<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="J97-3005">
  <Title>Squibs and Discussions Anaphoric Dependencies in Ellipsis</Title>
  <Section position="2" start_page="0" end_page="0" type="intro">
    <SectionTitle>
1. Introduction
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> It has long been known that anaphoric relationships in the implicit meaning of an elided verb phrase depend on corresponding anaphoric relationships in the source of the ellipsis. This squib concerns what the underlying cause of this dependency is. Does it arise directly through some uniform relation between the two clauses, or does it follow indirectly from independently motivated discourse principles governing pronominal reference? Verb phrase ellipsis is exemplified by sentence (1): (1) Ivan loves his mother, and James does too.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> The stranded auxiliary in the second clause (henceforth, the target clause) marks a vestigial verb phrase (VP), a meaning for which is to be recovered from another clause (henceforth, the source clause), in this case, the first clause. The core phenomenon that we address concerns the space of possible readings of the target clause corresponding to the antecedent of the pronoun his in the source clause, which exhibits the following dependency. If his refers extrasententially to some third person, say Kris--that is, if the source clause is taken to mean that Ivan loves Kris's mother--then the target clause must mean that James also loves Kris's mother. That is, example (2a) only has the reading reflected by the indices shown in sentence (2b): (2) a. Ivan/loves hisk mother, and Jamesj does too.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> b. Ivan/loves hisk mother, and Jamesj loves hiSk mother too.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> On the other hand, if the pronoun refers intrasententially to Ivan, so that the source clause is taken to mean that Ivan loves his own mother (as in example (3a)), then the target clause is ambiguous between two readings. It might mean that James loves Ivan's mother (the so-called strict reading shown in (3b)) or that James loves his  own mother (the sloppy reading shown in (3c)).</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> (3) a. Ivan/ loves his/mother, and Jamesj does too.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> b. Ivan/loves his/mother, and Jamesj loves hisi mother too.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> c. Ivan/loves hisi mother, and Jamesj loves hisj mother too.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"> * Artificial Intelligence Center, 333 Ravenswood Avenue, Menlo Park, CA 94025. E-mail: kehler@ai.sri.com t Division of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 33 Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA 02138. E-mail:  (~) 1997 Association for Computational Linguistics Computational Linguistics Volume 23, Number 3 Notice that the two sets of readings are disjoint and depend crucially on the antecedent of the pronoun in the source clause. 1 Past approaches to recovering these readings fall into two categories, source-determined analyses and discourse-determined analyses. We describe these in the sections that follow.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>