Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:22:33.492Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The comprehension of idioms: The effects of familiarity, literalness, and usage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Brian C. Cronk  and
Wendy A. Schweigert
Brian C. Cronk*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
Wendy A. Schweigert
Affiliation:
Bradley University
*
Brian C. Cronk, Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, P.O. Box 413, Milwaukee, WI 53201. e-mail (Internet): CRONK@CONVEX. CSD. UWM. EDU
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The relationships among the familiarity of an idiom's figurative meaning, the likelihood of its literal meaning (literalness), and its usage were explored. Previous research has been inconsistent in supporting any one model of idiom comprehension, although certain factors have been found to affect reading times of sentences containing idioms. Consistent with this research, familiarity was found to have a significant effect on reading times for sentences containing idioms. A significant new finding is that literalness affects reading times. Additionally, it was found that familiarity and literalness exert interactive effects, suggesting a common underlying mechanism. The results are interpreted as supporting a model of idiom comprehension in which a single phrase processor simultaneously computes figurative and literal meanings of idioms.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , April 1992 , pp. 131 - 146
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Boatner, M. T. (Ed.). (1969). A dictionary of idioms for the deaf. Woodbury, NY: Barron's Educational Series.Google Scholar
Bobrow, S. A., & Bell, S. M. (1973). On catching on to idiomatic expressions. Memory and Cognition, 1, 343–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronk, B. C. (1989). Moving window paradigm program for IBM compatible computers [Computer program]. Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, Psychology Department.Google Scholar
Cronk, B. C. (1990, 06). Familiarity and likelihood ratings for idioms. Paper presented at the 2nd annual meeting of the American Psychological Society, Dallas.Google Scholar
Cutler, A. (1982). Idioms: The colder the older. Linguistic Inquiry, 13, 317–320.Google Scholar
Estill, R. B., & Kemper, S. (1982). Interpreting idioms. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 11, 559–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, B. (1970). Idioms within a transformational grammar. Foundations of Language, 6, 22–42.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. Jr, (1980). Spilling the beans on understanding and memory for idioms in conversation. Memory and Cognition, 8, 149–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibbs, R. W. Jr, & Gonzales, G. P. (1985). Syntactic frozenness in processing and remembering idioms. Cognition, 20, 243–259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoffman, R. R. (1984). Recent psycholinguistic research on figurative language. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 433, 137–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Woolley, J. D. (1982). Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 228–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Popiel, S. J., & McRae, K. (1988). The figurative and literal senses of idioms, or all idioms arc not used equally. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 17, 475–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reicher, G. M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 275–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schweigert, W. A. (1986a). The comprehension of familiar and less familiar idioms. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 15, 33–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schweigert, W. A. (1986b). Idiom comprehension and its relation to lexical ambiguity (Doctoral dissertation, Ohio University, 1985). Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 1308b.Google Scholar
Schweigert, W. A. (1991). The muddy waters of idiom comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 20, 305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schweigert, W. A., & Moates, D. R. (1988). Familiar idiom comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 17, 281–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, G. B. (1984). Lexical ambiguity and its role in models of word recognition. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 316–340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sternberg, S. (1969). Memory-scanning: Mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiments. American Scientist, 57, 421–457.Google ScholarPubMed
Swinney, D. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swinney, D. A., & Cutler, A. (1979). The access and processing of idiomatic expressions. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 523–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taft, M., & Forster, K. I. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 638–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanenhaus, M. K., Leiman, J. M., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1979). Evidence for multiple stages in the processing of ambiguous words in syntactic contexts. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 427–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar