The Grammar and Semantics of Near CT

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/301719875
The grammar and semantics of near
Article in Cognitextes · April 2016

DOI: 10.4000/cognitextes.859
CITATIONS READS
0 398
1 author:
Maria Brenda
University of Szczecin
12 PUBLICATIONS 4 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Maria Brenda on 03 January 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The grammar and semantics of near
Tuesday 22nd March, 2016
Abstract
The cognitive linguistic interest in spatial prepositions is a relatively new re-

search path. The question of their categorical status has not been resolved yet —
linguists underline either their purely grammatical or lexical nature. The present
paper investigates the semantic structure of near, functioning as a preposition, an
adverb, an adjective and a verb, as well as the semantic structure of the complex
preposition near to to determine whether the word belongs to the English lexicon or
grammar. The research confirms that the semantic structure of near is best viewed
as a continuum encoding both lexical and grammatical information giving, at the
same time, an insight into the polysemy of near which is rather impoverished com-
pared with the polysemy of other spatial prepositions such as over or at. Finally, the
semantic difference between the simple and complex expressions, near and near to,
is discussed. Even though the two structures are often considered synonymous, the
present study argues that their formal difference reflects the difference in meaning.
Introduction
The Oxford English Dictionary (henceforth OED 1989), as well as other monolingual
dictionaries of the English language, such as the Oxford Dictionary,1 Merriam-Webster
Dictionary 2 and Free Dictionary,3 label the word near as a preposition, an adverb, an
adjective and a verb. This categorization is confirmed by the research conducted for the
purpose of the present study in the course of which over two thousand sentences from
the British National Corpus (henceforth BNC)4 have been investigated to determine the
semantic structure of the word near and its frequencies of use. As the word near can
also be part of the complex preposition near to, the study looks into how and to what
1
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/near?q=near/
2
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/near
3
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/near
4
http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/
1
extent the two formally different forms are also different in meaning. Since prepositions
and adverbs are both considered space characterizing words, an investigation into how
the two word classes describe space is also in order.
The long history of near, with the first records in English texts dating back to the
9th century (OED 1989), might suggest that the word is established in the language
and entrenched in the minds of its users. Near derives from the comparative of the Old
English adverb néah. The transition from the comparative to the positive sense in Old
Norse probably originated in expressions such as koma or ganga nær meaning ‘to come/go
nearer’ (to a person or place), which passed into the sense ‘close’ or ‘near.’ When the
positive sense attached to nær, the word started to be used with stative verbs, such as
standa or vera (‘to be’) as well. This transition might have been reflected in Old English
where the word néar could be used either absolutely, without a complement, or governing
a noun in the dative case. Both usages passed into Middle English when the construction
near to was introduced.
The analysis of the collected data reveals that the word near can function as a prepo-
sition, an adverb, an adjective and a verb, while the complex sequence near to is only
a preposition. Despite the fact that near is a member of many word classes, its prepo-
sitional usage in the database is by far the most common–amounting to 1750 instances
out of 2172. Table (1) below summarises the frequency of occurrence of the word near
in the database–there are 1750 prepositional occurrences 166 occurrences as an adverb,
131 as an adjective, 3 as a verb, and 24 instances of idiomatic expressions (with only two
elements far and near and near and dear ).
Table 1: The frequency of occurrence for near
Word class number of occurrences per 2172
the preposition near 1750

the preposition near to 98
the adverb near 166
the adjective near 131
the verb near 3
idiomatic expressions with near 24
Total: 2172
The semantic analysis of the word near reveals five semantic categories: in the vicinity
of, interaction, approaching, approximately and temporal. The analysis is based on the
principled polysemy model (Tyler and Evans 2003) which is used to show how different
senses of the semantic category of near may arise and how they are related to one another.
The model proposes two criteria for distinguishing distinct senses of a preposition. First
2
of all, a new sense may be postulated when it encodes a novel TR-LM spatial configura-
tion or when it encodes a metaphorical meaning component not encoded by an already
existing sense. The second criterion holds that the new sense should be context indepen-
dent, that is, it should not be inferred from the context of use. Contextual modulations,
however, do play a role at an initial stage of the expansion of semantic networks. Prag-
matic strengthening allows for a contextual interpretation of a given spatial preposition
to become associated with the form of the preposition as a new meaning component.
After sufficient establishment in the linguistic community, the new meaning component
becomes gradually more detached from its original context and starts functioning as a
distinct sense of a given preposition.
The model is especially fitted for a logical and an elegant presentation of the semantic
structure of spatial prepositions. As with any other theory attempting to model rich and
intricate reality a certain amount of approximation must be accepted. Thus, I consider
individual senses of the word near as prototypical instances keeping in mind that there
may be more and less prototypical usages of a given sense. Additionally, the motivations
behind the expansion of prepositional semantic networks that the model provides are
convincing as it is easy to trace the links between individual senses and see how they
relate. Practical benefits of the model for second language learning (Tyler 2012) and for
lexicography (Adamska-Sałaciak 2008a, 2008b) should also be appreciated.
The present corpus-based study expands the principled polysemy model (Tyler and
Evans 2003) by taking usage-data into account. As Lewis (2007) rightly points out, such
data can be useful for investigating polysemy. The analysis of the data shows how distinct
usages of the word near cluster to form crystallized and related nodes of meaning.
1 Methodological issues
The aim of the research is to calculate the probability of occurrence of distinct senses of
near in the database selected from the BNC. In order to do this, it is necessary to have a
representative sample of the item in question. In mathematics, the law of large numbers
assumes that the average of the results obtained from a large number of trials is close
to the expected value, and becomes closer to it when the number of trials increases. The
data selected should be random. The law of large numbers yields satisfying results when
the number of trials equals or is larger than 1000, and increases with the increase of the
number of trials.5
5
Encyclopeadia Britannica (retrieved from www.britannica.com/science/law-of-large-numbers) (date
of access: 25th Sept, 2015), Wolfram Math World (retrieved from www.mathworld.wolfram.com) (date of
access: 25th Sept, 2015).
3
The BNC is a 100 million word collection featuring samples of both written (90 per
cent) and spoken (10 per cent) language coming from a wide range of sources. A simple
search yielded a sample large enough to satisfy the requirements of the law of large num-
bers and small enough to be manageable in a reasonable span of time. However, there are
two reservations concerning the randomness of the sample that must be noted. First, it
should be remembered that corpora are rarely, if ever, random samples of language al-
though corpus builders strive for balance, representativeness and comparability (McEnery
and Hardie 2012:10). The corpus itself represents data selection and screening, which is
why simple statistical results obtained in the course of the present study should be taken
as an approximation showing a certain linguistic tendency. Second, a relatively small num-
ber of samples analyzed in the course of the present research, with the statistical error
amounting to around 2-5%, only allows for rough estimates about the frequency of the
word near in English.
At the first stage of the analysis, a sample of 2200 sentences containing the word
near was extracted from the BNC. The initial intention was to analyze 5000 instances
of use; however, such a large number of samples would prolong the processing of the
data, but it would not significantly reduce the statistical error. The cursory reading of the
data resulted in 2172 instances of use. The rejected 50 instances constituted incomplete
sentences difficult to make sense of. The remaining 2172 instances were all classified with
more or less effort into one of the categories emerging during the process of analysis. In
order to identify the occurrences of the complex preposition near to, the database of 2172
items was searched for the phrase. The first selection was subject to further scrutiny which
resulted in rejecting phrases such as they perceive the sites as being too near to be worthy
of a special car trip classified as adverb-infinitive structures.
In order to establish individual senses of near and near to, the methodology to estab-
lish distinct senses outlined in Tyler and Evans (2003) is used. Individual examples are
analysed in terms of TR-LM relationships between two objects they encode in order to
assess geometric configurations between the two. Identified metaphorical meaning compo-
nents are compared with metaphorical meaning components encoded by other non-spatial
senses of near/near to in attempt to assess if they are, in fact, novel. After the process
of classification into different semantic categories, each sense is given a name constituting
its closest paraphrase.
The OED (1986) is helpful in establishing the primary sense of the word near as Tyler
and Evans’ (2003) criteria for establishing the primary sense of a preposition seem un-
reliable (Lewis 2007). Thus, I assume that the primary sense of the preposition near is
spatial rather than metaphorical in nature, and locative rather than dynamic, as loca-
tion seems conceptually simpler than motion. The OED (1986) is not a helpful source
4
for establishing individual senses of near though, because it is not free of faults dictio-
naries are in general guilty of. Severe criticism of dictionary entries of content words
comes from Wierzbicka (1996), but prepositions are probably even more challenging for
lexicographers, as Adamska-Sałaciak (2008a, 2008b) rightly points out. Various senses of
polysemous prepositions are listed in an apparently arbitrary way, superfluous and redun-
dant information is provided and the same sense is illustrated in different places of the
entry by different examples. However, OED (1986) is used for reference and confirmation
of the findings concerning distinct senses of near.
Although the study does not focus on text-type distribution, the source information
identifying the discussed examples is provided in the footnotes. The abbreviation BNC
together with a reference code of an example is provided first and bibliographical informa-
tion of the source comes later. Two sentences were retrieved via Google Books,6 in which
case it is indicated in the footnote.
2 Grammatical considerations
There has been a great deal of discussion about what a word is and about the most
fundamental distinction between lexical and grammatical words (for instance Lyons 1995,
Cruse 2000). Generally speaking, words are considered composite forms as they have
form (either spoken or written) and meaning (Lyons 1995:23-26). In cognitive linguistics
a word is defined as a symbolic relation between a phonological pole (its spoken form)
and a semantic pole (its meaning) (Langacker 1987).
Traditionally, words are divided into two classes–open-class words, also called lexemes
or dictionary-words, and closed-class words, also called grammatical or functional words
(Lyons 1995, Cruse 2000:88-89). Specifically, open-class words belong to large substitution
sets, carry meaning in a sentence, and undergo change relatively quickly, as they either
come into existence or fall out of use. In contrast, closed-class words belong to small
substitution sets, express grammatical functions in a sentence, and are relatively slow to
change. Members of the open class include nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs, while the
closed class features determiners, prepositions, conjunctions, and particles, while (Cruse
2000, Talmy 2000).
The categorical status of prepositions, however, has not been conclusively established.
Radford (1997:45), for instance, makes a strong case for the lexical nature of prepositions
as they form antonymous pairs such as inside-outside or over-under, just like nouns, verbs
and adjectives. Evans (2010) considers prepositions as lexical concepts which hints at
their relationship with lexemes and concepts, suggesting, thereby, their ability to encode
6
https://books.google.com.
5
chunks of encyclopedic knowledge. Lakoff (1987), Brugman (1988), Herskovits ([1986]
2009), Talmy (2000) and Coventry and Garrod (2004) conceive of prepositions as closed-
class items.
An interesting approach to the categorical status of prepositions in particular, and
adpositions in general, is presented in Hagège (2010) who claims that “elements allegedly
belonging to grammar, (. . . ) also belong to the lexicon” (2010:332). In other words, the
author advocates a morpholexical treatment of the category of prepositions pointing to
the difficulties foreign language learners have when mastering prepositions of the target
language and to the prepositional ability to function as stylistic markers in poetry (Hagège
2010:268-270). To my mind, an equally convincing argument for treating prepositions
as morpholexical units is that at least some of them can function as members of both
grammatical and lexical categories (Brenda 2014). The preposition over, for example, can
function as an adverb, an adverbial particle in a number of phrasal and prepositional verbs
and a prefix in nouns, verbs adjectives and adverbs. Although over is not as productive
as a member of lexical categories, it can be a noun (overs denote copies printed in excess
(OED 1986)), a verb (as in the dialectal He done an operation on a woman and she never
overed it (OED 1986)) and an adjective (as in a little outdated combination A skirt of
black satin with over drapery of guipure lace (OED 1986)). The word near has similar
characteristics because, as the research shows, it can function as an untypical preposition
(by virtue of its ability to inflect for grade), an adverb, an adjective and a verb.
Prepositions and adverbs which are identical in form are often considered semantically
similar categories (Quirk et al. 1985). Frequently, as is the case with near, defining dis-
tinguishing features between them is a difficult task. For instance, the simple preposition
near and the complex preposition near to behave as typical prepositions as they can be
complemented by a noun phrase, a wh-clause and an -ing phrase. At the same time, near
and near to are the only prepositions (together with close to) inflecting for grade, as in
(1) below, and taking intensifiers, as in (2), which makes them similar to typical adjec-
tives.7 Adverbial uses of near without a complement are also relatively common. These
grammatical, formal and semantic similarities between the prepositional and adverbial
categories may be the grounds for disregarding the distinction and treating the prepo-
sition and the adverb near in a unified fashion, as many dictionaries in fact do, listing
7
It seems that there may be other prepositions taking intensifiers, for example, the preposition behind.
The Google search provides over 66 thousand hits for the phrase quite behind in sentences with positive
and negative polarity (not quite behind bars yet facing the threat of imprisonment and beautiful open pool
quite behind the hotel ). To make sure that behind takes an NP complement and is a typical preposition,
not an adverb or a noun, the searched for quite behind the and quite behind a was conducted and it yielded
respectively over 17 thousand and over 9 thousand hits. I would like to thank an anonymous reviewer for
bringing the matter to my attention.
6
distinct senses of the preposition/adverb near in one dictionary entry.
(1) Constance tiptoed nearer (to) the door.8
(2) That’s why we stay quite near (to) the top.9
The status of near in English grammar is not a clear-cut matter. Its prepositional
character is reflected by the ability to take NP, wh- and -ing complements (Quirk et al.
1985), as well as by the ability to be fronted together with its complement and accept
right as a modifier. Near generally does not complement the verb become (Huddleston and
Pullum 2002). As an adjective near inflects for grade and takes intensifiers very and too
(Quirk et al. 1985, Huddleston and Pullum 2002). Thus, it combines both prepositional
and adjectival characteristics.
Near is an attributive adjective in the near future, but the majority of its non-
attributive uses are prepositional (Huddleston and Pullum 2002:609) as is the case in
(1), where near/near to is treated as a preposition heading the prepositional phrase and
not an adjective taking the to- complement. Most of all, prepositional phrases, unlike
adjectival phrases, are able to function as non-predicative adjuncts in a sentence (Hud-
dleston and Pullum 2002:604). In Near/nearer (to) the city there is plenty going on, for
example, the word near heads the prepositional phrase near/nearer (to) the city which
functions as a non-predicative adjunct. Also, near/nearer (to) can be fronted together
with its complement in a relative clause as in The city near/nearer (to) which there is
plenty going on (Brenda 2014:81-82).
Although simple prepositions have received relatively little scholarly attention so far,
complex prepositions are even more neglected, with the most extensive corpus-based study
being Hoffmann (2005) who analyses the class of complex prepositions in terms of their
frequency of use. Unfortunately, his research focuses on PNP expressions (preposition-
noun-preposition, for example in spite of ), and excludes the phrase near to.
Traditionally, complex prepositions are two- or three-word sequences. Two-word se-
quences usually consist of an adverb, adjective, or conjunction and a simple preposition,
for example as for or apart from. The most common patterns of three word-sequences
include preposition+noun+preposition, as in in view of or by means of (Quirk 1985:669-
673, Biber 1999:75). However, it is difficult to distinguish between simple and complex
prepositions in an absolute fashion and, according to Hoffmann (2005), manipulation
tests designed to differentiate between complex prepositions and free forms (Quirk 1985,
8
Weger, Jackie. A strong and tender thread. (retrieved from: https://books.google.pl.) (date of
access: 12th March 2015).
9
BNC KD0, 106 conversations recorded by ‘Kevin’ (PS0HM) between 29 November and 5 December
1991 with 14 interlocutors.
7
Seppänen et al. 1994, Huddleston and Pullum 2002) are inconclusive.
Huddleston and Pullum (2002, 2005) suggest that the phrases in front of (2005) and
out of (2002) do not always function as inseparable units. It is possible to say He ran of
the office and He ran out but not *He ran out of. Similarly, they suggest that it is possible
to say She stood in front of the car and She stood in front but not *She stood in front of.
The analysis of the two phrases may be accepted. However, the authors (Huddleston and
Pullum 2002, 2005) also cite other expressions, such as according to, owing to, because
of and by means of which cannot be analyzed in the same way. For example, omitting
the complement to the word according in the sentence According to Kim, most of the
signatures were forged would result in an ungrammatical sequence even if the order of
the sentential elements was changed into *Most of the signatures were forged, according.
In the same way, the phrases owing to, because of and by means of cannot be broken
into separate elements retaining, at the same time, their prepositional characteristics.
Huddleston and Pullum (2005) claim that if by means of were a simple preposition, it
would not be possible to insert similar in the phrase and drop of as in by similar means.
However, clearly, by similar means is not a preposition at all. It is a prepositional phrase
which functions as a sentence adverbial. What is more, it cannot be complemented by of,
as we cannot say *by similar means of.
The expression near to might be analysed in the fashion similar to that of out of and
in front of. Specifically, in example (1) Constance tiptoed nearer (to) the door the phrase
to the door can be dropped leaving a perfectly correct sentence Constance tiptoed nearer
and showing that the preposition to might be analysed as belonging with the noun phrase
the door. However, other manipulations are not allowed as we cannot say, for instance,
*near at, which would be possible with a free expression (Quirk et al. 1985). In light of this
inconclusive evidence, it would seem advisable to look for more support elsewhere. For
example, Hoffmann (2005) suggests that the notion of frequency gives an insight into the
research into complex prepositions. His survey of 30 most frequent complex prepositions
in the BNC demonstrates that in the vast majority of the instances (92 per cent) no part
of the complex preposition is repeated in coordinated constructions, 4 per cent of the
instances involve full repetition of the complex preposition and 4 per cent involve partial
repetition separating different constituents, which may suggests that complex prepositions
are, in fact, inseparable units. Unfortunately, the expression near to is beyond the scope
of the author’s research.
Thus, in view of scant evidence, the present study follows the traditional distinction
between simple and complex prepositions (Quirk et al. 1985). It is assumed that a complex
preposition consists of two or three constituent parts, the second of which is a simple
preposition. Space characterizing properties of near to, that is its ability to encode a
8
spatial relation between two objects, also suggest that the sequence may be treated as a
complex preposition.
The word near realizes spatial relations of position and direction, both as a preposi-
tion and an adverb in a fashion similar to other spatial words. Formally the difference
between prototypical prepositions and adverbs relies respectively in the presence or ab-
sence of complements and, semantically, in the presence or absence of the LMs which the
complements encode. According to traditional accounts of grammar, prepositions are com-
plemented by noun phrases, wh-clauses and ing-clauses (Quirk et al. 1985), while more
cognitively oriented grammarians also include prepositional phrases, adverbial phrases
and a variety of clauses into the group of prepositional complements (Huddleston and
Pullum 2002, Biber et al. 1999). Certain approaches to grammar such as that of Huddle-
ston and Pullum (2002), however, suggest that less typical derivational adverbs license
direct complements and less typical prepositions license optional noun phrase comple-
ments or do not take complements at all. The authors attempt to reduce the extension of
the adverb category by shifting the boundary primarily with regard to the prepositional
category; however, they still maintain that “the pattern of complementation [...] provides
the most general criterion for distinguishing prepositions from adverbs” (Huddlestion and
Pullum 2002:604).
As for modification, adverbs generally modify verbs but also other adverbs (as in al-
most always), adjectives, (almost incomprehensible), determinatives, (almost all the can-
didates), as well as prepositional phrases (almost without equal ), noun phrases (almost the
whole book ) and clauses (Huddleston and Pullum 2002:562). Adverbial elements serving
as premodifiers belong to one of three types–polarity adverbs, such as not, comparison
adverbs, for instance more, less, as and so, and intensification adverbs such as very, quite
and nearly among others (Halliday 2004:356-357). Different types of adverbial modifiers
can obviously combine. With regards to postmodification, only comparison adverbs can
serve this role as in, for example, as early as two o’clock.
Similarly, prepositions form prepositional phrases which can function as sentence ad-
verbials or noun postmodifiers. In The seal has been fired at by a man with a rifle, for
instance, with a rifle postmodifies a man, and in A.M., 37, is alleged to have shot Robert
with a rifle the same phrase is an adverbial. Prepositional phrases can also premodify
nouns as in in-flight explosion. In fact, prepositional phrases are the most frequent type
of postmodifier in all registers (Biber et al. 1999).
On the other hand, prepositions form prepositional phases which can be themselves
modified in a number of ways. They can be modified by degree expressions, such as
completely or wholly, and noun phrases such as a long time–in a long time after the
accident. Adverbs such as right and straight function as typically prepositional modifiers;
9
however, other adverbial modifiers such as clearly, shortly or immmediately can modify
prepositional phrases as well. Finally, prepositional phrases can be modified by other
prepositions (Huddleston and Pullum 2002:643-645, Biber et al. 1999:103-104).
In light of what has been said, it is now possible to sum up the main characteristics of
the word under study. The simple adverb near and the derivational adverb nearly often
function as a clause element adverbial, in which case they modify a verb, as in He nearly
forgot about it. The two adverbs appear as a premodifier of an adjective or another adverb
in A solicitor’s undertaking is near/nearly absolute and near everywhere. Functionally,
near and nearly may be classified as downtoners or, more specifically, as approximators
(Quirk et al. 1985:445). When they modify an adjective or another adverb, they scale
downwards from an assumed norm expressed by the adjective/adverb, and when they
modify a verb, they deny its meaning.
3 The senses of the preposition near

A total of 2172 linguistic items were first and foremost divided in terms of the occurrence
of the single word near, with 2048 instances, and the complex sequence near to, with 98. In
the study, the complex sequence near to is considered a complex preposition, whereas the
former group is classified into prepositional, adverbial, adjectival and verbal categories.
Out of 2048 occurrences of a single word near 1750 turned out to be prepositional
uses. The frequencies of occurrence of distinct prepositional senses of near are presented
in table 2 below. The semantic category of the preposition near includes: the primary
In-the-vicinity Sense, with 1591 instances, the Interaction Sense, with 53, the Approach
Sense, with 32, the Approximately Sense, with 20, and the Temporal Sense, with 54.
Table 2: The frequency of occurrence for the preposition near
Sense number of occurrences per 1750
The In-the-vicinity Sense 1591

The Interaction Sense 53
The Approach Sense 32
The Approximately Sense 20
The Temporal Sense 54
Total: 1750
10
3.1 The primary sense of the preposition near –In-the-vicinity
Sense
According to the OED (1989), the first meaning of both the adverb and the preposition
near, already obsolete except when used dialectically, can be paraphrased as ‘nearer or
closer (to a place, point, or person).’ The first record of the sense comes from Beowulf
(line 745):
For near ætop
(3) forward near approach
Forward near he approached
The earliest attested sense of the preposition near which has survived into contemporary
English denotes the spatial proximity of two objects and can be paraphrased as ‘to, within,
or at, a short distance; to or in, close proximity.’ The origins of this sense can be traced
back to around 1250 when it was used in the sentence10
Egipte wimmen comen ner
(4) Egyptian women should come near
Egyptian women should come near.
clearly as an adverb.
Locative prepositions are usually divided into two main subclasses–topological and
projective (Coventry and Garrod 2004:7-8). The preposition near is classified as a topo-
logical preposition, as it disregards the metric distance between the TR and LM, and, more
specifically, as a proximity term denoting close distance between two objects (Radden and
Dirven 2007:311). The preposition near, like other topological prepositions, encodes a spa-
tial relation which does not depend on the viewpoint of an observer and which does not
change when the two objects involved are somewhat manipulated. The preposition can
be used to describe a given relation when the most crucial structural properties of the
relation between the two objects are preserved (Kemmerer and Tranel 2000:394).11 In
contrast, projective prepositions denote regions which project from the axis of the LM.
The preposition over, for instance, specifies a ‘higher than’ relation of the TR relative to
the LM along the up-down axis of the LM.
The preposition near is one of the prepositions expressing a symmetrical relation
between the TR and LM in the sense that when the TR is near the LM, the LM is
also near the TR (Herskovits 1989 [2009]:35).12 The preposition conveys the information
10
After OED (1989), Gen & Ex. 2611
11
Topological prepositions neglect Euclidean metric or, in other words, are magnitude neutral. The
name topological makes reference to topology, the mathematical study of shapes, also called “rubber-
sheet geometry”, which allows objects to be stretched or bent without losing their properties (Talmy
2003:25-32, http://www.mathworld.wolfram.com/Topology.html.)
12
There is a body of data showing that the geometric axiom of symmetry between two objects may be
11
concerning distance but not the orientation or direction of the objects involved (Ashley
and Carlson 2007). In the database collected, the primary sense of the preposition near,
the In-the-vicinity Sense, is frequently used with the proper names of human dwellings of
different sizes and with names of geographical regions, such as mountain ranges, islands,
lakes and forests, among others. The preposition is complemented by a proper name 771
times out of 1591 instances of the primary sense. The In-the-vicinity Sense of near is
illustrated below:
(5) (. . . ) CERN, Euorpe’s center near Geneva (. . . )13
(6) Manzoni was born in 1785 near Lake Como (. . . )14
The preposition near implies the presence of a TR on an unspecified territory adjacent to

its LM. The interpretation of phrase (5) suggests that CERN, the centre for research into
subatomic particles, is located somewhere in the neighbourhood of the city of Geneva.
Similarly Manzoni, an Italian poet and novelist in sentence (6), was born somewhere on
the grounds surrounding Lake Como.
The preposition near is also used with common nouns denoting LMs having a variety
of physical characteristics. A LM typical of the preposition near is usually one-, two- or
three-dimensional, with the exception of zero-dimensional points usually functioning as
LMs of the preposition at.15 Likewise, the orientation of the TR and LM is not an issue in
the primary sense of the preposition near. The following sentences encode various types
of LMs:
(7) Azzafi could be beaten for speed near the finish.16
(8) It has been suggested that the magnetic field (. . . ) arises from magnetized rocks
near the surface(. . . )17
(9) There was nothing to alarm him, no activity in the building at the end or near the
hangars.18
Sentence (7) above encodes a one-dimensional horizontal LM, the finish line, sentence (8)
a two-dimensional horizontal LM, the surface, and sentence (9) a three-dimensional LM,
violated. Specifically, the estimated distance between a good reference object and a poor reference object
is considered greater when the poor reference object functions as a LM (Coventry and Garrod 2004:117).
13
BNC B75, New Scientist. London: IPC Magazines Ltd, 1991.
14
BNC ANB, Milan: the complete travel organiser. Sale, Richard. Marlborough, Wilts: The Crowood
Press, 1991, pp. 37-145.
15
The preposition at presupposes a distant perspective, which is why the TR and LM are often perceived
as coinciding points. In contrast, the preposition near encodes a proximity between two objects which,
in consequence, are not scaled down to a point.
16
BNC K32, Belfast: Belfast Telegraph Newspapers Ltd, n.d., Leisure material.
17
BNC GW6, The solar system. Jones, Barrie William. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1984.
18
BNC G0L, The Lucy ghosts. Shah, Eddy. London: Corgi Books, 1993, pp. 321-452.
12
the hangers. All the sentences imply the presence of the TRs in the region adjacent to the
LM without specifications concerning the TRs’ precise positions. Thus, it may be argued
that the preposition near in its In-the-vicinity Sense highlights the outer borders of the
LM together with an area surrounding it. The area surrounding the LM may be called
“fuzzy” as its outer boundaries are undetermined. This brings two issues into question:
1) how distant can the TR be from the LM to be still described as “near”, and 2) can the
TR be in contact with the LM and be still described as “near?”
As has been said before, a topological preposition does not encode metric properties of
objects or relationships involved. However, the use of the preposition near is determined
by a number of characteristics of the spatial scene (Coventry and Garrod 2004:113-114).
First of all, geometric properties such as the size of the TR and LM and the spatial scale
at which the objects are viewed are important for the choice. If a small TR and LM
such as a fork and a knife are placed on a table one metre apart, the appropriate word
characterizing their relation would probably be far, but when two large objects such as
a ship and a sail boat are one metre apart, they are considered dangerously near one
another. The scale at which the objects are viewed influences the choice of an appropriate
proximity term as well. For example, the distance between the fork and the knife would
be described with the word far when they are on the table and with the word near when
they are placed on a football pitch. Small objects are also usually located with reference to
larger objects, while mobile objects are more naturally located with reference to immobile
objects. It seems more acceptable to say The boat is near the pier than The pier is near
the boat both because of the sizes and im/mobility of the TRs and LMs. Experiments
have also shown that the presence of a third object in the spatial scene influences human
judgements for proximity terms. When the distance between the TR and the distractor
object is larger than the distance between the TR and LM, the term near is judged more
appropriate (Burgio and Coventry 2010).
Nongeometric factors also determine the use of a given spatial term to describe a
given spatial relation. Coventry and Garrod (2004) report on a body of psychological
research proving the importance of the background knowledge of the world in the choice
of proximity terms to describe spatial scenes. To a cyclist who had to travel five kilometres
to his house (on his bicycle) and a car driver who had to go the same distance in his
car, the five kilometres would seem longer to the cyclist. If, however, the house and
the vehicle are separated by a series of lanes too narrow for the car to go through, the
cyclist might consider the distance shorter and the driver as much longer (Coventry and
Garrod 2004:116). The functional relationship between the TR and LM also influences the
choice of the preposition in the way that functionally related objects are termed as near
more often than unrelated objects. Subjects rate near significantly more appropriate, for
13
instance, when a couch is located in such a way relative to the TV that it is possible to
view the program clearly whilst being seated on it (especially if they are short sighted)
(Coventry and Garrod (2004:117)
Logan and Sadler (1996) provide an interesting answer to the question of distance
between the TR and LM encoded by the preposition near. They suggest that language
users decide if a given spatial term is appropriate to describe a spatial relation by ap-
plying a spatial template to the spatial scene, which represents the so-called regions of
acceptability. A spatial template is a two- or three-dimensional field centered on the LM
specifying whether a spatial relation applies to a pair of objects. In one of the experiments
they tried to determine the regions of space corresponding to the best examples of English
spatial prepositions. The results for near are presented in figure (1).
Figure 1: Distances between the TR and LM encoded by the preposition near (Logan and Sadler 1996:508)
The square in figure (1) represents the LM and the dots show the positions of the TR
which may be considered near the LM. It appears that, at least for some of the subjects,
the preposition near can encode contact between the TR and LM. This is in contrast
to Lindstromberg’s observation (2010:152) that the preposition near entails no contact
between the TR and LM. Lindstromberg (2010:144) further specifies that the difference
between the two proximity prepositions near and by rests on the lack and/or presence of
contact or connection between the TR and LM respectively. It seems plausible, however,
that the contact between the TR and LM cannot be precluded, especially in small scale
scenes involving small objects. A fork and a knife on a table described as near each other
may in fact be touching one another. What is important perhaps is that contact is not
a salient feature encoded by the preposition near.19 Thus, the interpretation of sentence
(10) below, for instance, suggests that the TR he is located in the region adjacent to
19
Salience is related to the basic phenomenon of attention attributive to the human conceptual system
(Croft and Cruse 2004:47), and it is understood as the foregrounding or prominence of an object or its
part, or, alternatively, as strength of attention directed towards this object or its part (Talmy 2000:76).
Thus, in the present study, salience refers to participants of spatial scenes encoded by spatial expressions
which are, for some reason, foregrounded or made prominent.
14
the LM the side of the boat. It is quite feasible to imagine that the man is either leaning
against the side of the boat, or that he is sitting a little away from the boat. In any case
the exact distance is not encoded by the preposition near and it may be argued that it is
not relevant.
(10) Sometimes, when he had been sitting near the side of the boat (. . . )20
The preposition near encodes the TR located in the area or space surrounding the
LM and not in the area or space occupied by the LM itself, as is the case, for instance,
with the preposition at which encodes a TR located within the surface or space of an
object functioning as a LM. The difference between the two prepositions near and at is
evidenced in the following sentence:
(11) Visitors to Yordas Cave who have left their cars parked at or near Masongill
(. . . )21
The coordinating conjunction or is used to show the choice between the two alternatives:
the cars could have been parked either at or near the village of Masongill. The preposition
at prompts for the conceptualization of the cars being parked in an unspecified area within
the limits of the village, also along its borders, whereas the preposition near excludes the
area occupied by the village and highlights the territory outside the outer borders of
Masongill.
Two other sentences containing the prepositions near and at are even more illustrative
as far as the difference between the actual spatial relations is concerned:
(12) (. . . ) I shot near his head.22
(13) The gunman raised his gun to fire at the door.23
The preposition near in sentence (12) denotes that the bullet missed a man’s head and
went past it without coming in contact with it. In contrast, when the gunman in sentence
(13) fired at the door, he actually hit the door causing damage to it.
Taking what has been already said about the preposition near into consideration,
I suggest that figure (2) below is an abstract graphic representation of the spatial ar-
rangement between the TR and LM encoded by the preposition near. The black sphere
20
BNC AS7, Tales of the loch. Sandison, Bruce. Edinburgh: Mainstream Publishing Company Ltd,
1990, pp. 1-102.
21
BNC ASU, Wainwright in the limestone dales. Wainwright, Alfred. London: Michael Joseph Ltd,
1991, pp. 1-122.
22
BNC GVL, The night mayor. Newman, Kim. Sevenoaks: New English Library, 1990, pp. 49-185.
23
Lawless, Stephen F. The Gods’ Glass. (retrieved from: https://books.google.pl) (date of access:
17 March 2015).
15
represents the LM, while the dashed circle represents the region adjacent to the LM. The
x-symbol indicates the possible, although undetermined, position of the TR relative to
the LM.
Figure 2: The primary sense of the preposition near
3.2 The Interaction Sense of the preposition near

In certain contexts, a geometric relation between the TR and LM encoded by the spatial
preposition near is supplemented by a functional element suggesting contact and interac-
tion as a consequence of the proximity between the TR and LM. The earliest use of the
Interaction Sense dates back to 831.24
Nis Eðelmode enig meghond neor ðes cynees ðanne Eadwald
(14) Is not Eðelmode any relative near this kind than Eadwald
There is no one nearer of kin to Aethelmond than Eadwald.
The Interaction Sense of the preposition near arises via the process of pragmatic strength-
ening, whereby inferences of certain prepositional usages in certain contexts are associated
with that preposition and, with time, start functioning as its separate sense (Tyler and
Evans 2003:38). The Interaction Sense arises when the preposition near is used with verbs
denoting motion, such as come, go and get, as well as with verbs denoting permission,
such as let and allow. A characteristic feature of this sense is that both the TR and the
LM usually, although not always, denote people. The sense is illustrated below:
(15) He is the only person who could have got near the animal.25
(16) On no account let that charlatan near me!26
The spatial relation between the man and the animal in sentence (15) is encoded by
the preposition near indicating proximity. However, all the sentential elements contribute
to the interpretation which extends beyond the spatial arrangement. The man is the only
person who can come into the vicinity of the animal not being threatened by it. Thus, the
notion of proximity carries with it an additional element of possible interaction between
the TR and the LM which, in (15), may be endangering for some. The notion of unwanted
24
After OED (1989), Charter in Old English Texts 445.
25
BNC CH2, The Daily Mirror. London: Mirror Group Newspapers, 1992.
26
BNC EFW, The siege of Krishnapur. Farrell, J G. London: Fontana Paperbacks, 1988, pp. 205-313.
16
interaction is also conceptualized in sentence (16). The fact that the doctor approaches the
patient physically implies negative consequences for the patient who is, clearly, reluctant
to have anything to do with the doctor.
Spatial proximity which invites interaction between the TR and LM encoded by the
preposition near is represented in figure (3) below:
Figure 3: The Interaction Sense of the preposition near
A black sphere in the figure represents the LM, while an x-symbol represents the TR.
The two remain in the relation of a spatial proximity enriched by the functional element
of interaction symbolized by the left-right arrow.
3.3 The Approach Sense

The Approach Sense of the preposition near prompts for the conceptualisation of the TR
becoming closer to the LM in various non-spatial domains. In the database the sense is
used to encode different states (physical, emotional, importance, colour) and the concepts
of achievement and failure. One of the first written records of the sense comes from 1585.27
The people... are of complection neerer the blacke then white
(17) The people... are of complexion nearer the black than white
The people’s complexion is nearer black than white.
Numerous examples of the sense are also found in Modern English, for example They are
in shape and bigness the nearest like our green grasshoppers (OED 1989).28 Sentence (18)
below is a typical example of the sense in contemporary English:
(18) Check that all the wedding clothes are near completion.29
In (18) the phrase wedding clothes is a TR and completion is a LM. The TR, undergoing
the process of preparation, is approaching its final stage. In this sentence the LM is
realized as a desired state for which the TR is heading. The Approach Sense can also
encode LMs realized as various emotional states. Sentence (19), for instance, encodes the
TR, Rosamund Coldharbour, who is on the verge of breaking into tears, a state of sadness
functioning as a LM:
27
After OED (1989), Washington Thomas, translation of Nicholay’s (N. de) Nauigations into Turkie
IV.X. 122 b, translation.
28
Shelvoke George (the elder) A Voyage round World, 1726.
29
BNC BPF, Wedding and Home. London: Maxwell Consumer Magazines, 1992.
17
(19) Rosamund Coldharbour had been near tears, he had noticed, as he had gone into
Wheeler’s room.30
Figure (4) below represents a schematic relation between the TR and LM encoded by
the Approach Sense of the preposition near. In the figure the x-symbol represents the TR,
the black sphere stands for the LM which the TR is approaching and the left pointing
arrow symbolizes the process of the TR drawing closer to the LM.
Figure 4: The Approach Sense of the preposition near
3.4 The Approximately Sense

I argue that the Approximately Sense is an extension of the Approach Sense. The Ap-
proach Sense is non-spatial and so is the Approximately Sense; however, they encode
two different metaphorical meaning components. The Approximately Sense makes clear
reference to the concept of SCALE, that is quantitative and qualitative aspects of our ex-
perience. As Johnson (1987:122-123) claims, human beings frequently experience reality
in terms of more, less and the same.
The Approach Sense of the preposition near prompts for the conceptualization involv-
ing the TR drawing closer to the LM. In the Approximately Sense the LM is conceptualized
as a numerical value on the scale. The preposition near does not, however, encode a larger
fraction of the scale with the neighbouring values, in the fashion similar to that of at, but
only a small fraction of the scale with a given number the TR is close to.
The preposition near has encoded this non-spatial relation between the TR and LM
for over seven centuries, as its earliest written record dates back to before 1300.31
He welk þat fell ner dais thre
(20) He walked that hill near days three
He took nearly three days to walk that hill.
A more modern example comes from Early Modern English (OED 1989).
30
BNC H8B, Clerical errors.Greenwood, D M Headline 1991, pp. 31-151.
31
After OED (1989), Cursor Mundi 3155 (The Cursor of the world) A Northumbrian poem of the 14th
century in four versions 13.., 14..
18
(21) I have sayled neere 70 degrees from North to South.32
Sentences (22) and (23) illustrate the sense in contemporary English:

(22) As growth in France’s economy slows to an expected 2 per cent this year after two
years near 4 per cent, (. . . )33
(23) He hadn’t been dead for very long—my earlier estimate of around six hours will
be somewhere near the mark.34
The TR in sentence (22), the growth in France’s economy, is estimated as roughly achieving
the level encoded by the LM, 4 per cent. In other words, the growth amounts to, more or
less, 4 per cent. Sentence (23) expresses a similar relation between the TR and LM, as the
death of a person is estimated to have taken place approximately six hours before. The
preposition near in the two sentences can be paraphrased with the prepositions around
or about.
The non-spatial relation between the TR and LM encoded by the Approximately Sense
is given in figure (5) below where the horizontal arrow represents a scale with numerical
values indicated by the black points. The dashed circle surrounding the bold sphere (LM)
shows the possible area of approximation, whereas the bold arrow represents the TR being
fairly close to the value in question.
Figure 5: The Approximately Sense of the preposition near
3.5 The Temporal Sense

The preposition near, like many other spatial prepositions, such as over or at, can denote
a temporal relation between the TR and LM. The Temporal Sense of the preposition near
arises as a consequence of a metaphorical transfer of meaning when the spatial relation
between the TR and the proximal LM is shifted to the temporal domain. This sense was
in use as early as around 1300, when it was first recorded in the sentence35
32
Grimstone Edward D’Acosta’s (J. de) Naturall and morall historie of the East and West Indies I.ii
5, translation.
33
BNC ABJ, The Economist. London: The Economist Newspaper Ltd, 1991.
34
BNC H0D, Death in the City. Anderson, J R L. UK: F A Thorpe (Publishing) Ltd, 1980, pp. 1-200.
35
After OED (1989), Cursor Mundi 518023 (The Cursor of the world) A Northumbrian poem of the
14th century in four versions 13.., 14..
19
It sal be nere þe worldes end
(24) It shall be near the world’s end
It will be near the end of the world.
As an extension of the In-the-vicinity Sense, the Temporal Sense of the preposition
near encodes the TR localized close to the LM not in the spatial but in the temporal
domain. The LM is frequently instantiated by temporal phrases, such as morning, end of
September, beginning of the century, the end, an exam, etc. The sentences below illustrate
the sense:
(25) Most Greek religious festivals occurred at or near full moon (. . . )36
(26) It was getting near Christmas and we were both under pressure to get orders com-
pleted.37
Sentence (25) prompts for the conceptualization of the TR, Greek religious festivals, which
usually occurs close to the period signified by the LM, the time of the month when the
moon is full. The relation between the TR, it, and the LM, Christmas, mediated by the
preposition near in sentence (26) yields to the interpretation that the time span between
now and the holiday is getting shorter. In both sentences reflections of the primary spatial
sense may be noticed with the exception that the relation is realized in the temporal
domain.
Taking the above into consideration, the following schematization of the The Temporal
Sense of the preposition near may be suggested:
Figure 6: The Temporal Sense of the preposition near
Figure (6) resembles figure (2) representing the spatial primary sense of near as the
number of participants in the spatial scene, and their configuration remain the same. The
small unfilled circle represents the LM, the x-symbol stands for the TR located in the
vicinity of the LM, while the dashed circle marks the region adjacent to the LM. Unlike
the representation of the primary sense, however, the representation of the Temporal
Sense makes use of the unfilled circle which is supposed to draw attention to the temporal
nature of the relationship which the representation reflects.
In summary, taking the above findings into consideration, it may be argued that five
36
BNC ASF, Time in history. Whitrow, G J. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990, pp. 19-120.
37
BNC CGV, Machine Knitting Monthly. Maidenhead: Machine Knitting Monthly Ltd, 1992.
20
regions of “higher semantic density” (Cruse 2006[2000]) emerge in the semantic structure
of the preposition near : the primary In-the-vicinity Sense, the Interaction Sense, the
Approach Sense, and its extension the Approximately Sense, and the Temporal Sense. It
may be noticed that the semantic structure of the preposition near is rather impoverished
relative to some other spatial prepositions, such as over or at, which have over twenty
distinct senses in their semantic networks (for example Tyler and Evans 2003, Kokorniak
2007). The senses associated with the preposition near may be arranged in a semantic
network, given in figure (7), following Tyler and Evans’ (2003) principled polysemy model.
In the figure, the bold sphere represents the primary sense of near, the lightly shaded
spheres represent its extensions, and the arrows indicate the direction of change motivating
subsequent senses.
Figure 7: The semantic network for the preposition near
4 The complex preposition near to

The analysis of the complex preposition near to reveals that its semantic network com-
prises the same senses as the semantic network for the preposition near. The difference
between near and near to rests on a different conceptualization of the LM. While the
preposition near encodes the same salience of the TR and the LM, near to prompts for
the conceptualization of a highlighted LM. In purely spatial senses, such as the In-the-
vicinity Sense, the side of the LM closer to the TR is usually more prominent, however,
without any specific TR/LM orientation. In sentences encoding dynamic spatial scenes
the LM may be conceptualized as a goal that the TR is trying to reach. In non-spatial
senses, the whole LM receives a high degree of salience.
The frequencies of occurrence for the preposition near to are presented in table 3.
Sentences comprising near to constitute a minority in the collected database, as only 98
instances out of 2172 contain this complex preposition. Despite the scarcity of the sample,
it is noticeable that instances of the preposition near to fall into the following categories:
In-the-vicinity (64 occurrences), Interaction (3 occurrences), Approach (34 occurrences),
Approximately (3 occurrences) and Temporal (3 occurrences).
21
Table 3: The frequency of occurrence for the preposition near to

The Approximately Sense 3
Total: 98
Distinct senses of near to can be arranged into a semantic network in the fashion
similar to that of the preposition near (figure 8):
Figure 8: The semantic network for the preposition near to
The history of the preposition near to is shorter than that of near. The preposition
near to was first recorded around 1250 in the sentence38
Laban cam to ðat welle ner
(27) Laban came to that well near
Laban came near to that well.
The preposition belongs to a group of complex prepositions consisting of the adverb or
adjective near, which is usually relatively stressed, and the simple preposition to (Quirk
et al. 1985). The question arises if different forms correspond to different meanings of the
pair near and near to or if the simple and complex prepositions mean the same regardless
of the difference in form?
4.1 The primary sense of near to

The spatial In-the-vicinity Sense of the preposition near to is the most common sense in
the database collected and it amounts to 64 instances. Sentences (28) and (29) represent
the simplest uses of the primary sense of the preposition as they encode stative rather
than dynamic actions.
38
After OED (1989), Genesis & Exodus 1395.
22
(28) ‘Where’s the fresh meat we were promised?-’ a man standing near to Ruth called
out.39
(29) At midday six guerrilla fighters arrived to help them from a military base near to
their village.40
In (28) the TR, man, is located in the vicinity of the LM, Ruth, and the relation is
encoded by the complex preposition near to rather than the simple one near. The above
discussion of the simple preposition near reveals that the preposition encodes the presence
of the TR on an unspecified territory adjacent to the LM. The question arises, then, what
semantic element the simple preposition to contributes. Quirk et al. in reference to the
preposition to, talk about “completive movement in the direction of a place” (1985:667) or
“the assumption that the destination will be reached” (1985:696). Lindstromberg (2010)
defines the basic spatial sense of to as an endpoint of a path, as in went to their house,
and he distinguishes various other senses, such as a metaphorical pointing in, for instance,
refer to, directed physical connection in connected to, possession in it belongs to her and
metaphorical presentation in known to everyone.
An interesting account of the meaning of the preposition to is given in Tyler and
Evans (2003:145-153). The authors disagree with many previous analyses understanding
the preposition to as an endpoint of a path and they rightly argue instead that the proto-
scene for to encodes a stative TR oriented toward a LM given “an unusual degree of
saliency” (Tyler and Evans 2003:150). This analysis seems convincing as the proto-scene
should, by definition, constitute the simplest physical configuration between the TR and
LM which is later elaborated on in a context. The highlighted status of the LM makes
it available for the interpretation as a target or a goal which constitutes a functional
element arising from a geometric configuration encoded by the preposition. Specifically,
the authors suggest that the LM of to functions as the primary target or goal, as opposed
to the oblique goal encoded by the preposition for with the notions of passage, path and
motion excluded from the proto-scene. It may be argued that one of the extensions of the
proto-scene for the preposition to, its Locational Sense (Tyler and Evans 2003:150-151),
is part of the complex preposition near to.
The preposition to contributes to the complex preposition near to–the element of
salience of the LM involved in the spatial relation. The preposition near denotes the
proximity of the TR relative to the LM, whereas the preposition to makes the LM a
salient element of the scene. This is clearly seen if the preposition to is removed from the
39
BNC CB5, Ruth Appleby. Rhodes, Elvi. London: Corgi Books, 1992, pp. 109-226.
40
BNC H88, Mathematics, teachers and children. Pimm, David. Sevenoaks, Kent: Hodder; Stoughton
Ltd, 1988, pp. 69-182.
23
expression in question:
(30a) ‘Where’s the fresh meat we were promised?-’ a man standing near Ruth called
out.
(30b) ‘Where’s the fresh meat we were promised?-’ a man standing near to Ruth called
out.
(31a) At midday six guerrillas fighters arrived to help them from a military base near
their village.
(31b) At midday six guerrillas fighters arrived to help them from a military base near
to their village.
In (30a), both the TR, a man, and the LM, Ruth, receive the same degree of salience. The
interpretation of the sentence involves two participants in a symmetrical spatial relation.
The situation changes in (30b) where Ruth is a more salient participant of the relation
and where the bigger salience of the LM is prompted for by the preposition to. The same is
also true about the second pair of similar sentences. In (31a), the TR and LM participate
in a symmetrical relation where a military base is proximal to the village and none is
particularly prominent. The complex preposition near to in (31b) adds the element of
salience to the LM. It may be further argued that in the spatial In-the-vicinity Sense, the
complex preposition near to highlights the side of the LM closer to the TR, but, without
the TR or LM being oriented towards one another.
Taking the above into consideration, the following schematization of the primary sense
of the complex preposition near to may be proposed. In figure (9) the black sphere rep-
resents the LM, while the dashed sphere represents the region adjacent to the LM. The
x-symbol indicates the possible, although undetermined, position of the TR relative to
the LM, as it was the case with the simple preposition near. The arc symbol to the right
of the LM shows the more foregrounded side of the LM, closer to the TR, towards which
the TR is oriented.
Figure 9: The primary sense of the preposition near to
The primary sense of the complex preposition near to may also be used to encode
dynamic spatial scenes, in which case the considerable saliency of the LM remains un-
changed. In (32), for instance,
24
(32) But this time I’ll get as near to the front as possible!41
the TR, I, is trying to get closer to the LM, the front. The complex preposition near
to denotes the proximity between the two entities in the scene and highlights the LM.
However, as the verb get encodes a dynamic action, the LM may also be understood as a
goal for the TR to achieve.
4.2 Interaction Sense

The presence of the TR in the vicinity of the LM may result in an interaction between
them. The Interaction Sense of the preposition near to denotes the interplay of the TR
with a salient LM. One of the earliest records of the Interaction Sense comes from 145042
Y saide she was bothe good and faire but she shulde be to me no nere than she was
(33) I said she was both good and faire but she should be to me no near than she was
I said that she was both good and faire, but she should be no near to me than she was.
The following sentence illustrates the use in contemporary English:
(34) To his surprise, the strongest argument in favour of taking the job had been that
it would keep him near to Frances.43
The interpretation of (34) does not suggest that accepting the job would cause only
the physical proximity of the TR, him, and the LM, Frances. Rather, the TR hopes for a
possible frequent contact and broadly understood interaction with the LM. The to element
contributes to the salience of the LM and makes it an important participant of the scene
in the same fashion as it does in the primary sense.
Figure (10) below is a graphic representation of the sense. The black sphere in the
figure represents the LM while the x-symbol stands for the TR. The two remain in the
relation of spatial proximity enriched by the functional element of interaction symbolized
by the left-right arrow. Additionally, the salience of the LM is represented by a circle
embracing the shaded sphere. As the Interaction Sense is not spatial, the TR interacts
with the whole LM and not with its salient side.
Figure 10: The Interaction Sense of the preposition near to
41
BNC JYA, Sweet deceiver. Ashe, Jenny. Richmond, Surrey: Mills; Boon, 1993.
42
After OED (1989), Knight de la Tour-Landry The book of the... around 1450 (1868).
43
BNC H92, Murder unprompted. Brett, Simon. UK: Futura Publications Ltd, 1984, pp. 45-170.
25
4.3 The Approach Sense of near to
The Approach Sense of the preposition near to parallels the Approach Sense of the prepo-
sition near. Specifically, this sense encodes the TR drawing closer to the LM in various
non-spatial domains. In 1548 we find one of the early examples of the sense in44
He came verai nere to man bothe seeying and beeyng seen
(35) He came very near to man both seeing and being seen
He came very near to the man so that he could see him and be seen.
The interpretation of sentence (36), which is the contemporary example of the sense, sug-
gests that we will probably never get closer to knowing the truth. The contrast between
the Approach senses of the prepositions near and near to is based on different conceptu-
alizations of the LM, which for near to functions as a salient participant in the relation
and constitutes the TR’s goal.
(36) Speculative, as you say, but I think it’s as near to the truth as we’re going to get.45
A schematic relation between the TR and LM encoded by the Approach Sense of

the preposition near to is presented in figure (11). The x-symbol represents the TR, the
black sphere stands for the LM which the TR is approaching, and the left pointing arrow
symbolizes the TR drawing closer to the LM. The circle around the LM indicates its
salient nature.
Figure 11: The Approach Sense of the preposition near to
4.3.1 The Approximately Sense
The Approximately Sense of the preposition near to is used with numbers and it consti-
tutes an extension of the Approach Sense denoting coming closer in respect of estimation.
There are only three instances of the Approximately Sense of the complex preposition
near to in the database collected and, although the scarcity of the sample does not allow
for generalization, the interpretation of the examples shows that the difference between
44
After OED (1989), Udall Nicolas Apophthegmes, that is to saie, prompte saiynges. First gathered by
Erasmus Luke X.93b, translation.
45
BNC B20, Look about and die. Butters, Roger. Lewes, East Sussex: The Book Guild Ltd, 1991, pp.
45-167.
26
the Approach senses of near and near to consisting in the salient nature of the LM is still
maintained. Sentence (37) is a typical example of the sense:
(37) This time last year Bulmers shares were at 170p, today they are near to 260p.46
Bulmers shares function as the TR, and the LM, 260p, is the value the price of the shares is
approaching. The preposition at denotes the price that amounts to exactly 170p, whereas
the preposition near to indicates that the price is getting close to 260p. The preposition
near to highlights the LM, 260p, which would not be as salient if the preposition encoding
the relation were replaced with near.
The abstract relation between the TR and LM encoded by the Approximately Sense is
given in figure (12). The shaded sphere symbolizes the LM, encircled to indicate its salient
role in the relation. The thin horizontal arrow represents a scale with growing numerical
values shown as small points. The dashed circle around the LM limits the adjacent price
region, including for example 258p and 259p, and the bold arrow shows that the TR is
getting closer to a certain price value.
Figure 12: The Approximately Sense of the preposition near to

The Temporal Sense of the preposition near to reflects that of the preposition near in the
sense that it encodes the metaphorical movement of the TR in the direction of the LM in
the temporal domain. Sentence (38) illustrates the usage:
(38) You’re coming near to the end of your shift.47
The TR, you, is drawing close to the LM, the end of the shift. The preposition near
to encodes the temporal relation between the TR and LM, where the preposition to
introduces the salience of the LM to the sense in much the same way it did in other
senses.
The relation between the TR and LM encoded by the Temporal Sense is shown in figure
(13) below. The unfilled thick circle represents the highlighted LM, a certain moment in
46
BNC A14, What’s brewing. St Albans: CAMRA, 1991.
47
BNC JY1, His woman. Steele, Jessica Mills & Boon Richmond, Surrey 1991.
27
time, and the x-symbol stands for the TR. The dashed circle around the LM symbolizes
the region in the temporal domain considered proximal to the LM.
Figure 13: The Temporal Sense of the preposition near to
5 The adverb near

The frequency of occurrence for the adverb near is presented in table 4 below. In the
sample collected for the purpose of the present research, 166 sentences out of 2172 contain
the adverb near. The high frequency of the Approach Sense is particularly striking among
all the adverbial senses described (89 occurrences), with the spatial In-the-vicinity Sense
ranking second (56 occurrences). Next come the Temporal Sense (12 instances of use) and
the Interaction Sense being the least frequent in the database (9 instances). The adverb
near does not encode the Approximately Sense.
Table 4: The frequency of occurrence for the adverb near

Total: 166
5.1 The In-the-vicinity Sense

The earliest record of the adverb near is in the following line from Beowulf : ForD near
ætstop (OED 1989)48 which may be translated into contemporary English as “forward
near he approached.” Similarly, the adverb near is used in the phrase from King Aelfred’s
Boethius De consolatione philosophiae dated 888 (OED 1989):
Da eode se Wisdom near...
(39) She went his wisdom near...
She drew near his wisdom.
48
Beowulf 745.
28
It is not an exaggeration to say that the majority of citations provided by the OED (1989)
to illustrate the history of various senses of the word near involve the adverb rather than
the preposition. This might suggest that the adverb near has been more frequently used
in the English language than the preposition; however, the observation is not supported
by the present analysis.
The primary sense of the adverb near, the In-the-vicinity Sense, roughly reflects that
of the preposition; however, with a few modifications. First of all, an adverb remains in
a closer relation to a verb it modifies than a preposition focused on the spatial relation
between the participants of a spatial scene. For example, the adverb near in (40)
(40) A slim attractive girl in jeans hovered near, her pose suggesting I could approach
her.49
provides additional information about the verb hover, making it clear that the action
denoted by the verb was performed nearby. Specifically, the adverb cannot overtly encode
the relationship between two objects in the scene because it is not complemented by a
noun phrase encoding a localizing object. The TR in (40), a slim attractive girl, who
hovered near, is not in an explicit spatial relation with another object functioning as
a LM. Interestingly, however, the second part of the sentence suggests that the adverb
near does provide the information about where the action takes place relative to another
participant of the scene encoded by the pronoun I. What is more, the adverb near would
also imply an implicit localizing entity even if we disregard the second part of the sentence.
The clause A slim attractive girl in jeans hovered near characterizes the localization of
the girl in relation to another object not implicitly encoded in the sentence.50
5.2 The Interaction Sense

The purely geometric localization encoded by the adverb near in the In-the-vicinity Sense
is now transfered to the non-spatial domain of human interaction. The Interaction Sense
of the adverb was first recorded around 1456 in51 The contemporary example is given in
(42)
His inymyes pressit him sa nere that...
(41) His enemies pressed him so near that...
His enemies pressed him so near that...
(42) Let us rejoice in the Lord always, in the midst of everyday life, for the Lord is
49
BNC AE0, Lying together. Thomas, D M. London: Victor Gollancz Ltd, 1990.
50
The observation about the implicit nature of the LM has already been made in relation to other
adverbs in, for example, Lindstromberg (2010) and McMichael (2006).
51
After OED (1989), Haye, Sir Gilbert The buke of the law of armys or buke of bataillis 204, 1456.
29
always near.52
where the presence of the TR, the Lord encoded by the verb is, is modified by the adverb
near. Again, the absence of the implicit LM is related to the fact that the adverb near
does not take a noun complement. Even though implicit, the LM is very well understood,
making clear reference to the faithful over whom the Lord watches.
5.3 The Approach Sense

In the collected database the Approach Sense of the adverb near is used in the context of
object qualities, with the notions of failure and success and with the concept completion.
The early usage of the adverb near modifying the verb be is illustrated in the sentence
coming from about 1200 (OED 1989).53
Forr all þe Judewisshe follc Well ner wass all forrworrpenn
(43) For all the Jewish folk well near was all renounce
For all the Jewish people were nearly all renounced.
The adverb near encodes the same semantic information of a diminishing distance as
the preposition, but the LM is not explicitly encoded by a particular linguistic expression.
In (44), for instance,
(44) But to be so near, and then to fail!54
the speakers see themselves as very close to achieving a certain goal. If near functioned
as a preposition in this sentence, the goal the speaker aimed at would be overtly stated.
Since near is an adverb, we can only suppose that the LM is a generally conceived success
to which the speakers came close and which they did not achieve. The lack of an explicitly
mentioned LM also makes it difficult to propose a separate, though related, Approximately
Sense as is the case with prepositions where the scalar and nonscalar nature of the LMs
is the reason for the distinction between the two senses.
In the majority of instances in the database, the Approach Sense of the adverb under
study modifies an adjective, as in the near universal experience, a near vertical climb
and near discordant notes, or a verb, as in we were near deluding ourselves and in the
colloquial it’ll damn near cut you in two. Although not marked as obsolete in the OED
(1989), this usage is frequently replaced by the adverb nearly in contemporary English.
The typical uses of the Approach Sense, illustrated in (45) and (46), prompt for the
conceptualization of coming closer to an implicit standard, norm, value or state, and
52
BNC G5H, Sermons (Public/institutional). Recorded in April 1993, with 1 participant.
53
Ormin The Ormulum 9638, around 1200.
54
BNC K8S, The green branch. Pargeter, Edith. London: Warner Books, 1987, pp. 126-232.
30
may well be paraphrased as ‘almost.’ In (45) a representative assembly is characterized
as coming close to being universal among western democracies. Similarly, in (46), where
the adverb near modifies the verb, the action of killing oneself is almost completed. The
interpretation suggests that a man endangered his life to such an extent that he was very
close to losing his life but, at the same time, we know that he survived the peril.
(45) A representative assembly is a near universal feature of modern western democ-
racies.55
(46) Did a man near kill himself ?56

The Approach Sense does not yield easily to the interpretation in terms of the TR
and LM. Clearly the adverb near does not mediate a relationship between two entities
in (45) and in (46), as it is closely related to, respectively, the adjective and the verb it
modifies. Thus, rather than indicating a relationship of any kind, it delimits the meaning
of the modified word. Specifically, in accordance with its function as a downtowner, it
scales downwards from the value universal and it approximates the action denoted by the
verb kill.

The Temporal Sense of the adverb near was first registered around 1300 in the sentence57
þe time es nu comand nere
(47) the time is now command near
The time to command is now near.
The Temporal Sense of the adverb prompts for the conceptualization of the proximal TR
relative to the implicit LM in the domain of time reflecting, thereby, the prepositional
usage. The interpretation of sentence (48) suggests that the TR the competitive end is
localized in a future long ahead of Navratilova.
(48) Sukova said she hoped the competitive end was not near for Navratilova.58
The word near in example (48) is considered an adverb even though it might resemble
an adjective used predicatively, since it can inflect for grade. However, relying solely
on morphological evidence when determining categorical status of a word is not enough
55
BNC C8R, An introduction to British constitutional law. Calvert, Harry. London: Blackstone Press,
1985.
56
BNC KDN, 90 conversations recorded by ‘Raymond2’ (PS1HH) between 15 and 17 April 1992 with
10 interlocutors.
57
After OED (1989), Cursor Mundi (The Cursor of the world). A Northumbrian poem of the 14th
century in four versions. 18023 (Gött).
58
BNC K2L, Belfast: Belfast Telegraph Newspapers Ltd.
31
owing to the fact that morphology may be irregular (Radford 1997:43-44). Thus, syntactic
criteria should be used in conjunction with morphology. Even though the word near could
inflect for grade in (48), syntactically it is in a much closer relation with the verb be than
with the noun the end.
6 The adjective near

131 out of the 2172 sentences in the database contain the adjective near used in an
attributive function. The adjectival usage of near appeared much later in the history of
English compared to the preposition and adverb, as the earliest quotation59
Sant iohan þat was his sibe ner kines-man
(49) Saint John that was his relative near kinsman
Saint John that was his relative, near kinsman.
dates back to around 1300. The collected sample demonstrates that the semantic informa-
tion encoded by the adjective near reflects that of the adverb, including the senses such as
In-the-vicinity (37 occurrences), Interaction (6 occurrences), Approach (28 occurrences)
and Temporal (60 occurrences). The frequency of occurrence for different senses of the
adjective near is presented in table 5.
Table 5: The frequency of occurrence for the adjective near

Total: 131
The first two senses listed in the adjective entry of near in the OED (1989) can be
subsumed under the cover term interaction. They relate to either blood relations or are
used to described very intimate and familiar relations between friends. The above-quoted
earliest example of the adjective near also encodes the Interaction Sense. Other instances
of the adjectival usage in the collected database include: a near relation, a very near
kinsman and a near neighbour.
The adjective near is relatively frequently used in a spatial sense corresponding to
the In-the-vicinity Sense of the preposition and adverb. We find the earliest use in 1565
in For that was the next nere water, which he could conueniently use for baptism (OED
59
After OED (1989),Cursor Mundi (The Cursor of the world). A Northumbrian poem of the 14th
century in four versions. 20068 (Gött.).
32
1989).60 Similar examples in the database include the Near East, the near bank, the near
vision and the near side. The expression her near shoulder in sentence (50), for instance,
suggests the proximal location of the girl’s shoulder in relation to the LM of the sentence,
the man.
(50) The girl moved a little closer to the man, who put his hand ponderously, patriar-
chally, on her near shoulder.61
Sentence (50) may, however, be interpreted in a different way as the adjective near
may also signify the left or right hand side (OED 1989). The adjective was frequently
used in relation to animals, especially horses, often approached from the left side which
was consequently near the person dealing with the animal. The sentence dated 1884, To
mount without stirrups the rider should stand facing the near shoulder of the horse, also
contains the phrase near shoulder with the difference that it refers to an animal not to
a person. The sense was subsequently extended to refer with the same meaning to motor
vehicles, with the exception that in countries where one drives on the right side of the
road the adjective near came to signify “the right hand side.”
28 out of 131 sentences in the database collected encode the Approach Sense of the
adjective near. The phrase a near miss appears 10 times, while other examples include
near certainty, near ellipses and near pandemonium. In sentence (51), for instance, the
adjective near modifies the noun starvation, indicating the seriousness of the situation in
the city of Kabul last year.
(51) A US-trained officer, 48-year-old General Hakim is the most experienced convoy
trouble-shooter in the regime, having organized the relief convoy to the besieged city of
Khost two years ago and saved Kabul from near starvation last year.62
The Temporal Sense of the adjective near, with its 60 uses, is the most common in
the database; however, the sense is instantiated by only two expressions–the near future,
appearing 59 times, and near time used only once. Sentence (52)
(52) We look forward to hearing from you regarding the above in the near future.63
represents the typical use of the Temporal Sense of the adjective near where it character-
izes the future as proximal in the domain of time.
60
Stapleton Thomas Bede’s History of the Church of England 68, translation.
61
BNC G13, The magus. Fowles, J. London: Pan Books Ltd, 1988, pp. 72-175.
62
BNC A1G, Independent, electronic edition of 19891002. London: Newspaper Publishing plc, 1989.
63
BNC FS1, The spinning wheel. Lorrimer, C. London: Corgi Books, 1993, pp. 289-409.
33
7 The verb near
The word near is sometimes used as a verb with the meaning ‘approach, draw or come
near’ (OED 1989); however, in the collected database the verb near occurs only 3 times.
For the first time, it appears in 1513 in the sentence64
The swipir Tuscan hund assais And nerys fast
(53) The agile Tuscan dog attacks and nears fast
The agile Tuscan dog attacts and nears fast.
which is relatively late even when compared to the first occurrence of the adjective. The
uses of the verb in (54) and (55) are spatial, while the one in (56) is clearly temporal.
(54) I don’t just near the cabbage.65
(55) as they near the Sargasso (. . . )66
(56) As you near the end of your first video safari.67
In all the three sentences near prompts for the conceptualization of movement either in
the spatial domain, or in the temporal domain.
8 Final remarks
The analysis conducted for the purpose of the present study reveals that the word near
belongs to prepositional, adverbial, adjectival and verbal word classes. It can also function
as part of the complex preposition near to. In the collected database the discrepancy be-
tween prepositional and other usages of near is striking. The word appears as a preposition
with the highest frequency of 1750 occurrences. The second frequent adverbial category
contains 166 occurrences, then goes the adverbial category, with 131 occurrences. A com-
plex preposition near to appears 98 times, the verb near is found only 3 times, and a
miscellaneous idiomatic category features 24 items.
The two prepositions near and near to, although undeniably semantically similar to
one another, encode slightly different relations between the TR and LM, once again mak-
ing a case for the absence of redundancies in language. The two formally different linguistic
expressions convey, if only a little, different meanings. As the analysis reveals, the particle
to contributes a semantic element of salience to the complex preposition near to where
the LM is much more highlighted than the LM of near. The salience of the LM in near
64
After OED (1989), Douglas Gavin AEneis XII, xii. 147.
65
BNC KCV, 50 conversations recorded by ‘Katherine’ (PS0H7) between 2 and 5 June 1991 with 3
interlocutors.
66
BNC F9F, The trials of life. Attenborough, David. London: David Collins; sons, 1990, pp. 1-161.
67
BNC CBP, The complete video course. Brookes, Keith. London: Boxtree, 1989, pp. 7-119.
34
to makes it readily available for its interpretation as a goal the TR aims at. The added
salience makes the LM of near to a prominent participant of the spatial scene.
Likewise, the preposition and the adverb near, belonging to two different word classes
which share the function of characterising spatial relations, perform this function in a
different manner. A prepositional complement encodes a LM making it an overt partic-
ipant of any spatial scene. On the contrary, as adverbs do not take complements, the
localizing entity in a spatial scene described by the adverb near is usually backgrounded
to a considerable extent.
Finally, it must be noticed that, although prepositions are generally regarded as highly
polysemous words, the polysemy of the preposition near is significantly impoverished when
compared to other prepositions, such as over (e.g. Brenda 2014, Brugman 1988, Lakoff
1987) or at (Kokorniak 2007). The semantic network for the preposition near comprises
five different senses and so do the networks for the preposition near to and for the adverb
near. The semantic range for the word near is considerably insignificant when compared
with well over twenty senses of the prepositions over and at.
References
[1] Adamska-Sałaciak, Arleta. 2008a. “Prepositional entries in English-Polish Dictio-
naries.” In: Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 44, 339-372.
[2] Adamska-Sałaciak, Arleta. 2008b. “Prepositions in dictionaries for foreign

learners: a cognitive linguistic look.” (retrieved from https://www.academia.
edu/2944355/Prepositions_in_Dictionaries_for_Foreign_Learners_A_
Cognitive_Linguistic_Look)(date of access: 2nd Apr. 2015).
[3] Ashley, Aaron and Laura A. Carlson. 2007. “Encoding direction when interpreting
proximal terms.” Language and Cognition Processes 22 7:1021-1044.
[4] Burigo, Michael and Kenny Coventry. 2010. “Context Affects Scale Selection for
Proximity Terms.” Spatial Cognition and Computation 10: 292-312.
[5] British National Corpus. (http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/) (date of access: 21st

June 2014).
[6] Brenda, Maria. 2014. The cognitive perspective on the polysemy of the English spatial
preposition over. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
[7] Brugman, Claudia. 1988. The story of over: polysemy, semantics and the structure
of the lexicon. New York, London: Garland Publishing.
35
[8] Coventry, Kenny R. and S.C. Garrod. 2004. Saying, seeing and acting: The psycho-
logical semantics of spatial prepositions essays in cognitive psychology. Hove/New
York: Psychology Press.
[9] Cruse, Alan D. 2006[2000]. “Aspects of the Micro-structure of word meanings.” In:
Ravin Yael and Claudia Leacock (eds.). Polysemy. Theoretical and computational
approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[10] Cruse, Alan D. 2000. Meaning in language: an introduction to semantics and prag-
matics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[11] Evans, Vyvyan. 2010. How words mean: lexical concepts, cognitive models, and
meaning construction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[12] Halliday, Michael A.K. 2004. An introduction to functional grammar. London: Hod-
der Education.
[13] Herskovits, Annette. 1986 [2009]. Language and spatial cognition. An interdisci-
plinary study of the prepositions in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
[14] Huddleston, Rodney and Geoffrey Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the
English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[15] Huddleston, Rodney and Geoffrey Pullum. 2005. A student’s introduction to English
grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[16] Kokorniak, Iwona. 2007. English at: an integrated semantic analysis. Frankfurt am
Main: Peter Lang.
[17] Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal
about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
[18] Lewis, Diana. 2007. “Review of A. Tyler and V. Evans, The Semantics of English
Prepositions: Spatial Scenes, Embodied Meaning and Cognition. Cambridge: C.U.P.,
2003.” In: Cognitive Linguistics 18:1, 110-121.
[19] Logan, Gordon D. and Daniel D. Sadler. 1996. “A computational analysis of the
apprehension of spatial relations.” In: Bloom, Paul, Mary A. Peterson, Lynn Nadel
and Merrill F. Garrett (eds.). Space and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[20] Lyons, John. 1995. Linguistic semantics: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.
36
[21] McEnery, Tony and Andrew Hardie. 2012. Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and
Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[22] McMichael, Andrew. 2006. “The a’s and b’s of English prepositions.” In: Saint-
Dizier, Patrick (ed.). Syntax and semantics of prepositions. Dordrecht: Springer.
[23] Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, Jan Svartvik. 1985. A com-
prehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
[24] Radden, Günter and René Dirven. 2007. Cognitive English Grammar. Amster-
dam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
[25] Radford, Andrew. 1997. Syntactic theory and the structure of English. A minimalist
approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[26] Seppänen, Aimo, Bowen, Rhonwen and Joe Trotta. 1994. “On the so-called complex
prepositions.” In: Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 29, 3-29.
[27] Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. I. Concept structuring
systems.. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
[28] Talmy, Leonard. 2005. “The Fundamental System of Spatial Schemas in Language.”
In: Hampe, Beate and Joseph E. Grady (eds.). From perception to meaning: image
schemas in cognitive linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
[29] Wierzbicka, Anna. 1996. Semantics: primes and universals. Oxford: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
[30] Wolfram Mathworld. (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/) (date of access: 10 July

2014).
[31] Tyler, Andrea and Vyvyan Evans. 2003. The semantics of English prepositions.
Spatial senses, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
37
View publication stats

The Grammar and Semantics of Near CT

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Grammar and Semantics of Near CT

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

The grammar and semantics of near

Article in Cognitextes · April 2016

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Tuesday 22nd March, 2016

The cognitive linguistic interest in spatial prepositions is a relatively new re-

Word class number of occurrences per 2172

the preposition near 1750

(2) That’s why we stay quite near (to) the top.9

3 The senses of the preposition near

Table 2: The frequency of occurrence for the preposition near

Sense number of occurrences per 1750

The In-the-vicinity Sense 1591

The preposition near implies the presence of a TR on an unspecified territory adjacent to

Figure 2: The primary sense of the preposition near

3.2 The Interaction Sense of the preposition near

Figure 3: The Interaction Sense of the preposition near

3.3 The Approach Sense

Figure 4: The Approach Sense of the preposition near

3.4 The Approximately Sense

Sentences (22) and (23) illustrate the sense in contemporary English:

Figure 5: The Approximately Sense of the preposition near

3.5 The Temporal Sense

Figure 6: The Temporal Sense of the preposition near

Figure 7: The semantic network for the preposition near

4 The complex preposition near to

Sense number of occurrences per 98

The In-the-vicinity Sense 64

Figure 8: The semantic network for the preposition near to

4.1 The primary sense of near to

Figure 9: The primary sense of the preposition near to

4.2 Interaction Sense

Figure 10: The Interaction Sense of the preposition near to

A schematic relation between the TR and LM encoded by the Approach Sense of

Figure 11: The Approach Sense of the preposition near to

4.3.1 The Approximately Sense

Figure 12: The Approximately Sense of the preposition near to

4.4 The Temporal Sense

Figure 13: The Temporal Sense of the preposition near to

5 The adverb near

Sense number of occurrences per 166

The In-the-vicinity Sense 56

5.1 The In-the-vicinity Sense

5.2 The Interaction Sense

5.3 The Approach Sense

(46) Did a man near kill himself ?56

5.4 The Temporal Sense

6 The adjective near

Sense number of occurrences per 131

The In-the-vicinity Sense 37

[2] Adamska-Sałaciak, Arleta. 2008b. “Prepositions in dictionaries for foreign

[5] British National Corpus. (http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/) (date of access: 21st

[20] Lyons, John. 1995. Linguistic semantics: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge

[30] Wolfram Mathworld. (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/) (date of access: 10 July

View publication stats

You might also like