Abstract
The present study examines non-native (L2) and native (L1) listeners' access to figurative idiomatic meaning and literal constituent meaning in two cross-modal priming experiments. Proficient German learners of English (L2) and native speakers of American English (L1) responded to English target words preceded by English idioms embedded in non-biasing prime sentences in a lexical decision task. English idioms differed in levels of translatability: Lexical level idioms had word-for-word translation equivalents in German, while post-lexical level idioms had matching idiomatic concepts in German but could not be translated word for word. Target words either related to the figurative meaning of the idiom or related to the literal meaning of the final constituent word of the idiom (e.g., to pull someone's leg, literal target: walk, figurative target: joke). Both L1 and L2 listeners showed facilitatory priming for literally- and figuratively-related target words compared to unrelated control target words, with only marginal differences between the listener groups. No effect of translatability was found; that is, the existence of word-for-word translation equivalents in German neither facilitated nor hindered meaning activation for German L2 listeners. The results are interpreted in the context of L1 and L2 models of idiom processing as well as further relevant translation studies.
Highlights
While understanding idioms is usually easy for native (L1) listeners of a language, non-native (L2) listeners often find recognizing and understanding them to be a stumbling block
In the studies presented here, we addressed two major questions: How does L2 access to figurative meaning of an idiom and literal meaning of constituent words compare to L1 access? And, what is the role of the L1 in this process? can L1 similarities, i.e., translatability, ease L2 processing? To address these questions, we tested online processing of figurative and literal meaning in idioms in L1 and L2 listeners
The speed and availability of the literal constituent meaning in addition to activation of the figurative meaning suggests that neither was literal composition aborted, as suggested by the early models presented by Swinney and Cutler (1979) and Gibbs (1980), nor is it likely that this meaning only became available after obligatory composition and rejection of the literal meaning, as proposed by the standard pragmatic view supported by Bobrow and Bell (1973)
Summary
While understanding idioms is usually easy for native (L1) listeners of a language, non-native (L2) listeners often find recognizing and understanding them to be a stumbling block. The fixed nature of idioms might suggest that non-native speakers can learn and use idioms quickly, but the conventional misalignment between figurative and literal meaning poses a particular challenge. When a speaker expresses that she is in hot water, one can interpret from the figurative meaning that she is in Bilingual and Monolingual Idiom Processing trouble rather than assuming that she is literally submersed in heated water, as in a hot bath or hot springs. In the studies presented here, we addressed two major questions: How does L2 access to figurative meaning of an idiom and literal meaning of constituent words compare to L1 access? We tested online processing of figurative and literal meaning in idioms in L1 and L2 listeners. We explored the impact of the L1 on the L2 by addressing the translatability of the idioms from the L2 into the L1 and tested idioms that were either directly translatable or not translatable
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call