ࡱ> dfabc'`TbjbjVwVw ;X446 @2 0d d d  $b1b1b181$2 f3^3333O<"q< }<lnnnnnn$èh+$ d >-<"O<>> 33S"xhxhxh># 3d 3lxh>lxhxhL4$ @d 3Z3 Дub1b6>\<6Of<O|Od (< =^xhg=L=K<<<g<<<>>>> #b1 b1x   b v    Cross-linguistic Analysis of Metaphorical Conceptions of #(/DUSZA/DU`A (soul) in Slavic Languages (Russian, Polish, and Croatian) KRISTINA `TRKALJ DESPOT1, INNA SKRYNNIKOVA2, JULIA OSTANINA OLSZEWSKA3 Institute of Croatian Language and Linguistics (Croatia)1; Volgograd State University (Russia)2; University of Warsaw (Poland)3 Introduction The idea that an individual is made up of various elements some physical and some spiritual, and that soul is the distinguishing mark of living things seems to be universally present in all philosophical and spiritual systems since ancient times. Broader meaning of a soul as not only animating body but being morally, cognitively and intellectually significant (responsible for functions like thought, perception, desire, and moral qualities) was already firmly established in the fifth century Greek usage. The Concept of soul was primary concern of various Pre-Socratic thinkers, and of ancient philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, and the Stoics. Their worked out theories of soul have shapened later theoretical developments in the writings of Plotinus and other Platonists,  HYPERLINK "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul" \l "Thomas_Aquinas" Thomas Aquinas,  HYPERLINK "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul" \l "Immanuel_Kant" Immanuel Kant, etc. Our inner life has remained the subject of research of various different contemporary approaches as well. The concept of soul serves as a cue to revealing and understanding existential representation of human immaterial nature in different cultures, thus being one of the basic elements which forms the linguistic picture of the world fixed in the national mentality. A great body of researches is based on the idea that the concept of soul concerns several key issues in human life: the source of life, cognition and emotion, personality characteristics, social relationships, and human destiny. The concept of soul has been actively studied from mythological, religious, philosophic, cognitive, sociological and psychological perspectives. A number of authors have analyzed the concept of soul from the point of view of its linguistic representation in different languages: Wierzbicka (1989; 1992); Shmelev (1997); Mikheev (1999); Vardanyan (2007); Kolesnikova (2011); Tszin (2010); Uryson (1999); etc. Our research differs from the previous ones in the sense that it is cross linguistic, corpus-based and cognitive. This paper is an attempt to carry out cross-linguistic, corpus-based and cognitive analysis of the concept in question in three Slavic languages: Russian (East Slavic), Polish (West Slavic), and Croatian (South Slavic). Slavic words for soul are derived from Proto-Slavic *duxJ with suffix -j-a (Proto-Indo-European *dhousi) and the meaning is connected with breathing and blowing, which is common in many Indo-European languages and hence refers to the vital breath, the animating principle. The fact that the Russian word dusha (soul) has much wider range of use and much higher frequency than English word soul has been noticed and extensively analyzed by Wierzbicka (1989). Since in other Slavic languages dusha has a similar range of use and frequency to its equivalent in Russian, we assume that the relevant conceptual structure is not just Russian but pan-Slavic. To see what that conceptual structure actually looks like we will provide a detailed corpus-based analysis of linguistic manifestations of the conceptual metaphors and metonymies for #(/DUSZA/DU`A ( soul ) as the target domain in Polish, Russian and Croatian corpora. The basis of our theoretical and methodological approach is the conceptual metaphor theory as presented in the Lakoff and Johnson 1980, and then further developed and applied in Lakoff (1987), Sweetser (1987), Grady (1997), Lakoff and Johnson (1999), Kvecses (2000; 2010), Feldman (2006), Lakoff (2009). Lakoff and Johnson (1999) and Sweetser (2004) have presented an extensive analysis of the metaphorical conceptions of our internal structures and the embodiment of spiritual experience. Our analysis is largely based on their results. The research corpus consists primarily of Russian National Corpus, Polish National Corpus and Croatian Language Repository. 1 Conceptual Structure of 4CH0/dusza/duaa ( soul ) in Russian, Polish, and Croatian Language  What we have called variously the Subject or the disembodied mind is called in various religious traditions the Soul or Spirit. In spiritual traditions around the world, the Soul is conceptualized as the locus of consciousness, subjective experience, moral judgment, reason, will, and, most important, one's essence, which makes a person who he or she is. (Lakoff and Johnson's 1999:563) The concept of soul is tightly connected with religion, spirituality and philosophy, and this apect has been the focus of the linguistic analysis of that concept in Slavic languages so far. We will not entirely neglect this perspective, but will be more interested in the embodied experience behind the conceptual structure of DUSHA. Lakoff and Johnson (1999:267-289) have revealed that we have a system of different metaphorical conceptions of our internal structure and a small number of source domains that the system draws upon: space, possession, force and social relationships. Their analysis of the metaphorical conceptions of our inner lives is based on fundamental distinction between the Subject and one or more Selves, which was first introduced by Andrew Lakoff and Miles Becker (1992). Lakoff and Johnson (1999) have shown that metaphors for conceptualizing our inner lives are grounded in universal experiences and that they conceptualize the Subject as being personlike, with an existence independent of the Self. As they have pointed out, those metaphoric conceptions have a hierarchical structure with the General Subject-Self metaphor (conceptualization of person as bifurcated) at the first level and many more specific instances on other levels. They further point out (1999:562) that natural concomitant of this metaphor is the metaphorical concept of mind separated from the body. This metaphor is crucial for our analysis. In Slavic languages in question this conceptualization of Soul is indeed present and there are linguistic expressions of conceptual metaphors of DUSHA as the locus of consciousness, reason, emotions, will, etc. This conceptualization is often bound with other conceptual metaphors (with conceptualization of a Soul as either a person or a thing) and with other conceptual metaphors from other domains in an interesting way, as we shall see further. Very often in these languages the specific cases of Subject-Self metaphors (listed in Lakoff and Johnson 1999:269-289) are manifested too. And sometimes some other loci of reason, emotions, will, etc. are expressed in language, as for example Heart As The Locus Of Emotions, Head/Brain As The Locus Of Reason, Mind As The Locus Of Consciousness, etc. These other metaphors were not of our closer examination in this article. 2 General Disembodied Soul Metaphor The concept of disembodied Soul, like the one of disembodied Mind, is metaphorical: it arises from embodied experiences that we have throughout our life. And this requirement of Soul (and Mind) being embodied is no small matter because it contradicts the crucial beliefs of many religions around the world based on transmigrations of souls and reincarnation as Lakoff and Johnson (1999:563) pointed out. But being aware of the fact that metaphors may create realities for us, especially social realities as stated repeatedly in Lakoff and Johnson (1980:156) it is not surprising that in many languages, including the three Slavic languages in question, disembodied Mind and/or Soul is a religious and social reality which is very well reflected in language as well. This metaphor is combined with the conceptions of soul as being either the locus of emotions, moral judgment, will, essence or reason. Depending on the type of locus and combining these metaphors with either reification or personification we get many specific levels manifested by numerous linguistic metaphors as we shall see in the examples.  3 Soul Is A Physical Object Metaphor Reification 3.1 Possession Metaphor In addition to the general metaphor of disembodiment, the possession metaphor (PARTS ARE POSSESSIONS) is at least equally pervasive underlying all other metaphorical conceptions of soul. Within the cognitive model of a person, soul is conceptualized as being a part of a person, and therefore we get metaphor: A Person Possesses A Soul (Which Lives In His/Her Body). A person is the owner of a body and a soul (we say my body, my soul). The owner and his/her soul usually both live in the body, which is other metaphor and we will go back to it later. PARTS ARE POSSESSIONS metaphor is most probably universal. The linguistic manifestations of most other specific cases of conceptual metaphors are often bound with this metaphor. This means that regardless of weather the soul is conceptualized as a person or a thing (and more specific what kind of a person and what kind of a thing) it always belongs to somebody. That possessive meaning is always grammaticalized with possessive pronouns or case markers. PARTS ARE POSSESSIONS + cognitive model of a person where Soul and Body are parts of a person = A Person Possesses A Soul (Which Lives In His/Her Body) CRO: moja dua (my soul); tvoja dua (yours soul); njegova duaa ( his soul ); RUS: =0H0 4CH0 ( our soul ); <>O 4CH0 ( my soul ); POL: nasza dusza ( our soul ); moja dusza ( my soul ); jego/jej dusza ( soul of his/her ); PARTS ARE POSSESSIONS + PSYCHOLOGICAL PAIN IS PHYSICAL PAIN = Soul Is A Physical Part Of The Body That Can Hurt CRO: I samoga me duaa boli! ( My soul hearts ); zar vas ne boli duaa? ( Doesn't your soul hurt? ); RUS: 'B>-B> C <5=O 4CH0 1>;8B 70 =53>. ( I don't know why but my soul hurts because of him ); 'B> 45;0BL, =5 7=0N& 4CH0 1>;8B, ;N1>2L C<8@05B. ( I don't know what to do & my soul hurts and my love is dying ). Less common version of this metaphor is that A Person Possesses A Soul (Which Lives In Some Other Person s Body). This metaphor is a very specific instantiation of the possession metaphor used in conceptualizing love relationships. Its experiential bases might be connected with the cultural frame of bringing your material possession into the relationship (marriage) which then becomes material possession of your partner as well (shared property). Since Soul is metaphorically conceptualized as being a Possession, it can also be shared with the partner in a love relationship. This linguistic metaphor is probably bound with the conceptualization of Soul As The Locus of Essence. Not only two persons in love share one soul, but so can larger social groups united by some important (nonphysical) property. PARTS ARE POSSESSIONS + SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF ESSENCE + Cultural frame of sharing possessions while being in a love relationship = A Person Posseses A Soul (Which Lives In Someone Else's Body) CRO: moja dua je tvoja (My soul is all yours); njegova dua tvoja dua (His soul is your soul); RUS: >O 4CH0 - B5?5@L B2>O 4CH0 ( My soul is now yours ); POL: Kiedy w moich najskrytszych marzeniach roiBem o duszy, ktra bdzie moj, kiedy czuBem, |e dusza taka istnieje, nie znaBem Ci ( When in my most secret dreams I longed for the soul, which would be mine when I felt that such soul exists, I did not know you); SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF ESSENCE + metonymy Sharing A Soul/Possession stands for Intimacy = Close Social/Religious/National Group Share One Soul CRO: Mnotvo vjernih jedno su srce i jedna dua. ( People who believe in God are one soul and one heart ); Kad sluaaa ove pjesme, shvatia ato zna i slavenska duaa, to drugi narodi nemaju ( When you listen to these songs, then you can understand what the Slavic soul means, other nations don't have something like that ); POL: ... dowiem si czego[ o stanie, w jakim znajduje si dusza naszego Narodu. ( I ll know something about the state of our Nation s soul ). 3.2 What Kind of an Object is Soul? Conceptualizing Soul as being an Object (reification) is very common and very general. Reification is an ontological metaphor by its cognitive function, which means that it does not provide much cognitive structuring for the target domain (Lakoff and Johnson 1980:25-33; Kvecses 2010:38). This metaphor is almost always bound with other metaphors, to provide more structure for this abstract target domain by means of structural or more specific metaphors. As a result of binding of different conceptual metaphors, and sometimes of cultural frames as well, we get many specific cases of linguistic metaphors where Soul is conceptualized as different kind of an object: a valuable object, a brittle object, a hot, cold or burning object, etc. We will now go through the examples and see what conceptual metaphors determine the properties of an Object/Soul on the linguistic level: SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF ESSENCE + ESSENCE IS VALAUBLE + SOUL IS AN OBJECT = Soul Is A Precious/Valuable Object (That Can Be Lost, Stolen Or Sold) CRO: dua zlata vriedi (his soul is as valuable as gold); RUS: @>40BL 4CHC ( to sell your soul ); SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE (EMOTIONALITY) + EMOTIONAL VULNERABILITY IS PHYSICAL FRAGILITY + SOUL IS AN OBJECT = Soul Is A Brittle Object RUS: & :>340-B> 2 45BAB25 <>O 4CH0 E@CAB=C;0 ?>4 BO65ABLN >3@><=>3> 0;L1><0, ?>A2OIQ==>3> 402=> 8AG57=C2H59 :C;LBC@5 >E>B=8:>2 70 <0<>=B0<8 ( at some point in my childhood my soul cracked under the weight of a huge German album, devoted to the mammoth hunters culture. ); CRO: U podsvijesti se nalazi sve ato se u vaau duau urezalo i ato nosite sa sobom, ato mo~e biti bol, patnja, traume, a mo~e se raditi i o ne emu ato se zove slomljena duaa ( In your subconscious, there is everything that has been engraved in your soul and that you carry with you, it can be suffering, pain, traumas, and it can as well be what we call broken soul); SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF REASON (MEMORY) + MEMORIZING IS WRITING + SOUL IS AN OBJECT= Soul Is A Physical Object Made Of A Solid Substance (So You Can Engrave On It) CRO: Sve to je vrlo kratko trajalo, a duboko nam se u duu urezalo (all that did not last long, but it was deeply engraved into our soul); SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE (EMOTIONALITY) + Image Metaphor SOUL IS A FLOWER = Emotions Are Nutrition For The Soul RUS: 4CH0 2O=5B ( soul is wilting ); POL: Moja dusza rozkwitBa obok Ci. ( My soul is blooming when I am next to you ); SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE (EMOTIONALITY) + EMOTIONS ARE FLUIDS + SOUL IS A CONTAINER + KNOWING IS SEEING = Soul Is A River/Sea CRO: da duaa moja, na isto iae stvora te e ( my soul flowes towards the spring of being ); dirala ga u dno duae ( she touched him to the bottom of his soul ); RUS: 4CH0 53>  2>B B>B A0<K9 =52848<K9 :>;>45F, :>B>@K9 AB0; ?CAB, ACE, 0 B5?5@L ?>B8E>=L:C 218@05B 2 A51O 2>4C. ( His soul is a kind of the invisible well, which became dry and empty, and now is absorbing water little by little ). Very common specific case of the Reification metaphor in all languages in question is the one of Soul being an entity with different degrees of the soul's warmth being expressed (it can be cold, warm, hot or burning), depending on the intensity of emotions and passions (this is an instantiation of the primary metaphors EMOTIONAL IS WARM, RATIONAL IS COLD). Intensity of emotions is expressed by the degree of warmth, which is conceptualized by scale image schema (Feldman 2006:138) and Soul Is The Locus of Emotionality metaphor. AFFECTION IS WARMTH; RATIONALITY IS COLD + SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE (EMOTIONALITY) + SOUL IS AN OBJECT + SCALE IMAGE SCHEMA = Soul Is A Warm/Hot/Burning/Cold Object RUS: =05HL, GB> C =0A 5ABL BQ?;>5? !C4L10 8 A5@4F5, 687=L 8 4CH0.  B5< 1>;55 A25B >B >30. ( Do you know what warmth we have? Fate and heart, life and soul. And the light from God ); CRO: Bio je on neobi no darovit i uman mladi, a njegova vrua i zanosna duaa nosila je u svemu biljeg Bogom odabrana pravoga pjesnika ( He was an exceptionally talented and smart young man, and his hot and ecstatic soul carried the mark of a real poet chosen by God); POL: kiedy dusza jest jeszcze rozpalona i jest obdarzona dobrem i resztkami minionego pocieszenia (yet when the soul is still burning up and is blessed with the good and the remnants of the last consolation); CRO: Hladnu duu imaju oni koji su nevoljeni od drugih i nesposobni podijeliti osjeaje i najdublje duaevne strune s drugima ( Those who are not being loved by others and who are not able to share their feelings and the deepest strings of their souls with others, they have a cold soul ); SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF MORALITY + MORALITY IS PURITY + SOUL IS AN OBJECT = Soul Is A Clean Object CRO: Moja je duaa ista ( My soul is clean ); RUS: >340 >= ?@> A51O ?8A0; - 4CH0 <>O G8AB0 - MB> 1K;> 8AB8==>9 ?@024>9. ( When he wrote - My soul is pure- it was true). 3.3 Container Image Schema: Soul Is Contained Within A Body; Soul Is A Container Conceptualization and experience of a body as a container is inherent to human beings as Lakoff and Johnson (1980, 1999) and Johnson (1987) have shown and the experiential basis for this conceptualization is obvious: we fill and empty our digestive tract and our internal organs are contained inside the surface of our skin, flash and bones. The concept of soul being contained within the body is probably universal, and it is widely used in Slavic languages as well. It is very common that we conceptualize all our nonphysical experiences as being a part of our inner life, and inner means, of course, in the body. BODY IS A CONTAINER FOR THE SOUL CRO: Dua prebiva u mojem tijelu (My soul dwells in my body); POL: Jak niemowl u swej matki, jak niemowl  tak we mnie jest moja dusza ( As an infant in his mother  as is my soul in me ). In Slavic languages in question this general metaphor is very often linguistically expressed, but there are also many more and very interesting specific cases of this metaphor which taken together are forming a complex image in which soul is metaphorically conceptualized as a person living in a house/body. Soul can move within that house, and it can even leave that house and move to another. Usually it rests in the upper and central part of the body (most often it is visible in someone's eyes), but under the influence of fear or other uncontroled event it can move to the peripheral parts of the body (heels) and then it can come to its place again. Mouth is understood as being an opening to the container (door to the house) and when soul leaves the house, it leaves through mouth (There is an expression in Croatian: Dua mi je bila na jeziku My soul was on my tongue), which means being very close to death. This means that a soul can be in its normal location; it can go out of a normal location and then go back to it. We defined this specific level metaphor as Normal Location Of The Soul Is Normal State Of The Soul (which is connected with the primary metaphor STATES ARE LOCATIONS). These are all examples of the specific cases of the general Body Is A Container For The Soul metaphor: Body Is A House For A Soul (inference: soul can vacate from one house/body and move to another) CRO: Ako se moja dua posl smrti, polag pojamah duaoselbe, u tlo kojeg kurira preseli, to e bit za me pravi pakao ( If according to the concept of reincarnation my soul after my death moves to the body of some courier, it is going to be real hell for me ); POL: Prawdopodobnie moja dusza zamknita byBa w ciele czBowieka, ktry spadB z tej kamienicy. Moje koszmary to wspomnienia z poprzedniego wcielenia. ( Probably my soul has been enclosed in the body of a person who fell from that building. My nightmares are the memories of the previous incarnations ); Eyes are windows on the body/ house; you can see soul in person's eyes POL: Z jej oczu promieniuje dusza spokojna i subtelna, jak w niebieski dymek unoszcy si znad filizanek kawy na jej obrazach ( Her soul radiates from her eyes calm and subtle, like the blue smoke/vapour floating above the coffee cups on her paintings ); RUS: 4CH0 A<>B@8B 87 :0@8E "0=8=KE 3;07. ( her soul was looking at me from Tanja s brown eyes ); Soul Is Capable Of Moving Within Body RUS: B =5:>B>@>3> 2=CB@5==53> F5=B@0 4CH0 42865BAO 2>2=5 & : <0B5@80;L=><C <8@C, 2 :>B>@><, ?> ?@54?>;>65=8N, 2A5 ?@>F5AAK ?@54AB02;ONB A>1>9 =5GB> 02B><0B8G5A:>5 ( From some inner center the soul is moving towards the material world where supposedly all the processes are something automatic ); CRO: Sva mi je duaa siala u pete. ( My whole sole descended to my heels ); Mouth is door of the body/house; To Have Soul On Your Tongue Is To Be Close To Death CRO: Duaa mi je bila na jeziku, a ~ivot na tankoj niti. ( His soul was on his toungue, and his life was hanging on a very thin fibre ); STATES ARE LOCATIONS and Normal State Of The Soul is Normal Location Of The Soul RUS: CH0 =5 =0 <5AB5 ( Soul is not in its place ); POL: Jedno zimne piwko i dusza wrci na swoje miejsce ( One cold beer and the soul will be back into place); CRO: treba mi tvoj oprotaj da mi dua bude na mjestu (I need your forgiveness so that my soul can go back to its place). Another very general conception of a soul is that of a SOUL itself being a CONTAINER. This conception is bound with metaphor PROTECTION IS CONTAINMENT, as described in Sweetser (2004: 30), who points out that the important purpose of physical containment is to protect contents. As she argues, experiential basis for this metaphorical mapping is the fact that our vital organs are protected by being contained within our body by flesh and bones but also our everyday experience of putting something fragile in a box, or store something in a drawer, or lock a door etc. There are special cases of this metaphor where SOUL IS A CONTAINER FOR EMOTIONS, and given the fact that the exposure of emotions in western cultures is seen as vulnerability, the need to close those emotions in the container and make them invisible to others is logical. This concept involves primary metaphor KNOWING IS SEEING as well, that is why soul container may be OPENED or CLOSED, LIGHT or DARK in our examples. As Sweetser states in the mentioned analysis in understanding of Self, we see our strongest emotions as a source of vulnerability; anyone who affects them has an important (and potentially dangerous) effect on our whole psyche. We therefore try to allow only trusted people to affect these essential feelings, hoping they will not 'hurt' us psychologically. This need to control and hide emotions is not universal; it is typical of (modern) western cultures. Aspects of control are very well described in Kvecses (2003). Sweetsers model of SELF as a CONTAINER in the above described sense includes these metaphors: ESSENTIAL, EMOTIONAL SELF IS (FRAGILE, VULNERABLE) CONTENTS OF A CONTAINER; PROTECTIVE SOCIAL RESERVE IS A CONTAINER; TRUSTED FRIENDS ARE PEOPLE ALOWED TO OPEN THE CONTAINER; FEARED EMOTIONAL HURT IS FEARED DAMAGE OR LOSS OF CONTAINER'S CONTENT, and all of them are relevant for the CONTAINER metaphorical concept of SOUL in Slavic languages. Given that SOUL is conceptualized as a CONTAINER, it is not surprising that it can contain other soul as well in some cases. This concept is used to describe the very close relationship, usually love relationship. This conceptual metaphor is manifested in all Slavic languages in question. Concept of one soul being contained within another has not only inference of protection, but also of tight closeness: SOUL IS A CONTAINER RUS: 8=> MB> 74>@>2>, => =0AB>OI0O ;N1>2L 682QB =5 2 :8=>, 0 2 4CH5. ( Movies are great, however real love doesn't live in a movie, but in the soul ); POL: a tu taki psalm zaczyna wdziera si w dusze jak robak. ( and here such psalm begins to penetrate the soul like a worm ); CRO: Ljubica rad tog poljubca nije samo utila njeki osobiti stid u duai svojoj, nego je takoer od tog asa sasvim drugu privr~enost i nagnue osjeala prama Petru ( Ljubica not only felt some special kind of shame in her soul but also, from that moment, she felt some other kind of attachment and affection towards Petar.); SOUL IS A CONTAINER + SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE (EMOTIONALITY) + SOUL IS A CONTAINER FOR EMOTIONS + EMOTIONS ARE FLUID CONTENT OF A CONTAINER = Soul Of An Emotional Person Is A Full Container; Soul Of An Emotionless Person Is An Empty Container CRO: Njihova je dua prazna ko smijeh bludnica, a smijeh be~ivotan ko slovo zakona ( Their soul is empty like prostitute's laugh, and their laughing is lifeless like the letter of the law ); POL: po|ywamy Chrystusa, a dusza napeBnia si Bask i otrzymuje zadatek przyszBej chwaBy ( we receive Christ, and the soul is filled with grace and receives a pledge of future glory); SOUL IS A CONTAINER FOR EMOTIONS + KNOWING IS SEEING = A Visible Soul's Content Is In The Open Container; An Invisible Soul's Content Is In The Closed Container CRO: njena dua se otvara za prvi put; njena put je jo svje~a, ( Her soul is opening itself for the first time, her skin is still fresh ); duaa im je oboma bila zatvorena za onoga drugog ( both their souls were closed one for another ); RUS: K >1I8B5;L=K  >B:@KBK =02AB@5GC <8@C 8 ;N4O<, C 20A  4CH0 =0@0A?0H:C ( You're so sociable, open to the world and people, your soul is always unbuttoned ); An Invisible Soul's Content Is In The Dark Container RUS:  >1I5<, =5 7=0N, GC60O 4CH0, :0: 8725AB=> - ?>BQ<:8. ( In short, I don't know it, as someone else's soul is darkness ); CRO: Mo~da u jednom shvatiti mra nu no tvoje duae ( I might one day be able to understand dark night of your soul ). 4 Soul Is A Person metaphor  Personification Personification is one the most pervasive conceptual metaphors in general and that is the case with the concept of SOUL in Slavic languages as well. General ontological SOUL IS A PERSON metaphor has many special cases in which personified soul has a great variety of human properties which, taken together, form an interesting image. Pervasively in the corpora SOUL IS A PERSON conceptual metaphor is bound with SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE (EMOTIONALITY) which reflects in linguistic metaphor Soul Is A Person That Feels: Fear, Shame, Pain, Sorrow, Joy, Passion, Desire, Lust etc. Uncommonely SOUL IS A PERSON conceptual metaphor is bound with SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF REASON which gives linguistic metaphor Soul Is A Person That: Thinks, Understands, Remembers etc. Sometimes Personification is bound with SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF MORALITY. These are the examples: SOUL IS A PERSON + SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF REASON = Soul Is A Person That Reasons, Thinks, Understands, Remebers RUS: C6A:0O ... 4CH0 ?><=8;0 > B09=>AB8. =0, 4CH0 <>O, 640;0 C1;03>B2>@5=8O 8 2 B> 65 2@5<O ?C60;0AL 53>. ( This man s soul remembered those secrets and was waiting for gratification, but at the same time it was afraid of it. ); POL: dusza nasza rozr|nia wyobra|enie samej siebie od wyobra|eD innych przedmiotw ( Our soul distinguishes the idea of itself from the idea of images of other objects ); DzieBa Twoje s przedziwne, i wie o tym dusza moja ( your works are wonderful, and my soul knows that ); CRO: ova moja duaa je: mislila, osjeala ('This soul of mine was thinking and feeling'); SOUL IS A PERSON + SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE (EMOTIONALITY) = Soul Is A Person That Feels: Fear/Shame/Sorrow/Joy/Lust CRO: Duaa mi osjea strah ( My soul feals fear ); RUS:  E@8AB80=A:0O 5Q 4CH0, =5A<>B@O =0 @>A:>HL >B4KE0, 8A?KBK20;0 ;Q3:89 ABK4. ( And her Christian soul felt some slight shame, despite the luxurious rest she was having .); POL: Smutna jest moja dusza a| do [mierci; zostaDcie tu i czuwajcie ( My soul is sorrowful until death comes: stay here here and watch. ); RUS: A>15==> 565;8 45=L A>;=5G=K9  4CH0 ?>5B >B @04>AB8! ( Especially when the day is sunny, the soul sings from joy ); CRO: Duaa mi je tako vesela ( My soul is so happy ); duaa ti se smije ( Your soul is laughing ); Sva duaa izgarala joj od ~elje za dragim ( All her soul was burning with desire for her dear love ); esto, pre esto nije se mogao, dakako, nadja ati da mu krv ne usplamti i da mu sva duaa i sve tijelo silno ne po~udi posjedx    F H l n 1 2 Q S e t y } Ͽᑿ{o{o{ocUcUcUIchWghP5mH sH hWghP6H*mH sH hWghP6mH sH hWghPH*mHsHhWghPmHsHhWghPmH sH /jhWghP0J5CJU\aJmH sH +hWghP5CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH hWghP5CJaJmH sH "hWghP56CJaJmH sH "hWghP5CJ\aJmH sH hWghP\mH sH    S T U V W X e f g$hd1$[$\$`ha$gdP$hd1$7$8$H$`ha$gdP$d1$7$8$H$a$gdP $d1$a$gdP$d1$[$\$a$gdP}F8HT} ~ $% $,XZh<TX$嬟{{ob{hWghPPJmH sH hWghP]mH sH hWghP6]mH sH hLhP6hPhP0J#mH sH hWghP0J#mH sH hWghP0J#6mH sH hWghPPJmH sH  hWghPPJmH nH sH tH hWghP0J!mH sH hWghPmH sH jhWghPUmH sH "$B8V&&' (((|,},,,--..3.7.>.{.}.........//X0_00*1K1躬zzhWghP5CJaJmH sH $jhWghPUmHnHsH uhWghPCJaJmH sH hWghP56mH sH hWghP5mH sH  hWghPPJmH nH sH tH !jhWghP0JUmH sH hWghPmH sH hWghP6mH sH -4 $Q&'' (!($+|,~,,,,$hhd1$[$\$]h^ha$gdP$d1$[$\$a$gdP$hd1$[$\$`ha$gdP,,,,,,,,,,,,,/00b1$hhd1$]h^ha$gdP$hd1$]ha$gdP $d1$a$gdP$hd1$[$\$`ha$gdP$ d1$[$\$a$gdP$d1$[$\$a$gdPK1P1T1[1b1g1k1~1112@3B3D3F33&404H4P444444444444444444455555555ϿϿϿϳޢϒϒσσσσσσσttttthWghPCJaJmHsHht3hPCJaJmH sH hWghPCJ\aJmH sH  hWghPCJPJaJmH sH hPCJaJmH sH hWghP6CJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH hWghP5CJaJmH sH "hWghP56CJaJmH sH -b1D3F3&466 9q:r:2;C>D>>>C@CCC6GG$ eed1$]e^ea$gdP$eed1$]e^ea$gdP$hd1$`ha$gdP $d1$a$gdP$hhd1$]h^ha$gdP5&5(5,5.565:5x5555555555555556 66666*7679 9q::ӯӯӯӯӯӯӯwf!jhWghP0JUmH sH hWghP6mH sH hWghPmH sH  hWghPCJPJaJmH sH hP0JCJPJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH $hWghP0JCJPJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH ht3hPCJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmHsH!:;;2;6;7;d;l;p;<v<4=@=v=|===========> > >>>$>%>,>->;><>A>νΛΫΉ΀ooooo]ooooo#hWghP0J6CJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH hWghPCJ#hWghP0J5CJaJmH sH hWghPCJ\aJmH sH #hWghP0J6CJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH "hWghP56CJaJmH sH hWghP5CJaJmH sH $A>B>>>>? BBB6C8CC@CC%E5G6GUGGGGGĴĩ㖩{n{]K];hWghPCJ\aJmH sH #hWghP5CJPJaJmH sH  hWghPCJPJaJmH sH hWghPPJ mH sH hWghPPJmH sH hWghP5PJmH sH $hWghPCJPJ mH nH sH tH hWghPCJaJhWghPCJ\aJmHsHhWghPCJaJmHsHhWghP5CJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH hP0JCJaJmH sH GTHVHIDNENNsOtOOPPQR&U(UWWX$ed1$]ea$gdP$hd1$`ha$gdP$eed1$]e^ea$gdP$hhd1$]h^ha$gdP$hhd1$7$8$H$]h^ha$gdPGTHVHVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJJJ"J:Jt@tHtJtbtdtttvtttttttttttttttttuuuuuuu6xJxlxpxx༬w#hWghP0J6CJaJmH sH #hWghP0J6CJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH hWghP5CJaJmH sH $hWghP0JCJPJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH .xxxlyvy~yy|zz{{{{|| ||||"|#|1|S|W|]|²㔄sbsbsbsbsbsQ?Q#hWghP0J6CJOJQJaJ hWghP0JCJOJQJaJ hWghP0JCJOJQJaJ hWghP0JCJOJQJaJhWghP5CJOJQJaJhWghPCJOJQJaJhWghPCJaJmHsHhWghPCJ\aJmHsH hWghPCJPJaJmHsHhWghP5CJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH hP0JCJaJmH sH uxly|z{||Nabh=>ߎ$eed1$7$8$H$]e^ea$gdP$ed1$7$8$H$]ea$gdP $d1$a$gdP$hd1$`ha$gdP$eed1$]e^ea$gdP$eed1$]e^ea$gdP]|f|g||||||||}}+}D} 6/[aekmrvz48MNY]u;zzzhWghP6mH sH hWghPmH sH  hWghPCJPJaJmH sH hWghPPJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH hWghPCJOJQJaJhP0J6CJOJQJaJ hWghP0JCJOJQJaJ#hWghP0J6CJOJQJaJ0u~ (,02FHVXbdhjlnx|~ĵxxxxxxxxxxxxc(hWghP0J$CJOJQJaJmHsH(hWghP0JCJOJQJaJmHsH(hWghP0JCJOJQJaJmHsH$hWghPCJOJQJaJmHsHhWghPCJOJQJaJ hWghPCJPJaJmHsH hWghPCJPJaJmH sH hWghPmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH &ćƇ·Їڇ܇ .4>Ĉ_`abxUhmx|<޽޽ޱo]#hWghP5CJPJaJmH sH "hWghP5CJ\aJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH  hWghPCJPJaJmH sH hWghPCJ\aJmH sH hPCJOJQJaJhWghPCJOJQJ\aJ hWghP0JCJOJQJaJhWghPCJOJQJaJ$hWghPCJOJQJaJmHsH"<Hҍԍ"#;<=`uގnrtʑΑͿޮ||m`m`m`m`m`m`m`mhShPCJmHsHh$#hPCJaJmH sH hWghPCJ\aJmH sH "hWghP5CJ]aJmH sH hWghPCJ]aJmH sH  hWghPCJPJaJmH sH hP0JCJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH #hWghP0J5CJaJmH sH %ΑБґܑؑʓ\JòգՒsh\hhWghP5mH sH hWghPmH sH hP0JCJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmHsH hWghPCJPJaJmH sH "hWghP5CJ]aJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH h$#hPCJaJmH sH hShPCJmHsHߎ\^@,$ed1$]ea$gdP $d1$a$gdP$d1$[$\$a$gdP$eed1$]e^e`a$gdP$eed1$]e^ea$gdP$eed1$7$8$H$]e^ea$gdPJěʛΛ؛ڛ*,02>@BFRTfhjprvxœĜ̜ΜԜ֜ޜ$&(ղ䲥䲥䲥䲥hWghP0JCJaJ hWghP0JCJaJmH sH #hWghP0J5CJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJhWghP5CJaJmH sH A(*468<PTVX^`bdjlvxƝȝНҝܝޝ |hWghPCJ\aJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH hWghP0JCJaJhWghP0JCJaJ hWghP0JCJaJmH sH #hWghP0J5CJaJmH sH hWghP0J5CJaJhWghPCJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJ-*.68>DLNVX\^fhnp@z*Ldɱ|kk hWghP0JCJaJmH sH #hWghP0J5CJaJmH sH  hWghPCJPJaJmH sH #hWghP5CJPJaJmH sH hWghP5CJaJmH sH hPCJaJhWghPCJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJhWghPCJ\aJmH sH hWghPCJ\aJ(΢Ԣܢޢ|HP+,p} "&(02>@HLVX\^jϿࡏ#hWghP5CJPJaJmH sH hWghP5CJaJmH sH hPCJaJmH sH UhWghPCJ\aJmH sH  hWghPCJPJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH 8 krasnoga mladoga stvora to ga je gledao (Often, very often he could not prevent his blood from burning and his whole soul from strongly desiring to posses this beautiful, young creature he was looking at); SOUL IS A PERSON + SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF MORALITY= Soul Is A Person That Is Moral/Immoral CRO: Oprosti mojoj grijenoj dui (Forgive my sinful soul); Ta se opaka ropska dua drznu igrati se kralja. (That evil, servile soul dared to impersonate a King ); RUS: 54L C =53> =5 B2>O ?>4;0O 4CH0, GB>1K 70 45=L38 ?@>40BL ;N1>2L A2>N! ( Indeed, his soul is not evil as yours is, so that he could sell his love for money ). 5 Soul metonymies Conceptual metonymy is a cognitive process in which one conceptual entity, the vehicle, provides mental access to another conceptual entity, the target, within the same domain, or cognitive model. Within the cognitive model of a Person which consists of a Body and a Soul (and possibly some other properties as well), Soul often serves as the vehicle that provides mental access to the Person as a whole. This PARS PRO TOTO metonymic concept is very basic and common, and it is a part of the ordinary way we think and act as well as talk (Lakoff and Johnson 1980:37). Not surprisingly, its manifistations appeared very often in the corpora we did our research on. Here are some examples: 1. PARS PRO TOTO SOUL FOR THE PERSON CRO: Niti duaa se nigd neukaza. ( There was not a single soul there ); Vode mi dajte ako je koja duaa ovdje. ( If some soul is here, please bring me some water ); POL: Kolejna dusza zgnieciona pi[ci alkoholu ( Another soul got crushed by alcohol ). As was the case with the examples of the linguistic expressions of the conceptual metaphor, in the linguistic expressions of the conceptual metonymy the metaphor Soul Is The Locus Of Emotionality plays a crucial role, and in this case Soul Is The Locus Of the Morality is important as well, for PARS PRO TOTO metonymy is often bound with one of these metaphors. As a result of the former binding we get the linguistic realization Soul For The Emotional Person, and the result of the latter metaphor is Soul For The Moral Person. SOUL FOR THE PERSON metonymy + SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF MORALITY metaphor= Soul For The Moral Person CRO: Kata je ina e dobra duaa; ali sada izpod tvoga dostojanstva. ( Kata is usually a kind soul, but now below her dignity ); No vi ste posve nevina duaa. ( You are a completely innocent soul ); SOUL FOR THE PERSON metonymy + SOUL IS THE LOCUS OF EMOTIONALITY metaphor = Soul For The Emotional Person POL: ty[ jedna dusza, co odczuBa ojcowskie strapienie i bl nie do stBumienia. ( you are the only soul, that felt his father's heartache and irrepressable pain ); RUS: K =5 7=05B5 <>53> !5<C. -B> 65 B0:0O 4CH0! 56=K9, GC2AB28B5;L=K9& ( You don't know my son Sema. He is such a good soul. Affectionate, sentimental... ). 6 Conclusion The analysis showed that the cultural model of DUSHA is indeed very similar in Russian, Polish and Croatian, and that it integrates bodily and cultural (especially religious) experiences. In Russian, Croatian and Polish several very general conceptual metaphors are crucial for conceptualizing soul: Disemebodied Soul metaphor, Soul Is The Locus of Emotionality, Reification (with Posession metaphor and Container Image schema) and Personification. The Disembodied Soul Metaphor and The Soul as the locus of subjective experience (emotionality) are the most important and pervasive in the conceptualization of SOUL in Slavic languages in question and we can infer that the Slavic soul is primarily the locus of emotionality. 7 References Feldman, J. From Molecules to Metaphors. 2006. Cambridge, MA: Bradford MIT Press. Gibbs, R. 1994. The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Grady, J. 1997. Foundations of Meaning. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley. Kolesnikova V.V. 2011. The concept of dusha and its linguistic representation in literature. (In Russian), http://studhistory.ru/pages/more/kolesnikova _.html) Kvecses, Z. 2000. Metaphor and Emotion: Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kvecses, Z. 2010. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, G. 2009. The Neural Theory of Metaphor. In Gibbs, R. The Cambridge Handook of Metaphor and Thought. New York: Cambridge University Press. Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, G. and Turner M. 1989. More Than Cool Reason, University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books. Langacker, R. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 2: Descriptive Applications. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Sullivan, K. and E. Sweetser. 2009. Is "Generic is Specific" a Metaphor? In Fey Parrill, Vera Tobin and Mark Turner, eds. Meaning, Form and Body. Selected papers from the 2008 CSDL meeting. Stanford CA: CSLI Publications. Sweetser, E. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sweetser, E . 2004. The suburbs of your good pleasure: Cognition, culture and the bases of metaphoric structure. In G. Bradshaw, T. Bishop and M. Turner (eds.), The Shakespearean International Yearbook, vol. 4: Shakespeare studies today. 24-55. Aldershot, England: Ashgate Publishing. Tszyn, L. 2010. Concepts of dusha and fate in Russian and Chinese (the analysis of phraseological units). PhD thesis.(In Russian) University of Minsk, Minsk. Uryson E. V. 1999. Dukh and dusha: on reconstructing the archaic human conceptualization. The image of a human in culture and language. (In Russian) Moscow. pp. 11-25. Vardanyan L.V. 2007. The ethnolinguocultural concept of dusha in the English, Russian and Erzyan linguistic pictures of the world. PhD thesis. (In Russian). Moscow State University, Moscow. Wierzbicka, A. 1992. Semantics, Culture And Cognition, Oxford: OUP. Wierzbicka, A. 1996. Semantics, Primes and Universals, Oxford: OUP. }ic- Fuchs, M. 2009. Kognitivna lingvistika i jezi ne strukture: engleski present perfect; Zagreb: Nakladni zavod Globus Dr. sc. Kristina trkalj Despot Senior Research Associate Department of Croatian Language History and Historical Lexicography Institute of Croatian Language and Linguistics Republike Austrije 16, HR - 10000 Zagreb, Croatia  HYPERLINK "mailto:kristina.despot@berkeley.edu" kristina.despot@berkeley.edu Dr. Inna Skrynnikova Associate Professor Department of Professional Intercultural Communication Volgograd State University 100 University Avenue, 400062, Volgograd, Russia  HYPERLINK "mailto:innavskr@berkeley.edu" innavskr@berkeley.edu home address: 87/7 University Avenue,400062. Volgograd, Russia Dr. Julia Ostanina Olszewska Associate Professor Institute of Applied Linguistics University of Warsaw ul. Browarna 8/10, 00-311 Warszawa, Poland  HYPERLINK "mailto:j.ostanina@berkeley.edu" j.ostanina@berkeley.edu  This work has largely benefited from George Lakoff's and Eve Sweetser's insightful comments and ideas and from the work of the Metaphor Seminar at the Berkeley Linguistic Department. We are also thankful to the participants in The 38th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society for their questions and comments.  We are well aware of the fact that data collected by corpus-based analysis does not represent objective, linguistic reality it is a corpus reality filtered through subjectivity of intuitive judgments (}ic-Fuchs 2009:98). Therefore we have combined corpus-based analysis with our judgments as native speakers and with the systematic introspection (as defined by Wierzbicka 1980:21). Nevertheless, we think that the corpus reality filtered through intuitive judgments is more suitable as a research tool than just intuitive judgments which are not confirmed in the corpus reality.  Those metaphors will not be of our interest in this article, but we will list a few Croatian examples to illustrate this: Suzdr~ao sam se da ga ne udarim ('I held myself back from hitting him'); Izvan sebe sam (literally: 'I am out of myself'); Rastresena sam danas (literally: I am scattered today); Saberi se! ('Pull yourself together!') etc.  Lakoff and Johnson (1999: 565): The embodied mind is part of the living body and is dependent on the body for its existence. The properties of mind are not purely mental: They are shaped in crucial ways by the body and brain and how the body can function in everyday life (...). The mind is not merely corporeal but also passionate, desiring and social. It has a culture and cannot exist culture-free. It has a history, it has developed and grown, and it can grow further. It has unconscious aspect, hidden from our direct view and knowable only indirectly. Its conscious aspect characterizes what we take ourselves as being. Its conceptual system is limited; there is much that it cannot even conceptualize, much less understand. But its conceptual system is expandable: It can form revelatory new understandings.  Figurative conceptions of DUSHA are tightly related to cognitive model or models of a person. One cognitive model of a human being is dual. According to that model human beings consist of two entities: body and soul. A body is a visible, physical part, and a soul includes whole inner life of a human being (or referring again to Lakoff and Jonson's citation:jlz|DFHln{|&08scscRDhP0JCJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH hWghPCJ\aJmH sH  hWghPCJPJaJmH sH jhWghP0JPJ UhWghPPJ hWghPPJ mH sH hWghPmH sH hWghP5mH sH hWghPPJmH sH $hWghP0JCJPJaJmH sH  hWghP0JCJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH ,FHlnp`$hd1$`ha$gdP$hhd1$^h`ha$gdP$hhd1$]h^ha$gdP$hhd1$]h^h`a$gdP$d1$7$8$H$a$gdP $d1$a$gdP$hd1$7$8$H$^h`a$gdP$eed1$7$8$H$]e^ea$gdP .8&.Xt$<hjp4:<BDFŶtcccccTTThWghPCJaJmHsH hWghP0JCJaJmH sH #hWghP0J5CJaJmHsHhWghP5CJaJmH sH hWghPCJ\aJmH sH hWghPCJ\aJmHsHhWghPCJaJmHsH hWghPCJPJaJmHsHhWghP5CJaJmH sH hWghPmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH  X9TUbt$hd1$[$\$`ha$gdP$d1$[$\$a$gdP $d1$a$gdP$hd1$^h`a$gdP$hhd1$]h^ha$gdP$hhd1$7$8$H$]h^ha$gdP$hhd1$^h`ha$gdP FHPRVX^`hl>9RUcm 2\˿˷˰˰˰ˊqqqht3hPKH$\mH sH hPKH$\mH sH h$#hPmHsHhWghP6]hWghPPJ hWghP6 hWghPhPmH sH hWghP5mH sH hWghPmH sH hPCJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmHsH(bc349:lm $d1$a$gdP$)d1$^`)a$gdP)7$8$H$^`)gdP-$ & 0` P@)d1$7$8$H$^`)a$gdP$(d1$[$\$^`(a$gdP789:M#Dmŵ̵yqhWghP6 hWghPh$#hPmH sH h$#hPmHsHhWghP6mH sH hWghPmH sH hPmH sH hWghP6KH$\hP hPKH$\hWghPKH$\h$#hP6KH$\mH sH hPKH$\mH sH h$#hPKH$\mH sH ,m_`hiQ+,$)d1$[$\$^`)a$gdP 7$8$H$gdP(7$8$H$^`(gdP$(d1$^`(a$gdP#7;BCE]ki|  OS*+,134<խ揄xhWghP5hPh$#hPmHsHhPmHsHhWghP0JmH sH hP6PJ ]hWghP6PJ ]hWghP6mH sH  hPPJ hWghP6]hWghPPJ hPmH sH hWghPmH sH hWghP6 hWghP+t u f h   ?U$(d1$EƀFY^`(a$gdP$(d1$^`(a$gdPU$(7$8$EƀFYH$^`(a$gdP     % & S T a g i k t u   d f h |           ଛwwwwwwhWghPmH sH  hhP hWghPhhPmH sH  h$#hPPJmH nHsH tHhP#h8l/hP6PJmH nHsH tHhPPJmH nHsH tH hhPPJmH nHsH tH hhPPJ mH nHsH tHhPPJ mH nHsH tH.           . 2 > @ x z |   9 ;    / K M eK2hJThP>*B*^J mH nH ph)QsH tH wh)Q5jhP>*B*U^J mH nH ph)QsH tH wh)Q,hP>*B*^J mH nH ph)QsH tH wh)Q hJThP^J mH nH sH tH hP^J mH nH sH tH hWghPmHsHhWghP6mHsH h$#hPPJmH nHsH tHhPmH sH hWghPmH sH hhP6 hhP z | 8 9 : ; ZFF;; 1$7$8$H$gdP$(d1$^`(a$gdPM$7$8$EƀFYH$a$gdPW$(d1$C$EƀFY^`(a$gdP; [ u     m n     `nU$(7$8$EƀFYH$^`(a$gdP 1$7$8$H$gdPM N O k l m   GHI^_45abcz{|}~íÜ~ujaZMF h{ihPjh{ihP0JU hWghPhWhP0JjhPUhPmhP0JjhPUjhPU h7hPhP hJThP^J mH nH sH tH *hWhP0J^J mH nH sH tH wh)Q5jhP>*B*U^J mH nH ph)QsH tH wh)QAjhWhP>*B*U^J mH nH ph)QsH tH wh)Q34|} A%B $1$a$gdP$d1$[$\$a$gdP$a$gdPU$(7$8$EƀFYH$^`(a$gdP)I$AOs   s@@@A$A6A>ADAYA^AAAAAAϽ㬡qeqqqqhPCJaJmH sH h{ihP6CJaJmH sH hWghPCJaJmH sH Uh{ihPCJaJmH sH h{ihPCJaJ!jh{ihP0JCJUaJ#h{ihPOJQJ]^JmH sH h{ihP6mH sH hPmH sH h{ihPmH sH !jh{ihP0JUmH sH ' consciousness, subjective experience, moral judgment, reason, will, and one's essence). There is also another cognitive model of a human being within which soul does not have such a broad meaning since its tasks are assigned to other 'parts' of a person: this model includes at least body (visible, physical part), heart (locus of emotions), mind (locus of reason and counciousessness), self and soul.  Sweetser (2004:38): Marriage makes a permanent metaphorical and spiritual link out of the temporary physical joining of sexual intercourse.  This metaphor is connected with our experience and knowledge about plants and flowers: we are well aware that if a flower lacks essential nutrition, it wilts, and when the nutrition is of a good quality, flower is blooming. Whatever soul is wilting for, it used to be something essential for it.  The concept of a soul as a river or sea is bound with the primary metaphor KNOWING IS SEEING in a sense that what is on the surface of a river/sea is easily accessible by vision/knowledge, and what is at the bottom of a sea/soul is something that is usually accessible only by applying considerable amount of additional effort.  In Lakoff and Johnson (1999: 274) the Location Self metaphor is described, but there the control of Subject over Self was conceptualized as being in a normal location. However, it seems that in our examples control is not crucial, altough it is often the case that the unusual state is caused by something external over which the Subject has no control.  More about conceptual metonymy see for example in Lakoff and Johnosn (1980); Kvecses (2010), Lakoff (1987), Lakoff and Turner (1989), Langacker (1991, 1993), Gibbs (1994) etc.      AUTHOR \* MERGEFORMAT Kristina trkalj Despot, Inna Skrynnikova, Julia Ostanina Olszewska Metaphorical Conceptions of #(/DUSZA/DU`A ( soul ) Possession metaphor Container metaphor Soul is a person (Personification) Soul is an object (Reification) Soul is the locus of: consciousness, emotions, moral judgment, reason, will, essence General Disembodied Soul MetaphoAAA%B&B'B(BPCQCRCODdDsDDDDDEEFNFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFGG GԽɡɚ㍃wwwwokobokhPmHnHuhPjhPUjhRUhRhPCJPJ aJh{ihPCJPJ aJ h{ihPjh{ihP0JUhWghPCJaJmH sH hPCJaJmH sH h{ihPmH sH h{ihPCJaJmH sH h{ihPCJaJ!jh{ihP0JCJUaJ&%B&BPCDDEFFFFFFFFFFGG G2H4H6H8H%$a$gdP%$a$gdP $7$8$H$a$gdP $d1$a$gdPgdP GH2H6H8HHHHHII>IIIIJTTTT浞omof hWghPU/hhbhP5B*CJOJ QJ \^J aJ(ph,hhbhP5B*CJ OJ QJ ^J aJph,hhbhP5B*CJOJ QJ ^J aJph/hhbhP5B*CJOJ QJ \^J aJ$ph)hhbhPB*CJOJ QJ ^J aJ0phhRhPhhP6aJhhP6\aJ8H`HHHHHHHII>IpIIIIITTT $7$8$H$a$gdPr TTU$(7$8$EƀFYH$^`(a$gdP9 0&P1h:pP/ =!p"p#p$% DyK kristina.despot@berkeley.eduyK Hmailto:kristina.despot@berkeley.eduDyK innavskr@berkeley.eduyK Rmailto:innavskr@berkeley.eduyX;H,]ą'cDyK j.ostanina@berkeley.eduyK >mailto:j.ostanina@berkeley.edu)@@@ NormalCJ_HaJmHsHtHZ@Z + Heading 1$<@&5CJ KH OJQJ\^JaJ X@X 8 Heading 2$@&#6OJPJQJaJmH nHsH tHZ@2Z l-j Heading 3 @&XDYD5CJOJQJaJmH sH tH V@V 8 Heading 5$@&"56OJQJaJmH nHsH tHDA@D Default Paragraph FontRiR  Table Normal4 l4a (k(No List B^@B W~ Normal (Web)dd[$\$4U@4 W~ Hyperlink >*ph.X@. 8Emphasis6]bO"b 8Default 7$8$H$-B*CJOJQJ^J_HaJmHphsHtHVO1V 8 Char Char2'6CJOJPJQJ_HmH nHsH tHROAR 8 Char Char&56CJOJQJ_HmH nHsH tHXORX l-jList Paragraph ^m$OJ QJ mH sH tH "Oa" l-jhps^J0Oq0 l-j short_text^JNON l-j Char Char15CJOJQJ_HmH sH tH ,W@, l-jStrong5^J*O* l-jhps atn^J,O, l-j b-wrd-explO l-jdoc>@> xI Footnote TextCJaJ@&@@ xIFootnote ReferenceH*O &k=st*O*  tocnumber&O& toctextO! 8fld&O1& 8unicode6OA6 S0b-wrd-expl g-em4@R4 \~Header % p#4 @b4 \~Footer & p#FV@qF R^FollowedHyperlink >*B*ph`>@` !Title($d1$`a$"5CJ KHPJ\mHnHsHtHvUR!C)89AKr C 588(Lm#P"P!P PPP(Lm XSTUVWXefkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk kkv:STUVWXefg y 6 +        ! " # $ W X p q N#d$e$$%%N&''E)**m+---s/t/// 33334777G8H88C9D999^;_;s=t=+>AAFBBBCCDCEEFFKK L>NNO PQQ^RRSSn[]]]__`bbb3dhd]e^eeehheikkBln?DEƂǂ<=߄0ij qrvwxy&XYՉ (YZ݊ފ0EqrGՓӖcdؙٙ=\]^Ϝ2XYZn|}00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000I00@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0005@0ȑ00j@0ȑ00j@0ȑ00j@0ȑ00j@%0@0I0 0@0@%0I004ȑ00l"j00I0300I0 300I040000I0400I04ȑ0 m} $K15:A>GKrX\`xflsx]|u<ΑJ(jF M A GTSVWZ\]^`abcefghiklmnoqrst,b1GXuߎ,bm ; %B8HTTTXY[_djpTU}$YZrXXXXX %i8 $@  # (   d  3 "Bv ?  ⣝⣝!+⣝`2!+dV3!+%5O(`2fdn  c $X99 ?"`d z  >GpHIpo_s1051K Tk z" B >GHѐIo_s1052+z"  >GHoIrNo_s1053+z  >G@HI@o _s1054{"  PS _s1055"  l "   P S _s1056"  {l " ! P!S_s1057" +tK  " " P"S_s1058" +dK  " # P#S_s1059" T   B S  ?O ! " #! h2 & t _Hlt198472421b@c jjj jj jLjjj *4BJJ (0>HPPB *urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-region=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace !q   #+ ! + T Y tz'-6<T\agS]BH(.*$9$%%% %%%%#%4%;%<%@%T%X%Y%]%l%o%p%t%%%%%%%%%%%%%U&[&_&c&d&h&~&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&'''''''"'#'''('-'/'5'6'='8+@+r+v+w+{+++++++++++++++++++++,,,, ,-,.,8,9,?,B,G,I,N,O,U,V,Z,\,a,b,h,j,l,m,r,x,,,,,,,,---......4/6/:/;/Y/Z/j/k/o/0000333333333344444444444444444444455 5 55555#5555555555555555555555555555666 6 66666 6$6(6.6/6063696:6=6A6E6F6O6P6T67777777777777777888888889 9 99999999999999999: ::1:7:8:::=:@:A:E:z:~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::0>M>p>s>t>y>z>~>>>>>>>>???? ? ?????"?#?$?%?,?-?1?2?8?>?C?D?J?K?P?Q?Y?Z?a?b?j????@@@@@@@!@*@+@1@2@3@4@=@>@G@H@S@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@AAAAAAAA'A(A/A0A6A9A@AKBOBUBVBXBYB]B_B`BpBwByBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCEEEEEEEEFFFF!F%F&F+F-F0F1F9FQEQIQJQOQRQVQQQQR$R+RURZRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRSSSS S SSSSVS[S_ScSdSlSmSoSsSwSxS|S}SSSSvT~TWWYYYY']+],]4]6]8]9]C]D]K]L]Q]R]T]U]V]W]\]^]_]`]a]b]g]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]?^F^G^J^O^W^X^\^]^a^b^h^i^n^o^v^w^{^~^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^w_|_``````````````````````LaTaUa^abagahapaqatauaza{a|a}aaaaaaaabbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb.c2c3c5c9c>c?cCcDcMcNcPcQcVcWc]cccdddddddee e eeeeeegg\idijiriviLjQjVjWj\j]jajcjfjgjmjnjrjsjxjyjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjkkkkkkkkkk k%k&k*k,k-k]k_kjknkqkrkxkkkkkkkkkGlKlOlUlVl[lflkl{llllllllllllllllllll)m/m5m9m:m?m@mBmFmMmOmXmYm[m\m]m^mgmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.n2n9n=n>nDn^nbncneninnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnoo ooooo o"o&o)o-o5o6o7o8o:o>oAoBoFoGoHoIoLoMoSoToYo]ocodojokosoto{o|oooooooopppppppppppppppppppqCqGqJqNqOqQqRqVqWq]q^qbqdqiqjqlqmqsqtq{q|qqqqrLrMrrrrr>s?sEsFsLsMsss?t@tRtSttttttttttttuuu!u"u%u)u-u.u2u3u8uuu|u}uuuuuuuu?uwҁԁDENYy{łۂ;=E@IT[joqrtхԅ߅  %*†džȆBCNPpr|Ƈ̇VXu&/08Y Y܊ފqr͍Ѝ!'ՖݖޙšɚDۛޛ^ϜМXZ|}  j&&&&>'-r/99O>n>>>vF|F L=NNNOOPPQRS Seik5qztz||}}}~p~~~~~~~34va=?CYłX;GJ27jdprˇuYԉՉ '(X܊ފ/0DEpr?[^ΜϜ12WZmn{}333333333333333333333333XN&?'9:+>n>>>>EFNO PXQRSpqh}s\;p8J[zK4k|Z86^`.^`.^`.^`. ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(hh^h`. hh^h`OJQJo(h=h^`567>*B*CJOJPJQJ\]^JaJphhH%h=8^`567>*B*CJOJPJQJ\]^JaJphhH%=pL^p`L567>*B*CJOJPJQJ\]^JaJphhH%h=@  ^@ `567>*B*CJOJPJQJ\]^JaJphhH%h= ^`567>*B*CJOJPJQJ\]^JaJphhH%=Lx^`L567>*B*CJOJPJQJ\]^JaJphhH%h=H^`567>*B*CJOJPJQJ\]^JaJphhH%h=^`567>*B*CJOJPJQJ\]^JaJphhH%=PL^P`L567>*B*CJOJPJQJ\]^JaJphhH%,,^,`o() ^`hH.  L ^ `LhH.   ^ `hH. ll^l`hH. <L<^<`LhH.   ^ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH.80^8`0^Jo(.^`^J.pL^p`L^J.@ ^@ `^J.^`^J.L^`L^J.^`^J.^`^J.PL^P`L^J.^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(opp^p`CJOJQJo(@ @ ^@ `CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(PP^P`CJOJQJo(^`6o() ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.^`^Jo(.^`^J.pL^p`L^J.@ ^@ `^J.^`^J.L^`L^J.^`^J.^`^J.PL^P`L^J.^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(opp^p`CJOJQJo(@ @ ^@ `CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(PP^P`CJOJQJo(^`.^`.pp^p`.@ @ ^@ `.^`.^`.^`.^`.PP^P`.8^8`^Jo(.^`^J. L^ `L^J. ^ `^J.x^x`^J.HL^H`L^J.^`^J.^`^J.L^`L^J.^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(opp^p`CJOJQJo(@ @ ^@ `CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(^`CJOJQJo(PP^P`CJOJQJo(^`o(. ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.^`o() ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.^`OJ PJQJ ^J.^`^J.pL^p`L^J.@ ^@ `^J.^`^J.L^`L^J.^`^J.^`^J.PL^P`L^J.^`OJ PJQJ o(- p^p`OJQJo(o @ ^@ `OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( P^P`OJQJo(o  ^ `OJQJo(,,^,`o() ^`hH.  L ^ `LhH.   ^ `hH. ll^l`hH. <L<^<`LhH.   ^ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH.^`o(. ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH. ^`OJQJo(n ^`OJQJo(n pp^p`OJQJo(n @ @ ^@ `OJQJo(n ^`OJQJo(n ^`OJQJo(n ^`OJQJo(n ^`OJQJo(n PP^P`OJQJo(n^`o() ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.SIa#m{ beU^+s5~}|4k|;)O<($2>ho6s\;p[zU/j2}                 tPH:         ƺntj        (        `ոlt DlV暰~:41 :qZx Esir%.YAP%V$GA1qZx R )N / J6s jK$cTEse;'0l 2u)N0|[rA! :$2u{w-2ub"3 :a5HP6MWr/\=Hqn@2u.YAAkH5MAkHvPOWTe;>XWv+=t8@]lg{ai2us j.ej2uj2u'0l5M'Smp2u'|pweqv+=tMWrlgv+=tnkt2u8@]4dBw/\=YWycTTx|)N0|gJ}}22u$vPOWMRPt3dE@p ;%;&;(+,-./3689;=?@ABFG L N O Q R S ] ^ _`abcejijjjkjljmjnjo>q>r>t>v>x>y>{>>ˍˎˏ>zz@,@4@<@24p@<|@@B@H@PR@X@^`@f@nrtxz@@@,@@@@@ @,@@H@UnknowndavidG:Ax Times New Roman5Symbol3& :Cx Arial[ {(00 ZRColaTimes New Roman7&@ CalibrieTTE1BD3B88t00Arial Unicode MSeTTE1BD4D28t00Arial Unicode MS[ dinamlexArial Unicode MS3: Times7@Cambriaa Sabon-RomanArial Unicode MS_TimesNewRomanPSMTMS Mincho;" Helvetica5& >[`)Tahoma;(SimSun[SO?5 :Cx Courier New;Wingdings#1 D D vGvGpp4dtt2qHP?625Metaphorical Conceptions of #(/DUSZA/DU`A ( soul ) CKRISTINA `TRKALJ DESPOT, INNA SKRYNNIKOVA, Julia OSTANINA OLSZEWSKAdavid|                       Oh+'0,DP\l |   @Metaphorical Conceptions of ДУША/DUSZA/DUŠA (‘soul’) HKRISTINA ŠTRKALJ DESPOT, INNA SKRYNNIKOVA, Julia OSTANINA OLSZEWSKANormaldavid2Microsoft Office Word@F#@<@<vG8ZT(m K &" WMFC* Kkl yYT'm EMFk L #p    y% Rp@Times New RomanG:Ax Times ew Roman&v&r0Ln0dv%   TT6b@־@UL yP  TTg6@־@L yP  TT6@־@L yP Rp@Times New RomanG:Ax Times ew RomanaFr0Ln0dv% Rp@Times New Roman6 0\06 0G:Ax Times ew Romanu3 0P0xNr0Ln0dv%  % Tl:@־@,L yXCross3#TT:@־@,L yP-NHT :@־@,3L ylinguistic Analysis of Metaphorical Conceptions of '#(J3'#$J#JB#''##J3#''#'J#% %  % sRp@Times New Roman6 0@ve<vh<D:Ax Times ew o=@v @e<vvTr1dv%  T4q@־@s L yh#(/DUSZA/DUh01O/33&+/32 Rp@Times New Roman/DUSZA/DU6 0@ve<vh<D:Ax txqF?"At%zqFBD? %axqFB svvtdv% (  TXk4@־@sL yP`A'/ % ( % TX3 @־@sL yP (2TT 3)@־@ sL yP?Td"3@־@"sL yTsoul#'TT3@־@sL yP?TX3@־@sL yP) 3T3 @־@sL yin Slavic Languages (Russian, '2'##2/#'#'##33'#'Rp@Times New Roman\u!,sX2|Hu!,s|HG:Ax Times ew RomanhbFx8r08Ln0Pdv% % %  T{@־@L yxPolish, and Croatian)*#'#''3###'% ! y% TTp@־@LP1" % TT{@־@L yP & % TT6@־@L yP  TT6W@־@JL yP Rp@Times New Roman!, aF"jh0&k0&k,Q0G:Ax Times ew Roman,Qg 8r08Ln0Pdv% %  % T[@־@L y|KRISTINA `TRKALJ DESPOT*)!%,*N!%)+,#N+%"!+%% TTQ~@־@uL yP1% T[@־@L yp, INNA SKRYNNIKOVAN,,*O"*(,+,++,*% TTQ~@־@uL yP2% T|[ @־@L y\, JULIA N-#+%  % T@־@L ypOSTANINA OLSZEWSKA+!&*,,+-#"$%8"++% TT@־@L yP3% TT@־@L yP Rp@Times New RomanG:Ax Times ew Romanup dK0r0Ln0dv% Rp@Times New Roman!, aF"jh0&k0&k,Q0G:Ax Times ew Roman,Qg 8r08Ln0Pdv% %  % T\-@־@ -L yInstitute of Croatian Language and Linguistic##(#!##!T-@־@  L yds (Croatia)#(% TT @־@L yP1% T -@־@ L yp; Volg&" WMFC +kograd State #%#%  % T2u@־@hL ytUniversity (Russia)+%% TT'U@־@LL yP2% T2u@־@hL y; University of Warsaw (Poland)+1(%% TT'&U@־@LL yP3% TT'';U@־@'LL yP @Rp@Times New RomanG:Ax Times ew Romanmo EK0r0Ln0dv%  TTx;@־@L yP  TT;@־@L yP  TT;J@־@>L yP  TTO;@־@L yP  TT;@־@L yP  Ta!@־@ L ydIntroduction!!!!TTb!@־@bL yP ?! % TT&6i@־@\L yP  Tn@־@;L yThe idea that an individual is made up of various elements %//TTn@־@L yP Tn @־@L yt some physical and / T @־@KL ysome spiritual, and that soul is the distinguishing mark of living things s//T|  @־@ L y\eems to / T, @@־@3PL ybe universally present in all philosophical and spiritual systems since ancient / T(D @־@zOL ytimes. Broader meaning of a soul as not only animating body but being morally, /'/// TD @־@TL ycognitively and intellectually significant (responsible for functions like thought,  Tl @־@ L yXperceT,  @־@ PL yption, desire, and moral qualities) was already firmly established in the fifth /*/ % T$ ^ @־@Q $L ycentury Greek usage. The Concept of *%(% Tl L^ @־@Q L yXsoul % TM ^ @־@MQ "L ywas primary concern of various Pre+.!TT  ^ @־@ Q L yP- TDb @־@ TL ySocratic thinkers, and of ancient philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, and !!*% T  @־@ L ylthe Stoics. Thei!%T @־@ >L yr worked out theories of soul have shapened later theoretical + T *4 @־@' ?L ydevelopments in the writings of Plotinus and other Platonists, /&" WMFC k+!!T+ 4 @־@+' L yhThomas Aquinas%.*TX 4 @־@ ' L yP,  T9 | @־@o L yhImmanuel Kant//*T9 | @־@o FL y, etc. Our inner life has remained the subject of research of various +/ TH ) @־@ *L ydifferent contemporary approaches as well./+TT* D @־@* L yP  T(v @־@v OL yThe concept of soul serves as a cue to revealing and understanding existential % T R @־@E L yrepresentation of human imm//.T R @־@E 8L yaterial nature in different cultures, thus being one of  T,W @־@ PL ythe basic elements which forms the linguistic picture of the world fixed in the .+/+ T @־@ ML ynational mentality. A great body of researches is based on the idea that the /* TP r) @־@ +L yconcept of soul concerns several key issuesT$s ) @־@s $L y in human life: the source of life, / T - p @־@c NL ycognition and emotion, personality characteristics, social relationships, and ((/((((( Tu  @־@ L ylhuman destiny. /Tu @־@ AL yThe concept of soul has been actively studied from mythological, %// Rp @Times New Romanjbeen activel@07 02d02Ĭ0,00D0QtG:Ax Times ew RomanjSr0Ln0dv% % ! yT< s) @־@ (L T|t ) @־@t L\ " ' % Ld   !??% ( % TT ) @־@ L yP Rp @Times New Roman x-0LnLn4 AM+0Ln_+0Ln`LnQp[T0<jG:Ax Times ew Roman?0 :adr0dLn0|dv%  % ! y% TT$ ,H @־@A LP1" Rp @Times New Roman09 0&P1h:pP/ =!p"p#p$% aFt0\\0\`G:Ax Times ew Roman?$l:adr0dLn0|dv% T|-+ c @־@-X ]L y This work has largely benefited from George Lakoff's and Eve Sweetser's insightful comments  $  & WMFC k%$ $    &&  T,d 0 @־@ %L yand ideas and from the work of the Me %$ ,T1d @־@1 9L ytaphor Seminar at the Berkeley Linguistic Department. We & !    %% / T| @־@ ]L yare also thankful to the participants in The 38th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics       $ , !      TD e@־@)L ySociety for their questions and comments.       && TTf {@־@fL yP % 6y6 y6 66x6 x6 66w6 w6 66v6 v6 66u6 u6 66t6 t6 66s6 s6 66r6 r6 66q6 q6 6 6 p6 p6 6  6 o6 o6 6   c."System????????-@Times New Roman-  2 wlc  2 lc  2 lc @Times New Roman-@Times New Roman--2 lcCross  2 c-X2 3clinguistic Analysis of Metaphorical Conceptions of e   ---l@Times New Roman-.2 l c/DUSZA/DU     .@Times New Roman-.2 cA .--2 c (  2 c?2 csoul 2 c?2 #c)  82 2cin Slavic Languages (Russian,     @Times New Roman---+2 lcPolish, and Croatian) -,c- 2 1'- 2 c - 2 lc  2 lc @Times New Roman---.2 lcKRISTINA TRKALJ DESPOT    - 2 #c1-&2 'c, INNA SKRYNNIKOVA     - 2 c2-2 c, JULIA   --&2 lcOSTANINA OLSZEWSKA     - 2 c3- 2 c @Times New Roman-@Times New Roman---O2 l-cInstitute of Croatian Language and Linguistic2 ] cs (Croatia)- 2 c1-&2 c; Volgograd State --(2 lcUniversity (Russia)S- 2 c2-:2 c; University of Warsaw (Poland) - 2 jc3- 2 nc @Times New Roman- 2 #lc  2 2lc  2 @lc  2 Nlc  2 \lc 2 kl cIntroduction 2 kc - 2 ylc d2 l;cThe idea that an individual is made up of various elements t   2 c(2 c some physical and S |2 lKcsome spiritual, and that soul is the distinguishing mark of living things sn  2 ceems to  2 lPcbe universally present in all philosophical and spiritual systems since ancient  2 lOctimes. Broader meaning of a soul as not only animating body but being morally,     2 lTccognitively and intellectually significant (responsible for functions like thought, 2 lcpercet2 Pcption, desire, and moral qualities) was already firmly established in the fifth   -A2 l$ccentury Greek usage. The Concept of  -2 *csoul t->2 B"cwas primary concern of various Pre   2 c-2 lTcSocratic thinkers, and of ancient philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, and  #2 lcthe Stoics. Theih2 >cr worked out theories of soul have shapened later theoretical j2 l?cdevelopments in the writings of Plotinus and other Platonists,   2 cThomas Aquinas 2 c, 2 l cImmanuel Kants t2 Fc, etc. Our inner life has remained the subject of research of various   J2 %l*cdifferent contemporary approaches as well.  2 %;c 2 3~OcThe concept of soul serves as a cue to revealing and understanding existential 42 Alcrepresentation of human imma  _2 A8caterial nature in different cultures, thus being one of 2 PlPcthe basic elements which forms the linguistic picture of the world fixed in the     2 ^lMcnational mentality. A great body of researches is based on the idea that the h L2 ll+cconcept of soul concerns several key issuesA2 lJ$c in human life: the source of life,  2 {lNccognition and emotion, personality characteristics, social relationships, and  "2 lchuman destiny.  m2 AcThe concept of soul has been actively studied from mythological, i  @Times New Roman- -,cC2 l( 2  '- @ !l-  - 2 c @Times New Roman- - ,c- 2 l1'@Times New Roman- 2 o]c This work has largely benefited from George Lakoff's and Eve Sweetser's insightful comments C2 l%cand ideas and from the work of the Me  a2  9ctaphor Seminar at the Berkeley Linguistic Department. We i 2 l]care also thankful to the participants in The 38th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics  I2 l)cSociety for their questions and comments.  2 c -ccccccccccbbbbbbbbbbaa՜.+,D՜.+,Tx  3TOSHIBAGt' ?Metaphorical Conceptions of ДУША/DUSZA/DUŠA (‘soul’) Title(V^j_PID_LINKBASE _PID_HLINKSAA$X mailto:j.ostanina@berkeley.edua3 mailto:innavskr@berkeley.eduao$mailto:kristina.despot@berkeley.eduak "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoulImmanuel_Kantf"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoulThomas_Aquinas  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~     !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXZ[\]^_`eRoot Entry FbgData 1TableˬWordDocument;XSummaryInformation( \DocumentSummaryInformation8YCompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q