Cognitive Thinking Differences in E-C Translation Driven by Temporal/Spatial Preferences: A Case Study of the Translation of “The Proceedings of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East”


  • Huan Cao
  • Shaolong Liu



Temporality Preferences, Spatiality Preferences, Cognitive Thinking Differences, English-Chinese Translation


This study, grounded in the interdisciplinary integration of cognitive science and translation studies known as translation cognition, examines how differing temporal-spatial cognitive orientations in English and Chinese influence translation processes. English exhibits a temporality preference, explicitly linking semantic logic through grammatical and lexical devices, while Chinese demonstrates a spatiality preference with nonlinear, chunked, and discrete language encoding. During translation, translators must cognitively reconstruct the source language to align with the target language's cognitive and expressive conventions. Analyzing English-Chinese translation cases from "The Proceedings of the International Military Tribunal For the Far East," the research reveals cognitive strategies in semantic processing and sentence restructuring. It emphasizes the importance of understanding and applying temporal-spatial cognitive differences in cross-linguistic and cross-cultural communication.


Download data is not yet available.


Alwhan, S. (2019). An overall study of formulaic expressions. IJALEL, 8(3), 24–30. AIAC.IJALEL.V.8N.3P.24.

Becker, J. (1975). The phrasal lexicon. In R. Shank & B. L. Nash-Webber (Eds.), Theoretical issues in natural language processing (pp. 60-63). Bolt Beranek and Newman.

Cao Huan, Liu Shaolong. Study on the Cognitive Generation Limitation of Chinese Current Political Discourse Chunk Constructions-Cognitive Chunk Characteristics of Xi Jinping's New Year's Address under Memory Limitation Theory[J]. Modern Education and Practice, 2021(3)9:144-147.

Cao Huan, Wang Liuqi, Liu Shaolong. Memory Limitation Constraints on the Generation of Chinese Political Chunk Constructions and Its English Translation Compliance[J]. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 2023, 46(01):129-137.

Cowan, N. The magical number 4 in short-term memory:a reconsideration of mental storage capacity[J]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2001, 24 (1): 87-185.

Chen, D. (1998). English and Chinese translation-A comparative study. China Translation & Publishing.

Chen, K., Gu, L., & Bai, Q. (2023). Processing Chinese formulaic sequences in sentence context: a comparative study of native and non-native speakers. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 622–630.

Dai Qingsha. Revisiting the Characteristics of the Chinese Language-From the Perspective of Jingpo Language [J]. Ethnic Languages, 2017, (02):3-11.

Dan Hanyuan. Coherence and Cohesion: The Manifestation of Logical Connections in English-Chinese Translation[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages (Shanghai International Studies University), 1996(01): 23-25.

Du, L., & Chen. W. (2022). Political discourse and translation studies. A bibliometric analysis in international core journals. Sage Open, 12, 1–18.

Fang Mengzhi. On English-Chinese Contrast and Translation [J]. China Science & Technology Translation, 1997, (03):7-10.DOI:10.16024/j.cnki.issn1002-0489.1997.03.003.

Feng Shengli. Introduction to Chinese Prosody Syntax (Part Two) [J]. Academic World, 2000, (02):94-117.

Fillmore, Charles J., 1988. The mechanism of construction grammar[J]. The Fourteenth Annual Meetingof the Berkeley Linguistic Society:35-55.

Fillmore, Charles J., 1990. Construction Grammar: Course Reader for Linguistics 120A[M]. University of California at Berkeley.

Goldberg, A. Constructions: A New Theoretical Approach to Language[J]. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2003, 7, 219–24.

Goldberg, A. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalizations in Language[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2006.

Goldberg, A. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalizations in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2006.

Goldberg, A. E. Constructionist approaches. In T. Hoffman & G. Trousdale (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar[G]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013: 27-38.

Huan Cao, Shaolong Liu. The Effectiveness of ChatGPT in Translating Chunky Construction Texts in Chinese Political Discourse[J]. J. Electrical Systems. 20-2 (2024): 1684-1698.

Huang Youyi. Central Documents Translation: Building the Last Mile of International Communication[J]. The 6th Central Documents Translation and Research Forum. 2021.12.18. Retrieved from:

Jackendoff, Ray, 1990. Semantic Structures[M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Lakoff, George, 1987, Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lian Shuneng. The "Abstract" in English and the "Concrete" in Chinese[J]. Foreign Language Journal (Journal of Heilongjiang University), 1993, (03):24-31. DOI:10.16263/j.cnki.23-1071/h.1993.03.005.

Liu Shaolong, Wang Liuqi. A Cognitive Psychology Study of Chinese Characteristic Political "Chunky" Discourse-Exploring the Characteristics of Multiple Text "Chunks" under Memory Limitation Theory[J]. Forum on Language and Culture,2021(3).

Liu Shaolong, Wang Hui, Cao Huan. Research on the Chinese Characteristic "Chunk" Discourse and Its English Translation-From the Perspective of Spatial-Temporal Thinking Differences between English and Chinese [J]. Chinese Translators Journal, 2021(6).

Liu Yumei. Cognitive Communication Studies: A Growth Point for Interdisciplinary Research[C]//Chinese Cognitive Communication Association, Gannan Normal University. Proceedings of the Second Academic Annual Conference of the Chinese Cognitive Communication Association. College of International Relations, Sichuan International Studies University, 2015:7.

Liu Geng. Temporal and Spatial Differences in English-Chinese Text and Language Structure[D]. Beijing: Beijing Foreign Studies University, 2022.

Lu Jianming. Sentence Types, Patterns, Templates, Styles, Expression Formats, and Constructions-Also on the "Construction-Chunks" Analysis Method[J]. Chinese Language Learning, 2016(01): 3-11.

Ni Baoyuan. Rhetoric and Revision [J]. Contemporary Rhetoric, 1987, (06):27-30. DOI:10.16027/j.cnki.cn31-2043/h.1987.06.016.

Nattinger, J. R. & Decarrico, J. S. Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Shi Chunhong. On the Interactive Relationship between Grammar and Rhetoric from the Perspective of Construction Suppression[J]. Contemporary Rhetoric, 2012, 1.

Shen Lianyun. Pragmatic Meaning and Translation Strategies of Coherence and Cohesion[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages (Shanghai International Studies University), 2003(02): 67-73.

Van Lancker Sidtis. Two-track mind: formulaic and novel language support a dual-process model. In Faust, M. (Ed.) The Handbook of the Neuropsychology of Language[G]. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2012: 342-367.

Wang Liuqi, Liu Shaolong. On the Processing of Bi-Lingual Related/Unrelated Chunk Representations in Translators from the Perspective of Vertical/Horizontal Paradigm[J]. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 2020(3).

Wang Wenbin, Zhao Yizhe. On the Homogeneity of Super-Conventional Four-Character Idioms and the Strong Spatial Representation of the Chinese Language[J]. Contemporary Rhetoric, 2021(01):10-18.

Wang Wenbin. On the Temporal Characteristics of English and the Spatial Characteristics of Chinese[J]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2013, 2.

Wang Wenbin. On the Spatio-Temporal Characteristics Behind the Representational Differences between English and Chinese-Starting from Humboldt's Concept of "Intrinsic Language Form"[J]. Foreign Languages in China, 2013, 3.

Wang Wenbin. 2019. On the Spatio-Temporal Differences Between English and Chinese[M].Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

Wang Wenbin, Cui Liang. The Diversity and Nationality of Linguistic Signs and Rhetoric[J]. Contemporary Rhetoric, 2019, 1.

Wang Wenbin, Liu Xinmiao. The Inheritance Relationship between the Construction of Chinese Ideogram Characters and the Representational Mode of Meaning Aggregation[J]. Contemporary Rhetoric, 2020, 1.

Wray, A. Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: principle and practice[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2000 (4) : 463-489.

Wierzbicka, Anna. 1988. The Semantics of Grammar[M]. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Xi Jinping Talks about the Deep Meaning of "Political Army Building" [N]. China Daily Website, 2015.02.04. Retrieved from:

Xun Endong, Rao Gaoqi, Xiao Xiaoyue, Zang Jiaojiao. Development of BCC Corpus under the Context of Big Data[J], Corpus Linguistics, 2016(1).

Yang Mingxing. An Analysis of the Core Discourse of the "Chinese Dream" in a Diplomatic Context [J]. Chinese Translators Journal, 2016,37(06):86-91.

Yang Mingxing. On the "Political Equivalence" of Diplomatic Language Translation-Taking the Translation of Deng Xiaoping's Diplomatic Concept "Hide Brightness Nourish Obscurity" as an Example[J]. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 2008(05): 90-94.

Yuan Yulin. The Cognitive Mechanism and Description System of Chinese Meaning-Aggregation Grammar[J]. New Horizons in Chinese Linguistics, 2017, 2.

Zhao Yizhe, Wang Wenbin. The Heterogeneity of Paired Idioms and the Strong Spatial Characteristics of the Chinese Language as Seen Through Their English Translations[J]. Shanghai Journal of Translators, 2020(03): 23-28+95.

Zhang Wei, Yang Jiaxin. Normative Analysis of the "Implied Narrative" in Chinese Political Discourse: The Case of "Xi Jinping: The Governance of China" (Volume Three)[J]. Foreign Language Teaching, 2023(05): 819-87.







How to Cite

Cao, H., & Liu, S. (2024). Cognitive Thinking Differences in E-C Translation Driven by Temporal/Spatial Preferences: A Case Study of the Translation of “The Proceedings of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East”. International Journal of Social Sciences and Public Administration, 3(2), 155-165.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 81

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.