Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T17:59:57.370Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Anger Metaphors across Languages: A Cognitive Linguistic Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2015

By
Zoltán Kövecses ,
Veronika Szelid ,
Eszter Nucz ,
Olga Blanco-Carrión ,
Elif Arica Akkök  and
Réka Szabó
Edited by
Roberto R. Heredia  and
Anna B. Cieślicka
Zoltán Kövecses
Affiliation:
Eötvös Loránd University
Veronika Szelid
Affiliation:
Szent Margit Gimnázium
Eszter Nucz
Affiliation:
Corvinus University of Budapest
Olga Blanco-Carrión
Affiliation:
Universidad de Córdoba
Elif Arica Akkök
Affiliation:
Ankara University
Réka Szabó
Affiliation:
Hungarian Academy of Sciences
Roberto R. Heredia
Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Anna B. Cieślicka
Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Get access

Summary

Abstract

This chapter studies metaphors for anger in four languages, American English, Spanish, Turkish, and Hungarian from a cognitive linguistic perspective. Our database includes large corpora and standard newspapers and magazines in the four languages for the past 10 years. First, we intend to uncover the most common conceptual metaphors in the respective languages. Second, we discuss the main systematic similarities and differences between the languages regarding the way anger is talked about and conceptualized in the languages under investigation. Given our results, we assess some of the implications of our work for the cross-cultural corpus-based study of metaphor. In particular, we propose a new complex measure of metaphorical salience as a tool to determine the cultural importance of conceptual metaphors.

Keywords: anger metaphor, conceptual metaphor, corpus analysis, metaphorical mappings, metaphorical salience

In the cognitive linguistic view, metaphor is conceptualizing one domain of experience in terms of another (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Kövecses, 2010). The domain of experience that is used to comprehend another domain is typically more physical, more directly experienced, and better known than the domain we wish to comprehend, which is typically more abstract, less directly experienced, and less known. The more concrete domain is called the source domain and the more abstract one is called the target domain. Domains of experience are represented in the mind as concepts given as mental frames. This is why we talk about conceptual metaphors.

Type
Chapter
Information
Bilingual Figurative Language Processing , pp. 341 - 367
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barcelona, A. (1989). Análisis contrastivo del léxico figurado de la ira en inglés y en español. Actas del VI Congreso Nacional de Lingüística Aplicada. AESLA. Santander: Universidad de Cantabria, Spain.Google Scholar
Blanco, O. (2012). Conceptualization of anger in English pop fiction stories. Praxis, 3. Retrieved from .Google Scholar
Oster, U. (2010). Pride-Stolz-orgullo: A corpus-based approach to the expression of emotion concepts in a foreign language. In García, F. & Sandino, M. (Eds.), Language windowing through corpora (pp. 593–610). Universidade da Coruña, Coruña.Google Scholar
Sánchez, J., & Blanco-Carrión, O. (2007). Frames and critical discourse analysis in violence-related emotive event analysis. In Hart, C. & Lukeš, D. (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics in critical discourse analysis: Application and theory (pp. 232–254). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Soriano, C. (2004). The conceptualization of anger in English and Spanish: A cognitive approach (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidad de Murcia, Spain.Google Scholar
Heylen, K., Tummers, J., & Geeraerts, D. (2008). Methodological issues in corpus-based cognitive linguistics. In Kristiansen, G. & Dirven, R. (Eds.), Cognitive sociolinguistics: Language variation, cultural models, social systems (pp. 91–128). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hungarian Academy of Sciences. (1999). Historical dictionary corpus. Retrieved from
Kövecses, Z. (2000a). Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2000b). The scope of metaphor. In Barcelona, A. (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads (pp. 79–92). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in culture: Universality and variation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2008). Metaphor and emotion. In Gibbs, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 380–396). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2011). Methodological issues in conceptual metaphor theory. In Handl, S. & Schmid, H-J. (Eds.), Windows to the mind: Metaphor, metonymy and conceptual blending (pp. 23–39). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lakeoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Kövecses, Z. (1987). The cognitive model of anger inherent in American English. In Holland, D. & Quinn, N. (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 195–221). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Real Academia Española. (n.d). Corpus de la Referencia del Español Actual (CREA). Retrieved from
Stefanowitsch, A. (2006a). Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy. In Stefanowitsch, A. & Gries, S.T. (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy (pp. 1–16). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A. (2006b). Words and their metaphors. In Stefanowitsch, A. & Gries, S.T. (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy (pp. 64–105). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szelid, V., &, Geeraerts, D. (2008). Usage-based dialectology: Emotion, concepts, in the southern Csango dialect. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 23–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×