MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1894605738 · doi:10.3968/7477

Pun in Advertising From the Perspective of Figure-Ground Theory

2015· article· en· W1894605738 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Li Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPunAmbiguityNoveltyPerspective (graphical)Rhetorical deviceFigure–groundCognitive linguisticsContext (archaeology)LinguisticsPragmaticsAdvertisingCommon groundRhetorical questionCognitionSociologyComputer sciencePsychologyHistoryEpistemologyPhilosophySocial psychologyCommunicationPerceptionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a flexible rhetorical device, pun is widely adopted by advertisers because of its brevity and novelty. For a long time, scholars have studied pun from different perspectives and focused on translation, pragmatics and aesthetics. This paper will study puns in advertising from the perspective of cognitive linguistics, and further analyze the cognitive mechanism of pun in advertising within the framework of Figure-Ground Theory. Based on the analysis of specific examples, we draw the conclusion that puns in advertisement not only has the features of ambiguity and double context, but conforms to the characteristics of figure and ground.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.015
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207