In Swedish dialects we find the terms ris, skäver and skärva referring to illnesses in children. The words are also parts of various compounds which refer to variants of the illnesses. The terms are linguistic expressions denoting two folk categories of illnesses, RIS and SKÄVER/SKÄRVA. These categories are investigated from a cognitive semantic perspective. The cognitive perspective argues that we organize our understanding of reality by using Idealized Cognitive Models (ICM) based on our physical, mental and emotional experiences of the world. The aim is twofold: to demonstrate the bases on which an experienced illness is placed in a certain category, and to show how a folk conception of illness is reflected in the word formation strategies. The word formation strategies emanate from notions of characteristic symptoms, and from notions of causes of illnesses. Both categories, RIS and SKÄVER/SKÄRVA, are based on a number of ICM's. The category RIS is a radial structure, which means that the category is held together although its members have no structural criteria in common. The category SKÄVER/SKÄRVA is a concentrating structure, meaning that all members share all structural criteria. There is a strong connection between word formation strategies and the structures of the categories. Terms related to symptoms refer to members of a category which are part of a radial structure, while terms related to causes refer to members of a category which are part of a concentrating structure. This can be explained by two of the basic assumptions of cognitive semantics: semantic content is structred and symbolized overtly on the surface form of a language and categories are conventional, based on cultural assumptions about the world. / digitalisering@umu

Depuis plusieurs décennies, un nombre important de travaux en linguistique et sciences cognitives avancent une thèse selon laquelle l’expression du temps dans la langue dépend de la cognition de l’espace. Cette étude cherche à établir que le discours scientifique sur les rapports temps–espace dans la langue et la cognition est un objet épistémologique qui a sa propre histoire et ses propres motivations disciplinaires. Ainsi, le programme de recherche généralement admis est le produit d’une trame complexe d’intérêts qui ne favorisent pas nécessairement la recherche de l’objet scientifique. Dans une première partie, nous confirmons que les rapports linguistiques entre temps et espace constituent un objet historique et variable, tant dans la langue que dans la pensée sur la langue. Dans une deuxième partie, nous explorons la tendance à la spatialisation du temps dans les écrits des philosophes et grammairiens des Lumières et dans le travail de Gustave Guillaume (1883–1960). Dans une troisième partie, nous examinons le paradigme de la priorité spatiale dans la linguistique cognitive à partir des années 1970 jusqu’à nos jours. Les résultats de cette étude nous amènent à proposer des lignes directrices pour la recherche future des manifestations linguistiques des rapports temps–espace. / Over the past few decades, a considerable number of studies in linguistics and the cognitive sciences have put forward the claim that the expression of time in language relies on the cognition of space. This study aims to show that the scientific discourse on time–space relations in language and cognition is an epistemological object, shaped by its history and disciplinary motivations. Thus, the predominant research framework of time–space relations is the product of an intricate network of interests which do not necessarily facilitate the research of the scientific object. In the first part of the study we show that relations between time and space changed through the history of both language and the theory of language. In the second part, we explore the theoretical trend of the spatialization of time in the writings of key philosophers and grammarians of the Enlightenment, and in the oeuvre of the French linguist Gustave Guillaume (1883-1960). In the third part we examine the paradigm of spatial priority in cognitive linguistics from the 1970s until today. The conclusions of the study lead us to put forth some proposals for the future research of time, space and the time–space interface in language.