In:Perception Metaphors
Edited by Laura J. Speed, Carolyn O'Meara, Lila San Roque and Asifa Majid
[Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 19] 2019
► pp. 209–230
Chapter 11Grounding mental metaphors in touch
A corpus-based study of English and Polish
Published online: 21 February 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.19.11tro
https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.19.11tro
Abstract
This study aims to describe how experiences of tactile properties of physical objects give rise to metaphorical conceptualisations of mind and thought in English and Polish based on linguistic data from the British National Corpus and the National Corpus of Polish. This issue is approached from the perspective of corpus-based cognitive linguistics by combining the Theory of Objectification framework and the methodological tools of corpus linguistics. By analysing a wide range of tactile properties ascribed to the selected mental phenomena in light of the Theory of Objectification, the study aims to demonstrate how active, exploratory, tactile experiences of physical objects’ qualities ground our talk about impalpable cognitive phenomena.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Touch
- 3.Theory of Objectification
- 4.Tactile properties and conceptualisations of mental phenomena
- 5.Methodological framework
- 6.Results
- 6.1Mind
- 6.1.1Size (physical dimensions)
- 6.1.2Shape
- 6.1.3Containment
- 6.1.4Liquidity
- 6.2Thought
- 6.2.1Density (firmness)
- 6.2.2Weight
- 6.2.3Temperature
- 6.2.4Size (physical dimensions)
- 6.2.5Shape
- 6.2.6Containment
- 6.2.7Liquidity
- 6.2.8Manipulability
- 6.1Mind
- 7.Results summary
- 8.Conclusions and further research
Notes References
References (62)
Aston, G. & Burnard, L. (1998). The BNC Handbook: Exploring the British National Corpus with SARA. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Barnden, J. A. (1997). Consciousness and common-sense metaphors of mind. In S. O’Nuallain et al. (Eds.), Two Sciences of Mind: Readings in Cognitive Science and Consciousness (pp. 311–341). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bayne, T. & Spence, C. (2015). Multisensory Perception. In M. Matthen (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Perception (pp. 603–620). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Classen, C. (1993). Worlds of Sense: Exploring the Senses in History and Across Cultures. London and New York: Routledge.
(2012). The Deepest Sense: A Cultural History of Touch. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Croft, W. (2009). Connecting frames and constructions: a case study of “eat” and “feed”. Constructions and Frames, 1(1), 7–28.
De Vignemont, F. & Massin, O. (2015). Touch. In M. Matthen (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Perception (pp. 294–313). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2008). Corpus linguistics and metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought (pp. 280–294). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Deignan, A. & Cameron, L. (2013). A re-examination of understanding is seeing. Journal of Cognitive Semiotics, 5(1–2), 220–243.
Diaz-Vera, J. (Ed.). (2015). Metaphor and Metonymy Across Time and Cultures. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Evans, V. (2012). Cognitive linguistics. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 3(2), 129–141.
Fabiszak, M. & Konat, B. (2013). Zastosowanie korpusów językowych w językoznawstwie kognitywnym [The use of language corpora in cognitive linguistics]. In P. Stalmaszczyk (Ed.), Metodologie językoznawstwa: Ewolucja języka, Ewolucja teorii językoznawczych (pp. 131–142). Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.
Foolen, A. (2017). The hand in figurative thought and language. In Athanasiadou, A. (Ed.), Studies in Figurative Thought and Language (pp. 179–198). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fulkerson, M. (2014a). The First Sense: A Philosophical Study of Human Touch. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
(2014b). What Counts As Touch? In D. Stokes, M. Matthen, & S. Biggs (Ed.) Perception and Its Modalities (pp. 191–204). New York: Oxford University Press.
Gibbs, R. W. (1999). Taking metaphor out of our heads and putting it into the cultural world. In R. W. Gibbs & G. J. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 146–166). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hatwell, Y., Streri, A. & Gentaz, E. (Eds.). (2003). Touching for Knowing: Cognitive Pychology of Haptic Manual Perception. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hertenstein, M. J. (Ed.). (2011). The Handbook of Touch: Neuroscience, Behavioral, and Health Perspectives. New York: Springer.
Heylen, K., Tummers, J. & Geeraerts, D. (2008). Methodological issues in corpus-based cognitive linguistics. In G. Kristiansen & R. Dirven (Eds.) Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems (pp. 91–128). Berlin and New York: de Gruyter Mouton.
Jäkel, O. (1995). The metaphorical conception of mind: “Mental activity is manipulation”. In Taylor, J. R. & MacLaury, R. E. (Eds.), Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World (pp. 197–229). Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
Johansson Falck, M., & Gibbs, R. W. (2012). Embodied motivations for metaphorical meanings. Cognitive Linguistics, 23(2), 251–272.
Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in Culture: Universality and Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.
Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (2012). Cognitive corpus studies: A new qualitative & quantitative agenda for contrasting languages. MFU Connexion. A Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 29–63.
Macpherson, F. (Ed.). (2011a). The Senses: Classic and Contemporary Philosophical Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(2011b). Individuating the Senses. In F. Macpherson (Ed.), The Senses: Classic and Contemporary Philosophical Perspectives (pp. 3–43). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Matthen, M. (2015). The Individuation of the Senses. In M. Matthen (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Perception (pp. 567–586). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McEnery, T. & Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pecher, D. & Zwaan, R. A. (2005). Grounding Cognition: The Role of Perception and Action in Memory, Language, and Thinking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pęzik, P. (2013). Paradygmat Dystrybucyjny w Badaniach Frazeologicznych. Powtarzalność, Reprodukcja i Idiomatyzacja [Distributional Paradigm in Phraseological Research. Repetitivity, Reproduction, and Idiomatization]. In P. Stalmaszczyk (Ed.), Metodologie Językoznawstwa: Ewolucja Języka, Ewolucja Teorii Językoznawczych (pp. 143–160). Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.
(2014). Graph-Based Analysis of Collocational Profiles. In V. Jesenšek & P. Grzybek (Eds.), Phraseologie Im Wörterbuch und Korpus/Phraseology in Dictionaries and Corpora (pp. 227–243). Maribor/Bielsko-Biała/Budapest/Kansas/Praha: Filozofska Fakulteta.
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39.
Proske, U. & Gandevia, S. C. (2012). The Proprioceptive Senses: Their Roles in Signaling Body Shape, Body Position and Movement, and Muscle Force. Physiological Reviews, 92, 1651–1697.
Przepiórkowski, A., Bańko, M., Górski, R. L. & Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (Eds). (2012). Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego. Warszawa: PWN.
Ratcliffe, M. (2013). Touch and the Sense of Reality. In Radman, Z. (Ed.), The Hand, an Organ of the Mind (pp. 131–157). Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press.
Semino, E. & Heywood, J. & Short, M. (2004). Methodological problems in the analysis of metaphors in a corpus conversations about cancer. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1271–1294.
Stefanowitsch, A. (2006a). Corpus-based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy. In A. Stefanowitsch & T. S. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy (pp. 1–17). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
(2006b). Words and their metaphors: A corpus-based approach. In A. Stefanowitsch & T. S. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy (pp. 63–105). Berlin and New York: de Gruyter Mouton.
Szwedek, A. (2000). Senses, perception and metaphors (of Object and Objectification). In S. Puppel & K. Dziubalska-Kołaczyk (Eds.), Multibus vocibus de lingua (pp. 143–153). Poznań: Wydział Neofilologii UAM.
(2011). The ultimate source domain. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(2), 341–366.
(2014). The nature of domains and the relationships between them in metaphorization. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 12(2), 342–374.
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Trim, R. (2011). Metaphor and the historical evolution of conceptual mapping. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Trojszczak, M. (2016). Selected aspects of conceptualization of ‘insight’ in English and Polish. In I. Czwenar, D. Gonigroszek & A. Stanecka (Eds.), Foreign Languages and Cultures: Contemporary Contexts (pp. 57–68). NWP: Piotrków Trybunalski.
(2017a). Problem solving in English and Polish – a cognitive study of selected metaphorical conceptualisations. In P. Pęzik & J. T. Waliński (Eds.), Language, Corpora, and Cognition (pp. 201–220). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
(2017b). On “paying attention”: The objectification of attention in English and Polish. In W. Wachowski, Z. Kövecses & M. Borodo (Eds.), Zooming In: Micro-Scale Perspectives on Cognition, Translation and Cross-Cultural Communication (pp. 81–100). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Tummers, J., Heylen, K. & Geeraerts, D. (2005). Usage-based approaches in Cognitive Linguistics: A technical state of the art. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 1,(2), 225–261.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Staniewski, Przemysław
Galac, Ádám
2024. Bold colors, sweeping melodies, offensive smells. International Journal of Language and Culture 11:1 ► pp. 58 ff.
Trojszczak, Marcin
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
