期刊文献+

前瞻中心排序对英汉指代消解影响的对比分析 被引量:7

Effects of “Cf-ranking” on Chinese and English anaphora resolution:A contrastive study
原文传递
导出
摘要 本文采用向心理论的参数化研究方法,根据影响前瞻中心排序的一些主要因素设计了6种算法,对比分析了不同排序方法对英汉指代消解的影响。研究发现,整体而言:1)语法功能在两种语言中都比线性语序更准确地反映了前瞻中心显著度;2)在按语法功能排序的基础上,考虑语法功能平行性对英汉零形代词消解具有一定优势,考虑回指中心连贯性对英汉代词消解具有一定优势,同时考虑两者的算法具有更广泛的优势;3)按语法功能排序,并同时考虑语法功能平行性和句子层级结构,对英汉零形代词和汉语代词消解都可以获得最佳结果,而对英语代词消解却会产生消极的影响。 This paper adopts the parametric approach to the Centering Theory and designs 6 algorithms to examine the effects of the different setting of the Centering parameter'Cf-ranking'on the results of anaphora resolution in Chinese and English.The results show that,overall,1)in both languages grammatical function is a better indicator of Cf salience than linear order;2) integrating syntactic parallelism and Cb continuity into grammatical function ranking may have its advantage in ZP and PRON resolution respectively,and the combination of the two gets a wider edge in the resolution of both ZP and PRON in the two languages;and 3)ranking Cfs according to grammatical function and at the same time taking both syntactic parallelism and hierarchical structure into consideration can achieve best results for ZP resolution in both languages and for Chinese pronoun resolution,but may produce a negative effect on English pronoun resolution.
出处 《外语教学与研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2013年第6期803-815,959,共13页 Foreign Language Teaching and Research
基金 上海外国语大学青年基金项目“向心理论的参数设定对英汉指代消解的影响”(kx18/068) 上海外国语大学第二届教师科研培育团队项目(QJTDBXXY01) 中国语言学国际化科研创新团队项目的资助
  • 相关文献

参考文献30

  • 1Chafe, W. 1976. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, and topics EA]. In C. Li (ed.). Subject and Topic C]. New York: Academic Press. 25-76.
  • 2Corbett, A. & F. Chang. 1983. Pronoun disambiguating. Accessing potential antecedents [J]. Memory and Cognition 11: 283-294.
  • 3Gernsbacher, M. & D. Hargreaves. 1988. Accessing sentence participants: The advantage of first mention I-J. Journal of Memory and Language 27. 699-717.
  • 4Giv6n, T. (ed.). 1983. Topic Continuity in Discourse : A Quantitative Cross-language Study I-C. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • 5Grosz, B. & C. Sidner. 1986. Attention, intention, and the structure of discourse [J]. Computational Linguistics 12: 175-204.
  • 6Gundel, J., N. Hedberg &R. Zacharski. 1993. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse [-J. Language 69: 274-307.
  • 7Kameyama, M. 1985. Zero Anaphora: The Case of Japanese I-D]. Ph.D. Dissertation. Stanford University.
  • 8Kameyama, M. 1986. A property-sharing constraint in centering [-A. In Proceedings of the 24 th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics -C. New York: The Association for Computational Linguistics. 200-206.
  • 9Kameyama, M. 1998. Intra-sentential centering: A case study LAJ. In M. Walker, A.Joshi&E. Prince (eds.). Centering Theory in Discourse EC3. Oxford: OUP. 89-112.
  • 10Kehler, A. 1997. Current theories of centering for pronoun interpretation: A critical evalu- ation [J]. Computational Linguistics 23. 467-475.

二级参考文献104

共引文献45

同被引文献96

引证文献7

二级引证文献18

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部