Figurative Language Processing Research Articles

Neural substrates of figurative language during natural speech perception: an fMRI study

Many figurative expressions are fully conventionalized in everyday speech. Regarding the neural basis of figurative language processing, research has predominantly focused on metaphoric expressions in minimal semantic context. It remains unclear in how far metaphoric expressions during continuous text comprehension activate similar neural networks as isolated metaphors. We therefore investigated the processing of similes (figurative language, e.g., “He smokes like a chimney!”) occurring in a short story. Sixteen healthy, male, native German speakers listened to similes that came about naturally in a short story, while blood-oxygenation-level-dependent (BOLD) responses were measured with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). For the event-related analysis, similes were contrasted with non-figurative control sentences (CS). The stimuli differed with respect to figurativeness, while they were matched for frequency of words, number of syllables, plausibility, and comprehensibility. Similes contrasted with CS resulted in enhanced BOLD responses in the left inferior (IFG) and adjacent middle frontal gyrus. Concrete CS as compared to similes activated the bilateral middle temporal gyri as well as the right precuneus and the left middle frontal gyrus (LMFG). Activation of the left IFG for similes in a short story is consistent with results on single sentence metaphor processing. The findings strengthen the importance of the left inferior frontal region in the processing of abstract figurative speech during continuous, ecologically-valid speech comprehension; the processing of concrete semantic contents goes along with a down-regulation of bilateral temporal regions.

Morphology in autism spectrum disorders: Local processing bias and language

We conducted a detailed study of a case of linguistic talent in the context of autism spectrum disorder, specifically Asperger syndrome. I.A. displays language strengths at the level of morphology and syntax. Yet, despite this grammar advantage, processing of figurative language and inferencing based on context presents a problem for him. The morphology advantage for I.A. is consistent with the weak central coherence (WCC) account of autism. From this account, the presence of a local processing bias is evident in the ways in which autistic individuals solve common problems, such as assessing similarities between objects and finding common patterns, and may therefore provide an advantage in some cognitive tasks compared to typical individuals. We extend the WCC account to language and provide evidence for a connection between the local processing bias and the acquisition of morphology and grammar.

Hemispheric differences in figurative language processing: Contributions of neuroimaging methods and challenges in reconciling current empirical findings

The following review critically synthesizes the literature on hemispheric differences in idiom and metaphor comprehension. It has long been debated whether figurative language is inherently different from literal language and is processed specifically in the right hemisphere (RH), or rather, whether figurative and literal language form a continuum rather than a dichotomy, and call upon a similar network of brain areas. In this paper, a number of neuropsychological, behavioral and neuroimaging studies are reviewed in the context of major theoretical accounts of metaphor and idiom comprehension. Specifically, the role played by the RH in metaphor and idiom processing is evaluated, and advancements that neuroimaging methods have made to our understanding of figurative language comprehension are assessed. This review also highlights a number of critical methodological discrepancies between studies, and emphasizes how such inconsistencies in operational definitions, stimuli and tasks pose a serious challenge to reconciling the debate on hemispheric differences, and do not allow for a clear-cut conclusion of which neural networks underlie figurative language processing. ► Studies assessing neurocognitive mechanisms of figurative language processing are reviewed. ►Comprehension of idioms/metaphors is compared to comprehension of literal language. ► Neural networks underlying figurative language processing are discussed. ► Empirical findings on neural basis of metaphor/idiom processing are contradictory. ► Methodological issues with important theoretical implications are highlighted.

Looking at the brains behind figurative language—A quantitative meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on metaphor, idiom, and irony processing

A quantitative, coordinate-based meta-analysis combined data from 354 participants across 22 fMRI studies and one positron emission tomography (PET) study to identify the differences in neural correlates of figurative and literal language processing, and to investigate the role of the right hemisphere (RH) in figurative language processing. Studies that reported peak activations in standard space contrasting figurative vs. literal language processing at whole brain level in healthy adults were included. The left and right IFG, large parts of the left temporal lobe, the bilateral medial frontal gyri (medFG) and an area around the left amygdala emerged for figurative language processing across studies. Conditions requiring exclusively literal language processing did not activate any selective regions in most of the cases, but if so they activated the cuneus/precuneus, right MFG and the right IPL. No general RH advantage for metaphor processing could be found. On the contrary, significant clusters of activation for metaphor conditions were mostly lateralized to the left hemisphere (LH). Subgroup comparisons between experiments on metaphors, idioms, and irony/sarcasm revealed shared activations in left frontotemporal regions for idiom and metaphor processing. Irony/sarcasm processing was correlated with activations in midline structures such as the medFG, ACC and cuneus/precuneus. To test the graded salience hypothesis (GSH, Giora, 1997), novel metaphors were contrasted against conventional metaphors. In line with the GSH, RH involvement was found for novel metaphors only. Here we show that more analytic, semantic processes are involved in metaphor comprehension, whereas irony/sarcasm comprehension involves theory of mind processes.

Isn't It Ironic? An Electrophysiological Exploration of Figurative Language Processing

Although the neurocognitive processes underlying the comprehension of figurative language, especially metaphors and idioms, have been studied extensively, less is known about the processing of irony. In two experiments using event-related brain potentials (ERPs), we examined the types of cognitive processes involved in the comprehension of ironic and literal sentences and their relative time course. The experiments varied in modality (auditory, visual), task demands (comprehension task vs. passive reading), and probability of stimulus occurrence. ERPs consistently revealed a large late positivity (i.e., P600 component) in the absence of an N400 component for irony compared to equivalent literal sentences independent of modality. This P600 was shown to be unaffected by the factors task demands and probability of occurrence. Taken together, the findings suggest that the observed P600 is related to irony processing, and might be a reflection of pragmatic interpretation processes. During the comprehension of irony, no semantic integration difficulty arises (absence of N400), but late inferential processes appear to be necessary for understanding ironic meanings (presence of P600). This finding calls for a revision of current models of figurative language processing.

The influence of sentence novelty and figurativeness on brain activity

The predominance of the left hemisphere in language comprehension and production is well established. More recently, the right hemisphere's contribution to language has been examined. Clinical, behavioral, and neuroimaging research support the right hemisphere's involvement in metaphor processing. But, there is disagreement about whether metaphors, in and of themselves, engage the right hemisphere or if other factors that vary between metaphors and literal language elicit right hemisphere engagement. It is important to disambiguate these issues to improve our basic knowledge of figurative language processing, to more precisely define how the right hemisphere supports language, and to facilitate our ability to understand and treat language impairments. Here we investigated the role of the right hemisphere in language comprehension with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) by manipulating familiarity in both literal and metaphoric sentences. In an event-related design, participants viewed English sentences that appeared every 4.5–9s, and to which they made a pleasantness judgment. All sentences elicited activation in traditional language brain regions including left inferior frontal gyrus, left anterior inferior temporal and left posterior middle temporal gyri. Overall, metaphors and novel stimuli elicited activation in bilateral inferior frontal gyri and left temporal regions. Additionally, metaphors elicited greater activation than literal sentences in right temporal pole. Although our results are partially consistent with the graded salience hypothesis and the coarse coding hypothesis, the right hemisphere's sensitivity to familiar metaphors suggests that right hemisphere recruitment is most influenced by semantic integration demands.

Figurative language processing after traumatic brain injury in adults: A preliminary study

Figurative speech (e.g., proverb, irony, metaphor, and idiom) has been reported to be particularly sensitive to measurement of abstract thinking in patients who suffer from impaired abstraction and language abilities. Metaphor processing was investigated with fMRI in adults with moderate to severe post-acute traumatic brain injury (TBI) and healthy age-matched controls using a valence-judgment task. We hypothesized that TBI patients would display decreased activation of the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG), which is considered central to semantic memory retrieval and abstract thought, in comparison with healthy controls. We also predicted that decreased activation in TBI individuals would correlate with their behavioral response times. A whole-brain analysis across the two participant groups revealed that patients did not strongly engage frontal and temporal regions related to semantic processing for novel metaphor comprehension, whereas control participants exhibited more intensive and concentrated activation within frontal and temporal areas. A region of interest (ROI) analysis verified that the LIFG was underactivated in TBI patients compared to controls across all conditions. TBI patients’ impaired abstraction of novel stimuli may stem from reduced prefrontal control of semantic memory as well as disrupted interconnectivity of prefrontal cortex with other regions.

Gesture influences the processing of figurative language in non-native speakers: ERP evidence

Gestures should play a role in second language comprehension, given their importance in conveying contextual information. In this study, the N400 and the LPC were evaluated in a task involving the observation of videos showing utterances accompanied by gestures. Students studying advanced (G-High participants) and basic German (G-Low participants) as a second language were investigated. The utterance–gesture congruence and metaphoric meaning of content were manipulated during the task. As in previous ERP reports with native speakers, metaphorical expressions were sensitive to gestures. In G-Low participants, no modulation in the 300–500 ms window was observed, and only a modest effect was observed for the 500–700 ms window. More subtle differences of verbal expression were not processed in this group. Consistent with previous reports of the same paradigm with native speakers, the N400 from G-High group discriminated both congruent and incongruent gestures as well as literal and metaphorical sentences. Our results suggest that semantic processing is robust in the learning of a second language, although the amplitude modulation and latency of ERPs might depend on the speaker's proficiency level.

Differences in task demands influence the hemispheric lateralization and neural correlates of metaphor

This study investigated metaphor comprehension in the broader context of task-difference effects and manipulation of processing difficulty. We predicted that right hemisphere recruitment would show greater specificity to processing difficulty rather than metaphor comprehension. Previous metaphor processing studies have established that the left inferior frontal gyrus strongly correlates with metaphor comprehension but there has been controversy about whether right hemisphere (RH) involvement is specific for metaphor comprehension. Functional MRI data were recorded from healthy subjects who read novel metaphors, conventional metaphors, definition-like sentences, or literal sentences. We investigated metaphor processing in contexts where semantic judgment or imagery modulates linguistic judgment. Our findings support the position that the type of task rather than figurative language processing per se modulates the left inferior gyrus (LIFG). RH involvement was more influenced by processing difficulty and less by the novelty or figurativity of linguistic expressions. Our results suggest that figurative language processing depends upon the effects of task-type and processing difficulty on imaging results.

A special role for the right hemisphere in metaphor comprehension?: ERP evidence from hemifield presentation

It has been suggested that the right hemisphere (RH) has a privileged role in the processing of figurative language, including metaphors, idioms, and verbal humor. Previous experiments using hemifield visual presentation combined with human electrophysiology support the idea that the RH plays a special role in joke comprehension. The current study examines metaphoric language. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded as healthy adults read English sentences that ended predictably (High-cloze Literals), or with a plausible but unexpected word (Low-cloze Literals and Low-cloze Metaphoricals). Sentence final words were presented in either the left or the right visual hemifield. Relative to High-cloze Literals, Low-cloze Literals elicited a larger N400 component after presentation to both the left and the right hemifield. Low-cloze Literals also elicited a larger frontal positivity following the N400, but only with presentation to the right hemifield (left hemisphere). These data suggest both cerebral hemispheres can benefit from supportive sentence context, but may suggest an important role for anterior regions of the left hemisphere in the selection of semantic information in the face of competing alternatives. Relative to Low-cloze Literals, Low-cloze Metaphoricals elicited more negative ERPs during the timeframe of the N400 and afterwards. However, ERP metaphoricity effects were very similar across hemifields, suggesting that the integration of metaphoric meanings was similarly taxing for the two hemispheres, contrary to the predictions of the right hemisphere theory of metaphor.

The Time Course of Metonymic Language Text Processing by Older and Younger Adults

The influence of aging on the processing of figurative language was investigated by utilizing Frisson and Pickering's (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1366–1383, 1999) paradigm, monitoring eye fixation times to target words in sentences. First fixation times and total fixation times were analyzed for familiar and unfamiliar metonymies and literal control sentences. Frisson and Pickering found that processing figurative and literal expressions yielded similar patterns of eye fixations. In the current study, these methods and results were replicated and extended to include older adults' processing of metonymies. This investigation replicated their findings for young adults and found that older adults produced the same processing patterns as the younger adults.

Context Incongruity and Irony Processing

In this research we investigated the role of context in interpretation (Experiments 1 and 2) and relative processing (Experiment 3) of literal and ironic statements. As such, we manipulated degree of situational negativity (using strongly negative, weakly negative, and neutral contexts) and found that, in strongly negative situations, reading times for ironic statements were slower than for literal statements, whereas in weakly negative situations reading times for ironic statements were faster than or equivalent to reading times for literal statements. When these reading time data were related to interpretation data, we found that differences in processing time could be predicted by certain aspects of interpretation. We argue that these results support a direct access model of figurative language processing (e.g., Gibbs, 1994), and also support Colston's (2002) theory of contrast and assimilation in verbal irony.

Contrast and assimilation in verbal irony

The study investigated a potential link between patterns of perceptual/cognitive biasing effects and interpretation effects in figurative language. Following a recent line of psycholinguistic research that theoretically introduced and empirically verified a predictive relationship between perceptual contrast effects and the pragmatic functions of verbal irony (Colston, 2000; Colston and O'Brien, 2000a,b), the present study tested, (1) whether the broader family of perceptual and cognitive biasing effects found throughout the cognitive, social and other psychological literatures influences aspects of language comprehension, (2) how such an influence would specifically operate, and (3) whether this view accounts for dissociations found on the pragmatic functions of ironic tropes. The results of 4 experiments on 144 participants demonstrated that the pattern of contrast versus assimilation effects found in many psychological research literatures enables prediction of the pragmatic functions interpreted from a speaker's use of figurative language, specifically, the degree of criticism expressed by a speaker using a form of verbal irony. This prediction is also enabled through the way in which the situations that are commented-upon with verbal irony are perceived. The implications of these results for other aspects of perceptual or cognitive biasing effects that might affect figurative language processing are discussed.

Convention, Form, and Figurative Language Processing

There are 2 basic controversies concerning how metaphors are processed. First, are metaphoric mappings more akin to literal comparisons or to literal categorizations? And second, is metaphor comprehension indirect or direct? We believe that these controversies are more apparent than real and that a unified theoretical framework can be offered that reconciles these opposing views. The central idea is that all metaphors involve structural alignment of the target and base domains. Whether these alignments are more akin to comparisons or to categorizations, and whether they are computed directly or indirectly, depends on 2 factors: the type of representation invoked by the base term and the linguistic form of the metaphor.

Obtaining a Figurative Interpretation of a Word: Support for Underspecification

Based on the results from a number of eye-tracking experiments, Frisson and Pickering (1999) and Pickering and Frisson (2001) proposed a model for the on-line processing of words with semantically related senses. According to this model, only the underspecified, schematic meaning of a word with multiple senses is activated initially. This underspecified meaning encompasses all related senses that are established in someone's lexicon. Once this underspecified meaning has been used to assign a semantic value, it can be followed by a homing-in stage in which context is used to arrive at the contextually appropriate sense. This article discusses the implications of the underspecification model with respect to the processing of figurative language and asserts that this model gives a better account of how incremental semantic processing can proceed smoothly and flexibly. In conclusion, the model is related to the linguistic distinctions of polysemy and monosemy, and it is argued that, at this moment in time, there is no compelling evidence to postulate more than one underspecified meaning.

Convention, Form, and Figurative Language Processing

Convention, Form, and Figurative Language Processing

The processing of metonymy: evidence from eye movements.

The authors investigated the time course of the processing of metonymic expressions in comparison with literal ones in 2 eye-tracking experiments. Experiment 1 considered the processing of sentences containing place-for-institution metonymies such as the convent in That blasphemous woman had to answer to the convent; it was found that such expressions were of similar difficulty to sentences containing literal interpretations of the same expressions. In contrast, expressions without a relevant metonymic interpretation caused immediate difficulty. Experiment 2 found similar results for place-for-event metonymies such as A lot of Americans protested during Vietnam, except that the difficulty with expressions without a relevant metonymic interpretation was somewhat delayed. The authors argue that these findings are incompatible with models of figurative language processing in which either the literal sense is accessed first or the figurative sense is accessed first. Instead, they support an account in which both senses can be accessed immediately, perhaps through a single under-specified representation.

"Food Is to Me as Gas Is to Cars??": Using Figurative Language to Explain Illness to Children

Anecdotal evidence suggests that using analogy and metaphor to explain illness to children is effective. However, very little empirical research has been conducted to support the effectiveness of using analogy and metaphor as an illness explanation strategy. Moreover, the limited research conducted has theoretical and methodological weaknesses. Upon examining the literature on the development of children's cognitive processing of analogy and metaphor, it is concluded that the anecdotal recommendations for using these tropes to explain illness are questionable. That is, the advice on using figurative language to explain illness in the health-oriented literature contradicts the research on children's figurative language processing abilities. These issues are discussed in relation to types and quality of analogy and metaphor and how they interface with explanation and interaction.