UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Psychosemantic aspects of figurative language Wilkinson, Walter Keith 1976

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1976_A1 W54.pdf [ 5.92MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0076970.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0076970-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0076970-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0076970-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0076970-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0076970-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0076970-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0076970-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0076970.ris

Full Text

PSYCHOSEMANTIC ASPECTS OF FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE by WALTER KEITH WILKINSON B.Ed., U n i v e r s i t y of A l b e r t a , 1965 M.Ed., U n i v e r s i t y of A l b e r t a , 1966 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Interdisciplinary)  We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l 1976 (c)Walter K e i t h Wilkinson, 1976  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s  in p a r t i a l  an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y the L i b r a r y I further  s h a l l make i t  freely  f u l f i l m e n t of  the r e q u i r e m e n t s  of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I agree  a v a i l a b l e for  agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e  r e f e r e n c e and copying of  this  of  this thesis for  It  i s understood that c o p y i n g o r  thesis  Department of  <£\Z> UC/j-TiO  /O/H-  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  Date  -2L? ArPB-lt-  or  publication  f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my  written permission.  that  study.  f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s .  for  Abstract  Unusual but meaningful combinations of i d e a s and t h e i r e x p r e s s i o n language  a r e common i n everyday  e x p l a i n adequately behavior.  life  but no theory has y e t  t h e i r n a t u r e nor t h e i r e f f e c t s  Four hypotheses  to e x p l a i n d i f f e r e n t  language were proposed and e l a b o r a t e d : imagery h y p o t h e s i s , feature v i o l a t i o n s t u r a l hypothesis  conceptual  those f i g u r e s  a s p e c t s of  a structural hypothesis,  an  one based upon semantic  contiguity,  h i g h and low imagery c o n s t i t u e n t s  of  would produce more e f f e c t i v e  of v i o l a t i n g  [-human]  generated  selectional  agentive,  from  c e r t a i n combinations o f  The l i n g u i s t i c hypotheses  effects  distinguished  w i t h h i g h imagery r a t i n g s  those w i t h low imagery r a t i n g s and i m p l i e d t h a t  t i o n s and the e f f e c t s  struc-  h i e r a r c h y , and, most  The imagery h y p o t h e s i s  comprised o f c o n s t i t u e n t s  r e g a r d i n g the r e l a t i v e  The  a number of c o n c e p t u a l r e l a t i o n s which u n d e r l i e  integration.  than o t h e r c o m b i n a t i o n s .  and  figurative  and the other upon F i l l m o r e ' s case grammar.  specified  to  upon human thought  and two l i n g u i s t i c h y p o t h e s e s ,  the o p e r a t i o n o f f i g u r e s — s i m i l a r i t y , generally,  been a b l e  in  objective,  figures expectations  restriction violaand d a t i v e  case  requirements. To t e s t the hypotheses  240 grade e i g h t ,  n i n e , and t e n s t u d e n t s  a high-SES a r e a of G r e a t e r Vancouver were g i v e n group c u e d - r e c a l l and l i k e a b i l i t y , figurative  s i m i l a r i t y and comprehension s c a l e s  expressions  two s y n t a c t i c  for several  tests, lists  r e p r e s e n t i n g a s p e c t s o f the v a r i o u s hypotheses  patterns—nominal-copula-nominal figures, ii  from  such as "A  of in  thicket  iii i s a c i t y " , and nominal-verb-nominal f i g u r e s such as "The  daffodil cripples  the shadow". Grade trends were s l i g h t , although students i n higher grades understood f i g u r a t i v e language i n a more abstract way  and l i k e d i t better than  students i n lower grades. The psychological relevance of the s t r u c t u r a l hypothesis was p a r t i c u l a r l y w e l l substantiated  by the observations.  For r e c a l l and  but e s p e c i a l l y f o r comprehension, students discriminated such a way  likeability,  amongst f i g u r e s i n  as to show that the conceptual r e l a t i o n s of s i m i l a r i t y , c o n t i g -  u i t y , hierarchy, and i n t e g r a t i o n are f u n c t i o n a l aspects of thought operati v e during the r e t r i e v a l and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of f i g u r a t i v e language. Moderate s i m i l a r i t y between concepts i n high imagery metaphors produced more l i k e a b l e f i g u r e s than e i t h e r extreme s i m i l a r i t y or d i s s i m i l a r i t y , but f o r f i g u r e s of mixed imagery and embedded conceptual r e l a t i o n s h i g h l y s i m i l a r concepts produced more l i k e a b l e f i g u r e s . High imagery proved to be r e l a t e d strongly to f i g u r e r e c a l l , moderately to f i g u r e l i k e a b i l i t y but only modestly to f i g u r e comprehension. Figures with high imagery nouns surpassed those with high imagery verbs on a l l measures, and order of high and low imagery constituents  favored  P a i v i o ' s "conceptual peg" hypothesis f o r r e c a l l . Figures i n v o l v i n g human semantic feature v i o l a t i o n s were l e s s w e l l r e c a l l e d than those i n v o l v i n g other v i o l a t i o n s , f i g u r e s i n v o l v i n g case v i o l a t i o n s were l e s s w e l l r e c a l l e d than those i n v o l v i n g  dative  objective  case v i o l a t i o n s , and two case v i o l a t i o n s produced higher l i k e a b i l i t y better comprehension than a s i n g l e case v i o l a t i o n .  and  These e f f e c t s are  more d i f f i c u l t to integrate t h e o r e t i c a l l y than those observed under the  iv imagery or s t r u c t u r a l h y p o t h e s e s . Because the s t r u c t u r a l h y p o t h e s i s i s more c o n s i s t e n t l y  s u p p o r t e d by  the d a t a than a r e the l i n g u i s t i c h y p o t h e s e s , and because the imagery hypot h e s i s can l a r g e l y be subsumed w i t h i n the s t r u c t u r a l one, the l a t t e r , i t i s argued, p r o v i d e s the most adequate e x p l a n a t i o n of t h e e f f e c t s of f i g u r a t i v e language.  Fundamental  psychological  i n the comprehension o f  f i g u r a t i v e thought i s c o n c e p t u a l i n t e g r a t i o n , a c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s f a c i l i t a t e d by h i g h i m a g e r y - i n d u c i n g q u a l i t i e s of f i g u r e components, c l e a r s t r u c t u r a l r e l a t i o n s between them, and p r e s e n c e of s u f f i c i e n t semantic anomaly to m a i n t a i n an o p t i m a l l e v e l of c o g n i t i v e  arousal.  V  TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I.  II.  INTRODUCTION  1  A.  The Importance of F i g u r a t i v e Thought  1  B.  Objectivescof the I n v e s t i g a t i o n and Research Questions  3  HYPOTHESES FOR THE ANALYSIS OF FIGURATIVE THOUGHT  7  A.  Cognitive Approaches 1. A S t r u c t u r a l Hypothesis 2. An Imagery Hypothesis  8 8 20  B.  L i n g u i s t i c Approaches 1. S e l e c t i o n a l R e s t r i c t i o n V i o l a t i o n s i n T r a d i t i o n a l Transformational Generative Grammar 2. S e l e c t i o n a l R e s t r i c t i o n V i o l a t i o n s i n Case Grammar  23 23 26  C. L i m i t a t i o n s of Hypotheses, Interactions and Related Measures III.  31  METHODOLOGY  36  A.  36  B.  Study I : Nominal-Copula-Nominal Figures 1. Design and M a t e r i a l s L i s t 1: V a r i a t i o n s i n Structure, Imagery and Semantic Feature V i o l a t i o n s L i s t 2: High Imagery Metaphors with V a r i a t i o n s i n Inter-Concept S i m i l a r i t y and Semantic Feature V i o l a t i o n s 2. Subjects 3. Procedures List 1 List 2 4. Scoring Study I I : Nominal-Verb-Nominal Figures with V a r i a t i o n s i n Case V i o l a t i o n s and Imagery 1. Design and M a t e r i a l s 2. Subjects ' 3. Procedures  36 39 39 41 42 42 43 43 45 45  vi Chapter IV.  V.  RESULTS  46  A.  Study I  46  B.  Study I I  59  DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS  .  76  A.  The S t r u c t u r a l Hypothesis  76  B.  The Imagery Hypothesis  86  C.  L i n g u i s t i c Hypotheses  87  D.  General Conclusions  88  E.  Implications f o r Further Research  91  F.  Implications f o r P r a c t i c a l A p p l i c a t i o n s  91  REFERENCE NOTES  93  BIBLIOGRAPHY  94  APPENDICES  101  LIST OF TABLES  Table I  P r o p e r t i e s of the Nominal-copula-nominal Figures ( L i s t 1)  II  P r o p e r t i e s o f t h e H i g h Imagery Metaphors ( L i s t 2)  Ill IV V VI VII VIII IX X  ...  P r o p e r t i e s of the Nominal-verb-nominal F i g u r e s ( L i s t 3) Mean Scores f o r L i s t 1 F i g u r e s by Embedded S t r u c t u r a l Relations Mean Scores f o r L i s t 1 F i g u r e s by Imagery L e v e l s Mean Scores f o r L i s t 1 F i g u r e s by Semantic Violations . .  . . . .  Feature  Mean Scores f o r L i s t 1 F i g u r e s by I n t e r - c o n c e p t Similarity N o n - p a r a m e t r i c A n a l y s i s o f L i s t 1 R e c a l l Data Results of Analyses of Variance f o r L i s t 1 R e c a l l , L i k e a b i l i t y and Comprehension Scores . . Frequency and P e r c e n t a g e o f S e l e c t i o n o f Comprehension S c a l e Response O p t i o n s f o r L i s t 1 F i g u r e s  XI XII XIII XIV XV  Likeability  S c a l e Mean Scores f o r L i s t 2 F i g u r e s  . . . .  Mean Scores f o r L i s t 3 F i g u r e s by Case V i o l a t i o n s Mean R e c a l l Scores f o r L i s t 3 F i g u r e s by Component Imagery L e v e l s L i k e a b i l i t y S c a l e Mean Scores f o r L i s t 3 F i g u r e s by Component Imagery L e v e l s . Comprehension S c a l e Mean Scores f o r L i s t 3 F i g u r e s by Component Imagery L e v e l s  XVI XVII  N o n - p a r a m e t r i c A n a l y s i s o f L i s t 3 R e c a l l Data R e s u l t s of Analyses of Variance f o r L i s t 3 R e c a l l , L i k e a b i l i t y and Comprehension Scores  . . .  viii Table XVIII XIX XX  Percentages of L i s t 3 Comprehension Scale Response Options by Grade  70  Frequencies of L i s t 3 Comprehension Scale Response Options by Item Types  71  C o r r e l a t i o n s Amongst Response Variables  74  ix  LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1  Percentage of cases s e l e c t i n g each type of response option for L i s t 1 Comprehension Scores  58  2  Comparison of R e l a t i v e L i k e a b i l i t y Scores at d i f f e r e n t s i m i l a r i t y l e v e l s f o r L i s t s 1 and 2  61  3  Percentage of cases s e l e c t i n g each type of response option f o r L i s t 3 Comprehension Scores  72  X  ACKNOWLEDGEMENT To a l l my f r i e n d s , r e l a t i v e s , colleagues, and teachers who gave me moral support and i n t e l l e c t u a l guidance throughout my program I give my thanks.  S p e c i a l thanks i s due to Seong-Soo Lee, my Supervisor, f o r h i s  u n f a i l i n g patience, breadth of v i s i o n , and a t t e n t i o n to the d e t a i l s of my work, and to my committee members, E l l i Kongas Maranda, Nancy Suzuki, David Ingram, and Stephen Foster, f o r the d i r e c t i o n and c o n s t r u c t i v e c r i t i c i s m they provided.  Thanks, too, to Alexandria, my w i f e , f o r  t o l e r a t i n g so much, so w e l l , f o r so long.  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A.  The Importance of F i g u r a t i v e Thought Unusualness and appropriateness together comprise the hallmark of  f i g u r a t i v e thought and of c r e a t i v i t y i n any human expression.  The  medium of such expression may be accessible to any of the senses, and the message may be p h i l o s o p h i c , a e s t h e t i c or t e c h n i c a l , but whatever i t s mode and content, regular experiences with expressions of f i g u r a t i v e thought are unavoidable. The term f i g u r e i s defined i n t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n to mean an unusual but meaningful combination of ideas;  the term f i g u r a t i v e thought  to mean thought characterized by such combined ideas;  and the term  f i g u r a t i v e language to mean language d i s t i n g u i s h e d by unusual but meaningf u l combinations of l i n g u i s t i c u n i t s . Language i s the v e h i c l e i n which f i g u r a t i v e thought i s most commonly encountered.  Metaphors, metonyms, synecdoches and oxymorons  are l i n g u i s t i c representations of elementary c o g n i t i v e s t r u c t u r e s . structures are dynamic i n so f a r as they are u l a t e mental searches f o r p o s s i b l e meanings.  These  thought-provoking and stimWhen a metaphor, f o r  example, no longer provokes thought i t ceases to be dynamic and we r e f e r to i t as a dead or frozen metaphor. Through the process of conceptual i n t e g r a t i o n these and other r u d i mentary conceptual structures merge i n t o more complex o n e s — a n a l o g i e s ,  1  proverbs, r i d d l e s , models, myths, t h e o r i e s , i d e o l o g i e s , e t c .  These  constructions are l i m i t e d by the parameters of the root metaphors from which they grow (Black, 1962; Pepper, 1971, 1972; Turner, 1974).  Hester, 1967;  Sarbin, 1965, 1968;  Levi-Strauss, 1963;  S h i b l e s , 1971a, 1971b, 1972;  Technical innovation ( C r o v i t z , 1970;  P r i n c e , 1970), s c i e n t i f i c revolutions (Kuhn,1-1962;  Gordon, 1971, 1966;  Leatherdale, 1974),  i d e o l o g i c a l changes, psychopathologies and psychotherapies (Caru'tft & E k s t e i n , 1966) a l l involve a r e j e c t i o n of o l d ways of conceiving and speaking of things and s u b s t i t u t i o n s of new world-views.  I n i t i a l l y such  views are judged as f i g u r a t i v e , and only over time do they become an integrated part of ordinary language and thought.  Knowledge thus expands  by a process of metaphorical and a n a l o g i c a l extension to new  domains.  Inchoate subjects are given shape by metaphorical p r e d i c a t i o n (Fernandez, 1974), and r a d i c a l metaphors e s t a b l i s h i d e n t i t i e s when there are no t r a d i t i o n a l ways to speak or conceive of the issues of concern (Alleman, 1967;  C a s s i r e r , 1923). Not only i s f i g u r a t i v e thought c e n t r a l i n everyday language and i n  our appreciation of l i t e r a t u r e ; sciences.  i t i s no l e s s important i n the "hard"  The conception of the benzene r i n g , the double h e l i x model of  DNA, and wave and quantum theories of l i g h t a l l o r i g i n a t e d i n metaphorical extensions from other semantic domains, i n many cases through f i g u r a l or s t r u c t u r a l modes of expression rather than purely l i n g u i s t i c ones. the s o c i a l sciences too f i g u r a t i v e thought plays a key r o l e .  In  We explore  computer and perceptual analogues of c o g n i t i v e functioning ( P a i v i o , Note 1);  during psychotherapy and much of our everyday l i v e s we are engaged  i n a process of r e d e f i n i n g " s e l f " , a process e n t a i l i n g metaphorical p r e d i c a t i o n , a continuing change i n our conceptualization of what we are  3 and what we might be;  and K a r l Marx provides a r a d i c a l metaphor of  immense s o c i a l consequence by describing s o c i e t y as a struggle between c o n t r o l l i n g and subservient  classes rather than as a mutually b e n e f i c i a l  a l l i a n c e between free agents. In the p r a c t i c a l areas of t e c h n i c a l innovation, a d v e r t i s i n g , p o l i t i c a l propaganda, and educational and other persuasive  communications  a better understanding of the mechanisms of f i g u r a t i v e thought can a i d us i n c r e a t i n g e f f e c t i v e materials and enlighten us as to how f i g u r a t i v e expressions produce t h e i r e f f e c t s . With these general purposes i n mind more s p e c i f i c objectives emerge. B.  Objectives of the I n v e s t i g a t i o n and Research Questions The chief aim of the i n v e s t i g a t i o n was  to develop and e m p i r i c a l l y  t e s t two c o g n i t i v e and two l i n g u i s t i c hypotheses of f i g u r a t i v e language processing.  The c o g n i t i v e approaches included a s t r u c t u r a l hypothesis  and an imagery hypothesis;  the l i n g u i s t i c approaches included a t r a d i -  t i o n a l transformational grammar and a case grammar. The term hypothesis i s used here as the most a p p l i c a b l e of several possible terms (e.g., model, system, theory, conceptual framework) and i n the sense of being a set of p r o v i s i o n a l explanatory  propositions  proffered  with l e s s f o r m a l i t y and l e s s e m p i r i c a l support than would be so i n the case of theory (Marx, 1970,  p. 9).  L i k e "theory", the word  i s used i n a v a r i e t y of ways (Kaplan, 1964;  Marx, 1970)  "hypothesis"  but i n t h i s  i n v e s t i g a t i o n the i n t e n t i s to provide a l a b e l f o r sets of propositions modest i n scope and c l o s e l y t i e d to e m p i r i c a l  observations.  The f i r s t l i s t of f i g u r e s f o r Study I was designed to examine the  4 e f f e c t s of (a) the d i f f e r e n t conceptual r e l a t i o n s inherent i n metaphors, metonyms and synecdoches, (b) the rated imagery and judged s i m i l a r i t y of t h e i r components, and (c) d i f f e r e n t types of semantic r e s t r i c t i o n v i o l a t i o n s on the r e c a l l a b i l i t y , l i k e a b i l i t y and comprehensibility of the figures.  The second l i s t i n Study I focused s o l e l y on metaphors composed  of nouns with high imagery r a t i n g s , and examined the importance of (a) inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y and (b) semantic r e s t r i c t i o n v i o l a t i o n s on metaphor l i k e a b i l i t y . Study I I aimed at discovering the e f f e c t s of (a) v i o l a t i o n s of the agentive, o b j e c t i v e and dative cases ( F i l l m o r e , 1968) and (b) d i f f e r e n t rated imagery l e v e l s of constituent u n i t s on the r e c a l l a b i l i t y , l i k e a b i l i t y and comprehensibility of more complex f i g u r e s of speech. A secondary o b j e c t i v e i n both studies was to record p o s s i b l e d i f ferences i n responses to the various types of f i g u r e s by adolescents i n d i f f e r e n t grades. Inherent i n a l l the approaches was the view that comprehension of f i g u r a t i v e language depended upon achieving an i n t e g r a t i o n of the concepts involved.  The a t t r i b u t e s of imagery, s t r u c t u r a l and case r e l a t i o n s , and  semantic feature v i o l a t i o n s were examined f o r t h e i r relevance i n e f f e c t i n g t h i s conceptual i n t e g r a t i o n . Although the e m p i r i c a l aspect of the i n q u i r y was r e s t r i c t e d to f i g u r a t i v e language, r e l i a b l e p r e d i c t i o n of psychological responses by the c o g n i t i v e hypotheses would permit g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of those hypotheses to f i g u r e s expressed i n n o n - l i n g u i s t i c m o d a l i t i e s .  The i n q u i r y was thus seen  as an examination of f i g u r a t i v e thought and not only of f i g u r a t i v e language. In general, i t was hoped to determine which of the hypotheses had  the greatest p s y c h o l o g i c a l relevance. son,  Results of a p i l o t study ( W i l k i n -  Note 2) suggested that the l i n g u i s t i c approaches were l e s s powerful  than e i t h e r of the c o g n i t i v e approaches i n p r e d i c t i n g l i k e a b i l i t y and recallability.  Imagery was p a r t i c u l a r l y powerful i n p r e d i c t i n g r e c a l l -  a b i l i t y of f i g u r e s , whereas judged s i m i l a r i t y between the major components of simple f i g u r e s was the best p r e d i c t o r of l i k e a b i l i t y , w i t h moderate inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y producing the most preferred f i g u r e s . Guided by the f i n d i n g s of the p i l o t study, the present i n v e s t i g a t i o n sought to answer the f o l l o w i n g seven major questions: 1.  Are f i g u r e s of speech embodying d i f f e r e n t conceptual structures responded to d i f f e r e n t l y i n terms of r e c a l l , l i k e a b i l i t y and comprehension?  2.  How c l o s e l y r e l a t e d i s the rated mental imagery of words to the r e c a l l , l i k i n g and comprehension of f i g u r a t i v e language using those words, and what e f f e c t s are there, i f any, of varying the o r d i n a l p o s i t i o n of high imagery elements i n a f i g u r e or the imagery l e v e l s of d i f f e r e n t grammatical form classes?  3.  Can semantic feature v i o l a t i o n s or case category v i o l a t i o n s account for the r e c o l l e c t i o n , l i k i n g or understanding of f i g u r a t i v e language?  4.  How important i s inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y or d i s s i m i l a r i t y i n p r e d i c t ing psychological responses to f i g u r a t i v e language?  5.  Do the r e c o l l e c t i o n , l i k i n g and understanding of f i g u r a t i v e language increase w i t h school grade?  6.  Can psychological responses to f i g u r a t i v e language be adequately explained by l i n g u i s t i c v a r i a b l e s , or would f i g u r a t i v e language be better considered as a manifestation of f i g u r a t i v e thought and explained i n terms of c o g n i t i v e v a r i a b l e s ?  7.  Can the r e l a t i o n s h i p between imagery and c o n c e p t u a l s t r u c t u r e b clarified  by o b s e r v i n g the r e l a t i v e  p r e d i c t i n g responses to f i g u r a t i v e Answers to these q u e s t i o n s e l a b o r a t i o n of the r e l e v a n t  importance of these language?  demanded, f i r s t  hypotheses.  factors  of a l l ,  further  CHAPTER I I  HYPOTHESES FOR  I have a l r e a d y  THE  ANALYSIS OF  suggested t h a t f i g u r a t i v e language can be  p a r t i c u l a r example of a more g e n e r a l  1970,  (e.g., Levi-Strauss,-  1973;  McLuhan, 1964)  1969,  them.  of s t u d y i n g  concepts and  other  and  semioticians  Barthes,  other  cartoonists frequently  employ  f i g u r e s , t h e r e f o r e , i s to examine the  t e s t p r i n c i p l e s t h a t c o u l d apply  general  expression,  to s i g n systems  than v e r b a l ones. Excessive  a t t e n t i o n to the v e r b a l system a l o n e may,  hampered development of an adequate e x p l a n a t i o n (e.g., A n g e l , 1967).  f o r which the s i g n s stand has  It  (for  of words), anomalous c o g n i t i v e reformulated  I t i s important i n theory  7  in  R i c h a r d s as e a r l y as 1928.  can r e s u l t , w i t h a p o t e n t i a l f o r b e i n g  e x t e r n a l s i g n systems.  signs,  tripartite  v e r b a l s t r i n g s are generated  the a r b i t r a r y j u x t a p o s i n g  representations  s o u r c e of c o n f u s i o n  the f a c t t h a t t h i s  c l e a r l y o u t l i n e d by Ogden and  i s u s e f u l to note t h a t when d e v i a n t example, by  f o r f i g u r a t i v e language  (c) the i n t e r n a l i z e d concepts  been a f r e q u e n t  w r i t i n g s on f i g u r a t i v e language d e s p i t e a n a l y s i s was  i n f a c t , have  F a i l u r e to m a i n t a i n d i s t i n c t i o n s amongst (a)  (b) those s i t u a t i o n s t h a t they s i g n i f y , and  other  (e.g.,  r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t u n d e r l i e p a r t i c u l a r modes of  t h a t i s , to d e l i n e a t e and  a  Anthro-  commonly speak of f i g u r e s i n these  a r t i s t s , a d v e r t i s e r s , and  way  or g e s t u r a l systems.  1973)  m o d a l i t i e s , and One  seen as  phenomenon t h a t o c c u r s i n a l l s i g n  systems, f o r example, i n g r a p h i c , m u s i c a l pologists  FIGURATIVE THOUGHT  in  construction  to  8 maintain the d i s t i n c t i o n between these i n t e r n a l and external  representa-  t i o n s , despite homologies between them. Whatever the external mode of representation several i n t e r n a l modes can be i n f e r r e d .  On the basis of past research two of these appear  p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t i n g — t h a t of q u a s i - l o g i c a l structures and that of imagery.  Consideration of both of these p o s s i b l e modes l e d to the  elaboration of two theories f o r p r e d i c t i n g responses to f i g u r a t i v e expressions.  Two other hypotheses were developed by examining the external  form of representation, i n t h i s case l i n g u i s t i c . A.  Cognitive Approaches 1.  A S t r u c t u r a l Hypothesis Concepts can be considered  as the basic c o g n i t i v e u n i t s from which  f i g u r e s are constructed, and some of the r e l a t i o n s h i p s that produce i n t e g r a t i o n of those concepts can be s p e c i f i e d .  The r e s u l t i n g p a r t i a l ,  but systematic, account of f i g u r a t i v e language can then be tested by observing psychological responses to the structures so defined.  If  there are d i s c e r n i b l e d i f f e r e n c e s i n responses to d i f f e r e n t l y structured f i g u r e s i t can be i n f e r r e d that the i n t e r n a l processing of those f i g u r e s differs. While the d i s t i n c t i o n between concepts and words has frequently been b l u r r e d i n the works of l i t e r a r y scholars, they and semioticians u s u a l l y regard a metaphor as an expression e n t a i l i n g a s i m i l a r i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p between two concepts (e.g., Brooke-Rose, 1958; Kftngas Maranda, 1971). The two concepts need not be present v e r b a l l y i n a p a r t i c u l a r s t r i n g of words f o r the metaphor to be a c t i v e i f a s u i t a b l e context i s presupposed.  Reddy (1969) notes that (1)  The rock i s becoming b r i t t l e with age  does not e s t a b l i s h a metaphor i n the context of a g e o l o g i c a l expedition, but may i f one i s discussing an e l d e r l y professor emeritus.  A metaphor  i s u s u a l l y established on the basis of a s t r u c t u r a l , perceptual or f u n c t i o n a l s i m i l a r i t y between concepts but, i n some cases, the s i m i l a r i t y may be at a more abstract semantic l e v e l .  Natural examples of v e r b a l  metaphor abound: (2)  The r i v e r sweats O i l and t a r  ( E l i o t , 1961, p. 61)  (3)  mustardseed sun  (Thomas, 1952, p. 170)  (4)  P i c k e t s choke o f f c i t y m a i l by surrounding post o f f i c e  (5)  We speak of our memories as v i v i d , faded, or erased  (6)  Light c o n s i s t s of waves  (7)  Organization l i g h t e n s the burden of the reader  (8)  WORDS Axes A f t e r whose stroke the wood r i n g s , And the echoes!  (Vancouver Sun, March 13, 1975, p. 1) ( P a i v i o , Note 1)  (American P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , 1967, p. 12)  ( P l a t h , 1965, p. 86)  The most rudimentary l i n g u i s t i c form of a metaphor seems to be that of nominal-copula-nominal as, f o r example, (9)  The medium i s the message  and (10)  An avalanche i s an acrobat.  Other conceptual r e l a t i o n s besides s i m i l a r i t y , however, may be concealed by t h i s surface form.  When the r e l a t i o n s h i p between two concepts i s one of c o n t i g u i t y or causality"*" the r e s u l t i n g f i g u r e i s termed a metonym.  Thus the two  concepts i n (11)  An answer i s a problem  are metonymically l i n k e d because of t h e i r frequent co-occurrence. Figures of t h i s sort are considered i n t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n to be metonyms despite the l i n g u i s t i c frame "NI i s N2" which, on f i r s t consideration, suggests that they are metaphors. In a l i k e manner, two terms whose corresponding concepts are i n h i e r a r c h i c a l r e l a t i o n , i . e . , genus to species, whole to p a r t , e n t i t y to a t t r i b u t e (or the inverse of these), are considered here as forming a synecdoche, f o r example: (12)  A m i n s t r e l i s a musician  (species-genus)  (13)  A hoof i s a cow  (part-whole)  (14)  Wisdom i s a monk  (attribute-entity).  Paired terms whose corresponding concepts are i n a r e l a t i o n s h i p of opposition are, c l a s s i c a l l y and here, defined as oxymorons: (15)  Black i s white  (16)  Cruel kindness.  Since antonyms are a l i k e i n a l l but j u s t one respect they are, paradoxic2 a l l y , very c l o s e to s i m i l a r i t i e s or metaphors.  For t h i s reason they d i d  not receive separate c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n .  Since  synecdoche can be considered as s i m i l a r i t y of l o g i c a l associations and "'"Hume (1748) maintained that c a u s a l i t y was i n f e r r e d when p a r t i c u l a r objects were constantly conjoined ( i . e . , contiguous) with each other. 2 "An antonym i s a synonym" i s an oxymoron.  11 metonym as s i m i l a r i t y of spatio-temporal l o c a t i o n , s i m i l a r i t y , and thus metaphor,  can be taken as the more rudimentary notions.  S i m i l e involves the same c o g n i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p as metaphor but a d i f f e r e n t l i n g u i s t i c form that forewarns the addressee of the h y p o t h e t i c a l nature of the espoused s i m i l a r i t y .  D i r e c t comparison i s even more  e x p l i c i t , s p e c i f y i n g the features of the concepts that are to enter i n t o the s i m i l a r i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p . In n a t u r a l language i t i s not always easy to determine which concept u a l r e l a t i o n s are operating to i n t e g r a t e a f i g u r e .  In some cases more  than one may be present, as i n (9) or (17)  A father i s a mother  i n which both metaphoric and metonymic r e l a t i o n s between the concepts are evident.  In other cases several successive i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s may be neces-  sary f o r a f u l l understanding of a f i g u r e . (18)  On one reading of  Macbeth murders sleep  "sleep" might be considered as a metonymical s u b s t i t u t i o n . f o r "the sleeping King";  on another reading, "murder" as a metaphorical s u b s t i t u -  t i o n f o r a verb such as " d i s t u r b s " and "Macbeth" as a synecdoche f o r "Macbeth's a c t i o n s " ;  f i n a l l y , the whole expression might be taken as a  concrete and metaphorical way of saying that both p a t r i c i d e and the d i s r u p t i o n of the accepted order are deeply d i s t u r b i n g events.  Similarly,  in (19)  He sang h i s didn't he danced h i s d i d  (e. e. cummings)  simple metaphorical replacement of the anomalous words (e.g., w i t h "song" and "dance" r e s p e c t i v e l y ) does not give a complete understanding of the f i g u r e , which should perhaps be taken to mean something l i k e "he v e r b a l i z e d h i s d i s l i k e s and enacted h i s d e s i r e s " .  Since the s t r u c t u r a l  12 hypothesis, hoc a n a l y s e s  at  i t s p r e s e n t l e v e l of development,  of  these more complex f i g u r e s ,  results  an i n i t i a l  i n somewhat ad  i n q u i r y s h o u l d be  l i m i t e d to s i m p l e forms, and a s e a r c h made f o r o t h e r s y s t e m a t i c a n a l y s i s o f complex  methods of  figures.  The s t r u c t u r a l concept of c o n c e p t u a l i n t e g r a t i o n , however, to the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a l l f i g u r e s . s a i d to be i n t e g r a t e d  A f i g u r e o f any c o m p l e x i t y can be  to the e x t e n t t h a t  the concepts  r e l a t e d i n some coherent way or ways to one a n o t h e r . p r a c t i c a l l y any c o l l e c t i o n o f concepts ficient  efforts  the c o n c e p t u a l  applies  encoded i n i t T h i s means  that  can be i n t e r p r e t e d g i v e n t h a t  a r e made to e s t a b l i s h a p p r o p r i a t e semantic l i n k s  If  suf-  amongst  elements.  I n t e g r a t i o n may e n t a i l a d i r e c t l i n k i n g o f the concepts by uity,  can be  i n d i r e c t l i n k i n g through a m e d i a t i n g element or elements,  contig-  or both.  no l i n k i n g can be made the f i g u r e w i l l be p e r c e i v e d as meaningless  uninterpretable.  While i t  t i o n i s not a s u f f i c i e n t degree of q u a l i t y  i s a necessary  condition for a figure's  i s a l s o demanded.  the b a s i s o f completeness,  integra-  acceptability,  since a  Such q u a l i t y might be determined on  o r the l e v e l o r the number o f l e v e l s  dimensions) of the i n t e g r a t i o n , but i t figural  c o n d i t i o n , conceptual  seems l i k e l y t h a t  (or  judgement  of  q u a l i t y v a r i e s w i d e l y amongst i n d i v i d u a l s , r e l a t i n g perhaps  t h e i r conceptual s t y l e s ,  preferences  or  to  f o r c o m p l e x i t y or s i m p l i c i t y , and  so o n . Two e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s figure  effectiveness  touch on the r o l e of s t r u c t u r a l v a r i a t i o n i n  but n e i t h e r d e a l s w i t h i t  r e p o r t e d the r e s u l t s o f a study of the e f f e c t s versus  i n any d e p t h .  Chun (1971)  o f r o l e demand  (accuracy  thematic o r i e n t a t i o n ) , s t i m u l u s m a t e r i a l s  a t i v e ) , and p e r s o n a l i t y a t t r i b u t e s  (aesthetic  (abstract  sensitivity,  versus  figur-  cognitive  13 fluency, and a n a l y t i c a l i t y ) on subjects' f a i l u r e to heed the " a s - i f " or f i g u r a t i v e status of prose passages and subjects' subsequent propensity r e i f y such f i g u r e s from the passages.  to  A tendency to r e i f y was c o r r e l a t e d  p o s i t i v e l y with the "opacity" of the materials (a construct  apparently  r e f l e c t i n g the u n f a m i l i a r i t y , abstractness, and ambiguity of the passages), low IQ t e s t scores, low a e s t h e t i c s e n s i t i v i t y t e s t scores and high ideat i o n a l fluency.  Chun suggested that f u r t h e r examination of the e f f e c t i v e  dimensions of opacity was required.  This i s e s s e n t i a l l y what the present  study undertakes. Koen (1965) showed that adults would r e l i a b l y complete f i g u r a t i v e expressions by choosing from a p a i r of words i n a sentence the one with a s s o c i a t i v e meaning c l o s e s t to that of a given set of cue words.  How-  i  ever, Koen did not examine the s t r u c t u r a l basis of t h i s word a s s o c i a t i o n response ( c f . P o l l i o , 1966). The a b i l i t y to use and e x p l i c a t e d i f f e r e n t conceptual 3 normally l i n k e d to age and maturity.  structures i s  Asch (1958), Asch and Nerlove  (1960), and Gardner (1974) reported studies with c h i l d r e n aged three to twelve years that revealed a developmental trend i n the a b i l i t y to comprehend and e x p l a i n c e r t a i n "double-function" words such as "hard" and "bright".  Apparently,  the p h y s i c a l sense of such words i s acquired  e a r l i e s t and the psychological sense l a t e r as an independent homonymic vocabulary  item, while r e c o g n i t i o n of the polysemous nature of the words  occurs at a s t i l l l a t e r stage.  P o l l i o and P o l l i o (1974) pointed out that  the terms apparently used i n these i n v e s t i g a t i o n s involved only frozen (dead) f i g u r e s rather than novel ones. Consequently, both the p h y s i c a l 3 When t h i s i n q u i r y was begun only a few e m p i r i c a l studies had taken a developmental approach to f i g u r a t i v e language.  14 and p s y c h o l o g i c a l senses  of such words a r e p a r t of the normal d i c t i o n a r y  e n t r i e s f o r the words and may be a c q u i r e d no d i f f e r e n t l y  than the meanings  of o t h e r polysemous words such as " b a l l " . The P o l l i o ' s own i n v e s t i g a t i o n s ative  language  by t h i r d ,  examined the p r o d u c t i o n of  f o u r t h and f i f t h  t r a i n e d to r e l i a b l y d i s c r i m i n a t e amongst  grade s t u d e n t s .  figur-  U s i n g judges  l i t e r a l , f r o z e n and n o v e l  expres-  s i o n s they observed t h a t p r o d u c t i o n of f r o z e n f i g u r e s was u n c o r r e l a t e d w i t h the p r o d u c t i o n of n o v e l f i g u r e s ,  but t h a t  the p r o d u c t i o n o f both  i n c r e a s e d over grades and v a r i e d a c c o r d i n g to t a s k demands.  Comparing  t h e i r f i n d i n g s w i t h those o f Asch and N e r l o v e they concluded " t h a t  chil-  dren i n the stage o f c o n c r e t e o p e r a t i o n s a r e a b l e to use f r o z e n and n o v e l figurative explicate  language w i t h i n a s p e c i f i c the use o f such language  context  but may be unable  i n completely abstract  terms  to until  they move from the stage o f c o n c r e t e o p e r a t i o n s to the stage of f o r m a l operations"  (p.  200).  to m i d d l e a d o l e s c e n c e  This l a t t e r  stage i s n o r m a l l y encountered i n e a r l y  and i s marked by the a b i l i t y  to perform l o g i c a l  o p e r a t i o n s i n the absence of c o n c r e t e examples and by a p s y c h o l o g i c a l " c e n t e r i n g " on or p r e f e r e n c e Groesbeck  functioning. t h r e e to f i v e  in  found i n c h i l d r e n ' s s c h o o l t e x t s and a l s o r e p o r t e d  c h i l d r e n i n these grades  language.  t h e o r e t i c a l mode of  (1961) r e p o r t e d an i n c r e a s e over grades  the number of f i g u r e s that  for this  can p r o f i t from i n s t r u c t i o n i n  figurative  Leondar (1968) suggested an important l i m i t a t i o n i n  e a r l y use o f f i g u r a t i v e  this  language:  D e s s o i r . . . mentions a youngster who, on f i r s t s e e i n g f a l l i n g snow, exclaimed " l o o k at the b u t t e r f l i e s p l a y i n g t o g e t h e r . " Such an i n a d v e r t a n t t r o p e demonstrates, not the i n v e n t i v e n e s s of the c h i l d ' s i m a g i n a t i o n , but the p o v e r t y of h i s v o c a b u l a r y . Only when h i s c o n c e p t i o n of b u t t e r f l i e s i s s u f f i c i e n t l y d e l i m i t e d to exclude snowflakes can he yoke these terms m e t a p h o r i c a l l y . His  15 p r o d u c t i o n of metaphor w a i t s on h i s a c q u i s i t i o n of a s u p p l y of s t a b l e , l i t e r a l , and s o c i a l l y s a n c t i o n e d c a t e g o r i e s . I f metaphor c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e development o f e a r l y l a n g u a g e , i t i s as metaphor e n c o u n t e r e d. Metaphor c r e a t e d would appear t o be a l a t e r and s u r e l y more complex achievement. (pp. 172-173) " f i g u r a t i v e " language i n t h e v e r y young may be s i m p l e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n — t h a t i s , n o t metaphor a t a l l . (Leondar, 1968, p.  220)  A c q u i s i t i o n of normal s e m a n t i c c a t e g o r i e s and t h e a b i l i t y t o u t i l i z e f o r m a l o p e r a t i o n s a r e t h e r e f o r e l i k e l y t o be p r e r e q u i s i t e c o n d i t i o n s f o r t h e t h o r o u g h comprehension of f i g u r e s of speech. I n o r d e r t o e s t a b l i s h t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e a l i t y of t h e metonymic/ s y n e c d o c h i c / m e t a p h o r i c t r i c h o t o m y i t was n e c e s s a r y t o o b s e r v e s y s t e m a t i c d i f f e r e n c e s i n responses to (or p r o d u c t i o n o f ) f i g u r e s those s t r u c t u r e s .  incorporating  Because o f t i m e l i m i t a t i o n s and because t h e p r a c t i c a l  a p p l i c a t i o n s of f i g u r a t i v e language depend upon knowing i t s e f f e c t s upon human r e s p o n s e s , o n l y r e s p o n s e measures were c o n s i d e r e d i n t h i s gation.  Of t h e many p o s s i b l e measures  & Q u l l l i a n , 1969;  Creelman, 1966;  S u c i & Tannenbaum, 1957;  investi-  ( e . g . , c f . A n g l i n , 1970;  Collins  F i l l e n b a u m & R a p o p o r t , 1971;  Osgood,  P a i v i o , 1971b;  P e r f e t t i , 1972) t h r e e appeared  t o be b o t h i m p o r t a n t and p r a c t i c a l — r e c a l l , l i k e a b i l i t y and comprehension. R e c a l l of m a t e r i a l s can be a s s e s s e d e i t h e r by r e c o r d i n g t h e e x t e n t of f r e e o r spontaneous r e c o l l e c t i o n , o r by c u e i n g r e c a l l w i t h some material previously associated with i t .  W h i l e f r e e r e c a l l would p r o v i d e  a more a c c u r a t e assessment of complete f i g u r e m e m o r a b i l i t y , i t would a l s o be a more d i f f i c u l t t a s k and one h i g h l y s u s c e p t i b l e t o r e c e n c y and p r i m a c y e f f e c t s ( W i l k i n s o n , Note 2 ) .  Randomized  cued r e c a l l g r e a t l y r e d u c e s  t h e s e e f f e c t s and, t h e r e f o r e , was chosen as t h e method f o r m e a s u r i n g r e c a l l i n t h i s study. F i g u r e s embodying metonyms and synecdoches were e x p e c t e d t o be  easier to r e c o l l e c t than those embodying metaphors because of the more common, and consequently stronger, associations between the two terms making up the f i g u r e s .  Because the c o n t i g u i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p involves  l e s s a b s t r a c t i o n than the h i e r a r c h i c one i t was expected that the r e c a l l of metonyms would also surpass that of synecdoches.  To the extent that  the s i m i l a r i t y between the two concepts could be scaled i t was also expected that f i g u r e s composed of h i g h l y s i m i l a r concepts would be more r e a d i l y r e c a l l e d than those composed of l e s s s i m i l a r concepts because the associations between the h i g h l y s i m i l a r concepts would be more extensive, and consequently stronger, than those between l e s s s i m i l a r ones. Measuring the extent to which f i g u r e s of speech are l i k e d taps emotive as w e l l as c o g n i t i v e responses to the f i g u r e s .  Psychologists  have only a modest understanding of what happens n e u r o l o g i c a l l y when something i s l i k e d . Berlyne, 1970;  The work of Berlyne and others (Anderson, 1964; Berlyne, Craw, Salapetek & Lewis, 1963;  Boudewijus, 1971;  Berlyne &  Berlyne, Note 3) suggests that items which are l i k e d  stimulate an optimal l e v e l of c o r t i c a l arousal.  D i s l i k e d items have  e i t h e r i n s u f f i c i e n t arousal p o t e n t i a l or are overly arousing.  This  explanation f i t s w e l l w i t h t r a d i t i o n a l discussions about the range of e f f e c t i v e metaphorical p r e d i c a t i o n s .  For example, Thomas (1969) argued  that a combination of h i g h l y d i s s i m i l a r concepts i n a metaphor i s d i s l i k e d , as i s a combination of concepts that are semantically too s i m i l a r . Koen (1965) observed that synaesthetic metaphors were considered by undergraduates to be b e t t e r figures of speech than metaphors i n which the semantic s h i f t remained w i t h i n a s i n g l e sense modality.  I t appears that  only moderately d i f f e r i n g concepts combined i n metaphorical r e l a t i o n can produce the appropriate arousal l e v e l to be judged as pleasing.  In t h i s  17 study, f i g u r e s w i t h two expected  components t h a t were moderately  to r e c e i v e h i g h e r l i k e a b i l i t y  s i m i l a r were  s c o r e s than f i g u r e s comprised  e i t h e r h i g h l y s i m i l a r or g r e a t l y d i s s i m i l a r concepts.  of  Since s i m i l a r i t y  judgements can be made of concepts s e t t o g e t h e r f o r reasons o t h e r than degree  of t h e i r s i m i l a r i t y ,  i t was  expected  the  t h a t s i m i l a r i t y e f f e c t s would  be o b s e r v a b l e a c r o s s a range of s t r u c t u r e s , i n c l u d i n g those based upon the c o n t i g u i t y or h i e r a r c h y between the concepts i n v o l v e d , a l t h o u g h i t was a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t such e f f e c t s might be masked by the c o n f l i c t i n g  struc-  tures. Comprehension poses some s p e c i a l problems.  While  the  understand-  i n g of f r o z e n f i g u r e s , p r o v e r b s , r i d d l e s , e t c . can be a s s e s s e d much as the u n d e r s t a n d i n g of any o t h e r n o r m a l i z e d l i n g u i s t i c p a t t e r n , t h e r e i s no o f j u d g i n g when a n o v e l f i g u r e i s c o r r e c t l y comprehended s i n c e , i n principle,  t h e r e e x i s t s no normative  Even f o r s e m i - t r a d i t i o n a l f i g u r e s (20)  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n f o r such a f i g u r e .  like  d u l l roots  ( E l i o t , 1961,  p.  51)  (21) dry b r a i n  ( E l i o t , 1961,  p.  33)  (22) the r i v e r ' s t e n t i s broken  ( E l i o t , 1961,  p.  58)  (23) When the evening i s spread out a g a i n s t the sky L i k e a p a t i e n t e t h e r i s e d upon a t a b l e ( E l i o t , 1961), p.  11)  e x p e r t s would be hard p r e s s e d to agree upon c o r r e c t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s or adequate comprehension. With s i m p l e r f i g u r a t i v e c o n s t r u c t i o n s agreement as to the major meanings may  be more r e a d i l y f o r t h c o m i n g , even i f a s i n g u l a r meaning  cannot be determined. determined  Furthermore,  i f g u i d i n g p r i n c i p l e s can  be  f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g s e v e r a l a c c e p t a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e meanings of  way  such f i g u r e s we can then begin to examine the q u a l i t y of understanding rather than the mere presence or absence of understanding. For figures comprised of two concepts the r e l a t i o n a l functions already d i s c u s s e d — s i m i l a r i t y , c o n t i g u i t y and h i e r a r c h y — p r o v i d e such guiding p r i n c i p l e s f o r the establishment of a l t e r n a t i v e meanings. t h i s system, a comprehension  Using  question f o r example (11) might appear as  follows: "An answer i s a problem" means that an answer and a problem (a)  both produce further questions  (major s i m i l a r i t y )  (b)  are often found together  (contiguity)  (c)  are parts of t e s t s  (hierarchy)  (d)  are both composed of ideas  (minor s i m i l a r i t y ) .  Each of these options provides an i n t e g r a t i o n of the two nominals i n the figure. Since s i m i l a r i t y of spatio-temporal l o c a t i o n , i . e . , c o n t i g u i t y , seems to be one of the more s a l i e n t of s i m i l a r i t i e s and to involve minimal a b s t r a c t i o n i t was expected that contiguity-based responses would be the more rudimentary and the ones displayed i n greater proportion by people at e a r l i e r stages of cognitive development.  Consequently, i t was  expected that students i n lower grades would i n t e r p r e t f i g u r e s more often on the basis of c o n t i g u i t y than would students i n higher grades.  Cate-  g o r i c a l and h i e r a r c h i c a l s i m i l a r i t i e s are more commonly encountered i n normal usage than those based upon a v a r i e t y of other features or dimensions, and so there i s reason to b e l i e v e that comprehension of the l a t t e r would emerge only at a l a t e r stage of development.  Consequently, students  i n higher grades were expected to make more response choices on the b a s i s of these l e s s common s i m i l a r i t i e s than students i n lower grades, and  19 c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y fewer h i e r a r c h i c r e s p o n s e s . c o n t i g u i t y - b a s e d and h i e r a r c h y - b a s e d nyms and  I t was  responses  a l s o expected  that  would be h i g h e r f o r meto-  synecdoches, r e s p e c t i v e l y , a c r o s s a l l grade l e v e l s .  Since  the  c a t e g o r y "metaphor" encompasses f i g u r e s formed on s i m i l a r i t i e s on a v a r i e t y of dimensions, responses  were expected  the o t h e r  i t c o n s t i t u t e s a s o r t of r e s i d u a l c l a s s to which to be more v o l a t i l e and  l e s s p r e d i c t a b l e than f o r  two.  In summary, i t was metaphoric  c o n j e c t u r e d t h a t metonymic, synecdochal  r e l a t i o n s between two  concepts  represent i n c r e a s i n g l y  and complex  s t r u c t u r e s t h a t would, as a r e s u l t , be i n c r e a s i n g l y d i f f i c u l t both r e c a l l and  to understand.  L i k i n g of f i g u r e s of t h i s s o r t was  to  expected.to  be p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h t h e i r comprehension, a l t h o u g h moderate s i m i l a r i t y of combined elements was  expected  to produce the most  likeable  figures. For f i g u r e s of thought  or speech i n v o l v i n g more than two  concepts  i n t e g r a t e d and n o n - i n t e g r a t e d  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s can be o f f e r e d as  alternat-  i v e meanings, a l t h o u g h t i o n cannot be (24)  the c o n c e p t u a l r e l a t i o n s i n v o l v e d i n the i n t e g r a -  specified easily.  Options  f o r a comprehension q u e s t i o n f o r  Ignorance i n t e r v i e w s the j u n g l e  might i n c l u d e : (a)  j u n g l e d w e l l e r s should t a l k to t r e e s ( c o n c r e t e , not  (b)  t h e r e ' s a l o t to be l e a r n e d about j u n g l e s ( c o n c r e t e , i n t e g r a t e d )  (c)  i n t e r v i e w e r s p r e f e r t r o p i c a l c l i m a t e s ( a b s t r a c t , not  (d)  a f o o l i s h person  Option Options  tries  to do the i m p o s s i b l e  (c) i n t e g r a t e s the verb and (b) and  integrated)  integrated)  (abstract, integrated).  second nominal but not the f i r s t  nominal.  (d) i n t e g r a t e the t h r e e components by t r a n s l a t i n g them i n t o  o t h e r p l a n e s of d i s c o u r s e , one  r e l a t i v e l y c o n c r e t e and  the o t h e r more  20  abstract.  Option (a) may  a c t u a l l y i n t e g r a t e the three concepts at a  concrete l e v e l , but f o r most adults at l e a s t , i t i s more l i k e l y to appear as a shallow, p r e j u d i c i a l or inept i n t e g r a t i o n .  Adeptness at  conceptual  i n t e g r a t i o n was assumed to increase concurrently with c o g n i t i v e development.  Consequently, i t was expected that the integrated i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s  would be chosen more often by students i n higher grades than by  students  i n lower grades. 2.  An Imagery Hypothesis I t i s a w e l l established behavioral law that the use of mental  images to represent and integrate v e r b a l materials enhances r e c o l l e c t i o n of those materials ( P a i v i o , 1971a, 1971b).  What i s not c l e a r i s the  nature of the imagery process, and debate and research continue as e f f o r t s are made to determine whether v e r b a l and v i s u a l information are both stored i n an a b s t r a c t , modality-free form (Anderson & Bower, 1973), i n separate but interconnected systems each s p e c i a l i z e d f o r representing a p a r t i c u l a r kind of input (Bower, 1972;  P a i v i o , 1971b, 1975;  Note 1) or i n a combination of such systems (Bartram, 1974; Clark, 1972;  Paivio, Chase &  Clark, Carpenter & J u s t , 1973).  While the terms themselves tempt one to equate " f i g u r a t i v e thought" and"mental imagery", the former term seems best retained as a broader concept that can include anomalous expressions i n v o l v i n g l i t t l e or no mental imagery.  Furbank (1970) s i m i l a r l y argues f o r r e t e n t i o n of a  d i s t i n c t i o n between the l i t e r a r y senses of "metaphor" and "image", a d i s t i n c t i o n that i s frequently b l u r r e d i n popular usage. Based on the r e s u l t s of the p i l o t study (Wilkinson, Note 2) and numerous paired-associate l e a r n i n g studies ( P a i v i o , 1971b), i t was  predicted  with considerable confidence that high imagery f i g u r e s , regardless of the  21 I n t e r p r e t a t i o n given to the imagery, would be more r e a d i l y r e c a l l e d than low imagery f i g u r e s .  Furthermore, i t can be argued that high imagery-  inducing materials more q u i c k l y evoke a s a t i s f y i n g l e v e l of c o g n i t i v e arousal than do low imagery-inducing m a t e r i a l s .  Although appropriately  structured low imagery f i g u r e s might produce as much arousal as high imagery ones, the low a s s o c i a t i v e meaningfulness which frequently accompanies abstractness ( P a i v i o , 1971b) would, on the whole, be expected to depress the extent of the arousal, while the non-synchronous l i n e a r processing required f o r abstract s t i m u l i ( P a i v i o , 1975) would delay a c t i v a t i o n of the arousal.  This r e l a t i v e depression and delay of arousal f o r low  imagery materials would r e s u l t i n them being l e s s l i k e a b l e than high imagery m a t e r i a l s .  Consequently, f o r t h i s study, the greater the number  of high imagery constituents i n a f i g u r e the greater was i t s expected likeability.  The p o s s i b l e r e l a t i o n s h i p between imagery and comprehension  was unclear, so on t h i s topic the i n v e s t i g a t i o n was exploratory. Tentative l i n k s between the order of high and low imagery c o n s t i t u ents and f i g u r a t i v e expression come from Davidson (Note 4) and Thomas (1969) who independently suggest that successful metaphors are generally those which hypostatize or concretize the abstract.  While t h i s i s c l e a r l y  not the case f o r a l l types of f i g u r e s , f o r example  or  (16)  c r u e l kindness  (25)  l e s s i s more,  h y p o s t a t i z a t i o n may s t i l l be an important f u n c t i o n i n some f i g u r e s . Neither Davidson nor Thomas, however, suggest why or how h y p o s t a t i z a t i o n might work i t s e f f e c t s . Under the h y p o s t a t i z a t i o n argument i t was expected that f i g u r e s formed from low-high p a i r s of terms, l i k e  22  or  (26)  W e l f a r e i s food  (27)  Hatred i s a g l u t t o n  would be p r e f e r r e d over those formed from h i g h - l o w imagery p a i r s , such as  or  (28)  A w a l l i s an e n t r y  (29)  A h o r s e i s an e c c e n t r i c .  A p p l i c a t i o n of the same argument to the comprehension t a s k suggested the same o r d e r , a l t h o u g h i t was d i f f i c u l t f i g u r e s h o u l d be a f f e c t e d low imagery  to see why the u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a  by e i t h e r the number o r o r d e r o f i t s h i g h and  constituents.  Paivio  (1971b) argued that h i g h - l o w imagery word p a i r s y i e l d  cued r e c a l l s c o r e s  than do l o w - h i g h imagery word p a i r s because  imagery cue i s more r e a d i l y s t o r e d i n , and r e t r i e v e d from, imagery system than i s a low imagery c u e , and thus serves  better  a high  a cognitive as a b e t t e r  mneumonic d e v i c e o r " c o n c e p t u a l peg" to which the response word can be related.  T h i s view was i n d e p e n d e n t l y t e s t e d  Use of more complex f i g u r e s  i n this  study.  p e r m i t t e d the examination o f imagery i n  r e l a t i o n to l i n g u i s t i c form c l a s s e s .  Noun imagery h a d , i n p r e v i o u s  r e s e a r c h ( P a i v i o , 1971b), surpassed verb imagery as a p r e d i c t o r o f r e c a l l and the same was expected  i n t h i s study.  These e x p e c t a t i o n s  were  extended  to the l i k e a b i l i t y and comprehension measures as w e l l under t h e b e l i e f noun-induced images a r e s i m p l e r to s t o r e and p r o c e s s c o g n i t i v e l y induced  than v e r b -  images. Because they presumably have more advanced c o g n i t i v e  students  i n h i g h e r grades were expected  imagery m a t e r i a l s than were students tasks  that  older adolescents  to p r e f e r a b s t r a c t  processes,  to d e a l more adequately  i n lower g r a d e s .  w i t h low  F o r comprehension  (presumably u s i n g f o r m a l o p e r a t i o n s ) were  over c o n c r e t e a l t e r n a t i v e s  even where both were  expected  23 acceptable.  Consequently, both abstract and concrete options were offered  f o r the more complex f i g u r e s ( c f . example (24) on page 19). B.  Linguistic  Approaches  Ordinary conversations and w r i t i n g s abound w i t h expressions which deviate from s t r i c t r u l e s of language but which are, nevertheless, i n t e r preted, being meaningful both to speaker or w r i t e r and to addressee. Such deviance may occur w i t h i n the context of a s i n g l e sentence or w i t h i n an aggregate of sentences that may otherwise observe normal r u l e s of discourse.  Some of these l i n g u i s t i c deviations are u n i n t e n t i o n a l mala-  propisms or lapses of grammar which, upon reception, are commonly i n t e r preted i n the intended sense, c l a r i f i e d sometimes by l i n g u i s t i c and e x t r a l i n g u i s t i c context, o r , i f f e a s i b l e , by r e p l i e s to questions d i r e c t e d to the producer of the deviant s t r i n g s of words.  Other deviations are  e i t h e r c l e a r l y i n t e n t i o n a l or impossible to do without and i t i s these l a t t e r classes of v e r b a l productions that are considered as f i g u r e s of speech.  More p a r t i c u l a r l y , f i g u r a t i v e language can be i d e n t i f i e d with  the presence of s e l e c t i o n a l r e s t r i c t i o n v i o l a t i o n s (Matthews, 1971).  Such  v i o l a t i o n s can be examined both i n t r a d i t i o n a l transformational generative grammars (Jacobs & Rosenbaum, 1968) and i n case grammars ( F i l l m o r e , 1968). 1.  S e l e c t i o n a l R e s t r i c t i o n V i o l a t i o n s i n T r a d i t i o n a l Transformational Generative Grammar Matthews' account of metaphor subsumes the f i g u r e s described by the  s t r u c t u r a l theory as metonyms and synecdoches.  He argues, a f t e r Chomsky  (1965, p. 149) that metaphors are sentences that are i l l - f o r m e d because of v i o l a t i o n s of what Chomsky c a l l e d " s e l e c t i o n a l r u l e s " and " s t r i c t subcatego r i z a t i o n r u l e s " , roughly, semantic and s y n t a c t i c r e s t r i c t i o n s on the  24 choice of formative f o r a p a r t i c u l a r p o s i t i o n i n a given l i n g u i s t i c ture.  struc-  Matthews r e f e r s t o b o t h o f t h e s e types o f r e s t r i c t i o n s as " s e l e c -  t i o n a l r e s t r i c t i o n s " , and argues t h a t " t h e presence o f a s e l e c t i o n a l t r i c t i o n v i o l a t i o n i s . . . a n e c e s s a r y and s u f f i c i e n t  res-  c o n d i t i o n f o r the  d i s t i n g u i s h i n g o f metaphor from non-metaphor" (Matthews, 1971, p. 424). Thus  and  (30)  Golf, p l a y s John  (31)  John found sad  a r e both metaphors by t h i s d e f i n i t i o n .  A sentence l i k e  (1) i s n o t a  metaphor i t s e l f but may have an u n d e r l y i n g one l i k e (32)  The e l d e r l y p r o f e s s o r emeritus i s a r o c k .  A c c o r d i n g t o Matthews we a r e guided i n our i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a metaphor b o t h by the metaphor's phrase s t r u c t u r e and by t h e non-metaphoric uses o f t h e c o n s t i t u e n t words c o m p r i s i n g t h e f i g u r e .  The l a t t e r a r e  r e v e a l e d by examination o f t h e l e x i c a l f e a t u r e s o f t h e c o n s t i t u e n t s . Such f e a t u r e s a r e n o t to be taken as semantic p r i m i t i v e s but as l e x i c a l e n t r i e s which w i l l infinitum"  themselves by " s p e c i f i e d  i n t u r n by f e a t u r e s , ad  (Matthews, 1971, p. 419), thus c o n s t i t u t i n g a network o f semantic  relations. An examination o f l e x i c a l f e a t u r e s i n the c o n s t i t u e n t s o f a nominalcopula-nominal f i g u r e can be expected t o r e v e a l both the s i m i l a r i t i e s between the concepts as s t r e s s e d  i n the s t r u c t u r a l model and the s e l e c t i o n a l  r e s t r i c t i o n v i o l a t i o n s as s t r e s s e d by Matthews.  Comparing the m e t a p h o r i c a l  sentence (33) and some a s s o c i a t e d f e a t u r e s w i t h a non-metaphorical w i t h t h e same phrase s t r u c t u r e b u t d i f f e r e n t f e a t u r e s observes t h a t  sentence  ( 3 4 ) , Matthews  (33) v i o l a t e s s e l e c t i o n a l r e s t r i c t i o n s p l a c e d upon "man" by  " w o l f " , w h i l e (34) v i o l a t e s none o f the r e s t r i c t i o n s imposed  upon "man" by  25 "gentleman". (33)  is  The man  a wolf.  +Noun -tcount +concrete +definite +anlmate -hnammal +human -l-adult +adult -KLinguistic +bipedal  (34)  * * * ? ? ? ?  The man  +Noun -fcount +concrete -definite +animate •fmammal -human +quadruped +tail +hairy +nocturnal +viscious +predatory  a  is  -fNoun 4-count +concrete H-animate +human -hnale -l-adult  Matthews  further  gentleman.  +Noun -l-count +concrete +animate +human -hnale -l-adult -fwell-bred +gracious +eonsiderate  contends  nected w i t h the v i o l a t i o n  that  the f e a t u r e s  (in this  case  which a r e most c l o s e l y  [4-human]  or  [-human])  important i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g the metaphor than f e a t u r e s  are  not c l o s e l y  i n the v i o l a t i o n , but he p r o v i d e s no way of d e t e r m i n i n g j u s t which can be c o n s i d e r e d as c l o s e l y view  (18)  as v i o l a t i n g  the grammatical o b j e c t ,  involved.  a selectional  Matthews'  conless involved features  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n would  r e s t r i c t i o n imposed by the v e r b upon  and would thus p r o j e c t  "sleep"  as the  anomalous  26 term i n the f i g u r e .  I t was argued p r e v i o u s l y , however, that t h i s provides  only one of several p o s s i b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s f o r the f i g u r e . Thomas (1969) suggests an a n a l y s i s almost i d e n t i c a l to that of Matthews but adds that i n the case of a nominal-copula-nominal metaphor "when the features of the two nominals are incompatible, those of the second nominal have predominance over those of the f i r s t " (p. 40). C l e a r l y though, t h i s i s only true f o r c e r t a i n selected features and i t i s d i f f i c u l t to determine a_ p r i o r i j u s t which features w i l l predominate. This account of f i g u r a t i v e language provides a convenient way of constructing metaphors and leads to assessment of the e f f e c t s of s p e c i f i e d feature v i o l a t i o n s i n terms of the response v a r i a b l e s proposed here.  Concrete  and a b s t r a c t , animate and inanimate, and human and non-human subject and object r e s t r i c t i o n s are among the more common ones discussed by l i n g u i s t s (e.g., Jacobs & Rosenbaum, 1968), and appear to comprise the more fundamental semantic r e s t r i c t i o n s .  Since the imagery hypothesis i s based  upon the f i r s t of these d i s t i n c t i o n s a t t e n t i o n was d i r e c t e d to the second and t h i r d .  One of these, however, was considered from a d i f f e r e n t  l i n g u i s t i c viewpoint, that of case grammar. 2. S e l e c t i o n a l R e s t r i c t i o n V i o l a t i o n s i n Case Grammar The theory j u s t o u t l i n e d describes metaphor as the v i o l a t i o n of c e r t a i n types of l i n g u i s t i c r e s t r i c t i o n s .  In a " t r a d i t i o n a l " transform-  a t i o n a l grammar, such as that developed by Jacobs and Rosenbaum (1968), these v i o l a t i o n s involve the categories of grammatical subject and gramm a t i c a l object, but as F i l l m o r e (1968) points out, these categories obscure important semantic r e l a t i o n s h i p s . (35) and (36)  John broke the window A hammer broke the window  Thus,.in  27 the  grammatical subjects are semantically d i s t i n c t and the d i f f e r e n c e s  cannot be s p e c i f i e d i n terms of subject r e s t r i c t i o n s required by the verb since the verb i s the same i n both cases.  F i l l m o r e , therefore proposes  an a l t e r n a t e system which he terms a "case" grammar. The case notions comprise a set of u n i v e r s a l , presumably innate, concepts which i d e n t i f y c e r t a i n types of judgements human beings are capable of making about the events that are going on around them, judgements about such matters as who d i d i t , who i t happened t o , and what got changed. The cases that appear to be needed include: Agentive (A), the case of the t y p i c a l l y animate perceived i n s t i g a t o r of the a c t i o n i d e n t i f i e d by the verb. Instrumental ( I ) , the case of the inanimate force or object c a u s a l l y involved i n the a c t i o n or s t a t e i d e n t i f i e d by the verb. Dative (D), the case of the animate being affected by the s t a t e or a c t i o n i d e n t i f i e d by the verb. F a c t i t i v e ( F ) , the case of the object or being r e s u l t i n g from the a c t i o n or s t a t e i d e n t i f i e d by the verb, or understood as a part of the meaning of the verb. Locative ( L ) , the case which i d e n t i f i e s the l o c a t i o n or s p a t i a l o r i e n t a t i o n of the s t a t e or a c t i o n i d e n t i f i e d w i t h the .verb. Objective ( 0 ) , the semantically most n e u t r a l case, the case of anything representable by a noun whose r o l e i n the a c t i o n or s t a t e i d e n t i f i e d by the verb i s i d e n t i f i e d by the semantic i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the verb i t s e l f ; conceivably the concept should be l i m i t e d to things which are a f f e c t e d by the a c t i o n or s t a t e i d e n t i f i e d by the verb. The term i s not to be confused with the notion of d i r e c t o b j e c t , nor with the name of the surface case synonymous w i t h accusative. A d d i t i o n a l cases w i l l surely be needed. ( F i l l m o r e , 1968, pp. 24-25) In case grammar, f i g u r a t i v e language w i l l r e s u l t whenever case r e s t r i c t i o n s are v i o l a t e d . (37) and (38)  For example,  The assumption climbs the tree The volcano burped  both v i o l a t e the agentive requirement of the verb; (39)  The man melted  v i o l a t e s the o b j e c t i v e case; (40)  The b a l l o o n c r i n k l e s the a i r  v i o l a t e s both agentive and o b j e c t i v e case r e s t r i c t i o n s ;  and  28 (24)  Ignorance i n t e r v i e w s the  v i o l a t e s both agentive  jungle  and d a t i v e case r e q u i r e m e n t s .  F i g u r e s of  the  n o m i n a l - c o p u l a - n o m i n a l form, as (9)  The medium i s the message  or a d j e c t i v e and noun, as (16) and  (3)  represent  c r u e l kindness mustardseed  sun  the complex " e s s i v e " case and  r e q u i r e s p e c i a l treatment ( c f .  Simmons, 1972). Developed p r i m a r i l y t o e x p l a i n l i n g u i s t i c p a t t e r n s i n n a t u r a l language, n e i t h e r of t h e s e l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r i e s was p s y c h o l o g i c a l responses.  power.  Some r e s e a r c h  t h a t case grammar has of young c h i l d r e n .  to p r e d i c t  T h e i r v a l u e would be enhanced, however, i f they  c o u l d be shown t o have p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e l e v a n c e explanatory  intended  as w e l l as p u r e l y  s t u d i e s ( e . g . , Brown, 1973)  linguistic  indicates  good correspondence w i t h the p s y c h o l o g i c a l There i s some e v i d e n c e , t o o , t h a t semantic  reality features  can p r e d i c t c o g n i t i v e responses t o c e r t a i n l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e s . Imagery r a t i n g of terms i s a p r o v e n p r e d i c t o r of cued r e c a l l , and h i g h low imagery r a t i n g s c o r r e s p o n d r o u g h l y  and  t o the B-concrete] and [-concrete]  f e a t u r e s commonly used i n t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l a n a l y s i s of l e x i c a l e n t r i e s . I t seems r e a s o n a b l e ,  t h e r e f o r e , t h a t o t h e r semantic f e a t u r e s might a l s o  have p r e d i c t i v e power.  A l t h o u g h n e i t h e r Matthews nor Thomas make any  attempt t o a s s i g n an o r d e r of i m p o r t a n c e or s a l i e n c y t o semantic f e a t u r e s , and  a l t h o u g h Matthews r e f u s e s t o c l a i m any p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e a l i t y a t a l l  for  the f e a t u r e system, a s t u d y by Howe and H i l l m a n  (1973) l e n d s  l o g i c a l credence b o t h t o the s e m a n t i c f e a t u r e t h e o r y and  psycho-  to case grammar.  From a t r a d i t i o n a l l i n g u i s t i c framework, Howe and H i l l m a n  examined  29 c h i l d r e n ' s judgements o f a c c e p t a b i l i t y o f s e m a n t i c a l l y anomalous s t r i n g s o f words.  They found t h a t c h i l d r e n i n k i n d e r g a r t e n through grade 4 r e c o g -  n i z e d animate s u b j e c t v i o l a t i o n s a t an e a r l i e r age than animate o b j e c t v i o l a t i o n s and t h a t s t r i n g s w i t h v i o l a t i o n s o f "more i d i o s y n c r a t i c " s e l e c t i o n a l r e s t r i c t i o n s were a c q u i r e d a t an i n t e r m e d i a t e s t a g e . sentences  or  of the type:  (41)  The s t o r y b e l i e v e d t h e t e a c h e r  (42)  The n e s t b u i l t t h e b i r d  were d e t e c t e d as d e v i a n t a t an e a r l i e r age than sentences  or  Thus,  (43)  The g r a s s d r i e d t h e wind  (44)  The baby f e d t h e mother  of the type:  w h i c h , i n t u r n , were more e a s i l y d e t e c t e d as d e v i a n t than sentences  or  (45)  The c h i l d r e n p l e a s e d t h e s t o r y  (46)  The cowboys warmed t h e f i r e .  Furthermore,  like:  a c q u i s i t i o n o f a l l r e s t r i c t i o n s o c c u r r e d a t a l a t e r age f o r  low-SES c h i l d r e n than f o r upper-SES c h i l d r e n . W h i l e t h e r e i s some doubt as t o whether a l l o f t h e sentences generated by Howe and H i l l m a n as d e v i a n t ones a r e a c t u a l l y d e v i a n t g i v e n the p r o p e r c o n t e x t , f o r example, (43) and (46) above, and (47)  The s k i r t c l e a n e d t h e soap,  t h e i r s t u d y , n e v e r t h e l e s s , i l l u s t r a t e s t h a t t h e semantic can be u s e f u l i n p r e d i c t i n g developmental  f e a t u r e system  t r e n d s and hence, presumably, i n  p r e d i c t i n g t h e i n h e r e n t d i f f i c u l t y , even f o r a d u l t s , o f c e r t a i n  linguistic  structures. U t i l i z i n g t h e K a t z and Fodor (1963) d i s t i n c t i o n o f semantic  markers  and semantic d i s t i n g u i s h e r s , Howe and H i l l m a n d e s c r i b e t h e sentences i n v o l v i n g s p e c i a l r e s t r i c t i o n s as n o n - r e v e r s i b l e by v i r t u e o f r e s t r i c t i o n s  30 at the l e v e l of semantic d i s t i n g u i s h e r s and the animate object and animate subject sentences as non-reversible due to r e s t r i c t i o n s a t the l e v e l of semantic markers.  This d i s t i n c t i o n i s somewhat a r b i t r a r y , and thus  untenable, as Weinreich  (1966) points out, and an a l t e r n a t e explanation i s  therefore required f o r the intermediate d i f f i c u l t y of the s p e c i a l r e s t r i c tion  sentences. For the s i x t e e n examples c i t e d by Howe and Hillman (1973, p. 134)  case grammar provides such an explanation. are predominantly  The animate subject sentences  of the form Agent-Action-Object,  object sentences are predominantly  while the animate  Instrumental-Action-Dative.  The  s p e c i a l r e s t r i c t i o n sentences represent a v a r i e t y of Agent-Aetion-Object, Instrumental-Action-Object, and Agent-Action-Dative  types.  This a n a l y s i s  supports the hypothesis that the r e c a l l , evaluation and comprehension of more complex f i g u r e s of speech may be p r e d i c t a b l e on the basis of which case arguments are v i o l a t e d , and more s p e c i f i c a l l y , that o b j e c t i v e case v i o l a t i o n s w i l l be comprehended more r e a d i l y and at a younger age than dative case v i o l a t i o n s . I f i t i s assumed that r e c a l l , l i k i n g and comprehension of language i s biased by anthropocentrism  as Howe and Hillman's study suggests, i t  can be predicted that v i o l a t i o n s of [-human] and [-animate] features w i l l produce the most s t r i k i n g p s y c h o l o g i c a l e f f e c t s because of the greater a t t e n t i o n given to those features.  The v i o l a t i o n s happen to correspond,  roughly, to p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n and animism (or animation), two common and popular forms of f i g u r a t i v e thought.  I t seems u n l i k e l y , however, that  j u s t any p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n or animism would be l i k e d , but only those i n which there i s an appropriate r e l a t i o n s h i p between terms.  Hence, animism  and p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n were expected to be preferred f i g u r a l forms only w i t h i n  31  bounds prescribed by the s t r u c t u r a l q u a l i t y of the r e l a t i o n s h i p .  Within  high imagery metaphors w i t h moderate inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n s and animations were expected to be p r e f e r r e d , but w i t h i n other f i g u r e s there was l e s s reason to expect d i f f e r e n c e s between them and other types. Examination of animation can be pursued i n case grammar by systemati c a l l y v i o l a t i n g agentive and dative cases and comparing the e f f e c t s of these v i o l a t i o n s w i t h those obtained by v i o l a t i n g cases w i t h inanimate referents.  Here, too, moderate and appropriate v i o l a t i o n were expected  to determine preferred f i g u r e s by producing optimal c o g n i t i v e a r o u s a l , and lower l e v e l s of v i o l a t i o n to p r e d i c t comprehension and r e c a l l by maintaining normal c o g n i t i v e l i n k s .  performance  Adolescents i n higher grades were  expected to supercede those i n lower grades i n comprehension of a l l types of v i o l a t i o n s . C.  L i m i t a t i o n s of Hypotheses, I n t e r a c t i o n s and Related Measures The four hypotheses discussed here represent four ways of t h i n k i n g  about f i g u r a t i v e thought, four ways of d i v i d i n g the observable phenomena of expression so as to i n f e r the unobservable processes that u n d e r l i e them. Although developed independently here i t i s u n l i k e l y that any of the hypotheses alone can account adequately f o r responses to f i g u r a t i v e expressions. Imagery, f o r instance, can give no account of how more abstract f i g u r e s operate, and so a v e r b a l or c o g n i t i v e hypothesis needs to be invoked f o r r a t i o n a l i z i n g response d i f f e r e n c e s amongst abstract f i g u r e s .  Likewise,  case grammars, i n t h e i r present state of development, can neither e x p l a i n nor p r e d i c t responses to s u b t l e r semantic v i o l a t i o n s as i n (48)  The idea melted  where " i d e a " v i o l a t e s none of the l i s t e d case r e s t r i c t i o n s f o r the verb  32 "melted"  yet i s , nevertheless, unacceptable,  o r as i n W e i n r e i c h ' s  (1966)  example: (49)  Mice chase c a t s .  As has been p o i n t e d out, grammatical s u b j e c t and o b j e c t c a t e g o r i e s a l s o obscure  important  semantic  r e l a t i o n s , and  the s t r u c t u r a l t h e o r y ,  p r o v i d e s o n l y a most g e n e r a l h a n d l i n g of more complex f i g u r e s .  too, A  which would i n t e g r a t e the s t r e n g t h s of each of the hypotheses used  theory here  would thus be most v a l u a b l e . In a sense the s t r u c t u r a l h y p o t h e s i s  i s the more g e n e r a l of  the  f o u r c o n s i d e r e d here s i n c e the i n t e g r a t i v e r e l a t i o n s t h a t i t s p e c i f i e s ( s i m i l a r i t y , c o n t i g u i t y , h i e r a r c h y ) can a p p l y v a r i o u s l y to images, e n t r i e s , case c a t e g o r i e s and  other s t r u c t u r a l r e l a t i o n s .  do y e t , but p o t e n t i a l l y c o u l d do,  systems.  The  of a more  relations.  imagery h y p o t h e s i s seems completely  compatible w i t h the  t u r a l h y p o t h e s i s and amenable to b e i n g subsumed w i t h i n i t . images can be contiguous  rela-  linguistic  t h e r e f o r e , be seen as e x t e n s i o n s and r e f i n e m e n t s  g e n e r a l t h e o r y of s t r u c t u r a l The  What i t does not  i s i n c o r p o r a t e t h a t v a s t range of  t i o n s r e p r e s e n t e d by v e r b a l s i n l i n g u i s t i c hypotheses can,  lexical  to one another  another  c a t and a c l a s s to which i t belongs,  mental  i n time, can be a s s e s s e d  s i m i l a r i t y , can be i n t e g r a t e d i n t o a whole and h i e r a r c h i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p to one  Two  struc-  of  their  can even be c o n c e i v e d i n  as, f o r example, i f we  imagine a  such as the c l a s s of animals, p o s s i b l y  v i s u a l i z e d as a c o l l e c t i o n of v a r i o u s animals.  In a d d i t i o n , some of  s t r u c t u r a l concepts  themselves,  i n a g r a p h i c way.  What the imagery h y p o t h e s i s u n i q u e l y p r o v i d e s i s an  e x p l a n a t i o n of our r a p i d way structures.  notably h i e r a r c h y , are r e a d i l y  the  of d e a l i n g w i t h s y n c h r o n o u s l y  conceived  organized  What the s t r u c t u r a l system does i s p r o v i d e a p r i m i t i v e  33 geometry f o r the imaginal system.  U l t i m a t e l y , the adequate explanation of  f i g u r a t i v e language r e s t s upon thorough l o g i c a l and psycho-logical explorations and mappings of semantic space, tasks l i k e l y to e n t a i l an extensive expansion and systematization of e x i s t i n g semantic categories (e.g., Maranda & Kongas Maranda, Note 5;  Maranda, Taylor & Flynn, Note 6).  At t h i s e a r l y stage of t h e o r e t i c a l development e f f e c t s of i n t e r actions amongst the various f a c t o r s — s t r u c t u r e , imagery, features and case r e l a t i o n s — w e r e extremely d i f f i c u l t to a n t i c i p a t e .  As a r e s u l t , the only  s p e c i f i c i n t e r a c t i o n f o r which there were a. p r i o r i expectations was that r e l a t i n g to high imagery metaphors.  The expectation was that those high  imagery metaphors which had moderate s i m i l a r i t y between t h e i r components would be b e t t e r l i k e d than those with e i t h e r more or l e s s s i m i l a r i t y . A number of studies had examined semantic s i m i l a r i t y w i t h a method d i f f e r e n t from that used here, namely, by observing r e a c t i o n time to judgements about word r e l a t i o n s ( C o l l i n s & Q u i l l i a n , 1969, 1972; and Smith, 1973;  Rumelhart & Abrahamson, 1973;  Rips, Shoben,  Schaeffer & Wallace, 1970).  The r e l a t i o n s so examined are commonly h i e r a r c h i c a l as, f o r example, amongst the terms "animal", " b i r d " and " r o b i n " , and r e a c t i o n times to statements l i k e "A r o b i n i s a b i r d " or "A r o b i n i s an animal" are taken as a measure of the distance beween the terms i n an abstract semantic space.  Mathemat-  i c a l techniques can then be applied to examine the i m p l i c i t structures of r e l a t i o n s f o r a given c o l l e c t i o n of words.  The same mathematical tech-  niques (multidimensional s c a l i n g and h i e r a r c h i c a l c l u s t e r i n g analyses) can be applied to other measures of semantic s i m i l a r i t y (Anglin, 1970; Fillenbaum & Rapoport, 1971; t i o n s amongst terms.  Henley, 1969;  Storm, 1975) to r e v e a l r e l a -  In the case of f i g u r a t i v e language there need be  l e s s concern about the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s amongst many words than about those  34 between a few words.  That i s , concern i s f o r a v e c t o r o f semantic  d i s t a n c e s between two concepts a l o n g s e v e r a l  dimensions.  These v a r i o u s i n v e s t i g a t i o n s o f r e a c t i o n time g e n e r a l l y s t r u c t u r e s t h a t a c c o r d w i t h i n t u i t i o n about i n t h e case o f a d u l t s ) . yielded  (at l e a s t  S i n c e a v a r i e t y o f measures o f s i m i l a r i t y  s i m i l a r s t r u c t u r e s i t appeared unnecessary to i n t r o d u c e r e a c t i o n  time experiments  i n t o t h e proposed  judgements o f s i m i l a r i t y . of  the terms i n v o l v e d  revealed  study but t o use i n s t e a d  subjective  S i n c e t h e study was o n l y concerned w i t h p a i r s  words, no mathematical a n a l y s i s o f i n t e r r e l a t i o n s was c o n s i d e r e d  necessary. The c o n t r o l l e d f a c t o r s and c r i t e r i a l measures used i n t h i s study were s e l e c t e d from the many measures o f v e r b a l m a t e r i a l s t h a t have been shown t o be p r e d i c t i v e o f human response t o such m a t e r i a l s . meaningfulness  (m), r a t e d f a m i l i a r i t y  Measures such as r a t e d  (fj) , and o b j e c t i v e frequency of  o c c u r r e n c e (F) w i t h i n a g i v e n corpus have been the most commonly s t u d i e d ( C a r r o l l , D a v i e s , & Richman, 1971; Madigan, 1968).  P a i v i o , 1971b;  The Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l  (Osgood,  Paivio, Yuille, & S u c i , & Tannenbaum,  1957), which p r o v i d e s measures o f emotive meaning o f symbolic m a t e r i a l s has a l s o been w i d e l y used and a v a r i e t y of attempts have been made t o c o n s t r u c t measures which c o u l d supplement imagery.  the s t r o n g e r p r e d i c t o r s such as  K i n t s c h ' s " l e x i c a l c o m p l e x i t y " (1972a, 1972b) and Kamman and  S t r e e t e r ' s c o n c e p t i o n o f two types of a b s t r a c t n e s s (1971) f a l l  into  this  category. C l e a r l y , n o t a l l o f these v a r i a b l e s c o u l d be manipulated meaningfully  i n a s i n g l e study.  The v a r i a b l e s d i s c u s s e d i n the p r e c e d i n g s e c -  t i o n s , t h e r e f o r e , were chosen t o c o n s t i t u t e the independent v a r i a b l e s i n the  proposed  investigation.  Control or randomization of a d d i t i o n a l  35 p s y c h o l o g i c a l c o r r e l a t e s was attempted wherever f e a s i b l e , b u t f o r t h e most p a r t they were l e f t t o v a r y  arbitrarily.  CHAPTER I I I METHODOLOGY A.  Study I : 1.  Nomlnal-Copula-Nominal Figures  Design and M a t e r i a l s L i s t 1: V a r i a t i o n s i n Structure, Imagery and Semantic Feature Violations Table I l i s t s the 24 nominal-copula-nominal f i g u r e s used i n the  3 x 4 x 2 repeated measures design.  The f i r s t f a c t o r was the r e l a t i o n -  ship between the nominals (metonymic, synecdochic, or metaphoric); the second f a c t o r represented four p o s s i b l e combinations of high (I > 4.0) and low (J. < 4.0) imagery p a i r s ;  the t h i r d f a c t o r separated f i g u r e s  i n v o l v i n g human features i n the second concept from those i n v o l v i n g a l l other features.  With the exception of items 14 and 16, a l l of those  i n v o l v i n g human features involved p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n (that i s , v i o l a t i o n of the  [-human] feature of the f i r s t , nominal).  Items 14 and 16 involved  p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n only i n the l o g i c a l l y t r i v i a l sense since i n each case the f i r s t nominal was already p e r s o n i f i e d (that i s , marked by the [+human] feature).  A l l nouns f o r the items were chosen from a . l i s t of 2,448 words  provided by P a i v i o (Note 7).  The nouns used had moderate f a m i l i a r i t y  r a t i n g s (2.5 < f_ < 7.0) and represented what was i n t u i t i v e l y judged to be a wide range of interconcept s i m i l a r i t i e s . Four types of responses were recorded f o r each i t e m — r e c a l l , l i k i n g , comprehension, and inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y scores. 36  37 TABLE I P r o p e r t i e s of the Nominal-copula-nominal  Concept Imagery  a  Semantic Features*  LL  0  A cost i s a patron.  LL  H  3  Negligence i s poverty  LH  0  4  Evidence i s a c r i m i n a l .  LH  H  5  A w a l l i s an entry.  HL  0  6  A b u i l d i n g i s a creator.  HL  H  7  A ship i s an ocean.  HH  0  8  A d o l l a r i s a banker.  HH  H  9  A quantity i s a bonus.  LL  0  10  Deceit i s a charlatan.  LL  H  11  Welfare i s food.  LH  0  12  Wisdom i s a monk.  LH  H  13  A book i s a reminder.  HL  0  14  An owner i s a wholesaler.  HL  H  15  Winter i s snow.  HH  0  A m i n s t r e l i s a musician.  HH  H  17  An obsession i s a f r a n c h i s e . Metaphor  LL  0  18  Chance i s an o r i g i n a t o r .  LL  H  19  An increment i s a saloon.  LH  0  20  Hatred i s a g l u t t o n .  LH  H  21  A s k i l l e t i s a magnitude.  HL  0  22  A horse i s an e c c e n t r i c .  HL  H  23  A thicket i s a c i t y .  HH  0  24  An avalanche i s an acrobat.  HH  H  1  An answer i s a problem.  2  116  a  Structural Relation  Figure  Item  Figures ( L i s t 1)  L=low;  H=high.  Metonym  Synecdoche  0=other than human; H=human.  3  38 Items were tape-recorded i n d i f f e r e n t random orders f o r each of two study and two r e c a l l t r i a l s .  The taped i n s t r u c t i o n s which preceded  each study t r i a l are transcribed i n Appendix A along w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r the other tasks. A seven-point l i k e a b i l i t y r a t i n g scale was prepared w i t h the 24 items l i s t e d randomly on a s i n g l e sheet.  The scale ranged from a r a t i n g  of 1 (DISLIKE VERY MUCH) to a r a t i n g of 7 (LIKE VERY MUCH).  These terminal  scale meanings appeared on the response sheets and intermediate p o s i t i o n s were p r i n t e d on the blackboard as (2) DISLIKE MODERATELY, (3) DISLIKE A LITTLE, (4) NEITHER LIKE NOR DISLIKE, (5) LIKE A LITTLE, (6) LIKE MODERATELY.  The l i k e a b i l i t y r a t i n g scale f o r L i s t 1 appears as Appendix B. A comprehension scale was developed according to the s t r u c t u r a l  p r i n c i p l e s o u t l i n e d previously.  The o r i g i n a l items were examined  independently by three graduate students and some ambiguities thereby removed.  Items and options were randomly ordered and mimeographed i n a  four-page booklet.  A separate glossary containing meanings f o r the more  d i f f i c u l t words i n the f i g u r e s was prepared f o r use w i t h the comprehension scale.  The comprehension scale and glossary f o r L i s t 1 are reproduced  as Appendices C and D. A 5-point r a t i n g scale was also developed f o r assessing the s i m i l a r i t y between the concepts i n L i s t 1.  Ratings ranged from VERY LOW (1),  through LOW ( 2 ) , MODERATE ( 3 ) , HIGH (4) to VERY HIGH (5) s i m i l a r i t y .  More  categories were judged to be meaningless and fewer to l a c k d i s c r i m i n a t o r y power.  The inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y r a t i n g scale i s provided as Appendix  E. Appendix F records the random orders of items f o r the various tasks.  39  L i s t 2:  High Imagery Metaphors with V a r i a t i o n s i n Inter-Concept  S i m i l a r i t y and Semantic Feature V i o l a t i o n s A second l i s t using only high imagery nouns was constructed as a hedge against the p o s s i b i l i t y that the abstract nouns of L i s t 1 would screen the expected e f f e c t s of inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y on l i k e a b i l i t y scores.  Table I I shows the 24 f i g u r e s used i n the 3 x 2  with four r e p l i c a t i o n s w i t h i n each c e l l .  f a c t o r i a l design  The f i r s t f a c t o r was comprised  of three l e v e l s of inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y e s t a b l i s h e d i n t u i t i v e l y by the investigator.  For items 1 through 15 and 17 through 20 the second f a c t o r  separated p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n s ( v i o l a t i o n s of the t-human] feature of the f i r s t nominal) from f i g u r e s e n t a i l i n g other types of semantic v i o l a t i o n .  For  items 16, and 21 through 24 p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n occurred only i n the t r i v i a l sense.  A l l nouns had a rated imagery, 1, greater than or equal to  4.0.  A seven-point l i k e a b i l i t y r a t i n g scale s i m i l a r to that used f o r L i s t 1 was constructed and mimeographed on a s i n g l e sheet.  This scale  appears as Appendix G. 2.  Subj ects The abstract nature of the tasks implied that only i n d i v i d u a l s with  r e l a t i v e l y advanced c o g n i t i v e s k i l l s would be able to cope with them. Consequently, areas.  high-school students were sought from r e l a t i v e l y high SES  Three grade l e v e l s of students from two West Vancouver schools  became a v a i l a b l e .  The three l e v e l s (grades 8, 9 and 10) permitted a  between-groups f a c t o r representing academic achievement to be added to the design.  This grade c o n t r o l , i t was assumed, would provide a rough  i n d i c a t o r of age and developmental l e v e l combined.  For the r e c a l l , l i k i n g  and comprehension measures 27 grade e i g h t , 50 grade nine and 21 grade ten students from E n g l i s h classes p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the study.  Inter-concept  40 TABLE I I Properties of the High Imagery Metaphors ( L i s t 2)  Item  Figure  1  A cigar i s a shoulder.  2  A mountain i s a strawberry.  3  A f l a s k i s a tower.  4  An iceberg i s a bagpipe.  5  A potato  6  A code i s a henchman.  7  A ship i s a grocer.  8  An apple i s a b u t l e r .  9  A city i s a thicket.  10  A horse i s an engine.  11  Fingers are tweezers.  12  A t o r t o i s e i s a tank.  13  An avalanche i s an acrobat.  14  An accordion i s a singer.  15  An octopus i s a busybody.  16  A s o l d i e r i s a butcher.  17  A l o b s t e r i s a scorpion.  18  A dog i s a c a t .  19  A car i s a truck.  20  A typhoon i s a hurricane.  21  A s u l t a n i s a baron.  22  A nun i s a monk.  23  A doctor i s a nurse.  24  A teacher i s a professor.  i s a minstrel.  Inter-concept Similarity  Controlled Features of Second Concept  Low  Non-human  Low  Human  Moderate  Non-human  Moderate  Human  High  Non-human  High  Human  41 s i m i l a r i t y r a t i n g s were obtained from an independent sample of two grade eight E n g l i s h classes comprised of 63 students.  Beyond grade, no further  subject controls (e.g., sex or school) were introduced, p r i m a r i l y because the main concerns of the study were w i t h task v a r i a b l e s .  Roughly equal  numbers of males and females p a r t i c i p a t e d , complete classes being used i n every case. The same 63 grade eight students who provided inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y r a t i n g s f o r L i s t 1 provided l i k e a b i l i t y r a t i n g s f o r L i s t 2 f i g u r e s . 3.  Procedures List 1 Data were c o l l e c t e d over two c l a s s periods spaced from two to seven  days apart.  I n the f i r s t session, each c l a s s was given a b r i e f introduc-  t i o n to the nature of the study and then asked to l i s t e n to the taped instructions.  Questions were then answered, answer sheets f o r the r e c a l l  task d i s t r i b u t e d and the f i r s t study and r e c a l l t r i a l begun.  Answer  sheets were c o l l e c t e d , new ones d i s t r i b u t e d and the second study and r e c a l l task conducted.  This procedure took between 30 and 40 minutes.  Study t r i a l s were spaced with a five-second i n t e r v a l between the end of one item and the beginning of the next.  Test t r i a l s consisted of the  f i r s t nominal and copula f o r each item presented at ten-second i n t e r v a l s . Between the study and test t r i a l s subjects were required to count backwards out loud from 50. seconds.  This counting was also included on the tape f o r 30  I t s i n t e n t was to minimize e f f e c t s of short term memory storage.  In the second session, classes l i s t e n e d to the taped i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r the l i k e a b i l i t y r a t i n g task and the categories were l i s t e d on the blackboard.  The l i k e a b i l i t y r a t i n g scales were then d i s t r i b u t e d , com-  pleted and c o l l e c t e d .  This procedure took about ten minutes.  Finally,  42 the comprehension scale and glossary were d i s t r i b u t e d , taped i n s t r u c t i o n s played, the example on the front page of the scale completed and the task begun.  A l l students were allowed s u f f i c i e n t time to f i n i s h , none  r e q u i r i n g more than 20 minutes. The two grade eight classes who completed the s i m i l a r i t y r a t i n g scale f o r L i s t 1 received a verbal i n t r o d u c t i o n and then l i s t e n e d to the taped i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r the task. pleted and c o l l e c t e d .  The scale was then d i s t r i b u t e d , com-  These procedures took about f i f t e e n minutes per  class. The tasks were presented i n such an order as to ensure equal study time per item f o r each i n d i v i d u a l p r i o r to r e c a l l , and to maximize contact w i t h the figures p r i o r to the comprehension task. List 2 Immediately f o l l o w i n g completion of the s i m i l a r i t y r a t i n g scale the two grade eight classes were played the taped i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r the l i k e a b i l i t y r a t i n g scale and the response categories were w r i t t e n on the blackboard.  The l i k e a b i l i t y r a t i n g scale f o r L i s t 2 was then d i s t r i b u t e d ,  completed and c o l l e c t e d , the procedures again taking about f i f t e e n minutes per c l a s s . 4.  Scoring Students were credited with the score of 1 f o r the correct noun on  the second r e c a l l t e s t t r i a l and 0 f o r any other response on that i n c l u d i n g synonyms of the correct noun.  trial  I n c o r r e c t l y spelled words that  were s t i l l recognizeable were deemed c o r r e c t . The l i k e a b i l i t y and s i m i l a r i t y r a t i n g scales were scored i n a straightforward  manner, each item r e c e i v i n g a score from 1 to 7 and 1 to 5»  r e s p e c t i v e l y , and blank records assigned the n e u t r a l ratings of 4 and 3,  43 respectively. The comprehension s c a l e was scored i n two ways.  Initially,  frequency of choice of each response option f o r each item was w i t h i n each grade.  the  recorded  For the second s c o r i n g , choice of metaphoric  options  was given more c r e d i t than choice of other options because the l i n g u i s t i c frame biased the best meaning toward the metaphoric.  Consequently,  options based on major s i m i l a r i t i e s between concepts were given the score of 4 and those based on minor s i m i l a r i t i e s the score of 3.  Because the  l i n g u i s t i c frame a l s o favored the synecdochal i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h i s option was given the score of 2, the metonymic response the score of 1 and absence of response the score of 0. B.  Study I I : Nominal-Verb-Nominal Figures with V a r i a t i o n s i n Case V i o l a t i o n s and Imagery 1.  Design and M a t e r i a l s Table I I I l i s t s the 24 items used i n the 3 x 8  design.  repeated measures  The f i r s t f a c t o r represented three categories of case v i o l a t i o n s :  agentive alone, agentive and o b j e c t i v e , and agentive and d a t i v e .  The  second f a c t o r represented the eight p o s s i b l e combinations of high and low word imagery.  Items were constructed from terms w i t h moderate f_ r a t i n g s  and what was judged to be a wide range of inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y , h i e r a r c h i c and c o n t i g u i t y r e l a t i o n s . R e c a l l , l i k i n g and comprehension scores were recorded f o r each item. As i n Study I , i n s t r u c t i o n s (Appendix A) and items were tape-recorded i n various random orders f o r each of two study and two r e c a l l  trials.  A l i k e a b i l i t y r a t i n g s c a l e , i d e n t i c a l i n form to that used f o r L i s t 1, was a l s o constructed f o r L i s t 3 (Appendix  H).  44 TABLE I I I P r o p e r t i e s of the Nominal-verb-nominal Figures ( L i s t 3) Concept Imagery LLL  Item  Figure  Case Violations  1  Mastery e s t a b l i s h e s j u s t i c e .  Agentive  2  The item i n d i c a t e s the cheese.  LLH  3  The agreement speaks the d e c e i t .  LHL  4  The s a l t bans the trade.  HLL  5  The assumption climbs the tree.  LHH  6  The j e l l y obtains the sugar.  HLH  7  The basin whimpers the idea.  HHL  8  The hammer sketches the lumber.  HHH  9  The perception abandons the i n c i d e n t .  a  Agentive  LLL  10  The idea permits the sky.  and  LLH  11  Truth f o l d s the advantage.  Objective  LHL  12  The piano condemns boredom.  HLL  13  The i l l u s i o n tramples the mirage.  LHH  14  The l a n t e r n attends the c e l l a r .  HLH  15  The earth caresses the emotion.  HHL  16  The b a l l o o n c r i n k l e s the a i r .  HHH  17  The q u a l i t y defeats the d e s c r i p t i o n .  18  The estimate f l a t t e r s the cost.  19  The length cheers the o r i g i n .  20  The decoy encourages the p o s i t i o n .  HLL  21  Ignorance interviews the jungle.  LHH  22  The pebble ousts the r i v e r .  HLH  23  The p r a i r i e questions the d i s t i n c t i o n .  HHL  24  The d a f f o d i l c r i p p l e s the shadow.  HHH  L = low imagery r a t i n g ;  H = high imagery r a t i n g .  Agentive  LLL  and  LLH  Dative  LHL  3  45 Following the p r i n c i p l e s of a b s t r a c t i o n and i n t e g r a t i o n that had been suggested  as fundamental i n the understanding of more complex f i g u r e s  of speech, a m u l t i p l e choice comprehension s c a l e was developed items i n L i s t 3.  f o r the  Items were again examined by three graduate students,  improvements incorporated, and both items and options randomized before being mimeographed and combined i n t o a four-page booklet.  Again, a  separate glossary f o r the more d i f f i c u l t words was prepared. hension scale and glossary f o r L i s t 3 are reproduced  The compre-  as Appendices J and  K, and the random orders used i n each task recorded i n Appendix L. 2.  Subjects D i f f e r e n t students from the same schools as those p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n  Study I p a r t i c i p a t e d i n Study I I .  For Study I I , 26 grade e i g h t , 36 grade  nine and 17 grade ten students from E n g l i s h classes took p a r t . 3.  Procedures Procedures were i d e n t i c a l to those used f o r the r e c a l l , l i k i n g and  comprehension aspects of Study I .  R e c a l l t e s t t r i a l s presented only the  f i r s t nominal f o r each item. 4.  Scoring R e c a l l , l i k e a b i l i t y and comprehension scores were recorded f o r each  i n d i v i d u a l on each item of L i s t 3 i n a manner s i m i l a r to that employed f o r L i s t 1.  R e c a l l was only c r e d i t e d when both verb and noun were c o r r e c t l y  recalled.  Changes of verb tense and p l u r a l i z a t i o n s of nouns were  credited.  Response options f o r the comprehension task were weighted as  follows:  abstract integrated option, 4 p o i n t s ;  option, 3 points;  concrete integrated  abstract non-integrated o p t i o n , 2 p o i n t s ;  non-integrated o p t i o n , ! p o i n t ;  no response, 0 p o i n t s .  concrete  CHAPTER IV RESULTS  A.  Study I T a b l e s I V through V I I d e t a i l t h e mean r e c a l l , l i k e a b i l i t y and  comprehension s c o r e s f o r each grade, s t r u c t u r e , imagery, semantic and i n t e r - c o n c e p t s i m i l a r i t y l e v e l o f t h e L i s t 1 m a t e r i a l s .  feature  The s t a t i s -  t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of the d i f f e r e n c e s d i s p l a y e d i n score d i s t r i b u t i o n s was a s s e s s e d i n two ways.  Because r e c a l l s c o r e s f o r i n d i v i d u a l  items  were d i s c o n t i n u o u s d a t a (1 o r 0 ) , and because an i n d i v i d u a l i t e m sometimes r e p r e s e n t e d a f a c t o r l e v e l o f i n t e r e s t , comparisons amongst c e l l  frequen-  c i e s were f i r s t a s s e s s e d n o n - p a r a m e t r i c a l l y w i t h t h e maximum l i k e l i h o o d X  2  - statistic  (Bock, 1975, pp. 551-552;  are reported i n Table  Bock & Y a t e s , 1973).  These  VIII.  For t h e purposes o f comparing r e c a l l s c o r e s w i t h o t h e r measures i t was assumed t h a t a l l s c o r e s were drawn from l a r g e r p o p u l a t i o n s o f n o r m a l l y d i s t r i b u t e d scores.  The v a l i d i t y o f t h i s assumption was supported by  goodness o f f i t t e s t s which i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f s c o r e s over a l l f a c t o r s d i d n o t d e v i a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y from n o r m a l i t y .  For  r e c a l l , x ( 1 3 ) = 13.46, £ > .05; Kolmogorov-Smirnov D_ = .056, £ > .05. 2  F o r l i k e a b i l i t y , x ( D = 21.31, £ > .05; D = .035, _p_ > .05. 2  2  p r e h e n s i o n , x ( 1 9 ) = 29.57, £ > .05; D = .09, £ > .05. 2  F o r com-  For s i m i l a r i t y  r a t i n g s , x ( 1 6 ) ^ 25.81, £ > .05; D = .05, £ > .05. 2  For comparisons amongst t h e s t i m u l u s f a c t o r s c e l l s i z e s were e q u a l 46  TABLE IV Mean Scores f o r L i s t 1 Figures by Embedded S t r u c t u r a l Relations  Criterion Recall  3  Likeability  Grade  Structure Synecdoche  Metonym  Metaphor  Totals  8  5.48  4.67  3.52  13.67  9  5.76  5.42  4.32  15.50  10  6.14  5.67  5.33  17.14  A l l Mean Grades sd  5.76 (1.40)  5.26 (1.33)  4.32 (1.85)  15.35 (3.72)  8  35.70  35.11  32.18  103.00  9  37.52  36.02  33.66  107.20  10  38.95  36.86  32.71  108.52  A l l Mean Grades sd  37.33 (7.08  35.95 (5.47)  33.05 (6.56)  106.33 (14.75)  8  20.92  22.22  25.04  68.18  9  21.68  22.20  25.40  69.28  10  21.95  22.33  25.81  70.10  21.53 (4.41)  22.23 (3.41)  25.39 (3.10)  69.15 (7.83)  b  Comprehension  c  A l l Mean Grades sd  T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l =  8  ^ T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 56 T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 32  marginals = 24 marginals = 168 marginals = 96  TABLE V Mean Scores f o r L i s t 1 Figures by Imagery Levels Criterion  Recall  3  Likeability  Grade  Imagery Levels HL HH  LL  LH  8  1.44  3.26  3.63  5.33  9  2.10  3.48  4.28  5.64  10  2.05  4.43  5.00  5.67  A l l Mean Grades sd  1.91 (1.30)  3.62 (1.41)  4.26 (1.55)  5.56 (.75)  8  23.92  23.89  25.11  30.07  9  25.00  26.62  26.28  29.30  10  24.10  27.05  26.71  30.67  A l l Mean Grades sd  24.51 (4.75)  25.96 (5.65)  26.05 (4.83)  29.81 (6.03)  8  16.81  17.26  16.96  17.15  9  17.30  17.46  16.92  17.60  10  17.38  17.38  17.43  17.90  A l l Mean Grades sd  17.18 (2.96)  17.39 (3.16)  17.04 (3.54)  17.54 (2.21)  b  Comprehension  c  cl  T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 6 ^ T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 42 T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 24 ^L = low imagery r a t i n g ;  H = high imagery r a t i n g  TABLE VI Mean Scores f o r L i s t 1 Figures by Semantic Feature V i o l a t i o n s  Criterion Recall"  8  7.15  6.52  9  8.38  7.12  10  9.24  7.90  8.22 (2.04)  7.12 (2.01)  8  51.48  51.52  9  54.42  52.78  10  54.62  53.90  53.65 (8.33)  52.67 (8.28)  8  34.15  34.04  9  35.12  34.16  10  34.90  35.19  34.81 (4.39)  34.34 (4.86)  All Grades Likeability  Feature V i o l a t i o n s Human (H) Non-human (0)  Grade  Mean sd  1 3  All Grades Comprehension  Mean sd  0  All Grades  Mean sd  T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 12 ^ T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 84 T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 48  TABLE V I I Mean Scores f o r L i s t 1 Figures by Inter-concept S i m i l a r i t y  Criterion Recall  3  Grade 8  1.92  3.37  3.00  5.37  9  2.48  4.06  3.48  5.48  10  3.43  4.48  3.62  5.62  2.53 (1.59)  3.96 (1.24)  3.38 (1.17)  8  22.30  25.93  25.89  28.89  9  23.30  27.62  27.00  29.28  10  22.62  27.00  27.76  31.14  22.88 (5.29)  27.02 (4.71)  26.86 (4.65)  29.57 (6.06)  8  17.37  16.89  18.11  15.81  9  17.76  16.74  18.62  16.16  10  18.05  17.19  18.33  16.52  17.71 (2.94)  16.88 (2.83)  18.42 (3.15)  16.14 (3.05)  All Grades Likeability  Inter-concept S i m i l a r i t y moderately low low high high  Mean sd  5.48 (.79)  b  All Grades Comprehension  Mean sd  c  All Mean Grades sd  a  T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 6  ^ T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 42 T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 24  TABLE V I I I Non-parametric A n a l y s i s of L i s t 1 R e c a l l Data Likelihood Component  C e l l s Contrasted  x  1.  Metonyms > synecdoches & metaphors  2.  Synecdoches > metaphors  3.  Imagery:  HH > (HL,LH,LL)  4.  Imagery:  (HL & LH) > LL  5.  Imagery:  2  12.27**  df 1  3.30  1  182.06**  1  48.90**  1  HL > LH  6.90*  1  6.  Features: Non-human > Human  9.18*  1  7.  Negative quadratic trend over four similarity levels  3.13  1  8.  P o s i t i v e l i n e a r trend over four similarity levels  Note.  82.26**  1  Contrasts 1 through 6 are those of t h e o r e t i c a l relevance  from a f u l l model of 23 orthogonal contrasts amongst response f a c t o r s across grades.  Contrasts 7 and 8 are from a separate  a n a l y s i s using only three orthogonal contrasts.  The eight  contrasts include the only s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t ones from amongst a l l grade and response f a c t o r comparisons. *p_ < .05 **p_ < .01  52 and l a r g e (N = 98) and v a r i a n c e s were s u f f i c i e n t l y homogeneous t h a t adjustment (Box, 1954; Myers, 1972) made no change i n t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the r e l e v a n t F _ - s t a t i s t i c s .  S i n c e a l l n e c e s s a r y assumptions were t h e r e -  f o r e met, s c o r e s were s u b j e c t e d t o m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e p r o c e d u r e s ( F i n n , 1972, 1974).  F o r comparisons between grades d i s t r i b u -  t i o n s were assumed t o be normal and v a r i a n c e s homogeneous.  Although c e l l  s i z e s were u n e q u a l (27, 50, 2 1 ) , t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f t h i s assumption b e i n g v a l i d was improved by t h e f a i r l y l a r g e sample s i z e o f 98. Twenty-one o r t h o g o n a l c o n t r a s t s amongst t h e r e p e a t e d measures were examined a c r o s s and between grades f o r t h e i n i t i a l a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e . A c r o s s grades t h i s a n a l y s i s produced a m u l t i v a r i a t e J_(21,75) = 1039.87, _p_ < .001.  L i n e a r and q u a d r a t i c t r e n d s over grade proved t o be n o n - s i g -  n i f i c a n t , F(21,75) = 1.14 and F(21,75) = .53, r e s p e c t i v e l y . A second m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s u s i n g n i n e o r t h o g o n a l c o n t r a s t s based on t h e i n t e r - c o n c e p t s i m i l a r i t y l e v e l s o f t h e i t e m s was performed on t h e same d a t a .  A c r o s s grades t h e r e were o v e r a l l s i g n i f i c a n t  differ-  ences, F_(9,87) = 1761.14, p_ < .001, b u t between grades m u l t i v a r i a t e d i f f e r e n c e s were a g a i n n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t , F = 1.36 and J_ = 1.30 f o r t h e f i r s t and second H e l m e r t - t y p e c o n t r a s t s between g r a d e s , ( i . e . , e i g h t v e r s u s n i n e and t e n , and n i n e v e r s u s t e n ) . F o l l o w i n g Hummel and S l i g o (1971) and F i n n (1974, p. 156) wherever t h e r e a r e s i g n i f i c a n t m u l t i v a r i a t e F_ r a t i o s t h e u n i v a r i a t e F_ r a t i o s f o r each c o n t r a s t were i n s p e c t e d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e s o u r c e o f t h e v a r i a t i o n . These a r e r e p o r t e d i n T a b l e I X . A l t h o u g h s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t c o n t r a s t s were used, comparison o f t h e n o n - p a r a m e t r i c a n a l y s i s and t h e a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e f o r r e c a l l  indicates  t h a t t h e former p r o v i d e s more c o n s e r v a t i v e t e s t s o f t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f  TABLE IX R e s u l t s of A n a l y s e s of V a r i a n c e f o r L i s t  C e l l s Contrasted (combined grades)  U n i v a r i a t e Analyses Likeability Comprehension MS F MS F  Recall MS  Structure 1."' Metonyms & synecdoches > m e t a p h o r s 2.  1 R e c a l l , L i k e a b i l i t y and Comprehension Scores  3  Metonyms > Synecdoches  3  563.52  57.96***  5,042.95  24.50  13.65***  185.97  26.28*** 4.91*  4,816.01  93.71***  48.58  2.02  100.01  1.37  .38  .01  Imagery 3. HH > (HL,LH,LL)  4,663.02  423.48***  16,303.02  4.  (HL,LH) > LL  1,616.37  215.37***  876.01  5.  HL > LH  39.22  21.00***  .82  .02  11.80  ,73  119.02  46.61***  94.04  1.59  20.66  .83  6,694.89  295.62***  38,880.70  44.45  19.28***  200.00  Semantic F e a t u r e s 6. Non-human > human Similarity 7. L i n e a r t r e n d (positive) 8.  Quadratic t r e n d  Note.  0  51.48*** 10.37**  85.57*** 3.66  986.95  6.33**  202.87  6.50**  H = h i g h imagery, L = low imagery. For c o n t r a s t s 1 through 6 m u l t i v a r i a t e F_(21,75) = 1039.87, £ < .0001; f o r c o n t r a s t s 7 and 8 m u l t i v a r i a t e F(9,87) = 1761.14, £ < .0001; d . f . f o r u n i v a r i a t e Fs a r e (1,95).  The d i r e c t i o n o f t h i s d i f f e r e n c e i s r e v e r s e d f o r Comprehension. ^For R e c a l l t h e q u a d r a t i c trend i s p o s i t i v e ; *£ < .05;  **£ < .01;  ***£ < .001.  f o r Comprehension the t r e n d i s n e g a t i v e .  54 the e f f e c t s .  Under the a n a l y s i s of variance assumptions, metonyms and  synecdoches were better r e c a l l e d , as expected, than metaphors, and metonyms b e t t e r than synecdoches.  Also as expected, items composed of high imagery  constituents were r e c a l l e d better than those of low imagery c o n s t i t u e n t s . This was manifested by s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n c r e a s i n g - r e c a l l scores over low-low (LL), low-high (LH), high-low (HL) and high-high (HH) imagery noun p a i r s . Presence of human semantic feature v i o l a t i o n s r e s u l t e d i n lower scores than presence of non-human feature v i o l a t i o n s . Mean inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y r a t i n g s ranged from 1.51 f o r item 21 to 4.40 f o r item 16.  With the 24 items divided evenly i n t o four l e v e l s  of rated s i m i l a r i t y a s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e l i n e a r trend appeared i n r e c a l l scores over the four l e v e l s from lowest to highest l e v e l of inter-concept similarity.  I n the a n a l y s i s of variance a s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e quadratic  trend i n r e c a l l was also recorded over s i m i l a r i t y l e v e l s . Students c o n s i s t e n t l y reported l i k i n g the metonyms and synecdoches better than the metaphors, and the metonyms b e t t e r than the synecdoches. Their preference f o r figures w i t h a preponderance of high imagery components was also s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t but type of feature v i o l a t i o n had no  s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on l i k e a b i l i t y r a t i n g s .  L i k e a b i l i t y was also affected by inter-concept s i m i l a r i t y l e v e l so that there was a s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e l i n e a r trend over the four categories from low to high s i m i l a r i t y .  The a n t i c i p a t e d negative quadratic  trend d i d not m a t e r i a l i z e at a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l e v e l . On the comprehension  scale students proved to be responsive both to  the s i m i l a r i t y - b a s e d meaning encouraged by the copular verb and to the p a r t i c u l a r conceptual ..relation ( c o n t i g u i t y , hierarchy or s i m i l a r i t y ) embedded i n each f i g u r e .  Table X d e t a i l s the frequency and percentage of  55 TABLE  X  Frequency and Percentage of S e l e c t i o n of Comprehension Scale Response Options f o r L i s t 1'Figures  Grade 8  n=648 9  n=1200 10  n=504 All  Embedded Conceptual Structure  none  contiguity  Response Options minor hierarchy s i m i l a r i t y  major similarity  metonym  7  64  31  17  97  synecdoche  5  26  72  22  91  metaphor  8  19  35  29  125  20 (3.1)  109 (16.8)  138 (21.3)  68 (10.5)  total  f %  313 (48.3)  metonym  5  121  56  21  197  synecdoche  4  45  150  39  162  metaphor  1  36  90  38  235  10 (.8)  202 (16.8)  296 (24.7)  metonym  1  50  23  11  83  synecdoche  0  14  76  9  69  metaphor  2  10  37  18  101  74 (14.7)  136 (26.9)  total  f %  total  f %  metonym synecdoche metaphor total  f  3 (.6)  98 (8.2)  38 (7.5)  594 (49.5)  253 (50.2)  13  235  110  49  377  9  85  298  70  322  11  65  162  85  461  33  385  570  204  1160  n=2352 Note.  Underlined f i g u r e s are those i n expected high frequency c e l l s .  56 s e l e c t i o n of each comprehension scale option by grade and by the embedded conceptual s t r u c t u r e and i l l u s t r a t e s the o v e r r i d i n g tendency f o r students to give responses based on major s i m i l a r i t i e s to a l l items but e s p e c i a l l y metaphors, and secondary tendencies to respond on a c o n t i g u i t y basis to metonyms and on a h i e r a r c h i c a l basis to synecdoches.  No choice and  choices based on minor inter-coneept s i m i l a r i t i e s proved to be l e s s common responses f o r a l l students. To assess the strength of these tendencies a measure was derived by contrasting the. frequency of responses i n the expected high frequency c e l l with the frequency of responses i n the remaining c e l l s f o r both s t r u c t u r a l and response option dimensions.  x  t e s t s of the comparisons  r e s u l t i n g from these Kronecker products representing the s t r u c t u r e by response option i n t e r a c t i o n produce the f o l l o w i n g values: f o r c o n t i g u i t y response to metonyms compared w i t h other responses, x ( l ) 2  =  _p_ < .001; f o r h i e r a r c h i c response to synecdoches, x ( l ) 2  =  82.74, 62.65,  2_ < .001; f o r minor s i m i l a r i t y based responses to metaphors, x ( l )  4.58,  _p_ < .05; f o r major s i m i l a r i t y based responses to metaphors, x(-*-)  63.46,  2  2  JD < .001.  =  =  These f i g u r e s i n d i c a t e that the observed responsiveness to the  embedded structures i s i n f a c t s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t .  Again, however,  no s i g n i f i c a n t grade d i f f e r e n c e s appeared, although the percentages of c o n t i g u i t y responses to metonyms decreased w i t h grade, and percentages of h i e r a r c h i c responses to synecdoches and major s i m i l a r i t y responses to metaphors both increased as predicted.  These trends are i l l u s t r a t e d i n  4 For example, i n assessing c o n t i g u i t y responses to metonyms the Kronecker product was formed by crossing the vector of s t r u c t u r e f a c t o r c o e f f i c i e n t s (2, -1, -1) w i t h the vector of response option c o e f f i c i e n t s (-1, 4, -1, -1, - 1 ) . This vector was then used to transform the observed frequencies i n the data matrix f o r the x a n a l y s i s . 2 -  57 Figure 1. With the metaphorically weighted scoring system thus v a l i d a t e d , examination of t h i s kind of comprehension i n l i g h t of the stimulus dimensions was p o s s i b l e (Table X I ) . understood  Metaphors were s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r  than e i t h e r metonyms or synecdoches combined, and n e i t h e r of  the l a t t e r was superior to the other.  Furthermore, neither the imagery  l e v e l s nor the human semantic features of the constituent nouns had s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t s on f i g u r e comprehension.  Linear and negative quad-  r a t i c trends i n comprehension scores over s i m i l a r i t y l e v e l s , however, were both s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . F i n a l l y , when mean scores f o r l i k e a b i l i t y , r e c a l l and comprehension were entered as the f i r s t three c o n t r a s t s , step-down a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d that the e f f e c t s i n terms of the three measures were r e l a t i v e l y  indepen-  dent, F(l,95) = 5093.71, £ < .0001, F(l,94) = 10.55, £ < .01, F(l,93) = 120.39, £ < .0001, r e s p e c t i v e l y . Item analyses of the scales (Nelson, 1974) showed them to have moderate i n t e r n a l consistency, the Hoyt estimates of r e l i a b i l i t y being  .77  f o r r e c a l l , .71 f o r l i k e a b i l i t y , .58 f o r comprehension, and .72 f o r similarity.  The lowest of these r e f l e c t s the p l u r a l i t y of i n t e r p r e t a -  tions acceptable to students on the comprehension scale. L i s t 2 had been designed j u s t i n case the expected negative quadr a t i c trend i n l i k e a b i l i t y scores over s i m i l a r i t y l e v e l s was obscured  by  other v a r i a b l e s such as the v a r i e t y of embedded s t r u c t u r a l r e l a t i o n s or low imagery f i g u r e c o n s t i t u e n t s .  L i s t 2 was comprised s o l e l y of meta-  phors w i t h high imagery constituent nouns.  L i k e a b i l i t y scores were  found to be d i s t r i b u t e d normally, x ( i 8 ) = 27.14, £ > .05; 2  £ > .05, and across s i m i l a r i t y l e v e l s the expected trend was  D = .12, clearly  58  Response  Figure  1.  Percentage for  List  of  cases  selecting  1 Comprehension  each  Scores  Options  type  of  response  option  present  (Table X I ) .  18.27, _p_ < .0001, was  The  source of a s i g n i f i c a n t m u l t i v a r i a t e F_(3,60) of  l o c a t a b l e as a n e g a t i v e q u a d r a t i c t r e n d F_(l,62) =  43.07, _p_ < .001, but t h e r e was  neither s i g n i f i c a n t linear trend,  F_(l,62) = .07, _p_ > .05, nor e f f e c t due t o human semantic t i o n s , ]?(1,62) = 3.61, _p_ > .05.  feature v i o l a -  F i g u r e 2 compares t h e r e l a t i v e  i t y s c o r e s of L i s t s 1 and 2 over s i m i l a r i t y  likeabil-  levels.  The Hoyt e s t i m a t e of r e l i a b i l i t y f o r the L i s t 2 l i k e a b i l i t y s c a l e was  .84, i n d i c a t i n g good i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y .  B.  Study I I T a b l e s X I I through XV summarize t h e mean r e c a l l , l i k e a b i l i t y  comprehension s c o r e s f o r the n o m i n a l - v e r b - n o m i n a l f o r L i s t 1 both non-parametric  and  f i g u r e s of L i s t 3.  and p a r a m e t r i c methods ( T a b l e s XVI  As  and  XVII) were used f o r a s s e s s i n g the d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e c a l l a b i l i t y .  The  d i s t r i b u t i o n of r e c a l l s c o r e s a g a i n d i d not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from a Normal d i s t r i b u t i o n ( x ( 9 ) = 14.66, _p_ > .05) and so t h e two 2  produced comparable r e s u l t s , w i t h t h e n o n - p a r a m e t r i c b e i n g t h e more c o n s e r v a t i v e of the  techniques  method once a g a i n  two.  The l i k e a b i l i t y r a t i n g and comprehension s c o r e d i s t r i b u t i o n s were b o t h skewed l e f t , M3 = -.437 leptokurtic,  = 1.89  and  and M3 = -1.128 r e s p e c t i v e l y , and were b o t h = 2.15  r e s p e c t i v e l y , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t the  f i g u r e s were g e n e r a l l y w e l l l i k e d and w e l l comprehended. peakedness of t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s r e s u l t e d i n the x t e s t s 2 -  The  skew and  indicating  s i g n i f i c a n t d e p a r t u r e s from N o r m a l i t y but the Kolmogorov-Smirnov t e s t s i n d i c a t i n g n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t departures £ < .05;  D = .09, _p_ > .05;  p_ = .09, _p_ > .05).  ( f o r l i k e a b i l i t y , x (16) = 29.54, 2  f o r comprehension, x ( l ? ) 2  =  38.72, £ <  S i n c e v a r i a n c e s were r e l a t i v e l y homogeneous and  .01; the  TABLE X I Likeability  S c a l e Mean Scores f o r L i s t 2 F i g u r e s  Controlled Semantic Features of Second Concept Non-human  Inter-concept Similarity low medium high Mean sd  Human  Mean sd  Total  Mean sd  Note.  15.49  18. 11  (5.04)  (4. 66) (4.28)  13.48  17. 35  (3.74)  (5. 13) (4.26)  28.97  35. 46  (7.52)  (8. 32) (7.58)  total 47 .71  14.11  (10 .0) 45 .95  15.13  (9 .34) 93 .67  29.24  (17 .94)  T o t a l po s s i b l e s c o r e per c e l l = 28  61  Relative Likeability Score  I  low  l  mod. low  I  med.  1  mod.  _L_  nigh  high  S i m i l a r i t y Levels F i g u r e 2.  Comparison of R e l a t i v e L i k e a b i l i t y Scores a t d i f f e r e n t s i m i l a r i t y l e v e l s f o r L i s t s 1 and 2 ( R e l a t i v e L i k e a b i l i t y = Mean observed l i k e a b i l i t y s c o r e * maximum p o s s i b l e l i k e a b i l i t y s c o r e x 100)  TABLE X I I Mean Scores f o r L i s t 3 Figures by Case V i o l a t i o n s  Criterion Recall  3  Grade  A  Cases V i o l a t e d A+0  0  1.54  1.96  1.27  4.77  9  1.72  2.08  1.19  5.00  10  1.76  2.53  2.00  6.29  2.13 (1.35)  1.39 (1.35)  5.20 (2.83)  8  28.50  31.88  31.50  91.88  9  29.67  34.53  33.33  97.53  10  35.00  39.65  39.53  114.18  34.76 (8.01)  34.06 (7.98)  99.25 (20.72)  All Mean 30.43 Grades sd (7.21) Comprehension 0  8  23.31  26.08  27.31  76.69  9  24.22  27.22  25.39  76.83  10  26.12  27.60  28.23  82.06  26.95 (3.79)  26.63 (3.36)  77.91 (8.29)  All Mean 24.33 Grades sd .(3.42) Note. a  Totals  8  All Mean 1.67 Grades sd (1.06) Likeability  A+D  A = Agentive case, 0 = o b j e c t i v e case, D = Dative case.  T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 8; marginals = 24  b„ T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 56; marginals = 168 cT o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 32; marginals = 96  TABLE X I I I Mean R e c a l l Scores f o r L i s t 3 F i g u r e s by Component Imagery L e v e l s All Grades  Component Imagery Levels  8  LLL  .04  .22  .18  .15  (.46)  LHL  .00  .14  .23  .11  (.36)  LLH  .38  .39  .82  .48  (.55)  LHH  .69  .53  .76  .63  (.74)  HLL  .62  .72  .88  .72  (.68)  HHL  .50  .30  .35  .38  (.56)  HLH  .85  1.08  1.06  1.00  (.90)  HHH  1.69  1.61  2.00  1.72  (.93)  Note.  Grade 9  T o t a l p o s s i b l e per  10  cell = 3  Mean  sd  TABLE XIV L i k e a b i l i t y Scale Mean Scores f o r L i s t 3 Figures by Component Imagery Levels Component Imagery Levels  8  Grade 9  10  < Mean  LLL  11. 08  11. 47  14. 24  11. 94  (3. 93)  LHL  9. 46  10. 17  13. 65  10. 68  (3. 64)  LLH  11.,42  11. 72  13. 06  11. 91  (2.,86)  LHH  12.,23  13. 53  16.,12  13.,66  (4. .37)  HLL  11,.54  11. 72  13..12  11.,96  (3..30)  HHL  10,.15  10. 64  13,.18  11,.02  (4,.26)  HLH  12 .92  13.,53  14,.24  13,.48  (3 .97)  HHH  13 .08  14..75  16 .59  14 .59  (4 .40)  Note.  T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 21  TABLE XV Comprehension Scale Mean Scores f o r L i s t 3 Figures by Component Imagery Levels Component Imagery Levels  All Grades Mean sd  8  Grade 9  LLL  9.81  10.11  11.06  10.22  (1.65)  LHL  9.73  9.33  10.12  9.63  (1.88)  LLH  9.12  8.64  8.76  8.82  (1.57)  LHH  10.46  10.83  11.00  10.75  (1.58)  HLL  9.81  9.47  10.88  9.88  (2.02)  HHL  7.85  8.42  9.29  8.42  (1.80)  HLH  9.96  10.22  11.00  10.30  (1.91)  HHH  9.96  9.80  9.94  9.89  (1.90)  Note.  10  T o t a l p o s s i b l e per c e l l = 12  TABLE XVI Non-parametric Analysis of L i s t 3 R e c a l l Data Likelihood Component C e l l s Contrasted 1.  Two case v i o l a t i o n s > one v i o l a t i o n  2.  Objective icase > dative case  3.  Imagery A:  (LHH,HLH,HHL,HHH) > (LLL,LLH,LHL,HLL)  4.  Imagery B:  HHH > (LHH,HLH,HHL)  5.  Imagery C:  HLH > (LHH,HHL)  6.  Imagery D:  LHH > HHL  7.  Imagery E:  8. 9.  x  2  df  .00  1  3.16  1  61.37**  1  119.70**  1  17.06**  1  8.71*  1  (HLL,LHL,LLH) > LLL  11.36**  1  Imagery F:  (HLL,LLH) > LHL  12.07**  1  Imagery G:  HLL > LLH  Note.  2.00  1  These nine contrasts are those of most t h e o r e t i c a l i n t e r e s t from a f u l l model of 23 orthogonal contrasts.  *£ < .05 **£ < .01  TABLE XVII Results  of Analyses  o f V a r i a n c e f o r L i s t 3 R e c a l l , L i k e a b i l i t y and Comprehension  Scores  U n i v a r i a t e Analyses C e l l s Contrasted (combined grades)  Recall MS F(l,76)  Case 1. Two v i o l a t i o n s > one v i o l a t i o n  2. 84  2.  Objective  3  > dative  Imagery 3. (HHH,HLH,HHL,HLL) > (LHH,LLH,LHL,LLL)  .47  Likeability MS F(l,76) 3  5008.11  42.24***  38.29  44. 06  20.01***  471. 51  122.35***  652.26  1.09  5.63*  Comprehension MS F(l,76) b  1915.46  43. i o * * *  7.91  • 65  67.46  3. 48  .14  164.51  7. 66**  28.92***  729.11  58. 13***  4.  (LHH,LLH,LHL) > LLL  47. 10  21.96***  15.51  5.  LHH > (LLH,LHL)  35. 56  15.97***  1761.13  6.  LLH > LHL  10. 64  38.49***  119.10  9.24**  51.85  7.  (HHH,HLH,HHL) > HLL  69. 32  21.41***  816.66  7.93**  87.20  2. 74  8.  HHH > (HLH,HHL)  336. 32  86.33***  1732.91  34.15***  87.20  5. 41*  9.  HLH > HHL  30. 39  26.97***  476.40  25.40***  281.02  Note.  HHL = h i g h imagery noun, h i g h imagery v e r b ,  low imagery noun  10. 16**  47. 69***  (etc.)  M u l t i v a r i a t e F(21,56) = 425.80, £ < .0001. Multivariate * £ < .05 * * £ < .01 * * * p < .001  F(9,68)  = 17.43, £ < .0001.  ^  68 t o t a l sample s i z e was f a i r l y l a r g e , i t was judged that these minor departures from Normality would not s e r i o u s l y bias the r e s u l t s df the F - t e s t s . Accordingly, m u l t i v a r i a t e analyses of variance were conducted as usual. Because of computer program l i m i t a t i o n s two separate analyses of variance were used, one w i t h 21 contrasts and one w i t h nine contrasts. In both cases there was a s i g n i f i c a n t o v e r a l l e f f e c t across grades, m u l t i v a r i a t e F(21,56) = 425.80, _p_ < .0001, and m u l t i v a r i a t e F(9,68) = 17.43, £ < .0001. Contrary to expectations the number of case v i o l a t i o n s involved i n a f i g u r e had no s i g n i f i c a n t bearing upon i t s r e c a l l , but o b j e c t i v e case v i o l a t i o n s were b e t t e r r e c a l l e d than dative case v i o l a t i o n s , a s u p e r i o r i t y judged s i g n i f i c a n t under the a n a l y s i s of variance assumptions but nons i g n i f i c a n t under the more conservative x  2  analysis.  Contrasts w i t h respect to imagery were formulated s l i g h t l y  differ-  ently i n the parametric a n a l y s i s than i n the non-parametric a n a l y s i s to permit a c l o s e r examination of the r o l e s of number, order and grammatical form c l a s s of high and low imagery c o n s t i t u e n t s , although the study was not designed to i s o l a t e these as f u l l y crossed f a c t o r s . As expected, a r e l a t i v e s u r f e i t of high imagery constituents i n a f i g u r e strongly improved i t s r e c a l l a b i l i t y .  On the whole, the presence  of a high imagery cue noun also aided r e c a l l , although there were except i o n s (e.g., Table XVI, contrasts 6 and 9).  C o n s i s t e n t l y , high noun  imagery f a c i l i t a t e d r e c a l l more than high verb imagery d i d . For  l i k e a b i l i t y , two case v i o l a t i o n s were superior to one but there  were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between double v i o l a t i o n s i n v o l v i n g the o b j e c t i v e case and double v i o l a t i o n s i n v o l v i n g the dative case.  A  greater number of high imagery constituents u s u a l l y corresponded to higher  69 likeability  s c o r e s , h i g h imagery cues f a c i l i t a t e d  l i k e a b i l i t y more than  low imagery cues, and h i g h imagery nouns were c o n s i s t e n t l y s u p e r i o r t o h i g h imagery v e r b s i n e f f e c t i n g  likeability.  D i s t r i b u t i o n of comprehension  s c a l e response types (Table XVIII)  showed t h a t a b s t r a c t and i n t e g r a t e d responses p r e v a i l e d , but f u r t h e r  anal-  y s i s t h a t took i n t o account item imagery l e v e l s  that  (Table XIX) r e v e a l e d  low imagery items r e c e i v e d fewer i n t e g r a t e d and fewer a b s t r a c t responses than d i d h i g h imagery i t e m s .  C o r r e s p o n d i n g l y , h i g h imagery items  r e c e i v e d more i n t e g r a t e d and more a b s t r a c t responses than d i d low imagery items.  D e r i v e d scores'* r e p r e s e n t i n g t h i s i n t e r a c t i o n of item imagery  l e v e l s w i t h response i n t e g r a t i o n and a b s t r a c t n e s s proved to be s t a t i s t i c ally significant  ( x ( l ) = 15.22, £ < .01). 2  The same i n t e r a c t i o n was  also  s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t amongst grades ( f o r grade e i g h t v e r s u s grades n i n e and t e n , x ( 2 ) = 17.40, £ < .01; 2  X ( 3 ) = 18.34, £ < .01). 2  f o r grade n i n e v e r s u s grade t e n ,  As f i g u r e 3 c l e a r l y i l l u s t r a t e s , grade  ences can be a t t r i b u t e d m a i n l y to the d i s t i n c t  differ-  types of c h o i c e s made by  the grade t e n s t u d e n t s — m o r e a b s t r a c t i n t e g r a t e d responses and c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y fewer c o n c r e t e i n t e g r a t e d r e s p o n s e s .  As was the case f o r L i s t  1,  the d i s t r i b u t i o n of responses v a l i d a t e d , to some e x t e n t , the proposed comprehension  scale scoring  system.  Under t h i s s c o r i n g two case v i o l a t i o n s r e s u l t e d i n b e t t e r  compre-  h e n s i o n than a s i n g l e case v i o l a t i o n , but t h e r e was no s i g n i f i c a n t  dif-  f e r e n c e i n comprehension between o b j e c t i v e and d a t i v e case v i o l a t i o n s . The number of h i g h imagery elements i n a f i g u r e was not a c o n s i s t e n t  ^A p r o d u c t was formed by c r o s s i n g the v e c t o r of c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r low-high imagery l e v e l s (-1, -1, -1, -1, 1, 1, 1, 1) w i t h the v e c t o r of response o p t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f a v o r i n g a b s t r a c t i n t e g r a t e d c h o i c e s (0, 1, -1, -1, 1 ) .  TABLE XVIII Percentages of L i s t 3 Comprehension Scale Response Options by Grade Response Options non-integrated integrated concrete abstract concrete abstract  Grade  No response  8  2.1  8.0  14.6  18.9  56.4  9  .6  8.4  15.5  21.1  54.3  10  .2  6.1  14.8  10.9  67.9  Total  1.0  7.6  15.1  18.3  58.0  TABLE XIX Frequencies of L i s t 3 Comprehension Scale Response Options by Item Types  Item Types Low Imagery Items (LLL,LLH, LHL,HLL)  High Imagery Items (LHH,HLH, HHL,HHH)  Response Options  concrete  abstract  Totals  66  162  228  integrated  192  520  712  Totals  258  682  940  No response  -  -  non-integrated  79  124  203  integrated  154  580  734  Totals  233  704  937  -  -  non-integrated  No response  8  11 1896  a  1896 = 24 items x 79 i n d i v i d u a l s  a  72  F i g u r e 3.  P e r c e n t a g e of cases s e l e c t i n g each type of r e s p o n s e o p t i o n f o r L i s t 3 Comprehension Scores  p r e d i c t o r of comprehension (e.g., Table XVII, contrasts 3 and 7) although high noun imagery was, c o n s i s t e n t l y , a b e t t e r p r e d i c t o r than high verb imagery. In a d d i t i o n to the d i f f e r e n c e s between response v a r i a b l e s , a l i n e a r trend across grade appeared f o r the various measures used f o r L i s t 3 ( m u l t i v a r i a t e F(21,56) = 1.98, £ < .05; p_ < .05).  and m u l t i v a r i a t e F(9.68) =  2.16,  The main sources of t h i s age trend were o v e r a l l l i k e a b i l i t y  scores, F_(l,76) = 12.74, £ < .001, and three imagery c o n t r a s t s , one on the l i k e a b i l i t y s c a l e (Table XVII, contrast 6 ) , F(l,76) = 4.61, £ < .05, and two on the comprehension scale (Table XVII, contrasts 4 rand 8 ) , F_(l,76) = 4.83, £ < .05, and F(l,76) = 4.08, £ < .05, r e s p e c t i v e l y .  Because the  l i k e a b i l i t y and comprehension score d i s t r i b u t i o n s deviated s l i g h t l y from Normality, u n i v a r i a t e F - r a t i o s w i t h p r o b a b i l i t i e s greater than .01 were considered as n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t .  Thus, only o v e r a l l l i k e a b i l i t y scores  showed a s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e trend across grades.  For o v e r a l l r e c a l l  and comprehension scores, grade trends, though not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , were i n the expected d i r e c t i o n . Hoyt estimates of r e l i a b i l i t y f o r the L i s t 3 scales were .65 f o r r e c a l l , .86 f o r l i k e a b i l i t y , and .73 f o r comprehension.  The r e l a t i v e l y  low i n t e r n a l consistency f o r r e c a l l suggests that s e v e r a l f a c t o r s may u n d e r l i e r e c a l l of these more complex f i g u r e s . When considered as the f i r s t three contrasts i n a step-down a n a l y s i s , mean l i k e a b i l i t y , r e c a l l and comprehension scores f o r L i s t 3 were seen to be r e l a t i v e l y independent, with F_(l,76) = 2098.43, £ < .0001, F(l,75) = 4.47, £ < .05, and F(l,74) = 220.17, £ < .0001. Comparing students' t o t a l scores on the various s c a l e s , as w e l l as error scores a f t e r grade e f f e c t s were removed (Table XX), i t was  found  TABLE XX Correlations Amongst Response Variables  Variables  L i s t 1 (N =98) Error Total Scores Scores  3  Recall & Likeability  .302**  .275**  Recall & Comprehension  .135  .114  -.012  -.027  Comprehension & Likeability  a  E f f e c t of grade l e v e l s removed *2 < .05 •£ < .01  Total Scores  ,183 292** .140  L i s t 3 (N =79) Error Scores 3  .114 ,267* .060  t h a t f o r L i s t 1 t h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t r e c a l l and l i k e a b i l i t y hension scores.  c o r r e l a t i o n between  and f o r L i s t 3 between r e c a l l and compre-  No o t h e r p a i r s of s c o r e s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y  T h u s , f o r both l i s t s , ent response  scores,  positive  factors.  comprehension and l i k e a b i l i t y  correlated.  appeared as  independ-  CHAPTER V DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS The preceding r e s u l t s have important bearings upon the three theories of f i g u r a t i v e language elaborated i n e a r l i e r chapters.  These  theories w i l l be discussed s e q u e n t i a l l y i n l i g h t of the f i n d i n g s . A.  The S t r u c t u r a l Hypothesis The p s y c h o l o g i c a l relevance of the s t r u c t u r a l hypothesis was  p a r t i c u l a r l y w e l l substantiated by the f i n d i n g s i n the present study. For comprehension e s p e c i a l l y , students d i s c r i m i n a t e d amongst metonyms, synecdoches and metaphors.  They d i d so i n such a way as to show that  the s t r u c t u r a l r e l a t i o n s of c o n t i g u i t y , h i e r a r c h y , and s i m i l a r i t y , which these types of f i g u r e s r e s p e c t i v e l y represent, are, i n f a c t , f a m i l i a r and f u n c t i o n a l aspects of thought that are operative during the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of f i g u r a t i v e language.  Furthermore,  the d i f f i c u l t y i n understanding the  types of f i g u r e s increases as t h e i r complexity increases.  Those f i g u r e s  i n which only one r e l a t i o n occurred (namely, s i m i l a r i t y ) were easier to comprehend than those i n which two r e l a t i o n s were s u g g e s t e d — c o n t i g u i t y or hierarchy by the semantic features of the p a r t i c u l a r concepts, and s i m i l a r i t y or equivalence by the copular verb u n i t i n g the concepts. For r e c a l l , too, the response to metonyms, synecdoches, and metaphors followed the expected order.  Those f i g u r e s comprised of elements co-  occurring with high frequency i n n a t u r a l language ( i . e . , a s s o c i a t i v e l y 76  77  r e l a t e d concepts) were easiest to r e c a l l ;  those composed of elements only  i n f r e q u e n t l y juxtaposed i n n a t u r a l usage were the most d i f f i c u l t to r e c a l l . The hypothesis that moderately s i m i l a r concepts would combine to make the best l i k e d f i g u r e s was borne out f o r the high imagery metaphors used i n L i s t 2.  I n L i s t 1 t h i s e f f e c t , while nominally present, d i d not  reach s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e , p o s s i b l y because of the i n t e r f e r e n c e from the v a r i e t y of s t r u c t u r a l r e l a t i o n s involved i n the f i g u r e s .  I t would be  of i n t e r e s t to determine whether moderate s i m i l a r i t y amongst concepts i n abstract metaphors would be equally e f f i c a c i o u s i n producing l i k e a b l e figures. Unexpectedly, both h i g h l y s i m i l a r and frequently conjoined concepts produced the most l i k e a b l e f i g u r e s of speech.  Apparently the unusualness  of the j u x t a p o s i t i o n s i n these types was s u f f i c i e n t to arouse i n t e r e s t , while f u r t h e r semantic deviance only made them l e s s memorable, l i k e a b l e and comprehensible. S t r u c t u r a l p r i n c i p l e s were operative i n the comprehension of the more complex L i s t 3 f i g u r e s as w e l l .  Students not only chose those i n t e r -  p r e t a t i o n s o f f e r i n g conceptual i n t e g r a t i o n , but chose i n a way that revealed the operation of a further c o g n i t i v e p r i n c i p l e based upon complementarity, a p r i n c i p l e which might be l a b e l l e d "imagery balance".  Thus, abstract  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s were more favored f o r concrete f i g u r e s than f o r abstract f i g u r e s , and concrete i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s were more favored f o r abstract f i g u r e s than f o r concrete f i g u r e s (Table XIX). The success of the s t r u c t u r a l hypothesis i n p r e d i c t i n g responses to f i g u r e s of speech augurs w e l l f o r g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of the theory to nonverbal modalities.  Since the constituents of the s t r u c t u r a l theory are  concepts, rather than l i n g u i s t i c u n i t s , i t seems reasonable to expect the  78 p a t t e r n s o f response observed i n t h i s i n q u i r y to reappear i n e x t r a linguistic  symbolic f i g u r a t i o n such as t h a t which might e x i s t  a r t s and communications media. u t i l i z a t i o n of f i g u r e s linguistic  in visual  The evidence here i m p l i e s t h a t  the  i s a c o n c e p t u a l phenomenon and not merely a  one.  For the more complex f i g u r e s grade t e n students a qualitative  the markedly g r e a t e r  f o r the a b s t r a c t  shift  p r e f e r e n c e by  i n t e g r a t e d response o p t i o n s  i n c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n at t h i s grade l e v e l .  suggests This  shift  i s towards b o t h i n t e g r a t e d responses  (78.8% f o r grade t e n compared to  and 75.3%  respectively)  f o r grades n i n e and e i g h t ,  and a b s t r a c t  responses  (82.7% f o r grade t e n compared to 71.0%  and 69.8% f o r grades n i n e and  eight,  the P i a g e t i a n view t h a t  respectively)  and s u b s t a n t i a t e s  o r f o r m a l o p e r a t i o n a l thought emerges around t h i s age 1958;  Rohwer, 1972;  Rohwer & Bean, 1973).  No s i g n i f i c a n t  grade d i f f e r e n c e s  t u r a l dimensions i n L i s t 1 a l t h o u g h trends suggested t h a t  higher grades, existed  and t h a t  f o r metonyms,  students  grade d i f f e r e n c e s  and metaphors.  p r o d u c t i o n and comprehension i n younger c h i l d r e n ,  ing that preference  f o r complex f i g u r e s  in  in recall in  figurative  as i s the  increases with grade.  developmental s t u d i e s , which were r e p o r t e d a f t e r were g a t h e r e d ,  of  struc-  in  This pattern i s  g e n e r a l agreement w i t h s e v e r a l r e c e n t developmental s t u d i e s language  to the  l e s s w e l l than those  increasingly greater  synecdoches  abstract  (Inhelder & Piaget,  appeared i n responses  lower grades p r o c e s s e d a l l types of f i g u r e s  75.4%  find-  These  the d a t a f o r t h i s  study  a r e worth d i s c u s s i n g i n some d e t a i l .  B i l l o w (1975) proposed a d i s t i n c t i o n between s i m i l a r i t y metaphor and p r o p o r t i o n a l metaphor, the d i f f e r e n c e of  elements  i n v o l v e d i n the f i g u r e ,  lying essentially  i n the number  t h r e e i n the former (two terms and a  79 shared a t t r i b u t e ) and f o u r o r more i n p r o p o r t i o n a l r e l a t i o n i n the  latter.  For example,  and  (50)  A butterfly is a flying  (51)  Hours a r e l e a v e s of l i f e  rainbow  r e p r e s e n t s i m i l a r i t y and p r o p o r t i o n a l metaphor, r e s p e c t i v e l y . t h a t p r o p o r t i o n a l metaphor i s what o t h e r s have c a l l e d analogy McCarthy & K i r k , 1968;  (Kirk,  Kongas Maranda, 1971).  Studying c h i l d r e n between f i v e and observed  I t appears  t h i r t e e n y e a r s of age  t h a t the presence of c o n c r e t e o p e r a t i o n s was  Billow  not n e c e s s a r y f o r  the u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f metaphor, but t h a t i n c r e a s e d use of c o n c r e t e o p e r a t i o n s did  c o i n c i d e w i t h i n c r e a s e d metaphoric  responding.  In a d d i t i o n , a h i g h  p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n e x i s t e d between comprehension o f p r o p o r t i o n a l metaphors and  f a c i l i t y with formal operations.  s i o n of f i g u r e s , B i l l o w rationalized;  Thus, the e a r l i e s t  s u g g e s t s , o c c u r s i n an i n t u i t i v e way  this ability  comprehen-  and i s l a t e r  i n c r e a s e s w i t h age and p e r m i t s the  reasoned  comprehension o f i n c r e a s i n g l y complex f i g u r e s . B i l l o w a l s o observed what he c a l l e d " s y n e c d o c h i c p r o c e s s e s " i n the i n c o r r e c t r e s p o n d i n g o f younger c h i l d r e n . upon i n s u f f i c i e n t  elements  of the t o t a l f i g u r e  f i g u r e , or a synecdochic p r o c e s s ) . contiguous a s s o c i a t i o n s . amongst younger and  These were responses f o c u s s i n g (hence a p a r t of the whole  The responses were f r e q u e n t l y common  T h i s metonymic r e s p o n d i n g was  l e s s developed  more f r e q u e n t  i n d i v i d u a l s than amongst o l d e r and  w i s e r ones, a t r e n d which i s i n a c c o r d w i t h the t r e n d s observed  i n this  study. Gardner,  K i r c h e r , Winner, & P e r k i n s (1975) found t h a t over  p e r i o d from f o u r to n i n e t e e n y e a r s , people i n c r e a s i n g l y p r e f e r r e d  the approp-  r i a t e m e t a p h o r i c a l endings over l i t e r a l , c o n v e n t i o n a l and i n a p p r o p r i a t e  80 m e t a p h o r i c a l endings  for s u i t a b l e passages.  predominated i n p r o d u c t i o n at produced the l a r g e s t  every  C o n v e n t i o n a l metaphors  age l e v e l but the youngest  number of both a p p r o p r i a t e and i n a p p r o p r i a t e  The authors suggest t h a t the h i g h p r o d u c t i o n by p r e - s c h o o l e r s willingness  '!to f o l l o w t h e i r sensory i m a g i n a t i o n " (p. 11)  c r i t i c a l analysis. first  individuals  As a n a l y t i c  capacity  l i t e r a l , then c o n v e n t i o n a l ,  increases,  and f i n a l l y  figures.  reflects  unfettered  individuals  a  by  place  appropriate constraints  on  t h e i r metaphorical productions. The study  considered b r i e f  t u r e u s i n g one of e i g h t e e n  c o n t e x t s ending w i t h a comparative  common or l e s s common a d j e c t i v e s ;  (52)  He l o o k s as g i g a n t i c  (53)  weather  (54)  c o l o u r s as b r i g h t as  as  .  .  .  .  .  as b o i l i n g as .  . .  state,  u s u a l domain.  A l t h o u g h the study was thereby  range of f i g u r a t i v e consistent  or g i v e n a r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t  form and c o n t e n t ,  w i t h the p r e f e r e n c e s  s e l e c t i o n of  for several  perspective  the developmental  observed  onto  i n the  l i m i t e d to a r a t h e r narrow  i n this  study  observations  were  f o r a broader  & Gardner (Note 8) r e p o r t e d on the  to f o u r t e e n - y e a r - o l d s  and (56)  was  figures.  Winner, R o s e n t i e l ,  (55)  the a d j e c t i v e  onto a sensory domain where i t was not l i t e r a l l y a p p l i c a b l e ,  a psychological  of s i x -  example:  .  A response was judged m e t a p h o r i c a l l y " a p p r o p r i a t e " i f projected  for  struc-  i n p r o v i d i n g or s e l e c t i n g  performance  interpretations  types of m e t a p h o r i c a l sentences such as  A f t e r many y e a r s of working at the j a i l , the p r i s o n guard had become a hard r o c k t h a t c o u l d not be moved. Her f i n g e r n a i l p o l i s h was a l o u d s p l a s h of  For m u l t i p l e c h o i c e q u e s t i o n s  color.  f o u r paraphrases based on  different  81 p r i n c i p l e s were p r o f f e r e d as o p t i o n s , in this of  study.  s i m i l a r to t h a t  The most p r i m i t i v e s o l u t i o n e n t a i l e d  the two elements b e i n g compared.  presumably i n t e r p r e t example of  a technique  (55)  the l i t e r a l  A more s o p h i s t i c a t e d  the two elements  of the metaphor i n a n a r r a t i v e sequence  link,  a rocky p r i s o n . essentially study,  so t h a t example  response would r e s u l t  (55)  relating  or by some o t h e r  T h i s r e s p o n s e , which the a u t h o r s terms " t h e m a t i c " ,  the same as the "metonymic" r e l a t i o n d i s c u s s e d  or the " s y n e c d o c h i c  labeled "concrete".  Example (55)  meaning " t h a t the g u a r d , l i k e the r o c k ,  choice e n t a i l e d (p.  5),  between guard and r o c k at  i n the  present  "the  engulfing  a response t h a t Winner,  might thereby be i n t e r p r e t e d  (since i t  as  i s p h y s i c a l l y hard and m u s c u l a r " .  The a u t h o r s do not c o n s i d e r t h i s response m e t a p h o r i c , interpretation  is  p r o c e s s " proposed by B i l l o w .  of one domain of the metaphor by the o t h e r "  not a f u l l  from  might mean t h a t the guard worked i n  A t h i r d and s t i l l more s o p h i s t i c a t e d  et a l .  transfiguration  as meaning " h e r f i n g e r n a i l p o l i s h made  a loud n o i s e " .  associative  equation  C h i l d r e n c h o o s i n g t h i s o p t i o n would  l i t e r a l l y as a m a g i c a l  the p e r s o n i n t o a r o c k and (56)  employed  overlooks  the p s y c h o l o g i c a l  and a l t h o u g h i t  fundamental  level)  it  is,  is  similarities nevertheless,  grounded on a r e l a t i o n s h i p of s i m i l a r i t y and should be c o n s i d e r e d both as an a c c e p t a b l e meaning o f the f i g u r e What Winner, et a l .  c o n s i d e r to be the "mature" meaning of example  i s the p s y c h o l o g i c a l meaning. the h i g h e s t  and as a m e t a p h o r i c a l l y based meaning.  They thus see a b s t r a c t  form o f metaphoric u n d e r s t a n d i n g .  abstract  interpretations,  not a l l f i g u r e s  do such i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s  always c o n s t i t u t e  present  a p r i n c i p l e of  study r e v e a l e d ,  interpretation  Although i t  to expect i n d i v i d u a l s capable o f f o r m a l o p e r a t i o n s  (55) as  is  reasonable  to p e r c e i v e  and p r e f e r  have such i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s ,  nor  the s u p e r i o r meaning.  the  imagery b a l a n c e  i s also  As  operative  82 i n d e t e r m i n i n i n g s u i t a b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , w i t h the consequence t h a t c o n c r e t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a r e commonly a c c e p t a b l e f o r a b s t r a c t metaphors. i n s i s t e n c e upon the a b s t r a c t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n as the most advanced  The introduces  an unnecessary narrowness i n d e f i n i n g good metaphor. The sequence of o p t i o n s used by Winner and her a s s o c i a t e s bears a s t r i k i n g resemblance  t o t h a t developed from the p r i n c i p l e s put forward i n  Chapter I I f o r p r o v i d i n g a l t e r n a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of n o m i n a l - c o p u l a nominal f i g u r e s .  Thus, t h e i r " t h e m a t i c " i n t e r p r e t a t i o n corresponds to my  "metonymic", and t h e i r " c o n c r e t e " and "mature" correspond a p p r o x i m a t e l y to my  o p t i o n s based r e s p e c t i v e l y on minor and major s i m i l a r i t i e s .  The  " c o n c r e t e " and "mature" c a t e g o r i e s a l s o correspond more or l e s s to the c o n c r e t e and a b s t r a c t i n t e g r a t i o n s proposed  i n t h i s study f o r i n t e r p r e t i n g  more complex f i g u r e s . Winner, et a l . documented a steady i n c r e a s e over age i n use of the metaphoric  interpretations.  These i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s r e p l a c e d the thematic  and c o n c r e t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s more commonly used by younger s u b j e c t s .  In  a d d i t i o n , c r o s s - s e n s o r y items were more r e a d i l y i n t e r p r e t e d m e t a p h o r i c a l l y than p s y c h o l o g i c a l - p h y s i c a l items, e s p e c i a l l y f o r the youngest  children.  T h i s suggests t h a t the i n c r e a s e d a b s t r a c t n e s s of the l a t t e r type made them particularly  difficult.  Examining  the comprehension  o f a d i f f e r e n t group o f p r e - a d o l e s c e n t s ,  Winner (Note 9) found t h a t a h a l f - h o u r o f t r a i n i n g f o r e i g h t weeks c o u l d significantly  improve  p r o d u c t i o n and s e l e c t i o n of a p p r o p r i a t e m e t a p h o r i c a l  endings to s h o r t v i g n e t t e s .  Moreover, i n d i v i d u a l s appeared  to pass  through the same stages b e f o r e r e a c h i n g a f u l l y p r o d u c t i v e s t a g e . c h a r a c t e r i z e d these stages as (a) c o n v e n t i o n a l , (b) embellishment conventional,  (c) a p p e a l of the i n a p p r o p r i a t e ,  Winner of the  (d) f a i l u r e to c r o s s  83 categories,  (e) incomplete  a c r o s s d i s p a r a t e domains.  metaphor, and The  finally  (f) clear  comparisons  c r e d i b i l i t y of these stages and  the  train-  i n g p r o c e s s becomes suspect when the example Winner c i t e s as r e p r e s e n t i n g an a p p r o p r i a t e m e t a p h o r i c a l (57)  Her v o i c e was  ending  i s examined:  as t h u n d e r i n g  as the s m e l l of g a s o l i n e .  D i s p a r a t e domains a r e s u r e l y c r o s s e d here but the r e s u l t i s l e s s a p p r o p r i a t e metaphor than a b a d l y mixed  an  one.  While v a l u a b l e from a developmental view, the s t u d i e s j u s t  consid-  ered were hampered by i n s u f f i c i e n t a n a l y s i s of the m a t e r i a l s i n use. They provided mainly  normative d a t a on persons when both t h a t and  a n a l y s i s o f m a t e r i a l s were n e c e s s a r y .  The  present  study  structural  complemented  these s t u d i e s by p r o v i d i n g a more thorough t a s k a n a l y s i s . These f o u r developmental s t u d i e s were b i a s e d i n another  way.  They  examined comprehension of f i g u r a t i v e language on the b a s i s of m u l t i p l e - c h o i c e s e l e c t i o n t a s k s , e x p l a n a t i o n s , and p r o d u c t i o n s ;  the s e l e c t i o n t a s k s were,  i n most c a s e s , d i s t o r t e d by "demand c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s " , t h a t i s , the a b s t r a c t metaphorical avoided  choice represented  the p r e f e r r e d response.  t h i s demand c h a r a c t e r i s t i c and  Kogan (Note  c o n c u r r e n t l y widened the study  10) from  f i g u r a t i v e language to f i g u r a t i v e thought by examining p r e f e r r e d p a i r i n g s made from amongst p i c t u r e t r i a d s . each t r i a d , one,  Of the t h r e e p a i r i n g s p o s s i b l e f o r  a c c o r d i n g to the author,  o f f e r e d a metaphorical  similar-  i t y , but respondents were asked i f they c o u l d make o t h e r p a i r i n g s and each case were asked f o r the b a s i s of t h e i r p a i r i n g . c r e d i t i n g f o r metaphorical central attributes.  g i v e n f o r r e c o g n i t i o n and  permitted  p a i r i n g on the b a s i s of u n a n t i c i p a t e d or  Thus the meaning of metaphor was  more c o r r e c t l y ) understood  The method  than i n the o t h e r s t u d i e s .  in  non-  more l i b e r a l l y Full credit  s a t i s f a c t o r y e x p l a n a t i o n of the  (and  was  metaphorical  84 linkage;  p a r t i a l c r e d i t f o r r e c o g n i t i o n accompanied by a l e s s  explanation.  I n t e r - j u d g e r e l i a b i l i t y was  h i g h , and Kogan r e p o r t s t h a t  the i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y r e l i a b i l i t y of the t r i a d t e s t was .77,  i m p l y i n g t h a t m e t a p h o r i c a l p r e f e r e n c e was Working w i t h s t u d e n t s i n the seven-  graduate  s t u d e n t s , Kogan observed  itivity. in  satisfactory  i n the o r d e r of  being r e l i a b l y  assessed.  to t h i r t e e n - y e a r age range and  a c l e a r age t r e n d i n m e t a p h o r i c a l  E a r l y d a t a a l s o suggested  sens-  a p o s s i b l e female s u p e r i o r i t y .  As  the p r e s e n t study, i t e m d i f f i c u l t i e s v a r i e d w i d e l y but showed o n l y  s l i g h t v a r i a t i o n w i t h age. ferential difficulty s p e c i f i c semantic observed  Whereas the p r e s e n t study r e l a t e d t h i s  dif-  to a s p e c t s of item c o n c e p t u a l s t r u c t u r e , imagery  and  v a r i a t i o n s , Kogan's r e p o r t o f f e r e d no r a t i o n a l e f o r the  differences.  C o r r e l a t i o n of t r i a d  t a s k s c o r e s w i t h o t h e r c o g n i t i v e and  measures r e v e a l e d few c o n s i s t e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s .  creative  Only a s p e c i a l l y d e v e l -  oped q u a l i t y s c o r i n g f o r the D i v e r g e n t - t h i n k i n g t a s k s (Wallaeh & Kogan, 1965)  and  t e a c h e r s ' r a t i n g s of s t u d e n t s ' " a e s t h e t i c s e n s i t i v i t y "  s i g n i f i c a n t l y and p o s i t i v e l y to the t o t a l metaphor s c o r e . ongoing work examining the r e l a t i o n s h i p between m e t a p h o r i c a l and  related  Kogan r e p o r t s sensitivity  a v a r i e t y of o t h e r m e a s u r e s — d a y d r e a m i n g , r e s o u r c e f u l n e s s , o r i g i n a l i t y ,  sense of humour, emotional e x p r e s s i v e n e s s , empathy and p r e f e r e n c e f o r working a l o n e . U s i n g the t r i a d t e s t , Kogan a l s o found i c a n t l y increase metaphorical responding. e x h a u s t i v e p a i r i n g w i t h i n the t r i a d s "was metaphoric  thinking.  Kogan concludes  signif-  In f a c t , a s i m p l e r e q u e s t f o r sufficient  c a p a c i t y " (Kogan, Note 10, p. 15).  s t r e n g t h e n s Winner's (Note 9) claim'about  that t r a i n i n g could  to e l i c i t  T h i s ease of  a latent  training  t r a i n i n g e f f e c t s on m e t a p h o r i c a l  t h a t f o r the age l e v e l s examined (seven-  and  85 nine-year-olds)  performance d i d not adequately  reflect  competence i n the  metaphoric domain. A l t h o u g h he does not l i n k i t Kogan ( a f t e r styles,  Kagan, Moss, & S i g e l ,  to h i s o b s e r v a t i o n s o f i t e m d i f f i c u l t y , 1963)  does suggest two c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g  one based on s i m i l a r i t y and one on complementarity. Complementarity i m p l i e s a r e j e c t i o n o f s i m i l a r i t y as a b a s i s  for  g r o u p i n g , and u t i l i z a t i o n i n s t e a d of f u n c t i o n a l or thematic r e l a t i o n s . T h i s p r i n c i p l e f o r i n t e r - c o n c e p t r e l a t i o n i s v e r y c l o s e to the p r i n c i p l e of c o n t i g u i t y as used i n t h i s s t u d y , to i n c l u d e c a u s e - e f f e c t nyms.  a r e l a t i o n s h i p w h i c h h a s been taken  r e l a t i o n s and to form the b a s i s  T h u s , c o m p l e m e n t a r i t y , metonymy and c o n t i g u i t y  f o r l i t e r a r y metoform a . s e m a n t i c  cluster. Kogan d i s t i n g u i s h e s two types o f s i m i l a r i t y , a n a l y t i c and ical,  categor-  a n a l y t i c s i m i l a r i t y b e i n g p r e s e n t when two concepts have common  attributes,  and c a t e g o r i c a l s i m i l a r i t y b e i n g p r e s e n t when two  r e p r e s e n t the same c l a s s .  concepts  T h i s d i s t i n c t i o n may not be t e n a b l e  since  c l a s s membership i s u l t i m a t e l y determined on the b a s i s of one or more attributes,  but the d i s t i n c t i o n i s s i m i l a r to t h a t made i n t h i s  study  between those f i g u r e s based on the p r i n c i p l e of h i e r a r c h y between components and those based on the p r i n c i p l e o f s i m i l a r i t y .  Kogan's  analysis  seems t o confound the h i e r a r c h i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n w i t h t h a t between c e n t r a l and n o n - c e n t r a l a t t r i b u t e s . In c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n , Kogan's work comes c l o s e s t model employed i n t h i s s t u d y . analyses  to the s t r u c t u r a l  In a d d i t i o n , he suggests t h a t i n t e r n a l  of h i s t r i a d items a r e r e q u i r e d and t h a t a c o n c e p t u a l - v i s u a l  d i s t i n c t i o n amongst metaphors might be f r u i t f u l to e x p l o r e .  This d i s -  t i n c t i o n i s comparable to t h a t made i n t h i s study between a b s t r a c t and  86 concrete items, a topic which i s discussed below. B.  The Imagery Hypothesis As has been the case f o r many other v e r b a l m a t e r i a l s , word imagery  r a t i n g was a potent f a c t o r i n determining the r e c a l l a b i l i t y of f i g u r a t i v e expressions.  P a i v i o ' s (1971) "conceptual peg" hypothesis, that i s , that  a high imagery cue word w i l l f a c i l i t a t e r e c a l l b e t t e r than a low imagery cue word by serving as a convenient mneumonic device to which to r e l a t e an associated word, gained c l e a r support i n these s t u d i e s .  Even when  v e r b a l m a t e r i a l s became more complex, as they d i d i n Study I I , the superiori t y of the high imagery cue noun p r e v a i l e d .  Sheer number of high imagery  components i n a f i g u r e a l s o improved i t s r e c a l l a b i l i t y , and high imagery nouns aided more than d i d high imagery verbs. In terms of l i k e a b i l i t y , too, high imagery was important, as was grammatical form c l a s s of the high imagery c o n s t i t u e n t s , but order of occurrence of those constituents was l e s s important.  Thus, no advantage  was gained by e x p l i c i t movement w i t h i n a f i g u r e from the abstract to the concrete, and consequently, the p r e d i c t i o n s of Davidson (Note 3) and Thomas (1969) about the importance of h y p o s t a t i z a t i o n or c o n c r e t i z a t i o n could not be supported.  Since f i g u r e s expressed i n concrete terms were  generally preferred i n t h i s study, i t can be speculated that words which r e a d i l y induce images are e f f e c t i v e at producing optimal l e v e l s of cognitive arousal.  Nouns are apparently more e f f e c t i v e at t h i s than are  verbs. Of considerable t h e o r e t i c a l i n t e r e s t was the r e l a t i v e l a c k of e f f e c t of component imagery l e v e l s on comprehension scores.  This c l e a r l y  implied that concrete f i g u r e s , while more memorable and l i k e a b l e , were not  87 n e c e s s a r i l y easier to understand.  I f t h i s i s true f o r n o n - f i g u r a t i v e  l i n g u i s t i c materials as w e l l , i t has important i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r the development of i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s .  In Study I I imagery d i d have  some e f f e c t upon comprehension but the pattern of r e s u l t s seemed to suggest that something other than the mere magnitude of mean imagery l e v e l was operating.  High noun imagery appeared to f a c i l i t a t e  comprehension  more than high verb imagery, but order of the high imagery elements had no consistent e f f e c t s .  Results of the p i l o t study (Wilkinson, Note 2)  suggested that rated imagery of a whole sentence was an even b e t t e r p r e d i c t o r of r e c a l l than the summed imagery r a t i n g s of the component words.  In  general, the processing of more complex l i n g u i s t i c structures may be a combined f u n c t i o n of imagery and i n t e g r a t i o n of the conceptual components. C.  L i n g u i s t i c Hypotheses Figures i n v o l v i n g human semantic aspects, whether encoded as  features or as case requirements, proved to be harder to r e c a l l than f i g u r e s w i t h no human reference, but v i o l a t i o n of [-human] s e l e c t i o n a l r e s t r i c t i o n s or dative case r e s t r i c t i o n s had no other behavioral e f f e c t s . The d i r e c t i o n of t h i s s i n g l e observed d i f f e r e n c e i s the same as that observed i n the data of Howe and Hillman (1973), that i s , dative case v i o l a t i o n s are more d i f f i c u l t to process c o g n i t i v e l y than o b j e c t i v e case violations.  Furthermore, Howe and Hillman observed young c h i l d r e n ' s  a b i l i t y to recognize v i o l a t i o n s whereas t h i s study observed adolescents' a b i l i t y to r e c o l l e c t f i g u r e s embodying those v i o l a t i o n s .  Thus, f o r at  l e a s t two measures and two age l e v e l s , dative case v i o l a t i o n s appear to be more d i f f i c u l t than o b j e c t i v e case v i o l a t i o n s .  There i s no ready  explanation f o r t h i s phenomenon unless, perhaps, c o g n i t i v e dissonance  88 r e s u l t s from s e m a n t i c a l l y animate. s i n c e no two  In any  v i o l a t i n g the  c a s e , the phenomenon i s of somewhat dubious  comprehension or l i k e a b i l i t y  types of case v i o l a t i o n s i n t h i s O v e r a l l , and  the p r e f e r r e d  within  investigation.  It therefore  restricted  to any  Given that  students p r e f e r r e d  preferred  appears t h a t n e i t h e r  the metonyms and  person-  inherently not  that  cognitive  a s i n g l e v i o l a t i o n to produce l i k e a b i l i t y . must be  subsequent comprehension.  This  f i g u r e s w i t h s i n g l e case v i o l a t i o n s .  D.  General Conclusions  1.  The  Also,  l e v e l was  i n t e g r a t i o n are p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y  arousal  was  provided  i t i s possible  a p p a r e n t l y not  s t r u c t u r a l r e l a t i o n s of c o n t i g u i t y , h i e r a r c h y ,  similarity  that  reached  and  m e a n i n g f u l (both t h e o r e t i c a l l y  e m p i r i c a l l y ) , h a v i n g demonstrable e f f e c t s upon r e c a l l ,  and  likeability  and  f i g u r a t i v e expressions.  Whereas h i g h imagery of f i g u r e c o n s t i t u e n t s and  preferred  reached to induce c o n c e p t u a l e x p l o r a -  for  comprehension of v e r b a l  they  List  3 f i g u r e s h a v i n g the g r e a t e r number of  Presumably, i n s u f f i c i e n t  a minimum l e v e l of a r o u s a l  synecdoches of  somewhat s u r p r i s i n g to see  b e s t comprehended those L i s t  high r e c a l l  (i.e.,  p a r t i c u l a r s e t of semantic domains.  case v i o l a t i o n s .  2.  2  Good f i g u r e s of speech are a p p a r e n t l y  1 over the metaphors, i t was  t i o n and  less  a n i m a t i o n produce f i g u r e s of speech which are  to o t h e r t y p e s .  by  appeared between these  f i g u r e s ) , p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n s were no more nor  preferable  and  differences  stability,  the moderately s i m i l a r f i g u r e s of L i s t  than o t h e r types of f i g u r e s . i f i c a t i o n nor  s a n c t i t y of t h a t which i s human or  moderately r e l a t e d  i s strongly  to l i k e a b i l i t y ,  related  i t appears  t h e r e i s o n l y a weak r e l a t i o n s h i p between h i g h imagery and  to  that  comprehension.  89  Expressions comprised predominantly of words that r e a d i l y induce mental imagery are easier to r e c a l l and are b e t t e r l i k e d than expressions comprised predominantly of words which do not r e a d i l y evoke images.  By i t s e l f , abundance of high imagery words i n a f i g u r a t i v e  expression has l i t t l e e f f e c t upon the comprehension of that expression.  Order of high imagery components i s also d i f f e r e n t i a l l y  important.  Expressions i n which high imagery constituents occupy  i n i t i a l p o s i t i o n s are easier to r e c a l l than expressions i n which low imagery constituents occupy those p o s i t i o n s , but the order of high and low imagery constituents i n a f i g u r e has l i t t l e e f f e c t upon the l i k e a b i l i t y or comprehension of that f i g u r e . l e v e l and grammatical form c l a s s i s consistent:  I n t e r a c t i o n of imagery high noun imagery i s  superior to high verb imagery i n p r e d i c t i n g r e c a l l , l i k e a b i l i t y and comprehension of f i g u r a t i v e expressions.  Imagery l e v e l s of component  words a f f e c t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s given to f i g u r e s i n such a way that adolescents show a s l i g h t tendency to choose concrete i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s for  abstract f i g u r e s of speech and abstract i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s f o r  concrete f i g u r e s of speech.  This phenomenon can be viewed as an  instance of a s t r u c t u r a l p r i n c i p l e of balance or complementarity, and provides a point of convergence between the s t r u c t u r a l and imagery hypotheses. 3.  Figures of speech employing human c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are more d i f f i c u l t to r e c a l l than those i n v o l v i n g other c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , but they are no d i f f e r e n t on measures of l i k e a b i l i t y or comprehension.  For the more  complex f i g u r e s of speech an optimal l e v e l of semantic v i o l a t i o n apparently must be attained to maximize l i k e a b i l i t y and comprehension. L i n g u i s t i c theories provide no ready explanation f o r these phenomena.  90 Thus, t h e hypotheses  based  upon semantic  f e a t u r e v i o l a t i o n s and case  c a t e g o r y v i o l a t i o n s a r e l e s s u s e f u l as p r e d i c t o r s o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l responses imagery  t o f i g u r a t i v e language than a r e c o n c e p t u a l s t r u c t u r e and hypotheses.  Moderate s i m i l a r i t y between elements o f h i g h imagery metaphors maximizes t h e i r l i k e a b i l i t y , w h i l e extreme s i m i l a r i t y o r d i s s i m i l a r i t y produces u n a c c e p t a b l e  figures.  conceptual r e l a t i o n s r e c a l l ,  For f i g u r e s i n v o l v i n g a v a r i e t y of  l i k e a b i l i t y and comprehension a r e a l l  enhanced by h i g h i n t e r - c o n c e p t s i m i l a r i t y . W i t h i n the l e v e l s s t u d i e d , grade t r e n d s i n the p r o c e s s i n g o f f i g u r a t i v e e x p r e s s i o n s a r e s l i g h t , a l t h o u g h s t u d e n t s i n h i g h e r grades i n d i c a t i o n s of understanding,  l i k i n g and remembering  language b e t t e r than those i n lower grades. n i n e and t e n responses  show  figurative  W i t h i n grades e i g h t ,  a r e not a f f e c t e d by v a r i a t i o n s i n the concep-  t u a l s t r u c t u r e s o f the e x p r e s s i o n s . Metaphor and i t s congeners should be c o n s i d e r e d as c o n c e p t u a l r a t h e r than p u r e l y l i n g u i s t i c phenomena.  Results of t h i s research i n d i c a t e  t h a t " m e t a p h o r i c a l t h i n k i n g " i s a p r o c e s s t h a t f o l l o w s the same s o r t s of l o g i c a l and p y s c h o l o g i c a l laws t h a t o t h e r forms o f t h i n k i n g do. The  study p r o v i d e d evidence o f a s t r o n g f u n c t i o n a l r e l a t i o n between  c o n c e p t u a l s t r u c t u r e and comprehension but o n l y a weak r e l a t i o n between comprehension and imagery. imagery g i v e s credence  O b s e r v a t i o n o f these l i m i t s t o  t o the view t h a t imagery i s an o p e r a t i o n a l  m o d a l i t y j u s t as language i s , but t h a t another m o d a l i t y , a q u a s i l o g i c a l , o r s t r u c t u r a l one permeates both imagery and v e r b a l p r o c e s s e s .  91 E.  Implications f o r Further Research I t i s conceivable  that the semantic complexities represented by  the various categories w i t h i n case grammar could be s y s t e m a t i c a l l y a n a l yzed i n terms of the s t r u c t u r a l r e l a t i o n s that they e n t a i l .  This would  require s p e c i f i c a t i o n of more s t r u c t u r a l r e l a t i o n s than were u t i l i z e d i n these studies.  Simmons (1972) and Suppes (1974) both provide approaches  to t h i s task, but i t i s c l e a r l y a monumental one.  Once such a l o g i c a l  a n a l y s i s i s a v a i l a b l e , systematic e m p i r i c a l v a l i d a t i o n can f o l l o w . Of more immediate p o t e n t i a l f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s the r o l e of conceptual s t r u c t u r e w i t h i n abstract expressions, and the r o l e of s t r u c t u r a l r e l a t i o n s amongst components i n non-verbal m o d a l i t i e s , f o r example, an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of p i c t o r i a l , s c u l p t u r a l or behavioral metaphor. Further i n v e s t i g a t i o n could also be undertaken to assess the e f f e c t s of conceptual structures i n the processing of f i g u r a t i v e language by younger c h i l d r e n . So as to strengthn the conclusions drawn here from a r t i f i c a l l y created f i g u r a t i v e language i t would also be u s e f u l to s t r u c t u r a l l y assess f i g u r e s of speech occurring i n n a t u r a l language and use that analy s i s to p r e d i c t behavioral responses to those f i g u r e s . F.  Implications f o r P r a c t i c a l A p p l i c a t i o n s The u b i q u i t y of f i g u r a t i v e expression i n everyday language,  adult's and children's l i t e r a t u r e , persuasive  discourse, a d v e r t i s i n g and  propaganda i s unquestionable, and those who would use i t e f f e c t i v e l y to influence or i n s t r u c t can be guided by the p r i n c i p l e s put forward and substantiated here. chosen;  For memorability, high imagery f i g u r e s should be  f o r appeal and comprehension, the semantic r e l a t i o n s amongst the  92 concepts  used i n the f i g u r e must be c o n s i d e r e d ;  f o r s i m p l e metaphors  c o n c e p t u a l s i m i l a r i t y i n v o l v e d must be moderate i f appealing;  f o r more complex f i g u r e s  the f i g u r e  the  i s to be  c o n c e p t u a l i n t e g r a t i o n must be  a c h i e v e d f o r comprehension. For i n s t r u c t i o n about f i g u r a t i v e provides,  i n the s t r u c t u r a l t h e o r y ,  language t h i s  a coherent and e m p i r i c a l l y grounded  account o f the m a j o r i t y of f i g u r a t i v e  forms.  improvement on the i n c o m p l e t e and i n c o n s i s t e n t predecessors.  investigation  This i t s e l f explanations  i s a major t h a t were  its  F o r layman and f o r poet the study merely p r o v i d e s an e x p l a n -  a t i o n o f a s u b t l e and complex thought p r o c e s s n o r m a l l y taken f o r What no study can do i s to a n t i c i p a t e  granted.  the immensely r i c h and v a r i e d  t h a t can be r e a l i z e d w i t h i n the b a s i c f i g u r a t i v e  forms.  contents  93  REFERENCE NOTES 1.  P a i v i o , A. Images, propositions and knowledge. Paper presented at the I n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y Workshop on Images, Perception and Knowledge, London, Ontario, U n i v e r s i t y of Western Ontario, May 9-12, 1974.  2.  Wilkinson, W. K. Psychosemahtic p r e d i c t o r s of e f f e c t i v e f i g u r e s of speech. Unpublished manuscript, 1975.  3.  Berlyne, D. E. A f f e c t i v e aspects of a e s t h e t i c communication. Paper presented at the Symposium oh A f f e c t and Communication, E r i n d a l e College, U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto, 1971.  4.  Davidson, R. E. Educational i m p l i c a t i o n s of research on e l a b o r a t i o n, imagery and memory: Discussion. Paper presented at the American Educational Research A s s o c i a t i o n Annual Meetings, Minneapolis, 1970.  5.  Maranda, P., & Kongas Maranda, E. Myth as a c o g n i t i v e map: A sketch of the Okanagan Myth Automaton. Unpublished manuscript, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1975.  6.  Maranda, P., Taylor, B., & Flynn, F. From words to p l o t s : Computerized a n a l y s i s of myths. Paper d e l i v e r e d i n the Canada-France Workshop on the A n a l y s i s of Representation Systems, No. 1, Vancouver, mimeo, 1972.  7.  P a i v i o , A.  8.  Winner, E., R o s e n t i e l , A. K., & Gardner, H. The development of metaphoric understanding. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society f o r Research i n C h i l d Development, Denver, Colorado, A p r i l , 1975.  9.  Winner, E. Can pre-adolescents produce metaphoric figures? In H. Gardner (Chair), "And Pharaoh's Heart Hardened ... ": Children's s e n s i t i v i t y to f i g u r a t i v e language. Symposium presented at the meeting of the Society f o r Research i n C h i l d Development, Denver, Colorado, A p r i l , 1975.  10.  Personal communication, November 30, 1972.  Kogan, N. Metaphoric thinking i n c h i l d r e n : Developmental and i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e aspects. Paper presented at the b i e n n i a l meeting of the Society f o r Research i n C h i l d Development, Denver, Colorado, A p r i l , 1975.  94  BIBLIOGRAPHY Alleman, B. Metaphor and antimetaphor. In S. R. Hopper, & D. L. M i l l e r (Eds.), I n t e r p r e t a t i o n : The poetry of meaning. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1967. American P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n . P u b l i c a t i o n Manual of the American P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n (Rev. ed.). Washington, D.C: Author, 1967. American Psychological A s s o c i a t i o n . P u b l i c a t i o n manual of the American Psychological A s s o c i a t i o n (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C: Author, 1974. Anderson, C. C. The psychology of the metaphor. Psychology, 1964, 105, 53-73. Anderson, J . R., & Bower, G. H. Wiley, 1973.  The Journal of  Human a s s o c i a t i v e memory. New  Angel, L. J . A transformational a n a l y s i s of metaphor. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1967. A n g l i n , J . M. The growth of word meaning. MIT Press, 1970.  M.A.  Genetic York:  Thesis,  Cambridge, Massachusetts:  Asch, S. E. The metaphor: A psychological i n q u i r y . In R. T a g i u r i , & L. P e t r u l l o (Eds.), Person perception and i n t e r p e r s o n a l behavior. Stanford: Stanford U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1958. Asch, S. E., & Nerlove, H. The development of double f u n c t i o n terms i n c h i l d r e n . In B. Kaplan, & S. Wapner (Eds.), Perspectives i n psychological theory. New York: I n t e r n a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1960. Barthes, R. W r i t i n g degree zero and Elements of semiology. Beacon Press, 1970. ( O r i g i n a l l y published, 1953).  Boston:  Barthes, R. Mythologies. Frogmore, St. Albans, U.K.: Paladin, ( O r i g i n a l l y published, E d i t i o n s du S e u i l , P a r i s , 1957).  1973.  Bartram, D. J . The r o l e of v i s u a l and semantic codes i n object naming. Cognitive Psychology, 1974, j>, 325-356. Berlyne, D. E. Novelty, complexity and hedonic value. Psychophysics, 1970, 13, 279-286. Berlyne, D. E. Aesthetics and psychobiology. Century-Crofts, 1971.  Perception  New York:  Appleton-  and  95  Berlyne, D. E., Craw, M. A., Salapatek, P. H., & Lewis, J . L. Novelty, complexity, i n c o n g r u i t y , e x t r i n s i c motivation and the GSR. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1963, j>6_, 560-567. Berlyne, D. E., & Boudewijns, W. J . A. Hedonic e f f e c t s of uniformity i n v a r i e t y . Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1971, 2_5, 195-206. B i l l o w , R. M. A c o g n i t i v e developmental study of metaphor Developmental Psychology, 1975, JJL, 415-423. Black, M. Models and metaphors. Press, 1962.  Ithaca, New York:  comprehension.  Cornell University  Bock, R. D. M u l t i v a r i a t e s t a t i s t i c a l methods i n behavioral research. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975. Bock, R. D., & Yates, G. M u l t i q u a l : Log-linear a n a l y s i s of nominal or o r d i n a l q u a l i t a t i v e data by the method of maximum l i k e l i h o o d . Chicago: National Educational Resources, Inc., 1973. Bower, G. H. Mental imagery and a s s o c i a t i v e l e a r n i n g . I n L. W. Gregg (Ed.), Cognition i n l e a r n i n g and memory. New York: Wiley, 1972. Box, G. E. P. Some theories on quadratic forms applied i n the study of a n a l y s i s of variance problems: I . E f f e c t of i n e q u a l i t y of v a r i ance i n the one-way c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . Annals of Mathematical S t a t i s t i c s , 1954, 25, 290-302. Brown, R. A f i r s t language: The e a r l y stages. Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1973. Brooke-Rose,  C.  A grammar of metaphor.  C a r r o l l , J . B., Davies, P., & Richman, B. Houghton M i f f l i n , 1971.  Cambridge, Massachusetts:  London:  Seeker & Warburg, 1958.  Word frequency book.  Boston:  Caruth, E., & E k s t e i n , R. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n w i t h i n the metaphor: Further considerations. American Academy of C h i l d Psychiatry J o u r n a l , 1966, 5 ( 1 ) , 35-45. C a s s i r e r , E. The power of metaphor. In P. Maranda (Ed.), Mythology. Harmondsworth, U.K.: Penguin, 1972. ( O r i g i n a l l y published i n German, 1923). Chase, W. G., & Clark, H. H. Mental operations i n the comparison of sentences and p i c t u r e s . In L. W. Gregg (Ed.), Cognition i n l e a r n i n g and memory. New York: Wiley, 1972. Chomsky, N. Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press, 1965.  Cambridge, Massachusetts:  96 Chun, Ki-Taek. A psychological study of myth-making: A three f a c t o r theory of metaphor-to-myth transformation. Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a (Berkeley), 1971. Clark, H. H., Carpenter, P. A., & J u s t , M. A. On the meeting of semantics and perception. I n W. G. Chase (Ed.), V i s u a l information process i n g . New York: Academic Press, 1973. C o l l i n s , A. M., & Q u i l l i a n , M. R. R e t r i e v a l time from semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1969, jJ, 240-247. C o l l i n s , A. M., & Q u i l l i a n , M. R. Experiments on semantic memory and language comprehension. I n L. W. Gregg (Ed.), Cognition i n l e a r n i n g and memory. New York: Wiley, 1972. Creelman, M. M. The experimental Springer, 1966. C r o v i t z , H. F.  Galton's Walk.  cummings, e. e. E l i o t , T. S.  i n v e s t i g a t i o n of meaning.  New York:  selected poems 1923-1958.  Selected poems. London:  New York:  Harper & Row, 1970. London:  Faber & Faber, 1960.  Faber & Faber, 1961.  Fernandez, J . The mission of metaphor i n expressive c u l t u r e . Anthropology, 1974, 15, 119-145.  Current  F i l l m o r e , C. J . The case f o r case. I n E. Bach, & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals i n l i n g u i s t i c theory. New York: H o l t , Rinehart & Winston, 1968. Fillenbaum, S., & Rapoport, A. Structures i n the s u b j e c t i v e l e x i c o n . New York: Academic Press, 1971. Finn, J . D. M u l t i v a r i a n c e : U n i v a r i a t e and m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s of variance, covariance and regression (User's Guide, Version V ) . Ann Arbor, Michigan: National Educational Resources, Inc., 1972. Finn, J . D. A general model f o r m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s . Rinehart & Winston, 1974. Furbank, P. N. R e f l e c t i o n s on the word "Image". Warburg, 1970.  New York:  London:  Holt,  Seeker &  Gardner, H. Metaphors and m o d a l i t i e s : How c h i l d r e n project polar a d j e c t i v e s onto diverse domains. C h i l d Development, 1974, 4o, 84-91. Gardner, H., K i r c h e r , M., Winner, E., & P e r k i n s , D. Children's metaphoric productions and preferences. Journal of C h i l d Language, 1975, 2_, 1-17.  97 Gordon, W. J . J . Synectics: The development of c r e a t i v e capacity. New York: Harper & Row, 1961. Gordon, W. J . J . The metaphorical way of l e a r n i n g and knowing. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Porpoise Books, 1966. Groesbeck, H. G. The comprehension of f i g u r a t i v e language by elementary c h i l d r e n : A study of t r a n s f e r . Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Oklahoma, 1961. Henley, N. A psychological study of the semantics of animal terms. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1969, 8_, 176-184. Hester, M. B. The meaning of poetic metaphor.  The Hague:  Mouton, 1967.  Howe, H. E. J r . , & Hillman, D. The a c q u i s i t i o n of semantic r e s t r i c t i o n s i n c h i l d r e n . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973, 12, 132-139. Hume, D. S c e p t i c a l doubts about i n d u c t i v e inference. I n W. P. A l s t o n , & R. B. Brandt (Eds.), The problems of philosophy. Boston: A l l y n and Bacon, 1967. ( o r i g . 1748). Hummel, T. J . , & S l i g o , J . R. E m p i r i c a l comparison of u n i v a r i a t e and m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s of v a r i a t e procedures. Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1971, 76(1), 49-57. Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J . The growth of l o g i c a l t h i n k i n g from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books, 1958. Jacobs, R. A., & Rosenbaum, P. S. E n g l i s h transformational grammar. Waltham, Massachusetts: Xerox College P u b l i s h i n g , 1968. Kagan, J . , Moss, H. A., & S i g e l , I . E. P s y c h o l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of s t y l e s of c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n . In J . C. Wright, & J . Kagan (Eds.), Basic c o g n i t i v e processes i n c h i l d r e n . Monographs of the Society f o r Research i n C h i l d Development, 1963, 28(2). Kamman, R., & S t r e e t e r , L. Two meanings of word abstractness. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1971, 10, 303-306. Kaplan, A. The conduct of i n q u i r y .  San Francisco:  Chandler, 1964.  Katz, J . J . , & Fodor, J . A. The s t r u c t u r e of a semantic theory. Language, 1963, 39, 170-210. K i n t s c h , W. Abstract nouns: imagery versus l e x i c a l complexity. of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972, 11, 59-65.  Journal  K i n t s c h , W. Notes on the s t r u c t u r e of semantic memory. I n E. T u l v i n g , & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of memory. New York: Academic Press, 1972.  98 K i r k , S. A.,. McCarthy, J . , & K i r k , W. D. Examiner's manual: I l l i n o i s Test of P s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c A b i l i t i e s (Rev. ed.). Urbana: U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s Press, 1968. Koen, F. An i n t r a - v e r b a l e x p l i c a t i o n of the nature of metaphor. of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1965, 129-133.  Journal  Kongas Maranda, E. K. A tree grows: Transformation of a r i d d l e metaphor. In P. Maranda, & E. K. K8ngas Maranda, S t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s of o r a l t r a d i t i o n . P h i l a d e l p h i a : U n i v e r s i t y of Pennsylvania Press, 1971. Kuhn, T. The s t r u c t u r e of s c i e n t i f i c r e v o l u t i o n s (2nd ed.). U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1962.  Chicago:  Leatherdale, W. H. The r o l e of analogy, model and metaphor i n science. New York: North-Holland P u b l i s h i n g Company, 1974. Leondar, B. The s t r u c t u r e and f u n c t i o n of metaphor. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Harvard U n i v e r s i t y , 1968.  Unpublished d o c t o r a l  Lesser, H., & Drouin, C. T r a i n i n g i n the use of double-function terms. Journal'of P s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c Research, 1975, 285-302. Levi-Strauss, C.  S t r u c t u r a l anthropology.  New York:  Basic Books, 1963.  Levi-Strauss, C. The raw and the cooked. New York: Harper & Row, 1969. ( O r i g i n a l l y published i n French: Mythologiques I : Le cru et l e c u i t . P a r i s : Plon, 1964). Levi-Strauss, C. From honey to ashes. New York: Harper & Row, 1973. ( O r i g i n a l l y published i n French: Mythologiques I I : Du m i e l aux cendres. P a r i s : Plon, 1966). Marx, M.,H.  Learning theories.  Toronto:  Macmillan, 1970.  Matthews, R. J . Concerning a ' l i n g u i s t i c theory' of metaphor. of Language, 1971, 7_(3), 413-425. McLuhan, M. Understanding media: McGraw-Hill, 1964.  The extensions of man.  New York:  Myers, J . L. Fundamentals of experimental design (2nd ed.). A l l y n & Bacon, 1972. Nelson, L. R. Guide to Lertap use and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Zealand: U n i v e r s i t y of Otago Press, 1974.  Foundations  Boston:  Dunedin,  Ogden, C. K., & Richards, I . A. The meaning of meaning. Harcourt, Brace & World, 1923.  New  New York:  Osborn, M. M., & Bowers, J . W. A t t i t u d i n a l e f f e c t s of selected types of concluding metaphors i n persuasive speeches. Speech Monographs, 1966, 33, 147-155.  99 Osgood, C. E., S u c i , G. J . , & Tannenbaum, P. H. The measurement of meaning. Urbana: U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s Press, 1957. P a i v i o , A. Imagery and deep structure i n the r e c a l l of E n g l i s h nominali z a t i o n s . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1971, 10, 1-12. (a) P i a v i o , A. Imagery and v e r b a l processes. 1971. (b)  New York:  P a i v i o , A. Imagery and synchronic t h i n k i n g . Review, 1975, 16, 147-163.  H o l t , Rinehart,  Canadian P s y c h o l o g i c a l  P a i v i o , A., Y u i l l e , J . C , & Madigan, S. A. Concreteness, imagery and meaningfulness values f o r 925 nouns. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph Supplement, 1968, 7_6_, (1, P t . 2). Pepper, S. C. World hypotheses. Press, 1961.  Berkeley: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a  Pepper, S. C. The root metaphor theory of metaphysics. In W. Shibles (Ed.), Essays on metaphor. Whitewater, Wisconsin: The Language Press, 1972. P e r f e t t i , C. A. meaning. P l a t h , S.  Psychosemantics: Some c o g n i t i v e aspects of s t r u c t u r a l P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 1972, 7_8, 241-259.  Ariel.  London:  Faber & Faber, 1965.  P o l l i o , H. R. The s t r u c t u r a l b a s i s of word a s s o c i a t i o n behavior. The Hague: Mouton, 1966. P o l l i o , M. R., & P o l l i o , H. R. The development of f i g u r a t i v e language i n c h i l d r e n . Journal of P s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c Research, 1974, 3_, 185-201. P r i n c e , G. M.  The p r a c t i c e of c r e a t i v i t y .  New York:  Harper & Row,  1970.  Rapoport, A., & Fillenbaum, S. Structures i n the s u b j e c t i v e l e x i c o n . New York: Academic Press, 1971. Reddy, M. A semantic approach to metaphor. Papers from the F i f t h Regional Meeting, Chicago L i n g u i s t i c s Society, A p r i l 18-19, 1969. Department of L i n g u i s t i c s , U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago, 240-251. Rips, L. J . , Shoben, E. J . , & Smith, E. E. Semantic distance and the v e r i f i c a t i o n of semantic r e l a t i o n s . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973, 12, 1-20. Rohwer, W. D. Children and adolescents: Should we teach them or l e t them learn? The Educational Researcher, 1972, 1_(7) , 5-11.  100 Rohwer, W. D., & Bean, J . P. Sentence e f f e c t s and noun-pair l e a r n i n g : developmental i n t e r a c t i o n during adolescence. Journal of Experimental C h i l d Psychology, 1973, 15, 521-533.  A  Rumelhart, D. E., & Abrahamson, A. A. A model f o r a n a l o g i c a l reasoning. Cognitive Psychology, 1973, _5, 1-28. Sarbin, T. R. Anxiety: The r e i f i c a t i o n of a metaphor. General P s y c h i a t r y , 1964, 10, 620-648.  Archives of  Sarbin, T. R. Ontology r e c a p i t u l a t e s p h i l o l o g y : the mythic nature of anxiety. American Psychologist, 1968, 23_, 411-418. Schaeffer, B., & Wallace, R. The comparison of word meanings. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970, 86, 144-152. S h i b l e s , W. A.  An a n a l y s i s of metaphor.  The Hague:  Mouton, 1971.  (a)  Shibles, W. A. Metaphor: An annotated bibliography and h i s t o r y . Whitewater, Wisconsin: The Language Press, 1971. (b) S h i b l e s , W. A. (Ed.). Essays on metaphor. The Language Press, 1972.  Whitewater, Wisconsin:  Simmons, R. F. Some semantic structures f o r representing E n g l i s h meanings. In J . B. C a r r o l l , & R. 0. Freedle (Eds.), Language comprehension and the a c q u i s i t i o n of knowledge. Washington, D.C: Winston, 1972. Storm, J . C Age d i f f e r e n c e s i n the semantic s t r u c t u r e of animal terms and the e f f e c t s of t r a i n i n g . Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1975. Suppes, P. The semantics of c h i l d r e n ' s language. 1974, 29, 103-114. Thomas, D.  C o l l e c t e d poems.  London:  Thomas, 0.  Metaphor and r e l a t e d subjects.  American Psychologist,  Dent, 1952. New York:  Random House, 1969.  Turner, V. Dramas, f i e l d s , and metaphors: Symbolic a c t i o n i n human s o c i e t y . Ithaca, New York: C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1974. Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. Modes of t h i n k i n g i n young c h i l d r e n . York: H o l t , Rinehart, & Winston, 1965.  New  Weinreich, U. Explorations i n semantic theory. In T. A. Sebeok (Ed.), Current trends i n l i n g u i s t i c s ( V o l . 3). The Hague: Mouton, 1966.  101  APPENDICES  102 APPENDIX A T r a n s c r i p t i o n of I n s t r u c t i o n s Recall (1)  ( l i s t s 1 and 3) There are many strange expressions i n our language, expressions  which are unusual but s t i l l understood.  We hear of "a sagging economy"  but we know that an economy cannot sag quite l i k e a c l o t h e s l i n e can sag. We t a l k of a " s i c k s o c i e t y " , but a society cannot have a cough or fever l i k e a person can.  T e l e v i s i o n advertisements f o r chewing gum t e l l us  that "Spearmint i s s t r a i g h t " , but what does that r e a l l y mean? (2)  You are now going to hear a l i s t of 24 unusual expressions l i k e  these, and some that w i l l be even more unusual.  Your f i r s t job w i l l be  to t r y to remember as many of them as you can.  A f t e r you have heard the  expressions once you w i l l be asked to count backwards out loud from f i f t y . F i f t y , f o r t y - n i n e , f o r t y - e i g h t , forty-seven, and so on. doing t h i s w i l l be explained afterwards.  The reason f o r  Next, you w i l l hear the f i r s t  part of each expression again and your job then w i l l be to w r i t e down the r e s t of the expression i f you can remember i t .  Your answer sheets w i l l  then be c o l l e c t e d and you w i l l be given a new answer sheet and the procedure w i l l be repeated.  You w i l l hear the complete expressions, then count  backwards out loud from f i f t y , hear the f i r s t part of each expression again, and when you hear each one, w r i t e down the r e s t of the expression i f you can remember i t .  I f you can only remember part of the expression w r i t e  down that part. (3)  Each time you hear the l i s t of expressions they w i l l be i n a d i f -  ferent order.  Don't worry about s p e l l i n g .  I f you're not sure how to  s p e l l a word w r i t e i t the way i t sounds to you.  Be sure to put your  name and your grade on your answer sheet, and don't worry i f you can't  103 Appendix A (continued) remember some of the expressions because many of them are hard to remember. Are there any questions? (4)  Ready.  Listen carefully.  Do not w r i t e anything down.  Here are  the expressions: (study t r i a l 1) Now count backwards, out loud, f i f t y , f o r t y - n i n e , f o r t y - e i g h t ... twentys i x , twenty-five. again.  OK, now, here i s the f i r s t part of each expression  As soon as you hear i t , w r i t e down the r e s t of the expression i f  you can remember i t . ( r e c a l l t r i a l 1) (5)  A l l right.  Be sure that your names are on the answer sheets and  then pass them to the front of the room. ( c o l l e c t i o n and d i s t r i b u t i o n of answer sheets) Here are the complete expressions again. t h i s time.  They should be a l i t t l e easier  Listen carefully. (study t r i a l 2)  Now count backwards out loud. s i x , twenty-five.  F i f t y , f o r t y - n i n e , f o r t y - e i g h t ... twenty-  Now here i s the f i r s t part of each expression again.  As soon as you hear i t w r i t e down the r e s t of the expression i f you can remember i t . ( r e c a l l t r i a l 2) A l l r i g h t , be sure that your names are on the answer sheets and pass them to the f r o n t of the room.  Thank you very much.  104 Appendix A (continued) Likeability (1)  ( L i s t s 1 and 3)  I n the f i r s t session you were asked to t r y to remember some unusual  expressions.  I n t h i s session we want to f i n d out how much you l i k e or  d i s l i k e each of those expressions.  Y o u ' l l be given a page now w i t h each  of the expressions p r i n t e d on i t and asked to r a t e each expression from 1 to 7 according to how much you l i k e i t . (2)  I f you l i k e an expression very much c i r c l e the number 7 on the l i n e  beside i t .  I f you d i s l i k e the expression very much c i r c l e the 1; i f  you l i k e i t moderately c i r c l e the 6; the 2;  i f you d i s l i k e i t moderately c i r c l e  i f you l i k e i t j u s t a l i t t l e c i r c l e the 5;  a l i t t l e c i r c l e the 3;  i f you d i s l i k e i t j u s t  and i f you r e a l l y n e i t h e r l i k e nor d i s l i k e the  expression c i r c l e the 4.  When the l i s t i s given to you put your name  and grade on i t and go ahead. There are no r i g h t answers.  Y o u ' l l have about 5 minutes to do the task. Are there any questions?  ( l i k e a b i l i t y task) Comprehension ( L i s t s 1 and 3) A l l r i g h t , the next task w i l l be the f i n a l one.  This time you w i l l  be given a l i s t of the expressions and some p o s s i b l e meanings f o r each of them.  You are to study them c a r e f u l l y and choose the meaning that you  think i s the best one from amongst the four choices given. l e t t e r beside the meaning that you t h i n k i s the most c o r r e c t . i s n ' t always a r i g h t answer. best of those given.  C i r c l e the There  Just choose the one that you think i s the  I f you aren't sure what some of the words mean, look  them up i n the separate glossary p r i n t e d i n red.  Don't spend too much  time on any one expression, but do make a choice f o r each of them, even i f you have to guess.  You w i l l have about 25 minutes to do t h i s task which  105 Appendix A ( c o n t i n u e d ) i s about one minute f o r each e x p r e s s i o n , so work c a r e f u l l y but  quickly.  A r e t h e r e any q u e s t i o n s ? (comprehension  Likeability (1)  ( L i s t 2)  (Same i n s t r u c t i o n s as paragraph 1 of the i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r L i s t 1 and  3 recall (2)  task)  tasks).  You a r e going to be g i v e n a l i s t now of 24 unusual e x p r e s s i o n s .  We want to f i n d out how much you l i k e o r d i s l i k e each of these e x p r e s s i o n s . B e s i d e s each e x p r e s s i o n w i l l be the numbers from 1 to 7 and your j o b w i l l be to r a t e each e x p r e s s i o n a c c o r d i n g to how much you l i k e (3)  it.  (Same i n s t r u c t i o n s as paragraph 2 of the i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r L i s t 1  and 3 l i k e a b i l i t y  tasks).  Similarity rating (List  1)  F o r the next t a s k y o u ' l l be g i v e n 24 p a i r s o f words and asked to judge how s i m i l a r the two concepts o r i d e a s a r e .  If  the two concepts  have  v e r y h i g h s i m i l a r i t y c i r c l e the 5 on the l i n e b e s i d e the p a i r of words. the two concepts have h i g h s i m i l a r i t y c i r c l e the 4. have moderate s i m i l a r i t y c i r c l e the 3. the 2,  and i f  If  If  the two  they have v e r y low s i m i l a r i t y , c i r c l e the 1.  and " b a l l o o n " have v e r y l i t t l e  o n l y 1 or 2.  concepts  they have low s i m i l a r i t y c i r c l e F o r example,  " c o r d " and " r o p e " have much s i m i l a r i t y and might be r a t e d 4 o r 5, "justice"  If  while  s i m i l a r i t y and might be r a t e d  The meanings o f some o f the h a r d e r words a r e g i v e n i n the  separate glossary p r i n t e d i n red. s i m i l a r two i d e a s a r e .  I t w i l l sometimes be hard to d e c i d e how  In those cases j u s t use your b e s t  Y o u ' l l have about 15 minutes to do the t a s k .  judgement.  A r e t h e r e any q u e s t i o n s ?  106 APPENDIX B L i k e a b i l i t y Scale - L i s t 1 Grade  Name  LIKE VERY MUCH  DISLIKE VERY MUCH Wisdom i s a monk.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A ship i s an ocean.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  An owner i s a wholesaler.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  An obsession i s a f r a n c h i s e .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A book i s a reminder.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A d o l l a r i s a banker.  1  2  3  4  5  .6  7  Chance i s an o r i g i n a t o r .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Winter i s snow.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  An increment i s a saloon.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Hatred i s a g l u t t o n .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A s k i l l e t i s a magnitude.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A horse i s an e c c e n t r i c .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A thicket i s a c i t y .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A m i n s t r e l i s a musician.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A w a l l i s an entry.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Welfare i s food.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A b u i l d i n g i s a creator.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  An avalanche i s an acrobat.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Evidence i s a c r i m i n a l .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Deceit i s a charlatan.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  107 Appendix B (continued) LIKE VERY MUCH  DISLIKE VERY MUCH An answer i s a problem.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A cost i s a patron.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Negligence  i s poverty.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A q u a n t i t y i s a bonus.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  108 APPENDIX C Comprehension Scale - L i s t 1 Name  Grade  C i r c l e the l e t t e r beside the best meaning f o r each of the f o l l o w i n g expressions. FOR EXAMPLE: "No man i s an i s l a n d " means that a) men aren't surrounded by water. b) human beings are land creatures. c) no person i s completely independent. d) women are i s l a n d s . I f you aren't sure of the meanings of some of the words use the glossary p r i n t e d i n red to help you. 1.  "Evidence i s a c r i m i n a l " means that a) b) c) d)  2.  "A t h i c k e t i s a c i t y " means that a) b) c) d)  3.  a s k i l l e t and a magnitude can both be round. both a s k i l l e t and a magnitude are s i z e a b l e . a s k i l l e t i s an example of a magnitude. s k i l l e t s and magnitudes are o f t e n found together.  "Negligence i s poverty" means that a) b) c) d)  5.  a t h i c k e t i s one type of c i t y . both t h i c k e t s and c i t i e s have bushes. t h i c k e t s are frequently found i n c i t i e s . both t h i c k e t s and c i t i e s are dense.  "A s k i l l e t i s a magnitude" means that a) b) c) d)  4.  evidence i s used to convict a c r i m i n a l . evidence harms some people. both evidence and c r i m i n a l s are connected w i t h the law. both evidence and c r i m i n a l s are brought i n t o court.  both negligence and poverty are found i n Vancouver. negligence causes poverty. negligence i s a type of poverty. negligence and poverty both r e s u l t from something being i n s u f f i c i e n t .  "Deceit i s a charlatan" means that a) b) c) d)  deceits and charlatans both pretend to be something that they aren't. deceits and charlatans are often found together. deceits and charlatans are types of i n j u s t i c e . both deceits and charlatans are unpleasant.  Appendix. C (continued) 6.  "An avalanche i s an a c r o b a t " means a) b) c) d)  7.  8.  b o t h s h i p s and oceans are a s p e c t s of s a i l i n g . a s h i p s a i l s on the ocean. a s h i p i s l a r g e and h e a v i l y p o p u l a t e d l i k e the ocean. b o t h s h i p s and oceans a r e o f t e n g r e y .  that  b o t h a r e composed of i d e a s . an answer o f t e n produces f u r t h e r an answer always has a p r o b l e m . b o t h a r e p a r t s of t e s t s .  questions.  that  chances and o r i g i n a t o r s b o t h a f f e c t our l i v e s . chance and o r i g i n a t o r s b o t h produce unexpected chance i s one k i n d of o r i g i n a t o r . o r i g i n a t o r s o f t e n take chances.  " W e l f a r e i s f o o d " means a) b) c) d)  that  increments and s a l o o n s a r e both t h i n g s . an i n c r e m e n t , l i k e a s a l o o n , i s u s u a l l y s m a l l . a s a l a r y i n c r e m e n t , l i k e a s a l o o n , can keep people happy. s m a l l c o s t i n c r e a s e s a r e common i n s a l o o n s .  "Chance i s an o r i g i n a t o r " means a) b) c) d)  12.  that  "An answer i s a problem" means a) b) c) d)  11.  snow i s the most important f e a t u r e of w i n t e r . w i n t e r and snow are b o t h i c y . w i n t e r and snow a r e b o t h c o l d and damp. w i n t e r and snow o f t e n o c c u r t o g e t h e r .  "An increment i s a s a l o o n " means a) b) c) d)  10.  that  "A s h i p i s an ocean" means a) b) c) d)  9.  avalanches and a c r o b a t s are f r e q u e n t l y found t o g e t h e r . an avalanche i s one k i n d of a c r o b a t . an avalanche tumbles and r o l l s l i k e an a c r o b a t . b o t h avalanches and a c r o b a t s f a l l down.  "Winter i s snow" means a) b) c) d)  that  food food both both  things.  that  and w e l f a r e a r e commonly g i v e n out i s a k i n d of w e l f a r e . w e l f a r e and food a r e taken home. food and w e l f a r e f u l f i l l needs.  together.  Appendix G (continued) 13.  "An owner i s a w h o l e s a l e r " means a) b) c) d)  14.  15.  a quantity a quantity a bonus i s any amount  that  and a bonus o f t e n can be found t o g e t h e r . and a bonus a r e b o t h amounts. an example of q u a n t i t y . of something i s b e t t e r than n o t h i n g .  i s a p a t r o n " means  that  b o t h a c o s t and a p a t r o n are a s p e c t s of monetary m a t t e r s a p a t r o n pays the c o s t . both ' c o s t ' and ' p a t r o n ' a r e words. both a c o s t and a p a t r o n can be connected w i t h a p r o d u c t that  e c c e n t r i c s o f t e n have h o r s e s . both e c c e n t r i c s and horses o f t e n walk s t r a n g e l y . a h o r s e i s one type of e c c e n t r i c . both h o r s e s and e c c e n t r i c s can do u n u s u a l t h i n g s .  "A m i n s t r e l i s a m u s i c i a n " means a) b) c) d)  20.  i s a bonus" means  "A h o r s e i s an e c c e n t r i c " means a) b) c) d)  19.  that  hatred, l i k e a glutton, i s unpleasant. h a t r e d and g l u t t o n s both consume and d e s t r o y too much. h a t r e d and g l u t t o n y are both types of e v i l . gluttons are often hated.  "A c o s t a) b) c) d)  18.  wisdom and monks a r e both found i n m o n a s t e r i e s . monks possess wisdom. both wisdom and monks a r e concerned w i t h t r u t h . both wisdom and monks a r e q u i e t .  "A q u a n t i t y a) b) c) d)  17.  that  " H a t r e d i s a g l u t t o n " means a) b) c) d)  16.  both owners and w h o l e s a l e r s a r e types of businessmen. both owners and w h o l e s a l e r s use money. o n l y owners can be w h o l e s a l e r s . owners and w h o l e s a l e r s f r e q u e n t l y meet t o g e t h e r .  "Wisdom i s a monk" means a) b) c) d)  that  that  both m i n s t r e l s and m u s i c i a n s p l a y m u s i c . m i n s t r e l s and m u s i c i a n s work t o g e t h e r . a m i n s t r e l i s a type of m u s i c i a n . both m i n s t r e l s and m u s i c i a n s l i k e m u s i c .  "An o b s e s s i o n i s a f r a n c h i s e " means a) b) c) d)  that  an o b s e s s i o n i s a type of f r a n c h i s e . b o t h o b s e s s i o n s and f r a n c h i s e s a r e concerned w i t h t h i n k i n g about something enough makes i t y o u r s . p e o p l e who have o b s e s s i o n s can have f r a n c h i s e s .  ideas.  Appendix C (continued) 21.  "A b u i l d i n g i s a c r e a t o r " means a) b) c) d)  22.  23.  bankers have both d o l l a r s both d o l l a r s both d o l l a r s  that  a book i s a type o f r e m i n d e r . books and reminders a r e commonly p r i n t e d on p a p e r . books and reminders both bear u s e f u l i n f o r m a t i o n . both books and reminders a r e found on d e s k s .  "A w a l l i s an e n t r y " means a) b) c) d)  that  dollars. and bankers occupy banks. and bankers have f a c e s . and bankers r e p r e s e n t w e a l t h .  "A book i s a reminder" means a) b) c) d)  24.  each b u i l d i n g makes i t s occupants f e e l l i k e new p e o p l e . both b u i l d i n g s and c r e a t o r s a r e a s p e c t s of a r c h i t e c t u r e . b u i l d i n g s and c r e a t o r s a r e both s t r o n g . every b u i l d i n g has a c r e a t o r .  "A d o l l a r i s a banker" means a) b) c) d)  that  that  a w a l l makes you stop and r e a l l y " e n t e r " where you a r e . b o t h w a l l s and e n t r i e s a r e p a r t s of b u i l d i n g s . most w a l l s and e n t r i e s a r e v e r t i c a l . most w a l l s have e n t r i e s .  112 APPENDIX D GLOSSARY  avalanche - a large mass of snow, ice, earth, rock, etc. in swift motion down a mountainside. something given or received that is over and above what is bonus expected. charlatan - one making especially noisy or showy pretenses to knowledge or ability. deceit the act or practice of deceiving, as by falsification, concealment or cheating. eccentric - a person that deviates from conventional or accepted conduct, especially in odd or whimsical ways. entry the place or point at which entry is made. evidence franchise - something that furnishes or tends to furnish proof. a right or privilege granted to an individual or group by a government or company. glutton increment - one that eats too much. magnitude - something that is gained or added. minstrel - greatness of size or extent. one of a class of medieval musical entertainers. monk a man who has retired from the world to devote himself to negligence - asceticism as a solitary. a failure to exercise the care that a prudent person usually obsession - exercises. a persistent and disturbing intrusion of or preoccupation with originator - an idea or feeling. patron one that causes the beginning of something. one who uses his influence to help or benefit an individual; poverty - a regular or steadyrclient. quantity a lack or relative lack of money or material possessions. reminder an indefinite amount or number. saloon something that prompts or aids the memory. an elegant apartment; a room or public establishment in which skillet alcoholic beverages are served, thicket - frying pan a dense and usually circumscribed growth of shrubbery or welfare - small trees. a condition characterized by good fortune, happiness, wellwholesaler - being, or prosperity; assistance given to improve well-being, a merchant who sells chiefly to retailers, other merchants or institutions.  L  APPENDIX E S i m i l a r i t y Scale - L i s t 1 Name  Grade SIMILARITY VERY LOW  LOW  MODERATE  wisdom....monk  1  2  3  4  5  ship....ocean  1  2  3  4  5  owner....wholesaler  1  2  3  4  5  obsession....franchise  1  2  3  4  5  book....reminder  1  2  3  4  5  dollar....banker  1  2  3  4  5  chance....originator  1  2  3  4  5  winter....snow  1  2  3  4  5  increment.... saloon  1  2  3  4  5  hatred....glutton  1  2  3  4  5  skillet....magnitude  1  2  3  4  5  horse....eccentric  1  2  3  4  5  thicket....city  1  2  3  4  5  minstrel....musician  1  2  3  4  5  w a l l . . . . entry  1  2  3  4  5  welfare....food  1  2  3  4  5  building....creator  1  2  3  4  5  avalanche....acrobat  1  2  3  4  5  evidence....criminal  1  2  3  4  5  deceit....charlatan  1  2  3  4  5  answer....problem  1  2  3  4  5  HIGH  VERY HIGH  114 Appendix E  (continued) VERY LOW  LOW  MODERATE  HIGH  VERY HIGH  cost...patron  1  2  3  4  5  negligence....poverty  1  2  3  4  5  quantity....bonus  1  2  3  4  5  115 APPENDIX F Random Orders of Items f o r L i s t 1 Tasks Task R e c a l l Study T r i a l 1  Item Order 6,17,23,9,13,19,24,12,21,7,5,2,10,16,22,1, 8,3,20,15.18,14,4.  Test T r i a l 1  24,18,5,17,13,4,15,14,22,19,20,6,1,21,11, 12,8,9,3,10,7,16,2,23.  Study T r i a l 2  8,13,18,2,23,24,1,19,11,12,3,15,17,10,5, 21,4,14,22,20,6,9,16,7.  Test T r i a l 2  20,4,5,23,14,17,12,7,19,8,18,22,2,1,10, 15,21,13,16,24,9,11,3,6.  L i k e a b i l i t y Scale Comprehension and S i m i l a r i t y Scales  12,7,14,17,13,8,18,15,19,20,21,22,23,16, 5,11,6,14,10,1,2,3,9. 4,23,21,3,10,24,15,7,19,1,18,11,14,12,20, 9,2,22,16,17,6.8,13,5.  116 APPENDIX G L i k e a b i l i t y Scale - L i s t 2 Name  Grade  '  LIKE VERY MUCH  DISLIKE VERY MUCH A t o r t o i s e i s a tank.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A code i s a henchman.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A nun i s a monk.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  An octopus  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A s o l d i e r i s a butcher.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A teacher i s a p r o f e s s o r .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  An a p p l e i s a b u t l e r .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A typhoon i s a h u r r i c a n e .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A car i s a truck.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A potato i s a m i n s t r e l .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A cigar i s a shoulder.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A f l a s k i s a tower.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  i s a busybody.  LIKE  DISLIKE A s u l t a n i s a baron.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A doctor i s a nurse.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A l o b s t e r i s a.scorpion.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A mountain i s a s t r a w b e r r y .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A ship i s a grocer.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  F i n g e r s a r e tweezers.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  An a c c o r d i o n i s a s i n g e r .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  A dog i s a c a t .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  An avalanche  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  i s an a c r o b a t .  Appendix G ( c o n t i n u e d ) DISLIKE  A city i s a thicket.  1  An i c e b e r g i s a b a g p i p e .  1  A h o r s e i s an e n g i n e .  1  118 APPENDIX H L i k e a b i l i t y Scale - L i s t 3 Name  '  Grade DISLIKE VERY MUCH  LIKE VERY MUCH  The  decoy encourages the p o s i t i o n .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  item i n d i c a t e s the cheese.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The p e r c e p t i o n abandons t h e i n c i d e n t .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  T r u t h f o l d s t h e advantage.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Mastery e s t a b l i s h e s j u s t i c e .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  j e l l y o b t a i n s t h e sugar.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  s a l t bans t h e t r a d e .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  earth caresses  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  l e n g t h cheers  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  q u a l i t y defeats the d e s c r i p t i o n .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  pebble o u s t s t h e r i v e r .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  p r a i r i e questions  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  piano  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  estimate  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  l a n t e r n attends  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  c l a i m permits  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  b a l l o o n c r i n k l e s the a i r .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  agreement speaks the d e c e i t .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  d a f f o d i l c r i p p l e s t h e shadow.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The  b a s i n whimpers t h e i d e a .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  t h e emotion. the o r i g i n .  the d i s t i n c t i o n .  condemns boredom. f l a t t e r s the cost. the c e l l a r .  t h e sky.  119 Appendix H (continued) LIKE VERY MUCH  DISLIKE VERY MUCH Ignorance i n t e r v i e w s t h e j u n g l e .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The hammer s k e t c h e s t h e lumber.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The i l l u s i o n tramples t h e mirage.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  The assumption climbs t h e t r e e .  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  120  APPENDIX J Comprehension Scale - L i s t 3 Name  '  Grade  C i r c l e the l e t t e r beside the best meaning f o r each of the f o l l o w i n g expressions. FOR EXAMPLE: "No man i s an i s l a n d " means that a) b) c) d)  men aren't surrounded by water. human beings are land creatures. no person i s completely independent. women are i s l a n d s .  I f you aren't sure of the meanings of some of the words use the glossary p r i n t e d i n red to help you. 1.  "Ignorance interviews the jungle" means that a) b) c) d)  2.  "The balloon c r i n k l e s the a i r " means that a) b) c) d)  3.  jungle dwellers should t a l k to t r e e s . there's a l o t to be learned about jungles. a f o o l i s h person t r i e s , to do the impossible. interviewers prefer t r o p i c a l climates.  containers a f f e c t t h e i r contents. burning rubber p o l l u t e s the atmosphere. a balloon compresses the a i r i n s i d e i t . a b a l l o o n makes c r i n k l i n g noises as i t f l o a t s .  "Mastery e s t a b l i s h e s j u s t i c e " means that a) b) c) d)  good s k i l l s are found i n democratic countries. power produces the law. the wolf k i l l s the lamb. union leaders b u i l d the courthouses.  4'. "The length cheers the o r i g i n " means that a) b) c) d)  long l i v e s have c h e e r f u l moments. the beginning of a long t r i p i s the most pleasant part. long distance runners are cheered mostly a t the s t a r t of the race. long tasks require e a r l y s t a r t s .  121 Appendix J 5.  "The c l a i m p e r m i t s the sky" means a) b) c) d)  6.  that  the b e s t t h i n g s a r e beyond d e s c r i p t i o n . good teams can beat g o o d - l o o k i n g teams. well-made p r o d u c t s are b e s t i n the l o n g - r u n . t h i n g s t h a t a r e most e a s i l y d e s c r i b e d a r e the b e s t .  poor v i s i o n causes a c c i d e n t s . o b s e r v a t i o n f a i l s to c o n f i r m the no one sees what happens. someone l o s e s t h e i r e y e s i g h t .  the c e l l a r " means  that  knowledge i s d i s c o v e r e d i n h i g h p l a c e s . lamps can be used i n basements. t r u e h e l p goes where i t i s needed most. gas l a n t e r n s are b e t t e r than e l e c t r i c ones i n c e l l a r s . that  on the p r a i r i e h i l l s a r e not much d i f f e r e n t from v a l l e y s . l a r g e t h i n g s make s m a l l t h i n g s seem l e s s i m p o r t a n t . p r a i r i e people ask q u e s t i o n s about each mountain. t h e r e i s l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e between the p r a i r i e and the f o r e s t .  "The hammer sketches a) b) c) d)  that  event.  "The p r a i r i e q u e s t i o n s the d i s t i n c t i o n " means a) b) c) d)  12.  good t h i n g s weaken e v i l t h i n g s . c r i p p l e d people need c h e e r f u l t h i n g s . flowers can be dangerous. flowers b r i g h t e n dark p l a c e s .  "The l a n t e r n a t t e n d s a) b) c) d)  11.  that  "The p e r c e p t i o n abandons the i n c i d e n t " means a) b) c) d)  10.  the Great S a l t D e s e r t can be c r o s s e d by camel. sodium c h l o r i d e i s s u b j e c t to t a x a t i o n . the ocean makes commerce d i f f i c u l t . s a l t i n sugar .might stop someone from buying i t .  "The q u a l i t y d e f e a t s the d e s c r i p t i o n " means a) b) c) d)  9.  that  "The d a f f o d i l c r i p p l e s the shadow" means a) b) c) d)  8.  that  There i s no l i m i t to the r i g h t s granted by the document. The c l o u d s permit the sun to s h i n e t h r o u g h . p i l o t s a r e r e s t r i c t e d to s e l e c t e d a r e a s . Buying a t i c k e t a l l o w s you to f l y .  "The s a l t bans the t r a d e " means a) b) c) d)  7.  (continued)  the the the the  the lumber" means  that  hammer h i t s the n a i l . strongman draws a p i c t u r e of the wood. t o o l s a v a i l a b l e determine the m a t e r i a l s to be used... t o o l s d e s t r o y the m a t e r i a l s .  122 Appendix J (continued) 13.  "The estimate f l a t t e r s the cost" means that a) b) c) d)  14.  "The decoy encourages the p o s i t i o n " means that a) b) c) d)  15.  b) c) d)  having the correct a n a l y s i s of a problem doubles up one's chances of s o l v i n g i t . f o l d i n g the newspaper makes d e l i v e r y e a s i e r . t e l l i n g the t r u t h turns good things your way. having the correct b e l i e f s i s an advantage i n l i f e .  music can eliminate d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n . piano was developed f o r o r c h e s t r a l music. piano lessons are boring. playing the piano can get one e x c i t e d .  "The earth caresses the emotion" means that a) b) c) d)  19.  lowland areas produce b o u n t i f u l harvests. the treasurer bravely makes a suggestion. sounds from a l e a k i n g container can give someone an idea. gurgling noises i n the sink sound l i k e words.  "The piano condemns boredom" means that a) b) c) d)  18.  decoy encourages hunters to come near. decoy aids i n hunting. lure i s usually attractive. good example improves performance.  "Truth f o l d s the advantage" means that a)  17.  a a a a  "The basin whimpers the idea" means that a) b) c) d)  16.  we often expect things to turn out worse than they do. the estimated p r i c e makes the true p r i c e look good. high p r i c e s r e s u l t i n l o s t money. great expectations need encouragement.  everybody f e e l s the earth. nature soothes f e e l i n g s . f e e l i n g s are a c e n t r a l part of nature. the earth f e e l s good.  "The assumption climbs the t r e e " means that a) b) c) d)  the wind blows the f i r s t page of the philosophy paper up the t r e e . the theory involves several t r e e - l i k e diagrams. the dog chases the cat up the t r e e . the assumption has e f f e c t s at each l e v e l of the theory.  123 Appendix J 20.  "The j e l l y a) b) c) d)  21.  that  the shopping l i s t says " c h e d d a r " . the a r t i c l e suggest a p a r t i c u l a r d a i r y p r o d u c t . the s i g n p o i n t s to the cow. something marks the s p o t . that  great things have s m a l l o r i g i n s . pebbles a r e found at the bottom of r i v e r s . s m a l l t h i n g s can a l t e r the course o f e v e n t s . pebbles can d e f l e c t w a t e r .  "The agreement speaks the d e c e i t " means a) b) c) d)  24.  that  a smooth s o f t approach y i e l d s good r e s u l t s . the f a t man takes the candy. weakness i s easy to o b t a i n . o n l y water i s added to j e l l y powder.  "The pebble o u s t s the r i v e r " means a) b) c) d)  23.  o b t a i n s the sugar" means  "The i t e m i n d i c a t e s the cheese" means a) b) c) d)  22.  (continued)  that  armies o n l y p r e t e n d to stop f i g h t i n g . the l e t t e r t e l l s the t r u t h . the agreement i s h o n e s t . the t r e a t y i n d i c a t e s d i s t r u s t .  "The i l l u s i o n tramples the mirage" means  that  a) b)  one scene always r e p l a c e s another scene. m i s t a k e n i d e a s a r e o f t e n more f o r c e f u l than u n u s u a l o b s e r v a t i  c) d)  seeing i s b e l i e v i n g . o p t i c a l i l l u s i o n s and mirages a r e n e a r l y i d e n t i c a l .  124 APPENDIX K GLOSSARY "B" abandons advantage assumption claim cost deceit decoy  -  distinction  -  emotion establishes estimate flatters ignorance illusion  -  incident indicates item  -  justice mastery mirage ousts perception  -  quality sketches whimpers  -  caresses condemns  g i v e s up by l e a v i n g , w i t h d r a w i n g , e t c . ; f o r s a k e s o r d e s e r t s , a more f a v o r a b l e o r improved c o n d i t i o n o r p o s i t i o n , the a c t o f t a k i n g f o r granted o r supposing t h a t a t h i n g i s t r u e , a demand o f a r i g h t o r supposed r i g h t ; an a s s e r t i o n , s t a t e ment o r i m p l i c a t i o n . the amount p a i d f o r a n y t h i n g bought or f o r s e r v i c e r e n d e r e d , the a c t o r p r a c t i c e o f d e c e i v i n g as by f a l s i f i c a t i o n , c o n cealment o r c h e a t i n g . something i n t e n d e d to a l l u r e o r e n t i c e , e s p e c i a l l y i n t o a trap. the a c t o f d i s t i n g u i s h i n g a d i f f e r e n c e ; something t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h e s one t h i n g from a n o t h e r , the a f f e c t i v e aspect o f c o n s c i o u s n e s s ; feeling, brings into existence; creates; founds. an e v a l u a t i o n o r judgement, e s p e c i a l l y from incomplete d a t a , p r a i s e s e x c e s s i v e l y , e s p e c i a l l y from motives of s e l f - i n t e r e s t , the s t a t e o f b e i n g unaware o r uninformed. a m i s l e a d i n g image p r e s e n t e d to the v i s i o n ; something t h a t deceives or misleads i n t e l l e c t u a l l y . an o c c u r r e n c e o f an a c t i o n o r s i t u a t i o n f e l t as a s e p a r a t e u n i t of experience. p o i n t s toward w i t h more o r l e s s e x a c t n e s s . an i n d i v i d u a l t h i n g o r d e t a i l s i n g l e d out from a number o f others; an o b j e c t o f a t t e n t i o n o r c o n c e r n . the assignment o f m e r i t e d rewards o r punishments; the q u a l i t y of being i m p a r t i a l or f a i r . the p o s s e s s i o n o f s k i l l o r t e c h n i q u e . an o p t i c a l phenomenon o f t e n observed on s t i l l days over d e s e r t s o r h o t pavement. e j e c t s o r puts out from a p o s i t i o n or p l a c e . awareness o f the elements o f environment through p h y s i c a l sensation. degree o f e x c e l l e n c e or conformance to a s t a n d a r d , o u t l i n e s , draws o r d e s c r i b e s the c h i e f f e a t u r e s o f . makes a low whining p l a i n t i v e o r broken sound. touches o r s t r o k e s i n a l o v i n g o r endearing manner, pronounces as i l l - a d v i s e d , wrong o r e v i l ; judges t o be u n f i t f o r use o r s e r v i c e .  125 APPENDIX L Random Orders of Items f o r L i s t 3 Tasks Task  Item Order  R e c a l l Study T r i a l 1  12,20,21,15,6,9,23,4,11,24,10,14,18,17, 2,7,13.5.8,16,1,3,19,22.  Test T r i a l 1  16,21,2,10,7,8,9,3,19,20,11,23,1,18,13, 5,12,22,6,4,14,17,24,15.  Study T r i a l 2  13,6,17,5,1,16,3,2,10,7,8,18,12,9,23, 24,20,21,15,22,19,4,14,11.  Test T r i a l 2  3,24,21,17,19,22,12,6,12,16,15,1,5,8, 11,13,4,14,10,20,9,7,2,18.  L i k e a b i l i t y Scale  20,2,9,11,1,6,4,15,19,17,22,23,12,18, 14,10,16,3,24,7,21,8,13,5.  Comprehension Scale  21,16,1,19,10,4,24,17,9,14,23,8,18,20, 7,11,12,15,5,6,2,22,3,13.  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0076970/manifest

Comment

Related Items