Cognitive+Linguistics-all认知语言学概论

CognitiveLinguisticsÜbungimSommersemester2004Dozentin:MonikaBednarek,M.A.10.5.2004OrganisatorischesGoalsofmoduleThestructureofthismoduleCourseContentCognitiveLinguistics:AnIntroductionOrganisatorischesEmail:mb399@yahoo.co.ukSprechstunde:GoalsofthismoduleThisclassaimstointroduceyoutoCognitiveLinguistics,byexplainingandapplyingitskeyconcerns:prototypes,categories,metaphors,metonymy,andframes.Indoingso,notonlywillyougaininsightintoanewapproachtolinguistics,butyouwillalsolearnmoreabouthowhumancognitionseemstowork.(VLvz)ThestructureofthismoduleCognitivelinguistics(CL):anintroductionPrototypesandcategoriesLevelsofcategorizationFramesFigureandgroundConceptualmetaphorsandmetonymiesOtherissuesinCLMostsessionswillfollowthispattern:ShortrefreshmentoflasttimeIntroducingnewtopicsGroupactivitiesSummary1.CognitiveLinguistics:anIntroductionWhatisCLandwheredoesitfitin?Thetermcognitive:‚Cognitivemeansrelatingtothementalprocessinvolvedinknowing,learning,andunderstandingthings.‘(COBUILD)Inthatmanymodernlinguistsrecognizethatlanguageknowledgeresidesinthemindsofspeakerstheymightbesaidtopractice‚cognitive‘linguisticsChomskyanlinguisticsas‚cognitivelinguistics‘andthe‚cognitiveturn‘inlinguisticsSyntacticStructures(Chomsky1957),AspectsoftheTheoryofSyntax(Chomsky1965):grammarexistsinspeakers‘minds;innateUG;languageasautonomouscomponentofthemind:knowledgeoflanguageformsanautonomousmodule/facultyindependentofothermentalprocessesCognitiveLinguistics:definitionsanddescriptions„[A]descriptivelabelforaratherbroadmovementwithinmodernlinguistics.Itincludesavarietyofapproaches,methodologies,andemphases,whichare,however,unifiedbyanumberofcommonassumptions.Foremostamongtheseisthebeliefthatlanguageformsanintegralpartofhumancognition,andthatanyinsightfulanalysisoflinguisticphenomenawillneedtobeembeddedinwhatisknownabouthumancognitiveabilities.“(Taylor2002:3f.)„Cognitivelinguistics[…]isanapproachtolanguagethatisbasedonourexperienceoftheworldandthewayweperceiveandconceptualizeit.“(Ungerer&Schmid1996:x)InCLresearchisshapedfromtheoutsetbywhatisbelievedtobecognitivelyplausible.Languageasanintegralpartofcognition:studyoflanguageinlightofwhatisknownaboutthemind(experimentation,introspection,common-senseobservation)„CognitiveLinguistsstudymuchthesamekindofthingsasanyotherlinguist–syntax,morphology,phonology,wordmeaning,discoursestructure[…].ButthegeneralthrustoftheCognitiveLinguisticsenterpriseistorendertheseaccountsconsonantwithaspectsofcognitionwhicharewelldocumentedorself-evident,oratleasthighlyplausible,andwhichmaywellbemanifestedinnon-linguisticactivities.“(Taylor2002:9)Threemain‘topics’/approaches:experientialism,prominence,attention1.Experientialism(vsobjectivism) Experientialismrejectsthebasicbeliefofobjectivismthatcategoriesexistinobjectivereality,togetherwiththeirpropertiesandrelations,independentlyofourconsciousness.Symbolsoflanguagearemeaningfulbecausetheyareassociatedwiththeseobjectivecategories.Threedoctrinesofobjectivismthatarerefuted:Thedoctrineoftruth-conditionalmeaning:Meaningisbasedonreference+truthThe‘correspondence’theoryoftruth:Truthconsistsinthecorrespondencebetweensymbolsandstates-of-affairsintheworldThedoctrineofobjectivereference:thereisan‘objectivelycorrect’waytoassociatesymbolswiththingsintheworld. Instead,experientialismsuggeststhat“ourbodilyexperienceandthewayweuseimaginativemechanismsarecentraltohowweconstructcategoriestomakesenseofexperience.”(Lakoff1987:xii)2.Prominence:selectionandarrangementofinformation3.Attention:whichaspectofaneventattractsattentionWhystudyCL?1)oneofthemostrecentapproacheswithinlinguistics,2)unifiedcognitiveexplanationoflanguage,3)applicabletoTEFLCLand‘neurocognitivelinguistics’Neurocognitivelinguisticsisbasedonthestudyofthebrain;howlanguageisrepresentedintheneuronalstructure.But:“ithastoberecognizedthatneurologicalstudiesoflanguagetendtodealwithveryglobalaspectsoflanguagestructureandlanguageprocessing,notwiththenitty-grittydetailsthatarethemainpreoccupationsoflinguists.”wesimplydonotknowenoughaboutthespecifics2.CognitiveCapacitiesCategorisation:humanabilitytocreateandoperatewiththousandsofcategories(fine-grainedvs.general);flexible(modifyandcreatecategories);externalversusinternalworld~andlanguage:wordsasnamesforcategories;languageasobjectofcategorizationFigure-groundorganization:e.g.visualperceptionandothersenses(sound);attentiondirectedtowardsfigure;flexible;levelsof~andlanguage(Talmy,Langacker):e.g.passive-activea.Thefarmershottherabbit.b.Therabbitwasshotbythefarmer.Mentalimageryandconstrual:wecan‚construe‘situationsindifferentways(figure-groundorganization,detail,perspective)~andlanguage:wordingreflectsconstrual:a.Theroofslopesgentlydownwards.b.Theroofslopesgentlyupwards.Metaphorand‚experientialism‘:metaphorreflectscapacitytoconstrueonethingintermsofanother~andlanguage:conceptualmetaphors(Lakoff)Conceptualarchetypes:conceptualuniversalssuchasThing(spatiallyboundedphysicalobject);Event,Action,figure-groundorganization,Containment,Support,Causality,Animacyetc.~andlanguage:linguisticdifferencesinentitiesdenotedbynounsetcInferencing:fillingoutofmissinglinks~andlanguage:wedonotstateeverythingthatcanbestatedAutomatisation:e.g.acquisitionofmotorskills(e.g.tieshoelaces,instruments)~andlanguage:pre-formedchunksoflanguageNotionofentrenchment(Langacker):expressionsbecomedeeplyrootedinlanguageStorageversuscomputation:e.g.12•12(calculation)vs.12•12=144(‚ready-made‘);rapid/effortlessvs.slow/laborious~andlanguage:open-choicevs.idiomprinciple(Sinclair);rule/listfallacy(Langacker):thefactthatweknowarule(e.g.pluralformation)doesnotmeantthatfrequentpluralsarestoredassuch(eyes)Focusonform:wederivepleasurefromform(abstractart;rituals)~andlanguage;languageplay(Jakobson‘spoeticfunction);formalcomplexitynotperceivedasburden(inflectionalmorphology)Socialbehaviour:‚man‘as‚socialanimal‘ ~andlanguage:impulsetouselanguageinsocialinteraction,e.g.toestablishgroupidentitySymbolicbehaviour:differencebetweenhumanbeingsandanimals;offlinethinking(past,present,future,imaginepossiblewords,alternatives,consequencesetc) ~andlanguage:thisofflinethinkingismadepossiblebyourcontrolofasymbolicsystem(language)SummaryCLtriestoofferaunifiedapproachtolanguageresearchRelatestheuseoflanguagetoourbasiccognitivecapacitiesActivityThinkofeverydayexamplesoftheuseofthesecognitivecapacitiesCognitiveLinguisticsWhatwedidlasttimeCL:unifiedapproachtolanguage;languageasinherentpartofcognition;Methodenpluralismus(experiments,introspection,observation)CognitivecapacitiesPrototypesandCategoriesIRemember:Categorisationoneofthecognitivecapacities:humanabilitytocreateandoperatewiththousandsofcategories(fine-grainedvs.general);flexible(modifyandcreatecategories);externalversusinternalworldHowdowecategorisetheworld?Book,house,peoplevs.vagueentities:knees(thigh),trunk(treetop),valley(slope/mountain),rain(drizzle)However:boundariesexistinrealityButwhataboutlength,width,height,temperature,colours(scales):nonaturaldivisionse.g.betweencold,warm,hotclassificationasamentalprocesscalledcategorizationCognitivecategories/conceptsasproductPrinciplesofcategorization:arbitraryornot?Thecaseforarbitrariness:(1)colourtermsdifferbetweenlanguages(braun--brun,marron,jaune);(2)supportsSapir-WhorfhypothesisThecasefornon-arbitrariness:focalcolours(Berlin&Kay1969)standardizedcolourchips(handout)Interestedin„basiccolourterms“(onewordofnativeorigin,generalapplication,familiar)AllthosechipswhichtheywouldcallXThebestexamplesofXFindings:speakersofdifferentlanguagesidentifiedthesamecolourchipsasbestexamples,called„focalcolours“whilethenamesforcoloursmayvary,thecategorizationofcolourisuniversallyanchoredinfocalcoloursPsychologicalbackground Focalcoloursandthecategorizationofnaturalphenomena:Selectionofstimuli(selectedforcognitiveprocessing)Identificationandclassification(comparewithstoredknowledge)NamingRosch‘sresearchoftheseaspectsinPapuaNewGuinea:focalcoloursareperceptuallymoresalient(attractchildren‘sattentionmoreoften),aremoreaccuratelyrememberedinshort-termandlong-termmemory,theirnamesareacquiredearlier.Renamedfocalcolours„naturalprototype“,enablinganextensionofthenotion,totypicalshapes(handout:description)Canthisnotionbeextended?ActivityNameasquicklyasyoucanfivetypesofbirds,fruit,furniture(inGermanorEnglish)NoworderthembasedontheirgoodnessortypicalityInRosch‘sexperimentshighlevelofagreementamonginformants(handout)categoriesareformedaroundprototypes(cognitivereferencepoints);theyhaveprototypes,‚good‘examples,and‚bad‘(marginal)members/examplesBoundaries?MaxBlack’s‘chairmuseum’:“aseriesof‘chairs’differinginqualitybyleastnoticeableamounts.Atoneendofalongline,containingperhapsthousandsofexhibits,mightbeaChippendalechair:attheother,asmallnondescriptlumpofwood.Any‘normal’observerinspectingtheseriesfindsextremedifficultyin‘drawingtheline’betweenchairandnon-chair.”(Black1959:32)Labov‘sresearch:cupsandbowlsandcontext-dependence(handout):fringeareasbetweenadjacentcategories(fuzzycategoryboundaries)Vaguenessversusfuzziness:mountain(slope)versusMOUNTAIN(HILL)SummaryCategorizationisbasedonthecognitivecapacitiesofthehumanmindconcreteentitiesandnaturalphenomenaareconceptuallystructuredasprototypecategories,withfuzzyboundariesandgoodandbadexamples(typicalityscale) Noone-to-onerelationbetweencategories/conceptsandwords(polysemy)ActivityWithyourneighbour,listbasiccolourtermsinEnglish/German.Alsolistsomenon-basiccolourterms.Thinkaboutwhenyouwoulduseoneortheother.Aretheretheyallknowntobothofyou?Whataretheirrestrictions?Lookingaroundtheroom/outsidethewindow:whichentitiesarevaguewhicharen‘t?Listtwovagueandboundedentities.Whatabouttheircategoryboundaries?PrototypesandCategoriesIIWhatistheinternalstructureofcategories?Activitylookupthedictionarydefinitionsfortypesofdogs(Alsatian,bulldog,dachshund,terrier,guidedog,gundog,sheepdog).Whatpropertiesarelisted?Shared(implied)properties:four-leggedmammal,fur,tail,ears…CategoryattributesTheclassicaltheory(Aristotle):AristotlemadeadistinctionbetweentheEssenzandtheAkzidenzofacategory.Acategoryisdefinedbyitsessentialfeatures(thesearenecessaryandsufficientconditions(two-leggedfeatherless=human)PrototypetheoryandWittgenstein‘snotionoffamilyresemblances(Handout)“eachitemhasatleastone,andprobablyseveral,elementsincommonwithoneormoreotheritems,butno,orfew,elementsarecommontoallitems.”(RoschandMervis1975:575)Importanttogreater(superordinatecategories)andlesserdegrees(BIRD:bundleof‚birdiness‘featuressharedbyall;thesefeaturesarecognitivelysalient(cuevalidity)(handout)Attributesandprototypes(RoschandMervis,1975):(1)prototypeshavethemostattributesincommonwithothercategorymembersandtheleastattributesincommonwithcategorymembersofanadjacentcategory;(2)badexampleshavetheleastattributesincommonwithothercategorymembersandshareseveralattributeswithcategorymembersofadjacentcategories.Summary(Handout)CognitiveLinguisticsWhatwedidlasttime:Categorisation:colourperception:arbitraryoruniversal?(focalcolours‚naturalprototypes‘)prototypes,goodexamples,badexamples,fuzzycategoryboundaries(fuzzinessvs.vagueness),familiyresemblances,attributes“WelchesistdergrößteVogel?”,fragtLuis. „DerAdler“,sageich.„Nein,derKondoristgrößer.“ „DergrößteVogelistderStrauß“,murmeltPaolaunterderBettdecke. „AberderStraußkannnichtfliegen“,sageich.„EinVogel,dernichtfliegenkann,istkeinrichtigerVogel.“ „Seitwannentscheidestdu,waseinrichtigerVogelist“,sagtPaolaundrichtetsichauf.(„DasBesteausmeinemLeben“,AxelHackeimSZMagazinNo.21,23.5.2003)

Levelsofcategorization

Remember:familyresemblanceshavedifferentvalidityinsuperordinateandothercategoriesCategoriesexistondifferentlevelsofgenerality:=thenotionofclassinclusion:„thesuperordinateclassincludesallitemsonthesubordinatelevel“U&S:60)(comparescientifictaxonomies)MAMMAL=superordinate;DOG=basiclevel;BULLDOG=subordinateA.BasiclevelcategoriesDOG,CAT,BIRDEverydayuseofcategorynames:Howdoyourefertoentitiesintheworld(objects,personsetc?)whenyouintroducethem?A.TwocarscrashedintoeachotherB.?TwovehiclescrashedintoeachotherC.?AMercedesandajeepcrashedintoeachotherPreferredinneutralcontexts,firstacquiredbychildren,simplemorphology,usedmostfrequentlyResearchintofolktaxonomiessuggestsaprimacyofsuch„generic“or„basic“(middle)levelcategories(DOG,CAT,BIRD)Possiblereasons:cultural(orbiological)significance;focusofhumaninterestPsychologicalresearch:Atbasiclevelthemostobviousdifferencescanbeperceived(toomanysimilaritiesbetweenkindsofdogs;toofewsimilaritieswithinsuperordinatecategorymammal;rightamountofdifferencebetweendogsandcats)Atthebasiclevelthemostinformationcanbeobtainedwiththeleastcognitiveeffort(principleofcognitiveeconomy)CharacteristicshapeofmembersofbasiclevelcategoriesandcharacteristicinteractionswiththemPrototypecategoriesandthebasiclevel:Prototypecategoriesaremostfullydevelopedonthebasiclevel„anidealprototypestructurecanonlybefoundonthebasiclevel“(U&S:74)B.SuperordinatecategoriesFURNITURE,GAME,FRUITLINGUISTICS,PHILOSOPHYActivityimaginethatyourneighbourisaforeignerwhohasaskedyouaboutthemeaningofthewordfruit–howwouldyouexplainittohim/her?Differencestothebasiclevel:Nocommonoverallshape:ifaskedtodrawafruit,youwouldprobablydrawanexample(anorange,banana,appleetc)Whenexplainingasuperordinatecategoryyougiveexamples;whenaskedaboutfeatures/attributesyougivefeaturesoftheseexamples(parasiticcategorisation).

FamilyresemblancesRevisited:

Veryimportantinsuperordinatecategories:‚whatholdsthemtogether‘:sometimesonly1category-wideattribute(TOY:‚usedtoplaywith‘)ornone(Wittgenstein‘sGAME).‘chaincategories’Non-basicstatusreflectedlinguistically:notone-syllabic;acquiredafterbasiclevelcategoriesScientific(logical)vs.experientialhierarchies:

‚folk‘taxonomiesarefullofgapsandalternatives(dependingoncognitiveneedsofuser)C.SubordinateCategoriesPOODLE,TERRIER,ROSEUsedwhenwewanttobespecificIsthereaprototypicalROBIN,DIME,QUARTER?Parasiticorganisation:wecannamealotofattributesbutmostaresharedandbelongtobasiclevel(thosethatarenot,veryspecific,versusgeneralonesofsuperordinatecategories)CompareFigure2.9and2.5(handout)Subordinatecategoriesareoftenexpressedbycomplexforms:compounds(blackbird,wheelchair)orsyntacticgroups(blackhair)attributesofcompoundderivedfrombothsourcecategoriestodifferentdegrees;otherattributesarenotborrowedfromeither(wheelchair:invalid,hospital)butarebasedonworldknowledgeSubordinatecategoriescanbecomebasiclevelcategoriesthemselves(newspaper)oftendropfirstelement(paper)Evensomeapparently‘simple’wordsareetymologicallyderivedfromtwosourcecategories(opaque):Daisy>day‘seyeDandelion>dentdelion(fr)Summary:handoutActivityEstablishahierarchyforadomainofexperienceyou’refamiliarwith(superordinatecategory;basiclevelandsubordinatecategories)Bytheway…HyponymyandHyperonymy)Hyponymie:“einWortbzw.…eineReihevonLexemen(z.B.rose,tulip,daisy,lily)[steht]ineinemUnterordungsverhältniszueinemallgemeineremAusdruck(flower)”(Kortmann1999:168)Intension:Hyponymcomprisesallattributesofhyperonym(comparetypesofdog)Extension:Hyperonymincludeshyponyms(canbeusedtorefertoallhyponyms)ActivityComparetheamountofbasiclevelwordsandsuperordinatewordsinthetwotextsonyourhandoutD.TypesofBasicLevelCategoriesSofar:objects(CHAIR)andorganisms(DOG)Others:action&eventcategories;properties;stative&locativerelationsActioncategoriese.g.LYING:(a)actualfalsehood(b)falsityofbelief(c)intentiontodeceivePrototypicalinstancessatisfyallcriteriaProblemoffinding‚true‘hierarchyofb.l.c.,sub/superordinates(MOVE–WALK–STRIDE).OnlysomeactioncategorieshaveprototypesmoreresearchisnecessaryEventcategories:e.g.BREAKFASTFusingofaction(EAT,DRINK,CUT,SPREAD)andobject/organism(BREAD,BUTTER,KNIFE)categoriesSuperordinate MEALBasiclevelBREAKFASTLUNCHDINNERSubordinateENGLISHBREAKFAST

Propertiescategoriesorexperiences?TALL,SMOOTH,HOT,SWEET:‚good‘examplesdependoncollocates.CompareforTALL:

sky-scraper church doorgood lessgoodButcanwedecideindependently?Probablynot:„propertiesmustbeunderstoodasrepresentingcognitivephenomenawhicharebasedonsensoryeventsderivedfromour[…]interactionwithobjects,otherpeopleandourownbodies.“(U&S:107)adjectivalpropertiesreflectbasicEXPERIENCES(ratherthanpresentingcategories)StativeandlocativerelationsBE,EXIST,RESEMBLE,CONTAIN,IN,UP,OFFpossibletoanalyseasprototypeCATEGORIESpossibletoanalyseasbasedonimageschemas,reflectingbasicEXPERIENCESMoreonthislaterSummaryClassicaltheoryvs.PrototypetheoryClassicaltheoryacategoryisdefinedbynecessaryandsufficientfeatures;categorymembershavethesamemembershipstatus;categoryboundariesareclear-cutandfixedPrototypetheoryacategoryisNOTdefinedbynecessaryandsufficientfeatures;categoriesgettheirstructurebyreferencetotheprototypeand/orbyfamilyresemblancesbetweentheirmembers;categorymembersdonothavethesamemembershipstatus:goodexamples,prototypes,badexamples;categoryboundariesarefuzzyPrototypetheorydifferenttypesofcategories:prototypecategoriesvs.familyresemblancecategories/subordinate–basiclevel–superordinatecategories/objects,organisms,actions,events,stative&locativerelations…ActivityUsetheclassificationsysteminDyirbal(handout)toargueagainsttheclassicaltheoryofcategorization.Cognitive

LinguisticsWhatwehavedonesofar:Cognitivelinguistics(definitions)&cognitivecapacitiesPrototypetheoryLevelsofcategorisation:subordinatelevel,basiclevel,superordinatelevel;typesofcategories(object,event,action,propertiesetc)FrameTheoryIFrametheoryisatheoryaboutworldknowledgeInterestedinhowknowledgeisstoredWhydoweneedsuchatheory?

JanewasinvitedtoJack’sbirthdayparty.

Shewonderedifhewouldlikeakite.

Shewenttoherroomandshookherpiggybank.

Itmadenosound(Minsky1975:241)ItallstartedinArtificialIntelligence(AI)research…(Handout)FrameTheoryinAIMarvinMinsky:concernedwiththequestionofhowtoequipcomputerswithworldknowledge,butalsowith“atheoryofhumanthinking”takesupanotionintroducedbythepsychologistBartlettasearlyas1932:“[...]thepastoperatesasanorganisedmassratherthanasagroupofelementseachofwhichretainsitsspecificcharacter.”(Bartlett1932:197).Hereistheessenceoftheframetheory:Whenoneencountersanewsituation[...],oneselectsfrommemoryastructurecalledaframe.Thisisarememberedframeworktobeadaptedtofitrealitybychangingdetailsasnecessary.Aframeisadata-structureforrepresentingastereotypedsituationlikebeinginacertainkindoflivingroomorgoingtoachild’sbirthdayparty.Attachedtoeachframeareseveralkindsofinformation.[...]Someisaboutwhatonecanexpecttohappennext(Minsky1977:355).aframe=amentalrepresentationofourknowledgeoftheworld,adata-structurewhichislocatedinhumanmemoryandcanbeselected,orretrievedwhenneeded.Aframeis“anetworkofnodesandrelations”(Minsky1977:355)whichseemtobestructuredindifferentlevels.Therearethefixedtoplevels,representingthosecomponentsofasituationthatarealwaystrue,andtherearethelowerlevels,whichhavemanyterminals,“‘slots’thatmustbefilledbyspecificinstancesordata”(Minsky1977:355).Thosespecificinstances,orassignmentscanthemselvesbesmallersub-frames,andusuallyhavetofulfilcertainconditionsgivenbytheterminalsthroughwhatMinskycallsmarkers.Concerningtheseterminals,Minskyhighlightsthefactthat„[a]frame’sterminalsarenormallyalreadyfilledwith‘default’assignments.[...]Thedefaultassignmentsareattachedlooselytotheirterminals,sothattheycanbeeasilydisplacedbynewitemsthatfitbetterthecurrentsituation.[...]Onceaframeisproposedtorepresentasituation,amatchingprocesstriestoassignvaluestoeachframe’sterminals,consistentwiththemarkersateachplace(Minsky1977:356,originalemphasis).

Someoftheseassignmentsaremandatory,othersoptional(Minsky1975:239).Basically,thismeansthat,inourmemory,knowledgeisstoredinaverylargenumberofframesandframe-systems(“collectionsofrelatedframes”,Minsky1977:355).[BED-ROOM]

frame(typicalfeaturessuchasbed,lamp,bed-sidetable).encounterparticularbed-roomselectingandmatchingprocess:(1)aframeis“evokedonthebasisofpartialevidenceorexpectation”(Minsky1977:359).(2)Comparisonofnewexperiencetoselectedframe(3)assignmentoffeaturesofnewexperience(particularlamp,bed-sidetableetc)toframe’sterminals.CriticismAIratherthanlinguistics;givesnoevidence;doesnotexplainframestructureinmoredetail;whatexactlyarethe‚top‘levels,forinstance?[t]heschemesproposedhereinareincompleteinmanyrespects.First,Ioftenproposerepresentationswithoutspecifyingtheprocessesthatwillusethem.SometimesIonlydescribepropertiesthestructuresshouldexhibit.Italkaboutmarkersandassignmentsasthoughitwereobvioushowtheyareattachedandlinked;itisnot(Minsky1975:213).

FrameTheoryinLinguisticsFillmore:Frame-semantics(Handout)“Aframesemanticsoutlookemphasizesthecontinuities,ratherthanthediscontinuities,betweenlanguageandexperience.”(Fillmore1982:111)

“AnAlternativetoChecklistTheoriesofMeaning”(Fillmore1975:123)(i.e.analternativetotheideathatthemeaningofawordcanbedescribedintermsofitssemanticfeatureslike[HUMAN],[MALE],[ADULT],asinstructurallinguistics)Fillmore:wordsrepresentcategorisationsofexperience,andeachofthesecategoriesisgroundedina(prototypebackground)frameexplainingthereasonfortheexistenceofthesecategories(cf.Fillmore1982:112).Example:anorphan=achildwhoseparentsaredead.Categoryismotivatedagainstaparticularcognitiveframe(prototypicalbackgroundworld),wherechildrendependontheirparents,parentscarefortheirchildren,andapersonwithoutparentshasaspecialsocialstatusuptoacertainage,becauseuntilthen,societymustprovideforthemAframeis“bestunderstoodasa‘prototype’ratherthanasagenuinebodyofassumptionsaboutwhattheworldislike”(Fillmore1982:118).Useofwordorphanshouldalsoevokethisprototypicalframeassociatedwithitsuse.alinguisticexpressionevokesaframealinguisticexpressionsituatesaparticularthinginaframealinguisticexpressionschematisestheworld:fromshoretoshore=tripacrosswater;fromcoasttocoast=tripacrossland;land(surfaceofearthasdistinctfromsea);ground(surfaceofearthasdistinctfromtheairaboveit)Differentlinguisticexpressionscanevokethesameframe,butfromadifferentperspective.E.g.converseverbs.Please-like,come-go,buy,selletc.Example:Fillmore’s[COMMERCIALEVENT]frame(e.g.backgroundofBUY):Ahasmoney;Bhasgoods.AgivesmoneytoB,BgivesgoodstoA.Ahasgoods,Bhasmoney.FourcategoriesareconnectedtoBUY:BUYER,SELLER,GOODS,MONEY(theseandtheirinterrelationsmakeupCOMMERCIALEVENTframe)ActivityWhichaspectsofthe[COMMERCIALEVENT]framearehighlightedbyusing(1)buy(2)sell(3)charges.o.[amountofmoney]for(4)pay[amountofmoney]tos.o.forDavidboughtanoldshirtfromJohnfortenpounds

focusonBUYER,GOODSJohnsoldanoldshirttoDavidfortenpounds

focusonSELLER,GOODSJohnchargedDavidtenpoundsforanoldshirt

focusonSELLER,BUYERDavidpaidtenpoundstoJohnforanoldshirt

focusonBUYER,MONEYThedifferenceisachangeofperspectivewithinthesameframeRelatednotions(withinAIandlinguistics):Scripts:Ascriptisapredetermined,stereotypedsequenceofactionsthatdefinesawell-knownsituation.(Schank&Abelson1977:41)Exhibit“averypredictabletemporalstructure”.ScriptisanameforaframethatdealswitheventsequencesJohnwentintoarestaurant.Heorderedahamburgerandacoke.Heaskedthewaitressforthecheckandleft.Johnwentintoarestaurant.Hesawthewaitress.Hegotupandwenthome.Hepushedagainstthedoor.Theroomwasempty=Hepushedagainstthedoor[>Thedooropened.Helookedinside.Hesawthat>]Theroomwasempty.Handout