Beller Sieghard, Singmann Henrik, Hüther Lisa, Bender Andrea
Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen Bergen, Norway.
Department of Psychology, University of Zürich Zürich, Switzerland.
Front Psychol. 2015 Sep 2;6:1283. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01283. eCollection 2015.
When referring to an object in relation to another, speakers of many languages can adopt a relative frame of reference (FoR). Following Levinson (2003), this kind of FoR can be established by projecting an observer's perspective onto the ground object either by translation, reflection, or rotation. So far, research on spatial FoRs has largely ignored the extent of variation in which of these projections are preferred generally, and specifically what kind of FoR is established for spatial arrays in one's back. This may seem justified by assumptions on "natural" preferences: for reflection in frontal settings (Canonical Encounter Hypothesis), and for converting dorsal into frontal situations by a turn of the observer before a reference is made (Turn Hypothesis). We scrutinize these assumptions by comparing the FoRs adopted for small-scale, static spatial arrays by speakers of four languages (German, US-English, Mandarin Chinese, and Tongan). Addressing the problem of inherent ambiguities on the item level when assessing FoRs from spatial prepositions, we use a multinomial processing tree (MPT) model for estimating probabilities of referencing strategies across sets of items. Substantial differences in frontal settings, both between and within languages, disprove the Canonical Encounter Hypothesis-translation occurs as frequently as reflection across samples. In dorsal settings, in contrast, the same type of response dominates in all samples. We suggest that this response is produced by a backward projection of the observer's coordinate system in correspondence with the two main FoR preferences for frontal settings. However, none of these strategies involves a turn of the observer, thus also disproving the Turn Hypothesis. In conclusion, we discuss possible causes of the observed variability, explore links between the domains of space and time, and reflect the relation between language, communication, and culture.
在提及一个物体相对于另一个物体的关系时，许多语言的使用者可以采用相对参照系（FoR）。根据列文森（2003年）的说法，这种参照系可以通过平移、反射或旋转，将观察者的视角投射到地面物体上而建立起来。到目前为止，关于空间参照系的研究在很大程度上忽略了这些投射中哪种投射通常更受青睐的变化程度，特别是对于人背后的空间阵列会建立何种参照系。基于“自然”偏好的假设，这似乎是合理的：在正面场景中偏好反射（规范相遇假设），以及在做出参照之前，通过观察者转身将背面场景转换为正面场景（转身假设）。我们通过比较四种语言（德语、美式英语、汉语普通话和汤加语）的使用者对小规模、静态空间阵列所采用的参照系，来审视这些假设。在从空间介词评估参照系时，为了解决项目层面固有的模糊性问题，我们使用多项式处理树（MPT）模型来估计跨项目集的参照策略概率。在正面场景中，无论是在不同语言之间还是在同一语言内部，都存在显著差异，这反驳了规范相遇假设——在样本中，平移和反射出现的频率一样高。相比之下，在背面场景中，所有样本中同一种反应占主导地位。我们认为，这种反应是由观察者坐标系的向后投射产生的，这与正面场景中两种主要的参照系偏好相对应。然而，这些策略都不涉及观察者的转身，因此也反驳了转身假设。总之，我们讨论了观察到的变异性的可能原因，探索了空间和时间领域之间的联系，并思考了语言、交流和文化之间的关系。
