{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020537124802527645, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.673684210526316, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cognitive hermeneutics: The better alternative

This article critically assesses Bell’s attempt at transforming discourse analysis into discourse interpretation by means of hermeneutics as developed by Paul Ricoeur. If a hermeneutic turn is to take place in a discipline that proceeds according to the principles of empirical research, cognitive hermeneutics is the better option compared to Ricoeur’s hermeneutics. Part I presents a short introduction to cognitive hermeneutics as developed by Tepe. Against this background, some central theses of Ricoeur’s hermeneutics, on which Bell’s approach is based, are discussed in part II.