The

1
The emotion of LOVE in George Seferis poetry  
A Cognitive Linguistic analysis
of one of his poems 

• Alexandra Christakidou
• PhD student in Cognitive Linguistics
• Thessaloniki Cognitive Linguistics Reading Group
• Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
• Greece

2

• George Seferis
• (1900-1971)
• Nobel Prize for Literature in 1963

3
Objectives

• To analyse a love poem that was written by George
  Seferis on August 28th , 1945 (Seferis 1973
  18-19 Seferis 1974 10).
• To analyse the poem using tools from Cognitive
  Linguistics.
• To investigate the separate emotional effects
  each lexical item, as well as, the poem as a
  whole has.
• To understand how figurative language works in
  the poem.
• To focus on contrast, blending, and synaesthesia.

4
Cognitive Poetics

• The cognitive turn in the humanities is an
  aspect of a more general cognitive turn taking
  place in the contemporary study of human beings.
  
• Its purpose is to invent a practical,
  sustainable, intelligible, intellectually
  coherent paradigm for answering basic and
  recurring questions about the cognitive
  instruments of art, language, and literature.
  (Turner 20029)

5
Embodiment

• One of the most important subjects in Cognitive
  Linguistics is that of embodiment.
• Embodiment associates cognition with our bodily
  experiences.
• (Lakoff and Johnson 1999 Gibbs 2006
  Sharifian, Dirven, Yu and Niemeier 2008).
• It also views the more abstract target domains
  of cognition, e.g. those of thought, emotion and
  language, as based on concrete source domains
  such as the human body and the conceptualizations
  of the internal body parts
• (Sharifian, Dirven, Yu and Niemeier 2008 7)
• EMBODIMENT IN THE EXPRESSION OF LOVE

6
Conceptualization of Emotions

• Conceptualization of emotions ?
• is governed by ecological, environmental,
  culture-specific and universal factors.
• (Athanasiadou and Tabakowska 1998 xxi)

7
????? ???µa, ????? s?µa

• ????? ???µa, ????? s?µat??t? ? ???p? p??
  p??a??e?s???p?sµ???, µa?eµ???,s???p?sµ???
  p???-p???,?? ?µ?? sf??e? ?? ?µ?? p???e?st?
  da???µat?? t?? µ????st? ?a?a?µat?? t?? s????s?
  ??a ß?ss??? ?e??s?s? µ?? ???a ?p? ??d?t?t?s?
  ???e?? ?f??d?t??? d???se? ?? ?e??se???a st?µa
  ?? ???? st?µa????? ???µa, ????? s?µa.
• (George Seferis
• August 28th 1945)
• (Seferis 1973 18-19)

8
Transcription of Pronunciation xorís xróma,
xorís sóma

• xorís xróma, xorís sóma
• toúti i a?ápi pou pi?éni
• skorpizméni, mazeméni,
• skorpizméni páli-páli
• ki ómos sfízi ki ómos páli
• sti dagomatçiá tou mílou
• sti xara?matçiá tou síkou
• s éna visiní kerási
• se miá ró?a apo rodíti
• tósi anáeri afrodíti
• ?a dipsási ?a kerási
• ena stóma ki álo stóma
• xorís xróma, xorís sóma

9
Translation Colorless, bodiless

• Colorless, bodiless,
• this love advances,
• scattered, gathered,
• scattered again and again,
• yet throbs and beats
• in the biting of the apple
• in the bursting of the fig
• into a dark-red cherry
• in a rose-colored grape
• so airy an Aphrodite
• will thirst, will offer
• one mouth and another mouth
• colorless, bodiless
• (Translation of Seferis
  poem by A. Anagnostopoulos
• in A Poet's Journal. Days of 1945-1951, 1974
  10)

10
????? ???µa, ????? s?µa/xorís xróma, xorís
sóma/Without color, without bodyColorless,
bodiless

• Negation effect creates contrast.
• E.g. from Elytis the Monogram (1972)
• And none had heard about you
• About you neither the dittany nor the mushroom
• On Cretes high places nothing.
• (Christakidou 2012 82)
• Binary opposition
• E.g. Right/left
• An opposition that carries a markedness criterion
  along with it right is unmarked and left is
  marked.
• 
  (Danesi 2009 29)

11
????? ???µa, ????? s?µa/xorís xróma, xorís
sóma/Without color, without bodyColorless,
bodiless

• Contrasting with the following lines that
  describe colorful fruit, pleasure, heartbeat,
  etc.
• Oxymoron and Paradox
• a. I must be cruel to be kind.
• b. Hes a wise fool.
• In a, which is an example of paradox, a cruel
  action is in fact kind if seen from a different
  perspective. In b, an oxymoron, a persons
  generally foolish behavior can be seen as
  occasionally having surprisingly positive results
  that would be considered wise by many.
• In both the hearer is required to construct a
  source domain where the opposed terms can be
  reconciled on the basis of different
  perspectives.
• Interestingly, in this kind of mapping, two
  separate (in fact opposite) domains are conflated
  into one single domain that reconciles their
  discrepancies, which ultimately converts the A IS
  B operation into a domain-internal one, which is
  the canonical relationship in A FOR B
  operations.
• (Ruiz de Mendoza 2011 113-115)

12
????? ???µa, ????? s?µa/xorís xróma, xorís
sóma/Without color, without bodyColorless,
bodiless

• This line can be read both literally and
  figuratively.
• Literally
• Love is an emotion and it cannot be seen or
  touched.
• Metaphorically
• LOVE IS A LIVING CREATURE with a body and colour
  (normally).
• In this love relationship?THE OPPOSITE HAPPENS.
• (Unmarked / marked).
• Also, it could be claimed that there is a
  metonymic relationship between the lack of BODY
  and lack of TOUCH.
• BODY STANDS FOR TOUCH (WHOLE FOR
  PART).
• Possible entailments
• ?This love relationship cannot be seen. (?It is
  secret)
• ?It is not a happy relationship.
• ?There is no hope to advance.
• ?It is without physical connection. (? From a
  distance?)

13
t??t? ? ???p? p?? p??a??e? /toúti i a?ápi pou
pi?éni/ this love that goesthis love
advances
One of the main metaphors of the poem is of the
type LOVE IS A JOURNEY (Lakoff and Johnson 1980
44-45)
14
s???p?sµ???, µa?eµ??? /skorpizméni, mazeméni/
scattered, gathered

• This love is not static but it changes
• -gtIt is scattered/ it spreads,
• -gtIt is gathered.
• METAPHORS
• LOVE IS AN OBJECT that can be broken, scattered,
  and its pieces can be gathered and form the
  initial object again.
• or
• LOVE IS A SUBSTANCE that can be scattered and
  gathered again.
• CONTRAST
• SCATTERED/GATHERED (OPPOSITE CONCEPTS)

15
s???p?sµ??? p???-p??? /skorpizméni
páli-páli/scattered again and again
The sense of repetition enhances the sense of
movement of this love and it places emphasis on
the first part of the contrast SCATTERED/
GATHERED. Moreover, SCATTERING creates an image
of expansiveness that may entail HAPPINESS (
Lakoff and Johnson 1980 18). But also SCATTERING
to even more pieces may refer to a DESTRUCTION
that entails SADNESS (Christakidou 2010). Thus
The same concept read from a different
perspective can lead to opposite emotions. Since
the reader cannot be sure of which reading is
correct, there is a kind of CONCEPTUAL BLENDING
(Fauconnier and Turner 2006/ 1998) , where both
inputs co-exist.
16
?? ?µ?? sf??e? ?? ?µ?? p???e? /ki ómos sfízi ki
ómos páli/ yet throbs, yet beatsyet throbs and
beats
Though love cannot be seen, it can be heard and
felt by the HEARTBEAT of the two
lovers. Metonymy PHYSICAL/BEHAVIORAL EFFECT FOR
EMOTION CAUSING IT (Radden and Kövecses 1999
39) THE INTENSE HEARTBEAT STANDS FOR LOVE
or THE INTENSE BEATING OF VEINS STANDS FOR
LOVE
17
?? ?µ?? sf??e? ?? ?µ?? p???e? /ki ómos sfízi ki
ómos páli/ yet throbs, yet beatsyet throbs and
beats

• An entailment of this metonymy is that THIS LOVE
  IS A LIVING ORGANISM since certain living
  organisms, can have a heartbeat. Hence, if LOVE
  IS A LIVING ORGANISM, it also has a BODY. This
  creates CONTRAST with the word bodiless of the
  first line of the poem.
• Moreover, the word sf??e? in Greek is related
  with being healthy and active.
• sf??e? ap? ???
• /Sfízi apo zoí/
• (S)he bustles with life
• Another CONTRAST Between this line and the
  previous one, due to the adversative conjunction
  KI OMOS/ ki ómos/ ???.

18
st? da???µat?? t?? µ????/sti dagomatçiá tou
mílou/ in the biting of the apple

• This love can be tasted though it cannot be seen.
• For the creation of a feeling of taste, the poet
  uses words that refer to fruit.
• This love has sound since there is the sound of
  the biting of an apple and the bursting of a fig.
• Conceptual blending and synaesthesia between
  tastes, sounds, and colors.
• Contrast The fruit mentioned in the poem have
  intense colors that come in contrast with this
  love that is referred to as colorless in the
  first line.

19
Conceptual blending and mixture of senses

• Mixture of senses
• Conceptual blending
• Semantic integration is performed by combining
  conceptual integration networks (see Fauconnier
  and Turner 1998 2006 307).
• At least two input mental spaces are required for
  each conceptual blend (ibid 308).

20
Synaesthesia

• Synaesthesia? the unconscious perceptual
  experience that comes from the combination and
  interaction of multimodal associations.
• 
  (Popova 2005 396
• In synaesthesia there is simultaneous
  neurological activation of different sense
  cortexes located in the brain lobes.
• This is called cross wiring or cross
  activation.
• (Ramachandran and Hubard 2001 8-13 Harrison and
  Baron-Cohen, 1997 Marks 1997)
• )

21
st? ?a?a?µat?? t?? s???? /sti xara?matçiá tou
síkou/ in the bursting of the fig

• The bursting of the fig can also be a metonymy
  that denotes the ripeness, as well as the
  sweetness of the fruit.
• Metaphorically, tasting these fruit is receiving
  loves pleasure.

22
s? ??a ß?ss??? ?e??s? /s éna visiní kerási/in a
morello-colored sweet cherry into a dark-red
cherry

• ß?ss???
  ?e??s?
• /v?sino/
  
  /kerási/
• morello
  sweet cherry

The word ß?ss??? is used in Greek for
dark-red. It literally means morello cherry
color However it is unusual to say ß?ss???
?e??s?. It is more usual to say
?ata???????/s????? ??????? ?e??s? or ???µ?
?e??s?. The phrase ß?ss??? ?e??s? activates
connotation mechanisms for both fruit and there
is blending and simultaneous contrast between the
sour taste of the morello cherry and the sweet
taste of the sweet cherry. Yet, with a second
reading of the phrase, the reader can realize
that when a sweet cherry has the color of the
morello cherry, it is in fact ripe and thus,
very sweet.
23
s? µ?? ???a ?p? ??d?t?/se miá ró?a apo rodíti/
in a grape of roditis in a rose-colored
grape

• The memory of eating roditis grape is not easy
  to access, since roditis is a variety of grapes
  mainly used in wine making. It is used
  particularly for white wine as well as for rosé
  (pink) wine varieties.
• Since this memory of eating roditis does not
  exist, there are some processes of blending in
  order to understand the meaning of the line.
• These blending processes create emergent meaning.

24
s? µ?? ???a ?p? ??d?t?/se miá ró?a apo rodíti/
in a grape of roditis in a rose-colored
grape

• ??d?
  ??d?t??
• /r?di/
  /rod?tis/
• Pomegranate
  Roditis
• 
  a variety
  of
• 
  pink- skinned grapes

Blending 1 ??d? ???a staf?????
Pomegranate Grape Blending 2 ??? ???a
(????) ???a staf????? Pink
nipple Pink grape (nipple and
grape have the same name in Greek)
25
s? µ?? ???a ?p? ??d?t? /se miá ró?a apo rodíti/
in a grape of roditis in a rose-colored
grape
Blending 3 Eating grape Drinking wine Since we
drink roditis and we know the wine, but we do
not know the taste of the fruit, the phrase s?
µ?? ???a ?p? ??d?t?/ In a grape of roditis
produces another blend since the reader combines
the two inputs (eating grape and drinking wine)
in a new, blended conceptualization.
26
t?s? ???e?? ?f??d?t?/tósi anáeri afrodíti/ so
ethereal an Aphroditeso airy an Aphrodite
Contrast between AN ETHEREAL GODDESS and HER
HUMAN NEED OF THIRST THAT GROUNDS HER NEXT TO
HUMANS
27
?? d???se? ?? ?e??se? /?a dipsási ?a kerási/she
will thirst, she will treat/offerwill thirst,
will offer
When someone thirsts, it is expected that (s)he
will drink something VAGUENESS to quench
his/her thirst. Nevertheless, there is no
reference to the Goddess drinking anything.
Rather, she offers the lovers something (to
drink/or eat). VAGUENESS. There is CONTRAST
between what is expected to be mentioned and what
is actually being mentioned. Besides, the verb
thirst can function metonymically, too.
Hence, it can mean that she will thirst and
drink, though only the first part of the process
is mentioned PART FOR WHOLE.
28
??a st?µa ?? ???? st?µa/ena stóma ki álo
stóma/one mouth and another mouth

• Metonymy
• MOUTH STANDS FOR THE LOVER
• PART FOR WHOLE
• What will she offer?
• Is this food/drink
• metaphorical?
• Is this food/drink love?
• Metaphor
• LOVE IS FOOD/DRINK

29
????? ???µa, ????? s?µa /xorís xróma, xorís
sóma/without colour, without body colorless,
bodiless

• Invisible Goddess?
• Impalpable?
• A spirit?
• An idea?
• An emotion?
• A bond?
• Love?
• IS THERE CONTRAST ONCE AGAIN ???
• The poem closes like a CYCLE
• and the last line is the same as
• the first line.
• THE REPETITION OF THE FIRST LINE
• IN THE FINAL LINE ENHANCES
• THE EFFECT OF CONTRAST IN

30
Conclusions

• The poet uses various cognitive processes and
  techniques to create an impression, a sense, an
  emotion.
• Metaphor and metonymy play an important role in
  the poets conceptualizations.
• However, conceptual blending, synaesthesia, and
  mainly contrast are responsible for the most
  intense emotional effects the poem has on the
  reader.

31

• Thank you for your attention!!!!!

32
References

• Athanasiadou A. and E. Tabakowska. (eds). (1998).
  Speaking of Emotions. Conceptualization and
  Expression. Berlin and New York Mouton de
  Gruyter.
• Christakidou A. (2010). Conceptualization and
  Expression of the Domain of SADNESS in Modern
  Greek. Unpublished Diploma Thesis. Aristotle
  University, Thessaloniki, Greece.
• Christakidou, A. (2012). The Language of Emotions
  in Elytis Poetry and the Affect of Culture A
  Cognitive Linguistic Analysis of Elytis The
  Monogram. MA Thesis. Aristotle University,
  Thessaloniki, Greece.
• Danesi, M. (2009). Opposition theory and the
  interconnectedness of language, culture, and
  cognition. Sign Systems Studies, 37(1/2).
• Fauconnier, G. and Mark Turner (2006) 1998.
  Conceptual Integration Networks. Cognitive
  Linguistics. Basic Readings. Dirk Geeraerts, ed.
  Berlin Mouton de Gruyter.
• Gibbs, R.W. (2006). Embodiment and Cognitive
  Science. Cambridge Cambridge University Press.
• Harrison, J.E. Baron-Cohen, S. (1997).
  Synaesthesia A review of psychological theories.
  In Baron-Cohen and Harrison (1997).
• Kövesces, Z. (1986). Metaphors of Anger, Pride
  and Love A Lexical Approach to the Study of
  Concepts. Amsterdam John Benjamins.
• Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. (1980). Metaphors We
  Live By. Chicago and London The University of
  Chicago Press.
• Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. (1999). Philosophy in
  the Flesh. The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to
  Western Thought. New York Basic Books.

33
References

• Marks, L.E. (1997), On coloured-hearing
  synaesthesia Cross-modal translations of sensory
  dimensions, in Baron-Cohen Harrison (1997).
• Popova, Y. (2005). Image Schema and Verbal
  Synaesthesia. Cognitive Linguistics Research 29.
  From Perception to Meaning. Image Schemas in
  Cognitive Linguistics. B. Hampe (ed). Berlin and
  New York Mouton de Gruyter.
• Radden, G. and Z. Kövecses. (1999). Towards a
  Theory of Metonymy. Metonymy in Language and
  Thought. K-U. Panther and G. Radden (eds).
  Amsterdam/Philadelphia John Benjamins
• Ramachandran V.S. and E.M. Hubbard. (2001).
  SynaesthesiaA Window into Perception, Thought
  and Language. Journal of Consciousness Studies,
  Vol. 8(12), 334.
• Ruiz de Mendoza, F. (2011). Metonymy and
  cognitive operations. Defining Metonymy in
  Cognitive Linguistics. Towards a consensus view.
  R. Benczes, A. Barcelona and F. Ruiz de Mendoza
  (Eds). John Benjamins.
• Seferis, G. (1973). ???e? t?? 1945-1951. Athens
  Ikaros.
• Seferis, G. (1974). A Poet's Journal. Days of
  1945-1951, tr. A. Anagnostopoulos. Cambridge,
  Massachusetts and London The Belknap Press of
  Harvard University Press.
• Sharifian, F., Dirven, R., Yu, N. and Niemeier,
  S. (2008). Culture and language Looking for the
  mind inside the body. Culture, Body, and
  Language Conceptualizations of Internal Body
  Organs across Cultures and Languages. Farzad
  Sharifian et al. (eds). Berlin and New York
  Mouton de Gruyter.
• Turner, M. (2002). The Cognitive Study of Art,
  Language, and Literature. Poetics Today, 23(1),
  9-20.