The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Suppression in Metaphor Interpretation: Differences between Meaning Selection and Meaning Construction
Abstract
Various accounts of metaphor interpretation propose that it involves constructing an ad hoc concept on the basis of the concept encoded by the metaphor vehicle (i.e. the expression used for conveying the metaphor). This paper discusses some of the differences between these theories and investigates their main empirical prediction: that metaphor interpretation involves enhancing properties of the metaphor vehicle that are relevant for interpretation, while suppressing those that are irrelevant. This hypothesis was tested in a cross-modal lexical priming study adapted from early studies on lexical ambiguity. The different patterns of suppression of irrelevant meanings observed in disambiguation studies and in the experiment on metaphor reported here are discussed in terms of differences between meaning selection and meaning construction.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical principles in experimental design.
Winer, B. J. (1962) · McGraw-Hill Book Company · doi:10.1037/11774-000 · Cited by 26,755
Grice, H. P. (1975) · Speech Acts · doi:10.1163/9789004368811_003 · Cited by 23,221
Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.127 · Cited by 7,335
Relevance: Communication and Cognition
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986) · Cited by 6,708
Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories
Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9 · Cited by 5,933
(1989) · Cited by 4,498
Neely, J. H. (1977) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037//0096-3445.106.3.226 · Cited by 2,828
Attention And Cognitive Control 1
Posner, M. I., & Snyder, C. R. R. (2024) · Information Processing and Cognition · doi:10.4324/9781032722450-4 · Cited by 2,264
Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects
Swinney, D. A. (1979) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(79)90355-4 · Cited by 1,786
Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition
Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1987) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(87)90005-9 · Cited by 1,752
Cited by
Poetic Metaphors: Creativity and interpretation
Rasse, C. (2022) · Figurative Thought and Language · doi:10.1075/ftl.15 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Rubio Fernandez, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Semantics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2007-07-16
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 345-371
- ISSN
- 0167-5133 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-4593
- OpenAlex
- W1994619817
- Cited by
- 275
- References
- 42
- FWCI
- 5.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Suppression in Metaphor Interpretation: Differences between Meaning Selection and Meaning Construction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jos/ffm006
- The paper
- Rubio Fernandez, P. (2007). Suppression in Metaphor Interpretation: Differences between Meaning Selection and Meaning Construction. Journal of Semantics. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffm006
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
