A Computational Theory of Metaphor

Conventional metaphors in longer passages evoke affective brain response

This study investigates claims that metaphor acquisition is rooted in the words’ concrete meanings: to be able to use metaphors and other non-literal languages, the child needs to ‘go beyond’ meanings that are conventional and so presumably concrete (e.g., Falkum, 2022: 97). To test if metaphor-related words emerge via their concrete senses and how this reflects child-directed speech, I examined 594 hours of interactional data for three English-speaking toddlers from urban middle-class England, whose speech was densely sampled between the ages of 2;00 and 3;01. The data show that 75%–82% conventional metaphors were acquired via their concrete senses and that the order of acquisition of concrete and abstract senses corresponded with their input frequencies. Overall, when hearing conventional metaphors, 81%–89% of the time children were exposed to their concrete meanings. Contrary to the generic argument that children’s pragmatic reasoning with non-literal uses is impeded by meaning conventionality (Falkum, 2022), my preliminary data suggest that it is influenced by the frequency of exposure to the concrete meanings of conventional metaphors, which leads to a generalised prediction that the most probable interpretation of any new metaphor is concrete (literal). Qualitative analyses further reveal that abstract meanings, when acquired first, were learned in highly emotive contexts.

Since Aristotle, many writers have treated metaphors and similes as equals: any metaphor can be paraphrased as a simile, and vice-versa. This property of metaphors is the foundation of standard comparison theories of metaphor comprehension. On this view, metaphors such as “my job is a jail” are literally false, and so cannot be directly interpreted. Instead, such “irrational” assertions are converted to similes (i.e., my job is like a jail) and understood as any literal comparison would be. Comparison theories rely on three assumptions: (1). Literal interpretations have unconditional priority; (2). Metaphor interpretation is optional, triggered whenever a literal interpretation fails to make sense in context; (3). Following assumptions (1) and (2), metaphor processing is not only more difficult than literal, but involves different processing mechanisms. I argue that none of the above assumptions hold. In addition, I show that metaphors cannot always be paraphrased as similes. The different forms of a metaphor – the comparison and categorical forms – have different referents. In comparison form, the metaphor vehicle refers to the literal concept, e.g., in my lawyer is like a shark, the term “shark” refers to the literal fish. In categorical form, my lawyer is a shark, “shark” refers to an abstract (metaphorical) category of predatory creatures. This difference in reference makes it possible for a metaphor and its corresponding simile to differ (a) in interpretability and (b) in meaning. Because a metaphor cannot always be understood in terms of its corresponding simile, I conclude that comparison theories of metaphor are fundamentally flawed. Metaphors can be processed directly as categorization assertions. Furthermore, when such metaphors are novel, they create new categories that are available for public discourse.KeywordsFigurative languageMetaphorSimilarityCatergorization

Between Paradigm Shift Judaism and Neo-Hasidism

The article is devoted to the analysis of the interpretation possibilities of the mass media metaphor. The aim of the work is to identify the semantic spheres that beget a metaphor in the modern language of the Ukrainian mass media. This work demonstrates the mechanism of metaphor production: components of a new meaning, components of metaphorical meaning, and the structure of metaphorical transference. The problems associated with the interpretation of metaphors are considered. The cognitive process of creating the investigated units represents the types of metaphorical transference. The metaphor is designed to simplify the process of perceiving complex new material. In 2000-2020 a new wave of metaphorical productivity was marked by the terms of the natural sciences during the timeframe of the research. As a result of the analysis, the metaphors of the political and economic discourses of the mass media were investigated, taking into account the semantic, cognitive-pragmatic approaches. On the basis of this material, the main trends in the development of the modern language of the Ukrainian mass media are revealed and the interpretative and evaluative potential of the media metaphor is determined.

Children encounter metaphor in all aspects of their daily lives, including the spoken and written discourse of school, and metaphor can be one of the routes through which socio-cultural norms are appropriated. The use of metaphor seems to be a basic human skill, which develops in interaction with developing world knowledge and linguistic skills. Both use of metaphor and the development of metaphor capacity take place in situations in which language is used for personal and interpersonal goals. This paper explores how the discourse context of metaphorical language supports children s understanding, and examination of classroom data shows how language, situation and interaction all offer assistance to the interpretation of metaphorically-used language. I further argue for a discourse approach to the study of children s developing metaphor capacity, and identify some of the dimensions of metaphor capacity: knowing when metaphor use or metaphorical interpretation is appropriate, negotiating appropriately rich...

Semantic dementia is characterized by fluent, phonologically adequate speech withvarious anomias and semantic paraphasias. Performance on semantic tasks is welldocumented in these patients, although little is known regarding performance onmore complex language tasks, such as those involving non-literal language(interpretation of metaphors and proverbs and recognition of irony).OBJECTIVETo report the investigation of non-literal language in cases of semanticdementia.METHODSTwo cases of semantic dementia were investigated for the presence of deficitsin non-literal language abilities using the screening test for Alzheimer'sdisease with proverbs, metaphor test and irony test.RESULTSBoth patients were found to have low performance on the tests applied,particularly for interpretation of proverbs.CONCLUSIONThis poor performance was attributed largely to the characteristic semanticchanges of the disease, but some frontal symptoms inherent to other forms offrontotemporal lobar degeneration were also observed which interfered in thetesting, such as negativism, reduced attention span, concretism andperseverations.

This study examines how well humans, both Jordanians and Emiratis, and four AI tools—ChatGPT-4, ChatGPT-3.5, Google Gemini, and Ask PDF—can understand metaphors in Classical Arabic (CA) and its everyday forms in Jordanian Arabic (JA) and Emirati Arabic (EA). We tested fifty participants from Jordan and the UAE on their grasp of various colloquial and CA metaphorical expressions. Two distinct tests were employed, each comprising 40 items. Test 1 was administered to Jordanian participants and included 20 metaphorical expressions in Jordanian Arabic and 20 metaphorical expressions in Classical Arabic. Similarly, Test 2 was administered to Emirati participants and contained 20 expressions in Emirati Arabic and 20 expressions in Classical Arabic. The Mann–Whitney U test was employed to evaluate differences in accuracy and interpretation between AI tools and human participants from both regions in the contexts of colloquial and Classical Arabic. The results showed that participants from Jordan had a better understanding than the AI tools, likely due to their strong cultural background. In contrast, the Emirati participants performed similarly to the AI. The AI tools were more effective at interpreting CA metaphors compared to Emirati participants; AI tools are typically trained on diverse datasets and that usually leads to strong performance in interpreting formal or Classical Arabic expressions. These findings emphasize the need for improvements in AI models to boost their language processing abilities, as they often miss the cultural aspects required for accurately interpreting figurative language. This study adds to the ongoing discussion about AI and language interpretation, revealing both the potential and the obstacles AI faces when dealing with culturally rich and context-sensitive language.

Problems with pragmatic aspects of language are well attested in individuals on the autism spectrum. It remains unclear, however, whether figurative language skills improve with language status and whether problems in figurative language are no longer present in highly verbal individuals with autism. To investigate whether highly verbal individuals with autism perform similarly as age-, intelligence- and verbal comprehension-matched controls on the processing of one of the most common types of figurative language, metaphors. The goal was to establish whether the participants with autism are primed similarly to controls by figurative expressions (metaphors) presented in different conditions. The experiment was designed as a cross-modal lexical-decision task where metaphors served as primes for target words related to their figurative or literal meaning. Our findings show that both ASD and control participants made very few errors in the experimental task. However, the participants with ASD presented with problems in performance on the task, reflected in significantly slower reaction times compared with the typically developing peer groups. The similar response speed observed between the younger typical control children and the adult ASD participants suggests that the mechanisms underlying metaphor processing (e.g., selection of metaphorical versus literal interpretation) are still developing in high-functioning autism, very much like in typical children. These results may suggest that metaphor processing requires more than adequate language competences. The findings are also suggestive of a delay in developing sensitivity to figurative language, rather than sheer inability. This suggests that a timely training programme can be implemented to improve figurative language abilities in ASD.

Teaching and Learning Guide for: Pragmatics: From Theory to Experiment and Back Again

Metaphor and ESP: A ghost in the machine?

Conventional and novel metaphors in language

The presently developed paper deals with the design of garlic expert systems using machine learning algorithms to advice the farmers in villages through online. An expert system is a computer program that simulates the judgments and behavior of a human or an organization that has expert knowledge and experience in a particular field. Typically, such a system contains a knowledge base containing accumulated experience and a set of rules for applying the knowledge base to each particular situation that is described to the program. Machine learning is a branch of computer science covering software that uses data to improve it's accuracy at some given task. Conrad uses supervised learning, which is one component of machine learning. Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) Algorithm is one of the mostly used Machine Learning Technique. By using this ABC Algorithm we developed a new 'Garlic Expert Advisory System'. This system is mainly aimed to identify the diseases and disease management in garlic crop production to advise the farmers in the villages on line to obtain standardized yields. This advisory system is designed by using Java Server Pages (JSP) as front end and MYSQL as backend.

Emotional context modulates embodied metaphor comprehension

Metaphorical language, though often overlooked, plays a pivotal role in couple's therapy, shaping the dynamics of communication and influencing conflict resolution processes. This conceptual exploration delves into the multifaceted impact of metaphorical language on the therapeutic discourse within couples. Through a synthesis of existing literature and theoretical frameworks, this paper elucidates the intricate interplay between metaphorical expressions and the resolution of relational conflicts. The use of metaphorical language in couple's therapy serves as a symbolic bridge, facilitating the articulation of deeply rooted emotions and experiences that may otherwise remain inaccessible. Metaphors act as linguistic vehicles, enabling individuals to convey complex thoughts and feelings in a manner that transcends literal expression. Within the therapeutic context, metaphors offer a creative space for couples to explore their relationship dynamics, perceptions, and narratives. Furthermore, metaphorical language not only elucidates individual experiences but also shapes the shared reality constructed by couples. Metaphors can reveal underlying relational patterns, power dynamics, and unspoken assumptions, thereby fostering insight and empathy between partners. By reframing conflicts through metaphorical lenses, couples can gain a fresh perspective on their challenges, promoting collaborative problem-solving and mutual understanding. However, the impact of metaphorical language in couple's therapy is not unidimensional. Misinterpretations or divergent interpretations of metaphors may inadvertently exacerbate misunderstandings or conflicts within the therapeutic process. Therapists must navigate the nuances of metaphorical communication sensitively, balancing interpretation with validation of individual experiences and perspectives. This conceptual exploration highlights the significance of metaphorical language in shaping the therapeutic discourse and its potential implications for conflict resolution in couple's therapy. By embracing and exploring metaphorical expressions, therapists can harness the transformative power of language to facilitate insight, empathy, and ultimately, relational healing within couples. Further empirical research is warranted to elucidate the nuanced mechanisms through which metaphorical language influences therapeutic outcomes in couple's therapy.