引用同义词典和文本凝聚力:椭圆的情况

IF 0.1 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
I. Korzen
{"title":"引用同义词典和文本凝聚力:椭圆的情况","authors":"I. Korzen","doi":"10.6092/LEF_37_P93","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses various anaphoric expressions and the textual dependency and cohesion that they convey, with a special focus on the anaphoric ellipsis. On the basis of a classification model distinguishing between anaphoric, cataphoric and exophoric “reference valency”, anaphoric NPs, pro-forms and ellipses are compared with NPs that establish an exophoric reference parallel to, but not depending on, that of an anteceding NP, i.e. cases which should not be termed anaphoric. The paper examines the co-textual restrictions linked to the different expressions investigated (including null forms) and distinguishes between four co-textual dependencies: thematic, referential, lexical, and structural. Unlike the other anaphoric expressions, the ellipsis exhibits all four dependencies and is therefore defined as the strongest cohesion marker of the ones investigated.","PeriodicalId":40434,"journal":{"name":"Linguistica e Filologia","volume":"37 1","pages":"93-119"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rimandi anaforici e coesione testuale: il caso dell’ellissi\",\"authors\":\"I. Korzen\",\"doi\":\"10.6092/LEF_37_P93\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper discusses various anaphoric expressions and the textual dependency and cohesion that they convey, with a special focus on the anaphoric ellipsis. On the basis of a classification model distinguishing between anaphoric, cataphoric and exophoric “reference valency”, anaphoric NPs, pro-forms and ellipses are compared with NPs that establish an exophoric reference parallel to, but not depending on, that of an anteceding NP, i.e. cases which should not be termed anaphoric. The paper examines the co-textual restrictions linked to the different expressions investigated (including null forms) and distinguishes between four co-textual dependencies: thematic, referential, lexical, and structural. Unlike the other anaphoric expressions, the ellipsis exhibits all four dependencies and is therefore defined as the strongest cohesion marker of the ones investigated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40434,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistica e Filologia\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"93-119\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistica e Filologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6092/LEF_37_P93\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistica e Filologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6092/LEF_37_P93","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文讨论了各种回指表达及其所传达的语篇依赖性和衔接性,特别是回指省略。在区分回指、后指和外指“参考价”的分类模型的基础上,将回指NP、前形式和省略与建立与前指NP平行但不依赖于前指NP的外指的NP进行了比较,即不应称为回指的情况。本文考察了与所研究的不同表达(包括空形式)相关的共语篇限制,并区分了四种共语篇依赖:主位、指称、词汇和结构。与其他回指表达不同,省略表现出所有四种依赖性,因此被定义为所研究的回指表达中最强的衔接标记。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rimandi anaforici e coesione testuale: il caso dell’ellissi
This paper discusses various anaphoric expressions and the textual dependency and cohesion that they convey, with a special focus on the anaphoric ellipsis. On the basis of a classification model distinguishing between anaphoric, cataphoric and exophoric “reference valency”, anaphoric NPs, pro-forms and ellipses are compared with NPs that establish an exophoric reference parallel to, but not depending on, that of an anteceding NP, i.e. cases which should not be termed anaphoric. The paper examines the co-textual restrictions linked to the different expressions investigated (including null forms) and distinguishes between four co-textual dependencies: thematic, referential, lexical, and structural. Unlike the other anaphoric expressions, the ellipsis exhibits all four dependencies and is therefore defined as the strongest cohesion marker of the ones investigated.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Linguistica e Filologia
Linguistica e Filologia LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信