Abstract
Three reading-time experiments in Chinese are reported that test contrasting views of how pronominal coreference is achieved. On the one hand, studies of reading time and eye tracking suggest that reduced expressions, such as the pronoun he, serve as critical links to integrate separate utterances into a coherent model of discourse. On the other hand, probe-word recognition studies indicate that full anaphoric expressions, such as a repeated name, are more readily interpreted than reduced expressions due to their rich lexical information, which provides effective cues to match the representation of the appropriate referent in memory. The results indicate that the ease of integrating the critical referent into a model of discourse is a function of the congruence of lexical, semantic, and discourse features conveyed by a syntactically prominent reduced expression within linguistic input. This pattern supports the view that a reduced expression is interpreted on-line and indeed plays a critical role in promoting discourse coherence by facilitating the semantic integration of separate utterances.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Cloitre, M., & Bever, T. G. (1988). Linguistic anaphors, levels of representation, and discourse. Language and cognitive processes, 3, 293-322.
Enrlich, K. (1983). Eye movements in pronoun assignment: A study of sentence integration. In K. Rayner (Ed.), Eye movements in reading: Perceptual and language processes. News York: Academic Press.
Garrod, S., Freudenthal, D., & Boyle, E. A. (1994). The role of different types of anaphors in the on-line resolution of sentences in a discourse. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 39-68.
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1989). Mechanisms that improve referential access. Cognition, 32, 99-156.
Givon, T. (1992). The grammar of referential coherence as mental processing instructions. Linguistics, 30, 5-55.
Gordon, P. C., Grosz, B. J., and Gilliom, L. A. (1993). Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention in discourse. Cognitive Science, 17, 311-347.
Gordon, P. C., and Hendrick, R. (1997). Intuitive knowledge of linguistic co-reference. Cognition, 62, 325-370.
Gordon, P. C., and Hendrick, R. (1998). The representation and processing of co-reference in discourse. Cognitive Science, 22, 389-424.
Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Foster, K. (2000). Language comprehension and probe-list memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26, 766-775.
Greene, S. B., McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Pronoun resolution and discourse models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 266-283.
Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1995). Centering: A framework for modelling the local coherence of discourse, Computational Linguistics, 21, 203-226.
Hudson-D'Zmura, S. B. (1988). The structure of discourse and anaphore resolution: The discourse center and the roles of noun and pronouns. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rochester.
Kennison, S. M., & Gordon, P. C. (1997). Comprehending referential expressions during reading: Evidence from eye tracking. Discourse Processes, 24, 229-252.
Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. A. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley, California, University of California Press.
Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Yang, C.-L., Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Wu, J. T. (1999). Comprehension of referring expressions in Chinese. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 715-743.
Yang, C.-L., Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Hue, C. W. (2000, March). The processing of coreference for reduced expressions in discourse integration-A case study of Chinese. Paper presented at the 13th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, La Jolla, California.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yang, C.L., Gordon, P.C., Hendrick, R. et al. The Processing of Coreference for Reduced Expressions in Discourse Integration. J Psycholinguist Res 30, 21–35 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005252123299
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005252123299