Differential bilateral involvement of the parietal gyrus during predicative metaphor processing: An auditory fMRI study Alexandre Obert a,⇑ , Fabien Gierski a,b , Arnaud Calmus a,c , Christophe Portefaix d,e , Christelle Declercq a , Laurent Pierot d , Stéphanie Caillies a a C2S Laboratory (EA6291), University of Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Reims, France b Adult Psychiatry Department, Robert Debré Hospital, Reims University Hospital, Reims, France c Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Sébastopol Hospital, Reims University Hospital, Reims, France d Imaging Department, Maison Blanche Hospital, Reims University Hospital, Reims, France e CReSTIC Laboratory (EA 3804), University of Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Reims, France article info Article history: Accepted 1 August 2014 Keywords: Predicative metaphors Semantics Context-embedded fMRI abstract Despite the growing literature on figurative language processing, there is still debate as to which cogni- tive processes and neural bases are involved. Furthermore, most studies have focused on nominal metaphor processing without any context, and very few have used auditory presentation. We therefore investigated the neural bases of the comprehension of predicative metaphors presented in a brief context, in an auditory, ecological way. The comprehension of their literal counterparts served as a control con- dition. We also investigated the link between working memory and verbal skills and regional activation. Comparisons of metaphorical and literal conditions revealed bilateral activation of parietal areas includ- ing the left angular (lAG) and right inferior parietal gyri (rIPG) and right precuneus. Only verbal skills were associated with lAG (but not rIPG) activation. These results indicated that predicative metaphor comprehension share common activations with other metaphors. Furthermore, individual verbal skills could have an impact on figurative language processing. Ó 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Figurative language can be defined as a type of language that requires us to go beyond the literal meaning of the words or sen- tences in order to access the meaning being conveyed (e.g.: Gibbs, 2002). The comprehension of figurative expressions such as irony, similes or metaphors is an important topic for research- ers, as these expressions are a common feature of our daily com- munication. Some authors even consider them to reflect our thought processes (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). Each type of figure is assumed to call on specific cognitive processes that are of interest to psychologists. Metaphors, for example, the subject of the pres- ent study, are a type of figurative language that requires the map- ping of two distant concepts (Lai, Curran, & Menn, 2009). The ability to understand metaphors has been found to be impaired in various pathologies, including Asperger syndrome (Gold, Faust, & Goldstein, 2010), Alzheimer’s disease (Amanzio, Geminiani, Leotta, & Cappa, 2008), and traumatic brain injury (Rinaldi, Marangolo, & Baldassarri, 2004). The neural bases of metaphor comprehension have yet to be fully identified, with the debate centering on the involvement of the right (RH) versus left (LH) hemispheres. The first attempts to elucidate the RH’s role in the comprehension of metaphorical stim- uli took the form of observations of patients with brain injury. Winner and Gardner (1977) conducted a pioneering study in which they compared LH brain-damaged patients (LHD) and RH brain- damaged patients (RHD) on a fairly conventional metaphorical sentence-to-picture matching task. Their results showed that RHD patients more frequently chose the literal picture than the metaphorical one, suggesting major RH involvement in metaphor comprehension. Consistent with this, Van Lancker and Kempler (1987) found that RHD patients had greater difficulty with familiar idiomatic sentences than with novel literal ones in a sentence-to- picture matching task, the reverse being observed for LHD patients. However, some studies have failed to replicate these findings, reporting that RHD patients retain the ability to understand con- ventional metaphorical sentences, performing just as well as healthy participants (Giora, Zaidel, Soroker, Batori, & Kasher, 2000; Zaidel, Kasher, Soroker, & Batori, 2002). It should be noted http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2014.08.002 0093-934X/Ó 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. ⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Laboratoire C2S, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, 57 rue Pierre Taittinger, 51096 REIMS Cedex, France. E-mail address: alexandre.obert@univ-reims.fr (A. Obert). Brain & Language 137 (2014) 112–119 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Brain & Language journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/b&l