Article published In:
Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Online-First ArticlesThe semantics of the polysemic Amharic word fit ‘face’
For a new perspective in the cross-linguistic study of body-part terms
This study examines the figurative conceptualization of the polysemic Amharic word fit ‘face.’
Based primarily on the “lexical approach,” the study shows how the meaning of “face” extends metaphorically and metonymically to
such abstract concepts as time, emotions, and the intellect. Most of the face-related words in Amharic are also found in other
languages, though cross-linguistic differences also exist. In the comparative study of body-part terms, a new approach is
proposed, the “encompassing approach,” which claims that the contrastive study of body-part terms cannot be confined
to a single term. Rather, it needs to consider the potential association between individual parts and specific cognitive
processes. Once these processes are considered, the cross-linguistic variations between related body-part terms become marginal.
We conclude that the (near)-universal status of body parts cannot be measured by examining the explicit use of a given part only.
Keywords:
fit ‘face’, cognitive operations, metaphor, metonymy, body-part terms
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Why does our “face” mean the same thing in all cultures?
- 3.Method: Data source and analysis
- 4.Metonymies and metaphors for fit ‘face’
- 4.1Face as the most distinctive part of a person
- 4.2Spatiotemporal extension of fit
- 4.3Temporal extensions of fit
- 4.4Face as a window to a person’s inner state
- 4.5Fit as the locus of focus, attention
- 5.Discussion: What does the concept of fit ‘face’ have to tell us about the body as a universal source domain in human conceptual system?
- 5.1The new perspective: “encompassing approach” in body-part terms contrastive analysis
- 6.Conclusion
- Acknowledgments
- Notes
- List of interlinear glosses abbreviations
-
References -
Dictionaries
Published online: 19 February 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00173.men
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00173.men
References (74)
Aberra, D. (2016). Grammaticalization of the Amharic word fit face: From a body part to grammatical meanings. Journal of Languages and Culture,
7
(9), 86–92.
Ado, D. (2016). Metaphors of time in Amharic. In R. Meyer & L. Edzard (Eds.), Time in languages of the Horn of Africa (pp. 104–116). Harrassowitz Verlag.
Bible Gateway (New International Version) retrieved from [URL]
Baranyiné, K. J. (2020). Keeping an eye on body parts: Cultural conceptualizations of the ‘eye’ in Hungarian. In I. Kraska-Szlenk (Ed.), Body part terms in conceptualization and language usage (pp. 216–245). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Boroditsky, L. (2000). Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition,
75
(1), 1–28.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
De Kadt, E. (1998). The concept of face and its applicability to the Zulu language. Journal of pragmatics,
29
(2), 173–191.
Dorst, A. G. (2011). Personification in discourse: Linguistic forms, conceptual structures and communicative functions. Language and Literature,
20
(2), 113–135.
Evans, N., & David, W. (2000). In the minds ear: The semantic extensions of perception verbs in Australian languages. Language,
76
(3), 546–587.
Frank, R. (2013). Body and mind in Euskara: Contrasting dialogic and monologic subjectivities. In C. Rosario & J. E. Díaz Vera (Eds.), Sensuous cognition: Explorations into human sentience: Imagination, (e)motion and perception (pp. 19–52). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Geeraerts, D., & Gevaert, C. (2008). Hearts and (angry) minds in Old English. In F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language: Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp. 319–347). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
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: Gruyter.
Gevaert, C. (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.
Gomola, A. (2010). From God is a father to God is a friend. Conceptual integration in metaphors for God in Christian discourse. In E. Tabakowska, M. Choiński & L. Wiraszka (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics in action: From theory to application and back (pp. 387–407). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Grady, J. (1999). A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor: Correlation vs. resemblance. In R. W. Gibbs & G. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 79–100). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Handl, S., & Schmid, H. (2011). Windows to the mind: Metaphor, metonymy and conceptual blending. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2008a). Guts, heart and liver: The conceptualization of internal organs in Basque. In F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language: Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp. 103–130). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
(2008b). Vision metaphors for the intellect: Are they really cross-linguistic? Atlantis,
30
1, 15–33.
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kinnison, L. Q. (2017). Power, integrity, and mask: An attempt to disentangle the Chinese face concept. Journal of Pragmatics,
114
1, 32–48.
Kiricsi, Á. (2005). Semantic Rivalry of mod/mood and gemynd/minde in Old and Middle English literature (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary. Retrieved from [URL]
Kövecses, Z. (1986). Metaphors of anger, pride, and love. 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: Gruyter.
(2000). Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
(2011). The Biblical story retold: A cognitive linguistics perspective. In M. Brdar, S. T. Gries & M. Ž. Fuchs (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Convergence and expansion (pp. 325–354). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Johns Benjamins.
(2015). Surprise as a conceptual category. Review of Cognitive Linguistics,
13
(1), 270–290.
Kraska-Szlenk, I. (2014). Semantic extensions of body part terms: Common patterns and their interpretation. Language Sciences,
44
1, 15–39.
(Ed.). (2020). Body part terms in conceptualization and language usage. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.). Metaphor and thought (2nd ed.) (pp. 202–251). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
(1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York, NY: Basic Books.
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). New York & Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Maalej, Z., & Yu, N. (Eds.). (2011). Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages and cultures. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Marmaridou, S. (2011). The relevance of embodiment to lexical and collocational meaning: The case of prosopo ‘face’ in Modern Greek. In Z. Maalej & N. Yu (Eds.), Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages and cultures (pp. 23–40). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Matsuki, K. (1995). Metaphors of anger in Japanese. In J. R. Taylor & R. E. MacLaury (Eds.), Language and the cognitive construal of the world (pp. 137–151). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Menete, S. N., & Jiang, G. (2021). Red-hot faces and burnt hearts: Anger is heat metaphor from Amharic and Changana perspective. Review of Cognitive Linguistics,
19
(2), 482–516.
Moore, K. E. (2000). Spatial experience and temporal metaphors in wolof: Point of view, conceptual mapping, and linguistic practice. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.]
(2011). Ego-perspective and field-based frames of reference: Temporal meanings of FRONT in Japanese, Wolof, and Aymara. Journal of Pragmatics,
43
1, 759–776.
Núñez, R. E., & Sweetser, E. (2006). With the future behind them: Convergent evidence from Aymara language and gesture in the cross-linguistic comparison of spatial construals of time. Cognitive Science,
30
(3), 401–450.
Pattillo, K., & Waśniewska, M. (2022). (Eds.). Embodiment in Cross-Linguistic Studies: The ‘Face.’ Leiden & Boston: Brill.
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol,
22
(1), 1–39.
Rohrer, T. (2007). Embodiment and experientialism. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 25–47). Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
Ruiz de Mendoza, I. F. J. (2020). Understanding figures of speech: Dependency relations and organizational patterns. Language & Communication,
71
1, 16–38.
Sharifian, F. (2017). Cultural linguistics and linguistic relativity. Language Sciences,
59
1, 83–92.
Sharifian, F., Dirven, R., Yu, N. & Niemeier, S. (Eds.). (2008). Culture, body, and language: Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sime, A. (2019). Semantics of Amharic ras ‘head.’ In I. Kraska-Szlenk (Ed.), Embodiment in cross-linguistic studies: The ‘head’ (pp. 183–204). Leiden & Boston: Brill.
Simó, J. 2011. Metaphors of Blood in American English and Hungarian: A cross-linguistic corpus investigation. Journal of Pragmatics,
43
(11), 2897–2910.
Slobin, D. I. (1991). Learning to think for speaking: Native language, cognition, and rhetorical style. Pragmatics, 7–26.
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vainik, E. (2011). The dynamic body parts in the Estonian figurative descriptions of emotions. In Maalej, Z. & Yu, N. (Eds.). Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages and cultures (pp. 41–70). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Wierzbicka, A. (1993). Reading human faces: Emotion components and universal semantics. Pragmatics & Cognition,
1
(1), 1–23.
(2000). The semantics of human facial expressions. Pragmatics & Cognition,
8
(1), 147–183.
(2007). Bodies and their parts: An NSM approach to semantic typology. Language Sciences,
29
(1), 14–65.
Wilkos, A., & De Carvalho, M. C. M. (2019). ‘Head(s)’ in Portuguese: the metaphor in European and Brazilian Portuguese. In I. Kraska-Szlenk (Ed.). Embodiment in cross-linguistic studies: The ‘head’ (pp. 183–204). Leiden & Boston: Brill.
Wolk, D. P. (2008). Expressions concerning the heart (libbā) in Northeastern Neo-Aramaic in relation to a Classical Syriac model of the temperaments. In F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language: Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp. 267–317). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Yu, N. (1995). Metaphorical expression of anger and happiness in English and Chinese. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity,
10
(2), 59–92.
(2001). What does our face mean to us? Pragmatics & Cognition, 9(1), 1–36.
(2002). Body and emotion: Body parts in Chinese expression of emotion. Pragmatics and Cognition,
10
(1–2), 341–367.
Amslau, A., & Dagnachew, W. (1979). Yamarəňňa fäliṭočč. [Amharic Idioms]. Addis Ababa: Kuraz Publishing.