Cover not available
Article published In:
Issues in Humour Cognition
Edited by Marta Dynel
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 16:1] 2018
► pp. 191–228
Regular articles

Emotions in motion

Towards a corpus-based description of the diachronic evolution of anger words

| Universitat Jaume I
This paper outlines some of the challenges and possibilities of a corpus-based approach to the diachronic description of the semantics of emotion words. It analyses three German anger words (Wut, Zorn and Ärger) in two corpora: DTA (Deutsches Textarchiv, covering the period 1600–1899) and DWDS (Digitales Wörterbuch der Deutschen Sprache, which covers twentieth-century German). The study is based on two complementary approaches: a semantic and pragmatic analysis of co-occurrences (Oster, 2012); and the use of semantic foci (Ogarkova & Soriano, 2014). This allows for a detailed description of the semantic evolution of the three anger words for four aspects of emotion – Control, Lack of Control, Visibility and Internalization – while exploring the advantages of a combined quantitative and qualitative corpus analysis.
Keywords: emotion concepts, corpus-based approach, diachrony, semantic and pragmatic profiling
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Results quantification and data interpretation in diachronic corpus studies
    • 2.1Quantification and visualization of results
    • 2.2Data interpretation
  • 3.Object of study: The German anger words Wut, Zorn and Ärger
  • 4.Method and resources
    • 4.1Step 1: Tracing the regulation and expression of Wut, Zorn and Ärger
    • 4.2Step 2: A quantitative diachronic analysis of Wut, Zorn and Ärger (1700–2000)
    • 4.3Step 3: A qualitative case study
  • 5.Framework: Tracing the regulation and expression of Wut, Zorn and Ärger
    • 5.1Classification of co-occurrences according to the semantic foci
      • 5.1.1Regulation: Control
      • 5.1.2Regulation: Lack of Control
      • 5.1.3Expression: Visibility
      • 5.1.4Expression: Internalization
    • 5.2Characterization of Wut, Zorn and Ärger in terms of Regulation and Expression
    • 5.3Productivity and creative use of the four semantic foci
  • 6.Quantitative study: A diachronic analysis of Wut, Zorn and Ärger
    • 6.1Incidence of Wut, Zorn and Ärger from the seventeenth to the twentieth centuries
    • 6.2Evolution of the presence of the semantic foci
  • 7.Qualitative study: Exploring the background to the changes
    • 7.1Data-driven periodization
    • 7.2Qualitative contrast between selected time segments
      • 7.2.1Procedure
      • 7.2.2Results
        • 7.2.2.1Question a
        • 7.2.2.2Question b
        • 7.2.2.3Question c
  • 8.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 31 May 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00008.ost
References

References

Allan, K.
(2008) Metaphor and metonymy: A diachronic approach. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dem’jankov, V.
(1998) Zur kontrastiv-semantischen Analyse von Emotionen. Semantische “Ärgerdörfer” im Russischen und Deutschen. In E. Weigand (Ed.), Contrastive Lexical Semantics (pp. 95–118). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Díaz-Vera, J. E.
(2013) Embodied emotions in medieval English language and visual arts. In R. Caballero & J. E. Díaz-Vera (Eds.), Sensuous cognition. Explorations into human sentience: Imagination, (e)motion and perception (pp. 195–220). Berlin/Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diller, H. J.
(1994) Emotions in the English lexicon: A historical study of a lexical field. In F. Fernández, M. Fuster, & J. J. Calvo (Eds.), English Historical Linguistics 1992 (pp. 219–234). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Durst, U.
(2001) Why Germans don’t feel “anger”. In J. Harkins & A. Wierzbicka (Eds.), Emotions in crosslinguistic perspective (pp. 115–148). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enrique-Arias, A.
(2012) Dos problemas en el uso de corpus diacrónicos del español: perspectiva y comparabilidad. Scriptum Digital, 11, 85–196.Google Scholar
Fabiszak, M., & Hebda, A.
(2010) Cognitive historical approaches to emotions: Pride. In M. E. Winters, H. Tissari, & K. Allan (Eds.), Historical Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 261–297). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fries, N.
(2004) Gefühle, Emotionen, Angst, Furcht, Wut und Zorn. In W. Börner & K. Vogel (Eds.), Emotion und Kognition im Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 3–24). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D.
(2010) Prospects for the past: Perspectives for cognitive diachronic semantics. In M. E. Winters, H. Tissari, & K. Allan (Eds.), Historical Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 333–356). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Four guidelines for diachronic metaphor research. In J. E. Díaz-Vera (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy across time and cultures: Perspectives on the sociohistorical linguistics of figurative language (pp. 15–30). Berlin/Munich/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D., Gevaert, C., & Speelman, D.
(2012) How anger rose: Hypothesis testing in diachronic semantics. In K. Allan & J. A. Robinson (Eds.), Current methods in Historical Semantics (pp. 109–132). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D., & Grondelaers, S.
(1995) Looking back at anger: Cultural traditions and metaphorical patterns. In J. R. Taylor & R. E. MacLaury (Eds.), Language and the cognitive construal of the world (pp. 153–179). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gevaert, C.
(2001) Anger in Old and Middle English: A “hot” topic? Belgian Essays on Language and Literature, 20011, 89–101.Google Scholar
(2005) The anger is heat question: Detecting cultural influence on the conceptualization of anger through diachronic corpus analysis. In N. Delbecque, J. van der Auwera, & D. Geeraerts (Eds.), Perspectives on variation: Sociolinguistic, historical, comparative (pp. 195–208). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geyken, A., Boenig, M., Haaf, S., Jurish, B., Thomas, C., Wiegand, F., & Würzner, K. -M.
(2015) Zeitliche Verlaufskurven in den DTA- und DWDS-Korpora: Wörter und Wortverbindungen über 400 Jahre (1600–2000). Conference at Jahrestagung DHd 2015: Von Daten zu Erkenntnissen: Digitale Geisteswissenschaften als Mittler zwischen Information und Interpretation , February 23 to 27, Graz. [URL] [last accessed on 23.06.2017]
Glynn, D.
(2015) The conceptual profile of the lexeme home. A multifactorial diachronic analysis. In J. E. Díaz-Vera (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy across time and cultures: Perspectives on the sociohistorical linguistics of figurative language (pp. 265–294). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Glynn, D., & Robinson, J. A.
(Eds.) (2014) Corpus methods for Semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S., & Hilpert, M.
(2008) The identification of stages in diachronic data: Variability-based neighbor clustering. Corpora, 3(1), 59–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. T., & Hilpert, M.
(2012) Variability-based neighbor clustering: A bottom-up approach to periodization in historical linguistics. In T. Nevalainen & E. C. Traugott (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English (pp. 134–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grimm, J., & Grimm, W.
(1838–1961) Deutsches Wörterbuch. Leipzig: Online version.Google Scholar
Haaf, S., & Thomas, C.
(2016) Die historischen Korpora des Deutschen Textarchivs als Grundlage für Sprachgeschichtliche Forschungen. In H. Runow, V. Harm, & L. Schiwek (Eds.), Sprachgeschichte des Deutschen: Positionierungen in Forschung, Studium, Schule. Stuttgart: Hirzel.Google Scholar
Hilpert, M.
(2011) Dynamic visualizations of language change: Motion charts on the basis of bivariate and multivariate data from diachronic corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16(4), 435–461. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M., & Cuyckens, H.
(2016) How do corpus-based techniques advance description and theory in English historical linguistics?: An introduction to the special issue. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 12(1), 1–5. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M., & Gries, S.
(2016) Quantitative approaches to diachronic corpus linguistics. In M. Kytö & P. Pahta (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of English Historical Linguistics (pp. 19–35). City: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Kövecses, Z.
(1987) The cognitive model of anger inherent in American English. In D. C. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 195–221). Melbourne: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lijffijt, J., Säily, T., & Nevalainen, T.
(2012) CEECing the baseline: Lexical stability and significant change in a historical corpus. Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English, 101.Google Scholar
Mischler, J. J.
(2008) A Time for anger: Conceptions of human feeling in Modern English, A. D. 1500–1900. Stillwater: Oklahoma State University.Google Scholar
(2013) Metaphor across time and conceptual space: The interplay of embodiment and cultural models. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oesterheld, C.
(2016) Changing landscapes of love and passion in the Urdu novel. Contributions to the History of Concepts, 11(1), 58–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ogarkova, A., & Soriano, C.
(2014) Variation within universals: The “metaphorical profile” approach to the study of anger concepts in English, Russian and Spanish. In A. Musolff, F. MacArthur, & G. Pagani (Eds.), About metaphor and intercultural communication (pp. 93–116). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Ogarkova, A., Soriano, C. & Lehr, C.
(2012) Naming feeling: exploring the equivalence of emotion terms in five European languages. In P. Wilson (Ed.), Dynamicity in emotion concepts (pp. 3–35). Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Oster, U.
(2010) Using corpus methodology for semantic and pragmatic analyses: What can corpora tell us about the linguistic expression of emotions? Cognitive Linguistics, 21(4), 727–763. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) “Angst” and “fear” in contrast: A corpus-based analysis of emotion concepts. In M. Brdar, I. Raffaell, & M. Žic Fuchs (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics between universality and variation (pp. 327–355). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.Google Scholar
(2014) Emotions between physicality and acceptability: A contrast of the German anger words Wut and Zorn . Onomázein, 301, 286–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
submitted). Cross-cultural semantic and pragmatic profiling of emotion words. Regulation and expression of anger in Spanish and German. In I. Navarro Ed. Current approaches to metaphor analysis in discourse Berlin/Boston de Gruyter Mouton DOI logo
Pagán Cánovas, C.
(2011) The genesis of the arrows of love: Diachronic conceptual integration in Greek mythology. American Journal of Philology, 132(4), 553–579. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Cognitive patterns in Greek poetic metaphors of emotion: A diachronic approach. In J. Díaz-Vera (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy through time and cultures (pp. 295–318). Berlin/Munich/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Soriano, C., Fontaine, J., Ogarkova, A., Quijano, C. M., Volkova, Y., Ionova, S., and Shakhovskyy, V.
(2013) Types of anger in Spanish and Russian. In J. J. R. Fontaine, K. R. Scherer, & C. Soriano (Eds.), Components of emotional meaning: A sourcebook (pp. 339–352). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tissari, H.
(2001) Affection, friendship, passion and charity: A history of four “love lexemes” since the fifteenth century. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 102(1), 49–76.Google Scholar
(2006a) Conceptualizing shame: Investigating uses of the English word shame, 1418–1991. In R. W. McConchie, O. Timofeeva, H. Tissari, & T. Säily (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 2005 Symposium on New Approaches in English Historical Lexis (HEL-LEX) (pp. 143–154). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
(2006b) Justified PRIDE?: Metaphors of the word pride in English language corpora, 1418–1991. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 5(1), 15–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trim, R.
(2007) Metaphor networks: The comparative evolution of figurative language. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) Conceptual networking theory in metaphor evolution: Diachronic variation in models of love. In M. E. Winters, H. Tissari, & K. Allan (Eds.), Historical Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 223–260). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weigand, E.
(1998) The Vocabulary of Emotion. A contrastive analysis of anger in German, English and Italian. In E. Weigand (Ed.), Contrastive Lexical Semantics (pp. 45–66). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, W., Geeraerts, D., & Speelman, D.
(2015) Visualizing onomasiological change: Diachronic variation in metonymic patterns for woman in Chinese. Cognitive Linguistics, 26(2), 289–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Oster, Ulrike
2023. Translating emotions. Languages in Contrast DOI logo
Rajeg, Gede Primahadi Wijaya & I Made Rajeg
2023. Exploring diachronic salience of emotion metaphors. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 21:1 ► pp. 229 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 november 2023. 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.