ABSTRACT
The paper deals with one but widespread natural language phenomenon: discourse anaphora. I make a bridge between three game- theoretical approaches to this phenomenon: (a) Hintikka's game- theoretical semantics (GTS); (b) Dekker and van Rooij's application of strategic games to the underspecification of anaphora; and (c) Abramsky's Dynamic Game Semantics. I see (b) as leading to a ‘gamification’ of a phenomenon which GTS (and other approaches such as Government and Binding Theory) saw as belonging to semantics or syntax. I see (c) as solving some problems left open by the ‘subgame interpretation’ of GTS. The present paper draws some comparisons and methodological reflections prompted by the remarks of my commentator, Paul Dekker.
