Las bases sensorio-motoras de la metáfora conceptual "El tiempo es espacio"

DOI:  https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/apl/a.6081

Barra lateral del artículo

PDF (English) HTML Lector Inteligente ePub

Publicado: mar 30, 2020
Número: Vol. 38 Núm. 1 (2020): Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana
Sección Artículos


Contenido principal del artículo

Autores/as

Alejandra Martín
Universidad Nacional del Comahue.
Máximo Trench
Universidad Nacional del Comahue.
Ricardo Adrián Minervino
Universidad Nacional del Comahue.

Resumen

La teoría de la metáfora conceptual postula que la interpretación de expresiones metafóricas implica simular mentalmente las experiencias sensoriomotoras base de las metáforas conceptuales de las que derivan. A pesar de que El tiempo es espacio es una de las metáforas conceptuales más estudiadas, la evidencia acerca de su carácter corporeizado es escasa y difícil de interpretar. Se llevó a cabo un experimento para poner a prueba la hipótesis de que interpretar expresiones metafóricas derivadas de la metáfora conceptual Persona en movimiento involucra simular la experiencia de avanzar hacia un objetivo fijo. Mientras que los participantes pertenecientes al grupo experimental leyeron este tipo de expresiones metafóricas después de realizar una actividad sensoriomotora correspondiente al dominio base, los participantes del grupo control leyeron las mismas expresiones después de realizar una actividad física no relacionada. No se encontraron diferencias en los tiempos de lectura de ambas condiciones. Se discuten las implicaciones de estos resultados en el contexto de las investigaciones previas sobre la perspectiva corporeizada acerca de la comprensión de metáforas.
Cómo citar
Martín, A., Trench, M., & Minervino, R. A. (2020). Las bases sensorio-motoras de la metáfora conceptual "El tiempo es espacio". Avances En Psicología Latinoamericana , 38(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/apl/a.6081
Referencias bibliográfica

Allbritton, D.W., McKoon, G., & Gerrig, R. (1995). Metaphor-based schemas and text representa-tions: Making connections through conceptual metaphors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 612-625. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.21.3.612

Alloway, T. P., Corley, M., & Ramscar, M. (2006). Seeing ahead: Experience and language in spatial perspective. Memory & Cognition, 34, 380-386. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193415

Aziz-Zadeh, L., Wilson, S. M., Rizzolatti, G., & Iacoboni, M. (2006). Congruent embodied representations for visually presented actions and linguistic phrases describing actions. Current Biology, 16, 1818-1823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.07.060

Bender, A., & Beller, S. (2014). Mapping spatial frames of reference onto time: A review of the-oretical accounts and empirical findings. Cog-nition, 132, 342-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.03.016

Bender, A., Beller, S., & Bennardo, G. (2010). Tempo-ral frames of reference: Conceptual analysis and empirical evidence from German, English, Man-darin Chinese and Tongan. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 10, 283-307. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853710x531195

Boroditsky, L. (2000). Metaphoric structuring: Under-standing time through spatial metaphors. Cognition, 75, 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(99)00073-6

Boroditsky, L. (2001). Does language shape thought?: Mandarin and English speakers’ conceptions of time. Cognitive Psychology, 43, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.2001.0748

Boroditsky, L., & Ramscar, M. (2002). The roles of mind and body in abstract thought. Psy-chological Science,13, 185-189. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00434

Boulenger, V., Hauk, O., & Pulvermüller, F. (2009). Grasping ideas with the motor system: semantic somatotopy in idiom comprehension. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 1905-1914. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhn217

Cacciari, C., & Pesciarelli, F. (2013). Motor activation in literal and non-literal sentences: Does time matter? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00202

Casasanto, D. (2009). When is a linguistic metaphor a conceptual metaphor? In V. Evans and S. Pourcel (Eds.) New Directions in Cognitive Lin-guistics (pp. 127-145).Amsterdam: John Ben-jamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.24.11cas

Casasanto, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2008). Time in the mind: Using space to think about time. Cogni-tion, 106, 579-593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.03.004

Casasanto, D., & Jasmin, K. (2012). The hands of time: Temporal gestures in English speakers. Cognitive Linguistics,23, 643 - 674. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2012-0020

Chen, E., Widick, P., & Chatterjee, A. (2008). Function-al-anatomical organization of predicate metaphor processing. Brain and Language, 107, 194-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2008.06.007

Desai, R. H., Binder, J. R., Conant, L. L., Mano, Q. R., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2011). The neural career of sensory-motor metaphors. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,23, 2376-2386. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2010.21596

Dove, G. (2011). On the need for embodied and dis-em-bodied cognition. Frontiers in Psychology,25, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00242

Feldman, J. A. (2006). From Molecule to Metaphor: A Neural Theory of Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods Instru-ments and Computers, 31, 116-124. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0493-8

Fuhrman, O., & Boroditsky, L. (2010). Cross-cultural differences in mental representations of time: Evidence from an implicit nonlinguistic task. Cognitive Science, 34, 1430-1451. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01105.x

Fuhrman, O., McCormick, K., Chen, E., Jiang, H., Shu, D., Mao, S., & Boroditsky, L. (2011). How linguistic and cultural forces shape conceptions of time: English and Mandarin time in 3D. Cognitive Science, 35, 1305-1328. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01193.x

Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology22, 455-479. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290442000310

Gentner, D., & Boronat, C. B. (1991). Metaphors are (sometimes) processed as domain mappings. Paper presented at the Symposium on Meta-phor and Conceptual Change, Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Chicago, IL, USA.

Gentner, D., Imai, M., & Boroditsky, L. (2002). As time goes by: Evidence for two systems in pro-cessing space→ time metaphors. Language and cognitive processes, 17, 537-565. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960143000317

Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (2006a). Embodiment and Cognitive Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511805844

Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (2006b). Metaphor interpretation as embodied simulation. Mind and Language,21, 434-458. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2006.00285.x

Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (2013). Walking the walk while thinking about the talk: Embodied interpretation of metaphorical narratives. Journal of Psycho-linguistic Research,42, 363-378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-012-9222-6

Gibbs, R. W., Bogdanovich, J. M., Sykes, J. R., & Barr, D. J. (1997). Metaphor in idiom comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 141-154. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.2506

Hampe, B., & Grady, J. E. (2005). From percep-tion to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (Cognitive Linguistics Research, Vol. 29). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197532

Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0149.1988.tb02084.x

Kemmerer, D. (2005). The spatial and temporal mean-ings of English prepositions can be independently impaired. Neuropsychologia, 43, 797-806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2004.06.025

Kranjec A., & Chatterjee A. (2010). Are temporal concepts embodied? A challenge for cognitive neuroscience. Frontiers in Psychology, 1(240). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00240

Lacey, S., Stilla, R., & Sathian, K. (2012). Metaphori-cally feeling: Comprehending textural metaphors activates somatosensory cortex. Brain and Lan-guage, 120, 416-421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2011.12.016

Lakoff, G. (2008). The neural theory of metaphor. In Gibbs, R. W. Jr. (Ed.). The Cambridge Hand-book of Metaphor and Thought (pp. 17-38).Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511816802.003

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to West-ern thought. Chicago: Chicago University Press. https://doi.org/10.5840/symposium20004110

Langston, W. (2002). Violating orientational metaphors slows reading. Discourse Processes, 34, 281-310. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3403_3

McGlone, M. S., & Harding, J. L. (1998). Back (or forward?) to the future: The role of perspective in temporal language comprehension, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Mem-ory, and Cognition, 24, 1211-1223. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.24.5.1211

Miles, L. K., Nind, L. K., & Macrae, C. N. (2010). Mov-ing through time. Psychological Science, 21, 222-223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797609359333

Minervino, R., Martín, A., Tavernini, M, & Trench, M. (2018). The comprehension of visual metaphors by the congenitally blind. Frontiers in Psychology 9:1242. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01242

Núñez, R. E., & Sweetser, E. (2006). With the future behind them: Convergent evidence from Aymara language and gesture in the crosslinguistic com-parison of spatial construals of time. Cognitive Science, 30, 401-450. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_62

Raposo, A., Moss, H. E., Stamatakis, E. A., and Tyler, L. K. (2009). Modulation of motor and premotor cortices by actions, action words and action sen-tences. Neuropsychologia. 47, 388-396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.09.017

Rothe-Wulf, A., Beller, S., & Bender, A. (2014). Tem-poral frames of reference in three Germanic lan-guages: Individual consistency, interindividual consensus, and cross-linguistic variability. 4515Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychol-ogy, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.970205

Santana, E., & de Vega, M. (2011). Metaphors are embodied, and so are their literal counterparts, Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00090

Santiago, J., Lupáñez, J., Pérez, E., & Funes, M. J. (2007). Time (also) flies from left to right. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 512-516. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03194099

Thibodeau, P., & Durgin, F. H. (2008). Produc-tive figurative communication: Conventional metaphors facilitate the comprehension of related novel metaphors, Journal of Memory and Lan-guage,58, 521-540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.05.001

Teuscher, U., McQuire, M., Collins, J., & Coul-son, S. (2008). Congruity effects in time and space: Behavioral and ERP measures. Cog-nitive Science, 32, 563-578. https://doi.org/10.1080/03640210802035084

Torralbo, A., Santiago, J., & Lupiáñez, J. (2006). Flexible conceptual projection of time onto spatial frames of reference. Cognitive Science, 30, 745-757. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_67

Ouellet, M., Santiago, J., Funes, M. J., & Lupiánez, J. (2010). Thinking about the future moves atten-tion to the right. Journal of Experimental Psy-chology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 17-23. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017176

Ouellet, M., Santiago, J., Israeli, Z., & Gabay, S. (2010). Is the future the right time? Experi-mental Psychology, 57, 308-314. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000036

Ulrich, R., Eikmeier, V., De la Vega, I., Ruiz-Fernández, S., Alex-Ruf, S., & Maienborn, C. (2012). With the past behind and the future ahead: Back-to-front representation of past and future sentences. Memory & Cognition, 40, 483-495. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0162-4

Wilson, N. L, & Gibbs, R. W. Jr. (2007). Real and imagined body movement primes metaphor com-prehension. Cognitive Science,31, 721-731. https://doi.org/10.1080/15326900701399962

Zwaan, R. A. (2014). Embodiment and language com-prehension: Reframing the discussion. Trends in Cognitive Science,18, 229-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.02.008

Estadísticas de consulta

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.
Métricas de publicación

1064 97




 

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC
Creative Commons License

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.

Los autores conservan los derechos de autor y garantizan a la revista el derecho de ser la primera publicación del trabajo al igual que licenciado bajo una Creative Commons Attribution License que permite a otros compartir el trabajo con un reconocimiento de la autoría del trabajo y la publicación inicial en esta revista.

Artículos similares

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

También puede Iniciar una búsqueda de similitud avanzada para este artículo.