CC BY
14
УДК 81'23
Ly Toan Thang / Ли Тоан Танг
DIFFERENT WAYS OF VIEWING AND THINKING ABOUT THE SAME LOCATION SITUATION: NON-INDO-EUROPEAN VIETNAMESE VS. INDO-EUROPEAN ENGLISH / РАЗЛИЧНЫЕ ПОДХОДЫ К РАССМОТРЕНИЮ ОДНОГО И ТОГО ЖЕ ПОЛОЖЕНИЯ В ПРОСТРАНСТВЕ: НЕИНДОЕВРОПЕЙСКИЙ ВЬЕТНАМСКИЙ VS. ИНДОЕВРОПЕЙСКИЙ АНГЛИЙСКИЙ
В данной работе представлены примеры использования вьетнамского пространственного термина «trong» («внутри», «в») и показаны специфические случаи пространственной концептуализации во вьетнамском языке, которые не имеют эквивалентов в английском языке. Данные отражают лингвистическую и культурную относительность человеческой пространственной ориентации и, кроме того, я надеюсь, это заставит по-новому посмотреть на «евроцентрические» идеи пространственного языка и познавательной способности, а также на схемы положения в пространстве Талми (Talmy 2000). Благодаря примерам из двух языков, английского и вьетнамского, становится ясно, что для того, что бы понять и перевести выражения, связанные с положением в пространстве, необходимы знания разного рода, т.к. язык - часть познания, которая отражает «совместное рассмотрение с позиций социального, культурного, психологического, коммуникативного, функционального подходов» (Casad & Palmer 2003:455).
Ключевые слова: лингвистическая относительность, пространственный язык, пространственное познание, когнитивная лингвистика, лингвокультурология.
1. Introduction
From the point of view of cognitive linguistics, in natural languages there are different conceptualization processes or construal operations that native speakers employ. In other words, there are different modes of viewing and thinking about the world. It is the easiest to find examples and evidence in cases of spatial relations (both in motion and location) expressed in natural languages, and to compare an Indo-European language such as English to an Oriental, non-Indo-European one, Vietnamese.
Cross-linguistic research on location situations can examine the relation between linguistic and cognitive categories through the semantics and uses of spatial terms in English and Vietnamese. Such research may highlight the linguistic and cultural relativity of human spatial orientation. Furthermore, I hope that such research contributes to the re-
thinking of a few 'Eurocentric' theoretical ideas of spatial language and cognition and to the revision of Talmy's proposal of reference frames used in spatial location (2000).
Based on cross-linguistic evidence of English and Vietnamese it is clear that in order to understand and interpret a locative expression we require knowledge of different kinds, because that language is a part of cognition 'which reflects the interaction of social, cultural, psychological, communicative and functional considerations' (Casad & Palmer, 2003:455).
2. Cross-linguistic evidence In this section, I will present the salient differences in specifying and describing the position of a located object relative to a reference object in Vietnamese and English.
2.1 Specific language strategies used in spatial location
Compare the following 'synonymous'
locative expressions in English and Vietnamese:
(1) The birds are flying in the sky
(2) Chim bay tren trai
'Birds fly up/above/over sky'
These sentences describe the same location situation, but in different ways. In English, the description of the birds' position with 'in' depends on the sky being 'seen' by native speakers as a space enclosed by boundaries or as a finite volume (in terms of length, width, and height or depth). It means that people have to imagine a geometric figure and map it onto the reference object, and then choose an adequate locative preposition (see for example, Talmy 1975; 1983; Herskovits 1986).
In Vietnamese, however, there is another way. In order to specify the position of birds, people have to identify the spatial relation among the birds and the sky and the observer/speaker to choose an adequate locative preposition. Theoretically, we have two versions of interpretation (Ly Toan Thang 1993, 2005):
a) the birds are viewed as spatial objects in terms of their interactions with human beings, eg. their position relative to the sky as viewed by us: it is over us.
b) the sky is viewed as a spatial part of a whole - our world, e.g. the sky and the ground are conceived of as 'top-to-bottom' concepts. This spatial relation exists in the mind of Vietnamese-speakers, and it is evident in the use of two prepositions tren 'up, over, above' and du&i 'down, below, under':
(3) Chim bay tren trai
birds fly up/over sky
'Birds fly in the sky'
(4) Nguai di duai dat
people move down/below ground
'People move on the ground'
It is easy to realize a difference in choosing the English prepositions in and on.
In the two above mentioned interpretations, there is a similarity. In Vietnamese locative expressions, the position of the Figure (birds) does not depend on the geometrical view of the Ground (sky) as in English,
but it depends on the construal of the spatial relation between the Figure (birds) and the Observer/Speaker's position or the spatial relation between the sky and the ground as the top and the bottom in the spatial part-whole structure of our world.
The intrinsic binary opposition 'topbottom' of an entity is also found in the meaning of other pairs of spatial terms:
TOP sky head peak (of a mountain) top (of a tree) ceiling
BOTTOM ground feet foot (of a mountain) base (of tree-stock) floor For example:
(5) Chim dau tren ngon cay bird sit up/over top tree 'The bird is on the tree'
(6) Cu gia ngoi dw&i g6c cay
old man sit down/below/under base tree The sentence (6) does not mean 'The old man is in a hollow located under the roots of the tree'. Rather, it means as 'The old man is at the base of the tree' because the spatial orientation 'over-below' used in those two sentences is controlled by the binary opposition 'top-bottom' of the top and the base of any tree.
The difference between Vietnamese and English spatial expressions examined above can be related to different strategies or cognitive styles used by native speakers in spatial orientation. Fillmore (1971/1975, 1982) spoke of the 'deictic' and 'non-deictic' strategies, and in cross-linguistic study on Hausa and English locative sentences Hill (1982) has also discussed the 'observer-centered' and 'object-centered' strategies.
In the next section of this paper, I present data on a few uses of the Vietnamese spatial term trong 'inside, in' and show some specific cases of spatial conceptualizations in Vietnamese which have no exact equivalents in English.
2.2. Location situations with trong orientation
In Vietnamese, the spatial word trong is poly-semantic and poly-functional, often named a 'locative-temporal' part of speech. It can be used in several situations with differ-
ent grammatical categories:
a) as a noun, for example:
(7) Trong nay nong qua inside this hot too
'It's too hot in here' (inside the house)
b) as a preposition, for example:
(8) Trong lap nay co nhim sinh vien nu&c ngoai
in class this have many student foreign 'In this group there are many foreign students'
c) as an attribute, for example:
(9) No aphong trong he live room inside
'He lives in the back room' In all those cases trong has the meanings expressed in English spatial terms: inside, in. However, its usage in different locative expressions shows that Vietnamese people do not view and think about any situation of location in the similar way to English-speakers, for example. Look at a few prototypical situations below.
2.2.1 Situation I
Suppose that in the garden of a university in Ho Chi Minh City there are four students seated on a bench located perpendicular to a wall. (Fig. 1)
Figure 1: The bench with 4 seated students and the wall
To describe the position of every student, Vietnamese people can say:
(10) A ngoi ngoai A sits outside
(11) B va C ngoi giua
B and C sit between / middle
v>A\
(12) D ngoi trong D sits inside
These locative expressions can be translated into English, with a very different spatial orientation, as follows:
(13) A sits on the left
(14) B and C sit in the middle
(15) D sits on the right
Naturally, here arises the question why the Vietnamese spatial term trong 'inside' is used in the example (12) and ngoai 'outside' in (10). Before answering that, let us look at a new situation. Suppose that the bench mentioned above (with fo four students seated on it) has been moved and now is located somewhere without any wall, as in Fig.2:
Figure 2: The bench with 4 seated students without the wall
To describe the positions of students in the new situation, both Vietnamese- and English-speakers can use similar sentences with the same spatial orientation. Compare:
a) For Vietnamese:
(16) A ngoi ben trai
A seat on the left
(17) B va C ngoi giua
B and C seat in the middle
(18) D ngoi ben phai
A B C D
fit fi In! 8 i - ^ ^ jW ,
D seat on the right
b) For American:
(19) A sits on the left
(20) B and C sit in the middle
(21) D sits on the right
In these sentences, there is no spatial term trong 'inside' (or/and ngoai 'outside') used to express the positions of the students. This can be cognitively explained by the absence of the wall. It means that the wall (as a third implicit spatial object, an external, secondary reference point) - not the bench (as a primary reference object) - decides the presence or/and absence of the spatial orientation INSIDE/OUTSIDE denoted by prepositions trong and ngoai. This brings us to the question of how the use of INSIDE orientation can be construed here. It seems that every
object has its 'own spatial region' (somewhat like a biological field) with boundaries, orientations and even, probably, 'affecting zone' (Langacker, 1987).
In the above mentioned situation, the wall has its 'own region' with a special 'affecting zone' (in the Fig.1 that is the space with ruled lines adjacent to the wall). Moreover, the wall seems to have the boundaries 'in-out': if the bench is located rather far from the wall, as we can see in Fig.3, the bench is out of the 'affecting zone' of the wall and, as a consequence, the INSIDE orientation of the student D cannot be used and is replaced by 'on the right': Figure 3: D sits on the right 2.2.2 Situation II Example 2A
Suppose that on a street in Ho Chi Minh City, a police officer is chasing two thieves who are running abreast on the sidewalk, but one of them is near houses, and the other one is near the road. To get help from the bystanders, the police officer can shout:
(22) Bât thang bên trong ây catch man inside that
'Catch the man near the houses'
(23) Thang bên ngoài cô dao dây man outside have knife (particle) 'The man near the road has a knife' This situation is the same thing as in
situation I. Unlike in English sentences, in Vietnamese spatial expressions, the secondary external reference object - the house with its 'affecting zone' and 'in-out' boundaries - implicitly determines the use of spatial terms trong and ngoài. It is noted that if one of the thieves is running on the sidewalk, and the other one is running on the road, the police officer would say the following utterance
with the spatial orientation ABOVE-BELOW:
(24) Bât thang chay trên ây
catch man run above/on that
'Catch the man running on the sidewalk'
(25) Thang chay dutti co dao dây
man run below/under have knife (particle)
'The man running on the road has a knife'
Example 2B
During the Vietnam War in Hanoi, people sometimes had to dig an underground airraid shelter inside their houses, and in this connection one often said:
(26) Phâi dào thêm hâm ngay dwâi gâm giuàng
must dig more shelter just below/under space under bed
'Must dig more shelters just under the
bed'
(27) Phâi dào thêm hâm ngay trong phàng ngù
must dig more shelter just in/inside bedroom
'Must dig more shelters just inside the bed-room'
However, in some cases, when context allowed ellipsis, people can choose an another location for the shelter. Here is a good example extracted from Bao Ninh's well-known novel 'Nôi buôn chiên tranh and its English translation 'The sorrow of waf (by Frank Palmos, Secker & Warburg, London, 1993). In this text a young woman (Hanh) asked a young man (Kien) to help her to dig an air-raid shelter under her bed, although there were public shelters located under the pavement in front of her house: + The original text:
(28) ... Chi muôn cô son mot cài trong giuàng, dê dêm cô cài khoi phâi chay ra duàng
... I want have already one air-raid shelter in/inside bed, for night have siren I not tear
out street
+ Its translation:
(29) ...I want to dig an air-raid shelter under my bed, so I don't have to tear down
the street every time that siren goes off.
From my experience of teaching Vietnamese, it is expected here that for a foreigner who begins to learn Vietnamese, this utterance (28) sounds strange because an airraid shelter cannot be located 'in' or 'inside' a bed. Logically, it seems to him that the locative preposition trong 'in/inside' should be changed, making it similar to English as in (29) by using an another preposition duai 'below/under'. But this is not obligatory. Grammatically, the Vietnamese sentence in (28) is perfectly correct.
One crucial question in this case, thus, is why Vietnamese people choose the INSIDE orientation but not another one. To answer that question, we need a general conception of the complex process of spatial orientation, which may be imagined in the following way.
To locate or move, for example, within a Vietnamese house, first of all, we have to acquire a mental map of spatial partitions: the INSIDE and OUTSIDE subspaces. In Vietnam (especially, in the North) the traditional houses in the countryside normally have a particular design named 'ba gian, hai chai' (three compartments, two wings): the living space is divided into five subspaces. The three compartments can be partitioned from each other not by wooden walls but by wooden columns only, and within them the family altar (at which the memory of deceased family members is respected) and furniture are placed; the biggest in the middle is considered a sitting-room. The wings on the sides are really rooms with a door and a wooden wall, used as bed-rooms and/or as storage areas for rice and other belongings. In this spatial division of a traditional Vietnamese house, the compartments are conceived as 'outside' subspace, and the wings (the lean-tos) are viewed as the 'inside' one; and that can be explained as follows:
a. Three compartments (in particular, the middle one) have a door leading out (to the front yard or garden) and are seen as the drawing-rooms open for every guest. These subspaces, therefore, are thought of as EXTERIOR/OUTSIDE and visible places.
b. The two wings, on the other hand, are far from the entrance and hidden from a stranger's eyes. These subspaces are considered as INTERIOR/INSIDE and invisible spaces.
This opposition 'interior/exterior' of a house provides an interpretation for the above mentioned Vietnamese locative sentence (28) with an INSIDE orientation, and we may paraphrase it as follows: 'He intended to dig an underground air-raid shelter what will be located inside the bed-room under the bed. However, in Vietnamese it is not necessary to express explicitly that the shelter is placed 'inside the bed-room of the house, under the bed'; one can say more simply and implicitly (with ellipsis) that the shelter is 'inside the bed'.
In a motion situation the direction of a subject's movement also depends on the cognitive difference of 'INSIDE subspace - bed room / OUTSIDE subspace - sitting room'. Linguistically, this will decide the choice between two spatial terms: ra 'exit/out' or vao 'enter/in (to)'.
Supposing that a person is now moving from the bed-room (Subspace-Source) to the sitting-room (Subspace-Goal), his situation can be described in English as in He is going to/into the sitting-room, but in Vietnamese it must be expressed in another way, only with the direction 'out':
(30) No di ra phong khach
he go exit/out room guest
If a man goes from the sitting-room to the bed-room, the English sentence denoting this situation of motion may use the same direction 'to/into': He is going to/into the bed-room; but in Vietnamese, it must be only the direction 'in':
(31) No di vao phong ngu
he go enter/in(to) room sleep
In this connection, the spatial relation 'whole-part' is cognitively very interesting. If the bed-room is conceived of as INSIDE a spatial object, then its door is also viewed, logically, as its INSIDE part. Thus an English spatial expression such as:
(32) He comes back to the door
should be translated into Vietnamese as:
(33) No quay ra cua he turn exit/out door
if the subject of motion, for instance, is in the sitting-room, and the door leads out to the front yard. In this case the orientation OUT is compulsory. But, if the subject of motion, for instance, is in the corridor, and he moves to the door leading to the bed-room, we have to choose another orientation IN(TO) as:
(34) No quay vao phong he turn enter/in(to) room
The above mentioned traditional orientation (with respect to spatial concepts of OUTSIDE sitting-room and INSIDE bed-room) continues to be preserved in Vietnamese, even in relation to modern houses and apartments with a very different structure in big cities (like Hanoi or Ho Chi Minh city). For example, there is a considerable difference between Vietnamese- and English-speakers in describing the location of two rooms in an apartment. In English, one can say:
(35) I live in the front room
(36) John lives in the back room whereas in Vietnamese, we can say:
(37) Tdi a phong ngoai I live room outside
(if the room is located more closed to the main door at the entrance)
(38) Gion a phong trong John live room inside
(if the room is located further from the main door)
2.2.3 Situation III
There is a linguistically and cognitively interesting case of spatial orientation that can be observed with respect to men's and women's clothing.
Americans can buy the following things labeled as:
(39) undershirt - underclothes - underwear
(40) overcoat
It is the same in Russian, as Russian people can say:
(41) nizhnee bel'jo
' underclothes/ underwear'
(42) verkhnaja odezhda
'any outwear worn over other clothing for warmth'
It means that in this case both English and Russian languages use the OVER/UNDER orientation. For Vietnamese, however, the INSIDE/OUTSIDE one can be used in naming some kinds of clothing.
The English underclothes or underwear is dô lôt or quân âo lôt (lit. clothes for lining) in Vietnamese. The English brassière (a kind of woman's undergarment) has Vietnamese equivalents: xu chiêng (from French: soutien), nit vû (lit. belt breasts), yêm, âo con (lit. shirt tiny), and âo trong (lit. shirt inside). The last term âo trong can be used in some situation; for example, a wife who is in the bathroom can ask her husband:
(43) Anh lây cho em câi âo trong v&i You take for me a shirt inside (particle) 'Take out my brassière' Here, in Vietnamese way of naming clothing, there exists cognitively well-known relationship between INSIDE and HIDDEN/INVISIBLE, and, similarly, between OUTSIDE and VISIBLE. For instance, what is conceived as 'under-wear' (or undergarment) in the cognitive experience of English speakers is considered as 'in(side)-wear' by Vietnamese people, because it is saliently 'invisible', 'hidden'. 3. Conclusion
Through all of the cross-linguistic data of Vietnamese and English presented above, it is possible to draw some conclusions. Firstly, the explorations of space in language and cognition, concerning mainly three coordinate systems, are clearly not adequate. In everyday situations of location and motion, orientation is not restricted to the scope of 'up/down' - 'front/back'- 'left/right' frames of reference. Therefore, a more serious and in-depth look at the issue of how languages differ in describing space should be supplemented by linguistic studies of the 'outside/inside' orientation, especially, in non-Indo-European languages (see, for instance, Casad & Langacker 1985).
Secondly, according to Talmy (2000) the location of the Figure with respect to the
Ground in a spatial scene includes segregat- terms in Vietnamese locative sentences coning the Ground into reference objects: Pri- sidered above. The human spatial location mary reference object (PRO) encoded usually and orientation are a cognitively complex explicitly (by lexical item) and Secondary 'architecture' in which, I believe, many men-reference object (SRO) implied merely. This tal processes and factors of different kinds kind of location is achieved by the use of a participate (see also a revision of Talmy's particular reference frame, and Talmy pro- topology of motion verbs provided by Choi-poses four types of reference frames: (a) ref- Jonin and Sarda in the book of Aurnague & erence frames that involve the PRO alone: a all eds. 2007).
Ground-based reference frame; (b) reference Finally, the Vietnamese language with
frames that also involve the SRO and divide materials presented and selected here can
into: Field-based (Encompassive SRO), (c) provide good evidence to expose Sapir-
Guidepost-based (External SRO, Non- Whorfs 'linguistic relativity'; and, at the
Projective) and (d) Projector-based (External same time, it can show that assumptions of
SRO, Projective) reference frames. However, uniformity in human conceptualization, at
it seems to me that these reference frames are least, of space, are clearly mistaken (Levin-
not enough to interpret the uses of spatial son 2003).
References
1. Aurnague, M., M. Hickmann & L. Vieu The categorization of spatial entities in language and in cognition. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2007. - 775 p.
2. Casad, E. & R.W. Langacker 'Inside' and 'outside' in Cora grammar, IRAL, 1985. P. 247281.
3. Casad, E. & G. Palmer Cognitive linguistics and non-Indo-European languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 2003. - 375 p.
4. Fillmore, Ch. Originally distributed as Santa Cruz lectures on Deixis. Indiana University Linguistics Club; 1997 Lectures on Deixis Stanford: CSLI Publications. 1971/1975. - 295 p.
5. Fillmore, Ch. Toward a descriptive framework for spatial deixis. In R. Jarvella & V. Klein (eds), Speech, place and action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1982. - 387 p.
6. Herskovits, A. Language and spatial cognition: An interdisciplinary study of the prepositions in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1986. - 296 p.
7. Hill, C. Up/down, front/back, left/right: A contrastive study of Hausa and English. In R. Weissenborn & W. Klein (eds), Here and there: Cross-linguistic studies on deixis and demonstration. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 1982. - 197 p.
8. Langacker, R.W. Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Standford, CA: Stanford University Press. 1987. - 183 p.
9. Levinson, S.C. Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2003. - 775 p.
10. Ly Toan Thang. Prostranstvenaia model' mira: Kognicia, Kultura and Ethno-psixologjia. (The spatial model oh World: Cognition, Culture, and Ethnopsychology). Moskva: Institut Jazykoznanija. Second edition 2003. - 325 p.
11. Ly Toan Thang. Cognitive Linguistics: From theoritical prerequisites to Vietnamese evidence (in Vietnamese: Ngon ngu hoc tri nhan : Tu ly thuyet dai cuang den thuc tien tieng Viet). Hanoi: Social Sciences Publishing House. 2005. - 175 p.
12. Talmy, L. Semantics and syntax of motion. In J. Kimball (ed), Syntax and semantics, vol 4. New York: Academic Press. 1975. - 235 p.
13. Talmy, L. How language structures space. In H. Pick & L. Acredolo (eds). Spatial orientation: Theory, research and application. New York: Plenum Press. 1983. - 469 p.
14. Talmy, L. Toward a cognitive semantics (2 vols). Cambridge MA: MIT Press. 2000. - 568 p.
