| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 語言學研究所 === 104 === Understanding figurative speech in a second language (L2) is a bottleneck for L2 learning. However, little is known about the nature of these difficulties. Studies done with native speakers have shown that metaphor understanding involves retrieving metaphorical meanings shortly after or concurrently with literal meanings from semantic memory and additional controlled processes to resolve the conflict between literal meaning, figurative meaning and the context (indexed by a more negative N400 and a late positive component, or LPC, to metaphors relative to literal expressions respectively)(De Grauwe et al., 2010). Understanding which aspect(s) the challenge for L2 learners’ metaphor comprehension lies is therefore of pedagogical value. We assessed event-related brain potentials (ERPs) from proficient Taiwanese learners of English while comprehending English nominal metaphors familiar to native speakers as well as literal and anomalous sentences (e.g., Metaphorical: Unemployment is a plague that affects many people. Literal: Cholera is a plague that affects many people. Anomalous: Metal is a plague that affects many people.). Sentences were taken from Experiment 2 of De Grauwe et al. (2010), and were presented word by word on the screen (duration: 400ms; ISI: 100ms; same presentation speed was used for native speakers in De Grauwe et al.). Participants had to judge whether the sentence made sense at the end of each sentence. Thirty proficient Taiwanese learners of English were tested (mean age: 23.4, range 21-29, 16 males); all scored 100 or above on a TOEFL test taken within 2 years. Participants were 78% accurate on average in the plausibility judgment test (Literal: 82%, Metaphorical: 72%, Anomalous: 79%). ERP results from correct trials showed anomaly effect similar to what was previously observed in native speakers—compared to metaphor and literal conditions, anomalous condition elicited, on the critical words underscored in the examples, reliably more negative N400s (300-600ms) and more positive LPC responses (800-1000ms), and on sentence final words, more negative N400s. By contrast, ERP responses to metaphors were reliably more positive than literal sentences only on the sentence final words. Further analysis on critical words showed that, compared to the literal condition, metaphors that have a corresponding expression and therefore an existing conceptual mapping in Chinese did elicit more negative N400s and larger LPCs, as was seen before in native speakers. These effects were reliably correlated with proficiency indices such as self-rated proficiency and TOEFL scores, with higher proficiency correlated with larger N400 and LPC effects. These results suggest that L2 speakers may be less sensitive to the semantic relations between the source and target concepts and the literal and metaphorical interpretations so as not to show differential responses on the critical words but delay the conflict resolution process till the end of a sentence. However, existing conceptual links in the native language aid the comprehension process and enable L2 speakers to engage qualitatively similar mechanisms as do native speakers. Our results thus suggest that emphasizing the conceptual mappings between the literal and metaphorical interpretations may facilitate metaphor understanding in L2, which in turn can help build higher L2 proficiency.
|
|---|
