Cover not available

In:Current Theoretical and Applied Perspectives on Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics
Edited by Diego Pascual y Cabo and Idoia Elola
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 27] 2020
► pp. 175–188

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 8
The overt pronoun penalty for plural anaphors in Spanish

 | Universidad de San Andrés
Published online: 4 June 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.27.08gel
Abstract
In null-subject languages, sentences with singular overt pronouns are read more slowly than sentences with singular null pronouns when the referent is prominent (Gelormini-Lezama & Almor, 2011). In a self-paced reading task, we tested 20 Spanish speakers to examine whether this processing delay extends to plural pronouns. Each item consisted of two sentences. The first sentence introduced two arguments with the same or different thematic roles. The second sentence contained a plural (null or overt) pronoun. Results showed that sentences with overt pronouns were read significantly more slowly than sentences with null pronouns, only when the two arguments had the same thematic role. This plural overt pronoun penalty heavily depends on semantic rather than on purely syntactic factors.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methods
    • 2.1Materials
    • 2.2Design
    • 2.3Procedure
    • 2.4Participants
  • 3.Results
  • 4.Discussion
  • References
References (44)
References
Albrecht Jr., J., & Clifton, C. (1998). Accessing singular antecedents in conjoined phrases. Memory & Cognition, 26(3), 599–610. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Almor, A. (1999). Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis. Psychological Review, 106, 748–765. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Almor, A., & Eimas, P. D. (2008). Focus and noun phrase anaphors in spoken language comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(2), 201–225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Almor, A., De Carvalho Maia, J., Cunha Lima, M. L., Vernice, M., & Gelormini-Lezama, C. (2017). Language processing, acceptability, and statistical distribution: A study of null and overt subjects in Brazilian Portuguese. Journal of Memory and Language, 92, 98–113. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barker, C. (1992). Group terms in English: Representing groups as atoms. Journal of Semantics, 9, 69–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boiteau, T. W., Bowers, E., Nair, V., & Almor, A. (2014). The neural representation of plural discourse entities. Brain and Language, 137, 130–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brennan, S., Friedman, M., & Pollard, C. (1987). A centering approach to pronouns. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Stanford, CA, 6–9 July (pp. 155–162). Stroudsburg, PA: ACL. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Camacho, J. (2000). Structural restrictions on comitative coordination. Linguistic Inquiry, 31, 366–75. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carminati, M. N. (2002). The processing of Italian subject pronouns (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
(2005). Processing reflexes of the feature hierarchy (Person_Number_Gender) and implications for linguistic theory. Lingua, 115, 259–285. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chafe, W. L. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 25–55). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chambers, C., & Smyth, R. (1998). Structural parallelism and discourse coherence. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 593–608. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crawley, R., Stevenson, R., & Kleinman, D. (1990). The use of heuristic strategies in the interpretation of pronouns. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 4, 245–264. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Carvalho Maia, J., Vernice, M., Gelormini-Lezama, C., Cunha Lima, M. L., & Almor, A. (2016). Co-referential processing of pronouns and repeated names in Italian. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eschenbach, C., Habel, C., Herweg, M., & Rehkamper, K. (1989). Remarks on plural anaphora. In Proceedings of the 4th conference of European chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Manchester, UK, 10-12 April (pp. 161–167). Stroudsburg, PA: ACL.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frederiksen. J. (1981). Understanding anaphora: Rules used by readers in assigning pronominal referents. Discourse Processes, 4, 323–347. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garrod, S., & Sanford, A. J. (1984). The mental representation of discourse in a focused memory system: Implications for the interpretation of anaphoric noun phrases. Journal of Semantics, 1, 21–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gelormini-Lezama, C., & Almor, A. (2011). Repeated names, overt pronouns, and null pronouns in Spanish. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(3), 437–454. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Singular and plural pronominal reference in Spanish. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 43, 299–313. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1989). Mechanisms that improve referential access. Cognition, 32, 99–156. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Givón, T. (1987). On understanding grammar. New York: Academic Press. (Revised edition (2018). Amsterdam: John Benjamins).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gordon, P. C., & Scearce, K. A. (1995). Pronominalization and discourse coherence, discourse structure and pronoun interpretation. Memory and Cognition, 23, 313–323. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gordon, P. C., & Hendrick, R. (1998). The representation and processing of coreference in discourse. Cognitive Science, 22, 389–424. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gordon, P. C., Grosz, B. J., & Gilliom, L. A. (1993). Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention in discourse. Cognitive Science, 17, 311–347. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., Ledoux, K., & Yang, C. L. (1999). Processing of reference and the structure of language: An analysis of complex noun phrases. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 353–379. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grober, E. H., & Beardsley, W., & Caramazza, A. (1978). Parallel function strategy in pronoun assignment. Cognition, 6, 117–133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grosz, B. J. (1981). Focusing and description in natural language dialogues. In A. K. Joshi & B. L. Webber (Eds.), Elements of discourse understanding (pp. 84–105). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1983). Providing a unified account of definite noun phrases in discourse. In Proceedings of the 2lst Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Cambridge, MA (pp. 44–50). Stroudsburg, PA: ACL. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69, 274–307. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaup, B., Kelter, S., & Habel, C. (2002). Representing referents of plural expressions and resolving plural anaphors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 17(4), 405–450. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moxey, L. M., Sanford, A. J., Sturt, P., & Murrow, L. I. (2004). Constraints on the formation of plural reference objects: The influence of role, conjunction and type of description. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 346–364. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moxey, L. M., Sanford, A. J., Wood, A. I. & Gintner, L. M. N. (2011) When do we use “They” to refer to two individuals? Scenario-mapping as a basis for equivalence. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26, 79–120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nair, V. A., & Almor, A. (2006). Referential processing in word by word reading. Poster presented at the 2006 annual CUNY conference on sentence processing, New York.
Patson, N. D., & Ferreira. F. (2009). Conceptual plural information is used to guide early parsing decisions: Evidence from garden-path sentences with reciprocal verbs. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 454–486. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Patson, N. D., & Warren, T. (2011). Building complex reference objects from dual sets. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 443–459. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prince, E. F. (1978). A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language, 34, 883–906. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, A. J., & Lockart, F. (1990). Description types and methods of conjoining as factors influencing plural anaphors: A continuation study of focus. Journal of Semantics, 7, 365–378. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, A. J., & Moxey, L. M. (1995). Notes on plural reference and the scenario-mapping principle in comprehension. In C. Habel & G. Rickheit (Eds.), Focus and cohesion in discourse. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sheldon, A. (1974). The role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 272–281. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smyth, R. (1994). Grammatical determinants of ambiguous pronoun resolution. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23, 197–229. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Ahn, Hyunah
2025. Null pronoun interpretation probed via thematic role ambiguity: a case in Korean. Linguistics Vanguard DOI logo
Loureda, Óscar, Mathis Teucher, Adriana Cruz, Celia Hernández Pérez & Carlos Gelormini-Lezama
2025.  Cognitive processing of anaphoric encapsulation and coreference in native Spanish speakers: an experimental approach with eye tracking . Discourse Processes ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue