Proverbial Understanding in a Pictorial Context

Honeck, Richard P.; Sowry, Brenda M.; Voegtle, Katherine

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1978.tb02319.x

Cited by 24 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings replicate earlier work showing that children are less able to explain idioms (Ackerman 1982, Prinz 1983, metaphors (Winner et al 1980, Vosniadou & Ortony 1983 and proverbs verbally (Honeck, Sowry & Voegtle 1978) than to choose their non-literal interpretations correctly. Generally, the results showed that frequency of correct idiomatic explanations increased with grade.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Linguistic factors in children's understanding of idioms

1987

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the effect of two linguistic factors on children's understanding of idioms. Kindergarten, first, third and fourth graders listened to idiomatic expressions either alone or at the end of short story contexts. Their task was to explain verbally the intended meanings of these idioms and then to choose the correct idiomatic interpretations of these phrases. The results showed that in the presence of supporting context younger children (kindergarten and first graders) understood idioms that were syntactically frozen (e.g. turn back the clock) better than they did idioms which can be seen in a variety of syntactic forms (e.g. lay down the law). Older children (third and fourth graders) comprehended both kinds of idiom equally well. Moreover, with context, children at all grade levels were better at explaining the figurative meanings of idioms whose literal and idiomatic interpretations were closely related (e.g. hold your tongues) than they were at explaining idioms whose literal and figurative meanings were not closely related (e.g. beat around the bush). Without context there were few significant differences noted in children's understanding of the different kinds of idiom. The significance of these findings for developmental models of idiom comprehension is discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Linguistic factors in children's understanding of idioms

1987

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Findings from the late 1970s and early 1980s suggest this to be the case (Gardner, 1974;Honeck, Sowry, & Voegtle, 1978;Vosniadou, Ortony, Reynolds, & Wilson, 1984;Winner, McCarthy, & Gardner, 1980;Winner, Wapner, Cicone, & Gardner, 1979). Findings from the late 1970s and early 1980s suggest this to be the case (Gardner, 1974;Honeck, Sowry, & Voegtle, 1978;Vosniadou, Ortony, Reynolds, & Wilson, 1984;Winner, McCarthy, & Gardner, 1980;Winner, Wapner, Cicone, & Gardner, 1979).…”

Section: Colston and Kuipermentioning

confidence: 93%

Figurative Language Development Research and Popular Children's Literature: Why We Should Know, "Where the Wild Things Are"

Colston¹,

Kuiper²

2002

Metaphor and Symbol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns have arisen recently over the ecological validity of materials used to study children's figurative language comprehension abilities. Materials commonly used in studies that evaluate children's comprehension of metaphorical language, for instance, are not as frequently found in popular children's literature (Broderick, 1992). In the following study, we first present arguments against the basis for this concern over ecological validity, but then we maintain for other important reasons that language development researchers should nevertheless have knowledge of the figurative language content of the popular children's literature. We then present a quantitative metaphorical-content analysis of the popular children's literature across historical, genre, and audience-age variables. We discuss the findings as important for understanding (a) whether the figurative language comprehension abilities of young children are still being underestimated, (b) the contextual backdrop that the popular children's literature provides for language development, and (c) potential opportunity costs of a literature that might be out of sync with children's comprehension.Research over the past three decades in cognitive and developmental psychology has lead to a well-developed and increasingly sophisticated understanding of how children come to comprehend figurative language. For instance, it is now known that children generally do not exhibit complete adult proficiency in metaphor comprehension until they reach roughly 7 or 8 years of age. Children younger than that may demonstrate some comprehension of metaphor but only if the topic is very fa-

show abstract

“…Existuje tiež značná škála výskumov, ktoré sa snažia poukázať na to, že vývin sa viaže na Piagetovské stupne vývinu (Billow, 1975;Cometa & Eson, 1978). A ďalej množstvo výskumov s cieľom poukázať na to, že deti sú schopné porozumieť metaforickým výrazom v oveľa mladšom veku ako ukazuje jadro výskumov (Gentner, 1977;Honeck, Sowry, & Voegtle, 1978). Deti sú schopné vnímať podobnosť medzi objektmi, pocitmi a okolnosťami od útleho veku.…”

Section: šTádiá Vývinu Porozumenia Metaforámunclassified

Gender and Developmental Aspects of Metaphor and Metonymy Comprehension Processes

Vernarská

Zelenayová

2018

Psychology and Pathopsychology of Child

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The goal of the present study was, in line with theoretical findings, to confirm a shift in metaphor and metonymy comprehension on a sample of Slovak children and to track an effect of a gender as well. Methods: Metaphor and metonymy comprehension were measured with an author constructed tool consisting of eight metaphors and eight metonymies. Respondents were given a multiple choice option to select a correct meaning of metaphor or metonymy. The sample consisted of 120 elementary school children from Košice area. For an age assessment, two age groups were created based on elementary school grades-fourth grade (9-10 years) and eighth grade (13-14 years). Results: Results of our study indicate that both metaphor comprehension and metonymy comprehension shift significantly with age. Eight graders scored significantly better than fourth graders in tasks given. We found statistically significant differences between genders as well. Girls scored significantly higher than boys both in metaphor comprehension and metonymy comprehension. Discussion: Metaphor and metonymy comprehension progress significantly in time, supposedly in line with the development of other cognitive processes. Gender differences can be explained in part by female advantage in verbal processes proclaimed by some research. Limitations: We see limits of our research in capturing a relatively narrow age range. Conclusion: Our study aims to contribute to knowledge about figurative language development since only few researchers have addressed the problem. Perspectives for future research are in exploring given topic on various developmental stages to gain a complex understanding of metaphor and metonymy development in Slovak population and to better explain gender differences.

show abstract

Proverbial Understanding in a Pictorial Context

Cited by 24 publications

References 15 publications

Linguistic factors in children's understanding of idioms

Linguistic factors in children's understanding of idioms

Figurative Language Development Research and Popular Children's Literature: Why We Should Know, "Where the Wild Things Are"

Gender and Developmental Aspects of Metaphor and Metonymy Comprehension Processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About