"pronoun" is semantic or distributional?

[Patrick C. Ryan]

Dear Lloyd and IEists:

 ----- Original Message -----
From: <ECOLING at aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 1:45 AM

<PR>
As usual, you have very concisely and accurately summed up the situation ---
with an eye to creating the conditions for fruitful discussion.

>> [PRp]
>> Perhaps the discussion could be foreshortened. 'My' could perhaps be termed
>> a "pronominal determiner".

<LA>
> This is a perfectly reasonable position, *GIVEN* that Pat is using
> the word "pronoun", here in the form "pronominal",
> as a semantic-functional term (referring to persons etc.).
> I believe that is an accurate statement, even if Pat's explanations
> have not said so explicitly.

<PR>
You have made explicit what the underlying assumptions were.

But, I would ask Larry if, given the analysis above, 'pronominal' is
inappropriate to distinguish 'my' from 'this' etal., what would be the
appropriate term? Certainly, I do not believe anyone will easily agree that
there is no discernible difference between 'my' and 'this' etal. Certainly,
'possessive', the term Larry employs in his published definition is
unproblematical so far as I can see but is it entirely without merit to
identify the substitutional  difference between words like 'my' and 'this'?

A more troublesome omission(?) in Larry's definifitions concerns words like
'mine', which he has assured us in a recent posting are 'pronouns'. But
under his published definition of 'pronoun', we find only personal,
reflexive, demonstrative, indefinite, interrogative, and relative --- listed
as categories.

Larry, under which of these categories does 'mine' belong?

<snip>

<LA>
> Pat Ryan seems not to understand that
> "she" does not substitute for "woman" with "the" mysteriously
> not manifest.
> Rather, "she" stands for the entire noun phrase
> "the woman", normally with all modifying semantics also
> included, so that "she who came yesterday" is at the margins
> in modern English, a rather unusual construction,
> even if perfectly grammatical.  As Trask points out,
> "the she who came yesterday" is not grammatical.

<PR>
I am not sure why you have interpreted what I have written to mean this ---
perhaps I expressed myself awkwardly. I am aware that 'she' stands not just
for the head noun but for the entire NP.

 <snip>

Pat

PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE at email.msn.com (501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th
St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE:
http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/ and PROTO-RELIGION:
http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/proto-religion/indexR.html "Veit ek,
at ek hekk, vindga meipi, nftr allar nmu, geiri undapr . . . a ~eim meipi er
mangi veit hvers hann af rstum renn." (Havamal 138)