Then and Now Space: Conceptual Mapping of Time and Space through Language in William Diehl’s Primal Fear

Language aids in the conceptual mapping between time and space. Furthermore, an individual holds both the real and the imaginary world in their memory and tries to make sense of it through the help of language. Language plays a significant role in mapping the abstract concepts rooted in the real world and stored in the human mind. The current study was aimed at tracing input and blended spaces in the selected text. It also analyzed the conceptual mapping between time and space through language and examined its significance in the selected character, named Aaron Stampler, in a novel titled ‘Primal Fear’. The study adds to the existing knowledge in the field of cognitive linguistics by tracing the connection between past and present mental spaces inside the human memory. It also highlights the mechanisms of then (past) and now (present) in mapping mental spaces through language. The current study is based on a conceptual framework designed by blending two theories: Conceptual Integration Theory and Here and Now Space. The analysis of the selected text revealed that conceptual mapping between then and now spaces connects the memories of the past with the present. An individual collects data from their surrounding and stores it in the form of language, to be used when required. The study concluded that mental concepts are mapped between time and space through the relatedness of their subject matter, which is traced with the help of language. The findings of this research may aid in investigating the language used in interrogating criminals, cross-questioning them, as well as dissecting their psychiatric sessions.


Introduction
In cognitive linguistics, mental spaces are given great importance. Spaces are set apart in a module inside the human mind and are brought together through proper channelization of time. The mind holds the outer world in its memory and defines it through the use of language. This memory can be studied and analyzed through conceptual mapping (Brandt, 2005). According to Mendoza (2014), conceptual mapping is a set of correspondences between conceptual domains inside the mental space of a human mind. Furthermore, a conceptual map is a systematic organizer inside a conceptual domain, it shows the connection between two or more concepts to find out the relationship between them. When these concepts are generated collectively in a mental space, they display a shared view of the missing information (Schwendimann, 2014). Therefore, it shows the direct relationship between the abstract and the real world.
Conceptual mapping is made possible when elements from one space of a particular time zone are compared with their counterparts from another space in another time zone through language. These elements signify those words which are used to define the material objects existing in the real world; they are stored in the form of an image in the mental space (Fauconnier, 1994). The shared elements of time and space are composed of their own properties and the properties of the concerned spaces (Fauconnier & Turner, 2002). Hence, it means that mental spaces are timebound, and are traced and studied by moving back and forth in time. Fauconnier (1998) divided the mental space into generic and input spaces. According to him, input spaces carry qualities of 'generic spaces'; whereas, generic spaces are those individual spaces that contain properties of their own. In conceptual mapping, a generic space maps similar concepts between two or more input spaces, which lie in different time zones. Next, it places these mapped concepts into a third conceptual space called a blended space (as cited in Pascual, 2007). This means that the mind conceptually maps the spaces over a period of time based on the similarity between them.
The current study attempted to identify the conceptual mapping between then (past) and now (present) spaces and time through language. This study was conducted on selected excerpts of a character, named Aaron Stampler, in a novel titled 'Primal Fear' by William Diehl. The study also traced input spaces in the selected excerpts of the text to find how they are blending into the third space, known as the blended space. This aimed to check the mechanism of conceptual mapping between past and present conceptual spaces in time.
Primal Fear is an American crime-thriller novel written by William Diehl in 1993. The novel is about Aaron Stampler, an altar boy, accused of murdering Archbishop Rushman of the Catholic Church in Chicago. His attorney Martin Vail believes that Stampler is innocent. As the case trial begins, Vail discovers that the Archbishop was sexually abusing the altar boys, specifically Stampler. Molly Arrington, the psychiatrist assigned to Stampler, revealed that Stampler suffers from bipolar disorder and Roy is his split personality. The case was dismissed and the jury decided to send Stampler to a mental hospital for treatment. At the end of the novel, Vail visits Stampler, who discloses that his true personality is Roy and Stampler was just a facade he adopted to escape imprisonment.

Research Objectives
The present study intends to: 1. Examine the relativity between temporal events and spatial frames in then and now spaces. 2. Trace input spaces and their blending in the blended space identified in the selected novel.
3. Analyze the conceptual mapping of time and space through language in the selected novel.

The Concept of Conceptual Mapping
According to Fauconnier and Turner (1998), blending is a dynamic process that maps similar concepts existing between two or more input spaces. An input space acts as the base to provide similar elements, which are further placed in the blended space. This blended space consists of its own properties and properties obtained from the shared input spaces (Fauconnier & Turner, 2002). When mapping thoughts and language, Fauconnier (1997) called conceptual frames 'smaller units of discourse' through which language is viewed and studied. Words are taken as constructions and their meanings are taken as an intricate web of connected frames. These frames shape thoughts and help in mapping similar thoughts between input spaces (Fauconnier & Turner, 1998). According to Imre (2005), conceptual frames help in mapping one viewpoint with another viewpoint in conceptual spaces.

Conceptual Spaces, Time and Language
The experiences collected by human cognition are chronologically stored in the mind and are traced from memory with the help of a matching condition, these experiences are expressed through language (Sinha & Gardenfors, 2014). Fauconnier (1997) discussed the importance of mapping thoughts through language and claimed that language is used as a tool to map different mental representations that are found at different time intervals inside the memory. Hutchins (2005) used the term "material anchors" for linguistic items. A material anchor of words is either a pattern of speech sounds or a set of written symbols which are conceptually mapped between time and space. According to Novak (2010), semantic units which formed the conceptual mapping such as [concept] + linking word + [concept], are the main units which compose the meaning and are stored in the mind. The meaning derived from semantic units is based not only on the clarity of these units but also on the composition of these units in the text.

Content and Context in Here and Now Spaces
According to Langacker (2001), the conceptual mapping between Here and Now input spaces is possible due to the shared elements between them. These shared elements are collected from the environment in the present space and time. These elements are the "basis for communication" and can be used to conceptually map two dimensions of time and space (p. 144). According to Hutchins (2005), human beings can talk about anything at any time and place. Human speech is based on context and content, which, in turn, is based on a body of knowledge shared between the speaker and the listener. This shared knowledge is analyzed in spatial frames (p. 8). Meara and Baez (2011) divided the spatial frames into extrinsic and intrinsic frames. Extrinsic frame connects a linguistic item with an object from the external situation of the speech; whereas, intrinsic frame connects a linguistic item with the internal situation of the speech. According to Danziger (2013), an extrinsic frame of reference has three basic components, namely figure, ground and anchor. The ground acts as a base for the figure (an object) in the sentence. Moreover, an anchor acts as the "zero point from which the vector which runs from the Ground towards the Figure originates" (p. 352). The extrinsic anchors are further divided into allocentric and egocentric frames. Egocentric frames are found inside the speech situation and allocentric are found outside the speech situation. In accordance to the narrated, reference, and speech events, egocentric frames are mapped based on the location of relativity between the object and the concept, while allocentric frames are mapped based on how the object is centered in the concept (ibid). According to Reichenbach (1947), a narrated event (E) is the moment that needs to be located in the spatial figure; whereas, a reference event (R) is a moment with the help of which narrated event is located. A speech event (S) is the moment of utterance. This shows that language can be used to determine the temporal events and the spatial frames in the human mind. Extrinsic allocentric frames are absolute; whereas, extrinsic egocentric frames are relative in relation to time. Likewise, intrinsic allocentric frames are object centered and intrinsic egocentric frames are direct (Danziger, 2013).

Temporal Relations and Spatial Frames
Danziger (2013) elaborates Reichenbach's (1947) work and proposes the idea of anchoring extrinsic and intrinsic frames on narrated, reference, and speech events. He proposed four types of temporal relations, namely eternal, personal, event-related, and instantiated. As their names suggest, they highlight the time of occurrence of a situation in the speech.

Methodology
In this study, a descriptive qualitative data analysis technique was used to trace the input and blended spaces in the selected text. This technique was used to analyze the language used in the courtroom and psychiatric sessions in the text. Discourse analysis was conducted to interpret the concepts found in spatial frames and examine their connection with the temporal events. Additionally, this study identified the blending of then and now spaces through language using a conceptual framework, which is designed by blending two theories, namely Conceptual Integration Theory and Here and Now Space.

Spatial Frames of Reference in Input Space One (Then)
The novel begins with the murder of Archbishop Richard Bernard Rushman, who is claimed to be killed by Aaron Stampler. It is stated in the novel that the boy wearing blood-soaked clothes was found holding a knife in his right fist in the backyard of the church. When the policeman flashed the flashlight on the boy's face, he panicked and started murmuring: In the above given spatial frame in the input space (1a), 'I' is the figure and 'it' is the ground. The anchor is a spatial word used to locate the position of the figure on the ground. There is no anchor found in the given speech. However, the ground 'it' is functioning as an anchor since the action by the figure 'I', introduced at the end, is connecting itself with the ground. Therefore, there is no need for a separate anchor in this frame. The discourse is framed intrinsically because the anchor is missing. The figure 'I' (object) is centred to the ground 'it', which means the action of the figure is solely dependent on the ground. Thus, the situation in this intrinsic frame is objectcentered and the sentence is centrally intrinsic.
The boy was accused of attempting the murder and was kept in custody. When his attorney Martin Vail visited him for the first time, he introduced himself to the boy and inquired about the murder.
In this input space (1b) of chapter nine, Stampler's identity was revealed. He was a young boy in his early teens, who was raised in a small village named Crikside in Kentucky. It was stated that he moved to the city recently since his accent reflected his countryside origins. When the boy was inquired about the murder, he denied attempting it.
Stampler was also asked, "Were you there when it happened?" In this question, 'you' is the figure, 'when it happened' is the ground, and 'there' is the anchor. The anchor 'there' is locating the position of the figure on the ground. The frame is extrinsic because the figure 'you' is found in the outside situation of the speech. Furthermore, within this extrinsic frame, the given sentence is framed egocentrically extrinsic, because the anchor shows the relative location of the figure on the ground.

Temporal Events in Input Space One (Then)
Temporal events, namely narrated event (N), reference event (R), and speech event (S), unveil the mechanism of mapping intrinsic and extrinsic spatial frames with time. They make mapping easier by locating the time of occurrence of events in input spaces. In the input space (1a), only two temporal events are present: "Didn't do it, Mama. Mama, I didn't do it." (Chapter 2, p. 9) (1a) Here, 'Didn't do it, Mama' is the reference event because it is referring to the narrated event. 'Mama, I didn't do it' is the narrated event because the narrator (figure) is present in it. The reference event is linking the two temporal events (narrated and reference) with each other inside the input space (1a). The narrated event was made soon after the bishop's body was found by the police. This narrated event is referring to the event of the murder. Furthermore, in the above given statement, the suspect seems to be denying an action that convicts him of murder. As discussed earlier, the above-mentioned discourse is framed allocentrically intrinsic. Thus, the frame of this speech is solely dependent on an event that occurred in the outside situation of the given speech. Therefore, the relationship between this spatial frame and the temporal event is event-related.
Another question asked in the same input space (1b) was "Were you there when it happened?" The answer was not made verbally, rather it was a gesture, 'Aaron nodded'. Here, the question acts as the narrated event and the non-verbal answer acts as the reference event. The reference event is referring to the narrated question in the speech. The frame in this speech is egocentrically extrinsic. Thus, the relationship between temporal events and the egocentrically extrinsic frame is personal. In the reference event, personal temporal relation is based on the choice of the figure. Hence, the non-verbal response was the figure's choice.

Spatial Frames of Reference in Input Space Two (Then)
After a few psychiatric sessions, Molly came to know that Roy is Stampler's split personality, about which he is unaware. After analyzing the language used during this session, it was inferred that the language shifted from emotional to rational. The session is as follows: Molly: Do you come out often, Roy? Roy: I come out whenever I feel like it. …………………..

Roy:
That night with the bishop and all? I waited until we were in the kitchen before I let him come back. …………………… Roy: Who says I killed the bishop? Molly: Then who did?
…………..…… Roy: Nobody killed him. He was executed. (Chapter. 23, (2a) In the input space (2a), Molly identified that Aaron Stampler has a multiple personality disorder. In the first frame of input space 2(a), Stampler was asked, "Do you come out often, Roy?" The answer to this question was "I come out…like it". Here, 'I' and 'you' are the figures. 'Roy' is the ground, and 'come out' is the anchor. The frame is extrinsic because the anchor is present in it. The anchor 'come out' is revealing the position of the figure, which is located in the outside situation of the speech in its absolute form. Thus, the frame is allocentrically extrinsic.
The other frame pertains to the night during which the bishop was murdered. Roy mentioned that night when he says, "That night with the bishop… come back". In this frame, 'I' is the figure, 'him' is the ground, and the anchor is 'the kitchen'. The frame is extrinsic because all three components are present in it. The anchor 'the kitchen' is locating the position of the figure to the ground. Additionally, the anchor also connects the figure and the ground with the night when the bishop was killed. This relation between the figure and the ground is relative. Therefore, it means this frame is egocentrically extrinsic.
The last frame in the input space (2a), namely "Do you come out often, Roy?", "Who says I killed the bishop?", and "Nobody killed him. He was executed", questions the intentions of the culprit behind the murder. Here, 'Nobody' is the figure and 'bishop' is the ground. The word 'come out' is the anchor. The relationship between them is relative. Therefore, the entire frame is egocentrically extrinsic.

Temporal Events in Input Space Two (Then)
Input space (2a) has three frames. In the first frame, the reference event is "Do you come out often, Roy?" and narrated event is "I come out…like it". The relationship between this allocentrically extrinsic frame and temporal events is eternal. The degree of time asked in the reference event is 'often', while its response is given as 'whenever' in the narrated event. Hence, the use of 'whenever' makes the temporal relation eternal.
In the second frame, the reference event is "That night with the bishop and all?", the narrated event is "I waited…in the kitchen", and the speech event is "before I let him come back". All three temporal events are present in this frame. The relation between this egocentrically extrinsic frame and temporal events is personal. This personal temporal relation is evident from the word 'before' given in the speech event.
In the last frame, the reference event is "Who says I killed the bishop?", the speech event is "Then who did?", and the narrated event is "Nobody killed him. He was executed". The temporal events and this egocentrically extrinsic frame is related through personal temporal relation.

Conceptual Mapping between Input Spaces 1b, 2a (Then) in Blended Space 3a (Now)
After a few psychiatric sessions with Molly, Roy confessed that he slaughtered the bishop. Before this confession, he claimed that he was not the murderer. Conceptual mapping of input space (1b, then), input space (2a, then), and the blended space (3a, now) is done to map the past and present mental spaces in Stampler's long-term memory. The following extract is taken in 'Now space' to map the concepts between Then and Now spaces in input space (3a): Roy: We … we decided to execute the bishop. Molly: Who's we? You and Sonny? He nodded Roy: …I swung that knife… I swung at his throat. I yelled, 'Forgive me, Father!' but I was laughing… I know every cut I made, they were all perfect. Thirty-six stab wounds, twelve incised, seventeen cute and one beautiful amputation. I counted everyone. Molly: How did it feel Roy? While you were doing that? ………………. Roy: Usually it feels good… But not this time. ……..

Roy
In blended space (3a), Roy explained how he killed the Bishop on the night of the murder. In this blended space (now), he recalls the incident from a past space and describes the situation in a present space. Before this confession, he had not given any details about the night of the murder. He only mentioned a few things about that night in his previous sessions with Vail and Molly. Using conceptual mapping, shared elements in the input spaces (1b and 2a) from the past were found. Next, the shared elements were identified in the blended space (3a).
In the blended space (3a), the first frame is "We … we decided to execute the bishop". In this blended space, the word 'execute' is triggered from the input space (2a), "Nobody killed him. He was executed". The word 'bishop' is triggered from input space (1b) in "Did you kill Bishop Richard, Aaron?" The common shared elements between the above mentioned two input spaces (1b and 2a) are 'execute' and 'bishop'. These shared elements are also found in the blended space (3a) This frame only gives detail about the night the bishop was killed. Hence, apart from common shared elements, the subject matter of these three selected spaces is also the same.
Furthermore, in the first frame, the figure is 'we' and the ground is 'the bishop'. The anchor in this frame is 'to'. Since all three components of the frame are present, the frame is extrinsic. The anchor 'to' is locating the position of the figure relatively towards the ground. It means the frame is egocentrically extrinsic.
The second frame in the blended space (3a) is "…I swung that knife…I yelled, 'Forgive me, Father!'…". In this frame, the word 'Father' is triggered from input space (1b) "Did you kill Bishop Richard, Aaron?" and input space (2a) "That night with the bishop…we were in the kitchen…come back". The subject matter of the three frames is the same and gives detail on the murder of the bishop. In this frame, 'I' is taken as the figure and 'Father' is taken as the ground. The anchor is 'at' and is locating the position of the figure near the ground. The presence of the anchor makes the frame extrinsic. The anchor 'at' is showing the absolute position of the figure on the ground. Therefore, the frame is allocentrically extrinsic.

Temporal Events between Input Spaces 1b, 2a and Blended Space 3a
In the first frame of blended space (3a), the reference event is "Did you kill Bishop Richard, Aaron?", the speech event is "Nobody killed him. He was executed", and the narrated event is "We…we decided to execute the bishop". This frame is egocentrically extrinsic. The relationship between the temporal events and egocentrically extrinsic frame is personal. The word 'we' shows that it is the personal choice of the narrator to narrate the events however he wishes.
In the second frame of the blended space (3a), the reference event is "Did you kill Bishop Richard, Aaron?", the speech event is "That night…we were in the kitchen…come back", and the narrated event is "…I swung that knife…'Forgive me, Father!'…". This frame is allocentrically extrinsic. The relation between the temporal events and the allocentrically extrinsic frame is eternal. It means the question was asked many times in the input spaces of the past, but the figure 'I' took his time to confess his crime in the present space.

Discussion
Conceptual mapping between then and now spaces connects memories of the past and with memories of the present. It can be used to detect the relatedness between different mental spaces over a period of time. Using conceptual mapping, it was revealed that Stampler's trials and psychiatric sessions activated related thoughts in his mind, which, in turn, brought the connected input spaces from the past closer and blended them in the blended space of the present.
The results revealed that language plays a significant role in shaping human memory. Language is used to store data in the memory, while the human mind provides the stored data to the working memory whenever needed. According to Fauconnier and Turner (1998), the conceptual integration between input spaces and blended space is through the projection of like elements found in input spaces. Therefore, the blended space (3a) in Stampler's working memory contains elements from input space (1b) and input space (2a). The blended space (3a) from the present was mapped with the input spaces from the past based on a matching condition, which depends upon the likeness of elements within input spaces (Fauconnier, 1997). During the conceptual mapping of input space (1b), input space (2a) and blended space (3a), it was found that the common shared elements between these spaces are 'execute ', 'bishop', and 'Father'. The current study agrees that the matching condition between input and blended spaces depends on the common shared elements between them. If the input spaces have similar subject matter, then there is a higher chance that these spaces would blend. Temporal relations highlight the relationship between mapped input and blended spaces based on their occurrence in time. This can be used to determine whether these relationships are eternal, personal, event-related, or instantiated. Furthermore, it was also identified that three out of the four temporal relations were personal. The personal nature of the relationship reveals that it was Stampler's personal choice to wear a façade and deceive the jury, his attorney Martin Vail, and his psychiatrist Molly Arrington. Thus, the analysis determined that Stampler switches back and forth between his two personalities, namely Roy and Stampler, and narrates the incident of the murder in different time zones just the way he wants.

Conclusion
To conclude, it was determined that elements in the blended space activate related concepts in the input spaces inside the human mind. If the input spaces have common elements with each other, then they are able to blend together. When the same incident is narrated again and again in the novel in different time streams, the language keeps on changing; however, some key concepts remain the same and are repeatedly used by the narrator. Through the conceptual mapping of the selected excerpts, it was revealed that these key concepts work as agents between the mapped input and blended spaces. This study examined the relationship between temporal events and spatial frames in the selected text. Through this examination, it was concluded that the time at which the events occurred does not matter in mental spaces; rather, the temporal event in blended spaces connects spatial references of the input spaces. Temporal relations can be used to examine the relationship between the narrated events in the Now space with the reference to the events in the Then space. They assist in minimizing the gap between the input and blended spaces. Reference events identified in the chosen excerpts were mostly questions, while, narrated events were mostly evasive answers given by the figure. Thus, narrated events can be utilized to understand the context of discourse. They can also be used to determine the reason behind selecting the concerned input spaces from the memory.

Further Recommendations
Although the current study focuses on a fictional character, its theoretical framework can be used to analyze non-fictional discourses. The framework can also be used to explore how the functioning of the working memory facilitates the long-term memory in real life situations. Future research in this field can utilize this framework to facilitate the process of analyzing and dissecting the transcripts of crime interrogations as well as psychiatric and courtroom sessions. This study utilized the descriptive-qualitative method for data collection; however, future researchers may utilize different methodologies using the same theoretical framework to obtain more detailed results. Further research on this novel can also be conducted, since this study only examined the selected excerpts.