Knowledge in Discourse

1. Schemata
2. Evidence for schemata
3. Complex schemata
4. Relevance
5. Discourse Deviation
 Introduction
• Examples:
1. There was a pineapple on the table. I ate it.
® Pineapple are edible and tables are not. (p.68)
2. I’m sorry. I saw you were home. There’s a cat stuck
under the gate…
The socially stereotyped roles of men and women
Understanding discourse involves far more
than the language being used, it involves pre-existent
knowledge of the world. (world or social knowledge)
 Knowledge Structure: Schemata
• Mental representations of typical situations, and that
they are used in discourse to predict the contents of
the particular situation which the discourse
describes.
• The main idea in schemata theory is that the mind,
when stimulated by key words/phrases in a particular
discourse or by the context, activates existing
knowledge schemata and makes sense of the
discourse.
• Example (p. 69)
 Evidence for schemata
• There is much evidence that the mind does use
knowledge schemata in interpreting discourse.
• One piece of evidence is the fact that when
questioned about a particular discourse or
asked to recall it, very often we fill in details
which were not actually given.
• Another piece of evidence is the use of the
definite article in certain cases. (p.70)
 Complex schemata
• Actual discourse is unlikely to be interpretable
with reference to a single schema.
• In making sense of a piece of discourse, the
mind activates a number of schemata
simultaneously.
• Predicting plot structure, conservational
development, structure of school lessons,
jokes, riddles and literature,…
 Relevance
• Successful communication gives us new information
but must work within the framework of the receiver’s
existing knowledge (the receiver’s assumptions)
• For effective communication to occur, it is necessary
that
– the receiver have enough prior knowledge
– the sender correctly judge the extent of that
knowledge
• Misjudgments and mismatches in communicating
across cultures and across languages
 Discourse deviation
What if people who view the world differently
and have almost no coincidence between their
mental states need to communicate?.
What happens to those who step outside the
predictable patterns and regularities?
As in the case of deviation within social
group: we don’t need to judge differences
negatively.