By Howard Lasnik (auth.)
The articles accrued during this ebook are taken with the remedy of anaphora inside of generative grammar, in particular, inside of Chomsky's 'Ex tended average thought' (EST). because the inception of this idea, and almost because the inception of generative grammar, anaphora has been a important subject of research. In present examine, it has, maybe, develop into much more vital, as an incredible concentration of research in such parts as syntax, semantics, discourse research, and language acquisition. starting within the early 1970's, and carrying on with to the current, Chomsky has constructed a entire syntactic conception of anaphora. The articles listed below are all concerning levels within the improvement of that idea, and will most sensible be understood on the subject of that improvement. as a result, bankruptcy 1 offers a historic survey of Chomsky's EST proposals on anaphora, besides short symptoms of ways the current articles healthy into that background. many of the articles the following (e.g. Chapters four, eight, and nine) proposed extensions of Chomsky's uncomplicated rules to a much broader diversity of phenomena.
Read or Download Essays on Anaphora PDF
Best semantics books
Utilizing a cognitive linguistics point of view, this paintings offers the main accomplished, theoretical research of the semantics of English prepositions to be had. All English prepositions are initially coded as spatial kinfolk among actual entities. whereas protecting their unique which means, prepositions have additionally built a wealthy set of non-spatial meanings.
Within the Dynamics of that means, Gennaro Chierchia tackles principal matters in dynamic semantics and extends the final framework. bankruptcy 1 introduces the proposal of dynamic semantics and discusses intimately the phenomena which were used to encourage it, comparable to "donkey" sentences and adverbs of quantification.
This article deals a philosophical exam of the fundamental conceptual framework of pragmatic conception, and contrasts this framework with specific descriptions of our daily practices of language use. whereas the implications will be hugely correct to pragmatics, the research isn't really a contribution to pragmatic concept.
A frightening new method of how we comprehend metaphors completely evaluating and contrasting the claims made through relevance theorists and cognitive linguists. The ensuing hybrid concept indicates the complementarity of many positions in addition to the necessity and threat of accomplishing a broader and extra practical concept of our realizing.
- The Sense of Language
- Language: Introductory Readings
- Mental Files
- Towards A Definition of Topos: Approaches to Analogical Reasoning
- Studies in Syntax and Semantics
Extra resources for Essays on Anaphora
As has been observed earlier, while the theory of binding has been based on complementarity between anaphors and bound pronouns, there are exceptions to this complementarity. (113) and (114) are two such configurations. MODERN BINDING THEORY 31 (113) a. The children like [each other's friends] b. The children like [their friends] (114) a. The children thought that [[pictures of each other] were on sale] b. The children thought that [[pictures of them] were on sale] As also noted earlier, and as discussed by Huang (1983), these paradigms suggest that the GCs for anaphor and for pronouns are different.
If this were not so, both (78a) and (78b) would be excluded by Principle A, since, patently, both bracketed NPs have nominal heads. Thus, in contradistinction to the situation with Ss, presence or absence of subject is key here. One final detail of (79), the mention of 'accessibility', remains to be discussed. Recall that certain cases of long distance anaphors have been problematic for most versions of BT. Example (64), repeated here as (80), is representative: (80) TheYl expected [that [[pictures of each otherd would be on sale]] The embedded clause (and the subject of that clause) must not be a GC for each other or Principle A will incorrectly be violated.
By virtue of this, PRO is subject to both Principles A and B. If PRO has a GC, it must then be both bound and free in that GC, a contradiction, since free means not bound. Thus, PRO has no GC, hence, is ungoverned. The central property is therefore derived. s This elegant deduction of the central distributional property of PRO clearly relies on the fact that the definition of GC makes reference to government. Is there independent justification for this aspect of the definition? " For PRO, however, Chomsky shows that the change leads to an incorrect consequence.