Relative Pronouns as an Accessibility Marker in Discourse
1
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this study is to examine the distributional patterns of relative pronouns and identify the pragmatic factors that affect the choice of a particular type of relative pronoun in discourse. To find out the pragmatic factors that characterize the use of relative pronouns, we examined overall types of relative pronouns employed in discourse on a corpus-based analysis, and investigated the combinational patterns of relative clauses in written and spoken discourse. The findings from the data analysis showed that relative pronouns, as an ‘accessibility marker’, can be a parameter in combining with a particular type of relative clause in discourse as follows: 1) ‘salience’ function: zero < that < which < who < whom; 2) ‘unification’ function: zero > that > which or who > whom. Consequently, we claim that the choice of an antecedent-relative pronoun combination is determined by the pragmatic factors such as ‘salience’ and ‘unification’, which contribute to the facilitation of language processing and production.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the distributional patterns of relative pronouns and identify the pragmatic factors that affect the choice of a particular type of relative pronoun in discourse. To find out the pragmatic factors that characterize the use of relative pronouns, we examined overall types of relative pronouns employed in discourse on a corpus-based analysis, and investigated the combinational patterns of relative clauses in written and spoken discourse. The findings from the data analysis showed that relative pronouns, as an ‘accessibility marker’, can be a parameter in combining with a particular type of relative clause in discourse as follows: 1) ‘salience’ function: zero < that < which < who < whom; 2) ‘unification’ function: zero > that > which or who > whom. Consequently, we claim that the choice of an antecedent-relative pronoun combination is determined by the pragmatic factors such as ‘salience’ and ‘unification’, which contribute to the facilitation of language processing and production.
참고문헌 (15)
- Ariel, M., "Text representation: Linguistic and Psycholinguistic Aspects" (2001), John Benjamins
- Diaz Perez, F. J., "Relative Connectives in Present-Day English: A Corpus-Based Analysis", Miscelane: A Journal of English and American Studies, 18 (1997)
- Fox, B. A., "A Discourse Explanation of the Grammar of Relative Clauses", Language, 66(2), pp.297~316 (1990)
- Fox, B. A., "Relative Clauses in English conversation : Relativizers, frequency and the notion of construction", Studies in Language, 31(2), pp.293~326 (2007)
- Givon, T., "The grammar of referential coherence as mental processing instructions", Linguistics, 30, pp.5~55 (1992)
- Gundel, J. K., "Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse", Language, 69, pp.274~307 (1993)
- Guy R. G., "On the Choice of Relative Pronouns in English", American Speech, 70(2), pp.148~162 (1995)
- Jaeger, T. F., "Redundancy and Syntactic Reduction in Spontaneous Speech", PhD, pp.2006
- Luche, C. D., "Effect of relative pronoun type on relative clause attachment", Ambiguity in Anaphora Workshop Proceedings, pp.23~30 (2006)
- Mak, W. M., "Processing relative clauses: Effects of pragmatic, semantic, and syntactic variables", doctor, pp.2001
- Mak, W. M., "Processing relative clauses in Dutch : When rocks crush hikers", Journal of Memory & Language, 54, pp.466~490 (2006)
- 문지순, "Observations and Remarks on Relative Pronoun Variation in English", 언어연구, 29(2), pp.281~297 (2012), 언어정보연구소
- Race, D. S., "The use of ‘that’ in the production and comprehension of object relative clauses", Paper presented at the 26th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (2003)
- Temperley, D., "Ambiguity avoidance in English relative clauses", Language : Journal of the Linguistic Society of America, 79(3), pp.464~484 (2003)
- Wasow, T., "Lexical variation in relativizer frequency", Paper presented at the workshop on expecting the unexpected: Exceptions in grammar at the 27th annual meeting of the German Linguistic Association, University of Cologne, Germany (2005)