Department of Cognitive Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Dec 4;8:982. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00982. eCollection 2014.
Language comprehension requires rapid and flexible access to information stored in long-term memory, likely influenced by activation of rich world knowledge and by brain systems that support the processing of sensorimotor content. We hypothesized that while literal language about biological motion might rely on neurocognitive representations of biological motion specific to the details of the actions described, metaphors rely on more generic representations of motion. In a priming and self-paced reading paradigm, participants saw video clips or images of (a) an intact point-light walker or (b) a scrambled control and read sentences containing literal or metaphoric uses of biological motion verbs either closely or distantly related to the depicted action (walking). We predicted that reading times for literal and metaphorical sentences would show differential sensitivity to the match between the verb and the visual prime. In Experiment 1, we observed interactions between the prime type (walker or scrambled video) and the verb type (close or distant match) for both literal and metaphorical sentences, but with strikingly different patterns. We found no difference in the verb region of literal sentences for Close-Match verbs after walker or scrambled motion primes, but Distant-Match verbs were read more quickly following walker primes. For metaphorical sentences, the results were roughly reversed, with Distant-Match verbs being read more slowly following a walker compared to scrambled motion. In Experiment 2, we observed a similar pattern following still image primes, though critical interactions emerged later in the sentence. We interpret these findings as evidence for shared recruitment of cognitive and neural mechanisms for processing visual and verbal biological motion information. Metaphoric language using biological motion verbs may recruit neurocognitive mechanisms similar to those used in processing literal language but be represented in a less-specific way.
语言理解需要快速灵活地访问存储在长期记忆中的信息，这可能受到丰富的世界知识的激活以及支持处理感觉运动内容的大脑系统的影响。我们假设，虽然关于生物运动的字面语言可能依赖于生物运动的神经认知表示，这些表示特定于所描述的动作的细节，但隐喻依赖于更通用的运动表示。在启动和自我调节阅读范式中，参与者观看了完整的点光步行者或（b）打乱控制的视频片段或图像，并阅读了包含与所描述动作密切或遥远相关的生物运动动词的字面或隐喻用法的句子。我们预测，阅读时间对于字面和隐喻句子将表现出对动词和视觉启动之间匹配的差异敏感性。在实验 1 中，我们观察到启动类型（步行者或打乱的视频）和动词类型（紧密或遥远的匹配）之间的相互作用对于字面和隐喻句子都有影响，但模式截然不同。我们发现，对于紧密匹配动词的字面句子，在步行者或打乱的运动启动后，动词区域没有差异，但在 walker 启动后，与 Distant-Match 动词的阅读速度更快。对于隐喻句子，结果大致相反，与 scrambled 运动相比，walker 后阅读 Distant-Match 动词的速度较慢。在实验 2 中，我们在使用静止图像启动后观察到了类似的模式，尽管关键的相互作用出现在句子的后期。我们将这些发现解释为处理视觉和口头生物运动信息的认知和神经机制共享招募的证据。使用生物运动动词的隐喻语言可能会招募类似于处理字面语言的神经认知机制，但以不太具体的方式表示。
