Comparing the apparent contrasting statements of Centering Theory and Fossard, Garnham and Cowles (2012) in regards to demonstrative descriptions, I particularly examined reference resolution as an influencing factor of text coherence. According to the results of Fossard et al. (2012), the reference resolution of demonstrative descriptions was only facilitated when the predicative information referred to the subordinate character in a gender-ambiguous condition. As demonstrative descriptions have an exceptional discourse function due to their anadeictic dimension, they are capable of ensuring unexpected referential continuity by marking a discontinuity with the previous context. In regards to Centering Theory, however, a discourse is more coherent if utterances preserve the same topic and keep it as the highest-focused entity without diminishing its relative ranking. This continue transition state is considered most preferable. While demonstrative descriptions serve in an unexpected and unique way, their exceptionality seems to be beyond the Centering Theory’s stated preferences for text coherence and hence not against it.
Table of Contents
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Centering Theory in contrast to the demonstrative description’s capability of ensuring unexpected referential continuity
3.1. The resolution of demonstrative descriptions in correlation to referential continuity
3.2. Centering Theory
3.2.1. The fundamentals of Centering Theory
3.2.2. An analysis of this-NPs
3.3. Is there a contradiction between Centering Theory and the anadeictic value of demonstratives to ensure referential continuity by “breaking” it?
4. Conclusion
Research Objective and Scope
This paper investigates whether a fundamental contradiction exists between Centering Theory’s principles of discourse coherence—which prioritize referential continuity—and the empirical findings suggesting that demonstrative descriptions can effectively ensure referential continuity precisely by marking a discontinuity with the previous context.
- Analysis of reference resolution in demonstrative descriptions.
- Evaluation of Centering Theory and its transition states.
- Examination of the interplay between anaphoric and deictic functions.
- Comparison of experimental results from Fossard et al. (2012) with standard coherence models.
- Assessment of whether demonstrative-induced discontinuity is mutually exclusive with Centering Theory.
Excerpt from the Book
The resolution of demonstrative descriptions in correlation to referential continuity
In the study of Fossard et al. (2012), the authors concluded that the demonstrative description preferentially orients processing towards the less salient referent in a discourse context when used anaphorically. The following section shall thereby provide a deeper insight into reference resolution of particularly demonstrative descriptions. It shall, moreover, present the study’s essential experimental results of whether the demonstrative description marks referential continuity within the previous discourse context.
Fossard et al. (2012) stated that there were two complemental discourse-referring management procedures, which are called anaphora and deixis. These operate on the mental model of the discourse and allow the interlocutors to coordinate their attention in a discourse. This is mainly achieved by their contrasting functions. Anaphora prototypically serves to maintain attention where a referent is already established. In doing so, it signals referential continuity. Deixis, on the other hand, shifts the attention to a new referent. According to the level of the referent’s accessibility in the addressee’s mental model, anaphoric forms are also characteristically used to refer to the highly-focused referent in the discourse representation; whereas, demonstrative expressions are preferentially interpreted as referring to the less salient referent, which is not in focus, but “activated”. In a nutshell, anaphora orients processing towards the highly-focused referent and thereby keeps the interlocutors’ attention, which is perceived as referential continuity. Deixis, by contrast, refers to the less salient referent and thus shifts the attention to a new referent.
Summary of Chapters
1. Abstract: Provides an overview of the conflict between Centering Theory and recent research on demonstrative descriptions regarding discourse coherence.
2. Introduction: Outlines the theoretical background of text cohesion and establishes the research goal of evaluating the interaction between demonstrative descriptions and Centering Theory.
3. Centering Theory in contrast to the demonstrative description’s capability of ensuring unexpected referential continuity: Examines the mechanisms of demonstrative resolution, the fundamentals of Centering Theory, and the specific analysis of this-NPs.
4. Conclusion: Summarizes the findings, arguing that the exceptional discourse function of demonstrative descriptions represents a case beyond, but not against, Centering Theory's preferences.
Keywords
Centering Theory, Demonstrative Descriptions, Referential Continuity, Anaphora, Deixis, Discourse Coherence, Anadeixis, Reference Resolution, Saliency, Cognitive Status, Givenness Hierarchy, Discourse Management, this-NPs, Text Cohesion, Processing
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this academic paper?
The paper examines the potential tension between Centering Theory, which posits that coherence is best maintained by preserving the same topic, and findings that demonstrative descriptions can create coherence by shifting attention to less salient, unexpected referents.
Which linguistic theories are contrasted in this study?
The study primarily contrasts the principles of Centering Theory with the findings of Fossard et al. (2012) regarding the specific discourse functions of demonstrative descriptions.
What is the core research question?
The paper asks whether the use of demonstrative descriptions to create referential continuity by "breaking" the previous context constitutes a contradiction to the core tenets of Centering Theory.
Which methodologies are discussed to analyze discourse processing?
The paper analyzes corpus-based investigations, self-paced reading tasks, and norming studies to understand how readers resolve demonstrative references and maintain discourse coherence.
What does the main body of the work cover?
It covers the resolution of demonstrative descriptions, the fundamentals of Centering Theory (including transition states), an analysis of this-NPs, and a critical discussion of the potential contradiction between these models.
Which keywords best characterize this research?
Key terms include Centering Theory, Anaphora, Deixis, Anadeixis, Referential Continuity, Discourse Coherence, and Givenness Hierarchy.
What distinguishes an anadeictic expression?
Anadeictic expressions, such as demonstratives, combine both anaphoric (referring to established entities) and deictic (shifting attention) properties, allowing them to fulfill a unique function in discourse construction.
How does the "Givenness Hierarchy" contribute to this analysis?
It provides a framework for understanding how speakers select specific referring expressions (like pronouns vs. demonstratives) based on the cognitive status—such as "in focus" or "activated"—of the discourse entities.
What is the author's final conclusion regarding the proposed contradiction?
The author concludes that while demonstrative descriptions behave in ways that seem to violate Centering Theory's preferences, they are not mutually exclusive; rather, they represent an exceptional functional case that falls outside the standard preference model.
- Quote paper
- Anonym (Author), 2016, Centering Theory in contrast to the demonstrative description’s capability of ensuring referential continuity by “breaking” it, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/385992
