if governs. Accepting that perspective is a cognitive rather than a syntactic notion, F. Lingerer and H.J. Schmid explain what lies behind it. The basis for perspective is mainly provided by the cognitive ability of directing ones attention. Among other things, the perspective from which we view a situation depends on what attracts our attention. We use the verb buy in order to describe a commercial event, when we want to direct the hearers attention to the BUYER and the GOODS, and the verb sell when the focus of our attention is on the SELLER and the GOODS.on where we direct оur attention, we can select and highlight different aspects of the frame, thus arriving at different linguistic expressions.
frame analysis knowledge situation
3. APPLICATION OF FRAME ANALYSIS
can provide valuable tools for the linguistic and conceptual analysis/ Frame analysis has bee successfully applied to research into semantic and grammatical (mainly syntactic) issues as well as some important problems in contrastive linguistics, translation studies, artificial intelligence, text comprehension, studies.working in the frame paradigm are interested in problems related to the meaning of the verbs that belong to a frame. The frame notion has already been used for detailed semantic analyses of a number of verbs (e.g., speak, talk, say, tell; risk ) and this has developed into the project of a frame-based dictionary.frame approach presents a unified view of syntactic patterns. A sentence can be analyzed as an instance of the event-frame (event-frame analysis).Talmy  dealt with conceptualization of various types of events and the language we use to talk about them. For instance, six cognitive components are distinguished in the conceptual structure of a motion event, namely FIGURE, GROUND, PATH, MOTION, MANNER, CAUSE. All these components occupy typically specific positions in sentences, as shown in the following examples.MOTION MANNER PATH GROUNDpencil rolled off the table.pencil lay on the table. MOTION CAUSE PATH GROUNDpencil blew off the table.pencil stuck on the table.six components are not of equal importance. It is perfectly possible to conceptualize a motion event whose CAUSE is unknown. Similarly, and of course this is particularly frequent for locative events, the manner, in which an object moves often is not expressed. By contrast, it is impossible to think of a motion without invoking each of the other four components, figure, GROUND, PATH, and MOTION. The outcome of these observations is that figure,-ground, PATH and MOTION are felt to belong together as the central and defining elements of the motion event. Taimy extends this idea of аn identifying core structure of an event to other event types and arrives at the definition of the notion of event-frame: a set of conceptual elements and relationships that are evoked together or co-evoke each other can be said to lie within or constitute an event-frame, while the elements that are conceived of as incidental whether evoked weakly or not at all - lie outside the event-frame.the basis of this definition L.Taimy has identified the following five types of event frames: motion event-frames, causation event-frames, cyclic event-frames, participant-interaction event-frames, and interrelationship event-frames.of the central elements of the motion event PATH may be expressed through the verb, as in French entrer and Spanish entrar. In view of this, French and Spanish are verb-framed languages. Conversely, PATH can be rendered by a preposition, as in English go into, or by a verbal prefix, as in German hineingehen. Hence, English and German can be called satellite-framed languages.. Talmy has argued that probably all languages of the world can be categorized in terms of verb-framing and satellite-framing. The group of verb-framed languages includes all Romance languages, Semitic languages (as Arabic and Hebrew), Japanese and many others. Satellite-framed languages besides English and German are all Indo-European languages (apart from the Romance languages), Finno-Ugric languages and Chinese.applying event-frame analysis to the comparison between different languages and between different narrative texts researchers make some interesting observations. Apparently, a satellite-framed language such as English is better suited for descriptions of MANNER, and elaborate PATH descriptions including dynamic descriptions of locations along the PATH. The reasons are that in satellite-framed languages MANNER is often incorporated in the verb meaning, and the information on the PATH and setting can be expressed in the same clause as the motion event by opening attentional windows. Since Spanish is a verb-framed language, descriptions of motion events tend to be restricted to the motion itself. Often the description of MANNER is only possible at the cost of extended and rather awkward constructions. Similarly, if details of the PATH and the setting are to be given, they are expressed in additional clauses. As this will sometimes slow down the pace of narratives considerably, Spanish speakers may opt for fewer MANNER and PATH details in favour of a more vivid MOTION description.is not the only discipline where frame analysis has been applied with quite impressive results. Another important field of research has been artificial intelligence that studies the ability of computers to behave like human beings. Here, the frame notion has been used in a more general, though also more technical, way than in linguistics. In this use of the term, the relevance of frames extends over the boundaries of single sentences to much larger linguistic and cognitive unitsnotion of frame was introduced into artificial intelligence as an attempt to equip computers with with necessary world knowledge. The computer scientist Marvin Minsky defined a frame as a datastructure for representing a stereotyped situation. This is a remembered framework to be adapted to fit reality by changing details as necessary.idea is that a cognitive category PLANE, for example, would activate a whole bundle of other categories which belong to the same [flying on the plane] frame., for example PILOT, FLIGHT ATTENDANT, LIFE VEST, SAFETY BELT, FIRST CLASS, ECONOMY CLASS and so on. All these categories and the specific relations that exist between them are part of the frame and must somehow be fed into the computer. In addition to this rather general frame there are many so-called subframes which capture the knowledge of still more specific situations of a flight.[FLYING ON THE PLANE] frame exhibits a very predictable temporal structure in which one stage is often a prerequisite for the next stage. If we view the flight from such a sequential perspective, we go beyond simple frames and move into the so-called scripts, i.e. knowledge structures that are particularly designed for frequently recurring event sequences.
Frame analysis belongs to the domain of cognitive (i.e. related to mental processes of perception and reasoning) linguistics.linguistics is an approach to language that is based on our experience of the world and" the way we perceive and conceptualize it. It endeavours to explain facts about language in terms of known properties and mechanisms of the human mind/brain.main descriptive devices of frame analysis are the notions of frame and perspective. The notion of frame was introduced into linguistics by Charles Fillmore in the middle of the 1970s.are viewed as unified frameworks of knowledge, or coherent schematizations of experience; cognitive structures knowledge of which is presupposed for the concepts encoded by the words; cognitive models which represent knowledge and beliefs pertaining to specific and frequently recurring situations., a frame is an assemblage of the knowledge we have about a certain situation, e.g., buying and selling.
1.Fillmore Ch.C. Frames and the Semantics of Understanding // Quaderni di Semantica. - 1985. - Vol VI. - P. 222-254
2.Minsky M.A. Framework for Representing Knowledge // The Psychology of Computer Vision / ed. P.H.Winston. - New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975. - P. 211-277
.Talmy L. Force dynamics in language and cognition // Cognitive Science. - 1988. - Vol. 12. - P. 49-100
.Ungerer F., Schmid H.J. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. - Harlow: Longman, 1996