Reference resolution and semantic coherence
Elisabeth Leinfellner, Ingeborg Steinacker, Harald Trost · 1982
restriction), to specified. There ts no epllctt chotomy between st ttcs. 3t ts seen as a 'cose' settc - th loopholes which have to be brted by trfotlo. Each concept In the septic net lncludl its conceptu restrtctlo, c, therefore, be nterpreted either a 8ntc deftlon, or as a 8tlc sentence patte. The latter approach accosts for the applicability of a mtlclzed' valence theo a '8emtctzed'dependency How do apply ts system to the pbem of semitic coherence n clauses d texts? The first practlc step co8ted 2n classlfyl t fo8 of semitic coherence d lnteatl them Into o ayst. Accory, septic coher- ence 18 eressed via 1, ofos 1.1. Profo wch c be dentfed morphologcly d morphologLcly/st act 1cl y 1.1.1. ely morphologlcly lexemes wch c be identified profos on a pely morphologlc sls (personal pnos, ceftin adverbial ofos). 1.1.2. Morphololcly/stactlcly lexes wch c be Ldentlfled possible profo on a morpholoc basis but we need syntactlc evidence for the decision of whether they reply e profo