This study compares the cultural conceptualizations of horse in Hungarian and Kazakh societies, focusing on how a shared steppe-nomadic heritage has developed into distinct figurative systems. Using the frameworks of Conceptual Metaphor Theory and Cultural Linguistics, the analysis examines three source-domain areas: the lexeme horse, horse body parts , and horse tack . The findings show that Kazakh phraseology is more practice-based and predominantly metonymic, grounded in everyday riding and mobility, whereas Hungarian displays stronger metaphorical abstraction related to power, control, and social position. A further difference concerns horse equipment: Kazakh uses only a limited set of tack-related expressions, while Hungarian develops a richer system conceptualizing authority, discipline, restriction, and burden. The comparison suggests that Kazakh reflects ongoing, practice-based human–horse interaction in nomadic culture, while Hungarian reflects its later transformation in a sedentary context, showing how similar cultural experiences can yield divergent metaphorical and metonymic patterns.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kóczy et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: