首页> 外文期刊>Discourse Processes >Effects of Contrast on Referential Form: Investigating the Distinction Between Strong and Weak Pronouns
【24h】

Effects of Contrast on Referential Form: Investigating the Distinction Between Strong and Weak Pronouns

机译:对比对指称形式的影响:研究强代词和弱代词的区别

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

To further our understanding of the nature of the form-function mapping in anaphoric paradigms, this study investigated the referential properties of strong pronouns (long pronouns) in Estonian. Cross-linguistically, 2 main accounts of the long-short distinction have been proposed: the salience account (long pronouns refer to less salient antecedents) and the contrast account (long pronouns refer to entities that are being mentioned contrastively). To test these claims, this study compared parallel corpora of Estonian and Finnish to see how Estonian long pronouns are realized in Finnish and what the grammatical role of the antecedent is. Building on Pajusalu (1997)50. Pajusalu, R. 1997. Eesti pronoomeneid I. Ühiskeele see, too tema/ta [Estonian pronouns I. See too tema/ta in common Estonian]. Keel ja Kirjandus , 1: 24-30. 2, 106-115View all references, this study also analyzed the referential properties of long pronouns from the perspective of alternative semantics (Rooth, 199255. Rooth, M. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics , 1: 75-116. [CrossRef], [CSA]View all references) and Jackendoff's (1972)26. Jackendoff, R. S. 1972. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.. View all references and Büring's (2003)8. Büring, D. 2003. On D-trees, beans and B-accents. Linguistics & Philosophy , 26: 511-545. [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]View all references research on contrast. The corpus patterns support the contrast account, indicating that the long-short distinction cannot be straightforwardly reduced to referent salience. As a whole, these results fit with the form-specific multiple-constraints approach to reference resolution (Kaiser & Trueswell, 200834. Kaiser, E. and Trueswell, J. C. 2008. Interpreting pronouns and demonstratives in Finnish: Evidence for a form-specific approach to reference. Language and Cognitive Processes , 23: 709-748. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]View all references).View full textDownload full textRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01638530903347643
机译:为了进一步了解照应范式中形式函数映射的性质,本研究调查了爱沙尼亚语中强代词(长代词)的指称特性。跨语言地,提出了长短区分的两个主要说明:显着性说明(长代词指的是不显着的先行词)和对比说明(长代词指的是被对比地提及的实体)。为了检验这些说法,本研究比较了爱沙尼亚语和芬兰语的平行语料库,以了解爱沙尼亚语长代词在芬兰语中是如何实现的,以及其前身的语法作用是什么。建立在Pajusalu(1997)50上。 Pajusalu,R. 1997年。Eesti pronoomeneid I. Öhiskeele看到,也太tema / ta [爱沙尼亚语代词I.在爱沙尼亚语中也看到了tema / ta]。 Keel ja Kirjandus,1:24-30。 2,106-115查看所有参考文献,本研究还从替代语义学的角度分析了长代词的指称性质(Rooth,199255。Rooth,M。1992。一种焦点解释理论。自然语言语义学,第1期:75-116 [CrossRef],[CSA]查看所有参考文献)和Jackendoff's(1972)26。 Jackendoff,R。S. 1972年。生成语法的语义解释。马萨诸塞州剑桥市:麻省理工学院出版社。。查看所有参考文献和Büring's(2003)8。 Büring,D.,2003年。关于D树,豆子和B重音符号。语言学与哲学,26:511-545。 [CrossRef],[Web of Science®]查看有关对比度的所有参考研究。语料模式支持对比说明,表明不能将长短区分直接简化为参照显着性。总体而言,这些结果与针对参考解析的特定于形式的多重约束方法相吻合(Kaiser&Trueswell,200834。Kaiser,E。和Trueswell,JC2008。在芬兰语中解释代词和指示词:特定于形式的方法的证据语言和认知过程,23:709-748。[泰勒和弗朗西斯在线],[Web of Science®]查看所有参考文献)。查看全文下载全文相关的变量add add_id services_compact:“ citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,可口,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多”,发布:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01638530903347643

著录项

  • 来源
    《Discourse Processes》 |2010年第6期|p.480-509|共30页
  • 作者

    Elsi Kaisera;

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-18 00:52:48

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号