Modeling for Neural Processing of Chinese Logogriphs
Wang Yizhen1, Wang Xiaolu2,3,4
1.School of International Studies, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China 2.School of Foreign Languages, Zhejiang University City College, Hangzhou 310015, China 3.School of International Studies, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China 4.School of Humanities & Communication Arts, Western Sydney University, Penrith NSW 2751, Australia
Abstract A Chinese logogriph is a type of word riddle with the answer of a single Chinese character. The Mimian of a logogriph is usually a conventional phrase, but vividly implies the graphic, phonetic or semantic traits of the Midi character. Making and solving logogriphs reflect the complexity of human cognition, so it is necessary to explore the cognitive mechanism of Chinese logogriph processing. Although there are some empirical studies on logogriphs, almost all of them use a logogriph as a tool to examine the phenomenon of insight rather than interpret it as a linguistic phenomenon. However, by analyzing the procedures and results of these experiments, we can use them as a basis to explore the cognitive neural mechanism of logogriphs comprehension.Some studies divide the process of logogriph comprehension according to a “four-stage model of the creative process”: preparation, incubation, illumination and verification. With reference to this classification criterion and based on the results of previous empirical studies, this paper attempts to construct a dynamic cognitive model of logogriphs and further explore the linguistic features reflected therein. By analyzing the brain regions activated, EEG components and their corresponding cognitive features involved in the four stages, the article finds that the cognitive process in the above stages can outline the whole process of Chinese logogriph comprehension, in which the illumination period is the critical period for successful logogriph solving. However, since guessing logogriphs is a word game, it is not only a matter of insight in the traditional sense, but also a subversion of conventional linguistic processing. If the logogriph solver is inspired and her/his insight occurs, s/he can figure out the unconventional meaning (Midi) by inhibiting the conventional meaning (Mimian).Therefore, the cognitive mechanism of logogriphs is closely linked to language processing, in which there are three key points: First, the core of logogriph insight lies in the competition between character-centered meaning and word-centered meaning: only by transcending the traditional conception based on word and returning to the meta-linguistic conception based on single character, and by splitting and combining words in the meta-linguistic sense, can we understand the essential skill of creating and understanding logogriphs, which is the core of logogriph’s insight. However, unlike non-literal language constructs such as metaphor, irony, or humor, whose non-literal meaning is often metaphorical, the non-literal meaning of a logogriph is in essence a retreat to the meta-linguistic forms in the beginning of character-creation. This is precisely how the logogriph processing mechanism innovates the non-literal language framework, i.e., the meta-linguistic meaning can exist at the same level of non-literal meaning as the metaphorical meaning. Second, the focus of logogriph insight is on the encounter between conventional and novel meaning: logogriph insight involves the conflict and transformation between the conventional literal meaning of the Mimian phrase and the novel non-literal meaning needed to get the Midi, and the focus of logogriph solving is to suppress the former meaning as well as to discover and verify the latter, i.e., a process of creative thinking in terms of word slicing and meaning construction. Third, the achievement of logogriph insight is by the cooperative work between the right and left hemispheres: the process of logogriph comprehension is a leap from the left brain to the right brain. The left hemisphere is often related to basic linguistic processing such as comprehending sentence structure and meaning, but the right one is responsible for the associative and analogical functions to make logogriph insight truly successful, and both parts work in synergy to accomplish the logogriph comprehension. In summary, the logogriph processing has similarities of other Chinese non-literal language processing as well as its own specificities.
1 朱承平： 《细说字谜》，长沙：岳麓书社，2005年。 2 曹石珠： 《走进字谜的艺术宫殿》，北京：中国社会科学出版社，2012年。 3 张雪梅、刘宇红： 《“低凸显假设”视域下别解字谜的拓扑认知分析》，《中国海洋大学学报（社会科学版）》2018年第4期，第110-115页。 4 徐盛桓： 《精巧的语言 有意味的形式——汉语谜语语言研究》，《外语教学与研究》2018年第4期，第483-494页。 5 刘茁： 《汉英离合字谜的元语言和语言学多维分析》，《广州大学学报（社会科学版）》2012年第8期，第86-90页。 6 邱江、张庆林： 《字谜解决中的“啊哈”效应：来自ERP研究的证据》，《科学通报》2007年第22期，第2625-2631页。 7 Luo J.， Li W. & Fink A. et al.， “The time course of breaking mental sets and forming novel associations in insight-like problem solving： an ERP investigation，” Experimental Brain Research， Vol. 212， No. 4 （2011）， pp. 583-591. 8 邢强、孙海龙、占丹玲等： 《执行功能对言语顿悟问题解决的影响：基于行为与ERPs的研究》，《心理学报》2017年第7期，第909-919页。 9 张忠炉、邢强、唐志文等： 《酝酿期有效提示和无效提示的比较》，《心理科学》2012年第4期，第901-905页。 10 Xing Q.， Zhang J. & Zhang Z.， “Event-related potential effects associated with insight problem solving in a Chinese logogriph task，” Psychology， Vol. 3， No. 1 （2012）， pp. 65-69. 11 邢强、张忠炉： 《猜谜作业中的ERP效应：基于催化范式的证据》，《心理与行为研究》2013年第1期，第37-42页。 12 陈建新、伍莉、黄蓉等： 《情绪的相容性对创造性思维的影响》，《心理与行为研究》2020年第4期，第433-439页。 13 陈石、梁正、李香兰等： 《新颖语义联结在顿悟促进记忆效果中的作用》，《心理学报》2021年第8期，第837-846页。 14 Wallas G.， The Art of Thought， London： Jonathan Cape Ltd.， 1926. 15 邱江、罗跃嘉、吴真真等： 《再探猜谜作业中“顿悟”的ERP效应》，《心理学报》2006年第4期，第507-514页。 16 Qiu J.， Li H. & Jou J. et al.， “Spatiotemporal cortical activation underlies mental preparation for successful riddle solving： an event-related potential study，” Experimental Brain Research， Vol. 186， No. 4 （2008）， pp. 629-634. 17 Kounios J.， Frymiare J. L. & Bowden E. M. et al.， “The prepared mind： neural activity prior to problem presentation predicts subsequent solution by sudden insight，” Psychological Science， Vol. 17， No. 10 （2006）， pp. 882-890. 18 罗劲： 《顿悟的大脑机制》，《心理学报》2004年第2期，第219-234页。 19 邢强、张忠炉： 《顿悟的准备效应：来自ERP的证据》，《心理与行为研究》2014年第6期，第756-762页。 20 Sio U. N. & Ormerod T. C.， “Does incubation enhance problem solving? a meta-analytic review，” Psychological Bulletin， Vol. 135， No. 1 （2009）， pp. 94-120. 21 沈汪兵、刘昌、罗劲等： 《顿悟问题思维僵局早期觉察的脑电研究》，《心理学报》2012年第7期，第924-935页。 22 van Veen V. & Carter C. S.， “The timing of action-monitoring processes in the anterior cingulate cortex，” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience， Vol. 14， No. 4 （2002）， pp. 593-602. 23 Kutas M. & Federmeier K.， “Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension，” Trends in Cognitive Sciences， Vol. 12， No. 4 （2000）， pp. 463-470. 24 Wang T.， Zhang Q. & Li H. et al.， “The time course of Chinese riddles solving： evidence from an ERP study，” Behavioural Brain Research， Vol. 199， No. 2 （2009）， pp. 278-282. 25 沈汪兵、刘昌、张小将等： 《三字字谜顿悟的时间进程和半球效应：一项ERP研究》，《心理学报》2011年第3期，第229-240页。 26 沈汪兵、刘昌、张晶等： 《三字字谜顿悟的时频特征与源定位》，《心理科学》2012年第6期，第1298-1303页。 27 邢强、张忠炉、王梦偌等： 《汉字字谜任务中限制解除的电生理机制》，《心理学报》2013年第5期，第508-516页。 28 Donchin E. & Coles M.， “Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating？” Behavioral & Brain Sciences， Vol. 11， No. 3 （1988）， pp. 357-427. 29 罗俊龙、李文福、张庆林： 《汉字识别的时间进程：来自字谜任务的ERP证据》，《心理与行为研究》2013年第1期，第43-48页。 30 Smith M. E.， “Neurophysiological manifestations of recollective experience during recognition memory judgments，” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience， Vol. 5， No. 1 （1993）， pp. 1-13. 31 李文福、罗俊龙、贾磊等： 《字谜问题解决中顿悟的原型启发机制再探》，《心理科学》2013年第2期，第315-319页。 32 Cabeza R.， Dolcos F. & Graham R. et al.， “Similarities and differences in the neural correlates of episodic memory retrieval and working memory，” Neuroimage， Vol. 16， No. 2 （2002）， pp. 317-330. 33 王小潞、王艺臻： 《汉语非字面语言认知加工的“规约层级递进模型”》，《浙江大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2020年第4期，第176-188页。
2022, Vol. 52 
