We provide psycholinguistic norms for a new set of 160 French idiomatic expressions and 160 proverbs: knowledge, predictability, literality, compositionality, subjective and objective frequency, familiarity, age of acquisition (AoA) and length. Different analyses (reliability, descriptive statistics and correlations) performed on the norms are reported and discussed. The norms can be downloaded as Supplemental Material.
BalotaD. A.YapM. J.HutchisonK. A.CorteseM. J. (2012). Megastudies: What do millions (or so) of trials tell us about lexical processing? In AdelmanJ. S. (Ed.), Visual word recognition (pp. 90–115). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
2.
BenjafieldJ.FrommholdK.KeenanT.MuckenheimR.MuellerD. (1993). Imagery, concreteness, goodness, and familiarity ratings for 500 proverbs sampled from the Oxford Dictionary of English Proverbs. Behavior Research Methods Instruments, & Computers, 25, 27–40.
3.
BohrnI. C.AltmannU.LubrichO.MenninghausW.JacobsA. M. (2012). Old proverbs in new skins—An FMRI study on defamiliarization. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 204.
4.
BoninP.BarryC.MéotA.ChalardM. (2004). The influence of age of acquisition in word reading and other tasks: A never ending story?Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 456–476.
5.
BoninP.MéotA.BugaiskaA. (2013). Norms and comprehension times for 305 French idiomatic expression. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 1259–1271.
6.
BrysbaertM.StevensM.ManderaP.KeuleersE. (2016). The impact of word prevalence on lexical decision times: Evidence from the Dutch Lexicon Project 2. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42, 441–458.
7.
CacciariC. (2014). Processing multiword idiomatic strings: Many words in one?Mental Lexicon, 9, 267–293.
8.
CacciariC.TabossiP. (1988). The comprehension of idioms. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 668–683.
9.
CailliesS. (2009). Descriptions de 300 expressions idiomatiques: Familiarité, connaissance de leur signification, plausibilité littérale, “décomposabilité” et “prédictibilite.” [Descriptions of French idiomatic expressions: familiarity, literality, compositionality, predictability, and knowledge of meaning]. L’Année Psychologique, 109, 463–508.
10.
CailliesS.Le Sourn-BissaouiS. (2008). Children’s understanding of idioms and theory of mind development. Developmental Science, 11, 703–711.
11.
CitronF. M. M.CacciariC.KucharskiM.BeckL.ConradM.JacobsA. M. (2016). When emotions are expressed figuratively: Psycholinguistic and Affective Norms of 619 Idioms for German (PANIG). Behavior Research Methods, 48, 91–111.
12.
CronkB. C.LimaS. D.SchweigertW. A. (1993). Idioms in sentences: Effects of frequency, literalness, and familiarity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22, 59–92.
13.
CuttingJ. C.BockK. (1997). That’s the way the cookie bounces: Syntactic and semantic components of experimentally elicited idiom blends. Memory & Cognition, 25, 57–71.
14.
FerrandL.BoninP.MéotA.AugustinovaM.NewB.PallierC.BrysbaertM. (2008). Age of acquisition and subjective frequency estimates for all generally known monosyllabic French words and their relation with other psycholinguistic variables. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 1049–1054.
15.
FerrandL.NewB.BrysbaertM.KeuleersE.BoninP.MéotA.. . . PallierC. (2010). The French Lexicon Project: Lexical decision data for 38,840 French words and 38,840 pseudowords. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 488–496.
16.
FerrettiT. R.SchwintC. A.KatzA. N. (2007). Electrophysiological and behavioral measures of the influence of literal and figurative contextual constraints on proverb comprehension. Brain & Language, 101, 38–49.
17.
GibbsR. W.Jr.BeitelD. (1995). What proverb understanding reveals about how people think. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 133–154.
18.
Gözİ.TekcanA. İ.ErciyesA. A. (2016). Subjective age-of-acquisition norms for 600 Turkish words from four age groups. Behavior Research Methods. Advance online publication. doi:10.3758/s13428-016-0817-y
19.
GuilleronG. (2011). A la queue leu leu: Origine d’une ribambelle d’expressions populaires [Origins of a number of popular expressions]. Paris, France: Le Point.
20.
HigbeeK. L.MillardR. J. (1983). Visual imagery and familiarity ratings for 203 sayings. American Journal of Psychology, 96, 211–222.
21.
HowellD. C. (2012). Statistical methods for psychology (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.
22.
JohnstonR. A.BarryC. (2006). Age of acquisition and lexical processing. Visual Cognition, 13, 789–845.
23.
JuhaszB. J. (2005). Age-of-acquisition effects in word and picture identification. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 684–712.
24.
KacinikN. A. (2014). Sticking your neck out and burying the hatchet: What idioms reveal about embodied simulation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, Article 689.
25.
KatzA. N.FerrettiT. R. (2001). Moment-by-moment comprehension of proverbs in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 16, 193–221.
26.
KatzA. N.FerrettiT. R. (2003). Reading Proverbs in context, the role of explicit markers. Discourse Processes, 36, 19–46.
27.
KeuleersE.BalotaD. (2015). Megastudies, crowdsourcing, and large datasets in psycholinguistics: An overview of recent developments. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1457–1468.
28.
KeuleersE.StevensM.ManderaP.BrysbaertM. (2015). Word knowledge in the crowd: Measuring vocabulary size and word prevalence in a massive online experiment. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1665–1692.
29.
KonopkaA. E.BockK. (2009). Lexical or syntactic control of sentence formulation? structural generalisation from idiom production. Cognitive Psychology, 58, 68–101.
30.
LiD.ZhangY.WangX. (2016). Descriptive norms for 350 Chinese idioms with seven syntactic structures. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 1678–1693.
31.
LibbenM. R.TitoneD. A. (2008). The multidetermined nature of idiom processing. Memory & Cognition, 36, 1103–1121.
32.
MermillodM.BoninP.MéotA.FerrandL.PaindavoineM. (2012). Computational evidence that frequency trajectory theory does not oppose but emerges from age-of-acquisition theory. Cognitive Science, 36, 1499–1531.
33.
MurphyP.ShalliceT.RobinsonG.MacPhersonS. E.TurnerM.WoollettK.. . . CipolottiL. (2013). Impairments in proverb interpretation following focal frontal lobe lesions. Neuropsychologia, 51, 2075–2086.
34.
NewB.BrysbaertM.VéronisJ.PallierC. (2007). The use of film subtitles to estimate word frequencies. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 661–677.
35.
NordmannE.ClelandA. A.BullR. (2013). Cat got your tongue? Using the tip-of-the-tongue state to investigate fixed expressions. Cognitive Science, 37, 1553–1564.
36.
NordmannE.ClelandA. A.BullR. (2014). Familiarity breeds dissent: Reliability analyses for British-English idioms on measures of familiarity, meaning, literality, and decomposability. Acta Psychologica, 149, 87–95.
37.
NordmannE.JambazovaA. A. (2017). Normative data for idiomatic expressions. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 198–215.
38.
PierronA.MontreynaudF.SuzzoniF. (2015). Dictionnaire des proverbes et dictons [Dictionary of proverbs and sayings]. Paris: Le Robert.
39.
RehmelJ. L.BrownW. S.PaulL. K. (2016). Proverb comprehension in individuals with agenesis of the corpus callosum. Brain and Language, 160, 21–29.
40.
SprengerS. A.LeveltW. J. M.KempenG. (2006). Lexical access during the production of idiomatic phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 161–184.
41.
SwinneyD. A.CutlerA. (1979). The access and processing of idiomatic expressions. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 523–534.
42.
TabossiP.ArduinoL.FanariR. (2011). Descriptive norms for 245 Italian idiomatic expressions. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 110–123.
TitoneD. A.ConnineC. M. (1994). Descriptive norms for 171 idiomatic expressions: Familiarity, compositionality, predictability, and literality. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 9, 247–270.
45.
TitoneD. A.ConinneC. M. (1999). On the compositional and compositional nature of idiomatic expressions. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 1655–1674.
46.
UekermannJ.ThomaP.DaumI. (2008). Proverb interpretation changes in aging. Brain and Cognition, 67, 51–57.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
