Two experiments examined meaning (re)activation of English idiomatic expressions by Spanish-dominant, English-dominant and balanced bilinguals. Participants listened to idiomatic expressions of the type I always 3*miss the boat1* when it comes to jokes, and that2* makes itnearly4* impossible to attend comedy shows, and made lexical decisions to visually presented targets that were related literally (water), figuratively (fail) or unrelated to the critical idiomatic expression. In Experiment 1, we measured meaning activation immediately at idiom offset (probe 1*) and after an anaphoric referential description (e.g., that; probe 2*). Probe 2 was intended to further examine whether an anaphoric referential description was more likely to (re)activate its antecedent figurative interpretation that could be more pragmatically plausible than its literal representation. In Experiment 2, targets were presented at idiom onset and 300 ms after anaphor offset. Results revealed that idiom meaning (re)activation was modulated by language dominance, where English-dominant and balanced bilinguals had faster and more accurate responses than Spanish-dominant bilinguals.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbelB. (2003). English idioms in the first language and second language lexicon: A dual representation approach. Second Language Research, 19(4), 329–358. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658303sr226oa
2.
AguinisH.GottfredsonR. K.CulpepperS. A. (2013). Best-practice recommendations for estimating cross-level interaction effects using multilevel modeling. Journal of Management, 39(6), 1490–1528. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313478188
3.
BarrD. J.LevyR.ScheepersC.TilyH. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
4.
Basnight-BrownD. M.AltarribaJ. (2007). Differences in semantic and translation priming across languages: The role of language direction and language dominance. Memory & Cognition, 35(5), 953–965. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193468
5.
BeckS. D.WeberA. (2016a). Bilingual and monolingual idiom processing is cut from the same cloth: The role of the L1 in literal and figurative meaning activation. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1350. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01350
6.
BeckS. D.WeberA. (2016b). L2 idiom processing: Figurative attunement in highly idiomatic contexts. In PapafragouA.GrodnerD.MirmanD.TrueswellJ. C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Cognitive Science Society.
7.
BeckS. D.WeberA. (2019). Context matters, figuratively, for L2 readers: Evidence from self-paced reading. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on the Mental Lexicon. University of Alberta Libraries. https://doi.org/10.7939/R3-MNCB-C270
8.
BockK.BrewerW. F. (1980). Comprehension and memory of the literal and figurative meaning of proverbs. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 9(1), 59–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067302
9.
BoersF.DemecheleerM. (2001). Measuring the impact of cross-cultural differences on learners’ comprehension of imageable idioms. ELT Journal, 55(3), 255–262. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/55.3.255
10.
BrysbaertM.NewB.KeuleersE. (2012). Adding part-of-speech information to the SUBTLEX-US word frequencies. Behavior Research Methods, 44(4), 991–997. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0190-4
11.
CacciariC.CorradiniP. (2015). Literal analysis and idiom retrieval in ambiguous idioms processing: A reading-time study. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27(7), 797–811. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2015.1049178
12.
CacciariC.GlucksbergS. (1991). Understanding idiomatic expressions: The contribution of word meanings. In SimpsonG. B. (Ed.), Understanding word and sentence (pp. 217–240). Elsevier Science Publishers.
13.
CacciariC.TabossiP. (1988). The comprehension of idioms. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(6), 668–683. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90014-9
14.
CailliesS.ButcherK. (2007). Processing of idiomatic expressions: Evidence for a new hybrid view. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 79–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336754
15.
CarrolG.ConklinK. (2017). Cross language lexical priming extends to formulaic units: Evidence from eye-tracking suggests that this idea ‘has legs’. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(2), 299–317. doi:10.1017/S1366728915000103
16.
CarrolG.ConklinK.GyllstadH. (2016). Found in translation: The influence of L1 on the processing of idioms in L2. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 403–443. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000492
17.
CarrolG.LittlemoreJ. (2020). Resolving figurative expressions during reading: The role of familiarity, transparency, and context. Discourse Processes, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2020.1729041
18.
Charteris-BlackJ. (2002). Second language figurative proficiency: A comparative study of Malay and English. Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 104–133. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/23.1.104
19.
CieślickaA. B. (2006). Literal salience in on-line processing of idiomatic expressions by second language learners. Second Language Research, 22(2), 115–144. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr263oa
20.
CieślickaA. B. (2013). Do nonnative language speakers chew the fat and spill the beans with different brain hemispheres? Investigating idiom decomposability with the divided visual field paradigm. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 42(6), 475–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-012-9232-4
21.
CieślickaA. B.HerediaR. R. (2011). Hemispheric asymmetries in processing L1 and L2 idioms: Effects of salience and context. Brain and Language, 116(3), 136–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2010.09.007
22.
CieślickaA. B.HerediaR. R. (2013, May). The multiple determinants of eye movement patterns in bilingual figurative processing. In 25th APS Annual Convention.
23.
CieślickaA. B.HerediaR. R.OlivaresM. (2014). It’s all in the eyes: How language dominance, salience, and context affect eye movements during idiomatic language processing. In AroninL.PawlakM. (Eds.), Essential topics in applied linguistics and multilingualism. Studies in honor of David Singleton (pp. 21–42). Springer.
24.
CohenJ. D.MacWhinneyB.FlattM.ProvostJ. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 25(2), 257–271. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204507
25.
ColomboL. (1993). The comprehension of ambiguous idioms in context. In CacciariC.TabossiP. (Eds.), Idioms: Processing, structure, and interpretation (pp. 163–200). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26.
CronkB. C.LimaS. D.SchweigertW. A. (1993). Idioms in sentences: Effects of frequency, literalness, and familiarity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22(1), 59–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068157
27.
CronkB. C.SchweigertW. A. (1992). The comprehension of idioms: The effects of familiarity, literalness, and usage. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716400005531
28.
CuttingJ. C.BockK. (1997). That’s the way the cookie bounces: Syntactic and semantic components of experimentally elicited idiom blendsß. Memory & Cognition, 25(1), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197285
29.
DunnA. L.Fox TreeJ. E. (2009). A quick, gradient bilingual dominance scale. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12(3), 273–289. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990113
30.
Flores d’ArcaisG. B. F. (1993). The comprehension and semantic interpretation of idioms. In CacciariC.TabossiP. (Eds.), Idioms: Processing, structure, and interpretation (pp. 79–98). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
31.
GibbsR. W. (1985). On the process of understanding idioms. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 14(5), 465–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01666721
32.
GibbsR. W. (1986). On the psycholinguistics of sarcasm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.115.1.3
33.
GibbsR. W.NayakN. P. (1989). Psycholinguistic studies on the syntactic behavior of idioms. Cognitive Psychology, 21(1), 100–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(89)90004-2
34.
GioraR. (2002). Literal vs. figurative language: Different or equal?Journal of Pragmatics, 34(4), 487–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(01)00045-5
35.
HerediaR. R. (1997). Bilingual memory and hierarchical models: A case for language dominance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 6(2), 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep11512617
36.
HerediaR. R.CieślickaA. B. (2016). Metaphoric reference: An eye movement analysis of Spanish-English and English–Spanish bilingual readers. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(439), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00439
37.
HerediaR. R.MuñozM. E. (2015). Metaphoric reference: A real-time analysis. In HerediaR. R.CieślickaA. B. (Eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing (pp. 89–116). Cambridge Press.
38.
HubersF.CucchiariniC.StrikH. (2020). Second language learner intuitions of idiom properties: What do they tell us about L2 idiom knowledge and acquisition?Lingua, 246, 102940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102940
KatzJ. J. (1973). Compositionality, idiomaticity and lexical substitution. In AndersonS. R.KiparskyP. (Eds.), A festshrift for Morris Halle (pp. 357–376). Holt, Reinhart and Winston.
41.
KecskesI. (2006). On my mind: Thoughts about salience, context and figurative language from a second language perspective. Second Language Research, 22(2), 219–237. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr266ra
42.
KemperS. (1981). Comprehension and the interpretation of proverbs. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 10(2), 179–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068037
43.
KesslerR.WeberA.FriedrichC. K. (2020). Activation of literal word meanings in idioms: Evidence from eye-tracking and ERP experiments. Language and Speech, 002383092094362. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830920943625
44.
LauferB. (2000). Avoidance of idioms in a second language: The effect of L1‐L2 degree of similarity. Studia Linguistica, 54(2), 186–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9582.00059
45.
LiontasJ. I. (2002). Context and idiom understanding in second languages. In Foster-CohenS. H.RuthenbergT.PoschenM.-L. (Eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook: Annual conference of the European Second Language Association (pp. 155–185). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
46.
LiontasJ. I. (2015). Straight from the horse’s mouth: Idiomaticity revisited. In HerediaR. R.CieślickaA. B. (Eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing (pp. 301–340). Cambridge University Press.
47.
LongT. H.SummersD. (1979). Longman’s dictionary of English idioms. Longman.
48.
MatlockT.HerediaR. R. (2002). Understanding phrasal verbs in monolinguals and bilinguals. In HerediaR. R.AltarribaJ. (Eds.), Bilingual sentence processing (pp. 251–274). Elsevier.
49.
MolinaroN.CarreirasM. (2010). Electrophysiological evidence of interaction between contextual expectation and semantic integration during the processing of collocations. Biological Psychology, 83(3), 176–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2009.12.006
50.
NelsonD. L.McEvoyC. L.SchreiberT. A. (2004). The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 36(3), 402–407. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195588
51.
PaulmannS.Ghareeb-AliZ.FelserC. (2015). Neurophysiological markers of phrasal verb processing: Evidence from L1 and L2 speakers. In HerediaR. R.CieślickaA. B. (Eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing (pp. 245–267). Cambridge University Press.
52.
RommersJ.DijkstraT.BastiaansenM. (2013). Context-dependent semantic processing in the human brain: Evidence from idiom comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25(5), 762–776. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00337
53.
Siyanova-ChanturiaA.ConklinK.SchmittN. (2011). Adding more fuel to the fire: An eyetracking study of idiom processing by native and nonnative speakers. Second Language Research, 27(2), 251–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658310382068
54.
SkoufakiS. (2008). Investigating the source of idiom transparency intuitions. Metaphor and Symbol, 24(1), 20–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480802568448
55.
SprengerS. A.LeveltW. J. M.KempenG. (2006). Lexical access during the production of idiomatic phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 54(2), 161–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.11.001
56.
SteinelM. P.HulstijnJ. H.SteinelW. (2007). Second language idiom learning in a paired-associate paradigm: Effects of direction of testing, idiom imageability, and idiom transparency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(3), 449–484. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263107070271
57.
TabossiP.FanariR.WolfK. (2008). Processing idiomatic expressions: Effects of semantic compositionality. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(2), 313–327. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.2.313
58.
TabossiP.ZardonF. (1995). The activation of idiomatic meaning. In EveraertM.Van Der LindenE.-J.SchenkA.SchreuderR. (Eds.), Idioms: Structural and psychological perspectives (pp. 273–282). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
59.
TitoneD. A.ConnineC. M. (1994a). Descriptive norms for 171 idiomatic expressions: Familiarity, compositionality, predictability, and literality. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 9(4), 247–270. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms0904_1
60.
TitoneD. A.ConnineC. M. (1994b). Comprehension of idiomatic expressions: Effects of predictability and literality. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(5), 1126–1138. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.20.5.1126
61.
TitoneD. A.LibbenM. (2014). Time-dependent effects of decomposability, familiarity and literal plausibility on idiom meaning activation: A cross-modal priming investigation. The Mental Lexicon, 9(3), 473–496. https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.9.3.05tit
62.
UnderwoodG.SchmittN.GalpinA. (2004). The eyes have it: An eye-movement study into the processing of formulaic sequences. In SchmittN. (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing, and use (pp. 153–172). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
63.
Van GinkelW.DijkstraT. (2020). The tug of war between an idiom’s figurative and literal meanings: Evidence from native and bilingual speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918001219
64.
VespignaniF.CanalP.MolinaroN.FondaS.CacciariC. (2009). Predictive mechanisms in idiom comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(8), 1682–1700. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21293
65.
ZhangH.YangY.GuJ.JiF. (2013). ERP correlates of compositionality in Chinese idiom comprehension. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 26(1), 89–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2012.05.002
