A discourse structural approach to anaphora in Chinese.

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:DX186069 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

An empirical approach to the signalling of enumerative structures

International audienceThis paper presents a data-intensive study of the signalling of enumerative structures. In contrast with semasiological studies of specific markers, the approach described here takes as its starting point annotated structures and cues, seeking to identify recurrent patterns in these data. To do so, it exploits a new resource for French, the ANNODIS resource, a large corpus of written texts manually annotated at discourse level. The data analysed - first quantitatively with large populations, then qualitatively on selected examples - allows the authors to illustrate how cues involved in signalling text organisation combine in complex ways metadiscourse and propositional content, or the textual and ideational metafunctions.Nous présentons dans cet article une analyse extensive sur corpus de la signalisation des structures énumératives. Notre étude diverge par rapport aux travaux antérieurs principalement caractérisés par une approche sémasiologique de marqueurs spécifiques, car elle se fonde sur une annotation manuelle systématique des structures et des indices. C'est à partir de ces données annotées que nous cherchons des motifs récurrents de signalisation. Nous exploitons une ressource récemment créée, la ressource ANNODIS, corpus de français écrit enrichi d'annotations discursives. Les données analysées - de manière quantitative d'abord pour embrasser des effectifs importants, puis de manière qualitative sur une sélection d'exemples - nous permettent de montrer que les indices qui contribuent à l'organisation textuelle peuvent associer métadiscours et contenu propositionnel, en d'autres termes les fonctions textuelle et idéationnelle

A corpus-driven approach to discourse organisation: from cues to complex markers

This paper reports on an experiment implementing a data-intensive approach to discourse organisation. Its focus is on enumerative structures envisaged as a type of textual pattern in a sequentiality-oriented approach to discourse. On the basis of a large-scale annotation exercise calling upon automatic feature mark-up alongside manual annotation, we explore a method to identify complex discourse markers seen as configurations of cues. The presentation of the background to what is termed "multi-level annotation" is organised around four issues: linearity, complexity of discourse markers, top-down processing, granularity and the multi-level nature of discourse structures. In this context, enumerative structures seem to deserve scrutiny for a number of reasons: they are frequent structures appearing at different granularity levels, they are signalled by a variety of devices appearing to work together in complex ways, and they combine a textual role (discourse organisation) with an ideational role (categorisation). We describe the annotation procedure and experimental framework which resulted in nearly 1,000 enumerative structures being annotated in a diversified corpus of over 600,000 words. The results of two approaches to the rich data produced are then presented: firstly, a descriptive survey highlights considerable variation in length and composition, while showing enumerative structure to be a basic strategy resorted to in all three sub-corpora, and leads to a granularity-based typology of the annotated structures; secondly, recurrent cue configurations---our "complex~ markers"---are identified by the application of data mining methods. The paper ends with perspectives for further exploitation of the data, in particular with respect to the semantic characterisation of enumerative structures

Inter-sentential anaphora and coherence relations in discourse: a perfect match

International audienceHobbs (1979) ('Coherence and Coreference', Cognitive Science 3, 67-90) claims that the interpretation of inter-sentential anaphors 'falls out' as a 'by-product' of using a particular coherence relation to integrate two discourse units. The article argues that this is only partly true. Taking the reader's perspective, I suggest that there are three stages in invoking and implementing a given coherence relation to integrate two discourse units when updating a given discourse context. Interleaved with these are two distinguishable levels in the assignment of reference to the anaphor(s) in the second unit: first, through a search for evidence for the appropriateness of a given anticipated relation, the reader will provisionally assign a referent to the anaphor(s) in the second unit via the semantic structure within the relation's definition (this would correspond to Hobbs's original thesis); and second, in coming to a final decision as to the applicability of the coherence relation(s), the anaphor(s) will receive a full, expanded interpretation. This in turn will serve to actually implement the coherence relation initially assumed. In more general terms, the article aims to pinpoint the precise nature of the interactions between the invocation and implementation of given coherence relations and the functioning of anaphors in non-initial units, in processing multi-propositional texts

Syntactic and Semantic Properties of Intensive Reflexives in English

This thesis explores syntactic and semantic properties of intensive reflexives (IRs) in English. The study is based on examples selected from the following on-line databases: Wilson Humanities Abstracts and The New York Times Book Review Digest Abstracts. The analysis also incorporates examples cited from linguistic articles on the subject of RRs and IRs. As opposed to regular reflexives (RRs), IRs have not been given sufficient consideration in linguistic accounts. As a point of departure, the author utilizes Quirk\u27s and Greenbaum\u27s descriptive framework to examine the evidence from the database. Since RRs are discussed more extensively than IRs in this framework, RRs are studied first, and are regarded as circumscribing standards for the subsequent investigation of IRs. The descriptive analysis of IRs and RRs shows that IRs, in addition to having the same morphological forms as RRs, display other affinities with RRs. First, both RRs and IRs exhibit a marked preference for subject antecedents positioned in the same clause as themselves. Second, RRs and IRs accept NP antecedents from non-subject positions. Third, NP antecedents do not have to be located in the same clause as IRs and RRs but can be implied from a neighboring main clause. Subsequently, the author undertakes to look closely into the syntactic distribution of IRs and RRs. It is demonstrated that while IRs take optional syntactic positions (i.e., they appear in apposition with the NPs they intensify, come after an auxiliary/modal verb, or at the end of a clause), RRs fill obligatory syntactic slots (i.e., those associated with a direct and indirect object, object of a preposition, and a subject complement). On the assumption that reflexivity is tied to syntactic obligatoriness and intensivity to syntactic optionality, RRs and IRs may be described in terms of the features (reflexive) and (intensive). As a result, RRs and IRs are assigned the following set of features, respectively: RRs (maximally reflexive, minimally intensive); IRs {maximally intensive, minimally reflexive). Further, an attempt is made at defining the features (max intensive) and (max reflexive) built into IRs and RRs, respectively. Unlike the feature (maximally reflexive), the activation of the feature (maximally intensive) depends on the following contextual factors: contrastive or emphatic context and discourse-prominent NP antecedent. By contrast, the feature (maximally reflexive) conveys interaction with one\u27s self (i.e., an agent performs some action on himself or herself), which does not hold of the feature (maximally intensive). Finally, the author explores another context-related connection between IRs and their NP antecedents. Twofold assumptions are made. First, for NPs to be intensified by IRs, they should be referential and/or identifiable in addition to being discourse-prominent. Second, the link between the referential status of intensified NPs and the presence of IRs is likely to be affected by the syntactic positioning of IRs. In the process of examining Lyons\u27s notion of reference (singular/general and definite/indefinite) against examples from the database, the author discovers that the assumptions posed at the beginning of the analysis appear to be correct. On the one hand, there is a link between the referentiality of intensified NPs and IRs, and, on the other hand, the link in question seems to be relevant only to adjacent (i.e., appositional) IRs. This leads to the conclusion that IRs do not form a uniform grammatical category

Syntactic and Semantic Properties of Intensive Reflexives in English

This thesis explores syntactic and semantic properties of intensive reflexives (IRs) in English. The study is based on examples selected from the following on-line databases: Wilson Humanities Abstracts and The New York Times Book Review Digest Abstracts. The analysis also incorporates examples cited from linguistic articles on the subject of RRs and IRs. As opposed to regular reflexives (RRs), IRs have not been given sufficient consideration in linguistic accounts. As a point of departure, the author utilizes Quirk\u27s and Greenbaum\u27s descriptive framework to examine the evidence from the database. Since RRs are discussed more extensively than IRs in this framework, RRs are studied first, and are regarded as circumscribing standards for the subsequent investigation of IRs. The descriptive analysis of IRs and RRs shows that IRs, in addition to having the same morphological forms as RRs, display other affinities with RRs. First, both RRs and IRs exhibit a marked preference for subject antecedents positioned in the same clause as themselves. Second, RRs and IRs accept NP antecedents from non-subject positions. Third, NP antecedents do not have to be located in the same clause as IRs and RRs but can be implied from a neighboring main clause. Subsequently, the author undertakes to look closely into the syntactic distribution of IRs and RRs. It is demonstrated that while IRs take optional syntactic positions (i.e., they appear in apposition with the NPs they intensify, come after an auxiliary/modal verb, or at the end of a clause), RRs fill obligatory syntactic slots (i.e., those associated with a direct and indirect object, object of a preposition, and a subject complement). On the assumption that reflexivity is tied to syntactic obligatoriness and intensivity to syntactic optionality, RRs and IRs may be described in terms of the features (reflexive) and (intensive). As a result, RRs and IRs are assigned the following set of features, respectively: RRs (maximally reflexive, minimally intensive); IRs {maximally intensive, minimally reflexive). Further, an attempt is made at defining the features (max intensive) and (max reflexive) built into IRs and RRs, respectively. Unlike the feature (maximally reflexive), the activation of the feature (maximally intensive) depends on the following contextual factors: contrastive or emphatic context and discourse-prominent NP antecedent. By contrast, the feature (maximally reflexive) conveys interaction with one\u27s self (i.e., an agent performs some action on himself or herself), which does not hold of the feature (maximally intensive). Finally, the author explores another context-related connection between IRs and their NP antecedents. Twofold assumptions are made. First, for NPs to be intensified by IRs, they should be referential and/or identifiable in addition to being discourse-prominent. Second, the link between the referential status of intensified NPs and the presence of IRs is likely to be affected by the syntactic positioning of IRs. In the process of examining Lyons\u27s notion of reference (singular/general and definite/indefinite) against examples from the database, the author discovers that the assumptions posed at the beginning of the analysis appear to be correct. On the one hand, there is a link between the referentiality of intensified NPs and IRs, and, on the other hand, the link in question seems to be relevant only to adjacent (i.e., appositional) IRs. This leads to the conclusion that IRs do not form a uniform grammatical category

Syntactic and Semantic Properties of Intensive Reflexives in English

This thesis explores syntactic and semantic properties of intensive reflexives (IRs) in English. The study is based on examples selected from the following on-line databases: Wilson Humanities Abstracts and The New York Times Book Review Digest Abstracts. The analysis also incorporates examples cited from linguistic articles on the subject of RRs and IRs. As opposed to regular reflexives (RRs), IRs have not been given sufficient consideration in linguistic accounts. As a point of departure, the author utilizes Quirk\u27s and Greenbaum\u27s descriptive framework to examine the evidence from the database. Since RRs are discussed more extensively than IRs in this framework, RRs are studied first, and are regarded as circumscribing standards for the subsequent investigation of IRs. The descriptive analysis of IRs and RRs shows that IRs, in addition to having the same morphological forms as RRs, display other affinities with RRs. First, both RRs and IRs exhibit a marked preference for subject antecedents positioned in the same clause as themselves. Second, RRs and IRs accept NP antecedents from non-subject positions. Third, NP antecedents do not have to be located in the same clause as IRs and RRs but can be implied from a neighboring main clause. Subsequently, the author undertakes to look closely into the syntactic distribution of IRs and RRs. It is demonstrated that while IRs take optional syntactic positions (i.e., they appear in apposition with the NPs they intensify, come after an auxiliary/modal verb, or at the end of a clause), RRs fill obligatory syntactic slots (i.e., those associated with a direct and indirect object, object of a preposition, and a subject complement). On the assumption that reflexivity is tied to syntactic obligatoriness and intensivity to syntactic optionality, RRs and IRs may be described in terms of the features (reflexive) and (intensive). As a result, RRs and IRs are assigned the following set of features, respectively: RRs (maximally reflexive, minimally intensive); IRs {maximally intensive, minimally reflexive). Further, an attempt is made at defining the features (max intensive) and (max reflexive) built into IRs and RRs, respectively. Unlike the feature (maximally reflexive), the activation of the feature (maximally intensive) depends on the following contextual factors: contrastive or emphatic context and discourse-prominent NP antecedent. By contrast, the feature (maximally reflexive) conveys interaction with one\u27s self (i.e., an agent performs some action on himself or herself), which does not hold of the feature (maximally intensive). Finally, the author explores another context-related connection between IRs and their NP antecedents. Twofold assumptions are made. First, for NPs to be intensified by IRs, they should be referential and/or identifiable in addition to being discourse-prominent. Second, the link between the referential status of intensified NPs and the presence of IRs is likely to be affected by the syntactic positioning of IRs. In the process of examining Lyons\u27s notion of reference (singular/general and definite/indefinite) against examples from the database, the author discovers that the assumptions posed at the beginning of the analysis appear to be correct. On the one hand, there is a link between the referentiality of intensified NPs and IRs, and, on the other hand, the link in question seems to be relevant only to adjacent (i.e., appositional) IRs. This leads to the conclusion that IRs do not form a uniform grammatical category

Anaphoric resolution of zero pronouns in Chinese in translation and reading comprehension

The primary aim of the thesis is to investigate some of the processes of reading Chinese text by means of comparing and analysing approximately 100 parallel translations of four texts from Chinese to English. The translations are answers to A Level examination questions. The focus of the investigation is interpretation of the zero pronoun, a common phenomenon in Chinese, which often requires explicitation when translated into English. The secondary aim is to show how translation gives evidence of comprehension, as shown by the variation in interpretation of zero pronouns. The thesis reviews relevant psycholinguistic research into reading, particularly reading of Chinese text. This is followed by reviews of relevant research into translation as a reading activity, and a discussion of its role in language teaching and testing.The core of the thesis is the discussion of the zero pronoun in Chinese, including discussion of anaphoric choice - the writer's decision on when to use zero in preference to an explicit anaphoric form - and of anaphoric resolution - how a reader decides what a zero pronoun refers to. Anaphoric resolution may be problematic for less experienced readers of Chinese owing to its lack of rich morphological inflection which, in other languages, provides the reader with information. Some of the key ideas on anaphoric choice and resolution are then applied to the analysis of the data in the parallel translations. It would appear that factors in Chinese texts which have an effect on comprehending zero pronouns are antecedent distance, topic persistence, abstraction, multiplicity of arguments and the meaning of the verb. Characteristics of the reader which may affect comprehension of the zero pronoun include personal schemata which may lead to elaborative inferences. On the basis of the data I suggest that mark schemes could be devised on a scalar system encompassing optimal solution, proximal solution and nonsolution, which might help to solve the problem of variability in marking translation.A by-product of the thesis, and an avenue for further research, is the apparent close relationship between idea units, clause length, punctuation breaks and antecedent distance in Chinese texts and saccade length and working memory capacity in the reader of Chinese

Perspectives on information structure in Austronesian languages

Information structure is a relatively new field to linguistics and has only recently been studied for smaller and less described languages. This book is the first of its kind that brings together contributions on information structure in Austronesian languages. Current approaches from formal semantics, discourse studies, and intonational phonology are brought together with language specific and cross-linguistic expertise of Austronesian languages. The 13 chapters in this volume cover all subgroups of the large Austronesian family, including Formosan, Central Malayo-Polynesian, South Halmahera-West New Guinea, and Oceanic. The major focus, though, lies on Western Malayo-Polynesian languages. Some chapters investigate two of the largest languages in the region (Tagalog and different varieties of Malay), others study information-structural phenomena in small, underdescribed languages. The three overarching topics that are covered in this book are NP marking and reference tracking devices, syntactic structures and information-structural categories, and the interaction of information structure and prosody. Various data types build the basis for the different studies compiled in this book. Some chapters investigate written texts, such as modern novels (cf. Djenar’s chapter on modern, standard Indonesian), or compare different text genres, such as, for example, oral narratives and translations of biblical narratives (cf. De Busser’s chapter on Bunun). Most contributions, however, study natural spoken speech and make use of spoken corpora which have been compiled by the authors themselves. The volume comprises a number of different methods and theoretical frameworks. Two chapters make use of the Question Under Discussion approach, developed in formal semantics (cf. the chapters by Latrouite & Riester; Shiohara & Riester). Riesberg et al. apply the recently developed method of Rapid Prosody Transcription (RPT) to investigate native speakers’ perception of prosodic prominences and boundaries in Papuan Malay. Other papers discuss theoretical consequences of their findings. Thus, for example, Himmelmann takes apart the most widespread framework for intonational phonology (ToBI) and argues that the analysis of Indonesian languages requires much simpler assumptions than the ones underlying the standard model. Arka & Sedeng ask the question how fine-grained information structure space should be conceptualized and modelled, e.g. in LFG. Schnell argues that elements that could be analysed as “topic” and “focus” categories, should better be described in terms of ‘packaging’ and do not necessarily reflect any pragmatic roles in the first place