B a r b a r a D u n i n - K @ p H c z Institute of Informatics, W a r s a w U n i v e r s i t y
P O B o x 1 2 1 0
0 0 - 9 0 1 W a r s z a w a , P o l a n d
A B S T R A C T
T h i s p a p e r p r e s e n t s a syntactical
m e t h o d of interpreting p r o n o u n s in Polish,
U s i n g t h e s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e of t h e s e n t e n c e
a s well a s g r a m m a t i c a l a n d inflexional
inlormation a c c e s s i b l e d u r i n g s y n t a c t i c
analysis, a n a r e a of r e f e r e n c e is m a r k e d out
for e a c h p e r s o n a l a n d p o s s e s s i v e p r o n o u n
T h i s a r e a c o n s i s t s of a f e w internal a r e a s
inside the c u r r e n t s e n t e n c e a n d a n e x t e r n a l
area, i.e the part of the text p r e c e d i n g it
In o r d e r to d e t e r m i n e that a r e a of r e f e r e n c e
s e v e r a l syntactic s e n t e n c e - l e v e l restrictions
o n a n a p h o r a interpretation a r e formulated
N e x t , w h e n l o o k i n g at the a r e a of
p r o n o u n ' s r e f e r e n c e , all N P s w h i c h n u m b e r -
- g e n d e r a g r e e with the p r o n o u n c a n b e
s e l e c t e d a n d this w a y the set of s u r f a c e
referents ol e a c h p r o n o u n c a n b e created
It c a n b e u s e d a s d a t a f o r further s e m a n t i c
analysis
I I N T R O D U C T I O N
R e f e r e n c e is o n e of the central
c o n c e p t s of a n y linguistic theory In r e c e n t
r e s e a r c h into a n a p h o r a the t e r m " r e f e r e n c e "
h a s b e e n u s e d in t h r e e different s e n s e s
( S z w e d e k , 1 9 8 1 ) :
( a ) a s a r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e n a m e a n d t h e
t h i n g n a m e d ( H a l l P a r t e e , 1 9 7 8 )
( b ) a s a n a s s o c i a t i o n b e t w e e n n o u n p h r a s e s
a n d m e n t a l e n t i t i e s i n t h e l a n g u a g e u s e r ' s
( N a s h - % ~ e b b e r , 1 9 7 8 )
( c ) a s a n a s s o c i a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e o c c u r r e n c e
of p h r a s e s i n t h e t e x t ( R e i n h a r t , 1 9 8 1 )
H o w e v e r t h e r e f e r e n c e i s u n d e r s t o o d ,
irl o r d e r to i n t e r p r e t c o r r e c t l y a n a p h o r a o n t h e
s e m a n t i c l e v e l ( ( a ) a n d ( b ) ) , f i r s t a s t a g e
(C) is n e c e s s a r y
in this p a p e r I h a v e t a k e n the point of
v i e ~ p r e s e n t e d u n d e r (c) i shall d i s c u s s the
p r o b l e m o~ o n a p h o r a in P o l i s h ser Atences rvly
altentioF, is f o c u s e d o n p e r s o n a l o n d
p o s s e s s i v e p r o n o u n s e x p t i c i t e l y o c c u r r i n g i n
the text a n d m o r e o v e r o n z e r o p r o n o u n s , i.e ellipsis of N P in the s u b j e c t position, specific for S l a v o n i c l a n g u a g e s
M y p u r p o s e in the d e s c r i p t i o n of regularities of the r e f e r e n c e in the P o l i s h
l a n g u a g e I shall e x p r e s s t h e m b y defining the
a r e a of p r o n o u n ' s r e f e r e n c e s , i.e t h o s e r e g i o n s
of the text w h e r e its a n t e c e d e n t s s h o u l d D e found, q h e s e s u r f a c e r e f e r e n t s will b e s e l e c t e d
f r o m a m o n g N P s o c c u r r i n g in the s e n t e n c e
T h e r e s e a r c h o n a n a p h o r a m a d e for
E n g l i s h h a s led to the formulation of s o m e structural rules u s i n g s u c h relations a s
c o m m a n d , c - c o m m a n d a n d p r e c e d e - a n d - c o m m a n d ( R e i n h a r t , 3.981)
I h a v e b e e n s e a r c h i n g for a n a l o g o u s r u l e s for Polish B u t t w o e s s e n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s h a v e
to b e c o n s i d e r e d : (i) g r a m m a t i c a l a n d m o r p h o l o g i c a l p r o p e r t i e s
of P o l i s h a n d E n g l i s h ; (ii) different g r a m m a t i c a l traditions
F o r E n g l i s h the r u l e s c o n c e r n i g the
c o r e f e r e n c e of entities w e r e forrrulated o n the
b a s i s of g e n e r a t i v e - t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l g r a m m a r
F o r P o l i s h the first p r e c i s e d e s c r i p t i o n of
P o l i s h s y n t a x w a s f o r m u l a t e d o n l y r e c e n t l y b y
S z p a k o w i c z , w h o b a s e d his w o r k o n the
f r a m e w o r k c r e a t e d b y S a l o n i (Saloni, 1 9 7 6 ;
S a l o n i a n d S w i d z i n s k i , 1 9 8 1 ) It is a k i n d of in,mediate-constituent g r a m m a r ; the g r a m m a t i c a l
c a t e g o r i e s ( c a s e , ~ e n d e r , etc) a r e a p p l i e d not only to single w o r d s , but a l s o to c o m p o u n d
p h r a s e s In m y p r e s e n t ~vork I h a v e limited m y attention to the s u b s e t of P o l i s h d e s c r i b e d
b y S z p a k o w i c z (Szpako~Jvicz, 1 9 8 3 )
F o l i s h is a h i g h l y inflexionat l a n g u a g e a n d this fact h a s m a n y a n d v a r i e d c o n s e q u e n c e s
S u r f a c e referents of the p r o n o u n will b e
s e l e c t e d f r o m a m o n g t h o s e N P s w h i c h n u m b e r -
- g e n d e r a g r e e with the p r o n o u n Strictly
s p e a k i n g , the g r a m m a t i c a l c a t e g o r i e s of the
p r o n o u n s h o u l d b e c o m p a t i b l e with the
c a t e g o r i e s of the N P , but in c a s e s of neutralization t h e y c a n n o t b e fully d e t e r m i n e d
M y m e t h o d of d e t e r m i n i n g the a r e a s of p r o n o u n ' s
r e f e r e n c e is a s y n t a c h c one, b e c a u s e it is
b a s e d o n m o r p h o l o g i c a l a n d syntactical
p r o p e r t i e s of the P o l i s h l a n g u a g e I a s s u m e
Trang 2s e n t e n c e a s well a s g r a m m a t i c a l a n d inflexional
information a c c e s s i b l e d u r i n g a syntactic
a n a l y s i s I detiberately d o not m a k e u s e of
a n y s e m a n t i c information, t r y i n g t o g e t the
m o s t out of g r a m m a r , ri'he feature I i n t e n d t O
p r o v i d e is a c o m p l e t e definition of the a r e a
of p r o n o u n ' s r e f e r e n c e
A
II A R E A O F R E F E R E N C E
Internal a n d e x t e r n a l a r e a s of r e f e r e n c e
In t h e p r o c e s s of d e t e r m i n i n g the s u r f a c e
r e f e r e n t s of the p r o n o u n , first the a r e a of its
r e f e r e n c e s h o u l d b e m a r k e d out T h i s a r e a ,
i.e t h o s e r e g i o n s of the text, w h e r e its
a n t e c e d e n t s s h o u l d b e found, is u s u a l l y m a d e
u p of s e v e r a l internal r e f e r e n c e a r e h s p i.e
the a p p r o p r i a t e bits of t h e c u r r e n t s e n t e n c e ,
a n d a n e x t e r n a l a r e a , the part of the text
p r e c e d i n g the c u r r e n t s e n t e n c e T h e list of
internal a r e a s d e p e n d s o n the s y n t a c t i c
position of the p r o n o u n in the s e n t e n c e
q'o d e t e r m i n e t h e s e a r e a s it is n e c e s s a r y to
f o r m u l a t e s e n t e n c e - l e v e l a n a p h o r a restrictions
for Polish T h e s e r u l e s will d e t e r m i n e the
c o n d i t i o n s of b o t h o b l i g a t o r y c o r e f e r e n c e a n d
0bii~atory n o n - c o r e f e r e n c e of entities T h u s
w e h a v e t w o situations to c o n s i d e r :
(i) in the c a s e of o b l i g a t o r y c o r e f e r e n c e o n e
internal a r e a of r e f e r e n c e c o n t a i n i n g the
a p p r o p r i a t e referent s h o u l d b e m a r k e d
o u t ;
( i i ) i n t h e c a s e o f o b l i g a t o r y " n o n - c o r e f e r e n c e
t h e e l e m e n t s w h i c h a r e f o r b i d d e n a s
s u r f a c e r e f e r e n t s o f t h e p r o n o u n s h o u l d
b e e x c l u d e d f r o m t h e i n t e r n a l a r e a
T h e c o r e f e r e n c e o f e n t i t i e s w h i c h i s q u a l i f i e d
o n t h e b a s i s o f s o m e o t h e r p r e m i s e s w i l l b e
c a l l e d a d m i s s i b l e c o r e f e r e n c e
A t o u r d i s p o s a l w e h a v e a m u l t i l e v e l e d ,
h i e r a r c h i c s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e s e n t e n c e
G e n e r a l l y , it s e e m s t h a t i n t e r n a l a r e a s c a n b e
i d e n t i f i e d w i t h t h e c o n s t i t u e n t s o n t h e h i ~ h e s t
l e v e l : s u b j e c t , o b j e c t s , m o d i f i e r s , r e g a r d l e s s
of their syntactic realization Strictly s p e a k i n g ,
n o u n a s well a s N P or a n y sentential
s t r u c t u r e s c a n b e i n s t a n c e s of internal a r e a s
of r e f e r e n c e
T h e partitioning of s e n t e n c e (i) illustrates i%:
(i) " ( E w a i Piotr) poszli ( d o n i e g o )
(z d z i e w c z y n q , kt6r~% w { a ~ n i e spotkali)"
" E v a a n d P e t e r w e n t to h i m with a girl
w h i c h j u s t fret"
[3 R u l e s c c n c e r n i n ~ c o r e f e r e n c e of
entities in P o l i s h
i T h e b a s i c criterion of e x c l u d i n g
c o r e f e r e n c e
T h e following r u l e s of e x c l u d i n g the
c o r e f e r e n c e of entities c o n c e r n a level
d e e p e r t h a n that o n the s u r f a c e , b e c a u s e t h e y refer to syntactical f u n c t i o n s of p h r a s e s in the
s e n t e n c e T h e first rule p r e s e n t s the p r o b l e m
of c o r e f e r e n c e of the s u b j e c t a n d o t h e r n o m i n a l
g r o u p s , i.e o b j e c t s a n d n o m i n a l trodifiers, in
s h o r t called objects It c o n c e r n s reflexive
p r o n o u n s , s o it s h o u l d b e n o t e d first that t h e y differ f r o m t h o s e in E n g l i s h , eg.:
- p o s s e s s i v e p r o n o u n " s w 6 j " m a y h a v e o n e of the following m e a n i n g s : his, her, its
- reflexive p r o n o u n "siebie" c a n m e a n : himself, herself, itself, myself, ourself, yourself,
t h e m s e l v e s
T h e b a s i c criterion of e x c l u d i n ~
c o r f e r e n c e I h a v e f o r m u l a t e d f r o m t h e analytical point of view:
( R I) If the o b j e c t is e x p r e s s e d b y m e a n s of
a reflexive p r o n o u n , t h e n it is coreferential with the subject; in o t h e r
c a s e s the referential identity of t h e
s u b j e c t a n d o b j e c t ist e x c l u d e d
T h i s criterion is a p p l i e d b o t h to l o o k for
c o r e f e r e n t s of o b j e c t s - b l o c k i n g the subject,
a n d in testing the p o s s i b l e a n t e c e d e n t s of the
s u b j e c t - b l o c k i n g the objects
Let u s c o n s i d e r s o m e e x a m p l e s :
M e a n i n g of s y m b o l s : .~ ,- obligatory c o r e f e r e n c e , / r obligatory n o n - c o r e f e r e n c e
~ .- a d m i s s i b l e c o r e f e r e n c e
r e f e r e n c e to e x t e r n a l a r e a
z e r o p r o n o u n (2) " E w a z a p y t a { a i o to"
" E v a a s k e d h e r a b o u t it"
4 (3) ~ ~ i ~ o to"
" A s k e ~ e m h e r a b o u t it"
( 4 ) " O n a z a p y t a { a i o t o "
" S h e a s k e d h e r a b o u t i t "
(5) " O n z a p y t a ~ J a n a o Piotra"
" H e a s k e d J o h n a b o u t P e t e r "
(6) " P i o t r nala{ s o b i e p i w • "
" P e t e r p o u r e d himself b e e r "
R u l e R 1 h o l d s for p o s s e s s i v e p r o n o u n s : (7) " E w a u w i e l b i a s w o j ~ p r z y j a c i 6 ~ k ~ "
" E v a a d o r e s h e r friend"
N o w let u s h a v e a loo[~ at the c a s e of the
p r e p o s e d P P s s o difficult to interpret in English T h e b a s i c criterion of e x c l u d i n g
c o r e f e r e n c e c o v e r s t h e s e p h r a s e s too:
( 8 ) "ik'~.gle, o b o k J a n a , ~) z o b a c z y ~ w q z a "
" S u d d e n l y , n e a r J o h n , s a w a s n a k e "
m a s t
Trang 3" S u d d e n l y , n e a r him, s a w a s n a k e "
m a s c (10) "Nagle, o b o k siebie, z o b a c z y { w ~ - a "
" S u d d e n l y , n e a r himself, s a w a s n a k e "
(ii) "Nagle, o b o k siebie, J n
m a s c
- - z o b a c z y ~ w ~ z a "
" S u d d e n l y , n e a r himself, h e s a w a s n a k e "
In e x a m p l e s (10) a n d (13.) the reflexive
p r o n o u n h a s a p p e a r e d T h e s e a r e the only
t w o c a s e s in w h i c h the c o r e f e r e n c e with the
subject of the m a i n s e n t e n c e is permitted a n d
e v e n obligator'y S u c h a n interpretation is
correct irrespective of the position of P P in
the s e n t e n c e , i.e it d o e s not d e p e n d o n
w h e t h e r this p h r a s e p r e c e d e s or follows the
subject
T h e b a s i c criterion of e x c l u d i n g
c o r e f e r e n c e w o r k s a s follows:
(i) it is valid only for a s i m p l e clause,
without blocking c o r e f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the
e l e m e n t s of the m a i n s e n t e n c e a n d the
constituents of e m b e d d e d clauses;
(ii) it is obligatory o n e v e r y level of the
s e n t e n c e , i.e it c o n c e r n s all the
s e n t e n c e constructions irrespective of
their position in the structure of the
w h o l e s e n t e n c e
E x a m p l e s (12) to (14) illustrate this:
12) "Piot"~ nie wiedzia~, c z y ' ~ pdjdzie d o
kina"
"Peter did not k n o w , w h e t h e r w o u l d g o
to the m o v i e s "
13) "Jan zapomnia{, o c o Pio£.F ~ Q pyta{"
" J o h n forgot, w h a t P e t e r a s k e d h i m aboulP
14) J a n spotka{ ch*opca, kt6ry e o d a w n o
ni e " o d ~ e c~z'ii "4"
" J o h n m e t a boy, w h o didn't visit h i m
for lon~"
T h e interpretation of reflexive p r o n o u n s
is not s o e a s y a s the criterion R 1 s u g g e s t s
T h e s e p r o n o u n s c a n b e i n v o l v e d i n various
c o m p o u n d p h r a s e s w h i c h often a r e a m b i g u o u s
Especially infinitive p h r a s e s a r e h a r d to
interpret In o r d e r to d o this correctly, a n
i m p l i c i t a g e n t w h i c h w i l l b e c a l l e d f u r t h e r t h e
d e e p s u b j e c t , s h o u l d b e o b t a i n e d It o f t e n
n e e d s a f e w h y p o t h e s e s to b e formulated
Let u s c o n s i d e r a n e x a m p l e T h e sentence:
(15) "Jan k a z a { s t u z q c e m u u m y d siq"
c a n b e translated in t w o w a y s w h i c h exactly
~lve the s e n s e of possible Polish
interpretations:
(15.1) " J o h n told (the s e v a n t ) (to w a s h h i m ) " (15.2) " J o h n told (the servant) (to w a s h
himself )"
In the infinitive p h r a s e " u m y d si@" ("to w a s h him" or "to w a s h himself") w h i c h is s t a n d i n g
in the object position, the reflexive p r o n o u n
"si~" is coreferential with the d e e p subject of this p h r a s e T h u s its interpretation h a s to b e determined H e r e w e h a v e t w o possibilities: (i) the p r e v i o u x o b j e c t - "servant" - interpretation (15.1)
(it) the subject of the m a i n s e n t e n c e - "John"
- interpretation (15.2)
O n e of t h e m is the referent of the d e e p subject A n d s o w e c o m e to the next rule: ( R 2) In o r d e r to interpret the infinitive
p h r a s e , the d e e p subject of the p h r a s e
h a s to b e selected from a m o n g the
p r e v i o u s object (if a n y ) a n d the subject of the m a i n s e n t e n c e
2 E x c l u d i n ~ the c o r e f e r e n c e b e t w e e n objects
T h e next s e n t e n c e - l e v e l restriction of
a n a p h o r a interpretation regulates the p r o b l e m
of c o r e f e r e n c e of l'4Ps other t h a n a subject, i.e objects, b e t w e e n them
(R 3
(16)
(18)
) T h e c o r e f e r e n c e of particular objets
is e x c l u d e d T h i s in a n obligatory
n o n - c o r e f e r e n c e
"Jan zapyta{ e o o Piotra
" J o h n a s k e d h i m a b o u t Peter"
"Jan zapyta~ e_qo o nie~o'
" J o 2 ~ a ~ u t him"
,, ja n zapyta, P i o ~ J ~ o H
" J o h n a s k e d P e t e r a b o u t him"
T h i s rule d o e s not hold for p o s s e s s i v e
p r o n o u n s w h i c h in Polish d o not create N P s
b y t h e m s e l v e s If t h e s e p r o n o u n s o c c u r in objects, t h e y m a y b e coreferential with objects
p r e c e d i n g t h e m Cadmissible c o r e f e r e n c e ) (19) "JaD zapyta~ P i o t ~ o ieRo brata"
" J o h n a s k e d P e t e r a b o u t his brother"
R u l e R 2 is only valid for a simple clause, • but it c o n c e r n s all the s e n t e n c e constructions irrespective of their position in the w h o l e sentence
Trang 43 R u l e s of interpretinq c o m p o u n d
s e n t e n c e s
"l~he next g r o u p of p r o b l e m s c o n c e r n s
the c o r e f e r e n c e of entities in a c o m p o u n d
s e n t e n c e , including the q u e s t i o n of the subject
In a P o l i s h s e n t e n c e it n e e d s not b e explicit
Ellipsis of the I'~P in the subject position,
often called "the elided subject", is a natural
w a y of e x p r e s s i n g "thematic cont,nu,ty' ' " a n d
exemplifies a n u n a c c e n t e d position in the
s e n t e n c e O n the other h a n d , the p r o n o u n a s
the subject s t a n d s in syntactic opposition to
the elided subject ( z e r o p r o n o u n ) a n d
exemplifies a n a c c e n t e d position in the
s e n t e n c e
~,'hile d e t e r m i n i n g the a n t e c e d e n t of the
subject of a simple s e n t e n c e or a m a i n c l a u s e
in a c o m p o u n d s e n t e n c e (explicit or implicit)
w e r e a c h out to the external a r e a of
references H o w e v e r , the b a s i c criterion of
e x c l u d i n g c o r e f e r e n c e is still valid
(20) " O h z a p ~ a { ~.~ o Pio~ra'
T h e interpretation of c o m p o u n d s e n t e n c e s is
d~icult a n d s o m e t i m e s l e a d s to a m b i g u o u s
results T h e following rules c o n c e r n m a i n l y the
c o r e f e r e n c e (or n o n - c o r e f e r e n c e ) of elided
subjects i n co-ordinate a n d a u b o r d i n a t e
clauses In the c a s e of c o - o r d i n a t e c l a u s e s
t~,o rules c a n b e formulated:
( R 4) I~or e a c h t w o c l a u s e s in a s e q u e n c e ,
if the elided subject is in the s e c o n d
clause, t h e n the subject of the first
c l a u s e s h o u l d b e extrapolated there
(obliRatory c o r e f e r e n c e )
"Piotr p o d s z e d ~ d o o k n a "
"Peter left the table a n d a p p r o a c h e d the
w i n d o w "
( R 5) 5"or e a c h t w o c l a u s e s i n a s e q u e n c e ,
the p r o n o u n or z e r o p r o n o u n subject
in the first c l a u s e c a n n o t b e
coreferential with the n o n - p r o n o u n
subject of the s e c o n d c l a u s e
(obligatory n o n - c o r e f e r e n c e )
o k n a "
"lie left the table a n d P e t e r a p p r o a c h e d
the w i n d o w "
Interpreting s u b o r d i n a t e c l a u s e s d e p e n d s o n
the relative position of the m a i n a n d the
e m b e d d e d clause
( R 6) If the e m b e d d e d c l a u s e p r e c e d e s the
m a i n c l a u s e a n d if both h a v e elided
subjects, t h e s e h a v e to b e coreferential
(zJ) Zanim 4 ~ ~ 2 z ~ > ~ zgasi~ ~wiat~o"
" B e f o r e leftmasc, t u r n e d Offmasc the l i g h t "
(24) "Poniewa~ % ~ ¢ zapyta~ o to"
" B e c a u s e f o r g o t , a s k e d a b o u t it"
m a s c m a s c ( R ?) T h e elided subject in the e m b e d d e d
c l a u s e is a natural w a y of indicating the n e a r e s t c a n d i d a t e - t h e p r e v i o u s object (if it is there) or the s u b j e c t
of the m a i n s e n t e n c e ( a d m i s s i b l e
c o r e f e r e n c e )
" - - - "' " - - z e ' * ~ p 6 j d z i e d o (25) "Jan z a p e w n i ~ Plotra,
(R 8
(26)
(27)
(28)
" J o h n p r o m i s e d Peter, that w i l l g o to the m o v i e s "
) T h e p r o n o u n o r z e r o p r o n o u n s u b j e c t
in the main s e n t e n c e c a n be
c o r e f e r e n t i a l with the n o n - p r o n o u n
s u b j e c t of the e m b e d d e d c l a u s e w h i c h
p r e c e d e s the main s e n t e n c e ( a d m i s s i b l e
c o r e f e r e n c e ) , but c a n n o t be
C o r e f e r e n t i a l with the n o n - p r o n o u n
s u b j e c t of the e m b e d d e d c l a u s e following the m a i n s e n t e n c e (obligatory
n o n - c o r e f e r e n c e )
" Z a n i n J a n w-y-szed{, ~ zgasi{ ~wiat{o"
" B e f o r e J o h n left, t u r n e d off the light"
m a s c
l
" ~ z z~gasi{ ~wiat~o, z a n i m J aan w y s z e d { "
{
" T u r n e d off the light, before J o h n left"
m a s c ,, O.~n-~ni e _ _ wiedzia~, c z y ~iot.r 156jdzie do /
k i n a "
" H e didn't k n o w , w h e t h e r P e t e r will g o
to the m o v i e s "
4 Interpretation of relative c l a u s e s Relative c l a u s e s a r e quite e a s y to
interpret in Polish Either their subject or object is r e p l a c e d w i t h p r o n o u n " w h i c h " or
"what" or their equivalents (only s u c h t y p e s
of relative c l a u s e s a r e d e s c r i b e d in the
S z p a k o w i c z grammar) T h e s e p r o n o u n s
a l w a y s indicate the N P next to w h i c h t h e y
s t a n d a n d inherit g e n d e r , n u m b e r a n d p e r s o n from it rfhus the obligatory c o r e f e r e n c e of relative p r o n o u n a n d this N P is determined Let u s h a v e a look at s o m e e x a m p l e s : (29) "E~'a zaprosi~ca Ani@, kt6r~ ~ z n a { a o d
d a w n a "
" E v a invited A n n t w h i c h for lon~"
h a d k n o w n
f e m
Trang 5d a w n ~ '
" E v a i n v i t e d A n n , w h i c h
( ~ ' - J ~ c t )
h e r for fang"
h a d k n o w n
III C O N C L U S I O N
T h e a b o v e syntactic m e t h o d o f
i n t e r p r e t i n g p r o n o u n s yields only partial results
- the list of internal a r e a s of r e f e r e n c e or the
external area, both with certain restrictions o n
c o r e f e r e n c e , a r e determined Next, m o r e
detailed results c a n b e obtained 1~'hen looking
at the internal areas, all N P s w h i c h n u m b e r -
- g e n d e r a g r e e with the p r o n o u n s h o u l d b e
selected a n d a list of s u r f a c e referents of
p r o n o u n together with a list of e l e m e n t s
b l o c k e d a s the referents c a n b e d r a w n up
If n o internal a r e a s are m a r k e d out, the
external a r e a with the list of b l o c k e d e l e m e n t s
is the result of the m e t h o d p r e s e n t e d here
Similary, while only a d m i s s i b l e c o r e f e r e n c e is
determined, the external a r e a is m a r k e d out
too a n d the list of b l o c k e d e l e m e n t s r e m a i n s
valid O n the other h a n d the obligatory
c o r e f e r e n c e m a k e s it p o s s i b l e to define the
appropriate a n t e c e d e n t of the p r o n o u n T h e
list of surface referents m a y be o r d e r e d b y
assunzin~ the specific m e t h o d of traversing the
p a r s i n ~ tree I expext, that a s for English,
r e c e n c y u n d e r s t o o d a s a p h y s i c a l distance
b e t w e e n the p r o n o u n a n d its a n t e c e d e n t c a n b e
the first a p p r o x i m a t i o n of the probability
A s e x p e c t e d the results o f the m e t h o d
applied h e r e n e e d s e m a n t i c verification B u t at
the s a m e time t h e y are a r e a s o n a b l e data for
further s e m a n t i c analysis D a t a arrived at in
this w a y m a k e this p r o c e s s m u c h easier
it s e e m s that a similar p r o c e d u r e c a n
b e carried out for other l a n g u a g e s Full
g r a m m a t i c a l information s h o u l d b e u s e d
w h e r e v e r it c a n s i m p l i f y s u c h c o m p l e x
p r o c e s s a s the s e m a n t i c analysis
N A S H - W E B B E R , B o n n i e L y n n ( 1 9 7 8 )
A F o r m a l A p p r o a c h to
D i s c o u r s e A n a p h o r a Phl) thesis, H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y
P A R T E E , B a r b a r a Hall ( 1 9 7 8 ) B o u n d
V a r i a b l e s a n d O t h e r A n a p h o r s in:
W a l t z 1978, 79-85
R E I N H A R T , T a n y a ( 1 9 8 1 ) Definite N P
A n a p h o r a a n d C - C o m m a n d D o m a i n s in: Linguistic Inquiry, V o l 12, N o 4, Fall 1981
S A L O N I ,
S A L O N I
Z y g m u n t ( 1 9 7 6 ) C e c h y s k { a d n i o w e
p o l s k i e g o c z a s o w n i k a ( S y n t a x
P r o p e r t i e s of Polish V e r b )
O s s o l i n e u m , P r a c e j ~ z y k o z n a w c z e ,
1 9 7 6
Z y g m u n t , S W I D Z I N S K I M a r e k ( 1 9 8 1 )
S k g a d n i a w s p 6 { c z e s n e g o j ~ z y k a
p o l s k i e g o ( S y n t a x of C o n t e m p o r a r y Polish L a n g u a g e ) 1 ~ ' y d a w n i c t w a
U n i w e r s y t e t u 9 V a r s z a w s k i e g o , 1981
S Z P A K O I A ' I C Z , S t a n i s { a w ( 1 9 8 3 ) F o r m a l n y
opis sk~adnio~y" z d a 6 polskich ( F o r m a l Syntactic D e s c r i p t i o n of
P o l i s h s e n t e n c e s ) I N y d a w n i c t w a
U n i w e r s y t e t u "vVarszawskiego, 1983 SZWEDEK, A l e k s a n d e r (1981) Word O r d e r ,
S e n t e n c e , S t r e s s a n d R e f e r e n c e
in E n g l i s h a n d Polish W S P
B y d g o s z c z , 1 9 8 1
V A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S
I would like to a c k n o w l e d g e J a n u s z
B i e 6 a n d Stanistaw S z p a k o w i c z for their
h e l p f u U c o m m e n t s o n this paper
H I R S T ,
H O B B S ,
H O B B S ,
R E F E R E N C E S
O r a e m e ( 1 9 7 9 ) A n a p h o r a in Natural
L a n g u a g e U n d e r s t a n d i n g : A S u r v e y
I~ept of C o m p u t e S c i e n c e ,
University of British C o l u m b i a
Jerry R ( 1 9 7 6 ) C o m p u t a t i o n a l
A p p r o a c h to D i s c o u r s e Analysis
A r t i f i c i a l I n t e l l i g e n c e C e n t e r ,
S R I I n t e r n a t i o n a l
Jerry lq ( 1 9 7 8 ) C o h e r e n c e a n d
C o r e f e r e n c e T e c h n i c a l note 168
Artificial Intelligence Center,
S R I i n t e r n a t i o n a l