[Lingtyp] Definition of “personal pronoun"

Wed Jul 7 13:01:28 UTC 2021

Dear all — This seems like a good opportunity to test a generalization that I’ve wanted to test for a long time: whereas 1st and 2nd person pronouns are inherently deictic (exophoric) (with an important exception mentioned below), 3rd person pronouns are not inherently anaphoric/endophoric, but merely weakly indexical, i.e., they can be used both anaphorically/endophorically and exophorically. This is true of all languages I have sufficient familiarity with. Are there any counterexamples out there? There could be two types of counterexamples: 3rd-person pronouns that are used strictly anaphorically/endophorically and 3rd-person pronouns that are used exclusively exophorically. (There are of course also languages in which 1st and 2nd person pronouns are used anaphorically/logophorically when they occur in the complements of certain matrix predicates.) — Best — Juergen

> On Jul 6, 2021, at 2:48 PM, Mira Ariel <mariel at tauex.tau.ac.il> wrote:
> 
> But what about (not so common, but attested) deictic references (first-mention) to 3rd person using "personal pronouns"?
>  
> Mira
>  
> From: Lingtyp [mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org] On Behalf Of Martin Haspelmath
> Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 1:48 AM
> To: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Definition of “personal pronoun"
>  
> Maybe the following will work:
> 
> "A personal pronoun is a free form that (i) denotes a speech role (speaker/producer and/or hearer/comprehender) OR that is used as an anaphoric form AND (ii) that can be used in a complement clause coreferentially with a matrix clause argument."
> 
> This is a disjunctive definition that brings together locuphoric forms ('I', 'we', 'you') and 3rd-person anaphoric (or "endophoric") forms, following the Western tradition (but not following any kind of compelling logic).
> 
> It seems that personal pronouns need to be delimited from three types of somewhat doubtful forms:
> 
> – person indexes (I do not include bound forms under "personal pronoun" here, following my 2013 paper on person indexes: https://zenodo.org/record/1294059)
> – demonstratives
> – titles like "Your Majesty"
> 
> I think that if a language has a form like "that-one" or "your-majesty" that can be used coreferentially in a complement clause, one will regard it as a personal pronoun:
> 
> (a) "My sister(i) thinks that that-one(i) has an answer."
> (b) "Does your-majesty(i) think that your-majesty(i) has an answer?"
> 
> In German, the polite second-person pronoun "Sie" (which has Third-Person syntax) can be used in (b), but the demonstrative "die" can hardly be used in (a), so it would not count as a personal pronoun (yet). However, in Hindi-Urdu and Mongolian, as mentioned by Ian, the demonstrative can be used in this way (I think), so it would count as a personal pronoun.
> 
> I don't think we need the general notion of "person" to define "personal pronoun". Wikipedia's current definition is therefore quite confusing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_pronoun).
> 
> Thanks for this interesting challenge, Ian! It seems to me that quite a few of our traditional terms CAN be defined, but their definitions are not obvious at all (and the textbooks don't usually give the definitions).
> 
> Best,
> Martin
> 
> Am 06.07.21 um 06:53 schrieb JOO, Ian [Student]:
> Dear typologists,
> 
> I’m having a hard time trying to find a definition of a “personal pronoun”.
> One definition is that a personal pronoun refers to a literal person, a human being. But then again, non-human pronouns like English it are also frequently included as a personal pronoun.
> Another definition seems to be that “personal” refers to a grammatical person and not a literal person. Thus, it refers to the (non-human) 3rd person, therefore it is a personal pronoun.
> But then again, demonstratives, interrogative, and indefinite pronouns also refer to the 3rd person. (This is a book, who is that man, anything is possible) Then are they also personal pronouns?
> What’s the clearest definition of a personal pronoun, if any?
> 
> From Hong Kong, 
> Ian
> 
> 
> Disclaimer:
> 
> This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and notify the sender and The Hong Kong Polytechnic University (the University) immediately. Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
> 
> The University specifically denies any responsibility for the accuracy or quality of information obtained through University E-mail Facilities. Any views and opinions expressed are only those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the University and the University accepts no liability whatsoever for any losses or damages incurred or caused to any party as a result of the use of such information.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> 
> 
> -- 
> Martin Haspelmath
> Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
> Deutscher Platz 6
> D-04103 Leipzig
> https://www.shh.mpg.de/employees/42385/25522
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp