:

. )*(
- 1

" "
(theorical
: ""

)
(D.Wilson ).(D.Sperber
:

.


) )

) (Modularity )Fodor (1983

) Grice (1975 .

(Relevance

.

:

: )( )

(Transducers
) (Perceptions
.

)Meta-

theory

.

:

.
)*( ) /

) (input
) (Priphriques

 ""

)(

) (1975
) (
.

.

)Logical form
( ) (2 ):(1

)/(
"
.(2)"...
:

) (1
)(2) ) "
"((.
)
(Central systems

- 1 ) (Quantit

.
) (1986
"
") (1
) (codiques


.

.

:
-
.
-
.
- 2
" ".
- 3 ) (Modalit
:
-

-
)(3

-

 " " )

(ostensive-inferential
" Stimulus

.
- 3

.
)
(1986 :
)(4

- 3

.

:

) (1986
" "
)(Concepts

:
- :

.
"
" ) (5)(Contextual Assumptions
:

" " ) (And. Elimination
)(

- 1

:
- 4
- = ) (
=

.
).(6
- 2

- = ) (
=

)( .

)(7

 - :

- 2

.

.

- :

:

) (1986
" ".

.
) (1981

:
) (contextual effects )
.(cognitif cost

" "

.

.


:

.

"
" ).(8
" "

.


.
)(9
)(1977
Lyons

.

)
] [Free Anaphora

) (

.

)
(


" " .
1.2


.




" "
.



.


.

1.1.2



" "
).(10


....
)( )( ) (1
.

) (1
.
) (Coreference
:

""
.
""
" " .
)(

) (Entit(

.
..

) (

) (.
:
)" (2

...
....
" .
").(11
)( )5

) "....(71:

(
.
)" (5 ".
) (12

" "

)intentionnelle

:
) (3
...



.
):(4
) (4

.
2.1.2

:
) (6 )
(
:
) (7
.
2.2



.

:
) } (10
{ ) (27:29
)( "

.
1.2.2

)8
(:
) (8

) (8
) (1
) (2
"" :
) .(1

" "
:
) } (9 {
)(
.

" :

:

").(13

".

):(11
) (11 )
( )
(.
) (11):(12
) (12
.

:


.

: ) (8 )(11

) (8 ) :(11 )(
} { )(
) (8 )( (11)..

) (12

)15( )15(

)
(13 :
) (13 ) (

:
) (16 -

.

) : (.

.
) 16(
):(17

2.2.2
) (13
:
)} (14 { )141 :6

-
-
-

)17(

(
)(
)( )(

:
= )(
) (15 -
)(

= )(
-
)(

" " "
"

:

:
) = ( ) = (.

)(18
.

.
:
) (18
-

)(

)20
(:
) (20

)(
)( ) (14
) (8)11
(

.
:

) (21

.

""
)( )(19
:

) (19
....



] [] [ .


)(
.

.

:
-
- .



.

:
- 1 ) Moeschler (1989.123:
- 2 ) (1975 .61-60
- 3

" "


. "
" "
".
- 4 ) (1956.101
- 5 " ".
- 6 .
.413/3
- 7 ) (1986 136: )
(1987 .42-41
- 8 . ).(1981

- 9 ) (1977 .659
- 10 ) Milner (1982
:
(
( .

).Anne Reboul (1990
)
- 11 ) (1966
(1993.116:
- 12.Kempson..R (1988) .
- 13
.4/2
- 14

.

.(1982)
)" (1991 "
.32
) (1972
.

)" .(1981

5 :
.
) .(1993
.

F. J (ed).Linguistics: The Cambridge

University Press.
Lita, L (1990) Un cas dambiguit Rferentielle,
Aspects Pragmatiques, dans Kleiber, G et
Tyvaert J. (ed).
Lyons. J. (1977) Semantics, Cambridge
University Press.
Lyons. J. (1990) Semantique Linguistique, (trad.
Dur and J. et Boulonnais, D. Larousse.
Paris).
Reboul, A (1990) Rhetorique de lanaphore in
Kleiber, G et Tyvaert, J. (ed.).
Sperber, D and Wilson. D. (1986) Relevance:
communication and cognition, Basil
Blackwell. oxford.
Werth, P (1983), Focus, coherence and
Emphasis, croomHelm. London.
Yan, H (1991), A Neo-Gricean Pragmatic
theory of Anaphora, in journal of
linguistics n27.

Blakemore, D. (1987), Semantic constraints on

Relevance. Blackwell, Oxford.
Carston, R. (1988) Language cognition, in
Newmeger, F.j (ed.). Linguistics, vol4,
Cambridge University Press.
Cornisch, F(1990). Anaphore Pragmatique,
Reference et Modeles du discours, in
Kleiber, G. Tyvaert, (ed). LAnahore et ses
domaines,Recherches
Linguistiques,
Universit de Metz. Paris.
Fodor, J.A (1983), The Modularity of Mind,
M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass. (Trad.
Franaise, la Modularit de lesprit. Minuit
(1986).
Grice. H.P. (1975) Logic and conversation, in,
cole, P and Morgan. J(ed). Syntax and
Semantics vol III, NewYork. Academic
Press.
Kempson,
R.
(1988).
Grammar
and
conversational Principles in, Newmeyer,