英语论文网

referential features, generative grammar had divided English noun phrases into referential, anaphor, and pronoun. The notion of pronoun in this generative concept only refers to personal pronoun and the third personal pronoun can be further sub-categorized into nominative (he, she) and accusative (him, her) pronouns. Example 1 refers to an anaphora resolution of personal pronoun in a sentence. 

(1) Lily knew that Mary remembered her. 

In this example sentence, “her” derives its comprehension from the existing anaphoric link with “Lily” and is the anaphora of the antecedent “Lily”, which is also called antecedent. “Mary”, the local subject, is embedded in the binding domain and the other proper name, the long-distance subject, is free from the syntactic government. The above example provides the processing of anaphoric expression in a finite clause which presents the morphosyntactic information in meaning.  

Anaphora resolution is defined as a kind of language process resolving the references to earlier or later items appearing in a discourse or a sentence, and the antecedent is identified based on the receiver’s knowledge state and the mental model of the given discourse (Horn & Ward, 2006). Research on this procedure can examine the potential factors that exert an influence on referential expressions. It not only reveals language learners’ morphosyntactic knowledge but also provides them with a pile of discourse-pragmatics information that might be difficult to acquire as mentioned in the background section. 

2.2 Previous Studies on Personal Pronoun

As an issue on natural language processing, the reception and production of AR of personal pronoun are concerned more on SLA dimension. Relevant studies are mainly divided into two domains: one is related to probing into the syntactic constraints of personal pronoun and the other regards IH as the fundamental theory for further investigation on language acquisition.

2.2.1 Studies on Syntactic Constrains of AR of Personal Pronoun

According to a theoretical study proposed by Yang and Yu (2014), the syntactic systems of English and Chinese were compared based on the constraints of the Binding Theory on personal pronouns. As for the similarity in anaphoric structure, English and Chinese pronoun systems were consistent with the same syntactic constraints, called binding principle B. Although these two languages obey the same rules on the specific and natural language processing phenomenon, slightly deviated results were shown in conclusions of a number of empirical studies related to the acquisition of AR of personal pronouns. 

Patterson (2014) embarked on an eye-movement monitoring study to probe into the native and non-native sentence processing features under the constraint of binding principle B. The research demonstrated that both native speakers and German EFL learners showed the sensitivity to the principle without a long period of consideration on the syntactically inappropriate antecedents. As for the inclinations, natives showed a weak preference for the local antecedent of object, but the non-native speakers showed a strong preference for subject even when the object was also permitted in co-reference. Patterson found that learners presented less sensitivity to syntactic constraint when the discourse cues were prompted in the sentence, whi本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。