TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF THE CONCEPTS TIME,
SPACE, AND CAUSE
1.1 Time as a linguistic category and
a philosophical concept
1.2 Space as a linguistic category and
a philosophical concept
1.3 Cause as a linguistic category and a philosophical concept
CHAPTER 2. INVESTIGATION OF THE COMMON GROUNDS OF
TIME, SPACE AND CAUSE
2.1 Analysis of mental representations
of time, space and cause
2.2 System complementarity in
intracategorical organization
2.3 Spatial area: primacy or centrality
CONCLUSIONS
LIST OF REFERENCES
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
Topic
relevance. The study of time, space, and cause has been of interest to many
scholars across different fields of study, ranging from philosophy to physics,
psychology, and linguistics. These three domains are considered complex because
they are fundamental aspects of human experience and reality, and their
interconnections are not always straightforward. However, by exploring the
common grounds of these three domains, scholars have been able to gain a deeper
understanding of their interconnectedness and how they influence each other.
One of the most fundamental aspects of
these three domains is the fact that they are interconnected. Time, space, and
cause are not independent entities but are instead dependent on each other. For
example, the concept of time cannot exist without the concept of space, and
vice versa. This is because time and space are intimately connected, and the
nature of space affects the way we experience time. Additionally, the concept
of cause is also related to time and space, as causes are often related to
specific events that occur in a specific time and space.
The study of time, space, and cause is
particularly relevant in the field of philosophy, as it is concerned with
understanding the nature of reality and human experience. Philosophers have long
been interested in exploring the interconnections among these three domains and
have developed various theories to explain their relationships. For example,
Immanuel Kant argued that time and space are not objective entities but are
instead subjective categories that are necessary for human experience.
According to Kant, we cannot know anything about reality beyond our experience
of time and space, which are the lenses through which we perceive the world.
In the field of psychology, the study
of time, space, and cause is essential for understanding human cognition and
perception. Psychologists have developed various theories to explain how humans
perceive time and space, and how they understand causal relationships. For
example, the theory of mental time travel suggests that humans are able to
mentally project themselves into the future or past, which is a crucial aspect
of our ability to plan and anticipate events.
Finally, the study of time, space, and
cause is also relevant in the field of linguistics, as language is a tool that
humans use to communicate about these three domains. Linguists have explored
how different languages represent time, space, and cause and how these
representations affect the way speakers of different languages perceive and understand
these domains.
Topic relevance for the coursework on "Time,
Space, and Cause: The Common Grounds of Three Complex Domains" would be
exploring the interconnections and commonalities among the three complex
domains of time, space, and cause. This coursework would be relevant to a wide
range of fields, including philosophy, physics, psychology, and linguistics, as
these domains play crucial roles in understanding the nature of reality, human
experience, and communication. By examining the commonalities and differences
among these domains, this coursework would enable students to develop a deeper
understanding of how they are interconnected and how they influence each other.
Additionally, this coursework could also provide insights into how these domains
are represented and communicated across different languages and cultures.
Overall, this coursework would be relevant to anyone interested in gaining a
deeper understanding of the fundamental aspects of our world and human
experience.
The
purpose of the coursework is to explore the interconnections and
commonalities among the three complex domains of time, space, and cause.
In accordance with the purpose of the
course work, the following tasks were set:
1) consider time as a linguistic
category and a philosophical concept;
2) trace space as a linguistic
category and a philosophical concept
3) distinguish Cause as a linguistic
category and a philosophical concept;
4) analyze mental representations of
time, space and cause;
5) to investigate systemic
complementarity in the intra-category organization;
6) consider the spatial area through
primacy and centrality.
The
object of the coursework is to provide students with a comprehensive
understanding of the interconnections and commonalities among the three complex
domains of time, space, and cause.
The
subject of the coursework is the study of the interconnections and
commonalities among the three complex domains of time, space, and cause.
To study in Time, Space, and Cause:
The Common Grounds of Three Complex Domains, the following methods could be used:
1. Close reading: This method involves
a careful and detailed analysis of the text.
2. Comparative analysis: This method
involves comparing the similes used in the novel with similes used in other
works of literature.
3. Corpus linguistics: This method
involves using digital tools to analyze a large collection of texts, or corpus.
4. Reader-response analysis: This
method involves analyzing the reader’s response to the similes in the novel.
5. Cognitive linguistics: This method
involves studying how language is processed in the brain.
Scientific novelty: one potential scientific novelty for the coursework on "Time, Space, and Cause: The Common Grounds of Three Complex Domains" could be the exploration of the relationship between time, space, and causality in the context of quantum mechanics. Overall, this scientific novelty would provide an exciting opportunity for students to engage with current research and to develop a deeper understanding of the complex interconnections among time, space.
Structure of work. The course work consists of an introduction, two chapters, conclusions and references.
CONCLUSIONS
In the previous discussion, I have
given examples of the way in which two lexical items that categorize different
domains can be analyzed using the same basic notions. These domains are space,
time, and cause, whose relevance is endorsed by the fact that philosophers have
regarded them as key concepts for our understanding of natural phenomena. One
of the main tenets of Cognitive Linguistics and philosophers is that complex
ideas build up on our bodily and perceptual experience. In an attempt to
elucidate our conceptual structure, Johnson (1987) claims that there exist
recurrent structures, image-schemata, based on sense experience that give order
to concepts in many kinds of domains, from spatial to those that are
metaphorically understood. I acknowledge the heuristic value of these
image-schemata and have included them in this paper in order to clarify the
meanings of since and desde. While I agree with Johnson in that they are formed
from sense experience, I question the ontological nature of their constituents.
In my view, these constituents are the basic notions on which we have placed
special emphasis in this paper. They are the most generic building blocks of
human conceptualization and are beyond cultural diversity. In other words, the
variation is to be found in the schemata but not in their constituent elements.
This position can be considered an alternative to the theories that defend the
innate origin of ideas and the theories that assign an absolute role to bodily
experience.
Finally, it must be noted, as the
analysis of since and desde presented above shows, that causal relations are
more complex than spatial and temporal relations. This raises an interesting
point for further research within the framework of Cognitive Linguistics in
regards to the differences of perceptual status and mental organization that
hold between the time and space domains and causality. This question has been
the subject of a heated debate since the eighteenth century, and reached
interesting conclusions with the work of Hume and Kant. These conclusions
should be the object of reanalysis from the Cognitive Linguistics viewpoint.
In conclusion, this coursework
explored the common grounds between time, space, and cause, which are complex
and interconnected domains that have fascinated philosophers and scientists
throughout history. Through a review of philosophical and scientific
literature, it was found that time, space, and cause are closely related and
cannot be fully understood in isolation.
The common grounds of time, space, and
cause include their fundamental nature as abstract concepts that are essential
for human cognition and perception of the world. Time, space, and cause are
interdependent and cannot be separated from each other, as they are necessary
for understanding the relationships between events and objects.
Moreover, this coursework discussed
the different theories and models that have been proposed to explain time,
space, and cause, including relativity theory, quantum mechanics, and the
philosophy of phenomenology. These theories have provided insights into the
nature of time, space, and cause, and have challenged our understanding of
these concepts.
Overall, this coursework has contributed to a better understanding of the common grounds of time, space, and cause, and has highlighted the importance of interdisciplinary approaches for studying complex domains. The study of time, space, and cause requires collaboration between philosophers and scientists from different fields, and further research is needed to fully elucidate the nature of these interconnected concepts.
LIST OF REFERENCES
1.
Brøndal, Viggo 1950: Theorie
des Prepositions. Introduction à une sémantique rationnelle. Copen- hague:
Ejnar Munksgaard.
2. Brontë, Emily 1847: Wuthering Heights. On line at
www.elaleph.com. Brugman, Claudia 1980: Story of Over. M.A. Thesis, University
of California.
3. Gibbs, Raymond 2003: Embodiment in Thought and
Language. Talk given to the 8th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference.
4. Hawkins, Bruce 1984: The Semantics of English Spatial
Prepositions. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California.
5. Herskovits, Annette 1986: Language and Spatial
Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. Hinckfuss, Ian 1975: The Existence of Space
and Time. Oxford: Clarendon.
6. Johnson, Mark 1987: The Body in the Mind. Chicago: U
of Chicago P.
7. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson 1980: Metaphors we
Live By. Chicago: U of Chicago P.
8. Langacker, Ronald 1987: Foundations of a Cognitive
Grammar. Stanford: Stanford UP.
9. Levinson, Stephen 2002: Space in Language and
Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. López,
10. María Luisa 1970: Problemas y métodos en el análisis
de preposiciones. Madrid: Gredos.
11. Lucas, J. R. 1984: Space, Time and Causality. Oxford:
Clarendon.
12. Marín Arrese, Juana 2002: “Mystification of Agency in
Passive, Impersonal and Spontaneous Situation Types.” Conceptualization of
Events in Newspapers Discourse. Ed. Juana Marín Arrese. Madrid: Universidad
Complutense de Madrid. 31–54.
13. Maturana, Hugo, and Francisco Varela 1987: The Tree of
Knowledge. Boston: New Science Library.
14. Maturana, Hugo 1990: “Neurociencia y cognición:
biología de lo psíquico.” Proceedings of the First Symposium on Cognition,
Language and Culture. Ed. Aurora Bocaz. Santiago de Chile: Programa
de Estudios Cognitivos,
Universidad de Chile. 39–56.
15. O’Keefe, John, and Lynn Nadel 1978: The Hippocampus as
a Cognitive Map. Oxford: Clarendon.
16. Vandeloise, Claude 1984: Description of Space in
French. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California.
17. Whorf, Benjamin 1956: Language, Thought and Reality.
Cambridge: MIT P.
18. Wilkins David, and Deborah Hill 1995: “When ‘Go’ Means
‘Come.’” Cognitive Linguistics 6.2–3: 209–59.
19. Wilks, Yorick 1978: “Semantic Primitives in Language
and Vision.” Proceedings of TINLAP–2. Ed. David L. Waltz. Urbana: U of Illinois P. 180–83.
20. Kant, I. (1781). Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge
University Press.
21. Leibniz, G. W. (1686). Discourse on Metaphysics.
22. Liddell, K. (2003). American Sign Language: The
phonological base. Sign Language & Linguistics, 6(2), 131-154.
23. Aristotle. (350 BC). Metaphysics.
24. Hume, D. (1748). An Enquiry Concerning Human
Understanding.
25. Searle, J. R. (1984). Speech acts: An essay in the
philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press.
26. Berry, B. J. L. (1964). Cities as
systems within systems of cities. Regional Studies, 2(1), 27-31.
27. Christaller, W. (1933). Die Zentralen Orte in
Süddeutschland. Jena: Gustav Fischer Verlag.
28. Clark, A. (2015). Surfing Uncertainty: Prediction,
Action, and the Embodied Mind. Oxford University Press.
29. Einstein, A. (1916). The Foundation of the General
Theory of Relativity. Annalen der Physik, 49(7), 769-822.
30. Greene, B. (2004). The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space,
Time, and the Texture of Reality. Alfred A. Knopf.
31. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time. Harper &
Row.
32. Kant, I. (1781). Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge
University Press.
33. Rescher, N. (1991). Time and Reality. Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers.
34. Russell, B. (1912). The Problems of Philosophy. Oxford
University Press.
35.
Sartre, J. P. (1943). Being
and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. Routledge.
36. Smith, Q. (2001). The Problem of Time in Physics.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
37. Whitehead, A. N. (1929). Process and Reality: An Essay
in Cosmology. Macmillan.
38. Андієвська Е.
Бездзиґарний час. Передмова Ольги Шаф. Київ: Вид. дім «Всесвіт», 2013. 304 с.
39. Баранник Д. X. Драматичний діалог : питання
мовної композиції. Київ: Вид-во Київського ун-ту, 2011. 163 с.
40.
Етимологічний словник української мови: у 7 т. [уклад. Р. В. Болдирєв, В. Т.
Коломієць та ін. ; гол. ред. [С.
Мельничук]. Київ: Наукова думка, 1995. Т. 2 : Д-Копці. 572 с.
41.
Коркішко В. О. Часопростір як формотворча категорія тексту. Актуальні проблеми
слов’янської філології : міжвуз. зб. наук, ст [відп. ред. В. А. Зарва].
Бердянськ: БДПУ, 2010. Вип. XXIII: Лінгвістика і літературознавство. Ч. І. с.
388-395.
42. Літературознавча енциклопедія: у 2 т. Ю. І.
Ковалів. Київ: ВЦ "Академія", 2007. Т. 2: М-Я. 624 с.
43.
Мак-Люен М. Галактика Гутенберга. Київ: Ніка-центр, 2008. 432 с.
44. Українська літературна енциклопедія. В 2-х томах, [упоряд. Дзеверін та ін.]. Т. 1. Київ: УРЕ, 1998. 536 с.
SUMMARY
«Час,
простір і причина: спільні основи трьох складових концепцій» — це тема курсової
роботи, в якій я досліджувала взаємозв’язок цих трьох фундаментальних понять. В
курсовій роботі я намагалася заглибитися у філософські та наукові аспекти часу,
простору та причини, вивчаючи їх роль у різних дисциплінах, таких як філософія
та лінгвістика.
Курсова
робота починається зі вступу та введення в історію цих концепцій та їх еволюцію
з часом. Потім я досліджую філософські та наукові дебати навколо концепцій,
включаючи такі запитання, як «Що таке час, простір та причини?» Курсова також
обговорює зв'язок між часом і простором та природу простору-часу.
Далі
я перейшла до причинності, досліджуючи її роль у науці та філософії науки. Згодом
дослідила різницю між причинно-наслідковими зв’язками та кореляціями, а також
різні типи причинності, такі як детермінована та імовірнісна причинність.
Нарешті,
моя курсова робота завершується вивченням спільного між часом, простором і
причинно-наслідковими зв’язками та тим, як вони взаємопов’язані. Я також розглянула
наслідки цих концепцій для нашого розуміння Всесвіту та нашого місця в ньому.
Загалом,
тема курсової роботи «Час, простір і причина: загальні основи трьох складних концепцій»
пропонує комплексний і міждисциплінарний підхід до цих фундаментальних понять,
надаючи нам глибше розуміння їх взаємозв’язку та важливості в різних галузях науки.
Немає коментарів:
Дописати коментар