Cover not available

In:Dynamism in Metaphor and Beyond
Edited by Herbert L. Colston, Teenie Matlock and Gerard J. Steen
[Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 9] 2022
► pp. 45–62

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Narrative experiences of metaphor

 | Stony Brook University
 | Stony Brook University
Published online: 9 September 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.9.02ger
Abstract
This chapter discusses the impact of narrative contexts on readers’ experiences of metaphor. We begin by reviewing extant theories of metaphor processing to offer an analysis of contextual effects on readers’ metaphor understanding. Next, we outline a dual process perspective that suggests how readers’ experiences of metaphor are guided by both intuitive and reflective processes. We suggest that the separate function of those processes may transform readers’ experiences of metaphor quality. Finally, we explore readers’ individual responses to metaphors as a product of their accumulation of knowledge through distinct life experiences. Throughout the chapter, we support our analyses with examples from the Pulitzer Prize winning novel Less (Greer, 2017).
Article outline
  • Metaphor processing in narrative contexts
  • Dual processes in narrative
    • Intuitive judgments in narrative experiences
    • Reflective judgments in narrative experiences
  • Readers’ distinct narrative experiences
  • Conclusions
  • References
References (41)
References
Bambini, V., Canal, P., Resta, D., & Grimaldi, M. (2019). Time course and neurophysiological underpinnings of metaphor in literary context. Discourse Processes, 56, 77–97. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bowdle, B. F., & Gentner, D. (2005). The career of metaphor. Psychological Review, 112, 193–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buckley, C. (2017, July 24). Less by Andrew Sean Greer [Review of the book Less, A. S. Greer]. New York Times. Retrieved from: [URL]
Campbell, S. J., & Raney, G. (2016). A 25-year replication of Katz et al.’s (1988) metaphor norms. Behavioral Research Methods, 48, 330–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cook, A. E., & O’Brien, E. J. (2014). Knowledge activation, integration, and validation during narrative text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 51, 26–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Passive activation and instantiation of inferences during reading. In E. J. O’Brien, A. E. Cook, & R. F. Lorch, Jr. (Eds.), Inferences during reading (pp. 42–67). New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diederich, A., & Trueblood, J. S. (2018). A dynamic dual process model of risky decision making. Psychological Review, 125, 270–292. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Donaggio, P., & Monash, P. (1976). Carrie [Motion picture]. United States: Red Bank Films.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dorst, A. G. (2015). More of different metaphors in fiction? A quantitative cross-register comparison. Language and Literature, 24, 3–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fincher-Kiefer, R., Post, T. A., Greene, T. R., & Voss, J. F. (1988). On the role of prior knowledge and task demands in the processing of text. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 416–428. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foy, J. E., & Gerrig, R. J. (2014). Readers’ responses when characters act on completed goals: Impact of characters’ mental states and readers’ task focus. Discourse Processes, 51, 312–332. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gentner, D., & Bowdle, B. F. (2008). Metaphor as structure mapping. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 110–128). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gentner, D., Bowdle, B., Wolff, P., & Boronat, C. (2001). Metaphor is like analogy. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.) The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 199–253). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerrig, R. J., & Egidi, G. (2010). The Bushwhacked Piano and the bushwhacked reader: The willing construction of disbelief. Style, 44, 189–206.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerrig, R. J., & Healy, A. F. (1983). Dual processes in metaphor understanding: Comprehension and appreciation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 667–675.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerrig, R. J., & Mumper, M. M. (2017). How readers’ lives affect narrative experiences. In M. Burke & E. Troscianko (Eds.), Dialogues Between Literature and Cognition (239–257). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerrig, R. J., & O’Brien, E. J. (2005). The scope of memory-based processing. Discourse Processes, 39, 225–242. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr., (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr., & Gerrig, R. J. (1989). How context makes metaphor comprehension seem “special.” Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 4, 145–158. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glucksberg, S. (2008). How metaphors create categories – quickly. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 67–83). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glucksberg, S., & Keysar, B. (1990). Understanding metaphorical comparisons: Beyond similarity. Psychological Review, 97, 3–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grayot, J. D. (2020). Dual process theories in behavioral economics and neuroeconomics: A critical review. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 11, 105–136. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greer, A. S. (2017). Less. New York: Lee Boudreaux Books/Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Griffin, T. D., Jee, B. D., & Wiley, J. (2009). The effects of domain knowledge on metacomprehension accuracy. Memory & Cognition, 37, 1001–1013. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holyoak, K. J., & Stamenković, D. (2018). Metaphor comprehension: A critical review of theories and evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 641–671. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laemmle, C., & Whale, J. (1931). Frankenstein. The man who made a monster [Motion picture]. United States: Universal Pictures.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York, NY: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inference during reading. Psychological Review, 99, 440–466. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Cognitive theories in discourse-processing research. In E. J. O’Brien, A. E. Cook, & R. F. Lorch, Jr. (Eds.), Inferences during reading (pp. 19–41). New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Merrill, G., & Rubicam, S. (1986). I wanna dance with somebody [Recorded by W. Houston]. On Whitney. New York, NY: Arista.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Brien, E. J., & Cook, A. E. (2016). Coherence threshold and the continuity of processing: The RI_Val model of comprehension. Discourse Processes, 53, 326–338. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Brien, E. J., Cook, A. E., & Gueraud, S. (2010). Accessibility of outdated information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 979–991.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Brien, E. J., Rizzella, M. L., Albrecht, J. E., & Halleran, J. G. (1998). Updating a situation model: A memory-based text processing view. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1200–1210.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Olidort, S. (2017, July 27). Andrew Sean Greer’s ‘Less’ in need of something more [Review of the book Less, by A. S. Greer]. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from: [URL]
Pérez-Sobrino, P., & Julich, N. (2014). Let’s talk music: A corpus-based account of musical motion. Metaphor and Symbol, 29, 298–315. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rataj, K., Przekoracka-Krawcyzk, A., & van der Lubbe, R. H. J. (2018). On understanding creative language: The late positive complex and novel metaphor comprehension. Brain Research, 1678, 231–244. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spilich, G. J., Vesonder, G. T., Chiesi, H. L., & Voss, J. F. (1979). Text processing of domain- related information for individuals with high and low domain knowledge. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 18, 275–290. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Steen, G. J. (2008). The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 23, 213–241. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thibodeau, P. H., Sikos, L., & Durgin, F. H. (2018). Are subjective ratings of metaphors a red herring? The big two dimensions of metaphoric sentences. Behavior Research Methods, 50, 759–772. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Colston, Herbert L.
2025. A look at, inside, and outside metaphors. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 23:1 ► pp. 35 ff. DOI logo
Boieblan, Mostafa
2024. Grounded cognition and the role of musical expertise in shaping synesthetic metaphors among a music speech community. International Journal of Language and Culture 11:2 ► pp. 180 ff. DOI logo
Gerrig, Richard J.
2024. Slowing Metaphor Down: Elaborating Deliberate Metaphor Theory. Metaphor and Symbol 39:3 ► pp. 217 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue