Every time we talk about our emotions, we use images, especially metaphors and metonymies. The phenomena of these two kinds of image seem to have always been essential for the human conceptualization of emotions, as Gábor Györi claims: “[…] emotions have always invited the human mind to metaphorise about them” (1998: 117). Thus, the quality of timelessness stresses the importance of this way of reference to emotions. It would be useful to find out if they are also universal regarding culture. If emotions were conceptualized in the same images in cultures that completely differ from each other, there would be an evidence for the universality of metaphors and metonymies in the conceptualization of human emotions. The question of culture-specification includes, additionally to the question if the images in which basic emotions are referred to are universal, also the question whether something like basic emotions exists in general, and is discussed intensively. Except of the meaning of metaphor and metonymy in general and in reference to human emotions, the question of culture-specification will be discussed in this paper. We will have a look at the opponents and supporters of the theory of universality of emotions and emotion images and find out whether they really exclude each other or if one can find a hypothesis that considers both points of view.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Metaphor and metonymy in emotions
2.1 Metaphor and its meaning in emotions
2.2 Metonymy and its meaning in emotions
3. Culture-specification of emotion concepts
3.1 Culture-limitation of emotion concepts
3.2 Universality of emotion concepts
4. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This paper examines the role of metaphors and metonymies in the human conceptualization of emotions and investigates whether these linguistic and cognitive structures are universal across different cultures or culture-specific. It addresses the debate regarding the existence of "basic emotions" by analyzing linguistic evidence and cross-cultural examples.
- Conceptualization of emotions through metaphor and metonymy.
- The distinction and interaction between conceptual metaphors and metonymies.
- The impact of cultural background on the formation of emotion concepts.
- Comparative analysis of emotion language in different linguistic communities (e.g., English, Tagalog, Zulu).
- Evaluation of the universality versus culture-specificity of emotion concepts.
Excerpt from the Book
2. Metaphor and metonymy in emotions
Agnieszka Mikolajczuk writes that “[…] metaphor and metonymy are not stylistic vehicles which are used to build texts […]” (1998: 154). In contrast to the conscious use of metaphor and metonymy in literature and rhetoric, the process of referring to our emotions in images is a completely unconscious one. Friedrich Ungerer even tells us “[…] that metaphors and metonymies are used to structure our emotions categories” (1997: 317), that means that the way of conceptualizing emotions in images seems to be the natural way our mind perceives emotions.
George Lakoff assumes a link between these images and human physiology, what consequently means non-arbitrariness and therefore universality of emotion metaphors and metonymies in all languages (Mikolajczuk 1998: 158). The question of this universality will be observed after finding out the general meaning of metaphor and metonymy, also in emotions.
Chapter Summaries
1. Introduction: This chapter introduces the essential role of imagery in conceptualizing emotions and sets the stage for investigating the universality of these conceptualizations across cultures.
2. Metaphor and metonymy in emotions: This section defines the cognitive mechanisms of metaphor and metonymy, explaining how they unconsciously structure our emotion categories through source and target domains.
2.1 Metaphor and its meaning in emotions: This chapter details the phenomenon of conceptual metaphor, illustrating how specific source domains are used to think about abstract emotional targets.
2.2 Metonymy and its meaning in emotions: This chapter contrasts metonymy with metaphor, highlighting the objective relationship of contiguity between the literal and figurative meanings.
3. Culture-specification of emotion concepts: This chapter explores whether the existence of basic emotions is supported by cross-cultural linguistic evidence or if emotion concepts are fundamentally limited by culture.
3.1 Culture-limitation of emotion concepts: This chapter discusses arguments suggesting that emotion concepts are culturally bound, using examples like the role of social scenarios in the Tagalog language.
3.2 Universality of emotion concepts: This chapter presents evidence for universality by comparing Zulu and English conceptualizations of anger, showing that shared underlying structures often persist despite cultural differences.
4. Conclusion: The concluding chapter synthesizes the findings, arguing that while cultural differences exist, the similarities in human emotion conceptualization suggest a underlying universal basis.
Keywords
Cognitive Linguistics, Metaphor, Metonymy, Emotion Concepts, Basic Emotions, Culture-specificity, Universality, Conceptual Domain, Source Domain, Target Domain, Linguistic Conceptualization, Cross-cultural Analysis.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this paper?
The paper explores how metaphors and metonymies are utilized as cognitive tools to conceptualize human emotions and whether these structures are universal or constrained by cultural context.
What are the central thematic fields explored?
The study centers on Cognitive Linguistics, specifically the mapping of emotional experiences into conceptual images, and the intersection between language, physiology, and cultural belief systems.
What is the primary research question?
The primary goal is to determine if metaphors and metonymies used for emotions are universal across all human cultures or if they are intrinsically limited by the specific culture of the speaker.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The author employs a qualitative literature review and comparative analysis, drawing on existing cognitive linguistic theories and cross-cultural case studies to evaluate the theory of basic emotions.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body examines the definitions of metaphor and metonymy, the debate surrounding the universality of basic emotions, and provides comparative analysis of specific cultural examples such as Tagalog and Zulu.
Which keywords characterize this study?
Key terms include cognitive linguistics, conceptual metaphor, metonymy, emotion conceptualization, universality, and culture-specificity.
How does the author define the difference between metaphor and metonymy in this context?
The author distinguishes them by noting that metaphors involve a mapping between different domains (similarity), whereas metonymies involve a relationship of contiguity within a single conceptual domain.
What conclusion does the author draw regarding the universality of emotions?
The author concludes that while some emotion concepts are culturally specific, there are sufficient cross-cultural similarities to suggest the existence of a universal, cognitively grounded basis for basic emotions.
- Citar trabajo
- Marion Schenkelberg (Autor), 2004, Metaphor and metonymy in the conception of emotion in different cultures, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/26754
