Choosing anaphoric expressions : do people take into account likelihood of reference?

Research has shown that following a sentence fragment such as John impressed Mary because…, people are most likely to refer to John, whereas following John admired Mary because…, Mary is the preferred referent. Two written completion experiments investigated whether such semantic biases affect the choice of anaphor (pronouns vs. names). Experiment 1 investigated biases due to verb semantics, and Experiment 2 contrasted biases due to different connectives (because vs. so). Frequency-based accounts such as proposed by Arnold (2001) and functional linguists (e.g., [Givon, 1988] and [Givon, 1989]) suggest that the likelihood of reference to a particular discourse entity should affect the choice of anaphor: more pronouns (relative to names) for the bias-consistent entity than the bias-inconsistent entity. Although the semantics of the verb and connective had strong effects on the choice of referent, neither experiment showed any effect of semantic bias on the choice of anaphoric form. In contrast, structural factors did affect anaphoric choice.

[1]  B. J. Winer Statistical Principles in Experimental Design , 1992 .

[2]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure , 2001 .

[3]  T. Givon The pragmatics of word order , 1988 .

[4]  M. Pickering,et al.  The Representation of Verbs: Evidence from Syntactic Priming in Language Production , 1998 .

[5]  John R. Frederiksen,et al.  Understanding Anaphora: Rules Used by Readers in Assigning Pronominal Referents. Technical Report No. 3, December 1, 1976 through July 1, 1980. , 1981 .

[6]  Gail McKoon,et al.  Telling Something we can't Know: Experimental Approaches to Verbs Exhibiting Implicit Causality , 1995 .

[7]  W. Dressler Current trends in textlinguistics , 1978 .

[8]  M. Beeman,et al.  Building and Accessing Clausal Representations: The Advantage of First Mention versus the Advantage of Clause Recency. , 1989, Journal of memory and language.

[9]  Kathryn Bock,et al.  Syntactic effects of information availability in sentence production , 1980 .

[10]  Hannah Rohde,et al.  The Bidirectional Influence between Coherence Establishment and Pronoun Interpretation , 2008 .

[11]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Comprehension of Anaphoric Pronouns. , 1977 .

[12]  Kees van Deemter,et al.  Information sharing : reference and presupposition in language generation and interpretation , 2002 .

[13]  P. Gordon,et al.  Pronouns, Passives, and Discourse Coherence , 1995 .

[14]  Jennifer E. Arnold,et al.  Reference production: Production-internal and addressee-oriented processes , 2008 .

[15]  Victor S Ferreira,et al.  Given-New Ordering Effects on the Production of Scrambled Sentences in Japanese , 2003, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[16]  J. Engelkamp,et al.  Subordinating conjunctions as devices for unifying sentences in memory , 2002 .

[17]  S. Kuno Generative Discourse Analysis in America , 1978 .

[18]  Terry Kit-fong Au,et al.  A Verb Is Worth a Thousand Words: The Causes and Consequences of Interpersonal Events Implicit in Language. , 1986 .

[19]  S. Brennan Centering Attention in Discourse. , 1995 .

[20]  J. Elman,et al.  Event Structure and Discourse Coherence Biases in Pronoun Interpretation , 2006 .

[21]  W. Chafe Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view , 1976 .

[22]  Alfonso Caramazza,et al.  Parallel function strategy in pronoun assignment , 1978, Cognition.

[23]  Carol A. Fowler,et al.  Reductions of Spoken Words in Certain Discourse Contexts , 1997 .

[24]  Scott Weinstein,et al.  Centering: A Framework for Modeling the Local Coherence of Discourse , 1995, CL.

[25]  M. Pickering,et al.  What are implicit causality and consequentiality? , 2007 .

[26]  Roger S. Brown,et al.  The psychological causality implicit in language , 1983, Cognition.

[27]  J. V. Berkum,et al.  On the use of verb-based implicit causality in sentence comprehension : Evidence from self-paced reading and eye tracking , 2006 .

[28]  Martin J. Pickering,et al.  The Time Course of the Influence of Implicit Causality Information: Focusing versus Integration Accounts , 2000 .

[29]  William D. Raymond,et al.  Probabilistic Relations between Words: Evidence from Reduction in Lexical Production , 2008 .

[30]  Debra L. Long,et al.  Implicit Causality and Discourse Focus: The Interaction of Text and Reader Characteristics in Pronoun Resolution , 2000 .

[31]  Matthew P. Aylett,et al.  The dissociation of deaccenting, Givenness, and syntactic role in spontaneous speech. , 1999 .

[32]  E. Keenan,et al.  Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar , 2008 .

[33]  Mira Ariel Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents , 1990 .

[34]  Carl Pollard,et al.  A Centering Approach to Pronouns , 1987, ACL.

[35]  J. Oberlander,et al.  Interpreting pronouns and connectives: Interactions among focusing, thematic roles and coherence relations , 2000 .

[36]  Barbara J. Grosz,et al.  Pronouns, Names, and the Centering of Attention in Discourse , 1993, Cogn. Sci..

[37]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Factors influencing assignment of pronoun antecedents , 1975, Cognition.

[38]  Mercè Prat-Sala,et al.  Discourse constraints on syntactic processing in language production , 2000 .

[39]  Patrick Lemaire,et al.  Cognitive Overload and Orthographic Errors: When Cognitive Overload Enhances Subject–Verb Agreement Errors. A Study in French Written Language , 1994 .

[40]  Knud Lambrecht,et al.  Information structure and sentence form , 1994 .

[41]  David McNeill,et al.  Speech, Gesture, and Discourse. , 1992 .

[42]  R J Stevenson,et al.  The use of heuristic strategies in the interpretation of pronouns , 1990, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[43]  Johanna D. Moore,et al.  Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , 2005 .

[44]  R Ratcliff,et al.  Discourse models, pronoun resolution, and the implicit causality of verbs. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[45]  Anna Siewierska,et al.  Word order rules , 1988 .

[46]  P. Gordon,et al.  Pronominalization and discourse coherence, discourse structure and pronoun interpretation , 1995, Memory & cognition.

[47]  M. Masson Using confidence intervals for graphically based data interpretation. , 2003, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[48]  Dan Jurafsky,et al.  Effects of disfluencies, predictability, and utterance position on word form variation in English conversation. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[49]  Janet L. McDonald,et al.  THE TIME COURSE OF ANAPHOR RESOLUTION: EFFECTS OF IMPLICIT VERB CAUSALITY AND GENDER , 1995 .

[50]  Jeanette K. Gundel,et al.  Cognitive Status and the form of Referring Expressions in Discourse , 1993, The Oxford Handbook of Reference.

[51]  C. Fowler,et al.  Talkers' signaling of new and old. words in speech and listeners' perception and use of the distinction , 1987 .

[52]  Juhani Järvikivi,et al.  Ambiguous Pronoun Resolution , 2005, Psychological science.

[53]  George W. McConkie,et al.  Eye movements and human information processing , 1985 .

[54]  Rosemary J. Stevenson,et al.  Thematic roles, focus and the representation of events , 1994 .

[55]  Charles N. Li,et al.  Subject and topic , 1979 .

[56]  C. Fletcher Markedness and topic continuity in discourse processing , 1984 .

[57]  A Pollatsek,et al.  On the use of counterbalanced designs in cognitive research: a suggestion for a better and more powerful analysis. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[58]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Establishing reference in language comprehension: An electrophysiological perspective , 2007, Brain Research.

[59]  T. Givón Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction , 1983 .

[60]  M. Pickering,et al.  Planning causes and consequences in discourse , 2005 .

[61]  Jeffrey L. Elman,et al.  Coherence and Coreference Revisited , 2007, J. Semant..

[62]  Rosemary J. Stevenson,et al.  Reference in single sentences and in texts , 1990, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[63]  Alan Garnham,et al.  The role of implicit causality and gender cue in the interpretation of pronouns , 1992 .

[64]  T. Givon Topic Continuity in Discourse , 1983 .

[65]  Jan Svartvik,et al.  A __ comprehensive grammar of the English language , 1988 .

[66]  Laurence R. Horn,et al.  The handbook of pragmatics , 2004 .

[67]  Jennifer E. Arnold,et al.  The Effect of Thematic Roles on Pronoun Use and Frequency of Reference Continuation , 2001 .

[68]  Michael Hammond,et al.  Studies in Syntactic Typology , 1988 .

[69]  Beth Levin,et al.  English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation , 1993 .

[70]  R. Freedle Discourse production and comprehension , 1978 .

[71]  T. Givon Mind, Code, and Context: Essays in Pragmatics , 1989 .

[72]  M. Gernsbacher,et al.  Accessing Sentence Participants: The Advantage of First Mention. , 1988, Journal of memory and language.

[73]  William D. Raymond,et al.  The effects of collocational strength and contextual predictability in lexical production 1 , 1999 .

[74]  Ellen F. Prince,et al.  Toward a taxonomy of given-new information , 1981 .

[75]  J. Engelkamp,et al.  The subordination effect: Evidence from self-paced reading and recall , 2003 .

[76]  Alan Garnham,et al.  Implicit causality, implicit consequentiality and semantic roles , 2006 .

[77]  No Value Proceedings of the 14th international congress of phonetic sciences , 2000 .