Timelines and multimodal constructions: Facing new challenges

References

Boroditsky, L. 2000. Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition 75(1). 1–28.10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00073-6Search in Google Scholar

Boroditsky, L. 2001. Does language shape thought? Mandarin and English speakers’ conceptions of time. Cognitive Psychology 43(1). 1–22.10.1006/cogp.2001.0748Search in Google Scholar

Boroditsky, L., O. Fuhrman & K. McCormick. 2011. Do English and Mandarin speakers think about time differently? Cognition 118(1). 123–129.10.1037/e527342012-221Search in Google Scholar

Boroditsky, L. & M. Ramscar. 2002. The roles of body and mind in abstract thought. Psychological Science 13(2). 185–189.10.1111/1467-9280.00434Search in Google Scholar

Bottini, R. & D. Casasanto. 2010. Implicit spatial length modulates time estimates, but not vice versa. Spatial Cognition VII. 152–162.10.1007/978-3-642-14749-4_15Search in Google Scholar

Brewer, M. B. 2000. Research design and issues of validity. In H. T. Reis & C. T. Judd (eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology, 3–16. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Casasanto, D. & L. Boroditsky. 2008. Time in the mind: Using space to think about time. Cognition 106. 579–593.10.1016/j.cognition.2007.03.004Search in Google Scholar

Casasanto, D. & K. Jasmin. 2012. The hands of time: Temporal gestures in English speakers. Cognitive Linguistics 23(4). 643–674.10.1515/cog-2012-0020Search in Google Scholar

Coulson, S. & C. Pagán Cánovas. 2013. Understanding timelines. Journal of Cognitive Semiotics 5(1–2). 198–219.10.1515/cogsem.2013.5.12.198Search in Google Scholar

Fauconnier, G. 1997. Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139174220Search in Google Scholar

Fauconnier, G. 2009. Generalized integration networks. In V. Evans & Stéphanie Pourcel (eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics, 147–160. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.24.12fauSearch in Google Scholar

Fauconnier, G. & M. Turner. 2002. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar

Fauconnier, G. & M. Turner. 2008. Rethinking metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 57–66. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511816802.005Search in Google Scholar

Fuhrman, O., K. McCormick, E. Chen, H. Jiang, D. Shu, S. Mao & L. Boroditsky. 2011. How linguistic and cultural forces shape conceptions of time: English and Mandarin time in 3D. Cognitive Science 35. 1305–1328.10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01193.xSearch in Google Scholar

Gentner, D. 1983. Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science 7. 155–170.10.1016/B978-1-4832-1446-7.50026-1Search in Google Scholar

Guyau, J. M. 1988 [1890]. The origin of the idea of time. Reprinted In J. A. Michon, V. Pouthas & J. L Jackson ((ed.)), Guyau and the idea of time. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Search in Google Scholar

Hutchins, E. 2005. Material anchors for conceptual blends. Journal of Pragmatics 37(10). 1555–1577.10.1016/j.pragma.2004.06.008Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. 1993. The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and thought, 202–251. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139173865.013Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. & M. Turner. 1989. More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226470986.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

McNeill David. 1992. Hand and Mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Núñez, R. & K. Cooperrider. 2013. The tangle of space and time in human cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 17(5). 220–229.10.1016/j.tics.2013.03.008Search in Google Scholar

Núñez, R. E. & E. Sweetser. 2006. With the future behind them: Convergent evidence from Aymara language and gesture in the crosslinguistic comparison of spatial construals of time. Cognitive Science 30(3). 401–450.10.1207/s15516709cog0000_62Search in Google Scholar

Pagán Cánovas, C. 2010. Erotic emissions in Greek poetry: A Generic Integration Network. Cognitive Semiotics 6. 7–32.10.1515/cogsem.2010.6.spring2010.7Search in Google Scholar

Pagán Cánovas, C. & M. F. Jensen. 2013. Anchoring time-space mappings and their emotions: The timeline blend in poetic metaphors. Language and Literature 22(1). 45–59.10.1177/0963947012469751Search in Google Scholar

Pagán Cánovas, C. & A. Piata. Forthcoming. The way time goes by: Conceptual integration and the poetics of time. In S. Csábi (ed.), New directions in cognition and poetics. New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Pagán Cánovas, C. & M. Turner. 2016. Generic integration templates for fictive communication. In E. Pascual & S. Sandler (eds.), The conversation frame: Forms and functions of fictive interaction, 45–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.55.03pagSearch in Google Scholar

Pagán Cánovas, C., J. Valenzuela & J. Santiago. 2015. Like the machete the snake: Integration of topic and vehicle in poetry comprehension reveals meaning construction processes. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 9(4). 385–393.10.1037/aca0000024Search in Google Scholar

Rosenberg, D. & A. Grafton. 2010. Cartographies of time: A history of the timeline. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.Search in Google Scholar

Santiago, J., J. Lupiáñez, E. Pérez & M. J. Funes. 2007. Time (also) flies from left to right. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 14. 512–516.10.3758/BF03194099Search in Google Scholar

Santiago, J., A. Román & M. Ouellet. 2011. Flexible foundations of abstract thought: A review and a theory. Spatial Dimensions of Social Thought 41–110.10.1515/9783110254310.39Search in Google Scholar

Santiago, J., A. Román, M. Ouellet, N. Rodríguez & P. Pérez-Azor. 2010. In hindsight, life flows from left to right. Psychological Research PRPF 74(1). 59–70.10.1007/s00426-008-0220-0Search in Google Scholar

Teuscher, U., M. McQuire, J. Collins & S. Coulson. 2008. Congruity effects in time and space: Behavioral and ERP measures. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal 32(3). 563–578.10.1080/03640210802035084Search in Google Scholar

Torralbo, A., J. Santiago & J. Lupiáñez. 2006. Flexible conceptual projection of time onto spatial frames of reference. Cognitive Science 30(4). 745–757.10.1207/s15516709cog0000_67Search in Google Scholar

Turner, M. 2014. The origin of ideas: Blending, creativity, and the human spark. New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Tversky, B., S. Kugelmass & A. Winter. 1991. Cross-cultural and developmental trends in graphic productions. Cognitive Psychology 23. 515–557.10.1016/0010-0285(91)90005-9Search in Google Scholar

Ulrich, R. & C. Maienborn. 2010. Left–right coding of past and future in language: The mental timeline during sentence processing. Cognition 117(2). 126–138.10.1016/j.cognition.2010.08.001Search in Google Scholar

Valenzuela, J., C. Pagán Cánovas & I. Olza In review. Gesturing the timeline: Gestures co-occurring with temporal demarcative expressions provide evidence for anchoring and viewpoint integration.Search in Google Scholar

Walker, E. & K. Cooperrider. 2016. The continuity of metaphor: Evidence from temporal gestures. Cognitive Science 40(2). 481–49510.1111/cogs.12254Search in Google Scholar

Weger, U. W. & J. Pratt. 2008. Time flies like an arrow: Space-time compatibility effects suggest the use of a mental timeline. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 15(2). 426–430.10.3758/PBR.15.2.426Search in Google Scholar

Wilson, M. 2002. Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 9. 625–636.10.3758/BF03196322Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, J. & V. L. Patel. 2006. Distributed cognition, representation, and affordance. Pragmatics & Cognition 14(2). 333–341.10.1075/bct.16.11zhaSearch in Google Scholar