[Lingtyp] Definition of “personal pronoun"

Sun Jul 11 15:32:48 UTC 2021

Dear all,

This is a question I asked but I’ll ask again - how are distance-sensitive pronouns/demonstratives inherently different from gender-sensitive pronouns?
So Hindi yah and vah distinguish proximal and distal 3rd person, whereas English she and he distinguish female and male 3rd person.
Then how are she and he lexically void when yah and vah aren't? Why is gender an exception whereas distance isn't?

Regards,
Ian
On 11 Jul 2021, 11:22 PM +0800, Martin Haspelmath <martin_haspelmath at eva.mpg.de>, wrote:
Yes, Bhat (2004) and Kibrik (2011) are excellent typological books from which I have learned a lot (thanks to Don Killian and Daniel Hieber for mentioning them).

But they do not seem to say clearly how personal pronouns are delimited from demonstratives. Bhat (2004), as in his WALS chapter<https://wals.info/chapter/43>, discusses the formal relationships between demonstratives and 3rd person pronouns, but how do we tell them apart? For example, Basque is sometimes said to lack 3rd-person pronouns and to use demonstratives instead (hau, hori, hura), and sometimes it is said to use demonstratives "as 3rd-person pronouns"<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basque_grammar#Personal_pronouns> – which of these is true depends on the definition of "personal pronoun". Kibrik (2011: 125) considers two criteria (""adnominal use", "a single structural-distributional system with locuphoric pronouns") but falls short of providing a clear definition.

This is why I proposed the definition in terms of coreferential use in a complement clause, as in

Jon-ek dio hura azkarra d-ela.
Jon-ERG says DEM smart be-COMP
'Jon(i) says that he(i) is smart.' (Iraola & Ezeizabarrena 2011)

Here the Basque distal demonstrative hura 'that (one)' is used coreferentially with the matrix subject, so according to this definition, hura is (also) a personal pronoun. It contrasts crucially with Spanish, where the distal demonstrative aquél 'that (one)' cannot be used in this way (Juan(i) dice que (*aquél(i)) es inteligente).

A language that is similar to Basque in that it seems to "use its demonstratives as personal pronouns" is Lezgian, but it appears that they cannot be used in a complement clause, because reflexive pronouns are required in this context (Haspelmath 1993: §22.4.2). Thus, even though Lezgian am/abur often correspond to English he/she/they, they do not count as personal pronouns.

[This delimitation may strike one as arbitrary, and it is – but I am assuming that we want *some* delimitation, because "personal pronoun" and "demonstrative" are technical terms that we want to have clear definitions for.]

Thanks also to Riccardo Giomi for mentioning the term "pro(-)form" used in FDG (along with "pro-adverb", "pro-verb", etc.). These kinds of terms have been used for quite some time (e.g. in Quirk et al. 1985, the well-known grammar of English), but they have not become standard. In a recent Twitter poll, when asked about what term to use for "where", a majority favoured "adverbial interrogative pronoun" or "interrogative pronominal adverb" over "interrogative pro-adverb" (https://twitter.com/haspelmath/status/1413525671163400192).

Best,
Martin

Am 11.07.21 um 06:01 schrieb Daniel W. Hieber:
Dear Ian,

I think it would be worthwhile to also consider the definition of pronouns advanced in Andrej Kibrik's excellent Reference in discourse. Some relevant quotes are below. Note that Kibrik is here using pronoun to mean primarily personal pronoun (p. 121).
"[...] the term 'pronoun' implies only three things. First, a pronoun is a referential device, directly coding referents. Second, it is a reduced referential device, that is, it does not have lexical content. Third, pronouns are overt devices, and so are opposed to zero reference." (p. 121; empahsis in the original)
Kibrik also notes that there are other types of items which sometimes share the function of personal pronouns, but should not themselves be considered personal pronouns:
Linguistic elements that can be characterized as overt reduced referential devices most typically coincide with what are traditionally known as personal pronouns. In the context of referential choice between full and reduced referential devices, most often these are third person pronouns. English is a typical example of a language that uses third person pronouns when a reduced referential device is needed. However, in this kind of language other reduced devices may be used, such as demonstratives. Furthermore, not all languages have dedicated third person pronouns: some languages employ overt reduced referential devices that fall out of the scope of what traditionally counts as third person pronouns. Several kinds of linguistic elements that belong to other pronoun types or even different lexico-grammatical classes may effectively function in discourse as analogues of third person pronouns. Such analogues can be thought of as marginal overt reduced referential devices.
Among these, the most salient ones are: demonstratives, classifiers, and social status nouns. All of these devices are distinct from personal pronouns, in particular because they do not contain the category of person. [...] However, in certain languages that lack genuine third person pronouns these devices play the pronominal role. (p. 124; emphasis in the original)
Kibrik also helpfully distinguishes between strong vs. weak pronouns, where strong pronouns are prosodically and pragmatically marked, and weak pronouns are prosodically reduced and/or dependent. Weak pronouns are functionally analogous to bound pronouns (p. 92).

Hope that's helpful!

Danny

References

  *   Kibrik, Andrej A. 2011. Reference in discourse. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199215805.001.0001<https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199215805.001.0001>.

Daniel W. Hieber, Ph.D.
Postdoctoral Fellow
University of Alberta Language Technology Lab (ALTLab)
danielhieber.com<http://www.danielhieber.com>
________________________________
From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org><mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of JOO, Ian [Student] <ian.joo at connect.polyu.hk><mailto:ian.joo at connect.polyu.hk>
Sent: Monday, July 5, 2021 11:53 PM
To: LINGTYP <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org><mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Subject: [Lingtyp] Definition of “personal pronoun"

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
[https://www.polyu.edu.hk/emaildisclaimer/PolyU_Email_Signature.jpg]

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>
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

[https://www.polyu.edu.hk/emaildisclaimer/PolyU_Email_Signature.jpg]

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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20210711/3f2cd4be/attachment.htm>