I had a random thought that I wish someone can explain whether or not my reasoning using reference frames may be correct.
It was in regards to the subtleties in human language. I noticed that for example, if someone uses a particular phrase in normal conservation, say a simile to insult someone - then we never think about the literal imagery behind said expression. If I said - “It’s raining cats and dogs” our first instinct is not to think of literal cats and dogs raining down. The first things that flash through are wetness, and maybe positive/negative thoughts associated with a rainy day.
I wonder - is it basically a translation to our reference frames? by observing when we were kids that the idiom referred to a wet day, or perhaps contextually knowing it refers to rain - we gained kind of (memory pathways/skip connections/directly connected cortical columns?) that bypassed our actual reference frames to individual words, but reached the reference frames associated to raw emotions of a wet day.
I wonder - is there any technical explanation for this phenomena (in layman neuroscience please, I am not of BIO background) and vice-versa (when we convert out raw emotions to idioms rather than describing it literally in the form of words)?
Or is this an unexplained aspect of the reference frames theory?