Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Measuring Metaphoric Thinking


Published on

The following slide deck was presented by Chris Parker at the 2014 Emerging Learning Design conference in Montclair, NJ.

My Ignite session is about using metaphoric thinking in learning environments. I demonstrate that metaphor has two parts, the tenor and vehicle. For example “my marriage is a rose with thorns.” Marriage is the tenor and rose is the vehicle. I will visually demonstrate target and domain. But also the tenor/vehicle can be considered as Domains of thought. These Domains can be Mental, Social, Intangible or Physical. Different Domains in tenor and vehicle make the bridge between tenor and vehicle longer, which makes for stronger metaphoric thinking. This is called Cross-domain mapping, a metaphoric thought process. Measuring the metaphoricity of the students’ writing using a gradient intuitive system has demonstrated higher levels of resultant metaphoric thinking. I will portray visually the gradient system.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Measuring Metaphoric Thinking

  1. 1. Measuring Metaphoric Thinking
  4. 4. Tenor/Vehicle “My twenty-nine year marriage is a rose with thorns”
  5. 5. Dunn • Metaphoricity = [(# of domains) + (# of mismatches)] x (# Case roles)
  6. 6. for natural language
  7. 7. Case Roles • Agent • Instrument
  8. 8. • Location • Path
  9. 9. • Source • Theme
  10. 10. • Event • Experience
  11. 11. CASE ROLES • 1) Governor Christie is [flirting] with the Democrats. One Case role • 2) Governor Christie is [flirting and making out with] the Democrats. One Case role with an added phrase (lexeme) [not another Case role]
  12. 12. CASE ROLES • 3) Governor Christie is [flirting with] [someone else’s girlfriend]. • EVENT and BENEFICIARY • Two different phrases (lexemes).
  13. 13. Domains
  14. 14. Measuring Metaphoricity • Metaphoricity = [(# of domains) + (# of mismatches or functions)] x (# Case roles) (Dunn, 2011) Mental Intangible Social Physical • Case roles: participants in an event (Nireburg, 2004) Agent Location Purpose Event Beneficiary Path Source Experience Instrument Destination Theme
  15. 15. Mismatch? Mental Mismatch “Even as confident as a [fusion rose shimmering] [in a fragile glass].” Physical 1
  16. 16. Cross Domain Mapping? “Even as confident as a [fusion rose shimmering] [in a fragile glass].” 2
  17. 17. Formula So far ((2 Domains) + (1 Mismatch))
  18. 18. Case Roles • THEME INSTRUMENT LOCATION “Even as confident as a [fusion rose shimmering] [in a fragile glass].” 2
  19. 19. ((2 Domains) + (1 Mismatch)) x 2 Case Roles=6
  20. 20. Metaphors be With You • “…teachers and students, like poets, use metaphor as a means of getting other people to see things their way” (Abrahamson, 2012, p. 56).