Cover not available

In:Beyond Meaning
Edited by Elly Ifantidou, Louis de Saussure and Tim Wharton
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 324] 2021
► pp. 61–76

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

Metaphor comprehension

Meaning and beyond

 | National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
Published online: 10 November 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.324.c4
Abstract
Preliminary evidence on non-propositional effects as indispensable to the informational content of metaphorical utterances is provided in Ifantidou (2019), Ifantidou and Hatzidaki (2019). The idea put forward was that the aesthetic apprehension of linguistic metaphors extends to enriching underdetermined aspects of propositional content.
In this paper, I further examine the distinguishing aspects of metaphors during interpretation. Following Sperber and Wilson 2015, Wilson and Carston 2019, I argue that an emotional response is triggered to the situation represented by the metaphor (see also Ifantidou 2019). I will suggest that metaphors enhance comprehension by being vehicles for emotions such as affection or dislike, as in texts which present difficulties in language comprehension. Ιn these cases, metaphors evoke non-propositional effects, such as images or emotional responses, by connecting to interpreters’ perceptions, memories, previous experiences, imagining, and beliefs. Evidence that addressees are able to derive meaning more frequently from metaphors than from literal sentences in equally supportive linguistic contexts (in terms of length, complexity, linguistic under-determinacy) attenuates the idea that metaphors enhance understanding as a merely linguistic tool, and reinforces the view that metaphorical processing involves a blend of language information with perceptual experience.
Article outline
  • 1.The issues
  • 2.The role of metaphors in meaning-making
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Expert Judges
    • 3.3Designed Test
    • 3.4Rating
  • 4.Results
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (30)
References
Aristotle. Rhetoric [The ‘Art’ of Rhetoric Aristotle]. Translated by John Henry Freese. 1959. London: William Heinemann. Retrieved from: [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Benedek, Mathias, Roger Beatyb, Emanuel Jauka, Karl Koschutniga, Andreas Finka, Paul J. Silviab, Beate Dunsta, and Aljoscha C. Neubauer. 2014. “Creating Metaphors: The Neural Basis of Figurative Language Production.” Neuroimage 90: 99‒106. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bowdle, Brian F., and Dedre Gentner. 2005. “The Career of Metaphor.” Psychological Review 112: 193‒216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 2010. “Explicit Meaning and Free Pragmatic Enrichment.” In Explicit Communication: Robyn Carston’s Pragmatics, ed. by Belen Soria, and Esther Romero, 217‒285. Palgrave Studies in Pragmatics, Language and Cognition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Citron, Francesca M. M., and Adele E. Goldberg. 2014. “Metaphorical Sentences Are More Emotionally Engaging than Their Literal Counterparts.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 26: 2585‒2595. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Citron, Francesca, M. M., Jeremie Güsten, Nora Michaelis, and Adele E. Goldberg. 2016a. “Conventional Metaphors in Longer Passages Evoke Affective Brain Response.” NeuroImage 139: 218‒230. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Citron, Francesca, M. M., Nora Michaelis, and Adele E. Goldberg. 2016b. “Comprehension of Conventional Metaphors by Second Language Speakers: Do They Show the Same Degree of Emotional Engagement as Natives Do?” Paper presented at the UK Cognitive Linguistics Conference (UK-CLC), Bangor, UK.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Citron, Francesca M. M., and Emmanouil A. Zervos. 2018. “A Neuroimaging Investigation into Figurative Language and Aesthetic Perception.” In Sensory Perceptions in Language, Embodiment and Epistemology, ed. by Annalisa Baicchi, Rémi Digonnet, and Jodi Sanford, 77‒94. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cope, Meredith Edward. 1877. The Rhetoric of Aristotle with a Commentary. Vol.3. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cunningham, William A., and Tobias Brosch. 2012. “Motivational Salience Amygdala Tuning from Traits, Needs, Values, and Goals.” Current Directions in Psychological Science 21 (1): 54‒59. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deonna, Julien A., and Fabrice Teroni. 2012. The Emotions: A Philosophical Introduction. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferrari, Gloria. 1997. “Figures in the Text: Metaphors and Riddles in the Agamemnon.” Classical Philology 92 (1): 1‒45. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garavan Hugh, Jo Cara Pendergrass, Thomas J. Ross, Elliot A. Stein, and Robert C. Risinger. 2001. “Amygdala Response to Both Positively and Negatively Valenced Stimuli.” Neuroreport 12: 2779‒2783. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. Jr. 2010. “Idioms and Formulaic Language.” In The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, ed. by Dirk Geeraerts, and Hubert Cuyckens, Oxford Handbooks Online. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Golding, Alex. 2015. “Mental Imagery and Metaphor.” Porto Alegre 8 (1): 20‒32.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Green, Nancy, and Sandra Carberry. 1999. “Interpreting and Generating Indirect Answers.” Computational Linguistics 25 (3): 389‒435.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hamann, Stephan, and Hui Mao. 2002. “Positive and Negative Emotional Verbal Stimuli Elicit Activity in the Left Amygdala.” Neuroreport 13 (1): 15‒19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hassabis, Demis, and Eleanor A. Maguire. 2007. “Deconstructing Episodic Memory with Construction.” Trends in Cognitive Science 11 (7): 299‒306. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ifantidou, Elly. 2019. “Relevance and Metaphor Understanding in a Second Language.” In Relevance, Pragmatics and Interpretation, ed. by Kate Scott, Billy Clark, and Robyn Carston, 218‒230. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ifantidou, Elly, and Anna Hatzidaki. 2019. “Metaphor Comprehension in L2: Meaning, Images and Emotions.” Journal of Pragmatics 149: 78‒90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Indurkhya, Bipin. 2016. “Towards a Model of Metaphorical Understanding.” In Metaphor and Communication, ed. by Elisabetta Gola, and Francesca Ervas, 123‒146. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lacey, Simon, Randall Stilla, and Krishnankutty Sathian. 2012. “Metaphorically Feeling: Comprehending Textural Metaphors Activates Somatosensory Cortex.” Brain and Language 120 (3): 416‒421. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lacey, Simon, Randall Stilla, Gopikrishna Deshpande, Sinan Zhao, and Krishnankutty Sathian. 2017. “Engagement of the Left Extrastriate Body Area during Body-Part Metaphor Comprehension.” Brain and Language 166: 1‒18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McIntyre, Ronald, and David Woodruff Smith. 1989. “Theory of Intentionality.” In Husserl’s Phenomenology: A Textbook, ed. by Jitendra Nath Mohanty, and William R. McKenna, 147‒179. Washington, DC: University Press of America.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul. 1978. “The Metaphorical Process as Cognition, Imagination, and Feeling.”Critical Inquiry 5 (1): 143‒159. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smith, Joel. 2014. “Are Emotions Embodied Evaluative Attitudes? Critical Review of Julien A. Deonna and Fabrice Teroni’s The Emotions: A Philosophical Introduction.” Disputatio 6: 93‒106. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 2015. “Beyond Speaker’s Meaning.” Croatian Journal of Philosophy 15 (44): 117‒149.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wharton, Tim, and Claudia Strey. 2019. “Slave to the Passions: Making Emotions Relevant.” In Relevance, Pragmatics and Interpretation, ed. by Kate Scott, Billy Clark, and Robyn Carston, 253‒266. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Robyn Carston. 2019. “Pragmatics and the Challenge of ‘Non-propositional’ Effects.” Journal of Pragmatics 145: 31‒38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vincent, Justin L., Abraham Z. Snyder, Michael D. Fox, Benjamin J. Shannon, Jessica R. Andrews, Marcus E. Raichle, and Randy L. Buckner. 2006. “Coherent Spontaneous Activity Identifies a Hippocampal–Parietal Memory Network.” Journal of Neurophysiology 96: 3517‒3531. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Ifantidou, Elly & Anna Piata
2021. Metaphor and mental shortcuts. Pragmatics & Cognition 28:2 ► pp. 299 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 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