Modern Understanding of Presupposition in The Framework of Cognitive Linguistics

Аннотация

This article examines the concept of presupposition within the framework of cognitive linguistics, offering a modern interpretation that extends beyond traditional formal and pragmatic approaches. It focuses on how presuppositions are rooted in mental representations, background knowledge, and conceptual structures that shape meaning in discourse. The study explores key cognitive mechanisms—such as mental spaces, frames, and conceptual integration—that contribute to the generation and interpretation of presuppositional content. By emphasizing the dynamic, context-sensitive nature of presupposition, the article highlights its role in the interaction between language and cognition, and underscores the importance of considering cognitive factors in linguistic analysis. Keywords: Presupposition, cognitive linguistics, background knowledge, language and cognition, contextual meaning. that is clear to those who speak from. He uses the term Introduction: In order for an understanding of a text or «previous experience» as a synonym for the concepts utterance to become adequate, certain conditions are of “background knowledge” and “presupposition”. In necessary that make it possible to explicate the implicit turn, N.S. Valgina understands presuppositions as informative content of the text, that is, presuppositions implicitly expressed “prior knowledge” that allows one or presumptions. However, currently in linguistics both to adequately perceive the text [1, p. 10]. Since the terms are used as synonyms, without having certain participants of communication, when producing an restrictions. The issue of distinguishing the essential utterance, do not explicate that part of the features that are the basis of the new classification of information, which is not individual knowledge, and it these phenomena is also controversial. Even the very refers to the base of general background knowledge, definition of the concept of “presupposition” is not any statement from the formal side is elliptical, while it single-valued and is interpreted by linguists in different is absolutely complete in semantic terms. In this regard, ways. In this regard, it seems advisable, after analyzing background knowledge is recognized by scientists as the work of linguists, to determine the scope of the one of the necessary conditions for successful concepts of “presupposition”. communication. The purpose of the article is to analyze the theoretical METHODS foundations of understanding the terms “presupposition”, to explore approaches to the N.S. Valgina considers the main criterion for classifying problem of their definition, to establish the relationship background knowledge to be the sign of the content of of these concepts in modern cognitive linguistics. A background knowledge, according to which number of scientists identify the concepts of background knowledge is divided into everyday, pre- “background knowledge” and «presupposition. A.M. scientific, scientific, literary and artistic. In addition, she Peshkovsky, saying that speech is elliptical in nature, suggests classifying background knowledge as trivial which is due to the tendency of any person not to finish and non-trivial. As one of the means of creating a his thoughts, that is, in an utterance, the information subtext, the author considers individual background American Journal Of Philological Sciences 132 https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN – 2771-2273) knowledge separately [1, p. 11]. expanded significantly and the term non-operational presupposition has become used as a synonym. Classifications of background knowledge in modern linguistics vary. V.Y. Shabes writes about the In this article, existential presupposition is identified extralinguistic components of a communicative act, with extralinguistic knowledge about the surrounding including background knowledge. The scientist reality, about phenomena and objects of the real classifies background knowledge into social world, about their interdependence and interaction. (knowledge possessed by all communicants before the Currently, due to the development of pragmalinguistics beginning of the speech act), individual (knowledge and communicative grammar, it is customary to possessed by two participants in communication distinguish the following subtypes of existential before the beginning of the speech act) and collective presupposition: the actual existential presupposition (knowledge possessed by team members) [2, pp. 7-11]. (correlates with extralinguistic knowledge participants in the speech act), pragmatic presupposition (defined According to another classification proposed by E.M. as knowledge of the pragmatic features of the Vereshchagin and N.M. Kostomarov, background communication process) and communicative knowledge is divided into four types: universal, presupposition (corresponds to knowledge of the regional, regional, and social (professional) background communicativ