On the functional equivalence of literal and metaphorical interpretations in discourse

Abstract

Are functionally equivalent operations required for understanding literal and metaphorical meanings? Context stories were constructed in which sentences such as "He is a baby" had both literal and metaphorical "truth" values. In Experiment 1, sentence verification was most difficult when literal and metaphorical meanings conflicted, indicating that both meanings were generated. In Experiment 2, people were asked to comprehend the text rather than to verify truth. Comprehension was easiest when both literal and metaphorical meanings were plausible in context. These results suggest that nonliteral meanings are generated automatically and are integrated with context whenever a coherent interpretation can be formed.