Idioms show effects of meaning relatedness and dominance similar to those seen for ambiguous words
Does the language comprehension system resolve ambiguities for single- and multiple-word units similarly? We investigate this question by examining whether two constructs with robust effects on ambiguous word processing – meaning relatedness and meaning dominance – have similar influences on idiom processing. Eye tracking showed that: (1) idioms with more related figurative and literal meanings were read faster, paralleling findings for ambiguous words, and (2) meaning relatedness and meaning dominance interacted to drive eye movements on idioms just as they do on polysemous ambiguous words. These findings are consistent with a language comprehension system that resolves ambiguities similarly regardless of literality or the number of words in the unit.
KeywordsFigurative language Ambiguity Idioms Ambiguous words Eye movements and reading
We thank Scott Fraundorf for statistical help and Sindhu Chennupati, Kyra Samuda, and Li Yi for stimulus creation.
- Brocher, A., Koenig, J. P., Mauner, G., & Foraker, S. (2018). About sharing and commitment: the retrieval of biased and balanced irregular polysemes. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 33(4), 443–466.Google Scholar
- Cacciari, C., & Tabossi, P. (2014). Idioms: Processing, structure, and interpretation. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers?. Applied linguistics, 29(1), 72–89.Google Scholar
- Glucksberg, S. (1991). Beyond Literal Meanings: The Psychology of Allusion. Psychological Science, 2(3), 146–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00122.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hamblin, J. L., & Gibbs, R. W. (1999). Why You Can’t Kick the Bucket as You Slowly Die: Verbs in Idiom Comprehension, 28(1), 15.221177/0023830913484899Google Scholar
- Klepousniotou, E. (2002) The processing of lexical ambiguity: Homonymy and polysemy in the mental lexicon. Brain and Language, 81(1–3):205–223.Google Scholar
- Klepousniotou, E., Titone, D., & Romero, C. (2008). Making sense of word senses: The comprehension of polysemy depends on sense overlap. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(6), 1534.Google Scholar
- Sprenger, S. A., Levelt, W. J., & Kempen, G. (2006). Lexical access during the production of idiomatic phrases. Journal of memory and language, 54(2), 161–184.Google Scholar
- Vilkaite, L. (2016). Are nonadjacent collocations processed faster? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(10), 1632–1642.Google Scholar