The answer by Tim Osborne is very comprehensive and accurate. But perhaps things might be easier when looked at through usage in text linguistics.
Although, co-reference and anaphora can be distinct, they are often used interchangeably by linguists. This is partly because by far the most studied type of anaphoric reference is co-referential. So you could ...
In your example Harry is a gifted singer, the word gifted is just a general attribute/modifier in an adjective phrase and there is no grammatical relation between gifted and Harry because gifted modifies solely the noun singer and is totally governed by it. I suspect that would be pretty much a universal case even in languages that employ verbs in place of ...
These are more or less like the word-sense disambiguation, anaphora resolution or co-reference resolution examples in the Winograd Schema Challenge and generally in natural language understanding.
How far ahead do we look when parsing and understanding text?
As you essentially show in your examples where the necessary information is not in the sentence, ...
So is it possible to pro-drop in Turkish in a causative sentence without any reference to the pronoun, i.e an inferred subject/null anaphora?
Short answer, no. The subject marking on the verb is mandatory.
As you mention, "the 3rd person takes no ending"—in other words, the third person singular marker is ∅ (nothing). So if you leave off all other ...
Coreference anaphora is just one type of anaphora. Following George Lakoff, syntacticians distinguish between identity-of-reference anaphora (which includes definite pronominalization) and identity-of-sense anaphora (which includes indefinite anaphora with "one"). So as a first approximation, the answer to the question is that anaphora includes indefinite ...
The question is difficult to answer due to its brevity and the lack of context in which the terms coreference and anaphora appear. However, I can provide some orientation that should help increase understanding of how these terms are used.
The term coreference denotes a situation where two or more expressions refer to the same one entity in the world of ...
It is fairly possible to make an account of the anaphoric words as deictic (or indexical; I consider deixis and indicality plainly synonymous). I personally share this approach. In my formulation (published here in Italian; summed up here in English), being deictic, for a word, means that the context disambiguates it deterministically.
Such words as horse, ...
You can take a look at this corpus at Linguistic data consortium: https://catalog.ldc.upenn.edu/LDC2013T22
The ARRAU (Anaphora Resolution and Underspecification) Corpus of Anaphoric Information was developed by the University of Essex and the University of Trento. It contains annotations of multi-genre English texts for anaphoric relations with information ...
The main point of Eleshar's answer and BillJ's comment seems to be that there is no explicit terminology because gifted is a modifier of the predicate singer rather than in direct interaction with Harry.
This is true syntactically:
As expressed by the arrow labelled "amod" going from the NN singer to the JJ "gifted", gifted is an adjectival modifier of the ...
Yes, you can! I’m fluent in turkish and my parents are both Turks.
It is possible to do so with a pretext or situational environment for example if you were with a friend and she asks:
Q: Köpeği nerede gördün? (Where did you see the dog?)
You can answer with many options:
Omit the verb
A: Kopeği sinemada (gördüm).
In English this would be “The dog, -at the ...
I don't know Turkish very well, but what you want is possible through using of the verb form of the state with high levels of the ambiguity, so:
(I am) going to the shop now, can be translated as:
(Ben) Shop'e varmakta (oluyorum).
As mentioned above, I don't know Turkish very well, so I don't know what is prescribed by Turkish usus (sic! in literary language)...
Conjunctions like "because" and "which" that are found at the beginning of a dependent clause are often referred to as "subordinating conjunctions" to distinguish them from conjunctions like "and" or "so" which do not form dependent clauses.
"Therefore" however would not be considered a subordinating conjunction as its use results in the formation of ...
This one was just released a couple months ago and is available for download.
If the anaphoric references are not to your liking, run the Hugging Face Neural CoRef classifier over the dataset. https://huggingface.co/coref/
Since you seem to be interested in reading, you may find the following overview of "The science of word recognition" (written in 2017, by Kevin Larson) to be an interesting read.
Larson says that the best supported model of how words are read is parallel recognition of multiple letters.
Larson also talks about the phenomenon of eye "saccades", which ...
No, anaphora is always involved in a relative clause construction, because relative clauses have relative pronouns (not necessarily explicit), and relative pronouns are anaphoric. The "which" of your example
The building land is the plot in relation to which the building permit has been issued.
is coreferential with the definite NP in the main clause:
Compared to speech:
Gesturing to a new location is a pronoun used in apposition to the noun phrase ('the house, here'). This is a form of 'mention' where the multiple possible locations correspond to something analogous to 'gender'.
('Indexing' seems good as a coined term)
The referent is the 'antecedent'. ('the house')
The gesture to a mentioned location ...
Note that there are 2 ways of defining anaphors; the narrower definition you're using refers back to an antecedent; the broader definition includes cataphors, which refer forward to a later word or phrase, and exophors, which refer to something outside of the text (e.g. when you point and say "There it is!", "it" is an exophor).
Anaphors can include:
In some major European languages:
Russian: Я так думаю. or Думаю, да.
(Note: the comma here may be correct but it does not represent a pause when speaking.)
Dutch: Dat denk ik wel.
German: Ich denke schon.
Italian: Credo di si.
Spanish: Creo/pienso que sí.
But you should also look at the use of sí as an intensifying adverb (eg Yo sí creo/...
For the first question as to what methodology can be used to determine whether a set of pronouns are third-person personal pronouns or anaphoric demonstratives, Cerberus' is right saying that they are demonstrative pronouns if you can also use then adjectivally, i.e. modifying a noun, which is normally not possible with true personal pronouns - though as he ...