[Lingtyp] Definition of “personal pronoun"
Riccardo Giomi
rgiomi at campus.ul.pt
Fri Jul 9 13:55:40 UTC 2021
Dear all,
This is my first ever post in this discussion list, so first of all, hi
everyone!
Just a quick reaction to Martin's note that
*(iv) “Pronouns” are often taken to be “noun-like” (because of the
etymology of “pro-noun”), but I include interrogative adverbs like “when”
and demonstrative adverbs like “there” (following widespread usage, also in
my 1997 book “Indefinite pronouns”).*
In Functional Discourse Grammar (a typologically-based model of grammar
developed by Kees Hengeveld and Lachlan Mackenzie), the general term
*proform* is used which encompasses pronouns as well as (i) "pro-adverbs"
(in their interrogative, demonstrative or relative uses) like *here/there/where
*for places*, when/then* for time intervals, *how/so* for manners, etc.,
(ii) "pro-adjectives" like English *such* or Romance *tal/tel/tale* and
(iii) "pro-verbs" like *do *and *do so*. I am not sure how new the term
proform actually is, but as far as I can tell it is not very common outside
this specific framework; however, I think it can indeed be very useful as a
typologically neutral, functional "super-category" -- whose members of
course have further subdistinctions which vary across languages, as has
been mentioned before for personal pronouns.
Best,
Riccardo
Martin Haspelmath <martin_haspelmath at eva.mpg.de> escreveu no dia sexta,
9/07/2021 à(s) 14:59:
> Dear all,
>
>
> It’s actually very tricky to (retro-)define “pronoun” and related terms in
> such a way that the definition corresponds to a large extent to the legacy
> uses. Below I propose some definitions of ten terms that are widely taken
> for granted. Can they be improved on? Four possible issues:
>
>
>
> (i) There is no definition of the general term “pronoun” – I wouldn’t know
> how to define it, other than by saying that the class comprises personal,
> demonstrative, interrogative and indefinite pronouns.
>
>
>
> (ii) Sebastian is right that people often use “pronoun” elliptically to
> mean “personal pronoun”, but I find this usage confusing.
>
>
>
> (iii) Possessive pronouns are sometimes taken to be on a par with personal
> pronouns (especially in the well-known Indo-European languages), but I
> think they are best thought of as a special subtype of personal pronouns.
>
>
>
> (iv) “Pronouns” are often taken to be “noun-like” (because of the
> etymology of “pro-noun”), but I include interrogative adverbs like “when”
> and demonstrative adverbs like “there” (following widespread usage, also in
> my 1997 book “Indefinite pronouns”).
>
> Best,
> Martin
>
> Am 09.07.21 um 11:29 schrieb Sebastian Nordhoff:
>
> Dear all,
> I think it is useful to have a look at the context in which "personal
> pronoun" is used. There is an opposition to "possessive pronoun",
> "reflexive pronoun" etc. So "personal pronoun" is the kind of pronoun
> which is not possessive, which is not reflexive and so on.
>
> If only "pronoun" is used, without further qualification, normally
> "personal pronoun" is intended. If someone says "The pronouns of
> language X and language Y are similar", the standard interpretation
> would be that this refers to personal pronouns, rather than to reflexive
> pronouns or the like.
>
> Sometimes it is important to clearly state that you are not interested
> in possessive/reflexive/interrogative pronouns. In those cases "personal
> pronoun" is used. I see this as a shorthand for "subject/object pronoun".
>
> Obviously, there are languages with very neat 2x3 paradigms, and there
> are languages where the paradigms are fuzzy at the edges and you get kin
> terms for reference and various politeness effects.
>
> If one sees "personal pronoun" as "subject/object pronoun", the question
> of whether a given form (eg in Korean) is actually third person becomes
> moot.
>
> So, the fact that we call a certain set of items "personal pronouns" is
> probably due to a) opposition to other categories and b) tradition. It
> should not be taken to imply that the category of "person" plays any
> role in there. (After all, possessive pronouns also encode person, but
> AFAICS they are normally not considered personal pronouns).
> Best wishes
> Sebastian
>
>
> *11 proposed definitions*
>
>
>
> A *possessive pronoun *(or adpossessive pronoun) is a personal pronoun
> that is used in adnominal possessive function.
>
>
>
> A *personal pronoun* is (i) a locuphoric form or (ii) an anaphoric form
> that is not a noun and that can be used in a complement clause
> coreferentially with a matrix argument.
>
>
>
> A locuphoric form (= a locuphor) is a form that denotes the
> speaker/producer or the hearer/comprehender speech role.
>
>
>
> An *anaphoric form *(or anaphoric pronoun) is a form that is primarily
> used for anaphoric reference.
>
>
>
> A *demonstrative (form)* is a form that can be used to direct the
> interlocutors’ joint focus of attention to entities in the discourse
> situation.
>
>
>
> A *demonstrative determiner* is a demonstrative that fulfills its
> function by occurring next to a noun in a nominal expression.
>
>
>
> A *demonstrative pronoun* is a demonstrative that forms a nominal or
> adverbial expression by itself without a noun.
>
>
>
> An *interrogative (form)* is a form that can be used to specify the open
> parameter in a constituent question.
>
>
>
> An *interrogative determiner* is an interrogative that fulfills its
> function by occurring next to a noun in a nominal expression.
>
>
>
> An *interrogative pronoun *is an interrogative that forms a nominal or
> adverbial expression by itself without a noun.
>
>
>
> A *reflexive pronoun *is an anaphoric form that signals coreference with
> an antecedent in the same clause and that forms a nominal by itself (cf.
> Haspelmath 2021).
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __ __
>
> *From:*Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org
> <mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>> *On Behalf Of
> *Martin Haspelmath
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 07, 2021 6:13 AM
> *To:* lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Lingtyp] Definition of “personal pronoun"____
>
> __ __
>
> Here's a new version of the definition that addresses Ian's point
> about Korean:
>
> "A personal pronoun is a form that (i) denotes a speech role
> (speaker/producer and/or hearer/comprehender) OR that is an
> anaphoric form which does not contain a noun AND (ii) that can be
> used in a complement clause coreferentially with a matrix clause
> argument."
>
> By saying "anaphoric form *that does not contain a noun*", we
> exclude the Korean case where 'brother' can be used coreferentially.
> Maybe one should add "ordinary noun" or "a noun that can be used
> indefinitely", because someone might claim, for example, that
> Spanish "usted" is still a noun (e.g. because it has the noun-like
> plural "usted-es").
>
> Guillaume Segerer remarked that "pronoun" implies that it is not a
> noun, but my proposed definition of "personal pronoun" does not say
> that a personal pronoun is "a kind of pronoun", because I don't know
> how to define "pronoun" (with such traditional terms, an extensional
> definition is often all we can give, e.g. "/pronoun/ is a cover term
> for /personal pronoun/, /interrogative pronoun/, ...")
>
> Re Mira's point about deictic uses of 3rd-person personal pronouns:
> I would say that this is not definitional – if a 3rd-person form
> cannot be used anaphorically, it will not be called "personal
> pronoun". But of course, personal pronouns often have other uses as
> well in particular languages. Comparative concepts rarely map
> perfectly onto language-particular categories.
>
> Guillaume also mentions person indexes (which are often included in
> personal pronoun charts), and this led me to look again at what I
> said in my 2013 paper about person indexes: I distinguish between
> cross-indexes, gramm-indexes, and pro-indexes, and the latter are
> actually included in "pronoun" (contrasting with "free pronouns").
> So I now say that "a personal pronoun is a form that..." (not "a
> personal pronoun is a free form that...").
>
> Best,
> Martin
>
>
> ____
>
> Am 06.07.21 um 20:48 schrieb Mira Ariel:____
>
> But what about (not so common, but attested) deictic references
> (first-mention) to 3^rd person using "personal pronouns"?____
>
> ____
>
> Mira____
>
> ____
>
> *From:*Lingtyp [mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> <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
> <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org> <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
> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fzenodo.org%2Frecord%2F1294059&data=04%7C01%7Cedith%40uwm.edu%7Cfcf0475684e1463b39ba08d941382d63%7C0bca7ac3fcb64efd89eb6de97603cf21%7C0%7C0%7C637612532579177572%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=RbFRPnwDeMNZBZ6rSsbcgAFVtnzCtCLFLvJhSRf2Meg%3D&reserved=0> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fzenodo.org%2Frecord%2F1294059&data=04%7C01%7Cedith%40uwm.edu%7Cfcf0475684e1463b39ba08d941382d63%7C0bca7ac3fcb64efd89eb6de97603cf21%7C0%7C0%7C637612532579177572%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=RbFRPnwDeMNZBZ6rSsbcgAFVtnzCtCLFLvJhSRf2Meg%3D&reserved=0>)
> – 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
> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPersonal_pronoun&data=04%7C01%7Cedith%40uwm.edu%7Cfcf0475684e1463b39ba08d941382d63%7C0bca7ac3fcb64efd89eb6de97603cf21%7C0%7C0%7C637612532579187566%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=dD%2BshVMYknV2PzXdBgWrIIAYTUuUtpRdjQcgGctDfco%3D&reserved=0> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPersonal_pronoun&data=04%7C01%7Cedith%40uwm.edu%7Cfcf0475684e1463b39ba08d941382d63%7C0bca7ac3fcb64efd89eb6de97603cf21%7C0%7C0%7C637612532579187566%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=dD%2BshVMYknV2PzXdBgWrIIAYTUuUtpRdjQcgGctDfco%3D&reserved=0>).
>
> 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 <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org> <Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>____
>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistserv.linguistlist.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flingtyp&data=04%7C01%7Cedith%40uwm.edu%7Cfcf0475684e1463b39ba08d941382d63%7C0bca7ac3fcb64efd89eb6de97603cf21%7C0%7C0%7C637612532579187566%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=H8oB0zqDHmOTOetiBLJTbR0QZV3i%2F6R5KvhC5MI8BYk%3D&reserved=0> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistserv.linguistlist.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flingtyp&data=04%7C01%7Cedith%40uwm.edu%7Cfcf0475684e1463b39ba08d941382d63%7C0bca7ac3fcb64efd89eb6de97603cf21%7C0%7C0%7C637612532579187566%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=H8oB0zqDHmOTOetiBLJTbR0QZV3i%2F6R5KvhC5MI8BYk%3D&reserved=0>____
>
>
>
>
> ____
>
> -- ____
>
> Martin Haspelmath____
>
> Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology____
>
> Deutscher Platz 6____
>
> D-04103 Leipzig____
>
> https://www.shh.mpg.de/employees/42385/25522 <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.shh.mpg.de%2Femployees%2F42385%2F25522&data=04%7C01%7Cedith%40uwm.edu%7Cfcf0475684e1463b39ba08d941382d63%7C0bca7ac3fcb64efd89eb6de97603cf21%7C0%7C0%7C637612532579197560%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=TK90tJ3oOqHQGUVMtDY7ylGIOPpqeFAjpPEkwfyb%2FKM%3D&reserved=0> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.shh.mpg.de%2Femployees%2F42385%2F25522&data=04%7C01%7Cedith%40uwm.edu%7Cfcf0475684e1463b39ba08d941382d63%7C0bca7ac3fcb64efd89eb6de97603cf21%7C0%7C0%7C637612532579197560%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=TK90tJ3oOqHQGUVMtDY7ylGIOPpqeFAjpPEkwfyb%2FKM%3D&reserved=0>____
>
>
>
> ____
>
> -- ____
>
> Martin Haspelmath____
>
> Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology____
>
> Deutscher Platz 6____
>
> D-04103 Leipzig____
>
> https://www.shh.mpg.de/employees/42385/25522 <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.shh.mpg.de%2Femployees%2F42385%2F25522&data=04%7C01%7Cedith%40uwm.edu%7Cfcf0475684e1463b39ba08d941382d63%7C0bca7ac3fcb64efd89eb6de97603cf21%7C0%7C0%7C637612532579207553%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=XzWfv5vruYrbbr0%2FsD%2BDZE3dDmU3SQ4SLHkCg3FgyJA%3D&reserved=0> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.shh.mpg.de%2Femployees%2F42385%2F25522&data=04%7C01%7Cedith%40uwm.edu%7Cfcf0475684e1463b39ba08d941382d63%7C0bca7ac3fcb64efd89eb6de97603cf21%7C0%7C0%7C637612532579207553%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=XzWfv5vruYrbbr0%2FsD%2BDZE3dDmU3SQ4SLHkCg3FgyJA%3D&reserved=0>____
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org> <Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp> <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing listLingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.orghttp://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing listLingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.orghttp://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
>
> --
> Martin Haspelmath
> Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
> Deutscher Platz 6
> D-04103 Leipzighttps://www.shh.mpg.de/employees/42385/25522
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
--
Riccardo Giomi, Ph.D.
Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa (FLUL)
Departamento de Linguística Geral e Românica (DLGR)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20210709/5409c41c/attachment.htm>
More information about the Lingtyp
mailing list