Strong semantic biases make demonstrative pronouns act like personal pronouns
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22130239 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Yvonne Portele (0000-0001-8823-4335, Goethe University Frankfurt), Markus Bader (0000-0002-9765-8970, Goethe University Frankfurt) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Publication date | 2023-03-29 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Glossa a journal of general linguistics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2397-1835 • E-ISSN: 2397-1835 |
| Publisher | Open Library of the Humanities (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.16995/glossa.8832 |
| OpenAlex | W4322632491 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 39 |
Anaphoric demonstrative pronouns (d-pronouns), which are found in some languages in addition to the more common personal pronouns (p-pronouns), provide an interesting test case for theories of pronoun resolution. With regard to structural factors (e.g., syntactic function, linear position, topichood), d-pronouns have been found to stand in complementary relation to p-pronouns. Whereas the latter prefer structurally prominent antecedents, the former prefer structurally non-prominent antecedents. In contrast to structural factors, semantic factors (e.g., implicit causality and consequentiality) have been intensively explored for p-pronouns but not for d-pronouns. In particular, it is an open question whether semantic biases can override structural biases in the case of d-pronouns in the same way as it has been shown for p-pronouns. We have addressed this question in three sentence completion experiments and one acceptability experiment that investigated German p- and d-pronouns. Semantic bias was manipulated by including causal and consequential discourse markers in the interpretation experiments. The production experiments used questions to elicit continuations expressing causes and consequences. The results show that the semantic factor of coherence influences p- and d-pronouns in similar ways. Based on our experimental results, we show that the Bayesian Theory of Pronoun Resolution (Kehler et al. 2008), which captures the relationship between pronoun interpretation and pronoun production in a quantitative way, provides a good fit of observed and predicted values for both p- and d-pronouns
Coreference · Demonstrative · Linguistics · Object pronoun · Personal pronoun · Pronoun · Reflexive pronoun · Sentence · Subject pronoun · Computer Science · Natural Language Processing Techniques · Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism · Philosophy · Psychology · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation · Artificial Intelligence
Interpreting pronouns and demonstratives in Finnish
Coherence and Coreference
Accessing sentence participants
Thematic roles, focus and the representation of events
Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4
The Oxford Handbook of Reference
Information Structure and Sentence Form
Empirical Perspectives on Anaphora Resolution
Constraints on German diese demonstratives
Pronominalization and Expectations for Re-Mention
Semantic predictability of implicit causality can affect referential form choice
Implicit Causality in younger and older adults
A probabilistic reconciliation of coherence-driven and centering-driven theories of pronoun interpretation
Reference determination for demonstrative pronouns
The interpretation of German personal pronouns and d-pronouns
Grammatical taboos
Pragmatic Binding
The psychological causality implicit in verbs
Evaluating an Expectation-Driven Question-Under-Discussion Model of Discourse Interpretation
The Effect of Thematic Roles on Pronoun Use and Frequency of Reference Continuation
The Interplay of Implicit Causality, Structural Heuristics, and Anaphor Type in Ambiguous Pronoun Resolution
Reference in single sentences and in texts
Grammatical determinants of ambiguous pronoun resolution
The use of heuristic strategies in the interpretation of pronouns
Coherence and Coreference Revisited
Pragmatics and Linguistics
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |