Cover not available

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. 327–346

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Chapter 16
Perception and metaphor

The case of smell

 | Eötvös Loránd University
Published online: 21 February 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.19.16kov
Abstract
The general issue I address in the paper is this: How is the concept of smell linguistically coded in English, as examined from a cognitive linguistic perspective? I break down this larger theoretical issue into three sub-issues: One sub-issue concerns what the lexis of smell in English reveals about the conceptual organisation of smell. What is the conceptual prototype of smell? Another has to do with which lexical items are used from the domain of smell to structure other, more abstract concepts. Indeed, I show, partly based on previous work by others, that there are several conceptual metaphors that involve the concept of smell as their source domain. However, and this is the third sub-issue, I also argue that smell can also occur as a target domain in conceptual metaphors. This possibility presents a challenge to conceptual metaphor theory, which claims that perceptual experiences (and the concepts corresponding to them) are understood in a direct, literal way and that concepts that are not based on perceptual experiences (i.e., are not concrete) are understood figuratively by making use of such direct, literal conceptualisations. I conclude that smell is a fairly richly coded concept in English, but whose degree of “linguistic codability” can only be established relative to counterpart concepts in other languages and relative to other sense modalities in studies conducted by means of the same methodology and cognitive linguistic machinery as employed in the present one.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methodology
  • 3.The conceptual structure of smell
    • Noun
    • Verb
  • 4.A comparison with emotion
  • 5.Smell as a source domain
  • 6.Smell as a target domain
    • 6.1Existence
    • 6.2Intensity
    • 6.3Lack of control
  • 7.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Online sources
  • References
References (40)
Online sources
English Collocations Dictionary online. [URL]
Online Oxford Collocations Dictionary. [URL]
Oxford Learner’s Dictionary. [URL]
WordNet. [URL]
References
Barcelona, A. (2000). On the plausibility of claiming a metonymic motivation for conceptual metaphor. In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads (pp. 31–58). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–609.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chu, S. & Downes, J. J. (2000). Odour-evoked autobiographical memories: psychological investigations of Proustian phenomena. Chemical Senses, 25(1), 111–116.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Classen, C., Howes, D. & Synnott, A. (1994). Aroma: the cultural history of smell. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ekman, P. (1992). An argument for basic emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 6 (3/4), 169–200.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, N. & Wilkins, D. (2000). In the mind’s ear: The semantic extensions of perception verbs in Australian languages. Language, 76(3), 546–592.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1982). Frame semantics. In the linguistic society of Korea (ed.), Linguistics in the Morning Calm (pp. 111–137). Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frijda, N. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grady, J. (1999). A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphors: Correlations vs. resemblance. In R. W. Gibbs & G. J. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 79–100). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holland, D. and Quinn, D. (Eds.), (1987). Cultural Models in Language and Thought. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (1999). Metaphorical mappings in the sense of smell. In R. W. Gibbs & G. J. Steen (Eds.) Metaphor in cognitive linguistics (p. 29–45). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1990). Emotion Concepts. New York: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). Metaphor and emotion. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002/2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction. (Second edition 2010) Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Methodological issues in conceptual metaphor theory. In S. Handl & H-J. Schmid (Eds.), Windows to the mind: Metaphor, metonymy and conceptual blending (pp. 23–39). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015a). Surprise as a conceptual category. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 13(2), 270–290.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015b). Metaphor and emergentism. In B. MacWhinney & W. O’Grady (Eds), The handbook of language emergence (pp. 147–162). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Levels of metaphor. Cognitive Linguistics, 28(2), 321–347.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. & Ambrus, L. & Hegedűs, D. & Imai, R. & Sobczak, A. (in press). The lexical vs. the corpus-based method in the study of metaphors. In M. Bolognesi & K. Despot & K. Štrkalj & M. Brdar (Eds.), Fantastic metaphors and where to find them: traditional and new methods in figurative language research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1999). Philosophy in the flesh. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Kövecses, Z. (1987). The cognitive model of anger inherent in American English. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 195–221). Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, R. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 1. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. & Majid, A. (2014). Differential ineffability and the senses. Mind and Language, 29(4), 407–427.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neagu, M. (2013). What is universal and what is language-specific in the polysemy of perception verbs? Revue roumaine de linguistique LVIII 3, 329–343.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prinz, J. J. (2006). Is emotion a form of perception? Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Volume 36, Supplement [vol. 32], 137–160.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and Categorization (pp. 27–48). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Soriano, C. (2005). The Conceptualization of anger in English and Spanish: A Cognitive Approach. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Murcia.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Soudry, Y. & Lemogne, C. & Malinvaud, D. & Consoli, S.-M., & Bonfils, P. (2011). Olfactory system and emotion: Common substrates. European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Diseases, 128(1), 18–23.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Willander, J. & Larsson, M. (2007). Olfaction and emotion: The case of autobiographical memory. Memory & Cognition, 35(7), 1659–1663.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Winter, B. (2016). Taste and smell words form an affectively loaded and emotionally flexible part of the English lexicon. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(8), 975–988.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (22)

Cited by 22 other publications

Huang, Jie
2025. Loudness Metaphors in Chinese: Lexical and Corpus-Based Approaches. Metaphor and Symbol 40:3 ► pp. 259 ff. DOI logo
Lang, Jun, Heidi Hui Shi & Zhuo Jing-Schmidt
2025. Beyond smell: rethinking the figurative force of olfactory language. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory DOI logo
Staniewski, Przemysław
2025. Figurativität im Bereich des pejorativ gebrauchten Wahrnehmungswortschatzes im Deutschen. In Germanistik international und interdisziplinär, ► pp. 311 ff. DOI logo
冯, 雨晴
2025. Conceptualization of Olfactory Experience in Chinese Four Character Idioms—Taking “Fragrance” as an Example. Modern Linguistics 13:07 ► pp. 54 ff. DOI logo
Boldizsár, Boglárka
2024. Cultural Conceptualization of mental pain in Hungarian Proverbs. In Cultural Linguistics and (Re)conceptualized Tradition [Cultural Linguistics, ], ► pp. 167 ff. DOI logo
Bolumar Martínez, Irene, Daniel Alcaraz Carrión & Javier Valenzuela Manzanares
2024. A multimodal approach to polysemy: the senses of touch. Language and Cognition 16:4 ► pp. 1697 ff. DOI logo
Ramšak, Mojca
2024. Olfactory Language. In The Anthropology of Smell, ► pp. 21 ff. DOI logo
Tóth, Máté
2024. A case for metonymic synesthesia. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 22:1 ► pp. 70 ff. DOI logo
Poulton, Thomas
2023. Things we smell and things they smell like. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 28:3 ► pp. 291 ff. DOI logo
Csatár, Péter
2022. Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Acta Linguistica Academica 69:2 ► pp. 263 ff. DOI logo
Galac, Ádám
2022. Megszemélyesítő konceptualizációk a látás, hallás és szaglás fogalmi tartományában. Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 9:1 ► pp. 155 ff. DOI logo
Galac, Ádám
2024. Bold colors, sweeping melodies, offensive smells. International Journal of Language and Culture 11:1 ► pp. 58 ff. DOI logo
Müller, Nadine, Arne Nagels & Christina Kauschke
2022. Metaphorical expressions originating from human senses: Psycholinguistic and affective norms for German metaphors for internal state terms (MIST database). Behavior Research Methods 54:1 ► pp. 365 ff. DOI logo
Siahaan, Poppy
2022. Indonesian basic olfactory terms: more negative types but more positive tokens. Cognitive Linguistics 33:3 ► pp. 447 ff. DOI logo
Zhao, Qingqing, Kathleen Ahrens & Chu-Ren Huang
2022. Linguistic synesthesia is metaphorical: a lexical-conceptual account. Cognitive Linguistics 33:3 ► pp. 553 ff. DOI logo
Gibbs, Raymond W.
2021. Metaphorical Embodiment. In Handbook of Embodied Psychology, ► pp. 101 ff. DOI logo
Jędrzejowski, Łukasz & Przemysław Staniewski
2021. Rendering what the nose perceives. In The Linguistics of Olfaction [Typological Studies in Language, 131], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Strik Lievers, Francesca
2021. Smelling over time. In The Linguistics of Olfaction [Typological Studies in Language, 131], ► pp. 369 ff. DOI logo
O’Meara, Carolyn & Asifa Majid
2020. Anger stinks in Seri: Olfactory metaphor in a lesser-described language. Cognitive Linguistics 31:3 ► pp. 367 ff. DOI logo
Scott, Penelope
2020. Holiness in Old English: The Construction of the Sacred in Ælfric’s Lives of Saints. Neophilologus 104:4 ► pp. 547 ff. DOI logo
Scott, Penelope
2023. Conceptualising olfaction: A study of the scent nouns and adjectives in Old English. Studia Neophilologica 95:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Motion metaphors in music criticism [Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication, 10], DOI logo

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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue