Volume 8, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2213-8722
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8730
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The goal of this paper is to further our understanding of how novel metaphor sentences are processed at a discourse level. Previous studies have focused on contextual issues during the processing of sentences containing conventional metaphors, with the effect of context on sentences with novel metaphors less studied. Accordingly, we determined the effects of contextual congruency on novel metaphor sentences in short texts by conducting two on-line reading experiments. We adopted Conceptual Mapping Model in order to create sentences with two types of novel metaphor (1) sentences with novel metaphors that follow mapping principles (considered to be comparatively less novel) and (2) sentences with novel metaphors that do not follow mapping principles (considered to be comparatively more novel). In Experiment 1, conventional metaphor scenarios were preceded by congruent novel metaphor sentences following mapping principles and those not following mapping principles. In Experiment 2, conventional metaphor scenarios were preceded by incongruent novel metaphor sentences following mapping principles and those not following mapping principles. Results showed that congruent novel metaphor sentences following mapping principles were read faster than those not following mapping principles in conventional metaphor scenarios (Experiment 1), while there was a marginal difference in reading times between incongruent novel metaphor sentences following and those not following mapping principles, but not in the expected direction (Experiment 2). Our research supports previous work that shows that congruency plays a large role in assimilating new information, and also provides further evidence for the role of mapping principles in the creation and processing of novel metaphors.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Ahrens, K.
    (2010) Mapping principles for conceptual metaphors. InGraham Low, Zazie Todd, Alice Deignan, and Lynne Cameron (Eds.), Researching and Applying Metaphor in the Real World. John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.26.12ahr
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.26.12ahr [Google Scholar]
  2. Ahrens, K., & Chung, S. F.
    (2019) Research on metaphors in Chinese. InChu-Ren Huang, Zhuo Jing-Schmidt, and Barbara Meisterernst (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Applied Chinese Linguistics. (pp.364–378). New York and London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315625157‑24
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315625157-24 [Google Scholar]
  3. Ahrens, K., Chung, S.-F., & Huang, C.-R.
    (2004) From lexical semantics to conceptual metaphors: Mapping principle verification with WordNet and SUMO. InJi Donghong, Lua Kim Teng, & Wang Hui (Eds.), Recent Advancement in Chinese Lexical Semantics: Proceedings of 5th Chinese Lexical Semantics Workshop (CLSW-5) (pp.99–106). Singapore: COLIPS.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. (2003) Conceptual metaphors: ontology-based representation and corpora driven mapping principles. Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on the Lexicon and Figurative Language (pp.35–41). Japan: Sapporo. 10.3115/1118975.1118980
    https://doi.org/10.3115/1118975.1118980 [Google Scholar]
  5. Ahrens, K. & Jiang, M.-H.
    (2020) Source Domain Verification Using Corpus-based Tools. Metaphor and Symbol. 35(1), 43–55. 10.1080/10926488.2020.1712783
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2020.1712783 [Google Scholar]
  6. Ahrens, K., Liu, H.-L., Lee, C.-Y., Gong, S.-P., Fang, S.-Y., & Hsu, Y.-Y.
    (2007) Functional MRI of conventional and anomalous metaphors in Mandarin Chinese. Brain and Language, 100(2), 163–171. 10.1016/j.bandl.2005.10.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.10.004 [Google Scholar]
  7. Burgers, C.
    (2016) Conceptualizing Change in Communication Through Metaphor. Journal of Communication, 66: 250–265. 10.1111/jcom.12211
    https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12211 [Google Scholar]
  8. Burgers, C., & Ahrens, K.
    (2020) Change in metaphorical framing over time: Metaphors of trade in 225 years of State of the Union addresses (1790–2014). Applied Linguistics, 41(2): 260–279. 10.1093/applin/amy055
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy055 [Google Scholar]
  9. Chung, S.-F., Ahrens, K., & Huang, C.-R.
    (2005) Source domains as concept domains in metaphorical expressions. International Journal of Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing, 10(4), 553–570.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Church, K. W., & Hanks, P.
    (1990) Word association norms, mutual information, and lexicography. Computational Linguistics, 16(1), 22–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. CKIP (Chinese Knowledge Information Processing Group)
    CKIP (Chinese Knowledge Information Processing Group) (1995) Corpus-Based Frequency Count of Words in Journal Chinese. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Glucksberg, S., Brown, M., & McGlone, M. S.
    (1993) Conceptual metaphors are not automatically accessed during idiom comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 21, 711–719. 10.3758/BF03197201
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197201 [Google Scholar]
  13. Glucksberg, S., McGlone, M. S., & Manfredi, D.
    (1997) Property attribution in metaphor comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 50–67. 10.1006/jmla.1996.2479
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.2479 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gong, S.-P., & Ahrens, K.
    (2007) Processing conceptual metaphors in on-going discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(4), 313–330. 10.1080/10926480701528121
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480701528121 [Google Scholar]
  15. Gong, S.-P., Ahrens, K., & Huang, C.-R.
    (2008) Chinese Word Sketch and Mapping Principles: A Corpus-Based Study of Conceptual Metaphors Using the BUILDING Source Domain. International Journal of Computer Processing of Oriental Languages. 21(2): 3–17. 10.1142/S1793840608001755
    https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793840608001755 [Google Scholar]
  16. Huang, C.-R.
    (1995) The morpho-lexical meaning of mutual information: A corpus-based approach towards a definition of Mandarin words. Presented at the1995 Linguistics Society of America Annual Meeting. New Orleans, LA.
  17. Keysar, B., Shen, Y., Glucksberg, S., & Horton, W. S.
    (2000) Conventional language: How metaphorical is it?Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 576–593. 10.1006/jmla.2000.2711
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2711 [Google Scholar]
  18. Kövecses, Z.
    (2019) Ten Lectures on Figurative Meaning-Making: The Role of Body and Context. Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. (2017) Levels of metaphor. Cognitive linguistics, 28(2), 321–347. 10.1515/cog‑2016‑0052
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0052 [Google Scholar]
  20. Lakoff, G.
    (1993) The contemporary theory of metaphor. InA. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (p.202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139173865.013
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173865.013 [Google Scholar]
  21. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
    (1980) Metaphors we Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Nayak, N. P., & Gibbs, R. W.
    (1990) Conceptual knowledge in the interpretation of idioms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 19(3), 315–330. 10.1037/0096‑3445.119.3.315
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.119.3.315 [Google Scholar]
  23. Sproat, R., Shih, C., Gale, W., & Chang, N.
    (1996) A stochastic finite-state word-segmentation algorithm for Chinese. Computational Linguistics, 22(3), 377–404.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Thibodeau, P., & Durgin, F. H.
    (2008) Productive figurative communication: Conventional metaphors facilitate the comprehension of related novel metaphors. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 521–540. 10.1016/j.jml.2007.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  25. Wen, X., & Yang, K.
    (2016) Systematicity and Complexity of IDEA Metaphors in Chinese. Metaphor and Symbol, 31(4), 230–249. 10.1080/10926488.2016.1223469
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2016.1223469 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error