Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Logic, Language and Information 9 (3):313-338 (2000)
|Abstract||The HOU-based analysis of ellipsis was shown byDalrymple et al. (1991) and Shieber et al. (1996) to correctly capture thecomplex interaction of VP-ellipsis, scope and anaphora and claimed toextend to further related phenomena. When applied to deaccenting, theanalysis makes a strong prediction, namely that all anaphors occurringin the deaccented part of a deaccented utterance are parallelanaphors, i.e., anaphors that resolve to their parallel counterpart inthe source. I argue that this prediction is supported by the data andshow that it correctly captures the interaction of deaccenting withanaphora, (in)definiteness and focus.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Nils A. Baas (2009). Hyperstructures, Topology and Datasets. Axiomathes 19 (3):281-295.
Stephen G. Pulman (1997). Higher Order Unification and the Interpretation of Focus. Linguistics and Philosophy 20 (1):73-115.
Jonah N. Schupbach (2005). On a Bayesian Analysis of the Virtue of Unification. Philosophy of Science 72 (4):594-607.
Christoph Benzmüller (2002). Comparing Approaches to Resolution Based Higher-Order Theorem Proving. Synthese 133 (1-2):203 - 235.
Michael Tye (1994). Why the Vague Need Not Be Higher-Order Vague. Mind 103 (409):43-45.
Mary Dalrymple, Stuart M. Shieber & Fernando C. N. Pereira (1991). Ellipsis and Higher-Order Unification. Linguistics and Philosophy 14 (4):399 - 452.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads2 ( #246,970 of 740,802 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,957 of 740,802 )
How can I increase my downloads?