Following the diagram above, the narrator stylistically performs a variety of artistic maneuvers. He chooses some levels of detail and leaves others out in what appears to be a complex series of schematic choices. Rather than simply selecting the highly reduced and schematized sentence "DAY was departing", the narrator goes even further, making a series of complex selections all over the different specification levels ranging from (2) and (3) up to (4) and progressively bringing it back to level (2).

That is, within level (1), the narrator has clearly mentioned the preconditioning headers (i.e., DAY, DEPARTING, RELEASED, ANIMALS and EARTH), which work as the starting point of triggering the other levels of detail (2), (3) and (4) represented by instrumental, locale and internal conceptualization headers respectively. The first level (i.e., LONELINESS schema) is connected somehow with the second creating other new schemata (e.g., FOREST and FEROCIOUS schemata).

Moving on to the third level, the narrator constructs a somewhat reversed schematic image of what the phrase "and I the only one" could necessarily imply.  In this regard, readers may believe that, because there are "ferocious animals" (see level 2), "Dante himself is the prey".

This level generates more deviant details, leading to create a complex series of "DEATH schema". As for deeply going through more deviant levels of detail, level (4) creates a more complicated series of multiple schemata (e.g., RUN, HIDING, READINESS, TREES, TRICKS, ANIMALS, REMEMBERING and FEELING schemata).

Returning to level (2), the narrator demonstrates a consistent avoidance of schematic under-specification and his desire is to look forward to over-specification within the context of the readers' most familiarized life experience. The narrator, thus, makes up for every level of detail associated mostly with the REMEMBERING schema (see level 4). Such a schema misrepresents the readers' schematic expectations, which then customarily be conveyed in two convenient and schematized sentence fragments such as: "Dante faces ferocious animals" and "the ferocious animals are exhausted, hungry, and looking for a prey" (see level 2).

4.1.3 The SKD of Alighieri's Opening Lines of the 3^rd Sample

Just as the readers have grown accustomed to the narrator's over-specified schematic preferences that generate utterly pointless traceable levels of detail, the narrator decides to underperform the readers' over-specified schematic knowledge with nothing but an amazingly underspecified depiction of repeated schema, which would be entitled DANTE'S GATE OF SORROW. Such a schema is represented by the repeated preconditioning phrase: ''Through me the way''. As for the other types of linguistic headers, they provide the following levels of detail drawn in Figure (4) below:

Figure 4. Levels of detail of Dante’s Gate of Sorrow schema triggered in Alighieri’s opening lines of the 3^rd sample

Unlike the previous samples, sample (3) above indicates that level (1) consists of simple and straightforward interpretation, with the result being a single schema describing Dante's sorrow. This could be because the narrator has said "Through me the way" several times.

In this case, readers would expect the narrator to go over all of the familiar details that fill the slots of the DANTE'S GATE OF SORROW schema, which is represented in the first level. As readers progress, there may be many attributives that describe God on the second level. This means that God is more than just 'Justice', 'Creator', or 'Master', because there are ninety-nine attributives that describe Almighty Allah in Islamic beliefs.

This also applies to the third level, but from two different perspectives. At first glance, these characteristics appear to be unique to Islamic culture. As for the second, 'The father', 'The Son' and 'The Holy Spirit' are three fixed attributives that describe God in Christianity, and hence lied down under the umbrella of "God's Trinity" or "The Triune God".

All three levels of schematic explication in the "Dante's Gate of Sorrow" schema are immensely nullified and schematized in terms of three under-specified and schematically simplified sentence fragments:

-THROUGH me the way is to the city dolent.

-Justice incited my sublime Creator.

-Created me divine Omnipotence.

Such an elevated schematic concision stands forth not only as the overloaded and deviated levels of detail that readers create but also as an internal deviation from a high schematic specificity norm that has been set in place multiple times all over the sample at hand.

4.1.4 The SKD of Alighieri's Opening Lines of the 4^th Sample

Exploring the novel's 4th sample, this study continues to track and identify the most formulaic and biased default elements, within which readers are supposed to be more or less closely associated with. Hence, the strangeness of readers' interpretation can be then detected and brought to the limelight. In order to identify the SKD, the linguistic headers in sample (4) are remarkably recognized as aesthetic functions of schematic level choice. Such a sample is noteworthy for the fact that almost every triggering of the most ordinary and quotidian level of schematic detailed information is either guided or initiated by a pretty weird and dreamlike narrative. Dante initiates the weirdest and most superfluous life experience by employing the most recognizable levels of detail in a schematic representation.

The preconditioning headers, represented in ''BROKE the deep lethargy within my head'', ''steadfastly I gazed'' and ''rested eyes'', initiate a close familiarity of SLEEPING schema, and then are immediately followed by an extremely instrumental and bizarre header (i.e., ''A heavy thunder''), creating THUNDER schema.

Since the narrator does not know where he is, locale headers are unknown. As for the internal conceptualization headers, they are represented by certain words like: ''force'', ''wakened'', ''upstarted'', ''uprisen erect'' and ''recognize'', and thus activating INABILITY schema. However, all these headers trigger various deviant levels of schematic detail diagrammatically drawn in Figure (5) below:

Figure 5. Levels of detail of sleeping, thunder and inability schemata in Alighieri’s opening lines of the 4^th sample

What attracts the researchers' attention is that sample (4) is made up of three contrasted schemata: SLEEPING, THUNDER, and INABILITY. This implies that the narrator prefers to give the reader a life jacket – or, to put it another way, a vastly over-specified familiarity with ordinary life experiences – before plunging him into a strange and magical world of what Inferno looks like.

The juxtaposition of contrasting types of incidents and adventures appears to be a common feature of epic literature: the known with the unknown, the predictable with the unpredictable. That is to say, the 'SLEEPING' schema may refer to another hidden schema (i.e., 'DEATH' schema); the 'THUNDER' to 'FEAR' schema; and the 'INABILITY' to 'PARALYZED BODY' schema.

All of these schemata are not explicitly mentioned by the narrator. Still, they are implicitly recovered by readers' schematic knowledge. Thus, their schematic knowledge deviation is clearly present and visible via the over-specified levels of detail displayed visually in the figure above.

4.1.5 The SKD of Alighieri's Opening Lines of the 5^th Sample

It is worth noting that the three schemas, portrayed in the fourth sample, represent Inferno's first circle and serve as a prelude to its second circle. It evidently goes on to give a rather internal conceptualization picture of what ''SLEEPING'' schema is exactly intended for. This means that ''SLEEPING" schema (in Sample 4) has its own reflection on Sample (5) represented by Inferno's second circle.

The linguistic headers in the sample above, for example, trigger the INFERNO's 2^nd circle schema: descended out, down, the less space begirds, dole, judge, snarl, Minos, horribly, send and transgressions. Figure (6) below provides a schematic representation of hierarchical various levels of detail involved within the INFERNO's 2^nd circle schema:

Figure 6. Levels of detail of Inferno's 2^nd circle triggered in Alighieri’s opening lines of the 5^th sample

Spelling out every piece of detail that a reader is already expected to be aware of and familiar with, the narrator in sample (5) makes an explicit state to some schematic instantiations that bring to mind certain levels of detail or recoverable predefined components of INFERNO schema. Customarily, such predefined components are presumed to be available in the mutual conceptual understanding of readers and narrators and are therefore not directly defined but indirectly retrieved.

The narrator, consequently, makes his stylistic choices somewhere in between and clearly ignores levels (4) and (5) focusing on levels (1); (2) and (3) in the first place. This is due to the fact that the narrator directs his attention towards "INFERNO'', ''Severe Torment'' and ''Minos" schemas, making readers create a weird network of levels of information. The over-specified schematic levels established so far in sample (5) may not be fulfilled as expected by all readers. Rather, there might be extra levels of detail that go beyond readers' expectation. This can be seen in level (5). Such a level can be gradually descended via the previous levels (i.e., as a result of the foregoing levels).

This means that what the narrator dealt with in his fifth sample leads to an underspecified level with few details. That is, every person in this world cannot bear to see how Inferno devours sinner people, and no one would hear the sounds of their suffering. That is why readers may reach an extra and/or limited interpretation: ''Dante lost his consciousness''.

In general, readers may anticipate or predict varying levels of detail, not only in terms of how the narrator has filled in the slots of the INFERNO's 2nd schema but also in terms of how readers may create other new schemas based on their schematic knowledge. Take level (4) as an example, readers may create new levels of detail depending on their Islamic background.

This indicates that the schematic gap between levels (3) and (4) is extremely close in terms of familiarity. In other words, the closer the schemata are in terms of various backgrounds of readers, the smaller the schematic gap between the new schema and familiar becomes.

4.2 Dan Brown's Inferno

Inferno, written by the American novelist Dan Brown, is the fourth installment in his Robert Langdon series after Angels & Demons, The Da Vinci Code, and The Lost Symbol. Ten years after the release of The Da Vinci Code (2003), Inferno is released on the fourteenth of May, 2013.

It has spent the first eleven weeks of its official launch at the top of the New York Times bestseller list for paperback narrative, and it is continued to be at the top of the list for e-book narrative for the first seventeen weeks of its publication. On October 28, 2016, a theatrical cut of Inferno is set to release in the US.

However, Brown's Inferno has been influenced by Dante's Inferno in terms of its portrayal of Hell. Robert Langdon is the protagonist in Dan Brown's Inferno. Brown affirms that Langdon is "a fictional alter ego", declaring that he is "the guy I wish I could be". Although most readers are aware that the terms "Inferno" and "Hell" refer to a large and dangerous fire, the novel "Inferno" has its own irregular language usage that may run counter to readers' expectations and impart a sense of SKD.

4.2.1 The SKD of Brown's Opening Lines of the 1^st Sample

Analyzing the first sample (see Table (1) above), one may note that Brown's Inferno deviates from the readers' typical preconceived knowledge with its meticulous descriptions of hell, bodies, blood, and fire. All these ideas are jumbled together in Brown's Inferno.

The reader activates every discernible detail that may be missed and/or unobserved in a typical schema instantiation. Therefore, Brown explicitly uses certain textual words that evoke several schematic representations. These representations work to create specific levels of information or traceable standard parts of a schema, see Figure (7) drawn by Cmap Tools down below:

Figure 7. Levels of detail of shade schema triggered in Brown's opening lines of the 1^st sample

Following the linguistic headers presented in the sentence "I AM THE Shade", it is clear to observe, from Figure (7), that a dominated SHADE schema is drawn in the first level, among other headers. This kind of schema has the upper hand over other schemas in terms of two perspectives. At a first glance, the narrator stylistically has foregrounded the idea that something bad is going to happen represented by an ominous sign ''the shade''. This is accomplished by capitalizing the sentence "I AM THE Shade"; as if the narrator were enunciating it with a rising then falling intonation occurred on the word "Shade". At the second glance, the narrator uses the SHADE schema and makes it unique inside his readers' minds to the extent that such a schema has nothing to do with the other schemas and it may be linked to DEATH schema, which is implicitly recovered.

In addition to the excessive levels of detail of the SHADE schema, the narrator also employs what is referred to as deviation within deviation – a deviation that occurs within the SHADE schema itself. Simply put, the narrator might want to deliver a hidden message to his readers telling them that ''Wherever you are, DEATH is closer than you think, like a SHADE'', where the "shade" could be anything from a virus to an accident to a sickness to death itself.

As for the remaining levels, the other textual headers (see Table 1) activate ESCAPISM, DIRECTIONS/ MAP OF ESCAPE and TIREDNESS schemata represented by the levels (2), (3) and (4) respectively. The hierarchical representation of these levels resembles a densely connected network of detailed information, making a consequent series of events with no stopping. Still, the overextended levels of detail are generated by the readers.

It is also important to note that even though the narrator initially focuses on the idea of "Shade," he implicitly ends his opening lines with a variety of the same idea, which is represented by the linguistic cues "And still they pursue me". This, in turn, increases the idea of DEATH in his readers' minds.

In "And still they pursue me," the word "they," used as the conceptualizing textual header, may activate two closely related sentences that are part of the TIREDNESS schema: "Enemies are chasing him" and "Enemies want him dead." As a result, the readers are led to believe that the narrator is still emphasizing the idea presented in the first level, which is implicitly recovered within the DEATH schema and/or constituted within the SHADE schema (see the levels of detail, in particular levels: 1 and 4).

4.2.2 The SKD of Brown's Opening Lines of the 2^nd Sample

Looking deeply at the second sample, this paper discovers that the narrator uses a limited number of conceptualizing textual headers, for example, memories, materialized, darkness, red, blood, motionless and shroud, that lead to mysterious, but very ramified interpretations, as if he were strongly motivated to imbue the idea of death in his readers' minds, see figure (8) below:

Figure 8. Levels of detail triggered in Brown's opening lines of the 2^nd sample

Following the textual headers shown in table (1) above, six schemata are activated with their pertinent detailed information. The BUBBLES/ MEMORIES schema and the ADDLE-BRAINED schema are the twofold hierarchal representations of the first level. As for the WELL, A VEILED WOMAN, and THE RIVER schemata, they respectively serve as portrayal representations for levels (2), (3), and (4).

If readers are mindful enough of reading this and the samples that follow, it is true that many fantasy-like images would be present in Brown's Inferno, but the narrator has based these on the incredibly hazy concept of "reality". It is the only spot where one can reside and/or make an effort to comprehend the surroundings. It must illustrate a specific facet of life so the reader is able to visualize or experience it.

This reality has been established by Dan Brown's Inferno, making readers expect every detail easier than making them expect a random selection of concepts happened to occur outside this reality, as in Alighieri's Inferno.

When reading Brown's Inferno, the readers' pre-existing schemata encounter a sort of cognitive challenge. As they try to comprehend literary texts, readers have the capacity to cause conceptual conflict, which is said to be a key element of literary texts. Nevertheless, sample two exhibits the triggering of unusually overextended levels of detailed information. This is shown in the figure above, where a ramified network of information is clearly displayed in the first level (i.e., two schemas within one level or schema within schema.

In terms of the other levels, the narrator makes his stylistic choices between levels (2) and (3), then moves on to the final level. When the narrator uses the textual headers, Bottomless Well, The Red River, and a Motionless Veiled Woman whose face is covered with a shroud, readers are forced to come up with even more deviant details. Once more, readers' thoughts regarding DEATH are strongly influenced by these linguistic cues.

4.2.3 The SKD of Brown's Opening Lines of the 3^rd Sample

Taking the third sample into account, readers grow accustomed to Brown's overly detailed schematic choices, which elicit unneeded extracted levels of detail. This time he decides abruptly and unexpectedly to disappoint the readers' overly detailed schematic expectations with drastically underspecified details of only one schema, the HOSPITAL schema.

Figure 9. Levels of detail triggered in Brown's opening lines of the 3^rd sample

What is intriguing about Brown's Inferno, as opposed to Alighieri's Inferno, is that readers can take a moment to breathe to maintain a particular level of schematic expectations via the entire narration. This is because the HOSPTIAL schema's various schematic elaborations that are attached with variously detailed information are incredibly neutralized.

Through his protagonist "Robert Langdon'', Brown draws the reader into the strangest and most unforeseen experiences by using the most basic detailed information in a schematic specification. What makes Brown's Inferno stand out is how even the most basic and everyday schematic details are triggered within the context of a realistic story, and yet schematic knowledge of the readers is deviated.

The narrator, however, provides ample space for his readers, using few opening lines of his third textual sample. This indicates that readers fall down under the umbrella of an excessive schematic deviation as a result of reaching too many details within one schema – the HOSPITAL schema.

Simply put, although the narrator employs a limited variety of textual cues in his opening lines, all of these linguistic headers refer to a single schema, which causes readers to generate an excessive amount of detail within the HOSPITAL schema. ''How Langdon gets to the hospital'', ''why he is being there'', and ''what he sees there!', are matters that the reader implicitly has brought up using his prior knowledge – matters that the narrator does not address at all.

4.2.4 The SKD of Brown's Opening Lines of the 4^th Sample

The linguistic headers mentioned in the fourth sample, for example, activate a very particular schema, the MENDACIUM (MILITARY) YACHT schema: the coast, 237-foot, luxury yacht, motored, predawn mist, swells, the Adriatic, ship, and military vessel.

The hierarchical encompassing of the different detailed information included in THE YACHT schema is depicted in Figure (10) below:

Figure 10. Levels of detail triggered in Brown's opening lines of the 4^th sample

As was the case in the previous sample, the narrator still emphasizes the reader's role in helping him navigate the boat of the opening lines of the fourth sample. Tying the narrator's ideas with the excessive amount of implicit details, the reader is invited to fill in the gaps left unnoticed by the narrator.

“Why does the narrator specifically urge the reader to fill in the gaps that occur in his first lines of the sample at hand?” – a question that raises doubt about what the narrator is intending to say in this regard!

It can be said that the decision regarding the right amount of specificity or detail in a given schema ultimately depends on the narrator's artistic and aesthetic objectives. Thus, the level of detail that is activated in a text – whether it tends toward underspecified or over-specified levels of detail – is likely an artistic result of the narrator's deliberate or accidental choice.

It is noteworthy that the narrator has ingrained the idea of death in the minds of his readers starting with the first lines of the novel, which are included in the first sample, and continuing to plant the same idea through the opening lines of the second, third, up to the fourth sample.

Consider the last few details in this sample (see Figure 10 above), which portray, for instance, that the image of the warship only ever leads to destruction and consequently ''death''.

Before throwing readers into the strange and enigmatic environment, it appears that Brown prefers to give them a lifejacket of extremely over-specified engagement with ordinary events, so to speak.

4.2.5 The SKD of Brown's Opening Lines of the 5^th Sample

Going further to analyze sample (5), it prompts and evokes even more deviant and challenging schematic levels of detail. What makes sample (5) remarkable is the realization that there is no break this time to allow readers to settle on a certain level of schematic anticipations all over the textual sample at hand. As long as they stay within the boundaries of samples (3) and (4), readers become accustomed to the narrator's reduced schematic levels (i.e., only to one level), which stimulate pointless attainable detailed information. This time, the narrator unexpectedly and considerably chooses to crash the readers' lower schematic-level expectations by providing an exceptionally over-explained description of three totally different schemata.

These three schemas are designated as THE VICTIM (level 1), THE PROTAGONIST (level 2), and THE VILLAIN (level 3). However, as shown in Figure (11), Cmap Tools clearly depict the hierarchal visualization of these schemata to show the various detailed information that readers may run into.

Figure 11. Levels of detail triggered in Brown's opening lines of the 5^th Sample

Examining the representational diagram of the schematic knowledge readers can arrive at, one can see that the narrator keeps trying to create the idea of death in his readers' minds. This is evidently displayed by the very first level 'THE VICTIM schema'. While the textual words in the sample above initially create an extensive and exceptionally weird series of cognitive schematic levels, the narrator appears sufficiently skilled to signal his readers to expect whatever details are already known to them.

However, a schema within schema of linked details is depicted in the hierarchical diagram above. The victim's portrayal schema on the first level is expanded into two attached schemas. The first of which is the doctor's appearance schema and the second is where the narrator has empowered his readers to emerge the idea of death, represented by the doctor's death schema.

Moving forward to deal with the second level, it is represented by Langdon (the PROTAGONIST schema). The narrator here uses a very limited account of textual headers causing his readers in general to activate overextended details – a matter that makes their schematic knowledge deviates from what the narrator has already mentioned.

Keeping the wheel in the same direction, it is undeniably true that a deviation within a deviation exists within the second level. This is because readers, at first glance, expect all the predictable detailed information within the first level, which ends with a twofold schema. At a second glance, because the second level is one-fold, this expectation has been destroyed, resulting in a process known as internal deviation.

Still, internal deviation is there within the third level. Simply put, readers in the second level have programmed their expectations on a one-fold schema, and then these expectations within the third level have taken another direction headed towards a twofold schema.

Whatsoever, the third level, represented by the VILLAIN schema, is a twofold schema. Each subsequent schema has its own distinct details. In this case, the narrator employs ambiguous textual cues that lead his readers to construct two distinct schemas: that of the spiky hair and that of the assassin. This is something that leaves readers dumbfounded as to what they are supposed to expect. But, how does a murderer reveal his/her spiked hair? Isn't it assumed that the murderer always hides his/her head?

As a result, the reader is compelled to create a scenario with two distinct schemata rather than just one, as illustrated in Figure (29). The reader builds up multiple pieces of information across two distinct levels within the hierarchical detailed levels.

Figure (11) shows up to be flexed between two directions: the highest schematic depiction, which could be reflected basically by the sentence "Dr. Marconi lay motionless on the floor," and the exceeding explanation, which could be portrayed thoroughly by an image of "the spike-haired", and even goes further into the depiction of "the assassin'' herself.

5. Measuring the Linguistic Side-Effects of SKD

Adopting his idea of the linguistic side-effects resulting from a schematic level, Cook (1994: 10) unequivocally asserts that deviations on the schematic level may only be an unavoidable result of deviations on the linguistic level. As a result, a linguistic deviation that is considered literary and aesthetic must be equivalent to a deviation at the level of the readers' evidently shared schematic knowledge. In this case, readers' schematic knowledge consists of theoretical levels of cognition which describe how higher-level concepts are constructed from lower-level building blocks.

However, the schematic levels, drawn by Cmap Tools so far, hierarchically and intuitively show how readers' minds in general move from general information (e.g., the textual samples) toward more specific details (e.g., readers' overextended or under-extended interpretations). Therefore, those specific details drawn cognitively by Cmap tools will be carried out linguistically by WordSmith Tools.

In other words, this study is going to extract the detailed information from Cmap Tools and put them in a Plain Text Format (i.e., TXT) file so that the user-friendly software WordSmith Tools can calculate the TTRs, those of the original textual samples and those of the levels of detail resulted from Cmap tools, in a rather accurate way, see Table (2) below:

Table 2. The TTRs of the textual samples and those of the levels of detail

Calculating the number of tokens in the data in relation to the number of types (i.e., type/ token ratios, TTRs) can provide an indication of the quantity of textual words used in the samples being investigated. For example, the sentence (I felt sad because I saw my father was sad) has (ten) tokens (I, felt, sad, because, I, saw, my, father, was, and sad) but only (eight) types (I, felt, sad, because, saw, my, dad and was).

As a result, this sentence's type/token ratio is (8 /10 = 0.8) types per token. As the size of a text increases, so does the total number of types. The likelihood of any token that represents a new type is going to be lower (Baker et al., 2006: 150). Thus, the textual samples used in this study are approximately equal in size. A high TTR indicates a high degree of linguistic deviation, whereas a low TTR denotes a low degree of linguistic deviation.

This calculation will assist in making this study serve its own favorable position in reaching accurate and reliable conclusions and promoting what comes from the cognitive/ qualitative analysis.

What attracts the researcher’s attention is the diversity of TTR values each textual sample reveals. This aids the researchers in observing:

1. which novel gains a high luxurious amount of textual/ linguistic headers;

2. which novel linguistically scores the highest degree of deviation.

Handling the two points raised above, this study is going to visualize firstly, the TTRs mentioned in the first two columns (i.e., those of the original textual samples of both novels) and secondly, the TTRs calculated in the last two columns (i.e., those of levels of detail obtained from Cmap Tools). This will be accomplished using an Excel spreadsheet, as shown in the diagrams (12) and (13) below:

Figure 12. The TTR curves of both Dante's textual samples and Brown's textual samples

The TTR curves, shown in the graphical representation above, reveal an exceptionally luxurious quantity of textual/ linguistic headers scored in the twentieth samples chosen sequentially from the two Infernos.

Despite the fact that each writer's linguistic repertoire (i.e., linguistic cues) differs and the samples have nearly the same number of tokens (i.e., opening lines) about (500), the TTR values between the two novels act rather strangely and their curves extend ahead in an unsteady manner.

However, the samples with the highest TTR values are the richest in terms of their textual headers. With lowest TTR values ranging from (0.65) to (0.78) and maximum values ranging from (0.81) to (0.89), Alighieri's and Brown's opening lines unexpectedly, but distinctively, come close to one another. Thus, Brown's use of linguistic headers seems so much richer than Alighieri's.

Fulfilling the final step of this paper, the researchers are undoubtedly going to pair up the TTR values scored for 'Levels of Detail' extracted from Cmap Tools in order to determine which novel, Alighieri's or Brown's, displays the highest degree of linguistic side-effects resulting from a deviation in readers' schematic knowledge, see Figure (13) below:

Figure 13. The TTR curves of levels of detail resulted from Cmap Tools (those of Alighieri's and Brown's)

The quantitative consistency of the curves presented in the figure above provides an unavoidably occurring track to sketch out a very concrete proof of linguistic side-effects of schematic deviancy belonging to the two novels. Alighieri's levels of detail have the highest TTR value rate (0.28), while Brown's have the lowest (0.25).

Though the overall value of TTRs is nearly the same, it is evidently true that Alighieri's samples may be rightfully attributed to him as a result of their own great textual multifariousness. On the other hand, Brown's TTR values do give an indication that there is a deviation. Yet, Brown's samples as a whole have a lot of repetitive linguistic headers, and hence cannot be trusted to assume the same likelihood as those that belong to Alighieri.

6. Results and Discussion

The two literary texts adopted in this paper differ in the way the concept of Inferno is presented. Within the context of the Schematic Deviancy Framework (see Figure 1), the decision on the right amount of specificity or detail in a given schema at some point rests on the author's creative and stylistic plans. The degree of information that is generated in a text – whether it tends toward under-specification or over-specification – is probably an aesthetic result of the writer's conscious or unconscious decision. Thus, the text creator's creative intents and aesthetic goals are intended to influence this decision.

Dante's Inferno, on the one hand, is presented through extremely fantastical pictures, such as ragged soulstortured in fire, screaming insane sinners bathed in unending rains of ice, gloomy castles and black towers wrapped in filthy smoke, and so on.

These depictions of the cursed, of the severe punishment being poured out in the realm of hell for crimes committed on earth, have pervaded Western civilization's collective mentality, and Dante's fantastical journey to the netherworld has influenced the thoughts and fantasies of numerous artists, musicians, philosophers of religion, politicians, writers, and even readers of the new world.

The linking of the usual to the exceptional, or the predictable to the unexpected, appears to represent a type of balance in Dante's Inferno. As a result, the SKD, which was produced by providing the most recognized and recoverable default characteristics, defamiliarizes readers' typical experience of viewing the world around them.

What is notable about Dante's journey (particularly the first five chapters' introductory lines) is that every activation of the most ordinary and conventional level of schematic specifications is either complied with or guided by a weird schema. Readers, through Dante's style, appeal to the most known levels of detail in a schematic explanation as a way into the oddest and most mysterious events, then progressively to the most astonishing specific details in an attempt to describe what HELL looks like.

Producing exceedingly levels of detailed information, readers of such a narrative deviate from what the narrator meant it to be received. For instance, the DRIVING schema shown in Figure (2) is immediately followed by a rather strange LONELINESS schema displayed in Figure (3).

In other words, during the entire opening lines of the first five chapters of Dante's Inferno, readers are not given any breath to take, so to speak, to settle into precise levels of schematic expectations.

The readers' schematic knowledge deviation is what matters in this paper. It is not merely affected and provoked by the linguistic headers the narrator offers in his textual samples. Additionally, their schematic knowledge lacks an in-depth comprehension of envisioning the inferno itself, (i.e., nobody has ever gone to the underworld and witnessed what is going on there, and then returned with specific descriptions of what and how the inferno looks like). This reflects another sort of deviation, that is internaldeviation.

However, readers, using their prior knowledge, begin recognizing the concept of Inferno in terms of the textual indicators that are brought out specifically in the fourth sample. When the implicitly recovered schema, such as the 'SLEEPING' schema, is activated, readers will definitely engage it with the encrypted schema of 'DEATH'. The THUNDER schema (whose hidden schema is the FEAR schema) and the INABILITY schema (whose hidden schema is PARALYZED BODY/ CORPSE schema) are also examples of this matter.

Brown's Inferno, on the other hand, makes readers directly go around real-life situations in a rather redundant way. Hence, these real-life situations are experienced by all readers. Through his opening lines, Brown generates mysterious thoughts while conveying his true emotions via Langdon to readers (i.e., because he is ''the guy Brown wishes to be'').

Simply put, the narrator makes the point that Inferno is not only a place where sinners go after they die; Inferno is also a real place where a person lives right now, in his life, before he dies.

It is true that many fantasy-like images would be present in Brown's Inferno, but the narrator has based these on the incredibly hazy concept of "reality". It is the only spot where one can reside and/or make an effort to comprehend the surroundings. It must illustrate a specific facet of life so the reader would be able to visualize or experience it.

This reality has been established by Dan Brown's Inferno, making readers expect every detail easier than making them expect a random selection of concepts happened to occur outside this reality, as in Alighieri's Inferno. While the concept of "Inferno" alludes to a place where sinners go in Dante Alighieri's extraordinary piece of writing, Dan Brown's work is all about the mundaneinferno where he presented it through different themes of his novel – through the SHADE, HOSPITAL, DEATH schemata and many others.

In other words, the underlying concept of mundane inferno in Brown's novel begins as soon as readers first recognize the dominated schema of the 'SHADE', see Figure (8). Then, in Figure (9), readers see Langdon awakening in a metaphorical hellish scene. He is in a hospital bed, suffering from a gunshot wound to the head, and is unable to recall anything. This turns us back to Dante's inability to locate his location or recollect the events that brought him to this painstaking situation, see Figure (5).

Whether the concept of inferno is shown using fantastical images or actual infernal ones, readers create overly-extended and/or under-extended schematic levels of information, causing their schematic knowledge to be deviated from what the two narrators have at their disposal. This has been investigated and proven through using Cmap Tools.

Last but not least, this paper has used WordSmith Tools to measure the TTRs of the linguistic side-effects that are resulted from the SKD. Comparing the TTRs of the linguistically side-effects of Dante's textual samples with those of Brown's, both revealed a rather slight difference in their graphical behaviour. Although Brown seemed to utilize linguistic headers in a far more sophisticated way than Alighieri, Alighieri's textual samples scored the highest degree of linguistic side effects. This in turn suggests that Dante Alighieri's literary work is written using extremely difficult headers that cause readers to come up with excessive degrees of detail, see the Figures: (12) and (13). As a result, the linguistic deviation, measured in terms of TTRs in both textual samples, is nearly identical to the deviation that occurred at the schematic level.

To sum up, Alighieri's Inferno is presented through exceptionally fantastical images to the point that readers' schematic knowledge is unprepared for comprehending the inferno itself. In contrast to Alighieri's Inferno, which relied on a haphazard collection of ideas that just so happened to take place outside reality, Brown also used fantasy-like images and based them on the remarkably foggy concept of "reality". As a result, it is the sole place where people may live and/or try to understand their surroundings. Dan Brown's mundane Inferno makes it easier for readers to expect every possible detail rather than making them expect a random selection of concepts that happened to occur outside this reality, as dealt with in Alighieri's Inferno.

With lowest TTR values ranging from (0.65) to (0.74) and maximum values ranging from (0.88) to (0.91), it is found that: Alighieri's and Brown's opening lines unexpectedly, but distinctively, come close to one another in terms of their high luxurious amount of textual/ linguistic headers. Though the overall value of TTRs is nearly the same, i.e., Alighieri's opening lines have the highest TTR value rate (0.28) and Brown's have the lowest (0.25), it is evidently true that Alighieri's samples may be rightfully attributed to him as a result of their own great textual multifariousness, and hence it linguistically scored the highest degree of deviation resulting from the SKD. On the other hand, Brown's TTR values do really give an indication that there is a linguistic deviation. Yet, his samples as a whole have a lot of repetitive linguistic headers, and hence cannot be trusted to assume the same likelihood as those that belong to Alighieri.

7. Conclusions

Rounding off this paper, the SKD emerged as a result of a strong association that happens to occur between the reader's schematic knowledge and the linguistic content of a literary work. This association produces a sort of cognitive challenge to the reader's pre-existing schemata. It is a fundamental aspect of literary writing. This kind of writing has its own ability to spark conceptual conflict when readers in general attempt to understand a particular concept.

Triggering certain amounts of default components, this paper has demonstrated the way the reader's prototypical network of schematic expectations may be activated to address this schematic challenge.

Acting as a kind of schematic foregrounding, the activation of such levels of information creates a process referred to as cognitive defamiliarization. With variable degrees of over- or under-specification, this kind of cognitive deviation raises a certain threshold of detailed information. Accordingly, the reader's pre-existing schematic repertoire may already contain unexpected degrees of information, thus a schematic challenge may not even need the destruction of old schemata or the creation of new ones.

Two software programs have been used in this study. The former, Cmap Knowledge Modeling Kit, accomplishes its role quite evidently in terms of drawing the schematic levels of detail. Through the use of Cmap Tools, researchers can easily create diagrammatical endpoints chosen to represent people's concepts. These endpoints can be connected together using lines and linking words (e.g., the textual headers provided in the text) to produce a network of interconnected interpretations readers may produce. Such a production reflects what readers have in their own bucket (i.e., their own schematic knowledge) with reference to a particular topic.

Besides, such tools have been used, in this paper for the first time, to visualize what might a reader think of in generating certain possible interpretations triggered in terms of a particular topic, like Inferno. These tools amazingly proved to visualize the over-extended and under-extended levels of detail. Using Cmap tools, hence, provides a hierarchically clear picture of where and how schematic knowledge deviation exists.

As for the latter, WordSmith Tools statistically proved themselves to deal with a tremendous amount of textual headers. The TTRs values, nevertheless, showed that Dante Alighieri's linguistic repertoire gains the highest luxurious amount of textual/ linguistic headers, and thus his textual samples scored the highest degree of linguistic deviation and/ or side-effects that resulted from readers' schematic knowledge. As for Brown's linguistic repertoire, its TTR values interestingly showed that Brown's samples gain a lower degree of linguistic deviation than that of Alighieri. This is due to the fact that Brown's textual samples have a lot of repetitive linguistic cues.