Studies in Psychology

SUBMITINFORMATION
EnglishTürkçe

Research Article


DOI :10.26650/SP2019-0011   IUP :10.26650/SP2019-0011    Full Text (PDF)

The Concept of Love From the Perspectives of Big Data and Corpus Semantics: Meaning, Reference, and Metaphor

Engin Arık, Beril Tezeller Arık

While love has been investigated by scholars in various disciplines, defining this abstract and evasive concept is a daunting task. In order to contribute to the multidisciplinary studies on love, this study investigates the meaning of love and its uses in everyday life in Turkish to provide its prototypes, using computational linguistics and corpus-based methods. The study follows the Prototype Theory and Corpus Semantics and applies corpus and Big Data methods. The data consisted of formal and colloquial dictionaries published by the Turkish Language Association; 2,500 lines, 10,671 types, and 27,855 tokens from the Turkish National Corpus; and, 85,980 short messages (tweets), 130,016 types, and 1,280,736 tokens from Twitter. The results showed that the love concepts were related to prototypes such as QUALITY, QUANTITY, TIME, PLACE, REALITY, MIND, BODY, LANGUAGE, BELIEF, THING, PERSON, PLANT, and VEHICLE. The results also showed that love in Turkish was not only related to positive emotions such as compassion and fun but also negative emotions such as pain and hate. Therefore, love was associated with both positive and negative emotion concepts. There were differences between the definitions of love, including idiomatic expressions in the formal dictionaries and the language used in daily life, because love was used not only in relation to intimate relationships or attachment but also in the context of pain, hate, illness, etc. Love was related to close relationships including both real and imaginary attachment. The meaning of love also differed depending on the context and with regard to (in)formal use of the language.
Keywords: Love, concept, meaning, emotion, big data, corpus
DOI :10.26650/SP2019-0011   IUP :10.26650/SP2019-0011    Full Text (PDF)

Büyük Veri ve Derlem Anlambilim Açısından Aşk Kavramı: Anlam, Gönderim ve Metafor

Engin Arık, Beril Tezeller Arık

Farklı disiplinlerde aşk üzerine çalışmalar yapılmakla birlikte aşk soyut bir kavram olduğu için tanımlanması oldukça güçtür. Disiplinlerarası aşk çalışmalarına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlayan bu çalışma, aşkın Türkçe’de ne anlama geldiğini ve dilde kullanımını bilgisayarlı dilbilim ve derlem yöntemleriyle analiz ederek aşk kavramının ilkörneğini ortaya koymaktadır. Çalışma kuramsal olarak İlkörnek Kuramı ile Derlem Anlambilim kuramlarını kullanıp Derlem ve Büyük Veri analiz yöntemlerinden yararlanmaktadır. İlkörnek kuramına göre ilkörnek bir sınıfın belli başlı özelliklerini taşımaktadır. Şeyler beyinde kategorize edilirken ilkörneklere benzerliklerine göre sınıflandırılırlar. Kategoriler arasında geçişler çok kesin değildir. Bazı şeyler ilkörneğe daha çok benzeyip kavramı daha çok temsil ederken, bazıları daha az benzeyip kavramı daha az temsil etmektedirler. Derlem anlambilim kuramına göre ise, bir sözcüğün anlamı, sözcüğün çekimli hallerini de kapsayan sözcüğün özüne, bu sözcükle beraber kullanılan diğer sözcüklere, sözcüğün içinde bulunduğu dilbilgisel yapılara, konuşucuların bilgi, tavır ve tutumları ile dış dünya bilgisine ve metin / konuşma türüne dayanmaktadır. Çalışmanın verisi Türkçe Ulusal Derlemi’nden aşk sözcüğünün geçtiği 2,500 satır, 10,671 farklı sözcük ve toplam 27,855 sözcükten ve Twitter’dan 85,980 kısa mesaj (tweet) 130,016 farklı sözcük ve toplam 1,280,736 sözcükten oluşmaktadır. Analiz sonuçlarına göre aşk, NITELIK, NICELIK, ZAMAN, YER, GERÇEKLIK, ZIHIN, BEDEN, DIL, INANÇ, ŞEY, KIŞI, BITKI ve TAŞIT ilkörnekleriyle bağlantılı bir kavram olup bu ilkörneklerle ilgili kavramlarla birlikte sıklıkla kullanılmaktadır. Aşk hem pozitif hem negatif duygu ifadeleriyle birlikte kullanılmaktadır. Ayrıca, aşk yakın ilişki ve bağlanma ile ilgili sözcüklerle ifade edildiği gibi gerçek olmayan bir bağlanmayı, nesne veya gruba bağlanmayı ve bağlanmasız ilişkileri de içermektedir. Dolayısıyla, aşkın anlamı bağlama göre değişken olup dilin resmi ve gündelik kullanımlarına göre de çeşitlilik göstermektedir. Bu nedenlerle, hem gözlem / görüşme yapılan çalışmalarda hem de deneysel çalışmalarda bu kavramların kullanımına dikkat etmek, geliştirilen ölçüm araçlarındaki tanımlar ve katılımcıların kullandığı kavramlar arasındaki farklılıkların araştırma sonuçlarını etkileyebileceği göz ardı edilmemelidir.
Keywords: Aşk, kavram, anlam, duygu, büyük veri, derlem

EXTENDED ABSTRACT


This study investigates the meaning of love in Turkish, using Big Data (National Institute of Standards and Technology [NIST], 2015) obtained from a corpus and social media. Love is defined as one’s commitment and/or attachment to somebody else, often involving a sexual relationship. However, debate exists over whether or not love is an emotion (Felmlee & Sprecher, 2006). Previous research has shown that love can be categorized in many ways, from romantic love to love for family members (Lee,1988; Murstein, 1977; 1988; Regan, 2011, 2016; Regan, Kocan, & Whitlock, 1998; Shaver, Schwartz, Kirson, & O’Connor, 1987; Sternberg, 2006). Nevertheless, a layperson’s definition of love can differ from the definitions used in literature/art and science. To contribute to this field of inquiry, following two theoretical approaches, the prototype theory (Goldstone, Kersten, & Carvalho, 2017; Rosch, 1978, 1999; Rosch & Mervis, 1975) and corpus semantics (Sinclair, 1991, 2004; Stubbs, 2001, 2009), we provided a definition of love in Turkish, on the basis of corpus and social media data. 

The prototype theory suggests that people categorize things based on those things’ resemblance to the most typical example in a category. Corpus semantics argues that a word’s meaning is not restricted to the traditional definitions that appear in dictionaries or to its denotations and connotations as argued in traditional linguistics. In addition to these, meaning is based on the use of the word and the (linguistic) context in which the word appears, such that the frequency of the targeted word, its linguistic forms, the words that co-occur with the targeted word, phrasal structures, and genre all contribute to the targeted word’s meaning. Following these theories, we aim to find the most central definition of love in Turkish on the basis of its use in (in)formal contexts.

Method

The data consisted of formal and colloquial dictionaries published by the Turkish Language Association; 2,500 lines, 10,671 types, and 27,855 tokens from the Turkish National Corpus; and, 85,980 short messages (tweets), consisted of 130,016 types, and 1,280,736 tokens from Twitter. The tweets were obtained automatically using Rich Site Summary (RSS) and Application Program Interface (API) between December 2017 and December 2018. Each line or tweet contained the word aşk (Eng. love) at least once. The data were analyzed by the type / token frequencies, logged frequencies, Mutual Information (MI), entropy and relative entropy, lexical gravity (G), probabilistic uncertainty (Δp), and Log-Likelihood (LL or G2 ). For frequencies, MI, and LL, the software programs AntConc and Lancsbox were used. 

Results

The results showed differences between the definitions of love, including idiomatic expressions in the formal dictionaries and the language used in daily life, because love was used not only in relation to intimate relationships or attachment but also in the context of pain, hate, illness, etc. The results also showed that love in Turkish was not only related to positive emotions such as compassion and fun but also negative emotions such as pain and hate. Therefore, love was associated with both positive and negative emotion concepts. A closer examination of the data indicated that the concepts were related to prototypes such as QUALITY, QUANTITY, TIME, PLACE, REALITY, MIND, BODY, LANGUAGE, BELIEF, THING, PERSON, PLANT, and VEHICLE. Love was related to close relationships including both real and imaginary attachment. The objects of attachment included not only persons but also collective things such as a soccer club. The duration of love could be very temporary or prolonged, even eternal. The meaning of love also differed depending on the context and with regard to (in)formal use of the language. For example, the Turkish National Corpus contained frequent uses of love stories, love poems, and love in families, which were significantly greater in number than the uses that appeared on Twitter. By contrast, there were frequent uses of love pains and extramarital love, which were significantly greater in number than the uses that appeared in the Turkish National Corpus.

Discussion

These findings contribute to the study of abstract concepts such as love and their meanings in daily life. This study highlights the importance of using new methods and perspectives such as Big Data and corpus semantics to examine the meaning of love. Because differences were found in the formal definitions of love and its meanings in formal use, as in the corpus and in daily use in the social media, the study calls for additional studies in this domain, especially studies of lexicography and theoretical and experimental studies of intimate relationships. Our future studies will investigate the meaning of love by considering love to be a lemma and by also focusing on its derivations and inflected forms. Researchers should take many meanings of love into account depending on the language usage when they develop tools and inventories to measure love and intimate relations. 


PDF View

References

  • Aksan, Y. ve Aksan, M. (2010). A corpus-based analysis of conceptual love metaphors. Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference 20-23 July 2009, University of Liverpool. google scholar
  • Aksan, Y. ve Kantar, D. (2008a). No wellness feels better than this sickness: Love metaphors from a crosslinguistic perspective. Metaphor and Symbol, 23, 262-291. doi: 10.1080/10926480802426795 google scholar
  • Aksan, Y. ve Kantar, D. (2008b). When love is a journey in English and in Turkey. P. Cap ve J. Nijakowska (Ed.), Current trends in pragmatics içinde (ss. 93-109). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press. google scholar
  • Aksan, Y., Aksan, M., Koltuksuz, A., Sezer, T., Mersinli, Ü., Demirhan, U. U., … ve Kurtoğlu, Ö. (2012). Construction of the Turkish National Corpus (TNC). Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2012). İstanbul, Turkiye. Erişim adresi: http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/papers.html. Erişim tarihi: 1 Aralık 2018. google scholar
  • Anthony, L. (2018). AntConc (Version 3.5.7) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Erişim adresi: http://www.laurenceanthony.net/software. Erişim tarihi: 1 Aralık 2018. google scholar
  • Baş, M. (2015). Conceptualization of emotion through body part idioms in Turkish: A cognitive linguistic study (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara. google scholar
  • Brezina, V., McEnery, T. ve Wattam, S. (2015). Collocations in context: A new perspective on collocation networks. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 20(2), 139-173. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.20.2.01bre google scholar
  • British Psychological Society (2017). Ethics guidelines for internet-mediated research. INF206/04.2017. Leicester: Author. Erişim adresi: https://www.bps.org.uk/news-and-policy/ethics-guidelinesinternet-mediated-research-2017. Erişim tarihi: 1 Aralık 2018. google scholar
  • Cheung, M. W. L. ve Jak, S. (2016). Analyzing Big Data in psychology: A split/analyze/meta-analyze approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 738. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00738 google scholar
  • Eichstaedt, J. C., Schwartz, H. A., Kern, M. L., Park, G., Jha, S., Agrawal, M., … ve Seligman, M. E. P. (2015). Psychological language on Twitter predicts county-level heart disease mortality. Psychological Science, 26(2), 159-169. doi: 10.1177/0956797614557867 google scholar
  • Ekman, P. (1992). An argument for basic emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 6(3/4), 169-200. doi: 10.1080/02699939208411068 google scholar
  • Felmlee, D. ve Sprecher, S. (2006). Love: Psychological and sociological perspectives. J. E. Stets ve J. H. Turner (Ed.), Handbook of sociology of emotions içinde (ss. 389-409). New York: Springer Press. google scholar
  • Foster, I., Ghani, R., Jarmin, R. S., Kreuter, F. ve Lane, J. (2017). Big Data in social science: A practical guide to methods and tools. New York, NY: CRC Press. google scholar
  • Glynn, D. ve Robinson, J. A. (Ed.) (2014). Corpus methods for semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. google scholar
  • Goldstone, R. L., Kersten, A. ve Carvalho, P. (2017). Categorization and concepts. J. T. Wixted ve S. Thompson-Schill (Ed.), The Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience içinde (4. baskı, 3. cilt: Language and Thought). New York: Wiley. google scholar
  • Gries, S. T. (2010). Useful statistics for corpus linguistics. A. Sánchez ve M. Almela (Ed.), A mosaic of corpus linguistics: Selected approaches içinde (ss. 269-291). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. google scholar
  • Gries, S. T. (2015). Quantitative designs and statistical techniques. D. Biber ve R. Reppen (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of English corpus linguistics içinde (ss. 50-71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. google scholar
  • Jankowiak, W. R. ve Fischer, E. F. (1992). A cross-cultural perspective on romantic love. Ethonology, 31(2), 149-155. doi: 10.2307/3773618 google scholar
  • Kövecses, Z. (1991). A linguist’s quest for love. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 8(1), 77-97. doi: 10.1177/0265407591081004 google scholar
  • Kövecses, Z. (2008). Metaphor and emotion. R. W. Jr. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought içinde (ss. 380-396). New York: Cambridge University Press. google scholar
  • Lakoff, G. ve Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. google scholar
  • Lee, J. A. (1988). Love-styles. R. J. Sternberg ve M. L. Barnes (Ed.), The psychology of love içinde (ss. 38-67). New Haven: Yale University Press. google scholar
  • Lee, S. W. S. ve Schwarz, N. (2014). Framing love: When it hurts to think we were made for each other. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 54, 61-67. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2014.04.007 google scholar
  • Meyers, S. A. ve Berscheid, E. (1997). The language of love: The difference a preposition makes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(4), 347-362. doi: 10.1177/0146167297234002 google scholar
  • Murstein, B. I. (1977). A taxonomy of love. Erişim adresi: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED149258. Erişim tarihi: 1 Aralık 2018. google scholar
  • Murstein, B. I. (1988). A taxonomy of love. R. J. Sternberg ve M. L. Barnes (Ed.), The psychology of love içinde (ss. 13-37). New Haven: Yale University Press. google scholar
  • Murty, D. (2018). Twitter: Social communication in the twitter age. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. google scholar
  • National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). (2015). Big data interoperability framework: Volume 1, definitions. Erişim adresi: https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1500-1.pdf. Erişim tarihi: 06 Mart 2019. doi: 10.6028/NIST.SP.1500-1 google scholar
  • Oakes, M. (1998) Statistics for corpus linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. google scholar
  • Regan, P. C. (2011). Close relationships. New York, NY: Routledge. google scholar
  • Regan, P. C. (2016). The mating game: A primer on love, sex, and marriage. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. google scholar
  • Regan, P. C., Kocan, E. R. ve Whitlock, T. (1998). Aint love grand! A prototype analysis of the concept of romantic love. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15(3), 411-420. doi: 10.1177/0265407598153006 google scholar
  • Rempel, J. K. ve Burris, C. T. (2005). Let me count the ways: An integrative theory of love and hate. Personal Relationships, 12(2), 297-313. doi: 10.1111/j.1350-4126.2005.00116.x google scholar
  • Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. E. Rosch ve B. B. Floyd (Ed.), Cognition and categorization içinde (ss. 27-48). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. google scholar
  • Rosch, E. (1999). Reclaiming concepts. The Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(11-12), 61-77. google scholar
  • Rosch, E. ve Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7(4), 573-605. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9 google scholar
  • Schröder, U. A. (2009). Preferential metaphorical conceptualizations in everyday discourse about love in the Brazilian and German speech communities. Metaphor and Symbol, 24(2), 105-120. doi: 10.1080/10926480902830862 google scholar
  • Shaver, P. R., Morgan, H. J. ve Wu, S. (1996). Is love a “basic” emotion? Personal Relationships, 3, 83-96. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1996.tb00105.x google scholar
  • Shaver, P. R., Schwartz, J., Kirson, D. ve O’Connor, C. (1987). Emotion knowledge: Further exploration of a prototype approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1061-1086. google scholar
  • Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. google scholar
  • Sinclair, J. (2000). Collins Cobuild English Dictionary for Advanced Learners: Major New Edition (3. Baskı). Collins ELT. google scholar
  • Sinclair, J. (2004). Trust the text: Language, corpus, and discourse. London: Routledge. google scholar
  • Sternberg, R. J. (2006). A dublex theory of love. R. J. Sternberg ve K. Weis (Ed.), The new psychology of love içinde (ss. 184-199). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. google scholar
  • Stubbs, M. (1995). Collocations and semantic profiles: On the cause of the trouble with quantitative studies. Functions of Language, 2(1), 23–55. doi: 10.1075/fol.2.1.03st google scholar
  • Stubbs, M. (2001). Words and phrases: Corpus studies of lexical semantics. Oxford: Blackwell. google scholar
  • Stubbs, M. (2009). The search for units of meaning: Sinclair on empirical semantics. Applied Linguistics 30(1), 115–137. doi: 10.1093/applin/amn052 google scholar
  • Tissari, H. (2001). Metaphors we love by: On the cognitive metaphors of Love from the 15th century to the present. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia, 36, 217-242. google scholar
  • Türk Dil Kurumu Sözlükler. (t.y.). Erişim adresi: http://www.tdk.gov.tr/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=645. Erişim tarihi: 01 Aralık 2017. google scholar
  • Williams, M. L., Burnap, P. ve Sloan, L. (2017). Towards an ethical framework for publishing Twitter data in social research: Taking into account users’ views, online context and algorithmic estimation. Sociology, 51(6), 1149–1168. doi: 10.1177/0038038517708140 google scholar

Citations

Copy and paste a formatted citation or use one of the options to export in your chosen format


EXPORT



APA

Arık, E., & Tezeller Arık, B. (2019). The Concept of Love From the Perspectives of Big Data and Corpus Semantics: Meaning, Reference, and Metaphor. Studies in Psychology, 39(1), 151-178. https://doi.org/10.26650/SP2019-0011


AMA

Arık E, Tezeller Arık B. The Concept of Love From the Perspectives of Big Data and Corpus Semantics: Meaning, Reference, and Metaphor. Studies in Psychology. 2019;39(1):151-178. https://doi.org/10.26650/SP2019-0011


ABNT

Arık, E.; Tezeller Arık, B. The Concept of Love From the Perspectives of Big Data and Corpus Semantics: Meaning, Reference, and Metaphor. Studies in Psychology, [Publisher Location], v. 39, n. 1, p. 151-178, 2019.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Arık, Engin, and Beril Tezeller Arık. 2019. “The Concept of Love From the Perspectives of Big Data and Corpus Semantics: Meaning, Reference, and Metaphor.” Studies in Psychology 39, no. 1: 151-178. https://doi.org/10.26650/SP2019-0011


Chicago: Humanities Style

Arık, Engin, and Beril Tezeller Arık. “The Concept of Love From the Perspectives of Big Data and Corpus Semantics: Meaning, Reference, and Metaphor.” Studies in Psychology 39, no. 1 (May. 2024): 151-178. https://doi.org/10.26650/SP2019-0011


Harvard: Australian Style

Arık, E & Tezeller Arık, B 2019, 'The Concept of Love From the Perspectives of Big Data and Corpus Semantics: Meaning, Reference, and Metaphor', Studies in Psychology, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 151-178, viewed 27 May. 2024, https://doi.org/10.26650/SP2019-0011


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Arık, E. and Tezeller Arık, B. (2019) ‘The Concept of Love From the Perspectives of Big Data and Corpus Semantics: Meaning, Reference, and Metaphor’, Studies in Psychology, 39(1), pp. 151-178. https://doi.org/10.26650/SP2019-0011 (27 May. 2024).


MLA

Arık, Engin, and Beril Tezeller Arık. “The Concept of Love From the Perspectives of Big Data and Corpus Semantics: Meaning, Reference, and Metaphor.” Studies in Psychology, vol. 39, no. 1, 2019, pp. 151-178. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/SP2019-0011


Vancouver

Arık E, Tezeller Arık B. The Concept of Love From the Perspectives of Big Data and Corpus Semantics: Meaning, Reference, and Metaphor. Studies in Psychology [Internet]. 27 May. 2024 [cited 27 May. 2024];39(1):151-178. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/SP2019-0011 doi: 10.26650/SP2019-0011


ISNAD

Arık, Engin - Tezeller Arık, Beril. “The Concept of Love From the Perspectives of Big Data and Corpus Semantics: Meaning, Reference, and Metaphor”. Studies in Psychology 39/1 (May. 2024): 151-178. https://doi.org/10.26650/SP2019-0011



TIMELINE


Submitted30.01.2019
First Revision28.02.2019
Last Revision19.04.2019
Accepted03.05.2019
Published Online31.05.2019

LICENCE


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


SHARE




Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.