INTERPRETING ANAPHORIC EXPRESSIONS - A COGNITIVE VERSUS A PRAGMATIC APPROACH

Levinson (1985, 1987a & b, 1991) and Ariel (1985a & b, 1987, 1988a & b , 1990a, 1991) have each proposed to anchor discourse and sentential a naphora within a more general theory of communication. Levinson chose a general, extra-linguistic pragmatic theory. He uses Grice's Quantity maxim to account for the distribution of zeros, reflexives, pronouns and lexical NPs, claiming that coreferent readings are preferred, unle ss a disjoint reading is implicated (by the revised Gricean maxims he offers). I have proposed a specifically linguistic, cognitive theory, whereby speakers guide addresses' retrievals of mental representations corresponding to all definite NPs (coreferent as well as disjoint) by signalling to them the degree of Accessibility associated with the in tended mental entity in their memory. An examination of actual data re veals that Levinson's predictions regarding definite NP interpretation s are often not borne out. In addition, his proposals cannot account f or many anaphoric patterns actually found in natural discourse. Access ibility theory, it is argued, can account for both types of problemati c data.