Cover not available

In:The Pragmatics of Personal Pronouns
Edited by Laure Gardelle and Sandrine Sorlin
[Studies in Language Companion Series 171] 2015
► pp. 241–258

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

Chapter 12. Interpreting antecedentless pronouns in narrative texts

Knowledge types, world building and inference-making

 | University of Glasgow
Published online: 10 November 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.171.12emm
Antecedentless pronouns provide a key to understanding the cognitive processing of texts, since, in the absence of antecedents, interpretation of these pronouns relies on inference-making based on general knowledge and/or text-specific knowledge (e.g. Yule 1982; Sanford et al. 1983; Gerrig 1986; Greene et al. 1994; Cornish 1996, 1999; Wales 1996; Emmott 1997, 1999; Gundel et al. 2005; Sanford et al. 2008; Gerrig et al. 2011). I examine examples of antecedentless pronouns in narratives and argue that interpretation depends on many factors, including scenario-mapping (Sanford & Garrod 1981, 1998; also Sanford & Emmott 2012) and world-building processes such as entity-linking, perspective-tracking and contextual monitoring (Emmott 1997). I also discuss the implications for anaphoric theory of knowledge-based approaches to pronoun interpretation.
References (52)
References
Ariel, Mira. 1990. Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Accessibility theory. In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Vol. 1, 2nd edn, Keith Brown (ed.), 546-551. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Atwood, Margaret. 1996. Bodily Harm. London: Vintage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, Gillian & Yule, George. 1983. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cornish, Francis. 1986. Anaphoric Relations in English and French. A Discourse Perspective. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1996. “Antecedentless” anaphors: Deixis, anaphora, or what? Some evidence from English and French. Journal of Linguistics 32: 19-41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. Anaphora, Discourse and Understanding. Evidence from English and French. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Emmott, Catherine. 1992. Splitting the referent: An introduction to narrative enactors. In Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent Theory and Practice, Martin Davies & Louise J. Ravelli (eds), 221-228. London: Pinter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. Frames of reference: Contextual monitoring and narrative discourse. In Advances in Written Text Analysis, Malcolm Coulthard (ed.), 157-166. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. Consciousness and context-building: Narrative inferences and anaphoric theory. In New Essays in Deixis: Discourse, Narrative, Literature, Keith Green (ed.), 81-97. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. Narrative Comprehension: A Discourse Perspective. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. Embodied in a constructed world: Narrative processing, knowledge representation and indirect anaphora. In Discourse Studies in Cognitive Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 176], Karen van Hoek, Andrej. A. Kibrik & Leo Noordman (eds), 5-27. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Reference: Stylistic aspects. In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Vol. 10, 2nd edn, Keith Brown (ed.), 441-450. Oxford: Elsevier. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Erkü, Feride & Gundel, Jeanette K. 1987. The pragmatics of indirect anaphors. In The Pragmatic Perspective [Pragmatics & Beyond Companion Series 5], Jef Verschueren & Marcella Bertuccelli-Papi (eds), 533-545. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Filik, Ruth, Sanford, Anthony J. & Leuthold, Hartmut. 2008. Processing pronouns without antecedents: Evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 20(7): 1315-1326. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Genette, Gérard. 1980. Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerrig, Richard J. 1986. Process models and pragmatics. In Advances in Cognitive Science, Noel E. Sharkey (ed.), 23-42. Chichester: Ellis Horwood.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerrig, Richard J., Horton, William S. & Stent, Amanda. 2011. Production and comprehension of unheralded pronouns: A corpus analysis. Discourse Processes 48: 161-182. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Graham, Winston. 1967. The Sleeping Partner. Glasgow: Fontana.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greene, Steven B., Gerrig, Richard J., McKoon, Gail & Ratcliff, Roger. 1994. Unheralded pronouns and management by common ground. Journal of Memory and Language 33(4): 511-526. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gundel, Jeanette K., Hedberg, Nancy & Zacharski, Ron. 1993. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 69: 274-307. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. Pronouns without explicit antecedents: How do we know when a pronoun is referential? In Anaphora Processing: Linguistic, Cognitive and Computational Modelling [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 263], Antonio Branco, Tony McEnery & Ruslan Mitkov (eds), 351-364. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A.K. & Hasan, Ruqaiya. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkins, John. 1977. The pragmatics of definiteness, part 1. Linguistische Berichte 47(77): 1-27.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1978. Definiteness and Indefiniteness: A Study in Reference and Grammaticality Prediction. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kitzinger, Celia, Shaw, Rebecca & Toerien, Merran. 2012. Referring to persons without using a full-form reference: Locally initial indexicals in action. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(2): 116-136. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lea, R. Brooke, Mason, Robert A., Albrecht, Jason E., Birch, Stacy L. & Myers, Jerome L. 1998. Who knows what about whom: What role does common ground play in accessing distant information? Journal of Memory and Language 39: 70-84. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lively, Penelope. 1982. Judgement Day. London: Penguin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1985. Perfect Happiness. London: Penguin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. The Photograph. London: Penguin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McKoon, Gail & Ratcliff, Roger. 1986. Inferences about predicable events. Journal of Memory and Language 50: 149-164.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nieuwland, Mante S., Otten, Marte & van Berkum, Jos J.A. 2007. Who are you talking about? Tracking discourse-level referential processing with event-related potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19(2): 228-236. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen F. 1981. Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In Radical Pragmatics, Peter Cole (ed.), 223-255. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rankin, Ian. 1993. Strip Jack. London: Orion.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998a. Knots and Crosses. London: Orion.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998b. Playback. In A Good Hanging, 1-22, London: Orion.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. The Hanging Garden. London: Orion.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. The Falls. London: Orion.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony J. 2002. Context, attention and depth of processing during interpretation. Mind and Language 17(1-2): 188-206. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony J. & Emmott, Catherine. 2012. Mind, Brain and Narrative. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony J., Filik, Ruth, Emmott, Catherine & Morrow, Lorna I. 2008. “They’re digging up the road again”: The processing cost of institutional “they”. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 61: 372-380. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony J. & Garrod, Simon C. 1981. Understanding Written Language: Explorations in Comprehension beyond the Sentence. Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony J., & Garrod, Simon C. 1998. The role of scenario mapping in text comprehension. Discourse Processes 26: 159-190. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony, J. Garrod, Simon, C., Lucas, A. & Henderson, R. 1983. Pronouns without explicit antecedents. Journal of Semantics 2(3-4): 303-318. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony J. & Graesser, Arthur C. 2006. Shallow processing and underspecification. Discourse Processes 42(2): 99-108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schank, Roger C. & Abelson, Robert P. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding: An Enquiry into Human Knowledge Structures. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwarz-Friesel, Monika. 2007. Indirect anaphors in text: A cognitive account. In Anaphors in Text: Cognitive, Formal and Applied Approaches to Anaphoric Reference [Studies in Language Companion Series 86], Monika Schwarz-Friesel, Manfred Consten & Mareile Knees (eds), 1-20, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wales, Katie. 1996. Personal Pronouns in Present-Day English. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walker, Marilyn A., Joshi, Aravind K. & Prince, Ellen F. (eds). 1998. Centering Theory in Discourse. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Webber, Bonnie-Lynn. 1979. A Formal Approach to Discourse Anaphora. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Werth, Paul. 1999. Text Worlds: Representing Conceptual Space in Discourse. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yule, George. 1982. Interpreting anaphora without identifying reference. Journal of Semantics 1: 315-322. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Gardelle, Laure & Frédéric Landragin
2024. Flou, vague et sous-détermination dans la référence. Lingvisticae Investigationes 47:2 ► pp. 143 ff. DOI logo
Gardelle, Laure, Laurence Vincent-Durroux & Hélène Vinckel-Roisin
2023. Speakers, addressees and the referential process. In Reference [Studies in Language Companion Series, 228], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Gardelle, Laure, Caroline Rossi & Laurence Vincent-Durroux
2019. La gestion de l’anaphore en discours : complexités et enjeux. Cahiers de praxématique :72 DOI logo
Montoro, Rocío
2016. The year’s work in stylistics 2015. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 25:4 ► pp. 376 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 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