Within the issue of embodiment (Brenzinger and Kraska-Szlenk 2014, Yu 2009, Maalej and Yu 2011, Sharifian et. al. 2008) this paper investigates how THINKING is conceptualised in Hungarian in relation to HEAD, i.e., as represented in the expressions of fej ‘head’ in the Hungarian National Corpus. It is evidenced that, in accordance with the Western tradition, THEHEADISTHESEATOFINTELLECT/THINKING is a significant conceptualization in Hungarian. Within corpus analysis, two main themes are outlined: metaphorical expressions of THOUGHT and those of the activity of THINKING. It is highlighted that there are numerous different types of conceptualizations in Hungarian to refer to thought, each pointing out some distinctive aspect of thought and thinking. It is evidenced that thought can be imagined as either inanimate or animate objects, and in most conceptualizations THEHEAD-AS-CONTAINER metaphor has an overwhelming influence. Within THOUGHTSASINANIMATEENTITIES, the basic metaphors are: THOUGHTSASENTITIESINADRUGSTORE, THOUGHTSASTHREADS, THOUGHTSASMOVINGENTITIES and THOUGHTSASNOISE/MUSIC, while in THOUGHTSASANIMATEENTITIES are conceived as HUMANS, ANIMALS or PLANTS. It has been shown that thoughts, ideas, data and memories are imagined as entities that exist (or live) in the head.
The second part of the paper focuses on the metaphors of THINKING. Each conceptualizations (THINKINGASCRACKINGONE’SHEAD, THINKINGASAWORKINGMACHINE, THINKINGASMARKINGAWOODENBOARD) reflect on different aspects of the intellect. The conceptualizations unfolded can be regarded as cultural conceptualizations (Sharifian 2011, 2017) because they are specific to the cognition of Hungarian people.
This paper offers an analysis of the Chinese body-part terms for ‘head’ and its related parts ‘brain’ and “neck” from a conceptual and cognitive perspective. It examines their semantic and morphological functions through the metonymic and metaphorical extensions which display both universal and language-specific tendencies derived from human experiences characteristic of this particular part of the body. Discussions focus on the historical development of these terms and how they manifest themselves in the semantic and cognitive template that is framed by the sensorimotor in the contour of the body. Comparison is made to several languages in the surrounding regions to provide cross-linguistic perspective in this semantic domain. The grammaticalization path of these body part terms is explored, as are the cognitive bases of their conceptual mapping and patterns of cognitive transfer. The study aims to contribute to a better understanding of how potentially universal features and cultural factors interact with each other in language and cognition.
Previous studies on body-part metaphors in Turkish investigate their cultural relevance, etymology, or semantic properties (cf. Baş 2015). Aksan (2011) focusing particularly on ‘head’, analyses metaphors that are either compounds or are sentential. The present chapter is the first on phrasal constructions that contain body parts in Turkish, in particular, ‘head’. Turkish has five terms for ‘head’, baş, kafa, kelle, ser, and tepe, all of which can form idiomatic expressions. Based on a survey of 350 phrasal idioms, we observe that especially idioms formed with the first two, baş and kafa are i) very productive, and ii) display a number of correlated asymmetries. These asymmetries pertain to the notions of internal vs. external structures, living entities vs. objects and mechanisms, body/self/emotion vs. mind, neutral vs. marked contexts, and to various other categories. Emotion vs. thought as one of these dichotomies is uniquely captured by two different terms for the same body part, ‘head’, whereas this very same dichotomy is, in other languages, expressed through different body parts (heart vs. head, cf. Maalej & Yu 2011).