Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, JAL Vol 6, No 2 (2009)

Reconstructing online metaphor processing and its optimal principles

Meixia Li, Jiaxiang Han
Issued Date: 14 Sep 2015

Abstract


Based on the review of previous research, this article, taking Conceptual Blending Theory and the Schema Theory as theoretical rationale, attempts to reconstruct the procedure of online metaphor processing in discourse comprehension and to tease out the factors influencing the metaphor processing. This is followed by the reporting of an experiment in which 36 Chinese university students participate. The results from data analysis show that this reconstruction is feasible. It is proposed that there are six optimal principles involved in online metaphor processing in discourse comprehension: the principle of economy, the principle of recursion, the principle of the target domain, the principle of the source domain, the principle of the context and the principle of the culture of the mother tongue.

Download Media

PDF (Price: £17.50 )

DOI: 10.1558/jal.v6i2.8981

References


Bartlett, F. C. (1932) Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Bortfeld, H. and McGlone, M. S. (2001) The continuum of metaphor processing. Metaphor and Symbol 16 (1–2): 75–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1601&2_6


Chateris-Black, J. (2004) Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230000612


Clark, P., Harrison, P. and Thompson, J. (2003) A knowledge-driven approach to text meaning processing. Proceedings of the HLT-NAACL 2003 Workshop on Text Meaning 9: 1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.3115/1119239.1119240


Coulson, S. and Oakley, T. (2000) Blending basics. Cognitive Linguistics 11 (3/4): 175–196.


Coulson, S. (2001) Semantic Leaps: Frame-shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551352


Fauconnier, G. (1994) Mental Spaces. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511624582


Fauconnier, G. (1997) Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174220


Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. (1998) Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science 22 (2): 133–187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2202_1


Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. (2000) Compression and global insight. Cognitive Linguistics 11 (3-4): 283–304.


Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. (2002) The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.


Gentner, D. and Bowdle, B. (2002) Metaphor processing, psychology of. Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. London: Nature Publishing Group.


Gentner, D. and Clement, C. (1988) Evidence for relational selectivity in the interpretation of analogy and metaphor. In G. Bower (ed.) The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 307–358. San Diego, CA: Academic.


Gibbs, R. W. and Tendahl, M. (2006) Cognitive effort and effects in metaphor comprehen­sion: Relevance theory and psycholinguistics. Mind & Language 21 (3): 379–403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2006.00283.x


Gibbs, R. W. and Tendahl, M. (2011) Coupling of metaphoric cognition and communication: A reply to Deirdre Wilson. Intercultural Pragmatics 8 (4): 601–609. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2011.027


Glucksberg, S., McGlone, M. S. and Manfredi, D. (1997) Property attribution in metaphor comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 36 (1): 50–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.2479


Goatly, A. (2007) Washing the Brain – Metaphor and Hidden Ideology. Amsterdam/Phila­delphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.23


Graesser, A. C., Singer, M. and Trabasso, T. (1994) Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review 101 (3): 371–395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.3.371


Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.


McClelland, J. L. and Rumelhart, D. E. (1981) An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic finding. Psychological Review 88 (5): 375–407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.5.375


Noveck, I. A., Bianco, M. and Castry, A. (2001) The costs and benefits of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol 16 (1&2): 109–121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1601&2_8


Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. (2008) A deflationary account of metaphors. In R. W. Gibbs, Jr. (ed.) The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, 84–106. New York: Cambridge University Press.


Tendahl, M. and Gibbs, Raymond. W. (2008) Complementary perspectives on metaphor: Cognitive linguistics and relevance theory. Journal of Pragmatics 40 (11): 1823–1864. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.02.001


Tyler, A. and Takahashi, H. (2011) Metaphors and metonymies. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger and P. Portner (eds) Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, 597–621. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.


Wilson, D. (2011) Parallels and differences in the treatment of metaphor in relevance theory and linguistics. Intercultural Pragmatics 8 (2): 177–196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2011.009


Yu, N. (1995) Metaphorical expressions of anger and happiness in English and Chinese. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 10 (2): 59–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1002_1


Yu, N. (2000) Figurative uses of finger and palm in Chinese and English. Metaphor and Symbol 15 (3): 159–175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1503_3


Yu, N. (2003) Chinese metaphors of thinking. Cognitive Linguistics 14 (2/3): 141–165.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.







Equinox Publishing Ltd - 415 The Workstation 15 Paternoster Row, Sheffield, S1 2BX United Kingdom
Telephone: +44 (0)114 221-0285 - Email: info@equinoxpub.com

Privacy Policy