This research investigates the process by which people understand metaphors . We apply processing distinctions from computational models of analogy to derive predictions for psychological theories of metaphor . We distinguish two classes of theories: those that begin with a matching process (e.g Gentner & Clement, 1988 ; Ortony, 1979) and those that begin with a mapping process (e.g. Gluckserg and Keysar, 1990). In matching theories, processing begins with a comparison of the two terms of the . metaphor. In mapping theories, processing begins by deriving an abstraction from the base (or vehicle) term, which is then mapped to the target (or topic) . In three experiments, we recorded subjects' time to interpret metaphors. The metaphors were preceded by either the base term, the target term, or nothing. The rationale was as follows. First, interpretations should be faster with advanced terms than without, simply because of advanced encoding. The important prediction is that if the initial process is mapping from the base, then seeing the base in advanced should be more facilitative than seeing the target in advanced. Matching-first models predict no difference in interpretation time between base and target priming . The results generally supported matching-first models, although the mapping-first model was supported for highly conventional metaphors.
[1]
S. Glucksberg,et al.
Understanding Metaphorical Comparisons: Beyond Similarity.
,
1990
.
[2]
Thomas G. Dietterich.
What is machine learning?
,
2020,
Archives of Disease in Childhood.
[3]
R. Gibbs.
Categorization and metaphor understanding.
,
1992,
Psychological review.
[4]
Moshe Burstein,et al.
Concept formatio n by incremental analogica l reasoning and debugging
,
1983
.
[5]
Douglas R. Hofstadter,et al.
Fluid Concepts and Creative Analogies: A Theory and its Computer Implementation
,
1987
.
[6]
A. Ortony.
Beyond Literal Similarity
,
1979
.
[7]
Russell Greiner,et al.
Abstraction-Based Analogical Inference
,
1988
.
[8]
S. Grossberg,et al.
Psychological Review
,
2003
.
[9]
Brian Falkenhainer,et al.
Viewing Metaphor as Analogy
,
1988
.
[10]
A. Scott,et al.
Ann Arbor
,
1980
.
[11]
James H. Martin,et al.
A Computational Theory of Metaphor
,
1988
.
[12]
Patrick Henry Winston,et al.
Learning and reasoning by analogy
,
1980,
CACM.
[13]
Brian Falkenhainer,et al.
The Structure-Mapping Engine: Algorithm and Examples
,
1989,
Artif. Intell..
[14]
Jaime G. Carbonell,et al.
Derivational analogy: a theory of reconstructive problem solving and expertise acquisition
,
1993
.