According to its characteristics, knowledge is divided into two subgroups named as Universal Knowledge and Individual Knowledge. Universal Knowledge is a kind of knowledge which is same everywhere and does not change according to the people’s understanding wherever you go on earth. On the other hand, Individual Knowledge is the knowledge a person can know, experience or understand, which is not known by large groups of people. After making a distinction between the two types of knowledge, it has been discovered that both the Universal and Individual Knowledge can work as a context at the back of a sentence. However there are some differences between them.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Knowledge in Cognitive Linguistics
3. A Different Approach to Knowledge
4. How does the Universal Knowledge function as a Context?
5. How does the Individual Knowledge function as a Context?
6. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This paper explores the role of knowledge as a contextual factor in language and how it influences the construction and understanding of sentences. The research investigates how different types of knowledge, specifically universal and individual knowledge, dictate the logical structure of conditional statements across various languages.
- Distinction between Universal and Individual Knowledge
- Knowledge as a reference database for word associations
- Pragmatic constraints on conditional sentences
- Comparative analysis of linguistic structures in Japanese, English, Turkish, Kyrgyz, and Russian
- The impact of context on speech situations (marked vs. unmarked)
Excerpt from the Book
A Different Approach to Knowledge
It can be said that the distinction of the knowledge handled in this paper is very close to cognitive linguistics, however our approach to knowledge is a little bit different. In cognitive linguistics, as we mentioned above, encyclopedic knowledge is referred for the description of the words, especially what a word reminds or connotes us relatedly. But on real world, it is thought that it works a little bit differently. In Lieberman (2003), there is a good example of it. Lieberman (2003: 126) gives the word ‘accident’ as an example, which might be assigned a 75% probability of being indicating a negative affect, as in “car accident” and “hurt by accident”. And he also gives some examples as follows “I avoided an accident”, “I met my girlfriend by accident”. The later one may not be the first connotation of what the word ‘accident’ directly reminds us, especially if it hasn’t been used in such a context. On the other hand, both meanings of ‘accident’ are included in the dictionary meaning. In cognitive linguistics, although it is thought that encyclopedic knowledge incorporates all related meanings of a word, it is not very easy to recall all the meanings that a word reminds us if we come across with that word outside the context. Maybe just the core meaning can be explained, or maybe one or two of the related meanings that might be closed to the speaker’s recent experiences. You may think that it is normal. But think that we have a knowledge called ‘encyclopedic’ including all the universes that a word can mean to us, but we cannot make an exact use of it without context, or let’s say, without the help of other words arranged or lined up in a context. Mostly if there is a knowledge about something, it is supposed that we should be able to make use of it without any other condition or without the help of anything. So, according to this paper, a revision is needed on the notion of ‘encyclopedic knowledge’, or let’s say just on the description of ‘knowledge’.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Introduces the concept of knowledge as recorded by the human brain and establishes the framework for distinguishing between Universal and Individual Knowledge.
2. Knowledge in Cognitive Linguistics: Examines traditional views in cognitive linguistics, specifically the distinction and interplay between dictionary and encyclopedic knowledge.
3. A Different Approach to Knowledge: Proposes a new definition of knowledge that acts as a contextual database, influencing how polysemous words connect within sentences.
4. How does the Universal Knowledge function as a Context?: Analyzes, through cross-linguistic examples, how universal knowledge acts as a context and restricts the use of conditional structures.
5. How does the Individual Knowledge function as a Context?: Discusses how specific, individual knowledge functions as context, particularly within "marked" speech situations where shared background knowledge is limited.
6. Conclusion: Summarizes the finding that knowledge functions as a hidden context in sentences and suggests the potential for further research across more languages.
Keywords
Knowledge, Universal Knowledge, Individual Knowledge, Cognitive Linguistics, Context, Conditional Sentences, Pragmatics, Polysemy, Word Association, Marked Context, Unmarked Context, Language Comparison, Encyclopedic Knowledge, Lexical Semantics, Linguistic Inference
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this work?
The work focuses on the intersection of knowledge and linguistic context, specifically examining how different types of knowledge influence sentence construction and meaning.
What are the central thematic fields covered?
The study covers cognitive linguistics, the pragmatics of conditional sentences, and the comparative linguistic analysis of how speakers organize information.
What is the primary research question?
The research asks how universal and individual knowledge function as a "context" behind sentences and how this context affects the grammatical feasibility of conditional statements.
Which scientific method is applied?
The author uses a comparative linguistic analysis, examining sentence structures across five different languages (Japanese, English, Turkish, Kyrgyz, and Russian) to observe how contextual knowledge influences them.
What is the focus of the main section?
The main section investigates how the reliability and scope of knowledge—categorized as either Universal or Individual—act as a constraining factor in the formation of "if-then" conditional sentences.
Which keywords best characterize the paper?
Key terms include Universal Knowledge, Individual Knowledge, Cognitive Linguistics, Context, and Conditional Sentences.
How does the author define "Universal Knowledge" in this context?
Universal Knowledge is defined as information widely accepted as true by large groups of people, remaining stable regardless of geographic location or individual perspective.
What distinguishes "marked" from "unmarked" speech situations?
An "unmarked" situation relies on general, universally accepted facts, while a "marked" situation requires specific, private, or situational knowledge understood only by a limited group of interlocutors.
Why is it sometimes "illogical" to use conditional sentences for universal facts?
The author argues that if a proposition is already known to be definitively true or false due to universal knowledge, placing it in a conditional statement becomes redundant or pragmatically unnatural.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Ali Aycan Kolukisa (Autor:in), 2015, The Functioning of Knowledge as a Context, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/299804
