{"title":"The 并不编码拟声索引:实物使用的证据","authors":"Sadhwi Srinivas","doi":"10.3765/plsa.v9i1.5764","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Two types of semantic theories concerning referring uses of the English definite article the have historically held sway: (i) uniqueness theories, where the is taken to uniquely describe a referent within some contextually restricted domain, and (ii) familiarity theories, where the picks out a previously mentioned referent. Here, we focus on an observation made in Reed (2024) on the anaphoric potential of the definite article in kind-denoting contexts: namely, that it is limited when compared to occurrences of the in anaphoric individual-denoting contexts as well as to occurrences of other referring expressions (e.g., that) in anaphoric kind-denoting contexts. Based on these data, we argue for an analysis of the definite article that makes crucial use of domain restriction rather than anaphoric indices. ","PeriodicalId":299752,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America","volume":"1 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The does not encode an anaphoric index: Evidence from kind uses\",\"authors\":\"Sadhwi Srinivas\",\"doi\":\"10.3765/plsa.v9i1.5764\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Two types of semantic theories concerning referring uses of the English definite article the have historically held sway: (i) uniqueness theories, where the is taken to uniquely describe a referent within some contextually restricted domain, and (ii) familiarity theories, where the picks out a previously mentioned referent. Here, we focus on an observation made in Reed (2024) on the anaphoric potential of the definite article in kind-denoting contexts: namely, that it is limited when compared to occurrences of the in anaphoric individual-denoting contexts as well as to occurrences of other referring expressions (e.g., that) in anaphoric kind-denoting contexts. Based on these data, we argue for an analysis of the definite article that makes crucial use of domain restriction rather than anaphoric indices. \",\"PeriodicalId\":299752,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America\",\"volume\":\"1 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3765/plsa.v9i1.5764\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3765/plsa.v9i1.5764","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
关于英语定冠词 the 的指代用法,历来有两类语义理论占据主导地位:(i) 唯一性理论,即定冠词 the 被认为是在某个受语境限制的领域内唯一描述指代对象的;(ii) 熟悉性理论,即定冠词 the 挑出一个先前提到过的指代对象。在这里,我们重点讨论 Reed(2024)就定语在种类指称语境中的拟喻潜力提出的一个观点:即与在拟喻个体指称语境中出现的 the 以及在拟喻种类指称语境中出现的其他指称表达式(如 that)相比,定语的拟喻潜力是有限的。基于这些数据,我们主张对定语进行分析,关键是要利用领域限制而不是拟喻指数。
The does not encode an anaphoric index: Evidence from kind uses
Two types of semantic theories concerning referring uses of the English definite article the have historically held sway: (i) uniqueness theories, where the is taken to uniquely describe a referent within some contextually restricted domain, and (ii) familiarity theories, where the picks out a previously mentioned referent. Here, we focus on an observation made in Reed (2024) on the anaphoric potential of the definite article in kind-denoting contexts: namely, that it is limited when compared to occurrences of the in anaphoric individual-denoting contexts as well as to occurrences of other referring expressions (e.g., that) in anaphoric kind-denoting contexts. Based on these data, we argue for an analysis of the definite article that makes crucial use of domain restriction rather than anaphoric indices.