THE LANGUAGE OF EMOTION

IN ENGLISH AND PORTUGUESE

 - A CORPORA-BASED APPROACH

by Belinda Maia

 

PLEASE NOTE:

This is NOT the original thesis (1994), but a revised version done in 1996, and adapted in 2004 to .html format.  It is impossible to retrieve the 1994 digital version now but, if anyone is remotely interested in what I did ten years ago, the revised version should be easier to read.

 

The following summary was written in 2004 with the benefit of hindsight and a better understanding of the (ir?) relevance of what I was trying to do at the time.

 

SUMMARY

 

This thesis looks at the way the emotion words in English and Portuguese behave lexically, syntactically and semantically.  The Brain/Mind debate was in full swing when the thesis was written and the first three chapters deal with various aspects of this debate and how it affects - and is affected by  - the whole area of emotion. The objective of the linguistic analysis in the following chapters was to see how actual usage of these words in context gives us clues as to how we conceptualise emotion through language. At the time, seeking for evidence of how we conceptualize by examining linguistic items in corpora was not popular in mainstream linguistics, but today, as a result of movements within cognitive linguistics and further sophistication of corpora linguistics, such an objective would not seem  unusual.

 

The process involved collecting words  that could be considered as describing emotion in any way from corpora, examining them through concordancing, and classifying them according to several parameters.  A general view of the area was obtained using the COBUILD corpus in Birmingham, and using a much larger corpus than that on which the thesis results are based,  proved very useful.  However, for copyright reasons, I was obliged to make my own corpora of literary texts: about 778,650 words were digitalized for  English and about 819,500 for Portuguese.  From these corpora about 25,000 examples were extracted and analysed. 

 

The lexical items were grouped according to the cognitive structure of the emotions described by Ortony, Clore & Collins (1998:19).  Although it is possible to recognize the concepts behind their categories, some categories are not lexicalized in English or Portuguese.  On the other hand, SURPRISE, which they do not recognize as an emotion, turned out to be similar in semantic structure linguistically, and the generic words for emotion, like feeling and sentimento, also merited our attention.  We recognize that emotional states can be described without using the emotion lexicon - for example, by describing body language - but this type of analysis was beyond the scope of our thesis.

 

Each lexical item was extracted with the related sentence from the corpus and classified according to parts-of-speech categorization and also according to its semantic role.  Using Halliday's terminology of Senser for the person who feels emotion - as with frightened - and Phenomenon for what is seen to cause or trigger the emotion - as with  frightening, all lexical items were classified as Senser focusing (SFoc) or Phenomenon focusing (PFoc).  The lexicon was then examined and quantified as to how the items behaved when analysed using functional sentence analysis and other syntactic criteria, with a view to demonstrating  the influence of semantics on syntax. The emotion lexicon accepts and rejects certain types of syntax quite clearly.

 

Finally, since the emotion lexicon behaves in ways that overlap with verbs of cognition, and the Mind/Brain debate essentially focuses the relationship of emotion to the way human beings understand the world, each Phenomenon was classified according to the degree to which the Senser consciously reasoned about the Phenomenon in the sentence or, whenever possible, the context.

 

This multi-level analysis produced results which we hope you may find interesting. Despite the apparent inadequacy of the  corpora and their literary content, we were able to discern some patterns that could now merit further investigation. As was to be expected, the two languages varied most at the level of the lexicon.  The semantic aspects of the syntax also showed some interesting differences that hint at underlying cultural differences that, as a late bilingual, I had always felt existed.  However, the deeper semantic analysis of the Senser and Phenomenon focused items and the analysis of the degree of conscious reasoning about the Phenomenon by the Senser resulted in remarkably similar results for both languages.  Whether this demonstrates anything more universal about the underlying cognitive apparatus with which the two languages conceptualize emotion is something that can only gain credibility if the same exercise is repeated with more representative corpora in both these and other languages.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

INTRODUCTION

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS    

                                                                                 

PREFACE     

                                                                                                            

                    

CHAPTER 1.   EMOTION - A CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECT

 

 CHAPTER 2.  THE EMOTIONS AS PHENOMENA             

                              

                                                 

CHAPTER 3.  CONCEPTUALISATION AND EMOTION

 

 

CHAPTER 4.  THE LEXICAL EXPRESSION OF EMOTION

 

 

CHAPTER 5.  SEMANTIC ASPECTS OF EMOTION        

   

 

CHAPTER 6.  SENTENCE PATTERNS AND THE VERB PHRASE OF EMOTION

 

 

CHAPTER 7.  THE VERB PHRASE OF EMOTION -SYNTACTIC RESTRICTIONS

 

 

CHAPTER 8.  THE SEMANTICS AND SYNTAX OF NOUNS OF EMOTION

 

 

CHAPTER 9.  THE LINGUISTIC BEHAVIOUR OF THE REACTION TO EVENTS LEXICON

 

 

CHAPTER 10.  THE LINGUISTIC BEHAVIOUR OF THE PROSPECT-BASED REACTIONS TO EVENTS LEXICON

 

 

CHAPTER 11.  THE LINGUISTIC BEHAVIOUR OF THE REACTIONS TO AGENTS LEXICON

 

 

CHAPTER 12.  THE LINGUISTIC BEHAVIOUR OF THE REACTION TO OBJECTS LEXICON

 

 

CHAPTER 13.  THE LINGUISTIC BEHAVIOUR OF OTHER CATEGORIES OF EMOTION LEXICONS

 

 

CHAPTER 14.  COMMENT

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY