Discourse context effects: Metaphorical and literal interpretations

Abstract

Some sentences can have both a literal and a metaphorical meaning, but typically only one is appropriate. What contextual constraints lead readers to the appropriate interpretation? This article focuses on a particular kind of discourse‐driven constraint: A meaning may be selected not only because context strongly suggests it, but because the alternative meaning is eliminated by context. It is commonly believed that a metaphorical interpretation may be selected because a literal interpretation would have been inappropriate. This article argues the same for a literal interpretation: A literal interpretation may be selected because a metaphorical interpretation would have been inappropriate. Three experiments demonstrated this claim: In Experiment 1 readers completed sentences and rated them as literal or metaphorical, in Experiment 2 they judged comprehension difficulty, and Experiment 3 measured comprehension latency. The experiments yielded similar patterns for metaphorical and literal interpretations, suggesting that similar discourse principles govern the selection of both interpretations.