Yeshayahu Shen

Metaphorical (In)coherence in discourse

This article introduces a critique of a version of the conceptual metaphor (CM) view (e.g., Lakoff & Johnson, 1980), regarding the issue of metaphorical coherence in natural discourse. The issue at stake is: Are metaphorical expressions in natural discourse coherently or incoherently distributed in discourse? The hypothesis derived from the theories developed by certain proponents of the CM view is that the occurrence of a conventional metaphorical expression (e.g., “We have reached a crossroads in our relationship”) that instantiates a certain root or conceptual conventional metaphor (e.g., LOVE IS A JOURNEY) will support the use of consistent metaphorical expressions, that is, expressions belonging with the same root metaphors (e.g., “Lets change direction”). In this study, we compared 15 randomly selected passages taken from daily newspapers to a baseline of 15 newspaper passages that marked their deliberate, explicit use of an underlying root metaphor. Contrary to the prediction derived from (a certa...

Metaphors and Categories

Despite the obvious affinity between the study of metaphor and the study of categorization, the link between these two fields of research has received little attention in cognitive psychology or in other disciplines. The purpose of the present study is precisely to establish and develop that link between those two research fields. After outlining the main recent developments in the modern study of categorization, focusing on the introduction of ad hoc categories, six major observations made in recent studies of metaphor comprehension (concerning, for example, the distinction between metaphors and non-metaphors, the asymmetry of metaphors, interpretation preference in metaphors, and the aptness of metaphors) are introduced. The main argument holds that these observations can be accounted for in a parsimonious and coherent way by assuming that metaphor comprehension is, in fact, a process of (ad hoc) category formation. The final section relates this proposal to alternative theories.

Symmetric and asymmetric comparisons

Abstract The present paper focuses on the distinction between symmetric and asymmetric comparisons of the form ‘A is like B’. Three main proposals are made: (1) It is proposed, contrary to a view commonly put forward in various studies of metaphor (e.g., Ortony (1979)), that the symmetry vs. asymmetry distinction in comparison statements is orthogonal to the literal vs. metaphor distinction; i.e., it is argued that both metaphorical and literal comparisons exhibit asymmetric and symmetric types. (2) The key notion, relative to which the distinction between symmetric and asymmetric comparisons is defined, is the ‘accepted order’: asymmetric comparisons are defined as those in which one of the two possible orders (i.e., ‘A is like B’ or ‘B is like A’) is the ‘accepted-order’, while the other is not. By contrast, in all cases of symmetric comparison there is no preference for one order over the other. The second proposal, then, is a definition of the ‘structural’ conditions under which a certain order is to be conceived as an ‘accepted order’: (i) The concepts represented by the A and B terms must both be conceived of as being included in the domain of some easily constructed ad-hoc or stable category G; (ii) The B term must be a prominent member of G. (3) A cognitive account for the relative ease of processing the accepted order is proposed. It is argued that the principles underlying the Reference point-Deviant relations (see Rosch (1975)) can be extended to the domain of ad-hoc categories. Some general implications of these proposals regarding theories of categorization in general are discussed.

Principles of metaphor interpretation and the notion of 'domain' : A proposal for a hybrid model

Abstract Metaphor is widely viewed as the (selective) mapping of properties from one conceptual domain (the ‘source’) onto another (the ‘target’). Two different models of metaphor comprehension are distinguished with respect to this characterization of metaphors: the ‘domain-as-a-schema’ model, and the ‘domain-as-a-taxonomic category’ model. These models differ radically from each other with respect to: 1. Their representational assumptions regarding the way knowledge is organized and represented in memory, and 2. Their interpretation principles, namely, the connectivity vs. diagnosticity principles. On the basis of several counter-examples, it is argued that neither model is sufficient to account for certain phenomena regarding metaphor interpretation. As an alternative, a ‘hybrid model’ of metaphor comprehension is outlined. While preserving the explanatory power of each of the other two models, the ‘hybrid model’ is capable of accounting for those counter-examples. A multiple-stage experiment is described, which provides some initial empirical support for the hybrid model.

Degrees of narrativity and strategies of semantic reduction

Abstract The paper examines strategies of summarization (i.e., semantic reduction) as a function of the type of text summarized. A scale defining degrees of narrativity is empirically established in terms of the type of narrative organization of events. A scalar notion of narrativity reveals that discourses low in narrativity invoke a Generalization procedure when summarized. Highly narrative texts, on the other hand, are shown to undergo Deletion when semantically reduced. Medium narrativity texts are shown to invoke both strategies. Specifically, Non-narrative and Temporally ordered texts are subsumed by a proposition which is not a subset of the original text but a higher order abstraction thereof. By contrast, Action-structured texts are represented by a subset of the original text. Causally organized texts, on the other hand, make use of both strategies and are subsumed by either a Generalization or a proposition which is a subset of the text in question.

Semantic transparency and translucency in compound blissymbols

Blissymbolics is a graphic symbol system used for communication by individuals whose speech is nonfunctional. The transparency and translucency of Blissymbolics have been viewed in the context of the visual relationship between symbols and their referents. This article suggests a new perspective in the study of Blissymbolic transparency and translucency that is semantic conceptual. At present, only compound symbols are discussed. Semantic transparency/translucency is conceived in this article as representing the relationship between the composite meaning of symbol components and the symbol referent. This relationship is measured by guessability, and by subject rating of degree of agreement between the composite meaning of symbol components and the symbol referent. We hypothesized that semantic transparency/translucency is affected by referent prototypicality or uniqueness, and by the interpretation of thematic relationships of symbol components. In the present study, we investigated the effect of referent...

Metaphors and conceptual structure

Abstract The paper focuses on the relations between metaphor use and a particular kind of conceptual organization: taxonomic categorization. The introductory section reviews some recent studies suggesting that various aspects of the use of metaphorical mapping (in, e.g., metaphor identification, appreciation and development) are constrained by the structure of the taxonomic categories to which the concepts comprising the metaphor belong. However, most of these studies do not relate directly to a crucial question: what kind of conceptual structure is the ‘product’ of metaphor interpretation? The present paper develops a recent answer (made notably by Glucksberg and Keysar, 1990), namely, that metaphor consists of an ad hoc categorization of the concepts comprising the metaphor. Developing this view, the present paper suggests that some of the principles underlying metaphorical ad hoc categorization are identical to the major principles underlying natural, common categorization. The paper focuses on principles and phenomena relating to two major aspects of categorization: (1) The internal, prototype structure of categories; (2) The basis of categorizing a set of objects into a category. Two experiments are described, which provide some empirical support for the proposal that these categorization principles equally apply to ad hoc, metaphorical categorization.

Cognitive constraints on directionality in the semantic structure of poetic vs. non-poetic metaphors

Abstract The paper focuses on directionality in the semantic structure of poetic vs. non-poetic metaphors. The first question addressed by the paper is: What are the constraints on mapping in the case of non-poetic metaphors (i.e., conventional metaphors, and/or artificial metaphors invented specifically for psychological tests). This question is discussed in section 2. Two major constraints are introduced to which non-poetic metaphors conform regarding their directionality. The second question pertains to poetic metaphors: Do poetic metaphors equally respect the above constraints? The importance of this issue stems from the widely held belief among students of literature and related disciplines that poetic language deviates from the rules underlying standard, non-poetic language. On the basis of a large scale analysis of literary metaphorical comparisons, the paper suggests that, contrary to prevailing views among students of literature, poetic metaphors do respect the above constraints in the same manner as their non-poetic counterparts. The Gestaltian ‘Cognitive reference point’ account is invoked to explain this finding, and is discussed in some detail.

Foregrounding in poetic discourse: between deviation and cognitive constraints

Foregrounding theory generally assumes that poetic language deviates from norms characterizing the ordinary use of language (e.g. at the phonological, grammatical, semantic or pragmatic levels) and that this deviation interferes with cognitive principles and processes that make communication possible. However, a neglected issue in foregrounding theory is whether any constraints exist, and if so, what characterizes them. The present article proposes that foregrounding theory should be complemented by a cognitive theory that specifies constraints on such deviations, on the basis of theoretical and empirical considerations. Due to the privileged status of figurative language among the foregrounding devices, this general argument is illustrated by a close analysis of two figurative types, similes and oxymora. The analysis examines their distribution in poetic discourse and investigates the psychological processes involved in the way people comprehend them. It is proposed that for each of these figures there is a set of existing structures that could equally instantiate them as a foregrounding device. However, poetic discourse, both cross-linguistically and cross-culturally, robustly favours the use of the cognitively simpler option. The implications of these empirical findings are discussed in the light of foregrounding theory.

Schema theory and the processing of narrative texts: The x-bar story grammar and the notion of discourse topic☆

Abstract The Story Grammar approach suggests a model based on the generative framework, for representing both the structure of that class of narratives known as “Stories”, and the cognitive aspects of story processing and comprehensive by actual readers (cf., e.g., Rumelhart (1975, 1977), Mandler and Johnson (1977), Stein and Glenn (1979). Thorndyke (1975)). The central aim of this paper is to suggest a radiacal revision of the S-G model (S-G=Story Grammar) replacing it with an X-Bar Story Grammar (XBSG), which incorporates the notion of the X-Bar system as developed in sentence level grammar (cf. Jackendoff (1977)). The XBSG will be presented in section 1. In section 2 I will argue that the XBSG is a framework within which central issues involved in the processing of narrative discourge can be accounted for; I will propose an analysis of one such issue, namely, the problem of the Discourse Topic construction within the XBSG framework.