Author(s): Coulson S, Matlock T
We propose an account of metaphor comprehension based on conceptual blending theory. We review data from on-line processing measures that support predictions of conceptual blending theory and report results of an off-line feature listing study that assessed how different sorts of contexts alter the information activated by a given word. Participants generated features for words used in the null context, sentences that promoted a literal reading of the target word, sentences that promoted a metaphorical reading, and sentences that required literal mapping. In literal mapping, the literal sense of the word was used in a way that prompts the reader to blend it with structure from a different domain. Results revealed some overlap in the features generated in each of the 4 contexts, but that some proportion of the features listed for words in literal, literal-mapping, and metaphoric-sentence contexts were unique and context specific.
Author(s): Arzouan Y, Goldstein A, Faust M
Author(s): Su P, Jiang MH, Bai C
Author(s): Searle JR
Author(s): Gibbs Jr RW
Author(s): Pynte J, Besson M, Robichon FH, Poli J
Author(s): Bambini V, Ghio M, Moro A, Schumacher PB
Author(s): Lai VT, Curran T, Menn L
Author(s): Coulson S, Van Petten C
Author(s): Coulson S, Oakley T
Author(s): Ferretti TR, Schwint CA, Katz AN
Author(s): Giora R
Author(s): Iakimova G, Passerieux C, Laurent JP, Hardy‐Bayle MC
Author(s): Kintsch W
Author(s): Kutas M, Hillyard SA
Author(s): Laurent JP, Denhieres G, Passerieux C, Iakimova G, Hardy-Bayle MC
Author(s): Osterhout L, Holcomb PJ
Author(s): Osterhout L, Nicol J
Author(s): Reddy MJ
Author(s): Sotillo M, Carretié L, Hinojosa JA, Tapia M, Mercado F, et al.
Author(s): Schmidt GL, Kranjec A, Cardillo ER, Chatterjee A
Author(s): Yang FPG, Bradley K, HuqM, Wu DL, Krawczyk DC