The question of discourse representation 95or the type and quality of the surface on which the text is found. In short,
discourse can reasonably be viewed as a multimedia process. Given such a
view, the advantage of a semiotic approach is that it has the potential to ac-
commodate the linguistic and non-linguistic aspects of discourse within a
single, coherent framework.
- Discourse representation
Even now we have by no means covered everything that might be regarded
as part of discourse studies. Nevertheless, our survey certainly shows that
there are many matters to consider in designing an adequate representation
for discourse. Let us, therefore, now discuss the question of representation.
3.1. Notation in FG and FDG
Given that not all FG authors have adopted the same framework for the de-
scription of discourse, it is not surprising that there is no consensus, either,
on the notation to be employed for representing discourse or discourse
models. In the chapter on discourse in Dik (1997b) we find some hints as
to notation. Dik proposes that illocutions at levels higher than the clause
should be represented along the following lines:
(1) ILL(DISCOURSE-EPISODE)
He also adopts the convention of showing hierarchical structure by
means of indentation. A simple example devised in the spirit of this princi-
ple is the following:
(2) ENTER DISCOURSE
ENTER EPISODE 1
Sequence of speech acts
LEAVE EPISODE 1
ENTER EPISODE 2
Sequence of speech acts
LEAVE EPISODE 2
LEAVE DISCOURSE
The ENTER-LEAVE pairs act as brackets around the stretches of language
which they enclose. In the present chapter we shall call them Delimiters.