Chapter 2 Reference

8/13/2019 Chapter 2 Reference

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-2-reference 1/83

30 INTRODUCTION

linguistic m-Mas whereby a cext is enabled co function as a sbgle-meaning-.ful unit. . "• •' ''f.'i.- vJ;-"''■'

o round or! this general introduction let us loo# at one further exam$le with a briefdiscursive commentary on its cohesion%

&%().* he +at only grinned when it saw ,lice.%at#h'e end we.nd the words ifo

that occurring as a verbal sub-'+ome it's $leased so far'

thought ,lice and she went on....■•.- -■•■. '"/ouldyou tellme $lease which way 0 oughtco go trotn ■ %;here1' '"' 2iv3v.'.h4c de$ends a good deal onwhere you wane to get co' said"'the .+at. " ;.i-v.5.i4;66 6ian7tmuch care where -' said ,lice.

8■■8t/8-'8lbng enough. t en.. e e $t ca orm w ere $resu$$oses 0: get

to; an2r'JM+ cart, s ex ca y re ace co want. ereference item?MîMsj $resu$$oses t e w o e o , ce's <uest on;and the litn , ce's'.2xst% remar $resu$$oses t e Cat, a so y

reference. !inally bothm %;$r$$ r;% sraes A ice an t e Cat orm co es ve

'«

if ''—\'^ ^"^ ^""



Chapter 2 [

=eference

>. ndo$horic and exo$horic reference

here are certain itetns in every language-which'.'hive68esreference in the s$ecific sense in which we areusi8'idie6if-"-to say instead of being inter$retedsemanticayiinitheitf;ma#e reference to someching else for theirinter.$re%d'tii?items arc $ersonals demonstratives andcom$ir2tiy

/e start with an exam$le of

each% '.-- ■

hree blind mice three blind mice8i6$

u$on a.tree. I ~~ @ A ' - B- ""-..'•;

%e were three. .' -8 8-

■f.v*

0n 9a: they refers to three blind ice; in 9b:lt7iA%7reCenDtt8Efc8i8'6n'F;9c: another refers to wrens. . ! 7•'4.-' " -.r

hese items are directives indicatingthat.infocmation-.8' %o.be%re.3me.Fed ■ from elsewhere. 2omuch they have in common with ill v+ohesiFe1ele8 ; ments."/hat characteriGes this $articular ty$e.of

cohesionv.tHac%Ivhicn8e.■-'.' are cailing =!=+ isthe s$ecific nature of the iniorman$h-thatris%' ' signalled forretrieval. 0n the case of reference the information coivberetrieved is the referential meaning the identity of the

$articular thing or class of things diac is being referred to;and che cohesion .lies' inchecon8--anility of reference

whereby thesamethingentersmedthe

discour se asecondtime. 0n#eehow

" •

there again c.here wece twowrens ,nother



they r$n%, they means not merely 'chreK blind rales' but'thesanie three blind mice that we have6ust been tal#ingabout3..; his is sometimes ex$ressed by die formula diatall reference items 'con- '

&M

H

r*



;

»

.>•

'4

', since the definite article is the item that in ng-sf s$ecific identity or 'dftniiteaess' in. its $ure •

Lform.92ee (.)*2.. below:.8ut this is $utting it inunnecessarily "concrete

..' terms; there is no need to imagine a the lur#ing inevery reference item. 0t

- is enough to say that refei-ence has the semantic $ro$erty of definiteness or

s$ecificity. ■ ....'..0n'$rinci$le this s$ecificity can be achieved by referenceto the context '; of situation; y contrast to substitutionwhich is a grammatical relation 9see Eha$tgr'( below:;

reference is a semanit6c6elat6on. Nne of the con-ise<uences of this distinction as we shall see; is'thatsubstitution is sub6ect %to a verystrong grammatical

condition% the substitute must be of the same igrammatical class as the item for which it substitutes.

his restriction does i not a$$lyto reference. 2ince therdarionshi$-is.i'brr-the' semantic-levelthe. . reference

iteih is in no way constrained to. match me granima'tical

diss-of i.mf.Jtiim; it refers to. /hat- must match aretbesemantic $ro$erties. ut •tlicsi-=eed7.n$t necessarily have been encoded in the text; they may be

8i.r8i8/ciO8theFntuarion as in

•■•BB;?68.'vfoi%8i'e:6'a%6cJlygood-fellow '.+!+&+,-.'% ,80J'4o.'say allof us.

whe're8the fext does not ma#e it ex$licit who he isalthough his identity is noi''in6doub.ttb%thPsewho are

$resent.'B 0t h'asF.been suggested in fact that reference to the

situation is the $rior ■.6formi$fiefereh'ce; arid that-reference to another item within the text is a &2econdary

oir derived form of this relation. his seems <uite $lausible even ■■@■%■ though it is not entirely clear"what it means; is the $riority a historical . 3'one; bris it in

some sense logical 1 0t is certainly $ossible that in theevolu-;ti$n' of language situational reference $receded

text reference% in other ■ "iw$rds that the-meaning 'thething you see in front of you' evolved earlier . ■■9than

the meaning .'the thing 0have 6ust mentioned'. eing $resent in the text is.as it were a s$ecial case of being $resent in the situation. "/e tend ■to. see-matters theother way round; the word +NQ for exam$le •

6me'ans literally 'accom$anying text' and its use in theallocation +NQ N! 20R,0N seems to us a

meta$horical extension. ut it is fairly easy to see thatthere is a logical continuity from naming 9referring to a

thing inde$endently of the context of situation: throughsituational reference 9referring to a thing-as identified in

the context of situation: to textual'-reference 9referring toa thing as identified in the surrounding text:; and in this

$ers$ective situational reference would a$$ear as the $rior form.

.■:#:■

>!M



. ■■-.;28t8- - ... .. '.8@- % '.v8F4..l4 ;.%.4 .

. ' - &&+&+ + . • "."' '. 4 '4. .

2.3 ENDOrHORIC AND EXOPHORIC

RXriittN.CI" J)/e shall find it useful in the discussion to have a

s6.r ... 0conatrefercnce. his we are referring to asQN4HN09, onxuninreference; and we could contrast it with SNDHN=0+a4 1 gI'for reference within the text% . '...'. '"■

=eference% . .

&situational* . &textual*exb$hora endo$hora"

&to $receding text* &to followingtext*

■•;•'" ana$hora "'''''•%• cata$hora&&&&&

,s a general nile therefore reference items may be.exo$horic or endo- $horic; and if endo$horic they may be ana$horic or

cata$horic 9f7.Tabove:. his scheme will allow us to recogniGecertaindistinctions withinthe class of reference items according to their differentuses and '$horic'tendencies. '..■.

xo$hora is not sim$ly a synonym for referentialmeaning. Lexicalitems li#e /ohn or tree or rn..have referential meaningin that they artnames for some thing% ob6ect class of ob6ects $rocessarid the #e. ,nexo$horic item Jiowevcr is one which does not nameanything; it signals

that reference must be made to the context of situation.oth exo$horicand endo$horic reference embody an instruction toretrieve from elsewhere the information necessary for inter$reting the

$assage in <uestion;and ta#en in isolation a reference item is sim$ly neutralin this res$ect - if we hear a fragment of conversation such as '

&>%(* hat must have cost a lot of money.

we have no means of #nowing whether the that isana$horic or exo$horic. he $revious s$ea#er mighthave said '0've 6ust been on holiday in ahiti' or the

$artici$ants might be loo#ing ar their host's collectionof anti<ue silver; and if both these conditions holdgood the inter$retation will remain doubtful.,mbiguous situations of this #ind do in fact <uite oftenarise.;

/hat is essential' to ever:' instance of reference



whether endo$horic 9textual: or exo$horic 9situational:is that there is a $resu$$osition -that must b; satisfied;the thing referred to has to be identifiable somehow.



34 REER

ENCE

I

i

Nneofthefeatur eschatdistingui

shdif fer ent=E02= 2istherelative

amountofexo$hor icref erencechac

theyty$icallydis



$lay.

0f the situati

on is one of

'language-in-action' with

the la

nguage

$laying a r el

atively small

and su

bor dinate r ole in th

e tota

levent

chetextisli# elycoco

ncainahigh

$r o

$o

rtionofinstancesofexo

$horicreferenc

e.Hence

as Jea

n 6Rr e has dem

onstr ated in

her studies of dif f er ent r e

gister

sitis

of ten dif f icu

ltto inter

$r e

ta textof this # ind if one

only h

ear s itandhasno

visualrecordavaila

ble.

0tisim$ortantco

ma# ethis

$ointandtoem$hasiGethatthes$e

cialflavouroflanguage-in-actionisnotasignthatit isungrammaticalsim-

$lifiedorincom$l

ece.0c isoftenhighly



com

$le

x alchough we

have no ver y

convincing measur es of str

uctur a

l com

$

lexicy; and if

it a

$ $ear s;

un-gr ammatical or incom

$let

e this

islar gelydue

coche

$r e$onderanceofref er en

ceicemsusedexo$horically

whichseemincom

$lece

becausetheir

$r esu$

$ositionsar e

unresolved. ,

high d

egr ee of exo

$h

or ic r ef er enc

e is .one.char acter istic of

che l

anguag

e of che child

r en's

$eer gr

ou $. /hen childr enginr er a+

.with

eachocheres$ecia

llyyoungchildrenchey doso 1chr ough6'c

$nUtanc

reference+Vchings;andsincethechingswhi

chser Feas "refe

$ehcev

$ointsare

$resentintheimmediateenvironmentcheyare'iW%Pi.cM'y

;iref erred coexo

$horica



lly. 0

n che same way

che adulc is

ex

$ected -J;+ ?88RJJ the

necess

ar y cl

ues f r om che c

oncext of sit

uation as in3 this exchail

glf t;%

becweenon

eofche

$r esencauchor sand

herchree-year-oldson%

9>%).*

+hild% /hy d

oes H, one come o

ut1Dar ent

%hacwhat1+hild%

H,one.Dar ent%h

acwhat1+hild%hatN

3Dar ent%haton

ewhac1

+hild%ha

clevercher echacyou

$ushco

leechewacerouc%

0td

id noc occurt

o the child thac he

could

$ointtothe

ob6ectin<uestion

$resuma

bly because itdid

nococcurcohimchacwhacwas inHis

fochsof attentionwasnocalso ineveryoneelse'salimitationthac ischaracteristicof

cheegocentric

$hase



of int

er action.

F

er

nstein has sh

own chat one char acter istic

of s

$

eech t

hac is r egulat

ed

by = 2= 0

+S +NS is che lar ge amou

nc of

exo $horicreference

thatisassociatedwithic;andtheresear che

rsinhisceam-have'fouhdi

blundancevi

denceofchis.HecharacteriGesicincer msofde$endence'Xa*th8%"cFn'%

c8O'UFofsiru

ation%exo

$horicrefe

r ence

i

s one

f

ormofcVricd(c8t8rdin6ef

ii;

J $ § p .



>% SNDHN=0+ ,S QNDHN=8+=J!M+H (U "'-

since without the context we cannot inter$ret what issaid;(Let us <uote one of ernstein's $assages in whichthis $oint is brought out' ..

/e can distinguish between uses of language which can be'called'context bound' and uses of language which" are lesscontext bound.+onsider for exam$le the two following stories whichDeter Haw#ins,ssistant =esearch Nfficer in the 2ociological'=esearchRnit constructed as a result of his analysis of the s$eech of middle-class andwor#ing-class five-year-old children. he children weregiven a series

of four $ictures which told a story and they were invited totell thestory. he first $icture showed some -boys $laying football;in thesecond the ball goes through the window'of a house; thethird shows awoman loo#ing out of the window and a man ma#ing anominous Figesture and in the fourth the children are moving away.Here are-the ■W3two stories% &+&++++". +'l'+0iî+.'.%"''.'. ■ 1'"

9i: hree boys are $laying football and one boy'Hc#8.fcheihall and. it-goes through the window and the ball brea#s the'iwndow and the boys are loo#ing at it and aman comes out and slioutsFat them because they've bro#enthe window so they run away and-then that -lady loo#s outof her window and she tells-thebbys off 9>: hey're $layingfootball and he #ic#s it and it goes through there it brea#sthe window and they're loo#ing at it and he comes out andshouts at them because they've bro#en it so they runawayand then' she loo#s out and she tells them off /ith the firststory the reader docs not have to have the four $ictureswhich were used as me basis for the story whereas in thecase of the second story'die reader would re<uire the initial'

$ictures -in order to &&. ma#e sense of the story. he

first story is free of die context which generated it whereasthe second story is much more closely ded to its context.

here is nothing ungrammatical about the second version ofthe story nor is it any sim$ler in its structure;' but it is'context-bound' because it %'% de$ends on exo$horic reference -he, she, they and there have no $ossible ;'.C inter$retationwithout the $ictures. otice that in the other version we donot get any significantly greater ,MNR of information.he e<uivalents of they, he, he and she are three boys, oneboy, a an and that lady, but we #now die sex from the

$ronouns and we could have guessed which were childrenand which were adults from die story. ,nd it is not hard tonifctiv-v



3! REERENCE

that tho$gh there means thro$gh the window. hesignificant difference be-rween the two versions is thatttiree boys, one hoy and a an do not $resu$$oseanything else. hey are not very s$ecific in themselves;

but they carry no im$lication that any furthers$ecification is available from elsewhere and hence theyare not context-bound. 9Nn the other hand that lady doescontain an exo$horic that; if Haw#ins had -wanted to betotally consistent he would have had to write a lady. !orthe interesting case of the in thro$gh the window see>.).> below.:

0f children's s$eech is characteriGed by a tendencytowards exo$horic reference this is6 because it isneighbourhood s$eech the language of the children's

$eer grou$. /e #now very little about neighbourhoods$eech; but it seems li#ely that it is highly exo$horic nodoubt because of the way children tend to relate to

things and to relate to each other through things.y$ically in $eer grou$ interaction the context ofsituation is the material environment - the ' things' arethere in front of one - and there is also a reservoir ofshared ex$erience a common context of culture;3soexo$horic reference $oses no $roblems and in fact anymore ex$licit naming would be unnatural. he 'restriaedcode' nature of neighbourhood?languageis a $ositivefeature; 6one should not be misled by the word 'restricted' which is an abstract technical term referring tothe highly coded non-redundant $ro$erties of s$eech inthis semantic mode. 2uch s$eech is characteristic notonly of the neighbourhood but of all close-#nit social;

grou$s; for exam$le to <uote from one of ernstein'sdescri$tions

'$rison inmates combat units of the armed forcescriminal subcultures the $eer grou$ of children andadolescents and married cou$les of long standing'.

0t becomes =2=0+0E if it is transferred to contextsin which it is ina$$ro$riate; if ernstein has em$hasiGedthe damaging conse<uences of restricted code in thecontext of formal education this is not because of anydeficiency in restriaed code as such but because theeducational context is one to -which neighbourhood and

$eer grou$ semantic styles are not relevant. he $roblemlies as much in the nature of formal education as in thenature of restricted code.

here are of course many other as$ects to restrictedcode3 than a highfre<uency of exo$horic reference. ut one of the $rinci$al•charaaeristicsof restriaed code is de$endence on the context and theexo$horic use'of reference items is one form such de$endence ta#es. . "Bl v

, reference item is not of itself exo$horic or endo$horic;it is 6ust;.



2.2 TPE# O

REERENCE

3$

'$horic' - it sim$ly has the $ro$erty of reference. ,ny given02,+ of reference may be either one or the other orit may even be both at once. "/e shall see in this cha$terthat there are tendencies for $articular items or classes ofitems to be used exo$horically or endo$horically; but thereference relation is itself neutral% it merely means 'seeelsewhere'. Nn the other hand as we have em$hasiGedalready only endo$horic reference is - cohesive. xo$horicreference contributes to the +=,0N of text in that itlin#s the language with the context of situation; but it doesnot contribute to the 0E=,0N of one $assage withanother so that the two together form $an of the 2,Mtext. Hence it does not contribute directly to cohesion as

we have defined it.!or this reason we shall ta#e only little account ofexo$horic reference not attem$ting to describe it in detail

but bringing it in where it relates to and contrasts withreference within the text../e shall treat 'endo$horic4reference as the norm; not im$lying by this that it is thelogically $rior form of the reference relation but merelythat it is the form of it which $lays a $art in cohesion andwhich therefore has $riority in the context of the $resentstudy. ,t the same time .however where we identifyYD2 N! =!=+ and =!=+ 0M2 inthe language we do so on the criterion of reference

$otential without regard to the endo$horic7exo-$horic

distinction. , reference item is any one which has this $ocential and a systematic account of the different ty$esof reference and their $lace in the linguistic system has to

be based on the generaliGed conce$t of reference and noton the $articular "concrete form that it ta#es when in-cor$orated into the text.

>.>' y$es of reference

here are three ty$es of reference% $ersonaldemonstrative and com$arative.

Dersonal reference is reference by means of function inthe s$eech situation through the category of D=2N9able >:.

Semonstrative reference is reference by means oflocation on a scale of D=NQ0M0Y 9able (:.

+om$arative reference is indirect reference by meansof 0S0Y or 20M0L,=0Y 9able ):.

Erammatically all reference items exce$t thedemonstrative adverbs and some com$arative adverbsfunction within the nominal grou$ 9noun $hrase:. 0t will

be necessary therefore to give a brief account of the struc-



s

xistential Dossessive

Head Modifi

noun determiner

0 me mine my

you your your

he him his hisshe her hers her i-the them their their %

it its it%one one

!or categories of grammaticalfunction and class see below.

3& REH.NCE

able >% Dersonalreference

#eantic

categor3

4raatical

1$nction

Clas

s

5erson* s$ea#er 9only:addressee9s:

able ( % Semonstxadvereference

#eantic category

4raatical 1$nction

Class

5ro6iit * near

far



thisthesethatdiose

here&now*theredien

the



2.2 TPE# O

REERENCE

(T

Modifier%Seictic7$ith

et • 9see below:

2ubmodifier7,d 6unct

ad6ective adyerb

same identicale<ual similaradditionalother differente#e

identicallysimilarlyli#ewise so suchdifferentlyotherwise

better moreetc

&com$arative ad6ectivesand

so mote less.e<ually

cur eofthen

ominalgr ou

$i

nor dertoex

$la

intheg

able )% +om$arative

reference 4raatical

1$nction

Class

4eneralcoparison*identitygeneralsimilarity



rammar ofreference inmote ex$licitterms.4

he logicalstructure of the

nominal grou$is one ofmodification; itconsists of aH,S witho$tionalMNS0!0=.he modifyingelements in-clude somewhich $recedethe head andsome which

follow it; thedistinction inthe relative

$osition ofmodifying'elements issemantically

* T( +,-%i%/ i +1i+,r4 /,,5%t(t /H,,i-6vr%i+% / it(v 44r

i+ vri%+47,i%(%r8%9 eg:

English System Networks:;<!=). r it%% i+ t>t,%ti% %R?i-H%+9' A,i+i%ti8%t- /8+tr%ti+/tr% i+ t(%t-, / 85

8+t14rr-E+,i%( 4r%5ritr%'9Uivr%ir- /Ei+7r(P(.D t(%i%9;<0=6 ,% @.J.Tr+r + .A. (+9 A

Linguistic Descriptionn! "omputer

#rogrm or"hil!ren's

Speech%B++9 R

t, + P,.;<$0. r ;r,ti+tr4rtti+% J. 8H.#i+8,ir9 A

" our sei n

S pok en

E n

g li sh:& r mmr%B++9O>/

rU.P.9;<$.At

i,88+t/t(4

r%+tv



r%i+ 5i,,44r i+ .A. . H,,i-9

ening o o!em English%B++9O>/r U.P.:/rt(81i+).F rti+ t(tr1NOINAB%G i+4r/r+8 tt(.1r %,NOUNPHUA#E94rt,- 78%i8 (% 7+%t(r(tH,,i-'%5riti+% +r,t47,i8ti+%9(vi+rii+,,- 7+t+ vr 7-H,,i-:;<0) /r1Fr #. A,,+:;<;)9 7t1r 78%9,t(( ++4(r% ++1i+, r4r 1r r,%%?iv,+t9

H,,i-'%(E)*AL@ROUT i%vr- i//r+t/r1 t( vr74(r%9 % t(tt( tr1vr7, r4(% t 7rti+ i++- 8%9 +97- t( %1t+9+1i+, r47,+% i+ %15(t

i>r+t8+84t,/r15r/r1 ++4(r%.



)X =!=+

' .' ' 3'significant so it is useful to ma#e it terminologicallyex$licit and we shall refer to modification $receding thehead by the term D=MNS0!0= and to that following

the head by the term DN2MNS0!0=. hus in ■&>%(* he two high stone walls along the roadside . i

the Head is walls, the Dremodifier is formed by the twohigh stone and the Dostmodifier by. along the roadside.

he Head is ty$ically ex$ressed by a common noun $ro$ter noun or $ronoun. Rsually only common nounsacce$t modification; $ronouns and $ro$er nouns tend tooccur alone 9see below:.

2imultaneouslyithe nominal grou$ is structured alonganother dimension the ex$eriential - that is in terms ofthe function that language has of ex$ressing 9thes$ea#er's ex$erience of: $henomena of the real world 9ef

.(.) above:. his has the effect of introducingsubdivisions within the Modifier although these are notin fact subcategories of Modifier but as we have saidstructural roles deriving from a different functional com-

$onent within the semantics. he elements of thisstructure are S0+0+

RM=,0F D0H +L,220!0=VR,L0!0= and what /e shallcall H0E.

he structural analysis of &>%U* is now as follows; thelast line shows the classes of word 9or in one caseran#shifted grou$: which " realiGe the functions in<uestion. hese are the ty$ical classes associated witheach function.

i

two high

stone

walls

3■a ongt e

2tructures%logical•ex$eriential

. Dremodifier Head

Dostmodifier

Seictic

umera-tive

$ithet

+lassifier

hing

Vualifier

+lasses eter-m n

numeral

ad6ec-tive

noun

noun

&$re$ositionalgrou$*

,s far as the 'ex$eriential' stru'eture is concerned theSeirtic is normally a determiner the umerative anumeral or other <uantifier the $ithet an ad6ectiye andthe +lassifier a common or $ro$er noun; but thecorres$ondence of class and function is far from beingone to <ne - ad6ec-



2.2 TPE# O/

REERENCE =i

rives for exam$le regularly function both as Seictic andas +lassifier eg

their 1ao$s old red wineSeictic Seictic $ithet +lassifier hingdeterminer ad6ective ad6ective ad6ective noun

9whereas7amow in a 1ao$s 0ictor78 and red in red paintare both functioning as $ithet:. he Vualifier isnormally a ran#shifted relative clause or $re$ositional

$hrase. ,$art from the hing all elements in theex$eriential structure may occur more than once; notethat this does N refer to coordination since coordinateitems function as single units - in boys and girls there aretwo nouns but only one hing and in hot or cold teathere are two ad6ectives but only one $ithet.

he logical structure is somewhat different; here there

is always a Head but it may be of any class and may bema$$ed on to any of the ex$eriential functions. his can

best be ex$lained by illustration%

these two custc- these two thesemen

Modifier Head

Seicti umerat hin

Modi-fier

Head

Sei umerativ

.Head

Seictic

2imilarly in the old wc have the function of Head

combined with that of $ithet and in the'red 9in the senseof'the red wine' eg in I+ll ta9e the red7 Head combinedwith +lassifier. /here the Head is a noun it may be notonly a common noun as in [:* U* but also a $ro$er nounor $ronoun. 9o avoid the confusion usually inherent inthe use of the word NR let us' re$resent its meaningas follows%

word classes

-verb noun6 adverb

noun> ad6ective numeraldeterminer

9Ksubstantive:

common noun $ro$er $ronoun9nouns: noun



=2 REERENCE

/e shall avoid as far as $ossible the use of NR in thesense of n$un6that of' nominal word' in the most generaliGed scheme ofword classes. 0n

almost all cases its use will corres$ond to noun> 'nominalword that?is thety$ical ex$onent of a hing'% Q+LRS0E ad6ectivenumeral 9<uantifier:and determiner but 0+LRS0E $ronoun and $ro$ernoun as well as common noun. /hen ic is necessary to indicate common or

$ro$er noun butexcluding $ronoun the locution +NMMN N=D=ND= NR wiill beused; since $ro$er nouns in many ways resemble

$ronouns ratherl thancommon nouns there is no $articular reason for using

noun in 6ust thissense. Nccasionally where the context ma#es it clear NR will be'usedin the sense of noun( 'common noun' only. ,ll other usesof noun &thosein which it refers to elements higher than words -

$hrases clausesnominaliGations of any #ind are avoided altogether.: 6

0f the Head is a $ro$er noun or $ronoun it usuallyoccurs without modification. 0t is beyond our sco$e hereto go further into the analysis and inter$retation of thenominal grou$; but for $ur$oses of cohesion it isim$ortant to clarify and ex$lain the structure u$ to this

$oint. +ommon nouns designate classes of things; so they

are liable to be further s$ecified and' the general meaningof the functions Seictic umerative $ithet +lassifierand Vualifier is that ofsD+i!ic ,0N. he Seictics$ecifies by idendcy non-s$ecific as well as s$ecificwhich train?, a train, ail trains7 and including identity

based on reference this train, y train7; the umerative by <uantity or ordination two trains, ne6t train7; the$ithet by reference to a $ro$erty long trains7; the+lassifier by reference to a subclass e6press trains,

passenger trains7; and the Vualifier by reference to somecharacteriGing relation or $rocess trains 1or <ondon,train I+ on7. hese functions are introduced into thenominal grou$ through the logical structure of

modification being ma$$ed on to the function ofModifier; hence common nouns arc ty$ically modified.uc $ronouns and $ro$er names are not as arule'susce$tible of further s$ecification. he category of

$ronoun is a mixed bag; but it com$rises D=2N,Land 0!00 $ronouns of which the $ersonals aswe have seen are reference items and ther6efore ta#e overthe s$ecificity of whatever it is they are $resu$$osingwhile the indefinites eg* soething, e0erybody7 alreadyembody a non-s$ecific deictic com$onent in theirmeaning and cannoc be s$ecified further. Dro$er namesdesignate individuals and are therefore fully s$ecified intheir* own right. Dro$er names can acce$cS2+=0D0F modification as in that Charlie =rown,bea$ti1$l =$tterere; this is a derived function of themodifying structure and one which differs in certainsignificant ways 9for exam$le descri$tive modifiers donot admit of elli$sis; see +ha$ter ):.



2.3 PER#ONAB

REERENCE

=.3

ut the normal $attern is% with Modifier if the Head is acommon noun without Modifier if the Head is $ro$ernoun or $ronoun.

!inally there is the structural relation of2R"MNS0H+,0N by which a Modifier is itselffurther modified. 2ubmodifiers are ty$ically adverbssuch as i'ery e>$ally, too; they may also be ran#shifted

$re$ositional grou$s li#e in e0ery way in an in e0eryway 0aliant attept. 2ubmodifiers are most fre<uentwithin the $ithet though they can be found elsewhere.

0t will be necessary to refer to the structure of thenominal grou$ at fre<uent $oints in the discussion ofcohesion. o cite one exam$le it is a regular source ofelli$sis and we can define an elli$tical nominal grou$ asone in which there is no overt hing and the Head istherefore-combined with some other function. /hatdistinguishes reference from other ty$es of cohesionhowever is that reference is overwhelmingly nNininal incharacter. /ith the exce$don of the demonstrativeadverbs 'here, there, now, and then, and somecom$arative adverbs all reference' items are foundwithin the nominal grou$. hey may have any of thefunctions in the 'ex$eriential' structure exce$t those of+lassifier and Vualifier. 0t is not that these elementscannot also incor$orate cohesive reference - they can

but if so the reference item functions as something-elsety$ically as Seictic in a ran#shifted nominal grou$ eg*

that referring to bo6 in

&>%P* 0t's an old box camera. - never had one of that#ind.

he classification of reference items is not however based on their function in the nominal grou$; it is basedon the ty$e of reference involved. his is a semanticclassification and cuts across the classification accordingto grammatical function. ,t the same time the ty$e ofreference is HN+ unrelated to the form which it ta#es inthe grammar and to the classes of word which functionas reference items. his will be discussed andexem$lified where necessary in what follows.

>.( Dersonal reference

he category'of D=2N,L2 includes the three classesof $ersonal $ronouns $ossessive determiners 9usuallycalled '$ossessive ad6ectives': and $ossessive $ronouns.here is no general name for this category in traditionalgrammar because che members of it belong to differentclasses Zvith diverse structural roles; but in fact theyre$resent a single system that of D=2N%



44 =!=+

$erson-

$-5$eec broles

[

$s$ca#er only I

rs$ea#er-

L-s$ea#er $lus

we -addressee9s: yo$

malehe

-other iroles[ i

■s$ecific •

L-$lural

they -generaliGed

human one

■female she •non-human it ?

I0n tabular form%

2$eech rolesNther roles

0 memine my

you you it itshe her 6 &its* its 6hers her 0. . i

%one one -one's

ore 6/e us

than one 3 ours our

yours your they them

theirs their

hese items are all reference items; they refer tosomething by s$ecifying its function or role in the s$eech situation. hissystem of reference is#nown as D= s X where' $erson' is used in the s$ecialsense of' role'; thetraditionally recogniGed categories are !0=2 D=2N2+NS D=2Nand H0=S D=2N intersecting with the RM=

categories of 20ERL,= and DLR=,L. he actual system found in thesemantics of6languages isnearly always a de$arture in some wayfrom this 'ideal'ty$e; that of nglish is as set out above with one or two further

&human[-A;



com$lexities which will be brought u$ in the discussion - including the so-calledim$ersonal uses of i+i$ you *+0 they. 9 J



>.( D=2N,L=!=+

)U

he term D=2 X might seem a little misleading asthe system includes not only 'im$ersonal' meanings9which are actually still $ersonal it human; they aremerely not individualiGed: Hut also reference that is trulynon-$ersonal reference to ob6ects. ut most grammaticalterms have fuGGy edges; they ex$ress the central orty$ical meaning of the category in <uestion and are

6ustified by being in this way sim$le and easy to remember. he alternatives would be either to use $urelyabstract labels such as letters and numbers which haveno mnemonic value; or to attem$t more accuratedesignations which would soon become cumbersomeand syntactically recalcitrant. he technical term itself is

not $an of any linguistic theory; it is sim$lyan'address'for easy recovery.

2..8 #eantic distinctions in the personal s7+sie

he significance of the D=2N system is that it is themeans of referring to =LF, $ersons and ob6ectsma#ing use of a small set of o$tions centring around the

$anicular nature of their relevance to the s$eech situ-ation. he $rinci$al distinction is that between the D=2N2 S!0S Y

THEIR ROBE# IN THE COUNICATION

PROCE##9 O+ t( O+ (+9

and all other entities on the other. he former we shallcall 2D+H =NL2; they are the roles of 2D,=and ,SS=22. hese are the two roles assigned bythe s$ea#er; and we use 'addressee' in $reference to'hearer' or 'listener' in order to suggest the meaning'$erson S20E,S Y H 2D,= ,2 reci$ientof the communication' - as distinct from one who choosesto listen or ha$$ens to hear. he latter which we shallcall sim$ly NH= =NL2 include all other relevantentities NH= H, s$ea#er or addressee. 0n termsof the traditional categories of $erson the distinction isthat between first and second $erson on the one hand I,

yo$, we7 and third $erson on the other he, she, it, they,

one7.ach of these $ersonal forms enters into the structure inone of two guises% either as $artici$ant in some $rocessor as $ossessor of some entity. 0f the former it falls intothe class NR subclass D=NNR and functions asHead - and sole element - in the nominal grou$; it thenhas one form when that nominal grou$ is the 2ub6ect I,

yo$, we, he, she, it, they, one7 and in most cases adifferent form when it is anything other than sub6ect e,

yo$, $s, hi, her, it, the, one7. 0f the latter it falls intothe class S=M0= and then functions either asHead ine, yo$rs, o$rs, his, hers, [its@, theirs7 or asModifier y, yo$r, o$r, his, her, its, their, one+s7.

xam$les%9a: 0 had a cat I* $artici$ant;

2ub6ect $ronoun Head



i). =+ i

i69b:the cat $leased me me; $artici$ant; r

non-2ub6ea $ronoun

Head9(:ta#e mine ine* $ossessor decerminer Head9):my $lace's em$ty y* $ossessor determinerModifier

oce thac one never occurs as $ossessor7Head althoughit does as $ossessor7 Modifier% we can say Bo they payone+s debts? but nor Bo they only pay their own debts, ordo they also pay one+s? here is a reason for this whichwill a$$ear lacer. he form its is also rare as Headalthough chere seems to be no very clear reason for thisrestriction and in fact instances do occur eg

[2*@ You #now that mouse you saw 1 /ell that hole

there must 6be its.•

/ithin each of the rwo ma6or categories of $ersonalsfurther distinctions are built into the system. /ithin thes$eech roles the nglish $erson system recogniGes onlys$ea#er 7and addressee yo$, ma#ing no distinctionaccording to the number of addressees or according cothe social hierarchy or the social distance betweenaddressee and s$ea#er.4 0t does however com$rise a thirdform we re$resenting the s$ea#er together withlsomeother $erson or $ersons among whom the addressee9s:may or may not be included.f

,s far as the remaining items are concerned those

which refer co other roles not to s$ea#er or addresseethe distincrions are fairly clearcut. here is a generaliGed $ersonal form with human referent one, $erha$s 'bor-rowed' from !rench on although it is not restricted tofunctioning as 2ub6ect as on is; in che followingexam$le only the second of the four could have on in!rench translation%

9a%\* hey couldn't do a thing li#e chat to one. - Nnenever #nowsdoes one 1 - 0t ma#es one thin# though. :

4 liGabethan nglish distinguished tho$ 9singularfamiliar: from yo$ 9$lural; or singular showing res$ect ordistance: much li#e che !rench distinction of 9 and

0o$s today. he distinction was tost in all varieties ofnglish exce$t some northern rural dialects in which itis now case dying out. he Vua#er usAs of thee is a lacerimitation and does noc directly reflect original usage.t 0t should be noted chac a se$arate system of '$erson'o$erates in im$erative clauses. he 2ub6ect of anim$erative clause is always a '$ersonal' element; buc inthis case che addressee is always included and cheo$tion is $lus or minus the s$ea#er. & other words thecontrast is between yo$7 yo7 and let+s gal. where let+salways includes 'you'. 2o let+s is not e<uivalent to fee usin which $s is $art of the ordinary $erson system andmay sxclude the addressee3 he tbnn let+s try is form ofthe im$erative of try; buc let $s ay contains theim$erative of let 9as in let /ohn ay, etc: and means '9you:allow us to try' where $s may and in such instances

ty$ically does exclude the $erson being s$o#en to.



2.3 PER#ONAB

REERENCE

=$

here is a difference between ritish and ,mericannglish as regards re$eririon of one within die sentence%ritish nglish retains one in second and subse<uentoccurrences where ,merican nglish normally substi-tutes he*

&(%T* Nne can hardly be ex$ected to reveal one's7hisinnermost secretsto the first casual en<uirer can one7he 1he rest of the ' other roles' are non-generaliGed% theyma#e s$ecific refer ence to $ersons or things and the categories are familiarto every studentof nglish from lesson one% $lural with no distinction of

$ersons andthings %,ey; singular human male he, female she, non-human it. ,nimalsare treated sometimes as $ersons and sometimes asthings; the lower ordersof creation are referred to as if the higher orders eitheras it or as he3shede$ending on a whole number of variables $rimarily thes$ea#er's- relationshi$ to the s$ecies in <uestion 9farmer and farmanimal $et owner and

$et for exam$le: but also on his individual $reference.0f the reference is

to a single human being but with the sex un#nown oruns$ecified theform used is he, as in% . . ' ■'%; •.

&>%X* 0f the buyer wants to #now the condition of the $ro$erty he has to have another survey carriedout on his own behalf.4''

his means that as in many languages the masculine isthe syntactically unmar#ed form. his is a matter ofconcern to some since they see in it anothermanifestation of the sub6ection of women and want toinsist on he or she 9or $resumably she or he7 in suchinstances. ot ail languages enforce the sex distinction;in +hinese there is only one word meaning both he and

she, 6ust as'there is only the one word they 9as contrastedwith Ds and elles7 for the $lural in nglish. ,nd itcannot be denied that whatever the origins of the 'unmar#edmasculine' - they lie far bac# in the history of 0ndo-uro$ean - the use of he has its $roblems. he authorsoE die =rea9thro$gh to <iteracy Feacher+s Man$al usedhe to refer to a child but she to refer to a teacher on thegrounds that infant teachers are more often female - areasoning that might e<ually be ob6ected to%

9>%* 0t is most im$orcanc to note that a child whotells his teacher an imaginative story which shesubse<uently writes down for him is not engagedin creative writing; but in creative s$ea#ing.

o doubt the authors were glad to be able to avoid the $ossible ambiguities that might arise if both child andteacher were referred to by identical $ersonal forms.

* ,he Legl Si!e o *uying -ouse% C+%1r%'

A%%%+.



=& REERENCE

t.yi #peech roles and other roles

he use of $ersonal forms as reference items with acohesive function is so - all-$cn'ading in nglish that it

hardly needs illustrating. he following is from ,lice'sconversation with the flowers%

&>%>* ' ,ren't you sometimes frightened at being $lanted% out here with nobody to ta#e care of you1''here's the tree in the middle' said the =ose"ftfhat else is itgood6for1' 0'ut what could it do if danger came 1',lice as#td. '0t could bar#' said the =ose.

'0t says "ough-wough3"' cried a Saisy% 'that'swhy its ' branches are called boughs3'

!our occurrences of it and one of its, refer ana$horicallyto the tree. o a$$reciate the effect of the use of

$ersonals and cohesive iteriis of all #inds /0HNRa$$ro$riate referents see the verses read out by the/hite =abbit as evidence in Alice in Gonderland,+ha$ter > beginning

&>%% (* 'hey fold me you had beento her ,nd mentioned me tohim.'

he whole $oem is an excellent exam$le of a $seudo-text i

here is a.distinction.to be made.however between 6tic s$eech roles

9first and second $erson: and the other roles 9third $erson:. Nnly the third $erson is inherently cohesive in that a third $erson formty$ically refersana$horically toa $receding item in the text. !irst andsecond $erson formsdo not normally refer to the text at all; their referents aredefined by thes$eech roles of? s$ea#er and hearer and hence they arenormally inter

$reted exo$horically by reference to the situation. hisis6 an im$ortantdistinction in $rinci$le% there is a ma6or division within

the $erson system between the third $erson which as far as the s$eechsituation is concernedis not a '$erson' - not a role - at all 9it can only be definednegatively as'not first or second': and the first and second $ersonswhich6are defined asroles in the s$eech situation. he first and second $ersonforms essentiallyrefer to the situation whereas those of the third $ersonessentially refer ana$horically or cata$horically to the text. ■

Hence the absence of any verbal reference for J and

yo$ does not normally lead to any sense ofincom$leteness. 0n written language they are ana$horicwhen they occur in <uoted 9'direct': s$eech as o$$osedto those instances where the writer is addressing hisreaders; so in &%()* land yo$ have as verbal referents

Alice and the Cat. +om$are



2.3 PER#ONAB

REERENCE

=<

&>%)* here was a brief note from 2usan. 2he 6ust said'0 am not coming home this wee#end.'

where 0. in the <uoted clause refers bac# li#e the $receding she, to #$san in the first sentence. hese areinstances of ana$hora albeit indirect ana$hora; J still refersto the s$ea#er but we have to loo# in the text to find outwho the s$ea#er is. 0n general however 7and yo$ are given

by the situation; other than in.cases of <uoted s$eech if weare 'in on' the text at all we arc .7' usually ourselvesoccu$ying one or other of the s$eech roles.

+onversely a third $erson form does normally im$lythe $resence of a referent somewhere in the text; and inthe absence of such a referent the text a$$earsincom$lete. he meaning 'male $erson other thans$ea#er or addressee' is hardly s$ecific so that anoccurrence of he y$ically $resu$$oses a singular humanmasculine common or $ro$er noun somewhere in thevicinity. ,t the same time 6ust as the first and second

$erson forms while ty$ically exo$horic may referana$horically so also the third $erson forms whilety$ically ana$horic may refer exo$horically to some

$erson or thing that is $resent in the context of situation.,n exam$le such as the following could occur as acom$lete text.

&>%U* Nh he's already been 1 - Yes he went by about

five minutes ago.

he nature of the re$ly shows that theidenrity of he isclear to the .res$ondent at least to his own satisfaction.,s we have em$hasiGed already '$resent in the context ofsituation' does not necessarily mean $hysically $resent inthe interactants' field of $erce$tion; it merely means thatthe context of situation $ermits the identification to bemade. he setting of the;.'above exam$le might be someevent at which a collection is being ta#en; where the firsts$ea#er money in hand notices that those around him areno longer $roffering contributions; by this time thesteward the he of the dialogue is in fact well out of

sight but it is obvious to both s$ea#ers who is in<uestion. /e may.be inclined to s$eculate as with otherreference items that the original mode of reference ofthird $erson forms was actually situational and thatendo$horic reference is ultimately derived fromexo$horic. here are reasons for thin#ing that reference is

$rimarily a situational =L,0N whereas substitutionis a textual one 9see +ha$ter (:. e that as it may thety$ical 02,+ of third $erson reference is textualand therefore cohesive; and in many texts the third

$ersonforms constitute the most fre<uent single class ofcohesive items.

!inally there is the 'mixed' $ersonal we. his may refer

6ust to s$ea#er and.addressee 9'you and 0': and so includein its meaning only the s$eech

http://may.be/

http://may.be/



m

m

#

^

•R

E

E

R

E

N

C

E

roles; but itmayextend to athird

$erson or

$ersons9eithe

r withorwith-outthe

addressee 'e 'he7she7they and 0' or 'he7she7they and youand I!7, in which case it is mixed and demands a referentfor the 'other role6'. his may be exo$horic as when theleader of a delegation uses we to refer to himself $lus thegrou$ of which he is acting as s$o#esman - who may ormay not be forgathered around him% again the conce$t

of'siruarion' is an abstract one denned not by the $hysical $resence of the $artici$ants but by the institutionalframewor# in this case the conce$t of a s$o#esman'onewho s$ea#s on behalf of 9himself and: others'. Nr it may

be ana$horic as in &>%P* My husband and 0 are leaving./e have seen <uite enough of this un$leasantness.

o summariGe% $ersonals referring to the s$eech roles9s$ea#er and addressee: are ty$ically exo$horic% thisincludes 7and yo$, and we meaning 'you and-'.hey

become ana$horic however in <uoted s$eech; and so arenormally ana$horic in many varieties of written languagesuch as narrative fiction. 0n narration the context ofsituation includes a 'context ' of reference' a fiction that is

to be constructed from the text itself so that all referencewithin it must ultimately be endo$horic. 2omewhere orother in the narrative will be names or designations towhich we can relate the I and yo$ of the dialogue. ,written text as a whole however still has its outer contextof situation in which the writer may refer exo$horicallyeither to himself as I or we, or to his reader9s: as yo$, orto both. his ha$$ens in letter-writing in first $ersonnarrative in advertising in official documents addressedto the $ublic and in notices; for exam$le%

&>%]* a. Sear +arrie% How are you1 0 had a strangedream about youlast night - we were wandering together

through a denseforest... --

b. 0 su$$ose my face must have given me awayfor suddenly sheswe$t across and #issed me but fortunately formy goodresolutions she didn't linger close to me but

$rom$tly returnedto her chair.

c. Loo# around you. Just how much of YNR is $ro6ected intoyour environment and how much of n is

$ro6ected at you1d. he Medical Sirector than#s you for your

attendance 'at the.Q-=ay Rnit and is ha$$y to inform you thatyour film issatisfactory YNR 2HNRLS D H02L= ,S , rr6 /0H

OU FHENEKER OU HAKE AN XRA

IN UTURE.

:6...L

e. You have been warned3

3

W

%



2.3 PER#ONAB

RER#NC

;

Dersonals referring to other roles 9$ersons or ob6ectsother than thes$ea#er or addressee: are ty$ically ana$horic; thisincludes he, she, it andthey, and also the 'third $erson' com$onent of we when

$resent. heymay be exo$horic however wherever the context ofsituation is 96udged

by the s$ea#er to be: such as to $ermit identification ofdie referent in■<uestion. • '

,s has been $ointed out it is only the ana$horic ty$eof reference that is relevant to cohesion since it $rovidesa lin# with a $receding $onion of the text. /hen we tal#of the cohesive function of $ersonal reference thereforeit is $articularly the third $erson forms that we have inmind. ut we shall find instances of these which are.notcohesive as well as instances of the first and second

$erson forms which'are. 0n s$o#en nglish es$ecially incontexts of' lariguage-in-action' those registers in whichthe verbal activity is closely interwoven with non-verbalactivity; it is <uite common-for diird $erson forms tofunction exo$horically; but in writing an ex$licit referentwill normally be re<uired and even inv s$eech the heareris sometimes constrained to demand one .-so. we.hear'exchanges such as% Fhey+re here% ' Gho are? 0nother words a third $erson form is assumed to be

ana$horic unless the context of situation ma#es it <uiteunambiguous. /ith the first and second $erson forms onthe other hand the assum$tion is the other way round. 0ns$o#en-language I means the s$ea#er and yo$ means theaddressee unless there is $ositive indication to thecontrary in the form of a clause introducing <uoteds$eech; and <uoted s$eech although common enough islargely associated with certain $articular ty$es ofnarrative such as gossi$ and 6o#e-telling. 0n written lan-guage the exo$horic use of 7 as writer and yo$ asaudience is restricted to certain registers; but even inwriting wc find some form of ex$licit signal 9<uotationmar#s or 'inverted commas': to tell us'whe'fi they are not

being used in this way.

2$eech rolesJ yo$, we 9' yo$ and H7

ty$ically%

exo$horic 9non-cohesive:%

s$ea#eraddressee9s:;writer reader9s:

Nther roleshe, she, it, they, we+andothers7+7ana$horic9cohesive:%$erson9s: orthing9s: ...

$reviously referredto

exo$horic 9non-





2 REERENCE

ote finally that it is characteristic of third $ersonforms that they may be cumulatively ana$horic. Nneoccurrence o1 /ohn at the beginning of a text may befollowed by an indefinitely large number of occurrences

of he, hi or his all to be inter$reted by reference to theoriginal /ohn. his $henomenoncontributes verymar#edly to the internal cohesion of a text since itcreates ai #ind of networ# of lines of reference eachoccurrence being lin#ed to all its $redecessors u$ to andincluding the initial reference. he number arid densityof such networ#s is one of the factors which gives to anytext its $articular flavour or texture.

■ - ■ '■% - ' J■ • •' .2.. #oe special 9inds o1 personal re1erence

■ i ■ ' .C i.

2.3.3.I EXTENDED REERENCE9 AND TEXT

REERENCE I

he word it differs from all other $ersonals in that it mayrefer not only to a $articular $erson or ob6ect someentity that is encoded linguistically as a '$artici$ant' - anoun or nominal ex$ression - but also to ariy identifiable

$ortion of text. his actually com$rises two ratherdistinct $henomena both of which are illustrated in thefollowing exam$le%

&>%\* &he Vueen said%* '+urtsey while you're thin#ingwhat to say. 0t saves time.' ,lice wondered a littleat this but she was too much 6n awe of the Vueento disbelieve it.

.''.' ■ . ' • ■

0n the first instance It sa0es tie, it refers to c$nsey[ing@while yo$+re thin9 ing what to say; the reference is still to a' thing' but notin thc6narrow senseof a $artici$ant 9$erson or ob6ect: - it is a whole $rocessor com$lex

$henomenon which is in <uestion. Nnly if has the $ro$erty of QSS=!=+ of this #ind% consider for exam$le an eye-witness's descri$tion of an accident concluding with the remar# It allhappened so >$ic9ly.0n the second instance... to disbelie0e it, the it refers notto a H E butto a !,+% [that@ c$rtsey[ing@ while yo$+re thin9ingwhat to say ... sa0es tie.his is an instance of Q =!=+. /hereasextended reference dif fers from usual instances of reference only in extent - thereferent is morethan 6ust a $erson or ob6ect it is a $rocess or se<uence of

$rocesses 9grammatically a clause or string of clauses not 6ust a singlenominal: - textreference differs in #ind% the referent is not being ta#en

u$ at its face-value but is being transmuted into a fact or a re$ort. Derha$sthe best way toconvey the distinction is through ambiguity% 6

&>%T* 0t rained day and night for two wee#s. he



basement flooded and everything was underwater. 0t s$oilt all our calculation4



2.3 PER#ONAB

REERENCE 3

ither the $henomenon of heavy rains and flooding theF itself destroyed our records; or the'meta$henomenon' the !, + that it rained so muchu$set the -weather $artem that; we had $redicted.

0n addition to ft the demonstratives.'this and thatfre<uently occur in both extended reference and textreference. Nne of the stri#ing as$ects of cohesion is theability of hearers and readers to identify the relevant

$ortion of text-as referent when they are faced with it,this or that in these uses. +learly one of the factors thatenables them to do this is theinternal cohesion within the

$assage that is being $resu$$osed.

2.3.3.2 @ENERABIMED EXOPHORIC REERENCE

ot only the generaliGed $ersonal one but also we, yo$,'they and ft ah have a generaliGed exo$horic use in which thereferent is treated as being as it ■were immanent in allcontexts of situation 9i: Jo$ and one mean 'any hu- •7 manindividual' as in yo$ ne0er 9now, one ne0er 9nows; andoften by im$lication 'any self-res$ecting individual' 'anyindividual 0 would a$$rove or $articularly in thecombination of one $lus a verbal modulation as in one $staccept certain standards, 9ii: Ge is used in similar fashion

but more •. concretely im$lying a $articular grou$ ofindividuals with which the s$ea#er wishes to identifyhimself as in we don+t do that sort o1 thing here. 0n additionthere are various other intermediate uses of we* royal andeditorial eg* we consider it o$r d$ty ..., with an assum$tionof status behind it; medical wc, from doctor to $atient as inhow are we today?, im$lying 'you in your role as $atientwith whom 0 see# to identify myself'; im$ersonal we used inex$ository writing 9for exam$le in this boo#: eg* weconcl$de there1ore that..., sim$ly because nglish demandsa sub6ect and an excess of $assives soon becomes tiresome9iii: Fhey is used to mean ' $ersons uns$ecified'; often thosewith res$onsibility 'the authorities' but also -sim$ly'$ersons ade<uately s$ecified for $ur$oses of discussion bythe context' as in they+re ending the road o$t there, 9iv: Itoccurs as a universal meteorological o$erator.in a fewex$ressions such as it+s snowing, it+s hot today. ,ll these areexo$horic but with a #ind of institutionaliGed exo$hora;they ma#e it $ossible to conform to the structuralre<uirements of the clause which demands a nominal invarious $laces - for this reason they are often untranslatablesince other languages ma#e different re<uirements.xo$horic reference ma#es no contribution to the cohesionof a text. ut it is worth noting $erha$s that this'institutionaliGed' exo$hora ma#es no' demands either on theverbal context or on the context of situation. +onfrontedwith the old verse



U) =CD=C+

&>%>X* hey're digging u$ Erand$a's grave to build asewer

the hearer does not feel obliged to as# "/ho are1' - chemessage is com$lete. 0f a $ersonal form cannot beinter$reted institutionally either because it does not ma#esense in the context or because it is one such?as he whichis never used in this way then the hearer must see# thenecessary evidence for inter$reting it. 0f he finds suchevidence in the situation he can acce$t the $assage in<uestion as a com$lete text. 0f not he has to see# textualevidence and therefore to assume that the original

$assage is related to some $receding $iece by cohesion -otherwise he can only regard it as incom$lete. 0t is notsuggested that he $erforms chese o$erations3 as asystematic search in this or any other order. he

im$ortant fact is that the hearer ty$ically assumes chatany $assage which for external reasons NREH to be atext 9as o$$osed to something that he #nows to be a frag-ment such as one end of a tele$hone conversation: is infact a text; and he will go c$.. enormous lengths tointer$ret it as com$lete and intelligible. his is an as$ectof che very general human tendency to assume in theother $erson an intention to communicate an assum$tionwhich is no doubc of very great value for survival.

1. '" • '

2..) 5ersonal prono$ns, possessi0e deteriners and

possessi0e prono$ns

,ll chac has been said about the $ersonal $ronounsa$$lies e<ually to che other two cacegories of $ersonalnamely che $ossessive decerminers and $ossessive

$ronouns. either the syntactic function of che $ersonalitself nor the syntactic function of ics referent has any

bearing on che ana$horic relacion becween che cwo; inthis res$ect reference is <uite unli#e substitution9+ha$ccr (:. 0n &>%>* below che $ersonal reference itemhe is a $ronoun functioning as Head; this refers bac# to

/ohn e<ually well whether /ohn is non-$ossessive $ro$ernoun as Head as in 9a: $ossessive as Seictic as in 9b: or

$ossessive as Head as in 9c:%

&>%>* a. John has moved to a new house. b. John's house is beautiful. I He had it built lastyear.c. hat new house is John's. J

Li#ewise che ocher $ersonal forms boch $ossessivedeterminers y, yo$r, etc: and $ossessive $ronounsine, yo$rs, etc: may refer wichouc resicric-cion to areferent having any of che functions oijohn in &>%>*'orincleed any ocher syncacric function that is o$en tonominals. 2o we could have any combination of chefollowing%



2.3 PER#ONAB

REERENCE

&>%>>* a. John has moved to a "* fx. He had it built last year new house.

b.John's house is beautiful. Q y. His wife must bedelighted with

it.c.hat new house is otal's G. 0 didn't #now itwas his.

J v.

where 9x: has $ersonal $ronoun he, 9y: has $ossessivedeterminer his and 9>: has $ossessive $ronoun his.

Moreover the referent may be embedded dee$ in acom$lex sentence; diere is still no difficulty inidentifying @7b7m as the referent of hisia &>%>(*.%

&>%>(* You9really ought to as# 2ally not to tell a storyli#e that to allthose friends of hers if she thin#s they might begoing to bewor#ing widi6ohn unless she can be'<uite sure it'snot going togo any further. 0 hardly thin# ic would a$$eal ..tohis sense of humour. .'I1;B"I ■■F%'

here is however one res$ect in which $ossessive $ronouns differ from other $ersonal reference items as

regards their ana$horic'function. /hereas the other $ersonals re<uire only one referent fortheir'inter$retation $ossessive $ronouns demand two a

$$ssessor and a $ossessed. he difference can be seen in[: % >)*%

&>%>)* a. John's is nice. b. His house is nice.c. His is nice.

Eiven 9a: we need die answer to 'John's what1'; given9b:the answer to 'whose house1'; but given 9c: we need theanswer to 'whose what1'. 2o any occurrence of a

$ossessive $ronoun involves two%ties only one. of whichis a form of reference; the other is $resent with any

$ossessive nominal such as /ohn+s or y 1ather+s,whenever it is. functioning as Head. his is in fact aninstance of elli$sis 9+ha$ter ):. Dossessive $ronouns inother words are doubly ana$horic because they are bothreferential and elli$tical% they are ana$horic 9i: byreference to the $ossessor and 9ii: by elli$sis to thething $ossessed. 2o in &>%>U* only 9c: satisfies die

$resu$$ositions of die second sentence%

&>%>U* a. +an you find another $rogramme 1 * b. +an you hel$ Mary 1 Hers has gotlost.c. +an you hand Mary a $rogramme 1 J

he.$ossessive $ronoun hers -$resu$$oses Mary by

reference and prograe by elli$sis.



# =!=+3' '

a.6.6 Cataphoric"Fe1erence +& &&K+&

2o far no mention has been made of cata$horic $ersonalreference. Der sonals can refer cata$horically as in 6. .

&>%>P* He who hesitates is lost.

where he does not $resu$$ose any referent in the $receding text but sim$ly refers forward to whohesitates.'Rnli#e demonstratives however which dorefer cata$horically in a way that is genuinely cohesive -they refer !N=/,=S to succeeding elements to whichthey are in t6fI v structurally related' 9see >) below: -

$ersonals are normally cata$horic only •within astructural framewor# and therefore do not contribute tothe cohesion of the text. he reference is within the

sentence and is determined by the structure of thesentence.0t may be hel$ful nevertheless to summariGe the

cata$horic structural functions of the $ersonal forms - inwhich only the $ersonal $ronouns $artici$ate never the

$ossessive forms 9i: hird $erson $ronouns other than ifmay refei- cata$horically to a defining relative clause; asin &>%>P*. his usage is felt to be somewhat archaic; it isfound in $roverbs and a$horisms and in some rhetoricalliterary and liturgical styles. 2uch cata$horic reference isalso found occasionally with we and yo$, as in yo$ whodo$bt y word 9meaning 'those among you who doubtmy word'; note that there is no cata$hora in forms which

are non-definingisuch as yo$, who $sed to he sotolerant7, 9ii: ,ll third $erson $ronouns occur cata$hori-cally as 'substitute themes' in clauses in which theirreferent is delayed to the end eg* they re good these

peaches, 9iii: ,s a s$ecial case of the last it is veryfre<uently &Rsed in this way where the sub6ect of theclause is a nominaliGation as in it+s tr$e that he wor9s0ery hard. his is in' fact the unmar#ed or ty$ical form insuch cases; the alternative that he wor9s 0ery hard istr$e, is $ossible but restricted. ,ll such cata$horicreference is structurally determined and ma#es no directcontribution to the texture.

here is one cata$horic use of it that is cohesiveillustrated by &>%>]*%

&>%>]* 0 would never have believed it. hey've acce$tedthe whole scheme3

his ha$$ens only where if is text-referring 9see>.(.(above:; again li#e itsana$horic e<uivalent it has more in common withdemonstrative refer ence than with $ersonal reference. .;

hus to sum u$ not all occurrences of $ersonal formsare ana$horic nor is the mere $resence of a $ersonalreference item by itself an indication



■2= DEON#TRATIKE

REERENCE $

0 of a cohesive tie. 0n the first $lace the reference may beexo$horic inter-J $retable by recourse to the context ofsituation% either in the generaliGed • exo$horic sense of we,

yo$, they or it or in the s$ecial exo$horic sense of thes$eech roles ex$ressed by yo$ and I. xo$horic referencedoes not constitute a cohesive tie. 0n the second $lace itmay be cata$horic; it will then be cohesive only in the caseof the% s$ecial use of '.' exem$lified by &>%>]* above. hisdoes constitute a tie lin#ing u$ with what follows. ,llother instances are ana$horic including most occurrencesof third $erson forms and some occurrences of first andsecond $erson forms 9those in a context of <uotation:.Rsually there is no great difficulty in recogniGing an ana-

$horic $c45--.4l form; and we are all sensitiGed to the $resence of one which seems to be ana$L..-^ but for whichno clear.reference is available. Derha$s this is one of the

reasons why children used to be discouraged from usingthem. he other reason is one of manners% '0t's rude to

$oint' and exo$horic reference is after all 6ust $ointingwith words.

>.) Semonstrative reference

Semonstrative reference is essentially a form of verbal $ointing. he s$ea#er identifies the referent by locatingit on a scale of $roximity. he system is as follows%

rneutral the

-near

■-selective

Lfar 9notnear:

$arti a$ants

^ L-cin

cumstance

singula

r%

.$lural%

■4i8

rime%

near%

this

the

se

far%

tha

t

tho

se

then

he circumstantial 9adverbial: demonstratives here,there, now and then refer to the location of a $rocess ins$ace or time and they normally do so directly not viathe location of some $erson or ob6ect that is $artici$ating



& REERENCE

notin the $rocess; hence chey ty$ically function as ,d6uncts inche clause as elemencs within che nominal grou$. heyhave a secondary function as Vualifier as in that anthen. he remaining 9nominal: demonstratives this, these,that, those, and the refer co the location of some thingty$ically some entity - $erson or ob6ect - that is

$artici$ating in the $rocess; they therefore occur aselements within the nominal grou$. hey belong to theclass of determiners and have che ex$eriential function ofSeictic; in che r logical scruccure chey function either asModifier or as Head wich che exce$tion of the which is aModifier only. 0n this res$ect che nominal demonstrativesresemble che $ossessives which can also function either asModifier or as Head alchough unli#e che $ossessives thedemonstratives have only one form - chere is nodiscinccion between demonstrative determiner and

demonstrative $ronoun corres$onding to that between $ossessive determiner 9eg; yo$r7 and $ossessive $ronouneg* yo$rs7*

as Modifier as Head&(. ... demonstrative thac garden seems bigger thatis a big garden "

$ossessive your garden seems bigger yours is a biggarden?

,.v'''■'■'' 0n the case of the demonscracives however there arecertain differences in

meaning between che funccions of Modifier and Head; a

demonstrative functioning as Head is more li#e a $ersonal $ronoun. Historically in fact_ both it and the are reduced forms of that; and although it

now o$erates inche system of $ersonals both can be ex$lained as beingche 'neutral' or non-selective ty$e of the nominaldemonstrative - as essentially one and the same elemencwhich ta#es the form it when functioning as Head andthe when functioning as Seictic 9see further >.).( below:.

ti#e $ersonals the demonstratives regularly referexo$horically to something within che context ofsituation. his is the $rimary form of verbal $ointing; andit may be accom$anied by demonstrative action in theform of a gesture indicating the ob6ect referred to.

xam$les are obviousd enough%

&a%(\* Dic#cheseu$3

&>%>o* HN/ would you li#e a cruise in chat yachc 1

2imilarly with the demonstrative adverbs% 6

ggI ; &>%(X* Leave chat there and come here3

?fe 0n general this, these and here im$ly $rox#ricy co che

s$ea#er; that,"those

and there im$ly distance from the s$ea#er which may or

may9noc involve

•

*



2. DEON#TRATIKE

REERENCE

<

$roximity to the addressee - the meaning is 'near you ornot near either of us but at any rate not near me'. Manylanguages for exam$le Ja$anese have a set of threedemonstratives in which the meanings 'near you' and 'not near either of us' are #e$t distinct; this system isfound in one or two dialects of nglish which have this,here 'near me' that, there 'near you' and yon, yonder ?nornear either of us'. 0n such languages there is a close

$arallelism between the demonstrative and the $ersonalsystems with 'diis' corres$onding co '0' 9s$ea#er: 'that' to'you' 9addressee: and 'yon' to ' he she it' 9other locationor role:.4 0n languages li#e 2tandard nglish with onlythe two terms ' this' is m$re s$ecific than' that' since 'this' has the s$ea#er as its $oint of reference while ' that'has no $articular reference $oint - it is sim$ly inter$retedas 'not this'. his ex$lains why the neutral forms the and% derived from that and not from this... '

/e are not concerned here with exo$horic referencefor the; reasons already given% it is not textually cohesive.ut the uses of t7ii's and that in endo$horic reference areex$lainable by reference to. their.exo$horic meanings; soit is im$ortant to start from the general conce$t of

$roximity as this is inter$reted situationally. he samea$$lies to% the definite article% the is also usedcxo$horically where the situation ma#es it clear whatreferent is intended as in

&>%(* Loo# at the flowers3&>%(>* Son't go; the train's coming.

his is the meaning of the here% namely that the referentis fully s$ecified by the context and no furthers$ecification is needed. he ana$horic and cata$horicuses ot the are li#ewise more readily inter$retable if werelate them to its meaning as an exo$horic deictic.

Semonstrative reference is discussed in more detail indie next three sections% >.). che selective nominaldemonstratives; >.).> the; >.).( the adverbialdemonstratives.

2.),8 Fhe selecti0e noinal deonstrati0es* this thesethat those

hese demonstratives occur extensively with ana$horicfunction in all

* T( 8(i, tr1' $0' i% %1ti1% >4,i+ i% 'i+i 4r>i1it- / %1 t(ir 4r%+'9 78 i% 1i%i+tr4rtti+9 7% + i %%14ti+ 1+%trtiv% r OEHIKED RO 4r%+,%.Rt(r 5 %(, %- t( t(ir 1+%trtiv95(r i8 i% /+9 %(r% 5it( 8( t(ir 4r%+ 8(811+ 1+i+ 't(r'9 i +it(r / t( t5%48i/i8 4%%i7i,iti%. # '(. %(9 it' i% '+it(r %+r+r r%%9 7t %1 t(r +tit-'6 '-+' i% '+it(r

+r %4r +r +r r%%9 78 %1 t(r,8ti+'.





2= DEON#TRATIKE

REERENCE !,

+onmare this with the exo$horic use of this to refer tocurrent $eriods of time% this orning, this year and so

on; and also in those days, in these days. either of these tendencies is fully dominant. 0f in agiven instance both arc -wor#ing in the same directionthe choice is li#ely to follow the ex$ected $attern; forexam$le &>%(P* '0 couldn't afford to learn it' said theMoc#.urtle with a sigh. ' 0 only too# the regular course.''/hat />2 mat1'in<uired ,lice.

Here ,lice could hardly have said Ghat was this?2imilarly with &>%(]*%

&>%(]* a. /hat about thisexhibition1 b. /hat aboutthat exhibition1

0f we hear &>%(]a* we are li#ely to su$$ly something li#e'that 0 told you is on now; shall we go and see it 1';whereas with &>%(]b* the $resu$$osition is more li#ely to

be 'that you told me was on earlier; did you go and seeit1' [ at least it could not be the other way round. utthe criteria may conflict $recisely because the notion of

$roximity has various inter$retations; and in such casesthere is no very clearly felt distinction between this andthat. 0n &>%(\* we could easily substitute that*

&>%(\* ut then Mr. Subois reflected gloomily womennever had any $rudence% hough he had $rofited

by this lac# many a time it annoyed him now.

0n any case there are mar#ed differences amongdifferent styles and varieties of nglish as regards their $atterns of ana$horic usage of this and that, the study ofwhich goes beyond bur $resent sco$e. !or exam$le innarrative of a traditional #ind such as children's storiesand ballads we often find that where in converwtfw43mw4nw5 a wFt uww/ •' 4 use this,conveying a sense of immediacy and also of solidaritywith the hearer of shared interest and attention. 2o the

ballad of the three little $igs has&>%(T* ,nd after a time those little $igs died.

whereas if we were recounting the incident we should $robably say these little pigs. 0t is this assum$tion of

shared interest and attention which lies behind the use ofth.e 'near' forms 9hi; and these, in conversationalnarrative where they are not strictly '$horic' at all% Fherewas this an ... where 'this man" is $resent neither inthe text nor in the situation but only in the s$ea#er'smind. he context is one of highly coded in-grou$s$eech and the effect is to em$hasiGe commonex$erience and a common interest.



: =!= +

m>.)..>20

ERL,=,SDLR= ,L%this

jthatF=2R2the

se3t hose 0ngeneralthis

distinctionfollowscheex$ected

$attern%this

3thatrefer cocount



siNt

&>%)X

u goin

g1 Loo# u

$ s

$

ea# nicely a

nd don't twiddle your f inge

r s all

die t

ime.',liceatcendedto allthesedireccions andex$lainedaswellasshecould chacshehadloseherway.

+&>%)

* 0've or der ed cwo tur # e

ys a

legoflam

b

somecoo# edhama

ndtongueandcwo

$oundsofminced

beef .-/hateverar eyo

ugoingto



do

eusesfollowfr omchegener aln

atur eofana

$hor icrefere

nceitemschacche

yrefercothemeaningsandn

>.).0.(H,S

,SMNS0!0=%this,+,2D=N

NR F= 2R2this,+DLR2

!NLLN/0 E NR',demoosera

dveasModifier 9'demonstrativead6ective':mayreferwictiouc

restrictioncoanyclassofnoun.,demonscrariveasHead

9'demonscr a'ave

$ronoun':on



cheocherhandwhile itcanrefer

freelyco non-humans ishighlyrestricted initsreference cohumannouns;ic

cannocrefer coalhu-manreferencexce$cin ches$ecialeavironmencof ane<uariveclause.

6!orexam$le in

&>%)>* '

entingan

ew $uddingduring

diemeat-course..'..0don'c

believechac

$uddingeverwasc

oo# ed.



itwould

be. $erfecuy

$ossible coomicchesecond

p$ddin gsay 7dpn+tbelie0ethate0erwascoo9edc1[:*`X* and&>%)*:.Nn cheotherhandin ?

&>%)(* 0mustintroduce

you cochesurgeonwholoo#edafter mewhen 0



2.= DEON#TRATIKE

REERENCE

!3

was in hos$ital. hat surgeon really did a fine 6oband nothing was too much trouble for him.

we could not re$lace that s$rgeon by that. he onlyinstance where demonstratives can refer $ronominally tohuman referents whether ana$hori-cally orexo$horically is in relational clauses of- the e<uativety$e where one element is su$$lying the'identification ofthe others for exam$le

&>%))* a. So you want to #now the woman whodesigned it1 hat was Mary 2mith b. /ho arethose colourful characters1 - hose must be the

$residential guards.

+om$are the exo$horic Gho+s that?, this is /ohn 9whenintroducing him: those.are the people I was telling yo$abo$t; but never let+s as9 this,% don+t 9now what that+sla$ghing abo$t. he $rinci$le is that the demonstrative

$ronoun corres$onds to it and not to he or she. he factthat the $lural form they is the same for both human andnon-human referents may ex$lain why the demonstrativeis slightly less unacce$table with a human referent whenit is in the $lural; we might $erha$s acce$t let+s as9these, I don+t 9now what those are la$ghing abo$t.

here is one other im$ortant characteristic ofdemonstrative reference that is s$ecifically a feature ofdemonstratives functioning as Head. his concerns the

level of generality of the referent.0f the demonstrative is used with a noun then themeaning is always identical with thac of die $resu$$oseditem. xam$les are 9>%(T* &>%)>* and &>%)(*. hisnormally holds true even if the noun following thedemonstrative is not identical with the $resu$$osed item;it may be some #ind of a synonym li#e 1ood in &>%)*which is a 2RD=N=S0O 9ie a more general term:or li#e directions in 9>)X* .here is still identity ofreference in such instances; it is 'that $articular food''those $articular directions'. hese are in fact differentty$es of lexical cohesion and are discussed further in+ha$ter P. o invent one further exam$le in &>%)U* itdoes not matter whether we have cat or anial ortric9ster in the second sentence; the reference is still tothe original cat*

9(%)U* here's a cat trying to get in shall 0 o$en thewindow1 -

Nh that cat 7 that animal 7 that tric#ster's alwayscoming here cadging.

2u$$ose however that we use the demonstrative alonewithout a following noun. he reference may still beidentical; but it may be broader



) HMM+ 0

referring to the general class denoted by the nounincluding but notlimited to the $articulai member or members of that class

being referred

to in the $resu$$osed item. 0f for exam$le the firstsentence in &>%)U* tad begun Fhere are two cats trying to get in, then t.FIeanswer those cats would stallhave referred only to the. original two cats; but theanswer those% ((+ Fhoseha0e to be 9ept o$t, could refer not 6ust to the two catsmentioned but to catsin general. +om$are%

' ' . i ' '. ■

&>%)9U* here's;been another big industrial merger. 0tseems that nothing

can be done about this.where the meaningiis not 'this $articular merger' but'mergers i$ general'as we can see by substituting this erger, or this one, forthis.+ A relatedinstance is $rovided by &>%)]*% %

&>%)]* His hand gro$ed for the #nife. 0f be could onlyreach that he would be safe.

■ ■ ' ■ ■ '''■ ■ I'

- ■. ■

Here we could in fact substitute that 9ni1e, but not thatone; thfc meaning is not 'that $articular #nife' but 'that

$articular ob6ect namely the #nife4. his affords a verygood illustration of the difference between reference andsubstitution as summariGed at the beginning of +ha$ter(3 below. 0n the $lural the distinction is less clearcut andthere is the $ossibility of ambiguity%

&>%)\* How did you li#e the recitations 1 0 find those boring.6

0f it had been I 1o$nd, the meaning would have been'those6 $articular recitations' and we could havesubstituted those rcdtations or those ones I 1ind,however suggests '9those $articular things namely:recitations in general'; here we could certainly not

substitute those ones, but it would $erha$s be $ossible'tosubstitute those recitations and still inter$ret it in thissense. 0n a com$arable way given there arc two catstrying to get in, the answer those creat$res ha0e.to be9ept o$t is ambiguous as between 'those $articular cats'and 'those $articular creatures namely cats in general'.he general $rinci$le behind this is sim$ly thatdemonstratives since

* I+ 1%t vriti% / 5ritt+ E+,i%(9 + 5it( %1%4r%9 tht +% + those ones +t 88r6 7tt(r i% 8r5i+ t++8- t % t(% /r1% i+%48( 4r8i%,- i+ rr t 1 t(i% i%ti+8ti+ i+1+i+6 t iv +t(r >14,9 Do you like

myhyirnges1 2 3es% like those :'(-r+% i++r,') 8+tr%t 5it( 3es% 5 like thou ones :'t(%4rti8,i (-r+%'). T( /r1 5it( one6s/ is vr-/t+ % >4(ri8,,-9 t(( +t >8,%iv,- %."F r +5 7i++i+ t (r my one6/% your one6s/t8 i+ 4,8 / 1i+9 yours% t89 ,t(( (r t(i%ti+8ti+ i% ++8%%r- 78% t( ,ttr 88r



+,- i+ t( %8+9 4rti8,riQ %+%. # 3.27,5.

I



2.= DEON#TRATIKE

REERENCE !

9li#e other reference items: they idenrify semanrically andnot gram- % marically when they are ana$horic re<uire theex$licit re$etition of the noun or some form of synonymif they are to signal exact identit:' of s$ecific reference;that is to refer unambiguously to the $resu$$osed item atthe identical degree of $articulariGation. , demonstrativewithout a ■ following noun may refer to some moregeneral class that includes-the $resu$$osed items; and thisalso a$$lies under certain conditions to a demonstrativewith a following noun - namely if the context is such thatthe noun can be 0=D=S more generally. 0t is noteasy to s$ecif:' exactly what these conditions are but theyare more li#ely to obtain with $lural or mass nouns

because these are general unless s$ecified. 0n s$o#en 'nglish there is a one-way $honological distinction% thedemonstratives have a wea#ened form that is used NtY

when they are N s$ecifying and the meaning is one ofgeneraliGed reference; for exam$le

&>%)T* How did you manage with the new drugs 0gave you 1 9i: 77 those 7 new 7 drugs u$7setme 77. ■ ' 9ii: 3I3" those 7new7 drugs u$7setme7'

Here 9i: is ambiguous% it might mean either 'the $articularones you gave me' or 'new drugs in general'; whereas 9ii:can mean only 'new drugs in general'. he generaliGedty$e is ty$ically associated with ex$ressions of attitudefor exam$le I don+t tr$st these lawyers 9'lawyers ingeneral': those Lrench are so to$chy 9note that in the

$articulariGed sense it would have to be those Lrench people7; and also that =ach had geni$s, meaning not 'J.2.as o$$osed to the rest of the family' but 'ach that we all#now'. ,ll these are sim$ly e<uivalent to non-s$ecificforms new dr$gs, lawyers, the Lrench and-ac7i: towhich a demonstrative has been added often forana$horic $ur$oses but without carrying over anys$ecificity there may have been in the item that is

$resu$$osed.he distinction between the $articular use of a

demonstrative having exact identit:' of reference withthe $resu$$osed item and the generaliGed use is relatedto that between defining and non-defining modifiers. 0n

that =ach, thai is non-defining; but if we change to itthat 1ellow =ach it becomes defining. 2imilarly if weinter$ret that in &>.)]* as 'that #nife' it is non-defining

but if we inter$ret it as ' that thing' it is defining.+om$are this in

&>.UX* hey we$t li#e anything to see2uch <uantities of

sand. ' 0f this were onlyswe$t away'

hey said 'it would be grand'



=!=+ ■ _. I; .

- 'this sand' or 'this stuff. he distincrioa does nothowever af!ect the textual function of demonstrativessince both uses are e<ually associated with ana$horic

reference and hence contribute to cohesion within thetext.

2.=.I.= EXTENDED REERENCE AND

REERENCE TO 'ACT' this AND tht =elated to die last generaliGed ty$e of demonstrativereference buc6at the same rime <uite distinct from it isthe use of demonstratives to refer to" extended textincluding text as 'fact' c1* it in >.(.(. above:. hisa$$lies only to the singular forms this and that usedwithout a following noun. !or exam$le%

9>%U* hey bro#e a +hinese vase

9i: hat was valuable9ii: hac was careless. i ■

0n 9i: that refers to the ob6ect 0ase; we could have that0ase instead. 0n 9ii: that refers to the total event 'their

brea#ing of the vase'. 0f there had been more than one brea#age we could have had those were 0al$able but notthose were careless?

&>%U>* hey bro#e a +hinese vase and damaged twochandeliers. '9i: hose were all very valuable9ii: hac was all very careless.4

xtended reference $robably accounts for the ma6orityof all instances of demonstratives in all exce$t a fews$ecialiGed varieties of nglish. !or exam$le in che lastcwo cha$ccrs of Alice+s Ad0ent$res in Gonderland 0 thereare U demonstratives made u$ of >> this, >) that, (these and > those. Nf the total ( are used in extendedreference. Nf the remaining >X ( refer to time which isanother form of extended reference [eg &>%U(a*: X areexo$horic in the dialogue eg &>%U(b*: and U areana$horic to $receding nominals eg &>%U(c*: %

* A 1+%trtiv /+8ti+i+ 4r +1i+,,-9 ie5it(t i /,,5i+ ++9 i% %1ti1% rr % i+i+%t+8 / ,,i4%i%6 t7 i+ 2;;S 5 1i(t 7 i+8,i+

CO 8+%ir tht i% ',,i4ti8, /' tht 8se. t i+1+- i+%t+8% 5 8++t9 i+ /8t9 ';; t' 5it( '1i%%i+' ++ 78%9 % 5 (v %+9 t(r i% +44r4rit ++ vi,7, it(r 78% t(r/r+8 i% 814+9 % i+ 2;S9 r +r,iQ9% i+ 2;=!S6 r 78% it i% CO + >t+ 4%%/ 8>t9 % i+ 22;;S. rvr r/r+8 i% i+r+8i+ 1+i+ /r1 ,,i4%i% :% C(488r% + $7,5)6 + ,, 1+%8r8iv%9 5(t(r /+8ti+i+% i/ir r i% H9 %ti%/- 8( %1+ti88+iti+. / r/r+89 5(r% t(- +8 %ti%/-t(% / ,,i4%i%



2.= DEON#TRATIKE

REERENCE

!$

[2%U(* a. Just at this moment ,lice felt a very curioussensation.

b. 'reacle said a slee$y voice behind her.'+ollar"that Sor mouse' the Vueen shrie#ed out.-

c. Nne of the 6urors had a $encil that s<uea#ed.his of course,lice could not stand ...

wo instances- are uhclassiiiable [be1ore she had this 1it,in the verses read out by the /hite =abbit and re$eated

by the ing:. xam$les of extended reference arc%

&>%U)* a. ' Eive your evidence' said the ing; 'and

don't be nervous or 0'll have you executed onthe s$ot'. his did not seem to encouragethe.witness.at all.

b. 'ut what did the Sormouse say1' ohe of the 6ury as#ed.'hat 0 can't remember' said the Hacteir. .

c. '"0 gave her one they gave him two" - why thatmust bewhat he did with the tarts you #now.' ...■ .;;.%

%.'..;' ■'

0t is not always easy to say whether the referent ofa'demonstrative in agiven instance is a $articular nominal item in. the text or

should be ta#ento include something more; the this in &>%U(c* could besu$$osed to refer to the whole of the $receding sentence. he distinction isnot" a shar$ oneand it is usually irrelevant; in either case the effect iscohesive. ut in manyinstances the referent clearly is an extended $assage oftext and thistogether with the related use of it, is one of the ma6orcohesive devices of the nglish language. •.;.•-.

Derha$s the most fre<uent form ta#en by such

extended reference is in e<uative clauses where thedemonstrative.$rovides the 'given' element in themessage and this then serves to identify some otherelement that is 'new' by sim$ly being e<uated with it.&>%U)c* is one exam$le; here are some others%

&>%UU* a. &following che /hite =abbit's reading of theverses* 'hat's the most im$ortant $iece ofevidence we've heard yet' said the ingrubbing his hands..

b. 0 come from /olverham$ton. - hat's where 0come fromtoo. 7•'

c. o one will ta#e it seriously. his is.the

frightening thing.2$o#en nglish is ty$ically held together by internalcross-referencing of this #ind which combines $owerful structure with greatflexibility and



freedom of movement. ■••--..



!& REERENCE

.=.;. ANAPHORIC AND CATAPHORIC

DEON#TRATIKE#here is differentiation between this and that in extended

text reference which relates to their differentiation interms of $roximity. /hereas that is always ana$horicthis may be either ana$horic or cata$horic 2ome2ha#es$earean exam$les%

&>%UP* a. Fiola% 0 am all the daughters of my father'shouse

6 ,nd all the brothers too - and yet 0 #noBynot. - 6 2ir shall 0 to this lady 1 Su#e%' ,ythat's the theme.

b. Hamlet% So not loo# u$on meLest with this% $iteous action youconvert

My stern effects% then what 0 have to do%/ill want true colour; tears $erchancefor blood.

Vueen% o whom do you s$ea# this 1Hamlet% So you see nothing there1 6Vueen; othing at all; yet all that is 0 see.Hamlet4or did you nothing hear1Vueen% o. nothing but ourselves 6.Hamlet% /hy loo# you there3 loo# how it

steals away3 My father in his habit as heliv'd3 ■ Loo# where he goes even nowout of the $ortal3

Vueen%' his is the very coinage of your brain. 6c. Eassius% hat you have wronged me dotha$$ear iri this%.

You have condemn'd and notedLucius Della !or ta#ing bribes here ofthe 2ardians; 0 /herein my letters

$raying on his side i ecause 0#new the man were slighted off 0

&>%UPa* has ana$horic that, 9b: three instances ofana$horic this, and 9c: cata$horic this.

his use of this, together with the $arallel use of here9see >.).( below: is the only significant instance of

cata$horic cohesion in nglish. /e have distinguishedthis iri the $revious discussion from structuralcata$hora as in he who hesitates; structural cata$hora isver:' common es$ecially with the definite article 9see>.).> below: but it is sim$ly a realiGation of a gram-matical relationshi$ within the nominal grou$ and has nocohesive text-forming function. extual cata$hora bycontrast is true reference forward in the text; it thereforeis cohesive not by $ic#ing u$ what has $receded but byantici$ating what is-to follow. !rom Alice*



2= DEON#TRATIKE

REERENCE

!<

&>%U(*.. hese were the verses the /hite =abbit read% -&followed by the verses*

0n writing sentences which are related.'cata$horically areoften 6oined by a colon; but there is no structural relation

between the two - this is a $urely orthogra$hicconvention serving $recisely to signal the $resence ofcata$hori c cohesi on

, final $oint to note is that in s$o#en nglish this andt7"ct in extended reference often carry the tonic 9$rimarystress:. 0n.this they are unli#e all other cohesive items inthe language. 2ince in the mosr general terms tonicity isassociated with information that is new it is notsur$rising to find that ana$horic items which bydefinition are not' new' because they are referring towhat has gone before do not normally earn' the tonic.9he $osition is <uite different with reference items usedexo$horically; these arc often tonic - again notsur$risingly;since in this case the referent has not beenmentioned before.: /e can be <uite $redse aboutana$horic items% they are tonic when and only whentheyare contrastive >nd this is $art of the same story. hesemantic category of'new' means 'information beingtreated by the s$ea#er as norirecoverable to the hearer';it may be non-recoverable dther because it has not been

$reviously mentioned or because it has been $reviouslymentioned but is unex$ected and hence contrastive in the

$articular context. !or exam$le in &>%U\* these is 'new' inthis second contrastive sense%

&>%U\* he first row of cottages loo#ed em$ty anddecre$it. ut behind them stood another rowwell #e$t and with small bright gardens./hoever lived in these cottages lived wellenough.

, demonstrative with textual reference however is veryfre<uently tonic; and this arises in two ways both ofwhich are sim$ly extensions of the $rinri$le mentionedabove that tonidty signals what is new. 0n the first $lacethere are very many instances in which the reference

while ana$horic 02 in fact contrastive this being thewhole $oint of the utterance; for. exam$le

&>%UT* /here are you going 1- o feed the fish.- H,'2 what 0 was trying to remember to do

6ust now.

0n the second $lace the reference may be cata$horic inwhich case the referent has not been mentioned before; acata$horic demonstrative is therefore regularly tonic.+ontrast.&>%Poa* where this is ana$horic mean-



]X =!=+

ing'what 0've 6ust said' with &>%PXb* where it iscata$horic andimeans' what 0'm 6 ust going to say'% i

&>%PX* a. 0 can't get any reliable 0!N=M,0N. hisis what /N==02 me. b. H02 is what worriesme% 0 can't get any reliable 0!N=M,0N.

90n &>%PXa* this could be re$laced by that, whereas in &>%dob* it could not.: ,s a corollary of its carrying the tonicthe cata$horic this could e<ually come at the end% in 9b:we might well have Ghat worries e is this*, whereas in9a: such a reversal is highly im$robable.

i2.). Fhe 6

he definite article the has usually been set a$art ingrammars of nglish as a uni<ue member of a class its

only relative being the indefinite article a. here is some 6ustification for this; no ocher item in nglish behavesexactly li#e the. Nn the ocher hand it has im$ortantsimilarities with a whole grou$ of other items so that weneed not hesitate to classify it with the determiners; andmore $articularly with the s$ecific determiners the classwhich includes the demonstratives and the $ossessives.9Li#ewise the indefinite article is a member of the widerclass of nou-soecific deter-miners.: he full set ofs$ecific determiners is as follows%

Semonstrative iDossessive

=eferential thisthat 2elecriveA"jhese those

2$eech rolesy, yo$r, o$r..his, her, theirNther ralesA its '■ [one+s

on-selectivethe

0nterrogative

which& ■

whose

Hence the in many ways resembles the demonstrativesfrom one form of which it is derived. 0t is originally areduced form o1t9at, functioning only as a modifier in

me same way chac a is a reduced form of one li#ewiserestricted to the modifier function. ,nd this is reflectedin its meaning. ssentially the, li#e the demonstratives isa s$ecifying agent serving

http://jhese/

http://jhese/



2.= DEON#TRATIKE

REERENCE

$;

to identify a; $articular individual or subclass within theclass designated by the noun; but it does this onlythrough de$endence on something else-it contains nos$ecifying element of its own.

his can be ex$lained as follows. ,ll other s$ecificdeterminers aresemantically selective; they contain within themselvessome referentialelement in terms of which the item in <uestion is to beidentified. /iththe $ossessives it is $erson% the item is identified as

belonging to or associated with a recogniGable $artici$ant - s$ea#eraddressee or some

$erson or ob6ect in the environment. /ith thedemonstratives it is $roximity% the item is identified as $resent in the environmentand more or less remote. 0n both these instances the environment aswe have seen may

be situational or textual; and when it is textual this formof s$ecification

by reference becomes cohesive. • ■ +&+,&&he definice article has no content% 0t merely indicates%

that the item in<uestion is s$ecific and identifiable; that somewhere theinformation

necessary for identifying it is recoverable. /here is thisinformation to besought 1 ,gain either in the situation or in the text. hereference is either exo$horic or endo$hytic. 0f it is exo$horic the item isidentifiable in one of two ways. 9: , $articular individual or subclass is beingreferred to andthat individual or subclass-is identifiable in the s$ecificsituation. ,n exam$le was &>%(>* Bon+t ; the train+s coing, where thetrain is inter$retedas 'the train we're both ex$ecting' - contrasted with Bon+t

go; a train+scoing which would $erha$s be a warning to avoid being run over. ,llimmediate situational instances of the are exo$horic inthis way% ind the

step; pass e the towel; the children are enjoyingthesel0es; the snow+s toodeep; the jo$rney+s nearly o0er, and so on. 9>: hereferent is identifiable onextralinguistic grounds no matter what the situation. hishas somethingin common with the generaliGed.exo$horic use of the

$ersonal forms andit occurs under two conditions. 0t may arise first because

there existsonly one member of the class of ob6ects referred to forexam$le the s$n;or at least one member which will be assumed in theabsence of s$ecificindication to the contrary for exam$le the baby 9'our



baby': the go0ernent 9'of our country': the tie 9'now':. 2econdly it mayarise becausethe reference is the whole class eg* the stars; or theindividual considered asa re$resentative of the whole class li#e the child, ia As

the child grows, helearns to. be independent, or the snail in Fhe snail isconsidered a great delicacy inthis region. his ty$e ofexo$horic reference which doesnot de$end on thes$ecific situation has been called HNMNDHN=0+ todistinguish it from thesiruarionally s$ecific ty$e. -

,lternatively the source of identification may lie in thetext% what we



$= REERENCE

are calling endophoric reference. 0n this case there axeagain two $ossibilities% reference forward and reference

bac#ward. 9(: +ata$horic or forward reference with the,is limited to the structural ty$e. Rnli#e the selective

demonstratives [this; these and here7, the can never referforward cohesively. 0t can only refer to a modifyingelement within the same nominal grou$ as itself. Hereare some exam$les %

&>%P* a. he ascent of Mount verest b.he $art:'in $ower +. he $eo$lewho $redicted a dry summer d. he longest stretche. he bestiway to achieve stability

J /hat is the significance of the in suchinstances 1 0t is as always a6signal of identity; or ratherof idenrifiability showing that criteria for identifying

/H0+H ascent, /H0+H party etc is intended arerecoverable - in this instance %hey are recoverable fromthe nominal grou$ in which the the occurs. 0n otherwords the is a signal that the modifying elements are to

be6ta#en as defining% we are to understand only suchmembers of the general class named by the Head noun asare s$ecified in the Modifier. he defining .'lements are.o1 Mo$nt E0erest, in power, who predicted a dry

s$er+; longest, ind in 9e: the discontinuous Modifierbest.. .to achie0e stability+. 3

9): !inally there is ana$horic reference the only one ofthe four coridi-.ions in which the is cohesive. heclearest instances of this' are those in .vhich the item isactually re$eated eg* hall in

[2*2@ 2he found herself in a long low hall which waslit u$ by a row of lam$s hanging from the roof.here were doors all round the hall but they wereall loc#ed.

:ften the reference is; to a synonym or near-synonymor to some other *c which by its connotations $rovides a target for theana$hora; in&&@, the eyes are clearly those of the +at 9and notethe lexical cohesion•ctween eyes and o$th7%

3

.&>%P(* 'How are3you getting on1' said the +at as soon

as there was mouth enough for it to s$ea# with.,lice waited till the eyes a$$eared and thennodded.

"his shades into the son of extended reference and textreference that we ave found with it, i7iwiand that; forexam$le theprospectin

[2*)@ ', nice mess we're all in. Dictures in the $a$ersand re$orters



3.= DEON#TRATIKE

REERENCE

$3

coming round.' 2he $aused obviously visualiGingthe future in a series of crude highly-coloured.$ictures. He thought that the $ros$ectwas still not wholly un$leasing.4

Nnce again the signals identifiability; but here theinformation about /H0+H hall, /H0+H eyes and/H0+H prospect is to be recovered from .the $recedingtext. his is what $rovides the 'texture'.

here is a commonly held belief that the ty$icalfunction of the is the ana$horic one% that it invariablys$ecifies by reference bac# in the text. 0ndeed it hassometimes been referred to as the 'secondmentionarticle'. 0t should be stressed therefore that

ana$horic reference is only one means whereby theachieves s$ecificity 9and even when it is -ana$horicmore often than not there is no 'second mention' of thesame noun:. 0t is $robably true that $urely ana$horicreference never accounts for a ma6ority of instances% in

$ragmatic s$eech the is $rimarily exo$horic and in mostother varieties of s$o#en and written nglish its

$redominant function is cata$horic. /hat must berecogniGed however is that these various ty$es ofreference are not mutually exclusive. , given occurrenceof the might have any two or even three functions at thesame time."

+onsider for exam$le%

&>%PU* Last year we went to Sevon for a holiday. heholiday we had • there was the best we've everhad. ■

Here the is both cata$horic $ointing forward to we hadthere, and also ana$horic referring the secondoccurrence of holiday bac# to that in the $recedingsentence; and it would be meaningless to argue that itmust be 6ust the one or the other. ow su$$ose the sameexam$le continues%

&>%PU* '9cont'd: he $eo$le we stayed with had fourchildren. he eldest girl was about nine.

he first the is cata$horic only since there is no lexicalrelation between people and anything in the $receding $assage. he second is again both cata$horic andana$horic% cata$horic showing that eldest defines girl,and ana$horic because girl is related to children. /emight even construct an exam$le with all three ty$es ofreference%

&>%@ Loo# at the moon3 he daytime moon alwaysseems so sad.

Here the second occurrence of the is cata$horic todaytie, ana$horic to the earlier oon, and exo$horic

both in the 'homo$horic' sense since there is

* At( C(ri%ti9 #ocketul o )ye% +t+ %.



74 REER

ENCE

i onl

yonemoonandalsointhesituationalsensesince itiss$ecificallyanob6ectofattention.

2uchinstancesoffourfoldreferenceare

$resumablyfairly



h

,s&(%P]*'So you

$

lay cr o<uec w

ich the Vueen

today1''0shouldli#e itverymuch'said

,lice'but 0haven't beeninvited.'

''You'llseemethere'

saidthe+atandvanished.

hemeanin

gatther eisana

$hor ica

ndlocative;icrefersco

'$laying8cr o-<uetwithcheVu



3.= DEON#TRATIKE

REERENCE

$

&>%P\* 'Nf course it would be all the better'said,lice% ■ '-; 'but it wouldn't be all the betterhis being $unished.' 'You're wrong there, atany rate' said the.Vueen.

0n such contexts here, li#e this, may be cata$horic; inexam$le &>%((* this couidbe re$laced.by here and thatcould be re$laced by there. he demonstratives this,these and here $rovide in tact almost the.only sourcesof cata$horic cohesion% they are the only items innglish which regularly refer forward QR,LLY tosomething to which they are not lin#ed by a structuralrelationshi$.4 9,n exam$le of the cata$horic use ofcom$aratives which is much rarer will be found in the

next section.: ......he tem$oral demonstratives then and note-are much

more.restricted in their cohesive function. he cohesiveuse of demonstrative then is that embodying ana$horicreference to time; the meaning is 'at.the-iime 6ustreferred to'%

&>%PT* 0n my young days we too# these-things moreseriously.

/e had different ideas men. 3 '"

he use of now is confined to those instances in whichthe meaning is.'this state of affairs having come about'

for exam$le &>%]Xa*; &>%]Xb* shows a com$arable use ofthen*

&>%]X* a. he $lane touched down at last. ow wecould breathe freely again b. /hy not tell your

$arents 1 hen we can sto$ $retending.

his is already a$$roaching the use oEthen as acon6unctive; see U.] below.

2.)) A 1inal note on deonstrati0es

here are very many ex$ressions containing a

demonstrative that occur as ad6uncts ty$ically at the beginning of a clause; in general they come within thecategory often #nown as 'discoune ad6uncts'. xam$lesare in that case, that being so, a1ter chat, at this oent,$nder these circ$stances. 0n the $resent analysis weare treating these as con6unctives not as

* T(- ,% 88r i+ t++ / %tr8tr,884(r9 >14,i/i 7- here in Lon!on% there onthe ooposite pge9 814r this + tht i+ this mni

or wshing crs% tht turkey we h! or "hristms%+ ,% t( %48i, % / those i+ those who%1+i+ ' t( 44, 5('9 % i+ those who pre!icte!n enhcukc. Bi t(r /r1% / %tr8tr,84(r9 t(% 1 + 88rri7ti 8 8(%i+.



]P I . JtlMH+2

•I

demonstratives; see +ha$ter U below. his 0s on semanticgrounds% tie $rinci$le is that any semantic relation whichis itself con6unctive is treated as con6unctive in all its

realiGations whether or not there is a demonstrative orother reference item $resent in its ex$ression. his alsoavoids ma#ing an aw#ward and iartificial distinction

between $airs of items 6such as as a res$lt and as ares$lt o1 this; both of these are inter$reted in the sameway as con6unctives. •' i

0n fact there is overla$ between con6unction andreference at this $oint and there would be no need in

$rinci$le to force a classification in-terms of 6ust one orthei other. ut one of the $ur$oses of the $resent study isto ma#e it easy to analyse and com$are texts in res$ect oftheir cohesive $ro$erties; and for this reason in allinstances of indeterminacy we have ta#en a decision oneway or the other. ,s far as $ossible the decision has 'followed the line of semantic consistency at the samerime with an eye to a$$licability in $ractice.

>.U +om$arative reference

he tabic of com$arative reference items was given in >.>above 9able ):. he system is as follows%

com$arison

[

-general-9deictic:

-$articular- -9non-deictic:

-idenrityr.J. "Nsoe

e>$al

identical1ideicallyJo6us'

-similaritya,J ^$chlsiilar.ô siilarlyli9ewise^ -^

-difference8 "other di11erentelseî11erentlyotherwise^lojj/

hore71ewer"less7/$rtheradditional; ̂ '9. .)8w-CgHA677C^ -r<uantifier eg* "B so any

-e$ithet B com$arative ad6ectivesand adverbs eg* better;si' d#' ore' less'n$ararive ad6ecti eg*e>$ally good

y 'general com$arison' is meant com$arison that is sim$lyin terms of

\ '6

ft{ ver s eg* etter i'soy as' ore'ess' @•I• .■C

e( My-`com$arat ve a ect vesIC 8 .

r-numerative

http://_some/

http://other/

http://_some/

http://other/



>.U +NMD,=,0F=!=+

/@

li#eness and unli#cncss without res$ect to any $articular $ro$erty% two things may bcithc same similar or different9where 'different' includes both 'not the same' and 'notsimilar':. Eeneral com$arison is ex$ressed by a certainclass of ad6ectives and adverbs 9se$arated from each other

by a comma in the above lists:. he ad6ectives function inthe nommal grou$ either as Seictic eg* identical in theidentical two cards7 or as $ithet eg* identical in twoidentical cards7; it will be seen that these have differentmeanings 9see >.U. below:. he adverbs function in theclause as ,d6unct eg* identically in the others per1oredidentically7. hese are called ,SJ+0F2 it N!+NMD,=02N ,SF=2 N! +NMD,=02N to

distinguish then1 from^COPARATIKE ADJECTIKE# +

COPARATIKE ADKER#9 5(i8( rthe com$arative forms of ordinary ad6ectives andadverbs eg* bigger, better, 1aster, ore >$ic9ly.

'Darticular com$arison' means com$arison that is inres$ect of <uantity or <uality. 0t is also ex$ressed bymeans of aa6ectives or adverbs; not of a s$ecial class butordinary ad6ectives and adverbs in some com$arativeform. he ad6ectives function as always within thenominal grou$ but not as Seictic; they function either as

umerative eg* ore in 5.n%' cards7 or as $ithet eg*better in better cards7. he adverbs function in either of

two ways% either as ,d6unct in the clause eg* better inthe others per1ored better7 or as 2ubmodifier in whichcase they sim$ly occur within an $ithet eg* s$cji in

s$ch good cards, identically in an ideiitically designedho$se7 or a umerative 9e8% so in so any words7, orwithin an ,d6unct eg* e>$clly in the others per1orede>$ally badly7. 0t ma#es no difference whether thecom$arative ad6ective or adverb is inflected eg* slower,

slowlier7 or com$ounded eg* ore lengthy, orelengthily7; the meaning and function are not affected bythis distinction.

he same $rinci$les o$erate with com$arison as withother forms of reference4 it may be ana$horic and

therefore cohesive or it may be cats $horic or evenexo$horic. Nnly brief illustrations will be given of thenon-ana$horic uses.

Eeneral com$arison is discussed in >.U. and $articularcom$arison in >.U.>.

>.U. 4eneral coparison

Eeneral com$arison ex$resses li#eness between things.he li#eness may ta#e the form of identity where 'twothings' are in fact the same thing as in &>%]a*; or ofsimilarity where two things are li#e each other as in&>%]b*. ach of these has its negative; there is non-

identity and non-



$& #EERENCE

i

• '■■ "

similarity. ut these two conce$ts are conflated in thesemantic system into a single meaning that of non-

li#eness or difference as in &>%]c*4r CCV'* : ; 0/ 0' . >%]* a. 0t's the.saxn8cat as8the one we saw yesterday.8

b. 0t's a similar cat to the one we saw yesterday.+. 0t's a different cat from the one we saw yesterday.

6I i

Li#eness is a referential $ro$erty. , thing cannot 6ust be 'li#e'; 0tmust5be 'ti#e something'. Hence com$arison is a form of referencealongside. $ersonal and demonstrative reference; and it embraces thesame set of

7 $ossibilities. he referent of the com$arison may be in thesituation or it7 may be in the text. 0f it is in the text the reference may be

bac#wards or ; forwards and it may be structural or non-structural 9cohesive:"/fith com$arison however there is one further $ossibility% checom$arison* may be internal - the li#eness ex$ressed as $t$al li#enesswithout a referent a$$earing as a distinct entity. I.

9

,ll the exam$les in &>%]* were cata$horic in the structuralsense; in .tj. ■each case the referent was the one we saw yesterday, and thecom$aratives C•■

sae, siilar and di11erent were $ointing forward to it in 6ustthe same way +. .+ that those $oints forward to who predicted an earth>$a9e. Ntherexam$lest; ;

&>%]>* a. "/e have received exacdy the same6re$ort8aswas submittedtwo months ago-6 8@@^ .

b. here arc .oti8<lialities thaivconvivialityoieeded forthis 6ob.c. !ind a number e<ual" tothe s<uare of the sum of its

digitsi 0he referents are [the one that@ was s$bitted twoonths ago, con0i0iality, and the s>$are o1 the s$ o1 itsdigits. 2uch cata$horic reference is fully determined bythe structure and therefore as always has no cohesivefunction.

0nstances of cohesive cata$hora with com$aratives are notvery com.--8"mon but they do occur% +$ir

L^WW^ < ; v'H

&>%](* he other.: s<uirrels hunted u$ and down the nut bushes6:buii ". 2fut#in gathered robin's $incushionsoff a briar bush and.stuc# them-full of $ine-needle

$ins.

!* T(r i% 4r77,- %-%t1ti8 ii8ri 7t5+8( t5 i+ 8rti+ 8+t>t%9 /r >14, someone



other thn John '+t i+ti8, 5it('9 someone !ierent rom John '+t 51i,/ t'. t !ierent is % i+ 7t(%+%%9 + t(r 44r% t 7 8+%i%t+ti%ti+8ti+ i+ +4(ri8 8+t>t%. A+ i+tr%ti+>14, / t( r%,ti+ %1+ti8 8+/%i+ 88r% i+t( /,,5i+ i, 5it( t(r-r, C(i,'F('% Ptr'% - G t(r Ptr'% - i%U+8, J8. C(i, I% 1- - ?ir i//r+t /r1Ptr'% -= t(r O( -%. C(i, t('% t-7r5%9 :r t(r t ,%t %1t(i+ i+ 811+7t5+ t(1.



2. COPARATIKE

REERENCE]T

h Hereotheriscata$h

oric to P$t9in;although thetwoarese$aratedonly

by '6.asemicolonthe

effectiscohesive astheyarenotstructurallyrelated.+om$are%

&>%]

)* he

blow w

ould have # no

c# ed a



nyone else cold.he cham$ 6ustv. leaned to oneside thenstraightenedagain.

xam$les such asthose in &->% ]U* might

be exo$boric thereferent being

retrievable from thesituation%.-'.■

t

&>%]U* a. 0 was

ex$ecting someonedifferent.' B

b. /ould you $refer the otherscats 1." •. • r

the first beinginter$reted as 'differentfrom you' or 'differentfrom that $erson there'die second as 'other

chan those you seehere'. ither howevermight e<ually beana$horic givencontexts-such as%

&>%]P* a. Jennings ishere to see you ;-was ex$ectingsomeonedifferent b.hey've given uss$ecial.$laces inthe7front

row8/ould you $refer the btheoleats 1"

,nother exam$le ofana$horic com$arisonis &(%]]* where s$chrefers bac# to thenominal grou$ <ualifiero1 ildly b$t

persistently depressi0eteperaent*

&>%]]* EeraldMiddletori was aman of-mildly

but $ersistendyde$rcs- ' sivetem$erament.'i2u

chmenarcnotatthei

r bestat

brea#fast.4 '-

,gainaswithotherty$esof

refer encetherefer entmay

be a $assage ofanyextent e6%

so in&>%]\

a*and s$chin&(%]\

b*%

&>%]\* a.'very

body

says"+omein3"her e'thought,liceasshewent-slo



wly after theEry$hon%'0never was soordered about inall my lifenever3' b. ' 0 see

nobody on theroad' said,lice.' 0 onlywish 0 had sucheyes,+ the ingremar#ed' o beable to seenobody - andâtthat distancetoo3'

Nr it may be texttreated as 'fact' whenan ex$ression such as

the sae >$estionsarise... refers bac# tothe whole of some

$revious discussion.,ll the above $atterns

of reference are familiarfrom the $ersonals anddie demonstratives. utit should be noted that

sae, siilar, identical,e>$al and di11erent donot necessarily im$lyreference of any #ind%

the com$ari-.

* A+% Fi,%+9 Anglo2 Sem Attitu!es% #r

5c 'Fr7r.



&0 REERENCE

son may be $urely internal two or more things beingcom$area6Fvitb eachother. !or exam$le . ■ i

4■ &a% ]T* a. Most $eo$le have the same brea#fast everyday. b. he candidates gave three similar answers.c. M $arties showed an identical reaction to thenews.;

he first means 'the same as every other day'" thoughwith the $ossible ambiguity of'the same as each other';the second 'similar to each other' the third 'reacted in thesame way as each other'. Here the com$aratives arefunctioning not >s Seictic bui as $ithet and therefore inthis use they ■will IiiN"WD any numeral that may be

$resent whereas in Seictic function they $recede it%contrast &>%\Xa* where di11erent is Seictic and referen-tial with &>%2ob* where it is $ithet and non-referential%-i. •

&>%\X* a. hey were a different twocolours b. hey were twodifferent colours.

he first means' different from the two referred to' thesecond ' different from each other'. Rsage is not totallyconsistent however and one not infre<uently comesacross the second ty$e used in the first of the twomeanings. he words other, additional and else occuronly in the referential sense; e>$al, on the other band isnormally not referential and can be so only when

modifying nouns such as n$ber, ao$nt and >$antity., brief comment on other and else. Ebc is

distinguished not only by its uni<ue "$osition in relationto what it modifies following instead of $receding butalso by the fact that it can accom$any only the generalnouns and adverbs soeone, nothing, e0erywhere etc orthe corres$onding interro-gatives who, what, where etcQther has two meanings 'different' and 'additional'leading at times to uncertainty of inter$retation%

&a% \* 0 need some other clothes. - ,s well or instead r

.R.2 5artic$lar coparisonDarticular com$arison ex$resses com$arability betweenthings; in res$ectof a $articular $ro$erty. he $ro$erty In66uesti$n@@may@

be6a?matter .of <uantity or of <uality. 6.

9l: 0f the com$arison is in terms of <uantity it isex$ressed inithe um-crative element in the.structure ofthe nominal grou$; either 9a: by a com$arative <uantifiereg* ore in ore ista9es, or 9b: by aii68yerh@gCcom$arison submo'difying a <uantifier e g* as in as anyista9es.



2. COPARAirv#

REERENCE

#i

9>: 0f the com$arison is in terms of@<uaJiry it isex$ressed in either of two ways% 9i:.in the $ithet elementin. the nominal grou$ either 9a: by a com$arativead6ective fg% easier ore ^di11ic$lt in easier l$te, o+Cdi11ic$lt taste, or 9b: by an adverb of com$arisonsubmodifving an ad6ective eg* so in so di11ic$lt c tas9;9ii: as ,d6unct in the clause either 9a: by a com$arativeadverb eg * 1aster in Cabridge rowed 1aster, or 9b: byan adverb of com$ari son submodifying an adv erb eg% asin she sang as sweetly.

Darticular com$arison li#e general com$arison is alsoreferential; there must be a standard of reference bywhich one thing is said to be su$erior e<ual or inferior

in <uality or <uantity. ,n exam$le of the hearer's demandfor a referent when faced with a com$arative of this#ind is the wcll-#nowa. $assage%

&>%\>* 'a#e some more tea' the March Hare said to,lice very earnestly.'0've had nothing yet' ,lice re$lied in an offendedtone 'so 0 can't ta#e more.'

he standard of reference may be another thing eg* "thistree is taller than that tree' or a measure eg* + this'tree istaller than ten feet'. he other thing may be im$licit as inthe co$y-writer's formula 1or a tastier eal, $se.,., wherethe com$arison is $resumably with a meal $re$ared with-out the $roduct .Pr $erha$s one $re$ared with 'rand Q'.0t may be some generaliGed situational referent as in

&>%\(* /e are demanding higher living standards.

- $resumably 'than we have now'. he most generaliGedcom$arative is actually the su$erlative% highest meanssim$ly 'higher man any other'. 2u$erlatives are non-referential because they are self-defining; and for thisreason they regularly act as defining Modifier beingshown to be defining in the usual way by the $resence ofthe definite article% so in the highest o$ntain in E$rope,the shows that highest.. .in E$rope s$ecifies whichmountain e1 [2*8c@ above:. 0n some languages which inthis region of the grammar have resources similar tonglish the su$erlative is in fact the combination of thecom$arative with the definite article. nglish #ee$scom$arison and definiteness formally a$art and so hason the one hand generaliGed exo$horic com$arativesused as.defining modifiers as in'the ilder tobacco 9'thanany': and on the other hand non-defining su$erlativessuch as a latest notion is..., meaning' one of the latestnotions'. ,ll the usual ty$es of reference are found. !orexam$le the following are cata$horic%





are cata$horic but in che cohesive sense such as thefollowing from Alice*

'&>%\]* 2he thought that in all her life she had never'seensoldiers% so uncertain on their feet% chey werealways tri$$ing over something or ochcr and.whenever one went down severaHnore always

fell over him...he com$arative eiemenc is so $ncertain on their 1eet;che cext then has a colon as a signal that this is to beinter$reted as $ointing forward.



2. COPARATIKE

REERENCE &3

L

r *■ 00y2'2l+>?2 r Ai.'s@r l$@:

0t is easy to thin# of exo$horic exam$les; one is thefisherman's so big with die arms held a$art to indicate diesiGe of die catchi'another die hair- ' dresser's wo$ld yo$ li9ethe water cooler? his ty$e of exo$horic com$arative •.7 isa very commonly used form of instruction and observationin everyday;8 '. life% we relate our wishes to the actual stateof things or relate what is %7 there'to what was there or whatis somewhere else% not so $ch noise%, ao slowli+er%, I needa sharper one, ine was $ch prettier and soon. Nne of,lice's comments on her ex$eriences too# such acom$arative form% ' C$rio$ser and c$rio$serl+

,s always it is che ana$horic ty$e that interests us sincethis is what brings about cohesion in the text; exam$les are

$erha$s obvious enough%&>%\\* a. +assius% Ye gods@y@e@gods must 0 endure allchls1

rucus% ,ll dus1 ,ymore3 !ret tillyour$roud heart brea#.

b. ' /hen 7\ooo is a minor matter it must' be reallylarge-scalecrime that is in <uestion1' . ■%

; "7 .'"'••. •'''igger rac#ets go on.' -.5

c. ,$$arently rown resignedt .when his $ro$osalwas re6ected.- wish he could have acted less $reci$itately.

he ana$horic com$aratives ict.pa, bigger, [email protected] ii..........................................................................referents are clearly identifiable as 9,if (1i,ooo andresigned. ,s usual diere is also extended reference tolonger and less-clearly defined $assages of text forexam$le so any in &>%\T*%

&>%\T* Here die =ed Vueen began again. '+an you answeruseful <uestions1' she said. 'How is bread made1' ' 0#now that%+ Alice cried eagerly.' You ca#e some flour-' "/here do you $ic# the flower1' the /hite; Vueenas#ed. '0n a garden or in the hedges 1' .'/ell it isn't pic9ed at all' ,lice ex$lained% 'it'sground-' 'How many acres of ground1' said the /hiteVueen. 'You mustn't leave out so"many6 things3'

0t is in the nature of com$aratives chat- of all thereference items they .. are die ones that are mostty$icaRy@anaChoric; rather than exo$horic. his is to beex$ected. Dersonals and demonstratives both involve aform of reference chat is inherendy extralinguistic thoughit may be reinter$reted in linguistic terms% reference tos$eech coles 9the roles of che $artici$ants in thecommunication $rocess: and co $roximity to the s$ea#eris essentially reference co che situation and only the 'third

$erson' $ersonals whose situational definition is a $urelynegative one - $erson or thing



@4% REERENCE

NH= H, s$ea#er or addressee - have theana$horic function as the clearly $redominant one -withexo$horic reference being only secondary. /ithcom$arison however although the relationshi$" is stillclearly a referential one 9in the sense in which we areusing the term the s$ecific nature of this relationshi$that of li#eness or com$arability between things ma#esirroore $robable that the things which are being related toone another should be at the same level of abstracrion;.inother wordsthat both the com$arative and its referentshould be located at6the semantic l2>CL9.'1..in. die text:rather than the one in the text and the"other iri thesituation. hus while there certainly is exo$horicreference 8ith the com$aratives - the sentence following&>%\T* $rovides a nice exam$le of it%

&>%\T* 9cont'd: '!an her head3' the =ed Vueen anxiously

interru$ted.' 2he'll be feverish after 3so^much thin#ing 0'I ... .. Y L LO'.'

- as a general rule they tend to be text-oriented and togive the reader or hearer a strong sense of fibres of internal cohesion. ?

Li#e general com$arison $articular com$arisonmav@also be .$urelyinternal and thus not.referenrial@6at@all; in this case it isex$ressed" bysub-modifiers in-7y nearly a6waysegwa6y% ■

&>%TX* hey as#ed me three e<ually difficult<uestions. 0

O I ■'■L■■ I,s it stands this is ambiguous; it could be ana$horic.ut iri the sense of "each as difficult as the others' it isnon-referential li#e &>%]T* above.

U' r■i i . ' ■ .■ ■ I

2.. A nole on 2N such and as

,mong the words of com$arison these re<uire a briefs$ecial mention. 0n $rinci$le they can be regarded asvariants of the same word. 0 which ta#es the form s$ chwhen it is an ad6ectiyC8when@u is@a@free adverb and aswhen it is a bound adverb. his is something of an

oversim$lification but it a$$roximates to the facts; allhave the same meaning of + similarly:' and the choiceamong them is largely a matter of grammatical function.

/e find so and s$ch used sim$ly as intensifiersmeaning '9extremely' although $erha$s; even here thereis a nuance of' such as you would never have imagined'%

&>%T* a. he war scenes- in the film were soterrifying b. Nur neighbours are such anuisance.

; i •! ■



2. COPARATIKE

EEENCE &

hese become structurally cata$horic in &>%T>*% . [

&>%T>* a. he war scenes in the filni •were so -terrifying

that many of the audience left. b. Nur neighboursare such a'nuisance that we may have to move.

Historically &>%T(* are also cata$horic though they areno longer felt to be so%

&>%T(* a. He hid in the shed so thatno one would findhim.

b. Nur fear of her was such" that wc dared notcontradict her.

oth &>%T>* and &>%T(* are unusual among instances ofcata$hora in that the referent is not $art of the nominal

grou$; in addition so, s$ch and as all occur in the usualty$e of cata$hora where the referent is a Vualifier forexam$le%

&>%T)* 2uch an efficient man as John"32o efficient a man as John is unli#ely to bemista#en. , man so7as efficient as John 6 ;

xo$horically we find s$ch and soyas is unusual amongreference items in having no exo$horic use - this is acorollary of its 'bound'-ness. 2o if we were watchingsomeone lifting a heavy weight we might say &>%T((* butnot &>%TUb* which could occur only ana$horicallyfollowing something li#e 7 didn+t e6pect /ohn to beat

5eter*&>%TU* a. 0 never thought he was so

strong b. 0 never thought hewas as strong.-

,lternatively we could ma#e the as in &>%TUb* cata$horic by adding as that at the end with the exo$horic referencecarried by the that. ,nother exam$le of exo$horic so isthe +ar$enter's

&>%TP* 0 wish you were not <uite so deaf- 0've had to as#you twice3

though that is simultaneously cata$horic to the succeeding0mc. one of these items however is as fre<uently used in exo$horiccontexts as thedemonstratives are; as we have already remar#edcom$aratives as a. whole ~jare more text-oriented than demonstratives and so, s$chand a6 are <uite 0ty$ical in this res$ect.- [ ■

/e have already cited exam$les of their ana$horic use both inde$endently in general com$arison Teg* &>%]]*&>%]\*: and as 2ubmodifiers in $articular com$arison&>%\T*. hree further;exam$les%



+

T]* i. He seemed most u$set. - never #new he caredso.

b. Lee me have men about me thac are fad ■ '-

Yon +assius hath a lean and hungry loo#.2uch men are dangerous. ?

c. ',re five nights warmer dun one night then1',lice ventured to as#.'!ive times as warm of course.'

/e shall come across so and s$ch in other cohesivefunctions in substitution 9+ha$ter (: and coti6unction9+ha$ter U:. 0n $articular so has a wide range of uses

$artly owing to its functioning freely bothias 2ub-modifier and as ,d6unct. 0n this res$ect it is resembled

by are and less; to give one more exam$le they arc,d6unct in &>%T\(* 2ubmodifier in &>%T\b*% .

&>%T\* a. He seemed most u$set.- 0 never #new hecared'so. - He used to care even mote.

b. He comes every wee#. - 0 never #new he cameso often. - Heused to come even more often.

.ut ore and less are only com$aratives whereas so ismany other things besides all of them cohesive in one wayor another.!inally there are a number of ex$ressions which resemblethe com$ara4 ' tives in meaning but arc themselvesconstructed in ocher ways exem$lified in 9>%TTa-4"3%9>%TT* a. 'Nswyn then says that a well-drilled e<uerry too#two ste$s forward received the $icture from you and too#

two ste$s bac#. He was accustomed to the wholemanoeuvre that is to say. ,nd then the visit ended. /ouldyou say that's right1' 'othing of the #ind- my dearfellow.'4 b. '0f we'd gone on $retending long enough 0

believe we might have been ha$$y together sometimes. 0toften wot#s out li#e chac-'f

c. /al# right u$ and ta#e the box where everyonecan set you.hat way ic won't loo# is though you're stealing.?%

d. dward ran u$ and vaulted the fence withoutefi'ort. John tried%o%do li#ewise - with disastrous results.

e. You don't seem to have got very far with ailthose 6obs 0 as#ed .you to do. ,nd anotiicr thing;- what have youdone with thescissors1

4 Michael bines A !amily .i1iair, Eaihncs.

Q J. (. Driestley Bg-w Nmerfhe ?hyS of J. (.Driestley Foi. t: eicemioa.

'4



2. COPARATIKE

REERENCE

&$

x$ressions such as o1 the 9ind, li9e that, that way, doli9ewise, and another thing show a semantic li#eness to die com$arativeswhich suggests due theymight.be treated under this heading. ut it y7ould.not beeasy to define or to list the set of ex$ressions that were being includedwithin this category./hat is more im$ortant they can a be identified in oneway or other with o.ther ty$es of cohesion either because they containa demonstrative[the, this, that7 or a substitute [do7, or because they fallwithin one of the con-

6unctive categories [eg* the discourse ad6uncts inaddition, and another thing,

siilarly, in other words, so 1ar7; and it is this thatdetermines how they areused. 0t seems more satisfactory therefore to inter$retthem not as com

$aratives but as falling under those other headingsalways bearing in mindthat the different forms of cohesion are nowhere shar$lyset a$art onefrom another." """'.'. "v.^

http://might.be/

http://might.be/



"*~

t»fcf

Documents

Chapter 2 Reference