This chapter examines the limitations of early speaker-based and subsequent hearer-based theories of interpretation, particularly in handling ambiguous language within polarised socio-political contexts. Specifically, this chapter critiques Rosenblatt’s Reader Response Theory, Grice’s model of implicature, and Sperber and Wilson’s Relevance Theory for their insufficient treatment of ambiguity and contextual variability. It argues that reality paradigms and schemata, moulded by individual and group identities, are crucial in driving interpretive differences. Proposing a ‘pragmacognitive’ approach, being one that merges pragmatics with cognitive processes, the chapter offers a framework to analyse how identity-driven cognitive structures influence meaning-making in contentious socio-political discourse, laying the groundwork for further exploration of these dynamics.