Vector Space Applications in Metaphor Comprehension

References

• Agatonovic-Kustrin, S., & Beresford, R. (2000). Basic concepts of artificial neural network(ANN) modeling and its application in pharmaceutical research. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis, 22(5), 717–727.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahrens, K., Liu, H. L., Lee, C. Y., Gong, S. P., Fang, S. Y., & Hsu, Y. Y. (2007). FunctionalMRI of conventional and anomalous metaphors in Mandarin Chinese. Brain and Language, 100(2), 163–171. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2005.10.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Azary, H., & Buchanan, L. (2017). Novel metaphor comprehension: Semantic neighbourhooddensity interacts with concreteness. Memory & Cognition, 45(2), 296–307.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. R., & Milson, R. (1989). Human memory: An adaptive perspective. Psychological Review, 96(4), 703–719. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.703
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aristotle. (1952). Rhetoric. In W. D. Ross (Ed.); W. R. Roberts (Trans.), The works of Aristotle Vol. 11: Theoretica, de rhetorica ad alexandrum, poetica (pp. 1–51). Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Aristotle. (1996). Poetics. (M. Heath, trans.). London, UK: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Bowdle, B. F., & Gentner, D. (2005). The career of metaphor. Psychological Review, 112(1), 193–216. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.112.1.193
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, S. (2015). Vector space models of lexical meaning. In S. Lappin & C. Fox (Eds.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory (2nd ed., pp. 493–522). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Dawson, M. R. W. (1998). Understanding cognitive science. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Deerwester, S., Dumais, S. T., Furnas, G. W., Landauer, T. K., & Harshman, R. (1990). Indexing by latent semantic analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41(6), 391–407. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1097-4571
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durda, K., & Buchanan, L. (2008). WINDSORS: Windsor improved norms of distance and similarity of representations of semantics. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 705–712.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eviatar, Z., & Just, M. A. (2006). Brain correlates of discourse processing: An fMRI investigation of irony and conventional metaphor comprehension. Neuropsychologia, 44(12), 2348–2359. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.05.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1989). The structure-mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41(1), 1–63. doi:10.1016/0004-3702(89)90077-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fass, D. (1991). met*: A method for discriminating metonymy and metaphor by computer. Computational Linguistics, 17(1), 49–90.
   Google Scholar
• Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7(2), 155–170. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0702_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glucksberg, S. (2003). The psycholinguistics of metaphor. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(2), 92–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glucksberg, S., & Keysar, B. (1990). Understanding metaphorical comparisons: Beyond similarity. Psychological Review, 97(1), 3–18. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.97.1.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harman, D. (1986). An experimental study of the factors important in document ranking. In F. Rabitti (Ed.), Association for Computing Machinery 9th Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 186–193). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery. doi:10.1145/253168.253206
   Google Scholar
• Harris, Z. S. (1954). Distributional Structure. WORD, 10(2–3), 146–162. doi:10.1080/00437956.1954.11659520
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofmann, T. (1999). Probabilistic latent semantic analysis. In K. B. Laskey & H. Prade (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (pp. 289–296). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1301/1301.6705.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jones, W. P. (1988). “As we may think”?: Psychological considerations in the design of a personal filing system. In R. Guindon (Ed.), Cognitive Science and its Applications for Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 235–287). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Kameya, Y., & Sato, T. (2005). Computation of probabilistic relationship between concepts and their attributes using a statistical analysis of Japanese corpora. In Proceedings of Symposium on Large-scale Knowledge Resources: LKR2005 (pp. 65–68), Tokyo, Japan. Retrieved from http://rjida.meijo-u.ac.jp/sato-www/reference/Kameya-LKR2005.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Katz, A. N., & Al-Azary, H. (2017). Principles that promote bidirectionality in verbal metaphor. Poetics Today, 38(1), 35–59. doi:10.1215/03335372-3716215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. (2000). Metaphor comprehension: A computational theory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7(2), 257–266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. (2008). How the mind computes the meaning of metaphor: A simulation based on LSA. In R. W. Gibbs Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought (pp. 129–142). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W., & Bowles, A. R. (2002). Metaphor comprehension: What makes a metaphordifficult to understand? Metaphor and Symbol, 17(4), 249–262. doi:10.1207/S15327868MS1704_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104(2), 211–240. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.104.2.211
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25(2–3), 259–284. doi:10.1080/01638539809545028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemaire, B., & Bianco, M. (2003). Contextual effects on metaphor comprehension: Experiment and simulation. In F. Detje, D. Dörner, & H. Schaub (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Cognitive Modeling (ICCM2003) (pp. 153–158). Bamberg, Germany: Universitäts‐Verlag Bamberg. Retrieved from http://cogprints.org/3205/1/iccm03_lemaire.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Levy, O., & Goldberg, Y. (2014). Neural word embedding as implicit matrix factorization. In Z. Ghahramani, M. Welling, C. Cortes, N. D. Lawrence, & K. Q. Weinberger (Eds.), Proceedings of Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (Vol. 27, pp. 2177–2185). Electronic proceedings, conference held in Montreal, Canada. Retrieved from http://papers.nips.cc/paper/5477-neural-word-embedding-as-implicit-matrix-factorization.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lin, D. (1998). Automatic retrieval and clustering of similar words. In P. Isabelle (Ed.), Proceedings of the 36^th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (pp. 768–774). Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics. doi:10.3115/980691.980696
   Google Scholar
• Lund, K., & Burgess, C. (1996). Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co- occurrence. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28(2), 203–208. doi:10.3758/BF03204766
   Google Scholar
• Marr, D. (1982). Vision: A computational investigation in the human representation of visual information. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Mikolov, T., Chen, K., Corrado, G., & Dean, J. (2013a). Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. In Proceedings of International Conference on Learning Representations Workshop, Scottsdale, AZ. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.3781
   Google Scholar
• Mikolov, T., Sutskever, I., Chen, K., Corrado, G. S., & Dean, J. (2013b). Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. In C. J. C. Burges, L. Bottou, M. Welling, Z. Ghahramani, & K. Q. Weinberger (Eds.), Proceedings of Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (Vol. 26, pp. 3111–3119). Electronic proceedings, conference held in Lake Tahoe, NV. Retrieved from https://papers.nips.cc/paper/5021-distributed-representations-of-words-and-phrases-and-their-compositionality.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Mohler, M., Rink, B., Bracewell, D., & Tomlinson, M. (2014). A novel distributional approach to multilingual conceptual metaphor recognition. In J. Tsujii & J. Hajic (Eds.), Proceedings of COLING 2014, the 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers (pp. 1752–1763). Dublin, Ireland: Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/C14-1165
   Google Scholar
• Ortony, A. (1975). Why metaphors are necessary and not just nice. Educational Theory, 25(1), 45–53. doi:10.1111/edth.1975.25.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ortony, A. (1979). Beyond literal similarity. Psychological Review, 86(3), 161–180. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.86.3.161
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Padó, S., & Lapata, M. (2007). Dependency-based construction of semantic space models. Computational Linguistics, 33(2), 161–199. doi:10.1162/coli.2007.33.2.161
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rapp, A. M., Leube, D. T., Erb, M., Grodd, W., & Kircher, T. T. J. (2004). Neural correlates of metaphor processing. Cognitive Brain Research, 20(3), 395–402. doi:10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.03.017
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rubenstein, H., & Goodenough, J. B. (1965). Contextual correlates of synonymy. Communications of the ACM, 8(10), 627–633. doi:10.1145/365628.365657
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., & Williams, R. J. (1986). Learning representations by back- propagating errors. Nature, 323, 533–536. doi:10.1038/323533a0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahlgren, M. (2008). The distributional hypothesis. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 20(1), 33–54.
   Google Scholar
• Shutova, E., Van de Cruys, T., & Korhonen, A. (2012). Unsupervised metaphor paraphrasing using a vector space model. In Proceedings of COLING 2012: Posters (pp. 1121–1130), Mumbai, India. Retrieved from http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/C12-2109
   Google Scholar
• Su, C., Huang, S., & Chen, Y. (2017). Automatic detection and interpretation of nominal metaphor based on the theory of meaning. Neurocomputing, 219(5), 300–311. doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2016.09.030
   Google Scholar
• Terai, A., & Nakagawa, M. (2012). A corpus-based computational model of metaphor understanding consisting of two processes. Cognitive Systems Research, 19, 30–38. doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2012.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tourangeau, R., & Sternberg, R. J. (1981). Aptness in metaphor. Cognitive Psychology, 13(1), 27–55. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(81)90003-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Touretzky, D. S., & Pomerleau, D. A. (1989). What’s hidden in the hidden layers?. Byte, 14(8), 227–233.
   Google Scholar
• Trick, L., & Katz, A. N. (1986). The domain interaction approach to metaphor processing: Relating individual differences and metaphor characteristics. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 1(3), 185–213. doi:10.1207/s15327868ms0103_3
   Google Scholar
• Utsumi, A. (2005). The role of feature emergence in metaphor appreciation. Metaphor and Symbol, 20(3), 151–172. doi:10.1207/s15327868ms2003_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Utsumi, A. (2011). Computational exploration of metaphor comprehension processes using a semantic space model. Cognitive Science, 35(2), 251–296. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01144.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van de Cruys, T., Poibeau, T., & Korhonen, A. (2011). Latent vector weighting for word meaning in context. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 1476–1485). Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00666475/document
   Google Scholar