語言聯覺長期以來在文學語言中受到廣泛研究，然而，在烹飪媒體中的作用卻鮮少有相關的研究。在此類媒體中，說話者必須向無法親身感受食物的觀眾傳達味覺經驗。電視烹飪話語是探討此議題值得研究的語境，因為味覺必須透過語言和視覺的互動來表達。在此語境中，聯覺表達有助於說話者將個人的感官經驗轉化為觀眾可以理解的公開評價。本論文探討聯覺表達如何運用於美國與俄羅斯Hell’s Kitchen電視烹飪話語，我們聚焦其感官分布、情境模式，以及跨語言的表現方式。研究以聯覺隱喻理論(Day, 1996)、情境化認知理論 (Grounded Cognition Theory)(Barsalou, 1999, 2008, 2020; Papies et al., 2020, 2022)以及互動多感官性(Interactional Multisensoriality)(Mondada, 2018, 2024)為理論基礎，探討感官意義如何被組織、如何植基於具體情境，並探討其如何在互動過程中轉化能為大眾理解的感知內容。
本研究的分析語料來自 Hell’s Kitchen 系列節目兩個語言分語料庫中的 4,000 筆聯覺飲食表達，其中美國版本 2,000 筆，俄羅斯版本 2,000 筆。資料辨識與標註採用語料庫取向的研究設計，結合感官領域分類、多模態詮釋與情境脈絡編碼。量化分析採用卡方檢定進行，並以 Cramér’s V 評估效果量；同時，質性話語分析則用於考察聯覺表達如何在評價序列中發揮作用。
研究結果顯示，在兩個分語料庫中，TASTE 均作為一貫的目標域，而 TOUCH 則是最具生成力的來源域，其次為 VISION 與 EMOTION。雖然兩組資料在來源域的整體排序上大致一致，但英語與俄語資料在分布特徵上仍呈現顯著差異。結果亦顯示，情境脈絡會系統性地影響來源域的選擇。在與食用相關的情境中，俄語相對依賴觸覺與聽覺線索，而美式英語則更凸顯視覺線索；在非食用情境中，俄語偏向於突顯 VISION 與 TOUCH，而英語則常依賴 TEMPERATURE 與 SMELL。就結構而言，兩組語料都傾向使用精簡的表達方式，其中感官來源域與味覺目標域通常在同一片語或句子中相近出現。然而，英語經常依賴明顯的形容詞—名詞搭配，而俄語則傾向將預期的映射關係留待話語脈絡中推知。
除了這些共同的體裁限制之外，本研究也揭示重要的跨語言評價風格差異。俄語更傾向透過小稱與弱化形態，在單一修飾語中同時表達程度、情感與立場，例如以詞綴形式表達「略微」、「小巧」或親暱語氣; 相較之下，英語則更常將相近意義分散於多字詞結構中。研究討論亦指出，擬人化、宗教詞彙、烹飪借詞以及其他精簡的評價形式，皆可作為受文化形塑的資源，用以表達立場並展現專業性。在理論層面上，研究結果顯示，烹飪話語中的語言聯覺，較適合被理解為一種隨語境變化而產生不同評價功能的語言現象，而不應僅被視為固定的跨感官轉移模式。就實務層面而言，本研究結果有助於提升人們對英語與俄語烹飪話語中感官評價表達差異的認識，並可應用於飲食文化與烹飪相關教學、翻譯與字幕製作，以及跨文化溝通。整體而言，本研究主張，聯覺飲食表達構成一套既受限制、又具生成力的評價資源。其形成同時受到語言特定資源以及公開飲食評估之多模態壓力的共同影響。

Linguistic synaesthesia has been widely studied in literary language and, to a lesser extent, in everyday discourse, yet much less attention has been paid to its role in culinary media, where speakers must communicate taste to audiences who cannot experience the food themselves. Televised culinary discourse provides a useful context for examining linguistic synaesthesia because taste is often expressed through language, visual presentation, and interaction. In this setting, synaesthetic expressions help speakers turn private sensory experience into public evaluation that viewers can follow and interpret. This dissertation investigates how embodied synaesthetic expressions are used in American and Russian televised cooking discourse, with particular attention to their sensory distribution, situational patterning, and cross-linguistic realization. Drawing on Synaesthetic Metaphor Theory (Day, 1996), Grounded Cognition Theory (Barsalou, 1999, 2008, 2020; Papies et al., 2020, 2022), and Interactional Multisensoriality (Mondada, 2018, 2024), the study examines how sensory meanings are structured, contextually grounded, and made publicly intelligible in interaction.
The analysis is based on a corpus of 4,000 synaesthetic food expressions collected from two language-specific subcorpora of the Hell’s Kitchen franchise, with 2,000 expressions from the American version and 2,000 from the Russian version. The data were identified and annotated through a corpus-based design combining sensory-domain classification, multimodal interpretation, and situational-context coding. Quantitative analysis was carried out through chi-square tests, with Cramér’s V used to assess effect size, while qualitative discourse analysis was used to examine how synaesthetic expressions functioned in evaluative sequences.
The findings show that in both subcorpora TASTE functions as the fixed target domain, while TOUCH is the most productive source domain, followed by VISION and EMOTION. Although the overall ranking of source domains is broadly shared, the English and Russian datasets differ significantly in their distributional profiles. The results also show that situational context systematically shapes source-domain choice. In consumption-related contexts, Russian relies relatively more on tactile and auditory evidence, whereas English gives greater prominence to visual cues. In non-consumption contexts, Russian foregrounds VISION and TOUCH, while English more often relies on TEMPERATURE and SMELL. Structurally, both datasets favor concise expressions in which the sensory source and taste target appear close together in the same phrase or sentence. However, English relies more heavily on overt adjective-noun pairings, whereas Russian more often leaves the intended mapping to be recovered from discourse context.
Beyond these shared genre constraints, the study identifies important cross-linguistic differences in evaluative style. Russian more readily expresses degree, affect, and stance into single modifiers through diminutive and attenuative morphology, allowing a single modifier to convey meanings such as slightness, smallness, endearment, or affective nuance. By contrast, English more often distributes comparable meanings across multiword constructions. The discussion also indicates that personification, religious lexicon, culinary borrowing, and other concise evaluative formats function as culturally shaped resources for stance-taking and expertise display. Theoretically, the findings show that linguistic synaesthesia in culinary discourse is best understood as a context-sensitive evaluative practice rather than solely as a fixed pattern of cross-sensory transfer. In practical terms, the results of the current study support culinary education, translation and subtitling, and intercultural communication by increasing awareness of how sensory evaluations are encoded differently in English and Russian culinary discourse. Overall, the research argues that synaesthetic food expressions form a constrained, yet productive evaluative repertoire shaped by embodied experience, language-specific resources, and the multimodal pressures of public food assessment.

Agha, A. (2004). Registers of language. Language & Communication, 24(1), 23–53.

Alber, B., & Arndt-Lappe, S. (2023). Clipping and truncation. In P. Ackema, S. Bendjaballah, E. Bonet, & A. Fábregas (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to morphology (pp. 1–28). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119693604.morphcom017

Anthony-Gerroldt, L.-H. (2023). Connecting with the world: Poetic synaesthesia, sensory metaphors and empathy. Journal of Literary Semantics, 52(2), 233–248. https://doi.org/10.1515/jls-2023-2014

Arendholz, J., Bublitz, W., Kirner-Ludwig, M., & Zimmermann, I. (2013). Food for thought – or, what’s (in) a recipe? A diachronic analysis of cooking instructions. In C. Gerhardt, M. Frobenius, & S. Ley (Eds.), Culinary linguistics: The chef’s special (pp. 119–138). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/clu.10.05are

Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315857473

Barrett, L. F. (2017). The theory of constructed emotion: An active inference account of interoception and categorization. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 12(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsw154

Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(4), 577–660. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X99002149

Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639

Barsalou, L. W. (2009). Simulation, situated conceptualization, and prediction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1521), 1281–1289. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0319

Barsalou, L. W. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for grounding cognition. Journal of Cognition, 3(1), Article 31. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.116

Batulina, A. (2021). Semantics and pragmatics of diminutives in the modern Russian language. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2021.05.02.5

Baudelaire, C. (1857). Les fleurs du mal. Poulet-Malassis & de Broise. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6099

Biber, D. (1993). Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 8(4), 243–257. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/8.4.243

Borghi, A. M., & Cimatti, F. (2010). Embodied cognition and beyond: Acting and sensing the body. Neuropsychologia, 48(3), 763–773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.10.029

Bouchet, M., Loison-Charles, J., & Poulin, I. (Eds.). (2020). The five senses in Nabokov’s works. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45406-7

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Harvard University Press.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.

Burrow, R., Scott, S., & Courpasson, D. (2024). Bloody suffering and durability: How chefs forge embodied identities in elite kitchens. Human Relations, 77(1), 111–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267221132936

Chancharu, J. N. (2012). “Green stink” and “fragrant taste”: Synaesthetic expressions in Thai. In T. Miyamoto, N. Ono, K. Thepkanjana, & S. Uehara (Eds.), Typological studies on languages in Thailand and Japan (pp. 183–197). Hituzi Syobo Publishing.

Chandrashekar, J., Hoon, M. A., Ryba, N. J. P., & Zuker, C. S. (2006). The receptors and cells for mammalian taste. Nature, 444(7117), 288–294. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05401

Craig, A. D. (2002). How do you feel? Interoception: The sense of the physiological condition of the body. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3(8), 655–666. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn894

Craig, A. D. (2003). Interoception: The sense of the physiological condition of the body. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 13(4), 500–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4388(03)00090-4

Creed, A. (2026). Wine words, cultural worlds: A systematic review of metaphor and language in global wine communication. Terminology: International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Issues in Specialized Communication. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1075/term.25016.cre

Curanović, A. (2012). The religious factor in Russia’s foreign policy: Keeping God on our side. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203133279

Davidson, P. (1989). The poetic imagination of Vyacheslav Ivanov: A Russian Symbolist’s perception of Dante. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511735790

Day, S. (1996). Synaesthesia and synaesthetic metaphors. Psyche, 2(32), 1–16. http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v2/psyche-2-32-day.html

de Araujo, I. E. (2011). Sweet taste signaling and the formation of memories of energy sources. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 5, Article 99. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2011.00099

Delbaere, M., McQuarrie, E. F., & Phillips, B. J. (2011). Personification in advertising: Using a visual metaphor to trigger anthropomorphism. Journal of Advertising, 40(1), 121–130. https://doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367400108

Delwiche, J. (2004). The impact of perceptual interactions on perceived flavor. Food Quality and Preference, 15(2), 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(03)00041-7

Dimova, P. (2016). Synaesthesia. In The Routledge encyclopedia of modernism. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781135000356-REM1011-1

Dimova, P. (2025). At the crossroads of the senses: The synaesthetic metaphor across the arts in European modernism. Penn State University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780271099576

Dressler, W. U., & Merlini Barbaresi, L. (1994). Morphopragmatics: Diminutives and intensifiers in Italian, German, and other languages. Walter de Gruyter.

Duan, H., & Gao, L. (2014). Construction of sensory transfer model of gustatory and olfactory-synaesthetic metaphor (GO-STM) and English-Chinese comparative study. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 4(2), 290–300. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojml.2014.42023

Duchêne, A., & Heller, M. (Eds.). (2012). Language in late capitalism: Pride and profit. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203155868

Dvizova, M., & Kryukova, I. (2014). Synaesthetic metaphors in Pasternak’s poetic language. Russian Linguistic Bulletin, (3), 54–57. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/yazykovye-osobennosti-reprezentatsii-semantiki-vkusa-v-stihotvoreniyah-b-pasternaka

Dzienisiewicz, M. (2021). The linguistic worldview of sound (based on Polish and Russian musical critical texts). Studia Rossica Posnaniensia, 46(2), 243–255. https://doi.org/10.14746/strp.2021.46.2.17

Freeman, M. H. (2000). Poetry and the scope of metaphor: Toward a cognitive theory of literature. In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads (pp. 253–281). Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110894677.253

Galac, Á., & Zayniev, D. (2023). Paths of linguistic synaesthesia across cultures: A lexical analysis of conventionalized cross-sensory meaning extensions in Europe and Central Asia. Cognitive Linguistic Studies, 10(2), 450–479. https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.00108.gal

Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22(3–4), 455–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290442000310

Garrard, J., & Garrard, C. (2008). Russian Orthodoxy resurgent: Faith and power in the new Russia. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt7rw7k

Gerhardt, C., Frobenius, M., & Ley, S. (Eds.). (2013). Culinary linguistics: The chef’s special. John Benjamins.

Ginter, A. (2016). Metafory synestezyjne w utworach Vladimira Nabokova [Synaesthetic metaphors in Vladimir Nabokov’s prose]. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Linguistica Rossica, 12, 53–61. https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-8025.12.06

Ginter, A. (2018). Synestezja jako forma języka figuratywnego: Rozważania o synestezyjnych asocjacjach Vladimira Nabokova [Synaesthesia as a figurative language device on synaesthetic associations of Vladimir Nabokov]. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Linguistica Rossica, 15, 179–190. https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-8025.15.18

Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(3), 558–565. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196313

González, J., Barros-Loscertales, A., Pulvermüller, F., Meseguer, V., Sanjuán, A., Belloch, V., & Ávila, C. (2006). Reading cinnamon activates olfactory brain regions. NeuroImage, 32(2), 906–912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.03.037

Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(10), 1489–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X

Grandi, N., & Körtvélyessy, L. (Eds.). (2015). Edinburgh handbook of evaluative morphology. Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748681754

Grady, J. E. (2005). Image schemas and perception: Refining a definition. In B. Hampe (Ed.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 35–55). Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197532.1.35

Grossman, J. D. (1983). Valery Bryusov. The Sewanee Review, 91(4), 612–627. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4208691

Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69(2), 274–307. https://doi.org/10.2307/416535

Hamilton, C., & Foltzer, A.-S. (2021). On euphemisms, linguistic creativity, and humor. Lexis: Journal in English Lexicology, 17, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.5355

Hampe, B., & Grady, J. E. (Eds.). (2005). From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics. Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197532

Hamre, C. (2024). A geographic analysis of lexical variation in North American English using Reddit corpora [Doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

Haspelmath, M. (2008). Lexical borrowing: Concepts and issues. In M. Haspelmath & U. Tadmor (Eds.), Loanwords in the world’s languages: A comparative handbook (pp. 35–54). De Gruyter Mouton.

Haugen, E. (1950). The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language, 26(2), 210–231. https://doi.org/10.2307/410058

Haugh, M. (2013). Disentangling face, facework and im/politeness. Sociocultural Pragmatics, 1(1), 46–73. https://doi.org/10.1515/soprag-2012-0005

Heller, M. (2010). The commodification of language. Annual Review of Anthropology, 39(1), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.012809.104951

Hemberger, K. S., & Menon, M. (2023). Modeling red tastes: Quality color adjectives in English color-taste synesthetic metaphors. In M. B. Goldwater, F. K. Anggoro, B. K.
Hayes, & D. C. Ong (Eds.), Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2023). Cognitive Science Society. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1vs2x16p

Hieber, D. W. (2021). Lexical polyfunctionality in discourse: A quantitative corpus-based approach [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

Hilpert, M. (2021). A multivariate approach to English clippings. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 6(1), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1315

Hilpert, M. (2023). Meaning differences between English clippings and their source words: A corpus-based study. English Language and Linguistics, 27(2), 339–361. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674322000429

IMDb. (n.d.). Hell’s Kitchen [TV series page]. Retrieved February 16, 2026, from https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0437005/

Isaeva, Y. P. (2023). Valery Bryusov’s symbolist aesthetics. Mental Enlightenment Scientific-Methodological Journal, 4(1), 52–64. https://mentaljournal-jspu.uz/index.php/mesmj/article/view/125

Jamet, D. (2009). A morphophonological approach to clipping in English: Can the study of clipping be formalized? Lexis: Journal in English Lexicology, 1. https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.884

Jo, C. (2017). A corpus-based study on synaesthesia in Korean ordinary language. In R. E. Roxas (Ed.), Proceedings of the 31st Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation (pp. 249–254). The National University. https://aclanthology.org/Y17-1034/

Jo, C. (2019). A corpus-based analysis of synesthetic metaphors in Korean. Korean Language and Literature, 78(3), 465–475. https://doi.org/10.17250/khisli.36.3.201912.005

Jo, C. (2022). Linguistic synaesthesia in Korean: Universality and variation. SAGE Open, 12(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221117804

Jo, C. (2024). Linguistic synaesthesia in language contact: Sino-Korean vs. native Korean synesthetic compounds. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, 909. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03423-5

Jo, C., Huang, C.-R., & Kim, S.-A. (2022). Linguistic synaesthesia in Korean: A compound word-based study of cross-modal directionality. Linguistic Research, 39(2), 275–296. https://doi.org/10.17250/khisli.39.2.202206.002

Johnstone, B. (2016). Enregisterment: How linguistic items become linked with ways of speaking. Language and Linguistics Compass, 10(11), 632–643. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12210

Jurafsky, D. (1996). Universal tendencies in the semantics of the diminutive. Language, 72(3), 533–578. https://doi.org/10.2307/416278

Jurafsky, D. (2014). The language of food: A linguist reads the menu. W. W. Norton & Company. https://wwnorton.com/books/the-language-of-food

Jurafsky, D., Chahuneau, V., Routledge, B., & Smith, N. (2016). Linguistic markers of status in food culture: Bourdieu’s distinction in a menu corpus. Journal of Cultural Analytics, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.22148/16.007

Kádár, D. Z., & Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding politeness. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139382717

Kaiser, E. (2021). Consequences of sensory modality for perspective-taking: Comparing visual, olfactory and gustatory perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 701486. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.701486

Kaltseis, M., & Stadler, W. (2023). Colloquial Russian between theory and practice: What is claimed and what is real? Russian Linguistics. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-023-09272-1

Kigel, T. (2022). Contrastive analysis of English, Russian, and Hebrew blue idioms. Philology and Culture, 1(67), 80–86. https://doi.org/10.26907/2074-0239-2022-67-1-80-86

Kitanina, E. A., & Trukhanova, D. S. (2020). Semantic transformations of the word bomba and its derivatives as a reflection of shifts in the linguistic picture of the world. Nauchnyi dialog [Scientific Dialogue], (4), 74–86. https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2020-4-74-86

Köhler, W. (1929). Gestalt psychology. Liveright.

Kumcu, A. (2021). Linguistic synaesthesia in Turkish: A corpus-based study of crossmodal directionality. Metaphor and Symbol, 36(4), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2021.1921557

Kusumi, T. (1988). Comprehension of synesthetic expressions: Cross-modal modifications of sense adjectives. The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 58(6), 373–380. https://doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.58.373

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.

Lam, C. F., Lee, C., & Sui, Y. (2019). Say it as it is: Consequences of voice directness and voice politeness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(5), 642–658. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000358

Larina, T. (2020). “Sense of privacy” and “sense of elbow”: English vs Russian values and communicative styles. In H. Bromhead & Z. Ye (Eds.), Meaning, life and culture: In conversation with Anna Wierzbicka (pp. 422–440). ANU Press.

Lau, C. S., Fulgoni, V. L., III, Van Elswyk, M. E., & McNeill, S. H. (2023). Trends in beef intake in the United States: Analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2001–2018. Nutrients, 15(11), 2475. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15112475

Lazarevich, S. V., Erofeeva, A. V., & Dorozhkina, D. S. (2016). Jargon words in the young people's slang. International Research Journal, 9(51), 140–144. https://doi.org/10.18454/IRJ.2016.51.087

Lee, A. J., Mason, M. F., & Malcomb, C. S. (2021). Beyond cheap talk accounts: A theory of politeness in negotiations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 41, 100154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2021.100154

Lee, S. H. (2014). Hanjung sikpum gwanggoe natanan gonggamgakjeok eunyu yangsang [Synaesthetic metaphors in Korean and Chinese food advertisements]. Journal of Chinese Language and Literature (中國語文學), 65, 289–317. https://journal.kci.go.kr/clsyn/archive/articlePdf?artiId=ART001873097

Lee, S. H. (2015). Hanjung gwanggoe natanan gonggamgakjeok eunyueui injijeok yeongu [A cognitive study of synesthetic metaphors in Korean and Chinese advertisements]. Journal of Chinese Language and Literature (中國語文學), 68, 205–242. https://doi.org/10.15792/clsyn.68.201504.205

Levada Center. (2023, June 2). Religious beliefs. https://www.levada.ru/en/2023/06/02/religious-beliefs/

Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001

Levinson, S. C., & Torreira, F. (2015). Timing in turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 731. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00731

Lim, L. T. C. (2011). The limits of linguistic variation: Stylistic diversity in Singapore English [Doctoral dissertation, New York University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

Liu, D., Deng, Y., Sha, L., Hashem, M. A., & Gai, S. (2017). Impact of oral processing on texture attributes and taste perception. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 54(8), 2585–2593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-017-2661-1

Locher, M. A., & Watts, R. J. (2005). Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), 9–33. https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.9

Lvovich, N. (2012). The “Gift”: Synaesthesia in translingual texts. Journal of Writing and Language, 1–18. University of California eScholarship. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0k59250t

Lynott, D., & Connell, L. (2009). Modality exclusivity norms for 423 object properties. Behavior Research Methods, 41(2), 558–564. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.2.558

Lynott, D., & Connell, L. (2013). Modality exclusivity norms for 400 nouns: The relationship between perceptual experience and surface word form. Behavior Research Methods, 45(2), 516–526. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0267-0

Majer, M. (2024). Inflectional endings: Declensions. In D. Šipka & W. Browne (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of Slavic linguistics (pp. 129–178). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108973021.008

Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444

Marks, L. E. (1978). The unity of the senses: Interrelations among the modalities. Academic Press.

Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.

Matheson, H. E., & Barsalou, L. W. (2018). Embodiment and grounding in cognitive neuroscience. In J. T. Wixted (Ed.), Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience (Vol. 3, Language & thought; S. L. Thompson-Schill, Vol. Ed., pp. 1–34). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119170174.epcn310

Matras, Y., & Adamou, E. (2020). Borrowing. In E. Adamou & Y. Matras (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language contact (pp. 237–251). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351109154-17

Matwick, K. (2014). Celebrity chefs performing the expert: A linguistic and discourse analysis of television cooking shows [Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

Meng, Y., Li, L., & Fan, J. (2024). The matching effects of advertising strategies on enhancing consumer trials of insect-based foods. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 30(8–9), 256–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2024.2440327

Merslikina, O. V. (2024). Synaesthetic metaphors in the description of fragrance properties in perfumery discourse (in modern Spanish). Vestnik of St. Petersburg University. Language and Literature, 21(1), 208–223. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2024.111

Mishra, R., & Mehta, R. (2023). The effects of food anthropomorphism on consumer behavior: A systematic literature review with integrative framework and future research directions. Appetite, 190, 107035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2023.107035

Mondada, L. (2018). The multimodal interactional organization of tasting: Practices of tasting cheese in gourmet shops. Discourse Studies, 20(6), 743–769. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445618793439

Mondada, L. (2024). Multisensoriality. In A. Gubina, E. M. Hoey, & C. W. Raymond (Eds.), Encyclopedia of terminology for conversation analysis and interactional linguistics. International Society for Conversation Analysis. https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/ukfms

Mustajoki, A. (2016). Challenges in the standardisation of contemporary Russian. In I. Tieken-Boon van Ostade & C. Percy (Eds.), Prescription and tradition in language: Establishing standards across time and space (pp. 288–302). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096510-020

Olofsson, J. K., & Gottfried, J. A. (2015). The muted sense: Neurocognitive limitations of olfactory language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(6), 314–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.04.007

O’Malley, G. (1957). Literary synaesthesia. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 15(4), 391–411. https://doi.org/10.2307/427153

Paik, S. M. (2020). Valery Bryusov’s The Earth as an experiment of scientific poetry. Tomsk State University Journal of Philology, (63), 264–281. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/valery-bryusovs-the-earth-as-an-experiment-of-scientific-poetry

Pangborn, R. M., & Bertolero, L. L. (1972). Influence of temperature on taste intensity and degree of liking of drinking water. Journal of the American Water Works Association, 64, 511–515. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1551-8833.1972.tb02739.x

Papies, E. K., Claassen, M. A., Rusz, D., & Best, M. (2022). Flavors of desire: Cognitive representations of appetitive stimuli and their motivational implications. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 151(8), 1919–1941. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001157

Papies, E. K., Tatar, B., Keesman, M., Best, M., Lindner, K., Barsalou, L. W., Rusz, D., & Dutriaux, L. (2020). Measuring and interpreting cognitive representations of foods and drinks: A procedure for collecting and coding feature listing data. OSF Preprints. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/ufpx8

Parrot Analytics. (2024). Hell’s Kitchen audience demand report – December 2024. https://www.parrotanalytics.com/

Paradis, C., & Eeg-Olofsson, M. (2013). Describing sensory experience: The genre of wine reviews. Metaphor and Symbol, 28(1), 22–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2013.742838

Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Barsalou, L. W. (2003). Verifying different-modality properties for concepts produces switching costs. Psychological Science, 14(2), 119–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.t01-1-01429

Petersen, W., Fleischhauer, J., Beseoglu, H., & Bücker, P. (2007). A frame-based analysis of synaesthetic metaphors. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication, 3, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.4148/biyclc.v3i0.21

Pew Research Center. (2015, May 12). America’s changing religious landscape. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/

Pew Research Center. (2017, November 8). Orthodox Christianity in the 21st century. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2017/11/08/orthodox-christianity-in-the-21st-century/

Poplack, S. (2018). Borrowing: Loanwords in the speech community and in the grammar. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190256388.001.0001

Popova, Y. (2005). Image schemas and verbal synaesthesia. In B. Hampe (Ed.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 395–420). Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197532.5.395

Primožič, J. (2017). Les métaphores synesthésiques et le son [Synesthetic metaphors and sound]. Vestnik za tuje jezike/Journal for Foreign Languages, 9, 25–43. https://doi.org/10.4312/vestnik.9.25-43

Pulvermüller, F. (2013). How neurons make meaning: Brain mechanisms for embodied and abstract-symbolic semantics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(9), 458–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.06.004

Rakova, M. (2003). The extent of the literal: Metaphor, polysemy and theories of concepts. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230512801

Ramachandran, V. S., & Hubbard, E. M. (2001). Synaesthesia—A window into perception, thought and language. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 8(12), 3–34. https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs/2001/00000008/00000012/1244

Ramachandran, V. S., & Hubbard, E. M. (2003). Hearing colors, tasting shapes. Scientific American, 288(5), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0503-52

Ramachandran, V. S., Miller, L. E., Livingstone, M. S., & Brang, D. (2012). Colored halos around faces and emotion-evoked colors: A new form of synaesthesia. Neurocase, 18(4), 352–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/13554794.2011.608366

Ronga, I., Bazzanella, C., Rossi, F., & Iannetti, G. D. (2012). Linguistic synaesthesia, perceptual synaesthesia, and the interaction between multiple sensory modalities. Pragmatics & Cognition, 20(1), 135–167. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.20.1.06ron

Sadamitsu, M. (2004). Synaesthesia re-examined: An alternative treatment of smell-related concepts. Osaka University Papers in English Linguistics, 8, 109–125.

Sanz-Valdivieso, L., & López Arroyo, B. (2024). Figurative language and sensory perception: Corpus-based computer-assisted study of the nature and motivation of synesthetic metaphors in olive oil tasting notes. Metaphor and Symbol, 39(4), 260–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2024.2377535

Satretdinova, A. Kh. (2012). Synaesthesia as a style-forming element of the Silver Age poetic text. Vestnik Bashkirskogo Universiteta, 17(2), 707–711. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sinesteziya-kak-osnovnoy-stileobrazuyuschiy-element-poeticheskogo-teksta-serebryanogo-veka

Sekacheva, S. B. (2007). Sinesteziya kak sredstvo poetiki v proze A. P. Chekhova [Synaesthesia as a means of poetics in A. P. Chekhov’s prose] (Candidate dissertation). Taganrog State Pedagogical Institute. https://www.dissercat.com/content/sinesteziya-kak-sredstvo-poetiki-v-proze-ap-chekhova

Shen, Y., & Aisenman, R. (2008). ‘Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard are sweeter’: Synaesthetic metaphors and cognition. Language and Literature, 17(2), 107–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947007088222

Shen, Y., & Gadir, O. (2009). How to interpret the music of caressing: Target and source assignment in synaesthetic genitive constructions. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(2), 357–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.08.002

Shepherd, G. M. (2006). Smell images and the flavour system in the human brain. Nature, 444(7117), 316–321. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05405

Shinohara, K., & Nakayama, A. (2011). Modalities and directions in synaesthetic metaphors in Japanese. Cognitive Studies: Bulletin of the Japanese Cognitive Science Society, 18(3), 491–507. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.18.491

Sifianou, M., & Tzanne, A. (2021). Face, facework and face-threatening acts. In M. Haugh, D. Z. Kádár, & M. Terkourafi (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of sociopragmatics (pp. 249–271). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108954105.015

Simonenko, M. A., & Kazaryan, S. Y. (2023). Synaesthetic metaphor and its reproduction in Russian-to-English translation: A frame-based study. Research Result. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 9(3), 26–40. https://doi.org/10.18413/2313-8912-2023-9-3-0-2

Sklyarevskaya, G. N. (2012). Leksika pravoslaviia v sovremennom russkom iazyke: Opyt leksikologicheskogo analiza i leksikograficheskogo opisaniia [Orthodox vocabulary in contemporary Russian: A lexicological and lexicographic description]. Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology, 11(9), 36–40.

Small, D. M., & Prescott, J. (2005). Odor/taste integration and the perception of flavor. Experimental Brain Research, 166, 345–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-005-2376-9

Speed, L. J., & Majid, A. (2020). Grounding language in the neglected senses of touch, taste, and smell. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 37(5–6), 363–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2019.1623188

Spence, C. (2015). Eating with our ears: Assessing the importance of the sounds of consumption on our perception and enjoyment of multisensory flavour experiences. Flavour, 4, Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/2044-7248-4-3

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2008). Culturally speaking: Culture, communication and politeness theory (2nd ed.). Continuum.

Spickard, J. V. (2017). Alternative sociologies of religion: Through non-Western eyes. New York University Press. https://doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9781479882908.001.0001

Straughn, J. B., & Feld, S. L. (2010). America as a “Christian nation”? Understanding religious boundaries of national identity in the United States. Sociology of Religion, 71(3), 280–306. https://doi.org/10.1093/socrel/srq045

Strauss, S. (2005). The linguistic aestheticization of food: A cross-cultural look at food commercials in Japan, Korea, and the United States. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(9), 1427–1455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.12.004

Strik Lievers, F. (2015). Synaesthesia: A corpus-based study of cross-modal directionality. Functions of Language, 22(1), 69–95. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22.1.04str

Suárez-Toste, E. (2007). Metaphor inside the wine cellar: On the ubiquity of personification schemas in winespeak. metaphorik.de, 12, 53–64. https://doi.org/10.17185/duepublico/83557

Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620904

Talavera, K., Yasumatsu, K., Voets, T., Droogmans, G., Shigemura, N., Ninomiya, Y., Margolskee, R. F., & Nilius, B. (2005). Heat activation of TRPM5 underlies thermal sensitivity of sweet taste. Nature, 438(7070), 1022–1025. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04248

Thomason, S. G., & Kaufman, T. (1988). Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. University of California Press.

Trubnikova, V. Yu. (2021). Pragmatic (in)appropriateness of diminutives in Russian language. RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics, 12(4), 1160–1174. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2299-2021-12-4-1160-1174

U.S. TV Database. (2025). Hell’s Kitchen ratings on FOX. Retrieved February 16, 2026, from https://ustvdb.com/networks/fox/shows/hells-kitchen/

Ullmann, S. (1957). The principles of semantics. Blackwell.

Ukhova, P. S. (2014). Otsenochnyy potentsial leksicheskikh edinits molodezhnogo slenga [Evaluative potential of youth-slang lexical items]. Yaroslavl Pedagogical Bulletin, 1(4), 180–184. https://vestnik.yspu.org/releases/2014_4g/40.pdf

Uryson, E. V. (2003). Problemy issledovaniia iazykovoi kartiny mira: Analogiya v semantike [Problems of studying the linguistic worldview: Analogy in semantics]. Yazyki slavyanskoi kul’tury.

Vasileiou, K., Barnett, J., Thorpe, S., & Young, T. (2018). Characterising and justifying sample size sufficiency in interview-based studies: Systematic analysis of qualitative health research over a 15-year period. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18, Article 148. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0594-7

Ward, J. (2004). Emotionally mediated synaesthesia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 21(7), 761–772. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290342000393

Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings (J. B. Carroll, Ed.). MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262730068/language-thought-and-reality/

Wierzbicka, A. (1997). Understanding cultures through their key words: English, Russian, Polish, German, and Japanese. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195088359.001.0001

Wierzbicka, A. (2003). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction (2nd ed.). Mouton de Gruyter.

Williams, J. M. (1976). Synaesthetic adjectives: A possible law of semantic change. Language, 52(2), 461–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/412571

Williams, L. E., & Bargh, J. A. (2008). Experiencing physical warmth promotes interpersonal warmth. Science, 322(5901), 606–607. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1162548

Willits-Smith, A., Odinga, H., O’Malley, K., & Rose, D. (2023). Demographic and socioeconomic correlates of disproportionate beef consumption among US adults in an age of global warming. Nutrients, 15(17), Article 3795. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15173795

Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625–636. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196322

Winter, B. (2016). Taste and smell words form an affectively loaded and emotionally flexible part of the English lexicon. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(8), 975–988. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2016.1193619

Winter, B. (2019). Synaesthetic metaphors are neither synaesthetic nor metaphorical. In L. J. Speed, C. O’Meara, L. San Roque, & A. Majid (Eds.), Perception metaphors (pp. 107–125). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.19.06win

Winter, B., & Strik Lievers, F. (2025). Linguistic synaesthesia: A meta-analysis. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009519182

Winter, B., Thompson, G. L., & Urban, M. (2018). Vision dominates in perceptual language: English sensory vocabulary is optimized for usage. Cognition, 179, 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.05.008

Wnuk, E., & Majid, A. (2014). Revisiting the limits of language: The odor lexicon of Maniq. Cognition, 131(1), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.008

Wolinska-Kennard, K., Schönberger, C., Fenton, A., & Sahin, A. W. (2025). Mouthfeel of food and beverages: A comprehensive review of physiology, biochemistry, and key sensory compounds. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 24(4), Article e70223. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.70223

Wongthai, N. (2013). The understanding of synaesthetic metaphors. Journal of Korean Association of Thai Studies, 20(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.22473/kats.2013.20.1.001

Xia, Y., Zhao, Q., Long, Y., Xu, G., & Wang, J. (2024). SensoryT5: Infusing sensorimotor norms into T5 for enhanced fine-grained emotion classification. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Cognitive Aspects of the Lexicon (pp. 162–174). European Language Resources Association. https://aclanthology.org/2024.cogalex-1.19.pdf

Yu, N. (2003). Synesthetic metaphor: A cognitive perspective. Journal of Literary Semantics, 32(1), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.1515/jlse.2003.001

Zaliznyak, A. A., Levontina, I. B., & Shmelev, A. D. (2005). Kliuchevye idei russkoi iazykovoi kartiny mira [Key ideas of the Russian linguistic worldview]. Yazyki slavyanskoi kul’tury.

Zampini, M., & Spence, C. (2004). The role of auditory cues in modulating the perceived crispness and staleness of potato chips. Journal of Sensory Studies, 19(5), 347–363. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.2004.080403.x

Zawisławska, M., & Falkowska, M. (2017). Typology of metaphors with the gustatory target domain in Polish wine discourse. Crossroads. A Journal of English Studies, 17(2), 76–91. https://doi.org/10.15290/cr.2017.17.2.05

Zawisławska, M. A., & Falkowska, M. H. (2018). All my sour–sweet days I will lament and love — A comparative analysis of metaphors with the basic taste adjectives in Polish and English. Cognitive Studies | Études Cognitives, 18, Article 1675. https://doi.org/10.11649/cs.1675

Zawisławska, M., & Falkowska, M. (2019). Metaphors in Polish wine discourse. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 55(3), 601–629. https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2019-0022

Zawisławska, M., & Falkowska, M. (2021). Metaphors in Polish, English, Russian, and French perfumery discourse: A comparative study. Metaphor and the Social World, 11(1), 143–170. https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.19006.zaw

Zawisławska, M. (2022). Frame-based annotation in the corpus of synesthetic metaphors. In Z. Vetulani, P. Paroubek, & M. Kubis (Eds.), Human language technology. Challenges for computer science and linguistics: 9th Language and Technology Conference, LTC 2019, Poznań, Poland, May 17–19, 2019, revised selected papers (pp. 289–300). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05328-3_19

Zhang, A., & Zhou, X. (2025). Encode and interpret senses: How sensory nature of recommendation tasks influences consumer preference for algorithms. Journal of Digital Management, 1, Article 5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44362-024-00001-2

Zhao, Q., Huang, C.-R., & Ahrens, K. (2019). Directionality of linguistic synaesthesia in Mandarin: A corpus-based study. Lingua, 232, 102744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2019.102744

Zhao, Q., Huang, C.-R., & Long, Y. (2018). Synaesthesia in Chinese: A corpus-based study on gustatory adjectives in Mandarin. Linguistics, 56(5), 1003–1041. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2018-0019

Zhong, Y., Ahrens, K., & Huang, C.-R. (2023). Novel metaphor and embodiment: Comprehending novel synesthetic metaphors. Linguistics Vanguard, 9(1), 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2022-0020

Zhong, Y., & Huang, C.-R. (2020). Sweetness or mouthfeel: A corpus-based study of the conceptualization of taste. Linguistic Research, 37(3), 359–387. https://doi.org/10.17250/khisli.37.3.202012.001

Zhong, Y., & Huang, J. (2018). Pleasing to the mouth or pleasant personality: A corpus-based study of conceptualization of desserts in online Chinese food reviews. In Proceedings of the 32nd Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation (PACLIC 32) & the 25th Joint Workshop on Linguistics and Language Processing (JWLLP 25) (pp. 893–903). PACLIC. https://aclanthology.org/Y18-2006/

Zhong, Y., Wan, M., Ahrens, K., & Huang, C.-R. (2022). Sensorimotor norms for Chinese nouns and their relationship with orthographic and semantic variables. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 37(8), 1000–1022. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2022.2035416

Zhou, Y., & Tse, W. S. (2022). Taste of wine or “taste” of a person: (Synesthetic) metaphors in wine reviews. In Proceedings of the 36th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation (PACLIC 36) (pp. 475–484). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/2022.paclic-1.53

Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human behavior and the principle of least effort: An introduction to human ecology. Addison-Wesley.