Hostname: page-component-6b989bf9dc-mbg9n Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-13T17:15:13.029Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Affective and sensory–motor norms for idioms by L1 and L2 English speakers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2024

Mahsa Morid*
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
Laura Sabourin
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
*
Corresponding author: Mahsa Morid; Email: mmori115@uottawa.ca

Abstract

In the present study, we developed affective (valence and arousal) and sensory–motor (concreteness and imageability) norms for 210 English idioms rated by native English speakers (L1) and English second-language speakers (L2). Based on internal consistency analyses, the ratings were found to be highly reliable. Furthermore, we explored various relations within the collected measures (valence, arousal, concreteness, and imageability) and between these measures and some available psycholinguistic norms (familiarity, literal plausibility, and decomposability) for the same set of idioms. The primary findings were that (i) valence and arousal showed the typical U-shape relation, for both L1 and L2 data; (ii) idioms with more negative valence were rated as more arousing; (iii) the majority of idioms were rated as either positive or negative with only 4 being rated as neutral; (iv) familiarity correlated positively with valence and arousal; (v) concreteness and imageability showed a strong positive correlation; and (vi) the ratings of L1 and L2 speakers significantly differed for arousal and concreteness, but not for valence and imageability. We discuss our interpretation of these observations with reference to the literature on figurative language processing (both single words and idioms).

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abel, B. (2003). English idioms in the first language and second language lexicon: A dual representation approach. Second Language Research, 19(4), 329358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altarriba, J., Bauer, L. M., & Benvenuto, C. (1999). Concreteness, context availability, and imageability ratings and word associations for abstract, concrete, and emotion words. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(4), 578602.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anwyl-Irvine, A., Massonnié, J., Flitton, A., Kirkham, N., & Evershed, J. (2018). Gorillas in our midst: Gorilla. sc. Behavior Research Methods.Google Scholar
Arfé, B., Delatorre, P., & Mason, L. (2022). Effects of negative emotional valence on readers’ text processing and memory for text: An eye-tracking study. Reading and Writing, 36(7), 17431768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, H. A., Otten, L. J., Kousta, S. T., & Vigliocco, G. (2013). Concreteness in word processing: ERP and behavioral effects in a lexical decision task. Brain and Language, 125(1), 4753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonin, P., Méot, A., & Bugaiska, A. (2013). Norms and comprehension times for 305 French idiomatic expressions. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 12591271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brysbaert, M., Warriner, A. B., & Kuperman, V. (2014). Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 46(3), 904911.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bulkes, N. Z., & Tanner, D. (2017). “Going to town”: Large-scale norming and statistical analysis of 870 American English idioms. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 772783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrol, G., & Conklin, K. (2020). Is all formulaic language created equal? Unpacking the processing advantage for different types of formulaic sequences. Language and Speech, 63(1), 95122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cieślicka, A. B., & Heredia, R. R. (2011). Hemispheric asymmetries in processing L1 and L2 idioms: Effects of salience and context. Brain and Language, 116(3), 136150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Citron, F. M., Cacciari, C., Kucharski, M., Beck, L., Conrad, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2016). When emotions are expressed figuratively: Psycholinguistic and Affective Norms of 619 Idioms for German (PANIG). Behavior Research Methods, 48(1), 91111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Citron, F. M., Weekes, B. S., & Ferstl, E. C. (2014). How are affective word ratings related to lexicosemantic properties? Evidence from the Sussex Affective Word List. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35(2), 313331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eilola, T. M., & Havelka, J. (2010). Affective norms for 210 British English and Finnish nouns. Behavior Research Methods, 42(1), 134140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fairfield, B., Ambrosini, E., Mammarella, N., & Montefinese, M. (2017). Affective norms for Italian words in older adults: Age differences in ratings of valence, arousal and dominance. PloS One, 12(1), e0169472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferré, P., Guasch, M., Moldovan, C., & Sánchez-Casas, R. (2012). Affective norms for 380 Spanish words belonging to three different semantic categories. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 395403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fischer, A. (Ed.). (2000). Gender and emotion: Social psychological perspectives. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrido, M. V., & Prada, M. (2021). Comparing the valence, emotionality and subjective familiarity of words in a first and a second language. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 24(2), 275291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gavilán, J. M., Haro, J., Hinojosa, J. A., Fraga, I., & Ferré, P. (2021). Psycholinguistic and affective norms for 1,252 Spanish idiomatic expressions. PLoS One, 16(7), e0254484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. Jr., & Gonzales, G. P. (1985). Syntactic frozenness in processing and remembering idioms. Cognition, 20(3), 243259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heredia, R. R., & Cieślicka, A. B. (Eds.). (2015). Bilingual figurative language processing: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holcomb, P. J., Kounios, J., Anderson, J. E., & West, W. C. (1999). Dual-coding, context-availability, and concreteness effects in sentence comprehension: An electrophysiological investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25(3), 721.Google ScholarPubMed
Hubers, F., Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Dijkstra, T. (2019). Normative data of Dutch idiomatic expressions: Subjective judgments you can bank on. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbault, C., Titone, D., Warriner, A. B., & Kuperman, V. (2021). How are words felt in a second language: Norms for 2,628 English words for valence and arousal by L2 speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 24(2), 281292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbir, K. K. (2016). Affective norms for 4900 Polish words reload (ANPW_R): Assessments for valence, arousal, dominance, origin, significance, concreteness, imageability and, age of acquisition. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1081.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kousta, S. T., Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Andrews, M., & Del Campo, E. (2011). The representation of abstract words: Why emotion matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140(1), 14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuppens, P., Tuerlinckx, F., Yik, M., Koval, P., Coosemans, J., Zeng, K. J., & Russell, J. A. (2017). The relation between valence and arousal in subjective experience varies with personality and culture. Journal of Personality, 85(4), 530542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1981). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Li, D., Zhang, Y., & Wang, X. (2016). Descriptive norms for 350 Chinese idioms with seven syntactic structures. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 16781693.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Libben, M., & Titone, D. (2008). The multidetermined nature of idiom processing. Memory & Cognition, 36, 11031121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Montefinese, M., Ambrosini, E., Fairfield, B., & Mammarella, N. (2014). The adaptation of the affective norms for English words (ANEW) for Italian. Behavior Research Methods, 46(3), 887903.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morid, M., Bachar, N., & Sabourin, L. (2021). Capturing the multi-determined nature of idiom processing using ERPs. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 75(2), 155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie, 45(3), 255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redondo, J., Fraga, I., Padrón, I., & Comesaña, M. (2007). The Spanish adaptation of ANEW (affective norms for English words). Behavior Research Methods, 39(3), 600605.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodriguez-Cuadrado, S., Hinojosa, J. A., Guasch, M., Romero-Rivas, C., Sabater, L., Suárez-Coalla, P., & Ferré, P. (2022). Subjective age of acquisition norms for 1604 English words by Spanish L2 speakers of English and their relationship with lexico-semantic, affective, sociolinguistic and proficiency variables. Behavior Research Methods, 118.Google ScholarPubMed
Russell, J. A. (1991). Culture and the categorization of emotions. Psychological Bulletin, 110(3), 426.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review, 110(1), 145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sabourin, L., Leclerc, J. C., Lapierre, M., Burkholder, M., & Brien, C. (2016). The language background questionnaire in L2 research: Teasing apart the variables. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Linguistics Association, Calgary, Canada.Google Scholar
Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Stowe, R. W. (1989). Context availability and the processing of abstract and concrete words in sentences. Reading Research Quarterly, 114126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H., Imbault, C., Pérez Sánchez, M. A., & Brysbaert, M. (2017). Norms of valence and arousal for 14,031 Spanish words. Behavior Research Methods, 49(1), 111123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tabossi, P., Arduino, L., & Fanari, R. (2011). Descriptive norms for 245 Italian idiomatic expressions. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 110123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Titone, D., Columbus, G., Whitford, V., Mercier, J., & Libben, M. (2015). Contrasting bilingual and monolingual idiom processing. In Heredia, R. R. & Cieślicka, A. B. (Eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing (pp. 171207). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Titone, D., Lovseth, K., Kasparian, K., & Tiv, M. (2019). Are figurative interpretations of idioms directly retrieved, compositionally built, or both? Evidence from eye movement measures of reading. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de Psychologie Experimentale, 73(4), 216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vigliocco, G., Kousta, S. T., Della Rosa, P. A., Vinson, D. P., Tettamanti, M., Devlin, J. T., & Cappa, S. F. (2014). The neural representation of abstract words: The role of emotion. Cerebral Cortex, 24(7), 17671777.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vigliocco, G., Meteyard, L., Andrews, M., & Kousta, S. (2009). Toward a theory of semantic representation. Language and Cognition, 1(2), 219247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warriner, A. B., Kuperman, V., & Brysbaert, M. (2013). Norms of valence, arousal, and dominance for 13,915 English lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 45(4), 11911207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, Z., Wu, J., Zhang, Y., & Wang, Z. (2017). Norms of valence, arousal, concreteness, familiarity, imageability, and context availability for 1,100 Chinese words. Behavior Research Methods, 49(4), 13741385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar