Cognitive Linguistics

1
Cognitive Linguistics

• Übung im Sommersemester 2004
• Dozentin Monika Bednarek, M.A.

2
10.5.2004

• Organisatorisches
• Goals of module
• The structure of this module
• Course Content
• Cognitive Linguistics An Introduction

3
Organisatorisches

• Email mb399_at_yahoo.co.uk
• Sprechstunde

4
Goals of this module

• This class aims to introduce you to Cognitive
  Linguistics, by explaining and applying its key
  concerns prototypes, categories, metaphors,
  metonymy, and frames. In doing so, not only will
  you gain insight into a new approach to
  linguistics, but you will also learn more about
  how human cognition seems to work. (VLvz)

5
The structure of this module

• Cognitive linguistics (CL) an introduction
• Prototypes and categories
• Levels of categorization
• Frames
• Figure and ground
• Conceptual metaphors and metonymies
• Other issues in CL

6
Most sessions will follow this pattern

• Short refreshment of last time
• Introducing new topics
• Group activities
• Summary

7
1. Cognitive Linguistics an Introduction

• What is CL and where does it fit in?
• The term cognitive
• Cognitive means relating to the mental process
  involved in knowing, learning, and understanding
  things. (COBUILD)
• In that many modern linguists recognize that
  language knowledge resides in the minds of
  speakers they might be said to practice
  cognitive linguistics

8

• Chomskyan linguistics as cognitive linguistics
  and the cognitive turn in linguistics
• Syntactic Structures (Chomsky 1957), Aspects of
  the Theory of Syntax (Chomsky 1965) grammar
  exists in speakers minds innate UG language as
  autonomous component of the mind knowledge of
  language forms an autonomous module/faculty
  independent of other mental processes
• Cognitive Linguistics definitions and
  descriptions

9

• A descriptive label for a rather broad
  movement within modern linguistics. It includes a
  variety of approaches, methodologies, and
  emphases, which are, however, unified by a number
  of common assumptions. Foremost among these is
  the belief that language forms an integral part
  of human cognition, and that any insightful
  analysis of linguistic phenomena will need to be
  embedded in what is known about human cognitive
  abilities. (Taylor 2002 3f.)

10

• Cognitive linguistics is an approach to
  language that is based on our experience of the
  world and the way we perceive and conceptualize
  it. (Ungerer Schmid 1996 x)
• In CL research is shaped from the outset by what
  is believed to be cognitively plausible. Language
  as an integral part of cognition study of
  language in light of what is known about the mind
  (experimentation, introspection, common-sense
  observation)

11

• Cognitive Linguists study much the same kind of
  things as any other linguist syntax,
  morphology, phonology, word meaning, discourse
  structure . But the general thrust of the
  Cognitive Linguistics enterprise is to render
  these accounts consonant with aspects of
  cognition which are well documented or
  self-evident, or at least highly plausible, and
  which may well be manifested in non-linguistic
  activities. (Taylor 2002 9)
• Three main topics/approaches experientialism,
  prominence, attention

12

• 1. Experientialism (vs objectivism)
• Experientialism rejects the basic belief of
  objectivism that categories exist in objective
  reality, together with their properties and
  relations, independently of our consciousness.
  Symbols of language are meaningful because they
  are associated with these objective categories.
  Three doctrines of objectivism that are refuted
• The doctrine of truth-conditional meaning
  Meaning is based on reference truth
• The correspondence theory of truth Truth
  consists in the correspondence between symbols
  and states-of-affairs in the world

13

• The doctrine of objective reference there is an
  objectively correct way to associate symbols
  with things in the world.
• ? Instead, experientialism suggests that our
  bodily experience and the way we use imaginative
  mechanisms are central to how we construct
  categories to make sense of experience. (Lakoff
  1987 xii)
• 2. Prominence selection and arrangement of
  information
• 3. Attention which aspect of an event attracts
  attention

14
Why study CL?

• 1) one of the most recent approaches within
  linguistics,
• 2) unified cognitive explanation of language,
• 3) applicable to TEFL

15
CL and neurocognitive linguistics

• Neurocognitive linguistics is based on the study
  of the brain how language is represented in the
  neuronal structure. But it has to be recognized
  that neurological studies of language tend to
  deal with very global aspects of language
  structure and language processing, not with the
  nitty-gritty details that are the main
  preoccupations of linguists. ? we simply do not
  know enough about the specifics

16
2. Cognitive Capacities

• Categorisation human ability to create and
  operate with thousands of categories
  (fine-grained vs. general) flexible (modify and
  create categories) external versus internal
  world
• and language words as names for categories
  language as object of categorization

17

• Figure-ground organization e.g. visual
  perception and other senses (sound) attention
  directed towards figure flexible levels of
• and language (Talmy, Langacker) e.g.
  passive-active
• a. The farmer shot the rabbit.
• b. The rabbit was shot by the farmer.

18

• Mental imagery and construal we can construe
  situations in different ways (figure-ground
  organization, detail, perspective)
• and language wording reflects construal
• a. The roof slopes gently downwards.
• b. The roof slopes gently upwards.

19

• Metaphor and experientialism metaphor reflects
  capacity to construe one thing in terms of
  another
• and language conceptual metaphors (Lakoff)
• Conceptual archetypes conceptual universals such
  as Thing (spatially bounded physical object)
  Event, Action, figure-ground organization,
  Containment, Support, Causality, Animacy etc.
• and language linguistic differences in
  entities denoted by nouns etc
• Inferencing filling out of missing links
• and language we do not state everything that
  can be stated

20

• Automatisation e.g. acquisition of motor skills
  (e.g. tie shoe laces, instruments)
• and language pre-formed chunks of language
• Notion of entrenchment (Langacker) expressions
  become deeply rooted in language

21

• Storage versus computation e.g. 1212
  (calculation) vs. 1212144 (ready-made)
  rapid/effortless vs. slow/laborious
• and language open-choice vs. idiom principle
  (Sinclair) rule/list fallacy (Langacker) the
  fact that we know a rule (e.g. plural formation)
  does not meant that frequent plurals are stored
  as such (eyes)

22

• Focus on form we derive pleasure from form
  (abstract art rituals)
• and language language play (Jakobsons poetic
  function) formal complexity not perceived as
  burden (inflectional morphology)

23

• Social behaviour man as social animal
• and language impulse to use language in
  social interaction, e.g. to establish group
  identity

24

• Symbolic behaviour difference between human
  beings and animals offline thinking (past,
  present, future, imagine possible words,
  alternatives, consequences etc)
• and language this offline thinking is made
  possible by our control of a symbolic system
  (language)

25
Summary

• CL tries to offer a unified approach to language
  research
• Relates the use of language to our basic
  cognitive capacities

26
Activity

• Think of everyday examples of the use of these
  cognitive capacities

27
Cognitive Linguistics
28
What we did last time

• CL unified approach to language language as
  inherent part of cognition Methodenpluralismus
  (experiments, introspection, observation)
• Cognitive capacities

29
Prototypes and Categories I

• Remember Categorisation one of the cognitive
  capacities human ability to create and operate
  with thousands of categories (fine-grained vs.
  general) flexible (modify and create
  categories) external versus internal world
• How do we categorise the world?

30

• Book, house, people vs. vague entities knees
  (thigh), trunk (treetop), valley
  (slope/mountain), rain (drizzle)

31
(No Transcript)
32

• ? However boundaries exist in reality
• ? But what about length, width, height,
  temperature, colours (scales) no natural
  divisions e.g. between cold, warm, hot ?
  classification as a mental process called
  categorization

33
(No Transcript)
34

• Cognitive categories/concepts as product
• Principles of categorization arbitrary or not?
• The case for arbitrariness (1) colour terms
  differ between languages (braun -- brun, marron,
  jaune) (2) supports Sapir-Whorf hypothesis
• The case for non-arbitrariness focal colours
  (Berlin Kay 1969)
• standardized colour chips (handout)
• Interested in basic colour terms (one word of
  native origin, general application, familiar)

35

• All those chips which they would call X
• The best examples of X
• Findings speakers of different languages
  identified the same colour chips as best
  examples, called focal colours ? while the
  names for colours may vary, the categorization of
  colour is universally anchored in focal colours

36
Psychological background

• Focal colours and the categorization of natural
  phenomena
• Selection of stimuli (selected for cognitive
  processing)
• Identification and classification (compare with
  stored knowledge)
• Naming

37

• Roschs research of these aspects in Papua New
  Guinea focal colours are perceptually more
  salient (attract childrens attention more
  often), are more accurately remembered in
  short-term and long-term memory, their names are
  acquired earlier. Renamed focal colours natural
  prototype, enabling an extension of the notion,
  e.g. prototypical shapes (handout description)
• Can this notion be extended?

38
Activity

• Name as quickly as you can five types of birds,
  fruit, furniture (in German or English)
• Now order them based on their goodness or
  typicality

39

• In Roschs experiments high level of agreement
  among informants (handout)
• ? categories are formed around prototypes
  (cognitive reference points) they have
  prototypes, good examples, and bad (marginal)
  members/examples
• Boundaries?

40

• Max Blacks chair museum a series of chairs
  differing in quality by least noticeable amounts.
  At one end of a long line, containing perhaps
  thousands of exhibits, might be a Chippendale
  chair at the other, a small nondescript lump of
  wood. Any normal observer inspecting the series
  finds extreme difficulty in drawing the line
  between chair and non-chair. (Black 1959 32)

41

• Labovs research cups and bowls and
  context-dependence (handout) fringe areas
  between adjacent categories (fuzzy category
  boundaries)
• Vagueness versus fuzziness mountain (slope)
  versus MOUNTAIN (HILL)

42
Summary

• Categorization is based on the cognitive
  capacities of the human mind
• concrete entities and natural phenomena are
  conceptually structured as prototype categories,
  with fuzzy boundaries and good and bad examples
  (typicality scale)
• No one-to-one relation between categories/concepts
  and words (polysemy)

43
Activity

• With your neighbour, list basic colour terms in
  English/German. Also list some non-basic colour
  terms. Think about when you would use one or the
  other. Are there they all known to both of you?
  What are their restrictions?
• Looking around the room / outside the window
  which entities are vague which arent? List two
  vague and bounded entities. What about their
  category boundaries?

44
Prototypes and Categories II

• What is the internal structure of categories?

45
Activity

• look up the dictionary definitions for types of
  dogs (Alsatian, bulldog, dachshund, terrier,
  guide dog, gun dog, sheepdog). What properties
  are listed?

46

• Shared (implied) properties four-legged mammal,
  fur, tail, ears
• Category attributes
• The classical theory (Aristotle) Aristotle made
  a distinction between the Essenz and the Akzidenz
  of a category. A category is defined by its
  essential features (these are necessary and
  sufficient conditions (two-legged featherless
  human)
• Prototype theory and Wittgensteins notion of
  family resemblances (Handout)

47

• each item has at least one, and probably
  several, elements in common with one or more
  other items, but no, or few, elements are common
  to all items. (Rosch and Mervis 1975 575)
• Important to greater (superordinate categories)
  and lesser degrees (BIRD bundle of birdiness
  features shared by all these features are
  cognitively salient (cue validity) (handout)

48

• Attributes and prototypes (Rosch and Mervis,
  1975) (1) prototypes have the most attributes in
  common with other category members and the least
  attributes in common with category members of an
  adjacent category (2) bad examples have the
  least attributes in common with other category
  members and share several attributes with
  category members of adjacent categories.
• Summary (Handout)

49
Cognitive Linguistics
50
What we did last time

• Categorisation
• colour perception arbitrary or universal? (focal
  colours ? natural prototypes)
• prototypes, good examples, bad examples, fuzzy
  category boundaries (fuzziness vs. vagueness),
  familiy resemblances, attributes

51

• Welches ist der größte Vogel?, fragt Luis.
• Der Adler, sage ich. Nein, der Kondor ist
  größer.
• Der größte Vogel ist der Strauß, murmelt Paola
  unter der Bettdecke.
• Aber der Strauß kann nicht fliegen, sage ich.
  Ein Vogel, der nicht fliegen kann, ist kein
  richtiger Vogel.
• Seit wann entscheidest du, was ein richtiger
  Vogel ist, sagt Paola und richtet sich auf.
• (Das Beste aus meinem Leben, Axel Hacke im SZ
  Magazin No. 21, 23.5.2003)

52
Levels of categorization

• Remember family resemblances have different
  validity in superordinate and other categories
• Categories exist on different levels of
  generality
• the notion of class inclusion the
  superordinate class includes all items on the
  subordinate level U S 60) (compare scientific
  taxonomies)
• MAMMAL superordinate DOG basic level
  BULLDOG subordinate

53
A. Basic level categories

• DOG, CAT, BIRD
• Everyday use of category names How do you refer
  to entities in the world (objects, persons etc?)
  when you introduce them?
• A. Two cars crashed into each other
• B. ? Two vehicles crashed into each other
• C. ? A Mercedes and a jeep crashed into each
  other

54

• Preferred in neutral contexts, first acquired by
  children, simple morphology, used most frequently
• Research into folk taxonomies suggests a primacy
  of such generic or basic (middle) level
  categories (DOG, CAT, BIRD)
• Possible reasons cultural (or biological)
  significance focus of human interest

55

• Psychological research
• At basic level the most obvious differences can
  be perceived (too many similarities between kinds
  of dogs too few similarities within
  superordinate category mammal right amount of
  difference between dogs and cats)? At the basic
  level the most information can be obtained with
  the least cognitive effort (principle of
  cognitive economy)
• Characteristic shape of members of basic level
  categories and characteristic interactions with
  them

56

• Prototype categories and the basic level
• Prototype categories are most fully developed on
  the basic level
• an ideal prototype structure can only be found
  on the basic level (U S 74)

57
B. Superordinate categories

• FURNITURE, GAME, FRUIT
• LINGUISTICS, PHILOSOPHY

58
Activity

• imagine that your neighbour is a foreigner who
  has asked you about the meaning of the word fruit
  how would you explain it to him/her?

59

• Differences to the basic level
• No common overall shape if asked to draw a
  fruit, you would probably draw an example (an
  orange, banana, apple etc) When explaining a
  superordinate category you give examples when
  asked about features/attributes you give features
  of these examples (parasitic categorisation).

60
Family resemblances Revisited

• Very important in superordinate categories what
  holds them together sometimes only 1
  category-wide attribute (TOY used to play
  with) or none (Wittgensteins GAME). chain
  categories
• Non-basic status reflected linguistically not
  one-syllabic acquired after basic level
  categories
• Scientific (logical) vs. experiential
  hierarchies

61

• ? folk taxonomies are full of gaps and
  alternatives (depending on cognitive needs of
  user)

62
C. Subordinate Categories

• POODLE, TERRIER, ROSE
• Used when we want to be specific
• Is there a prototypical ROBIN, DIME, QUARTER?
• Parasitic organisation we can name a lot of
  attributes but most are shared and belong to
  basic level (those that are not, very specific,
  versus general ones of superordinate categories)
• Compare Figure 2.9 and 2.5 (handout)

63

• Subordinate categories are often expressed by
  complex forms compounds (blackbird, wheelchair)
  or syntactic groups (black hair)
• ? attributes of compound derived from both source
  categories to different degrees other attributes
  are not borrowed from either (wheelchair
  invalid, hospital) but are based on world
  knowledge

64

• Subordinate categories can become basic level
  categories themselves (newspaper) ? often drop
  first element (paper)
• Even some apparently simple words are
  etymologically derived from two source categories
  (opaque)
• Daisy days eye
• Dandelion dent de lion (fr)
• Summary handout

65
Activity

• Establish a hierarchy for a domain of experience
  youre familiar with (superordinate category
  basic level and subordinate categories)

66
By the way Hyponymy and Hyperonymy)

• Hyponymie ein Wort bzw. eine Reihe von
  Lexemen (z.B. rose, tulip, daisy, lily) steht
  in einem Unterordungsverhältnis zu einem
  allgemeinerem Ausdruck (flower) (Kortmann 1999
  168)
• Intension Hyponym comprises all attributes of
  hyperonym (compare types of dog)
• Extension Hyperonym includes hyponyms (can be
  used to refer to all hyponyms)

67
Activity

• Compare the amount of basic level words and
  superordinate words in the two texts on your
  handout

68
D. Types of Basic Level Categories

• So far objects (CHAIR) and organisms (DOG)
• Others action event categories properties
  stative locative relations

69
Action categories

• e.g. LYING
• (a) actual falsehood
• (b) falsity of belief
• (c) intention to deceive
• ? Prototypical instances satisfy all criteria
• Problem of finding true hierarchy of b.l.c.,
  sub/superordinates (MOVE WALK STRIDE). Only
  some action categories have prototypes ? more
  research is necessary

70
Event categories

• e.g. BREAKFAST
• Fusing of action (EAT, DRINK, CUT, SPREAD) and
  object/organism (BREAD, BUTTER, KNIFE) categories
• Superordinate MEAL
• Basic level BREAKFAST LUNCH DINNER
• Subordinate ENGLISH BREAKFAST

71
Properties

• categories or experiences?
• TALL, SMOOTH, HOT, SWEET good examples depend
  on collocates. Compare for TALL
• sky-scraper church door
• good less good
• But can we decide independently? Probably not
  properties must be understood as representing
  cognitive phenomena which are based on sensory
  events derived from our interaction with
  objects, other people and our own bodies. (U
  S 107)
• ? adjectival properties reflect basic EXPERIENCES
  (rather than presenting categories)

72
Stative and locative relations

• BE, EXIST, RESEMBLE, CONTAIN, IN, UP, OFF
• ? possible to analyse as prototype CATEGORIES
• ? possible to analyse as based on image schemas,
  reflecting basic EXPERIENCES
• More on this later

73
(No Transcript)
74
Summary

• Classical theory vs. Prototype theory

75
Classical theory

• a category is defined by necessary and sufficient
  features category members have the same
  membership status category boundaries are
  clear-cut and fixed

76
Prototype theory

• a category is NOT defined by necessary and
  sufficient features categories get their
  structure by reference to the prototype and/or by
  family resemblances between their members
  category members do not have the same membership
  status good examples, prototypes, bad examples
  category boundaries are fuzzy

77
Prototype theory

• different types of categories prototype
  categories vs. family resemblance categories /
  subordinate basic level superordinate
  categories / objects, organisms, actions, events,
  stative locative relations

78
Activity

• Use the classification system in Dyirbal
  (handout) to argue against the classical theory
  of categorization.

79
Cognitive Linguistics
80
What we have done so far

• Cognitive linguistics (definitions) cognitive
  capacities
• Prototype theory
• Levels of categorisation subordinate level,
  basic level, superordinate level types of
  categories (object, event, action, properties etc)

81
Frame Theory I

• Frame theory is a theory about world knowledge
• Interested in how knowledge is stored
• Why do we need such a theory?
• Jane was invited to Jacks birthday party.
• She wondered if he would like a kite.
• She went to her room and shook her piggy bank.
• It made no sound (Minsky 1975 241)
• It all started in Artificial Intelligence (AI)
  research (Handout)

82
Frame Theory in AI

• Marvin Minsky concerned with the question of how
  to equip computers with world knowledge, but
  also with a theory of human thinking
• takes up a notion introduced by the psychologist
  Bartlett as early as 1932 ... the past
  operates as an organised mass rather than as a
  group of elements each of which retains its
  specific character. (Bartlett 1932 197).

83

• Here is the essence of the frame theory When one
  encounters a new situation ..., one selects
  from memory a structure called a frame. This is a
  remembered framework to be adapted to fit reality
  by changing details as necessary. A frame is a
  data-structure for representing a stereotyped
  situation like being in a certain kind of living
  room or going to a childs birthday party.
  Attached to each frame are several kinds of
  information. ... Some is about what one can
  expect to happen next (Minsky 1977 355).

84

• ? a frame a mental representation of our
  knowledge of the world, a data-structure which is
  located in human memory and can be selected, or
  retrieved when needed. A frame is a network of
  nodes and relations (Minsky 1977 355) which
  seem to be structured in different levels. There
  are the fixed top levels, representing those
  components of a situation that are always true,
  and there are the lower levels, which have many
  terminals, slots that must be filled by
  specific instances or data (Minsky 1977 355).

85

• Those specific instances, or assignments can
  themselves be smaller sub-frames, and usually
  have to fulfil certain conditions given by the
  terminals through what Minsky calls markers.
  Concerning these terminals, Minsky highlights the
  fact that a frames terminals are normally
  already filled with default assignments. ...
  The default assignments are attached loosely to
  their terminals, so that they can be easily
  displaced by new items that fit better the
  current situation. ...

86

• Once a frame is proposed to represent a
  situation, a matching process tries to assign
  values to each frames terminals, consistent with
  the markers at each place (Minsky 1977 356,
  original emphasis). Some of these assignments are
  mandatory, others optional (Minsky 1975 239).
  Basically, this means that, in our memory,
  knowledge is stored in a very large number of
  frames and frame-systems (collections of related
  frames, Minsky 1977 355).

87

• BED-ROOM frame (typical features such as bed,
  lamp, bed-side table). ? encounter particular
  bed-room ? selecting and matching process (1) a
  frame is evoked on the basis of partial evidence
  or expectation (Minsky 1977 359). (2)
  Comparison of new experience to selected frame
  (3) assignment of features of new experience
  (particular lamp, bed-side table etc) to frames
  terminals.

88
Criticism

• AI rather than linguistics gives no evidence
  does not explain frame structure in more detail
  what exactly are the top levels, for instance?
• the schemes proposed herein are incomplete in
  many respects. First, I often propose
  representations without specifying the processes
  that will use them. Sometimes I only describe
  properties the structures should exhibit. I talk
  about markers and assignments as though it were
  obvious how they are attached and linked it is
  not (Minsky 1975 213).

89
Frame Theory in Linguistics

• Fillmore Frame-semantics (Handout)
• A frame semantics outlook emphasizes the
  continuities, rather than the discontinuities,
  between language and experience. (Fillmore 1982
  111)

90

• An Alternative to Checklist Theories of Meaning
  (Fillmore 1975 123) ( i.e. an alternative to the
  idea that the meaning of a word can be described
  in terms of its semantic features like HUMAN,
  MALE, ADULT, as in structural linguistics)

91

• Fillmore words represent categorisations of
  experience, and each of these categories is
  grounded in a (prototype background) frame
  explaining the reason for the existence of these
  categories (cf. Fillmore 1982 112).

92

• Example an orphan a child whose parents are
  dead. Category is motivated against a particular
  cognitive frame (prototypical background world),
  where children depend on their parents, parents
  care for their children, and a person without
  parents has a special social status up to a
  certain age, because until then, society must
  provide for them

93

• A frame is best understood as a prototype
  rather than as a genuine body of assumptions
  about what the world is like (Fillmore 1982
  118). ? Use of word orphan should also evoke this
  prototypical frame associated with its use.
• ? a linguistic expression evokes a frame
• ? a linguistic expression situates a particular
  thing in a frame
• ? a linguistic expression schematises the world
  from shore to shore trip across water from
  coast to coast trip across land land (surface
  of earth as distinct from sea) ground (surface
  of earth as distinct from the air above it)

94

• Different linguistic expressions can evoke the
  same frame, but from a different perspective.
  E.g. converse verbs. Please-like, come-go, buy,
  sell etc.
• Example Fillmores COMMERCIAL EVENT frame
  (e.g. background of BUY)
• A has money B has goods. A gives money to B, B
  gives goods to A. A has goods, B has money. Four
  categories are connected to BUY BUYER, SELLER,
  GOODS, MONEY (these and their interrelations make
  up COMMERCIAL EVENT frame)

95
Activity

• Which aspects of the COMMERCIAL EVENT frame are
  highlighted by using
• (1) buy
• (2) sell
• (3) charge s.o. amount of money for
• (4) pay amount of money to s.o. for

96

• David bought an old shirt from John for ten
  pounds ? focus on BUYER, GOODS
• John sold an old shirt to David for ten pounds ?
  focus on SELLER, GOODS
• John charged David ten pounds for an old shirt ?
  focus on SELLER, BUYER
• David paid ten pounds to John for an old shirt ?
  focus on BUYER, MONEY
• ? The difference is a change of perspective
  within the same frame

97
Related notions (within AI and linguistics)

• Scripts A script is a predetermined, stereotyped
  sequence of actions that defines a well-known
  situation. (Schank Abelson 1977 41) Exhibit a
  very predictable temporal structure. Script is a
  name for a frame that deals with event sequences

98

• John went into a restaurant. He ordered a
  hamburger and a coke. He asked the waitress for
  the check and left.
• John went into a restaurant. He saw the waitress.
  He got up and went home.
• He pushed against the door. The room was empty
  He pushed against the door The door opened. He
  looked inside. He saw that The room was empty.
• Handout

99
Activity

• Try to write a script/frame for ATTENDING A
  SEMINAR AT A GERMAN UNIVERSITY
• If you have any cross-cultural experience compare
  this frame to ATTENDING A SEMINAR AT A
  UNIVERSITY in that country

100

• Scenarios One can think of knowledge of settings
  and situations as constituting the interpretative
  scenario behind a text (Sanford Garrod 1981
  110). Situation-specific
• Schema pre-existing knowledge structure in
  memory (Yule 1996 85))
• Scene any kind of human beliefs, actions,
  experiences or imaginings (Fillmore 1975 124)
• Handout (overview of terms)

101
Cognitive Linguistics
102
Frame Theory II

• What we did last time
• Marvin Minskys AI research on frames
• Fillmores frame semantics (vs structural
  semantics Saussure)
• Related notions script, scenario, schema, scene
  

103
One possible frame definition

• Typical characteristics
• - cognitive
• - established trough socialisation (not innate)
• - culturally and diachronically dependent
• - rather stable (no radical changes in reality)
• - conventionalised, widely recognised

104

• Structure
• - consists of cognitive components/features and
  their interrelations (X has a Y, X is on Y, X is
  a part of Y)
• - a feature / component can be a category or a
  sub-frame
• - components provide default assumptions by
  supplying prototypes
• - central vs. marginal components (scalar
  notion)

105
(No Transcript)
106
Types

• general vs. specific (going on holiday versus
  going on a cheap last-minute package holiday to
  Spain)
• EVENT frame / scripts / scenarios
• OBJECT frame, PERSON frame, etc
• Folk frames and expert frames (alternative terms
  Expertenwissen vs. Laienwissen/Alltagswissen
  (Schwarze 1981, Heringer 1999), naïve models (U
  S), folk models (Lakoff))

107
Folk Frames

• models formed by people who do not have any
  technical expertise
• From a strictly scientific p.o.v. they may be
  false
• E.g. (Activity)

108
Activity

• Imagine an airplane flying at constant speed
  altitude. At one point, a large metal ball is
  dropped from the plane this goes on flying at
  the same speed and altitude and in the same
  direction. Draw the path the ball will follow
  until it hits the ground (ignoring resistance).
  Indicate its end position in relation to the
  plane.

109
Answer

• Parabolic arc, hitting ground directly below
  plane

110

• Only 40 of informants got it right in experiment
  (most straight line/diagonal)
• ? naive cultural model of motion in contrast to
  expert model
• We dont need scientifically correct models, but
  functionally effective ones

111
Activities

• In how far do the texts on the handout show how
  frames are acquired through socialisation?
• Identify typical frame features of the BAR
  frame that are mentioned in both texts
• Identify the cognitive categories and sub-frames
  for the UNIVERSITY and the FOOTBALL frame
  that are called up by text

112
Frames and language I

• Sue caught a plane from London to Paris. After
  she had found her seat she checked whether the
  life vest was beneath it, but she could not find
  it. So she asked the flight attendant to find one
  for her
• Inferencing (Remember cognitive capacity)

113

• Plane ? PLANE ? FLYING ON A PLANE frame
  (compare above)
• Words evoke categories categories are grounded
  in complex frames ? consider frames as background
  structures against which the meaning of words are
  structured (Fillmores original idea)

114

• when we produce or listen to language we
  unconsciously fill in an incredible amount of
  information taken from frames and scripts (U
  S 216)
• A lot of research in text comprehension has dealt
  with the influence of world knowledge on
  understanding
• Frames help hearers to create coherence, to
  understand, make sense of the text
• Frame-breaks cause misunderstandings

115

• Frame-breaks can be an essential part of jokes
• Ralph You ever hear that joke?
• Mary No. laughing
• Ralph Well, it was just one woman wanted a
  telegram? She always wanted a singing telegram?
  Guy says, Maam I dont think you want this as a
  singing telegram. Yeah, go ahead. Fred and
  the kids are dead. singing and clapping on
  stressed words
• Mary laughs briefly I didnt get it.
• Ralph You dont get it. You dont sing a
  telegram about death or anything bad news.
  (SBCCN Singing Telegram)

116
Activitiy

• Discuss the relation between frames
  frame-breaks and joking, coherence, and
  misunderstanding in the texts on your handout

117
Frames and language II

• Linguistic cues for the existence of frames in
  speakers minds
• sixteen types of linguistic evidence (of all
  kind) found in research which reveal
  expectations omissions, repetitions, false
  starts, backtracks, hedges, negatives,
  contrastive connectives, modals, inexact
  statements, generalisations, inferences,
  evaluative language, interpretations, moral
  judgements, incorrect statements, and additions
  (Tannen 1993b 41).

118

• E.g. negation
• S50 (72)
• this road thats ... UH its not paved, its
  just sort of a dirt road
• negative statements are generally used to express
  something unusual, unexpected about a situation
  evidence for the fact that this speaker (an
  American) expects roads to be paved.
• Definite article (see above)

119
Frame Theory in Cognitive Linguistics

• Lakoffs idealized cognitive models (ICMs)
• The main thesis of this book is that we organize
  our knowledge by means of structures called
  idealized cognitive models, or ICMs, and that
  category structures and prototype effects are
  by-products of that organization (Lakoff 1987
  68).

120

• Example Tuesday ? ICM natural cycle (sun
  moving), standard means of measuring time,
  seven-day cycle (week). Week a whole with 7
  parts in linear sequence each is called a day,
  third is Tuesday.
• This model is idealized 7-day-weeks do not exist
  objectively in nature, created by us (other
  cultures have different kinds of weeks). ICMs are
  more complex than frames but can also consist of
  categories.
• This gives rise to prototype effects

121

• Example bachelor ? ICM human society with
  (typically monogamous) marriage, a typical
  marriageable age. Nothing in it about priests,
  un-married couples, homosexuality etc. With
  respect to this ICM, a bachelor unmarried adult
  man.
• This ICM is oversimplified it does not apply to
  the pope it does not apply to Tarzan
• ? prototype effects

122

• An ICM may fit the world
• Perfectly
• Very well
• Pretty well
• Somewhat well gradience
• Pretty badly
• Badly
• Not at all

123

• ? IF ICM fits perfectly and person referred to is
  an unmarried adult male, we can call him
  bachelor.
• ? If EITHER ICM does not fit OR person referred
  to is not an unmarried adult male, we cannot call
  him a bachelor.
• Lakoff argues that the category BACHELOR is NOT
  graded, but an all-or-none concept relative to an
  ICM. Gradience arises from ICM-world fit.

124
Lakoffs Cluster Models

• Some concepts are structured against a number of
  cognitive models that are combined, e.g. MOTHER
  (handout)
• The birth model person who gives birth
• The genetic model female who contributes genes

125

• The nurturance model female adult who nurtures
  raises the child
• The marital modther wife of father
• The genealogical mother closest female ancestor
• ? in ideal case, the models converge

126

• But a lot of divergences in modern life
• ? more than one of these models contributes to
  the characterization of a real (protoypical)
  mother.

127

• Compounds may reflect lack of convergence of
  models (Rather than simple sub-categories of
  mothers) stepmother, surrogate mother, adoptive
  mother, foster mother, biological mother, donor
  mother
• The concept MOTHER is NOT clearly defined in
  terms of common necessary and sufficient
  conditions.

128

• The ideal case of convergence as background
  structure gives rise to protoype effects.
• The category of mother has what we will call
  a radial structure. A radial structure is one
  where there is a central case and
  conventionalized variations on it which cannot be
  predicted by general rules. (p. 84) The
  variations are conventionalised and have to be
  learned.

129
Lakoffs metyonymic models

• Lakoff explains social stereotypes as metonymic
  models a subcategory is used to stand for the
  entire category in defining social aspects, e.g.
  housewife-mother stands for MOTHER
• Compare
• She is a mother, but she isnt a housewife.
• She is a mother, but she is a housewife.
• She is a mother, but she has a job.
• She is a mother, but she doesnt have a job.

130

• Such metonymic models can also give rise to
  prototype effects. E.g. bachelor example If ICM
  fits, a person who is macho nondomestic fits
  the stereotype bettter ? prototype effects
  because of social stereotype even though category
  is an all-or-none category
• Other cases of metonymy in categorization
  typical examples, ideals, paragons, generators,
  submodels, salient examples

131

• The main thrust of Lakoffs argument is that
  frames are too simple they only explain some
  prototype effects but not others
• He argues that you need image-schematic,
  metaphoric and metonymic models in addition.
  These are all included in his notion of ICMs

132
U Ss Cognitive Models

• U Ss cognitive models all the stored
  cognitive representations that belong to a
  certain field (p. 47)
• Are open-ended (very hard to describe,
  descriptions are always selective)
• Combine to build networks (cf Minsky)
• Are omnipresent

133

• Provide the context for categories and their
  prototypes
• The hunter took his gun, left the lodge and
  called his dog (HUNTING model prototypical dog
  retriever)
• She took her dog to the salon to have its curls
  reset (SALON model prototypical dog poodle)
• The ratings of prototypes given in experiments
  depend on a default model or zero-context
• Alternative term cultural model (shared,
  culture-bound)
• E.g. different cultural models for FIRST MEAL OF
  THE DAY (English breakfast, petit déjeuner)

134
Cognitive Linguistics
135
Evaluation

• Criticism recommendations
• What you like
• What you dont like
• What you would like
• Results to be discussed next class

136
Figure and Ground

• Langackers Cognitive Grammar
• Talmys notion of event-frames

137
Langackers Cognitive Grammar

• Remember Figure-ground perception one of the
  basic cognitive capacities
• Face/vase illusion (handout) old lady/young
  woman ? only one at a time (figure-ground
  segregation (Rubin))
• Figure perceived as more prominent (perceptual
  prominence)
• Objective input does not change images allow
  figure-ground reversal (unusual) ? factors

138
The Principle of Prägnanz

• Notion coined in Gestalt Psychology
• Refers to clear-cut organization in terms of
• The principle of proximity elements near each
  other are perceived as related
• The principle of similarity similar elements are
  perceived as one common segment
• The principle of closure perception is anchored
  in closed figures
• The principle of continuation elements are
  perceived as wholes if they are not interrupted

139
The pad is on the table
140

• ? the relationship between figure and ground can
  be seen in terms of locative relations (?
  prepositions)
• ? locative prepositions can be explained in terms
  of figure and ground

141
Prepositional analysis in cognitive linguistics I

• Remember locative relations (OVER, UNDER, UP,
  DOWN, IN, OUT) regarded as image schemas (basic
  cognitive structures which are derived from our
  everyday interaction with the world (U S
  160))
• Real world experience of things-over-things ?
  acquiring of schema for OVER relation ? can be
  applied to new experiences
• A schema is less concrete than a prototype
  category, an elementary mental picture

142
(Central) IMAGE-schema OVER

• handout

143
Instances of OVER-schema

• The balloon is flying over the house
• The bird is flying over the tree

144

• The figure follows a PATH
• The figure is called a TRAJECTOR (the path of a
  bullet is its trajectory - German Flugbahn)
• The ground functions as and is called LANDMARK
• Trajector most prominent element (figure) in a
  relational structure landmark ground
• trajector/landmark as basis for analysis of
  various prepositional meanings, e.g. out, up

145
(Central) IMAGE-schemas OUT/UP

• Handout
• Locative relations (prepositions) can be analysed
  in terms of image schemas which consist of a
  trajector, a landmark and a PATH.

146
Elaborations

• Variations of central schema
• Account for specific meanings (polysemy), linked
  by similarity to central schema
• handout
• Metaphorical extensions (She has a strange power
  over me)

147
Activity

• The table is under the pen
• The pen is on the table
• The woman is in front of the house
• The house is behind the woman
• Explain why some of these examples are unusual
  (although grammatically correct!)

148

• But special context?
• - Which house is his?
• - Oh, the one just behind this woman over there
• Woman as landmark (cognitive reference point)

149
Other schemas

• Remember image schemas are grounded in physical
  experience (perceiving, moving, exerting,
  experiencing force ) used to organize more
  abstract domains
• CONTAINMENT schema
• Experience body as container, being in rooms,
  putting thins into containers
• E.g. Shes deep in thought (activity as
  container)
• Polysemy of IN as expressing different
  relationships between entity container
  meanings again as extensions from a central
  containment schema

150

• The water in the vase
• The crack in the vase
• The crack in the surface
• The bird in the tree
• The chair in the corner
• PATH schema
• Shes writing a PhD thesis and shes nearly there
  (activity as moving along a PATH)

151

• FORCE schema
• Force F acts on Entity E
• F
• Blockage
• F

152

• Removal of Restraint
• F
• applied to modal verb analysis

153

• Other schemas links, balance, up-down,
  front-back, part-whole, centre-periphery
• Summary image schemas are experientially-based
  conceptual constructs by which we characterize,
  for example, spatial relations, and which can be
  metaphorically extended across a range of
  domains, typically shifting from the external and
  concrete to the internal and abstract (Saeed p.
  318)

154
Figure/ground and Cognitive Grammar (Langacker)

• Standard clause pattern S V C (object,
  adverbial)
• In Cognitive Grammar (CG)
• Subject figure /clausal trajector
• Object ground / clausal landmark
• Verb fig/ground (trajector/landmark)
  relationship

155

• Susan resembles my sister
• My sister resembles Susan
• Prominent / point of
• assessed entity reference (landmark)
• (trajector)
• (unusual in its symmetry, similar to face/vase
  illusion)

156
Role Archetypes

• ? semantic roles for elements in clauses (similar
  to case grammar etc Introduction to Linguistics)
• Agent, patient, instrumental, experiencer
• For Langacker, they are cognitive phenomena (see
  cognitive capacities)
• Based on our world experience

157

• I throw a ball
• Agent patient

158

• The ball smashes the window
• The glass breaks

159

• I love sunshine
• absolute/theme
• Experiencer

160

• All role archetypes (agent, patient, instrument,
  experiencer ) can occur in Subject position, but
  agents are favoured
• I (agent) throw a ball
• The ball (instrument) smashes the window
• The glass (patient) breaks
• I (experiencer) love sunshine (absolute/theme)
• Sunshine (absolute/theme) pleases me
• Langacker explains this by reference to the
  notion of energy transmission/flow

161
Langackers conception of energy transmission

• Entity 1 Entity2
• Contact
• Charged with / absorbs /
• source of transmits receives
• energy energy energy
• handout

162
Action Chains

• Longer interactions are called action chains
• Head (source) tail
• ? Imagine playing pool!
• Susan peels a banana
• Head of action chain tail
• Trajector landmark
• agent
• Floyd broke the glass with a hammer.
• Langackers explanation Tendency for agents to
  appear as subjects (clausal trajectors) because
  they are head of action chains

163

• The subject is consistently the head of the
  PROFILED portion of the action chain, i.e. the
  participant that is farthest upstream with
  respect to the energy flow. By contrast the
  object is the tail of the profiled portion of
  the action chain the participant distinct from
  the subject that lies the farthest downstream
  in the flow of the energy. (Langacker 1990 217)

164

• But when we want to change the usual perspective
  we can profile other segments of the action
  chain
• Floyd broke the glass with a hammer (usual
  profiling)
• The hammer broke the glass.
• The glass broke.
• (This explains the possibility to have patients
  and instruments as subject/figure/trajector)

165
Mental Interactions

• Experiencer absolute/theme
• Source mental link
• (no energy flow)
• ? This explanation does not mean that other role
  archetypes cannot be chosen as trajector, but it
  offers an explanation for fact that agents are
  preferred trajectors (subjects)

166
The background

• Like a setting of a play
• Versus participants (subjects objects)
• Adverbials of space and time
• I am teaching a class at the University of
  Augsburg at 2 oclock in the afternoon

167
Activity

• Action chain or mental interaction identify
  role archetypes?
• Dad opened the box with a knife.
• Little Sue wants a mountain bike
• Diana was sipping her long drink
• I hate cheese!

168
CG and other types of prominence

• A. Domains
• Linguistic expression based on perception of real
  world (stimuli)

169
CG and other types of prominence

• Each stimulus is evaluated with respect to a
  domain (context for the characterization of a
  semantic unit), e.g. the elementary domains of
  space, vision, temperature, taste, pressure,
  pain, colour. Elementary domains represent basic
  human experience, are not reducible. Specific
  domains may range from food to clothes to
  whatever context is needed at a given point in
  time
• handout
• circle is the primary domain for ARC

170

• Cognitive units are profiled on the basis of
  domains (pre-linguistic). Does not determine
  linguistic expression
• B. Word Classes

171

• The three people were together (adverb)
• The three people have many common views (adj)
• The three people share their views (verb)
• Focus on relation between them.
• Profiled relation

172

• A group of three people (n)
• The Haydn Trio (n)
• Profiled cognitive region
• ? regional profiles expressed by
  nouns/pronouns
• ? relational profiles expressed by verbs, adj,
  prepositions

173

• C. Scanning
• identification of similar and dissimilar items
• different ways of construing a scene
• Type 1 Summary Scanning
• Type 2 Sequential Scanning
• Summary scanning aspects of situation examined,
  put together, a whole gestalt complex profile
  consisting of simultaneous activation of its
  component states
• Highway 36 goes from Denver to Indianapolis.
• Part of H 36 part of H 36 part of H 36

174

• Sequential scanning used only for events,
  aspects examined, put together but only up to a
  certain stage of the event. Conceptualiser tracks
  the changing state of an entitiy m through
  processing time
• The milk went sour
• milk fresh milk less fresh milk slightly
  sour milk sour

175
Summary vs. Sequential scanning

• Sequential scanning viewing a process as a
  sequence of component sub-events (watching a
  film)
• Summary scanning viewing a process as a complete
  unit where all its sub-events are viewed as an
  integrated whole (looking at a photograph)
• Falling off a cliff
• Wheeler fell off the cliff sequential mode
• Wheelers fall from the cliff summary mode

176
Activity

• Explain the difference in scanning
• Keegan entered the room.
• Keegans entrance into the room

177
Summary of cognitive processing

• Situation Tom is cooking pasta
• ? cognitive stimuli (SPOON, KNIFE, PASTA)
• ? profiled in relation to domains (space, taste
  food, vegetable)
• ? cognitive units selected for relevance
• ? profiled as cognitive regions or relations
• ? Result interactive network (compare frame!)

178
Interactive Network (incomplete)

• cheese vegetables tomato
• is contain slice contain
• parmesan
• slice
• onion TOM oil
• saucepan
• in in with prepare contain
• spoon knife pasta

179

• A speaker who wants to express this situation
  linguistically can say
• Tom is cooking pasta (general action chain)
• Tom is slicing the onions (specific action chain
• The pasta has tomatoes and onions in it (setting)

180
Prominence and Specificity

• 3 principles guiding cognitive processing
• (1) prominence
• (2) specificity
• (3) perspective / viewing arrangement

181

• Specificity
• most specific Tom completely shattered the
  unfriendly neighbours living-room window
  by throwing his football at it very
  forcefully
• Tom smashed the window
• least specific Someone broke something
• ? can be understood as profiling

182

• Perspective/Viewing arrangement
• From whose perspective is the event
  conceptualized?
• E.g. who is the deictic focus?
• Norm 3rd person perspective
• The vinegar is on the table
• versus
• I can see the vinegar.
• Have you seen the vinegar?
• ? Langacker calls the vantage point (from which
  something) is conceptualized the ground

183
Summary of the figure-ground (trajector/landmark)
distinction in Langackers CG

• P. 200 U S

184
Activities

• Which of the elementary domains (space, taste,
  vision, temperature, pressure, pain, colour) are
  called up, which are especially important in
  profiling DOG, CHAIR, BALL, APPLE, ICE CREAM,
  SOUP
• Draw an interactive network for ROAD ACCIDENT and
  identify suitable action chains

185
Talmys Event Frames

• Remember according to Langacker, motion events
  consist of the following components figure /
  trajector, ground/landmark, path
• Talmy adds 3 more components motion (includes
  zero-motion/locatedness), cause, manner

186
(No Transcript)
187
Event-frames

• Core-structure of a motion event Figure, ground,
  path, motion event-frame
• Talmy A set of conceptual elements and
  relationships that are evoked together or
  co-evoke each other can be said to lie within or
  constitute an event-frame, while the elements
  that are conceived of as incidental whether
  evoked weakly or not at all lie outside the
  event-frame.
• (Compare Fillmores early frame theory
  COMMERCIAL EVENT FRAME

188
Event-frames

• Five types of event-frames
• 1) motion,
• 2) causation,
• 3) cyclic,
• 4) participant-interaction,
• 5) interrelationship

189
Langacker versus Talmy

• On 26 July 1909 Louis Blériot flew across the
  English Channel from Les Baraques to Dover.
• Langacker On 26 July 1909 (setting) Louis
  Blériot (figure) flew across the English channel
  (setting raised to ground status) from Les
  Baraques to Dover (setting)
• Talmy On 26 July 1909 (outside event-frame)
  Louis Blériot (figure) flew (motion) across
  (path) the English channel (ground) from les
  Baraques to Dover (path beginning and end)

190

• Beginning and end point of path are mentioned
  foregrounding of certain portions of an
  event-frame Talmy calls this windowing of
  attention in contrast to gapping (backgrounding)

191
Windowing in motion event-frames

• Grafik p. 224 / Examples p. 225
• Open paths X
• Closed paths
• Fictive paths imaginary paths
• My bike is across the street from the bakery
• ?Hearer constructs a mental/fictive path across
  the street

192

• With closed and fictive paths there are
  possibilities of windowing too (v. complex)
• Gapping
• My bike is across the street
• ? What is gapped must be known to S and H

193
Windowing in causation event-frames

• Three types of causation
• Event-causation (no animate beings)
• The vase broke
• Author-causation (caused but not intended by
  person)
• He broke the