Assessing the discourse referential properties of weak definites

Transcription

1 Assessing the discourse referential properties of weak definites TIN-dag 2010 Jolien Scholten & Ana Aguilar Guevara February 6, 2010

2 NWO project Weak referentiality: bare nominals at the lexicon-syntax-semantics interface Henriëtte de Swart Martin Everaert Joost Zwarts Bert Le Bruyn Ellen-Petra Kester Min Que

3 Outline Weak definites Characterization The problem The experiments Discussion Further work 3

4 Weak definites Some uses of non-relational count singular definites do not seem to presuppose the existence of a uniquely identifiable entity (cf. Carlson & Sussman 2005; Birner & Ward 1994; Löbner 1985): 1) (Context: Lola sitting on the sofa of a waiting room reading a newspaper. There are some more newspapers lying next to her.) Lola is reading the newspaper. They allow sloppy readings in VP-ellipsis: 2) Lola went to the hospital and Alice did too. (Different hospitals are possible) They take narrow scope : 3) Every boxer was sent to the hospital. (every boxer > the hospital) They occur only with a restricted class of nouns: 4) You should see the doctor vs # the surgeon. 4

5 Weak definites They occur only with a restricted class of governors: 5) Sally checked the calendar vs read # the calendar. Modification is also limited: 6) Lola is in # the big hospital vs. the psychiatric hospital. They often show an enriched meaning: 7) Eva called the doctor = Eva called a doctor + asked for medical assistance. They don t occur in subject position, unless with a generic reading: 8) # The newspaper was stolen. vs. The newspaper brings many people their daily news. 5

6 Weak definites It is unclear whether weak definites can set up discourse referents: 9) a. I checked the calendar i when I was planning my appointments and put it i back in my desk. b. She called the doctor i immediately. He i prescribed alternative therapy. c. Sheila took the limo i to the airport. It i was a huge gaudy Hummer. At least weak definites are not as good as other definites that pick up familiar referents (10) nor as indefinites that introduce new referents (11) (cf. Heim 1982, 1983; Kamp 1981): 10) a. Yesterday I saw a unicorn i and a donkey in my garden. I beat the unicorn i because it i was eating my roses. b. Next to my house there is a hospital and a church i. This morning I walked to the hospital i but it i was closed. 11) a. Yesterday I saw a donkey i in my garden. It i was sleeping next to my roses. b. This morning I went to a hospital but it i was closed. 6

7 Weak definites It is unclear whether weak definites can set up discourse referents: 9) a. I checked the calendar i when I was planning my appointments and put it i back in my desk. b. She called the doctor i immediately. He i prescribed alternative therapy. c. Sheila took the limo i to the airport. It i was a huge gaudy Hummer. At least they are not as bad as bare singulars, which can neither introduce nor pick up any referent (cf. Farkas & de Swart 2003; Espinal & McNally 2009) : 12) a. *Lola is still at school i because today her class had to help to clean it i b. *This morning I went to town i but it i was completely empty. c. *Yesterday I couldn t watch TV i because it i broke down. 7

8 The experiments Aim To assess the capacity of weak definites, bare singulars, regular definites and indefinites to elicit Different kinds of anaphoric NPs, i.e., pronouns, demonstratives and definite NPs. Predictions Assuming the following correlation between different kinds of referential expressions and the level of accessibility of their antecedents (cf. Ariel 1990; Gundel et al. 1993; Gordon et al. 1993). highly accessible antecedents < > less accessible antecedents Pronouns Demonstratives Full definite NPs Prediction 1: Indefinites and regular definites will elicit more pronouns than bare singulars and weak definites. Prediction 2: Bare singulars and weak definites will elicit more full NPs than regular definites and indefinites. Prediction 3: Bare singulars and weak definites will distinguish from each other. Presumably, weak definites will elicit more pronouns than bare singulars. 8

9 Experiment 1 This study tested the capacity of weak definites, bare singulars and indefinites to elicit three different kinds of anaphoric NPs, i.e., pronouns (a), demonstratives (b) and definites (c, d). Weak definite 13) Guido luisterde vanochtend naar de radio. Hij zette zo hard dat de buren er wakker van werden. Guido listened to the radio this morning. He turned up volume such that it woke up the neighbors. a. m b. die c. de radio d. het apparaat Bare singular 14) Martin zette vanochtend het ontbijt op tafel. Na het ontbijt heeft hij afgeruim Martin put the breakfast on the table this morning. After breakfast he has cleared away a. m b. die c. de tafel d. het meubelstuk Indefinite 15) Nienke zocht gisteren een map. Ze heeft zojuist gevonden. Nienke searched for a folder yesterday. She has just found. a.`m b. die c. de map d. het ding 9

10 Method Materials 18 target mini-discourses (six per condition) 36 fillers with similar format to the targets. Subjects 65 native Dutch-speaking undergraduates at Utrecht University participated in this study. Design Within-subjects design. Three conditions: weak definites, bare singulars and indefinites Pen-and-pencil questionnaire. 10

11 Results 80% 74% 70% Pronoun 60% 50% 50% 46% Full NP Demonstrative 40% 34% 33% Synonymic Definite 30% 20% 10% 0% 20% 12% 14% 4% 7% 5% Weak Definite Bare singular Indefinite 1% Type of target NP The proportion of pronouns elicited by the three kinds of NPs revealed differences (F(2,62)=53.60, p<0.001). Pairwise comparisons (with Bonferroni correction) showed: The proportions corresponding to weak definites and bare singulars were not statistically different, but that indefinites did elicit significantly higher proportions of pronouns than bare singulars (p<0.001) and than weak definites (p<0.001). 11

12 Experiment 2 This study tested the capacity of weak definites, bare singulars and indefinites to elicit pronouns (a) and anaphoric definites only (b). Weak definite 16) Guido luisterde vanochtend naar de radio. Hij zette zo hard dat de buren er wakker van werden. Guido listened to the radio this morning. He turned up volume such that it woke up the neighbors. a. m b. de radio Bare singular 17) Martin zette vanochtend het ontbijt op tafel. Na het ontbijt heeft hij afgeruim Martin put the breakfast on the table this morning. After breakfast he has cleared away a. m b. de tafel Indefinite 18) Nienke zocht gisteren een map. Ze heeft zojuist gevonden. Nienke searched for a folder yesterday. She has just found. a.`m b. de map 12

14 Results Pronoun Full NP 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 91% 59% 59% 41% 41% 9% Weak Definite Bare singular Indefinite Type of target NP The proportion of pronouns elicited by the three kinds of NPs revealed differences (F(2,62)=88.28 p<0.001). Those corresponding to weak definites and bare singulars were not statistically different from each other but those corresponding to indefinites were significantly higher than those corresponding to bare singulars (p<0.001) and to weak definites (p<0.001). 14

15 Experiment 3 This study tested the capacity of weak definites, regular definites and indefinites to elicit pronouns (a) and anaphoric definites only (b). Weak definites 19) Guido luisterde vanochtend naar de radio. Hij zette zo hard dat de buren er wakker van werden. Guido listened to the radio this morning. He turned up volume such that it woke up the neighbors. a. m b. de radio Regular definites 20) Aniek maakte de mat uit de hal schoon. Daarna heeft ze terug gelegd. Indefinites Aniek cleaned the mat in the hal. After that she had put it back 21) Nienke zocht gisteren een map. Ze heeft zojuist gevonden. Nienke searched for a folder yesterday. She has just found. a. m b. de mat a.`m b. de map 15

17 Results Pronoun Full NP 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 80% 70% 53% 47% 30% 20% Weak Definite Regular Definite Indefinite Type of target NP The proportion of pronouns elicited by the three kinds of NPs revealed differences (F(2,38)=30.08, p<0.001). Those corresponding to weak definites were significantly lower than those corresponding to indefinites (p<0.001) and to regulars definites (p<0.001). Those corresponding to indefinites were also significantly higher than those corresponding to regular definites (p<0.001). 17

18 Discussion Weak definites behave differently from indefinites and regular definites in their capacity to be referred back by pronouns and full NPs: Indefinites and regular definites favor pronouns over full NPs. Weak definites and bare singulars allow pronouns and full NPs almost equally. These results are compatible with the possibility that weak definites, just like bare singulars, do not set up discourse entities. But, is this the only possible explanation? The fact that weak definites favor full NPs is still surprising given the findings of reading experiments that repetitions of definites in subsequent sentences are highly penalized (cf. Gordon, Grosz & Gillion 1993). 18

19 Future Work Interpretation studies Acceptability judgment studies and self-paced reading/eye-tracking studies of sentences like Weak definite 22) I went to the store i but it i /the store i was completely empty. Indefinite 23) I went to a market i but it i /the market i was completely empty. Bare singular 24) I went to town i but it i /the town i was completely empty. 19

20 Acknowledgments We would like to thank Esther Janse, Henriëtte de Swart and Joost Zwarts for all their help, as well as the participants of the experiments and the teachers of Utrecht University who allowed us to apply the questionnaires in theirs classes. 20