Indexicality by degrees: Deixis, "anadeixis", and (discourse) anaphora

This paper takes as its starting point the ground-breaking claims of Sir John Lyons in his work on deixis and anaphora in the 1970s and early 1980s, developing the pioneering work of Karl Bühler: in particular, the basic insight that deixis is the source of reference. Flowing from this are the claims that anaphora is derivative upon deixis, and that there is an intimate relationship holding within the world's languages between modality and deixis. Lyons's hypothesis is that this asymetrical, "oriented" relation between deixis and anaphora is apparent in the very functioning of discourse in context: for while anaphora serves to refer back to the intensional correlates of entities already present within a given "universe of discourse", deixis is one (central) means of actually entering these discourse representations into such a universe. Taking inspiration from Lyons's conception, deixis and anaphora are conceived here as procedures for coordinating the speech participants' attention throughout the flow of text as produced within a given context to which they are party. These indexical referring procedures are by no means mutually exclusive: indeed, indexical reference is an inherently "scalar" phenomenon; for the continuous nature of the relation between strict deixis and strict anaphora, passing through "anadeixis" (a hybrid procedure type partaking of both these context-bound referring procedures) as an intermediate phase, reflects the priority of deixis over anaphora, which presupposes it both ontogenetically and phylogenetically. 'Strict' anadeictic and discourse-deictic uses both involve reference via the discourse context upstream of the occurrence of a given demonstrative expression; but while the 'strict' anadeictic function consists in simply retrieving a referent already present within a representation of the previous discourse by "pointing" toward it indexically, the discourse-deictic one requires the addressee or reader to operate upon a relevant contextual discourse representation in order to create a referent which was not present as such initially. Anadeictically-functioning demonstrative NPs may perform a discourse-structuring function, by heralding a transition between major discourse units within a given text. They realise this by shifting a hitherto individual-level reference from a macro-topical entity to a more generic class of referents that includes the one(s) in focus up to this point. It is the deictic property of demonstratives, coded morphologically via their proximal vs. distal character, along with the nature of the predicative component of the expression where it is a lexical NP (which as such may not correspond to presupposed information, but rather to a (re-)classifying or implictly-predicating function) which enable such expression types to perform the discourse-structuring roles at issue here

Null complements, event structure, predication and anaphora: A Functional Discourse Grammar account

International audienceThe theme of this chapter is the possible existence, and if so, interpretation, of zero or null complements of predicates which may take one or two internal arguments (i.e. either an A2 or an A2 and an A3), realizable syntactically. It aims to show how this phenomenon may receive a satisfactory treatment within Functional Discourse Grammar (FDG). I am concerned here only with null complements having nominal values, leaving aside predicational zeros (as in VP ellipses such as [...] and Peter was too). There are three essential issues concerning the possibility of occurrence and the type of interpretation of null complements: first, what are the conditions under which they may occur with various types of transitive verbs?; second, what are the semantic and referential values which these null complements may assume in different contexts?; and third, what are the principles which make these values possible? Clearly, the occurrence of null complements needs to be licensed - it is not just any transitive verb, in any type of context, which may allow its direct and/or indirect complement(s) to be unrealized syntactically. A satisfactory account of the possibility of non-realization of one or both of a predicate's internal arguments syntactically, and when this is possible, of the way in which they receive an interpretation, requires recognizing the existence of an interaction amongst lexical-semantic structure, the construction selected as a whole, and various discourse-contextual factors

How indexicals function in texts: Discourse, text, and one neo-Gricean account of indexical reference

International audienceMy goal in this article is to compare the behavior of a variety of non clause-bound types of indexical expression in English across three texts from different genres, spoken as well as written. A key distinction is the one claimed to exist between the dimensions of text and discourse, and the comparison of the indexical types demonstrates its relevance. In a given text, certain lexically-specific types of indexical bearing an anaphoric interpretation may perform particular strategic, discourse unit-demarcating roles; while others realizing a deictic value may signal a shift in referential perspective, preparing the reader or addressee for a transition to a new discourse unit or sub-unit. Particularly highlighted are the deictic, anadeictic and anaphoric roles of the various indexicals as a function of text genre, utterer's intention and the interlocutive relationships developed throughout the discourse. The article also assesses the neo-Gricean pragmatic account of (non-)coreference in discourse put forward in Levinson's (2000) Presumptive Meanings. The theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature, MIT Press. It argues that, rather than their discourse value being necessarily determined by the possibility of a choice between an attenuated and a prolix indexical type, it is the textual, contextual as well as discourse factors isolated during the earlier comparison which are adequate to describe and account for this

"Modal" 'that' as determiner and pronoun: the primacy of the cognitive-interactional dimension

International audienceIn this article, I examine the 'modal' or 'empathetic' (Lyons, 1977: 677) use of the distal (or "non-proximal") determiner/pronoun 'that': namely, where the intended referent may have just been evoked in the immediately prior discourse, but where the distal pronoun 'that', not the 'in-focus' 'it' or the 'activated',proximal 'this' is used. The rationale behind the choice of this particular type of indexical seems to be that the speaker is distancing him/herself from the referent, not wishing to ascribe actuality to it in the way that would be the case if either 'it' or 'this' were used instead. Examination of this particular value of that leads to the hypothesis that the principles underlying the choice of 'that' as opposed to 'this' or 'it' generally are not derived 'objectively', as it were, from their situational use in terms of degrees of proximity of a referent or demonstratum to the speaker or hearer, nor primarily in terms of attention focus. They are, rather, social and cognitive, and play an important interactional role in the construction of discourse

Inter-sentential anaphora and coherence relations in discourse: a perfect match

International audienceHobbs (1979) ('Coherence and Coreference', Cognitive Science 3, 67-90) claims that the interpretation of inter-sentential anaphors 'falls out' as a 'by-product' of using a particular coherence relation to integrate two discourse units. The article argues that this is only partly true. Taking the reader's perspective, I suggest that there are three stages in invoking and implementing a given coherence relation to integrate two discourse units when updating a given discourse context. Interleaved with these are two distinguishable levels in the assignment of reference to the anaphor(s) in the second unit: first, through a search for evidence for the appropriateness of a given anticipated relation, the reader will provisionally assign a referent to the anaphor(s) in the second unit via the semantic structure within the relation's definition (this would correspond to Hobbs's original thesis); and second, in coming to a final decision as to the applicability of the coherence relation(s), the anaphor(s) will receive a full, expanded interpretation. This in turn will serve to actually implement the coherence relation initially assumed. In more general terms, the article aims to pinpoint the precise nature of the interactions between the invocation and implementation of given coherence relations and the functioning of anaphors in non-initial units, in processing multi-propositional texts

Degrees of indirectness: Two types of implicit referents and their retrieval via unaccented pronouns

International audienceIn this chapter, I aim to show that so-called"indirect" anaphora, when realized via unaccented pronouns, is less of a marked discourse phenomenon than previously claimed. After a definition of indirect anaphora, which is distinguished from 'exophora',in particular, the chapter tries to delimit the threshold of discourse-cognitive activation or saliency beyond which the retrieval of an intended 'indirect' referent by a token of this indexical form type is not possible without incurring a processing cost. One condition for such a retrieval is claimed to be the degree of centrality of the referent (central argument of the predicate concerned, or peripheral instrument) within the semantic-pragmatic structure in terms of which the antecedent-trigger is represented in the discourse already established at the point of retrieval. Another is the nature of the referent itself (specific though indefinite, on the one hand, or non-specific frame-bound entity, on the other). Finally, I will present the format for an experimental verification of the hypothesis outlined above which has recently been carried out, in both a French and an English version, and will summarize its main results

Compléments nuls vs. pronoms objets manifestes en anglais en tant qu'anaphoriques : syntaxe, sémantique ou pragmatique ?

National audienceUnder the referential-anaphoric interpretation, null complements of transitive verbs, adjectives and prepositions in English are highly constrained. We examine this phenomenon in the context of certain other interpretative values than simply the anaphoric one, comparing null forms with overt pronouns. It is shown that it is semantic factors (the host predicate's Aktionsart type, the nature of its selection restrictions and the event structure of the entire predication) as well as pragmatic ones (the contextual reference domain of the utterance, the possible existence for a given predicate of a conventionally recognised denotation type) which may both sanction the null complement and assign it an interpretation.Dans leur interprétation référentielle-anaphorique, les compléments nuls de verbes, d'adjectifs et de prépositions transitifs en anglais sont très contraints. Nous examinons ce phénomène dans le contexte d'autres valeurs que la seule valeur anaphorique, en comparant ces formes nulles aux pronoms manifestes. Il est montré que ce sont des facteurs sémantiques (le type d'Aktionsart du prédicat hôte, la nature de ses restrictions de sélection, la structure événementielle de la prédication d'ensemble) et pragmatiques (le domaine de référence contextuel de l'énoncé, l'existence pour tel prédicat d'un type de dénotation reconnu par convention) qui peuvent à la fois autoriser le complément nul et lui assigner une interprétation

Anaphora: lexico-textual structure, or means for utterance integration within a discourse? A critique of the Functional Grammar account

International audienceThis article is a critical examination of Dik's (1997b: ch. 10) account of discourse anaphora, within the framework of the theory of Functional Grammar (but it highlights features of anaphora theory which hold more generally). I show first that Dik's definitions of the phenomenon involve two contradictory conceptions of this discourse procedure (the anaphor refers to a mental representation of its referent within a mental model of the ongoing discourse, yet at the same time needs first to connect up with a segment of co-text - its linguistic antecedent); second, that Dik's account of the relationship between given (pronominal) anaphor types and the "entity-order" of their potential referents is both too rigid and too narrow; and third, that his description of the underlying structure of anaphors, which includes both the referential index of their actual referent/antecedent and a variable specifying the latter's entity-order, does not allow for the necessary flexibility and dynamic character of anaphor use and interpretation. A discursively more realistic account of discourse anaphora needs to specify the necessary interaction between 'bottom-up' factors of these kinds, on the one hand, and 'top-down' relationships involving the wider discourse context, on the other. This is what I briefly outline at the end of the article

L'ACCESSIBILITÉ COGNITIVE DES RÉFÉRENTS, LE CENTRAGE D'ATTENTION, ET LA STRUCTURATION DU DISCOURS : UNE VUE D'ENSEMBLE

International audienceCet article constitue une vue d'ensemble critique de la théorie du " Centrage d'attention ", relativement peu connue à ce jour en France. Il commence par présenter la théorie du Centrage d'attention en tant que telle (section 2), puis envisage un certain nombre d'expérimentations destinées à vérifier la réalité psychologique du mécanisme de traitement des unités minimales de discours qu'elle postule (section 3). L'article se termine par un bilan critique de ce modèle (section 4)

Implicit internal arguments, event structure, predication and anaphoric reference

International audienceThis chapter deals with zero or implicit internal arguments of predicates which may take one or two internal arguments, realizable syntactically. It begins by distinguishing implicit (internal) arguments in terms of a predicate's semantic valency in relation to the syntactic valency of the verb or adjective corresponding to that predicate (§2), and continues with an attempt to distinguish three semantic or discourse-referential values assumable by null complements (§3). Section 4 then examines one of the three sub-types of null complement isolated in §3 (the contextually-definite anaphoric subtype), in an attempt to make precise its anaphoric potential, as compared with that of unaccented 3rd person personal pronouns. It is shown that this is a function of an interaction amongst the event-type designated by the clause as a whole, the host predicate's selection restrictions, the choice of zero vs. overt pronoun as complement, and wider contextual factors. Finally, section 5 examines the role of the host predication as a whole in the functioning of non-referential and anaphoric null complements, and attempts to arrive at certain generalisations licensing the possible occurrence of null complements bearing the three types of values isolated