Article published In: Review of Cognitive Linguistics
Vol. 19:1 (2021) ► pp.232–258
The semantic network of temperature
Non-sensory domains accessed with metaphorical extensions of the Italian adjectives caldo and freddo
Published online: 28 April 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00082.cos
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00082.cos
Abstract
The present study investigates the relation between temperature and non-sensory domains conceptually
close to it. Observing metaphorical extensions of the Italian basic temperature terms caldo ‘hot’ and
freddo ‘cold’, individuated through a collocational analysis performed on the ItTenTen16 corpus, mental
operations responsible for the association of temperature with other domains are assessed. Interestingly, many
associations are first elaborated onto warmth/heat and then used to map concepts onto cold. Although conceptual
associations are primarily motivated by embodiment, in some cases they stem from a shared “vertical” image-schematic structure:
warmth and heat are up, while cold is down on the axis, resembling the
configuration of other domains with a positive/negative orientation (e.g., good/bad). A visual representation of the
semantic network of temperature highlights that domains associated with temperature are mirrored in its two
poles: for instance, high and low temperature are associated, respectively, with friendliness and
unfriendliness.
Keywords: Italian, ItTenTen16, temperature, embodiment, image-schema, cognitive metaphor, semantic network
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Theoretical framework
- 3.The temperature domain
- 4.Data and methodology
- 5.Analysis and results
- 5.1Pleasant is warm and unpleasant is cold
- 5.2Enclosing is warm and not enclosing is cold
- 5.3Lack of self-control is heat and self-control is cold
- 5.4Activity is heat and inactivity is cold
- 6.Conclusions and prospective work
- Notes
References
References (71)
Agbetsoamedo, Y., & Di Garbo, F. (2015). Unravelling temperature terms in Sɛlɛɛ. In M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm (Ed.), Linguistics of temperature (pp. 107–127). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2014). Cross-linguistic view. In A. Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (Eds.), The grammar of knowledge (pp. 1–51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ameka, F. K. (2015). “Hard sun, hot weather, skin pain”. In M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm (Ed.), Linguistics of temperature (pp. 43–72). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Apresjan, V. (1997). Emotion metaphors and cross-linguistic conceptualization of emotions. Cuadernos de filología inglesa, 6121, 179–195.
Atintono, S. A. (2015). The semantics and metaphorical extensions of temperature terms in Gurenɛ. In M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm (Ed.), Linguistics of temperature (pp. 73–106). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Croft, W. (1993). The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. Cognitive Linguistics, 41, 335–370.
Deignan, A., & Potter, L. (2004). A corpus study of metaphors and metonyms in English and Italian. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(7), 1231–1252.
Emantian, M. (1995). Metaphor and the expression of emotion: The value of cross-cultural perspectives. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 101, 163–182.
Fauconnier, G. (1998). Mental spaces and conceptual integration. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure (pp. 251–279). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (1996). Blending as a central process of grammar. In A. Goldberg (Ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse and language (pp. 113–130). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.
Fruyt, M. (2013). Temperature and cognition in Latin. Revue de Linguistique Latine du Centre Alfred Ernout. De Lingua Latina, 91, 1–34.
Georgakopoulos, T., & Polis, S. (2018). The semantic map model: State of the art and future avenues for linguistic research. Language and Linguistics Compass, 12(2), 1–33.
Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (2007). Idioms and formulaic language. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 697–724). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goddard, C., & Wierzbicka, A. (2007). NSM analyses of the semantics of physical qualities: Sweet, hot, hard, heavy, rough, sharp in cross-linguistic perspective. Studies in Language, 34(1), 675–800.
Goossens, L. (1995). Metaphtonymy. The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in figurative expressions for linguistic action. In L. Goossens, P. Pauwels, B. Rudzka-Ostyn, A.-M. Simon-Vandenbergen & J. Vanparys (Eds.), By word of mouth. Metaphor, metonymy and linguistic action in a cognitive perspective (pp. 159–174). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Grady, J. E. (1997). Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. Berkeley: University of California PhD Thesis.
(2007). Metaphor. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 188–213). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harris, Z. (1970). Distributional structure. In Z. Harris (Ed.), Papers in structural and transformational linguistics. Formal linguistics (pp. 775–794). New York: Humanities Press.
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Johnson, C. (1997). Metaphor vs. conflation in the acquisition of polysemy: The case of see
. In M. K. Hiraga, C. Sinha & S. Wilcox (Eds.), Cultural, typological and psychological issues in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 155–169). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Kilgarriff, A., Baisa, V., Bušta, J., Jakubíček, M., Kovář, M., Michelfeit, J., Rychlý, P., & Suchomel, V. (2014). The Sketch Engine: ten years on. Lexicography, 11, 7–36.
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M. (Ed.). (2015). The linguistics of temperature. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
(2015). Introducing “The linguistics of temperature”. In M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm (Ed.), The linguistics of temperature (pp. 1–40). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Kövecses, Z. (1986). Metaphors of anger, pride and love: a lexical approach to the structure of concepts. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
(1995). Anger: Its language, conceptualization, and physiology in the light of cross-cultural evidence. In J. R. Taylor & R. E. MacLaury (Eds.), Language and the cognitive construal of the world (pp. 181–196). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
(2000). Metaphor and emotion. Language, culture, and body in human feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(2007). Emotion concepts: From happiness to guilt. A cognitive semantic perspective. Research Gate, January 2007. Available at: <[URL]>. Accessed: 22 March 2020.
Kövecses, Z., Palmer, G. B., & Dirven, R. (2003). Language and emotion: The interplay of conceptualisation with physiology and culture. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 133–159). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., Espenson, J., & Schwartz, A. (1991). The master metaphor list. Technical report, University of California at Berkeley.
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: Cambridge University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lehrer, A. (1970). Static and dynamic elements in semantics: Hot, warm, cool, cold. Papers in Linguistics (Carbondale), 31, 349–373.
Lorenzetti, M. I. (2009). “That girl is hot, her dress is so cool, and I’m just chilling out now”: Emergent metaphorical usages of temperature terms in English and Italian. Paper presented at the Corpus-Based Approaches to Figurative Language Colloquium in Liverpool, UK, July 2009.
Luraghi, S. (2015). Asymmetries in Italian temperature terminology. In M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm (Ed.), Linguistics of temperature (pp. 333–353). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Montes, M. (2017). Evaluación de la temperatura en el italiano escrito contemporáneo [Evaluation of temperature in written contemporary Italian]. Encuentros, 41, 9–19.
Panther, K. U., & Radden, G. (Eds.). (1999). Metonymy in language and thought. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Parrott, W. G. (1995). The heart and the head: Everyday conceptions of being emotional. In J. A. Russell, J.-M. Fernández-Dols, A. S. R. Manstead & J. C. Wellenkamp (Eds.), Everyday conceptions of emotion: An introduction to the psychology, anthropology and linguistics of emotion (pp. 73–84). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Perkova, N. (2015). Adjectives of temperature in Latvian. In M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm (Ed.), Linguistics of temperature (pp. 151–186). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Perrin, L.-M. (2015). Climate, temperature and polysemous patterns in French and Wolof. In M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm (Ed.), Linguistics of temperature (pp. 151–186). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Pinelli, E. (2017). The conceptualisation of fear in Italian and Russian: Different degrees of lexicalisation of metonymies. In A. Baicchi & E. Pinelli (Eds.), Cognitive modelling in language and discourse across cultures (pp. 283–297). Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Plank, F. (2003). Temperature talk: The basics. Paper presented at the Workshop on Lexical Typology at the ALT conference in Cagliari, September 2003.
(2010). Temperature talk: The basics revisited. Talk presented at the Workshop on Temperature in Language and Cognition, Stockholm University, 19–20 March 2010.
Radden, G. (2000). How metonymic are metaphors? In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads (pp. 93–108). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 17–59). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Rohrer, T. (2007). Embodiment and experientialism. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 25–47). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Roulon-Doko, P. (2015). Lexicalisation of temperature concepts in Gbaya (an Ubanguian language of C.A.R.). In M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm (Ed.), Linguistics of temperature (pp. 128–150). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. (2019). Understanding figures of speech: Dependency relations and organizational patterns. Language & Communication, 711, 16–38.
Sahlgren, M. (2006). The Word-Space Model: Using distributional analysis to represent syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations between words in high-dimensional vector spaces. Stockholm: Stockholm University PhD Thesis.
Strik Lievers, F. (2015). Synaesthesia: A corpus-based study of cross-modal directionality. Functions of Language, 22(1), 69–95.
(2017). Figures and the senses. Towards a definition of synesthesia. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 15(1), 83–101.
Stubbs, M. (1995). Collocations and cultural connotations of common words. Linguistics and Education, 71, 379–390.
Sutrop, U. (1998). Basic temperature terms and subjective temperature scale. Lexicology, 41, 60–104.
Taylor, J. R. (1995). Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in linguistic theory. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Turner, M. (2007). Conceptual integration. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 377–393). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Violi, P. (2003). Le tematiche del corporeo nella Semantica Cognitiva [Bodily matters in Cognitive Semantics]. In L. Gaeta & S. Luraghi (Eds.), Introduzione alla linguistica cognitiva [Introduction to cognitive linguistics] (pp. 57–76). Roma: Carocci.
Wierzbicka, A. (1995). Dictionaries vs. encyclopaedias: How to draw the line. In P. W. Davis (Ed.), Alternative linguistics: Descriptive and theoretical modes (pp. 289–315). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
(1999). Emotions across languages and cultures: Diversity and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Winter, B. (2019). Synaesthetic metaphors are neither synaesthetic nor metaphorical. In L. J. Speed, C. O’Meara, L. San Roque & A. Majid (Eds.), Perceptual metaphor. Converging evidence in language and communication research (pp. 105–126). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
