CONCEPTUAL METAPHORS IN WEATHER EXPRESSIONS OF PRECIPITATION AND TEMPERATURE

Öz

This paper aims to explore cross-linguistic variation in conceptual metaphors related to weather with a particular focus on precipitation (rain) and temperature (heat). We specifically examine how metaphorical mappings differ across languages concerning lexical category (i.e., nouns, verbs, adjectives) and source domain. Drawing on Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), we analyse weather descriptions from ten typologically diverse languages: Turkish, English, Polish, Italian, Persian, Filipino, German, French, Swahili, and Korean. We elicited these descriptions through email correspondence with native speakers, all of whom possess at least an intermediate level of English. We asked informants to describe two weather scenes (i.e., rainy and sunny) in their native languages and then to provide literal English translations of their descriptions. This method allowed us to observe how metaphorical expressions are grammatically and lexically encoded across linguistic systems. We find that metaphorical variation aligns with the dynamic vs. stative nature of weather events: rain, as a dynamic phenomenon, is more frequently expressed through motion-based metaphors, while heat, as a stative condition, tends to be framed via state or intensity-based metaphors. Moreover, while conceptual metaphors show cross-linguistic consistency, their grammatical realisation regarding lexical categories and argument structure varies according to language-specific typological patterns.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Conceptual Metaphor Theory
• cognitive linguistics
• source-target relations
• linguistic typology
• weather expressions

YAĞIŞ VE SICAKLIK BELİRTEN HAVA DURUMU İFADELERİNDEKİ KAVRAMSAL METAFORLAR

Öz

Bu çalışma, hava durumuna ilişkin kavramsal metaforların diller arası farklılıklarını, yağış (yağmur) ve sıcaklık (ısı) kavramlarına odaklanarak incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Kavramsal Metafor Kuramı çerçevesinde yürütülen çalışmada, metaforik eşleşmelerin sözcük türleri (ad, eylem, sıfat) ve kaynak alan bakımından diller arasında nasıl farklılaştırıldığı araştırılmıştır. Veriler, anadili Türkçe, İngilizce, Lehçe, İtalyanca, Farsça, Filipince, Almanca, Fransızca, Swahili ve Korece olan ve en az orta düzeyde İngilizce bilen kaynak kişilerden e-posta yoluyla toplanmıştır. Kaynak kişilerden, iki hava durumu sahnesini (yağmurlu ve güneşli) kendi anadillerinde betimlemeleri ve ardından bu betimlemelerin İngilizce çevirilerini yapmaları istenmiştir. Bu yöntem, metaforik ifadelerin farklı dillerde sözcüksel ve biçimbilimsel olarak nasıl kodlandığını gözlemlememizi sağlamıştır. Bulgularımız, metaforik değişkenliğin çoğunlukla hava olayının dinamik ya da durağan doğasıyla ilişkili olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Dinamik bir olgu olan yağmur, sıklıkla hareket temelli metaforlarla, durumsal bir olgu olan sıcaklık ise daha çok durum veya yoğunluk temelli metaforlarla ifade edilmektedir. Ayrıca, kavramsal metaforlar diller arasında genel olarak tutarlılık gösterse de, bu metaforların sözcük türü ve tümce yapısı bakımından dilsel gerçekleşimi, incelenen dillerin tipolojik özelliklerine bağlı olarak değişkenlik göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kavramsal Metafor Kuramı
• bilişsel dilbilim
• hedef-kaynak ilişkisi
• dilbilimsel tipoloji
• hava durumu ifadeleri

Kaynakça

1. Alba-Salas, J. (2004). Lexically selected expletives: evidence from Basque and Romance. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 17, 35-100.
2. Álvarez-López, Y. (2021). From meteorology to linguistics: What precipitation constructions in English, French and Spanish tell us about arguments, argumenthood, and the architecture of the grammar. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 6(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1271
3. Andrason, A. (2019). Weather in Polish: A contribution to the typology of meteorological constructions. Studia Linguistica, 73, 66-105. https://doi.org/10.1111/stul.12091
4. Bauer, B. (2011). Archaic syntax in Indo-European: The spread of transitivity in Latin and French (Vol. 125). Walter de Gruyter.
5. Bletou, A. C. (2012). Why does it always rain on me? On weather verbs. In B. Suranyi & D. Varga (Eds.), Proceedings of the First Central European Conference in Linguistics for Postgraduate Students (pp. 59-81). Pazmany Peter Catholic University.
6. Dong, S., et al. (2021). Directionality of atmospheric water in Chinese: A lexical semantic study based on linguistic ontology. SAGE Open, 11(1), https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020988293
7. Grady, J. E. (2007). Metaphor, In. D. Geeraerts, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.) The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 188-213). Oxford University Press.
8. Eriksen, P. K., Kittilä, S., & Kolehmainen, L. (2010). The linguistics of weather: Cross-linguistic patterns of meteorological expressions. Studies in Language. International Journal sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language”, 34(3), 565-601. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.34.3.03eri

9. Eriksen, P. K., Kittilä, S., & Kolehmainen, L. (2012). Weather and language. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(6), 383-402. https://doi.org/10.1002/lnc3.341
10. Evans, V. (2019). Cognitive linguistics: A complete guide. Edinburgh University Press.
11. Evans, V. & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh University Press.
12. Kövecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
13. Kövecses, Z. (2017). Conceptual metaphor theory. In E. Semino, & Z. Demjén (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of metaphor and language (pp. 13-27). Routledge.
14. Lakoff, G. (2008). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press.
15. Lakoff, G. (1993). The Contemporary theory of metaphor, In A. Ortony (Ed.) Metaphor and thought (2nd edition) (pp. 202-252). Cambridge University Press.
16. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. The University of Chicago Press.
17. Langacker, R. (1999). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume II: Descriptive application. Stanford University Press.
18. Levin, B., & Krejci, B. (2019). Talking about the weather: Two construals of precipitation events in English. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 4(1), https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.794
19. Mettouchi, A., & Tosco, M. (2011). Impersonal configurations and theticity. In A. Malchukov, & A. Siewierska (Eds.), Impersonal constructions: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 307-322). John Benjamins.
20. Ruwet, N. (1986). On weather verbs. Talk in Chicago Linguistic Society, April 1986. Chicago Linguistics Society.
21. Ruwet, N. (1989). Weather verbs and the unaccusative hypothesis. In C. Kirschner, & J. A. DeCesaris (Eds.), Studies in Romance linguistics: Selected proceedings from the XVII Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (pp. 313-345). John Benjamins.
22. Saarinen, S. (1997). Il pluit, idet dozhd’, it rains, es regnet, llueve, piove. In:Alinei M, Barros Ferreira M, Contini M (eds) Atlas linguarum Europae (ALE), Volume I: Cinquième fascicule, Cartes et Commentaires (pp. 1-34). Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, Roma.
23. Salo, M. (2011). Meteorological verbs in Uralic languages–are there any impersonal structures to be found. In A. Malchukov, & A. Siewierska (Eds.), Impersonal constructions: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 395-438). John Benjamins.
24. Stewart, A. E. (2007). Linguistic dimensions of weather and climate perception. International Journal of Biometeorology, 57, 57-67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-007-0101-z
25. Toma, D. O. (2021). Weather sentences in a cross-linguistic perspective [Master’s Dissertation]. Universidad del Pais Vasco. http://hdl.handle.net/10810/70097