Chapter published in:
Body Part Terms in Conceptualization and Language UsageEdited by Iwona Kraska-Szlenk
[Cognitive Linguistic Studies in Cultural Contexts 12] 2020
► pp. 195–214
The metonymic folk model of language in Turkish
Situated within the framework of linguistic embodiment, this chapter examines the speech-related terms ‘voice’, ‘mouth’, ‘tongue’, ‘lips’ and ‘chin’ in Turkish to reveal how speech and language are conceptualized in regards to these terms based on the metonymic chain model (Radden, 2001). The data of the study come from idiomatic constructions, which are analyzed in terms of their figurative uses, and the underlying conceptual metaphors and metonymies. The findings agree with Radden’s (2001) metonymic chain (i.e. speech organ – speaking – speech – language), which is expressed in conceptual code as speech organ for speaking, speaking for speech, and speech for language. The data unveil cognitive mechanisms for each term such as mouth/lip is a container, tongue movements for expression skill, chin for long talk that yield a general cognitive understanding of them. The study confirms the embodiment of verbal behavior as well as the existence of culture-specific patterns in the conceptualization of speech and language.
Keywords: speech-related organs, metonymy, metaphor, embodiment, Turkish
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Data collection and analysis
- 3.Conceptualizations of dil ‘tongue’
- 3.1Tongue for speaking
- 3.2Tongue for speech
- 3.3Tongue for language
- 4.Conceptualizations of ağız ‘mouth’
- 4.1Mouth for speaking
- 4.2Mouth for speech
- 4.3Mouth for language (subdialect)
- 5.Conceptualizations of dudak ‘lip’
- 6.Conceptualizations of çene ‘chin’
- 7.Conceptualizations of ses ‘voice’
- 8.Discussion
- 9.Conclusion
-
Acknowledgements -
References -
Dictionaries
Published online: 23 March 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/clscc.12.c09bas
https://doi.org/10.1075/clscc.12.c09bas
References
Bagasheva, Alexandra
Barcelona, Antonio
Baş, Melike
Brenzinger, Matthias, and Iwona Kraska-Szlenk
Charteris-Black, Jonathan
Deignan, Alice and Liz Potter
Enfield, Nicholas J. and Anna Wierzbicka
Evans, Vyvyan, and Melanie Green
Goossens, Louis
(1995) “Metaphtonymy: the interaction of metaphor and metonymy in figurative expressions for linguistic action.” In: Louis Goossens, Paul Pauwels, Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn, Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen, and Johan Vanparys, (eds.), By Word of Mouth: Metaphor, Metonymy and Linguistic Action in a Cognitive Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 159–174. 

İmer, Kamile, Ahmet Kocaman and A. Sumru Özsoy
Jing-Schmidt, Zhuo
Johnson, Mark
Kalafat, Yaşar
Kövecses, Zoltan
Kövecses, Zoltan, and Günter Radden
Lakoff, George, Jane Espenson, and Alan Schwarts
(1991) Second draft copy: Master metaphor list. Retrieved on 20 June, 2012 from http://araw.mede.uic.edu/~alansz/me taphor/METAPHORLIST.pdf
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson
Maalej, Zouhair and Ning Yu
Nissen, Uwe Kjær
Reddy, Michael
Sharifian, Farzad
Sharifian, Farzad, Rene Dirven, Ning Yu and Suzanne Niemeier
Szczygłowska, Tatiana
Dictionaries
Aksoy, Ömer A.
Çotuksöken, Yusuf
Püsküllüoğlu, Ali
Şahin, Hatice
Turkish Language Institution Online Dictionary of Proverbs and Idioms