Script (linguistics)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Script (engl. Script "data structure" from lat. Scribere , "write") is in the linguistics the schematically predetermined representation of a text structure or sequence of actions.

General and attempts at interpretation

The term script was introduced in 1977 by American linguists and was later adopted as Anglicism in Germany . According to Roger C. Schank and Robert P. Abelson, the entire field of knowledge is divided into the “frame” for objects and their properties and the script (“script”) for actions. “A script is a structure that describes appropriate sequences of events in specific contexts”. According to Attardo, script is an organized information complex. Scripts are all contexts of knowledge that deal with actions or sequences of events. Script is the procedural knowledge of a series of action sequences that, as common knowledge, regulates the behavior of the individual members. Scripts occur in all types of text in linguistics .

Scripts in everyday life

Certain actions are taken based on the script. The knowledge stored in the script is used for orientation in frequently occurring everyday situations. As a rule, one only needs to call up a script in order to be able to apply certain knowledge or experience about specific sequences of events. According to Dorsch Psychological Dictionary , script is an entry (storage) in long-term memory , which describes the regular sequence of events in situations or contexts and can be called up when confronted with these events. Since the script already provides for concrete action sequences, humans do not have to first construct them anew through thinking. If, for example, a guest in the restaurant notices that the food served is cold, he remembers the stored script to complain about this deficiency to the wait staff.

Script opposition

In the text type joke , two opposing scripts usually come together, one then speaks of script opposition . It works using opposing pairs of terms such as life / death, rich / poor or sexual / non-sexual etc. The joke counter offers an ambiguous script, which the listener interprets in only one form. The punch line gives the listener the insight that the narrator meant the other, opposing meaning; in the punch line this incongruence is resolved.

“Two hunters meet in the forest. Both dead. "

Meeting is the script opposition, which has two meanings. The complication of the joke suggests with “meet” that the two hunters meet in the forest, but the punchline surprisingly uses the “hit” as a result of mutual firearms. A second interpretation is triggered by the language element. The punch line is the point at which a switch from one script to another is possible.

The script opposition knows the possibility of ambiguity ( overlapping ) and contradiction ( oppositeness ). In the case of overlappings , a script has several readings that overlap; in the case of oppositeness , they are of opposite nature. In a text that contains a simple joke, there is always an interplay of both features. According to Raskin, the conditions are as follows: First, the text is compatible for both scripts. Second, the scripts with which the text is compatible have the characteristic of contradiction.

Individual evidence

  1. Roger C. Schank / Robert P. Abelson, Scripts, Plans, Goals And Understanding , 1977, p. 41  ( page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: dead link / oak.conncoll.edu  
  2. Salvatore Attardo, Translation and Humor , 2002, p 181
  3. Dietrich Busse, Frame-Semantics: Ein Kompendium , 2012, p. 223
  4. Yasunari Ueda, text type joke and caricature as material for language learning, 2013, p. 35
  5. Hartmut Häcker / Kurt-Hermann Stapf (eds.), Friedrich Dorsch, Psychological Dictionary , 1998
  6. Zeit online from January 2, 1998, Linguists know why we giggle at jokes: The joke lives from contradiction
  7. ^ Victor Raskin, Semantic Script Theory of Humor , 1985, p. 99