Cultural differences in conceptualization of loss and grief as expressed by Americans and Poles

How do people put into words the experience of losing someone they love? This book offers a systematic, cross-cultural linguistic analysis of how loss and grief are conceptualized in American and Polish contexts, revealing both shared human patterns and culturally specific ways of expressing and processing bereavement.
Drawing on qualitative data from nearly eighty participants who had lost a loved one up to five years before participating in the study, the study examines the metaphors and conceptual blends through which individuals articulate their experiences of grief. Using the frameworks of conceptual metaphor theory and conceptual integration theory, the book identifies recurrent conceptual structures—such as absence, emptiness, pain, inanimate physical object, and journey—that speakers draw on to make sense of profound emotional disruption. While many of these schemas appear across both cultural groups, the analysis reveals important differences in their subtypes, linguistic realizations, and cultural meanings. Notably, some patterns challenge the dominant view of grief as exclusively negative, including personifications such as grief as a guest in American narratives and grief as a teacher in the Polish data.
The book fills a significant interdisciplinary gap between linguistic research on metaphor and psychological scholarship on grief. It is the first work to develop empirically grounded conceptual models of loss and grief for American and Polish speakers based on qualitative linguistic data, offering a novel, culturally sensitive perspective on bereavement.
Accessible yet theoretically rigorous, the book will be valuable as a research reference, a methodological model for qualitative metaphor analysis, and a resource for classroom use. It will appeal to scholars and students in cognitive linguistics, cultural studies, psycholinguistics, and cross-cultural communication, as well as to psychologists, therapists, counselors, social workers, and others working professionally with grief and loss.

List of figures
List of tables
Acknowledgements
Introduction

PART ONE: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Chapter 1 Loss and grief
1.1 General approach
1.2 Psychology and psychiatry
1.2.1 Definitions
1.2.2 Changing approach to loss and grief
1.2.3 Grieving over different types of loss: The person who died
1.2.3.1 Loss of a parent
1.2.3.2 Loss of a child
1.2.3.3 Loss of a partner
1.2.3.4 Loss of a grandparent
1.2.3.5 Loss of a friend
1.2.3.6 Loss of a relative
1.2.4 Grieving over different types of loss: Mode of death
1.2.4.1 Anticipated loss and anticipatory grief
1.2.4.2 Unanticipated loss
1.2.4.3 Suicide
1.2.5 Unusual cases
1.2.5.1 Disenfranchised and ambiguous grief
1.2.5.2 Non-typical grief reactions
1.2.6 Grief and gender
1.3 Culture
1.3.1 Grief and culture
1.3.2 Mourning and the history of death
1.4 Language: Terminology and translation problems
1.4.1 “Loss”
1.4.2 “Grief,” “bereavement,” and “mourning”
1.4.3 Strata and utrata
1.4.4 Żałoba
1.5 Conclusion
Chapter 2 Conceptualization: Metaphor and blend
2.1 Cognitive linguistics and conceptual science
2.2 Frames
2.3 Image schemas
2.4 Metaphor
2.4.1 Traditional perspective
2.4.2 Conceptual metaphor theory: Lakoff and colleagues
2.4.3 Conceptual metaphor theory: Kövecses
2.4.3.1 Emotion metaphors
2.4.3.2 Metaphor and culture
2.4.4 Reception, further development, and application of CMT
2.4.5 Image metaphor
2.4.6 Metaphor use in psychology, psychotherapy, and psychiatry
2.4.6.1 LOSS and GRIEF metaphors
2.5 Metonymy
2.6 Mental spaces
2.7 Conceptual integration or conceptual blending
2.7.1 Principles and constraints
2.7.2 Integration networks. Metaphoric blends
2.7.3 Metonymy in blending
2.7.4 Integration in grammar and integration of events
2.7.5 Reception, further development, and application of the theory
2.8 Cultural implications on conceptualization
2.9 Conclusion
Chapter 3 Methodology and research approach
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Overview of information needed
3.3 Rationale for qualitative research
3.4 Research sample
3.4.1 Sampling method
3.4.2 Americans
3.4.3 Poles
3.5 Data collection
3.6 Data analysis and synthesis
3.7 Ethical considerations
3.7.1 Research on sensitive topics
3.7.2 Benefits of participation
3.8 Issues of trustworthiness
3.9 Limitations of the study
3.10 Conclusion
PART TWO: CONCEPTUALIZATIONS OF LOSS AND GRIEF. THE ANALYSIS
Introduction to Chapters 4 and 5
Chapter 4 Americans: Loss and grief
4.1 Conceptualizations of LOSS
4.1.1 THERE WAS, NOW THERE IS NOT
4.1.1.1 ABSENCE
4.1.1.2 EMPTINESS
4.1.1.3 HOLE
4.1.1.4 DARKNESS
4.1.1.5 Summary
4.1.2 IT WAS [ADJ], NOW IT IS DIFFERENT
4.1.2.1 CHANGE OF SELF
4.1.2.2 Summary
4.1.3 THERE WAS NOT, NOW THERE IS
4.1.3.a PHYSICAL ENTITY (THING)
4.1.3.1 SUBSTANCE
4.1.3.2 INANIMATE PHYSICAL OBJECT
4.1.3.3 ANIMATE PHYSICAL OBJECT
4.1.3.4 Other
4.1.3.b UNPLEASANT BODILY EXPERIENCE (SENSATION)
4.1.3.5 ILLNESS
4.1.3.6 INJURY (WOUND)
4.1.3.7 PAIN
4.1.3.8 SCAR THAT BURNS YET STRENGTHENS
4.1.3.9 TRAUMA
4.1.3.10 FEELING IN THE STOMACH
4.1.3.11 Summary
4.1.4 JOURNEY
4.1.4.1 LOCATION
4.1.4.2 OBSTACLE ON THE JOURNEY
4.1.4.3 Summary
4.1.5 Summary
4.2 Conceptualizations of GRIEF
4.2.1 THERE WAS, NOW THERE IS NOT
4.2.1.1 EMPTINESS
4.2.1.2 Summary
4.2.2 THERE WAS NOT, NOW THERE IS
4.2.2.a PHYSICAL ENTITY (THING)
4.2.2.1 SUBSTANCE
4.2.2.2 INANIMATE PHYSICAL OBJECT
4.2.2.3 ANIMATE PHYSICAL OBJECT
4.2.2.b UNPLEASANT BODILY EXPERIENCE (SENSATION)
4.2.2.4 PAIN (IN THE PIT OF THE STOMACH)
4.2.2.5 Summary
4.2.3 JOURNEY
4.2.3.1 JOURNEY (GENERAL CATEGORY)
4.2.3.2 JOURNEY (CRAZY RIDE)
4.2.3.3 JOURNEY (PROCESS)
4.2.3.4 Summary
4.2.4 Other
4.2.4.1 GAME
4.2.4.2 DOWN / DESCENT
4.2.4.3 Summary
4.2.5 Summary
4.3 Conclusion
Chapter 5 Poles: Loss and grief
5.1 Conceptualizations of LOSS
5.1.1 THERE WAS, NOW THERE IS NOT
5.1.1.1 ABSENCE
5.1.1.2 EMPTINESS
5.1.1.3 ABSENCE / EMPTINESS
5.1.1.4 HOLE
5.1.1.5 DARKNESS
5.1.1.6 Summary
5.1.2 IT WAS [ADJ], NOW IT IS DIFFERENT
5.1.2.1 CHANGE OF SELF
5.1.2.2 Summary
5.1.3 THERE WAS NOT, NOW THERE IS
5.1.3.a PHYSICAL ENTITY (THING)
5.1.3.1 INANIMATE PHYSICAL OBJECT
5.1.3.2 ANIMATE PHYSICAL OBJECT
5.1.3.3 Other
5.1.3.b UNPLEASANT BODILY EXPERIENCE (SENSATION)
5.1.3.4 INJURY (WOUND)
5.1.3.5 PAIN
5.1.3.6 SCAR
5.1.3.7 Summary
5.1.4 JOURNEY
5.1.4.1 LOCATION
5.1.4.2 OBSTACLE ON THE JOURNEY
5.1.4.3 Summary
5.1.5 Other
5.1.5.1 TEST OF MATURITY
5.1.5.2 AWARENESS OF DEATH, INABILITY TO COMPREHEND IT
5.1.5.3 LOSS NOW VS. LOSS 4 YEARS AGO
5.1.5.4 Summary
5.1.6 Summary
5.2 Conceptualizations of GRIEF
5.2.1 IT WAS [ADJ], NOW IT IS DIFFERENT
5.2.1.1 [LOSS IS] CHANGE OF SELF
5.2.1.2 Summary
5.2.2 THERE WAS NOT, NOW THERE IS
5.2.2.a PHYSICAL ENTITY (THING)
5.2.2.1 INANIMATE PHYSICAL OBJECT
5.2.2.2 ANIMATE PHYSICAL OBJECT
5.2.2.b UNPLEASANT BODILY EXPERIENCE (SENSATION)
5.2.2.3 PAIN
5.2.2.4 Summary
5.2.3 JOURNEY
5.2.3.1 JOURNEY (GENERAL CATEGORY)
5.2.3.2 LOCATION
5.2.3.3 Summary
5.2.4 Other
5.2.4.1 MEMORIES OF THE DEAD
5.2.4.2 SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCE
5.2.4.3 CONTAINER AND JOURNEY
5.2.4.4 Summary
5.2.5 Summary
5.3 Conclusion
Chapter 6 Previous relationship and the mode of death
6.1 Americans: Relationship with the person
6.1.1 Loss of a parent
6.1.2 Loss of a child
6.1.3 Loss of a partner
6.1.4 Loss of a grandparent
6.1.5 Loss of a friend
6.1.6 Loss of a relative
6.1.7 Summary
6.2 Americans: Mode of death
6.2.1 Anticipated
6.2.2 Unanticipated
6.2.3 Summary
6.3 Poles: Relationship with the person
6.3.1 Loss of a parent
6.3.2 Loss of a child
6.3.3 Loss of a grandparent
6.3.4 Loss of a friend
6.3.5 Loss of a relative
6.3.6 Summary
6.4 Poles: Mode of death
6.4.1 Anticipated
6.4.2 Unanticipated
6.4.3 Summary
6.5 Conclusion
Chapter 7 Observations, conclusions, and recommendations
7.1 Matters of interpretation
7.2 Blends and their types
7.3 (In)directness in referring to loss and grief
7.4 Different perspectives
7.5 Concepts of loss and grief
7.6 Implications
7.6.1 Practical applications
7.6.2 Further research
7.6.3 Recommendations
Conclusion
Appendices
Appendix 1: Demographic data
Appendix 2: Questionnaire (questions only)
Appendix 3: Blend types
Appendix 4: Metaphoricity
Appendix 5: Further examples from the data
References
About the author
Index

Kamila Midor is a linguist and translator from Poland. She holds a PhD in linguistics from Jagiellonian University in Kraków, where her dissertation—later updated as this book—explored cross-cultural differences in the conceptualization of loss and grief in American and Polish contexts, integrating insights from cognitive linguistics, psychology, and cultural studies.
In 2015–2016, she was a visiting student researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, where she further developed her expertise in cognitive linguistics and interdisciplinary research methods. Her research combines qualitative analysis, conceptual metaphor theory, and conceptual integration theory to examine how language shapes emotional experience.
In addition to her academic work, she is actively involved with the Institute of the Good Death (Instytut Dobrej Śmierci), a Polish foundation that promotes open, compassionate dialogue around death, loss, and grief in contemporary society.
Her interdisciplinary training and experience position her to contribute unique insights at the intersection of linguistics, psychology, and cultural studies, making her work relevant to scholars, students, and practitioners interested in the language of grief and emotional expression across cultures.

qualitative discourse analysis, metaphor identification, survey-based analysis, narrative analysis, embodied cognition, cultural models of emotion, language and emotions, bereavement discourse, language of grief, meaning-making in loss, emotional schemas, personification of abstract concepts, American English discourse, Polish linguistic data, intercultural pragmatics