Interpreting metaphorical statements

Xu Xu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The topics of metaphorical statements can vary considerably in abstractness, whereas the vehicles are often concrete. This study evaluated the appreciation and interpretation of metaphorical statements with abstract topics versus those with concrete topics, while taking into consideration of the two common linguistic forms (nominal metaphor and simile) of metaphorical statements. Experiment 1 showed that topic abstractness was positively associated with the aptness of similes. Experiment 2 found that comprehenders assessed more topic-vehicle similarities for sentences with abstract topics than for sentences with concrete topics, and more topic-vehicle similarities when topic-vehicle pairs were presented as metaphors than as similes. In addition, comprehenders often called upon their subjective experiences for interpretations. Experiment 3 indicated that these subjective experiences played an essential role in metaphorical comparison. These findings add the factor of topic abstractness to the literature about metaphorical language comprehension, and provide insight for research on similarity evaluation between abstract concepts and concrete concepts.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1622-1636
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Pragmatics
Volume42
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2010

Fingerprint

Concretes
metaphor
experiment
interpretation
Experiments
comprehension
experience
Linguistics
linguistics
language
evaluation
Simile
Experiment
Abstractness
Subjective Experience
literature
Evaluation
Language Comprehension
Metaphorical Language
Aptness

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Linguistics and Language
  • Artificial Intelligence

Cite this

Xu, Xu. / Interpreting metaphorical statements. In: Journal of Pragmatics. 2010 ; Vol. 42, No. 6. pp. 1622-1636.
@article{0472324f876342a4a686293e8e959f93,
title = "Interpreting metaphorical statements",
abstract = "The topics of metaphorical statements can vary considerably in abstractness, whereas the vehicles are often concrete. This study evaluated the appreciation and interpretation of metaphorical statements with abstract topics versus those with concrete topics, while taking into consideration of the two common linguistic forms (nominal metaphor and simile) of metaphorical statements. Experiment 1 showed that topic abstractness was positively associated with the aptness of similes. Experiment 2 found that comprehenders assessed more topic-vehicle similarities for sentences with abstract topics than for sentences with concrete topics, and more topic-vehicle similarities when topic-vehicle pairs were presented as metaphors than as similes. In addition, comprehenders often called upon their subjective experiences for interpretations. Experiment 3 indicated that these subjective experiences played an essential role in metaphorical comparison. These findings add the factor of topic abstractness to the literature about metaphorical language comprehension, and provide insight for research on similarity evaluation between abstract concepts and concrete concepts.",
author = "Xu Xu",
year = "2010",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.pragma.2009.11.005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "42",
pages = "1622--1636",
journal = "Journal of Pragmatics",
issn = "0378-2166",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "6",

}

Interpreting metaphorical statements. / Xu, Xu.

In: Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 42, No. 6, 01.06.2010, p. 1622-1636.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interpreting metaphorical statements

AU - Xu, Xu

PY - 2010/6/1

Y1 - 2010/6/1

N2 - The topics of metaphorical statements can vary considerably in abstractness, whereas the vehicles are often concrete. This study evaluated the appreciation and interpretation of metaphorical statements with abstract topics versus those with concrete topics, while taking into consideration of the two common linguistic forms (nominal metaphor and simile) of metaphorical statements. Experiment 1 showed that topic abstractness was positively associated with the aptness of similes. Experiment 2 found that comprehenders assessed more topic-vehicle similarities for sentences with abstract topics than for sentences with concrete topics, and more topic-vehicle similarities when topic-vehicle pairs were presented as metaphors than as similes. In addition, comprehenders often called upon their subjective experiences for interpretations. Experiment 3 indicated that these subjective experiences played an essential role in metaphorical comparison. These findings add the factor of topic abstractness to the literature about metaphorical language comprehension, and provide insight for research on similarity evaluation between abstract concepts and concrete concepts.

AB - The topics of metaphorical statements can vary considerably in abstractness, whereas the vehicles are often concrete. This study evaluated the appreciation and interpretation of metaphorical statements with abstract topics versus those with concrete topics, while taking into consideration of the two common linguistic forms (nominal metaphor and simile) of metaphorical statements. Experiment 1 showed that topic abstractness was positively associated with the aptness of similes. Experiment 2 found that comprehenders assessed more topic-vehicle similarities for sentences with abstract topics than for sentences with concrete topics, and more topic-vehicle similarities when topic-vehicle pairs were presented as metaphors than as similes. In addition, comprehenders often called upon their subjective experiences for interpretations. Experiment 3 indicated that these subjective experiences played an essential role in metaphorical comparison. These findings add the factor of topic abstractness to the literature about metaphorical language comprehension, and provide insight for research on similarity evaluation between abstract concepts and concrete concepts.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77952744580&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77952744580&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.11.005

DO - 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.11.005

M3 - Article

VL - 42

SP - 1622

EP - 1636

JO - Journal of Pragmatics

JF - Journal of Pragmatics

SN - 0378-2166

IS - 6

ER -