master_presen_final_manami_sato_12_03_04 by yaohongm

VIEWS: 1 PAGES: 59

									Image schema projection
   primed by pictures




        Manami Sato
        Dec. 3, 2004
  Cognitive Research Group
                             1
  Summary of the Presentation
Pilot experiment
1) Background information
2) Research question
3) Hypothesis
4) Pilot experiment
5) Results and discussion

Possible interpretations
1) Image schema activation
2) Linguistic description
3) Structural priming           2
    Do you know how hard it would be to talk
             without metaphors?
New York Times:

   “a sale of the personal computer business would
    be a step away from IBM’s traditional
    emphasis…”
   Profits in hardware business were slender and
    growth prospects were limited.
   Personal computer making has followed the same
    path to Asia…
   …attack on the web site.
   We have reached our goal…
                                                  3
Conceptual metaphors:
Metaphors people unconsciously use in
everyday life.
i.e.) “follow the same path”
      “reached the goal”


Creative metaphors:
i.e.)


                                        4
How do people make metaphorical
sentences unconsciously?



Contemporary theory of metaphor

According to this theory, we unconsciously process
an image schema projection, that is, a projection of
concrete experiences onto abstract concept.
In other words, we use concepts we know well
based on our experiences to understand more
abstract concept such as emotions.
                                                   5
 My experiment aims at testing
whether people actually process in
  metaphor production or not .




                                     6
         Background information

Contemporary theory of metaphor (CTM)
             by Lakoff and Johnson(1980)


There are 5 primary claims they proposed:
   (1) Conceptual metaphors
   (2) Cognitive domains existence
   (3) Mental images grounded in perceptual experience
   (4) Its operation: Image schema projection
   (5) Evidence: Linguistic expressions

                                                   7
        (1) What are conceptual metaphors?

   They focus on only conceptual metaphors.
   Conventionalized metaphor expressions
    (NOT poetic or creative metaphor expressions)

   Metaphors people use unconsciously and
    automatically.

i.e.)   I got an idea.
        She stole my idea.
        We exchange our ideas.




                                                    8
             (2) Cognitive domains existence

The essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing
one kind of thing (abstract domain) in terms of another
(concrete domain).

i.e.) ANGER IS HOT LIQUID IN A CONTAINER metaphor
 A concept of ANGER is understood in terms of HOT LIQUID IN A
  CONTAINER concept.

   “She was brimming with rage”
     anger is heat of a liquid in a container
   “He got steamed up about what she said”
     intensity of anger is degree of temperature (producing steam)
   “He managed to keep his anger bottled up inside him”
     Suppressing anger is closing a container
                                                               9
  (3) Mental images grounded in perceptual experience


Concrete domains contain image components called
Mental Images.
They come from perceptual experience or
                bodily based experience.

HOT LIQUID IN A CONTAINER          ANGER




                                                        10
          (4) Image schema projection
   It is an operation for metaphor production.

   It projects part of a general structure of a
    recurrent pattern of bodily experience onto
    another.
   It's dynamic, rather than static (item-to-item
    projection).
   Unconscious and automatic.

   In order to talk and think about abstract domain
    we use the structure of other concrete domains.

                                                       11
i.e.) “ANGER IS HOT LIQUID IN A CONTAINER”

We project internal structure from our everyday
conception of HOT LIQUID IN A CONTAINER to
organize our everyday conception of ANGER.

Since projection is not simple image-to-image
mappings, instead, it is a dynamic structure
projection,

we can also project inferences from a concrete
domain to an abstract domain.

                                                  12
   Hot liquid in a                               Anger
     container


         Degree of                           Intensity of anger
        temperature
                          Structure
                                                   body
         Container        projection




Inference:                        Inference:
Hot liquid might splash you.      You might be the target w/o reasons.
It’s dangerous to be around it.   It’s dangerous to be around angry person.

                                                                        13
(5) Linguistic evidence for Conceptual metaphors


The evidence for conceptual metaphors is inferred
from linguistic expressions that occur systematically
and consistently in the everyday speech.

   Anger is hot liquid in a container:

    “She was brimming with rage”
     “He got steamed up about what she said”
    “He managed to keep his anger bottled up inside him”
    “Let him stew”

                                                           14
             Motivation of the study
Contemporary Theory of Metaphor (CTM):
  (a) Cognitive domains existence
  (b) Mental images
  (c) Image schema projection
       Metaphor is a matter of thought.
       Thought is reflected in words.


                    However,

CTM does not provide an empirical-based evidence
in language production: do people really activate
the concrete domain when they produce
metaphorical language?
                                                    15
            Research Question

   Is it possible to prove this unconscious image
    projection, that is, projection of concrete/scene
    domain onto abstract domains to understand
    abstract concepts?

   In other words, how can we prove that people
    construct and process image schema projection in
    metaphor production?


                                                        16
Pilot experiment



                   17
                  Hypothesis
If an image schema projection takes a place while
producing metaphorical sentences,

                       then,

Picture instantiates a concrete image schema, and
should activate metaphorically associated abstract
domains.

This should result in increased production of
corresponding metaphorical language about that
target domain.
                                                     18
Example:

Perceiving a static picture (an apple in the box)
would activate the whole domain of Containment
  (being contained, getting out from
or getting into the box etc.).

As a result, people would make associated
metaphorical sentences not only ‘S. is in trouble’
(static events), but also ‘S. is getting into trouble’
(Dynamic Containment event).

                                                     19
Perceiving
a picture     ‘being contained’
              component is
              activated.




             At the same time...




                             20
             Not only that, but
             the whole domain
             of containment is
             activated.
Perceiving
a picture




                             21
             Given words


                Sally      S is out of
                           trouble
Perceiving
a picture




                 +         S is in
                           trouble




                           S. got into
               Trouble     trouble


                                  22
                Pilot-Experiment
Each trial is conducted as follows:


                                          Record
Picture          Picture    Target       Response
                  Prime     Words        sentence
 Prime

2500ms    500     2500ms     3000ms
          ms

Pictures are selected based on norming study.
They should be the same type (either cont. pictuers
or poss. Pictures).                               23
       Materials (Picture Primes)
Condition A (Containment)
  an apple in a box / a bird in a cage
  a person in a car / a goldfish in a fish tank

Condition B (Possession)
  a person holding an apple/a dog holding a cookie
  a person carrying a baby/a gorilla having a banana

Condition C (Neutral)
  a dog chasing a cat / a person singing a song
   a smiling baby / a person watching   TV
                                                   24
       Recall norming study for pictures

To ensure that the pictures can clearly convey their
containment or possession concepts, a recall
norming study was conducted with 2 subjects
(I am planning to do this with 10 subjects).

Norming test:
(1) Provide a picture for 1000ms
(2) Picture disappears
(3) Ask a subject to describe what he saw.
(4) Select cont./poss. pictures both subjects agree.

                                                   25
          Materials (Targets words)

          An animate Noun + a Critical word

Animate nouns: Person’s name
Critical words: allow participants equal possibilities to create
                both containment and possession sentences.

Trouble       (in   trouble/ have trouble)
Pain          (in   pain/ have a slight pain)
Affair        (in   an affair/ have an affair)
Day           (in   a day/ have a sunny day)



Whether the words were not strongly biased to either cont. or
poss. were examined by applying BNC corpus search.
                                                             26
       BNC Corpus search for target words

   Purpose: To know which underlying preference
    (cont. or poss.) each target word has.

   Method: 1000 sentences (500 from written
    and 500 from spoken materials) are selected
    for each target word from BNC data files.

   Data includes lectures, speeches, conversations,
    journals, books, newspapers etc.

    Ideally, the use of cont. and poss. metaphors is
    50/50. because…
                                                   27
Because if the crucial words are unbiased
to cont. and poss., then the prime effect can
be easily reflected by the responses.

If the words are strongly biased to either
type, then the priming effect cannot be
realized easily.


                                             28
Prediction…


              29
      Cont.         Neutral          Possession
     Primes         Primes             Primes

                                    Prime
Prime
                                    Effect
Effect

     Activation                        Activation
    Of C-Schema                       Of P-Schema




    Container     Underlying word      Possession
    Metaphors       preference         Metaphors
                                                    30
                    Examples
Cont. pictures  Sally, trouble  ‘Sally is in trouble’

Neutral pictures  Sally, trouble  ‘Sally is in trouble’

Interpretations:
(1) Cont. pictures prime a container metaphor.
(2) Underlying preference of the word ‘trouble’

 Cannot confirm which of them is the source of
   priming.

                                                     31
                    Examples
Cont. pictures  Sally, trouble  ‘Sally is in trouble’

Neutral pictures  Sally, trouble  ‘Sally has trouble’

Interpretation:
(1) Pictures shift the underlying word preference from
    possession to containment.

 Can confirm that cont. pictures are the source of the
   priming to lead a container metaphor.

                                                     32
 This is why it’s important to have fairly biased words which
  allow cont. and poss. sentences in 50/50.
 The shift from one to the other type of metaphors can be the
  evidence for the picture priming effect.
Good:                                           Underlying
                                               word preference
                                    Poss.
    N      N      S + trouble     Metaphors
                                                Shift from Poss.
                   Cont.50                      to Cont. because
                   Poss.50                      of pictures
       C   C                         Cont.
                                   Metaphors
Bad:
       N   N                        Cont.
                   S + pain

       C   C       Cont.80           Cont.
                                                   Hard to be
                   Poss.20                         influenced
       P   P                        Cont.                        33
Brief Results…


                 34
                    Containment Pictures        Neutral Pictures
  Resp.Type         Cont.    Poss.    Other    Cont    Poss.    Other
   Subj. 1            9        4        2       6        3        6
                                                       Underlying
    Subj.2            8        3        4       5      word
                                                          4       6
                                                       preference
    Subj.3            8        4        3       5        2        8
    Subj.4            6        5        4       6        4        5
    Subj.5            8        3        4       3        2       10
    Subj.6            5        6        4       4        2        9
     Total           44       25       21       29       17      44
     Mean            7.33    4.17      3.5     4.83     2.83    7.33
% of getting this   48.87%   27.80%   23.33%   32.2%   18.87%   48.87%
 response type


                             16.67%                                   35
        Examples for Containment metaphors
The results show the whole domain of Containment
Words ((Satic & Dynamic words)):

i.e.) ‘Sally + trouble’
 Sally is in trouble.                Static word

 Sally got out of the trouble.
                                       Dynamic words
 Sally’s life is full of trouble.



i.e.) ‘Tom + situation’
 Tom is in difficult situation.     Static word
 Tom put us in a strange situation. Dynamic words


                                                       36
                    Possession Pictures       Neutral Pictures
  Resp.Type         Poss.    Cont.    Other Poss.    Cont.   Other
   Subj. 1            5        4       6      3        5      7
                                                     Underlying
    Subj.2            4        2       9      2      word
                                                       3      10
                                                     preference
    Subj.3            5        6       4      2       5       8
    Subj.4            6        3       6      6       4       5
    Subj.5            9        2       4      5       4       6
    Subj.6            6        2       7      4       4       7
     Total           35       19       36    22       25      43
     Mean           5.83     3.17      6    3.67     4.17    7.17
% of getting this   38.87%   21.13%   40%   24.47%   28%     47.8%
 response type

                             14.4%                                 37
    Examples for Containment metaphors
The results show the whole domain of
possession words ((Static & Dynamic words)):

i.e.) ‘Sally + trouble’
 Sally is having trouble with her family. Static word

 Sally gave me too much trouble. Dynamic words



i.e.) ‘Tom + pain’
 Tom has a pain in the back.        Static word

 That gave Tom a lot of pain.
                                      Dynamic words
 Tom did not take great pain.

                                                     38
  Cont.             Neutral          Possession
 Primes             Primes             Primes

                                              Prime
Prime                                         Effect
Effect

                                          Activation
  Activation
                                         Of P-Schema
 Of C-Schema




                    Underlying
Container                                Possession
            16.7%     word       14.4%
Metaphors           preference           Metaphors
                                                       39
                  Conclusion

As predicted, perceiving a static picture (an apple in
the box) activated the dynamic event of the whole
domain (being contained, getting out from or
getting into the box etc.).

As a result, pictures influence the preference of
metaphorical sentences.

It supports that image schema projection occurs
during metaphor production.
                                                     40
 Are there any other possible
interpretations (except image
     schema projection)?




                                41
            Interpretations


Intp#1: Image schema activation (metaphor)

Intp#2: Linguistic description

Intp#3: Structural priming



                                        42
          Image schema projection in
    metaphor production triggered by pictures
                                    Perception


    Int.#1
                          Categorization (meaning extraction)
   Metaphor
                              Int.#2                    Int.#3


      Image schema                Ling.Description   Structural
        Priming                                       Priming
                                       Priming



Static & dynamic sentences
‘in X’, ‘out of X’ ‘get into X’
‘have X’ ‘give, exchange X’
                                                                  43
                  Possible interpretation:
               Linguistic Description priming
                                    Perception


    Int.#1
                          Categorization (meaning extraction)
   Metaphor
                              Int.#2                    Int.#3


      Image schema                Ling.Description   Structural
        Priming                                       Priming
                                       Priming



Static & dynamic sentences
‘in X’, ‘out of X’ ‘get into X’
‘have X’ ‘give, exchange X’
                                                                  44
          Intp.#2 Linguistic description

Ling. Descriptions of pictures:

    Static events

   Cont. pictures … “X is in Y” (( being contained))
   Poss. Pictures … “X has/carries/holds Y” (( being possessed))

Schema words:

    Dynamic events

   Cont. pictures … “X gives/steals/lose Y” ((changing its state))
   Poss. Pictures … “X is out of Y, gets into Y” ((changing))


                                                                45
If there is linguistic priming…..
 we should have more static sentences.

If there is image schema priming …
 we should have more static & dynamic
   sentences.



                                          46
                            Static/Dynamic words
                        in Cont. metaphor sentences
                             50

                             40
   # of Sentences



                             30                                       Dynamic
                             20                                       Static

                             10

                             0
                                  Underlying Word   W Picture Prime
                                    preference       (Containment)
                    Dynamic              8                13
                    Static              21                31



Not only Static, but also Dynamic sentences
increased after perceiving picture prime.
                                                                                47
                        Static/Dynamic words
                    in Poss. metaphor sentences
                          40
# of Sentences




                          30

                                                                   Dynamic
                          20
                                                                   Static

                          10

                          0
                               Underlying Word   W Picture Prime
                                 Preference       (Possession)
                 Dynamic              6                11
                 Static              16                24


Not only Static, but also Dynamic sentences
increased after perceiving picture prime.                                    48
In both Cont. and Poss. metaphorical
sentences, there are increase of both
static & dynamic sentences.

It means that there is image schema
priming, instead of linguistic priming.


                                        49
                     Possible interpretation:
                       Structural Priming
                                    Perception

                          Categorization (meaning extraction)
    Int.#1
   Metaphor
                              Int.#2                   Int.#3


      Image schema                Ling.Description   Structural
        Priming                                       Priming
                                       Priming



Static & dynamic sentences
‘in X’, ‘out of X’ ‘get into X’
‘have X’ ‘give, exchange X’
                                                                  50
              Structural priming effect
Structural priming effect:

the tendency of speakers to reuse syntactic structures
that they have recently read, heard, or produced
(Chang et al. 2000).

i.e.) In picture description task:
  Dative (The girl showed a picture to the teacher)
  Dative (The boy is giving the guitar to the singer)


Structural priming are also found in double-object
structures and active/passive transitive sentences.
                                                         51
Chang et al. state that structural priming is
a syntactic process

                  because…

Priming occurs at sentence with similar
surface configurations but different thematic
roles.
However, priming does not occur when the
syntactic configurations are changed.

                                                52
It means that changes in conceptual level do
NOT influence structural priming, but
changes in syntactic configurations influence.

i.e.) “She drove her car to school.”
      Syntactic Conf: S V DO PP
      Thematic role: S V DO Locative
                 Syntactic
                 priming

     “She gave donations to school.”
     Syntactic Conf: S V DO PP
     Thematic role: S V DO goal
                                            53
        If there is syntactic priming….

   Cont.Pic: contains a V+PP structure

It should prime the same syntactic structure
“V+PP” in metaphorical sentences.


   Poss.Pic: contains a V +NP structure

Likewise, it should prime the V+NP structure
in metaphorical sentences.

                                           54
Other possible way to prevent structural priming
Task:
During subjects see pictures, ask them to
count numbers backwards (10 to 1).

Purpose:
To suppress the other ling. process subjects
may do (i.e. making a sentence while they are
seeing pictures in their minds).

Prediction:
If subjects still make more metaphor sentences with
pictures, it indicates that structural priming is not the
cause of priming.Then, image schema priming can be
supported as a cause of metaphor production.            55
                Conclusions
   A picture that instantiates a concrete
    image schema can activate an associated
    metaphorical abstract domain.

   As a result, there are increases in
    metaphorical sentences after perceiving
    their corresponding concrete domain
    pictures.

   It supports the existence of image schema
    projection proposed by Lakoff and
    Johnson (1980).
                                              56
             Further studies


   Need more subjects.

   The experiment should be
    redesigned in Latin Square.



                                  57
Acknowledgement


Dr. Amy Schafer
 Dr. Ben Bergen




                   58


Thank you!!


              59

								
To top