Answer:
This situation could be explained by describing the context first. It is when Shrek gives Donkey an imaginative situation in which he is like a normal orge that can use violence to get what he wants as Donkey thinks. In that situation, Shrek will kill all the villagers brutally. However, Shrek is not a monster like that. It’s just their universe of discourse is different.

Asserting the donkey can’t understand the ogre’s situation and should comment or advise nothing.

Again, Donkey has some hesitation and answers without considering its meaning. This is not what Shrek wants.

2. Question from Team 3:
When Shrek said “Maybe that’s the reason why a donkey should not talk”, why did the donkey not understand? Was it the matter of the difference in the 2 characters’ universe of discourse?
Answer:
That's right, since they have different ideas of the swamp. Donkey is trying to persuade and comforting Shrek.

3. Question from Team 4:
The lesson from your “universe of discourse” tells us to respect other people’s opinion. Why’s that?
Answer:
As we have told you, the differences in the beliefs, opinions and concepts potentially lead to misunderstandings and disagreements. We can hardly change their perspectives, so it’s way better to listen to them in the first place and respect their opinions. This would help avoid unnecessary arguments and disagreements. 

4. Question from Team 4:
Does the context of the video you mentioned at the beginning have any meaning? (the sunflower field setting)
Answer:
We are not so sure; however, we believe that it has meanings as the director used it as the setting for this iconic conversation. So as far as we know, A sunflower is usually used to symbolize guidance in the right direction. After walking through the sunflower field together and sharing about the layers, maybe donkey will understand more about Shrek? Maybe their companionship will be stronger, as it will lead the couple to the tower and successfully rescue princess Fiona? 

We are not so sure about those assumptions; however, we do believe that the setting has its meanings. And those meanings, interestingly, depend on how we the audiences perceive. 

5.  Question from Team 1:
Why is metaphor commonly used in daily conversations?
Answer:
Metaphor is commonly used in daily conversations to perceive a person or an object as metaphorical, understanding them in terms of something else. Besides, it enable speakers to structure abstract areas of knowledge and experience in more concrete experiential terms (according to definition). We all know sometimes it is difficult to express our thoughts directly, right?
6. Question from Team 1:
Can you name some examples in which perlocutionary acts are not under control of the speaker?
Answer:
The case of perlocution when it is not under control of speaker is common in daily life. For example, when you intend to condol your friend because of her recent break up with boyfriend by saying “May you find a better man.” Instead of being thankful as you expected, your friend got mad at you because she thought it was a cliché advice and she can’t easily move on at that time.

7. Question from Team 1:  
Do you think using metaphors when two speakers do not share the same universe of discourse is bad for communication?
Answer:
Yes we think so. As metaphor is used to deliver message, not understanding the metaphor means not understanding the message, so the conversation failed to meet the purpose of communication. Moreover, misunderstanding is never a good thing, especially in those situations in which it’s unsolved. Different universe of discourse might lead to misunderstanding, in some cases, the hearer might experience negative feelings (for example, they might feel offended).

In this scene, Woody mainly used the illocution types of directive, by requesting and demanding. This use of illocution type can show Woody’s mood in the scene, he is in a hurry, desperately asking for help so that he can get out of that room as soon as possible.

3. Question from team 2: Your group mentioned that in movies or conversation in real life, we can see the perlocution of the listeners and it helps the conversation develop. Can you expand on that?
Answer:

In movies and conversations in real life, illocutionary utterances of the speakers are followed by perlocutionary acts of listeners.
Perlocution of the listeners then becomes the illocution of them in the continuing conversation. In other words, the listeners then act as the speakers in the next utterance. As a result, we can create a cycle of illocution and perlocution. By this way, a conversation (or a movie) can develop.

4. Question from team 1: What is the relation between the different aspects of semantics you analyze in the presentation?

Answer:
All semantics aspects that we analyzed in this presentation (ambiguity, universe of discourse, deixis and speech act) are actually connected. They can all be parts of speech acts, contributing to the meanings of the utterance. 

(Ans) President Snow is very pond of the couple and he wants to express his happiness when the two of them wed by congratulating them on the wedding. If the speaker is distant to the couple, this utterance can be classified as Assertives, however, because the speaker is close to the couple, this sentence is intended to express his feeling more than to just announcing information.

2. Question from Team 1
- We find Ross saying this: “It will be like a funny Thanksgiving story”. So is “Thanksgiving story” a referring expression?
Answer:
No. Because while saying that, Ross did not have any particular idea or image of a funny Thanksgiving story. It's just a way to indicate the dislike towards the trifle.

- Is “Mary” in “I will call my friend Mary to tell her how good it is” a referring expression?
Answer:
Yes. Because the speaker has a close relationship with Mary as they are friends. Therefore, the speaker has a specific referent of “Mary” in her mind -> "Mary" is a referring expression.

- "Vomiting stories are funny". Why is this sentence a contradiction?
Answer:
Joey means the trifle that Rachel made is not something regarded as funny, but instead quite impolite to the eaters. Thus, that dish is distasteful and can make eaters "vomit" -> Calling "vomiting stories" funny is ridiculous and unreasonable. Therefore this sentence is a contradiction.


3. Question from Team 4
“And I think we should have everyone taste how good it is, especially Ross” leads to a perlocution - Ross’s reactions. So why does Monica specifically mention Ross here?
Answer:
- It is not stated clearly in the excerpt but Rachel (the one who makes trifle) and Ross are in a relationship, Monica and Ross are siblings. 

- When Monica tastes the trifle, she knows that everyone including Ross will also indicate a dislike as hers. Therefore, saying Ross to taste first means she is mocking Ross (if he dares to show an unpleasant attitude, it will have a certain effect on Rachel).