Traditionally, time and space are viewed as the backdrop for societal development. However, this study argues that they are essential cognitive elements shaping the evolution of humanity, law, and society. The interdependence between these three domains is highlighted by the ongoing reforms and evolution of laws as society progresses. Existing research has explored time and space within these domains, focusing on philosophical interpretations of law's spatial and temporal dimensions. This study expands on this research by investigating the dynamic 'tempo-spatial construction' within the human-law-society triangle. It specifically investigates how time and space, viewed through the lens of semiotics (as 'signs of time' and 'signs of space'), contribute to the construction of law, the shaping of human behavior, and the evolution of societies. Three key research questions are addressed: (i) How do varying conceptions of time and space influence legal frameworks and societal order? What are the associated human psychological representations? (ii) What is the fundamental nature of time and space as encoded in the human-law-society relationship? (iii) What are the functions of 'signs of time' and 'signs of space' in this cognitive construction?

The study draws upon various perspectives on time and space. Haney (1969) distinguishes between cyclical and linear time, while Nöth (2020) categorizes time into points, age, and continuity. Regarding space, Lagopoulos (2009) describes place space as an internalized semiotic entity, and Harvey (1973, 2006) emphasizes space's construction through human practices. Previous research has investigated how time and space are defined, represented in signs, and construct social meaning across different fields. This study aims to move beyond static interpretations, focusing on the dynamic construction of time and space within the human-law-society framework, and using these concepts to understand legal discourse and its impacts.

The study employed a corpus-based method, using a self-compiled corpus of data protection laws from China, the EU, the US, and the UK. The corpus construction adhered to four criteria: availability, typicality, language consistency, and comparability. Wordsmith 8.0 was used for corpus analysis. The analysis proceeded in three stages. First, human psychological representations were examined through the lenses of cyclical and linear time (associated with ancient and modern laws, respectively) and place and field space (based on Halliday's field theory). Second, the essence of time and space as signs was explored from a cognitive semiotic perspective. Third, the functions of time and space in shaping humanity, law, and society were summarized. Specific keywords and concordance lines were examined to understand the representation of different time and space constructs within the legal texts. Visual representations, such as linear timelines and global maps, were created to illustrate the temporal and spatial dimensions of the laws.

The study found that human psychological representations of temporal construction include cyclical time (characteristic of ancient laws, reflecting discontinuous and context-specific legal systems tied to specific dynasties) and linear time (characteristic of modern laws, showing continuous development and updates based on previous legislation). Spatial construction was analyzed through the lens of 'place space' (local, national, and global legal jurisdictions) and 'field space' (interactive practices related to rights and obligations within legal discourse). Analysis of the EU GDPR illustrated the evolution of the definition of 'personal data' over time, while analysis of Chinese cybersecurity laws showed the progressive refinement of related terminology. The study reveals that ancient laws reflected a cyclical view of time aiming at maintaining static power structures, while modern laws reflected a linear conception, enabling social dialogue and innovation. Place space was shown to have a power hierarchy, with central places exerting more influence than peripheral ones. Field space, arising from interactive practices around rights and obligations, adds dynamism and flexibility to the legal landscape. The interplay between these temporal and spatial constructs forms the core of the tempo-spatial essence in the human-law-society relationship.

The findings show that the tempo-spatial construction within the human-law-society triangle is a dynamic process of semiotic meaning-making. The shift from cyclical time in ancient laws to linear time in modern laws reflects the evolution of societal power dynamics and the increasing importance of social dialogue and negotiation. Similarly, the interaction between place space and field space, and the hierarchy of power associated with different spatial locations shape legal discourse and practice. The study highlights the importance of understanding how time and space are symbolized and negotiated in legal frameworks, influencing power dynamics, shaping human behavior, and fostering the evolution of societies. This includes analyzing the interactions across different legal jurisdictions and the evolving nature of legal concepts.

This research offers a comprehensive framework for understanding the interplay of time and space in legal discourse, providing insights into the evolution of legal systems and their relationship with societal structures. The findings demonstrate the utility of cognitive semiotics in analyzing legal texts and understanding how they reflect and shape human behavior. Future research could explore other legal domains, examine specific case studies in greater detail, or investigate the impact of emerging technologies on the tempo-spatial construction within the human-law-society triangle.

The study focuses on data protection laws, limiting the generalizability of findings to other legal areas. The corpus used, while extensive, may not fully represent the diversity of legal discourse across different cultures and legal systems. The reliance on a corpus-based analysis could overlook nuances and contextual complexities not captured in written texts. Furthermore, the categorization of time into strictly cyclical or linear types might be an oversimplification of the complex temporalities at play within legal discourse.