Revisiting the binding designation between source and target domains in the creation of Javanese food names metaphors

Abstract

This study aims to investigate metaphorical representation in Javanese food names in terms of linguistic forms, metaphorical element distribution, similarity basis, source domains, and sociocultural factors underlying their existence. This study employed a qualitative approach by positioning researchers for collecting and generating data through literature studies, with questionnaire responses from 50 native respondents. The results of the analysis showed that Javanese metaphorical food names were expressed in various linguistic forms, including monomorphemic and compounded words consisting of compounding (whether on the first, last, or entire expression), contraction, and reduplication processes. Further analysis then revealed that everything related to humans and mythologies, animals, plants, natures, things, and actions were used as metaphor source domains; and compared based on shape, size, function, texture, colour, taste, and state. By considering the juxtaposition between metaphor and culture, this study concluded that the environment significantly impacts the meanings that Javanese members of groups use to understand other aspects of their world.

Keywords:

• Javanese foods
• metaphors
• metaphors basis of similarity
• source domain
• target domain

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

With its enormous geographical and cultural diversity across the archipelagos, it is clear that Javanese cuisines are distinctive and diverse. As a result, the names given to Javanese foods also distinct and varied. Their naming practice was primarily dependent on shapes, states, or associations. Yet, this study highlighted linguistic forms, metaphorical element distribution, similarity basis, source domains, and sociocultural factors underlying the creation of Javanese food metaphors from morphology and cognitive linguistic perspectives. The findings of this study will help readers understand how Javanese language and culture influence Javanese society’s cognition and perception of the surroundings of the objects.

1. Introduction

Metaphors have long been studied in various fields, ranging from literary studies and analytical philosophy to cognitive psychology and linguistics. In literature studies, discussions of metaphors are mainly related to their function as figures of speech and feel within the field of rhetoric and are viewed as one of the various tropes (Danesi, 2004, p. 130). Literary works practitioners, literary critics, as well as psychologists of art and philosophers, proposed that the stylistic properties of poetic language, particularly figurative expressions, deliberately pervert or flout regular cognitive principles to achieve the effects unique to poetic discourse. On the same basis of argument, Shen (2008, p. 295) states that many figurative expressions that appear in poetic discourse are perplexing. Thus, according to Semino & Steen (2008, pp. 232–246), some literary metaphors are perceived as “unmarked” while others are perceived as “marked”.

However, unlike the aforementioned studies that place metaphors as the imaginary and poetic application of words, metaphor debates evolved over time in linguistics by viewing metaphor as both a linguistic and cognitive phenomenon. As the pioneer of the metaphor theory, Aristotle, who lived in 384–322 BCE, pointed out that words are composed of three entities: form (pronunciation), referent (the pointed object), and meaning. Under those entities and two millennia (concrete and abstract), metaphors tend to compare or substitute two paralleled phenomena: genus to species, species to genus, species to species, or by analogy (Aristotle, 1995, p. 105). Richard (1968) built his model upon the Aristotelian dichotomy by seeing metaphors as the omnipresent principle of language (Vernoos, 2018, p. 20). This model is then known as the “triadic configuration of metaphors” that consists of the words used to express metaphors (vehicle), the referent or topic represented by the symbols (tenor), and the meaning generated by the vehicle and the tenor (Richard, 1968, p. 92). Since the emergence of the discussion of metaphors from a cognitive linguistic standpoint, metaphors are no longer seen as merely superficial and superfluous linguistic ornament (Ji, 2020, p. 370). Lakoff and Johnson (1980, p. 244) proposed that metaphors are fundamentally conceptual and placed metaphors as “devices of thought and action” beyond the concept of “embodied mind” or “linguistic determinism”. Metaphor is then described as an inter-domain relation in the human conceptual system or as indispensable conceptual tools for thinking, talking, and acting (Ji, 2020, p. 370).

Bringing two domains into account: the source domain (the element of the vehicle) and the target domain (the element of the tenor), they state that metaphors are pervasive in human language and conceptual systems. In the metaphor-forming process, the conceptual structure of the source domain is metaphorically mapped onto the target domain, and thus relations between entities in the source domain are replicated and projected in the target domain (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003; Vernoos, 2018). They then identified three basic types of image schemes by involving: (1) the experience of orientation; (2) the ontological thinking; and (3) structural orientation. Metaphorical meanings and forms should be traced through experiential grounding, systematicity, and coherency in the metaphorical concepts. Therefore, metaphors must be viewed as dynamic features that create and/or convey meaning in any communication process creative process.

Metaphors flourish and cover a wide range of grammatical categories, such as nouns, verbs, adjectives, prepositions, etc., As metaphors are form of unconscious thought formulas that permeate everyday language (Danesi, 2004, p. 122), they can be manifested in a variety of human-life-related references, such as human body parts (as identified by Angelopoulou, 2021; Farghal & Alenezi, 2022; Huisman et al., 2021; Huo & Chen, 2021; Khatin-Zadeh et al., 2023; Poppi & Urios-Aparisi, 2018; Rotasperti, 2021; Vujković & Vuković-Stamatović, 2021; Wang, 2023; Yang & Wang, 2022), animals (as identified by Ardianto, 2022; Fowler, 2023; Ho, 2022; Magd, 2016; Orhero et al., 2021; Wang, 2022; Wu, 2022), plants (as identified by Ahmadi & Ghazali, 2018; Austin, 2019; Brickman, 2020; Fitri & Rini, 2022; Luciani, 2022; Tsuchimoto, 2023; Van Ooijen & Kuzmicova, 2019; Wang, 2022; Xiao & De Wang, 2022), house utensils (as identified by Moshina, 2022), actions (as determined by Huo & Chen, 2021; Strathern & Stewart, 2018; Tong & Cienki, 2016), foods, dishes, and beverages (as determined by Aljanada & Alfaisal, 2020; Boujena et al., 2021; Genovesi, 2019; Guru, 2019; Huo et al., 2020; Negro, 2019; Ratchatakorntrakoon, 2020; Sankaran, 2022; Tseng, 2017; Widener, 2018; Yurina & Baldova, 2017), behaviour (as identified by Jing-Schmidt, 2008 as well as Ureña & Faber, 2010), etc. Regarding foods as metaphor’s source domain, Yurina and Baldova (2017) proposed that food metaphor refers to a metaphoric cognitive model that allows cognizable phenomena from various extra-linguistic spheres to be conceptualized through analogy with phenomena from the “food” sphere. Their findings then proclaimed that food metaphors are linguistically manifested in figurative lexis with an internal metaphoric form, phraseology units of varying structure, or proverbs, and verbally manifested in the author’s metaphorical expressions.

Supposedly, Tseng (2017), who explores how food metaphors are realized through the actual dining experience, views that food metaphors comprise a combination of primary metaphors enriched by schema propositions and embedded in food performance. In that case, human eating experiences reactivate sensory-motor experiences that underlie the formation of complex metaphors. Focusing on metaphorically-based food idioms, Negro (2019) found that the source domain of food is used in both English and Spanish to represent people and conceptualize money and further investigated the chain between metaphor and metonymy. Meanwhile, by examining four contemporary texts from global South India, Singapore, and the Philippines that are themed around the making and eating of foods, the most recent monograph on food metaphors conducted by Sankaran (2022) reveals that different cultures contribute to or challenge ideas about cooking, eating, and even wasting foods.

Wulandari (2017) and also MacRae and Reuter (2020) have already conducted tentative studies on foods metaphor in Indonesia. Wulandari (2017) investigated food metaphors through the lens of social sciences by combining literary and diasporic identity studies. She emphasized that food can be used as a platform for expressing one’s identity as well as a negotiating tool for bridging the gap between binary cultural differences. Differently, MacRae and Reuter (2020) investigated the existence of the word lumbung “the traditional rice barn” as a central pillar for food security in Indonesia. They found that Indonesian cultural metaphors of food security revolve around staple foods and their storage. The decisive reason behind the use of lumbung because Indonesia has long relied heavily on seasonally harvested crops stored in secure structures known in English as barns or granaries.

Of all studies mentioned, none of them examines the origins of food naming by incorporating morphological and anthropological perspectives into the analysis. As the study of how various parts of words combine or stand-alone to change the meaning of the word (Parker & Riley, 2014; Yule, 2010), morphology becomes inevitable to dissect the processes that occur in words or the arrangement of words (i.e., the pattern of word formation and internal organization) that form metaphors as well as their etymology. Metaphors are widely used as a functional mechanism in word formation as the lexicon provides basic units both for language and thought (Basilio, 2006, p. 79). Otherwise, cultural background also plays a pivotal role in the study of metaphors (Liu et al., 2020, p. 2), especially food metaphors. It cannot be denied that foods and their names are undoubtedly crucial in every culture. Food entails both technical and symbolic functions within a particular cultural group (Wijaya, 2019, p. 2) as they were constructed by a number of common words that share characteristics with the objects to which they refer or are named based on their associations with many entities as they evolve throughout humans’ lifetimes. Beyond those concerns, this study focuses on the names of foods as metaphor source domains based on the linkage between food and cultural environment.

This study limited its attention to metaphorical expressions contained in Javanese food names. In this context, Javanese foods are defined as traditional or authentic culinary preparations and dishes that Javanese people (one of Indonesian’s ethnics, originated in East Java, Central Java, and Yogyakarta) usually consume, produced by traditional raw materials, traditional formulation, and traditional types of production and/or processing (Trichopoulou et al., 2006, 2007). Javanese foods are strongly linked to a territory, a historical depth, and a constellation of associated knowledge, meanings, values, and practice (Rocillo-Aquino et al., 2021, p. 6); this study was under the hypothesis that multiple factors or dimensions, such as nature, history, and culture, shape Javanese food culture. The Javanese are an Austronesian ethnic group of natives who speak a Malayo-Polynesian language (Katzner, 2002, p. 5). It is spoken by roughly 80 million people who live in the central and eastern parts of the island of Java in Indonesia. For Javanese, food has become recognized as an expression of identity and culture, connected to social contexts, cultural values, identities, and powers. The ingredients used to prepare the dishes were sourced from the surrounding natural resources, while the cooking technique used was relatively simple (Wijaya, 2019, p. 4). With its enormous geographical and cultural diversity across the archipelagos, it is evident that Javanese cuisine is rich in variety and taste. Consequently, the names given to Javanese foods are distinctive and diverse. Their naming practice primarily depended on shapes, states, or associations, which implies that Javanese food names are within the scope of this study as they are rich in symbolism.

In order to fill the gap, this study tends to (1) identify linguistic forms used to express the metaphorical names of Javanese foods; (2) investigate the focus of metaphorical expressions in the case of the food names constructed in polymorphemic forms; (3) explore the similarity basis and source domain of the food the Javanese names; and (4) determine sociocultural factors influencing the metaphorical Javanese food naming. This study posits that speakers are not always compelled to create new words to refer to the new entities they can make or produce. As a result, they create various forms of metaphors from the vocabulary the language already possesses.

According to Falk (1994), the eating community and the meals are the fundamental foundations of all societies. As a result, there is no culture without food. People’s relationships with food are characterized by a tension between the reasoning and calculation that can be used to improve human performance and health and the sensual, physical, and cultural aspects of food that are essential for the experience of closeness, coherence, and comprehensibility (Nordström et al., 2013, p. 358). Consequently, the number of lexical items that refer to them will always increase, and their semantic concepts might be expanded or narrowed due to a change in the nature and conception of the phenomenon denoted by a lexicon item (see Allan (1986, p. 203)).

2. Methods

This study positioned researchers as the primary instrument for collecting and generating data using the reflective-introspective method. A total of 42 data of Javanese food names suspected of containing metaphors (known if there were terms in Javanese food names construction that contain non-literal meaning) presented and supplemented in this study were obtained from the researchers’ knowledge (as native Javanese speakers who have lived in Yogyakarta (one of the central places in Indonesia, where the standard and prestigious varieties of Javanese are manifested) for more than 40 years and 28 years), respectively, conducted through literature studies (such as from “Kitab Masakan: Kumpulan Resep Sepanjang Masa [The Cookbook: A Collection of Recipes Throughout the Ages]” by Tim Dapur Demedia (2010), “Makanan Tradisional Indonesia Seri 2: Makanan Tradisional yang Populer [Indonesian Traditional Food Series 2: Popular Traditional Food]” by Santosa et al. (2017), “101 Resep Jajan Pasar Tradisional Yang Istimewa [101 Special Indonesian Traditional Treats ans Snack Recipes]” by Kusumawati and Putra (2017), “Jajanan Pasar Khas Yogyakarta [Yogyakarta Traditional Treats and Snacks]” by Kuswanto (2018), “30 Resep Jajan Pasar Ala Master Kue Tradisional [30 Traditional Treats and Snacks Recipes Inspired by Traditional Cake Masters]” by Rustan (2020), and “120 Recipes Home Made Jajanan Pasar” by Marga et al. (2021)).

To obtain saturated and more complete data as well as to acquire as much data as possible, this study also used data collected from Google Forms questionnaires which were disseminated among 50 native Javanese respondents (consisting of Javanese literature students and natives) as the secondary instrument. The researchers selected all respondents using non-random convenience sampling due to geographical proximity, availability at a given time, or willingness to participate in the research (Vanderstoep & Johnston, 2009, p. 27). All the respondents were then asked three open-ended questions about their origins, names of traditional foods in their respective areas, and further descriptions of the foods. Data similarity is then subsequently eliminated for the sake of diversity since the answers were quite wide-ranging. The experts (consisting of two academics and two practitioners or cultural observers) were then asked to validate the collected data to ensure its reliability and validity as well as to avoid subjectivity and bias.

By using the cognitive linguistics approach as the scalpel, the data were then classified and analyzed by adopting the procedures proposed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980) and Kovecses (2006). First, the Javanese food data containing metaphorical elements were manually identified and classified according to the linguistic forms. Second, the data were differentiated based on their metaphorical element distribution, the source domains, the similarity basis, and the social factors that cause their existence. In order to facilitate global readers’ understanding, researchers also provided the literal translation of each Javanese food name and also included glossaries as additional information in the appendix. However, it should be noted that some names were exotic and belonged to culturally specific items (CSIs). To this extent, they can only be explained in descriptive ways since there is no one-to-one correspondence in English. Third, the overall data were holistically analyzed by using a descriptive-qualitative approach. Fourth, summarizing the whole discussion. Last, drawing the final justifications and conclusions.

3. Findings and discussion

Given that humans need to form and maintain social relationships (Nordström et al., 2013, p. 359), food cannot be reduced to culture. As asserted by Fischler (1988), “Any given human individual is constructed, biologically, psychologically and socially by the food he/she chooses to incorporate”. Thus, food then serves as a vehicle for people to connect with one another. The following sections present the research findings on metaphors’ binding designation identified through linguistic forms, metaphorical element distribution, source domains and similarity basis, as well as sociocultural factors that cause their emergence in Javanese food names.

3.1. Determining linguistic forms of Javanese food names construction

Human beings’ ability to think about realities in the world is far greater than their ability to express realities through language. In this case, language has evolved into a tool that conceals rather than reveals realities (Gerrig & Banaji, 1994). Even though the human language is generative (as it can convey an infinite number of ideas from a finite number of components) and recursive (as it can build upon itself without limits) in forming ideas (Lobina, 2017; Sauerland & Alexiadou, 2020); not everything that humans can think of can be expressed through the language they use to communicate. Interestingly, to be able to talk about things that are not in their language, they do not have to invent new words because creating new words or terms for each new concept will tax human memory.

There are at least two principal ways in which they are important. First, metaphors are the basic process in the formation of words and word meanings. Second, metaphors are highly dependent on context, function, and purpose, either to communicate what humans think or feel about something, to explain what a particular thing is like, and to convey meaning in a more interesting or creative way, or to do all of these (Knowles & Moon, 2006, p. 3).

As the literature review outlines, metaphors encompass a wide range of grammatical categories, including nouns, verbs, adjectives, prepositions, etc. Furthermore, based on the internal structure of words, metaphors are frequently composed of a word or word order formed through various word formation processes. In this context, a word (a lexicon) can be defined as a set of symbolic forms associated with meanings (Basilio, 2006, p. 68). It can be constructed through coinage, borrowing, compounding, blending, clipping, back-formation, conversion, reduplication, contraction, composition, acronyms, derivation, etc. Regardless of the base word or mono-morphemic food names, only three morphological processes are presented in the construction of Javanese food names. They were reduplication, compounding, and contraction. The overall findings are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Linguistic forms of Javanese food names construction

No	Linguistic form	Occurrence(s)	Percentage(s)
1.	Monomorphemic words	3	7.14%
2.	Compound words
	Compounding	32	76.19%
	Contraction	4	9.53%
	Reduplication	3	7.14%
	TOTAL	42	100.00%

Monomorphemic and compounded words became the top two linguistic forms of Javanese food names construction. As laid out by Saussure (1959), a word is like a coin because it has two sides that can never be separated. One side of this metaphorical coin is the form of a word: the sounds (or letters) that combine to form the spoken or written word. The other side of the coin is the word’s meaning: the image or concept humans have in mind when using it. Thus, a word serves a purpose in connecting a given form to a given meaning. Compounding dominates the entire data set of Javanese food names formation in Table 1., followed by contraction, reduplication, and monomorphemic word construction. The usage of monomorphemic words for Javanese food names indicates cases where the target and the source word had the same morphological structure, such as balok which means “beam”, satêlit which means “satellite”, and lapis which means “layers”, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Lists of Javanese food names represented in monomorphemic words

No.	Food Name	Literal Meaning	Metaphorical Meaning
1.	Balok	wooden beam	diced fried cassava
2.	Satêlit	Satellite	pastries made from cassava flour mixed with grated coconut
3.	Lapis	Layers	sweet food made from rice flour, starch, coconut milk, sugar, and salt, with two or more layers of different colours

In contrast with mono-morphemic or single-word construction, in compound word production, the closeness of multiple constructions was attained at least through the characteristics of one constituent involving a fixed association with other constituents in one construction. Name processing takes many considerations towards its meaning. Food names then become the psychological realization of the society constructed by certain conventions and cultures. By creating new things or ideas, compounding conveys a unit idea that is not as clearly or quickly conveyed by the component words in unconnected succession. Compounding (i.e., a series of two or more words collectively forming a single word) produced the most metaphorical Javanese food names. They were mainly presented as endocentric compound words, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Lists of Javanese food names represented in compound words

No.	Food Name	Literal Meaning	Metaphorical Meaning
1.	Apêm Contong	Apêm: Apêm Contong: Cone	a type of rice cake wrapped in a unique container shaped like a cone-shaped made of jackfruit leaf
2.	Bubur Sumsum	Bubur: porridge Sumsum: morrow	a type of white porridge made from rice flour that is eaten with brown sugar syrup
3.	Cakar Ayam	Cakar: claw Ayam: chicken	food made from thinly shaved fried cassava sweetened with palm sugar
4.	Carang Gêsing	Carang: twig Gêsing: a kind of thorny bamboo	steamed chopped banana wrapped with rice flour in coconut milk and banana leaves
5.	Carang Madu	Carang: twig Madu: honey	a kind of food made of rice and sticky rice flour mixed with palm sugar and finely cut
6.	Dawêt Ayu	Dawêt: dawêt Ayu: beautiful	a cold drink made of rice flour, coconut milk, and palm sugar
7.	És Lilin	És: ice Lilin: candle	kinds of ice in various flavours placed in a plastic tube
8.	Ganjêl Ril	Ganjêl: wedge Ril: rail	long and extensive wheat flour cake-like train wedge
9.	Gêthuk Lindri	Gêthuk: gêthuk Lindri: beautiful princess	food made from boiled cassava, finely ground with granulated sugar, sprinkled with food colouring and vanilla, printed in an elongated shape, and cut into small pieces
10.	Inthil Gorêng	Inthil: goat feces Gorêng: fry	dried chopped cassava that looks like sheep dropping
11.	Jadah Gêmblong	Jadah: sticky rice Gêmblong: oval shape	food made from white glutinous rice flour dough, which is kneaded until smooth
12.	Jênang Gêmpol	Jênang: sticky porridge Gêmpol: round-shape	a combination of gêmpol rice and brown sugar marrow porridge topped with coconut milk gravy
13.	Jênang Grêndul or Jênang Candil	Jênang: sticky porridge Grêndul: bubbling	a sweet porridge made from glutinous rice flour, brown sugar, and coconut milk
14.	Kacang Atom	Kacang: peanut Atom: plastics or atoms	fried round-peanut product coated with tapioca and spices
15.	Kêmbang Waru	Kêmbang: flower Waru: spade (Hibiscus Tiliaceus sp.)	a type of brown bread shaped like a spade flower with a sweet taste
16.	Kuping Gajah	Kuping: ears Gajah: elephant	cracker shaped like an elephant ear made of wheat flour
17.	Kuping Tikus	Kuping: ears Tikus: mouse	cracker shaped like a mouse ear made of wheat flour
18.	Madu Mangsa	Madu: honey Mangsa: season	black sticky rice porridge made from fermented glutinous rice
19.	Mata Kêbo	Mata: eyes Kêbo: buffalo	red oval sticky rice cake filled with sweet green bean dough
20.	Mata Sapi	Mata: eyes Sapi: cow	cassava wet cake snacks with banana filling
21.	Randha Royal	Randha: widow Royal: royal	a traditional snack made from wheat flour filled with tapé (fermented cassava)
22.	Randha Kêmul	Randha: widow Kêmul: blanket	fried food made from uli or crushed glutinous rice
23.	Putu Ayu	Putu: putu Ayu: beautiful	green cake with palm sugar filling and grated coconut on top
24.	Rujak Cingur	Rujak: salad-like Cingur: beef/ox snout	mixed vegetable salad with slices of beef/ox snout and peanut butter
25.	Sangga Buwana	Sangga: guardian Buwana: universe	burger-like food with chicken, eclairs, eggs, gravy, and lettuce
26.	Sêmar Mêndêm	Sêmar: Javanese puppet character Mêndêm: drunken	a traditional snack made of glutinous rice and topped with shredded chicken
27.	Susur Wéwé	Susur: tobacco quid Wéwé: female supernatural being or vengeful ghost in Javanese mythology	a kind of food made of grated young coconut cooked with sugar
28.	Tahu Susur	Tahu: tofu Susur: tobacco quid	fried tofu wrapped in flour dough and filled with carrots and cabbage
29.	Témpé Kêmul	Témpé: fermented soy-bean cake Kêmul: blanket	fried témpé covered with seasoned flour dough
30.	Thêngkléng Gajah	Thêngkléng: goat bones/ribs Gajah: elephant	a soup made from goat meat, offal, ribs, and bones that are similar to a curry dish but served with extra portions
31.	Têrang Bulan	Têrang: light Bulan: moon	a thick and sweet pancake with a round shape like a moon
32.	Unthuk Cacing	Unthuk: mound Cacing: worm	a snack shaped like a worm’s nest

As presented in Table 3, the compounding process has resulted in the formation of new words (derived from the syntactic relation of two roots: noun +noun or noun +verb) that made Javanese food names idiomatic and metaphorical since “idiomatic meaning” and “the integrity of forms” became the main criterion of compounded words formation (Alieva, 1991). These constructions formed since the words that comprised Javanese food names were typically dictated or followed by the production processes or preparation methods (manifested by verbs), as well as shapes, states, or associations (mostly embodied by nouns). Since there were abundant lists of Javanese foods that were almost similar, the Javanese used these basic similarities to differentiate one food from another based on their semantic ground (Jackson & Amvela, 2000; O’Grady et al., 1997). For this circumstance, the use and arrangement of compound words in Javanese food names construction transform abstract concepts into more concrete ones.

While many Javanese food names were shared, several food names were produced through contraction by combining two words. Several Javanese foods were manifested in a combination of two metaphorical words, metaphorical plus non-metaphorical words, and vice versa. The names of the food such as Bolumprit for “a hemispherical sweet treat with a firm texture and pink, white, green, and brown colours”, Bangjo for “colourful wheat flour cake shaped like a traffic light”, Tholpit for “rice flour cake with melted palm sugar inside”, and Turbin for “a kind of food made of glutinous rice and tholo beans, as well as grated coconut and salt”; were examples of compound words with the external construction. Table 4 displays the abbreviation and meaning of each name.

Table 4. Lists of Javanese food names that have undergone contraction

No.	Food Name	The Origin of The Word	Literal Meaning
1.	Bolumprit	Bolu Emprit	small sponge cake
2.	Tholpit	Konthol Kêjêpit	clamped penis
3.	Turbin	Turuk Bintul	slightly bumped vagina
4.	Bangjo	Abang Ijo	red and green colours

Javanese society is dense with philosophical values that can be applied directly in life. This culture can be seen in various ways, one of which is through Javanese food names. The contraction process manifested the maximum “ease of articulation (EoA)” principle by Locke (1972). It basically stems from Passy’s (1891) economy principle, which states that all languages avoid superfluous words (Hamann, 2013). Thus, natives Javanese tend to expend the least amount of effort in language production to create a more economical expression (Wijana et al., 2023, p. 89).

All Javanese food names construction proves that language continues to expand over time. The rate of change varies from language to language as they are heavily influenced by various factors, including the speaker’s creativity or innovation. They can be found in every aspect of the language, most notably in meaning, pronunciation, and vocabulary. The changes in terminology stem from the speakers’ need to refer to new concepts that do not already exist in their language. To fulfill this need, the language may borrow from other languages, coin, or create in various ways from its own terminology.

Among all Javanese food names formation processes, reduplication (i.e., the repetition of a word to create a new word with a modified meaning) can be found in a small number of Javanese food names, such as in the formation of Untir-Untir, Alén-Alén, and Orak-Arik. Untir-Untir is created by full reduplication (known as dwilingga padha swara) of the basic unit untir, which means “twisted”. There is also Alén-Alén which is constructed from ali-ali that interacts with inflection -én, to perform artificiality, similarity or imitation. In a different manner, Orak-Arik is formed by reduplication and vowel modification (known as dwilingga salin swara) of the basic unit arik “to scramble” as the manifestation of continuity and intensity. Table 5 presented forms of reduplication found in Javanese food names construction.

Table 5. Lists of Javanese food names that have undergone reduplication

No.	Food Name	Word’s Origin	Literal Meaning	Metaphorical Meaning
1.	Untir-Untir	Untir	Twisted	a twisted cake made of fried rice flour (also known as rope pastry)
2.	Alén-Alén	Ali-Ali	Ring	savoury round-shaped snacks with holes resembling rings
3.	Orak-Arik	Arik	to scramble/to stir	scrambled eggs mixed with cabbage and carrot

Different from the function of reduplication in English and Indonesian, in these cases, reduplication could not be interpreted as a plural form, as used in Indonesian. Instead, it functioned as a word class modifier or carried concessive denotation, associating with additional meanings with their non-reduplicated counterparts when it has no grammatical change (Inkelas, 2014; Wijana, 2021).

3.2. Beyond the naming system: Placement of metaphorical elements in Javanese food names construction

Foods are named primarily according to their origins and ingredients. While most international foods were enacted to the name of a particular region as territorial identity’s marker, in most cases, Javanese foods from the plant kingdom usually have the same name as the plant, while food from animals usually has the same name as the animal. The exceptions are built through metaphorical words. In Javanese food names construction, the metaphorical elements of monomorphemic and reduplicative food names are thoroughly distributed throughout the word in phrase construction, as there is only a single basic word that composes the word order construction (such as Satelit (literally means “satellite”) and Balok (literally means “block”), Lapis (literally means “layer”) or Alén-Alén from the word ali-ali (literally means “finger ring”), Orak-Arik (literally means “to scramble”), and Untir-Untir from the word untir (literally means “twisted”)). However, for those built through the compounding process, the placement or distribution of metaphorical elements can vary and be fluid, as shown in Diagram 1.

Diagram 1. The distribution of morphological and metaphorical elements in the construction of Javanese food names.

Varieties of metaphorical element placement occurred since most of the compound words in Javanese food names construction were typically dictated by the production process or preparation method (such as goréng “fried”, bakar “roasted”, gongso “sheered”, godhog “boiled”, kukus “steamed”, and so on) or begin by the name of the main ingredient (such as télo “either cassava or sweet potato”, jagung “corn”, kacang “peanut”, pisang “banana”, dêlê “soybean”, sêgo “rice”, témpé “fermented soybean cake”, tahu “tofu”, tapé “fermented cassava or fermented glutinous rice”, and so on). These naming systems were used by Javanese society to distinguish one food from another. Nonetheless, it is essential to investigate the metaphors’ basis similarities and source domain in the construction of Javanese food names. Based on the position of metaphorical elements, some compound words tend to have metaphorical elements in the front, final, or entire words, as shown in Table 6.

Table 6. Lists of Javanese food names based on the metaphorical elements’ distribution

No.	Distribution of Metaphorical Element	Food Name(s)
1.	Front	Inthil (goat feces) Goréng and Rujak (salad-like) Cingur
2.	Final	Dawêt Ayu (beautiful), Putu Ayu (beautiful), Apêm Contong (cone)¸ Gêthuk Lindri (beautiful princess), Kacang Atom (atoms or plastics), Bolu Emprit (sparrow), Jadah Gêmblong (round-shape), Jênang Grêndul (sticky chewy texture), Jênang Gêmpol (round-shape), Thêngkléng Gajah (elephant), Bubur Sumsum (marrow), És Lilin (candle), Tahu Susur (tobacco quid), Témpé Kêmul (blanket)
3.	Entire	Bangjo (red and green), Ganjêl Ril (rail wedge), Cakar Ayam (chicken claw), Carang Gêsing (bamboo twig), Carang Madu (honey twig), Sêmar Mêndêm (drunken Sémar), Madu Mangsa (honey black sticky rice porridge), Randha Royal (royal widow), Randha Kêmul (widow in blanket), Kuping Gajah (elephant ears), Kuping Tikus (mouse ears), Têrang Bulan (moonlight), Kêmbang Waru (spade flower), Unthuk Cacing (worm nest), Mata Kêbo (buffalo eyes), Mata Sapi (cow eyes), Konthol Kêjêpit (clamped penis), Turuk Bintul (bumping vagina), Sangga Buwana (guardian of the universe), Susur Wéwé (ghost’s tobacco quid)

As shown in Table 6., metaphorical elements’ placement determines the physical existence of the referred name. The etymological root conjured up sensory experiences and suggested why it is known as that. Some etymological information can be reasoned by associating it with the surrounding since senses are developed from the original meaning in several ways. However, some names are probably created through figurative processes which require further identification. As stated by Knowles and Moon (2006, p. 15), the etymological roots show that a metaphorical process has happened; however, their metaphorical nature may be more transparent or not be obvious unless we examine their etymologies since their meanings are not fixed or frozen.

3.3. Shape-based metaphors and sensory experiences in Javanese food names

Every metaphorical expression is made up of three essential elements. These three elements have been referred to as (1) the target domain (tenor/topic) as something the linguistic expressions intend to communicate; (2) The source domain (vehicle) as something the linguistic expression uses to compare (the literal concept); and (3) the cognitive or point of similarity (ground) underlying the target domain and the source domain (Knowles & Moon, 2006; Richard, 1968). The metaphor encompasses multiple senses (i.e., an image based on sight, sound, touch, taste, and smell) (Knowles & Moon, 2006, p. 8). This kind of crossover is referred to as “synesthesia”. Researchers’ thorough examination shows that most metaphorical Javanese food names rely on these associations, as presented in Table 7 below.

Table 7. Metaphors’ basis of similarities in Javanese food names

No.	Basis of Similarity	Food Name(s)
1.	Shape	Cakar Ayam, Kêmbang Waru, Mata Kêbo, Mata Sapi, Unthuk Cacing, Balok, Apêm Contong, És Lilin, Untir-Untir, Jadah Gêmblong, Jênang Grêndul, Jênang Gêmpol, Inthil Goréng, Alén-Alén, Kuping Gajah, Kuping Tikus, Kacang Atom, Ganjêl Ril, Satêlit, Tahu Susur, Têrang Bulan, Konthol Kêjêpit, Turuk Bintul, Orak-Arik
2.	Texture	Bubur Sumsum
3.	Colour	Bangjo
4.	Size	Thêngkléng Gajah, Bolu Emprit, Sémar Mêndêm
5.	Taste	Madu Mangsa, Carang Madu
6.	State	Dawêt Ayu, Putu Ayu
7.	Function	Randha Kêmul, Témpé Kêmul

The object properties (such as shape, size, and function) and aspects of the human sensory experience (such as texture, colour, taste, and state) determine the representation of metaphorical elements in Javanese food names. Cakar Ayam came from the similarity between the food shape and something scratched by a chicken claw, Kêmbang Waru came from the similarity between the dominant part of the cake and the eight Hibiscus tiliaceus petals, Bubur Sumsum came from the similarity between the porridge texture and the marrow, Mata Kêbo came from the similarity between the shape of the cake and buffalo eyes, Mata Sapi came from the similarity between the shape of the cake and cow eyes, Unthuk Cacing came from the similarity between the food shape and worm’s nest, Balok came from the similarity between the shape and cube shape, Apêm Contong came from the similarity between the shape and ice-cream cone, És Lilin came from the similarity between the shape of the ice and candle shape, Untir-Untir came from the similarity between the shape and twisted things, Jadah Gêmblong because of its round and oval shape, Inthil Goréng came from the similarity between the form and sheep’s dropping shape, Alén-Alén came from the similarity between the shape and finger ring, Kuping Gajah came from the similarity between the cake shape and elephant ears, Kuping Tikus came from the similarity between the cake shape and mouse ears, Kacang Atom came from the similarity between the food shape and atoms particle, particularly, atomic bomb shape, Ganjêl Ril came from the similarity between food shape and rail sleepers shape, Satêlit came from the similarity between the shape and satellite miniature, Têrang Bulan came from the resemblance to moon shape), Konthol Kêjêpit came from the similarity between the food and men’s genital, Turuk Bintul came from the similarity between the food and women’s vaginas, Bangjo came from the similarity between the colour and traffic light colours, Thêngkléng Gajah came from the similarity between the food portion with the elephant size, Bolu Emprit came from the similarity between the size of the cake and the size of sparrow bird, Sémar Mêndêm came from the similarity between the size and Sêmar body size, Madu Mangsa and Carang Madu came from the similarity between foods taste and honey taste, Dawêt Ayu and Putu Ayu rely on their resemblance to the state of the food, as well as Randha Kêmul and Témpé Kêmul based on the function of the flour dough which similar to the function of the blanket.

So far, the metaphors mentioned have been quite diverse and fuzzy, and it is already clear that they have covered several linguistic phenomena. Metaphors are instances of non-literal language that involve some sort of comparison and identification. As literal meanings manifest a concrete entity or something with physical existence, metaphors become historical or diachronic since they display abstract or abstract qualities (Knowles & Moon, 2006, p. 3). Since metaphors are a form of symbolism, to analyze and discuss metaphors in any depth, it is essential to identify and consider the metaphor, the meaning, and the similarity or connection between the two, as mentioned by Lakoff and Johnson (2003) and Kovecses (2006). The comparison in a metaphor becomes implicit and cannot only be construed literally despite the explanation of metaphor depending on the definition of “literalness”.

3.4. Exploring the source domain and mapping of Javanese food metaphors

Metaphorical expressions frequently include culturally specific concepts representing associations with distinct cultural communities. They apply exclusively to the acquisition of a first language, not a foreign language (Knowles & Moon, 2006, p. 61). Because metaphors can indicate differences in viewpoints and understandings, metaphors can be categorized as “realia” or “culture-bound phenomena” as they reflect additional cultural information and closely intertwine with human speech’s texture (Baldó, 2022; Sukirman et al., 2022). As metaphors are strongly connected to Javanese culture and identity, this section highlighted various source domains the Javanese used to name their foods (either in mono morphemic or compound word construction). Metaphorical mappings preserve the source domain’s cognitive topology (i.e., the image schema structure). Meaning components have been transferred from the original use with reference to certain source domains and mapping. This study then designed recurrent or consistent patterns of Javanese food metaphoric transfer by associating them with humans and mythologies, animals, plants, natures, things, and actions, as shown in Table 8.

Table 8. The source domain and mapping of Javanese food metaphors

No.	Source Domain	Food Name(s)
1.	Human Beings and Mythologies	Sêmar Mêndêm, Susur Wéwé, Konthol Kêjêpit, Turuk Bintul, Bubur Sumsum, Dawêt Ayu, Putu Ayu, Randha Kêmul, Randha Roya
2.	Animals	Bolu Emprit, Unthuk Cacing, Cakar Ayam, Mata Kêbo, Kuping Gajah, Thêngkléng Gajah, Kuping Tikus
3.	Plants	Kêmbang Waru, Carang Gêsing, Carang Madu, Madu Mangsa
4.	Natures	Têrang Bulan, Sangga Buwana
5.	Things	És Lilin, Bangjo, Satêlit, Balok, Lapis, Ganjêl Ril, Alén-Alén, Apêm Contong, Kacang Atom, Témpé Kêmul, Randha Kêmul
6.	Actions	Untir-Untir, Orak-Arik

Human beings and mythologies were quite popular among Javanese native speakers to be used as food names’ metaphorical thought sources. Religio-magical, cosmogonic, and elastic concepts that carry culture cosmic-mystical (mystical circle of the universe) and cosmic-biological culture (the circle of human real life) cause myths to take firm root in the life of Javanese society. They involve imaginative characters, supernatural creatures, statuses, physical states, body parts (embodiments), and everything associated with them, such as in Sêmar Mêndêm, Susur Wéwé, Konthol Kêjêpit, Turuk Bintul, Bubur Sumsum, Dawêt Ayu, Putu Ayu, Randha Kêmul, and Randha Royal. There is a relation between Sêmar (the name of the main character in the Javanese leather puppet) in Sêmar Mêndêm, Konthol (men’s genital) in Konthol Kêjêpit, Turuk (vagina) in Turuk Bintul, Sumsum (the marrow) in Bubur Sumsum, as well as Randha (widow) in Randha Royal and Randha Kêmul.

Visually, the Sêmar Mêndêm cake resembles Sêmar, which is described as having a fat body. The name of Konthol Kêjêpit is said to be pinned as the shape of this cake resembles pinched male genitalia. The name Turuk Bintul is pinned similarly because this cake’s form is similar to swollen female genitals. It is called Bubur Sumsum as this porridge is white, like the colour of bone marrow. Meanwhile, the term Randha Royal was given because the food was said to have assimilation with the widow status. Although it is difficult to trace the relationship between Wéwé (a female supernatural creature or vengeful ghost in Javanese mythology) and the shape or characteristics of the foods, as well as Ayu “beautiful” with Dawêt Ayu and Putu Ayu appearance, it appears unlikely that such namings occur by chance. Therefore, diachronic studies on this subject are urgently needed, even though there is frequently no clear distinction between synchronic and diachronic issues since they have played an increasingly important role in recent cognitive linguistics (Wardhaugh & Fuller, 2015, p. 18).

Animals and anything related to them were prevalent and became one of the richest and most productive source domains in Javanese metaphorical food names construction. Animals pervade human speech and thought by conveying a multiplicity of meanings. The intentional selection of animals as source domain metaphors is not random or isolated linguistic products (López-Rodríguez, 2016, p. 74). On the contrary, they form coherent systems of thought that enable people to connect animals’ appearances with their actual experiences. In this regard, Song (2009, p. 10) has claimed that the colourful animal kingdom is inextricably linked with human life, and the relationship between humans and animals makes people familiar with them.

The metaphorical application of animal names to Javanese food names appears to be inextricably linked to the process of “anthropomorphization” since only those animals are used as source domains in Javanese food names. Hence, the names of animals can be used either referentially (as a label for an object) or predicatively (as a description of an object) in the construction of Javanese food names, such as êmprit (sparrow bird) in Bolu Emprit, cacing (worm) in Unthuk Cacing, ayam (chicken) in Cakar Ayam, sapi (cow) in Mata Sapi, kêbo (buffalo) in Mata Kêbo, gajah (elephant) in Kuping Gajah and Thêngkléng Gajah, and tikus (mouse) in Kuping Tikus.

Environment or ecology as a holistic concept embodied in the earth in the form, arrangement, and interactive functions available (available), renewable, and permanent not just functioned as the element of culture but also an integral part of the culture itself that is resulting in concrete and contextualized concepts. The environment is in direct contact with culture due to their reciprocal relationship. It fosters the development of cultural processes, activities, and belief systems by providing feedback to shape biodiversity (Bellarsi, 2009; Deneys-Tunney & Zarka, 2016).

Additionally, humans as social beings (Homo sapiens) are qualitative, casuistic, universal, and relative; as a result, humans not only adapt to their surroundings but also create and maintain environmental conditions that ensure the continuity of the development of life and culture as a framework for the formation of self and group identity. Human demands to institutionalize with the environment, then create that the understanding about the environment will not be perfect if it is not equipped with the understanding about humans as sentient beings. As a result, plants and their parts were also used as source domains in Javanese food names. For instance, in Kêmbang Waru (Hibiscus tiliaceus flower), Carang Gêsing (a kind of thorny bamboo), as well as Carang Madu and Madu Mangsa (with the understanding that honey is a form of sweet liquid produced by honey bees from the nectar of flowers). Since many kinds of objects and natural objects exist in Javanese environment, the source domains were also drawn from various things surrounding humans, such as bulan (moon) in Têrang Bulan, buwana (universe) in Sangga Buwana, lilin (candle) in És Lilin, bangjo (traffic light or red and green colours) in Bangjo, satêlit (satellite) in Satêlit, balok (beam) in Balok, lapis (layer) in Lapis, bantalan ril (lit. rail wedge) in Ganjêl Ril, Ali-Ali (finger ring) in Alén-Alén, contong (cone) in Apêm Contong, as well as atom (plastics or atoms) in Kacang Atom.

Humans serve as agents or actors performing various roles, activities, and movements. In this case, Javanese food metaphors’ also resulted from human action acted out with hands (known as sensorimotor or mimetic action). For example, the word untir (twisted) in Untir-Untir and arik (to scramble) in Orak-Arik. As stated by Lakoff and Johnson (1980, p. 5), when the concept is metaphorically structured and the activity is metaphorically structured, consequently, the language is metaphorically structured.

The findings revealed that Javanese society tends to use the objects around them and their life experiences in their social and cultural environment as metaphors source domain. Javanese food metaphors represent human’s sensitivity in observing the reality of their lives. The selection of domain-reference designations is determined by the angle of referent perception in the particular culture. Beyond this reason, food naming based on metaphors helps people barely visualize the food’s original form since they were already inherent and ingrained in Javanese society’s cognition.

3.5. Further examination of sociocultural factors influencing the connection of the source and target domains in Javanese food metaphors

It is widely known within linguistics that languages vary considerably along the social dimension (Benczes & Ságvári, 2018; Wardhaugh & Fuller, 2015). Accordingly, Javanese food names are linked to sociocultural issues (regarding physical, social, cultural, and discourse), which are frequently very specific (exotic) and cannot be found in other languages. Metaphors have a cognitive basis and are culturally motivated that reflect particular community’s attitudes and beliefs. These may vary from culture to culture, in time and space. Consequently, there were conceptual distinctions in Javanese that were not lexicalized in another language.

The analysis of Javanese food metaphors shed interesting results. As cultural facts are unique, each linguistic community has its own way of viewing natural and social phenomena. As a result, most social and cultural products, including food names, are expressed differently from language to language and cannot be literally transferred to another language. For example, Ganjêl Ril (lit. wedge rail), which predictably appears after the Javanese speakers recognize a train as a mode of transportation, could hardly be found in other language expressions, so did Sêmar Mêndêm (lit. drunken Sêmar), Susur Wéwé (lit. ghost’s tobacco quid), Randha Royal (lit. royal widow), Randha Kêmul (lit. widow in the blanket), etc., that are closely related to traditional Javanese performance, supernatural belief, and habits.

Metaphors can be used to construct social identity and ideology (Kovecses, 2006, p. 152). Basically, the Javanese society divides human life into two cosmos (nature): the macrocosm and the microcosm. In the Javanese mind, the macrocosm is the attitude and view of life toward the universe, which contains supernatural powers and is full of mysteries. Meanwhile, the Javanese microcosm is their attitude and perspective on life in the real world. Although the truth is difficult to explain and prove logically or scientifically, myths occupy pivotal roles in the life of the Javanese people as they become a reference for all actions and attitudes or implied messages (wasita sinandhi) by: (1) giving humans the power to take a role in life-related to natural processes surroundings; (2) providing a means of earning a living and ensuring the fertility of all things that intersect with various kinds of events; (3) providing guidelines about the world; and (4) the origins of identity, personality, values, and norms that can be used as guidelines and directions for the actions of individuals or groups who believe in myths (Herusatoto, 2011; Puersen, 1979).

Puppet (wayang) mythology is the most prominent feature of Javanese society. There are two versions of opinion regarding the origin of wayang. The first opinion states that wayang originated and was born for the first time on the island of Java, precisely in East Java (Hazeau, Brandes, Kats, Rentse, and Kruyt in Kresna, 2012); while the second opinion suspects the story of wayang originating from India brought with Hinduism to Indonesia through adaptation from the Ramayana and Mahabharata epics (Pischel, Hidding, Krom, Poensen, Goslings, and Rassers in Kresna, 2012). According to the second opinion, Ramayana and Mahabharata then developed in their own way, undergoing changes and additions to adapt to Javanese philosophy and culture (Kresna, 2012). Wayang stories become the most critical element in Javanese culture as “compelling religious mythology” that unites the entire Javanese community. The community then recognizes the Punakawan clown figures (consisting of Semar, Garéng, Pétruk, and Bagong) as representations of the Javanese people’s character. Each character in Punakawan represents Javanese philosophy and is believed to symbolize human life horizontally (social) and vertically (religious). Sêmar name derives from “hèsêming samar-samar”, which means “the guide to the meaning of life”. Semar represents both the Begawan (wise man) and the plebeian. Based on the body shape’s philosophy, the figure of Sêmar depicted with his finger pointing downwards, narrowed eyes, and a fat body represent humility, honesty, love for others, not arrogance, patience, and wisdom. Sêmar‘s facing-up head and views represent a message to remember God’s existence in all aspects of life. The Sêmar Parangkusumorojo cloth embodies hayuning bawana or “upholding justice and truth in the earth”. Meanwhile, the Mustika Manik Astagina amulet, which is kept in a lock, describes eight powers, including avoiding hunger, sleepiness, romance, sadness, tiredness, sickness, hotness, and coldness.

The unconscious and sub-conscious minds are crucial in bringing out human imagination’s creativity (Kind, 2022; Ritter & Dijksterhuis, 2014). For instance, in Javanese, Randha means “widow”, and royal means “a tendency to exaggerate and push the boundaries”. Tapé is a fermented food that is ready to eat but still subjected to secondary treatment or reprocessing. This condition is linked to widows (Randha), who have the right to remarry to another man due to their status (second treatment). Furthermore, the tapé treatment, which involves coating it in flour and then frying it, feels strange or inappropriate since it can be eaten without it. This is the reason why this food is known as royal.

Javanese people and society are also known for being witty, polite, and positive. Thus, vulgar words or obscenities used in the names of Javanese food, such as in Konthol Kêjêpit and Turuk Bintul, are not intended to offend anyone. In order to limit the number of linguistic expressions, they frequently compare the similarities between the shapes, sizes, textures, colours, tastes, states, or functions, as well as based on the association with the referential words that already exist in their language for referring to or naming foods.

The Javanese are very philosophical. As a result, the Javanese language is very rich in metaphorical expressions. To understand the meaning of Javanese metaphorical expressions, everyone must learn it as a native speaker and cannot rely solely on surface analysis reviewed based on the combination or arrangement of words that form it. For instance, to understand the meaning of Sangga Buwana (burger-like food), it is not enough for people to simply interpret sangga as “to support” and buwana as “the universe” (only based on its lexical meanings). Philosophically, Sangga Buwana reflects the existence of human life on earth. There are symbols and meanings hidden within these food components. Chicken or beef represents human life, eclairs represent the earth itself, eggs represent the mountain, pickles represent the stars, gravy represents the sky, and lettuce represents the plants that protect and become the source of life on earth. Ganjêl ril, which literally means “train wedge”, appeared after the train was used as a mode of transportation in Java. The train was first recognized by the people of Java in 1984. This train was built by the Nederlandsch-Indische Spoorweg Maatschappij (NIS) or Dutch East Indies Railway Company, connecting Semarang with Vorstenlanden (Yogyakarta). There is also a story behind the sweetness that dominates Javanese foods, as the taste was influenced by history when the Dutch implemented a forced cultivation system in Java. Java was the epicentre of sugar cane production, breeding, and distribution (Tegegn & Dhont, 2023, p. 3). Therefore, the abundant commodity of sugar cane and the urgent need for food make it used as a raw material for making various kinds of food in Java.

Overall findings have shown that the environment contributes significantly to the meanings that members of groups use to comprehend other aspects of their world. This influence of the environment is most visible in metaphorical conceptualization (Kovecses, 2000, 2006), such as the entanglement of supernatural powers and mythologies in the formation of Javanese food metaphors. This indicated that the creation of metaphors (regarding linguistic forms, metaphorical element distribution, similarity basis, and source domains) might diverge along several dimensions, including social, regional, ethnic, style, subcultural, diachronic, and individual, as stated by Kovecses (2006).

4. Conclusion

The objectives of this study were to investigate metaphorical representation in Javanese food names in terms of linguistic forms, metaphorical element distribution, similarity basis, source domains, and sociocultural factors underlying their existence. As metaphors encompass a wide range of grammatical categories, this study found that many Javanese food names were presented in the form of mono-morphemic words and compounded words (through the process of compounding, contraction, and reduplication). The metaphorical elements of all monomorphemic and reduplicative food names were scattered throughout the text. However, for those built through the compounding process, the placement or distribution of metaphorical elements can be placed in the front, back, or entire compound elements. This study also discovered that most Javanese food names comprised various source domains associated with humans and mythologies, animals, plants, natures, things, and actions, relying on object properties (such as shape, size, and function) and aspects of the human sensory experience (such as texture, colour, taste, and state) as metaphors of similarity.

Therefore, because many Javanese food names are linked to sociocultural issues (regarding physical, social, cultural, and discourse), which are frequently very specific (exotic) and cannot be found in other languages; since different conceptual meanings can occur to distinct perceptions. Javanese environment significantly impacts the meanings that members of groups use to understand other aspects of their world. Thus, cultural issues regarding physical, social, cultural, and discourse were crucial when investigating Javanese food names’ metaphors. Moreover, the origins of the names given to certain Javanese foods were difficult to trace. The close relationship between Indonesian as national language and Javanese as regional language, as well as the identical vocabulary items shared by both languages, causes severe difficulties in distinguishing whether food names are Indonesian or Javanese. Capturing these changes from a cross-cultural perspective would present a more formidable research challenge. Therefore, linguists’ expertise is thus required and more work must be done to solve these intriguing problems. While metaphors are inextricably linked to culture, this study gives readers valuable insights into the understanding of cultural and social environments that shape humans’ perceptions of the world.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The authors received no direct funding for this research.

Notes on contributors

  Hendrokumoro

Hendrokumoro is a senior lecturer in the Faculty of Cultural Sciences at Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), Indonesia. His areas of expertise lie in language, communication, and culture; as well as historical linguistics; dialectology; Javanese literature; and regional linguistics.

I Dewa Putu Wijana

I Dewa Putu Wijana is a senior lecturer and associate professor in the Faculty of Cultural Sciences at Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), Indonesia. He has made significant contributions to the field of language, communication, and culture; as well as sociolinguistics; cognitive linguistics; pragmatics; and discourse analysis.

Nadia Khumairo Ma’shumah

Nadia Khumairo Ma’shumah graduated with a Master of Arts (M.A.) in Linguistics at the Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), Indonesia, in 2023. As a junior researcher, her interests lie in the contestation of language, identity, and culture; literary translation; general linguistics; as well as Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA).

Appendix

Glossarium of Javanese food names

Table

No.	Food Name	Description	Picture
1.	Balok (lit. cube)	diced fried cassava
2.	Lapis (lit. layer cake)	sweet food made from rice flour, starch, coconut milk, sugar, and salt, with two layers of different colours
3.	Satêlit (lit. sattelite)	pastries made from cassava flour mixed with grated coconut
4.	Apêm Contong (lit cone apêm)	a type of corn flour cake wrapped in a unique container shaped like a cone-shaped jackfruit leaf
5.	Bubur Sumsum (lit. marrow porridge)	a type of white porridge made from rice flour that is eaten with sweet sauce or brown sugar water
6.	Cakar Ayam (lit. chicken claw)	food made from thinly shaved fried cassava sweetened with palm sugar like something messed up by chicken claw
7.	Carang Gêsing (lit. bamboo twig)	steamed chopped banana wrapped with rice flour in coconut milk and banana leaves
8.	Carang Madu (lit. honey twig)	a kind of food made of rice and sticky rice flour mixed with palm sugar and finely cut to resemble bamboo twigs
9.	Dawêt Ayu (lit. beautiful dawêt)	a cold drink made of rice flour, coconut milk, and palm sugar
10.	És Lilin (lit. candle ice)	kinds of ice in various flavours placed in a plastic tube
11.	Ganjêl Ril (lit. rail wedge)	long and extensive wheat flour cake like train wedge
12.	Gêthuk Lindri (lit. Beatiful princes gêtuk)	food made from boiled cassava, finely ground with granulated sugar, sprinkled with food colouring and vanilla, printed in an elongated shape, and cut into small pieces
13.	Inthil Goréng (lit. fried sheep dropping)	dried chopped cassava that looks like sheep dropping
14.	Jadah Gêmblong (round sticky rice dough cake)	food made from white glutinous rice flour dough, which is kneaded until smooth
15.	Jênang Gêmpol (lit. ball-like porridge)	a combination of gêmpol rice and brown sugar marrow porridge topped with coconut milk gravy
16.	Jênang Grêndul (lit. bubble porridge)	a sweet porridge made from glutinous rice flour, brown sugar, and coconut milk
17.	Kacang Atom (lit. atomic or plastic peanut)	fried round-peanut product coated with tapioca and spices
18.	Kêmbang Waru (lit. hibiscus flower)	a type of brown bread shaped like a Hibiscus tiliaceus flower, with a sweet taste
19.	Kuping Gajah (lit. elephant ears)	cracker shaped like elephant ear made of wheat flour
20.	Kuping Tikus (lit. mouse ears)	cracker shaped like mouse ear made of wheat flour
21.	Madu Mangsa (lit. honey porridge)	black sticky rice porridge made from fermented glutinous rice
22.	Mata Kêbo (lit. buffalo eyes)	red oval sticky rice cake filled with sweet green bean dough
23.	Mata Sapi (lit. cow eyes)	cassava wet cake snacks with banana filling
24.	Putu Ayu (lit. beautiful putu)	green cake with palm sugar filling and grated coconut on top
25.	Randha Royal (lit. royal widow)	Jepara’s traditional snack made from wheat flour filled with tapé (fermented cassava)
26.	Randha Kêmul (lit. widow in the blanket)	food made from uli or crushed glutinous rice
27.	Rujak Cingur (lit. Ox snout salad)	mixed vegetable with ox snout and peanut butter, even though the food contains no fruit with which rujak used to prepare
28.	Sangga Buwana (lit. the guardian of the universe)	burger-like food with chicken, eclairs, eggs, gravy, and lettuce
29.	Sêmar Mêndêm (lit. drunken Sêmar)	a traditional Yogyakarta snack made of glutinous rice and topped with shredded chicken
30.	Susur Wéwé (lit. Ghost’s tobbaco quid)	a kind of food made of grated young coconut cooked with sugar
31.	Tahu Susur (lit. Soya bean curd tobbaco quid)	fried tofu wrapped in flour dough and filled with carrots and cabbage
32.	Témpé Kêmul (lit. Fried soya bean cake in blanket)	fried témpé covered with seasoned flour
33.	Têrang Bulan (lit. Moon light)	a thick and sweet pancake with a round shape like a moon
34.	Thêngkléng Gajah (lit. elephant bone)	a soup made from goat meat, offal, and bones that are similar to a curry dish but with big portions
35.	Unthuk Cacing (lit. worm’s nest)	a snack shaped like a worm’s nest
36.	Bolu Emprit (lit. sparrow bolu)	a hemispherical sweet treat with a firm texture and pink, white, green, and brown colours
37.	Abang Ijo (lit. red and green)	Cake with a traffic-light colour
38.	Kontol Kêjêpit (lit. clamped pennis)	rice flour cake with melted palm sugar inside
39.	Turuk Bintul (lit. slightly bumped vagina)	food made of glutinous rice and tolo beans, as well as grated coconut and salt
40.	Alén-Alén (lit. ring-like)	a Javanese fake or pseudo reduplication meaning “ring”
41.	Untir-Untir (lit. twisted cake)	a twisted cake made of fried rice flour (also known as rope pastry)
42.	Orak-Orik (lit. stirred eggs)	scrambled eggs mixed with cabbage