Volume 9, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2213-8722
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8730
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



One of the most fundamental claims of the Cognitive Theory of Metaphor is the direction of mapping from concrete to abstract. The pervasiveness of this path of semantic change has been widely accepted among researchers interested in the study of the history and development of emotional expressions. Whereas most studies focus on the analysis of one specific target domain (i.e., one emotion or one family of emotions), less attention has been paid to the reconstruction and analysis of the set of diachronic changes that affected one single source domain. Within this framework, in this paper I have used data extracted from standard Old English dictionaries and thesauri, in order to propose a complete analysis of the set of Old English adjectives for different textural properties of physical objects (such as roughness, smoothness, softness and hardness). I am especially interested in the reconstruction and analysis of the paths of semantic change (from concrete to abstract) illustrated by this section of the Old English vocabulary. Broadly speaking, apart from the original senses for physical texture, these adjectives developed secondary meanings in the fields of feelings and emotions, which I have classified into three categories: (such as weakness and pleasantness), (such as auditive, visual or gustative sensations) and (such as grief, anger, compassion and empathy). Furthermore, the resulting figurative meanings (which I have analysed in terms of metonymic, synaesthetic and metaphoric extensions) can also be grouped into positive and negative sensations. The present paper supports the idea that the origin of our understanding of abstract concepts is deeply rooted in our physical experiences. This is indeed a conceptual pattern showed by the diachronic evolution of Old English adjectives for texture. This paper concludes with some remarks on the social and cultural changes that prompted some of these semantic changes, paying special attention to the Christianization of Anglo-Saxon England and the introduction of Christian values.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Apresjan, V.
    (1997) Emotion metaphor and cross-linguistic metaphorization of emotions. Cuadernos de Filología Inglesa, 6(2), 179–195.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Desmond, W.
    (1986) Art and the absolute: A study of Hegel’s aesthetics. Albany: State University of New York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Díaz-Vera, J. E.
    (2002) The semantic architecture of the Old English Verbal Lexicon: A Historical-Lexicographic proposal. InJ. E. Díaz-Vera (Ed.), A changing world of words: Studies in English Historical Lexicography, Lexicology and Semantics (pp.47–77). Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789004489349_004
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004489349_004 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2016) Coming to past senses: Vision, touch and their metaphors in Anglo-Saxon language and culture. InK. Annette & B. Busse (Eds.), The five senses in Medieval and early Modern England (pp.36–66). Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ding, S., Pan, Y., Tong, M., & Zhao, X.
    (2017) Tactile perception of roughness and hardness to discriminate materials by friction-induced vibration. Sensors, 17(12), 2748. 10.3390/s17122748
    https://doi.org/10.3390/s17122748 [Google Scholar]
  6. Ekman, G., Hosman, J., & Lindstrom, B.
    (1965) Roughness, smoothness, and preference: A study of quantitative relations in individual subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(1), 18–26. 10.1037/h0021985
    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021985 [Google Scholar]
  7. Gallace, A.
    (2014) Textures that we like to touch: An experimental study of aesthetic preferences for tactile stimuli. Consciousness and Cognition, 29, 178–188. 10.1016/j.concog.2014.08.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2014.08.011 [Google Scholar]
  8. Geeraerts, D., & Gevaert, C.
    (2008) Hearts and (angry) minds in Old English. InF. Sharifian, R. Dirven & N. Yu (Eds.), Culture, body, and language: Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp.319–347). Berlin: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Goebs, K.
    (2011) King as god and god as king: Colour, light and transformation in Egyptian ritual. InR. Gundlach & K. Spence (Eds.), Palace and temple: Architecture – Decoration – Ritual. 5. Symposium zur Ägyptischen Königsideologie/5th Symposium on Egyptian Royal Ideology (pp.57–101). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Hurtienne, J., Stößel, Ch., & Weber, K.
    (2009) Sad is heavy and happy is light: Population stereotypes of tangible object attributes. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (pp.61–68). New York: ACM. 10.1145/1517664.1517686
    https://doi.org/10.1145/1517664.1517686 [Google Scholar]
  11. Hurtienne, J., & Reinhardt, D.
    (2017) Texture metaphors and tangible interaction: No smooth relationship?TEI ’17: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (pp.79–87). New York: ACM. 10.1145/3024969.3024986
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3024969.3024986 [Google Scholar]
  12. Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I.
    (2013) The power of the senses and the role of culture in metaphor and language. InR. Caballero & J. E. Díaz-Vera (Eds.), Sensuous cognition: Explorations into human sentience: Imagination, (e)motion and perception (pp.109–133). Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110300772.109
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110300772.109 [Google Scholar]
  13. Jager, E.
    (2000) The book of the heart. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 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]
  15. Kövecses, Z.
    (2000) Metaphor and emotion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. (2007) Variation in metaphor. Ilha do Desterro, 55, 13–39.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Lishner, D., Batson, D., & Huss, E.
    (2011) Tenderness and sympathy: Distinct empathic emotions elicited by different forms of need. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(5), 614–625. 10.1177/0146167211403157
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211403157 [Google Scholar]
  18. Minaya-Gómez, F. J.
    (2019) As beautiful inside, as it is outside: On the connection between beauty and morality in the Old English corpus. Complutense Journal of English Studies, 27, 205–221. 10.5209/cjes.63808
    https://doi.org/10.5209/cjes.63808 [Google Scholar]
  19. Peters, J. D.
    (1999) The bowels of mercy. BYU Studies Quarterly, 38(4), 27–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Sacharin, V., Schlegel, K., & Scherer, K. R.
    (2012) Geneva Emotion Wheel rating study. Geneva: Swiss Center for Affective Sciences.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Semino, E.
    (2010) Descriptions of pain, metaphor, and embodied simulation. Metaphor and Symbol, 25(4), 205–226. 10.1080/10926488.2010.510926
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2010.510926 [Google Scholar]
  22. Skeates, R., & Day, J.
    (2020) The Routledge handbook of Sensory Archaeology. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Stevens, B.
    (2008) The scent of language and social synaesthesia at Rome. Classical World, 101(2), 159–172. 10.1353/clw.2008.0009
    https://doi.org/10.1353/clw.2008.0009 [Google Scholar]
  24. Suzuki, Y., Gyoba, J., & Sakamoto, S.
    (2008) Selective effects of auditory stimuli on tactile roughness perception. Brain Research, 1242, 87–94. 10.1016/j.brainres.2008.06.104
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2008.06.104 [Google Scholar]
  25. Swan, T.
    (2009) Metaphors of body and mind in the History of English. English Studies, 90(4), 460–475. 10.1080/00138380902796292
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00138380902796292 [Google Scholar]
  26. Turner, J., & Stets, J.
    (2006) Moral emotions. InJ. Stets & J. Turner (Eds.), Handbook of the Sociology of Emotions (pp.544–566). Boston: Springer. 10.1007/978‑0‑387‑30715‑2_24
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30715-2_24 [Google Scholar]
  27. Weisfeld, G.
    (1996) Research on emotions and future developments in human ethology. InA. Schmitt, K. Atzwanger, K. Grammer & K. Schäfer (Eds.), New Aspects of Human Ethology (pp.25–46). Boston: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Winter, I. J.
    (1994) Radiance as an aesthetic value in the art of Mesopotamia. InB. N. Saraswati, S. Ch. Malik & M. Khanna (Eds.), Art: The Integral Vision, a Volume of Essays in Felicitation of Kapila Vatsyayan (pp.123–132). New Delhi: D.K. Printworld.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Xie, J., Lu, Z., Wang, R., & Cai, Z.
    (2016) Remember hard but think softly: Metaphorical effects of hardness/softness on cognitive functions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1343. 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01343
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01343 [Google Scholar]
  30. BT: J. Bosworth and T. N. Toller
    (Eds. 1972) An Anglo-Saxon dictionary: Based on the manuscript collection of Joseph Bosworth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. DOE: A. diPaolo Healey, J. Holland, I. McDougall and P. Mielke
    (Eds. 2018), The dictionary of Old English A to I. Toronto: DOE Project.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. DOEC: A. diPaolo Healey, J. Holland, I. McDougall and P. Mielke
    (Eds. 2000), The dictionary of Old English Corpus in electronic form. Toronto: DOE Project.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. OED: J. Simpson
    (Ed. 2000) Oxford English dictionary (second edition on CD-ROM). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Pokorny: J. Pokorny
    (1959) Indogermanisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch. Bern: Francke.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. TOE: J. Roberts & Ch. Kay
    (Eds. 1995) A thesaurus of Old English. London: King’s College, CLAMS.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

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