U N I T 6
Predicates, referring expressions, and universe of discourse
63
might bring do actually exist. So in examples like this we have interaction
between fact and
fiction, between real and imaginary worlds. When two
people are ‘arguing at cross-purposes’, they could be said to be working
within
partially di
fferent universes of discourse.
Example Theist: ‘Diseases must serve some good purpose, or God would not allow them’
Atheist: ‘I cannot accept your premisses’
Here the theist is operating with a universe of discourse which is a world in
which God exists. The atheist’s assumed universe of discourse is a world in
which God does not exist.
Practice In the following situations, are the participants working with the same
universe of discourse (
S), or di
fferent universes (
D), as far as you can tell?
(1) A:
‘Did Jack’s son come in this morning?’
B:
‘I didn’t know Jack had a son’
A:
‘Then who’s that tall chap that was here yesterday?’
B:
‘I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure Jack hasn’t got any kids’
A:
‘I’m sure Jack’s son was here yesterday’
S / D
(2) Time traveller from the eighteenth century: ‘Is the
King of France on good terms with the Tsar of Russia?’
Twenty-
first-century person: ‘Huh?’
S / D
(3) Optician: ‘Please read the letters on the bottom line of the card’
Patient: ‘E G D Z Q N B A’
Optician: ‘Correct. Well done’
S / D
Feedback
(1) D: in A’s universe of discourse Jack’s son exists; in B’s he does not.
(2) D (3) S
Comment Assuming the same universe of discourse
is essential to successful
communication. The participants in questions (1) and (2) are in a sense
talking about di
fferent worlds. Assuming different universes of discourse is not
the only reason for breakdown of communication: there can be other causes –
both participants’ assuming that exactly the same entities exist in the world,
but
referring to them by di
fferent words (an extreme case of this would be two
Chia sẻ với bạn bè của bạn: