Cognitive relations in the semantics of Brazilian-Portuguese preposition em

In this paper, we present a semantic description of the polysemy of Brazilian-Portuguese preposition em, by following Ronald Langacker’s model of Schematic Network. We based our study on an introspective analysis of a 1.2-million-word corpus of journalistic texts published in three newspapers from major Brazilian cities between 2007 and 2008. A locative sense has long been ascribed to this word, although it can be found in some uses which do not invoke this concept. Furthermore, em occurs in less specific contexts than locative prepositions with approximate values in other languages, such as dans, sur, à, and in, on, at, into, and onto, a fact which renders its meaning strongly context-dependent. Our aim then is to propose an account for both its abstractness and its polysemy, by adopting Langacker’s (1987) usage-based model of language and his concept of ‘construal’, Johnson’s (2005; 1987) ideas about ‘image schemas’, Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980) theory of ‘conceptual metaphor’, Talmy’s (2000) ‘closed-class semantics’, and Vandeloise’s (1991) study of ‘functional relations’ as determinants of the meaning of spatial prepositions. The analysis of 2813 samples revealed two highly schematic senses for the preposition em, derived from the CONTAINER schema: ‘location’ and ‘specification’. The first is elaborated in twenty-two categories and subcategories, representing 86.78% of the uses. As a result of the functional effects of ‘control’ and ‘support’, nine categories were found to instantiate the latter sense of specification, also in various concrete and abstract domains. Most of the variation obtained in spatial contexts could be explained by construal effects and the Container/contained functional relation. Other uses were interpreted as emerging from metaphorical and metonymic processes.

Keywords: preposition, construal, functional relation, polysemy, schematic network


Biber, D. (1990).  Methodological issues regarding corpus-based analyses of linguistic variation.  Literary and Linguistic Computing 5: 257-69.

Biber, D. (1993).  Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and Linguistic Computing 8 (4): 243-257.

Cunha, A.G. et al.  (1991).  Dicionário etimológico Nova Fronteira da língua portuguesa. 2. ed. rev. e acresc. de um suplemento. Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira.

Cuyckens, H. (1993).  The Dutch preposition in: a cognitive-semantic analysis. In C. Zelinsky-Wibbelt (ed.), The Semantics of Prepositions:From Mental Processing to Natural Language Processing.  Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.  pp. 27-71.

Grady, J.E. (1997).  Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Linguistics, University of California at Berkeley.

Johnson, M.  (1987). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Johnson, M. (2005).  The philosophical significance of image schemas. In B. Hampe (ed.), From Perception to Meaning: Image Schemas in Cognitive Linguistics.  Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.  pp. 15-33. 

Jornal do Brasil. Available at Access on May.01.2008.

Jornal Estado de Minas. Available at Access on May.01.2008.

Jornal O Estado de São Paulo. Available at Access on May.01.2008.

Lakoff, G. (1987).  Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980).  Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1999).  Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Society. New York: Basic Books.

Langacker, R. (1987).  Foundations of Cognitive grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Langacker, R. (2001).  Viewing and experiential reporting in cognitive grammar. In A.S. Silva (ed.), Linguagem e Cognição. Braga: Faculdade de Filosofia de Braga. pp. 19-49.

Langacker, R. (2008).  Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Neves, M.H. de M. (2000).  Gramática de Usos do Português. São Paulo: UNESP.

Rosch, E. (1978).  Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch and B. Lloyd (eds.), Cognition and Categorization.  Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.  pp. 27-48. 

Silva, A.S. (2006).  O Mundo dos Sentidos em Português: Polissemia, Semântica e Cognição. Coimbra: Almedina.

Smith, B. (1994).  Topological Foundations of Cognitive Science. A revised version of the introductory essay in C. Eschenbach, C. Habel and B. Smith (eds.), Topological Foundations of Cognitive Science, Hamburg: Graduiertenkolleg Kognitionswissenschaft, 1994, the text of a talk delivered at the 1st International Summer Institute in Cognitive Science in  Buffalo in July 1004.

Talmy, L. (1977) “Rubber-sheet cognition in language”. In: Papers from the 13th Regional Meeting  Chicago Linguistic Society. W. Beach, et al. (eds.), University of Chicago.

Talmy, L. (2000).  Toward a Cognitive Semantics, vol. 1: Concept Structuring Systems. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.

Traugott, E.C. (1988).  Pragmatic strengthening and grammaticalization.  Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: 406-416.

Tyler, A. and Evans, V. (2003).  The Semantics of English Prepositions: Spatial Scenes, Embodied Meaning and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vandeloise, C. (1991).  Spatial Prepositions: A Case Study from French. Trans. A.R.K. Bosch. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Vandeloise, C. (1994).  Methodology and analyses of the preposition in. Cognitive Linguistics 5 (2): 157-184.

Vendler, Z. (1967).  Linguistics in Philosophy.  New York: Cornell University Press.

Wittgenstein, L. (1953).  Philosophical Investigations. New York: Macmillan.


Download full text of the article as PDF