

rati

on

Es

tim

ate

)

The Plan1. Can we devise nonlinguistic experiments to test

whether people think metaphorically?

2. Do people who use different metaphors think differently?

3. How does language cause these differences?

4. Beyond space and time?

Space and Musical Pitch

• Musical pitch—Vertical metaphors• Do we think about musical pitch this way or is it just

coded onto the same words for convenience?• Musical pitches combined with upward or horizontally

growing lines• Length of upward growing lines significantly

influenced pitch estimate, no horizontal effect• Consistent with linguistic metaphor use• Unclear whether (a) linguistic metaphors reflect

underlying pitch representations or (b) language metaphors shape the way we think about pitch

(Casasanto et al., 2003)

Casasanto et al. experiments support the Deep View

• People really do think about time metaphorically, the way they talk about it, using mental representations of space.

• People who talk differently also think differently.

• Language can shape the way we think about time.

• Pitch may also be conceived metaphorically.

Discussion questions

• Liz’s question about the calendars

• Is this likely to be somewhat specific to the abstract idea of time or relevant to almost all abstract thinking?

• How can we compare the two studies?