The Preposition (fii) in the Horizontal and Vertical Axes as Used in the Taizzi Dialect: A Cognitive Approach

In this paper the framework of Cognitive Grammar (CG) developed by Langacker is adopted to attain a cognitive semantic analysis of the use of the Arabic prepositions (fii) in the horizontal and vertical axes, as used in the Taizzi dialect. Although, encoding the sense of CONTAINMENT, the preposition (fii) is assumed not to play any role in the horizontal and vertical axes; the use of the preposition (fii) in the TD proves things differently. The problem with (fii) is that it is very tempting to be used in the locative sense in which one physical entity is CONTAINED WITHIN another physical entity. However, the cognitive analysis of (fii) justifies the use of this preposition in many instances of the Taizzi dialect where this preposition is seemingly exploited to encod e non-containment-related spatial relations. This unfolds some of the unsolved issues concerning prepositions in general and the Arabic prepositions in particular taking the use of (fii) in the Taizzi dialect as a sample. The data presented in this paper show that speakers of the Taizzi dialect extend the use of (fii) to depict spatial relations other than the ones where the Trajector (TR) is actually contained within the boundaries of the Landmark (LM). The instances analyzed in this paper show that (fii) encodes spatial relations in which the TR and the LM are horizontally or vertically related to each other. However, the use of the preposition (fii) by speakers of the Taizzi dialect to encode these spatial relations proves they cognitively characterized the LMs as containers that contain the TRs.


Introduction
The conundrums of (fii) lie in being very tempting to be used in the locative sense.Other difficulties with (fii) are with regard to its multiplicity of meanings.As a polysemous preposition (fii) can exhibit a set of related senses.This polysemous preposition can signify containment in geographical regions, containment in public or private places, containment in a place of work or institution, containment in time, existence, exclusiveness, other domains and abstract metaphorical senses that (fii) can signify, and vertical and horizontal containment which will be particularly elaborated upon in this paper.
We will be adopting the framework of Cognitive Grammar (CG) in this paper in order to attain a comprehensive analysis of the use of (fii) in the horizontal and vertical axes based on attested instances from the Taizzi dialect (hence forth the TD).It is worth noting that the TD is one of the dialects spoken by the people of Taiz, a city in Yemen, and is considered one of the variants of Arabic language.In terms of number of speakers and being a dialect of around three million people, the TD obtains its position as one of the most important dialect in the Republic of Yemen.Though the TD has many similarities to other dialects in the Arab Peninsula, it differs from them in the phonological, morphological, syntactic and semantic levels.There are also vocabulary-related features that differentiate the TD from other variants of Yemeni Arabic or other Arabic dialects in general.
Cognitive linguistics (CL) has proved to be one of the most dynamic approaches by which language is analyzed.Driven and Ibanez (2010) maintain that 'The dynamicity of Cognitive Linguistics (CL) is largely due to the fact that it is not a single person's enterprise.Rather it arises from the combination of various pioneering ideas that, acting as separable strands of one whole, have drawn together to give rise to a unified paradigm'.What is peculiar about CL is that it is not a simple descriptive method of analysis; rather it is a multi-based scheme of analysis that deals with both cognition and language.(Dirven and Iba´n˜ez 2010) In relation to the category of prepositions, it is a fact that it constitutes a form of speech in almost every language or even a dialect, spoken or written except for few languages like Korean that 'has no such words at all', (Lindstromberg 2010).Taking that into account, the reader can understand why prepositions of Arabic with the number of at least seventeen prepositions (Al-Afghaani 1971), constitute a crucial category of the language.Nevertheless, for the most part of the literature written on prepositions of the Arabic language or even its different dialects the analyses and investigation on prepositions were based on a descriptive ground.
The significance of prepositions results from the fact that it is mostly through prepositions the spatial scenes are depicted and the fact that different languages vary in the ways they utilize prepositions to encode spatial relations.According to Fuse (2006) 'Languages contrast in the various ways they lexicalize spatial relations depending on the details of the relation (e.g., degree of fit, the shape or orientation of the objects, the frame(s) of reference commonly used in the language; i.e., absolute, deictic, intrinsic), and the grammatical forms of the spatial terms themselves (e.g., prepositions, verbs)'.Moreover, prepositions cover a wide range of relations where they can profile different kinds of relations, "simplex or complex", (Langacker 2008).This makes the category of prepositions uniquely different from other linguistic categories that can profile either simple or complex relations.
Although the views of some linguists considered prepositions as being "meaningless words" (Tesnière 1953), and the opinions of some Arab grammarians who judged prepositions as being less important and less meaningful than the arguments they relate; prepositions show an extremely significant role in expressing a wide range of relations, and capability of describing a wide set of metaphors and abstract expressions that can be subject to linguistic analysis.(Fuse 2006)

Literature Review
Despite the reasonable number of books and the recent research that aimed at thoroughly analyzing the prepositions of Arabic language, these works looked at prepositions as a grammatical class subjecting all its entries into analysis rather than examining them individually.Further, these analyses did not focus on the semantics of prepositions of Arabic nor attempted to provide the readers with thorough illustration and full exploration of the semantic content of these lexical items taken individually.
Within the area of prepositions of Arabic, most research dealt with the genitive case that Arabic prepositions assign to their arguments and focused more on the function these particles play in a sentence.Examining the semantics of one particular preposition by subjecting it into a detailed and comprehensive analysis instead of examining the whole grammatical class (as one finds in almost all the works dealing with prepositions of Arabic language) received far less attention, however.
Arab grammarians judged prepositions as being semantically less significant than other grammatical classes of Arabic language.Expressing a relation between two arguments x and y, prepositions are thought of as being significant due only to the grammatical function they play.Traditionally speaking, Arab grammarians divided lexical items of Arabic language into three main classes: nouns, verbs and particles; and different definitions were assigned to these classes.This is what Arab grammarians and the two main schools of Arab grammarians namely: Basriyyuun and Kufiyyuun agreed upon.(c.f Najjar 1986).Naming Arabic prepositions, these two schools differed radically.Kufiyyuun called them 'huruuf al-idhafah' (particles of addition).On other hand, Bsariyyuun called them 'huruuf aljarr' (particles of attraction).
The class of 'huruuf' (particles) received considerable controversy among Arab grammarians.As a result, the different definitions of prepositions (which are subsumed under the category of particles) proposed by Arab grammarians show to a great extent the importance of 'prepositions' as lexical items of Arabic language.The different views of Arab grammarians of how to classify and sub-classify prepositions of Arabic language make it clear that Arabic prepositions do deserve special attention and profound analyses.We argue that all these traditional definitions do not semantically provide sufficient distinction between prepositions and other parts of speech, however.What is interesting here is that Arab grammarians separated prepositions from the general grammatical class of particles.Nevertheless, they did not subject them to thorough analysis.This in fact shows that this particular proportion in Arabic language is research worthy and, linguistically, demand further explication.
One observation we can infer while reading some old grammar books of Arabic language is that these books mention the prepositions and their different senses, and then support that with explanation.Nevertheless, explanation in this case is nothing more than 'exemplification'; (e.g.Al-Muzani 1983).This, in fact, can be true even about recently written grammar books.(e.g.Al-Afghaani 1971).This can be due, in our opinion, to either of two following reasons: (a) These books were intended to be very concise books.
(b) Authors considered other parts of speech as more important than prepositions and thus paid little attention to them.
Arab grammarians tried to assign different senses to a number of prepositions and described prepositions of Arabic as being 'mutually substitutable'.Based on that, different prepositions of Arabic can replace one another.Basriyyuun, however, accepted with caution such a way of assigning different senses to a preposition.They insisted on that the above-mentioned examples are to be accepted but with some kind of 'construal'.They claimed that even if prepositions can substitute one another in such utterances which render them grammatical it is because we 'construe' the meaning of these sentences as to have the substituted preposition in their 'tacit' explanation.
By separating prepositions from the class of particles, Arab grammarians seemed to be aware of the importance of these lexical items, but they did not subject them to adequate analysis.What is more interesting is that Arab grammarians (e.g.Al-Sarraaj1996) called particles 'tools of change'.Particles are believed to change the grammatical cases of nouns and verbs they precede and remain unchanged at the same time.With a particle preceding a noun or a verb they can have different grammatical cases.
One remark we would like to make here before proceeding any further is that talking about prepositions we are concerned with a close set of particles that grammatically affects nouns marking them with Genitive case.This, in fact, distinguishes prepositions from other particles that can precede verbs only, particles that can precede nouns and verbs alike, or those particles that can precede nouns affecting them with grammatical cases other than the Genitive case.
On the other hand, one can find some other books of Arabic preposition that tried to examine the use of Arabic prepositions as used in the Holy Quraan.One of these books is (Khuḍarī 1989) in which the writer highlights the extensive use of prepositions in the Holy Quraan and examines the secrets of their use.In the same vein, Salman (2005) examined the use of the Arabic preposition in the Holy Quraan.She focused on how different prepositions can substitute one another in the Holy Quraan, and how they can be implicitly referred to in certain contexts.(Salman 2005) Other works have been devoted to the study of common mistakes in the use of the Arabic preposition and how these particles can replace one another in some contexts.One of these books is (Ammār 1998).Once again, the writer here describes the use of the Arabic preposition in line with the views of the views of old Arab grammarians in the two mains schools of Basriyyuun and Kufiyyuun, and all the instances elaborated upon are selected from the Holy Quraan, and Standard Arabic.Some works that dealt with prepositions in Arabic language were of comparative perspective.Darraaj (1991) compared the prepositions of Arabic with the prepositions of Hebrew and Syriac languages.Najjar (1986) studied the meanings of Arabic prepositions in their linguistic use in MSA based on the description of prepositions in the books of old Arab grammarians.She conducted, as well, a comparative study between the use of prepositions in Arabic, Hebrew, and other Semitic languages.(Darraaj 1991) With regard to the dialects of Arabic language, it is more recently that Arab linguists realized their importance and started to subject them to linguistic analysis.Yemeni Arabic is one of the dialects of standard Arabic that has been recently subjected to linguistic analysis.Nevertheless, in most of these linguistic studies the topic of prepositions has been briefly explained if not totally neglected.On the other hand, nothing to our knowledge has been written on the prepositions of the TD adopting the Cognitive Linguistics approach.In fact, we have not come across any studies of this nature especially with regard to the prepositions used in the TD.
There have been a number of studies that dealt with Yemeni Arabic, but none of these works dealt with prepositions from a cognitive point of view.Some of these works dealt with the phonology, morphology and grammar of Yemeni Arabic such as Hamdi Qafisheh's Yemeni Arabic I & II (1984).Qafisheh primarily deals with San'aani dialect trying to; phonologically, morphologically, and grammatically; analyze 40 units of conversations that he has collected in different conversation situations.Mohammed, Turki (2008) provides a morpho-sematic analysis of the nouns and verbs used in the TD.In his research he offers a descriptive analysis of the different word patterns of the nouns and verbs used in the TD and examined how the change of pattern affects the semantics of a word.His analysis, however, is based on a descriptive ground, and is limited to only two grammatical classes of Arabic language.
Other studies, like Al-Zumor's ( 2009), have touched upon Yemeni Arabic from a sociolinguistic point of view.Zumor's study, for example, studies the specific linguistic act of "Naming".The study is basically concerned with investigating personal names, particularly female names, as "they look very striking" to a person who does not know much about the culture of the regions under study.Using questionnaire as a tool for data collection, Zumor's collected almost 300 personal female names.These names are, then, classified into different categories on the basis of their sources.
Al-Shar'abi Tawfeek (2010) dealt with Yemeni Arabic from another perspective.He examined the interaction between prosody and morphology in Yemeni Arabic, and how they could affect each other.He argued that this kind of mutual interaction in the case of Yemeni Arabic may or may not be the same in other dialects of Arabic dialects.

Theoretical Framework
We will adopt the framework of (CG) in this paper in order to introduce to the readers different linguistic tools as to examine one entry of a linguistic category of Arabic language (prepositions) in accordance with speakers' everyday perception and interaction with the outside world.Heine (1997) looks at language as a 'product' of our experience of the outside world; language is 'the product of our interaction with world around us'. Speakers' understanding of the world that they interact with is one way or the other represented in their everyday language.
The reader should keep in mind that speakers of a language try to choose a proper preposition, for instance, to locate different entities in spatial relations in accordance with their understanding and their experience in the world.Consequently, the possibility of using various prepositions to depict one spatial relation comes as a result of the different mental images that the speakers have of how to situate these entities around them.
Adopting some notions of Cognitive Grammar like trajector, landmark, image schema, cognitive domains, and others, we will analyze a number of instances where the preposition (fii) is used.That is, the paper will subject the preposition (fii) to full and thorough analysis in its use in the horizontal and vertical axes.The different uses of (fii) in this domain will be described, and the paper will try to find out how the speakers of the TD exploit (fii) to encode various horizontal and vertical spatial relations, and how different conceptualizations are involved.
Basically, the Arabic preposition (fii) belongs to the semantic field of 'containment'.Nevertheless, (fii) proves to be able to cover a wide range of spatial relations (relation in the horizontal and vertical axes is one of them) which together form a coherent semantic network where the concept of CONTAINMENT is the underlying image schema.

Method and Data Collection
The data under analysis in this paper are a set of collected instances which will be investigated in two stages.In the first stage, we will be elaborating upon the instances from a cognitive semantic perspective.That is, we will utilize notions of cognitive grammar to examine how the speakers of the TD do cognitively characterize the spatial relations in these instances.In the second stage, we will be presenting illustrative figures to visually represent the instances and make it easier for the reader to comprehend the seemingly containment-irrelevant instances, which are in fact commonly used by the speakers of the TD as well as speakers of some other parts of Yemen.
The problem with the TD is that it is a spoken variant of language.Though the TD is one of the variants of Arabic language, it is commonly used as a spoken form rather than a written one.In contrast to Standard Arabic that is used by the educated people for different formal registers-newspapers, books, media, governmental decrees and addresses, applications, formal letters…etc; the TD is rather spoken than written.Being a spoken dialect rather than a written one requires our attention to a number of points.This, however, should not go against the fact that the TD can be used as a written form.The TD can, in a few cases, be used as a written form.This includes written personal letters among friends, and recently in mobile messages and electronic mails.It becomes clear that the TD is employed in the everyday life of the people of Taiz, and that the speakers of the TD switch to Standard Arabic only when the necessity calls for that.As for running their daily affairs, the speakers of TD will only employ their own dialect, namely, the TD.
To ensure the triangulation of sources of data, data collection was performed in different registers, and in different conversational situations.We collected data by taking notes and recoding tapes when necessary through personal interviews with a few persons of native speakers of the TD, and through friendly gatherings in the city of Taiz.In some cases, specialists in Arabic language were consulted in order to confirm data taken from the native speakers, ensure the validity of the data, and provide the researcher with new instances.We conducted data collection in the city of Taiz, and focused more on data in which the preposition (fii) is utilized to cover a wide variety of senses.

The Conceptual Base of (fii)
(fii) describes a relation where two participants are involved; the TR being a physical or abstract entity that receives the idea of containment, and the LM being a physical, or abstract, entity that is conceived as a three dimensional area where the TR is contained.
As is shown in figure 1, at the very basic level the first participant of this spatial relation (TR) is thought of as a three dimensional movable physical entity.The second participant in this spatial relation (LM) is thought of as a three dimensional physical entity.One of its important properties is its capability to serve as a container.That is, it should have an interior that could be identified against its exterior.
The spatial relation of containment can be characterized in terms of other sub-components.At the basic level, the spatial relation of containment differs from other spatial relations in that it is not thought of in association with vertical and horizontal axes.That is, the two participants in the containment relation are neither thought of in terms of which one is front/behind the other nor which one is above/below the other one.
In terms of force dynamics, the containment relation can be thought of as a result of an external force that moves the TR and situates it in the interior of the LM.Consequently, the TR's path is characterized as getting away from the source of this external force.Figure 1 presents the conceptual base of the preposition (fii).
Conceptualizing the relation of containment the speaker will mentally triggers two participants the first serves as a container and the second receiving this containment.These two participants build up the semantic structure of the relation of containment.The other elements mentioned in the figure above can be described as subcomponents that help in fully conceptualizing this relation.
If a speaker of the TD chooses to use the preposition (fii) rather than other prepositions of Arabic, it is because he/she characterizes the TR as being contained in the LM as is shown in figure 2. Saying that " ‫اﻟﺼﻨﺪوق‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫اﻟﻜﺮة‬ " /alkurah fii aS-Sunduuq/ meaning 'the ball is in the box' characterizes a mental image where the TR is enclosed by the LM.That is to say, the LM is conceived as an enclosing area.The idea of containment is highly stressed in such instances.

(fii) -Horizontal and Vertical Axes
Though the sense of containment suggests that the TR is enclosed by the LM and that horizontality and verticality don't seem to play any role in better understanding the sense of containment, the use of the preposition (fii) in the TD proves things differently.
Horizontality and verticality do play a significant role in understanding the use of the preposition (fii) in the TD.The use of the preposition (fii) in the instances below implies that the TR is contained by the LM, albeit the LM is situated horizontally above or under the TR, or vertically the TR is situated at the beginning, end, or even the middle of the LM.The TR can even be situated opposite to the LM and the LM contains only the reflection of the TR.Consider the following instances: In instance (1) the LM is technically situated under the TR.If one is standing on something they have to be situated above it, and this entity plays the role of a supporter.Since the sense of support is not strongly implied, the use of the preposition /ʕalaa/ meaning 'on' does not seem to be a competitive candidate to encode this relation.The relation between the TR 'he' and the LM 'shadow' is mentally perceived as such 'shadow' is an enclosure of 'he' and thus prevents the sunlight to reach 'he'.The sense of containment in this instance overmasters the sense of support and that justifies the use of the preposition (fii).As is shown in figure 3 the speakers of the TD do not conceptualize 'shadow' as a supporter, and rather perceive it as container that encloses the TR.
The reader finds a much similar situation in (2) where the TR 'he' is vertically situated down the LM 'sun'.In such a case, the use of the adverbials /fawq/ meaning 'up' or /taHt/ meaning 'down' seems to be very tempting to be used to encode the spatial relation between the TR and the LM.
'Sun' is perceived as an entity that has extensions that contain the TR.If one is standing under the sun, they have to be exposed to sunlight, surrounded and contained by it.From a mental perspective, the 'sun' here is conceptualized as an entity that plays the role of container.The sense of containment is regarded as the focal relation between the TR and the LM and that justifies the use of the preposition (fii).What reinforces our argument here is that some speakers of the TD might choose the adverbial /bein/ meaning 'in between' or /waST/ meaning 'in the middle of' to encode this relation.
The relation between the TR 'he' and the LM 'sun' is perceived as such 'sun' affects the TR with its extension and encloses it.Once again, the sense of containment in this instance seems to overmaster other senses and that justifies the use of the preposition (fii).The speakers of the TD in such an instance are conceptually more concerned with how the LM affects the TR rather than the actual locations of the TR with respect to the LM.Consider figure 4.
The instance (3) sounds more interesting.The use of the preposition (fii) clearly implies that the TR is contained in the inner part of the LM.The LM 'queue' is more likely to contain the TR 'he' in its interior.That will quite understandable in contexts where the TR is located in between the two ends of a queue.The question is that will the speakers of the TD use the preposition (fii) to encode that relation if the TR is located at the beginning or the end of the queue?The answer is 'yes'.
Taking the horizontal axis into account the reader can simply understand that if one is the first in a queue, no one would be there to precede them, and if one were last in a queue, no one would be there to follow them.In other words, containment in both cases remains 'partial'.The TR, in both cases, is thought of as being contained from one side and the other end remains open.Figure 5 shows the location of the TR in relation to the LM .
What is worth mentioning here is that in (3) the TR constitutes a dispensable portion of the LM.The TR 'he' is a part of the LM 'queue', albeit 'he' profiles the TR in this instance.The TR can even stand for the LM itself.The reader can imagine a situation where 'he' is standing alone waiting for his turn, and there comes another one trying to trespass him, he would ask them to stand in the 'queue'.The 'queue' here is no one but 'he'.
The situation in ( 4) is a little bit different.The LM 'mirror' contains only a reflection of the TR 'myself'.Here what draws the attention of the speaker more is the reflection of the TR rather than the TR itself.The speaker characterizes the 'mirror' as a container and focuses more on what it contains, and the actual location of the TR comes in second priority.This, in fact, justifies the use of the preposition (fii), since the sense of containment is obviously perceived within the frames of the LM.
On the other hand, the instance above does not clearly how much of the TR is reflected and contained in the LM.It seems that the sense of containment itself carries more significance than any other details, and the speaker, as a result, chooses to exploit the preposition (fii) to encode this relation.Figure 6 describes the spatial relation that holds between the TR and the LM as stated in instance (4).
Compared to instance (4) above, there are situations where the preposition (fii) is used to encode a relation of a TR that is directed towards a LM.In such a situation, the TR is neither actually contained by the LM, nor situated upon or below it.Using the preposition (fii) in such instances implies that the speaker one way or the other conceptualizes the TR as being contained by the LM.Consider the following instance: (5) ‫ورﻗﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﻋﻴﻨﻪ‬ ‫واﺣﺪ‬ ‫آﻞ‬ kol waaHed ʕeenoh fii waraqtoh every one eye his in paper his Everyone keeps his eyes on his answer sheet!
In the instance above, the speaker conceptualizes the TR 'eye' as entity that has a focus point that, in turn, is situated in the LM.Though the TR in the instance above is never thought of as being factually contained in the LM, the speaker seems to be more concerned with the visual focus and the location where it is situated.The LM in this instance is perceived as to contain the extension of the TR, and consequently the TR has to be directed towards the LM. Figure 7 illustrates how the LM contains the extension of TR and the TR is inevitably directed towards the LM.
As the reader can simply conclude from the figure above, the TR is situated outside the interior of the LM, and only the focus point that is contained within its boundaries.The dashed lines, on the other hand, suggest that the TR is directed towards the focus point represented by the black circle.It is worth mentioning, however, that the focus point towards which the TR is directed could be the entire space of the entity that profiles the LM.

(fii) -TR and LM Facing One Another
Another situation where the preposition (fii) is used is when the TR is in front of the LM.Similarly, in such a spatial relation the TR is neither actually contained by the LM, nor situated upon or below it.However, using the preposition (fii) to encode this spatial relation holding between the TR and the LM suggests that the speaker on way or the other conceptualizes the TR as being contained by the LM.Consider the following instance: (6) ‫ﻋﻴﻨﻚ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﻋﻴﻨﻲ‬ ʕeeni fii ʕeenak eye (my) in eye (your) Put my eye in your eye.(Look at my eyes).
In the instance above, the speaker conceptualizes the relation that holds between the TR and the LM as such they are situated in front of one another.Imagine a situation where one is talking to his friend and one wants him to look at him in the eyes; usually their eyes will be situated in such a manner that they are facing each other.Though the TR in such a case is not factually contained in the LM, the speaker seems to be more concerned with the visual focus and sight extension and the location where they are eventually situated.
It is interesting that though the LM in this instance is thought of as to contain the focus and the extension of the TR, the TR at the same time serves as a container of the LM.The visual focus and the sight extension of the LM is directed towards the TR and is seemingly contained by it.Figure 8 illustrates how the LM contains the visual focus and the sight extension of TR and how the TR is directed towards the LM, and vice versa.
It happens that the speaker might choose to omit the preposition (fii) in the instance above, and consequently the semantics of the utterance will entirely change.Although there will be no overt spatial particle to mediate between the TR and the LM, speakers of the TD do characterize the relation between these two entities as a spatial relation.Consider the instance (7) below: (7) ‫ﻋﻴﻨﻚ!‬ ‫ﻋﻴﻨﻲ‬ ʕeeni ʕeenak

eye (my) eye (your)
To say/do something without feeling shameful.
As is clear in the instance above, no spatial particle is employed to encode the assumed spatial relation holding between the two physical entities that profile the TR and the LM.The speaker here does not only choose not to use the preposition (fii) to encode this spatial relation but not to use any other spatial particle.In the instance above the TR is neither thought of to be enclosed by the LM nor situated upon or below it.The instance, however, suggests something like that the person referred to did or said something in public without feeling shameful.It is rather with audacity.
Compared to instance (6) above, there are similar situations where the preposition (fii) is used to encode a spatial relation that holds between a TR that is located in front of a LM.Different from the situations described obviously the TR here is not factually contained by the LM, and its focus or extensions are not situated within its boundaries.Nevertheless, using the preposition (fii) in such cases implies that the speaker one way or the other conceptualizes the TR as being contained by the LM.Consider the following instance: (8) ‫اﻟﺒﺎب‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫اﻟﺒﺎب‬

albaab fii albaab
The door in the door The door is in front of the door.
In the instance above, the use of the preposition (fii) is ascribed to the fact that the speaker conceptualizes the spatial relation that hold between the TR and the LM as a relation of containment.It is obvious, however, that the TR and the LM are located in front of one another where no physical entity is enclosed by the other.As is presented in figure 9 we can imagine a scene with two neighbors residing in two flats whose two doors are facing one another.It is acceptable that the speaker might not need to use the preposition (fii) to encode this spatial relation and could use any other spatial particle that describes this seemingly horizontal relation holding between the TR and the LM.
The question now is that why speakers of the TD will use the preposition (fii) rather than any other spatial particle that is equivalent to the English 'in front of' or 'behind' to encode this seemingly horizontal spatial relation.It has previously been argued that how a speaker will choose to code a spatial relation linguistically depends on how they mentally characterize it.Choosing 'in front of' and 'behind' depends on the vantage point a speaker assumes, (Langacker 2008).
How one would linguistically code the relation that holds between a rock and a tree, for instance, depends on the vantage point assumed.Now suppose that the rock, tree, and vantage point are roughly in alignment.When the vantage point is such that the rock intervenes in the line of sight (VP1), the speaker will use either sentence in (9) (b).If the vantage point is such that the tree intervenes (VP2), the sentences in (9) (c) are appropriate instead.Consider figure 10 and see how the vantage point affects the choice of a spatial particle to encode a spatial relation.(Langacker 2008) (9) (a) VP1 (rock)---(tree) VP2 (b) VP1: The rock (TR) is in front of the tree (LM).The tree (TR) is behind the rock (LM).
(c) VP2: The tree (TR) is in front of the rock (LM).The rock (TR) is behind the tree (LM).
This, in fact, does not apply to the spatial relation holding between the doors in ( 8) where the preposition (fii) is used to encode.The vantage point here does not seem to play a significant role in deciding the kind of relation holding between the two entities or in conveying the semantic message the speaker wants to express.As figure 11 shows whether the vantage point is VP1 or VP2 the relation will still remain the same and speakers of the TD will use the same linguistic expression: ‫اﻟﺒﺎب'‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫'اﻟﺒﺎب‬ -'the door in the door'.
The speaker here is not much concerned with which door is in front or behind the other.Rather, the speaker probably wants to communicate much more than just that the doors are seen as having fronts facing one another similar to what Clark (1973) calls the 'canonical encounter', a situation where two individuals meet face-to face.
Thus, the use of the preposition (fii) to encode this spatial relation could be ascribed to the fact that the speaker here necessarily needs another tool rather than the one supposed to be used to suggest a more comprehensive sense than just the mutual canonical encounter taking place between the TR and the LM.
We argue that the speaker wants to convey that the two doors are very close to each other and they are enclosed and contained within the same space.The use of the preposition (fii) in the 'contained within' proto-scene, which basically neither involves a horizontal axis nor a vertical one, is associated with a LM that is mentally characterized as a three dimensional container within its boundaries the TR is included.That is, the speaker does not show much concern with asymmetric feature of the TR and the LM being entities that have front/back axis.Their conceptualization is more directed against the bounded space that encloses them and the closeness of these two entities.
As a matter of fact, the use of the preposition (fii) does not only indicate the closeness of the two doors but further implies a wider range of containment.Since this expression /albaab fii albaab/ is uttered to indicate close neighborhood, an assumed consequence is that people of this neighborhood are contained within an extended space.Neighbors who are residing within this closed space are supposed to be privileged with a special kind of treatment and are supposed to show the same kind of behavior.figure 12 shows how the limits of containment are extended to cover and enclose a wider space and more entities.
To conclude the discussion we can say that the use of the preposition (fii) in the horizontal and vertical axes as presented above strongly supports the hypothesis that the choice of this preposition in particular is based on cognitive and cultural considerations.
The data shows that prepositions of Arabic are not arbitrary lexemes that have no meanings.Each preposition of Arabic has a meaning.The instances presented above show how cognition and the way a speaker characterizes a spatial relation influence the selection of prepositions to encode a spatial relation holding between two entities.The presentation of data in this paper shows that some uses of the preposition (fii) are exclusively found in the TD and probably some other dialects of Yemen.
The use of the preposition (fii) to encode a spatial relation where the TR is contained within the LM in the TD may be generalized to cover many dialects of Arabic language.The extension of (fii) in the TD to cover the horizontal and vertical axes as the data above showed need not be necessarily be generalized to other dialects of Arabic, however.
Speakers of the TD while using a preposition to encode a spatial relation are influenced by two factors.The first is the nature of spatial relation holding between the TR and the LM.The second is how the speaker characterizes this relation.The cognitive semantic analysis of the use of the Arabic preposition (fii) in the TD shows that using (fii) to encode a spatial relation where the TR and the LM are horizontally or vertically related to one another are all motivated by the image schema of containment.It is this sense of containment that serves as the core meaning to which the use (fii) in the horizontal and vertical axes can be related.
The data presented above show that speakers of the TD extend the use of (fii) to depict spatial relations other than the ones where the TR is actually contained within the boundaries of the LM.In such cases (fii) encodes spatial relations in which the TR and the LM are horizontally or vertically related to each other.However, the use of the preposition (fii) to encode these spatial relations proves that speakers of the TD cognitively characterized the LMs as containers that contain the TRs.

Conclusion
This paper elaborated upon the use of the Arabic preposition (fii) in the horizontal and vertical axes as used in the TD, a dialect spoken in Yemen.It has been shown that the schematic meaning of "containment" is the underlying sense under which the use of (fii) in these axes can be related.The paper, as well, shows that that the speakers of the TD developed the semantic content of the preposition (fii) in such a way that they employ it to cover more domains more than it is actually used in the SA or MSA.As a spatial particle, in its schematic sense the preposition (fii) evokes the idea of "containment" where a physical entity that denotes the TR is contained in another physical entity that profiles the LM.
The paper in hand demonstrates that the semantics of (fii) is extended to cover other spatial relations other than the one where the TR is actually contained within the LM.The preposition (fii) is used to denote spatial relations where the TR is situated on the LM, the TR is under the LM, the TR is inevitably directed towards the LM, the TR and the LM are facing one another, and others.However, the analysis presented in this paper has established that in all these spatial relations, in one way or the other, speakers of the TD cognitively characterized the LMs as containers that contain the TRs.
The data and the analysis presented in this paper have demonstrated that using (fii) to encode a spatial relation where the TR and the LM are horizontally or vertically related to one another are all motivated by the image schema of "CONTAINMENT WITHIN".This sense of containment serves as the core meaning of the preposition (fii) to which all these spatial relations can be related.
With regard to future work, the issue of intervarietal analysis should be given more attention in the future research.Future work may be done on the different ways speakers of Arabic dialects choose to express themselves and encode the same spatial relations employing various spatial particles.
Reviewing tens of articles in the International Journal of Cognitive Linguistics we noticed that most of these studies dealt with lexical items from European languages including English, Dutch, Spanish, Finnish, German, and others.This includes the nouns, the verbs, the adjectives and prepositions of these languages.Cognitive analyses of the semantics of lexical items of Arabic language were totally absent.Thus, this research can further provide a linguistic base of other cognitive semantic analyses of other grammatical classes of Arabic (nouns, verbs, and adjectives) adopting the framework of CG.  Figure 1 shows the use of (fii) at the very basic level.The containment spatial relation that holds between the TR and the LM results in a number of prerequisites concerning the participant of this spatial relation.That is, the TR is thought of as a three dimensional movable physical entity that is contained by the second participant, the LM, which is thought of as a three dimensional physical entity.In this spatial relation, horizontality and verticality seem not to play any significant role in characterizing the sense of containment at the very basic level.On the other hand, the TR is thought to under the effect of a force dynamic that moves it and locates it in the interior of the LM.This results in a change of state of both the TR and LM.The TR is moved to a new location and the LM serves as container of this entity.Figure 3 shows how the TR is situated on the LM rather than in it.The relation between the TR and the LM in this case is mentally perceived as such the LM is a container of the TR.That is, the sense of containment in this instance overmasters the sense of support and this justifies the use of the preposition (fii).Apparently, the relation holding between the TR and the LM is not as such every part of the TR is situated within the interior of the LM.However, the use of the preposition (fii) by the speakers of the TD to encode this spatial relation suggests that they, one way or the other, construe it as a containment relation.Figure 4 shows how actually the TR is vertically situated down the LM.However, the LM is perceived as a container of the TR.That is, the sense of containment is believed to be the focal relation between the TR and the LM and this justifies the use of (fii) to encode this spatial relation.Despite the fact that the TR is situated under the LM rather than in it, the relation between the TR and the LM in this case is mentally perceived as such the LM is a container of the TR.That is, the sense of containment in this instance overmasters other possible sense and this justifies the use of the preposition (fii) to encode this spatial relation.It is clear the TR is not actually situated within the interior of the LM.However, the use of the preposition (fii) by the speakers of the TD to encode this spatial relation suggests that they construe it as a containment relation.
Figure 5.He Is in the Queue Figure 5 shows the location of the TR in relation to the LM.In figure 5 the reader can simply understand that if one is in the queue he/she is contained by it.In case he/she is the first in a queue, no one would be there to precede him/her, and if one were last in a queue, no one would be there to follow him/her.Here, the spatial relation holding between the TR and the LM is seemingly a horizontal one.However, the speakers of the TD conceptualize it as a containment relation.They understand the fact that if someone moves out of this horizontal line (the queue) he/she is no longer in it.The relation holds between the TR and the LM in this instance can be characterized as a partial containment.In figure 6 the LM 'mirror' contains only the reflection of the TR 'myself'.In this instance, the speakers of the TD characterize the LM 'mirror' as a container of the TR "I" though it only contains it reflection.As is clear in this figure, the spatial relation that holds between the TR and the LM is seemingly characterized at the horizontal axis.The TR is horizontally situated in front of the LM.However, the speaker here focuses more on what the LM contains rather than the actual location of the TR.The sense of containment overmasters all other possible senses and that justifies the use of the preposition (fii) to encode this spatial relation.
Figure 7 'Everyone Keeps His Eyes on His Answer Sheet!' In figure 7, the LM, 'answer sheet', contains only the focus point of the TR 'eye'.The speaker characterizes the LM as a container of the TR though, as matter of fact, it only contains its focus point.In this instance, the relation that holds between the TR and the LM take place at the vertical axis depending on setting where such an expression is uttered.In an examination room, people who are sitting for a test are supposed to keep their eyes on their answer sheets.However, the speakers of the TD here are more concerned with what the LM contains rather than the actual location of the TR or the LM.The use of the preposition (fii) by the speakers of the TD to encode this spatial relation suggests that the sense of containment overmasters other senses.In figure 12, the use of (fii) further implies a wider range of containment.The expression /albaab fii albaab/ is uttered to indicate close neighborhood, and an assumed consequence is that people of this neighborhood are contained within an extended space.Though the TR and the LM are horizontally related to one another, the speakers of the TD choose the preposition (fii) to encode this spatial relation.It is not only that the speakers of the TD characterize this spatial relation as a containment relation but also more, as figure 12 shows, the limits of containment are extended to cover and enclose a wider space and more entities.In this metaphorical use of the preposition (fii), it is not simply that the LM contains the TR or the TR is contained by the LM but the containment limits extend to involve the entities that the TR and LM already contain.

Figure 2 .
Figure 2. The Ball Is in the BoxFigure2shows how the TR is contained within the interior of the LM.As we can see, the TR is located within the boundaries of the three-dimensional LM that serves as a container.In the domain of spatial relations the cognitive interpretation of the relation holding between the TR and the LM is that the TR (the ball) is contained within the interior of the LM (the box).

Figure 3 .
Figure 3.He Is Standing in the Shadow

Figure 4 .
Figure 4.He Is Standing in the Sun

Figure 6 .
Figure 6.'I Saw Myself in the Mirror'

Figure 8 .
Figure 8. TR and LM Facing One AnotherIn figure8the TR is situated in front of the LM.As figure8shows, in this spatial relation the TR is neither actually contained by the LM, nor situated upon or below it.The TR and the LM are factually facing one another and the relation holding between them seems to a horizontal one.However, using the preposition (fii) by the speakers of the TD to encode this spatial relation and excluding other possible prepositions of Arabic suggests that the speakers one way or the other conceptualizes the TR as being contained by the LM.

Figure 9 .
Figure 9. /albaab fii albaab/: "The Door in The Door" In figure 9 the TR and the LM are located in front of one another where no physical entity is enclosed by the other.The figure clearly shows that the tow doors are horizontally related to one another.It is interesting that despite the actual location of the TR and the LM the speakers of the TD characterize this spatial relation as a containment relation.The use of the preposition (fii) to encode this spatial relation rather than any other Arabic prepositions reinforces the fact that speakers of the TD characterize the spatial relation between the TR and the LM in this instance as a containment relation.

Figure 10 .
Figure 10.Choice of Spatial Particles Depends on Different Vantage Points (Adapted from(Langacker 2008) Figure10shows how the vantage point affects the choice of a spatial particle.The different positions of the speaker involved determine how he/she characterizes the spatial relation holding between the TR and the LM.Though the position of the TR and the LM remain the same in all cases, the change of the position of the speaker has affects the choice of the spatial particle that is used to depict the spatial relation.However, this is neither true of all languages nor of all cases.This remains true only when the spatial relation is characterized as a horizontal or a vertical relation.

Figure 11 .
Figure 11.Vantage Points Might Not Affect the Choice of a Spatial ParticleFigure11shows that the vantage point might not affect the choice of a spatial particle to encode a spatial relation.The different positions of the speaker involved in this case does not affect the way he/she characterizes the spatial relation holding between the TR and the LM.Though the position of the person involved might not be the same and the TR and the LM do not change positions, this does not affect the choice of the spatial particle that is used to depict the spatial relation.This is true only since the speakers of the TD in this case characterize this

Figure 11
Figure 11 clearly shows that the preposition (fii) is the only means used by the speakers of the TD to encode the spatial relation holding between the door 1 and door 2 no matter what the vantage point is.

Figure 12 .
Figure 12.Limits of Containment Extended to Cover a Wider Space