Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Do Nonnative Language Speakers Chew the Fat and Spill the Beans with Different Brain Hemispheres? Investigating Idiom Decomposability with the Divided Visual Field Paradigm

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

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore possible cerebral asymmetries in the processing of decomposable and nondecomposable idioms by fluent nonnative speakers of English. In the study, native language (Polish) and foreign language (English) decomposable and nondecomposable idioms were embedded in ambiguous (neutral) and unambiguous (biasing figurative meaning) context and presented centrally, followed by laterally presented target words related to the figurative meaning of the idiom or literal meaning of the last word of the idiom. The target appeared either immediately at sentence offset (Experiment 1), or 400 ms (Experiment 2) after sentence offset. Results are inconsistent with the Idiom Decomposition Hypothesis (Gibbs et al. in Mem Cogn 17:58–68, 1989a; J Mem Lang 28:576–593, 1989b) and only partially consistent with the idea of the differential cerebral involvement in processing (non)decomposable idioms [the Fine/Coarse Coding Theory, Beeman (Right hemisphere language comprehension: perspectives from cognitive neuroscience, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1998)]. A number of factors, rather than compositionality per se, emerge as crucial in determining idiom processing, such as language status (native vs. nonnative), salience, or context.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abel, B. (2003). English idioms in the first language and second language lexicon: A dual representation approach. Second Language Research, 19(4), 329–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bąba, S.,& Liberek, J. (2002). Słownik frazeologiczny wspoółczesnej polszczyzny. Warszawa: PWN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beeman, M. (1998). Coarse semantic coding and discourse comprehension. In M. Beeman& C. Chiarello (Eds.), Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (pp. 255–284). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Boulenger, V., Hauk, O.,& Pulvermüller, F. (2009). Grasping ideas with the motor system: Semantic somatopy in idiom comprehension. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 1905–1914.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cacciari, C.,& Glucksberg, S. (1991). Understanding idiomatic expressions: The contribution of word meanings. In G. B. Simpson (Ed.), Understanding word and sentence (pp. 217–240). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cacciari, C.,& Tabossi, P. (1988). The comprehension of idioms. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 668–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caillies, S.,& Butcher, K. (2007). Processing of idiomatic expressions: Evidence for a new hybrid view. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 79–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiarello, C. (1988). Lateralization of lexical processes in the normal brain: A review of visual half-field research. In H. A. Whitaker (Ed.), Contemporary reviews in neuropsychology (pp. 36–76). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chiarello, C., Liu, S.,& Faust, M. (2001). Bihemispheric sensitivity to sentence anomaly. Neuropsychologia, 39, 1451–1463.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chiarello, C., Liu, S., Shears, C., Quan, N.,& Kacinik, N. (2003). Priming of strong semantic relations in the left and right visual fields: A time-course investigation. Neuropsychologia, 41, 721–732.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and representations. New York: Columbia Univeristy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cieślicka, A. (2006). Literal salience in on-line processing of idiomatic expressions by L2 speakers. Second Language Research, 22(2), 115–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cieślicka, A. (2007). Language experience and fixed expressions: Differences in the salience status of literal and figurative meanings of L1 and L2 idioms. In M. Nenonen& S. Niemi (Eds.), Collocations and idioms 1: Papers from the first nordic conference on syntactic freezes, Joensuu, Finland, May 19–20 (pp. 55–70). Joensuu: Joensuu University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cieślicka, A. (2010). Formulaic language in L2: Storage, retrieval and production of idioms by second language learners. In M. Pütz& L. Sicola (Eds.), Cognitive processing in second language acquisition: Inside the learner’s mind (pp. 149–168). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cieślicka, A. B.,& Heredia, R. R. (2011). Hemispheric asymmetries in processing L1 and L2 idioms: Effects of salience and context. Brain and Language, 116, 136–150.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Colombo, L. (1993). The comprehension of ambiguous idioms in context. In C. Cacciari& P. Tabossi (Eds.), Idioms: Processing, structure, and interpretation (pp. 163–200). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coney, J. (1998). Hemispheric priming in a reading task. Brain and Language, 62, 34–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coney, J.,& Evans, K. D. (2000). Hemispheric asymmetries in the resolution of lexical ambiguity. Neuropsychologia, 38, 272–282.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coulson, S., Kutas, M., Federmeier, K. D.,& Van Petten, C. (2005). Right hemisphere sensitivity to word- and sentence-level context: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(1), 129–147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coulson, S.,& Van Petten, C. (2007). A special role for the right hemisphere in metaphor comprehension? ERP evidence from hemifield presentation. Brain Research, 1146, 128–145.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cronk, B. C., Lima, S. D.,& Schweigert, W. A. (1993). Idioms in sentences: Effects of frequency, literalness, and familiarity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22(1), 59–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronk, B. C.,& Schweigert, W. A. (1992). The comprehension of idioms: The effects of familiarity, literalness, and usage. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13, 131–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cutting, J. C.,& Bock, K. (1997). That’s the way the cookie bounces: Syntactic and semantic components of experimentally elicited idiom blends. Memory and Cognition, 25(1), 57–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eviatar, Z.,& Just, M. A. (2006). Brain correlates of discourse processing: An fMRI investigation of irony and conventional metaphor comprehension. Neuropsychologia, 44(12), 2348–2359.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faust, M., Bar-lev, A.,& Chiarell, C. (2003). Sentence priming effects in the two cerebral hemispheres: Influences of lexical relatedness, word order, and sentence anomaly. Neuropsychologia, 41, 480–492.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faust, M.,& Chiarello, C. (1998a). Constraints on sentence priming in the cerebral hemispheres: Effects of intervening words in sentences and lists. Brain and Language, 63, 219–236.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faust, M.,& Chiarello, C. (1998b). Sentence context and lexical ambiguity resolution by the two hemispheres. Neuropsychologia, 36(9), 827–835.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faust, M. E.,& Gernsbacher, A. M. (1996). Cerebral mechanisms for suppression of inappropriate information during sentence comprehension. Brain and Language, 53, 234–259.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faust, M.,& Kahana, A. (2002). Priming summation in the cerebral hemispheres: Evidence from semantically convergent and semantically divergent primes. Neuropsychologia, 40, 892–901.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faust, M.,& Lavidor, M. (2003). Semantically convergent and semantically divergent priming in the cerebral hemispheres: Lexical decision and semantic judgment. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 585–597.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faust, M.,& Mashal, N. (2007). The role of the right cerebral hemisphere in processing novel metaphoric expressions taken from poetry: A divided visual field study. Neuropsychologia, 45, 860–870.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Federmeier, K. D., & Kutas, M. (1999). Right words and left words: Electrophysiological evidence for hemispheric differences in meaning processing. Cognitive Brain Research, 8, 373–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flores d’Arcais, G. B. (1993). The comprehension and semantic interpretation of idioms. In C. Cacciari& P. Tabossi (Eds.), Idioms: Processing, structure, and interpretation (pp. 79–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogliata, A., Rizzo, S., Reati, F., Miniussi, C., Oliveri, M.,& Papagno, C. (2007). The time course of idiom processing. Neuropsychologia, 45, 3215–3222.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, M. A. (1995). Tropic implicature and context in the comprehension of idiomatic phrases. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. (1970). Idioms within a tranformational grammar. Foundations of Language, 6(1), 22–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geeraerts, D. (1995). Specialization and reinterpretation in idioms. In M. Everaert, E.-J. van der Linden, A. Schenk,& R. Schreuder (Eds.), Idioms: Structural and psychological perspectives (pp. 57–74). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, R. W. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Gibbs, R. W. (1995). Idiomaticity and human cognition. In M. Everaert, E.-J. van der Linden, A. Schenk,& R. Schreuder (Eds.), Idioms: Structural and psychological perspectives (pp. 97–116). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, R. W.,& Nayak, N. P. (1989). Psycholinguistic studies on the syntactic behavior of idioms. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 100–138.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, R. W., Nayak, N., Bolton, J.,& Keppel, M. (1989a). Speakers’ assumptions about the lexical flexibility of idioms. Memory and Cognition, 17, 58–68.

  • Gibbs, R. W., Nayak, N. P.,& Cutting, C. (1989b). How to kick the bucket and not decompose: Analyzability and idiom processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 576–593.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giora, R. (1997). Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics, 8(3), 183–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giora, R. (1999). On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(7), 919–929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giora, R. (2002). Literal vs. figurative language: Different or equal? Journal of Pragmatics, 34(4), 487–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giora, R. (2003). On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Giora, R., Zaidel, E., Soroker, N., Batori, G.,& Kasher, A. (2000). Differential effects of right- and left-hemisphere damage on understanding sarcasm and metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 15(1&2), 63–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glucksberg, S. (1989). Metaphors in conversation: How are they understood? Why are they used? Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 4(3), 125–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glucksberg, S. (1991). Beyond literal meanings: The psychology of allusion. Psychological Science, 2(3), 146–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glucksberg, S. (1993). Idiom meanings and allusional content. In C. Cacciari& P. Tabossi (Eds.), Idioms: Processing, structure, and interpretation (pp. 3–26). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glucksberg, S. (2001). Understanding figurative language: From metaphors to idioms. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hillert, G. D.,& Buraças, G. T. (2009). The neural substrates of spoken idiom comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(9), 1370–1391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff, R. (1997). The architecture of language faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung-Beeman, M. (2005). Bilateral brain processes for comprehending natural language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(11), 512–518.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. J. (1973). Compositionality, idiomaticity and lexical substitution. In S. R. Anderson& P. Kiparsky (Eds.), A festshrift for Morris Halle (pp. 357–376). New York: Holt Reinhart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kecskes, I. (2000). A cognitive-pragmatic approach to situation-bound uterrances. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 605–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koivisto, M. (1998). Categorical priming in the cerebral hemispheres: Automatic in the left hemisphere, post-lexical in the right hemisphere? Neuropsychologia, 36, 661–668.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laurent, J.-P., Denhieres, G., Passerieux, C., Iakimova, G.,& Hardy-Bayle, M.-C. (2006). On understanding idiomatic language: The salience hypothesis assessed by ERPs. Brain Research, 1068, 151–160.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. S.,& Dapretto, M. (2006). Metaphorical vs. literal word meanings: fMRI evidence against a selective role of the right hemisphere. NeuroImage, 29, 536–544.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Libben, M. R.,& Titone, D. A. (2008). The multidetermined nature of idiom processing. Memory and Cognition, 36(6), 1103–1121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liontas, J. (2002). Context and idiom understanding in second languages. In S. H. Foster-Cohen, T. Ruthenberg,& M. L. Poschen (Eds.), EUROSLA yearbook (Vol. 2, pp. 155–185). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mashal, N., Faust, M.,& Hendler, T. (2005). The role of the right hemisphere in processing nonsalient metaphorical meanings: Application of principle components analysis to fMRI data. Neuropsychologia, 43, 2084–2100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mashal, N., Faust, M., Hendler, T.,& Jung-Beeman, M. (2007). An fMRI investigation of the neural correlates underlying the processing of novel metaphoric expressions. Brain and Language, 100, 115–126.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mashal, N., Faust, M., Hendler, T.,& Jung-Beeman, M. (2008). Hemispheric differences in processing the literal interpretation of idioms: Converging evidence from behavioral and fMRI studies. Cortex, 44, 848–860.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Matlock, T.,& Heredia, R. R. (2002). Understanding phrasal verbs in monolinguals and bilinguals. In R. R. Heredia& J. Altarriba (Eds.), Bilingual sentence processing (pp. 251–274). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, R. A. G.,& Gibbs, R. W. (1987). Processing idioms with multiple meanings. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 16(1), 63–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neely, J. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current theories and findings. In D. Besner& G. Humphries (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition (pp. 264–336). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunberg, G. (1978). The pragmatics of reference. Bloomington: Indiana Linguistic Club.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunberg, G. (1979). The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions: Polysemy. Linguistics and Philosophy, 3(2), 143–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunberg, G., Sag, I.,& Wasow, T. (1994). Idioms. Language, 70, 491–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oldfield, D. J. (1971). The assessment of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–113.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oliveri, M., Romero, L.,& Papagno, C. (2004). Left but not right temporal involvement in opaque idiom comprehension: A repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16(5), 848–855.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pollio, H., Barlow, J., Fine, H.,& Pollio, M. (1977). Psychology and the poetics of growth: Figurative language in psychology, psychotherapy, and education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popiel, S. J.,& McRae, K. (1988). The figurative and literal senses of idioms, or all idioms are not used equally. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 17(6), 475–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp, A. M., Leube, D. T., Erb, M., Grodd, W.,& Kircher, T. T. J. (2004). Neural correlates of metaphor processing. Cognitive Brain Research, 20, 395–402.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reagan, R. T. (1987). The syntax of English idioms: Can the dog be put on? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 16(5), 417–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rizzo, S., Sandrini, M.,& Papagno, C. (2007). The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in idiom interpretation: An rTMS study. Brain Research Bulletin, 71, 523–528.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Romero, L. L., Tettamanti, M., Cappa, S. F.,& Papagno, C. (2008). Idiom comprehension: A prefrontal task? Cerebral Cortex, 18, 162–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, G. L., DeBuse, C. J.,& Seger, C. A. (2007). Right hemisphere metaphor processing? Characterizing the lateralization of semantic processes. Brain and Language, 100, 127–141.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schweigert, W. A. (1991). The muddy waters of idiom comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 20(4), 305–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sprenger, S. A., Levelt, W. J. M.,& Kempen, G. (2006). Lexical access during the production of idiomatic phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 161–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stringaris, A. K., Medford, N., Giora, R., Giampietro, V. C., Brammer, M. J.,& David, A. S. (2006). How metaphors influence semantic relatedness judgments: The role of the right frontal cortex. NeuroImage, 33, 784–793.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stringaris, A. K., Medford, N. C., Giampietro, V., Brammer, M. J.,& David, A. S. (2007). Deriving meaning: Distinct neural mechanisms for metaphoric, literal, and non-meaningful sentences. Brain and Language, 100, 150–162.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tabossi, P., Fanari, R.,& Wolf, K. (2005). Spoken idiom recognition: Meaning retrieval and word expectancy. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34(5), 465–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabossi, P., Fanari, R.,& Wolf, K. (2008). Processing idiomatic expressions: Effects of semantic compositionality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(2), 313–327.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tabossi, P., Fanari, R.,& Wolf, K. (2009). Why are idioms recognized fast? Metaphor and Cognition, 37(4), 529–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabossi, P.,& Zardon, F. (1993). The activation of idiomatic meaning in spoken language comprehension. In C. Cacciari& P. Tabossi (Eds.), Idioms: Processing, structure, and interpretation (pp. 145–162). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabossi, P.,& Zardon, F. (1995). The activation of idiomatic meaning. In M. Everaert, E-Jvd Linden, A. Schenk,& R. Schreuder (Eds.), Idioms: Structural and psychological perspectives (pp. 273–282). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Titone, D. (1998). Hemispheric differences in context sensitivity during lexical ambiguity resolution. Brain and Language, 65, 361–394.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Titone, D. A.,& Connine, C. M. (1994a). Comprehension of idiomatic expressions: Effects of predictability and literality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(5), 1126–1138.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Titone, D. A.,& Connine, C. M. (1994b). Descriptive norms for 171 idiomatic expressions: Familiarity, compositionality, predictability, and literality. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 9(4), 247–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Titone, D. A.,& Connine, C. M. (1999). On the compositional and noncompositional nature of idiomatic expressions. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(12), 1655–1674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vespignani, F., Canal, P., Molinaro, N., Fonda, S.,& Cacciari, C. (2010). Predictive mechanisms of idiom comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(8), 1682–1700.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wasow, T., Sag, I.,& Nunberg, G. (1983). Idioms: An interim report. In S. Hattori& K. Inoue (Eds.), Proceedings of the XIIIth international congress of linguistics (pp. 102–105). Tokyo: CIPL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinreich, U. (1969). Problems in the analysis of idioms. In J. Puhvel (Ed.), Substance and structure of language (pp. 23–81). Los Angeles: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zempleni, M.-Z., Haverkort, M., Renken, R.,& Stowe, L. A. (2007). Evidence for bilateral involvement in idiom comprehension: An fMRI study. NeuroImage, 34, 1280–1291.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology and Communication, Texas A&M International University, 5201 University Boulevard, Laredo, TX, 78041-1900, USA

    Anna B. Cieślicka

Authors
  1. Anna B. Cieślicka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna B. Cieślicka.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cieślicka, A.B. Do Nonnative Language Speakers Chew the Fat and Spill the Beans with Different Brain Hemispheres? Investigating Idiom Decomposability with the Divided Visual Field Paradigm. J Psycholinguist Res 42, 475–503 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-012-9232-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-012-9232-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation