7.

 COHERENCE IN THE
INTERPRETATION OF
DISCOURSE

Group 1: Bùi Thị Ái Linh

Trần Thị Kim Thêu
Đặng Dương Phương Trinh
 7.5 Top-down and bottom-up
processing
One metaphor for the way we process and
comprehend discourse comes from computational
modelling of language understanding.
We can think of our processing of incoming
discourse the first the combination of (at least)
two activities.
1.Bottom-up processing
2.Top-down processing
In one part of the processing, we work out
the meanings of the words and structure of a
sentence and build up a composite meaning
for the sentence (i.e bottom-up processing).

At the same time, we are predicting, on the

basis of the context plus the composite
meaning of the sentence already processed,
what the next sentence is most likely to mean
(i.e. top-down processing).
Since the main thrust of analysis in
general linguistics has been towards
developing a grammatical description of
sentence form and meaning, any view taken
on the processing of sentences has tended
to be primarily of the 'bottom-up' type.
A similar view can be found in some
Artificial Intelligence (AI) approaches to
linguistic data, in which the aim of the
research is to develop a parser to analyse
acceptable English sentences.
(25) Slim is beautiful
Many reasons are there for peaple to want
a slim body. All become very lighter and
lighter but it's very diffecult to held a
normally weight.
Nowadays, in our country, Sweden, there
is so well of all sort of eating that man light
come to big overweight. What to doing?
If a machine with a fully operational sentence
grammar of English was presented with the
following text to parse, it would tend to come
to a halt very quickly and return a 'non-
grammatical' or 'unacceptable' reading for the
sentence in the second line.
 However, human processors, unlike the
machine parser, do not reject ungrammatical
text, they try to interpret it. We suspect that the
reader has a reasonable interpretation for the
writer's intended message in the discourse
fragment.
What enables the human processor to do 
this? 
A partial answer to this question is that the
human processor does indeed 'parse' the
sentences of the encountered text.
It would be absurd to suggest that when we
read the first line of (25) we do not attempt
to build (i.e.from the bottom-up) some
composite meaning for the three-word string
on the basis of its structure and the meaning
of the lexical items involved.
At the same time, however, we suggest that
the reader is also operating a top-down
interpretive strategy which creates
expectations about what is likely to come
next in the text.
(In Chapter 4 we demonstrated how
effectively titles provide an interpretive
point of departure for texts.)
It is the predictive power of top-down
processing that enables the human reader
to encounter, via his bottom-up processing,
ungrammatical or mis-spelt elements in the
text and to determine what was the most
likely intended message.
Top-down and bottom-up processing

If we believe that bottom-up

processing operates with rules of
the sort presented in descriptions of
sentential syntax and lexical
semantics, what is the basis of
top-down processing?
Top-down and bottom-up processing
 That once we start processing a discourse
fragment we do not treat it as the first piece
of discourse we have ever encountered.
 We have our experience of having
processed other, perhaps very similarly
titled, discourse fragments before.
 We can also draw on our experience of the
way the world is- our background
knowledge.
Top-down and bottom-up processing

 Yet, as has been noted already, we amass

colossal amounts of “knowledge” and
“experience” in our lives.
 If top-down processing depends on our
activating only a small part of this
background knowledge at a time, then
there must be some way in which that
knowledge is organised and stored to allow
easy access.
7.6. Representing background knowledge
 7.6.1 What is background
knowledge?

It is an information that is not in a text,

but is used from memory by a reader to
understand the text.
Ex: John was in his way to school last
Friday.
Background knowledge: John is a
student.
7.6.2 Representing background
knowledge
Conventional or stereotypic representations of
“knowledge of the world” as a basis for the
interpretation of discourse.

These representations are found in psychological

and computational approaches to discourse
understanding and used to account for the type of
predictable information a writer/speaker can
assume his hearer/listener has availble whenever a
particular situation is described.
 7.6.2 Representing background
knowledge
Ex: Such as a restaurant scene, customers order
and pay for the food there, the writer/speaker
should not have to inform his/her customers that
there are tables and chairs in the restaurant.
Knowledge of this sort about restaurants is
generally assumed.
7.6.2 Representing background
knowledge
+ In representations of this knowledge,
conventional aspects of a situation, such as
the tables and chairs in a restaurant can be
treated as default elements. These default
elements will be assumed to be present, even
when not mentioned.
 7.6.2 Representing background
knowledge

+ It is a feature of these knowledge

representations that they are organised in a fixed
way as a complete unit of stereotypic
knowledge in memory. Riesbeck (1975) asserts
that “ comprehension is a memory process”.
 7.6.2 Representing background
knowledge
+ Understanding discourse, in this sense, is a
process of retrieving stored information from
memory and relating it to the encountered
discourse.
+ An important direction of the research in this
area is to find the best storage concept for
handling the pre-existing conventional
knowledge.
7.6.2 Representing background
knowledge
+ The emphasis on storage of knowledge-of-the-world is
most apparent in computational approaches to discourse
understanding.
+ In recent years, the role of knowledge in discourse
production and comprehension has been stimulated by
findings in the field of Artificial Intelligence
+ AI tries to understand how knowledge and language
interact and reproduce the process in computers.
 7.6.2 Representing background
knowledge

 Generalised knowledge about the world

was too large and too diffuse to be
incorporated, in any encyclopaedic fashion
within the computer’s memory.
 Some AI investigators was to produce
specialised knowledge structures for
coping with discourse requiring a
particular type of knowledge.
7.6.2 Representing background
knowledge
Ex: When we read a story involving a visit
to the dentist, we use our knowledge of
dentist-visiting, but not normally our
knowledge of typing a letter or going to a
birthday party – that is, unless some part of
the text also requires that other particular
subset of our knowledge to be involved.
 7.6.3 Knowledge representaion
techniques in AI
AI represents knowledge by frames and scripts. They
have been very influential in considerations of how
discourse is understood.

+ Frames: principles of organization that govern

events in which they are subjectively involved.
Ex: “school”: teacher, students, assignments, desks,...
 7.6.3 Knowledge representaion
techniques in AI
+ Scripts: a standard sequence of events that
describes a situation. It’s essentially a dynamic
schema in which conventional actions take place.
Ex: “I’m thirsty” “Would you like something to
drink?
Clearly, our standing of what we read is not only
based on what we see on the page (language
structures), but also on other things that we have in
mind (knowledge structures).
 7.6.3 Knowledge representaion
techniques in AI
+ In psychological research, ways of representing
knowledge stored in memory and how it relates to
discourse processing: scenarios, schemata, mental
models.
+ Scenarios: knowledge of the settings and situations
behind a text.
Ex: thanksgiving family, holiday, closures,...
 7.6.3 Knowledge representaion
techniques in AI
+ Schemata: is conventional knowledge which exists in
memory.
Ex: The schema of a supermarket holds the knowledge
“food displayed on shelves, arranged in aisles, shopping
carts and baskets, checkout counter,...” as part or your
background knowledge.
 CONCLUSION
Background knowledge can be very much helpful in
interpreting any text.

Schema and script are two terms that comprise the

background knowledge.

Schema and script tell us what is usually the real

situation and what are the actions.
Thank you for your attention!