‘My daughter is no angel’: impairments in nominal metaphor comprehension by aphasic patients ( ‘Mi hija no es un tesoro’: alteraciones en la comprensión de metáforas nominales en personas con afasia )

Abstract

Spanish

This study explored possible impairments in the comprehension of nominal metaphors in five aphasic patients with semantic deficits and two with difficulties in lexical access. To this end, a set of four novel tasks was designed: two oral paraphrasing and two forced-choice tasks. The results support the claims of the Class-Inclusion Model and the Graded Salience Hypothesis, and showed that difficulties in the comprehension of these types of expressions are sensitive to certain features of metaphor vehicles, especially their ambiguity, level of conventionality and degree of semantic opacity. Similarly, they confirmed that metaphors understood as categorization statements require the undamaged processing of low-imageability words, as opposed to analogical metaphors, which comply with the assumptions of the Structural Mapping Model. Generally, patients with lexical impairments do not show difficulties in the processing of metaphorical expressions, while the performance of patients with semantic deficit is affected in accordance with their inability to understand abstract and low-frequency words.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Almagro

(2003). Estudio del componente léxico y morfosintáctico en pacientes afásicos bilingües del catalán y del castellano . [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Universitat Rovira i Virgili.

Amanzio, M., Geminiani, G., Leotta, D., & Cappa, S . (2007). Metaphor comprehension in Alzheimer’s disease: novelty matters. Brain & Language, 107 (1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2007.08.003

Anaki

Faust

Kravetz

(1998). Cerebral hemispheric asymmetries in processing lexical metaphors. Neuropsychologia, 36(4), 691–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(97)00141-3

Arzouan

Goldstein

Faust

(2007). Brainwaves are stethoscopes: ERP correlates of novel metaphor comprehension. Brain Research, 1160, 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2007.05.034

Bowdle

B. F.

Gentner

(2005). The career of metaphor. Psychological Review, 112(1), 193–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.1.193

Cardillo

McQuire

Chatterjee

(2018). Selective metaphor impairments after left, not right, hemisphere injury. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02308

Catena

Ramos

M. H.

Trujillo

H. M.

(2003). Análisis multivariado: Un manual para investigadores. Biblioteca Nueva.

Damasio

Grabowski

T. J.

Tranel

Hichwa

R. D.

Damasio

A. R.

(1996). A neural basis for lexical retrieval. Nature, 380(6574), 499–505. https://doi.org/10.1038/380499a0

Franklin

Howard

Patterson

(1994). Abstract word meaning deafness. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 11(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643299408251964

10.

Franklin

Howard

Patterson

(1995). Abstract word anomia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 12(5), 549–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643299508252007

11.

Franklin

Turner

Lambon Ralph

M. A.

Morris

Bailey

P. J.

(1996). A distinctive case of word meaning deafness? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 13(8), 1139–1162. https://doi.org/10.1080/026432996381683

12.

Gainotti

(2007). The anatomical locus of lesion in category-specific semantic disorders and the format of the underlying conceptual representations. In Hart

Jr. Kraut

M. A.

(Eds.), Neural basis of semantic memory (pp. 8–61). Cambridge University Press.

13.

García-Albea

J. E.

Sánchez-Bernardos

M. L.

(2005). Adaptación española del Test de Boston (3rd ed.). Médica Panamericana.

14.

Gentner

Wolff

(1997). Alignment in the processing of metaphor. Journal of Memory and Language, 37(3), 331–355. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1997.2527

15.

Gibbs

R. W.

(1994). The poetics of mind. Figurative thought, language and understanding. Cambridge University Press.

16.

Gibbs

R. W.

(2002). A new look at literal meaning in understanding what is said and implicated. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(4), 457–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(01)00046-7

17.

Giora

(1997). Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics, 8(3), 183–206. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1997.8.3.183

18.

Giora

(2003). On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language. Oxford University Press.

19.

Giora

Zaidel

Soroker

Batori

Kasher

(2000). Differential effects of right- and left-hemisphere damage on understanding sarcasm and metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 15(1–2), 63–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2000.9678865

20.

Goldstein, A., Arzouan, Y., & Faust, M . (2012). Killing a novel metaphor and reviving a dead one: ERP correlates of metaphor conventionalization. Brain & Language,123(2), 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2012.09.008

21.

Glucksberg

(1989). Metaphors in conversation: How are they understood? Why are they used? Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 4(3), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms0403_2

22.

Glucksberg

(2001). Understanding figurative language. From metaphors to idioms. Oxford University Press.

23.

Glucksberg

(2008). How metaphors create categories quickly. In Gibbs

(Ed.), Handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 67–83). Cambridge University Press.

24.

Glucksberg

Gildea

Bookin

H. B.

(1982). On understanding non-literal speech: Can people ignore metaphors? Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21(1), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(82)90467-4

25.

Glucksberg

Haught

(2006). On the relation between metaphor and simile: When comparison fails. Mind and Language, 21(3), 360–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2006.00282.x

26.

Glucksberg

Manfredi

McGlone

(1995). Metaphor comprehension: How metaphors create new categories. In Ward

Smith

Vaid

(Eds.), Creative thought. An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 27–49). APA.

27.

Glucksberg

McGlone

M. S.

Manfredi

(1997). Property attribution in metaphor comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 36(1), 50–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.2479

28.

Gold

Faust

(2010). Right hemisphere dysfunction and metaphor comprehension in young adult with asperger syndrome. Journal of Autims and Developmental Disorders, 40(7), 800–811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-009-0930-1

29.

Goodglass

Kaplan

Barresi

(2005). Boston diagnostic aphasia examination (3rd ed.). Lippincott Wiliams y Wilkins.

30.

Gorno-Tempini

M. L.

Cipolotti

Price

C. J.

(2000). Category differences in brain activation studies: Where do they come from? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 267(1449), 1253–1258. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1135

31.

Grice

H. P.

(1957). Significado. In Valdés Villanueva

(Ed.), La búsqueda del significado (pp. 81–90). Tecnos. (2005).

32.

Hair

Jr. Anderson

Tatham

Black

(2007). Análisis multivariante (5th ed.). Prentice Hall.

33.

Hall

Riddoch

(1997). Word meaning deafness: Spelling words that are not understood. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14(8), 1131–1164. https://doi.org/10.1080/026432997381295

34.

Hillis

Caramazza

(1991). Category-specific naming and comprehension impairment: A double dissociation. Brain, 114(5), 2081–2094. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/114.5.2081

35.

Lai

V. T.

Van Dam

Conant

Binder

J. R.

Desai

R. H.

(2015). Familiaritydifferentially affects right hemisphere contributions to processing metaphors and literals. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00044

36.

Laine

Martin

(2006). Anomia. Theoretical and clinical aspects. Psychological Press.

37.

Lakoff

(1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Ortony

(Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 202–251). Cambridge University Press.

38.

Lakoff

Johnson

(1980). Metáforas de la vida cotidiana. Cátedra.

39.

Lambon Ralph

M. A.

Sage

Roberts

(2000). Classical anomia: Aneuropsychological perspective on speech production. Neuropsychologia, 38(2), 186–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(99)00056-1

40.

Lee

S. S.

Dapretto

(2006). Metaphorical vs. literal word meanings: FMRI evidence against a selective role of the right hemisphere. NeuroImage, 29(2), 536–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.08.003

41.

Marulanda

(2003). La valoración de la competencia metafórica en la afasia [Memoria inédita para el Título de Estudios Avanzados. Programa de Doctorado “Cognición y Trastornos”]. Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.

42.

Marulanda

Igoa

J. M.

(2007). Estudio normativo de dos corpus de expresiones figuradas: Principales indicadores de metáforas nominales y modismos [Poster presentation]. At the VIII Simposio de Psicolingüística, April 26-28, Palma de Mallorca, España.

43.

Mashal

Faust

Hendler

(2005). The role of the right hemisphere in processing nonsalient metaphorical meanings: Application of principal components analysis to fMRI data. Neuropsychologia, 43(14), 2084–2100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.03.019

44.

Monetta

Pell

(2007). Effects of verbal working memory deficits on metaphor comprehension in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Brain and Language, 101(1), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2006.06.007

45.

Norusis

M. J.

(1994). SPSS base para Mac (versión 6.0). Guía del usuario. Hispanoportuguesa.

46.

Onishi

Murphy

(1993). Metaphoric reference: When metaphors are not understood as easily as literal expressions. Memory & Cognition, 21(6), 763–772. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202744

47.

Peleg

Giora

Fein

(2001). Salience and context effects: Two are better than one. Metaphor and Symbol, 16(3–4), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2001.9678894

48.

Pynte

Besson

Robichon

Poli

(1996). The time-course of metaphor comprehension: An event-related potential study. Brain and Language, 55(3), 293–316. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1996.0107

49.

Rapp

Caramazza

(1997). The modality-specific organization of gramatical categories: Evidence from impaired spoken and written sentence production. Brain and Language, 56(2), 248–286. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1997.1735

50.

Rapp

Mutschler

D. E.

Erb

(2012). Where in the brain is non literal language? A coordinated-based meta-analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging studies. Neuroimage, 63(1), 600–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.06.022

51.

Roberts

Kreuz

(1994). Why do people use figurative language? Psychological Science, 5(3), 159–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00653.x

52.

Roncero

de Almeida

R. G.

(2014). The importance of being apt: Metaphor comprehension in Alzheimer’s disease. Frontiers of Human Neuroscience, 8, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00973

53.

Schmidt

G. L.

DeBuse

C. J.

(2009). Neural correlates of metaphor processing: The role of figurativeness, familiarity and difficulty. Brain and Cognition, 71(3), 375–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2009.06.001

54.

Schmidt

G. L.

DeBuse

C. J.

Seger

C. A.

(2007). Right hemisphere metaphor processing? Characterizing the lateralization of semantic processes. Brain and Language, 100(2), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.03.002

55.

Searle

(1979). Metáfora. In Valdés Villanueva

(Ed.), La búsqueda del significado (pp. 83–617). Tecnos.

56.

Sperber

Wilson

(1995). La relevancia. Visor distribuciones (2nd ed.). Blackwell.

57.

Stringaris

A. K.

Medford

N. C.

Giampietro

Brammer

M. J.

David

A. S.

(2007). Deriving meaning: Distinct neural mechanisms for metaphoric, literal, and non-meaningful sentences. Brain and Language, 100(2), 150–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.08.001

58.

Valle

Cuetos

(1995). Evaluación del procesamiento lingüístico en la afasia (EPLA). Traducción, revisión y adaptación al castellano. Erlbaum.

59.

Wilson

(1998). Discourse, coherence and relevance: A reply to Rachel Giora. Journal of Pragmatics, 29(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00012-X

60.

Wilson

Carston

(2006). Metaphor, relevance and the “emergent property” issue. Mind and Language, 21(3), 404–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2006.00284.x