Griffen Nicholas, Noveck Ira
Laboratoire de Linguistique Formelle, CNRS and Université Paris Cité, 8 Rue Albert Einstein, 75013, Paris, France.
Mem Cognit. 2025 May 5. doi: 10.3758/s13421-025-01719-8.
While early accounts of idiomatic expressions proposed that they are compositional or else directly retrievable from memory, the multi-determined view posited that idiom comprehension depends on observable characteristics, such as meaningfulness, familiarity, literal plausibility, global decomposability, and final word predictability. This led researchers to periodically undertake norming tasks in which participants rate idioms on these dimensions. The current study extends this tradition while investigating 36 American English idioms, expressed as She/he verbed x noun (e.g., He fanned the flames). Study 1 introduced a new control (Nonsense idioms), which encourages the exploitation of a scale's lower end, while recruiting sub-samples of participants online for each of the five aforementioned dimensions. Our findings, which primarily concern correlations among dimensions, very largely confirm the prior findings. Study 2 introduced a novel norming dimension that we call presupposition strength. This asks participants to provide a likelihood score about background information that is not conventionally associated with each idiom. The 36 idioms were presented through a vignette (e.g., Tom fanned the flames at the meeting) after which we collected scores to a presuppositional probe question (e.g., How likely is it that there was tension before the meeting?). Participants' mean scores for an individual idiom's presupposition strength were compared to two yoked controls, a paraphrase (from dictionary definitions) and a nonsense idiom. Presuppositional strength for idiomatic expressions led to significantly superior scores, pointing to the importance of this feature to these figures. Intriguingly, correlations between presupposition strength and (Study 1's) meaningfulness and familiarity were statistically significant.
虽然早期关于习语表达的观点认为它们是可组合的,或者可以直接从记忆中检索出来,但多因素决定观点认为习语理解取决于可观察的特征,如意义性、熟悉度、字面合理性、整体可分解性和最后一个词的可预测性。这使得研究人员定期进行标准化任务,让参与者在这些维度上对习语进行评分。本研究在调查36个美式英语习语(表述为“她/他动词+名词”,例如“He fanned the flames”)时延续了这一传统。研究1引入了一种新的对照(无意义习语),这有助于利用量表的低端,同时针对上述五个维度在线招募参与者子样本。我们的研究结果主要涉及各维度之间的相关性,在很大程度上证实了先前的研究结果。研究2引入了一个新的标准化维度,我们称之为预设强度。这要求参与者就通常与每个习语无关的背景信息提供一个可能性分数。36个习语通过一个小场景呈现(例如“汤姆在会议上煽风点火”),之后我们收集对一个预设探测问题(例如“会议前存在紧张气氛的可能性有多大?”)的分数。将个体习语的预设强度的参与者平均分数与两个匹配对照进行比较,一个是释义(来自词典定义),另一个是无意义习语。习语表达的预设强度导致分数显著更高,表明这一特征对这些数据的重要性。有趣的是,预设强度与(研究1中的)意义性和熟悉度之间的相关性具有统计学意义。