🔠Intro to Semantics and Pragmatics Unit 11 – Anaphora and Coreference

Anaphora and coreference are crucial concepts in linguistics that deal with how words and phrases refer to each other in text. They're essential for understanding how language creates coherence and conveys meaning efficiently, allowing us to track entities and ideas across sentences and paragraphs. This topic explores various types of anaphora, linguistic theories explaining these phenomena, and practical techniques for resolving anaphoric references. It also delves into pragmatic considerations, real-world applications, and common challenges in anaphora resolution, highlighting the complexity of natural language understanding.

Key Concepts and Definitions

  • Anaphora refers to the use of an expression that depends on another referential element for its interpretation
  • Antecedent is the linguistic expression that an anaphor refers back to and derives its meaning from
  • Coreference occurs when two or more expressions in a text refer to the same entity or concept
  • Referential ambiguity arises when there are multiple potential antecedents for an anaphor
  • Binding theory governs the syntactic constraints on the interpretation of anaphors and pronouns
    • Principle A states that an anaphor must be bound in its local domain
    • Principle B requires a pronoun to be free in its local domain
  • Discourse model represents the mental representation of entities and their relationships in a text
  • Salience refers to the degree of prominence or accessibility of an entity in the discourse model

Types of Anaphora

  • Pronominal anaphora involves the use of pronouns (he, she, it) to refer back to a previously mentioned entity
  • Nominal anaphora uses noun phrases (the book, that idea) to refer to an antecedent
  • Verb phrase anaphora occurs when a verb phrase (do so, do it) refers to a previously mentioned action or event
  • Zero anaphora, also known as ellipsis, involves the omission of an anaphor when it can be inferred from the context
  • Bridging anaphora requires inferring the relationship between the anaphor and its antecedent based on world knowledge (the door, implying the door of a previously mentioned house)
  • Cataphora is a less common type of anaphora where the anaphor precedes its antecedent in the text
  • Split antecedents occur when an anaphor refers to multiple antecedents in a coordinated structure (John and Mary, they)

Coreference Explained

  • Coreference chain is a sequence of expressions in a text that all refer to the same entity
  • Identity coreference occurs when two expressions refer to the exact same entity (John, he)
  • Near-identity coreference involves expressions that refer to almost the same entity with slight differences (the book, the novel)
  • Bound variable coreference arises when a pronoun is bound by a quantified antecedent (every student, their)
  • Coreference resolution is the task of determining which expressions in a text corefer
    • It involves identifying potential antecedents and selecting the most likely one based on syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic factors
  • Coreference clusters are formed by grouping expressions that corefer into sets
  • Singleton coreference occurs when an entity is mentioned only once in the text and does not participate in a coreference chain

Linguistic Theories and Models

  • Government and Binding Theory (GB) provides a modular approach to anaphora and coreference within the framework of generative grammar
  • Centering Theory focuses on the local coherence of discourse and the role of salience in anaphora resolution
    • It introduces the concepts of backward-looking center (CB) and forward-looking centers (CF) to model the attentional state of discourse
  • Discourse Representation Theory (DRT) represents the semantic content of a discourse using discourse representation structures (DRS)
    • Anaphoric expressions are resolved by linking them to accessible discourse referents in the DRS
  • Optimality Theory (OT) approaches anaphora resolution as a constraint satisfaction problem
    • It proposes a set of violable constraints (e.g., AGREE, DISJOINT) and selects the optimal candidate based on their ranking
  • Mention-pair models treat coreference resolution as a binary classification task between pairs of mentions
  • Entity-mention models consider the properties of entities and their mentions across the entire text

Anaphora Resolution Techniques

  • Rule-based approaches use a set of hand-crafted rules based on linguistic knowledge to resolve anaphors
    • They often rely on syntactic patterns, gender and number agreement, and semantic compatibility
  • Machine learning methods learn patterns and features from annotated data to make coreference decisions
    • Supervised learning techniques (decision trees, logistic regression) require labeled training data
    • Unsupervised learning (clustering algorithms) can discover coreference chains without explicit annotations
  • Neural network models, such as LSTMs and transformers, can capture complex semantic and contextual information for anaphora resolution
  • Hybrid approaches combine rule-based and machine learning techniques to leverage their strengths
  • Knowledge-based methods incorporate external knowledge sources (WordNet, Wikipedia) to aid in resolving anaphors
  • Discourse structure and rhetorical relations (elaboration, contrast) can provide additional cues for anaphora resolution
  • Psycholinguistic factors, such as recency and frequency of mention, influence the accessibility of antecedents

Pragmatic Considerations

  • Gricean maxims, particularly the maxim of quantity and manner, guide the use and interpretation of anaphors in communication
  • Conversational implicature can affect the choice of anaphoric expressions and their perceived meaning
  • Common ground and shared knowledge between the speaker and hearer play a role in resolving anaphors
  • Perspective-taking and theory of mind enable speakers to use anaphors in a way that is easily interpretable by the hearer
  • Referential intentions of the speaker, as inferred by the hearer, contribute to the resolution of anaphors
  • Pragmatic presupposition, such as the existence and uniqueness of referents, is often assumed when using anaphoric expressions
  • Deixis, or the use of expressions that depend on the extralinguistic context (I, you, here), interacts with anaphora resolution

Real-world Applications

  • Machine translation systems need to handle anaphora and coreference to produce coherent and fluent translations across languages
  • Information extraction and question answering tasks require accurate identification and resolution of anaphoric expressions
  • Summarization systems aim to maintain coreference chains and avoid ambiguity when generating concise versions of texts
  • Dialogue systems and conversational agents must keep track of referents and resolve anaphors to engage in natural interactions
  • Sentiment analysis and opinion mining can benefit from coreference resolution to attribute sentiments to the correct entities
  • Legal and medical text processing often involves complex anaphoric relations that need to be properly resolved
  • Coreference annotation tools, such as brat and WebAnno, assist in creating datasets for training and evaluating anaphora resolution models

Common Challenges and Pitfalls

  • Pronoun resolution can be difficult when there are multiple compatible antecedents in terms of gender and number
  • Cataphoric references, where the anaphor precedes its antecedent, can be harder to resolve than anaphoric references
  • Long-distance anaphora, where the antecedent is far from the anaphor in the text, poses challenges for resolution algorithms
  • Ambiguous or underspecified antecedents, such as "it" referring to a complex idea or event, can be difficult to resolve
  • Metaphorical or non-literal language use can complicate the interpretation of anaphoric expressions
  • Cross-document coreference, resolving anaphors across multiple texts, introduces additional complexity compared to within-document resolution
  • Domain-specific language and terminology can require adapted anaphora resolution approaches
  • Evaluation metrics for anaphora resolution, such as MUC, B-CUBED, and CEAF, have their own strengths and limitations


© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.
AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.

© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.
AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.