CULTURAL MODELS OF KINSHIP: A COGNITIVE LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH AND UZBEK METAPHORS
PDF

Keywords

cognitive linguistics, conceptual metaphor, kinship, family, cultural models, metaphor analysis, English language, Uzbek language, comparative study

How to Cite

Shakhlo , B., & Ayubova , L. (2026). CULTURAL MODELS OF KINSHIP: A COGNITIVE LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH AND UZBEK METAPHORS. Journal of Pedagogical and Philological Research, 1(5), 27-36. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20099523

Abstract

This article describes how kinship and family relationships are conceptualized through metaphorical language in English and Uzbek from a cognitive linguistic perspective. The study focuses on identifying culturally grounded metaphorical patterns that shape the understanding of family roles in both languages. A qualitative comparative method is applied to analyze data derived from idiomatic expressions, proverbs, and naturally occurring language use. The results indicate that although both linguistic systems demonstrate shared conceptual tendencies, such as viewing family as a unified entity and parents as sources of emotional support, notable differences arise due to cultural contexts. Uzbek metaphors tend to emphasize social hierarchy, collective identity, and respect for elders, whereas English expressions often reflect individual-centered perspectives and flexible family structures. The findings highlight the role of metaphor in encoding cultural knowledge and cognitive patterns.

PDF

References

1 Gibbs, R. W. (2021). Metaphor wars: Conceptual metaphors in human life. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108913166⁠

2 Kövecses, Z. (2020). Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859129⁠

3 Littlemore, J. (2020). Metaphoric competence and figurative language. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315621243⁠

4 Sharifian, F. (2021). Cultural linguistics. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.2⁠

5 Yu, N. (2022). Metaphor, body, and culture: Theoretical perspectives and applications. Journal of Pragmatics, 190, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.01.001⁠

6 Dancygier, B., & Vandelanotte, L. (2021). Discourse viewpoint and cognitive linguistics. Cognitive Linguistics, 32(2), 215–240. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2020-0050

7 Semino, E. (2021). “Not soldiers but fire-fighters”: Metaphors and Covid-19. Health Communication, 36(1), 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1844989⁠

8 Winter, B., & Matlock, T. (2021). Metaphor, embodiment, and simulation. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 12(6), e1573. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1573⁠

9 Forceville, C. (2020). Visual and multimodal metaphor. Journal of Pragmatics, 156, 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.10.011

10 Musolff, A. (2022). Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. Bloomsbury Publishing. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350113765⁠