Conventionality matters in Chinese metaphor but not simile comprehension: evidence from event-related potentials

Abstract

Metaphor and simile, two prevalent forms of figurative language widely employed in daily communication, serve as significant research subjects in linguistics. The Career of Metaphor Theory in cognitive linguistics posits that as conventionality increases, the cognitive mechanisms of metaphor comprehension shift from “comparison” to “categorization.” In line with this notion, prior electrophysiological investigations have revealed that novel metaphors elicit a stronger N400 brain response compared to conventional metaphors. However, the observed N400 difference between conventional and novel metaphors may merely stem from the familiarity contrast between them, as conventional metaphors are typically more familiar than novel ones. To address this dichotomy, the present study not only compared the N400 responses between conventional and novel metaphors but also between conventional and novel similes. While conventional and novel similes differ in familiarity, similar to conventional and novel metaphors, both are processed via “comparison” mechanisms. The results revealed that novel metaphors elicited larger N400 amplitudes compared to conventional metaphors, aligning with previous findings. In contrast, no significant N400 differences were observed between conventional and novel similes, suggesting that familiarity disparity is unlikely to account for N400 distinctions. Our findings imply that conventional and novel metaphors undergo distinct cognitive processing mechanisms (“comparison” versus “categorization”), thereby providing further empirical validation for the Career of Metaphor Theory.