Zugl.: Mainz, Univ., Diplomarbeit, 2006

Diss.--Sozialwissenschaften--Mainz--Johannes-Gutenberg-Universität, 1978.

Konstanz, Univ., Diss., 2006.

Universiẗat, Diss., 2002--Jena.

Universiẗat, Diss., 2000--Mannheim.

Universiẗat, Diss., 2004--Bielefeld.

Univ., Habil-Schr./2001--Potsdam, 2000. / Literaturverz. S. [179] - 193.

Pronoun resolution normally takes place without conscious effort or awareness, yet the processes behind it are far from straightforward. A large number of cues and constraints have previously been recognised as playing a role in the identification and integration of potential antecedents, yet there is considerable debate over how these operate within the resolution process. The aim of this thesis is to investigate how the parser handles multiple antecedents in order to understand more about how certain information sources play a role during pronoun resolution. I consider how both structural information and information provided by the prior discourse is used during online processing. This is investigated through several eye tracking during reading experiments that are complemented by a number of offline questionnaire experiments. I begin by considering how condition B of the Binding Theory (Chomsky 1981; 1986) has been captured in pronoun processing models; some researchers have claimed that processing is faithful to syntactic constraints from the beginning of the search (e.g. Nicol and Swinney 1989), while others have claimed that potential antecedents which are ruled out on structural grounds nonetheless affect processing, because the parser must also pay attention to a potential antecedent’s features (e.g. Badecker and Straub 2002). My experimental findings demonstrate that the parser is sensitive to the subtle changes in syntactic configuration which either allow or disallow pronoun reference to a local antecedent, and indicate that the parser is normally faithful to condition B at all stages of processing. Secondly, I test the Primitives of Binding hypothesis proposed by Koornneef (2008) based on work by Reuland (2001), which is a modular approach to pronoun resolution in which variable binding (a semantic relationship between pronoun and antecedent) takes place before coreference. I demonstrate that a variable-binding (VB) antecedent is not systematically considered earlier than a coreference (CR) antecedent online. I then go on to explore whether these findings could be attributed to the linear order of the antecedents, and uncover a robust recency preference both online and offline. I consider what role the factor of recency plays in pronoun resolution and how it can be reconciled with the first-mention advantage (Gernsbacher and Hargreaves 1988; Arnold 2001; Arnold et al., 2007). Finally, I investigate how aspects of the prior discourse affect pronoun resolution. Prior discourse status clearly had an effect on pronoun resolution, but an antecedent’s appearance in the previous context was not always facilitative; I propose that this is due to the number of topic switches that a reader must make, leading to a lack of discourse coherence which has a detrimental effect on pronoun resolution. The sensitivity of the parser to structural cues does not entail that cue types can be easily separated into distinct sequential stages, and I therefore propose that the parser is structurally sensitive but not modular. Aspects of pronoun resolution can be captured within a parallel constraints model of pronoun resolution, however, such a model should be sensitive to the activation of potential antecedents based on discourse factors, and structural cues should be strongly weighted. / Pronomenauflösung erfolgt normalerweise scheinbar mühelos und ohne bewusste Anstrengung. Jedoch ist die Verarbeitung von pronominalen Referenzen aus linguistischer Sicht ein hochkomplexer Prozess. Durch unterschiedliche wissenschaftliche Studien wurden bereits zahlreiche Faktoren ermittelt, die bei der Pronomenauflösung eine Rolle spielen, allerdings herrscht weitgehend noch keine Einigkeit darüber, wie genau diese Faktoren die Verarbeitung von Pronomen beeinflussen. Ziel dieser Dissertation ist es zu untersuchen, wie der Leser/Hörer mit Pronomen umgeht, denen mehrere Antezedenten zugeordnet werden können, um zu verstehen, welche Rolle bestimmte Informationsquellen in der Verarbeitung von Pronomen spielen. Besondere Beachtung findet dabei, wie strukturelle Eigenschaften sowie Informationen aus dem vorangegangenen Diskurs für die Suche nach einem passenden Antezedenten benutzt werden. Die angewandte Untersuchungsmethode der vorliegenden Dissertation ist Eye-tracking during reading, ergänzt mit verschiedenen offline-Fragebögen. Die Experimente erforschen die Rolle der folgenden Aspekte in der Verarbeitung von Pronomen: Prinzip B der Bindungstheorie (Chomsky 1981; 1986), Koreferenz und Variablenbindung laut der Primitives of Binding Hypothese (Reuland 2001, Koornneef 2008), Antezedentenreihenfolge im Satz, und Diskursstatus des Antezedents. Obwohl es zeigt sich, dass der Hörer/Leser sensibel für subtile Veränderungen in der syntaktischen Konfiguration ist, wie z.B. für die Reihenfolge der Antezedenten im Satz und für den Diskursstatus des Antezedenten, gibt es keinen Nachweis dafür, dass Variablenbindung zeitlich vor Koreferenz erfolgt. Einige Aspekte der Auflösung pronominaler Referenzen können in einem parallel constraints model erfasst werden, allerdings sollte so ein Modell strukturelle Informationen stark gewichten und sensitiv sein für die Aktivierung potenzieller Antezedenten aufgrund von Diskursfaktoren.

Zugl.: Leipzig, University, Diss., 2007.

Zugl.: Leipzig, Universiẗat, Diss., 2003.