Received 11.02.2026, Revised 04.06.2026, Accepted 27.06.2026

Cultural conceptualisations of emotion: Heart metaphors in Kyrgyz and English

Nazgul Dzharkinbaeva*, Anarkan Bekturova, Gulnara Baigobylova, Cholpon Naimanova, Gulnura Dzhumalieva

ndzharkinbaeva@bhu.kg



The study of heart-related verbal metaphors expressing emotions in various languages remains a relevant area of modern cognitive linguistics. This is particularly important in the context of the need to understand different cultures and ensure effective intercultural communication. The aim of this study was to investigate and analyse heart-related verbal metaphors in the Kyrgyz and English languages. The methodological framework was based on Z. Derbisheva’s cognitive-conceptual model and the Metaphor Identification Procedure. The British National Corpus and the Manas-UdS Kyrgyz Corpus were employed in the study. The findings revealed a considerable number of heart-related metaphors in both languages, indicating the significant role of the heart in the conceptualisation of emotions. It was established that in the Kyrgyz language, metaphors related to fear and emotional pain are particularly well developed. The metaphorical landscape demonstrated a strong influence of the nomadic tradition through images of nature, permeable containers and organic processes. In English, metaphorical models are characterised by a mechanistic and individualistic orientation, including metaphors of control and containment. It was also found that, although some metaphorical mappings are universal, their development differs considerably across languages. It was shown that metaphorical systems not only reflect cultural worldviews but also shape them. The results obtained may be applied by linguists, translators and specialists in intercultural communication in theoretical research, translation practice, and the development of intercultural competence programmes. Thus, this study contributes to the advancement of cognitive linguistics and intercultural studies

heart-related verbal metaphors; cognitive linguistics; cross-linguistic comparison; somatic metaphor; conceptual metaphor theory; nomadic worldview
8-20
Dzharkinbaeva, N., Bekturova, A., Baigobylova, G., Naimanova, Ch., & Dzhumalieva, G. (2026). Cultural conceptualisations of emotion: Heart metaphors in Kyrgyz and English. Bulletin of the Bishkek State University, 24(2), 8-20. https://doi.org/10.35254/ss/2.2026.08

References

  1. Aksan, M. (2006a). Metaphors of anger: An outline of a cultural model. Journal of Linguistics and Literature, 3(1), 31-67.
  2. Aksan, M. (2006b). The container metaphor in Turkish expressions of anger. Journal of Linguistics and Literature, 3(2), 1-20.
  3. Almaghlouth, S., & Alotaibi, L. (2024). Heart metaphors in economic discourse corpora: Conceptual evidence and translation insight. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 11(1), article number 2331671. doi: 10.1080/23311983.2024.2331671.
  4. Barcelona, A. (Ed.). (2003). Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
  5. Baş, M. (2023). The conceptual nature of the Turkish emotion term “Heyecan”. Language and Cognition, 16(3), 666-689. doi: 10.1017/langcog.2023.53.
  6. Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
  7. Derbisheva, Z.K. (2017). Cognitive-conceptual approach to the study of the Kyrgyz language. Journal “Herald of KRSU”, 17(9), 111-115.
  8. Gibbs, J.R.W. (2005). Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511805844.
  9. Group, P. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1-39. doi: 10.1080/10926480709336752.
  10. Ingold, T. (2021). The perception of the environment: Essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill (1st ed.). London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781003196662.
  11. Kövecses, Z. (2020). Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/9781108859127.
  12. Malik, N.A., Shak, M.S.Y., Mohamad, F., & Joharry, S.A. (2022). Corpus-based studies of metaphor: An overview. Arab World English Journal, 13(2), 512-528. doi: 10.24093/awej/vol13no2.36.
  13. 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, article number e6. doi: 10.1017/langcog.2024.37.
  14. Pelkey, J. (2023). Embodiment and language. Wires Cognitive Science, 14(5), article number e1649. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1649.
  15. Ponsonnet, M. (2022). Emotional linguistic relativity and cross-cultural research. In G.L. Schiewer, J. Altarriba & B.C. Ng (Eds.), Language and emotion: An international handbook (pp. 1032-1061). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110347524.
  16. Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  17. Sharifian, F. (2011). Cultural conceptualisations and language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  18. Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S.T. (2007). Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110199895.
  19. Zhao, X., Zheng, Y., & Zhao, X. (2023). Global bibliometric analysis of conceptual metaphor research over the recent two decades. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, article number 1042121. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1042121.
  20. Zou, J., Fuller, C., & Wang, L. (2025). The interplay between cultural models and metaphor understanding: A cross-cultural cognitive perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, article number 1539784. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1539784.