Back (or forward?) to the future: The role of perspective in temporal language comprehension.

McGlone, Matthew S.; Harding, Jennifer

doi:10.1037/0278-7393.24.5.1211

Cited by 171 publications

(270 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

254

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study was a replication of Experiment 2 of McGlone and Harding (1998), albeit in patients and in Dutch. Since the purpose was to establish whether perspective information was utilized when interpreting temporal language the study was conducted only on Wednesdays.…”

Section: 21: Materials and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Alternatively, information about temporal ordering is only used when reading unambiguous sentences, without considering the underlying perspectival entailments. In the latter case people would not show a preference for the previously activated perspective (McGlone and Harding, 1998).…”

Section: 1: Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…An example of a ME sentence could be "We have passed the deadline", with movement directed to the future (We have passed the deadline in the direction of the future). According to a MT perspective this sentence would be "The deadline has passed (us)", as in this case the deadline passes us in direction to the past (McGlone and Harding, 1998).…”

Section: 1: Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Metaphor interpretation and use: A window into semantics in schizophrenia

Elvevåg

Helsen

Hert³

et al. 2011

Schizophrenia Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nature of putative semantic anomalies in schizophrenia is controversial. Metaphor interpretation and use provide a useful methodology with which to probe semantics since metaphors are critical in reasoning processes and in how conceptual knowledge is organized.The first study examined free speech for figurative language. The second study explored whether emotional versus non-emotional metaphorical language interpretation elicits differences in the tendencies to produce idiosyncratic (bizarre) or literal interpretations or use of other metaphors to describe the meaning of a metaphor. The third study examined the interpretation of time metaphors. We expected the time perspective in ambiguous sentences to be differentially influenced by previously presented unambiguous sentences of a specific perspective, either events moving relative to a stationary observer (moving-time) or an observer moving relative to a stationary event (moving-ego). First, we found that patients used a similar amount of figurative language as control participants. Second, we did not find any difference between the groups in terms of idiosyncratic interpretations, although patients did interpret more metaphors literally and controls utilized more figurative language. Third, we did not find evidence of a difference between the groups in terms of time perspectives influencing ambiguous target sentences differentially. As operationalized here, the interpretation and use of metaphors is similar in patients with schizophrenia to that of healthy control participants. To the extent that metaphors recruit semantic processes this area of cognition is generally intact in schizophrenia.

show abstract

Section: 21: Materials and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: 1: Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: 1: Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Metaphor interpretation and use: A window into semantics in schizophrenia

Elvevåg

Helsen

Hert³

et al. 2011

Schizophrenia Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, psycholinguistic studies suggest that hypothesis (4) might be true to some extent (Gibbs et al, 1997a). This work includes studies investigating people's mental imagery for conventional metaphors, including idioms and proverbs (Gibbs and O'Brien, 1990;Gibbs et al, 1997b), people's context-sensitive judgments about the figurative meanings of idioms in context (Nayak and Gibbs, 1990), people's immediate processing of idioms (Gibbs et al, 1997a), people's responses to questions about time (Boroditsky and Ramscar, 2002;Gentner and Boroditsky, 2002), readers' understanding of metaphorical time expressions (McGlone and Harding, 1998), and studies looking at the embodied foundation for metaphoric meaning (Gibbs, 2006c;Gibbs et al, 2004. At the same time, Coulson (2001) describes several neuropsychological studies whose results are consistent with some of the claims of blending theory, particularly the idea that understanding metaphors demands various blending processes, which require cognitive effort.…”

Section: Pragmatics and Online Metaphor Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Complementary perspectives on metaphor: Cognitive linguistics and relevance theory

Tendahl

Gibbs

2008

Journal of Pragmatics

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary theories of metaphor differ in many dimensions, including the discipline they originate from (e.g., linguistics, psychology, philosophy), and whether they are developed primarily within a cognitive or pragmatic theoretical framework. This article evaluates two directions of metaphor research within linguistics, cognitive linguistics and relevance theory, which both aim to capture essential aspects of the reason for metaphor, and how people ordinarily use and understand metaphor in daily life. We argue, contrary to most received opinion, that cognitive linguistics and relevance theory provide complementary perspectives on metaphor. Both theories offer important insights into the role of metaphor in cognition and language use, and suggest detailed hypotheses on metaphor understanding that surely are part of a comprehensive theory of metaphor. #

show abstract

“…Various psycholinguistic experimental methods have been devised to assess whether (a) people conceptualize of certain topics via metaphor, (b) whether conceptual metaphors assist people in making sense of WHY verbal expressions, particularly idioms and metaphors mean what they do, and (c) whether people access conceptual metaphors during their immediate, online production and comprehension of conventional and novel language. This work includes studies investigating people s mental imagery for conventional metaphors, including idioms and proverbs (Gibbs & O Brien, 1990;Gibbs, Strom & Spivey-Knowlton, 1997), people s context-sensitive judgments about the figurative meanings of idioms in context (Nayak & Gibbs, 1990), people s immediate processing of idioms (Gibbs, Bogdonovich, Sykes, & Barr, 1997), people s responses to questions about time (Boroditsky & Ramscar, 2002;Gentner, Imai, & Boroditsky, 2002), readers understanding of metaphorical time expressions (McGlone & Harding, 1998), and studies looking at the embodied foundation for figurative meanings. Let me briefly discuss this last line of evidence, because this work embraces a research strategy to deal with the problem of circularity of reasoning in cognitive linguistic analyses.…”

Section: Responding To the Criticismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive linguistics and metaphor research: past successes, skeptical questions, future challenges

Gibbs

2006

DELTA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An important reason for the tremendous interest in metaphor over the past 20 years stems from cognitive linguistic research. Cognitive linguists embrace the idea that metaphor is not merely a part of language, but reflects a fundamental part of the way people think, reason, and imagine. A large number of empirical studies in cognitive linguistics have, in different ways, supported this claim. My aim in this paper is to describe the empirical foundations for cognitive linguistic work on metaphor, acknowledge various skeptical reactions to this work, and respond to some of these questions/criticisms. I also outline several challenges that cognitive linguists should try to address in future work on metaphor in language, thought, and culture. KEY-WORDS: Cognitive Linguistics; Metaphor research; metaphor in language; metaphor in thought; metaphor in culture.RESUMO: Uma importante razão para o grande interesse pela metáfora nos últimos 20 anos está na pesquisa realizada pela Lingüística Cognitiva. Os lingüistas cognitivos adotam a idéia de que a metáfora não é meramente uma parte da língua, mas reflete uma parte fundamental da nossa maneira de pensar, raciocinar e imaginar.Um grande número de estudos empíricos em Lingüística Cognitiva tem, de diferentes modos, oferecido suporte a essa idéia. Meu objetivo neste artigo é descrever os fundamentos empíricos do trabalho da Lingüística Cognitiva sobre a metáfora, apresentar vários questionamentos sobre esse trabalho, e responder algumas dessas questões/críticas. Eu também aponto vários desafios que a Lingüística Cognitiva deveria encarar em futuros trabalhos sobre a metáfora na língua, no pensamento e na cultura. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Lingüística Cognitiva; Pesquisa da metáfora; a metáfora na língua; a metáfora no pensamento; a metáfora na cultura.

show abstract

Back (or forward?) to the future: The role of perspective in temporal language comprehension.

Cited by 171 publications

References 20 publications

Metaphor interpretation and use: A window into semantics in schizophrenia

Metaphor interpretation and use: A window into semantics in schizophrenia

Complementary perspectives on metaphor: Cognitive linguistics and relevance theory

Cognitive linguistics and metaphor research: past successes, skeptical questions, future challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About