1. Metaphors—Space and Time November 18, 2008 Presented by: Kathryn Lawrence Using some slides from Daniel Casasanto

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. Spatial primes asymmetrically influence temporal judgments These results parallel the asymmetry in linguistic metaphors. Boroditsky, 2000

6. 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?

7. 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?

8. The Plan 1.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?

12. 200 275 350 425 500 575 650 725 800 X 1-5 seconds 9 X 9 design Fully Crossed

13. Interdependent Independent Asymmetrically Dependent (*as in language) Effect of space on time Effect of time on space Target time Target space Estimated space Estimated time How are space and time related in our minds?

14. TIME SPACE Independent TIME SPACE Interdependent TIME SPACE Asymmetric How are space and time related in our minds? **People use spatial metaphors for time (more than the other way around).

15. Effect of Space on Time Reported duration (msecs) Actual displacement in pixels Effect of Time on Space Reported displacement (pixels) Actual duration in milliseconds r2r2 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

16. 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)

17. *** ns Effect of space on time Effect of time on space (Casasanto & Boroditsky, 2003)  Importance of spatial representations for temporal thinking

18. The Plan 1.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?

19. How English and Greek describe events: Distance vs. Quantity Metaphors 1e. long night 1g. megali nychta (big night) 2e. long relationship 2g. megali schesi (big relationship) 3e. long party 3g. parti pou kratise poli (party that lasts much) 4e. long meeting 4g. 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)

20. Natural expressions for ‘long time’ vs. ‘much time’ elicited: Google search (exact matches, sites in that language) (Casasanto, et al., 2004)

21. 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)

22. Growing lines Filling tanks How behavior differs. Growing lines Filling tanks Later—Confirmed not just vertical difference

23. Growing lines Filling tanks How behavior differs.How languages differ. Distance metaphors Quantity metaphors (Casasanto, et al., 2004)

24. The Plan 1.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?

25. 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)

26. 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 Trained English Untrained English Quantity Trained English Slope (Effect of Fullness Level on Duration Estimate)

27. The Plan 1.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?

28. 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)

29. 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.

30. 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?