The heart and cultural embodiment in Tunisian Arabic Zouhair Maalej Abstract The Muslim concept of the heart as an instrument of understanding is evident in the teachings of the Koran (the Holy Book of Muslims). The heart in present-day T. Arabic, however, is almost exclusively the seat of emotions and cultural values, but hardly ever the instrument of thought and understanding, which are relegated to the 3aql ‘intellect’. Compared to other parts of the body, the heart is one of the most productive source domains for cultural conceptualizations in present-day T. Arabic. It is a CONTAINER for emotions, people, and objects that can enter it and leave it (IN-OUT schema). It is also capable of movement as in UPDOWN (fear, panic, and worry), and WIDE-NARROW (worry, anxiety) image schemas. The heart provides metaphoric conceptualizations for love and sadness, and is also involved in conceptualizations of cultural values such as compassion, cruelty, courage, encouragement, generosity, hard work, kindness, laziness, meanness, (in)tolerance, conscience, remembrance, and so forth. The metonymic model of the heart’s Idealized Cognitive Model describes the HEART FOR PERSON metonym, where the heart stands for the person. Compared to the conceptualizations of the heart in English, the heart in present-day T. Arabic is fairly restricted in scope. Indeed, while the heart in English describes a wider range of emotions, mental faculties, and cultural conceptualizations – equating this organ with the mind, thinking, understanding, etc. – in present-day T. Arabic the qalb ‘heart’ is largely dissociated from the mind, thinking, and understanding. Keywords: heart, metaphor, metonymy, cultural model, cultural values, emotions, Tunisian Arabic. 1. Introduction In the West, three models of the relation between body and mind can be isolated: (i) the humors model, which originated in the Greek culture and medicine and dominated Western thought up to the middle ages, with remnants still felt in some language use nowadays (Geeraerts and Grondelaars 1995); (ii) the body-mind split model, which was staunchly defended by Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle and systematized by Descartes, and which dominated Western philosophy for many centuries (Lakoff and Johnson 1999); and (iii) embodied thought model, which called 396 Zouhair Maalej for a body-mind conflation (Johnson 1987; Lakoff and Johnson 1999). In particular, the embodied model recently questioned the other two models, especially the body-mind split model. The embodiment thesis is the backbone on which cognitive linguistics rests, and, perhaps, also on which its future will greatly depend. Drawing on the foundational work by Lakoff and Johnson (1980), Johnson (1987) and Lakoff (1987), the literature on embodiment is growing bigger with the addition of specific volumes (Gibbs 2005; Ziemke et al., in press) and papers in journals (Sinha and Jensen de López 2000; Ziemke, 2003; Maalej 2004, 2007; Rohrer in press). Treatments of embodiment range from “embodiment as the physical substrate” (Rohrer in press) to structural coupling, historical embodiment, physical embodiment, ‘organismoid’ embodiment, organismic embodiment, and social embodiment (Ziemke 2003). Lakoff and Johnson (1999: 102–4) investigated embodiment by distinguishing it into neural, phenomenological, and cognitive unconscious levels, which are all useful biological, experiential, and psycho-philosophical dimensions to embodiment. However, why do we have, for instance, to move in the direction of abstract forms of embodiment such as some of the types distinguished by Ziemke (2003) while rudimentary physiological and cultural forms of embodiment are out there awaiting treatment and recognition? It may seem a proliferation of terminology to add new concepts to the already existing ones (developed by Lakoff and Johnson 1999, Rohrer 1998 2001, Wilson 2002, Ziemke 2003). But cultural embodiment (Sinha and Jensen de López 2000; Maalej 2004), as another addition to the list, may turn out to be a promising alley into research on embodiment. The conception of “cultural embodiment” offered here can be contrasted with the more physiological kind of embodiment. For instance, emotions are known in brain studies to be regulated by the hypothalamus brain structure, and controlled by the limbic system, which inhibits and excites them. Lakoff and Johnson (1999) call this kind of correlation between emotions and their correlative brain structures “neural embodiment.” Cultural embodiment occurs when physiological embodiment is departed from in significant ways, thus constructing a culturally-situated form of embodiment. Cultural embodiment in the sense used here is when the neural synchronization between emotions, on the one hand, and the hypothalamus and the limbic system, on the other, is ignored in a given culture, and when the control of experience and its conceptualization is permeated by culture. An important type of cultural embodiment is when the physiology, function, and neural basis of body parts are imaginatively exploited and hijacked by The heart in Tunisian Arabic 397 culture. This conception of embodiment runs counter to “Lakoff & Johnson’s companion formulation that the physiological body grounds cultural thought and never the reverse” (Maalej 2007: 91). Bodily organs used in emotions and endearment are commonplace in present-day T. Arabic. For instance, in the conceptualization of anger, body parts such as stomach, brain, nerve, bone, and testicle represent different degrees of anger such as fqa3-l-i ma3id-ti (He burst open my stomach), Haraq-l-i muxx-i (He caused my brain to burn), Haraq-l-i 3Saab-i (He burnt my nerves), digdig-l-i 3Daam-i (He broke my bones into small bits), and nfaxx-im-l-i (He inflated my testicles) (Maalej 2004). On the other hand, organs such as the heart, liver, and eye are commonly used in endearment in present-day T. Arabic, offering conceptualizations such as ya ruH qalb-i (hey, soul of my heart), ya kibd-i (hey, my liver) or ya mamm-u 3ayn-i (hey, pupil of my eye). Such conceptualizations show how the dearness of children is motivated by and correlated in present-day T. Arabic with the centrality of organs such as the heart, liver, and eye to perception. The eye, in particular, is involved in a panoply of cultural conceptualizations such as love (e.g. flaan fi 3ainayya: X is in my eyes: I love X so much), perseverance (e.g. 3mill l-milH fi 3ainay-h w bana daar: He put salt into his eyes and built a house: He worked hard/persevered and managed to build a house), ambition (e.g. 3ain-ha kbiira/waas3a: her eye is big/ spacious: She is very ambitious), over-ambition (e.g. l-3ain ma yimlaa-ha kaan d-dud w traab: only worms and sand can fill the eye: Her/His ambition is outrageous), desire of coveting (e.g. 3ain-u 3ali-ha: His eye is on her/it: He covets her/it), with the object of the desire of coveting being a woman, a car, a house, a plot of land, etc. The eye can also be found in memory-related conceptualizations as in xalli-ha bain 3ainay-k (Keep it between your eyes: Don’t forget it) or jaat bain 3ainayya (It came between my eyes: I remembered it). Remembrance is also conceptualized with the ear as in xalli l-Hkaaya xirS fi wiDnik (Keep that story as an earring: Never forget that story). However, except for eye and ear, bodily organs used as bearers of mental faculties are rare in present-day T. Arabic. Each of the body parts used in the conceptualization of emotions, endearment, and cognitive faculties does not, however, constitute a cognitive/ cultural model as complex and elaborate as that of the heart in present-day T. Arabic. The heart as a source domain has been attested in the expression of emotions in many cultures, including Chinese (Yu, 1995, 1998, 2003), English (Niemeier 1997, 2000), Hungarian (Kövecses, 2000, 2002), and Persian (Sharifian this volume), and so forth. Building on Maalej (2004, 398 Zouhair Maalej 2007), the present chapter shows the heart to be one of the most productive source domains in present-day T. Arabic for the conceptualization of emotions and feelings, describing a complex Idealized Cognitive Model (Lakoff 1982, 1987). Its image schematic structure shows the heart both as a static container for emotions, people, and objects, and a dynamic entity moving in space. Its metaphoric model establishes the heart as a repository for emotions and cultural values while its metonymic model describes the HEART FOR PERSON metonym, where the heart stands for the person. The data on which this chapter is based comes from conventionalized expressions that take the heart as a target domain in present-day T. Arabic. It is based on the author’s intuition as a native speaker, and it is crossed-checked informally by other natives of T. Arabic to minimize the risk of interference from English expressions. There exist for T. Arabic no sizeable written documents such as dictionaries, nor even oral corpora recorded or transcribed. Since T. Arabic is only a spoken language variety of Arabic, few documents1 are found in written form. The only book that discusses Tunisian culture and traditions in the author’s sub-dialect is Zouari and Charfi (1998), which has very little to offer about the heart in present-day T. Arabic. The structure of the present chapter is as follows. Section 2 discusses conceptions of the heart in the Arab-Islamic culture, isolating a religionbased model and a secular one, arguing that present-day T. Arabic has opted for the latter as the basis of an Idealized Cognitive Model. Section 3 addresses the conceptualizations of the heart in present-day T. Arabic in light of the humoral doctrine, which is shown to offer very little toward accounting for the Idealized Cognitive Model of the heart in present-day T. Arabic. Section 4 deals with the image schematic conceptualizations of the heart in present-day T. Arabic, especially the CONTAINER schema with regard to anger, fear, and love emotions and some cultural values. Section 5 is devoted to the metaphoric conceptualizations of the heart in emotions, cultural values, and mental faculties. Section 6 discusses the metonymy of the HEART FOR PERSON. 2. The heart in the Arab-Islamic culture In the Koran, the holy book of Muslims, the heart is a bearer of the mental faculty of understanding, though it is not used to think with as, for instance, is the heart in Chinese (Yu this volume). Consider the following examples from the Koran: The heart in Tunisian Arabic 399 (1) a. Many are the Ginns and men we have made for Hell: They have hearts wherewith they understand not, eyes wherewith they see not, and ears wherewith they hear not.2 b. Do they not travel through the land, so that their hearts (and minds) may thus learn wisdom.3 c. Verily in this is a Message for any that has a heart and understanding or who gives ear and earnestly witnesses (the truth).4 In (1a), it is clear through the use of the instrumental conjunction (wherewith) that the heart is for understanding. Emphasis is added between brackets “(and minds)” by the translator in (1b) to the translation of qulubun (hearts), though it does not have a counterpart in the source text. The intention of the translator is to make sure that through this added (and conjoined) parallel to “their hearts” the heart in translation is interpreted by the reader as “their minds.” But the translator could have done away with the addition as understanding the heart as a mental faculty is very obvious in the cognitive verb “learn” predicated of hearts. The translator did the same in (1c), whereby he translated the word qalb (heart) by “heart and understanding.” This extra care on the part of the translator to render “heart” as “heart and understanding” in the translated text is taken to ensure that “heart” triggers the right translation equivalent intended in the Koran. The heart-as-instrument-of-understanding metaphor is brought out more clearly when the heart is said to be veiled/locked/covered, thus precluding it from performing its main function of understanding, signaled in many places in the Koran: (2) a. But we have thrown veils on their hearts, so they understand it not.5 b. Do they not then earnestly seek to understand the Qur’an, or are their hearts locked up by them?6 c. And We put coverings over their hearts (and minds) lest they should understand the Qur’an, and deafness into their ears.7 There is, therefore, a relation of causality between lack of understanding and the heart being veiled, locked up, and covered, whereby the heart is clearly held responsible for the understanding task. 400 Zouhair Maalej In (2c), the heart also shares the hearing function with the ear as an instrument of understanding. This is clearly understood if we add the necessary material to the elliptical construction used to avoid repetition: “… and [put] deafness into their ears” [lest they should understand the Koran]. Further confirmation of the involvement of audition and sight with the heart in the Koran, can be seen in the following contexts: (3) a. We could punish them (too) for their sins, and seal up their hearts so that they could not hear.8 b. Truly it is not their eyes that are blind, but their hearts which are in their breasts.9 The heart in the Koran, therefore, does part of the mind’s work as in Western culture. This can be inferred from the conceptual metonymy CONCRETE FOR ABSTRACT, which subsumes the specific conceptual metaphor, UNDERSTANDING IS SEEING AND HEARING, with the heart as the organ of understanding. This perceptive metaphor for understanding has been attested for Indo-European languages by Sweetser (1990: 28), who studied it under the generic Mind-as-Body metaphor. Alongside the conceptual metaphor CONCRETE FOR ABSTRACT, where the heart qualifies as an organ of understanding, the Koran also makes use of the more universal heart-as-container metaphor. The container is signaled by the preposition fi (in) as in: (4) “And God knows (all) that is in your hearts: And God is AllKnowing, Most Forbearing.”10 Obviously, the logic of the container presupposes contents filling it, which can be positive or negative. Man’s heart, thus, may be filled with faith (Suras XLIX, LVIII), hypocrisy (Sura IX), ignorance (Sura XLVIII), indignation (Sura IX), peacefulness (Suras XLVIII), perversity (Sura III), rancor (Suras LIX), regret (Sura III), sickness (Suras V, VIII, IX, X, XXIV, XLVII, LXXIV), terror (Suras III, VIII, XXXIII, LIV). In particular, the heart being filled with sickness is very frequent in the Koran, whereby sickness is metaphorically conceptualized. As will be seen later on in the chapter, Tunisian culture conceives of the heart as being filled with different contents than does the Koran. The heart in Tunisian Arabic 401 The prevalent religious system in Islam (which it shares with Christianity and Judaism) can be captured in the soul-body dichotomy, where the soul is heavenly, immaterial, and eternal while the body is earthly, material, and ephemeral: (5) Body Soul Religious system Believers should aspire to shun things bodily in favor of things heavenly. As seen in the Koran, the heart and the intellect overlap at the bodily member of the dichotomy since both heart and intellect have biological foundations. However, compared to the Western body-mind dichotomy, Islam not only does not dichotomize the heart and the intellect, it explicitly states that both heart and intellect are bodily-based. As stated by al-Jawziyya (1998: 81), “according to Islamic medicine, the primary connection of the spirit (rûh) with the body is by the heart from which the spirit arises and is sent forth into the parts of the body” (quoted in MacPhee 2003: 66): (6) ruH (soul) qalb (heart) jasad (body) Thus, under this religious model the heart acts like a mediator between the body and the soul. The Arab culture has certainly been impacted by the teachings of Islam, which explains the existence of the heart-as-intellect metaphor in olden times. Indeed, the heart among Arabs had come to stand for the intellect as attested in The Tongue of Arabs (Ibn ManDur 1994), one of the famous books that documents linguistic practices in Arabic history. Reporting from authorities, Ibn ManDur (1994 Book I: 687) mentioned that “it is permissible in Arabic to say: ‘You have no heart’ and ‘Your heart is not with you’, i.e., ‘Your intellect/reason/mind is not with you,’ and ‘Where did your heart go?’, i.e. ‘Where did your intellect/reason/mind go?’ Others said: He who has a heart, i.e., understanding and reflection.”11 There are certainly relics of ancient conceptions surviving in deeply religious communities, as documented by MacPhee (2003: 57) for the rural province of Errachidia, Morocco, where the heart is seen as “an organ and symbol that links spiritual, emotional, and physical experience.” However, the religious model of body versus soul and the medical body-spirit-heart model have been abandoned in present-day T. Arabic, thus giving rise to a secular system where 402 Zouhair Maalej heart and intellect find themselves dichotomized. The heart and intellect have gradually been separated in the Arab culture probably under the influence of western philosophy, especially ancient Greek philosophy and rationalist-oriented Enlightenment in Europe, which was overwhelmingly translated and adopted into Islamic philosophy and Arab culture. The religious conceptualization of the heart-as-understanding that existed in Arab-Muslim culture, therefore, seems to have been short-lived in many of the dialects of Arabic. As documented by MacPhee (2003: 65) for Morocco, “the growing influence of secularism and capitalist sentiments in the Sahara” are responsible for social disunity. Probably for similar political reasons, the religious component was lost in Tunisian culture, giving way to the secular heart-intellect dichotomy. The heart and the intellect in present-day T. Arabic have come apart so completely that those who think with their hearts are deemed irrational as in: (7) flaan yxammim X think-IMPERF X thinks with his heart. ‘X is quite irrational.’ b-qalb-u with heart his As a result, the heart has kept a very low profile in the conceptualization of mental faculties in present-day T. Arabic, but occupies a preponderant place in the conceptualization of emotions and cultural values, describing an Idealized Cognitive Model of the heart image schematically, metaphorically, or metonymically. Curiously enough, thinking to the self is achieved with the help of the soul or between the self and the soul as in the following examples: (8) a. xammimt bain-i [I] think-PERFECT between myself ‘I thought between myself and my soul.’ I thought to myself. b. xammimt m3a [I] think-PERFECT with ‘I thought with my soul.’ I thought to myself. w bain ruH-i and between soul my ruH-i soul my The heart in Tunisian Arabic 403 The “with” in (8b) expresses the notion of instrumentality rather than that of accompaniment, where the soul is conceptualized as carrying some of the burden of thinking with the self. Such a soul-as-understanding metaphor seems to be the only religious survivor in present-day T. Arabic. 3. The heart in Islamic medicine Burnett (2004), a professor of the History of Islamic Influences in Europe, presents Avicenna’s medicine as built on the four humors: The basis of this medicine was ‘humoral pathology', i.e. an understanding that the human body consisted of four humours: blood, yellow bile (choler), phlegm, and black bile (melancholy), which were related to other `quaterneries': the elements air, fire, earth and water; the seasons spring, summer, autumn and winter; the ages of man, childhood, youth, middle age and old age; and the triplicities of the signs of the zodiac. Good health depended on the four humours being well-balanced in respect to each other (the Greek term is ‘eukrasia' – a ‘good mixing’, ‘temperament’ or ‘complexion’). Winsvold (2005) argues that “the success of the Arabian medicine can be credited for their endorsement of Greek and Roman medicine at a time when this knowledge was lost to the West.” Winsvold (2005) adds that medicine was practiced according to the: Six Necessities': Air (including climate, soil etc.), Food, Bodily rest and movement, Sleep, Emotional rest, Excretion and retention. Any of these were believed to influence the temperament. This meant that people living in one climate would have a different temperament than others. Food or even substances surrounding a man, such as wood, brick or metal, would influence his health, and thus both be potential explanations for disease and form the basis of a cure. However, the question that must be raised is whether the theory of the four humors can be traced back in cultural conceptualizations of the heart in T. Arabic. As presented by Geeraerts and Grondelaers (1995: 156) and Yu (this volume), the humoral tradition includes physiological, psychological, and medical aspects. Physiologically, the four humors (yellow bile, black bile, phlegm, and blood) regulate the body’s well-being. Psychologically, they 404 Zouhair Maalej generate corresponding temperaments (angry, fearful, phlegmatic, and sanguine), depending on the dominant humor available to the body. Medically, the humoral theory identifies diseases and their symptoms and prescribes therapies to regulate the body’s imbalance. Arguing against the conceptualization of anger as the HEAT OF A FLUID IN A CONTAINER, Geeraerts and Grondelaers (1995: 174) claim that anger “has undergone the influence of the humoral doctrine, but that the original set of humoral expressions has been subjected to a process of reinterpretation and obsolescence,” whereby the humoral expressions have been, under scientific influences, corrected as physiological ones. To address the heart in present-day T. Arabic, the system of humoral correspondences is reproduced from Geeraerts and Grondelaers (1995: 158) in the following table: Table 1. The system of humoral correspondences Phlegm Black bile Yellow bile Blood Characteristic Cold and moist Cold and dry Element Temperament Organ Color Taste Season Wind Planet Animal Water Phlegmatic Brain/bladder White Salty Winter North Moon Turtle Earth Melancholic Spleen Black Sour Autumn West Saturn Sparrow Warm and dry Warm and moist Fire Air Choleric Sanguine Liver/stomach Heart Yellow Red Bitter Sweet Summer Spring South East Mars Jupiter Lion Goat Originating in translations of western concepts, names for the four humors do exist in Modern Standard Arabic as ?an-nafsu l-balRamiyyatu (phlegmatic self), ?an-nafsu is-Safraawiyyatu (choleric self), ?an-nafsu ssawdaawiyyatu (melancholic self), and ?an-nafsu d-damawiyyatu (sanguine self). However, unlike English and French, present-day T. Arabic does not seem to include the nominal concepts that stand for the humors (except, of course, blood), nor any of the adjectives derived from the four humors that designate the temperaments in the theory. Practically, the humoral theory no longer has an existence in the mind of speakers of T. Arabic. The heart in Tunisian Arabic 405 Present-day T. Arabic does include expressions such as damm-u sxun (His blood is hot/He is hot-blooded), to mean that he is easily irritable, and damm-u baarid (His blood is cold: He is not irritable). Such expressions might be argued to evoke the humoral doctrine. However, a close scrutiny reveals a skewing of correspondences. For instance, in damm-u sxun, although blood is hot not just warm, the person having that kind of disposition is not sanguine but choleric in present-day T. Arabic. In damm-u baarid, there is a problem fitting the expression either under phlegm or black bile since both of them are cold (and it does not fit under blood as blood does not associate with coldness). Granting that it can fit under either one, there is still a problem of correspondence between blood, on the one hand, and phlegm or black bile, on the other. Blood associates with the heart while phlegm as coldness associates with the brain/bladder and black bile with spleen. If one believes, as do Geeraerts and Grondelaers (1995: 163), that blood here stands for yellow bile and phlegm because blood carries all humors, then it can be argued that these expressions have come into being under the influence of the humoral theory, and have subsequently been reinterpreted physiologically later on in history. The same problem persists with expressions using the heart as a landmark as in the following expressions describing various degrees of heartburn: 3and-i n-naar 3ala qalb-i (I have fire on my heart), qalb-i yaHraq ki n-naar (My heart is burning like fire), 3and-i sihraaja naar 3ala qalb-i (I have a flame of fire on my heart). Fire (and its derivatives burning and flames) associates with liver and stomach in the theory while in these expressions in present-day T. Arabic it is in/on to the heart. There also exists in present-day T. Arabic the expression qalb-u baarid (His heart is cold: He is a lazy person) discussed earlier in connection with laziness/idleness. The laziness-as-coldness metaphor does not evoke phlegmatic placidity, which is often contrasted to the choleric temper associated with yellow bile. Rather, coldness here is contrasted to dynamism and activity. This may be attributed to the metaphor INTENSITY IS HEAT (LACK OF INTENSITY IS COLDNESS), as discussed in Kövecses (2005: 27). Coldness acts as a source domain for many experiential domains in present-day T. Arabic such as in riiq baarid (cold saliva: silly talk), janab-ha baarid minn-u (Her side is cold about him: She does not trust him), ydai-h baarda (His hands are cold: He does not have the courage to do anything), wja33 baarid (cold labor: intermittent pain during labor), 3iiša baarda (cold life: spice-free food), wTaa baarda (cold land: fairly infertile land), s-suq baarda (cold market: bear market), liqma 406 Zouhair Maalej baarda (cold mouthful: food that one does not work or tire for), s-tiqbaal baarid (cold welcome), and so forth. (Zouari and Charfi 1998: 33–4). Presumably, such expressions do not suggest phlegm or any synonym of it, especially those expressions that talk about food, life, labor, market, and land. The lack of correlation between coldness in these conceptualizations and phlegm suggests cultural mappings between coldness and expected qualities of food, welcome, life, labor, market, and land that are experienced and judged to be below a certain level of normalcy in the culture. As a result, the humoral theory does not seem to motivate or predict emotions and cultural values addressed in the current chapter. Such a cultural explanation of these well-established correlations between the experiential domain of coldness and various experiences points to cultural specificities. In other words, if it were the case that the four humors governed conceptualizations, all cultures would have had the very same conceptualizations of experience, and we know this is true of only a restricted number of experiences across cultures. For instance, Englishspeaking people conceptualize the present-day T. Arabic “cold talk” as stupid or silly talk, “cold side” as distrust, “cold land” as fairly infertile land, “cold labor” as having little labor pain, “cold market” as bear market, and so on. These conceptualizations are evidence that our cognition is fundamentally “built for encultured variation” (Levinson 1996: 177). However, this does not mean that cultures do not share some conceptualizations as in s-tiqbaal baarid and s-tiqbaal Haarr in present-day T. Arabic and “cool welcome” and “warm welcome” in English. The following sections present cultural conceptualizations of the heart in present-day T. Arabic following Lakoff’s (1982, 1987) theory of categorization known as Idealized Cognitive Model. 4. The image-schematic model of the heart in T. Arabic Lakoff and Johnson (1980) and Lakoff and Turner (1989) isolated four semantically autonomous domains that serve as metaphoric grounding for semantically non-autonomous concepts. Such cognitive domains, which seem to be pervasive in many cultures, include spaces, substances, objects, and containers. In many (if not all) cultures, the heart is not only associated with emotions but receives them as its contents, which makes it a CONTAINER for them. The preposition fi (in) in present-day T. Arabic shows the heart’s containment dimension in: The heart in Tunisian Arabic (9) a. qult [I] say-PERFECT ‘I said in my heart.’ I said to myself. 407 fi qalb-i in heart my b. yxalli/yxabbi/yaxzin fi qalb-u [he] keep/hide/store-IMPERF in heart his ‘He keeps/hides/stores everything in his heart.’ He is too secretive. c. HaaTiT/3aamil [he] keep/do-IMPERF ‘He keeps things in his heart.’ He is anxious/worried. fi qalb-u in heart his In (9a), things that are said to the self are kept in the heart as a secret chamber. In (9b-c), the heart is a storehouse or hiding place, tightly preserving positive and negative emotions and information. The logic of containers predicts that the heart can be full or empty of some contents as in: (10) a. qalb-u m3ibbi heart his full ‘His heart is full about me.’ He strongly picks at me. 3aliy-ya on me b. qalb-u ma fi-š raHma heart his no in not compassion/mercy ‘There is no compassion in his heart.’ He is/is not compassionate/merciful. In (10a), the heart is full of bias against the speaker while in (10b) the heart is empty of mercy. In Maalej (2004: 59–60), it was shown that in present-day T. Arabic the heart, alongside the body, is a container for anger. Because anger is considered a liquid filling the body or the heart, anger as a liquid in a container may slosh, fill up, or may explode as a consequence of incapacity to take it in, etc, as in: 408 Zouhair Maalej (11) a. qalb-i TafTaf heart my slosh-PERFECT ‘My heart was sloshing with anger.’ b. qalb-I t3abba minn-u my heart was full from him ‘I had had enough of him.’ c. qalb-I taršaq heart my explode-PERFECT ‘My heart exploded.’ The logic of containers assumes that if the heart can be filled, it can also be relieved of its contents by emptying one’s anger into someone else as in: (12) farraRt fii-h qalb-i [I] empty-PERFECT in him heart my ‘I emptied my heart’s contents into him.’ This expression is not equivalent to the English “to pour one’s heart out;” its meaning has to do with retribution, that is someone angry finds an opportunity to take revenge on someone else. Emptying one’s heart in this way seems to have a relieving/cleaning effect on the heart’s contents. Congruent with the CONTAINER image schema, the heart can function according to an IN-OUT schema, whereby beloved people and desired objects enter it and leave it as in: (13) a. daxl-u fi qalb-i kiif niktit l-3asal [they] enter-PERFECT in heart my like drop the honey ‘They entered in my heart like a drop of honey does.’ I like them so much. b. xarj-u min qalb-i [they] leave-PERFECT from heart my ‘They left my heart.’ I was sad to lose/give/sell them. c. sallit-l-i qalb-i [she] pull-PERFECT to me heart my ‘She pulled out my heart.’ Her departure made me sad indeed. The heart in Tunisian Arabic 409 Together with the preposition fi, the deictic verbs txall (enter) in (13a) and xrajj (leave) in (13b) provide an excellent illustration of the heart as a bounded space having an entrance and an exit, which people and objects can enter and leave. However, as Niemeier (1997: 94) rightly suggests, “the way from feelings to heart is no one-way street but works both ways, as feelings may go in and go out of one’s heart.” Even though this also takes place in T. Arabic, the way in is happy and difficult and the way out is painful and easier. It takes a lot of time and energy to get in someone’s heart, but it takes very little to leave it or be washed out of it. In (13c), however, separation between two people profiles the heart as an entity that can leave its place by being pulled out of the body. For the target domain of separation, T. Arabic metaphorically conceptualizes the heart as a MOVABLE OBJECT. Present-day T. Arabic culturally imagines the physical separation of two people as a separation between the body and the heart, in which the latter is pulled out from the former by exerting force-dynamics. In English, such a state occasions the breaking of the heart; in present-day T. Arabic the heart does not seem to be breakable as love is in the mind or intellect. In other words, love affects the mind not the heart in present-day T. Arabic. As such, love, like anger, tends to interfere with accurate perception as in mahbul 3ali-ha ([He] is mad/crazy about her), xarjit-tu min 3aql-u ([She] made him leave his intellect: She made him crazy about her), and so forth. Beside the container or the three-dimensional in-out schemas, the heart in present-day T. Arabic admits conceptualizations using the one-dimensional UP-DOWN verticality schema as in: (14) a. habbaT-l-i id-dimmar [he] lower-PERFECT to me the destruction ‘He lowered destruction in my heart.’ He managed to dishearten me. fi qalb-i in heart my b. qalb-i TaaH heart my fall-PERFECT ‘My heart fell.’ Fear took hold of me. c. hazz-l-i qalb-i [he] lift-PERFECT to me heart my ‘He lifted my heart for me.’ He encouraged me/He gave me a lot of encouragement. 410 Zouhair Maalej d. qalb-i xrajj min blast-u heart my go out-PERFECT from place its ‘My heart left its usual place.’ Panic took hold of me. Sadness in (14a) is lowered into the bottom of the heart as is clear from the verb habbaT (to lower). In (14b), the heart is conceptualized as dropping out of fear. Someone who needs encouragement needs their heart to be lifted as in (14c). It, thus, seems that these downward movements of the heart are motivated by the conceptual metaphor DOWN IS BAD. In (14d), the place for the heart in the body is spatially ambiguous. As Niemeier (2000: 200) notes for English, the heart does not settle in one place or one position, but is imagined as a “MOVABLE OBJECT.” As noted above, the heart in present-day T. Arabic is filled with emotions different than those mentioned in the Koran such as faith, hypocrisy, ignorance, indignation, peacefulness, perversity, rancor, regret, sickness, terror. Some of the emotions addressed image-schematically in present-day T. Arabic include compassion, fear, panic, sorrow, and others. The imageschema of Idealized Cognitive Model of the heart in present-day T. Arabic includes three sub-models: CONTAINER, IN-OUT, and UP-DOWN. The container presupposes contents, which are mostly emotions such as anger, mercy, spite, and so on. The IN-OUT schema suggests that ENTERING THE HEART IS GOOD (or IN IS GOOD) but LEAVING THE HEART IS BAD (or OUT IS BAD) while the UP-DOWN schema suggests UP IS GOOD and DOWN IS BAD. In most cases, cultural conceptualizations of the heart as motivated by embodied schemas describe it as a MOVING AND MOVABLE OBJECT. 5. The metaphoric model of the heart in T. Arabic In Western culture, the body-mind dichotomy has been understood as a hindrance to making sense of the self, meaning, reason, and communication. In order to do so, it was urged to bring body and mind together (Johnson 1987: xxxvi; Varela et al 1991: 28). However, in the Arab-Islamic culture, as has been shown earlier on in this chapter, two dichotomies seem to be active together. In religious matters, a Muslim is an earthly body contrasted to an eternal soul. In earthly, experiential matters, the self is seen as divided between a 3aql (an intellect) and a qalb (a heart). The two are The heart in Tunisian Arabic 411 thought to be hard to reconcile, because the former is rational while the latter is sentimental. This section will look into the following target domains: (i) the metaphoric conceptualizations of the heart in emotions, and (ii) the conceptualizations of the heart in cultural values. In almost all the metaphoric conceptualizations of the heart in present-day T. Arabic, the heart could be seen as HEART FOR THE PERSON. And based on this metonymy, specific metaphoric conceptualizations will be spelled out below. 5.1. The heart in the target domain of emotions A lot of different things can metaphorically happen to the heart in presentday T. Arabic depending on what emotion is involved. Such happenings may range from leaving one’s heart behind, feeling pain in it, witnessing various mechanical transformations to it, to having it cooked as illustrated in the following examples: (15) a. xallayt qalb-i [I] leave-PERFECT heart my ‘I left my heart with him/her.’ It was so painful for me to leave him behind. 3and-u/-ha with him/her b. Haal-u ywijja3 l-qalb state his cause pain-IMPERF the heart ‘His condition is causing pain to my heart.’ I feel pain in my heart for him. c. qaTTa3-l-i [he] cut-PERFECT to me ‘He cut up my heart.’ qalb-i heart my d. Haal-u yfitfit l-qalb. state his cause to fall into pieces-IMPERF the heart. ‘His condition is causing the heart to fall into pieces.’ e. qalb-i walla heart my become-PERFECT ‘My heart turned henna.’ Hinna henna 412 Zouhair Maalej f. Haal-u yDawwib l-qalb state his melt-IMPERFECT the heart ‘His condition makes the heart melt.’ g. qalb-i miswi (w miqli) heart my roast and fry-PERFECT-PASSIVE ‘My heart is roasted and fried about her.’ I am very sad about her condition. 3alii-ha on her Caring for others in present-day T. Arabic is imagined to occasion a split between the heart and the body or the self as in (15a), whose conceptual metaphor is CARING FOR OTHERS IS LEAVING ONE’S HEART BEHIND FOR THEIR SAKE. Based on the metonymy HEART FOR THE PERSON, this conceptualization creates a Divided-Person metaphor (Lakoff 1996: 103). In present-day T. Arabic, the mildest form of compassion for others is represented by the conceptual metaphor, HAVING PITY IS FEELING PAIN IN ONE’S HEART, whose linguistic counterpart is in (15b). Having pity for someone is not something that one does for them but it is something that happens to one’s heart as a result of its being affected by people’s states or situations. Various other ways to express one’s pity/compassion towards people may include the conceptualizations in (15c-f) above. No English equivalents are provided for them because these conceptualizations are highly culturally-constructed. It takes a lot of imagination to conceptualize pity in the way it is done in present-day T. Arabic. In (15c), the kind of pain felt as a result of pity is the result of a knife cutting the heart into pieces, which presupposes the letting of blood that is at the origin of pain. In (15d), the pain comes as a result of the heart turning into small crumbs, which suggests a painful disintegration of the heart. In (15e), the heart undergoes a further transformation turning it into henna powder – a fine form of grinding, suggesting extreme pain and concern. In (15f), the pain to the heart caused by pity simply makes it melt. Clearly, these expressions reflect the metaphor, PITY CAUSES CHEMICAL/MECHANICAL TRANSFORMATIONS TO THE HEART, where the degree of pain felt by the speaker is proportional to the degree of sufferance the affected person endures. Another transformation of the heart occurs to it in sadness/sorrow in (15g), whereby it is profiled as undergoing a mutation that usually occurs to food while it is cooking. Interestingly, roasting and frying presuppose heat of fire in the heart, which is a way of imagining one’s heart as cooking by The heart in Tunisian Arabic 413 roasting and/or frying. Such roasting and frying of the heart may evoke the conceptual metaphor, BEING SAD IS HAVING ONE’S HEART COOKED, not in the sense that we eat it as food, but in the sense that what happens to it in sorrow is similar to what happens to food as it is being prepared. As a structuring domain, food has been attested in many areas of experience such as sex and lust (Emanatian 1995), and women in many cultures (Maalej 2001), and so forth. While the image-schematic model of the heart in present-day T. Arabic involves containment and movement in space, the metaphoric model with emotions mainly describes transformations, which occasions changes of state to the heart ranging from being cooked by roasting or frying, being cut into pieces, or ground into powder, to completely melting away. 5.2. The heart in the target domain of cultural values Apart from featuring as an important source domain in the conceptualization of emotions in present-day T. Arabic, the heart is at the center of the conceptualization of many cultural values, which manipulate the heart according to various pairs of antonyms such as soft/tough, strong/weak, small/big, black/white, cold/warm, live/dead, and so forth. Niemeier (2000: 205) captures the transformations that occur to the heart in English in the conceptual metaphor, THE HEART IS A MANIPULABLE OBJECT. Before dealing with these pairs, it is useful to address the polysemy of the heart in present-day T. Arabic as in the following metaphor: (16) ma 3and-him-š qalb no with them not heart ‘They have no heart.’ They are heartless. Contextualized, heartlessness represents either laziness or indifference. Laziness is invoked in the following proverbs: (17) a. l-qalb ma ySiir kaan l-ir-rHa the heart no become-IMPERF only to the grinder ‘The heart can only be made to the hand-operated grinder.’ 414 Zouhair Maalej b. illi ma fii-h qalb ymut smiin m3aš3aš who no in him heart die-IMPERF fat fatten-PASSIVE ‘He who does not have a heart will die so fat.’ The moral of the proverb in (17a) is that love for work can only be selfgenerated. In (17b), an idle person is teased about his fatness, which is a metonymy for lack of physical exercise. However, to profile other moral/cultural values, the heart is manipulated in various ways. Compassion, for instance, is conceptualized as softness of the heart while cruelty is conceptualized as hardness or toughness: (18) a. qalb-u rqiiq heart his affectionate ‘His heart is affectionate.’ He is kind. b. qalb-u SHiiH heart his hard ‘His heart is hard.’ He is unfeeling/cruel. Compassion and affection are, thus, correlated with softness of the heart in present-day T. Arabic, and cruelty correlates with different degrees of toughness. In (18b), the degree of toughness is mild, giving rise to a moderate kind of cruelty. But cruelty can be conceptualized as having qalb kaasaH (a tough heart) or qalb Hjarr (a heart of stone), which are shared by English’s hardness of heart, heart of marble, heart of iron, heart of stone, and so forth. (Niemeier 2000: 201) and Hungarian’s hardness or toughness of the heart (Kövecses personal communication). The experiential mapping of soft/tough things (such as foods and non-foods) in the socio-physical environment onto affection/cruelty is captured in the conceptual metaphors, SOFT IS GOOD and TOUGH IS BAD. Apart from softness and toughness, the heart is conceptualized as changeable in degree of strength or weakness as in the following cases: (19) a. qalb-u qwiyy heart his strong ‘His heart is strong.’ He is courageous/He has a lot of courage. The heart in Tunisian Arabic 415 b. qalb-u D3iif heart his weak ‘His heart is weak.’ He lacks courage. If the material the heart is made of is strong, a person is said to have courage to confront hardships as in (19a). Weakness in the heart profiles lack of courage as in (19b). The heart in present-day T. Arabic is not only conceptualized as changeable in texture (toughness/strength, softness/weakness), but also in size as in the following cases: (20) a. qalb-u kbiir heart his big ‘His heart is big.’ He is generous. b. qalb-u SRiir heart his small ‘His heart is small.’ He is mean. Bigness of the heart as in (20a) is conceptualized as generosity, and smallness as meanness as in (20b). This correlation between bigness and generosity and smallness and meanness owes its existence to the conceptual metaphors, BIG IS GOOD and SMALL IS BAD. The heart changing in size was also noted for English by Niemeier (2000: 200), who captures it in CHANGEABLE IN SIZE. Beside the change of texture, strength, and size, the heart in present-day T. Arabic is also conceptualized as changing in color as in: (21) a. qalb-u abyaD heart his white ‘His heart is white.’ He is tolerant. b. qalb-u akHal heart his black ‘His heart is black.’ He is spiteful (Maalej 1999). 416 Zouhair Maalej In T. Arabic, just like in some Western cultures, white is associated with tolerance as in (21a) and black is profiled as intolerance as in (21b). This correlation of whiteness with tolerance and blackness with intolerance comes from the conceptual metaphors, WHITE IS GOOD and BLACK IS BAD. Black hearts, which are presupposed in (22a-b) as lacking in purity, should undergo a process of purification to attain or approximate whiteness as in: (22) a. Saffi purify-IMPERATIVE ‘Purify your heart.’ Be more lenient/tolerant. qalb-ik heart your b. qalb-u Saafi heart his pure ‘His heart is pure.’ He is kind. The heart can only be pure if its contents are purified, which can be captured as HEART IS A CONTAINER, where, by extension, THE CONTENTS OF THE HEART ARE SUBSTANCES. The process of purification that Tunisians map onto tolerance/kindness and intolerance is picked up from the purification of substances in their experience. Indeed, both liquid and solid substances undergo this purification process. A liquid such as milk is purified from its skin using a filter. Substances such as corn or olives are also purified, removing pebbles, seeds, and leaves with a sieve. Thus, in this case, if someone is intolerant, their heart needs to be purified to become tolerant and kind. Tolerance as purification of the heart is echoed in the present-day T. Arabic proverb: (23) xiyaar l-mumin qalb-u Saafi the best the believer heart his pure ‘The best believer is one whose heart is pure.’ An interesting metonymy for purity of the heart is flaan qalb-u Saafi laban (X’s heart is milk pure/white), where the whiteness of milk is a metonymy for its purity. The heart in Tunisian Arabic 417 Along with change of texture, strength, size, and color, the heart in present-day T. Arabic is also conceptualized as changing in temperature as in: (24) a. qalb-u baarid heart his cold ‘His heart is cold.’ He is idle/lazy. b. qalb-u yaHraq heart his burn-IMPERFECT ‘His heart is burning for his job.’ He is a conscientious worker. 3ala on xidmt-u work his In (24a), coldness is a metaphor for lack of life or death, which stands for laziness. The phenomenological, felt sense of the physiological warmth of the heart is turned into a cultural metaphor for laziness as coldness. The laziness-as-coldness-of-the-heart metonymy-motivated metaphor dispenses with the heart’s warmth as a physiological necessity, thus profiling lack of warmth in the heart as a typically cultural value. As Fauconnier and Turner (2002: 300) showed convincingly, HEAT OF THE BODY is not physiological, but a metaphor transferring heat to the human body. In (24b), however, the conceptualization of industriousness takes advantage of the phenomenological, felt sense of physiological warmth of the body, turning it into fire burning in the heart. The industriousness-as-firein-the-heart augments, so to speak, the heart’s warmth as a physiological necessity, thus profiling it as a typically cultural value. Burning as industriousness, however, is sometimes profiled ironically as in: (25) qalb-u yaHraq heart his burn-IMPERFECT ‘His heart is burning a lot.’ He could not care less about work. barša a lot The ironical use of yaHraq barša (burning a lot) in fact suggests its total opposite – that the heart is not burning with industriousness. Fire that metaphorically is supposed to power a person’s heart can be extinguished, extinguishing with it the cultural value of industriousness. In all the aforementioned conceptualizations where the heart’s texture, strength, size, color, and temperature are manipulated, the heart is concep- 418 Zouhair Maalej tualized as effecting a change of state, which profiles it culturally as a passive participant. However, the heart can also assume a more active role, thus controlling the self as in: (26) a. qalb-i kalaan-i heart my eat-PERFECT me ‘My heart ate me.’ I had a pang of conscience. b. qalb-i ma heart my no ‘My heart did not eat me.’ I had no pang of conscience. kalaan-i-š eat-PERFECT me not In (26a), the physiological experience of eating is mapped onto the more mental experience of conscientiousness, where the heart becomes the eater and the body the object of the eating process. Inferentially, the phenomenological, felt sense of the physiological rest (i.e. the non-eating state) of the heart is when the self is doing things conscientiously. However, when the self starts doing things non-conscientiously, the heart finds itself in the physiological necessity of eating the self, profiling this physiological eating as a typically cultural value, which can be captured in the conceptual metaphor CONSCIENCE IS WHEN THE HEART EATS THE SELF or CONSCIENCE IS WHEN THE SELF BECOMES EDIBLE TO THE HEART. The counterpart of conscientiousness is rendered via the negative as in (26b), where the self does not think that it is being lazy. Another conceptualization of laziness versus conscientiousness/industriousness is profiled through the death/life of the heart, where the heart stands for the person having that heart, as in: (27) a. qalb-u mayyit heart his dead ‘His heart is dead.’ He is idle/lazy. b. qalb-u Hayy heart his alive ‘His heart is alive.’ He is industrious. The heart in Tunisian Arabic 419 Abiding by the metonymy of HEART FOR PERSON, the conceptual metaphor in (27a) could be LACK OF ENERGY/INDUSTRIOUSNESS IN AN INDIVIDUAL IS BEING DEAD and in (27b) PRESENCE OF ENERGY/ INDUSTRIOUSNESS IN AN INDIVIDUAL IS BEING ALIVE. To sum up this section, as Niemeier (2000: 200) captured regarding size in CHANGEABLE IN SIZE for English, a characteristic of the Idealized Cognitive Model of the heart in present-day T. Arabic is its manipulability in terms of degree of texture, strength, size, color, temperature, status, and vitality. Owing to the gradable nature of the linguistic categories used to conceptualize cultural values metaphorically in present-day T. Arabic, the values themselves should not be seen as absolute pairs with two poles, the negative and the positive. Rather, the values are graded so that they constitute a cline, and are modified by quantifiers such as barša (a lot) and šwayya (a little bit). For instance, laziness can be talked about in terms of degree as in qalb-u baarid šwayya (He is a bit lazy), qalb-u baarid (He is lazy), qalb-u baarid barša (He is very lazy). Sometimes, the quantifier barša (a lot) is reduplicated to create another degree of laziness such as in qalb-u baarid barša barša (He is extremely lazy). 6. The metonymic model of the heart Idealized Cognitive Model in T. Arabic As seen so far, the picture of the Idealized Cognitive Model drawn by the heart in present-day T. Arabic profiles it image schematically not only as a CONTAINER, but also as MOVING and MOVABLE in the bodily space, capable of IN-OUT and UP-DOWN movements. This dynamism is captured via directional metaphors that extend the IN-OUT and UP-DOWN image schemas metaphorically. Metaphorically, the heart’s characteristic property is CHANGEABILITY and MANIPULABILITY. This kind of understanding is termed “indirect understanding via metaphor” by Lakoff and Johnson (1980: 178), who argue that directional structure is imposed via directional metaphors as projections of image schemas such as the ones dealt with in Section 4 above, whereas the structure of experience is imposed via structural metaphors as in Section 5 above. To complement the discussion of the MOVABILITY and the CHANGEABILITY or MANIPULABILITY of the heart Idealized Cognitive Model in present-day T. Arabic, we need to address its inherent metonymic model. But before doing that, some reflection about metonymy as a 420 Zouhair Maalej conceptual phenomenon is needed. Metonymy is not simply a matter of reference or words substituting for others in the lexicon as traditional accounts had it. Langacker (2000: 199) argues that “a metonymic expression serves as a reference point affording mental access to the desired target (i.e. the entity actually being referred to).” Kövecses and Radden (1998: 39) define metonymy as “a cognitive process in which one conceptual entity, the vehicle, provides mental access to another conceptual entity, the target, within the same domain, or ICM.” Talking about the cognitive and communicative function of metonymy, Langacker (2000: 199) argues that “metonymy allows an efficient reconciliation of two conflicting factors: the need to be accurate, i.e. of being sure that the addressee’s attention is directed to the intended target; and our natural inclination to think and talk explicitly about those entities that have the greatest cognitive salience for us.” Thus, MENTAL ACCESSIBILITY realized via metonymy can be added to the picture. Indeed, the most prevalent metonymy is the HEART FOR PERSON, where the heart provides this mental accessibility to the person possessing the heart as in: (28) a. l-qalb 3al l-qalb the heart on the heart. ‘The heart is on the heart.’ Two hearts that beat as one. b. qalb-u baahi/Tayyib heart his good/fine ‘His heart is good/fine.’ He is kind. c. qalb-u xaayib heart his bad/ugly ‘His heart is bad/ugly.’ He is unkind/cruel. The HEART FOR PERSON metonymy is motivated by the fact that the heart in (28a) is “salient and easily coded” (Langacker 2000: 199) in the sense that the heart inhabits an individual, which it can evoke. In (28b–c), the question is not about the metaphoricity of the heart as good or bad, but the salience between the heart and its possessor. The heart in Tunisian Arabic 421 In the context of emotional conceptualization, an important candidate for the metonymy of HEART FOR PERSON is love in present-day T. Arabic as in: (29) 3and-i qalb illi With me heart that ‘I have a heart that loves her.’ I love her so much. yHibb-ha love-IMPERF her It is socially motivated to avoid talking directly about one’s love in public in the Tunisian culture. Using a metonymy violates “the need to be accurate” (Langacker, 2000: 199), and allows speakers to hide behind it, knowing that the heart has “the greatest cognitive salience” with the person (Langacker 2000: 199). Conversely, present-day T. Arabic does not have the metaphor ‘breaking someone’s heart,” although Tunisians talk of “broken heart” in cases of disappointment such as in the proverb, ?in-naaSri lmaxSur w l-qalb l-miksur (lost money and broken heart), which means that money wasted brings disappointment. Very often the relation between metaphor and metonymy is indeterminate (Riemer 2002: 386), that is the demarcation line between the two may be fuzzy. Metonymy and metaphor may co-occur, creating MENTAL ACCESSIBILITY and MANIPULABILITY of the heart in present-day T. Arabic as in the conceptualization of greed and gratification (sexual or other): (30) a. qalb-u jii3aan heart his hungry ‘His heart is hungry.’ He is greedy/He is insatiable. b. qalb-u šib3aan heart his satiated ‘His heart is satiated.’ He is satiated. MENTAL ACCESSIBILITY is captured through the metonymy, HEART FOR PERSON. Metonymically, the heart’s hunger and gratification stand for the hungry or gratified person. However, when the person is substituted for the heart, this creates metaphors such as, The person is hungry. The 422 Zouhair Maalej linguistic metaphor can be captured in the conceptual metaphor, GREED IS HUNGER or the more generic metaphor DESIRE IS HUNGER. Conversely, social gratification is profiled in hunger terms as in (30a). The negative evaluation of a socially greedy person is captured in the T. Arabic proverb, xuð-ha min yidd šib3aan iða jaa3 w ma taaxiðhaaš min yidd jii3aan iða šbi33 (Take it from the hand of a satisfied person if he gets hungry and don’t take it from a hungry person if he becomes satisfied). Inferentially, the heart here becomes the stomach for greed and satisfaction. One dimension of this indeterminacy has been interpreted as metonymic motivation for metaphoric mappings (Barcelona 2000). Forgetfulness is a form of malfunction of the mind, leading up to a defective memory, but in present-day T. Arabic one forgets with one’s heart as in: (31) qalb-i ?a3ma heart my blind ‘My heart is blind.’ I am forgetful. It should be noted that in the metaphoric interpretation the blindness of the heart in present-day T. Arabic is forgetfulness, which presupposes that one of the heart’s function is its capacity to remember. This can be captured in the conceptual metaphor, REMEMBERING IS SEEING, which is related to the more generic KNOWING IS SEEING; if my heart is blind, I do not remember things. In the metonymic interpretation, the heart is interpreted as contiguous with the person as in HEART FOR PERSON. This seems to be consistent with the conception of blindness as encoded in the Koran in (3b) above, which is repeated here for the sake of convenience: (32) Truly it is not their eyes that are blind, but their hearts which are in their breasts.12 However, blindness of the heart in the Koranic conception is incapacity to understand while this Tunisian conception has to do with forgetfulness. Niemeier (2000: 208) expressed fascination as to how memory, which is normally associated with the head/brain comes to be associated with the heart in expressions like “learn something by heart.” If this unscientific match between heart and memory means something, it serves to suggest that this model of the heart in English and present-day T. Arabic has a cultural basis. The heart in Tunisian Arabic 423 In sum, the metonymic model of the heart is realized via simple metonymy having potential metaphoric counterparts, or via a metaphormetonymy continuum. The correlative work that these do is ACCESSIBILITY via the HEART FOR PERSON metonymy or metonymic ACCESSIBILITY in conjunction with metaphoric CHANGEABILITY. 7. Conclusion The chapter has tried to demonstrate that the heart in present-day T. Arabic is a productive source domain, profiling most emotions and culture-specific values. The cognitive/cultural model of the heart reflects these cultural conceptualizations exploiting image schema, metaphor, and metonymy. Logically, since the heart is seen as the locus of emotions and values, it is culturally affected by these emotions and values. The cultural model of the heart, therefore, qualifies as an Idealized Cognitive Model (Lakoff 1982, 1987). Its propositional structure shows the heart to be an affected participant in interpersonal relations and an affecting participant across the image schemas, metaphors, and metonymies that profile it. As seen in the body of the chapter, the heart is conceptualized image schematically as a CONTAINER and in UP-DOWN and IN-OUT schemas. This has been captured in the directional metaphor, THE HEART IS MOVING/MOVABLE. It also offers various metaphoric conceptualizations that profile emotions in terms of CHANGEABILITY or MANIPULABILITY of the heart. Apart from these conceptualizations, the heart yields a HEART FOR PERSON metonymy, providing ACCESSIBILITY of the body/self through the heart. As a source domain for emotions and cultural values, the heart is an excellent illustration of the cultural embodiment of the mind. If Johnson (1987) is right in claiming that the embodied mind yields embodied meaning, imagination, and reasoning, the present chapter extends embodiment to culture, thus suggesting that cognition is not just embodied but culturally embodied. Imaginative structures such as image schemas, metaphor, and metonymy contribute to cultural imagination, which motivates what Maalej (2004, 2007) called “cultural embodiment,” which is a kind of embodiment mediated and motivated by cultural imagination. To further corroborate the import of culture in conceptualization, reference has to be made to Palmer (1996: 36), who considers cultural linguistics as “primarily concerned not with how people talk about some objective 424 Zouhair Maalej reality, but with how they talk about the world that they themselves imagine.” The present-day T. Arabic culture has imagined generosity to be bigness of the heart, meanness smallness, tolerance whiteness, spite blackness, compassion/mercy softness, indifference toughness, and so forth. But cultures do not randomly talk about the world as they imagine it; each culture organizes itself according to “its own priorities of grouping and differentiation” (Palmer 1996: 227). Acknowledgements I am thankful and grateful to the following friends and colleagues: René Dirven for generous comments on the first and second drafts of the current chapter, which made an impact on my analysis; Zoltán Kövecses for being generous with his time and knowledge of metaphor and metonymy, which has greatly improved the quality of my analyses; Farzad Sharifian for his help, patience, and encouragement; an anonymous reviewer for insightful comments on the chapter. I owe also special thanks to Jessica Cleary-Kemp (Monash University, Australia) for very useful comments that greatly improved the quality of the language of the chapter. However, responsibility for the contents remains mine. Notes 1. As far as I know, the only written documents in T. Arabic that exist are a few plays by Taoufik Jebali (Night’s Talk, 1997), Mohamed Idriss (Ismail Pacha, 1997), Fadhel Jaidi (Familia, 1997), etc. 2. Sura VII (A’raaf, or Heights), translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1938), pp. 396–97. 3. Sura XXII (Hajj, or The Pilgrimage), translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1938), p. 863. 4. Sura L (qaf, or The Matter has been decreed), translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1938), p. 1417. 5. Sura VI (An’am, or Cattle), translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1938), p. 289. 6. Sura XLVII (Muhammad, or The Prophet), translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1938), p. 1385. 7. Sura XVII (Bani Isra’il, or The Children of Israel), translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1938), p. 707. 8. Sura VII (A’raaf, or Heights), translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1938), p. 371. 9. Sura XXII (Hajj, or The Pilgrimage), translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1938), p. 864. The heart in Tunisian Arabic 425 10. Sura XXXIII (Ahzab, or The Confederates), translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1938), p. 1123. 11. Translation mine. 12. Sura XXII (Hajj, or The Pilgrimage), translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1938), p. 864. References Al-Jawziyya, Ibn Q. 1998 Medicine of the Prophet. Cambridge: The Islamic Texts Society. Barcelona, Antonio 2000 On the plausibility of claiming a metonymic motivation for conceptual metaphor. In Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A Cognitive Perspective, A. Barcelona (ed.), 31–58. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Burnett, C. 2004 Arabic Medicine in the Mediterranean. Retrieved 26-03-06, from http://www.muslimheritage.com/topics/default.cfm?ArticleID=459. Emanatian, Michele 1995 Metaphor and the expression of emotion: The value of cross-cultural perspectives. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10 (3): 163–182. Geeraerts, Dirk & Stefan Grondelaers 1995 Looking back at anger: Cultural traditions and metaphorical patterns. In Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World, J. R. Taylor and R. E. MacLaury (eds.), 153–179. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Gibbs, Raymond W. Jr. 2005 Embodiment and Cognitive Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ibn ManDur, M. 1994 Lisaanu l-3arabi. 3rd ed. (The Tongue of Arabs). Beirut: Dar Saadir. Johnson, Mark 1987 The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press. Kövecses, Zoltán 2000 Metaphor and Emotion: Language, Culture and Body in Human Feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002 Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 426 Zouhair Maalej 2005 Metaphor in Culture: Universality and Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kövecses, Zoltan & Gunther Radden 1998 Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics, 9 (1): 37–77. Lakoff, George 1982 Categories: An essay in cognitive linguistics. In Linguistics in the Morning Calm, The Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.), 139–193. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company. 1987 Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press. 1996 Sorry, I'm not myself today: The metaphor system for conceptualizing the self. In Spaces, Worlds and Grammar, G. Fauconnier and E. Sweetser (eds.), 91–123. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson 1980 Metaphors We Live By. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press. 1999 Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books. Lakoff, George & Mark Turner 1989 More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press. Langacker, Ronald W. 2000 Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Levinson, Stephen C. 1996 Relativity in spatial conception and description. In Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, J. J. Gumperz & S. C. Levinson (eds.), 177–202. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Maalej, Zouhair 1999 Metaphoric discourse in the age of cognitive linguistics, with special reference to Tunisian Arabic. Journal of Literary Semantics, 28 (3): 189–206. 2001 Of animals, foods, objects, and plants, or how women are conceptualized: A cross-cultural perspective. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Researching and Applying Metaphor (RAAM IV): Metaphor, cognition, and culture, University of Manouba, Tunisia. 2004 Figurative language in anger expressions in Tunisian Arabic: An extended view of embodiment. Metaphor and Symbol, 19 (1): 51–75. The heart in Tunisian Arabic 2007 427 The embodiment of fear expressions in Tunisian Arabic: Theoretical and practical implications. In Applied Cultural Linguistics: Second Language Teaching/Learning and Intercultural Communication, F. Sharifian and G. B. Palmer (eds.), 87–104. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. MacPhee, M. 2003 Medicine for the heart: The embodiment of faith in Morocco. Medical Anthropology, 22: 53–83. Niemeier, Susanne 1997 To have one's heart in the right place – metaphorical and metonymic evidence for the folk model of the heart as the site of emotions in English. In Human Contact through Language and Linguistics, B. Smieja and M. Tasch (eds.), 87–106. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. 2000 Straight from the heart – Metonymic and metaphorical explorations. In Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A cognitive perspective, A. Barcelona (ed.), 195–213. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gryuter. Palmer, Gary B. 1996 Toward a Theory of Cultural Linguistics. Austin: University of Texas Press. Riemer, Nick 2002 Remetonymizing metaphor: Hypercategories in semantic extension. Cognitive Linguistics, 12 (4): 379–401. Rohrer, Tim 1998 When metaphors bewitch, analogies illustrate, and logic fails: Controversies over the use of metaphoric reasoning in philosophy and science. Ph.D. dissertation: Department of Philosophy and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon. 2001 Pragmatism, ideology and embodiment: William James and the philosophical foundations of cognitive linguistics. In Language and Ideology: Cognitive Theoretical Approaches, R. Dirven, B. Hawkins and E. Sandikcioglu (eds.), 49–82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. In press The body in space: Dimensions of embodiment. In Body, Language and Mind (Vol. 1): Embodiment, T. Ziemke, J. Zlatev and R. M. Frank (eds.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Sharifian, Farzad 2003 On cultural conceptualisations. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 3 (3): 187–207. Sinha, Chris and Kristine Jensen de López 2000 Language, culture and the embodiment of spatial cognition. Cognitive Linguistics, 11 (½): 17–41. 428 Zouhair Maalej Sweetser, Eve 1990 From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Varela, Francisco J., Evan Thompson, and Eleanor Rosch 1991 The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Wilson, M. 2002 Six views of embodied cognition. Psychological Bulletin and Review, 9 (4): 625–636. Winsvold, B. S. 2005 Arabian medicine in the Middle Ages: The Arabian world’s contribution to science and medicine. Retrieved 26-03-06, from http://www.globalcomment.com/science&technology/article_14.asp. Yu, Ning 1995 Metaphorical expression of anger and happiness in English and Chinese. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10 (2): 59–92. 1998 The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor: A Perspective from Chinese. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 2003 Metaphor, body, and culture: The Chinese understanding of gallbladder and courage. Metaphor and Symbol, 18 (1): 13–31. Yusuf Ali, Abdallah 1938 The Holy Qur’an (3rd edition). Syria: Dar Al-MuSHaf. Ziemke, Tom 2003 What is that thing called embodiment? In Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Retrieved 10-02-05, from http://www.cogsci.rpi.edu/CSJarchive/Proceedings/2003/pdfs/244.pdf. Ziemke, Tom, Jordan Zlatev, and Roselyn M. Frank (eds.) In press Body, Language and Mind (Vol. 1): Embodiment. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Zouari, A. & Charfi, Y. 1998 Mu3jamu l-kalimaati wa t-takaaliidi iš-ša3biyyati bi Safaaqusa (Dictionary of Words and Popular Traditions in Sfax). Sfax: Société générale d’imprimerie et de cartonnage (SOGIC).
© Copyright 2016 ExploreDoc