Cover not available
Part of
Producing Figurative Expression: Theoretical, experimental and practical perspectives
Edited by John Barnden and Andrew Gargett
[Figurative Thought and Language 10] 2020
► pp. 37–54

Producing metaphor (and other forms of non-literal language) in the laboratory

Structural and pragmatic effects as seen from the perspective of an experimental psycholinguist

| The University of Western Ontario
In this chapter I argue for the utility of studying nonliteral language production in the laboratory. Three aspects of nonliteral language production were provided as examples: first, inducing non-literal language in interactive communication (and identifying features of the produced language); second, using production techniques to identify the discourse context in which nonliteral language emerges and, finally, examining how production techniques can inform about the basic cognitive mechanisms that underlie metaphor usage.
Keywords: online discussion task, vehicle completion task, passage completion task, life event generation task
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Inducing the production of nonliteral language in interactive communication
    • 2.1The online discussion task
    • 2.2The passage completion task
  • 3.What is the ecology that invites metaphor or sarcasm production?
    • 3.1The discourse context generation task
  • 4.Production techniques to study the underlying mechanisms of metaphor
    • 4.1The vehicle production task
    • 4.2 The life event generation task
  • 5.Concluding comments
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 17 December 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.10.02kat
References (29)
References
Al-Azary, H., & Buchanan, L. (2017). Novel metaphor comprehension: Semantic neighbourhood density interacts with concreteness. Memory and Cognition, 45, 296–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Al-Azary, H., & Katz, A. N. (2017). Semantic effects underlying novel metaphor production. Paper presented at the Sixth International Conference on Metaphor and Thought , Salvador, BA, Brazil.
Bowes, A., & Katz, A. N. (2015). Metaphor creates intimacy and enhances one’s ability to infer the internal states of others. Memory and Cognition, 43, 953–963. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campbell, J., & Katz, A. N. (2012) Are there necessary and sufficient conditions for inducing a sense of sarcasm? Discourse Processes, 49, 459–480. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clevenger, T., Jr., & Edwards, R. (1988). Semantic distance as a predictor of metaphor selection. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 17, 211–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colston, H. 2002. Pragmatic justifications for non-literal gratitude acknowledgments: “Oh sure, anytime.”. Metaphor and Symbol, 17: 205–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, P., & Holt, E. (1998). Figures of speech: Figurative expressions and the management of topic transition in conversation. Language in Society, 27, 495–522. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. (2000). Irony in talk among friends. Metaphor and Symbol, 15(1–2), 5–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hussey, K., & Katz, A. N. (2006). Metaphor production in online conversation: Gender and friendship status. Discourse Processes, 42, 75–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009). Perception of the use of metaphor by an interlocutor in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 24, 203–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hussey, K., Katz, A. N., & Leith, S. (2015). Gendered language in interactive discourse. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 44, 417–433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jorgensen, J. (1996). The functions of sarcastic irony in speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 613–634. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Katz, A. N. (1989). On choosing the vehicles of metaphors: Referential concreteness, semantic distances, and individual differences. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 486–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992). Psychological studies in metaphor processing: Extensions to the placement of terms in semantic space. Poetics Today, 13, 607–632. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996). Pragmatics and the processing of metaphor: Category dissimilarity in topic and vehicle asymmetry. Pragmatics and Cognition, 4, 265–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Katz, A. N., & Al-Azary, H. (2017), Principles that encourage bi-directionality in verbal metaphor. Special issue of Poetics Today, 38, 36–59Google Scholar
Katz, A. N., & Hussey, K. (2017). Do people hear a sarcastic tone of voice when silently reading sarcastic text?. Metaphor and Symbol, 32, 84–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Katz, A. N., & Taylor, T. (2008). The journeys of life: Examining a conceptual metaphor with semantic and episodic memory recall. Metaphor and Symbol, 23, 148–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Katz, A. N., & Woodbury, J. (2017). Gender differences in being thanked for performing a favor. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 46, 481–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Katz, A. N., Lenhardt, M., & Mitchell, K. (2007). Acknowledging thanks for performing a favour, Metaphor and Symbol, 22, 233–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kreuz, R.J., & Glucksberg, S. (1989). How to be sarcastic: The echoic reminder theory of verbal irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(4), 374–386. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University PressGoogle Scholar
Simpson, R., & Mendis, D. (2003). A corpus-based study of idioms in academic speech. TESOL Quarterly, 37, 419–441. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sopory, P., & Dillard, J. P. (2002). The persuasive effects of metaphor: A meta-analysis. Human Communication Research, 28, 382–419. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Su, H. (2017). Thank bloody God it’s Friday”: A local grammar of thanking. Corpus Pragmatics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29, 24–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toplak, M., & Katz, A. N. (2000). On the uses of sarcastic irony, Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1467–1488. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Țurcan, A., & Filik, R. (2016). An eye-tracking investigation of written sarcasm comprehension: The roles of familiarity and context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 1867–1893.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Katz, Albert N.
2024. Selective View of the Last 50 Years of the Experimental Psycholinguistics of Idiom, Metaphor, and Irony: A Commentary. Discourse Processes 61:1-2 ► pp. 90 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.