Semantic Extension of HEAD in Korean and Thai: A Contrastive Perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1512.23Keywords:
semantic extension, metaphor, Korean, Thai, HEADAbstract
Modern linguistic traditions have witnessed increasing attention to embodied cognition, culture, and typology. Embodiment is responsible for the universalities of human experience as reflected in language, due to similarities in human cognitive processes such as metaphor and metonymy. Many crosslinguistic studies corroborate the claims of similar cognitive mechanisms operating behind ontological divisions, conceptual networks, construal of events, semantico-functional change of lexemes, among others. Closer scrutiny, however, reveals an array of differences in their operations, largely attributable to culture-specific idiosyncrasies and/or typological dissimilarities, hence the significance of crosslinguistic and comparative investigations. Based on the established cognitive-linguistic theoretical frameworks, this research analyzes the semantic extension of a conceptually prominent body-part term HEAD in Korean (meli and taykali) and in Thai (hǔa) from a comparative perspective. HEAD is among the most perceptually-prominent and functionally-essential body parts, and thus it constitutes a convenient and effective reference point for analyzing embodiment. A comparative investigation reveals commonalities and differences in the conceptualization of HEAD and its semantic extension scenarios, which merit the attention of researchers of cognitive linguistics, linguistic typology, and comparative/contrastive linguistics. This study shows that, most notably, Korean favors contour-based conceptualizations (HEAD is ROUND; HEAD is UNIT), whereas Thai favors horizontal-axis-based conceptualizations (HEAD is FRONT; HEAD is BEGINNING). Furthermore, Korean has multiple lexemes with specialized meanings, including one for animal heads, a reflection of the monosemy strategy of lexicalization, which is in contrast with the polysemy structure in Thai. The multiplicity of HEAD lexemes in Korean is partly responsible for the emergence of pejorative meanings.
References
Adams, K. (1986). Numeral classifiers in Austroasiatic. In C. Craig (Ed.), Noun classes and categorization (pp. 241-262). John Benjamins.
Bae, D.-Y. (2001). Wulimal sincheyeuy uymi hwakcang yenkwu [A study of semantic extension of Korean body-part terms]. Ph.D. dissertation, Pusan National University, Korea.
Bae, D.-Y. (2002). Wulimal ‘meli’-uy uymi hwakcang yenkwu [A study of semantic extension of Korean meli]. Kwukehak, 40, 269-304.
Becker, A. K. (1975). A linguistic image of nature: The Burmese numerative classifier system. Linguistics, 165, 109-121.
Bovonwiwat, W., & Rhee, S. (2023). Heart metaphors: A lexicalization perspective. Paper presented at the 23rd Biennial Meeting of the International Circle of Korean Linguistics (ICKL-2023), Palacký University Olomouc. The Czech Republic, June 28-30, 2023.
Carston, R. (2021). Polysemy: Pragmatics and sense conventions. Wiley Online Library.
De Busser, R., & LaPolla, R. (2015). The influence of social, cultural, and natural factors on language structure: An overview. In R. De Busser & R. LaPolla (Eds.), Language structure and environment (pp. 1-28). John Benjamins.
DeLancey, S. (1986). Toward a history of Tai classifier systems. In C. Craig (Ed.), Noun classes and categorization (pp. 437-452). John Benjamins.
Erbaugh, M. S. (1986). Taking stock: The development of Chinese noun classifiers historically and in young children. In C. Craig (Ed.), Noun classes and categorization (pp. 399-436). John Benjamins.
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2008). Rethinking metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 53-66). Cambridge University Press.
Geeraerts, D. (1993). Vagueness’s puzzles, polysemy’s vagaries. Cognitive Linguistics, 4, 223-272.
Geeraerts, D., & Cuyckens, H. (2007). Introducing cognitive linguistics. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 3-21). Oxford University Press.
Gibbs, Raymond W., Jr. (2008). Metaphor and thought: The state of the art. In R. W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 3-13). Cambridge University Press.
Glynn, D., & Robinson, J. A. (Eds.). (2014). Corpus methods for semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy. John Benjamins.
Heine, B. (1997). Cognitive foundations of grammar. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Heine, B., Claudi, U., & Hünnemeyer, F. (1991). Grammaticalization: A conceptual framework. The University of Chicago Press.
Hong, S.-M. (1986). Sincheyeuy tauykwuco pwunsek (II): Meliuy uymi [An analysis of polysemy structure of body-part terms (II): The meaning of meli]. Festschrift of Professor Kim Min-Soo: Kwukehak sinyenkwu (pp. 180-196). Tower Press.
Hong, S.-M. (2003). Kwuke Ehwiuymiuy sacek pyenchen - Yuuyeuy uymi kiswul [Historical change of lexical meanings in Korean: Semantic description of synonymy]. Hankook Publisher.
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind. The University of Chicago Press.
Johnson, M. (2007). The meaning of the body: Aesthetics of human understanding. The University of Chicago Press.
Khammee, K., & Rhee, S. (2021). Small and cute? Small and bad?: Semantic network of diminutives in Thai and Korean. Paper presented at the 54th Societas Linguistica Europaea Conference, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, August 31 – September 3, 2021.
Khammee, K., & Rhee, S. (2022). Same and different ways of seeing faces: The cases of Korean and Thai. The Journal of Linguistic Science, 103, 361-381. https://doi.org/10.21296/jls.2022.12.103.361
Khammee, K., & Rhee, S. (2025). The goal-over-source asymmetry in Thai and Korean. Language and Cognition, 17, e27, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2024.70
Kilarski, M. (2013). Nominal classification: A history of its study from the classical period to the present. John Benjamins.
Koo, H. J. (2009). Body in the language: A case with Korean body-part term ‘head’. Language and Linguistics, 46, 1-28.
Koo, H. J., & Rhee, S. (2016). Pejoratives in Korean. In R. Finkbeiner, J. Meibauer, & H. Wiese (Eds.), Pejoration (pp. 301-323). John Benjamins.
Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford University Press.
Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in culture: Universality and variation. Cambridge University Press.
Kraska-Szlenk, I. (2019). Metonymic extensions of the body part ‘head’ in mental and social domains. In I. Kraska-Szlenk (Ed.), Embodiment in cross-linguistic studies: The ‘head’ (pp. 136-154). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004392410_009
Kuteva, T., Heine, B., Hong, B., Long, H., Narrog, H., & Rhee, S. (2019). World lexicon of grammaticalization (2nd edition). Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Cognitive models and prototype theory. In U. Neisser (Ed.), Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization (pp. 63-100). Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. The University of Chicago Press.
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). Cambridge University Press.
Lee, K. H. (1992). Kwuke yuuyeuy thongsicek yenkwu [A diachronic study of Korean near-synonyms]. Ph.D. dissertation, Kyungpook National University, Korea.
Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. A. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. University of California Press.
Lu, X.-H., & Park, K. (2019). A cognitive linguistic study on polysemy of body part term /hua/ (‘head’) in Thai. Southeast Asia Journal, 28(3), 71-121. http://dx-doi-org.sproxy.hufs.ac.kr/10.21485/hufsea.2019.28.3.003 (in Korean)
Mithun, M. (1986). The convergence of noun classification systems. In C. Craig (Ed.), Noun classes and categorization (pp. 379-398). John Benjamins.
Moore, C. G. (2006). Heart talk: Say what you feel in Thai. Heaven Lake Press.
Nerlich, B., & Clarke, D. D. (2001). Ambiguities we live by: Towards a pragmatics of polysemy. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 1-20.
Park, J. Y., & Lee, H. H. (2018). Koetaysacen [A pre-modern Korean dictionary]. Sunmoon University Press.
Park, K. (2011). A polysemy of /gada/ in Korean in comparison to /paj/ in Thai: A cognitive linguistic approach. Ph.D. dissertation, Thammasat University, Thailand. (in Thai)
Park, K., & Rhee, S. (2018). A comparative study on the grammaticalization of Korean and Thai adpositions from macroscopic and typological perspectives. The Journal of Linguistic Science, 86, 69-95. https://doi.org/10.21296/jls.2018.09.86.69 (in Korean)
Rhee, S. (2019). Politeness pressure on grammar: The case of first and second person pronouns and address terms in Korean. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 23(4), 950-974. https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2019-23-4-950-974
Rhee, S. (2022). Where to go at the end: Polylexicalization and polygrammaticalization of kAz ‘edge’ in Korean. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 26(3), 571-595. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-30616
Rhee, S., & Khammee, K. (2024). Grammaticalization of future-time reference markers in Korean and Thai. GEMA: Online Journal of Language Studies, 24.3: 1-19.
Royal Thai Dictionary, The. (n.d.). Available at https://dictionary.orst.go.th/. Accessed May 2025.
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.
Thai National Corpus, The. (n.d.). Available online at https://www.arts.chula.ac.th/ling/tnc3/. Accessed March-June 2025.
Vanhove, M. (2008). Semantic associations between sensory modalities, prehension and mental perceptions: A cross-linguistic perspective. In M. Vanhove (Ed.), Towards a typology of semantic associations (pp. 341-370). Mouton de Gruyter.
Vicente, A., & Falkum, I. L. (2015). Polysemy: Current perspectives and approaches. Lingua, 157, 1-16.
Woo, H.-S. (1988). Sincheyeuy uymilon: Ehwiuymiloncek pwunsek sito [Semantics of body-part terms: An exploration of lexical semantics]. Yonsei Emwunhak, 21, 291-319.
Wulimalsaym [Online Korean dictionary]. (n.d.). Available at https://opendict.korean.go.kr/. Accessed March-June 2025.
Yu, N. (2008). The relationship between metaphor, body, and culture. In R. M. Frank, R. Dirven, T. Ziemke, & E. Bernárdez (Eds.), Body, language, and mind (vol. 2): Sociocultural situatedness (pp. 387–407). Mouton de Gruyter.
