اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 20 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 429 |
| تعداد مقالات | 3,546 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 5,445,693 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 3,711,276 |
Unlocking Metaphorical Minds: Associations of Working Memory and Contextual Support with Iranian L2 Learners’ Metaphor Comprehension | ||
| Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies | ||
| دوره 13، شماره 2، تیر 2026، صفحه 49-75 اصل مقاله (605.86 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Research Paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30479/jmrels.2025.22113.2523 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Afrooz Choopanizadeh* 1؛ Mahmood Hashemian2؛ Aliakbar Jafarpour2 | ||
| 1Shahrekord University | ||
| 2Department of English Language Faculty of Letters & Humanities Shahrekord University Shahrekord, Iran | ||
| تاریخ دریافت: 31 اردیبهشت 1404، تاریخ بازنگری: 15 شهریور 1404، تاریخ پذیرش: 22 شهریور 1404 | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Current studies probe the essence of using language that conveys a meaning different from its literal interpretation. Although figurative language has been widely studied, metaphors themselves have received less attention (e.g., Lee & Choi, 2023; Tocaimaza-Hatch, 2019). This study used an online experiment to investigate how working memory (WM) resources are associated with metaphor processing in nonnative sentence comprehension. Sixty TEFL students at Shahrekord University participated in the study and were classified as intermediate or advanced according to their scores on the Cambridge Proficiency English (CPE) test. Before the experiment, 100 TEFL postgraduates rated the familiarity of base words from Cardillo et al. (2017). A self-paced reading task, which included critical sentences such as “The gossipy coworker was an amplifier, spreading rumors and gossip,” was designed using E-Prime software. Participants’ WM (storage and recall) was measured using a computerized test based on Shahnazari’s (2013) reading span test (RST) corpus. Data were analyzed using E-Prime and SPSS. Results showed better performance in storage than in recall in the RST. Reading times for metaphorical sentences were slightly faster with metaphorical versus literal context. Higher WM capacity was associated with quicker reading of metaphorical sentences. These findings suggest that metaphor processing is more cognitively demanding than literal language, and L2 learners with higher WM tend to comprehend metaphors more efficiently. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| L2 processing؛ Self-Paced reading؛ Literal meaning؛ Metaphorical meaning؛ Working Memory | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Altmann, G., & Steedman, M. (1988). Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition, 30(3), 191–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(88)90020-0
Anderson, J. R., Reder, L. M., & Lebiere, C. (1996). Working memory: Activation limitations on retrieval. Cognitive psychology, 30(3), 221–256. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1996.0007
Baddeley, A. D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2
Baddeley, A. D. (2010). Working memory. Current biology: CB, 20(4), 136–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2009.12.014
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 47–89). Academic Press.
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1993). The recency effect: Implicit learning with explicit retrieval? Memory & Cognition, 21(2), 146–155. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202726
Baddeley, A., Allen, R., & Vargha-Khadem, F. (2010). Is the hippocampus necessary for visual and verbal binding in working memory? Neuropsychologia, 48(4), 1089–1095. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acab060
Beck, S. D., & Weber, A. (2020). Context and literality in idiom processing: Evidence from self-paced reading. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 49(5), 837-863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-020-09719-2
Benedek, M., Beaty, R., Jauk, E., Koschutnig, K., Fink, A., Silvia, P. J., Dunst, B., & Neubauer, A. C. (2014). Creating metaphors: The neural basis of figurative language production. NeuroImage, 90(100), 99–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.12.046
Berger, A., & Kiefer, M. (2021). Comparison of different response time outlier exclusion methods: A simulation study. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 675558. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.675558
Borghini, G., & Hazan, V. (2020). Effects of acoustic and semantic cues on listening effort during native and nonnative speech perception. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 147(6), 3783–3794. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0001126
Brownell, H. (2000). Right hemisphere contribution to understanding lexical connotation and metaphor. In Y. Grodzinsky, L. P. Shapiro, & D. Swinney (Eds.), Language and brain: Representation and processing (pp. 185–201). Academic Press of Elsevier.
Bryan, K. L. (Ed.). (1995). The right hemisphere language battery. Whurr Publishers, Ltd.
Campbell, S. J. (2014). Evaluating the career of metaphor and categorization models of metaphor processing: An eye-tracking study [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Illinois.
Campbell, S. J. (2017). Are figurative tropes unique? An eye-tracking comparison of metaphors, similes, and idioms [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Illinois.
Cardillo, E. R., Schmidt, G. L., Kranjec, A., & Chatterjee, A. (2010). Stimulus design is an obstacle course: 560 matched literal and metaphorical sentences for testing neural hypotheses about metaphor. Behavior Research Methods, 42(3), 651–664. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.3.651
Cardillo, E. R., Watson, C., & Chatterjee, A. (2017). Stimulus needs are a moving target: 240 additional matched literal and metaphorical sentences for testing neural hypotheses about metaphor. Behavior Research Methods, 49(2), 471–483. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0717-1
Chen, Y. C. (2019). Teaching figurative language to EFL learners: An evaluation of metaphoric mapping instruction. The Language Learning Journal, 47(1), 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2016.1185798
Chiappe, D. L., & Chiappe, P. (2007). The role of working memory in metaphor production and comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(2), 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.11.006
Chow, B. W. Y., Mo, J., & Dong, Y. (2021). Roles of reading anxiety and working memory in reading comprehension in English as a second language. Learning and Individual Differences, 92(1), Article e102092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102092
Chun, D. M., & Payne, J. S. (2004). What makes students click: Working memory and look-up behavior. System, 32(4), 481–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.09.008
Cienki, A., & Müller, C. (2008). Metaphor, gesture, and thought. In R. W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 483–501). Cambridge University Press.
Citron, F. M., Michaelis, N., & Goldberg, A. E. (2020). Metaphorical language processing and amygdala activation in L1 and L2. Neuropsychologia, 140, 107381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107381
Columbus, G., Sheikh, N. A., Côté-Lecaldare, M., Häuser, K., Baum, S. R., & Titone, D. (2015). Individual differences in executive control relate to metaphor processing: An eye movement study of sentence reading. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 1057. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.01057
Conway, A. R., Jarrold, C., Kane, M. J., Miyake, A., & Towse, J. N. (2008). Variation in working memory: An introduction. Oxford University Press.
Cowan, N. (2012). Working memory capacity. Psychology Press.
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(4), 450–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6
Drijvers, L., Vaitonytė, J., & Özyürek, A. (2019). Degree of language experience modulates visual attention to visible speech and iconic gestures during clear and degraded speech comprehension. Cognitive Science, 43(10), e12789. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12789
Dzikovska, M. O., Allen, J. F., & Swift, M. D. (2008). Linking semantic and knowledge representations in a multi-domain dialogue system. Journal of Logic and Computation, 18(3), 405–430. https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exm067
Erçetin, G., & Alptekin, C. (2013). The explicit/implicit knowledge distinction and working memory: Implications for second-language reading comprehension. Applied Psycholinguistics, 34(4), 727–753. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716411000932
Felser, C. (2019). Structure-sensitive constraints in non-native sentence processing. Journal of the European Second Language Association, 3(1), 12–22. https://doi.org/10.22599/jesla.52
Feng, Y., & Zhou, R. (2021). Does embodiment of verbs influence predicate metaphor processing in a second language? Evidence from picture priming. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 759175. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.759175
Forgács, B., Lukács, Á., & Pléh, C. (2014). Lateralized processing of novel metaphors: Disentangling figurativeness and novelty. Neuropsychologia, 56, 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.01.003
Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22(3–4), 455–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290442000310
Gibbs, R. W. (2013). The real complexities of psycholinguistic research on metaphor. Language Sciences, 40, 45–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2013.03.001
Gibbs, R. W. (2017). Metaphor wars: Conceptual metaphors in human life. Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs, R. W., & Coulson, S. (2006). Figurative language. In M. J. Traxler & M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (2nd ed., pp. 835–861). Academic Press of Elsevier.
Glucksberg, S. (2003). The psycholinguistics of metaphor. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 7(2), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(02)00040-2
Glucksberg, S. (2008). How metaphor create categories quickly. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 67–83). Cambridge University Press.
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge University Press.
Grice, P. H. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Speech acts: Syntax and semantics (pp. 41–58). Academic Press.
Hannula, D. E., Tranel, D., & Cohen, N. J. (2006). The long and the short of it: Relational memory impairments in amnesia, even at short lags. Journal of Neuroscience, 26(32), 8352–8359. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5222-05.2006
Harrington, M. (1992). Working memory capacity as a constraint on L2 development. In R. J. Harris (Ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals (pp.123–135). Elsevier.
Huang, L., Ouyang, J., & Jiang, J. (2022). The relationship of word processing with L2 reading comprehension and working memory: Insights from eye-tracking. Learning and Individual Differences, 95, 102143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2022.102143
Ifantidou, E., & Hatzidaki, A. (2019). Metaphor comprehension in L2: Meaning, images, and emotions. Journal of Pragmatics, 149, 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.06.005
Ikuta, M., & Miwa, K. (2021). Structure mapping in second-language metaphor processing. Metaphor and Symbol, 36(4), 288–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2021.1941971
Indrarathne, B., & Kormos, J. (2018). The role of working memory in processing L2 input: Insights from eye-tracking. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(2), 355–374. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728917000098
Jamrozik, A., McQuire, M., Cardillo, E. R., & Chatterjee, A. (2016). Metaphor: Bridging embodiment to abstraction. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(4), 1080–1089. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0861-0
Jankowiak, K., Rataj, K., & Naskręcki, R. (2017). To electrify bilingualism: Electrophysiological insights into bilingual metaphor comprehension. PloS ONE, 12(4), Article e0175578. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175578
Joh, J., & Plakans, L. (2017). Working memory in L2 reading comprehension: The influence of prior knowledge. System, 70, 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.07.007
Jonides, J., Lewis, R. L., Nee, D. E., Lustig, C. A., Berman, M. G., & Moore, K. S. (2008). The mind and brain of short-term memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 193–224. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093615
Jung, J. (2018). Effects of task complexity and working memory capacity on L2 reading comprehension. System, 74, 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.02.005
Jung, J. (2021). The role of glossing and working memory capacity in second language reading comprehension. Journal of Asia TEFL, 18(2), 438–450. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2021.18.2.4.438
Karabanowicz, E., Tyburski, E., Karasiewicz, K., Sokołowski, A., Mak, M., Folkierska-Żukowska, M., & Radziwiłłowicz, W. (2020). Metaphor processing dysfunctions in schizophrenia patients with and without substance use disorders. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11(331), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00331
Karimi, M. N. and Naghdivand, R. (2017). Literal and inferential listening comprehension: The role of L1 vs. L2 auditory working memory capacity. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 4(4), 67-84. https://doi.org/10.30479/elt.2017.1532
Kim, M. (2023). Exploring literal and inferential reading comprehension among L2 adolescent learners: The roles of working memory capacity, syllogistic inference, and L2 linguistic knowledge. Reading and Writing, 36(5), 1085–1110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10320-3
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Kintsch, W. (2000). Metaphor comprehension: A computational theory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7(2), 257–266. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03212981
Kintsch, W., & Bowles, A. R. (2002). Metaphor comprehension: What makes a metaphor difficult to understand? Metaphor and Symbol, 17(4), 249–262. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1704_1
Kofler, M. J., Spiegel, J. A., Austin, K. E., Irwin, L. N., Soto, E. F., & Sarver, D. E. (2018). Are episodic buffer processes intact in ADHD? Experimental evidence and linkage with hyperactive behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 46(6), 1171–1185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-017-0346-x
Kouvatsou, Z., Masoura, E., Kiosseoglou, G., & Kimiskidis, V. K. (2020). Evaluating the relationship between working memory and information processing speed in multiple sclerosis. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 29(4), 695–702. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2020.1804911
Kövecses, Z. (1986). Metaphors of anger, pride, and love: A lexical approach to the structure of concepts. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Kövecses, Z. (2003). Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling. Cambridge University Press.
Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in culture: Universality and variation. Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Conceptual metaphor in everyday language. The Journal of Philosophy, 77(8), 453–486. https://doi.org/10.2307/2025464
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. Basic Books.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2020). Conceptual metaphor in everyday language. In S. D. Sarasvathy, N. Dew, & S. Venkataraman (Eds.), Shaping entrepreneurship research (pp. 475–504). Routledge.
Langacker, R. W. (2016). Metaphor in linguistic thought and theory. Cognitive Semantics, 2(1), 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1163/23526416-00201002
Lee, E. K. and Choi, S. H. (2023). Development of metaphor reasoning comprehension in infants. Clinical Archives of Communication Disorders, 8(1), 23–28. https://doi.org/10.21849/cacd.2023.00997
Leeser, M. J. (2007). Learner‐based factors in L2 reading comprehension and processing grammatical form: Topic familiarity and working memory. Language Learning, 57(2), 229-270. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00408.x
Li, W., Guo, Z., Jones, J. A., Huang, X., Chen, X., Liu, P., Chen, S., & Liu, H. (2015). Training of working memory impacts neural processing of vocal pitch regulation. Scientific Reports, 5(1), 162-165. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep16562
Liu, D. (2024). The effects of segmentation on cognitive load, vocabulary learning, retention, and reading comprehension in a multimedia learning environment. BMC Psychology, 12(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01489-5
Liu, Y. T., Nassaji, H., & Tseng, W. T. (2024). Effects of internal and external attentional manipulations and working memory on second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 28(4), 1701–1741. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211030130
Lü, J., Liang, L., & Chen, B. (2019). The effect of executive control ability on the comprehension of second language metaphor. International Journal of Bilingualism, 23(1), 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006917709096
Martin, K. I., & Ellis, N. C. (2012). The roles of phonological short-term memory and working memory in L2 grammar and vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(3), 379–413. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000125
Martín-Gascón, B. (2023). Developing L2 learners’ metaphoric competence: A case study of figurative motion constructions. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 61(1), 79–109. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0043
Martín-Gilete, M. (2022). The role of input in the use of metaphor in L2 writing. ES Review: Spanish Journal of English Studies, 43, 207–241. https://doi.org/10.24197/ersjes.43.2022.207-241
Mashal, N., Borodkin, K., Maliniak, O., & Faust, M. (2015). Hemispheric involvement in native and nonnative comprehension of conventional metaphors. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 35, 96–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2015.04.001
Menashe, S., Leshem, R., Heruti, V., Kasirer, A., Yair, T., & Mashal, N. (2020). Elucidating the role of selective attention, divergent thinking, language abilities, and executive functions in metaphor generation. Neuropsychologia, 142, Article e107458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107458
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude. In A. F. Healy & L. E. Bourne (Eds.), Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention (pp. 339–364). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Miller, G. A. (2020). The magical number seven, plus-or-minus two, or some limits on our capacity for processing information. In G. A. Miller (Ed.), Brain physiology and psychology (pp. 175–202). University of California Press.
Mitchell, R. L., & Crow, T. J. (2005). Right hemisphere language functions and schizophrenia: The forgotten hemisphere? Brain, 128(5), 963–978. https://doi.org/10. 1093/brain/awh466
Molokopeeva, T., & Simard, D. (2024). Interaction between levels of text representation and working memory during L2 reading comprehension: What about it? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 34(2), 568–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12516
Nakamura, C., Arai, M., Hirose, Y., & Flynn, S. (2020). An extra cue is beneficial for native speakers but can be disruptive for second language learners: Integration of prosody and visual context in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article e2835. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02835
Nassaji, H. (2002). Schema theory and knowledge‐based processes in second language reading comprehension: A need for alternative perspectives. Language learning, 52(2), 439–481. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00189
Osaka, M., & Osaka, N. (1992). Language-independent working memory as measured by Japanese and English reading span tests. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 30(4), 287-289. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03330466
Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. University of Illinois Press.
Pambuccian, F. S., & Raney, G. E. (2021). A simile is (like) a metaphor: Comparing metaphor and simile processing across the familiarity spectrum. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 75(2), 182–188. https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000242
Pan, H. Y., & Felser, C. (2011). Referential context effects in L2 ambiguity resolution: Evidence from self-paced reading. Lingua, 121(2), 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.08.003
Pan, H. Y., Schimke, S., & Felser, C. (2015). Referential context effects in nonnative relative clause ambiguity resolution. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19(3), 298–313. https://doi.org/0.1177/1367006913515769
Patterson, C., Esaulova, Y., & Felser, C. (2017). The impact of focus on pronoun resolution in native and nonnative sentence comprehension. Second Language Research, 33(4), 403–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/026765831769778
Płużyczka, M., Kakimova, A., & Mendhakar, A. (2024). Processing and appreciation of literary metaphors in English as a foreign language: An eye-tracking study. AILA Review. https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.23024.plu
Rączy, K., & Orzechowski, J. (2021). When working memory is in a mood: Combined effects of induced affect and processing of emotional words. Current Psychology, 40(6), 2843–2852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00208-x
Roehr, K., & Gánem-Gutiérrez, G. A. (2009). The status of metalinguistic knowledge in instructed adult L2 learning. Language Awareness, 18(2), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410902855854
Romman, A. O. (2025). Conceptual metaphor theory in cognitive linguistics. Jordan Journal of Applied Science-Humanities Series, 43(2), 126–142. https://doi.org/10.35192/jjoas-h.v43i2.1182
Rossetti, I., Brambilla, P., & Papagno, C. (2018). Metaphor comprehension in schizophrenic patients. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(670), 1–15. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00670
Santamaria, K., & Sunderman, G. (2015). Working memory in processing instruction: The acquisition of L2 French clitics. In Z. Wen, M. B. Mota, & A. McNeill (Eds.), Working memory in second language acquisition and processing (pp. 205–223). Multilingual Matters.
Scucchi, S. (2022). The variation of metaphor processing strategies and the effects on reading skills in L2 English learners [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of South Carolina.
Searle, J. (1979). Metaphor. In A. Ortoni (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 92–123). Cambridge University Press.
Shahnazari, M. (2013). The development of a Persian reading span test for the measure of L1 Persian EFL learners’ working memory capacity. Applied Research on English Language, 2(2), 107–116. https://doi.org/10.22108/are.2013.15473
Shahnazari, M. (2023). The role of WM in second language reading comprehension: Does L2 proficiency level matter? Learning and Motivation, 82, 101875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2023.101875
Shin, J., Dronjic, V., & Park, B. (2019). The interplay between working memory and background knowledge in L2 reading comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 53(2), 320–347. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.482
Steen, G., Dorst, A., Herrmann, J., Kaal, A., & Krennmayr, T. (2010). Metaphor in usage. Cognitive Linguistics, 21(4), 765–796. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2010.024
Stringaris, A. K., Medford, N. C., Giampietro, V., Brammer, M. J., & David, A. S. (2007). Deriving meaning: Distinct neural mechanisms for metaphoric, literal, and nonmeaningful sentences. Brain and Language, 100, 150–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.08.001
Tadayyon, P., & Farrokhi, F. (2026). Working memory as a predictor of syntactic complexity in Iranian EFL learners’ argumentative writing: Considering different planning conditions. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 13(1), 141-169. https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2025.21965.2514
Tan, M., Barbot, B., Mourgues, C., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2013). Measuring metaphors: Concreteness and similarity in metaphor comprehension and gifted identification. Educational & Child Psychology, 30(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsecp.2013.30.2.89
Tang, X., Shen, L., Yang, P., Huang, Y., Huang, S., Huang, M., & Ren, W. (2022). Bilingual processing mechanisms of scientific metaphors and conventional metaphors: Evidence via a contrastive event-related potentials study. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article e894114. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.894114
Teng, M. F. (2024). The roles of second-language proficiency level and working memory on vocabulary learning from word-focused exercises. RELC Journal, 55(2), 296–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882221102228
Thibodeau, P. H., & Boroditsky, L. (2011). Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PLoS ONE, 6(2), e16782. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782
Tocaimaza-Hatch, C. (2019). Metaphor in Spanish L2 and heritage language learners’ speech: How does it compare? Sustainable Multilingualism, 15(1), 170–194. https://doi.org/10.2478/sm-2019-0019
Tsai, N., Au, J., & Jaeggi, S. M. (2016). Working memory, language processing, and implications of malleability for second language acquisition. In G. Granena, D. O. Jackson, & Y. Yilmaz (Eds.), Cognitive individual differences in second language processing and acquisition (pp. 69–88). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Wallace, M. P. (2022). Individual differences in second language listening: Examining the role of knowledge, metacognitive awareness, memory, and attention. Language Learning, 72(1), 5–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12424
Wang, W., Fan, L., Wang, Z., Liu, X., & Zhang, S. (2021). Effects of phonological loop on inferential processing during Chinese text reading: Evidence from a dual-task paradigm. PsyCh Journal, 10(4), 521–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.451
Wang, X., He, Y., Lu, K., Deng, C., Qiao, X., & Hao, N. (2019). How does the embodied metaphor affect creative thinking? NeuroImage, 202(8), 114-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116114
Yin, C. H., & Yang, F. P. G. (2022). The effects of working memory capacity in metaphor and metonymy comprehension in Mandarin–English bilinguals minds: An fMRI study. Brain Sciences, 12(5), 633. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12050633
Zhou, X., Younas, M., Omar, A., & Guan, L. (2022). Can second language metaphorical competence be taught through instructional intervention? A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article e1065803. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1065803
Zibin, A., Altakhaineh, A. R. M., & Musmar, O. (2024). Head metonymies and metaphors in Jordanian and Tunisian Arabic: An extended conceptual metaphor theory perspective. Language and Cognition, 16(4), 20-31. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2024.31 | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 227 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 5 |
||