AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF METAPHORS TYPES AND TASKS

ABSTRACT How do people interpret metaphors? The goal of this paper is to acknowledge metaphors’ complexity beyond the scope of any specific theory of metaphors. Instead of ignoring contradictory findings, we propose to highlight and analyze regularities and irregularities in our findings, using insights from complex systems science to guide our discussions. In this exploratory study, participants were asked to substitute a metaphor vehicle for a word with a similar meaning and to explain the analogical motivation of the metaphor. There were three types of metaphors: primary, complex, and predicative. This is the first study to compare these three types of metaphors across two different tasks. Results show how metaphors cluster according to its type, but not uniformly. In this quantitative and qualitative analysis, we also show that multiple sources of experiences are available during metaphor interpretation. In conclusion, we highlight that no current theory can accommodate and predict all types of metaphoric behavior different people display in different contexts, but we understand some of the major biases and factors that are involved in metaphor interpretation.摘要：人们如何解读隐喻？本文旨在探讨隐喻超越任一单一隐喻理论范畴的复杂性。我们并未回避相悖的研究结论，而是借助复杂系统科学的相关洞见指导讨论，着重分析研究结果中的规律与异常之处。在本探索性研究中，受试者需以含义相近的词语替换隐喻喻体（metaphor vehicle），并阐释该隐喻的类比理据。本次研究涵盖三类隐喻：本原隐喻（primary metaphor）、复合隐喻（complex metaphor）与述谓隐喻（predicative metaphor）。这是首项针对上述三类隐喻在两项不同任务中开展对比的研究。结果显示，隐喻会依据自身类型形成聚类，但并非均匀分布。在本次定量与定性分析中，我们还证实，隐喻解读过程中可调用多维度的经验来源。综上，现有理论均无法适配并预测不同个体在不同情境下展现的各类隐喻使用行为，但我们已明确隐喻解读过程中涉及的部分核心偏向性因素与影响因子。