I just heard some comments on the radio where a guy was talking about “up North” and “down South” and it made me wonder if we could ever adapt to the notions of “in West” or “up South” or “down North” if we decided that the upness and downness of directions were truly arbitrary and meaningless in themselves.
Then I began to wonder if other prepositions (more specifically prepositional phrases) have us conditioned to think a certain way about things like “into the house” or “into the woods” or “out of your mind” and all sorts of things like that.
Outside of its being very trivial and mundane, do you have any thoughts on this topic?
Up North and Down South are not arbitrary. We have used maps for hundreds of years, and north is is up and south is down. All our coordinates systems have developed to stay consistant, so we still refer to north as up and south as down.
It’s a great topic to investigate, but even more fun is to look at the differances in what you’re calling prepositional phrases between cultures. They can show has some of the most basic assumptions we live with are cultural, not factual.
Thanks for grasping the main idea here. In spite of knowing why we have the Up and Down relationship with North and South, it’s still a matter of convention. And my posing the question has to do with how ingrained these notions are. Could we adapt to changes in the language without going nuts?
I suspect it would vary greatly by individual, but that some mindsets are more resistant to such changes than others. Treating anything as natural is a dangerous way to see things. IMO.
Good question. I suspect the American version is based on what you describe.
I found it revealing when I learned that the concept of “orienting” and “orientation” derive from setting a map so that East (the Orient) was wherever East was supposed to be. And even though modern maps have the North-pointing arrow in many cases, we still think of “orienting” as setting the map so North is Up. What if East was Up to go with the notion of “Orienting” as the word means?
Then we’d be going Up East or Down West. Can your head accept such a thing?
In Britain people talk of going up to town, or up to university (“up” is even shorthand for being at university), and Cockneys (stereotype alert) go “up West” (to the West End of London, specifically) when they fancy a night on the town. I suppose you could theorise that “up” is being used in the sense of going to where it’s at, the top of the list of places you might like to be. But you can also go down (the) town and into town, so who knows?
In many cities (e.g. NYC) people would be lost if they couldn’t use phrases like Uptown and Downtown (and Midtown and crosstown). The fun thing about New York is that Uptown and Downtown are both locations and directions.
Another preposition that seems to vary in its implications is “over” and I always have this sense that I have to go “over” something when I go “over to somebody’s house” or the like. Maybe it’s a lake or a stream or a bridge or a railroad track or the ocean, but if I can’t think of something that I will actually go “over” it makes me feel funny.
My aunt, from Phoenix via Texas, finds it utterly hilarious that all of us here in Cleveland say we go “by” someone’s house for a visit.
“…then we’ll all go by Grandpa’s for Christmas dinner.”
“Haw haw! Y’all are gonna go BY his house but I’m going to go IN his house! I’ll wave as you go on BY! Haw haw!”
Every single friggin’ time someone says it, too…grrr…
Anyway, I am perfectly cool with the use of “by” meaning “to,” but apparently she is not.
Good one. A variation I particularly like is the “swing by” usage. As in: “we’re going from Nashville to New Orleans but we’re going to swing by Atlanta to pick up Virgil and Clarissa and the kids.”
Go by somebody’s place, was asociated in our family to mean taking a trip to somebody’s house, driving around the area seeing how the local crops were doing, who had changed what on their property, and and a general tour of the land. Stop at the person’s house, and mybe go to see the back forty and fish. Pack up and go home by the shortest route if late, or touring back on different roads to stop at the popcorn stand or the Dairy Queen before getting home. Going to somebody’s house meant we were going there the quickest way.
The Australian Outback is an example of another culture’s usage that shreds my own concept of what “out back” means. “Out back” has been no more space than the back yard, the back lot or maybe the field out behind the house. To have an entire region of a country or continent be “out back” messes with my head.
When I visited New York City, I was surprised by the uptown/downtown thing. In my hometown, the words are generally interchangeable. Both uptown and downtown refer to the central business district. These days hardly anyone goes to this area for shopping or entertainment purposes, since most of the stores and theaters are long gone, but you used to hear “I’m going into town” (meaning “going to the central business district to shop or to see a movie”).
When I lived in rural MS, we went “updown” for any conglomeration of shopping, businesses, etc. There was no downtown, in any sense.
When I visited cousins in Memphis, it was only downtown, no uptown.
Now that I live in New York, the idea that uptown *and * downtown are directions and locations makes so much sense. However, in Brooklyn, the only such conglomerations are considered downtown, at least directionally from where I live.
