Article.
Hanna Pasko УДК 81’42 THE ROLE OF THE
BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE IN THE SPEECH GENRE OF RIDDLE DECODING The basic frames of the
English and German riddles based on the concept RIVER / FLUSS are
considered, the background knowledge as the means of decoding of the concept
RIVER / FLUSS represented through the basic frames in terms of speech
genre of riddle in Germanic languages has been studied. Keywords: frame, concept,
speech genre, riddle, background knowledge, addressee, addresser. The purpose of the analysis is
to show the key role of the background knowledge in the process of solving of
riddles by their addressee. The purpose raises the following tasks: 1) determination of the
basic linguistic definitions – speech genre, frame, background knowledge;
2) establishment of the basic frames of the speech genre of riddle based
on the concept RIVER / FLUSS in English and German languages; 3)
establishment of the lexical units with the polysemantic (ambiguous) origin
that help the addressee decode the riddle correctly. The novelty of the analysis is that it is the first time the
background knowledge as the means of decoding of the concept RIVER/FLUSS has
been studied in terms of speech genre of riddle through the basic frames in
Germanic languages.In
modern linguistics there is a tendency to study speech genres in terms of
cognitive discursive paradigm, which enables to reveal their cognitive semantic
structure and mental mechanisms of their creation and decoding
(V.V. Dementiev, L.F. Markova, O.I. Tymchenko). Speech genre of
riddle in particular, apart from its speech act dialogical structure, is also
represented through some definite cognitive structures – frames. Thus, the
article appears to be an attempt to show how the addressee of the speech genre
of riddle decodes the concept-answer via the background knowledge. Firstly, it should be said that the category of speech genre includes
both the utterances produced by the communicants related to a certain topic and
potentially possible authentic texts actualization by means of the speech acts,
which, under a certain situationally conditioned discursive context, help
addressee identify the type of communication as a corresponding speech genre;
moreover, such authentic texts can implicitly regulate the speech acts
production of the addresser and addressee. Speech genre of riddle appears to be
a communicative phenomenon of discursive nature; it is a replicable
communicative-pragmatic category. So, it is quite clear how the addressee identifies the type of a speech
genre of riddle, but how can he guess it correctly? In terms of cognitive
semantics speech genre of riddle is organized in the basic frames – ways to
represent stereotyped situations, a net of interconnected nodes [Минский 1988: 289]. Such frames
involve different metonymic and metaphoric units, which appear to be a kind of
a hint, since they reflect some real characteristics of the concept hidden in
the answer. In another similar approach these elements are called the actants
of the predicate-actant frame. The theoretical basis for the analysis is the thing frame, the action
frame, the possessive frame by S.A.
Zhabotynska [Жаботинская 2004]. Thing frame characterizes
concepts by the quantitative, qualitative, existential, locative and temporal
criteria. In the analyzed English riddles the concept RIVER is represented
through the thing proper frame on the basis of the locative criterion – SOMETHING is/exists THERE: RIVER is/exists in BED. It is
interesting to note, that this frame is used not in the descriptive part of the
riddle, but it appears to be the answer: Why are rivers lazy? (Because they
never get off their beds) (QASR 2013). Action frame fixed in the
analyzed riddles in English language means that SOMETHING acts with the purpose or because of something – RIVER runs: What runs
but never walks? (A river) (Загадки 2013). On the other hand, cognitive representation of the concept FLUSS in
German riddles involves a combination of two types of frames simultaneously,
which can be called a marginal frame. Thus, a thing-action frame combines the locative characteristics of the
object (river) with the action it performs and the given riddles are the
obvious examples of this phenomenon: Ohne
daß ich Füße hätte, eil’ ich fort im schnellen Lauf. Höre Tag und Nacht nicht
auf und bin stets im Bette (Der Fluß) (Heinrich
1989: 134); Wer liegt in seinem Bett und läuft doch
immerzu? (Der Fluß) (Heinrich 1989: 134); Wer läuft mit dem
Schnellsten um die Wette Und liegt doch zur selben Zeit in seinem Bette? Wer ist
bald hier und ist bald dort Und bleibt doch stets am selben Ort? (Der Fluß)
(Spittel 1988: 93); Wer kann im Bett nicht still liegen? (Der Fluß)
(Heinrich 1989: 137). But more common marginal frame is a possessive-action
one, which combines the
characteristics of the possessive and action frame patterns. Possessive frame,
according to S. A. Zhabotynska, is represented through the model SOMETHING-owner has SOMETHING-property in
the following variations: 1) the
owner has property; 2) the whole has a part; 3) a container has content [Жаботинская 2004]. As a matter of fact,
in many Germanic riddles one can observe both the owner’s property (a fork, a
bed) and the part of the whole represented by means of meronyms – (a mouth, an arm, a head). Such phenomenon is rather common
both for metaphorical and metonymic representation of objective reality. For
example, Z. Kövecses notes that
“… a large portion of metaphorical meaning derives from our experience of our
own body” [Kövecses 2002: 16],
i.e. this is the anthropocentric approach to the objective reality
interpretation, which involves “a human” as an especially productive source
domain, as it is shown by the examples, cf.: What
can run, but never walks, has a mouth
but never talks, has a head but
never weeps, has a bed but never
sleeps? (A river) (КЗ 2013); What always runs, but never
walks, often murmurs, never talks, has a
bed but never sleeps, has a mouth
but never eats? (A river) (RAA 2013); Wer hat
ein Bett und kann doch nie schlafen? (Der Fluß) (Heinrich 1989: 134); Ich habe ein Bett und
schlafe doch nicht, Lauf und Mündung
hab ich und schließe doch nicht. Ich eile nur vorwärts und niemals zurück. Es
sucht mich vergebens in der Wüste dein Blick. Auf einer Karte kannst du mich
sehn, Du darfst’s nur nicht als Spielkarte verstehn. Mein Vater – ein Berg,
meine Mutter – die See, Zur Mutter eil ich hinab von der Höh. Meine Brüder
kommen und machen mich Groß, Doch schließlich vergehe ich in der Mutter Schoß (Der Fluß) (Spittel 1988: 100). However, this is not to claim
that all the actions metaphorically represented in the thing-action and
possessive-action frames reflect real characteristics of the river, since many
of them appear to be false and “misleading”, cf.: objective, real
characteristics (Eng. can run, always
runs, Germ. läuft) and secondary,
false ones (Eng. never walks, never
talks, never weeps, never sleeps, never eats, Germ. nicht still liegen, kann doch nie schlafen). To decode a riddle (its descriptive part) correctly the addressee of
this speech genre should have the background knowledge which is a first and
foremost obligatory condition. The speakers – representatives of a particular
ethnic group potentially have non-situational background knowledge [Габидуллина
2005: 121]. Such knowledge concerns general information about the culture,
traditions, linguistic knowledge, etc. This provides evidence that, having
background knowledge, the addressee can easily single out some lexical units
with ambiguous meaning that represent real metonymic characteristics of the
concept hidden in the answer of the riddle. Going by K. U. Panther, “metonymies are prompts that
induce fairly general inferences, which are in need of further inferential
elaboration unless the reader has at her disposal a rich knowledge data-base
that enables her to fill in the details on the basis of the metonymy alone” [Panther 2006: 172]. So, in the given riddles such words (hints) are classified into meronyms and artifacts, which, of course, are
ambiguous in meaning, i.e. they can be understood by the addressee in different
ways. This ambiguity correlates with the violation of one of the maxims
of H. Grice – the maxim of manner, according to which our communication should
be perspicuous and evident. The meronyms are as
follows: 1) a head – cf.: ‘the part of the body on top of the neck
containing the eyes, nose, mouth and brain’ [OALD 2000: 594] and ‘the place where
a river begins’ [OALD 2000: 595] – see the examples given above; 2) a mouth –
‘the opening in the face used for eating, speaking, etc.’ [OALD 2000: 831] and
‘the place, where a river joins the sea’ [OALD 2000: 831]: What has a mouth but can`t
chew? (A river); 3) an arm – ‘either of the two long parts that stick out
from the top of the body and connect the shoulder to the hands’ [OALD 2000: 54]
and ‘a long narrow piece of water or land that is joined to a larger area’
[OALD 2000: 54]: Er läuft ohne Füße, hat Arme, aber keine Hände (Der
Fluß) (Heinrich 1989:
134). This provides evidence that such geographical background knowledge
optimizes the process of solving the riddles by the addressee of the speech
genre [Селіванова 2010: 757]. Then, objects denoting property or artifacts with ambiguous meaning in the
studied speech genre of riddle include: 1) a bed (both in English and German
riddles) – ‘a piece of furniture for sleeping on’ [OALD 2000: 96] and ‘the bottom of a river’ [OALD 2000: 96] – see the examples given above; 2) a fork
(only in English riddle) – ‘a tool with a handle and three or four sharp
points, used for picking up and eating food’ [OALD 2000: 504] and ‘a place
where a road, river, etc. divides into two parts’ [OALD 2000: 504]: What
has a fork and mouth, but cannot eat? (A river) (Collis 1996: 17). Moreover, let us consider some
more examples where the concept BETT is often used as a source domain to
describe the concept FLUSS in German linguistic puzzles: Ein Bett ohne Kissen, Ein Bett ohne Bein, Ein Bett ohne Laken. Was könnte das sein? (Das Flußbett) (Heinrich 1989: 137) or Welches sind die längsten Betten? (Die Flußbetten) (Heinrich 1989: 137) – as we can see, the homonyms in the
answers constitute the part of a composite word. In contrast,
thing-action and possessive-action frames are not universal for the other
non-related languages, they are typical only of the English and German riddles,
while, for example, in Slavonic riddles only pure action frames have been fixed
due to the fact that in Russian and Ukrainian languages there are none lexical
units with ambiguous meaning that can stand for the characteristics of the
concept RIVER, cf.: Rus. Течет, течет – не вытечет, бежит, бежит – не
выбежит (Река) (РНЗ 1990:
30); Ukr. Біжить – не вибіжить, тече – не
витече (Річка)
(УНЗ 1963: 23).
In light of the given examples it is evident that the background
knowledge plays a key role in the interpretation of the concept RIVER /
FLUSS in Germanic languages in the thing and action proper frames, thing-action
and possessive-action frames, while the latter two appear to be universal for
both English and German speech genre of riddle, that is the evidence of the
common processes of conceptualization of the objective reality, and, of course,
common background knowledge. Thus, cognitive approach appears to be a
resourceful and efficient way to carry out the analysis of the speech genre of riddle and new
results will be produced to reveal the mental mechanisms of its creation and
ways of decoding.
References.
References Габидуллина 2005:
Габидуллина, А.Р. Основы
теории речевой коммуникации : [Учебное
пособие для вузов. Изд. 2-е, перераб. и доп.] [Текст] / А. Р. Габидуллина, М. В. Жарикова. – Горловка : Изд-во ГГПИИЯ, 2005. – 282 с. Дементьев 2007: Дементьев, В.В. Когнитивная генристика [Текст] / В. В. Дементьев // Антология речевых жанров : повседневная коммуникация. – М.
: Лабиринт, 2007. – С. 103-115. Жаботинская 2004: Жаботинская, С.А. Геометрия смысла : концептуальные модели
языка и фрактальные формы [Текст] / С. А. Жаботинская // Первая российская
конференция по когнитивной науке. Тезисы докладов. – Казань : Казанский гос.
ун-т, 2004. – С. 85-87. Минский 1988: Минский, М. Остроумие и логика когнитивного
бессознательного [Текст] /
М. Минский // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. Вып. ХХІІІ. Когнитивные аспекты языка
: Пер. с англ. / [Сост., ред., вступ. ст.
В. В. Петрова и В. И. Герасимова]. – М. : Прогресс, 1988. – С. 281-309. Селіванова 2010: Селіванова, О.О. Лінгвістична енциклопедія [Текст] / О. О. Селіванова. – Полтава : Довкілля – К, 2010. – 844 с. Kövecses 2002:
Kövecses, Z. Metaphor :
a practical introduction [Text] / Z. Kövecses. – Oxford University Press, 2002. –
285 рp. OALD 2000: Oxford
advanced learner’s dictionary of current English [Text] / Edited by S. Wehmeier.
– Sixth edition. – Oxford University Press, 2000. – 1540 рp. Panther 2006:
Panther, K.-U. Metonymy as a usage event [Text] / K.-U. Panther // Cognitive
linguistics : current applications and future perspectives / edited by G. Kristiansen … [et al.].
– Mouton de Gruyter, 2006. – Pр.
147-186. Sources and
Abbreviations Загадки 2013: Загадки [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : http://englishkids.
narod.ru/practice/ riddles/riddles.html. – Назва з екрана. КЗ 2013: Коллекция загадок [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим
доступа : http://www.study. ru/riddles/.– Название з экрана. РНЗ 1990: Русские
народные загадки, пословицы, поговорки [Текст] / [Сост., авт. вступ. ст., комент. и слов Ю. Г. Круглов]. – М. : Просвещение, 1990. – 335 с. : ил. – (Б-ка словесника). УНЗ
1963: Українські народні загадки [Текст] / [Упор. М. Шестопал]. – К. : Видавництво Академії Наук Української
РСР, 1963. – 342 с. Collis 1996: Collis, H. 101 American English Riddles [Електронний ресурс] / H. Collis. – Lincolnwood (Chicago), Illinois : McGraw Hill, 1996. – 144 рp. – Access mode : URL : http://
mirknig.com/knigi/nauka_ucheba/1181259598-101-zagadka-na-amerikanskom-variante-anglijsko
go.html. – Title from the screen. Heinrich 1989: Heinrich K. Kinder, kommt und ratet : Rätselsammlung für d. Schulhort [Text] / K. Heinrich. [III. : Wolfgang Würfel]. – 4. Aufl. – Berlin : Volk u. Wissen, 1989. – 206 S. : Ill. HR 2012: Hard Riddles [Електронний ресурс]. – Access
mode : URL : http://www.increase brainpower.com/hard-riddles.html. – Title from
the screen. QASR 2013: Quick and simple riddles [Електронний
ресурс]. – Access mode : URL : http:// www.scatty.com/jokes/ riddles/index.html. – Title from the screen. RAA 2013: Riddles and answers [Електронний ресурс]. – Access
mode : URL : http://dan.hersam. com/ riddles.html. – Title from the screen. Spittel 1988: Spittel, O. Kleines Rätselbuch für Kinder / O. Spittel. - Berlin : Kinderbuchverlag, 1988. - 160 S. Розглянуто базові фрейми
англійських та німецьких загадок, що мають в основі концепт РІКА, досліджено
фонові знання як засіб декодування концепту РІКА, репрезентованого через базові
фрейми в межах мовленнєвого жанру загадки у германських мовах. Ключові слова: фрейм, концепт,
мовленнєвий жанр, фонові знання, адресат, адресант.
Available 2 September 2013.
|
