Brain correlates of discourse processing: An fMRI investigation of irony and conventional metaphor comprehension

Abstract

Higher levels of discourse processing evoke patterns of cognition and brain activation that extend beyond the literal comprehension of sentences. We used fMRI to examine brain activation patterns while 16 healthy participants read brief three-sentence stories that concluded with either a literal, metaphoric, or ironic sentence. The fMRI images acquired during the reading of the critical sentence revealed a selective response of the brain to the two types of nonliteral utterances. Metaphoric utterances resulted in significantly higher levels of activation in the left inferior frontal gyrus and in bilateral inferior temporal cortex than the literal and ironic utterances. Ironic statements resulted in significantly higher activation levels than literal statements in the right superior and middle temporal gyri, with metaphoric statements resulting in intermediate levels in these regions. The findings show differential hemispheric sensitivity to these aspects of figurative language, and are relevant to models of the functional cortical architecture of language processing in connected discourse.

Theory of Mind disruption and recruitment of the right hemisphere during narrative comprehension in autism

“…Combined, these two regions play a key role in discourse processing. This network has been found to be activated in Theory of Mind tasks (Castelli et al, 2002;Gallagher & Frith, 2003;Greene, Sommerville, Nystrom, Darley, & Cohen, 2001;Martin & Weisberg, 2003;Moll, de Oliveira-Souza, Bramati, & Grafman, 2002), as well as discourse comprehension tasks (Bottini et al, 1994;Eviatar & Just, 2006;Ferstl & von Cramon, 2001Ferstl, Rinck, & von Cramon, 2005;Nichelli et al, 1995;Xu, Kemeny, Park, Frattali, & Braun, 2005). Mason and Just (2006) attribute activation in this network to Protagonist monitoring.…”

Metaphoric advertisement comprehension: The role of the cerebral hemispheres

“…Some evidence supports left hemisphere superiority or no hemispheric differences during metaphor comprehension (e.g., Gagnon et al, 2003;Eviatar and Just, 2006;Arzouan et al, 2007;Rapp et al, 2007;Stringaris et al, 2007). In contrast, other findings support a greater role of the right hemisphere in processing metaphors (e.g., Burgess and Chiarello, 1996;Anaki et al, 1998;Monetta et al, 2006;Faust and Mashal, 2007;Schmidt et al, 2007).…”

“…Some marketing and advertising research is consistent with the Standard Pragmatic Model by suggesting that metaphors place additional processing demands on consumers (Kardes, 1988;Mick, 1992;Toncar and Munch, 2001). Other research, however, suggests that metaphor comprehension is fundamental to language processing in general, and does not require special processes or additional effort (Gibbs, 1980;Keysar, 1989;Glucksberg and Keysar, 1990;Glucksberg, 1998;Eviatar and Just, 2006). Given these conflicting findings, it is currently difficult to determine whether or not consumers use additional processes during metaphor comprehension that could lead to misinterpretations of the advertisement and decreased purchase intent.…”

“…Specifically, the left hemisphere is thought to activate closely related semantic associates (e.g., scissors) to a given word (e.g., cut), whereas the right hemisphere is thought to activate distantly related semantic associates (e.g., foot, cry, glass) to a given word (e.g., cut) (Beeman et al, 1994). Evidence in support of this theory comes from semantic priming studies (e.g., Chiarello et al, 1990;Beeman et al, 1994;Anaki et al, 1998;Schmidt et al, 2007) and neuroimaging studies (e.g., Jung-Beeman et al, 2004;Mashal et al, 2005Mashal et al, , 2007Eviatar and Just, 2006) showing right hemisphere activation for alternative word meanings of ambiguous words. Given that readers need to connect information that is not explicitly stated when comprehending both metaphors and ambiguous words, the Fine-Coarse Semantic Coding Theory (Beeman et al, 1994) can be used to explain why the right hemisphere may exhibit a processing advantage for metaphors.…”

Review on the Role of the Two Hemispheres in Metaphor Comprehension

“…隐喻，其使用的普遍性和重要性不言而喻。传统认知科学一直把右半球当作"无声半球"，即大脑左半 球是语言加工的绝对优势半球。然而越来越多的研究表明，大脑右半球在理解幽默言语、讽刺、反讽、 请求、间接请求、隐喻等其他非字面义的功能性言语中发挥了重要作用 (Brownell, Michel, Powelson, & Gardner, 1983;Bihrle, Brownell, Powelson, & Gardner, 1986;Kaplan, Brownell, Jacobs, & Gardner, 1990;Brownell & Stringfellow, 1999;Eviatar & Just, 2006 (Winner & Gardner, 1977)。Brownell 等人(1990)要求被试对目标词的替代词语进行选择，目标词 包含两类：一种是多义形容词(例如："warm"具有隐喻义"loving")、另一种是多义名词(例如："pen" 具有非隐喻义"writing implement/cage")。结果发现，左半球损伤病人比右半球损伤病人更偏向选择隐 喻义的替代词 (Brownell, Simpson, Bihrle, Potter, & Gardner, 1990 Bottini, G., Corcoran, R., Sterzi, R., Paulesu, E., Schenone, P., Scarpa, P. et al (1994). …”