Topic
Antecedent (grammar)
About: Antecedent (grammar) is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1392 publications have been published within this topic receiving 41824 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
DOI•
14 Jan 2014
TL;DR: The GCP and PAP of Wexler and Manzini (1987) and as mentioned in this paper were re-produced in (1) and (2), respectively: A. Anaphors must be bound in their governing category.
Abstract: Antecedent Parameters (GCP and PAP) of Wexler and Manzini (1987),
reproduced in (1) and (2), respectively:(1) A. Anaphors must be bound in their governing category.
B. Pronominals must be free in their governing category.
C. R-expressions must be free.
2 citations
02 Jan 2019
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explored the influence of antecedent landscapes on the placement of medieval castles in Sussex and considered the relationship between castles and major physical features of the pre-Conqu...
Abstract: This paper explores the influence of antecedent landscapes on the placement of medieval castles in Sussex. It considers the relationship between castles and major physical features of the pre-Conqu...
2 citations
TL;DR: This paper found that high power individuals are more likely to interpret messages semantically, whereas low power individuals were more likely interpret messages pragmatically, and examined how power level effects an individual's choice to send a message with semantic or pragmatic implications.
Abstract: Power affects the behavior of people in the workplace. Communication is a prime example of a behavior that can be affected by the level of power that a person holds in an organization. Statements can have both semantic and pragmatic implications. The semantic implication of a statement concerns the literal meaning of the statement, whereas the pragmatic implication of a statement includes the antecedent conditions that led the communicator to make the statement. We hypothesize that high power individuals are more likely to interpret messages semantically, whereas low power individuals are more likely to interpret messages pragmatically. Furthermore, we examine how power level effects an individual's choice to send a message with semantic or pragmatic implications. We believe that low power individuals are more likely to use pragmatic messages, and high power individuals are more likely to use semantic messages. Organizational implications for our findings are discussed.
2 citations
TL;DR: It is shown that reference shifting has absurd consequences and it is the widely accepted principle concerning anaphora that is to be blamed for these consequences and not the supposed sin of reference shifting.
Abstract: Semantic theories that violate semantic innocence, that is require reference shifts when terms are embedded in ‘that’ clauses and the like, are often challenged by producing sentences where an anaphoric expression, while not itself embedded in a context in which reference shifts, is anaphoric on an antecedent expression that is embedded in such a context. This, in conjunction with a widely accepted principle concerning unproblematic anaphora (the ‘Principle of Anaphoric Reference’), is used to show that such reference shifting has absurd consequences. We show that it is the widely accepted principle concerning anaphora that is to be blamed for these consequences and not the supposed sin of reference shifting.
2 citations
TL;DR: This paper investigated the conditions under which in English a pronoun and a following noun may be understood as having intended coreference when the pronoun lacks an immediate antecedent and found that, with the exception of certain syntactic restrictions, the possibility of such coreference is determined by discourse factors.
Abstract: This article investigates the conditions under which in English a pronoun and a following noun may be understood as having intended coreference when the pronoun lacks an immediate antecedent. The analysis presented supports the claim that, with the exception of certain syntactic restrictions, the possibility of such coreference is determined by discourse factors. The sensitivity of pronominal anaphora to various discourse-dependent stress patterns and syntactic structures is presented as evidence supporting the analysis offered. Finally, it is argued that apparent counterexamples represent a special use of pronouns and therefore do not refute the proposed framework.
2 citations