A Typology of Frame-Based Models of Intellectual Concepts in Kazakh, Russian, and English Linguacultures
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1610.23Keywords:
typology of intellectual concepts, conceptosphere, frame-based model, linguaculture, cognitive semanticsAbstract
The relevance of this study is driven by the growing interest of modern linguistics in the contrastive analysis of the intellectual conceptosphere and the need to identify universal and culture-specific mechanisms of conceptualizing thinking across different linguacultures. The aim of the study is to develop a typology of frame-based models of intellectual concepts in Kazakh, Russian, and English linguacultures on the basis of their cognitive-semantic and linguacultural comparison. The methodology combines frame analysis, a typological approach, and linguacultural analysis, drawing on a corpus of texts representing different genres and discourse types. The scientific novelty of the study lies in identifying and systematizing semantic domains of intellectual concepts as internal cognitive–semantic subsystems that form hierarchically organized frame-based models. The results establish the dominant types of conceptualization of the intellectual domain and identify universal and culture-specific elements of the frame structure of concepts across the three languages. The main conclusions confirm the productivity of frame-based and typological approaches for analyzing the intellectual conceptosphere and demonstrate their potential for intercultural comparison and further cognitive-linguistic research.
References
Akhmetova, M. K., Zhanzhigitov, S. Kh., Alpysbayeva, A. Y., Sarekenova, K. K., Bibekov, K., & Abitzhanova, Z. (2025). The representation of ethnocultural names in the linguistic consciousness of Kazakh youth. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language (IJSCL), 13(2), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijscl.2025.2056961.3990
Alejo-González, R. (2023). Conventional metaphors in English as a lingua franca. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 23(1), 286–312. https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00168.ale
Altavilla, D., Mazzaggio, G., Deriu, V., Garello, S., Vecchi, A., Adornetti, I., Chiera, A., Canali, S., & Ferretti, F. (2025). Metaphor as a cognitive and relational tool for self-narrating experience of addiction: A qualitative-quantitative analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1658238. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1658238
Baigozhina, D. O., Klushina, N. I., & Takhan, S. Sh. (2019). Mediatization of Culture in the Discourse of Modern Kazakh Media. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 23(3), 784–801. https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2019-23-3-784-801
Bakytzhanova, A., Bekmukhambetova, S. B., Utemissova, E. K., Zhanzhigitov, S., Alpysbayeva, A. Y., Omarbayeva, G. S., & Tatiyeva, S. S. (2025a). Linguo-conceptual and linguocultural analysis of the concept “memory”: Semantic typology of Kazakh-Russian-English phraseology. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 15(12), 4162–4171. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1512.36
Bakytzhanova, A., Zhanzhigitov, S., Bibekov, K., Yelubay, A., & Mussabayeva, A. (2025b). Linguoconceptual nature of intellectual parameters in Kazakh legal discourse. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(7), 146–157. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i7.9973
Bateman, J. A., Thiele, L., & Akin, H. (2021). Explanation videos unravelled: Breaking the waves. Journal of Pragmatics, 175, 112–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.12.009
Beknazarova, U. U., Almautova, A. B., Yelemessova, S. M., & Abadildayeva, S. K. (2021). The cognitive function of a conceptual metaphor and its methodological foundations. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(3), 1312–1324. https://doi.org/10.52462/jlls.94
Boas, H. C., Ruppenhofer, J., & Baker, C. (2024). FrameNet at 25. International Journal of Lexicography, 37(3), 263–284. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/ecae009
Brugman, B. C., Burgers, C., & Steen, G. J. (2019). Metaphorical framing in political discourse through words and gestures. Language and Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2019.5
Burgers, C., Brugman, B. C., Renardel de Lavalette, K. Y., & Steen, G. J. (2016). HIP: A method for linguistic hyperbole identification in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 31(3), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2016.1187041
Dalpanagioti, T. (2023). What frame semantics can offer to task-based language teaching. TESOL Journal, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.692
Gast, V., & Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M. (2022). Patterns of persistence and diffusibility in the European lexicon. Linguistic Typology, 26(2), 403–438. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2021-2086
Georgakopoulos, T., Grossman, E., Nikolaev, D., & Polis, S. (2022). Universal and macro-areal patterns in the lexicon: A case-study in the perception-cognition domain. Linguistic Typology, 26(2), 439–487. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2021-2088
Gibbs, R. W., Jr., & Siman, Z. (2021). How We Resist Metaphors. Language and Cognition, 13(4), 670–692. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2021.18
Grisham, E. L., Wong, M., Flusberg, S. J., & Martin Hard, B. (2025). The Gardener and the Coach: How Metaphor Use Shapes Impression Formation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 44(5), 800-822. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X251328359
Hu, G., & Chen, L. (2019). “To our great surprise …”: A frame-based analysis of surprise markers in research articles. Journal of Pragmatics, 143, 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.02.021
Kalinin, O. I., & Ignatenko, A. V. (2024). Metaphor power in the context of the author’s opinion expression and perception. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 28(1), 166–189. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-34791
Lederer, J. (2019). Lexico-grammatical alignment in metaphor construal. Cognitive Linguistics, 30(1), 165–203. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2017-0135
Mon, S. K., Nencheva, M., Citron, F. M. M., Lew-Williams, C., & Goldberg, A. E. (2021). Conventional metaphors elicit greater real-time engagement than literal paraphrases or concrete sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 121, 104285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2021.104285
Narziev, N. T. (2025). Framing the economy through conceptual metaphors: A linguistic-cognitive perspective. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence, 5(6), 1667–1672. https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai/article/view/5479
Navarro i Ferrando, I., & Esbrí-Blasco, M. (2024). Frames and semantic roles in metaphorical mappings. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 24(1), 63–98. https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00180.nav
Neumair, P. A., Gehrecke, F. M., Hartmann, S., & Ziem, A. (2025). A frame-semantic approach to conceptual metaphors in the domain of emotion. Language and Cognition, 17. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2024.37
Norcliffe, E., & Majid, A. (2024). Word formation patterns in the perception domain: A typological study of cross-modal semantic associations. Linguistic Typology, 28(3), 419–459. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2023-0038
O’Dowd, N. A. (2025). The Framing Effects of Metaphor and Metonymy in Multimodal Campaigns About Plastic Pollution: A Solutions-Oriented and Emotion-Oriented Study. Metaphor and Symbol, 40(1), 76–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2024.2429988
Orazbaeva, F. S., Ryskulova, A. D., Orazaliyeva, E. N., & Rauandina, A. K. (2025). Generative-cognitive model of linguistic structure and thought process in the Kazakh language. Lingua: Journal of Linguistics and Language, 3(1), 17–37. https://doi.org/10.61978/lingua.v3i1.617
Pan, Y. (2022). Framing in interactive academic talk. Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20028.pan
Petruck, M. R. L. (2016). Introduction to MetaNet. Constructions and Frames, 8(2), 133–140. https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.8.2.01pet
Ptashkin, A. (2021). The Category of Deviation in the Novel The Master and Margarita by Mikhail Bulgakov. SAGE Open, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211032670
Reijnierse, W. G., Burgers, C., Krennmayr, T., & Steen, G. J. (2018). DMIP: A Method for Identifying Potentially Deliberate Metaphor in language use. Corpus Pragmatics, 2, 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-017-0026-7
Safaralieva, L. A., & Perfilieva, N. V. (2023). The modelling of a multidimensional linguocultural concept on the example of the concept ‘SENILITY’. RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics, 14(4), 1217–1234. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2299-2023-14-4-1217-1234
Schapper, A. (2022). Baring the bones: The lexico-semantic association of bone with strength in Melanesia and the study of colexification. Linguistic Typology, 26(2), 313–347. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2021-2082
Schapper, A., & Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M. (2022). Introduction to special issue on areal typology of lexico-semantics. Linguistic Typology, 26(2), 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2021-2087
Segerer, G., & Vanhove, M. (2022). Areal patterns and colexifications of colour terms in the languages of Africa. Linguistic Typology, 26(2). 247–281. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2021-2085
Sharifian, F. (2017). Cultural linguistics: The state of the art. In Advances in Cultural Linguistics (pp. 1–28). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4056-6_1
Spiess, O. (2025). Frames are for talking: Modeling interactants’ co-constructed semantic and pragmatic structures. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2025.07.004
Suleimenova, E. D., Akanova, D. K., & Aimagambetova, M. M. (2021). Biz birgemiz, or Revisiting the Diversification of Russian Language in Kazakhstan. RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics, 12(1), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2299-2021-12-1-7-22
Sullivan, K. (2015). Judging a book by its cover (and its background): Effects of the metaphor INTELLIGENCE IS BRIGHTNESS on ratings of book images. Visual Communication, 14(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357214554348
Sullivan, K. (2016). Integrating constructional semantics and conceptual metaphor. Constructions and Frames, 8(2), 141–165. https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.8.2.02sul
Sullivan, K. (2023). Three levels of framing. WIREs Cognitive Science, 14(5), e1651. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1651
Thibodeau, P. H., & Boroditsky, L. (2011). Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PLOS ONE, 6(2), e16782. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782
Thibodeau, P. H., Hendricks, R. K., & Boroditsky, L. (2017). How linguistic metaphor scaffolds reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(11), 852–863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.07.001
Thiele, L., Schmidt-Borcherding, F., & Bateman, J. A. (2024). All eyes on the signal? Mapping cohesive discourse structures with eye-tracking data of explanation videos. Frontiers in Communication, 9, Article 1356495. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2024.1356495
Tjuka, A. (2024). Objects as human bodies: Cross-linguistic colexifications between words for body parts and objects. Linguistic Typology, 28(3), 379–418. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2023-0032
Tokpayeva, L. S., Kuzembayeva, G. A., & Spulber, D. P. (2024). A Comparative Lexical Analysis of Kazakh, Russian and English Children’s Folklore. RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics, 15(1), 107–125. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2299-2024-15-1-107-125
Tran, B. T. (2022). Universality vs. cultural specificity of anger metaphors and metonymies in English and Vietnamese idioms. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-24951
Wnuk, E., & Ito, Y. (2021). The heart’s downward path to happiness: cross-cultural diversity in spatial metaphors of affect. Cognitive Linguistics, 32(2), 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2020-0068
Wong, B. W., Lam, H. C., Lo, J. W. K., Maurer, U., & Huo, S. (2023). How do Hong Kong bilingual children with Chinese dyslexia perceive dyslexia and academic learning? An interview study of metaphor analysis. Reading and Writing. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10434-2
Xu, L., Naserpour, A., Rezai, A., Namaziandost, E., & Azizi, Z. (2022). Exploring EFL learners’ metaphorical conceptions of language learning: A multimodal analysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 51(2), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-022-09842-2
Zhang, L., Atari, M., Schwarz, N., Newman, E. J., & Afhami, R. (2022). Conceptual metaphors, processing fluency, and aesthetic preference. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 98, 104247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104247
