Anaphoric Binding: an integrated overview
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The interpretation of anaphors depends on their antecedents as the semantic value that an anaphor eventually conveys is co-specified by the value of its antecedent. Interestingly, when occurring in a given syntactic position, different anaphors may have different sets of admissible antecedents. Such differences are the basis for the categorization of anaphoric expressions according to their anaphoric capacity, being important to determine what are the sets of admissible antecedents and how to represent and process this anaphoric capacity for each type of anaphor. From an empirical perspective, these constraints stem from what appears as quite cogent generalisations and exhibit a universal character, given their cross linguistic validity. From a conceptual point of view, in turn, the relations among binding constraints involve non-trivial cross symmetry, which lends them a modular nature and provides further strength to the plausibility of their universal character. This kind of anaphoric binding constraints appears thus as a most significant subset of natural language knowledge, usually referred to as binding theory. This paper provides an integrated overview of these constraints holding on the pairing of nominal anaphors with their admissible antecedents that are based on grammatical relations and structure. Along with the increasing interest on neuro-symbolic approaches to natural language, this paper seeks to contribute to revive the interest on this most intriguing research topic.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 95 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Mar 2021.
Builds on
6 of 95 references.
References · 6
- 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,880
- 2019BERT Rediscovers the Classical NLP Pipelinecited by 1,049
- 2018What you can cram into a single vector: Probing sentence embeddings for linguistic propertiescited by 455
- 2017End-to-end Neural Coreference Resolutioncited by 240
- 2020Does syntax need to grow on trees? Sources of hierarchical inductive bias in sequence-to-sequence networkscited by 72
- 2020Revealing the Myth of Higher-Order Inference in Coreference Resolutioncited by 49
Built on by
Not cited yet.