Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Preschoolers’ Metaphor Comprehension. Methodological Issues in Experimental Pragmatics Cover

Preschoolers’ Metaphor Comprehension. Methodological Issues in Experimental Pragmatics

Open Access
|Jan 2020

References

  1. Beaty, Roger E. –Paul J. Silvia. 2013. Metaphorically speaking: Cognitive abilities and the production of figurative language. Memory and Cognition 41(2): 255–267.10.3758/s13421-012-0258-5
  2. Camp, Elisabeth. 2009. Two varieties of literary imagination: Metaphor, fiction, and thought experiments. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 33: 107–130.10.1111/j.1475-4975.2009.00186.x
  3. Carriedo, Nuria Antonio Corral–Pedro R. Montoro–Laura Herrero–Patricia Ballestrino–Iraia Sebastián. 2016. The development of metaphor comprehension and its relationship with relational verbal reasoning and executive function. PLOS ONE 11(3): e0150289. DOI: 10.1371/journal. pone. 0150289 (Last accessed: 17 June 2019).10.1371/journal.pone.0150289
  4. Corsi, Philip Michael. 1972. Human Memory and the Medial Temporal Region of the Brain. Doctoral Thesis at McGill University (Canada). http://digitool.library.mcgill.ca/R/?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=93903&local_base=GEN01-MCG02 (Last accessed: 17 June 2019).
  5. Deckert, Matthias–Michaela Schmoeger–Ines Schaunig-Busch–Ulrike Willinger. 2018. Metaphor processing in middle childhood and at the transition to early adolescence: The role of chronological age, mental age, and verbal intelligence. Journal of Child Language 18: 1–34.10.1017/S0305000918000491
  6. Gardner, Howard–Ellen Winner. 1978. The development of metaphoric competence: Implications for humanistic disciplines. Critical Inquiry 5(1): 123–141.10.1086/447976
  7. Gardner, Howard–Mary Kircher–Ellen Winner–David Perkins. 1975. Children’s metaphoric productions and preferences. Journal of Child Language 2: 125–141.10.1017/S0305000900000921
  8. Gibbs, Raymond W, Jr. –Teenie Matlock. 2008. Metaphor, imagination, and simulation: Psycholinguistic evidence. In Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. 2008 (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, 161–176. New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.011 (Last accessed: 17 June 2019).10.1017/CBO9780511816802.011(Lastaccessed:17June2019)
  9. Giora, Rachel. 1997. Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics 8(3): 183–206.10.1515/cogl.1997.8.3.183
  10. Giora, Rachel. 2002. Optimal innovation and pleasure. In Oliviero Stock, Carlo Strapparva, Anton Nijholt (eds), Processing of The April Fools’ Day Workshop on Computational Humour, April 2002, 11–28. Trento, Italy: ITC-itst.10.2165/00024666-200201000-00007
  11. Giora, Rachel–Ofer Fein–Ann Kronrod–Idit Elnatan–Noa Shuval–Adi Zur. 2004. Weapons of mass distraction: Optimal innovation and pleasure ratings. Metaphor and Symbol 19(2): 115–141.10.1207/s15327868ms1902_2
  12. Kalandadze, Tamar–Courtenay Norbury–Terje Nærland–Kari-Anne B. Næss. 2018. Figurative language comprehension in individuals with autism spectrum disorder: A meta-analytic review. Autism 22(2): 99–117.10.1177/1362361316668652
  13. Kasirer, Anat–Nira Mashal. 2014. Verbal creativity in autism: Comprehension and generation of metaphoric language in high-functioning autism spectrum disorder and typical development. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8. Article 615. doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00615 (Last accessed: 17 June 2019).10.3389/fnhum.2014.00615
  14. Kő, Natasa–Andrea Mészáros–Sándor Rózsa–Csilla Szabó–Renálta Mlinkó. 2015. WPPSI-IV Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence – Fourth edition, technical and interpretative manual; Hungarian adaptation. Budapest: OS Hungary Tesztfejlesztő.
  15. Kövecses, Zoltán. 2010 [2002]. Metaphor. A Practical Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
  16. Lakoff, George–Mark L. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  17. Lorusso, Maria Luisa. 2007. APL-Medea. Abilità Pragmatiche Del Linguaggio. Firenze: Giunti OS.
  18. Mashal, Nira. 2013. The role of working memory in the comprehension of unfamiliar and familiar metaphors. Language and Cognition 5(4): 409–436.10.1515/langcog-2013-0024
  19. Mashal, Nira–Anat Kasirer. 2011. Thinking maps enhance metaphoric competence in children with autism and learning disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities 32: 2045–2054. DOI: 10.1016/j.ridd.2011.08.012 (Last accessed: 30 June 2019).10.1016/j.ridd.2011.08.012(Lastaccessed:30June2019)
  20. Melogno, Sergio–Maria A. Pinto–Gloria DiFilippo. 2017. Sensory and physico-psychological metaphor comprehension in children with ASD: A preliminary study on the outcomes of a treatment. Brain Sciences 7(7): 85. DOI: 10.3390/brainsci7070085 (Last accessed: 17 June 2019).10.3390/brainsci7070085(Lastaccessed:17June2019)
  21. Melogno, Sergio–Maria A. Pinto–Margherita Orsolini. 2017. Novel metaphors comprehension in a child with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder: A study on assessment and treatment. Frontiers in Psychology 7. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02004 (Last accessed: 17 June 2019).10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02004(Lastaccessed:17June2019)
  22. Müller, Ulrich–Philip D. Zelazo–Leah E. Lurye–Dana P. Liebermann. 2008. The effect of labeling on preschool children’s performance in the Dimensional Change Card Sort Task. Cognitive Development 23: 395–408.10.1016/j.cogdev.2008.06.001
  23. Özcaliskan, Seyda. 2005. On learning to draw the distinction between physical and metaphorical motion: Is metaphor an early emerging cognitive and linguistic capacity? Journal of Child Language 32(2): 291–318.10.1017/S0305000905006884
  24. Pinto, Maria A. –Sergio Melogno–Paolo Iliceto. 2008. TCM Junior. Test di Comprensione Delle Metafore. Scuola dell’infanzia e Scuola Primaria. Roma: Carocci Faber.
  25. Pouscoulous, Nausicaa. 2011. Metaphor: For adults only? Belgian Journal of Linguistics 25: 64–92.10.1075/bjl.25.04pou
  26. Sperber, Dan–Deirdre Wilson. 1996 [1995]. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
  27. Stöver, Hanna. 2010. Metaphor and Relevance Theory: A New Hybrid Model. PhD thesis. University of Bedfordshire. http://hdl.handle.net/10547/145619 (Last accessed: 17 June 2019).
  28. Tendahl, Markus. 2009 [2006]. A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor. Relevance Theory and Cognitive Linguistics. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230244313
  29. Wilson, Deirdre. 2011. Parallels and differences in the treatment of metaphor in relevance theory and cognitive linguistics. Intercultural Pragmatics 8(2): 177–196.10.1515/iprg.2011.009
  30. Winner, Ellen. 1979. New names for old things: The emergence of metaphoric language. Journal of Child Language 6: 469–491.10.1017/S030500090000249X
  31. Zelazo, Philip D. 2006. The Dimensional Change Card Sort (DCCS): A method of assessing executive function in children. Nature Protocol 1(1): 297–301. DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2006.46 (Last accessed: 17 June 2019).10.1038/nprot.2006.46(Lastaccessed:17June2019)
  32. Zheng, Qin–Zhongheng Jia–Dandan Liang. 2015. Metaphor and metonymy comprehension in Chinese-speaking children with high-functioning autism. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 10: 51–58.10.1016/j.rasd.2014.11.007
Language: English, German
Page range: 133 - 150
Published on: Jan 21, 2020
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 3 issues per year

© 2020 Anna Babarczy, Andrea Balázs, Fruzsina Krizsai, published by Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.