Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
Vol. 13:2 (2023) ► pp.163–189

Electrophysiological insights into the role of proficiency in bilingual novel and conventional metaphor processing

ORCID logo | Henan University
ORCID logo | Adam Mickiewicz University

While novel and conventional metaphor comprehension has received much attention in the monolingual context, thus far little electrophysiological research has been conducted with a view to examining how bilingual speakers process metaphors in their non-native language (L2) as well as how L2 proficiency level might modulate such processes. The present study aims to investigate the electrophysiological correlates of novel and conventional metaphor comprehension in intermediate and advanced Chinese-English bilingual speakers. The participants performed a semantic decision task to English (L2) novel metaphoric, conventional metaphoric, literal, and anomalous word pairs. The results showed a graded N400 effect from literal utterances, to conventional metaphors, novel metaphors, and finally to anomalous utterances in both groups of participants, indicating that both types of metaphors were more cognitively taxing than literal utterances, irrespectively of L2 proficiency level. Additionally, between-group differences that were irrespective of utterance type were found in the N400 time frame, indicating more extended lexico-semantic access in the intermediate relative to the advanced group. Finally, in both groups of participants, an anterior sustained negativity was found in response to anomalous, novel metaphoric, and conventional metaphoric word pairs, thus suggesting a continuing difficulty of meaning integration.

Keywords: bilingualism, metaphor comprehension, ERPs, N400, sustained negativity
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Method
    • 2.1Participants
    • 2.2Materials
    • 2.3Procedure
    • 2.4Electrophysiological recording
    • 2.5Data analysis
      • 2.5.1ERP data processing
      • 2.5.2Statistical analyses
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Behavioral data
      • 3.1.1Accuracy rates
      • 3.1.2Reaction times
    • 3.2Event-related potentials
      • 3.2.1The N400 (300–400 ms)
      • 3.2.2The late positive complex (600–800 ms)
  • 4.Discussion
    • 4.1Behavioral findings
    • 4.2Event-related potential findings
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 14 June 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.20051.wan
References
Ardal, S., Donald, W., Meuter, R., Muldrew, S., & Luce, M.
(1990) Brain responses to semantic incongruity in bilinguals. Brain and Language, 391, 187–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arzouan, Y., Goldstein, A., & Faust, M.
(2007) Brainwaves are stethoscopes: ERP correlates of novel metaphor comprehension. Brain Research, 11601, 69–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baggio, G., Van Lambalgen, M., & Hagoort, P.
(2008) Computing and recomputing discourse models: An ERP study. Journal of Memory and Language, 591, 36–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bambini, V., Bertini, C., Schaeken, W., Stella, A., & Di Russo, F.
(2016) Distangling Metaphor from Context: An ERP Study. Frontiers in Psychology, 71, 559. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blank, G. D.
(1988) Metaphors in the lexicon. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 3(3), 21–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M.
(2008) An alternative perspective on ‘semantic P600’ effects in language comprehension. Brain Research Reviews, 59(1), 55–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bott, O.
(2010) The processing of events. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowdle, B. F., & Gentner, D.
(2005) The Career of Metaphor. Psychological Review, 112(1), 193–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braunstein, V., Ischebeck, A., Brunner, C., R. H., Stamenov, M., Neuper, C.
(2012) Investigating the influence of proficiency on semantic processing in bilinguals: An ERP and ERD/S analysis. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, 72(4), 421–438.Google Scholar
Chen, H. J., Peng, X. S., & Zhao, Y. L.
(2013) An ERP study on metaphor comprehension in the bilingual brain. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 36(4), 505–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, M. X.
(2014) Analyzing neural time series data. MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulson, S., & Van Petten, C.
(2002) Conceptual integration and metaphor: An event-related potential study. Memory & Cognition, 30(6), 958–968. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Bruin, A.
(2019) Not All Bilinguals Are the Same: A Call for More Detailed Assessments and Descriptions of Bilingual Experiences. Behavioral Sciences, 9(33), 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Grauwe, S., Swain, A., Holcomb, P. J., Ditman, T., & Kuperberg, G. R.
(2010) Electrophysiological insights into the processing of nominal metaphors. Neuropsychologia, 48(7), 1965–1984. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeLong, K. A., Urbach, T. P., Groppe, D. M., & Kutas, M.
(2011) Overlapping dual ERP responses to low cloze probability sentence continuations. Psychophysiology, 48(9), 1203–1207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T., & van Heuven, W. J. B.
(2002) The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 51, 175–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Federmeier, K. D., Wlotko, E. W., De Ochoa-Dewald, E., & Kutas, M.
(2007) Multiple effects of sentential constraint on word processing. Brain Research, 1146 (1), 75–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friederici, A. D., von Cramon, D. Y., & Kotz, S. A.
(1999) Language related brain potentials in patients with cortical and subcortical left hemisphere lesions. Brain, 1221, 1033–1047. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friedman, D., & Johnson, R.
(2000) Event-related potential (ERP) studies of memory encoding and retrieval: A selective review. Microscopy Research and Technique, 51(1), 6–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D., & Wolff, P.
(1997) Alignment in the processing of metaphor. Journal of Memory and Language, 37(3), 331–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, J. W., & Colston, H.
(2012) Interpreting Figurative Meaning. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, A., Arzouan, Y., & Faust, M.
(2012) Killing a novel metaphor and reviving a dead one: ERP correlates of metaphor conventionalization. Brain Lang, 123(2), 137–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F.
(1998) Studying bilingualism: Methodological and conceptual issues. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 131–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hahne, A.
(2001) What’s different in second-language processing? Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30(3), 251–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoshino, N., & Thierry, G.
(2012) Do Spanish-English bilinguals have their fingers in two pies – or is it their toes? An electrophysiological investigation of semantic access in bilinguals. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(9), 1–6. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ibáñez, A., Manes, F., Escobar, J., Trujillo, N., Andreucci, P., & Hurtado, E.
(2010) Gesture influences the processing of figurative language in non-native speakers: ERP evidence. Neuroscience Letters, 471(1), 48–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jankowiak, K.
(2019) Lexico-semantic processing in bilingual figurative language comprehension: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.Google Scholar
Jankowiak, K., Naranowicz, M., & Rataj, K.
(2021) Metaphors are like lenses: Electrophysiological correlates of novel meaning processing in bilingualism. International Journal of Bilingualism. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jankowiak, K., Rataj, K., & Naskręcki, R.
(2017) To electrify bilingualism: Electrophysiological insights into bilingual metaphor comprehension. PLoS ONE, 12(4): e0175578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kapa, L. L., & Colombo, J.
(2013) Attentional control in early and later bilingual children. Cognitive Development, 281, 233–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kolk, H. H. J., Chwilla, D. J., van Herten, M., & Oor, P. J. W.
(2003) Structure and limited capacity in verbal working memory: A study with event-related potentials. Brain and Language, 851, 1–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kotz, S. A., Rothermich, K., & Schmidt-Kassow, M.
(2012) Sentence comprehension in healthy and brain-damaged populations. In M. Faust. (Ed.), The Handbook of the Neuropsychology of Language (pp. 760–777). Blackwell Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuperberg, G. R., Sitnikova, T., Caplan, D., & Holcomb, P. J.
(2003) Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relations within simple sentences. Cognitive Brain Research, 17(1), 117–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D.
(2000) Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 41, 463–470. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) Thirty years and counting: finding meaning in theN400 component of the event related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 621, 621–647. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A.
(1983) Event-related brain potentials to grammatical errors and semantic anomalies. Memory and Cognition, 11(5), 539–550. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kutas, M., Hillyard, S. A., & Gazzaniga, M.
(1988) Processing of semantic anomaly by right and left hemisphere of commissurtomy patients. Brain, 1111, 553–576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kutas, M., Van Petten, C. K., & Kluender, R.
(2006) Psycholinguistic electrified II (1994–2005). In M. J. Traxler & M. A. Gernsbacher. (Eds.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics. Second Edition (pp. 659–724). Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lai, V., & Curran, T.
(2013) ERP evidence for conceptual mappings and comparison processes during the comprehension of conventional and novel metaphors. Brain and Language, 127 (3), 484–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lai, V., Curran, T., & Menn, L.
(2009) Comprehending conventional and novel metaphors: An ERP study. Brain Research, 1284 (11), 145–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lemhofer, K., & Broersma, M.
(2012) Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced earners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 325–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luck, S. J.
(2005) An introduction to the event-related potential technique. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Luk, G., De Sa, E., & Bialystok, E.
(2011) Is there a relation between onset age of bilingualism and enhancement of cognitive control? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 141, 588–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mecklinger, A.
(2000) Interfacing mind and brain: A neurocognitive model of recognition memory. Psychophysiology, 371, 565–582. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J.
(2009) Masked repetition and translation priming in second language learners: A window on the time-course of form and meaning activation using ERPs. Psychophysiology, 46 (3), 551–565. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Obert, A., Gierski, F., & Caillies, S.
(2018) He catapulted his words from the dais: An ERP investigation of novel verbal metaphors. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 471, 59–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ojima, S., Nakata, H., & Kakigi, R.
(2005) An ERP study of second language learning after childhood: Effects of proficiency. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(8), 1212–1228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J.
(1992) Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and languages, 311, 785–804. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paczynski, M., Jackendoff, R., & Kuperberg, G.
(2014) When events change their nature: The neurocognitive mechanisms underlying aspectual coercion. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 26(9), 1905–1917. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paller, K. A., Voss, J. L., & Boehm, S. G.
(2007) Validating neural correlates of familiarity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(6), 243–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paradis, M.
(2004) A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rossi, S., Gugler, M., Friederici, A., & Hahne, A.
(2006) The impact of proficiency on syntactic second-language processing of German and Italian: evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(12), 2030–2048. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rugg, M. D., & Curran, T.
(2007) Event-related potentials and recognition memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 111, 251–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rutter, B., Kroger, S., Hill, H., Windmann, S., Hermann, C., & Abraham, A.
(2012) Can clouds dance? Part 2: An ERP investigation of passive conceptual expansion. Brain and Cognition, 80(3), 301–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salthouse, T. A., & Hedden, T.
(2002) Interpreting reaction time measures in between-group comparisons. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24(7), 858–872. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Canal, P., & Heredia, R.
(2019) Event- related potentials in monolingual and bilingual non-literal language processing. In J. Schwieter. (Ed.), The Handbook of the Neuroscience of Multilingualism (pp. 508–529). Wiley Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Su, C., Huang, S. M., & Chen, Y. J.
(2017) Automatic detection and interpretation of nominal metaphor based on the theory of meaning. Neurocomputing, 2191, 300–311. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swick, D., Kutas, M., & Knight, R. T.
(1998) Prefrontal lesions eliminate the LPC but do not affect the N400 during sentence reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience Supplement 51. 29.Google Scholar
Tang, X. M., Qi, S. Q., Jia, X. J., Wang, B. T., & Ren, W.
(2017a) Comprehension of scientific metaphors: Complementary processes revealed by ERP. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 421, 12–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017b) The temporal dynamics underlying the comprehension of scientific metaphors and poetic Metaphors. Brain Research, 16551, 33–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tartter, V. C., Gomes, H., Dubrovsky, B., Molholm, S., & Stewart, R. V.
(2002) Novel metaphors appear anomalous at least momentarily: Evidence from N400. Brain and Language, 801, 488–509. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thornhill, D. E., & Van Petten, C.
(2012) Lexical versus conceptual anticipation during sentence processing: Frontal positivity and N400 ERP components. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 83(3), 382–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M.
(1991) Influences of semantic and syntactic context on open and closed class words. Memory and Cognition, 191, 95–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weber-Fox, C. M., & Neville, H. J.
(1996) Maturational constraints on functional specializations for language processing: ERP and behavioral evidence in bilingual speakers. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8(3), 231–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wittenberg, E., Paczynski, M., Wiese, H., Jackendoff, R., & Kuperberg, G.
(2014) The difference between “giving a rose” and “giving a kiss”: Sustained neural activity to the light verb construction. Journal of Memory and Language, 731, 31–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Jankowiak, Katarzyna
2021. Current trends in electrophysiological research on bilingual language processing. Language and Linguistics Compass 15:8 DOI logo
Jankowiak, Katarzyna & Olha Lehka-Paul
2022. Novel metaphor translation is modulated by translation direction. Applied Psycholinguistics 43:1 ► pp. 177 ff. DOI logo
Jankowiak, Katarzyna, Marcin Naranowicz & Guillaume Thierry
2022. Positive and negative moods differently affect creative meaning processing in both the native and non-native language. Brain and Language 235 ► pp. 105188 ff. DOI logo
Shen, Lexian, Xiaoguang Li, Shaojuan Huang, Yanhong Huang, Xinyu Gao, Ziqing You, Zirun Mao & Xuemei Tang
2022. Comprehending scientific metaphors in the bilingual brain: Evidence from event-related potentials. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 march 2023. 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.