The inferential chain makes the difference between familiar and novel figurative expressions

Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 525-540

  Bosco, Francesca M ^a   Vallana, Marianna ^a   Bucciarelli, Monica ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TURIN   (Italy)

Author keywords

Communicative meaning; Familiar figurative expressions; Inferential chains; Novel figurative expressions

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; CHILD; COMMUNICATION SKILL; COMPREHENSION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LINGUISTICS; LITERATURE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH; THEORETICAL MODEL; ASSOCIATION; COGNITION; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FEMALE; INFERENTIAL CHAIN; LANGUAGE; LANGUAGE ABILITY; LANGUAGE PROCESSING; MALE; NERVOUS SYSTEM PARAMETERS; PREDICTION; PRESCHOOL CHILD; SCHOOL CHILD; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; VERBAL COMMUNICATION;

EID: 84861777524     PISSN: 20445911     EISSN: 2044592X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/20445911.2012.658156     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Adenzato, M., and, Bucciarelli, M. 2008. Recognition of mistakes and deceits in communicative interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, 40: 608-629.
2. Airenti, G., Bara, B. G., and, Colombetti, M. 1993. Conversation and behaviour games in pragmatics of dialogue. Cognitive Science, 17: 197-256.
3. Altman, D. G. 1991. Practical statistics for medical research, London, UK: Chapman & Hall.
4. Bara, B. G. 2010. Cognitive pragmatics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Bara, B. G., Bosco, F. M., and, Bucciarelli, M. 1999. Developmental pragmatics in normal and abnormal children. Brain and Language, 68: 507-528.
6. Bara, B. G., and, Bucciarelli, M. 1998. Language in context: The emergence of pragmatic competence. In Cognition in context, Edited by: Quelhas, A. C. and Pereira, F. 317-345. Lisbon, Portugal: Istituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada.
7. Bara, B. G., Bucciarelli, M., and, Johnson-Laird, P. N. 1995. Development of syllogistic reasoning. American Journal of Psychology, 2: 157-193.
8. Bara, B. G., Bucciarelli, M., and, Lombardo, V. 2001. Mental model theory of deduction: A unified computational approach. Cognitive Science, 25: 839-901.
9. Blasko, D. G., and, Connine, C. M. 1993. Effects of familiarity and aptness on metaphor processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19: 295-308.
10. Bosco, F. M., and, Bucciarelli, M. 2008. Simple and complex deceits and ironies. Journal of Pragmatics, 4: 583-607.
11. Bosco, F. M., Bucciarelli, M., and, Bara, B. G. 2006. Recognition and recovery of communicative failures in children. Journal of Pragmatics, 38: 1398-1429.
12. Bosco, F. M., Vallana, M., and, Bucciarelli, M. 2009. Comprehension of communicative intentions: The case of figurative language. Journal of Cognitive Science, 10: 245-277.
13. Bucciarelli, M., Colle, L., and, Bara, B. G. 2003. How children comprehend speech acts and communicative gestures. Journal of Pragmatics, 35: 207-241.
14. Cacciari, C., and, Levorato, M. C. 1989. How children understand idioms in discourse. Journal of Child language, 16: 387-405.
15. Cacciari, C., Padovani, R., and, Corradini, P. 2007. Exploring the relationship between individuals' speed of processing and their comprehension of spoken idioms. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19: 417-445.
16. Cacciari, C., and, Tabossi, P. 1988. The comprehension of idioms. Journal of Memory and Language, 27: 668-683.
17. Caillies, S., and, Butcher, K. 2007. Comprehension of idiomatic expressions: Evidence for a new hybrid view. Metaphor and Symbol, 2: 79-108.
18. De Marco, I., Colle, L., and, Bucciarelli, M. 2007. Linguistic and extralinguistic communication in deaf children. Journal of Pragmatics, 39: 134-158.
19. Gentner, D. 2003. Why we're so smart. In Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought, Edited by: Gentner, D. and Goldin-Meadow, S. 195-235. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. Gibbs, R. W. 1994. The poetics of mind: Figurative though language and understanding, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21. Gibson, E. 2000. The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In Image, language, brain: Papers from the first mind articulation project symposium, Edited by: Marantz, A., Yasushi, M. and O'Neil, W. 94-126. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Gottfried, G. 1997. Using metaphors as modifiers: Children's production of metaphoric compounds. Journal of Child Language, 24: 567-601.
23. Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Speech acts: syntax and semantics, Edited by: Cole, P. and Morgan, F. L. Vol. 3, 41-58. New York, NY: Academic Press.
24. Grice, H. P. 1989. Studies in the way of words, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25. Johnson, J. 1991. Developmental versus language-based factors in metaphor interpretation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83: 470-483.
26. Johnson, J., and, Pascual-Leone, J. 1989. Developmental levels of processing in metaphor interpretation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 48: 1-31.
27. Karmiloff-Smith, A. 1992. Beyond modularity, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Keil, F. 1986. Conceptual domain in the acquisition of metaphor. Cognitive Development, 1: 73-96.
29. Levorato, M. C., and, Cacciari, C. 1992. Children comprehension and production of idioms: The role of context and familiarity. Journal of Child Language, 19: 415-433.
30. Levorato, M. C., and, Cacciari, C. 1995. The effects of different tasks on the comprehension and production of idioms in children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 60: 261-283.
31. Levorato, M. C., and, Cacciari, C. 1999. Idiom comprehension in children: Are the effects of semantic analyzability and context separable?. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 11: 51-66.
32. Levorato, M. C., and, Cacciari, C. 2002. The creation of new figurative expressions: Psycholinguistic evidence in Italian children, adolescents and adults. Journal of Child Language, 29: 127-150.
33. Miller, G. A. 1979. Images, models, similes and metaphors. In Metaphor and thought, Edited by: Ortony, A. 202-253. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34. Nippold, M. A., and, Taylor, C. L. 1995. Idiom understanding in youth: Further examination of familiarity and transparency. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38: 426-433.
35. Nippold, M. A., and, Taylor, C. L. 2002. Judgements of idiom familiarity and transparency: A comparison of children and adolescents. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 45: 384-391.
36. Ortony, A. 1979. Metaphor and thought, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37. Ortony, A., Schallert, D., Reynolds, R., and, Antos, S. 1978. Interpreting metaphors and idioms: Some effects of context on comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 17: 465-477.
38. Ozcaliskan, S. 2005. On learning to draw the distinction between physical and metaphorical motion: Is metaphor an early emerging cognitive and linguistic capacity?. Journal of Child Language, 32: 291-318.
39. Pearson, B. Z. 1990. The comprehension of metaphor by preschool children. Journal of Child Language, 17: 185-203.
40. Searle, J. R. 1975. Indirect speech acts. In Syntax and semantics: Speech acts, Edited by: Cole, P. and Morgan, J. L. Vol. 3, 59-82. New York, NY: Academic Press.
41. Searle, J.R. 1979. Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
42. Sperber, D., &, Wilson, D. 1995. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. (Original work published 1986)
43. Titone, D. A., and, Connine, C. M. 1994. Descriptive norms for 171 idiomatic expressions: Familiarity, compositionality, predictability and literality. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 9: 247-270.
44. Tversky, A. 1977. Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84: 327-352.
45. Wilson, D., and, Carston, R. 2006. Metaphor, relevance and the emergent property. Mind and Language, 21: 404-433.