Are the Literal Meanings of Constituents Activated in Chinese Idioms’ Processing? Evidence from the Semantic Preview Effect

doi:10.12139/j.1672-0628.2025.06.005

Abstract

Abstract: The literal meanings of constituents in Chinese idioms typically cannot be directly combined to derive their figurative meaning. Whether the literal meanings of the constituents are activated during idiom processing remains unclear. To explore this issue, 78 constituent words of idioms were embedded into both literal and idiomatic contexts. The boundary paradigm was used to manipulate the preview of constituent words (correct, semantic related, or semantic unrelated preview). Eye movements of 78 participants were recorded with an SR Research EyeLink 1000Plus eye tracker. The results on the constituent words showed a significant semantic preview benefit during first-pass reading, with shorter fixation times under semantically related previews compared to semantically unrelated previews, regardless of context. Moreover, in idiomatic contexts, the semantic preview effect was significant under relatively high semantic transparency, but not for those with relatively low semantic transparency. Our findings indicate the literal meanings of constituent words are activated during idiom processing which is modulated by semantic transparency, in line with the hybrid models.

Key words: constituents, idioms, semantic preview effect, Chinese reading, semantic transparency

摘要： 惯用语中的成分词义通常无法直接合成比喻义。成分词义在惯用语加工中是否被激活，还存在争议。为此，本研究选取78个惯用语的成分词作为目标词，分别将其编入字面和惯用语语境句子中。采用边界范式操纵成分词的预视(正确、语义相关、语义无关)。使用EyeLink 1000Plus记录78名被试在阅读这些句子时的眼动轨迹。对成分词的结果分析显示，语义相关预视下的第一遍阅读中的注视时间显著短于语义无关预视，且不受语境影响；在惯用语语境下，成分词的语义预视效应在较高语义透明度惯用语中显著，而在较低语义透明度惯用语中不显著。结果表明，汉语惯用语加工中存在成分词义的激活，其激活受语义透明度的调节，支持了惯用语表征的混合观点。

关键词: 成分词, 惯用语, 语义预视效应, 汉语阅读, 语义透明度

CLC Number:

B842

WANG Shuangshuang, ZHANG Zhichao, ZHANG Manman, ZANG Chuanli, YAN Guoli. Are the Literal Meanings of Constituents Activated in Chinese Idioms’ Processing? Evidence from the Semantic Preview Effect[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2025, 23(6): 759-765.

王双双, 张志超, 张慢慢, 臧传丽, 闫国利. 成分词义在汉语惯用语加工中是否被激活？—基于语义预视效应的证据[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2025, 23(6): 759-765.

References

符颖, 鹿子佳, 张慢慢, 臧传丽, 白学军. (2022). 中文惯用语的加工: 结构和熟悉性的作用. 心理科学, 45(6), 1290–1296.
黄斌宏. (2009). 汉语惯用语词典. 北京: 商务印书馆国际有限公司.
李行健. (2001). 现代汉语惯用语规范词典. 长春: 长春出版社.
马利军, 林婉君, 张积家. (2016). 词图启动范式下惯用语加工机制研究. 大理大学学报, 1(3), 68–72.
马利军, 张积家. (2014). 汉语动宾结构惯用语加工的基本单元: 来自词切分的证据. 心理学报, 46(6), 754–764.
马利军, 张积家, 杜凯. (2013). 语义分解性在惯用语理解中的作用. 心理学报, 45(4), 391–405.
佘贤君, 吴建民. (2000). 惯用语比喻意义理解的影响因素. 宁波大学学报(教育科学版), 22(1), 10–13.
闫国利, 熊建萍, 臧传丽, 余莉莉, 崔磊, 白学军. (2013). 阅读研究中的主要眼动指标评述. 心理科学进展, 21(4), 589–605.
张积家, 马利军. (2008). 词素性质对惯用语理解的影响. 心理与行为研究, 6(3), 171–175.
张积家, 孙尔鸿. (2024). 惯用语键和成分字词在动宾结构惯用语理解中的作用. 心理学探新, 44(3), 209–217.
张静宇, 马利军, 卢植. (2021). 汉语惯用语理解机制研究: 来自英文词素的启动效应证据. 外国语, 44(5), 53–61.
张慢慢, 臧传丽, 白学军. (2020). 中文阅读中副中央凹预加工的范围与程度. 心理科学进展, 28(6), 871–882.
Beck, S. D., & Weber, A. (2016). Bilingual and monolingual idiom processing is cut from the same cloth: The role of the L1 in literal and figurative meaning activation. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1350.
Bobrow, S. A., & Bell, S. M. (1973). On catching on to idiomatic expressions. Memory & Cognition, 1(3), 343–346.
Bybee, J. L. (2006). From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733.
Cacciari, C., & Tabossi, P. (1988). The comprehension of idioms. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(6), 668–683.
Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82(6), 407–428.
Gibbs, R. W. Jr. (1980). Spilling the beans on understanding and memory for idioms in conversation. Memory & Cognition, 8(2), 149–156.
Gibbs, R. W. Jr., Nayak, N. P., Bolton, J. L., & Keppel, M. E. (1989). Speakers’ assumptions about the lexical flexibility of idioms. Memory & Cognition, 17(1), 58–68.
Holsinger, E. (2013). Representing idioms: Syntactic and contextual effects on idiom processing. Language and Speech, 56(3), 373–394.
Hubers, F., Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Dijkstra, T. (2022). Individual word activation and word frequency effects during the processing of opaque idiomatic expressions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75(6), 1004–1020.
Kessler, R., Weber, A., & Friedrich, C. K. (2021). Activation of literal word meanings in idioms: Evidence from eye-tracking and ERP experiments. Language and Speech, 64(3), 594–624.
Libben, M. R., & Titone, D. A. (2008). The multidetermined nature of idiom processing. Memory & Cognition, 36(6), 1103–1121.
Pan, J. E., Laubrock, J., & Yan, M. (2016). Parafoveal processing in silent and oral reading: Reading mode influences the relative weighting of phonological and semantic information in Chinese. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(8), 1257–1273.
R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Rayner, K. (2009). The 35th Sir Frederick Bartlett Lecture: Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457–1506.
Rommers, J., Dijkstra, T., & Bastiaansen, M. (2013). Context-dependent semantic processing in the human brain: Evidence from idiom comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25(5), 762–776.
Sprenger, S., Levelt, W., & Kempen, G. (2006). Lexical access during the production of idiomatic phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 161–184.
Swinney, D. A., & Cutler, A. (1979). The access and processing of idiomatic expressions. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(5), 523–534.
Titone, D. A., Columbus, G., Whitford, V., Mercier, J., & Libben, M. (2015). Contrasting bilingual and monolingual idiom processing. In R. R. Heredia & A. B. Cieślicka (Eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing (pp. 171–207). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Titone, D. A., & Connine, C. M. (1999). On the compositional and noncompositional nature of idiomatic expressions. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(12), 1655–1674.
Titone, D. A., & Libben, M. (2014). Time-dependent effects of decomposability, familiarity and literal plausibility on idiom priming: A cross-modal priming investigation. The Mental Lexicon, 9(3), 473–496.
van Ginkel, W., & Dijkstra, T. (2020). The tug of war between an idiom’s figurative and literal meanings: Evidence from native and bilingual speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 131–147.
Vega-Moreno, R. E. (2001). Representing and processing idioms. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 13, 73–107.
Westfall, J., Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. (2015). Replicating studies in which samples of participants respond to samples of stimuli. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(3), 390–399.
Zang, C. L. (2019). New perspectives on serialism and parallelism in oculomotor control during reading: The multi-constituent unit hypothesis. Vision, 3(4), 50.
Zang, C. L., Fu, Y., Bai, X. J., Yan, G. L., & Liversedge, S. P. (2021). Foveal and parafoveal processing of Chinese three-character idioms in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 119, 104243.
Zang, C. L., Fu, Y., Du, H., Bai, X. J., Yan, G. L., & Liversedge, S. P. (2024). Processing multiconstituent units: Preview effects during reading of Chinese words, idioms, and phrases. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 50(1), 169–188.

[1]	Yufei DU, Zhichao ZHANG, Manman ZHANG, Chuanli ZANG. Semantics Takes Precedence over World Knowledge in Sentence Comprehension: Evidence from Eye Movements [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2025, 23(2): 153-160.
[2]	Yongsheng WANG, Yang HAN, Xin LI, Liyuan HE. The Promotion of Inter-Word Space in Chinese Sentence Reading of Uyghur College Students with Different Text Presentation Directions [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2025, 23(1): 41-48.
[3]	Xiangwen CHEN, Longge WANG, Huilan HU, Zhichao ZHANG, Mengsi WANG, Qiang WANG, Manman ZHANG. The Neural Structural Basis of Individual Differences in Word Frequency Effect on Eye Movement Measures During Chinese Reading [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2024, 22(6): 721-729.
[4]	Xin LI, Mengling LONG, Feifei LIANG, Yongsheng WANG. The Role of Character Positional Probability During Chinese Reading: Evidence from Eye Movements of Uyghur Readers [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2024, 22(5): 585-593.
[5]	Min CHANG, Kuo ZHANG, Yue SUN, Sha LI, Jingxin WANG. Semantic Similarity Effects in Chinese Reading: Evidence for Semantic Prediction [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2024, 22(4): 442-449.
[6]	Tongwen HU, Kuo ZHANG, Yuru CHENG, Jingxin WANG. The Emotion Word Type Effect in Chinese Reading not Moderated by Valence: Evidence from Eye-Tracking [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2024, 22(2): 197-203.
[7]	Ruqi CHEN, Yaqian BAO, Linjieqiong HUANG, Xingshan LI. An Introduction to the Chinese Reading Model (CRM) [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2023, 21(6): 725-735.
[8]	Feifei LIANG, Linlin FENG, Ying LIU, Changhao WANG, Jie WANG. The Role of Character Positional Probability in Chinese Two-Word Identification: Moderation of Lexical Contextual Diversity [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2023, 21(6): 736-743.
[9]	Zijia LU, Zhichao ZHANG, Ying FU, Manman ZHANG, Chuanli ZANG, Xuejun BAI. Repeating Words Cannot Help Chinese Readers to Obtain Word Class Information from Parafoveal Words [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2023, 21(5): 577-584.
[10]	Lijuan ZHANG, Fengjun ZHANG, Sainan ZHAO, Jingxin WANG. The Predominant Role of Preview Plausibility on Semantic Preview Benefit of Two-Character Words in Chinese Reading: An Eye Movement Study [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2023, 21(1): 12-19.
[11]	Haibo CAO, Liang REN, Dan HAN, Dongli JIA, Jingxin WANG. The Role of Character Positional Frequency of Word Segmentation of Overlapping Ambiguous Strings in Chinese [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(6): 732-738.
[12]	ZHANG Manman, HU Huilan, BIAN Han, LI Fang, ZHANG Zhichao, ZANG Chuanli. Word Frequency Effects in Fast and Slow Readers During Skilled Chinese Reading [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(3): 304-310.
[13]	WANG Yongsheng, HE Liyuan, LI Xin, BAI Xuejun. The Role of the First Character Frequency in Low-Frequency Two-Character Words in Parafoveal Processing in Chinese Reading [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(3): 311-317.
[14]	LIANG Feifei, XIANG Ying, LONG Mengling. Initial Character Positional Probability Does Not Influence Word Segmentation in Chinese Reading: Evidence from Parafoveal Processing [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(3): 318-324.
[15]	HE Liyuan, ZHAO Xing, BAI Yu, LIU Nina. Multi-Word Unit Processing for Chinese Older Readers: Evidence from Eye Movements [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(2): 160-166.