Familiarity or conventionality? Investigating relevant factors in metaphor processing
| Autor(a) principal: | |
|---|---|
| Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
| Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
| Idioma: | por |
| Título da fonte: | Cadernos de Linguística |
| Texto Completo: | https://cadernos.abralin.org/index.php/cadernos/article/view/466 |
Resumo: | Are metaphors processed by the listener more slowly than literal expressions? To what extent can the speaker's familiarity with metaphorical expressions accelerate the process of understanding them? Studies on metaphor processing show divergences as to how this figure of speech is interpreted. Some authors argue that metaphors are processed more slowly than literal expressions, given the need to observe the three stages for understanding provided for in the Standard Pragmatic Model (SEARLE, 1979). Evidence of the indirect processing of metaphors, compatible with the aforementioned model, is reported in the literature (JANUS and BEVER, 1985). The priority of literal over metaphorical meaning has, however, been questioned by other studies that defend the direct processing of metaphorical expressions (GLUCKSBERG, 2003; RICCI, 2016). A third theoretical wave aims to reconcile the hitherto conflicting theories, proposing that, depending on the degree of conventionality of the metaphorical vehicle, a metaphor can be processed more slowly or at the same time as literal expressions (BOWDLE and GENTNER, 2005). In this framework, our study rescues the importance of familiarity already indicated as a relevant factor in a previous experimental study (SILVA, 2018). Here, we present new evidence, based on a psycholinguistic self-paced reading experiment, that the effective control of the metaphor's cognitive processing rests on the familiarity of the expression and not on the conventionality of the vehicle, as has been pointed out by most theorists. |
| id |
ABRALIN_59b18bf707fbf0c42b0eef5eb4e60a40 |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs3.cadernos.abralin.org:article/466 |
| network_acronym_str |
ABRALIN |
| network_name_str |
Cadernos de Linguística |
| repository_id_str |
|
| spelling |
Familiarity or conventionality? Investigating relevant factors in metaphor processingFamiliaridade ou convencionalidade? Investigando fatores relevantes no processamento de metáforasMetaphorsPsycholinguisticsProcessingFamiliarityConventionalityPsicolinguísticaProcessamentoMetáforaFamiliaridadeConvencionalidadeAre metaphors processed by the listener more slowly than literal expressions? To what extent can the speaker's familiarity with metaphorical expressions accelerate the process of understanding them? Studies on metaphor processing show divergences as to how this figure of speech is interpreted. Some authors argue that metaphors are processed more slowly than literal expressions, given the need to observe the three stages for understanding provided for in the Standard Pragmatic Model (SEARLE, 1979). Evidence of the indirect processing of metaphors, compatible with the aforementioned model, is reported in the literature (JANUS and BEVER, 1985). The priority of literal over metaphorical meaning has, however, been questioned by other studies that defend the direct processing of metaphorical expressions (GLUCKSBERG, 2003; RICCI, 2016). A third theoretical wave aims to reconcile the hitherto conflicting theories, proposing that, depending on the degree of conventionality of the metaphorical vehicle, a metaphor can be processed more slowly or at the same time as literal expressions (BOWDLE and GENTNER, 2005). In this framework, our study rescues the importance of familiarity already indicated as a relevant factor in a previous experimental study (SILVA, 2018). Here, we present new evidence, based on a psycholinguistic self-paced reading experiment, that the effective control of the metaphor's cognitive processing rests on the familiarity of the expression and not on the conventionality of the vehicle, as has been pointed out by most theorists.Metáforas são processadas pelo ouvinte mais lentamente que expressões literais? Em que medida a familiaridade do falante com as expressões metafóricas pode acelerar o processo de compreensão das mesmas? Estudos sobre o processamento da metáfora apresentam divergências quanto ao modo como essa figura de linguagem é interpretada. Alguns autores defendem que metáforas são processadas mais lentamente que expressões literais, tendo em vista a necessidade de observar os três estágios para a compreensão previstos no Modelo Pragmático Padrão (SEARLE, 1979). Evidências do processamento indireto das metáforas, compatíveis com o referido modelo, são reportadas na literatura (JANUS e BEVER, 1985). A prioridade do sentido literal sobre o metafórico tem sido, no entanto, questionado por outros estudos que defendem o processamento direto das expressões metafóricas (GLUCKSBERG, 2003; RICCI, 2016). Uma terceira onda teórica visa a conciliar as teorias, até então, conflitantes, propondo que, a depender do grau de convencionalidade do veículo metafórico, uma metáfora pode ser processada mais lentamente ou no mesmo tempo das expressões literais (BOWDLE e GENTNER, 2005). Nesse arcabouço, nosso estudo resgata a importância da familiaridade já indicada como um fator relevante em estudo experimental prévio (SILVA, 2018). Aqui, apresentamos novas evidências, com base em experimento psicolinguístico de leitura autocadenciada de que o controle efetivo do processamento cognitivo da metáfora recai sobre a familiaridade da expressão e não sobre a convencionalidade do veículo, como vem sendo apontado pela maioria dos teóricos.Abralin2021-09-11info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/xmlapplication/pdfhttps://cadernos.abralin.org/index.php/cadernos/article/view/46610.25189/2675-4916.2021.v2.n4.id466Cadernos de Linguística; Vol. 2 No. 4 (2021); e466Cadernos de Linguística; Vol. 2 Núm. 4 (2021); e466Cadernos de Linguística; v. 2 n. 4 (2021); e4662675-4916reponame:Cadernos de Linguísticainstname:Associação Brasileira de Linguística (ABRALIN)instacron:ABRALINporhttps://cadernos.abralin.org/index.php/cadernos/article/view/466/513https://cadernos.abralin.org/index.php/cadernos/article/view/466/529Copyright (c) 2021 Gladiston Alves da Silvainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSilva, Gladiston Alves da2023-10-25T06:48:54Zoai:ojs3.cadernos.abralin.org:article/466Revistahttps://cadernos.abralin.org/ONGhttps://cadernos.abralin.org/index.php/cadernos/oaiabralin@abralin.org || cadlin@abralin.org13083-8592675-4916opendoar:2023-10-25T06:48:54Cadernos de Linguística - Associação Brasileira de Linguística (ABRALIN)false |
| dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Familiarity or conventionality? Investigating relevant factors in metaphor processing Familiaridade ou convencionalidade? Investigando fatores relevantes no processamento de metáforas |
| title |
Familiarity or conventionality? Investigating relevant factors in metaphor processing |
| spellingShingle |
Familiarity or conventionality? Investigating relevant factors in metaphor processing Silva, Gladiston Alves da Metaphors Psycholinguistics Processing Familiarity Conventionality Psicolinguística Processamento Metáfora Familiaridade Convencionalidade |
| title_short |
Familiarity or conventionality? Investigating relevant factors in metaphor processing |
| title_full |
Familiarity or conventionality? Investigating relevant factors in metaphor processing |
| title_fullStr |
Familiarity or conventionality? Investigating relevant factors in metaphor processing |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Familiarity or conventionality? Investigating relevant factors in metaphor processing |
| title_sort |
Familiarity or conventionality? Investigating relevant factors in metaphor processing |
| author |
Silva, Gladiston Alves da |
| author_facet |
Silva, Gladiston Alves da |
| author_role |
author |
| dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Silva, Gladiston Alves da |
| dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Metaphors Psycholinguistics Processing Familiarity Conventionality Psicolinguística Processamento Metáfora Familiaridade Convencionalidade |
| topic |
Metaphors Psycholinguistics Processing Familiarity Conventionality Psicolinguística Processamento Metáfora Familiaridade Convencionalidade |
| description |
Are metaphors processed by the listener more slowly than literal expressions? To what extent can the speaker's familiarity with metaphorical expressions accelerate the process of understanding them? Studies on metaphor processing show divergences as to how this figure of speech is interpreted. Some authors argue that metaphors are processed more slowly than literal expressions, given the need to observe the three stages for understanding provided for in the Standard Pragmatic Model (SEARLE, 1979). Evidence of the indirect processing of metaphors, compatible with the aforementioned model, is reported in the literature (JANUS and BEVER, 1985). The priority of literal over metaphorical meaning has, however, been questioned by other studies that defend the direct processing of metaphorical expressions (GLUCKSBERG, 2003; RICCI, 2016). A third theoretical wave aims to reconcile the hitherto conflicting theories, proposing that, depending on the degree of conventionality of the metaphorical vehicle, a metaphor can be processed more slowly or at the same time as literal expressions (BOWDLE and GENTNER, 2005). In this framework, our study rescues the importance of familiarity already indicated as a relevant factor in a previous experimental study (SILVA, 2018). Here, we present new evidence, based on a psycholinguistic self-paced reading experiment, that the effective control of the metaphor's cognitive processing rests on the familiarity of the expression and not on the conventionality of the vehicle, as has been pointed out by most theorists. |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-09-11 |
| dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
| format |
article |
| status_str |
publishedVersion |
| dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://cadernos.abralin.org/index.php/cadernos/article/view/466 10.25189/2675-4916.2021.v2.n4.id466 |
| url |
https://cadernos.abralin.org/index.php/cadernos/article/view/466 |
| identifier_str_mv |
10.25189/2675-4916.2021.v2.n4.id466 |
| dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
| language |
por |
| dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://cadernos.abralin.org/index.php/cadernos/article/view/466/513 https://cadernos.abralin.org/index.php/cadernos/article/view/466/529 |
| dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Gladiston Alves da Silva info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Gladiston Alves da Silva |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
| dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/xml application/pdf |
| dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Abralin |
| publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Abralin |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Cadernos de Linguística; Vol. 2 No. 4 (2021); e466 Cadernos de Linguística; Vol. 2 Núm. 4 (2021); e466 Cadernos de Linguística; v. 2 n. 4 (2021); e466 2675-4916 reponame:Cadernos de Linguística instname:Associação Brasileira de Linguística (ABRALIN) instacron:ABRALIN |
| instname_str |
Associação Brasileira de Linguística (ABRALIN) |
| instacron_str |
ABRALIN |
| institution |
ABRALIN |
| reponame_str |
Cadernos de Linguística |
| collection |
Cadernos de Linguística |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Cadernos de Linguística - Associação Brasileira de Linguística (ABRALIN) |
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
abralin@abralin.org || cadlin@abralin.org |
| _version_ |
1836103765410709504 |