Volume 11, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2213-8722
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8730
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The Roman author Lucius Anneus Seneca (4 BC–65 AC), the main representative of Stoic philosophy in Latin literature, wrote several tragedies in verse in which the Latin noun ‘hand’ has a remarkable incidence, almost doubling the occurrence of other terms more related to tragic themes, such as ‘crime’ or ‘death’. This paper is based on the hypothesis that this high frequency is linked to the concept of embodiment as well as on the metonymies and metaphors used in Seneca’s figurative language to encode abstract concepts. The occurrences of the term in a corpus composed of Seneca’s dramatic and philosophical texts have been analysed, paying attention to the metonymic and metaphorical contexts where it appears. As a result, it has been observed that this word can refer to multiple realities such as individuals, actions, identity, control, or power.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Ahn, H. J., & Kwon, Y. J.
    (2007) A study on metaphor and metonymy of hand. Journal of Language Sciences, 14(2), 195–215.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Armisen-Marchetti, M.
    (1989) Sapientiae Facies: Étude sur les images de Sénèque [The face of wisdom: Study on Seneca’s images]. Paris: Les Belles Lettres. 10.4000/books.lesbelleslettres.5564
    https://doi.org/10.4000/books.lesbelleslettres.5564 [Google Scholar]
  3. (1991) La métaphore et l’ abstraction dans la prose de Sénèque [Metaphor and abstraction in Seneca’s prose]. InP. Grimal (ed.), Sénèque et la prose latine: Neuf exposés suivis de discussions [Seneca and the latin prose: Nine lectures followed by discussions] (pp.99–139). Genève-Vandœuvres: Fondation Hardt.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bartsch, S.
    (2009) Senecan metaphor and stoic self-instruction. InS. Bartsch & D. Wrey, Seneca and the self (pp.188–217). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bekaert, E.
    (2009) Análisis de las metáforas y metonimias relativas a cinco partes del cuerpo esenciales: El ojo, la oreja, la nariz, la boca y la mano [Analysis of metaphors and metonymies relating to five essential parts of the body: The eye, the ear, the nose, the mouth and the hand]. Ghent: Universiteit Ghent.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Billioti de Gage, C.
    (2012) Hands and manipulations in the grammar and cognitive systems of English. Bordeaux: Michel de Montaigne – Bordeaux III.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Casasanto, D.
    (2009) Embodiment of abstract concepts: Good and bad in right- and left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(3), 351–367. 10.1037/a0015854
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015854 [Google Scholar]
  8. Castaño, E., Gilboy, E., Feijóo, S., Serrat, E., Rostan, C., Hilferty, J. & Cunillera, T.
    (2018) Hand position and response assignment modulate the activation of the valence-space conceptual metaphor. Cognitive Science, 42(7), 2342–2363. 10.1111/cogs.12669
    https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12669 [Google Scholar]
  9. Cienki, A.
    (2007) Frames, idealized cognitive models, and domains. InD. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp.170–187). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Codoñer Merino, C.
    (1997) Séneca: Obras filosóficas [Seneca: Philosophical works]. InC. Codoñer Merino (Ed.), Historia de la literatura latina [History of Latin literature] (pp.545–556). Madrid: Cátedra.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Díez Velasco, O. I.
    (2000) A cross-linguistic analysis of the nature of some “hand” metonymies in English and Spanish. Atlantis, 22(2), 51–67. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41054991
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Dirven, R.
    (2003) Metonymy and metaphor: Different mental strategies of conceptualisation. InR. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp.75–112). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219197.1.75
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.1.75 [Google Scholar]
  13. Fan, H.
    (2017) A study of “hand” metaphors in English and Chinese – Cognitive and cultural perspective. Advances in Literary Study, 5(4), 84–93. 10.4236/als.2017.54007
    https://doi.org/10.4236/als.2017.54007 [Google Scholar]
  14. Fedriani, C.
    (2011) Experiential metaphors in Latin: Feelings were containers, movements and things possessed. Transactions of the Philological Society, 109(3), 307–326. 10.1111/j.1467‑968X.2011.01284.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.2011.01284.x [Google Scholar]
  15. (2016) Ontological and orientational metaphors in Latin: Evidence from the semantics of feelings and emotions. InW. M. Short (Ed.), Embodiment in Latin semantics (pp.115–140). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.174.05fed
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.174.05fed [Google Scholar]
  16. García Jurado, F., & López Gregoris, R.
    (1995) Las metáforas de la vida cotidiana en el lenguaje plautino como procedimiento de caracterización de los personajes [Daily life metaphors in the Plautinian language as a procedure for characterisation of the characters]. Studi Italiani Di Filologia Classica, 13(2), 233–245.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Gazzarri, T.
    (2020) The stylus and the scalpel–Theory and practice of metaphor in Seneca’s prose. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110673715
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110673715 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gómez Caballero, I.
    (2021) Estudio estilométrico del teatro latino: a vueltas con Octavia y Hercules Oetaeus de Séneca [Stylometric study of latin theather: Around with Seneca’s Octavia and Hercules Oetaeus]. Cuadernos de Filología Clásica. Estudios latinos, 41(1), 57–74. 10.5209/cfcl.77308
    https://doi.org/10.5209/cfcl.77308 [Google Scholar]
  19. Goossens, L.
    (2003) Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. InR. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp.349–378). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219197.3.349
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.3.349 [Google Scholar]
  20. Johnson, M.
    (1987) The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  21. Kimmel, M.
    (2010) Why we mix metaphors (and mix them well): Discourse coherence, conceptual metaphor, and beyond. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(1), 97–115. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.05.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.05.017 [Google Scholar]
  22. Kövecses, Z.
    (2010) Metaphor: A practical introduction (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. (2016) A view of “mixed metaphor” within a conceptual metaphor theory framework. InR. W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), Mixing metaphor (pp.3–15). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/milcc.6.01kov
    https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.6.01kov [Google Scholar]
  24. Lakoff, G.
    (1987) Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  25. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
    (2018) Metáforas de la vida cotidiana [Metaphors we live by]. Translated byC. G. Marín. Madrid: Cátedra
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Luque Moreno, J.
    (1999) Séneca: Tragedias II. Madrid: Gredos.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Marco Simón, F.
    (1986) Topografía cualitativa en la magia romana. Izquierda y derecha como elementos de determinación simbólica [Qualitative topography in Roman magic. Left and right as elements of symbolic representation]. Memorias de historia antigua, 71, 81–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Mocciaro, E., & Short, W. M.
    (2019) Toward a cognitive classical linguistics: The embodied basis of constructions in Greek and Latin. Warsaw: De Gruyter Open Poland. 10.1515/9783110616347
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110616347 [Google Scholar]
  29. Pérez Gómez, L.
    (1997) La tragedia [Tragedy]. InC. Codoñer (Ed.), Historia de la literatura latina [History of Latin literature] (pp.567–578). Madrid: Cátedra.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z.
    (1999) Towards a theory of metonymy. InK.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp.17–59). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.4.03rad
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.03rad [Google Scholar]
  31. Seto, K.-I.
    (1999) Distinguishing metonymy from synecdoche. InK.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp.91–120). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.4.06set
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.06set [Google Scholar]
  32. Short, W. M.
    (2008) Thinking places, placing thoughts: Spatial metaphors of mental activity in Roman culture. Quaderni Del Ramo d’oro, 11, 106–129.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. (2016a) Embodiment in Latin semantics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.174
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.174 [Google Scholar]
  34. (2016b) Spatial metaphors of time in Roman culture. The Classical World, 109(3), 381–412. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44509052. 10.1353/clw.2016.0038
    https://doi.org/10.1353/clw.2016.0038 [Google Scholar]
  35. Sjöblad, A.
    (2015) Metaphorical coherence: Studies in Seneca’s epistulae morales. (Studia Graeca et Latina Lundensia; Vol. 20). Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Stepien, M. A.
    (2007) Metáfora y metonimia conceptual en la fraseología de cinco partes del cuerpo humano en español y polaco. Anuario de estudios filológicos, 301, 391–409.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Tarriño Ruiz, E.
    (2021) El adjetivo [The adjective]. InJ. M. Baños (coord.), Sintaxis Latina (vol. 1) [Latin syntax (vol. 1)] (pp.271–300). Madrid: CSIC.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Taylor, J. R.
    (2002) Category extension by metonymy and metaphor. InR. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp.323–348). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219197.323
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.323 [Google Scholar]
  39. Traina, A.
    (1974) Lo stile ‘drammatico’ del filosofo Seneca [The ‘dramatic’ style of the philosopher Seneca]. Bologna: Pàtron.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Tur, C.
    (2022) Metonimias y metáforas conceptuales con manus en el teatro latino [Conceptual metonymies and metaphors with manus in Latin drama]. Emerita, 90(1), 121–148. 10.3989/emerita.2022.06.2117
    https://doi.org/10.3989/emerita.2022.06.2117 [Google Scholar]
  41. Unceta Gómez, L.
    (2012) Metáforas para pensar: Los verbos latinos de ‘pensamiento’ y ‘opinión’ desde un enfoque diacrónico structural [Metaphors for thinking: The Latin verbs of ‘thought’ and ‘opinion’ from a structural diachronic approach]. InJ. Martínez del Castillo (Ed.), Eugenio Coseriu (1921–2002) en los comienzos del siglo XXI [Eugenio Coseriu (1921–2002) at the beginning of the 21st century.] (pp.169–185). Málaga: Universidad de Málaga.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Zanobi, A.
    (2008) The influence of pantomime on Seneca’s tragedies. InE. Hall & R. Wyles (Eds.), New directions in ancient pantomime (pp.227–257). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199232536.003.0012
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199232536.003.0012 [Google Scholar]
  43. Zimmermann, B.
    (2008) Seneca and pantomime. In: E. Hall & R. Wyles (eds.), New directions in ancient pantomime (pp.218–226). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199232536.003.0011
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199232536.003.0011 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conceptual metaphor; conceptual metonymy; embodiment; Latin language
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error