1. Introduction

The classification of meaning of abstract nouns present a fundamental challenge for linguistic theory, particularly in semantics. Abstract nouns refer to qualities, emotional states, social constructs, and intellectual concepts, i.e. entities that do not possess physical referents, and as such, elude straightforward definition based on sensory or perceptual experience [1], [2], [6]. Their meanings are context-sensitive, and open to interpretive variation [5].

Cognitive semantics, as a branch of cognitive linguistics, offers a productive theoretical lens through which this complexity can be addressed [3], [4]. It is grounded in several foundational assumptions: language is an integral part of human cognition; meaning is not autonomous but arises from embodied experience and conceptual structure; linguistic knowledge is encyclopaedic, context-dependent, and structured by image schemas, metaphors, and conceptual integration [9], [10]. Within this framework, lexical meaning is understood not as a static dictionary entry, but rather as a dynamic mapping between linguistic forms and conceptual content. Words are seen as cues to access conceptual networks, and polysemy is treated as a manifestation of conceptual flexibility rather than lexical ambiguity [12], [13], [14], [15]. The cognitive approach to polysemy emphasizes mechanisms such as conceptual metaphor, metonymy, and profiling as key processes in the formation and extension of meaning [9], [10], [11].

Despite these advances, the classification of abstract polysemous nouns remains methodologically underdeveloped in both theoretical semantics and practical lexicography. Traditional lexicographic models often prioritize definitional clarity over cognitive coherence, and struggle to capture adequately the conceptual complexity of such lexical items. In contrast, cognitive linguistics permits the construction of a typological model that reflects how abstract meanings are structured, accessed, and extended in the mental lexicon.

This study proposes a cognitive typology of meanings of abstract polysemous nouns in contemporary English. The typology is based on a set of four interrelated criteria: Source and Target Domains, Levels of Categorization, Categorial Status, and Degree of Abstraction. These parameters reflect not only the internal semantic structure of each lexeme, but also its position within broader conceptual networks. In doing so, the study contributes to the development of a more nuanced methodology for analyzing meaning variation in abstract nouns.

2. Research methods and principles

This study employs a complex methodology, integrating psycholinguistic findings, definitional and conceptual analysis, and corpus-based discourse analysis, to develop a cognitively informed approach to the classification of polysemous abstract nouns in English. The definitional and conceptual analyses involve identifying central (core) and peripheral conceptual attributes conveyed through abstract nouns. Corpus-based discourse analysis supports the identification of common usage patterns and reveals nuanced, context-sensitive senses of these nouns [16], [17], [18], [19]. Collectively, these methodological tools constitute a comprehensive strategy for tackling the complex semantics of abstract polysemous nouns.

The study unfolds over four methodologically sequenced stages:

Stage 1: A representative sample of highly polysemous abstract nouns in Modern English was compiled by systematically examining leading lexicographic resources (WordNet, Cambridge, Merriam-Webster, Collins, Oxford). Continuous sampling was employed, with inclusion criteria requiring a minimum of three distinct meanings per noun. It is noteworthy that abstract nouns tend to exhibit lower semantic multiplicity than their concrete counterparts — a pattern frequently observed in cognitive lexical research [11], [16]. This stage yielded a final dataset of 354 lexical items.

Stage 2: Authentic usage examples were extracted from major linguistic corpora (British National Corpus, Corpus of Contemporary American English, News on the Web Corpus), encompassing a range of registers (academic, journalistic, colloquial). Both synchronic and diachronic variations in meaning realization were considered, with particular emphasis on contextual diversity.

Stage 3: The corpus and lexicographic data were analyzed against a unified set of classificatory criteria. WordNet 3.1 served as the primary lexicographic reference due to its comprehensive sense inventories, hierarchical organization of polysemy, and synset-based relational architecture [19]. Its frequency-ordered sense lists and structured definitional networks provided a robust foundation for assessing the adequacy of traditional dictionary representations and mapping conceptual connections between senses.

Stage 4: The meanings of each selected noun were then categorized and organized into a cognitive-analytical matrix presented in tabular form. This matrix captures the semantic, conceptual, and usage-based dimensions of meaning. Each sense is evaluated using four interrelated criteria: Source and Target Domains, Categorization Level, Categorial Status, and Degree of Abstraction. The table thus serves not only as a means of visualization but as an instrument of theoretical analysis.

3. Main results

The present study proposes a four-dimensional typology for analyzing the semantic architecture of polysemous abstract nouns (their primary and secondary meanings) through a set of the following criteria:

1. Source and Target source and target conceptual domains governing semantic derivation. This criterion identifies the trajectory of conceptual projection underlying meaning derivation — whether through metaphor, metonymy, or conceptual profiling (a process for accessing implicit or associated meaning).

2. Categorization Level: meanings are differentiated according to their cognitive accessibility.

· Base-level concepts (e.g., PAIN, HAPPINESS) are grounded in embodied experience and are highly codable and immediately recognizable.

· Macro-level concepts (e.g., justice, effect) lack perceptual grounding but function as abstract superordinate structures for organizing complex knowledge.

· Sub-level concepts (e.g., flavour, charm) require contextual or cultural scaffolding and often emerge through discourse rather than direct experience.

3. Categorial status: Drawing on Wittgenstein’s notion of family resemblance, meanings are positioned within non-prototypical conceptual categories:

· Central members (e.g., joy, anger) display strong associations with core conceptual features.

· Peripheral members (e.g., insight, intuition) are activated through metalinguistic reasoning and involve higher-order cognitive processing. Abstract concepts lack clear prototypes, but maintain internal coherence via overlapping semantic traits.

4. Degree of Abstraction: meanings are distinguished by their cognitive distance from embodied experience.

· Base-level abstraction (e.g., fear, love) reflects universal psychophysiological states with cross-linguistic stability.

· Medium-level abstraction (e.g., value, importance) mediates between embodiment and socio-cultural cognition.

· High-level abstraction (e.g., logic, interpretation) arises from disciplinary discourse and epistemological frameworks.

4. Discussion

The data obtained in the course of developing the proposed typology are presented in Table 1. It is important to emphasize that this typological framework enables the systematic categorization of both primary (core) and derived meanings of abstract polysemous nouns in accordance with the outlined criteria. Let us proceed to the analysis of an abstract polysemous noun "charm" as a case study building on the proposed methodological framework to demonstrate the application of the proposed model of meaning classification.

The conducted analysis has demonstrated that the polysemous noun "charm" qualifies as abstract chiefly in its primary (core) sense — "attractiveness that interests or pleases or stimulates" — as it denotes a quality or state attributed to an individual or object, capable of eliciting a positive emotional response in an observer. In this sense, "charm" refers to a subjective experiential attribute, conceptualized as inherently affective and interpersonally salient. The concept verbalized by this primary meaning aligns with the base level of categorization, as it evokes an intuitively accessible and experientially grounded property that does not require complex inferential processing for its activation or comprehension.

The degree of abstraction associated with this conceptualization has been classified as base-level, given its close connection to emotional-affective states such as pleasure or attraction. This assessment is supported by corpus data. For instance:

(1) "But Junior, with his electric smile, youthful charm and backward cap, had company" [16].

(2) "Her soft demeanor and smile are keys to her seemingly endless charm" [16].

These examples highlight the ability of an individual endowed with charm to evoke favourable emotional responses. In (1), the phrase "electric smile" and in (2), "smile are keys to her charm" suggest a causal link between externalized expressions of positive emotion (i.e., "smiling") and the perception of charm, reinforcing the view that charm is construed as an emotionally resonant and socially oriented attribute.

With respect to its status within the relevant conceptual category, the concept underlying the primary sense of "charm" occupies a peripheral position. While cognitively salient, it does not represent the prototypical core of the category. For comparison, a concept such as love, which is verbalized through the abstract noun of the same name, would serve as a more central or prototypical member due to its stronger conceptual coherence, higher emotional intensity, and broader cultural and experiential embedding.

Finally, the conceptual structure underlying the primary meaning of "charm" is associated with the source domain "MATTER" / "ATTRIBUTE (HUMAN BEING/OBJECT)". This domain supplies the experiential grounding from which the abstract meaning is metaphorically or metonymically projected, emphasizing the affective and evaluative dimensions of human perception in social interaction.

In contrast to the primary meaning, the other meanings of the noun "charm" demonstrate various degrees of semantic shift and metaphorical reinterpretation, typically resulting in sub-level categorization and more peripheral conceptual status. The remaining senses of "charm" illustrate semantic shifts via metaphor and metonymy:

· Meaning (2) — "a verbal formula believed to have magical force" — represents a metaphorical extension rooted in ritual language. Though still abstract, it references language as an objectified entity with influence, aligning it with the "OBJECT" target domain. Its dual status as a linguistic act and a cultural object complicates the identification of its abstraction level.

· Meaning (3) — "something believed to bring good luck" – is a metonymic shift wherein an abstract property (influence) is embodied in a tangible token. It thus aligns with sub-level categorization and object-based target domain.

· Meaning (4) — "a type of quark in physics" — is a technical appropriation within scientific discourse. This highly abstract, formal usage departs from the noun’s affective roots and illustrates a semantic recontextualization typical of scientific nomenclature. While it retains the original lexical form, its meaning is opaque outside specialized knowledge domains.

5. Conclusion

The proposed typology aims to capture the diversity of abstract concepts by accounting for their cognitive functions, conceptualization patterns, status within the conceptual system, and modes of verbalization in language. It demonstrates that lexicalized abstract concepts are deeply intertwined with individual cognitive activity and experiential grounding. Furthermore, the typology reveals several systematic patterns. First, the concepts underlying the primary meanings of most abstract nouns typically belong to foundational conceptual categories such as "RELATION", "TIME", "INTELLECT", and "AFFECTIONS". Second, abstract nouns denoting emotional states exhibit greater intuitive accessibility and often manifest perceptible correlates, whereas conceptual nouns (e.g., those encoding epistemic or social constructs) demand more complex cognitive effort for comprehension and interpretation.

This study advances the theoretical discourse in cognitive semantics by integrating traditional semantic frameworks with dynamic, usage-based models of meaning construction. The four-dimensional criteria — Source and Target Domain, Categorization Level, Categorial Status, and Degree of Abstraction — provide a systematic methodology for analyzing polysemy in abstract nouns, bridging the gap between lexicographic practice and cognitive theory. By foregrounding conceptual projection mechanisms (e.g., metaphor, metonymy) and their role in semantic extension, the typology elucidates how abstract meanings emerge from embodied experience and are subsequently recontextualized in specialized domains.

Ultimately, this study underscores the centrality of cognitive mechanisms in shaping abstract semantics, advocating for a holistic approach that harmonizes linguistic structure, conceptual dynamics, and embodied cognition. By doing so, it not only refines our understanding of abstract nouns but also reinforces the interdisciplinary potential of cognitive linguistics in unraveling the complexities of human thought and language.

The additional file for this article can be found as follows: