Thematic role and grammatical function affect pronoun production

Authors

  • Sofiana-Iulia Lindemann Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Transilvania University of Brasov, Romania Author
  • Stanca Mada Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Transilvania University of Brasov, Romania Author
  • Laura Sasu Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Transilvania University of Brasov, Romania Author
  • Madalina Matei Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Transilvania University of Brasov, Romania Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36505/ExLing-2020/11/0028/000443

Keywords:

Thematic role, grammatical function, pronoun interpretation, Romanian

Abstract

According to different approaches to pronoun processing, in pro-drop languages, null pronouns are interpreted as referring back to the grammatical subject and topical referent, while overt pronouns are usually interpreted as coreferring with a non-subject and non-topical antecedent. The present study investigates whether thematic role and grammatical function impact (overt and null) pronoun production in Romania. Results show that we do not encounter a clear division of labour between the two pronoun forms triggered by syntactic structure alone and that thematic roles matter as well. The findings support a multi-dimensional approach, suggesting that different referential forms are constrained by different factors.

References

Ariel, M. 1990. Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London, Routledge.

Arnold, J.E. 2001. Reference form and discourse patterns. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Stanford University, Stanford, CA.

Carminati, M.N. 2002. The processing of Italian subject pronouns. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from Proquest (AAI3039345).

Chiriacescu, S.I. 2011a. Effects of reference form on frequency of mention and rate of subsequent mention, In S.L. Devi, A. Branco and R. Mitkov (eds.) 2011, Anaphora Processing and Applications. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 132-142. Heidelberg, Springer.

Chiriacescu, S.I. 2011b. Factors contributing to the salience of referents. In M. Nevaci (ed.) 2011, Studia linguistica et philologica, 74-96. Bucuresti, Editura Universitatii.

Dobrovie-Sorin, C. 1994. The Syntax of Romanian. Berlin, De Gruyter.

Fukumura, K, van Gompel, R.P.G. 2010. Choosing anaphoric expression. Do people take into account likelihood of reference? Journal of Memory and Language 62, 52-66.

Gundel, J., Hedberg, N, Zacharski, R. 1993. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 69(2), 274–307.

von Heusinger, K., Chiriacescu, S.I. 2009. Definite “bare” nouns and pe-marking in Romanian. In Espinal, M.T., Leonetti, M., McNally, L. (eds.) 2009, Proceedings of the IV Nereus International Workshop “Definiteness and DP Structure in Romance Languages”, 63-82. Konstanz, Universität Konstanz, Arbeitspapier 124. Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft.

Kaiser E., Trueswell, J. 2008. Interpreting pronouns and demonstrantives in Finnish: Evidence from a form-specific approach to reference resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes 23(5), 709-748.

Rosa, E., Arnold, J. 2017. Predictability affects production: Thematic roles can affect reference form selection. Journal of Memory and Language 94, 43-60.

Downloads

Published

01-01-2020

How to Cite

Thematic role and grammatical function affect pronoun production. (2020). Linguistic Proceedings Series, 11(1), 113-116. https://doi.org/10.36505/ExLing-2020/11/0028/000443

Share

Similar Articles

1-10 of 133

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.