Cover not available
Article published In:
International Journal of Language and Culture
Vol. 9:2 (2022) ► pp.258–291

The structure of the concept of kærlighed ‘love’ in Danish

ORCID logo | Adam Mickiewicz University,
Based on 4 sets of linguistic data (dictionaries, corpus, texts, and surveys), the article explores the way in which the concept of KÆRLIGHED ‘love’ is organized in Danish. Thus, the key factors which play a role in the complex structure of the concept are: the language system, together with the emotion terms it makes available to its speakers; metaphoric models; models at the level of single subcategories; as well as individual experience. There also seem to occur prototype effects within the concept, both with regard to the single attributes of the concept as well as its subcategories. Additionally, the analysis has revealed the unique character of the Danish concept of KÆRLIGHED, which is inherently connected to other parts of the Danish worldview such as gender parity, sex, motherhood, God, the self or homeland, and which uses unique linguistic tools to convey the single conceptualizations.
Keywords: concept of love, structure of the concept of love, models of love, types of love, love in Danish, kærlighed, Danish worldview, Danish society, ethnolinguistics
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.State of research
  • 3.Material
  • 4.The Danish concept of kærlighed
    • 4.1Lexical representations of kærlighed
    • 4.2Domains and metaphors of kærlighed
    • 4.3Subcategories of kærlighed
    • 4.4Individual conceptualizations and general tendencies
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • List of references
Published online: 27 June 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijolc.22035.kac
References (55)
List of references
Aalbæk-Nielsen, Kai. (1999a). Kærlighed i antikken. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Aalbæk-Nielsen, K. (1999b). Kærlighed i middelalderen. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
(2001). Kærlighed i det 15.-18. århundrede. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
(2003). Kærlighed i det 19.-20. århundrede. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Alstola, T., Jauhiainen, H., Svärd, S., Sahala, A., & Lindén, K. (2023). Digital Approaches to Analyzing and Translating Emotion: What Is Love? In K. Sonik & U. Steinert (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Emotions in the Ancient Near East,. (pp. 88–116). London & New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartels, A., & Zeki, S. (2000). The neural basis of romantic love. NeuroReport: For Rapid Communication of Neuroscience Research, 11 (17), 3829–3834. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004). The neural correlates of maternal and romantic love. Neuroimage, 21 1, 1155–1166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartmiński, J. (2018). The axiological Lexicon of Slavs and their Neighbours. What does it contain, what principles it is based on, who is it intended for? In J. Bartmiński (Ed.), The axiological lexicon of Slavs and their neighbours. Vol. 1, The concept of home (pp. 7–13). Lublin: Maria Curie-Skłodowska University Press.Google Scholar
Beall, A. E., & Sternberg, R. J. (1995). The Social Construction of Love. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12 (3), 417–438. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bierwiaczonek, B. (2002). A cognitive study of the concept of LOVE in English. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.Google Scholar
Brzozowska, M. (2006). O przebiegu badań nad zmianami w rozumieniu nazw wartości w latach 1990–2000. In J. Bartmiński (Ed.) Język. Wartości. Polityka. Zmiany rozumienia nazw wartości w okresie transformacji ustrojowej w Polsce. Raport z badań empirycznych (pp. 36–43). Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1988). Love acts: The evolutionary biology of love. In R. J. Sternberg & M. L. Barnes (Eds.), The psychology of love (pp. 100–118). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Danaher, D., Głaz, A., & Łozowski, P. (2013). The Linguistic Worldview: Ethnolinguistics, Cognition, and Culture. Berlin: De Gruyter Open Poland.Google Scholar
Fisher, H., Aron, A., & Brown, L. L. (2005). Romantic love: an fMRI study of a neural mechanism for mate choice. The Journal of Comparative Neurology, 493 (1), 58–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Głaz, A. (2015). Ethnolinguistics near and far. Ethnolinguistics. Problems of Language and Culture, 27 1, 7.Google Scholar
(2019). Cognitive ethnolinguistics from Lublin and cultural linguistics in the English-speaking context. Selected issues. Ethnolinguistics. Problems of Language and Culture, 30 1, 231.Google Scholar
Goddard, Cliff. 1995. Cognitive mapping’ or ‘verbal explication’?: Understanding love on the Malay archipelago. Semiotica 106 (3/4), 323–354.Google Scholar
Hougaard, J. (2008). Romantisk kærlighed. Aarhus: Klim.Google Scholar
von Humboldt, W. (1988). On Language. The Diversity of Human Language-Structure and its Influence on the Mental Development of Mankind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kacprzak, A. (2022). Changes to the traditional family structure as reflected in Danish language. Zeszyty Łużyckie, 56 1, 13–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2023, in press). MATKA w duńskiej kulturze – językowy stereotyp a współczesna rzeczywistość. Etnolingwistyka 35 1.Google Scholar
(2025, in press). The unique conception of HOMELAND in Danish. Scandinavian Studies 97 (1).Google Scholar
Karandashev, V. (2015). A Cultural Perspective on Romantic Love. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 5 (4). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). Romantic Love in Cultural Contexts. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Cross-Cultural Perspectives on the Experience and Expression of Love. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (1986). Metaphors of anger, pride, and love: A lexical approach to the structure of concepts. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (1991). A Linguist’s Quest for Love. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 8 (1), 77–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000). Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George. (2002). Moral politics: how liberals and conservatives think. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. (2013). Essentials of Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Levisen, C. (2012). Cultural Semantics and Social Cognition: A case study on the Danish universe of meaning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Dark, but Danish: Ethnopragmatic perspectives on black humor. Intercultural Pragmatics, 15 (4), 515–531. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lomas, T. (2018). The flavours of love: A cross-cultural lexical analysis. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 48 (1), 134–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Magon, N., & Kalra, S. (2011). The orgasmic history of oxytocin: Love, lust, and labor. Indian Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 15 (Supp l3), 156–161. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Medin, D. L. (1989). Concepts and conceptual structure. American Psychologist, 44 (12), 1469–1481. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paahus, A. M. (2013). Kærlighed. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rinne, P., Tavast, M., Glerean, E., & Sams, M. (2022). Body Maps of Loves. (preprint) [URL]. DOI logo
Shaver, P., & Mikulincer, M. (2006). A behavioral systems approach to romantic love relationships: Attachment, caregiving, and sex. In R. J. Sternberg & K. Weiss (Eds.), The new psychology of love (pp. 35–64). Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Song, H., Zou, Z., Kou, J., Liu, Y., Yang, L., Zilverstand, A., Uquillas, F. D., & Zhang, X. (2015). Love-related changes in the brain: A resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9 1, Article 71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swidler, A. (2001). Talk of love: How culture matters. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tissari, H. (2000). Five Hundred Years of Love: A Prototype-Semantic Analysis. In J. Cole & Ch. J. Kay (Eds.), Lexicology, Semantics, and Lexicography. Selected Papers from the Fourth G. L. Brook Symposium, Manchester, August 1998 (pp. 127–156). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Underhill, J. W. (2012). Ethnolinguistics and cultural concepts: Truth, love, hate and war. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, A. (1971). Kocha, lubi, szanuje: Medytacje semantyczne. Warszawa: Wiedza Powszechna.Google Scholar
(1986a). Metaphors linguists live by: Lakoff & Johnson contra Aristotle. Papers in Linguistics 19 1, 287–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1986b). Human emotions: Universal or culture-specific? American Anthropologist, 88 (3), 584–594. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992a). Semantics, culture and cognition: Universal human concepts in culture-specific configurations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(1992b). Defining Emotion Concepts. Cognitive Science 16 1, 539–581. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1999). Emotions Across Languages and Cultures: Diversity and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). The biblical roots of English ‘love’: The concept of ‘love’ in a historical and cross-linguistic perspective. International Journal of Language and Culture, 6 (2), 225–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dictionaries and corpora
København: Politikens Forlag A/S.
Den Danske Begrebsordbog (DDB): Nimb, S., Trap-Jensen, L., Lorentzen, H., Theilgaard, L., Troelsgaard, T. (2015). Den Danske Begrebsordbog. København: Det Danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab.Google Scholar
Den Danske Ordbog (DDO): [URL]
KorpusDK: [URL]