Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Siyanova-Chanturia, Anna; Conklin, Kathy; Schmitt, Norbert (2011)
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Languages: English
Types: Article
Using eye-tracking, we investigate on-line processing of idioms in a biasing story context by native and non-native speakers of English. The stimuli are idioms used figuratively (at the end of the day – ‘eventually’), literally (at the end of the day – ‘in the evening’), and novel phrases (at the end of the war). Native speaker results indicate a processing advantage for idioms over novel phrases, as evidenced by fewer and shorter fixations. Further, no processing advantage is found for figurative idiom uses over literal ones in a full idiom analysis or in a recognition point analysis. Contrary to native speaker results, non-native findings suggest that L2 speakers process idioms at a similar speed to novel phrases. Further, figurative uses are processed more slowly than literal ones. Importantly, the recognition point analysis allows us to establish where non-natives slow down when processing the figurative meaning.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Arnon I and Snider N (2010) More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases. Journal of Memory and Language 62: 67-82.
    • Bannard C and Matthews D (2008) Stored word sequences in language learning: The effect of familiarity on children's repetition of four-word combinations. Psychological Science 19: 241-48.
    • Bobrow S and Bell S (1973) On catching on to idiomatic expressions. Memory and Cognition 1: 343-46.
    • Cacciari C and Tabossi P (1988) The comprehension of idioms. Journal of Memory and Language 27: 668-83.
    • Cieslicka A (2006) Literal salience in on-line processing of idiomatic expressions by second language learners. Second Language Research 22: 115-44.
    • Colombo L (1993) The comprehension of ambiguous idioms in context. In: Cacciari C and Tabossi P (eds) Idioms: Processing, structure, and interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 163-200.
    • Conklin K and Schmitt N (2008) Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and non-native speakers? Applied Linguistics 29: 72-89.
    • Cowie AP (1998) Phraseology: Theory, analysis, and applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Gibbs R (1986) Skating on thin ice: Literal meaning and understanding of idioms in conversation. Discourse Processes 9: 17-30.
    • Gibbs R (1980) Spilling the beans on understanding and memory for idioms in conversation. Memory and Cognition 8: 449-56.
    • Gibbs R and Gonzales G (1985) Syntactic frozenness in processing and remembering idioms. Cognition 20: 243-59.
    • Gibbs R and Nayak N (1989) Psycholinguistic studies on the syntactic behaviour of idioms. Cognitive Psychology 21: 100-38.
    • Gibbs R, Nayak N, and Cutting C (1989) How to kick the bucket and not decompose: Analyzability and idiom processing. Journal of Memory and Language 28: 576-93.
    • Glucksberg S (1989) Metaphors in conversation: how are they understood? Why are they used? Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 4: 125-43.
    • Hyona J (1993) Effects of thematic and lexical priming on readers' eye movements. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 34: 293-304.
    • Jurafsky D (2003) Probabilistic modeling in psycholinguistics: Linguistic comprehension and production. In: Bod R, Hay J, and Jannedy S (eds) Probabilistic linguistics. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 39-95.
    • Langacker R (1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar: Volume 1. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    • Martin C, Vu H, Kellas G, and Metcalf K (1999) Strength of discourse context as a determinant of the subordinate bias effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 52A: 813-39.
    • Matlock T and Heredia R (2002) Understanding phrasal verbs in monolinguals and bilinguals. In: Heredia R and Altarriba J (eds) Bilingual sentence processing. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 251-74.
    • McFalls E and Schwanenflugel P (2002) The influence of contextual constraints on recall for words within sentences. American Journal of Psychology 115: 67-88.
    • Mondini S, Jarema G, Luzzatti C, Burani C, and Semenza C (2002) Why is 'red cross' different from 'yellow cross'?: A neurophysiological study of non-adjective agreement within Italian compounds. Brain and Language 81: 621-34.
    • Paterson K, Liversedge S, and Underwood G (1999) The influence of focus operators on syntactic processing of short relative clause sentences. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 52A: 717-37.
    • Pawley A and Syder F (1983) Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In: Richards JC and Schmidt RW (eds) Language and Communication. London, New York: Longman, 191-226.
    • Pollio H, Barlow J, Fine H, and Pollio M (1977) Psychology and the poetics of growth: Figurative language in psychology, psychotherapy, and education. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    • Popiel S and McRae K (1988) The figurative and literal uses of idioms, or all idioms are not used equally. Journal of Psycholinguistics Research 17: 475-87.
    • Rayner K and Well A (1996) Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further examination. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 3: 504-09.
    • Rayner K, Binder K, and Duffy S (1999) Contextual strength and the subordinate bias effect: Comment on Martin, Vu, and Metcalf. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 52A: 841-52.
    • Rayner K, Sereno S, Morris R, Schmauder A, and Clifton C (1989) Eye movements and on-line language comprehension processes. Language and Cognitive Processes 4: 21-50.
    • Schmitt N (2008) Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research 12: 329-63.
    • Sinclair J (1991) Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Sosa A and MacFarlane J (2002) Evidence for frequency-based constituents in the mental lexicon: Collocations involving the word of. Brain and Language 83: 227-36.
    • Swinney D and Cutler A (1979) The access and processing of idiomatic expressions. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour 18: 523-34.
    • Tabossi P, Fanari R, and Wolf K (2009) Why are idioms recognized fast? Memory and Cognition 37: 529-40.
    • Tabossi P and Zardon F (1993) The activation of idiomatic meaning in spoken language comprehension. In: Cacciari C and Tabossi P (eds) Idioms: Processing, structure, and interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 145-61.
    • Titone D and Connine C (1999) One the compositional and noncompositional nature of idiomatic expressions. Journal of Pragmatics 31: 1655-74.
    • Tomasello M (2003) Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge/London: Harvard University Press.
    • Underwood G, Schmitt N, and Galpin A (2004) The eyes have it: An eye-movement study into the processing of formulaic sequences. In: Schmitt N (ed.) Formulaic Sequences. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 153-72.
    • Van Lancker-Sidtis D (2003) Auditory recognition of idioms by first and second speakers of English. Applied Psycholinguistics 24: 45-57.
    • Van Lancker D and Kempler D (1987) Comprehension of familiar phrases by left- but not by righthemisphere damaged patients. Brain and Language 32: 265-77.
    • Van Lancker D, Canter G, and Terbeek D (1981) Disambiguation of ditropic sentences: Acoustic and phonetic cues. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 24: 330-35.
    • Van Patten B, Williams J, and Rott S (2004) Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition. In: Van Patten B, Williams J, and Rott S (eds) Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition. Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1-26.
    • Vu H, Kellas G, Paul S (1998) Sources of sentence constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution. Memory and Cognition 26: 979-1001.
    • Vu H, Kellas G, Petersen E, and Metcalf K (2003) Situation-evoking stimuli, domain of reference, and the incremental interpretation of lexical ambiguity. Memory and Cognition 31: 1302-15.
    • Wray A (2002) Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article