{"title":"Eye movements reveal readers’ sensitivity to deliberate metaphors during narrative reading","authors":"C. D. Vries, W. G. Reijnierse, Roel M. Willems","doi":"10.1075/SSOL.18008.VRI","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Metaphors occur frequently in literary texts. Deliberate Metaphor Theory (DMT; e.g., Steen, 2017) proposes that metaphors that serve a communicative function as metaphor are\n radically different from metaphors that do not have this function. We investigated differences in processing between deliberate\n and non-deliberate metaphors, compared to non-metaphorical words in literary reading. Using the Deliberate Metaphor Identification\n Procedure (Reijnierse et al., 2018), we identified metaphors in two literary stories.\n Then, eye-tracking was used to investigate participants’ (N = 72) reading behavior. Deliberate metaphors were\n read slower than non-deliberate metaphors, and both metaphor types were read slower than non-metaphorical words. Differences were\n controlled for several psycholinguistic variables. Differences in reading behavior were related to individual differences in\n reading experience and absorption and appreciation of the story. These results are in line with predictions from DMT and underline\n the importance of distinguishing between metaphor types in the experimental study of literary reading.","PeriodicalId":222412,"journal":{"name":"Empirical Studies of Literariness","volume":"34 7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Empirical Studies of Literariness","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/SSOL.18008.VRI","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14
Abstract
Metaphors occur frequently in literary texts. Deliberate Metaphor Theory (DMT; e.g., Steen, 2017) proposes that metaphors that serve a communicative function as metaphor are
radically different from metaphors that do not have this function. We investigated differences in processing between deliberate
and non-deliberate metaphors, compared to non-metaphorical words in literary reading. Using the Deliberate Metaphor Identification
Procedure (Reijnierse et al., 2018), we identified metaphors in two literary stories.
Then, eye-tracking was used to investigate participants’ (N = 72) reading behavior. Deliberate metaphors were
read slower than non-deliberate metaphors, and both metaphor types were read slower than non-metaphorical words. Differences were
controlled for several psycholinguistic variables. Differences in reading behavior were related to individual differences in
reading experience and absorption and appreciation of the story. These results are in line with predictions from DMT and underline
the importance of distinguishing between metaphor types in the experimental study of literary reading.