Interpretation Of Ellipsis Research Articles

“The tiger is hitting! the duck too!” 3-year-olds can use prosodic information to constrain their interpretation of ellipsis

This work aims to investigate French children's ability to use phrasal boundaries for disambiguation of a type of ambiguity not yet studied, namely stripping sentences versus simple transitive sentences. We used stripping sentences such as “[Le tigre tape]! [Le canard aussi]!” (“[The tiger is hitting]! [The duck too]!”, in which both the tiger and the duck are hitting), which, without the prosodic information, would be ambiguous with a transitive sentence such as “[Le tigre] [tape le canard aussi]!” (“[The tiger] [is hitting the duck too]!”, in which the tiger is hitting the duck). We presented 3-to-4-year-olds and 28-month-olds with one of the two types of sentence above, while they watched two videos side-by-side on a screen: one depicting the transitive interpretation of the sentences, and another depicting the stripping interpretation. The stripping interpretation video showed the two characters as agents of the named action (e.g. a duck and a tiger hitting a bunny), and the transitive interpretation video showed only the first character as an agent, and the second character as a patient of the action (e.g. the tiger hitting the duck and the bunny). The results showed that 3-to-4-year-olds use prosodic information to correctly distinguish stripping sentences from transitive sentences, as they looked significantly more at the appropriate video, while 28-month-olds show only a trend in the same direction. While recent studies demonstrated that from 18 months of age, infants are able to use phrasal prosody to guide the syntactic analysis of ambiguous sentences, our results show that only 3-to-4-year-olds were able to reliably use phrasal prosody to constrain the parsing of stripping sentences. We discuss several factors that can explain this delay, such as differences in the frequency of these structures in child-directed speech, as well as in the complexity of the sentences and of the experimental task. Our findings add to the growing body of evidence on the role of prosody in constraining parsing in young children.

At the syntax-discourse interface: Verb phrase ellipsis interpretation in context

A central question of language comprehension concerns the interaction between linguistic form and broader representations of discourse in the interpretation of context-sensitive expressions. This interaction is instantiated in the interpretation of verb phrase ellipsis (VPE), where previous work has shown that the linguistic antecedent and the broader context are both considered in resolution. Using a novel experimental paradigm, we investigated VPE interpretation in discourses where the antecedent and the broader context make different information available for inclusion in the interpretation of the ellipsis site. Our results point to a complex interaction between linguistic antecedents and the broader discourse context in interpretation, putting considerable constraints on the set of possible models for VPE resolution. This work contributes to a better understanding of both the connections between and the boundaries separating linguistic structure and mental models of discourse contexts.

Linearization and its discontents

Much recent work on coordination in the HPSG framework seeks to deal with some of the most intractable issues this phenomenon poses for a constraint-based phrase structure architecture by appealing to the linearization mechanism introduced in Reape 1993. The research in question utilizes the mismatch between linear phonological sequences on the one hand and phrasal configuration on the other to underwrite a particular interpretation of ellipsis in which multiple structural objects with identical or near-identical descriptions are mapped to a single dom-object token. This mapping apparently allows a variety of problematic cases, such as right node raising, dependent cluster coordination, and unlike category coordination to be reinterpreted as instances of ordinary coordination in which structurally present elements receive no prosodic expression, creating the impression that strings which do not correspond to constituents of the same category have nonetheless been conjoined or disjoined. I argue in this paper that such linearization-based ellipsis (LBE) analyses, though plausible when confined to a narrow class of simplest-case data, prove untenable in the face of data sets in which the LBE approach must account for the interaction of nonconstituent coordination and quantification or symmetric predication, symmetrical modification of nominal heads, and a large and varied class of unlike category coordinations that do not admit of any ellipsis-based solutions. I show in addition that various objections offered in the LBE literature to categorial grammar treatments of the problems posed by noncanonical coordinations do not take into account techical resources available to CG which permit straightforward and unproblematic solutions to these problems. One must conclude that despite the general poplularity of LBE accounts of conjunction, there is at the moment no satisfactory HPSG treatment of noncanonical coordinations.

A content-addressable pointer mechanism underlies comprehension of verb-phrase ellipsis

Interpreting a verb-phrase ellipsis (VP ellipsis) requires accessing an antecedent in memory, and then integrating a representation of this antecedent into the local context. We investigated the online interpretation of VP ellipsis in an eye-tracking experiment and four speed–accuracy tradeoff experiments. To investigate whether the antecedent for a VP ellipsis is accessed with a search or direct-access retrieval process, Experiments 1 and 2 measured the effect of the distance between an ellipsis and its antecedent on the speed and accuracy of comprehension. Accuracy was lower with longer distances, indicating that interpolated material reduced the quality of retrieved information about the antecedent. However, contra a search process, distance did not affect the speed of interpreting ellipsis. This pattern suggests that antecedent representations are content-addressable and retrieved with a direct-access process. To determine whether interpreting ellipsis involves copying antecedent information into the ellipsis site, Experiments 3–5 manipulated the length and complexity of the antecedent. Some types of antecedent complexity lowered accuracy, notably, the number of discourse entities in the antecedent. However, neither antecedent length nor complexity affected the speed of interpreting the ellipsis. This pattern is inconsistent with a copy operation, and it suggests that ellipsis interpretation may involve a pointer to extant structures in memory.

Ellipsis and the Structure of Discourse

It is generally assumed that ellipsis requires certain parallelism between the clause containing the ellips is and some antecedent clause. We argue that the parallelism requirement generated by ellipsis must be applied in accordance with discourse structure: a matching antecedent clause must be found that locally c-commands the clause containing the ellipsis in the discourse tree. We show that the claim makes several correct predictions concerning the interpretation of ellipsis, both in terms of the selection of the antecedent (in Sluicing and Verb Phrase Ellipsis), and in terms of the possible readings given a particular antecedent (in the “many-clause” puzzle and in Antecedent-Contained Deletion).

Ellipsis resolution and inference

Y Since Webber (1978) it has been known that ellipsis interpretation sometimes requires inference. However, the literature on ellipsis has largely Ignored this: prominent accounts such as (Sag (1976); Williams (1977); Dalrymple et al. (1991); Fiengo and May (1994) and Hardt (1999)) provide no mechanism for inference in ellipsis resolution. The proposal in Rooth (1992) is an exception to this: Rooth gives several examples in which inference is required in ellipsis interpretation. He argues that ellipsis is subject to two different kinds of licensing conditions: an ellipsis-specific identity condition and a general focus-background condition. Rooth argues that the focus-background condition interacts with inference, while the ellipsis-specific identity condition does not. Rooth does not propose any constraints on inference. This presents an evident problem of overgeneration, since it is possible to come up with some chain of inferences to license virtually any interpretation of an elliptical expression.

A classification of ellipsis based on a corpus of information seeking dialogues

The standard classification of ellipsis has determined the way it is handled in natural language understanding (NLU) systems. This work provides a novel classification of ellipsis based on the analysis of ellipsis usage rather than forms in a corpus of information seeking dialogues. The aim is to demonstrate that pragmatic analysis is necessary for the interpretation of ellipsis. The context, in terms of the dialogue participants' belief states, determines interpretation and in turn the interpretation of subsequent utterances. The dialogues produced in a NLU system using this classification are presented.

Unmatched chains and the representation of plural pronouns

Plural pronouns create the possibility of overlapping reference, which does not not fit naturally into the classical GB theory of anaphora, where each NP has a single integer as its referential index. Thus, one must either complicate the indexing system used in syntax or complicate the semantic interpretation of indices. This paper argues for the former approach based on the properties of a particular comitative-like construction found in Mohawk and certain other languages. This construction is analyzed as a type of Left Dislocation where the dislocated NP forms a syntactic chain with a pronoun that it overlaps in reference with. Several unusual characteristics of such chains can be accounted for if plural pronouns have sets of integers as their indices—characteristics involving bound anaphora, ellipsis interpretation, and connectivity effects. Certain implications for the theory of chains are also discussed.

Ellipsis and higher-order unification

We present a new method for characterizing the interpretive possibilities generated by elliptical constructions in natural language. Unlike previous analyses, which postulate ambiguity of interpretation or derivation in the full clause source of the ellipsis, our analysis requires no such hidden ambiguity. Further, the analysis follows relatively directly from an abstract statement of the ellipsis interpretation problem. It predicts correctly a wide range of interactions between ellipsis and other semantic phenomena such as quantifier scope and bound anaphora. Finally, although the analysis itself is stated nonprocedurally, it admits of a direct computational method for generating interpretations.