Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics
[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 24, No. 0, pp.1255-1277
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print) 2586-7474 (Online)
Print publication date 31 Jan 2024
Received 23 Sep 2024 Revised 15 Oct 2024 Accepted 23 Nov 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15738/kjell.24..202411.1255

Analyzing Sentiment of English Adjective Words Associated with Scent

Jungyeon Kim ; Sok-Hun Kim
(first author) Kangwon National University, Tel: 033-250-6635 jungyeonkim@kangwon.ac.kr
(corresponding author) Hanyang University, Tel: 031-400-5902 praxis94@hanyang.ac.kr


© 2024 KASELL All rights reserved
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

This study investigates the semantic and figurative meanings of scent-related adjectives in English, focusing on fragrant, stinking, smelly, and nauseating. Using the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA), this research reveals that these adjectives serve a dual function across different genres and contexts: they not only describe literal (physical olfactory experiences) but also convey metaphorical (abstract emotional, moral, and cultural) meanings. Fragrant is predominantly associated with positive sensory experiences and extends metaphorically to represent emotional tranquility or aesthetic pleasure, while stinking, smelly, and nauseating are typically linked to negative emotions, often symbolizing moral judgments or disdain. This dual usage underscores the linguistic versatility of scent-related adjectives in capturing both sensory and abstract experiences. This study also tracks the collocational patterns of these adjectives over time, revealing how their usage has evolved and diversified. The research contributes to the fields of semantics, pragmatics, cognitive linguistics, and corpus linguistics by providing comprehensive insights into how olfactory language operates at both literal and figurative levels, reflecting broader cultural and emotional attitudes. The findings highlight the importance of sensory language in shaping meaning and offer a foundation for future cross-linguistic studies on the role of scentrelated adjectives in human cognition and communication.

Keywords:

words of scent, semantic meaning, figurative meaning, corpus, sentiment analysis

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by 2024 Research Grant from Kangwon National University.

References

  • Allan, K. 2009. The Connotations of English Sensory Words. Oxford University Press.
  • Carston, R. 2010. Metaphor: Ad hoc concepts, literal meaning, and mental images. In Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 110(3), 295-321. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9264.2010.00288.x]
  • Classen, C., D. Howes and A. Synnott. 1994. Aroma: The Cultural History of Smell. Routledge.
  • Collins English Dictionary. 1994. Collins English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Available online at www.collinsdictionary.com.
  • Cruse, D. A. 1986. Lexical Semantics. Cambridge University Press.
  • Davies, M. 2008. The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): One billion words, 1990-2019. Retrieved from https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/
  • Gries, S. Th. 2010. Useful statistics for corpus linguistics. In A. Lüdeling and M. Kytö, eds., Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook, 269-291. Walter de Gruyter.
  • Kövecses, Z. 2010. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
  • Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago Press.
  • Le Guérer, A. 1994. Scent: The Mysterious and Essential Powers of Smell. Kodansha International.
  • Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics (vols. 1-2). Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165693]
  • Merriam-Webster. 1828. An American dictionary of the English language. Available online at https://webstersdictionary1828.com, .
  • Merriam-Webster. 2016. Merriam-Webster learner's dictionary. Available online at https://www.learnersdictionary.com
  • Oxford English Dictionary. 2011. Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. Available online at www.oed.com.
  • Sperber, D. and D. Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition (2nd ed.). Blackwell.
  • Sperber, D. 1975. Rethinking Symbolism. Cambridge University Press.
  • Stefanowitsch, A. and S. Th. Gries. 2006. Corpus-based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy. Mouton de Gruyter. [https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199895]
  • Viberg, Å. 1983. The Verbs of Perception: A Typological Study. Walter de Gruyter. [https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1983.21.1.123]
  • Wiktionary. 2024. Wiktionary. Retrieved from www.wiktionary.org.
  • Winter, B. 2019. Sensory Linguistics: Language, Perception, and Metaphor. John Benjamins. [https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.20]