Beginning in the early 1980's, several studies regarding the semantics of prepositions were put forward by cognitive linguistics such as Brugman (1981), Brugman and Lakoff (1988), Herskovits (1986, 1988), Taylor (1988) and Vandeloise (1999), Carey and Cukor-Avila (1996), and Dirven (1993, 1995). These studies revealed that prepositions in different languages classify their relationships differently. As Dirven (1993) argues, prepositions divide up physical, temporal and abstract space in different ways. However, prepositions in different languages might reveal such differences of domains and meanings mapping.
In particular, one might logically question whether the usual usages of domains are similar across different languages and whether the various links between the different usage types are equally important?
The cognitive approach assumes that prepositional usages are dynamic in nature. In other words, the various and multiple meanings associated with a single preposition could be accounted for as deriving from the primary domain through a set of domains variations. Thus, the multiple meanings associated with each preposition are conceived as forming a polysemic network in which more derived meanings are organized around a central domain. I agree with linguistics point of view. The cognitive linguistics approaches to prepositional meaning identifies the many meanings or usages of a preposition and occurrence as not chaotic, but are highly structured and systematic. This is the case for different uses within a single domain and applies equally to the various uses in different conceptual domains of different languages.
What is important for the present purpose is to find out whether the study of prepositions across languages has both theoretical and pedagogical benefits. Prepositions have different but related senses. In cognitive semantics, abstract domains are extended from spatial domains through conceptual senses. Cross-linguistically, it is useful to draw the learners' attention to those aspects of a preposition's spatial sense that are especially relevant for its representation. First, prepositions differ according to their domain of usages. We can group them into three main domains using concepts from space, point, surface, area or volume, means, or circumstances and so on. For example, a. Spatial usages should be used in those cases where its object is to be conceptualized as a place, surface, point or line; b.Temporal prepositions presenting time or events must be identified and explained systematically, stressing, for example, that "on" is used for days, but "in" for months and year and "at" as a point of time; and c. Abstract prepositions do not fit any system and can only be mastered if its usage is carefully introduced and consistently reinforced.
Therefore, the use of the domain analysis in analyzing prepositional usages in the semantic field has been shown to be an effective way of increasing cross-linguistically knowledge of two different languages.
In addition, an important benefit from this pedagogical insight is that it is natural to present the uses of spatial, temporal and abstract prepositions using line figures or objects. The domain analysis of prepositional analysis has been able to create a variety of simple yet informative domains which could have a strong visual impact on learners. The learners could also be induced to draw their own figures in response to the stimulus sentences and to compare them for the best fit.
Second, theoretically, prepositions are a part of our language constituents that exert influence on languages. Therefore, using translation as a method might draw EFL attention to the manipulation of language and to the fact that translation of different languages may lead learners to map to other prepositions. What is important to bear in mind is that not every single preposition in one language has a definite equivalent in other language.
In conclusion, the cross-linguistics mapping is to be expected since different languages may carve-out semantic space in different ways as well. Learners of different languages might also tend to impose their mother tongue system onto the target language. The extent and the influence of their mother tongue may vary in terms of frequency and extent depending on the degree of similarities and differences between the two languages involved in the process of translation as well as the degree of the learners' proficiency and command of both the source and target languages.
Finally, in my opinion the much foreign studies about the semantics of prepositions and the introduction of mappings via domains analyses and translation has yet to be widely introduced to schools as a method.
I think if you examine your own experience with prepositions within your language and any other language, you will agree that the semantics of prepositions of different languages is still an empty promise for most learners.
Prepositions, the semantics or the mappings of different languages will not magically introduce to our learners. It still must be done with reading, good teaching methods, study and everyday communication. Good learning methods can only be realized if the learners earn it.
