Skip to main content
Log in

Conceptual Clusters in Figurative Language Production

  • Published:
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although most prior research on figurative language examines comprehension, several recent studies on the production of such language have proved to be informative. One of the most noticeable traits of figurative language production is that it is produced at a somewhat random rate with occasional bursts of highly figurative speech (e.g., Corts & Pollio, 1999). The present article seeks to extend these findings by observing production during speech that involves a very high base rate of figurative language, making statistically defined bursts difficult to detect. In an analysis of three Baptist sermons, burst-like clusters of figurative language were identified. Further study indicated that these clusters largely involve a central root metaphor that represents the topic under consideration. An interaction of the coherence, along with a conceptual understanding of a topic and the relative importance of the topic to the purpose of the speech, is offered as the most likely explanation for the clustering of figurative language in natural speech.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Barlow, J. M., Kerlin, J. R., & Pollio, H. R. (1971). Training manual for identifying figurative language (Tech. Report No. 1). Knoxville: University of Tennessee, Metaphor Research Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corts, D. P. (1999). Spontaneous production of figurative language and gestures in college lectures: A comparison across disciplines. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corts, D. P., & Pollio, H. R. (1999). The spontaneous production of figurative language and gestures in college lectures. Metaphor and Symbol, 14, 81-100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, A. N. (1989). On choosing the vehicles of metaphors: Referential concreteness, semantic distances, and individual differences. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 486-499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortony, A. (1975). Why metaphors are necessary and not just nice. Educational Theory, 25, 45-53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollio, H. R., & Barlow, J. M. (1975). A behavioural analysis of figurative language in psychotherapy: One session in a single case study. Language and Speech, 18, 236-254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollio, H. R., Fabrizi, M. S, & Weddle, H. L. (1982). A note on pauses in spontaneous speech as a test of the derived process theory of metaphor. Linguistics, 20, 431-443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams-Whitney, D., Mio, J. S., & Whitney, P. (1992). Metaphor production in creative writing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 21, 497-509.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel P. Corts.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Corts, D.P., Meyers, K. Conceptual Clusters in Figurative Language Production. J Psycholinguist Res 31, 391–408 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019521809019

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019521809019

Navigation