“Metaphor has a long and controversial history, going back at least to the views of Aristotle, who spoke both of metaphor’s brilliance and dangers. However, discussions of metaphor continued to be the realm of philosophers and poets until the birth of disciplines of linguistics and verbal learning.” [Mey: 1676]
As time went by, more and more researchers showed their interest in the mysterious topic of metaphor and started to carry on researches. While Aristotle limited metaphors to four types, which are (1) genus for species (e.g. “my ship stands here”), (2) species for genus (e.g. “ten thousand noble deeds has Odysseus accomplished”), (3) species to species (“drawing off the life with bonze” & “cutting with slender-edges bronze”) and (4) analogy (‘b’ to ‘a’ as ‘d’ is to ‘c’: e.g. “the day’s old age” & “life’s sunset”) [comp. Pramling], subsequent researchers came up with several new theories and undertook many studies to support their ideas concerning the question of how human beings are able to understand metaphors and which areas of the brain are involved in processing metaphorical data. The publication of Lakoff and Johnson’s work in 1980 changed the research concerning metaphors significantly and shifted it to a search for general cognitive principles. The new idea was that „metaphor is largely a matter of thought“. [Hadl: 27]
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Metaphors
3. Processing nonliteral language
3.1.Standard pragmatic model: Sequential processing
3.2.The direct Access view: Context-Dependent-Hypothesis
3.3.Graded salience hypothesis
3.4. Testing traditional hypotheses
4. The role of hemispheres
4.1. Questioning the special role of the right hemisphere
4.2. Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
4.3.Visual Half-Field Priming
4.4.Neuroimaging
5. Recent research
6. Conclusion
7. Bibliography
Research Objectives and Core Topics
This paper aims to explore how human beings process figurative language, specifically metaphors, and to investigate which brain regions are involved in this cognitive process. It examines the validity of the longstanding thesis that the right hemisphere plays a primary role in understanding metaphors by reviewing experimental evidence from various psycholinguistic studies and neuroimaging techniques.
- Theoretical models of metaphor processing (Standard Pragmatic, Direct Access, Graded Salience)
- Neuropsychological studies involving brain-damaged patients
- Electrophysiological measures and brain stimulation techniques
- The role of sensory experience and sensorimotor grounding in metaphor comprehension
Excerpt from the Book
3. Processing nonliteral language
One might wonder if people could not simply ignore metaphors, so that further researches would not be necessary anymore. Because of this, researchers conducted a study and asked the participants to decide if the sentences which will be shown to them are literally true or false. The following sentences were either literally true (e.g. “some birds are robin” [Glucksberg]), literally false (e.g. “some birds are apples” [Glucksberg]), literally false but metaphorically right (e.g. “some jobs are jails” [Glucksberg]) scrambled, not interpretable metaphors (e.g. “some jobs are birds” & “some flutes are jails” [Glucksberg]). The results showed that the participants “had difficulty in rejecting metaphors as literally false”. It took them longer to identify the literally false but metaphorically right sentences as being literally false (1239 msec) than it took them to identify the scrambled metaphors (1162 msec) and sentences which were just literally false (1185 msec) as being not literally right. [comp. Glucksberg: 22] In other words, it is not possible to simply ignore metaphors, which evokes even more interest in solving the question how people understand metaphors. In the following, three different theories of understanding metaphors will be introduced and then tested against each other.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Provides a historical overview of metaphors from Aristotle to Lakoff and Johnson and outlines the linguistic difficulties in processing figurative language.
2. Metaphors: Explores different definitions of metaphors, distinguishing between traditional views and the cognitive linguistic perspective on how they function as conceptual tools.
3. Processing nonliteral language: Analyzes the cognitive mechanisms behind metaphor comprehension, contrasting the sequential processing model, direct access view, and the graded salience hypothesis.
4. The role of hemispheres: Investigates the lateralization of metaphor processing, questioning whether the right hemisphere is exclusively responsible for figurative language through various clinical and empirical methods.
5. Recent research: Discusses modern findings, such as the Neutral Theory of Language (NTL), which suggests a link between metaphors and sensory perception in the brain.
6. Conclusion: Synthesizes the evidence, concluding that while the right hemisphere is involved, the traditional belief in its unique "special role" is largely unsupported by current empirical data.
7. Bibliography: Lists the academic sources used to substantiate the arguments regarding psycholinguistics and cognitive science.
Keywords
Metaphor, Cognitive Linguistics, Psycholinguistics, Brain Hemisphere, Mental Lexicon, Sequential Processing, Graded Salience, N400, Neuroimaging, Sensorimotor Grounding, Figural Language, Lateralization, Semantic Integration, Right Hemisphere Damage, Cognitive Effort
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this research paper?
The paper explores the cognitive and neurological processes underlying how humans understand and interpret metaphors in everyday language.
Which thematic fields does the work primarily address?
It bridges the fields of linguistics and neuroscience, focusing on metaphor theory, brain lateralization, and experimental psycholinguistics.
What is the primary research question regarding the brain?
The paper asks whether the right hemisphere of the brain plays a unique and essential role in the comprehension of metaphorical data compared to the left hemisphere.
Which scientific methods are analyzed in the work?
The author reviews studies using electroencephalography (EEG), Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS), visual half-field priming, and neuroimaging (fMRI/PET).
What topics are covered in the main section of the paper?
The main part analyzes three major processing models—the standard pragmatic model, the direct access view, and the graded salience hypothesis—and evaluates clinical evidence from right-hemisphere-damaged patients.
How would you characterize the primary keywords of this study?
The study centers on metaphors, cognitive models of language processing, neural networks, and the functional role of different brain hemispheres in figurative comprehension.
Does the paper support the hypothesis that the right hemisphere is specialized for metaphor comprehension?
No, the reviewed evidence suggests that this hypothesis is largely refuted; metaphors are processed in complex neural networks involving both hemispheres.
What role does sensory experience play according to recent findings mentioned in the paper?
Recent 2012 research indicates that metaphors are linked to sensory perception, where the brain simulates physical actions or textures described in the figurative phrase.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Melissa Grönebaum (Autor:in), 2012, Understanding Metaphors, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/268372
