Antecedent (grammar)

About: Antecedent (grammar) is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1392 publications have been published within this topic receiving 41824 citations.

Sloppy identity unbound

Abstract: Reinhart (1983) claims that only pronouns whose antecedents c-command them may give rise to sloppy identity readings. This paper presents counterexamples to this claim; for instance, referring to the famous 1960 televised presidential debate, it is acceptable to say: "Kennedy looked good. People voted for him. Nixon looked bad. People didn't." Despite the fact that the antecedent "Kennedy" for the pronoun "him" is in a previous sentence, this pronoun allows a sloppy identity reading wherein the fourth sentence ("People didn't.") means that people didn't vote for Nixon. To analyze such cases, I first propose an extension to the ~ focus operator due to Rooth (1992), allowing this operator to alter the assignment function used to interpret pronouns. One construction where Rooth places ~ is in the answers to questions. My new meaning for ~ explains why pronouns are so constrained in answers, e.g., "Who does John like? He[=John] likes Mary." Next, I argue for the Question-Under-Discussion (QUD) model of discourse described in Roberts (1996), which theorizes that every sentence is the answer to an explicit or implicit question. Finally, I show that unbound sloppy identity can be analyzed as cases where pronouns are constrained by antecedents in implicit questions. Along the way, I argue that the QUD model is compatible with the coherence relation model of discourse due to Hobbs (1979), explaining how coherence can constrain pronoun reference as well.

Discourse Cues to Ambiguity Resolution: Evidence From "Do It" Comprehension

Abstract: In sentences such as Sam borrowed a jigsaw puzzle, and he did it while everyone else was out, the Ado it@ expression can take its meaning from the entire preceding verb phrase (= borrowed the jigsaw puzzle) or from just the noun phrase (= did the jigsaw puzzle). We examine how the choice of verbal or nominal interpretation is influenced by changes in discourse structure, and in doing so, illustrate those processes that guide discourse comprehension more generally. With 3 manipulations, we show how Ado it@ interpretation is influenced by the nature of the following subordinating conjunct (while vs. because), the preceding coordinating connective (full stop vs. and), and the presence or absence of a pronominal agent. With these results, we argue that readers take cues from the amount of overlapping discourse structure in an antecedent and anaphor clause, and from a consideration of how events in a discourse can be causally related.

Adverbial relative clauses in world Englishes

Abstract: This paper investigates adverbial relative clauses in world Englishes, in particular relative clauses expressing place (the place where), time (the time when), manner (the way in which) and reason (the reason why). Using data from the ICE corpora, it compares the varieties spoken in India, Hong-Kong and Singapore. In particular we consider: (i) the meaning expressed by the relative clause; (ii) the nominal antecedent, both its meaning and form; and (iii) the relative word used to introduce the relative clause (adverbial relative word, wh- pronoun, that and zero). An examination of these issues reveals distinguishing features in the distribution of relative words that are related to the different constructions, to the specific postcolonial varieties that have been developed in the different countries and, finally, to the interaction between the superstrate and the different substrate languages.

Middle School Music Ensemble Participation, Homophobic Name-Calling, and Mental Health:

Abstract: Homophobic name-calling is commonplace in middle schools and is emerging as an antecedent to more serious, deleterious concerns, including depressive or anxious symptoms among youth. While music ed...

On establishing coreference in Left Dislocation constructions

Abstract: The phenomenon of left dislocation (LD) has received relatively little attention in the generative literature. In Government & Binding theory and early versions of Minimalist Syntax, the left-dislocated expression is conventionally taken to be base-generated in its sentence-initial surface position and the resumptive pronoun in some other position in the structure. The establishment of an (obligatory) coreferential relationship between these expressions is usually ascribed to a special binding mechanism, A-bar binding, though this issue is seldom explicitly addressed in LD studies. The aim of this paper is to present, in broad outline, an alternative analysis of LD constructions, one that incorporates the core hypotheses of the nominal shell analysis of coreferential constructions put forward by Oosthuizen (2013a,b). On this analysis, the resumptive pronoun and the referring expression that is to serve as its antecedent are base-generated in a nominal shell structure which is headed by a presentational focus light noun, a functional category belonging to a natural class of identificational elements. The coreferential relationship between the two expressions is established within this structure by means of phi-feature valuation. The antecedent is subsequently raised into the left-periphery of the sentence, where it surfaces as the left-dislocated expression. It is claimed that such an analysis can account for the phenomenon of obligatory coreferentiality in LD constructions in terms of formal devices that are either already provided by or compatible with the basic assumptions and concepts of Minimalist Syntax. A tentative proposal is also put forward to account for the word order in LD constructions, specifically for the fact that left-dislocation does not bring about (surface) subject-verb inversion in V2 languages such as Afrikaans.