<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="C96-2158">
  <Title>Anaphor Resolution and the Scope of Syntactic Constraints</Title>
  <Section position="8" start_page="941" end_page="941" type="concl">
    <SectionTitle>
6 Conclusion
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> Starting with a recapitulation of current work on anaphor resolution, it was argued for an approach which bases on syntactic restrictions.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> The original formulation of Chomsky's Binding Theory proved to be unsuitable for immediate implementation. Straightforward approaches may fail in cases in which interdependencies between antecedent decisions arise. Based on this observation, an algorithm has been presented which, on the one hand, is interdependency-sensitive, but, on the other hand, avoids computational unfeasibility l)y following a strategy according to which the choices with the highest plausibility are considered first. For each decision, its dynamic compatibility with the earlier (more plausible) deci-.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> sions is verified. The practical behaviour of the algorithm fulfilled the expectations.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> There are, however, limitations to the scope of syntactic constraints. It has been demonstrated that, in general, the construction of appropriate representations for binding domains may necessitate semantic or pragmatic inferencing.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> A topic which should be subject of further research is the interdependency between parse tree construction and anaphor resolution. Up to now, it has been assumed tacitly that, at the time of binding constraint application, the surface structure representation is available. The construction of this representation involves disambiguation decisions (relative clause attachment, prepositional phrase attachment, and uncertainty of syntactic flmction), which, due to their structure determining effects, may interfere with the antecedent options of anaphor resolution (cf. (Stuckardt, 1996)).</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> At current, the KONTEXT text analysis system employs a processing model according to which parsing is performed prior to anaphor resolution.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> Because of the interdependency between parsing and anaphor resolution, however, these two problem (:lasses should be handled at one stage of processing rather than sequentially.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>