Here and There

HERE AND THERE
Pragmatics & Beyond

An Interdisciplinary Series of Language Studies
Editor:
Herman Parret
(Belgian National Science Foundation,
Universities of Antwerp and Leuven)
Associate Editor:
Jef Verschueren
(Belgian National Science Foundation,
University of Antwerp)
Editorial Assistant & Editorial Address:

Hubert Cuyckens
Department Germaanse
University of Antwerp (UIA)
Universiteitsplein 1
B-2610 Wilrijk
Belgium
Consulting Editors:
Norbert Dittmar {Free University of Berlin)
David Holdcroft {University of Warwick)
Jacob Mey (Odense University)
Jerrold M. Sadock {University of Chicago)
Emanuel A. Schegloff (University of California at Los Angeles)
Daniel Vanderveken (University of Quebec at Trois-Rivières)
Teun A. van Dijk (University of Amsterdam)
III:2/3
Jürgen Weissenborn and Wolfgang Klein (eds.)
Here and There

Cross-linguistic Studies on Deixis and Demonstration
HERE AND THERE
Cross-linguistic Studies on
Deixis and Demonstration
Jürgen Weissenborn & Wolfgang Klein (eds.)

Max-Plack-Institut für Psycholinguistik, Nijmegen
JOHN BENJAMINS PUBLISHING COMPANY

AMSTERDAM/PHILADELPHIA
1982
© Copyright 1982 - John Benjamins B.V.
ISSN 0166 6258 / ISBN 90 272 2519 2
No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint,

microfilm or any other means, without written permission from the publisher.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jürgen Weissenborn & Wolfgang Klein

Introduction 1
Clifford Hill
Up/down, front/back, left/right. A contrastive study of Hausa and
English 13
Veronika Ehrich
Da and the system of spatial deixis in German 43
Hubertus Opalka
Representations of local Ni-deixis in Swahili in Relation to Bühler's
"Origo des Zeigfelds" 65
Volker Heeschen
Some systems of spatial deixis in Papuan Languages 81
Ulrike Mosel
Local Deixis in Tolai 111
Priska-Monika Hottenroth
The system of local deixis in Spanish 133
István Bátori
On verb deixis in Hungarian 155
Christa Hauenschild
Demonstrative pronouns in Russian and Czech - deixis and anaphora 167
Dietrich Hartmann
Deixis and anaphora in German dialects: The semantics and
pragmatics of two definite articles in dialectical varieties 187
Florian Coulmas
Some remarks on Japanese deictics 209
Eckehart Malotki
Hopi Person deixis 223
Fritz Pasierbsky
Zur historischen Entwicklung der Personendeixis im Chinesischen 253
Peter Austin
The deictic system of Diyari 273
Contributors 285
Index of Names 287
Index of Subjects 291
INTRODUCTION
JÜRGEN WEISSENBORN - WOLFGANG KLEIN
Natural language is always used in certain situations — at a certain time

and at a certain place by people who share a great deal of both situational per
ception and general knowledge. This contextual boundness determines to a
large extent how utterances in natural language are produced and com
prehended. An utterance like "I told her that yesterday, when she was here" is
fully understandable only if we are able to identify
(a) the speaker — the word "I" itself doesn't tell us who performed the
action —
(b) the time of utterance — otherwise, we wouldn't know when "yes
terday" was —
(c) where this sentence was uttered—because "here" can be anywhere—
(d) who "I" was speaking to—the utterance says only that it is a female
person ("her"), "she") — and
(e) a part of what was said before — namely what is taken up by "that".
In general, we don't have any problem in interpreting utterances of this kind,
since all necessary information is provided either by the non-linguistic context
— (a), (b) and (c) may be derived from the situation —, or by the linguistic
context — (d) and (e) may be gathered from what has been said before. A
speaker who plans his utterance can take it for granted that the listener has ac
cess to this contextual information, and this clearly affects the way in which
the utterance is produced — what is made fully explicit, and what is left to the
context.
Contextuality is not only one of the most fundamental characteristics of
natural languages — in contrast to formal languages; it is also one of the cent
ral links between language, perception, and cognition: what is meant when
2 JÜRGEN WEISSENBORN & WOLFGANG KLEIN
something is uttered depends on the linguistic form of the utterance, on fea

tures of the situation as perceived by speaker and listener (including previous
utterances), and on general knowledge shared by them.
All languages seem to have developed a number of divices to integrate
contextual information. Among these devices, deixis is most salient. Deictic
expressions have a shifting meaning, depending on when, where, and by
whom they are used. Typical examples are "I", "now" and "here", but there
are many others. They are usually subdivided into three classes: personal
deixis, with expressions like "I", "you", "my", etc., temporal deixis, with ex
pressions like "now", "today", "formerly" or the tense morphemes, and local
(or spatial) deixis, with expressions like "here, there, left" etc. This subdivi
sion is unsatisfactory in some respects: it neglects some important deictical ex
pressions, such as "that!" (when used with a pointing gesture), and it doesn't
account for the fact that temporal and local use often overlap (such as in the
case of German "da").But it is sound enough for heuristic purposes.
The idea that utterances are basically rooted in this threefold way in the
speech situation was systematically developed by the psychologist Karl
Bühler in 1934, whose treatment of deixis is in many respects still unexcelled.
He maintained that deictical expressions refer into what he calls the "indexical
field", whose zero—the "origo"—is fixed by the person who speaks (the "I");
by the place of utterance (the "here"); and by the time of utterance (the "now").
What these expressions refer to is determined by the presently relevant origo,
and all other deictic expressions are defined in contrast to these ones — e.g.
"you" as the addressee, "there" as an opposite place to "here", etc. It is also
possible to shift the basic reference point, the origo, by introducing for exam
ple an appropriate context. This new context may be given verbally, instead
by the speech situation itself, such as in "... arrived at Rome. Here, he got
lost"; in this case, "here" refers to a verbally introduced reference point
("Rome") instead of the place utterance. The most important phenomenon of
this "secondary deixis" — i.e. deixis that is not directly related to the speech
situation itself — is "anaphora", that is, text-immanent deixis by means of
pronouns (others than "I" and "you") and similar devices.
Bühler's account is not only the most comprehensive treatment of deixis
as a whole, it also combines linguistic and psychological perspectives. It is
however rather limited in empirical respects; his empirical statements are
more illustrative than systematic, and this leads sometimes to vagueness and
oversimplifications. Closer examination of the deictic systems of various lan
guages has led to deeper insights into the functioning of deixis — the mutai
INTRODUCTION 3
connections between its various types, its relation to other phenomena of con
text-dependency, and the contrast between deictic and non-deictic expres
sions. The focus of research has been on temporal deixis, since the tense sys
tem of most languages is based on it. Much less attention has been paid to local
and to personal deixis, though at least the former is considerably elaborated in
many languages and it allows for a much better empirical control than the tem
poral systems, whose expressions refer to much more abstract entities.
The aim of this volume is to provide some information on the deictic sys
tems of a wide variety of languages. Its focus is on local and personal, rather
than on temporal deixis. It grew out of a workshop on deixis in various lan
guages organized by the editors at the occasion of the first annual meeting of
the German Linguistic Society held in March 1979 at the University of
Tübingen. Not all of the contributions, however, were presented originally at
this workshop, and those which were are completely re-written.
The original aim of the workshop was to draw attention to the fact that in
spite of the continuous interest in indexicality in the philosophy of language
and in spite of Karl Bühler's pioneering work on the psychological and linguis
tic foundations of a theory of deixis, there still exists an important discrepancy
between our theoretical assumptions and our actual knowledge of the form
and function of deictic phenomena in natural languages.
This becomes blatantly clear to anyone who has ever tried to obtain reli
able information about the deictic system of even the best described Indo-
European languages from the available sources as dictionaries or grammatical
descriptions. This fact is repeatedly mentioned in the contributions of this vol
ume and the authors provide new perspectives which reveal how much re
mains to be done for even the better known languages.
II
One reason why our present knowledge of deixis is still so fragmentary

may have to do with the fact that deixis is the domain par excellence where lan
guage and reality meet. The development of linguistics in the last decades has
not been particularly favorable to systematic investigation of the interplay of
these two domains, to say the least.
A number of the parameters which may determine the use of deictic ex
pressions, e.g. relative distance of the referent with respect to speaker and/or
hearer, visibility vs. non-visibility of the referent or the static vs. dynamic na
ture of the referent are clearly perceptual in nature. Thus it is not surprising
that it is necessary to observe language use in context, varying experimentally

the relevant context factors in order to find out which are the situational fac
tors that enter into the rules of use of deictic expressions. Hill's contribution is
a good example of such an approach.
Given these obvious links of the deictic vocabulary with the situational
context it is not astonishing that certain authors are ready to assume a direct
relationship between features of the extra-linguistic environment of a particu
lar language and the specific structure of its deictic system. It is clear that this
does not apply with the same degree of verisimilitude to all parts of the deictic
system.
The number of meaningful person contrasts is very limited and time most
obviously lacks the kind of 'concrete' perceptual support that characterizes
space. This means that we would expect the influence of the extra-linguistic
context to be most striking in spatial deixis.
Denny, for example, states that "Relativity of lexical semantics ... is
traceable to particular man-environment relations found for particular
human groups" (1978:72). He considers the obligatory lexical encoding of fre
quently expressed aspects of reality as facilitating human information proces
sing in the course of complex actions by freeing processing space for conscious
cognitive processes. Accordingly, the differentiation of a given deictic system
is related to the degree of naturalness of the environment of the speech com
munity: The more natural the living space (that is unaltered by human inter
vention), the higher the differentiation of the local deictic system. Similarly,
Perkins (1980) claims that deictic complexity decreases with the introduction
of objective, i.e. context independent reference frames such as, for example,
the quarters of the heavens. He tests this hypothesis with a systematic study of
'affixai' deixis in languages that are all different from each other with respect
to linguistic relatedness and sociocultural setting. A related position is taken
by Keenan (1976) who hypothesizes a relationship between literacy and the
structure of deictic systems. Unwritten languages of small populations that
are always spoken in a face-to-face-situation tend to have "better developed
deixis systems than languages with long established writing traditions"
(1976:92).
A problem akin to that of the origin of deictic parameters is the question
of how they are related to each other. Is there any kind of implicational hierar
chy to be found between these parameters like that described for color terms
by Berlin & Kay (1969)? It seems intuitively plausible that certain parameters
are more basic than others and should therefore be found in every deictic sys-
INTRODUCTION 5
tem, as for example the contrast 'proximal' vs. 'distal' with respect to the
speaker (see Denny 1978 for details). The contributions in this volume should
help to evaluate these and corresponding claims.
Another question that is frequently raised in the context of the discussion
of linguistic diversity on both the syntactic and the semantic level is that of the
intertranslatability of languages. Does the unavailability of certain syntactic
devices or lexical elements in a particular language entail its general inability
to express certain conceptualizations? In this regard Opalka (this volume)
considers the possibility in Swahili of using locatives in subject function as
such a case of "ineffability" for languages like German or English.
This assumption should be compared to Keenan's (1976) position.
Keenan for example sees his universal subject promotion hierarchy as con
straining in principle the expressive potentialities of a particular language de
pending on its place in the hierarchy (see Katz 1976 for a critique of this point
of view).
A recurrent theme of the contributions is the reference to Karl Bühler.
This clearly shows the continuing relevance of his work on deixis. It appears
that his analysis of the deictic modes ('Zeigarten') is basically correct even if it
turns out that some of his distinctions have to be revised as suggested by diffe
rent authors in this volume. We will occasionally point out various suggestions
to this effect in the following presentation of the contributions.
III
The initial contribution, Clifford Hill's 'Up/down, front/back, left/right'.

A Contrastive Study of Hausa and English' presents a detailed discussion of
the use of these orientational terms in both languages. The article shows
clearly that the application of the last two pairs of expressions (front/back;
left/right) to spatial configurations where an object with no intrinsic orienta
tion serves as a reference point is not invariant from language to language.
These findings are contrary to what one would expect if there were a 'uni
versal' tendency in interpreting such configurations, for example in terms of
what H. Clark (1973) has called the 'canonical encounter', i.e. two inter
locutors facing each other.
There are basically three ways of projecting the body schema of the
speaker onto the reference object, namely
(a) by pure translation ;

(b) by rotation of 180° around a vertical axis;
(c) by reflection (mirror image).
The canonical encounter would correspond to case (b) above. But not
only the preferred projection type can vary from speech community to
speech community but also the perceptual features that determine the choice
among them. In Hausa this seems to be the contrast between visibility and
non-visibility of the object to be localized, in English and other Indo-Euro
pean languages the dynamic or static character of the reference point.
Hill's results are of interest for the question of the relationship between
language and reality. It has equally important consequences for the study of
the acquisition of lexical meaning and conceptual development.
Like Hill, Veronika Ehrich concentrates in her contribution 'Da and the
system of spatial deixis in German' on the detailed analysis of a subset of local
deictic. Her three main hypotheses are: first, that German distinguishes bet
ween strict deictics and strict anaphora; second, that there is an opposition be
tween the local deictics hier and da as well as between da and dort, and third
that da but not hier and dort can be used as a strict spatial anaphor. After hav
ing shown that the first hypothesis is necessary in order to account for the use
of personal pronouns and spatial and temporal expressions the author ap
proaches the second hypothesis by differentiating between speaker's place,
reference space and denotation space. Here she draws on Reichenbach's
(1947) distinction between speech time, reference time and event time. Thus
she is able to verify the oppositions in question. In support of the third
hypothesis Ehrich points out that the anaphoric use of personal pronouns
and demonstratives is sensitive to whether their antecedent has attributive or
distributive meaning and whether their function is thematic or rhematic.
Ehrich concludes that because of these contraints, a mixed deictic/anaphoric
category should be posited.
The same constraints hold for the anaphoric use of the spatial deictic ex
pressions. Whereas hier and dort are of the mixed type and can only occur in
thematic uses, da can be both thematic or rhematic. These findings suggest in
teresting relationships between indexicality, topicalization and anaphoric
processes.
Hubertus Opalka's article 'Representations of local ni-deixis in Swahili
in relation to Bühler's "Origo des Zeigfeldes'" argues for an extension of
Bühler's concept of the center of the deictic field, which the author considers
INTRODUCTION 7
to be too narrowly associated to the speaker. Opalka bases his argumentation

on a discussion of the simultaneous use of the local nominal suffix -ni and the
spatial enclitics mo-,po- and ko-. These morphemes encode relative proxim
ity, direction, position and definiteness. These parameters, together with the
possibility of using the local deictic expressions in subject or object position,
define what Opalka calls a frame of orientation. Since, as Opalka argues, this
frame apparently cannot be maintained in a translation from Swahili to Ger
man or English, it reveals a conceptualization of spatial relationships that
seems to differ greatly from the one commonly expressed in other languages.
The languages studied in Volker Heeschen's contribution 'Some systems
of spatial deixis in Papuan languages' are Eipo, Yale and Angguruk, which
are spoken in the Eastern highlands of Irian Jaya, the former Dutch West New
Guinea. Heeschen's article focuses on the expressions corresponding to 'here'
and 'there'. The basic contrast in these languages is that between an un
specified here and a specified there. The specification of the domain of there is
done along the vertical dimension distinguishing between positions that are
'up', 'down' or 'across' with respect to the speaker. These spatial contrasts
seem to be molded on the main topological features of the natural environ
ment of the speakers of these languages. In Angguruk every such 'there'-posi
tion is then further differentiated according to four different degrees of pro
ximity to the speaker. Secondary differentiations of the deictic terms that cut
across the deictic oppositions are specifications like 'mentioned before',
'dual', etc. Heeschen then discusses some problems that result from the use of
the local deictics in specific communicative situations. These problems mainly
concern the identification and co-ordination of reference spaces. Where the
necessary perceptual support for the use of local deictics is lacking, as in story
telling, the speaker may either refer to features of the immediate environment
of the interlocuters in order to set up a 'spatial model' or reduce the deictic sys
tem and use some of the expressions anaphorically.
Ulrike Mosel's 'Local deixis in Tolai' deals with another Papuan language
spoken in Papua, New Guinea. After a short grammatical sketch Mosel pro
vides a detailed analysis of the spatial contrasts expressed in Tolai. Tolai of
fers another illustration of the greater differentiation of the distal pole in a
basic here vs. there opposition. Mosel attributes this to communicative needs,
i.e. to the fact that a location that is not situated near the speaker/hearer, nor
even in their common perceptual field, needs more specification in order to be
identified than one that is.
Tolai distinguishes among 9 spatial parameters within the there-domain;
eight of the resulting forms that have to be further specified by affixation with
respect to four additional parameters, namely action, location, goal and
source. Further optional parameters that apply to a subset of the distal expres
sions are 'known by the hearer' and 'intensification'.
Like Heeschen, Mosel points out the possibility of a relationship bet
ween the structure of the local deictic system and the natural environment of
the Tolai people. These observations should be compared with those reported
by Denny (1978), who on the basis of data from Eskimo and Kihuyu argues in
basically the same way for the importance of cognitive factors in the differenti
ation of the spatial vocabulary of particular languages. An interesting differ
ence between Tolai and the languages described by Heeschen is that the local
deictics of the former cannot be used anaphorically.
In her paper The system of local deixis in Spanish' Priska-Monika Hot-
tenroth compares the traditional analysis of the Spanish local demonstrative
pronouns and adverbs with their actual use. She concludes that the commonly
accepted characterization of the Spanish local deictic system is not adequate.
The system is traditionally analyzed as tripartite, based on relative proximity
with respect to the speaker and hearer. This results in a perfect parallelism of
personal pronouns, possessive pronouns and demonstratives and describes a
system which is different from nearly all other Romance languages.
The author presents evidence that there is no opposition between
speaker- and hearer-centered proximity spaces but that the Spanish system is
speaker-centered. In this system the delimitation of the sub-spaces referred to
by the deictics is decided by the speaker with the apparent restriction that, in
the same speech situation, two spatial referents must be located at different
distances from the speaker if he is to be able to refer to them with two different
deictic expressions.
According to Hottenroth this points to a perceptual basis for the other
wise subjective boundary delimitations by the speaker. The persistent misin
terpretation of the system of Spanish local deictics is explained with reference
to secondarily developed meanings on the basis of stereotypical expectations.
This is much in line with recent proposals put forward by C. Fillmore (1982).
O n verb deixis in Hungarian' by István Bátori focuses on person and
space. Bátori first points out an asymmetry in the morphological structure of
the lst/2nd person and the 3rd person. This asymmetry, which is easily over
looked in a description that works with zero morphemes, should be inter
preted in light of the fundamental pragmatic distinction between the speaker
and hearer and all other protagonists (cf. Benveniste 1966). The second part
INTRODUCTION 9
of Bátori's contribution deals with the spatial deictic aspects of some Hunga
rian verbs, mainly verbs of motion. After having stressed that deictic contrast
based on the distinction between 'speaker' and 'non-speaker' can be observed
in different lexical domains (modal adverbs, nouns, demonstratives) Bátori
shows that the use of verbs of motion like come and go is based on a strictly
speaker-centered perspective, contrary to their use in English or German,
where in dialogue situations there is a perspective change between speaker
and hearer. As Hottenroth indicates, this holds also for Spanish and can thus
be considered as support for her analysis of the Spanish local deictic system as
essentially speaker centered.
The aim of Christa Hauenschild's contribution 'Demonstrative pronouns
in Russian and Czech — deixis and anaphora' is the description of the condi
tions of use of some demonstratives corresponding to English this and that.
She first points out the inadequacy of their treatment in existing grammars
and dictionaries and then proposes a framework for a unified description of
deictic phenomena in natural language. Starting from Morris' distinction bet
ween pragmatics, semantics and syntax she differentiates between corres
ponding types of deixis.The differential criteria consist in the nature of the
phenomena that are used in order to identify the referent of the demonstra
tive. That is, this categorization is conceived from the point of view of lan
guage comprehension. In the case of pragmatic deixis the referent is deter
mined by means of information pertaining to the speech situation; the criter
ion for semantic deixis is coreferentiality of the demonstrative and its antece
dent. In the case of syntactic deixis neither of these criteria apply. These dis
tinctions allow us to describe Fillmore's 'discourse deixis' as well as Burner's
'Deixis am Phantasma' as special cases of pragmatic deixis. Ehlich's
'anadeixis' (Ehlich 1982) is treated as a case of semantic deixis. Finally
Hauenschild discusses the semantic opposition 'proximal' vs. 'distal' as well as
its neutralization with respect to the main deictic categories. She shows that in
order to apply this distinction consistently one has to distinguish between the
system meaning of a demonstrative pronoun and its meaning in actual use,
where the system meaning may be neutralized in a given context. As the au
thor points out herself it should be interesting to apply her framework to other
domains of deixis like person and space.
Dietrich Hartmann's contribution 'Deixis and anaphora in German
dialects: The semantics and pragmatics of two definite articles in dialectal var
ieties' begins with an analysis of the semantic functions of the definite article
in Standard German. He then shows that contrary to Standard German the
dialect of Mönchengladbach in the Rhineland has two morphologically dis

tinct paradigms for the definite articles, corrsponding to functional differ
ences. One set is exclusively used with a deictic value whereas the other set al
lows only non-deictic use. In the deictic mode the referent of the definite noun
phrase has to be determined either on the basis of its presence in the common
perceptual field of speaker and hearer or of its occurrence in the preceding lin
guistic context. That is, Hartmann considers anaphora as a special case of
deixis. In both cases the referent of the noun phrase has to be specific.
In the non-deictic mode the referent of the definite noun phrase is iden
tified on the basis of (presupposed) common knowledge of the speech par
ticipants. In this case the referent of the noun phrase may be specific or
generic. The author goes on to argue that there seems to be a tendency also for
speakers of Standard German to develop a morphologically marked distinc
tion along the same lines. Hartmann concludes by suggesting a revision of
Bühler's basic distinction between 'demonstratio ad oculos', 'anaphora' and
'Deixis am Phantasma'.
Florian Coulmas' contribution 'Some remarks on Japanese deictics' pre
sents an overview of the system of Japanese demonstratives. The different
syntactic classes of demonstratives e.g. demonstrative pronouns, demonstra
tive adverbs, and demonstrative determiners, are all derived from a common
quadripartite morphemic base. These base morphemes encode a three term
distance contrast i.e. proximal, medial, distal, as well as a neutral element.
These parameters govern totally the deictic use of these expressions. As Coul
mas shows, this does not hold for their anaphoric use. In this case the spatial
parameters are neutralized and different criteria for the choice of the approp
riate expression have to be applied. They involve whether the speaker be
lieves that he and the hearer share or do not share knowledge of the referent of
the anaphoric expression. But as Coulmas notices, there are cases where it is
hard to decide whether the demonstrative has been used deictically or
anaphorically, a fact that seems to point once more to a mixed type category.
Eckehart Malotki's 'Hopi Person Deixis' presents the first detailed de
scription of this aspect of the grammar of Hopi. Hopi provides another exam
ple of the differential treatment of third person as compared to first and sec
ond person. Like other languages Hopi lacks a genuine third person pronoun
and makes use of demonstratives to fulfill this function. The Hopi personal
pronoun system is characterized by the emphasis it puts on spatial opposi
tions. This is in accordance with the overall importance of deictic distinctions
in Hopi (see Malotki 1979). The third person displays an especially rich
INTRODUCTION 11
paradigm in that to non-deictic spatial distinctions already present in the first

and second persons it adds a differentiation according to a speaker-centered
tripartite distance principle, i.e. proximal, distal, extreme distal.
Fritz Pasierbsky's contribution 'Zur historischen Entwicklung der Per-
sonendeixis im Chinesischen' shows that person deixis did not follow the gen
eral evolutionary tendencies of Chinese towards greater morpho-syntactic
differentiation. On the contrary one can observe a morphological simplifica
tion of the system. Like Bátori and Malotki in their contributions, Pasierbsky
stresses the asymmetry between the treatment of first and second person on
the one hand and the third person on the other. He points out that the function
of the original personal pronoun system has progressively been taken over by
a socially based system of designations for the speech participants. Pasierbsky
takes Chinese as evidence for questioning Buhler's 'objectivistic', spatio-
temporal oriented foundations of deixis to which he opposes a system that is
rooted in specific parameters of the social system of a society.
The last contribution of this volume, Peter Austin's T h e deictic system of
Diyari' gives a brief sketch of personal, temporal and local deixis in this Au
stralian aboriginal language. It illustrates very clearly the asymmetries that
can be observed in the degree of differentiation of one or the other member of
the basic deictic oppositions, asymmetries that may vary greatly from lan
guage to language. Thus, for example, contrary to what can be observed in the
Papuan languages (see Heeschen and Mosel, this volume) Diyari displays a
more elaborate specification of the here pole than of the there pole.
IV
In preparing this volume, we benefitted very much from the continuous help
of Elena Levy; she suggested numerous improvement in style, presentation
and content; we are very greatful to her. Similarly, we wish to thank Marlene
Arns who has typed and re-typed the manuscript; she also did most of the
proof-reading (together with Sylvia Aal) and prepared the index. Of course,
all remaining errors are ours.
REFERENCES
Benveniste, E. (1966): Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: Gallimard.

Berlin, B. & Kay, P. (1969): Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and
Evolution. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Bühler, K. (1934): Sprachtheorie. Jena: Fischer.
Clark, H. (1973): Space, Time, Semantics and the Child. In Moore, T. (ed.),
Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language. New York:
Academic Press, 147-168.
Denny, J.P. (1978): Locating the Universals in Lexical Systems for Spatial
Deixis. In Farkas, P., Jacobson, W. & Todrys, K. (eds.), Papers from the
Parasession on the Lexicon. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 70-84.
Ehlich, K. (1982): Anaphora and Deixis: Same, Similar or Different? In Jar-
vella, R. & Klein, W. (eds.), Speech, Place and Action. Chichester: John
Wiley, 315-338.
Fillmore, (1982): Towards a Descriptive Framework for Spatial Deixis. In
Jarvella, R. & Klein, W. (eds.), Speech, Place and Action. Chichester:
John Wiley, 31-59.
Jarvella, R. & Klein, W. (1982): Speech, Place and Action. Chichester: John
Wiley.
Katz, J. (1976): A Hypothesis about the Uniqueness of Natural Language. In
Harnad, S., Steklis, H. & Lancaster, J. (eds.), Origins and Evolution of
Language and Speech. New York: The New York Academy of Sciences,
33-41.
Keenan, E. (1976a): The Logical Diversity of Natural Languages. In Harnad,
S., Steklis, H. & Lancaster, J. (eds.), Origins and Evolution of Language
and Speech. New York: The New York Academy of Sciences, 73-91.
Keenan, E. (1976b): Discussion. In Harnad, S., Steklis, H. & Lancaster J.
(eds.), Origins and Evolution of Language and Speech. New York: The
New York Academy of Sciences, 92.
Malotki, E. (1979): Hopi-Raum: Eine sprachwissenschaftliche Analyse der
Raumvorstellungen der Hopi-Sprache. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
Perkins, R. (1980): The Evolution of Culture and Grammar. PhD-Thesis,
State University of New York at Buffalo, Mimeo.
Reichenbach, H. (1947): Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York: MacMil-
lan.
UP/DOWN, FRONT/BACK, LEFT/RIGHT
A CONTRASTIVE STUDY OF AND ENGLISH*
CLIFFORD HILL
"When he wanted to show that I was

many, he would say that I have a right
and a left side, and a front and a back,
and an upper and a lower half, for I can
not deny that I partake of multitude."
Plato, Parmenides
In all languages there appear to be pairs of lexical items that name asym
metrical axes of spatial orientation: the up/down, the front/back, and the left/
right. The referential functions for these lexical polarities may be compared
across languages, for they are ultimately anchored in the human body itself.
For examples, front in English parallels gaba in Hausa with reference to the
body: each refers to the sphere adjacent to that part of the body with eyes,
nose, mouth, and toes (this sphere will be hereafter referred to, following Ben
nett (1976), as the 'anterior', a term that reflects the spatio-temporal field an
chored in this sphere); and back parallels baya: each names both the sphere
adjacent to the opposing part of the body and a certain area of that part, the
upper torso (this sphere will hereafter be referred to, once again following
Bennett, as the 'posterior').1
That back and baya actually refer to a portion of the body, unlike front
and gaba, suggests the seminal role that human anatomy plays in determining
referential functions for these lexical items; for referential asymmetry is ap
parently related to this anatomical asymmetry; that is to say, the greater dif
ferentiation of the anterior part of the body leads to a variety of specific
names, which usurp, as it were, the naming function of the more general term.
Hence an English-speaking person can say, My nose itches or My stomach
14 CLIFFORD HILL
itches, but not My front itches. By way of contrast, the posterior part of the
body is relatively undifferentiated and so the lexical item referring to the adja
cent sphere may also refer to this part. A Hausa speaker can say Bayata ta yi
zafi 'My back itches', as well as Yana bayata 'It's in back of me', just as an Eng
lish speaker can comfortably say either of the two sentences that serve as
glosses. 2
These stable bodily asymmetries that allow for cross-linguistic study of
orientational words are not merely formal: they are functional as well. With
respect to the vertical axis, the body characteristically functions, at least in its
waking hours, in an upright, or at least partially upright, position (i.e. sitting,
standing, walking). The physical extremities of the body in this upright posi
tion are, of course, formally differentiated as well: the 'up end' is head where,
of course the salient sense organs are located, and the 'down end' is feet.
With respect to the front/back axis, the body is differentiated not only by
the formal asymmetry already mentioned — namely, the location of salient
organs — but by a functional one as well: it ordinarily moves so that its ante
rior part arrives first. 3 The asymmetry marking the other horizontal axis, the
left/right one, tends to be more functional than formal: the vast majority of
human beings are more dexterious in the use of limbs on the right side of their
bodies. In addition, there is a formal asymmetry in the location of vital organs
such as the heart and liver. This asymmetry, however, is not particularly sal
ient, since the organs that mark it are located internally. It is thus quite appar
ent that bodily asymmetries do not differentiate the three axes to the same de
gree: the up/down has the most differentiation then the front/back, and, final
ly, the left/right. 4 This order is also reflected in the degree to which each axis is
viewed as intrinsically belonging to other entities in the physical world. In ef
fect, we view more entities as possessing up/down orientation than front/back
or left/right and more entities as possessing front/back orientation than left/
right, a hierarchy that may be represented by an implicational scale:
up/down > front/back > left/right
Let us pause, for a moment, and consider just what we mean when we say
that orientational properties are intrinsic to certain entities (e.g., a car, which
may be viewed as possessing an up/down, a front/back, and even a left/right)
and not to others (e.g., a ball without any external marking). In a fundamental
sense, these properties are more derived than intrinsic; that is to say, an entity
is viewed as possessing an orientational axis if it is characterized by asymme-
UP/DOWN, FRONT/BACK, LEFT/RIGHT 15
tries, either formal or functional, which are perceived as analogous to those

which reflect the corresponding axis in our own bodies.5 For example, we as
cribe an up/down axis to a tree. In semantic terms, we may say that the lexical
item tree possesses the feature [+intrinsic up/down]. A tree, like our bodies,
possesses a stable orientation in vertical space. Furthermore, its 'up' is differ
entiated from its 'down', just as our own is; a 'leafy bulge' constitutes the top
portion of a tree, much as the bulge that we call head constitutes the top por
tion of the human body. We do not, however, ascribe front/back or left/right
axes to a tree; it possesses no characteristic asymmetries that we can analogize
to those which define our own front/back and left/right axes.
We do ascribe a front/back axis as well as an up/down axis to a telephone.
Like our bodies, it is characterized by a stable upright position, but it also re
flects a horizontally oriented asymmetry—it possesses one side, which we call
its front, more differentiated than the others. This is the side with the digital
display, which is characteristically oriented toward a human user. A tele
phone is not, however, ordinarily viewed as possessing an intrinsically defined
left/right axis; it possesses no formal or functional asymmetries by means of
which an intrinsic left/right can be ascribed. Hence we do not characteristical
ly speak of the telephone's 'left' or 'right', even though a left/right axis can be
analytically derived from the intersection of the other two axes.6
We can, however, ascribe all three axes of spatial orientation to a physi
cal entity such as a truck. In semantic terms, the lexical item truck is viewed as
possessing the features [+intrinsic up/down], [-(-intrinsic front/back], [+in
trinsic left/right]. Like our bodies, it possesses a characteristic orientation in
vertical space. As it moves horizontally, the same side ordinarily arrives first:
this is also the side on which its 'eyes' — the headlights — are mounted. A
truck is also differentiated along the other horizontal axis, the left/right axis.
Its external form is, in fact, more differentiated along this axis than the hu
man body's. The steering wheel, more visible than the human heart, is
mounted on the 'left side', at least in most parts of the world (and even where
it is not, it is mounted on therightside rather than the center). And, of course,
the driver sits on the side where the steering wheel is located, providing fur
ther articulation of the left/right axis.
Some physical entities, however, do not possess any asymmetries which
can be analogized to those which express orientational axes in the human
body. For example, a ball does not characteristically possess any features,
either formal or functional, by means of which it can be viewed as intrinsically
possessing an up and down, a front and back, or a left and right. The lexical
16 CLIFFORD HILL
items representing physical entities such as a ball form a semantic class charac
terized [—intrinsic up/down], [—intrinsic front/back], and [—intrinsic left/
right]. 7
Nevertheless, in all languages the lexical items that lack these semantic fea
tures can be used in certain utterances as though they possessed at least one of
them. In English, for example, the word ball readily occurs as the head of loca
tive phrases such as the following:
Look at the speckled leaf right on top of that ball.
Look! There are the keys I lost to the right of that ball.
Hey, that's my squash racket right there in front of that ball.
It is clear that the ball, the specified reference point, possesses no intrinsic
'top', 'front', or 'right' by means of which the speckled leaf, squash racket, or
lost keys can be located (nor, for that matter, does this latter set of objects pos
sess any such features). In order to process these phrases, a larger field of
orientation needs to be established within which these objects can be approp
riately located. This larger field is ordinarily constructed in some characteris
tic relation to the field which belongs to one or more participants in the speech
situation (canonically, the speaker). Hence the orientation field in which the
leaf and ball are located is viewed as parallel to the participant's own. When
ever the originating field and the derived field are related in this way, we will
refer to the latter as ALIGNED (fig. I): 8
Figure 1
18 CLIFFORD HILL
A similar parallelism is reflected in the relation between the originating

field and the derived one in which the keys are described as to the right of the
ball (again the two fields are aligned in the same direction) (fig.2):
Figure 2
But notice that the field in which the squash racket is described as in front
of the ball is ordinarily related to the participants' field in an opposing way. In
stead of being aligned with their own field (fig.3),
Figure 3
it is, as it were, facing back toward that field (fig.4):

20 CLIFFORD HILL
Figure 4
This FACING field is constructed by the great majority of native speakers of

standard English in interpreting locative phrases that involve 'front' and
'back'.
It appears, however, that in a wide number of languages speakers con
struct an aligned field for phrases involving 'front' or 'back', just as they do for
phrases involving 'up' or 'down' and 'left' or 'right'. Native speakers of stand
ard Hausa, for example, use such an aligned field for phrases involving gaba
or baya in a situation such as the following (fig.5):
Ga cokali can baya da k'warya. Ga k'warya can gaba da cokali.

look spoon there back with calabash look calabash there front with spoon
There's the spoon in front of There's the calabash in back
the calabash'. of the spoon'.9
Figure 5
Yet there are other situations in which native speakers of Hausa con
struct a facing field for phrases involving gaba or baya. If an object is hidden,
either partially or wholly by another, then it is described as baya da 'in back of
the object that obscures it (fig.6):
22 CLIFFORD HILL
Go kwallo can baya da itace.

look ball there back with tree
There's the ball behind the tree'.
Figure 6
This use of a facing field whith baya da 'in back of occurs so frequently that
many Hausa speakers, when questioned, do not readily see any difference be
tween their own use of gaba da and baya da and English speakers' use in front
of and in back of10
By the same token, we can observe that native speakers of English tend to
construct an aligned field whenever the situation includes some kind of dy
namic feature. When people are, say,ridingin a vehicle, they are more likely
to describe a further object as in front of a. nearer one (e.g., Oh, look at that
cemetery up there in front of those trees). When in front of is used with an
aligned field in their way, we often find such elements as out, out there, or up
there in the utterance. It is as though a need is felt to signal that the constructed
field is not, as it usually is, a facing one. n
We may summarize the uses of these two kinds offieldsby native speak
ers of Hausa and native speakers of English with the following chart (fig.7):
Figure 7
24 CLIFFORD HILL
In effect, it is the contrast between visible and invisible that governs whether
Hausa speakers shift from an aligned field to a facing one, whereas for English
speakers, it is the contrast between dynamic and static that governs this shift.
This description is clearly an oversimplified one, since other perceptual fac
tors, no doubt, intervene as well (e.g., the relative distance between the refer
ence object and the object to be located). Nevertheless, the exploration of
such correlations between perceptual conditions and semantic functions con
stitutes a promising direction in psycho-linguistic research (see Miller and
Johnson-Laird, 1976).12
In understanding this shift between aligned and facing fields, it is impor
tant to bear in mind that it takes place only with respect to the front/back axis,
for the exclusive use of an aligned field is apparently stable for speakers of all
languages with respect to the other two axes. It appears, however, that speak
ers of non-standard dialects of English — and, for that matter, certain Hausa-
English bilinguals — sometimes construct a facing field in interpreting loca
tive phrases involving 'left' and 'right'. This might well be a further illustration
of hypercorrection. In internalizing the greater functional role of a facing field
for phrases involving 'front' and 'back', speakers of non-standard dialects
may overgeneralize and extend the use of this field to phrases involving 'left'
and 'right'. It may well be that such a facing field will, at some future point,
come to have, even for speakers of standard English, a greater functional role
in interpreting phrases involving 'left' and 'right' (such a role appears to have
gradually evolved for 'front' and 'back' in Indo-European languages).
Let us pause at this point and observe that all the discussion in the forego
ing section has focused on what linguists such as Bennet (1976) and Fillmore
(1975) have describedas a DETTIC use of locative phrases ; that is to say, these
constructs make use of, to use Bennett's expression, 'an unspecified reference
point' (canonically, the speaker's location). Yet in a great number of locative
phrases the specified reference point (i.e., the head of the phrase) provides its
own orientational properties by means of which some object can be located.
When these properties are actually used, as in the example below, then we
may speak of a NON-DEICTIC strategy (fig.8):13
There's your pen in front of the telephone.
Figure 8
We may observe, however, that a deictic strategy can still be used even
when the specified reference point possesses orientational properties. These
properties can simply be ignored and an orientational field constructed which
is either aligned (the object to be located would be on the far side of the object
that functions as the reference point) (fig.9):
26 CLIFFORD HILL
Ga bironka can gaba da telefoni.

look pen-of-your there front with telephone
There's your pen in front of the telephone'.
Figure 9
or facing (the object to be located would be on the near side of the reference
point) (fig. 10):
There's your pen in front of the telephone.
Figure 10
This conflict between deictic and non-deictic strategies can also occur
with phrases involving 'left' and 'right'. With these phrases it occurs perhaps
more frequently, since a deictic strategy necessarily contradicts the non-deic
tic one whenever the reference object is facing, as it often is, toward the speak
er/hearer (fig. 11):
28 CLIFFORD HILL
That's my sister to the left of John
Figure 11
This conflict is even evidenced, though less frequently, for phrases involving
vertical orientation (fig. 12):
Look! There's a wasp just above his knee
Figure 12
Given this conflict between deictic and non-deictic strategies, it is of in

terest that a great number of languages possess a marked resource for signall
ing which of the two strategies is to be used. It is of even greater interest that
this marked resource ordinarily involves the addition of a linguistic element
whose primary function is to distinguish old information from new informa
tion. Hence in a language such as French the insertion of the article la before
an orientational term calls for the use of a non-deictic strategy (fig.13):14
C'est ma soeur à la gauche de Jean

that is my sister at the left of John
That's my sister to John's left'.
Figure 13
30 CLIFFORD HILL
Given the marked status of la, the phrase à la gauche is not suitable when the
specified reference point possesses no orientational features. Rather the
phrase à gauche is used, allowing, in principle, for the use of a deictic strategy
(fig.14):
That's my sister to the left of John'.

C'est ma soeur à gauche de Jean,
that is my sister at left of John
Figure 14
Just as Indo-European languages make use of the article in marked struc

tures that call for a non-deictic strategy, so Afro-Asiatic languages make use
of a nominal suffix. Like the article, this suffix distinguishes old information
from new information. Hence in a language such as Hausa the suffixing of -n
to hagu 'left' calls for a non-deictic strategy (fig. 15):15
Ga yarona can a hagun Tijjani.

look child-of-my there at left-the Tijjani
'There's my child to Tijjani's left
Figure 15
whereas the use of non-suffixed hagu allows, in principle, for either a deictic
or a non-deictic strategy (we will provide experimental evidence that Hausa
speakers tend to use, much more than American speakers of English, a non-
deictic strategy,even in the absence of a marked structure; hence the marked
structure hagun merely strenghtens an already existing tendency) (fig. 16):
32
Figure 16
CLIFFORD HILL
Ga yarona can a hagu da Tijjani.

look child-of-my there at left with Tijjani
'There's my child to the left of Tijjani'.
Such marking is discussed more extensively in Allen and Hill (1979), where its
role in temporal predication as well as spatial is dealth with. That discussion
will not be repeated here, but it is worth noting that in both Indo-European
and Afro-Asiatic languages the marked structure calls for a non-deictic stra
tegy rather than a deictic one; that is to say, an interpretation based on those
orientational properties viewed as intrinsically belonging to the reference ob
ject (i.e., old information) and not an interpretation based on some momen
tary relationship between the participant(s) and the reference point (i.e., new
information). Yet it is possible to conceive of a different order of marking
which would call for a deictic interpretation rather than a non-deictic one (Ta-
kako Noguchi has suggested that certain Asian languages may reflect such
marking). Certainly it appears that in an Asian language such as Japanese a
deictic interpretation of locative phrases is much less likely than, say, in Indo-
European languages. Not only are orientational phrases less likely to be used
when the specified reference point provides no orientational features (instead
more neutral phrases are used which specify only a feature such as [±proxi-
mate]), but where the reference object does, in fact, possess such features, the
use of a non-deictic strategy appears to be normative.
In the case of Japanese these claims are based only on informal inter
views with native speakers, but in the case of an Afro-Asiatic language such
as Hausa a recent set of experiments (Isma'il, 1979) shows that, with respect
to a wide range of tasks, Hausa-speaking students in Nigerian secondary
schools are more likely than American students of the same age to use a non-
deictic strategy. Consider, for example, tasks such as the following that pres
ent a conflict between a deictic and a non-deictic strategy (fig. 17):
34 CLIFFORD HILL
PROPORTION OF STUDENTS
USING A NON-DEICTIC STRATEGY ON THE TASK BELOW
[ HAUSA STUDENTS AMERICAN STUDENTS 1

Responding Responding
1 in Hausa in English
74.4% 63.3% 40.0%
The pen is the sandals

A. to the left of . in front of
C. behind D. to the right of
Figure 17
The above results indicate not only that the Hausa students were more in
clined than the American students to use a non-deictic strategy, but that when
ever the Hausa students responded in English, their use of a non-deictic stra
tegy decreased, shifting substantially toward the norms of the American stu
dents.
By the same token, the Hausa students moved toward the norms of the
American students when they responded in English to tasks that required a
deictic strategy. Consider, for example, the performance of the Hausa and
American students on the following task (fig. 18):
PROPORTION OF STUDENTS
USING AN ALIGNED STRATEGY ON THE TASK BELOW
1 -HAUSA STUDENTS AMERICAN STUDENTS 1

Responding Responding
1 in Hausa in English
62.2% 34.4% 2.6%
The ball is. the rock.

A. on B. in front of
C. behind D. to the left of
Figure 18
36 CLIFFORD HILL
When the Hausa students responded in English rather than in Hausa, the pro
portion of those who constructed a facing field increased substantially,
though, once again, they did not attain the norms of the American students. 16
There is not space here to discuss Isma'il's experimental findings in great
er detail, but I would like to raise a point that I have discussed more extensive
ly elsewhere (Hill, 1981); namely, there appears to be some correlation be
tween the non-deictic strategy and the deictic strategy that involves construct
ing an aligned field. This correlation may be represented by the following
schema (fig. 19):
Figure 19
Both the non-deictic strategy and the 'aligned' deictic strategy may involve, in
the Piagetian sense, greater DECENTERING, as opposed to the 'facing' deic
tic strategy. In effect, thefirsttwo involve a kind of OBJECT-CENTERING,
the latter a kind of OBSERVER-CENTERING. Such a strong hypothesis
needs, of course, to be tested by a wider variety of cross-cultural experiments ;
but the data accumulated so far is quite suggestive. It may well be that a simple
dichotomy between deictic and non-deictic masks important psychological
phenomena, providing further evidence that psycholinguistic categories do
not necessarily match up in any neat way with linguistic ones. 17
In concluding this article, I would like to call for more cross-cultural re
search on the complex ways in which relations along the up/down, front/back,
and left/right axes are represented in languages. Such research holds particu
lar promise, since, as suggested earlier, meaningful comparisons, given the
stability of human anatomy, can be made across languages for lexical items ex
pressing orientational polarities. Moreover, the lexical items expressing the
front/back polarity are generally used in representing anterior/posterior rela
tions in time, thereby considerably enlarging the potential scope of this re
search. The lexical domain for spatio-temporal orientation, much like lexical
domains for color, number, and kinship, provides a delimited area wherein
cross-cultural research can be conducted on a large scale with a reasonable
promise of reliable results.
NOTES
* I would like to thank Eric Larsen and Enid Pearsons for helpful comments and Jared Jamison
for help in preparing the illustrations.
1) In certain languages the word that represents 'posterior' most generically refers to the lower
torso, more specifically, the buttocks (e.g., in French it is derrière, not dos, which opposes devant).
In this regard, English is of particular interest. Within a nominal compound is is back that opposes
in front of, at least in British dialects of English. In American dialects both behind and in back of'op
pose in front of. It is interesting to note that behind is characteristically used when the object to be
located is not visible; on the other hand, in back of is characteristically used when the object to be
located is aligned along with the reference object within some larger field (e.g., Hey, isn't that Liz in
back of Cathy in the lunchline?).
2) By the same token, an English-speaking person can say the back of his head, but not the front
of his head. Again, a more specific name, face, intervenes. It is interesting to note that what is
'marked' in physical reality is 'unmarked' in the linguistic systems that represent it. In English, for
example, not only does front function more generally than back, in terms of syntactic ordering,
front functions in the unmarked position when these two words are joined: we ordinarily say front
38 CLIFFORD HILL
and back, not back and front, just as we say up and down rather than down and up. In English we
can say left and right or right and left, although in many languages such as Hausa 'right' necessarily
precedes 'left' (e.g., dama da hagu 'right and left', but not hagu da dama 'left and right'). It ap
pears that in western cultures the left-to-right order in information-processing has contributed to
the possibility of reversing what was once, according to certain historical evidence, a relatively
fixed order (notice that 'right' precedes 'left' in this article's epigraph taken from the Parmenides).
3) As Fillmore (1975) points out, the formal criterion—location of salient organs—may conflict
with the functional one—locomotion—in establishing front/back orientation. If these two contra
dict each other, it is the formal criterion that takes precedence. Consider, for example, the body of
a crab: 'front' ordinarily refers to the 'side' of the body on which its eyes are mounted. This side does
not, however, lead as it moves through space. We thus say that a crab's body moves sideways, not
that its eyes are on the side of its head. Or consider a hypothetical example. If we were to meet an
exotic species whose members characteristically moved in such a direction that their salient sense
organs werein the 'trailing' side, we would be likely to say, They walk backwards rather than Their
faces are on the back of their heads.
4) In terms of purely formal criteria, the front/back axis appears to be as radically differentiated
in the human body as the up/down. In terms of functional criteria, however, the up/down is much
more differentiated, largely because of the effects of gravity on the body. The body is continuously
adjusting itself to the downward pull of gravity in order to maintain an upright posture. This contin
uous adaptation to the force of gravity leads to highly developed sensations of vertical orientation,
which have formed the basis for a large body of experimental research on the perception of the up
right (Witkin and Asch, 1948). There is no similar force that the body must push against in order to
maintain a 'frontward' orientation.
5) Although it is intuitively appealing to consider ourselves as projecting orientational axes from
our own bodies onto the world of physical objects, this view may, given certain developmental re
search, simply be one more example of the ways in which our egocentric notions mislead us. As
Tanz (1980) suggests, it may well be that children first learn concepts such as 'front' and 'back' with
respect to external such objects as a horse, a truck, or a television set and only later come to apply
these concepts to their own bodies. The bodies of other persons may, of course, be prominent
among the entities used by children for visual learning of orientational concepts.
6) Any of the three axes can be derived, in principle, if the other two are known. In practice,
however, a stable vertical axis is usually taken for granted because of the effects of gravity on all
physical entities. The less salient horizontal axis, the left/right, is then derived from the more salient
one, the front/back.
Certain dictionaries define 'left' and 'right' in relation to 'front' and 'back'. 'Left', for example,
refers to the side of a person oriented to the west when the person faces north. This manner of defin
ing 'left' assumes, of course, a stable vertical orientation. If a person were to face north standing on
his head, then his 'left' would be oriented to the east.
Fillmore presents the relations among the three axes of spatial orientation in a slightly different
way: the up/down and front/back axes may be ascribed independently; the left/right, however, is as
cribed only if the other two are present:
A thing can have a vertical or up/down orientation without having either of the two possi
ble horizontal orientations, as, for example, a cylindrical water-tower. A thing can have
a front/back orientation, as for example, a missile moving in outer space, without having
either an up/down orientation or a left/right orientation. The left/right orientation, how
ever, is possible for an object only if that object has both a vertical or up/down orienta
tion and a front/back orientation. (1975: 19)
The left/right axis is, in effect, derived from an intersection of the other two.
As Fillmore himself observes, the conditions under which the missile is considered as possessing
a front/back orientation, but not an up/down one, are somewhat atypical:
A missile travelling in outer space has a front and back, determined by the direction of
motion, but in outer space there is no standard reference plane in terms of which it can be
said to have an up/down orientation. (1975: 21)
In the universe in which gravity operates, an entity viewed as possessing a front/back orientation or
dinarily has a characteristic upright position in vertical space. There is, however, a large class of en
tities characterized by a stable upright position, but not by an intrinsically marked front/back orien
tation (i.e., trees, bushes, tables, lamps, plates, bowls, and so forth).
7) We often function, however, as though the ball has an 'intrinsic top'. The downward pull of
gravity exercised on all physical entities causes us to view them as though the side momentarily 'up'
were permanently 'up'. Speakers of English are much more likely to answer affirmatively the ques
tion Does the ball have a top ? than the question Does the ball have a front?
8) It is important to recognize that even if the participants were lying down, they could still speak
of the leaf as on top of the ball. In effect, the originating field is the upright one which human beings
ordinarily maintain in their waking hours, even though, at the actual moment of speech, they may
not be in an upright position.
9) Throughout this article, two kinds of translation are provided: (1) a morpheme-by-mor
pheme glossing in which orientational terms are rendered literally (for excample, gaba is translated
as 'front' and baya as 'back') ; and (2) a functional version in which locative phrases are rendered ac
cording to what native speakers would normally say (for example, gaba da and baya da are often
translated as 'behind' and 'in front of respectively).
Cross-cultural experiments have shown that speakers of the same language do not necessarily
make use of the same strategies in interpreting locative phrases involving 'front' and 'back'. Cer
tainly westernized Hausa speakers show a substantially greater tendency to construct a facing field
than non-westernized speakers. Moreover, these westernized speakers show a greater tendency to
construct a facing field when responding in English rather than Hausa. By the same token, native
speakers of English whose ethnocultural heritage lies in West Africa show a greater tendency than
do speakers of standard English to construct an aligned field (for reports of this experimental re
search, see Hill, 1975a and b; Isma'il, 1979).
10) It appears that Hausa-speaking children first acquire the use of baya da 'in back of when one
object disappears on the far side of another. In her research with English-speaking children, Tanz
(1980) points out that the disappearance of an object is the fundamental condition that motivates
the initial use of behind.
11) The claim for this tendency to construct an aligned field is supported only by impressionistic
evidence (observation of usage, discussion with native speakers, and so forth), unlike the claim for
Hausa speakers, whose reversal of aligned and facing fields has been documented experimentally
(Isma'il, 1979).
It may be noted that Hausa speakers do not ordinarily describe a nearer object as gaba da 'in front
of an object that it shields. From a perceptual point of view, the setting up of a shielded object as a
reference point is obviously not motivated. By the same token, English speakers do not ordinarily
construct an aligned field in describing the relation of a nearer object to a further one, even when
some kind of motion is presented within their experience (i.e., they do not often use behind/in back
of to describe the relation of a nearer object to a further one).
Finally, it may be noted that in a great deal of lanuage experience a dynamic feature may be ver-
40 CLIFFORD HILL
bally mediated rather than perceptually given. Hence, the tendency to shift to an aligned field may
be strengthened simply by the presence of an active verb rather than a stative one:
Please put this there in front of those flowers.
I think it is there in front of those flowers.
For the sake of greater clarity, we have focused on orientational phrases throughout this article;
and yet we need to bear in mind that orientational fields are not constructed to interpret locative
phrases in isolation; rather they are constructed for interpreting actual speech that happens to in
clude such phrases.
12) In another article (Hill, 1978) I have shown how to contrast between aligned and facing fields
is also evident in the temporal encoding of 'anterior' and 'posterior' by native speakers of Hausa
and native speakers of English. There is a striking parallelism in spatial and temporal predication
between the ways in which the two groups of speakers shift between the two kinds of orientational
fields. As a consequence of this parallelism, there are certain situations where the apparently corre
sponding temporal terms in the two languages for 'anterior' and 'posterior' do not match up. For ex
ample, a Hausa speaker, in dealing with calendric time, describes an earlier point as baya da 'poste
rior to' a later one, whereas an English speaker describes the earlier point as before 'anterior to' a
later one. By the same token, an English speaker says afterwards to signal a subsequent event,
whereas a Hausa speaker says can gaba (literally, there front/forward').
13) Throughout this article, the terms 'deictic' and 'non-deictic' will be used in the functional
sense established by Bennett and Fillmore, even though such use can be confused with the more tra
ditional use of these terms to characterize language form. The following example may illustrate this
potential confusion. One person asks Where's this week's New Yorker? and a second answers eith
er, Oh, there it is on the rug in front of that table, or more simply, Over there. The first answer is tradi
tionally described as non-deictic because its form is lexically explicit, whereas the second, on the ba
sis of its reduced form, is described as deictic. Yet in the functional sense of deictic established by
Bennett and Fillmore, the first answer would be described as deictic as well. To avoid this confu
sion, I have sometimes used the terms PARTICIPANT-BASED and FIELD-BASED instead of
deictic and non-deictic.
14) As indicated by the English gloss, 's may be considered a marked element in phrases involv
ing 'left' and 'right'. With respect to other locative phrases, a systematic contrast between 0 and an
article can be found in English as well:
It's stuck on 0 top of the box.
It's stuck on the top of the box.
It's there in 0 front of the telephone.
It's there at/to the front of the telephone.
It may be noted that within the neo-Firthian tradition of linguistics DEICTIC is a term used to de
scribe the element that occurs in the initial position of a nominal group. Hence what is ordinarily
called an article is referred to as a DEICTIC ELEMENT. This use of the term adds to the confusion
discussed in the preceding footnote, for it is the presence of the deictic element in a marked struc
ture that signals the use of a non-deictic strategy.
15) In Hausa, the suffix -n closely parallels Englishtfie:;they share a number of linguistic func
tions, all of which may be viewed as the marking of old information (Halliday and Hasan, 1976).
Each can signal that a particular nominal group refers to that which is already known. One source
for this old information may be the non-verbal context:
a ni littafm, don Allah.
'Give me the book, please'.
In this instance, - , and the may be described as functioning EXOPHORICALLY. In effect, the
book and littafin refers to an entity present in the immediate environment. Another source for old
information may be the verbal context:
Wani mutum ya zo gidan Jani jiya da dare ya tambayi k ya iya amfani da telefoni. Amma
saboda Jani yana tsammani mutumm ana da fuska mai-ban tsoro, bai yarda ba.
A man came to John's place late last night asking to use the telephone. But since John
thought the man looked suspicious, he didn't let him in.
In this instance -n and the may be described as functioning ENDOPHORICALLY. In effect, they
signal that a referent for mutum 'man' has been established in the discourse.
The use of -n and the to signal the use of a non-deictic strategy can also be considered as marking
the use of old information. The presence of-n or the, in principle, activates use of the semantic fea
ture (+intrinsic orientation) associated with the lexical item representing the reference point. Since
this feature belongs to the linguistic code that the speaker brings with him to the particular speech
situation, it may be regarded as old information.
In contrast, a deictic interpretation may be considered to activate new information with respect
to the entity functioning as reference point. This new information is derived from a contingent rela
tion between the speaker and the reference point, not from any intrinsic feature that the latter pos
sesses. In effect, a referential function for the orientational phrase is derived from the momentary
(i.e., 'new') relation between the speaker and the reference point rather than from the permanent
(i.e., 'old') orientation that the reference point is viewed as intrinsically possessing.
16) In an extension of Isma'il's research, urban black students in New York City were given
some of the same tasks. These students made consistently greater use of an aligned field than did
the American students in the original research (white students in a suburb of New York City). Mo
reover, when the tasks were administered to the black students by a black peer rather than a white
teacher, certain students shifted to the 'aligned' strategy from a 'facing' one. This research, which is
now being extended, is of particular interest since it suggests that speakers of Black English reflect
their ethno-cultural heritage not simply in language form (e.g., the use of an expression such as he
be working, reflecting the habituative aspect so common in West African languages) but in lan
guage function as well (hence their use of forms such as in front of and behind differs from that of
speakers of standard English.
17) Tanz (1980) has rightly pointed out how an exclusive focus on the linguistic categories deictic
versus non-deictic has been misleading in research on language acquisition. For this contrast has
often been used as a means of discussing the vexed question of egocentrism (the assumption being
that use of a deictic strategy represents greater egocentrism). But as Tanz points out, the very ac
quisition of a deictic strategy involves a kind of radical decentering: children come to control this
strategy only as they observe their interlocutors' use of it, and so the development of such control
necessarily involves a decentering to other people's point of view.
REFERENCES
Allen, R. and Hill, C. (1979): Contrast Between 0 and The in Spatial and
Temporal Predication. Lingua 48. 123-176.
Bennett, D. (1976): Spatial and Temporal Uses of English Prepositions: An
Essay in Stratificational Semantics. London: Longman.
42 CLIFFORD HILL
Fillmore, . (1975): Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis. Bloomington: Indiana

University Linguistics Club.
Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R. (1976): Cohesion in English. London:
Longman.
Hill, . (1975 ): Variation in the Use of 'Front' and 'Back' by Bilingual
Speakers. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 1. 196-206.
Hill, (1975b): Sex-based Differences in Cognitive Processing of Spatial Re
lations Among Bilingual Students in Niger. In Patterns of Language, Cul
ture, and Society: Sub-Sahara Africa. Ohio State University Working Pa
pers. 19. 185-198.
Hill, C. (1978): Linguistic Representation of Spatial and Temporal Orienta
tion. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 4: 524-538.
Hill, C. (1981): Cognition, Language, and Myth in Hausa Culture. Semiotica
(to be published).
Isma'il, T. (1979): Cross-Cultural Variation in Spatial and Temporal Con
structs: An Error Analysis of Hausa Speaker's Use of Spatial and Tempo
ral Constructs in English. Doctoral dissertation. Teachers College, Co
lumbia University.
Miller, G.A. and Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1976): Language and Perception.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Tanz, . (1980): Studies in the Acquisition of Deictic Terms. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Witkin, H.A. and Asch, S.E. (1948): Studies in Space Orientation. IV. Fur
ther Experiments on Perception of the Upright with Displaced Visual
Fields. Journal of Experimental Psychology 38. 762-782.
DA AND THE SYSTEM OF SPATIAL DEIXIS IN GERMAN
VERONIKA EHRICH
Da is certainly one of the most frequent words in spoken German and.it

belongs to the first words children learn to use when they acquire German as
their mother tongue (Leopold 1939-1949). Child language in particular, but
also adult speech and even literary German all show a striking variability with
respect to the possible interpretations (spatial, temporal, etc.) of da. Since da
is so frequent and semantically variable, it certainly would be interesting to in
vestigate how speakers actually use da in various contexts and how listeners
manage to take up the intended meanings. Any such investigation, of course,
presupposes that the range of possible meanings of da be outlined with respect
to a fully shaped analysis of the deictic system to which da belongs. The pres
ent paper, however, will be mainly devoted to only one part of that system,
namely to the spatial part, and will be based on the excellent analysis given by
Bühler (1934).
Bühler distinguishes three modes of pointing: objective (=strictly deic
tic) pointing, syntactic (=strictly anaphoric) pointing and imaginative point
ing. By objective pointing, speakers refer to individuals in their extralinguistic
environment. The most basic way of pointing according to this mode is the so-
called demonstratio ad oculos, where the reference space is roughly identical
to the perceptual field of speaker and listener; for example a child, when
asked "Wo ist der Baum?" (Where is the tree) may answer "Da" (there) by
pointing to the only tree in his visual field. Certainly, the demonstratio ad ocu
los is not the only way of "objective" pointing; the objects being pointed to can
also be rather abstract entities like institutions or social events (cf. v. Stechow
1982). By syntactic pointing, reference is made to linguistic entities intro
duced by previous discourse, i.e. to expressions which denote 'real' objects.
Psychologically, both these modes of pointing are quite distinct, pointing to a
chair is not the same as pointing to The chair, e.g. an 18 month old child will be
able to perform the first, but not the second type of pointing. By imaginative
pointing, people make reference to entities which exist in their imagination,
44 VERONIKA EHRICH
e.g. to places they remember or to persons in a narrated world; Bühler calls

this mode the Deixis am Phantasma. For a theory of literary texts this concept
will be of particular interest, but it is unfortunately also very difficult to handle,
therefore I will restrict myself to the first two modes of pointing, the strict
ly deictic and the strictly anaphoric ones. With respect to these two modes I
will try to defend three hypotheses:
(A) The distinction between strict deixis and strict anaphorics is sensible
and necessary for German.
(B) Within the system of strict spatial deixis there is (still) a full contrast
between hier (here) and da (there) as well as between da (there) and
dort (there).
(C) Da can be used as a strict spatial anaphor, hier and dort cannot.
1. DA AND THE FIELD OF DEICTIC EXPRESSIONS IN GERMAN
Hypothesis A has been questioned in Klein (1978). In giving arguments

in favour of A, I will first consider the position of da within the wholefieldof
pointing expressions in German.
Like other Indo-European languages, German has pronominal and ad
verbial pointers; the former include personal pronouns and demonstrative
pronouns (cf. fig. 1).
DA AND SPATIAL DEIXIS IN GERMAN 45
Figure 1
46 VERONIKA EHRICH
The class of personal pronouns contains strictly deictic elements that cannot
be used anaphorically and stricly anaphorical elements that cannot be used
deictically. The first and second person pronouns trivially belong to the first
group, the third person pronoun belongs to the second. Accordingly, 'objec
tive' pointing cannot be carried out by use of a third person personal pronoun
in (1) and (2), but has to be achieved by using a demonstrative pronoun.
(1) Welches Bild gefällt dir am besten? Das/*Es
(Which picture do you like most? That/*It)
(2) Welche Bücher möchten Sie haben? Diese hier/*Sie hier
(Which books do you want to have? These here/*They here)
However, things are in fact more complicated than this, because one may use
the third person pronoun as a strictly deictic pointer when it refers to persons.
It is e.g. possible to point to a man at a party by saying something like "Kennst
du ihn?" (Do you know him?). In such a case, the referent of the pronoun is a
potential persona of the ongoing interaction and can therefore be identified by
strictly deictic pointing. In other words, the third person pronoun does have a
strictly deictic use, but this is restricted to persons and not applicable to things.
It is also required that the deictic pronoun is realized by a long syllable which
can be stressed. This is not the case with the neutral form of the third person
pronoun es. Therefore a question like "Kennst du es (das Mädchen)?" (Do
you know it (the girl)?) would be deviant. The strict deictic/anaphoric asym
metry also shows up within the field of temporal deixis: e.g. jetzt, gleich and
eben (now, immediately and just) do not have a strictly anaphoric use whereas
they do have a strictly deictic one. Dann, danach and vorher {then, after this
and first) have a strictly anaphoric but no deictic use.
(3) Question: Wo ist Peter? (Where is Peter?)

Answer: a) Er kommt gleich (He will come immediately)
b) * Er kommt danach (He will come after this)
(4) Question: Ist der Zug schon da? (Is the train already there?)
Answer: a) Er ist eben angekommen (It has just arrived)
b) * Er ist vorher angekommen (It has first arrived)
(5) Laß uns gerade noch einen Sherry trinken.

(Let us just have some sherry)
a) Gleich können wir essen (We can eat immediately)
b) Danach können wir essen {After this we can eat)
(6) Wir können in zehn Minuten essen. (We can eat in ten minutes)
a) Aber laß uns eben noch einen Sherry trinken
(But let's just have some sherry)
b) Aber laß uns vorher noch einen Sherry trinken
(But let'sfirsthave some sherry)
Gleich and danach (immediately and after this) both denote some time interval
after a certain reference point, for gleich this point is always given by the utter
ance time, for danach it must be introduced linguistically. The same holds mu
tatis mutandis for eben as opposed to vorher (just as opposed to first). Accord
ingly, (3b) and (4b) are deviant, whereas (5b) and (6b) are not. (5a) and (6a),
having a deictic element in place of an anaphoric one, are also not deviant, but
in these cases the reference points are not introduced by the respective first
sentences, they must be derived from the utterance situation itself. As a con
sequence the eben (just) even loses its past-time meaning (which it does have
in (4a)) and adopts a present-time interpretation within the strictly deictic
mode of pointing. Therefore, even though (5a) and (6a) are non-deviant, they
are rather incoherent sequences of speech.
I will now illustrate the many usesofda more thoroughly. Fig. 2 shows the
positions occupied by da within the system of demonstrative adverbs in Ger
man. These positions are illustrated by sentences (7a - g).
(7) a) Um Gotteswillen, da (hier)* ist eine Maus im Schrank.

(Oh god, there (here) is a mouse in the cabinet)
b) Da (dort) drüben auf der anderen Rheinseite wollen sie ein
Kraftwerk bauen.
(Over there (over there) on the other side of the Rhine they
want to build a power plant)
c) Mein Vater ist dann 1918 ins Ruhrgebiet gegangen, weil da
(dort) die Verdienstmöglichkeiten besser waren. (Runge,
Frauen, Mathilde N.)
(In 1918 my father then moved to the Ruhrgebiet, because the
job opportunities were better there (there))
d) Mit dreizehn wollte ich Nonne werden, da (damals) hatte ich so
eine religiöse Phase. (Maxie Wander, Guten Morgen, du
Schöne. Katja P.)
(At the age of thirteen I wanted to become a nun, there (at that
time) I had such a religious phase)
* The expressions in parentheses are possible subtitutes for the different occurrences of da.
48 VERONIKA EHRICH
e) Ich bin auch als Standesbeamte bestellt. Der beamtete Standes

beamte macht das nur, wenn der erste und zweite Bürgermeister
nicht da sind. Das war immer so, wenigstens hier. Mein Standes
beamter hat wohl Angst gehabt, daß ich Mist rede. Und da (des
wegen) hat er mir zwei Entwürfe gemacht, einen für ganz junge
Leute und einen für ältere und geschiedene. (Mathilde N.)
(I am also an assistant justice of the peace. An assistant only
does it when the first and second mayor are not there. That has
always been like this, at least here. My justice of the peace has
perhaps been afraid that I will talk nonsense. And there (there
fore) he has made two drafts for me, one for very young people
and one for older and divorced people)
f) R: Von der Stechbahn zum Bahnhof, das schaffen Sie doch in
zehn Minuten!
A: Da müssen Sie rennen, Herr Richter, da müssen Sie rennen.
(Amtsgericht T4.1)
(R: From the Stechbahn to the station, you can make that in ten
minutes!
A: There you have to run Judge, there you have to run)
g) Ich will abnehmen, da muß ich das Mittagessen schon auslassen.
(I want to lose weight, there (for this) I have to leave out dinner).
Figure 2
2. DA AND THE FIELD OF STRICT SPATIAL DEIXIS IN GERMAN
In what follows I will restrict myself to the branches a-c in Fig. 2, i.e. to
the spatial subsystem of German deixis.
The substitutes for da and their English translations illustrate a major dif
ference between the German system and the English one. The former has
three elements, the latter only two.
German English
Hier Here
Da _____^^
~^^ There
Dorf~~~
Hence, for German we not only need to reconstruct the opposition between
here and there, but also the opposition between something like therej and
there2 i.e. between da and dort.
Before discussing examples 7a - in section 1,1 want to introduce an analytic
distinction between
- the speaker's place S, i.e. the place which is physically covered by the
speaker
- the denotation space D, i. e. the space that the speaker denotes by using
a deictic expression
- the reference space R, i.e. the space with respect to which the denota
tion space gets identified
Bühler's origo is split up into two parts (S, R) by using this distinction, which is
theoretically analogous to Reichenbach's (1947) semantic model for the inter
pretation of tenses. Reichenbach distinguishes speech time (analogue of S),
event time (analogue of D) and reference time (analogue of R). This tryadic
system is introduced in order to reconstruct the meanings of the simple as well
as of the complex tenses. E.g. Peter is going to the station* has to be under
stood in such a way that the event time of Peter's going to the station is identi
cal to some interval which includes the speech time and where this speech time
also serves as'reference time. In other words, the meaning of the present tense
is characterized by a convergence of speech, event and reference time. Speech
time and reference time also converge in past tense sentences like Peter was
going to the station, but in this case the event time is in the past, i.e. belongs to
* I leave aside aspect as expressed by the progressive form.

50 VERONIKA EHRICH
some interval prior to speech as well as reference time. For the pluperfect Pe
ter had been going to the station, event time, reference time and speech time
are altogether divergent; the event time being some interval prior to the refer
ence time and the reference time being some interval prior to the speech time.
According to this analysis, different tenses express different ways in which the
elements of the triple include each other.
Are there any such different inclusiveness relations for the expression of
spatial reference which also justify the analogy introduced abqve? According
to the analytic concepts introduced by Bühler the meaning of spatial deictics is
usually reconstructed in terms of only two theoretical notions, namely the de
notation space and the reference space (= origo), the latter always including
the speaker's place. Accordingly here is analyzed as denoting some space
around the origo, there denotes a place which does not include the origo. The
splitting of Bühler's origo into two aspects is motivated by cases where S and R
are not mutually inclusive. The following example is an instance of such a
case.
(8) Ich mußte also Stadtratssitzung halten mit dem Tagesordnungs
punkt Grundsteuererhöhung. Wir waren alle gut vorbereitet, wir
haben uns das wirklich gut überlegt. Meine Güte, und ich mußte ja
nun diesen Antrag, diesen Tagesordnungspunkt begründen. Und
das muß man zunächst einmal schaffen, daß man da vorne sitzt und
die anderen sechzehn, die sitzen vor einem, und man sieht den Ge
sichtern an 'Na, wie wird sie es denn machen?' (Erika Runge
Frauen, Mathilde N.)
(I had to hold a village council meeting with an increase of property
taxes on the agenda. We were all very well prepared, we had been
really thinking about it. My goodness, and I had to justify this point
on the agenda. And this you will first have to be able to do, that you
are sitting there in front and the other sixteen are sitting in front of you
and you can read from their faces 'Well, how is she going to manage
it?'
To understand this example one needs to know that in a village council meet
ing speaker and audience are placed opposite each other with the speaker's
position (i.e. the position of the podium) counting as 'front'. In the first part of
the underlined clause daß man da vorne sitzt (that you are sitting there in
front), the position of the audience serves as reference space for the identifica-
tion of the place denoted by da vorn (there in front) — cf. Fig. 3a—; in the se
cond part of that same clause und die anderen sechszehn, die sitzen vor einem
(and the other sixteen are sitting in front of you), it is the speaker's position
which serves as reference space for the identification of the place denoted by
vor einem (in front of you) — cf. Fig. 3b.
Figure 3 a Figure 3 b
Example (8) ,in which the actual place of the speaker is distinct from both de
notation as well as reference space, is an illustration of a so-called narrative
deixis (Ehlich 1982). But even if this were not the case, reference space and
speaker's place might be different. The speaker of (8) could utter the very
same sentence standing at the speaker's podium and in this case the reference
space for the interpretation of da vorn would still not be the speaker's but the
audience's place. Thus, reference space and speaker's place need not be
identical, and that is why they are analytically separated here.
I will now try to reconstruct the deictic oppositions between hier, da and
dort (here, there1 and there2) within the tryadic system introduced above.
Imagine that a speaker, who is standing behind his panel and in front of his au
dience, would utter (9) or (ΙΟ):
(9) Und das muß man erst mal schaffen, daß man hier vorne steht und
die andern sechzehn sitzen vor einem
(And this you have to be able to do, that you are standing here in
front and the other sixteen are sitting in front of you)
52 VERONIKA EHRICH
(10) Und das muß man erst mal schaffen, daß man dort vorne steht und
die andern sechzehn die sitzen vor einem
(And this you have to be able to do, that you are standing there2 in
front and the other sixteen are sitting in front of you)
(9) would be quite normal in the given situation, however, (10) would be at
least questionable if not completely deviant. In (9), the speaker's place is not
only contained in the denotation space (like in (8)) but also in the reference
space. The dort used in (10) shares with the hier in sentence (9) the require
ment that S be included in R, and it shares with the da in sentence (8) the re
quirement that D be excluded from R. This latter requirement causes the odd-
ness of (10). Table 1 shows the different inclusiveness relations that hold for
hier, da and dort in terms of different modalities. It turns out that the obligato
ry constraints for hier as opposed to dort are optional for da such that for da
the denotation space can either be included in the reference space or excluded
from it.
hier
da
dort
Table 1: Oppositions in spatial deixis
"included or identical"
"necessarily"
"possibly"
"necessarily not"
54 VERONIKA EHRICH
According to the traditional analysis, the speaker's place must be included in

the denotation space of hier. Table 1 only says that it may be included. That
the inclusiveness relation is indeed weaker than traditionally assumed can be
demonstrated by examples like (11):
(11) Hier ist eine Maus im Schrank (Here is a mouse in the cabinet)
(12) Da ist eine Maus im Schrank (There1 is a mouse in the cabinet)
Example (11) need not mean that the speaker is where the mouse is, namely in
the cabinet. It only has to be understood as involving a shared space that in
cludes both speaker's place and denotation space. In other words, the hier as it
is used in (11) only requires that the speaker's place and the denotation space
be both included in the same reference space (cf. fig. 4a). In contrast to (11),
(12) has to be interpreted in a way that clearly excludes the speaker's place
from the denotation space. However it is not clear whether S is included in R,
whether D is included in R or whether S, R, and D are altogether distinct (cf.
fig. 4b).
Fig. 4a: "Hier ist eine Maus im Schrank"
Fig. 4b: "Da ist eine Maus im Schrank"
Fig. 4c: "Dort ist eine Maus im Schrank"

56 VERONIKA EHRICH
In fact, either S or D may be included in R, but not both. In thefirstcase the da

would be in contrast with hier, in the second it would be in contrast with dort.
An instance of the second case would be a situation where e.g. R is given by
the listener's field of action and where the cabinet but not the speaker's place
would lie within that field. In this situation it would be clearly odd to address
the listener with something like (12')
(12') Achtung, dort ist eine Maus im Schrank

(Attention, there2 is a mouse in the cabinet)
Hier would, of course, be even more inappropriate in this case.

Separating the speaker's place from the reference space involves splitting
the physical and the psychological aspect of the origo. The speaker's place can
in principle be identified in terms of geometrical fixed points which are essen
tially external to the act of communication. Taking some area as reference
space for the identification of places is a mental act (Rehbein 1977), which is
not only inseparable from the act of communication but which even consti
tutes a kind of a priori condition for communication.
Of course this statement does not say much about the external variables
which determine the actual selection of a reference space in a given situation.
One basic variable is certainly given by spatial distance, but there are other
factors besides just physical ones which may also cause distances, like e.g. so
cial inequalities, perceptual obstacles, obstacles for physical contact etc.
Speakers and listeners belonging to different social classes will perhaps have
difficulties in establishing a common reference space in class sensitive situa
tions (like e.g. job interviews); for people who are placed on two different
sides of the same wall it will be more difficult to establish a common reference
space than for people in the same room, although the former may be closer to
each other in purely spatial terms; again, a glass wall, which at least allows
people to see each other, may create serious distance problems caused by the
impossibility of physical contact, which — as is known from experiences with
jailed people — can even become life-threatening.
In other words, physical distance is only one type of distance and for psy-
cholinguistic investigations it is perhaps not the most relevant one.
3. DA AS A SPATIAL ANAPHOR
In this section I will put forward two arguments in favour of hypothesis C.

1. For strict anaphors as opposed to strict deictics, the utterance situation in

which the expressions in question are used is of no relevance for the identifica
tion of entities denoted by those expressions. The reason is that strict ana
phors do not point to real world individuals but to discourse elements that de
note real world individuals. Therefore the discourse itself is the only relevant
reference domain for the interpretation of strictly anaphorical expressions.
Let us compare the following sentences:
(13) Ich bin vor vier Jahren von Düsseldorf nach Nijmegen gegangen
a und hier will ich vorläufig bleiben
b und dort will ich vorläufig bleiben
und da will ich vorläufig bleiben
(Four years ago I moved from Düsseldorf to Nijmegen
a and here I want to stay for some time
b and there3I want to stay for some time
and there^ I want to stay for some time)
Continuation (a) is only appropriate when the sentence is uttered in Nijme

gen, (b) only when the utterance place is not Nij
megen, for (c) it does not play
any role where the sentence is uttered. In other words, the applicability of hier
and dort {here and there^) is dependent on the utterance place, the applicabili
ty of da (there2) is not. The reason is that only da (there^) is a real anaphor
having a discourse element as its only reference point, whereas hier and dort
have besides this a second reference point anchored in the utterance situation.
This is to say that hier and dort keep a deictic aspect even when they are used
for phorical binding.
2. Genuine anaphors can be used to point back to distributive or attributive
NPs, which is to say that they can serve as pronouns of laziness, whereas strict
ly deictic expressions even when they are used phorically may only point back
to individually referring NPs. (14) is an example of a distributive, (15) an ex
ample of an attributive reading.
(14) Zum Braten gab es für jeden einen Kloß. Peter hat den Kloß mit
dem Messer geschnitten
a und Paul hat ihn mit der Gabel zerquetscht
b* und Paul hat den mit der Gabel zerquetscht
c* und Paul hat diesen mit der Gabel zerquetscht
58 VERONIKA EHRICH
(With the meat everybody got a dumpling. Peter cut the dumpling
with the knife.
a and Paul squashed it with the fork
b* and Paul squashed that with the fork
c* and Paul squashed this with the fork)
(15) Matthias wünscht sich ein neues Fahrrad,

a Er will es blau streichen
b* Er will das blau streichen
c* Er will dieses blau streichen
(Matthias wants to have a new bike.
a He wants to paint it blue
b* He wants to paint that blue
c* He wants to paint this blue)
Things are, however, more complicated than just this, because whether a cer
tain pronoun may be used or not also depends on its syntactic position. In topic
position the pronominalized definite article as well as the demonstrative
pronouns are grammatical (14'bc, 15'bc), whereas the personal pronoun, i.e.
the genuinely anaphorical term, is a deviant topic in both contexts (14'a,
15'a).
(14') Zum Braten gab es für jeden einen Kloß.

a* Ihn hat Peter mit dem Messer geschnitten
b Den hat Peter mit dem Messer geschnitten
Diesen hat Peter mit dem Messer geschnitten
(With the meat everybody got a dumpling.
a* It Peter cut with the knife
b That Peter cut with the knife
This Peter cut with the knife)
(15') Matthias wünscht sich ein neues Fahrrad,
a* Es will er blau streichen
b Das will er blau streichen
Dieses will er blau streichen
(Matthias wants to have a new bike.

a* It he will paint blue
b That he will paint blue
This he will paint blue)
When an object is shifted from its post-verbal position to a pre-verbal one it be
comes syntactically marked. Syntactic marking can have different psychologi
cal functions, whose precise nature is far from being clear; but one of them
probably is to direct the listener's attention to the referent of the marked con
stituent. According to Ehlich (1982) the function of deixis in text is similar,
namely to shift the listener's attention from one individual to another, while
anaphoric expressions serve to maintain some pre-established attentional fo
cus. A similar view is held by Linde (1979). Relying on both Ehlich's and
Linde's views, one could say that topic shift and discourse deixis (as opposed
to anaphorics) in serving similar (or even the same) functions support each
other, whereas the functions of deixis and non-topics on the one hand or ana-
phors and topics on the other hand disturb each other. This would explain why
a strict deictic element is deviant in (14b, c) and (15b, c) but possible in (14'b)
and (15'b), while the strict anaphor is possible in (14a) and (15a) but deviant in
(14'a) and (15'a). However, assumptions about focushood and consciousness
(like also Chafe's ideas) always refer to individually referring terms, not to
distributive or even attributive (= non referring) ones. Psychologically, it
seems rather empty to speak about focussing attention on something which
cannot even be identified. Thus, it appears that the element in focus cannot be
the referent of some linguistic term but has to be the linguistic term itself. This
result certainly makes the distinction between strict anaphorics and strict
deixis at least a bit shaky.
One possible way out of the dilemma between arguments against a strict
categorial distinction between deixis and anaphorics (like the one just dis
cussed) and arguments in support ofthat distinction (like the ones discussed in
sect. 1 and sect. 3.1) is to assume a third category of an essentially mixed type
which shares properties of strict deixis with properties of strict anaphorics.
Ehlich (1981) proposes a category of that kind, which he calls 'anadeixis'.
Based on Ehlich's findings, one could state the following rules
(i) Backwards pointing in non-topic position must be strictly anaphoric.
(ii) Backwards pointing in topic position cannot be strictly anaphoric.
(ii') Backwards pointing to NPs that are either non-referring (=attributive)
60 VERONIKA EHRICH
or non-individually referring (=distributive) cannot be deictic,

(iii) Therefore, if backwards pointing to either non-referring or non-indi
vidually referring NPs is acceptable in topic position it must be of the
mixed type,
(iv) In reference to things the German third person personal pronoun is re
stricted to the strictly anaphoric use.
(v) The German demonstrative pronoun and the German pronominalized
article allow the deictic as well as the mixed use but not the strictly ana
phoric use.
These rules can explain why the third person personal pronoun is acceptable
for backwards reference to non- or non-individually referring NPs in non-top
ic position but not in topic position (violation of (ii, iv)), while demonstrative
pronouns and pronominalized definite articles are acceptable pointers ofthat
kind in topic position but not in non-topic position (violation of (i, v)).
Let us come back to the system of spatial deixis and to the oppositions be
tween hier, da and dort. (16) and (17) are examples of a distributive and an at
tributive context respectively. The examples show that obviously da can be
used as a strict anaphor, i.e. as a pointer to any non- or non-individually refer
ring term in non-topic position, whereas hier and dort cannot.
(16) a Peter raucht im Bett und Paul trinkt da

b* Peter raucht im Bett und Paul trinkt hier
c* Peter raucht im Bett und Paul trinkt dort
(a Peter smokes in bed and Paul drinks there 1
b* Peter smokes in bed and Paul drinks here
c* Peter smokes in bed and Paul drinks there 2 )
(17) a Johannes wünscht sich einen Sandkasten. Er will da Schlösser

und Burgen bauen
b* Johannes wünscht sich einen Sandkasten. Er will hier Schlösser
und Burgen bauen
c* Johannes wünscht sich einen Sandkasten. Er will dort Schlösser
und Burgen bauen.
(a Johannes wants to have a sandbox. He wants to build there 1 cas
tles and forts
b* Johannes wants to have a sandbox. He wants to build here cas
tles and forts
c* Johannes wants to have a sandbox. He wants to build there 2 cas
tles and forts.)
Again, things get more complicated when we consider the interaction be
tween spatial pointing and topicalization. In distributive contexts any spatial
pointer seems to be unacceptable as topic constituent (16'), whereas in attrib
utive contexts like (17') every spatial pointer seems to be an acceptable topic.
(16') a* Peter raucht im Bett und da trinkt Paul

b* Peter raucht im Bett und hier trinkt Paul
c* Peter raucht im Bett und dort trinkt Paul
(a* Peter smokes in bed and there1 Paul drinks
b* Peter smokes in bed and here Paul drinks
* Peter smokes in bed and there 2 Paul drinks)
(17') Johannes wünscht sich einen Sandkasten

a Da will er Schlösser und Burgen bauen
b? Hier will er Schlösser und Burgen bauen
Dort will er Schlösser und Burgen bauen
(Johannes wants to have a sandbox
a There1 he will build castles and forts
b Here he will build castles and forts
There2 he will build castles and forts.)
Obviously, spatial pointing in distributive contexts must not be of any deictic

character, be it strictly deictic or mixed. Attributive contexts do allow mixed
deictic pointing. Accordingly, hier and dort are possible topics in attributive
contexts but not in distributive ones. The fact that not even da is an acceptable
topic in distributive contexts, although it does in principle have a strictly ana
phoric use besides its deictic meaning, shows that topic assignment in fact de
termines the mode of pointing to be used. This is stated by rules (i, ii) p. 19.
Rule (iii) has to be constrained in such a way that spatial reference is exluded
from mixed pointing in distributive contexts,
(iii') Distributive contexts forbid any mixed-type spatial pointing.
Moreover we need to add a rule about the spatial deictics
(iv) Hier and dort always have a deictic aspect. They can be used as strictly
deictic pointers or as mixed pointers. Da can be used in any mode of
pointing.
62 VERONIKA EHRICH
4. SUMMARY
The oppositions within the subsystem of spatial deixis have been studied
here in two parts. Based on a defense of the strict deixis/strict anaphorics dis
tinction (sect. 1), I have first analyzed the conditions of use for the strictly
deictic da as opposed to hier and dort. This analysis was based on three analyti
cal categories S, D and R (speaker's place, denotation space, reference
space). It turned out that a full contrast can be made between hier and da as
well as between dort and da. This contrast has been reconstructed in terms of
inclusiveness relations holding between S, D and R with either necessary or
possible strength (sect. 2).
Finally, I have argued for Ehlich's suggestion of a mixed-type deictic
function, sharing deictic aspects with phorical ones. The argument is based on
two considerations: 1. Hier and dort always point to the utterance place even
when they are used in phoric binding; da on the contrary is neutral in this re
spect, which makes it a strict anaphor. 2. It seems to be the case that the deictic
and the thematic function are mutually supportive as are the anaphoric and
the rhematic function. In non-referring contexts topical pointers therefore
need to have a deictic aspect, whereas non-topical pointers must be strictly
non-deictic, i.e. anaphoric. Hier and dort are forbidden in the second case,
which again shows that they are not strict anaphors, but they are acceptable in
the first case i.e. as topical pointers to attributive NPs. The applicability oída
is less constrained by the thematic organization of the utterance in question.
In attributive contexts it can occur as either a thematic or rhematic element. In
distributive contexts, however, its applicability is restricted to the rhematic
function. Although this is a clear restriction to the 'overall' applicability of da,
it is evident that da is the least constrained — or to put it more positively —
that it is the most neutral element within the system of German spatial deixis.
REFERENCES

Ehlich, K. (1982): Anaphora and Deixis: Same, Similar or Different. In Jar-
vella, R.J. & Klein, W. (eds.): Speech, Place and Action. New York:
Wiley.
Klein, W. (1978) : Wo ist hier? Präliminarien zu einer Untersuchung der loka
len Deixis. Linguistische Berichte 58.18-40.
Leopold, W.F. (1939-1949): Speech Development of a Bilingual Child. A

Linguist's Record. 1-4. Evanston, 111.: Northwestern University Press.
Linde, Ch. (1979): Focus of Attention and the Choice of Pronouns in Dis
course. In Givon, T. (ed.): Discourse and Syntax (Syntax and Semantics
Vol. 12). 337-354. New York: Academic Press.
Rehbein, J. (1977): Komplexes Handeln: Elemente zur Handlungstheorie
der Sprache. Stuttgart: Metzler.
Reichenbach, H. (1947): Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York: MacMil-
lan.
Stechow, A. v. (1982): Three Local Deictics. In Jarvella, R.J. & Klein, W.
(eds.): Speech, Place and Action. New York: Wiley.
REPRESENTATIONS OF LOCAL NI-DEIXIS IN SWAHILI
IN RELATION TO
BÜHLER'S "ORIGO DES ZEIGFELDS"*
HUBERTUS OPALKA
In this article I discuss an extension of Bühler's "Origo des Zeigfelds"

with the aim of showing that an egocentric (= only speaker-) based standpoint
for describing deictic phenomena is misleading. I would assert that a general
conception of orientation — be it spatial or social — should be the starting
point of any linguistic investigation. To justify such a claim I shall discuss re
presentations of the local ni-deixis in Swahili, where the appropriate frame of
orientation is linguistically better marked than, e.g., in European languages.
A brief introduction to Swahili syntax is given beforehand.
1. BÜHLER'S "ORIGO DES ZEIGFELDS" AND ITS NECESSARY

EXTENSION
The investigation of deictic systems in given languages has often pro

ceeded on the basis of Bühler's concept of "Origo des Zeigfelds" as developed
in his Sprachtheorie (1965). Starting with the assumption that language signals
can have either symbolic character or signal character, Bühler developed a
"Zweifelderlehre" (two-fields theory). One field he calls the symbolic field
("Symbolfeld"), the other the pointing field ("Zeigfeld") (1965:80). On the
strength of this fact Bühler comes to the conclusion that:
"alles sprachlich Deiktische deshalb zusammengehört, weil es nicht im Sym
bolfeld, sondern im Zeigfeld der Sprache die Bedeutungserfüllung und Be
deutungspräzision von Fall zu Fall erfährt". (1965:80ff)
* This is the extended version of an article presented in the annual meeting of the Deutsche Ge
sellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft, Tübingen, 1979.
I wish to thank Paul Anderson for his criticism as a native speaker, and Fritz Pasierbsky for other
help: "ahsante sane marafiki wangu!"
66 HUBERTUS OPALKA
Bühler divides the deictic system into four ways of pointing ("Zeigarten")
which he sets in opposition to another as follows: I-deixis ("ich-Deixis") vs.
you-deixis ("du-Deixis") and here-deixis ("hier-Deixis") vs. there-deixis ("da/
dort-Deixis") 1 (1965:80ff). To these deictic oppositions belong three manners
of pointing ("Modi des Zeigens") :
"Ich kann ad oculos demonstrieren und in der situationsfernen Rede die
selben Zeigwörter anaphorisch gebrauchen. Es gibt noch einen dritten Mo
dus, den wir als Deixis am Phantasma charakterisieren werden". (1965:80)
Based upon this Bühler constructs his "Origo des Zeigfelds":
"Ich behaupte, daß drei Zeigwörter an die Stellen des Koordinatenmittel
punkts gesetzt werden müssen, wenn dieses Schema das Zeigfeld der
menschlichen Sprache repräsentieren soll, nämlich die Zeigwörter hier, jetzt
und ich". (1965:102)
Now, this kind of egocentric view of the language-world relation can — in my
opinion — no longer be maintained. For it is not the communication-specific
unity between speaker and hearer upon which the representation of Bühler's
"Zeigfeld der menschlichen Sprache" is based, but the speaker-specific par
tial aspect of the "Zeigfeld" which is analysed. The fact that such an abridged
interpretation devolved on Bühler is due to the fact that although he correctly
recognized the concrete speech event as a complex human action he was not
able to advance from this knowledge to the general social character of human
action, and hence to linguistic action. That Bühler's analysis wound up as be
ing speaker-centered is partly due to the fact that he tried to establish "das
sprachliche Zeigfeld" psychologically and argued only from the perspective of
individuals.
This egocentric interpretation can also be found in modern linguistics.
Lyons (1968) contains an eloquent example of this:
"The typical situation of the utterance is egocentric: as the role of speaker is

transferred from one participant to another in a conversation, so the 'centre'
of the deictic system switches..." (1968:275)
Such an egocentric interpretation, however, must be misleading in the analy
sis and explanation of deictic systems, because it fails to capture their real es
sence . Lyons — just as Bühler — has overlooked the fact that it is not the situ
ation of the utterance that is egocentric, but the act of utterance itself. The
typical utterance situation is, however, to be described as duocentric, that is
speaker- and listener-centered. But even by a duocentric interpretation, the
LOCAL NI-DEIXIS IN SWAHILI 67
underlying essence of linguistic pointing is lost: using deixis which the partners
in a communication find in their language, a general framework of orientation
will be set up from the very beginning.
With this framework, the communication's partners will be able to deter
mine and arrange entities on the one hand spatially in the widest sense, and on
the other hand informationally . 2 Here spatial means not only physical but also
social space, in other words, there is also a social orientation. The inclusive or
exclusive we, the dual or the honorative will be called representations of the
social or role-specific frame of orientation. 3
It should become clear through this reflection that the typical utterance
situation as a prerequisite to the "Origo des Zeigfelds" is to be taken neither
egocentrically nor duocentrically, but in relation to the frame of orientation
through which one can point to social or distal dimensions. By gradually en
larging this frame it is then legitimate to select duocentric or egocentric partial
aspects.
2. SOME GENERAL REMARKS ON SWAHILI SYNTAX
Swahili belongs to the Bantu language family, but, in contrast to other

languages of this family, it does not possess tones. A characteristic feature of
the grammatical structure of Swahili is the system of nominal classes. Every
noun belongs to a specific class according to it's prefix. The system of prefixes
determines the entire sentence: adjectives and numbers receive the same
prefix as nouns, while pronouns and verbs are combined with pronominal pre
fixes of the respective classes. This formal identity is called concordance.
Nouns and personal pronouns are not differentiated for natural gender. The
syntactic relations between parts of a sentence are expressed by word order.
Every noun thus possesses two types of concordances: pronominal con
cordance which is employed together with pronominal roots, and further to
mark subject and object within the verbal paradigm. And a number of adjec
tive concordances which usually agree with the class prefixes. This I have tried
to elucidate in the following example:
(1) wale watoto wazuri wawili wa mzungu mzee yule wamekuja na mi
mi nimewaona 4
68
HUBERTUS OPALKA
"Those/the two beautiful children of that old European have arrived and I have seen them."
Sj = SENTENCE!
subjk = SUBJECT CONCORDANCE plm = PLURAL MARKER gen = GENITIVE MARKER
objk = OBJECT CONCORDANCE sgm = SINGULAR MARKER con = CONJUNCTION
Figure I
In (1) and Figure 1 we have a complex sentence which is composed of two

clauses connected by the copula na "and". For clarity, I have underlined the
word-stems. The subject of the sentence is the stem -toto with the prefix wa-,
which marks the plural. The subject watoto "children" will now be modified
by the two adjective roots -zuri "beautiful" and -wili "two" in which the plural
prefix wa- is preposed to both adjective stems. We now obtain the subject ex
pression wale watoto wazuri wawili "the two beautiful children", which will
now be expanded by a genitive phrase. This will be formally expressed by the
genitive particle wa-. The genitive attribute itself will be marked for the singu
lar by m-, whereas the pronominal syllable of thera/wa-classin combination
with the stem of the demonstrative pronoun -le "that" becomes yu-. We ob
tain: wale watoto wazuri wawili wa mzungu mzee yule "Those/the two beauti
ful children of that old European".
The verb complex of the first sentence is wamekuja "they have arrived".
Here we immediately recognize the plural prefix wa- of the subject expression
before it had expanded through the genetive attribute in this construction.
This is an additional special feature of Swahili and other Bantu languages: the
class prefix of the subject always has to be repeated as a subject marker on the
verb.
The infix -me- expresses time. In our example here it expresses an action
which has been terminated a short time previously, this we will call the "per
fect". This leaves us with the verb stem -kuja which means "to come". Here
-ja corresponds to the English verb stem "come", and -ku is the class prefix for
the infinitive class which corresponds to the English "to" in "to come".
The second sentence begins with the absolute personal pronoun mimi 'T"
as subject. The verbal complex is nimewaona "I have seen them", whereby
the prefix ni- "I" is the marker of the subject mimi', by this the subject concor
dance is expressed, -me- expresses the perfect tense and -ona is the verb root
"to see". Comparing this verb to the verb in the first sentence we see that the
prefix ku- which marks the infinitive class is left out because the verb root is
two syllables long. We still have to explain the infix - wa "they". This expresses
the object concordance and it functions here as the accusative object. Re
member that -wa was at the same time the subject concordance of the previous
sentence.
Let me now call attention to two special features.
1. In Swahili new words can be built by means of various class prefixes in the
singular or plural in combination with adjective stems. For example, the noun
mzungu "foreigner"/"European" is built from the adjective stem -zungu "for-
70 HUBERTUS OPALKA
eign/European" in combination with the singular prefix -m. The plural here
would be wazungu "foreigners/Europeans". In combination with the class
prefix u-, which is used to build abstract nouns, uzungu "aliéhtation" can be
built.
2. The "far-pointing" demonstrative pronoun -le is usually placed after the
substantive which it refers to, just as all pronoun and adjective stems are. If
the demonstrative pronoun, however, is placed in front of the noun to which it
refers, as in the case wale watoto, then it will be interpreted by many authors as
the definite article, for the Swahili language does not possess a definite or an
indefinite article.5
3. LOCAL NI-DEICTIC EXPRESSIONS IN SWAHILI
Local deixis in Swahili, as in all Bantu languages, has two components

which reveal something about the orientation behavior of the Africans which
we do not find, e.g., when contrastively comparing it to English of German in
their modern day usage and structure. It is a question here on the one hand of
a pragmatic-semantic specification, and on the other of a morpho-syntactic
one. In the "pointing field" of the Swahili speakers three local meanings of
orientation are used which determine the relationship between two objects or
the relationship of speaker to object (cf. Brauner & Herms, 1979:196;
Ashton, 1974:18). This threefold spatial orientation is based on the features
distance, dimension and indefiniteness. In local deixis, this situation can be
represented as follows:
distance: objects which are immediate, i.e. near
each other or directed to the speaker
dimension : objects which are in each other or speak-
er-inclusion
indefiniteness: objects which are somewhere and/or
away from the speaker
In contrast to English or German, Swahili expressions of local deixis can oc
cupy the position of subject or object within a sentence. Through this the con
ception of an explicit frame of orientation of the Bantu speaker is revealed.
According to these three means of orientation one can reconstruct three
locative classes in Proto-Bantu, as Meinhof (1948) has done. These are the
classes 16, 17 and 18 with the class prefixespa-, ku-, mu (1948:54ff). In the
course of time the locative prefixes ku-, mu- and pa- preposed to the substan-
tives have become obsolete in many Bantu languages as well as in Swahili.

They were replaced by the suffix -ni which developed from Proto-Bantu ini-
(cf. Meinhof, 1922/23:242). These three local classes are no longer productive
in Swahili, but analogous to these classes "enclitics of place" have been estab
lished (Ashton, 1974:19). They are:
mo- from mu- +

po- from pa- +
- from ku- +
The suffixed -o is that o- of reference which has been characterized for the
Bantu languages by Ashton: "The o- of reference is so called because it directs
attention to some word or words in the sentence already mentioned or about
to be mentioned..." (1974:19)
The locative suffix ni-6
Through this locative suffix nouns of all classes in Swahili can become ex
pressions of local deixis, with the exception of those which indicate the name
of persons, animals and places:
from chumba "a/the room"

is derived chumbani a) "room-within-ness"
b) "on, by, to or in the room";
from mji "a/the city"

is derived mjini a) "city-within-ness", "city-center"
b) "on, by, to or in the city".
Many authors tend to give these words the status of a separate noun class while
others interpret them as prepositional expressions.7 In my opinion the second
form of argumentation does not do justice to the relevant problems because it
does not argue, strictly speaking, in relation to the Swahili conception — i.e.
to a class language — but with an understanding based on Latin grammar, i.e.
in relation to adverb and/or preposition.
Let me add a few examples to clarify this: an old riddle begins in the fol
lowing way:
72 HUBERTUS OPALKA
(2)
sea with animal(s)
A literal translation would be: "(The) sea-within-ness it with animal/anim

als". In English or German we would say: "In the sea there are animals"; "Im
Meer da gibt es Tiere". The noun bahari (class 9/10) becomes a noun of the
locative class 17 because the locative noun baharini is definite by virtue of the
subject concordance ku-. The Swahili conception concerning locatives in sub
ject position can easily be understood if one compares the following expres
sions: "in her heart she carried much pain" which is synonymous with "her
heart was full of pain" and quite another conception, "in her heart there was a
hole". Another example from Meinhof (1948:66):
(3) dirisha
house desire window
The literal translation is "(The) house-within-ness, it wishes window" . 8 Today

we would say: "At home one needs/wishes a window" ; "Zuhause wünscht man
(braucht man) ein Fenster". Here the noun nyumba (class 9/10) becomes a
locative noun of the class 18, which furthermore, becomes evident through
the subject concordance mw- which has arisen from mu- in connection with
the verb complex -ataka "wish". The local conception of the Swahili speaker
which is expressed through nyumbani in a subject position can no longer be
explicitly reproduced in an English or German translation. Not only by the
fact that the pure locative expression of Swahili must fall back upon a preposi
tional expression in English or German, but because the subject position will
be replaced in English and German through a dummy-subject "one/man"
which will have the semantic marker (+ animate)! In Swahili, on the other
hand, the semantic marker (— animate) appears.
Another example:
(4) watu
town arrived people
The literal translation: "In town-within-ness it arrived people". Today we

would say "In town there arrived people" or "In der Stadt (da) kamen Men
schen an".
In all three examples the locative noun phrase of the Swahili sentence
stands in the syntactic relation "subject of'. In the English or German transla
tion, however, we have in all examples a prepositional phrase: "in the sea",
"at home", "in town" resp. "im Meer", "im Hause", "in der Stadt", which
holds the syntactic relation of a "prepositional object". If we would now trans
late the sense of the English or German translation of the last example back in
to Swahili, for instance, then the alternation of the frame of orientation would
be clearly expressed. The explicit local Swahili deixis would be weakened and
we would have a change expressing the subject concordance:
(5) "People arrived in town"
(5') "Menschen kamen in der Stadt an".
(unspecified)
(5")
The exact meaning of "(5)/(5')", however, has to be expressed by using the
preposition katika "in":
74 HUBERTOS OPALKA
In this example the subject concordance of the plural suffix wa- of the noun
stem -tu "people" will be established through the pronominal syllable wa- on
the verb stem -lifika, and -ni appears in the syntactic relation "prepositional
object". When we make use of the preposition katika, however, the suffix is
omitted (5'").
I will now give further examples which — in connection with the suffixed
m-deixis — may indicate more clearly the underlying local conception of the
Swahili speaker.
(6)
(6')
( -)
These examples are in this respect an exception as nouns from the class 1/2,
i.e. the living class (cf. Ashton, 1974:29) usually cannot be connected with the
locative particle -ni. In (6) we are confronted with a figurative sense which us
ually cannot be specified through the variants (6') and (6"): the general mean
ing of (6) would be "in humans" or "in human beings". The locative concep
tion which is being expressed here can be related to physical space so that we
can then choose a construction like (6'), "in the human body". If, on the other
hand, a mental space is meant, i.e. one's consciousness, then (6") would be
used in the meaning "in human sense" or "in relation to the human sense".
The following construction is time-deictic for the European, but time-
space-deictic for the African:
(7) mwakam "within a year"
Usually nouns which contain a time-deictic component cannot be replaced by

the suffix ni-, but must be expressed with prepositions. (7) is the only excep
tion to this. Normally we have constructions like:
(8) katika miaka ile "in those years"
katika mi-aka i-le

I I I II
in pi year pi that
In this example we can follow the development of temporal deixis from the lo
cal — found not only in Bantu-languages but in other languages as well. This
transition is clearer in the following construction:
(9) ukaribum " near-ness-locality" (— "in the near future")
The stem -karibu from the Arabic ; "qarub" = "to be near" is a) used as
a local or temporal adverb, and b) as a noun ("proximity") of the class 9/10.
The abstract nouns are built by means of the prefix u-, such as ukaribu "near
ness". To this, the local suffix -ni is added. The temporal interpretation is de
rived — as the construction shows — from a local one.
The reference to "temporal" must be used with caution because the pres
entation of time refers to processes of spatial extension (compare, for exam
ple, the orbit of the sun as a measure of time being a measure of distance) ; de
grees of longitude are, strictly speaking, based on nothing besides this. 9
To conclude my representation of ni-deixis I would now like to mention
the following riddle: 10
(10)
76 HUBERTUS OP ALKA
Today we would say "In my house there is a devil who always drinks (my) wa
ter". As an answer the Swahili speaker expects:
(11) taa ya mafuta "oil lamp"

I I I
lamp of oil
The subject nyumbani establishes through the locative prefix mu- "to be with
in" not only the subject concordance to the verb -na "with/have", but also re
fers explicitly to the speaker: he is included. The possessive -angu "mine"
alone in combination with the suffix -ni does not yet accomplish this explicit
act of pointing to the speaker, because a statement "somewhere in my house
(there) is..." without explicit speaker reference requires the local prefix ku-,
thus:
(12) nyumbam kwangu k ...
I would now like to say something more about the three locative classes in
Swahili already mentioned above which are no longer productive and which
indicate, to a great extent, pointing to distance, dimension and indefiniteness.
The speaker of Swahili is able to refer in his utterance to his exact position
without using additional adverbial localizations. He can, for example, very
generally ask the following question:
subjk
sg sg l o e n
I I /
(13) kisu ki ko wapi? "where is the knife?"
I LI. I
knife it being where
somewhere
By using the locative suffix -ni and the three different locative enclitics the
Swahili is able to give the three following answers to this question:
(14) a)
The person spoken to indicates through (14a), which employs the two suffixes
-ku and-ni, that the knife is somewhere on or in the box, far away from his
present place of communication. Through (14b) he expresses through the suf
fix -po in connection with the suffix -ni, that 1) the locality which has been
asked for through wapi "where" is known to the speaker and the listener and
2) that the object which was asked about is near the hearer. The answer is then
"it is on the box". An even more precise local specification can be expressed
through (14c), which employs the suffixes -mo and -ni, namely that "it is in
something" whereby the speaker can also be included: "it is in the box". The
underlying frame of orientation of the adverbial place classes KU-, PA-, and
MU- in Proto Bantu and the derived locative enclitics ko-,po-, mo- in Swahili
can be demonstrated as follows:
ko- indefinite place, direction
po- definite place, position
mo- area "alongness", "withinness"
I would like to refer to a special feature of English and German. To a question
like: "Where is the table?" we could answer: "It is in the garden" or German:
"Er ist im Garten". But here the Swahili speaker would have problems trans
lating this although he can easily translate the question:
(15) "where is the table?"

78 HUBERTUS OPALKA
The answer "It is in the garden" could be translated in two different ways,
however:
(16) a) ipo bustanin/ b) '\mo bustanini
(16a) means: "It (the table) is in the garden (here near me)" whereas (16b)
means: "It (the table) is right next to me in the garden and I am also in the
garden". Thus the translation of (16b) would not be: "It is in the garden" but
"It is here with me in the garden" or "Er ist hier bei mir im Garten". The
choice of which locative enclitic should be used lies thus in the evaluation of
the speech situation making use of the frame of orientation, and is not primar
ily a consequence of grammatical regularity.
NOTES
1) The German demonstrative adverbs da and dort as deictic particles have to be translated both
as English 'there' ! Another correct interpretation is given by Lockwood (1968:72): "da is the gener
al demonstrative adverb and can mean either 'here' or 'there' as the context requires". What is nec
essary to keep in mind is the fact that da points in another way to proximity-orientation than the
English here; German dort, on the other hand, indicates explicity non-proximity-orientation. The
English expression "I'm here" can have the German meaning of "Ich bin hier" (= I'm here) point
ing to location or "Ich bin da" (= I'm present) pointing to existence. I omit here considering the
stressed uses of these words.
2) By the term "informationally " I mean to indicate that part of linguistic analysis which does not
concentrate on deictic phenomena.
3) Such a frame of orientation is present in Klein (1978) when he tries to specify the problem of
identification of deictic spaces through partial spaces such as the space of (visual) conception, geo-
graphically obtained space and history of mind obtained space, (cf. 1978:23) This argumentation
was convincing to me. However, whether we receive additional insight into the deictic "darkness"
through the inclusion of set-theoretical notions is questionable: "A deictic space is nothing more
than an ordered set of elements" (1978:32). Really nothing more?
4) This example I have taken from Meinhof (1949:27) which has only been altered by the addi
tion of the copula na "and".
5) Cf. Ashton (1974:15 and 59); Brauner & Herms (1979:15). Meinhof (1948:68f) describes this
fact more accurately: "A demonstrative pronominal element appears in front of the noun in many
Bantu languages, which we, in short, can call an "article", although its use is naturally different
from that of the article in Indo-European languages".
6) In this article I shall concentrate on the construction of the suffix -ni; I have not taken into ac
count the local deictic conceptions by the application of the infinitive class ku-, the actual near- and
distant-demonstratives or the enclitics in connection with their applicative forms.
7) Ziervogel (1971) is a representative of the first group, Harries (1977) of the second.
8) "For Europeans the use of locatives causes some difficulties because of the fact that this con
struction has to be built by prepositions or local adverbs in European languages, while in Bantu
(and hence in Swahili) nominal classes rule this usage" (Meinhof, 1948:162).
9) Thus there exists in addition to the Arabic loanword for "noon" (= the second hour of prayer)
adhuhuri also a typical Swahili construction jua kichwani lit. "sun head-locality" = "sun on the
head". This has developed from jua "sun" + kichwa "head" + suffixed locative -ni. Kichwani as a
noun alone is given the meaning "upper end" by Höftmann (1967).
10) cf. Farsi (1973:1).
REFERENCES
Ashton, E.O. (1974): Swahili Grammar (including intonation). London:

Longmans.
Brauner, S. & I. Herms (1979): Lehrbuch des modernen Swahili. Leipzig.
Bühler, K. (1965): Sprachtheorie. 2nd edition. Stuttgart: Fischer.
Farsi, S.S. (1973): Swahili sayings from Zanzibar. Kampala Nairobi, Dar es
Salaam.
Harries, L. (1977): The Syntax of Swahili locative Affixes. African Studies.
36. 171-185.
Höftmann, H. (1967): Suaheli — Deutsches Wörterbuch. Leipzig.
Klein, W. (1978): Wo ist hier? Präliminarien zu einer Untersuchung der loka
len Deixis. Linguistische Berichte 58. 18-40.
Lockwood, W.B. (1968): Historical German Syntax. Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Lyons, J. (1968): Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cam
bridge University Press.
Meinhof, C. (1922/23): Der Lokativ im Swahili. Zeitschrift für Eingeboren
en-Sprachen 23.
Meinhof, (1948): Grundzüge der vergleichenden Grammatik der Bantu-
Sprachen. 2nd revised edition. Hamburg: Eckhardt & Messtorff.
Ziervogel, D. (1971): The Bantu locative. African Studies 30. 371-384.
SOME SYSTEMS OF SPATIAL DEIXIS IN
PAPUAN LANGUAGES 1
VOLKER HEESCHEN
1. INTRODUCTION
Space can be recognized as an underlying principle of language and

speech in two different ways. Firstly, movement in space and the spatial or
ganisation and arrangement of things around us lie at the base of much ab
stract vocabulary, and secondly, the speech situation — that is, the triad of
speaker, hearer and their shared perceptual field with the inclusion of 'the
thing meant' — is directly reflected in that part of language structure which
Bühler (1934) called the "Zeigfeld" (deictic field). Many modern views follow
ideas and speculations already expressed in older works. Thus, the emphasis
on space as a building principle for the semantics of abstract vocabulary, as
well as the importance of the spatial arrangement of speaker, hearer and 'the
thing meant' for the situation of speech, were expounded in the works of W.
von Humboldt; he was one of the first to mention the problem of coordination
between the speaker's here and the hearer's there.2
In view of these older works, in view of the different disciplines, among
them Human Ethology (see e.g. Lorenz 1973) and psycholinguistics (e.g.
Miller & Johnson-Laird 1976), which emphasize the importance of space for
cognitive and linguistic problems, and in view of the flood of works from exot
ic fields illustrating the use of spatial reference in different languages, there
seems to be no real merit in simply adding to this mass of evidence, unless one
relates the new material to ideas and concepts developed while working on the
better known languages. In this article, then, I will first try to give an account
of the systems of spatial deixis in some Papuan languages and, then will try to
view these systems from the perspectives outlined by Bühler (1934) and Klein
(1978). I will restrict myself to expressions of spatial deixis, the interpretation
of which are relative to "a speaker's egocentric origin and coordinate axes"
(Miller & Johnson-Laird 1976:396) and of which English here and there or Ger-
82 VOLKER HEESCHEN
man hier, da and dort form an example. Though quite a few motion verbs like
coming and going play an important role in situating the Eipo's or Yale's ego
within the situational context, I will not treat them here. Before describing the
systems of spatial deixis in the Eipo and Yale languages, two wider points
must first be mentioned. I will not return to these points, although I am well
aware of the intricate and interesting problems to which they give rise.
1. Anthropological and linguistic studies of small, illiterate communities
sometimes suggest that space is of much more importance in ordering
experience than it is in the speech communities of Western civilisa
tion. Barth (1975:18) writes: "Baktaman are highly oriented towards
space in ordering their experience. The vocabulary and grammar of
their language impel a speaker constantly to specify relative location
... of observer and actor in describing events ... in describing or in
quiring about events much discussion focuses on the exact details of
location". R.D. and K. A. Shaw (1973:158) describe "the importance
of location as a linguistic and cultural focus ... In a word count from
several short texts on various topics, 22% of the words were of a loca
tive nature". The respective figure for some Eipo and Yale texts may
equal 22%, or may be even higher, especially in some myths of origin.
Anecdotal evidence supports the view that location is of outstanding
importance: In tape recording the speech of Yale informants, it is very
hard to adjust the modulation, because they constantly move away
from the microphone, pointing and looking at the places where the
stories came to pass. In some Papuan languages reference to space
and direction (e.g. upwards, downwards), and to the relative position
of the referent to the speaker or hearer, is built into the verbal mor
phology either by means of infixes or non-terminal suffixes (see
Anceaux 1965; Lang 1973; cf. also Friedrich 1970).
Haarwood (1976) comes to the conclusion that, in narrative
texts, the spatial as opposed to the temporal axis is predominant in
non-literature cultures. Movements in space are in themselves signifi
cant; they are plans of action. Saying that one goes down there or up
there implies that one will get some special kind of rope in the lower
regions or that one is going to hunt for marsupials in the mountain
forests. The actually perceived space is congruent with one's own life
long experience; there is no distance between actual perception and
the ordering of past experiences. This seems to be a possible explana
tion for the positive relation which Denny (1978:80) sees between a
SPATIAL DEIXIS IN PAPUAN LANGUAGES 83
low degree of man-made environment and large spatial deictic sys

tems : Almost necessarily, wherever a high degree of untouched na
ture prevails, communities tend to be small and their experience and
knowledge in equilibrium with their actually perceived world.
2. The investigation of a grammatical structure unfamiliar from more
commonly known languages may be considerably supported by tak
ing into account a wider range of languages; this may give us a clear es
timate, or at least an impression of the possible range of variation with
respect to the structure in question. An inspection of some grammars
and articles, most of them on Papuan languages, suggests a distinction
between two systems of spatial deixis, (a) those which have an un
specified here, but which do specify the generalized there known from
most European languages, and (b) those which also specify the here.
All specifications should be described as features of one word of mor
pheme. I will neglect those specifications which could be attained by
means of word formation or syntax as in English up there or down
there. A speaker who wants to refer to something which is "over
there" must choose between various words, all of which mean there
but yet differ in terms of additional features like "down" or "up". The
following features can be added to the notion of "there" : spatial direc
tion (up, down, across, seawards, mountainwards), relative proximi
ty to speaker and/or hearer, visible to speaker and/or hearer, present
or not, previously mentioned in discourse.3 Where the generalized
here of European languages is specified as well, we find the same fea
tures as those realized in the system of there. A first conclusion
emerges, namely that here never exhibits a greater number of features
than there. With the above mentioned features in mind, and with the
further aim of discovering more systematic relationships between the
features of an expanded deictic system, let us turn to some Papuan
languages.
2. THE SYSTEM OF LOCAL DEIXIS IN THE EIPO, YALE AND
ANGGURUK LANGUAGE
The Eipo, Yale and Angguruk people live in the Eastern highlands of Iri
an Jaya, the former Dutch West New Guinea. The valleys they live in run in a
north-south direction originating from the main mountain range, which itself
stretches from west to east through the entire island of New Guinea. The sin
gle valleys are separated from each other by lower ranges. Before contact
84 VOLKER HEESCHEN
times the range of movements in the valley was restricted approximately to

walks of two to four hours. The people knew hardly more than the immediate
ly adjacent valleys to the east or west. They sometimes crossed the main
mountain range to visit their trading partners and occasionally moved to the
north to get wood, rope or birds not found in their immediate surroundings.
The main valleys are intersected and bifurcated by torrential rivers, which
fracture the landscape into an assemblage of steep slopes and deep ravines.
2.1 The Eipo language

The Eipo orient themselves in this environment by an incredibly dense
network of names for mountains, hills, stones, rivers, fields and plains on the
one hand, and by distinguishing four deictic points of reference relative to
ego's position, on the other: 4
(1) a- here
ei- up there
ou- down there
or- across there
These bound morphemes combine most frequently with verbs, nouns,
postpositions and predicative suffixes. The most common postposition is -tarn
"side, to the side of, to".
Some typical examples are:
(2) a) ei-binmal
up=there-he=goes
he is going up there
b) a-bisik
here-way
this way
c) bisikatam
way here
this way
d) u-asik
down=there-village
the village down there
e) ortam dit lebnanam
across=there song we=two=will=sing
we two will sing a song from across there
The predicative (or better: predicativizing) suffixes -te and -teba are
found in the following typical context:
(3) a) an kwaning ateba
you sweet=potato here=it=is
here is your sweet potato
b) ei-bukmal eiteba
up=there he=is=sitting up=there=it=is
it is up there, where he is sitting
Here the deictics anaphorically resume the reference to location in the
preceding utterance, giving a shade of contrastive and emphatic meaning to
the utterance as a whole. This meaning is dominant in utterances like:
first speaker : yate me yanmal-do
What child he=is=coming-(question)
Who is coming?
second speaker: na-teba
I-it=is
itsme.
The predicative meaning is evident from the following examples:
(4) a) yupe gekenman ateba
speech I=hear here=it=is
this is what I have heard
b) na marabnik mal ateba
I it=wounded=me arrow here=it=is
this is the arrow which wounded me
The past tense of -tebai-tebuk yields, together with the four deictic parti
cles, another set of expressions adding the feature "previously mentioned in
discourse" to the spatial references.
(5) a) yupe atebuk yuk ninye lenmik yupe lenman
speech this=it=was other people they=spoke speech I = a m =
speaking
I am speaking of that which other people talked of
b) motokwe eitebuk yanmaupe motokwe
mountain up=there=it=was we=came mountain
we came that mountain up there (which you know already)
86 VOLKER HEESCHEN
Formations with -tebuk are seldomly used: in some 300 pages of transcripts I
have found only three genuine examples.
The Eipo add another feature to the deictic system by prefixing d-\
(6) da- here (in a wider area around the speaker and hearer, here and
there)
dor- very far across there
dei- very far up there
dou- very far down there
In this case compound forms as in (5) were not found, and their excist-
ence even was explicitly denied. In current use dei and dou have a strong con-
notational meaning, the first that of "up in the mountains, in the hunting
grounds", and the second that of "far down there, where we usually don't go"
or "down there, on the other (southern) side of the mountain range". Very
often fera "far" modifies dei and dou; e.g. fera dou "very far down there".
While the use of dei and dou is fairly frequent, and while their free, non-com
pound form corresponds very well to their non-deictic, connotational mean
ing, the use and occurrence of da- and dor- is restricted, if not problematic.
My only example of a pure deictic use is:
(7) a) da-deibmalyam
here-you=put=it
put it here (but don't put it at another place somewhere around
here)
b) da-bukman
here-I=am=sitting
I am sitting somewhere here
The other uses imply a movement from "here" to "here", and a meaning
of intensity:
(8) a) da-abmal
from=here=to=here-he=is=making
he is springing
b) da-kanye
from-there=to=here-soul
uncertainty, doubt
c) da-nirya
here-all
everything here
d) da-obre balamlulum
here-beating you=shall=go
you (all) go and destroy everything here!
da- occurs, as these last examples show, only in idiomatic expressions. The
last utterance is from the highly formalized speech of a large man admonishing
the people to wage warfare; the informants judged it to be "speech of former
times". Da-, then, is not productive.
The difference between a- and da- is obvious in another field of grammat
ical structure, namely that of marking the topic-comment structure of utteran
ces. We find these forms occuring here with the suffix ra-\
(9) a) yile nang ara yupe malye lebikye nang ora ninye gum
arelamikye nang
coward people ara speech bad they = saying=and and people
not they=giving=and people
those, who are fainthearted, speak nonsense and lie and they
don't give anything to other people
b) Dingerkon nang ara dabosib balamak gum
Dingerkon people ara lower=regions they=are=usually=go
ing not
the people of Dingerkon usually don't go to the lower regions
to the north
c) arebkin dara arebnilyam
I=have=given=to=you dara you=give=to=me
I have given to you, now give me!
d) sisi nang birye winyablye dara lebnamyak
big=man people from he=having=spoken=and dara they=
may=speak
the big man having spoken, the other people may speak
ara orders the information in successive utterances, where the grammatical
subject remains the same (first two examples), whereas dara most often, but
not always does so, where a change of grammatical subject occurs. We find
dara also in small daily, conversational exchanges, where a change of speaker
occurs:
88 VOLKER HEESCHEN
(10) first speaker : am a-deibmakin

taro here-I=am=putting=for=you
I put the taro here for you
second speaker: am dara dobman
taro dara I=am=taking
I take the taro
The difference between ara and dara as information ordering particles re
flects the tentatively given meaning analysis of a- and da-: Within a field close
to the speaker or within a bit of information relating to the same topic, a minor
movement occurs; with regard to ara we can say it means "this here, what fol
lows, is the information I want to give" ; with regard to dara a change from one
subject to another or from one speaker to another occurs, but within a prees-
tablished field of things meant or things spoken of:
The first example of (9) illustrates the use of ora, which is derived from
or- (see (1)) in the same way as ara is from a-, ora occurs abundantly in all
kinds of utterances simply meaning "and then, next to that". For example:
(11) Talime nang yayik ora febinmikye olamuk unmikye anyak ora
obrane yanmikye ora Marikla nang ton obik.
Talim people they=came and=then they=were=fighting=and
fighting they=were=and there (nominalizer) and=then fighting=
with=each=other they=were=coming=and and=then Marikla
people they=killed.
The people of Talim came to fight and at the place, where they were
fighting, they killed one of the people of Marikla.
There is a d- formation of ora: dora, but I am unable to discover a difference
between ora and dora.
In the Eipo language we have then a system with a threefold there op
posed to here, there being split into three distinct spatial areas. The feature
"previously mentioned" does occur, but it occurs infrequently, and the fea
ture "relative proximity" to the four possible reference points is not fully
developed. Some derivations from the original set (1), which have the feature
of relative proximity, serve discourse functions.
2.2 The Yale language

In the language of the Inlom people, the Yale language, the same four
deictic points of reference are found:
(12) ane here

ani up there
anu down there
anet across there
These free morphemes are often compounded with -a "from", -sib "side,
to the side of', and -siba "from". Some common examples are:
(13) a) ane beimnun
here I=will=put=it
I will put it here
b) ane-a lambamen-di mak In koubalulam
here-from you=starting=then river In you=will=cross
if you start right from here, you will cross the river In
c) anusib bidob kom nang
down=there=side going not people
the people usually don't go down there
With the exception of ane the set can add the feature "relative proximity":
(14) ane [a'ni] up there : áni ['a:ni] up there, but a little bit closer to
the speaker
anu [a'nu] down there : ánu ['a:nu] down there, but a little bit closer
to the speaker
anet across there: ano across there (on the same level, but not
separated by a valley)
I have overheard áni and ánu only in utterances like this:
(15) ani beibseng kom áni
up = there you=put=it not up=there=close
don't put it up there, but a little bit closer
Though accent together with vowel length are phonemic in the Yale language,
I feel that the difference between ani - áni and anu - ánu is a matter of phonetic
symbolism by means of intonation; otherwise the pairs should be found in
other contexts as well and independent of each other. The difference between
anet and ano is constant, and does not depend on more or less subjective crite
ria, but on a "topographical" feature of the real environment. In addition, we
find in the Yale language dei and dou. The same applies to these deictics in
Yale as in Eipo (see above), except that dei here is associated with "the upper
zone of gardening, where we have some temporary huts" rather than with
90 VOLKER HEESCHEN
"mountain forests".
The following applies to the five deictics ane, ani, anu, anet, and ano.
A morpheme d- can be prefixed to these five deictics (see above (6,7,8)).
The d-formations have the meaning (a) reference to a whole area, hence a
meaning of collectivity or reference to a set of human beings, animals or things
in a given area, and (b) plurality. See, for example:
(16) a) first speaker : winang kulib dala ulamla
bird bird=of=paradise where it=lives
where do the birds of paradise live?
second speaker: dane wamla
hereit=exists
b) nimi danu pam didob kom
people down=there=(in that area, these people) pig eating not
the people down there usually don't eat pigs
(Which can only mean that they are not human beings, but perni
cious spirits.)
As opposed to arte, dane refers to a whole area, primarily that surround
ing the speaker and set globally against the other areas up there, down there,
etc. A noun phrase like nimi dane is always ambiguous; it means either "man
(with no indication of plural) in the area here" or "man these=in the area
here". The sense of plurality is transferred from the finite verb, which indi
cates singular, plural, and dual, an from the noun feature "countable" or "ex
tended" . The main difference between ane and dane is that between a point of
reference and an area of reference.
The prefix ab- can be prefixed to ane, ani, anu, anet, ano. It means either
"only this, not too many" or "dual". The formations undergo a slight morpho-
nological alternation:
(17) abene only this here, these two here
abini only that up there, these two up there
abunu only that down there, these two down there
abenet only that across there, these two across there
abono only that across there, these two across there.
For example:
(18) a) abene lemna
only=this=here I=have=said
And that is the end (of my story or my speech)
b) nimi abenet yalamdang

people across=there=two they=two=are=coming
two people are coming across there
I suppose that the ab-formations, which are quite unique among the Mek
languages, originate from constructions like these:
(19) a) me-ab banudang
child-and the=two=will=be=going
he and the child will be going
b) me-ab ane banudang
child-and here the=two=will=be=going
he and the child will be going here
c) me abene banudang
child here=two the=two=will=be=going
two children will be going here
Whenever "the two" entities are of the same class, e.g. "boys", "girls" or
"birds of paradise" rather than of different reference classes, as in "he (a
child) and his father" or "the child and she (a girl)", the contraction of -ab and
the deictics was appropriate.
With the suffix -ko to ane, ani, anu, anet, and ano and the corresponding
d- and ab-formations, features previously mentioned in the discourse or
known from the situational context are introduced. This again is a specific fea
ture of the Mek languages, a feature also, that is rarely found among the more
than 700 Papuan languages. I will give two examples:
(20) a) amanekoobla
taro this=here (which you yourself put into the ashes)
is=cooked
the taro here is cooked
b) nimi obleaksib biang-di wamang-ba nimi daniko sembe
kwaneng babinun
man mountain=side they=have=gone-then they=are=
there-while man these=up=there for sweet=potatoes I=will
=bring
I will bring sweet potatoes to the men, who have gone to the
mountain forest (That they have gone and that they are still
here should be expressed in good Yale. We only presuppose
that they are still there, since somebody will bring them some
thing).
92 VOLKER HEESCHEN
In these examples the -ko-formations end noun phrases. However, they

may end any unit, thus nominalizing it, e.g.
(21) an-di ibom aneko nimi-di dobong
you-(actor indicating suffix) you=saw this=here man-(actor)
they=took
what you saw here, some people took it away
-na can be suffixed, to all -ko-formations, as well as to all words and mor
phemes capable of ending a construction. This indicates that a previously in
troduced topic is maintained or that one can expect this topic to be continued
either by the speaker himself or by the hearer.
(22) first speaker : ibnumu nimi danekona wamang-do kom-do
we=two=saw man these=here=na they=are=
still=there-(question)not-(question)
these men, which we saw, are they still there or
not?
second speaker: nimi daneko wamang
man these=here they=are=still=there
these men are still there
In response to such a question as "what is this initiation like?" the speaker may
give a long answer, attaching wherever possible -na, and finally concluding
"what you have asked me, I have answered now and this is the end". The dis
course as a whole must be understood as providing an answer to the topic in
troduced by the initial question of the first speaker.
I believe that the deictic system of the Yale language has evolved only
recently and is still in development. Accordingly, it can best be described in
two lines (the details must be left to another study):
1. At the origin we have a pure deictic system (see (12,14)). These deic-
tics can be substituted, or accompanied (and in actual discourse this is
done almost obligatorily, by a pointing gesture). The more the d-,ab-,
and -fco-formations assume discourse functions — i.e., the more they
refer, not to points in concrete space but to items previously men
tioned in the linguistic context — the more they lose the potential for
pointing to those things, which are truly "up there" or "down there".
2. As this development proceeds, forms based on ane continue to super
sede those based on ani, anu, anet, and ano. These tend to be lost,
since their use is less economic. Suppose the concrete location of some
people is introduced, say by ani "up there" (with pointing gesture).

Subsequent reference to these people may then be done by again ref
erring to this concrete location which, of course, is a temporary prop
erty, but it suffices to identify them in the given discourse. This and
subsequent references could again fully specify the actual location
("up there", plus gesture), but since these people are not at their per
manent arte 'here' — in the area of the village — arte is free to be used
as a neutral, discourse-based deictic expression. This is illustrated in
the following text (which, as all examples so far, is not construed but
taken from my recordings):
(23) Leleken ani nimi biek-di dani ulamek. Leleken aniko ulamek-ba
wamek-ba mana obi aka ulamek. nimi daniko mana obi aka ulam-
ek-di nimi daneko yalamek.
Leleken=mountain up=there (with a pointing gesture) man
they=went-then in=the=area=up=there they =were.
Leleken up=there (the mountain already pointed to) they=were-
while they=were=still=there-while marsupials hunting been
they=were. man these=(already mentioned)= up=there marsup
ials hunting been they=were-then man these=(already mentioned)
they=came.
Some men went to the Leleken mountain. There they hunted for
marsupials, and after that they came back.
The first reference to the mountain is made with ani accompanied by a
pointing gesture. The following reference is made using dani- which refers to
the area; the third reference, aniko, both identifies the mountain as having
been previously introduced into the discourse, and at the same time maintains
reference to its permanent location "up there". The first deictic reference to
the hunting men is daniko "these up there". The next reference to them uses
daneko 'these here', which carries the meaning of (a) those that are here (in
the area of the village) and (b) those whose position has been introduced be
fore; since their actual position is indeed "up there" and not "here", daneko
only means "those introduced before".
To conclude I will give a short text, the beginning of a fairy tale. It is a typ
ical example which clearly illustrates the frequency of reference to space in
Yale.
(24) Moolane ani kel nhon nenge nhon ulamdek. kel nhon nenge nhon
ulamdeka aneko dani Salioblom Omollom dani mana olbina dedo
VOLKER HEESCHEN
ulamdeka aneko winang olbina dedo ikin-ak mana yobolbina dedo

ulamdeka ik nhon sum anda: "nana mana odo baeyalamnuamna
winang odo baeyalamnuamna ana kulualina anea anet bimen-di
ampum anena ampum yanuamla sembamen sum anena ken
dulukdo am mehedo ... beilamen andana amni aneko sembamen
sum anekona na yalamna sum anekona adam-akne abene menek-
labmen-akna na yanun" aka bilamok aneko "amni andabinuamna"
ae-ak dou semboka-ak nenge anikona menekna menekdo winang
man odo winido ikin-ak heng-akne yobdo winido Salioblu Omollu
dam biok-di unulamok. unulamok-ba kel aneko anet biok-di...
Moolane up=there (with a pointing gesture) woman one man one
they=two=lived. Woman one man one they=two=lived this=
here, in=the=area=up=there, Salioblom=mountain, Omollom=
mountain in=he=area=up=there, marsupials hunting eating they
=two=lived-then this=here, birds hunting eating trap-at marsu
pials catching eating the=two=lived=then time one day this
(something new happened): "I marsupials killing I=will=bring,
birds killing I=will=bring, you going=down from=here across=
there you=going-then tomorrow this=here, tomorrow he=will=
come you=thinking day this.—here, pandanus=fruits cracking, taro
cutting (follows an enumeration of all edibles to be prepared), you
=carrying this=here, the=day=after=tomorrow this=here you
=thinking day this=here, I=am=coming day this=here what=is=
close=to=the=village-at only=this you=preparing-at I will=
come" been he=collected this=here "the=day=after=tomorrow
this=then I=will=go" house-at far=down=there he=thought=
of-at man this=up=there what=was=prepared preparing birds
marsupials killing collecting trap-at snare-at catching collecting,
Salioblu, Omollu close he=went-then he=was=living. He=was=
living — while women this=there across=there she=went...
On the Moolane mountain a woman and a man lived, and in the area
of the hills of Saliob and Omol they hunted for marsupials and birds.
And they hunted for marsupials with traps. And one day the man
said: "I will continue to hunt marsupials and birds with traps and
snares, and you will go to the village across there, and if you think, I
will be coming, then prepare pandanus fruits and taro. If you think
of that and if you have prepared everything and if everything is car-
ried close to the village, then I will come". And he collected (the
prey) and thought: "The day after tomorrow I will come". And he
thought of his house far down there, and what he had caught by
means of traps and snares he collected. He lived close to the Saliob
and Omol headwaters. And his woman went across there ...
2.3 The Angguruk language
The following note on the Angguruk language is only a small addition to
what has been said above. The Angguruk language is a member of the Great
Dani language family, (see Bromley 1965). The relationship to the Mek lan
guages is uncertain. We find here almost the same system as in the Yale lan
guage, especially in respect to the shift from purely deictic reference to that of
discourse functions. But the Angguruk language adds one noteworthy fea
ture:
It distinguishes the three 'theres' (up, down, across) by four degrees of rela
tive proximity to ego's position, e.g. :
(25) lindi across there
louk across there (but a little bit further away)
lukum far across there
lumu very far across there
There is no evidence so far that similar deliminations are made in the
Yale area. As with Yale dou and dei, I assume that a set of known locations is
almost mechanically associated with the four degrees of distance. Thus village
A is "across there", village is a little bit "further across there" and so on.
When doubt arises concerning the relative distance of a referent, other con
structions are used (see below).
3. PROBLEMS AND QUESTIONS
In the following passage all statements are valid for the Eipo as well as the
Yale language, unless a difference is explicitly marked. (E and Y standing for
Eipo and Yale language respectively, will follow the number of each exam-
ple).
The Eipo and Yale local deictics are a good example of Bühler's
(1934:80f) statement that "die Bedeutungserfüllung der Zeigwörter an sinn
liche Zeighilfen gebunden, auf sie und ihre Äquivalente angewiesen bleibt"
and that "die adäquate Analyse des konkreten Sprechereignisses ein
96 VOLKER HEESCHEN
weitgehendes Miterfassen der gegebenen Situationsmomente fordert". In

deed, the Eipo and Yale deictics rely heavily upon an accompanying pointing
gesture, which, according to my observation, is also true when speaking at
night, when the location referred to is not visible. Nevertheless, speakers con
stantly point in the direction of the things meant. The deictics are mere stand-
ins for real place names, and their use presupposes a common knowledge of
what events are likely to happen at what places. With regard to this use, I can
not find a difference between recent events and daily conversations on the one
hand, and myths and fairy tales on the other. Spirits and ancestors do not live
in a world set apart from the perceived space; they roam about in the same
world as the presently living people, and it is said that this ancestor has created
this valley down there, and that spirit happened to pass up there the other day.
More than in our societies does the use of deictics presume a shared geo
graphical and cultural context. They are much less used when a problem of
identification and coordination arises between speaker's "here" and hearer's
"there". I know of four such problems.
A. The directional areas indicated by up, down, and across are fairly well dis
tinguished from each other, because (a) the accompanying gesture, a look up
wards or a point downwards, permits of no doubt, and (b) because by the na
ture of things the areas thus referred to are far enough from both speaker and
hearer to pose no such problems of coordination. But the here-area is proble
matic when two different things both close to the speaker and hearer, must be
identified.
Imagine the following situation:
(26E)
first piece of wood second piece of wood
X Y
ego alter
ego : or-yo arebnilyam
across=there-wood you=give=to=me
give me the piece of wood across there
alter: a-yo arebmakin
here-wood I=am=giving=to=you
I will give you this piece of wood here
Or imagine a situation like this

(27E) Y
alter (on a hill, tree, etc.)
X
ego (somewhere downwards)
ego : a-yalyam
here-you=corne
come here
alter: u-yanman
down=there-I=am=coming
I will come down there
Another possible response of alter:
a-bulonmane
here-I=will=be=sitting=for=a=long=time
I will stay here
I have tested situations like these with several informants in both Eipo
and Yale speech communities. Though the dialogues seem perfectly well-
formed, I must confess that (a) I have never overheard such dialogues in daily
scenes and (b) the informants were always quick to give other solutions to the
reference problems. The real-life dialogue in the first situation is the follow
ing:
(28E) ego : yo arebnilyam
wood you=give=to=me
give me the piece of wood
alter: (hands over the/a piece of wood, if not the one wanted by
ego:)
ego : a-yo gum yuk yo arebnilyam
here-wood not other wood You=give=to=me
not this one, give me the other one
After alter's response, ego can refer by a- to a known object, and the
identification of the right object comes into the focus of attention. Other solu
tions are, for example:
1) naming the kind of wood (a proper name etc.)
2) marking the place of the desired object more precisely,
e.g.:
98 VOLKER HEESCHEN
(29E) yo kubkubtam arebnilyam

wood periphery=side you=give=to=me
give me the piece of wood on that side
or:
an-ak yo arebnilyam
you-at wood you=give=to=me
give me the piece of wood beside you
The real life dialogue of the second situation would be:
( ) ego : kulukyalyam
climb=downwards=you=come
climb or come down
or:
yalyam
come
alter: yanun
I=will=come
or
a-bulonmane
here-I=will=be=sitting=for=a=long=time
I will stay here
Having thoroughly discussed some ten situations like this with the infor
mants, I have come to the conclusion that local deictics are used only when lin
guistic and non-linguistic contexts leave no doubt with regard to the identity of
the referent. In other words, the shift from an intrinsic system, Bühler's "Sym
bolfeld" , to a deictic system occurs when speaker and hearer share a common
understanding of the situation. On the other hand, the initial speaker tries not
to be too explicit or too redundant; he does not say: "give me the piece of
wood at your side" or "come down", but "give me a piece of wood" or
"come". There seems to be a systematic vagueness in the initial speaker's
turns. The problem of identifying the referent and coordinating the speaker's
"here" with the hearer's "there" is the task of the subsequent dialogue, and is
one of the main motives for dialogues. If reference were clear from the very
start, we would hear only monologues.
. If two things or persons in the same referential area are to be identified by
means of up, down, and across, the Eipo and Yale speaker would tend to fall
back on the "Symbolfeld", or the intrinsic system.
For the following situation

(31E) X
Y upward direction
ego
the Eipo speaker would not use the local deictics distinguishing
relative proximity (see (6,14)), but rather
(32E) ninye ton fera yanamle
man one far he=is=coming
and
ninye ton dam yanamle
man one close he=is=coming,
or
ninye min ei-yanamle
man first up=there-he=is=coming
and
ninye amenyan ei-yanamle
man later up=there-he=is=coming
Again there are tens of solution for the problem of identification. Only if
Y is already on the same level as ego, while X is still climbing down, would the
Yale speaker say:
(33Y) b) nimi nhon yim aka yalamla

man one across=there he=is=coming
and
nimi nhon ani yalamla
man one up=there he=is=coming
But the preferred solution is:
(33Y) b) nimi nhon aka yalamla
man one top at=from he=is=coming
one man is climbing down from the top
and
nimi nhon alunak yalamla
man one bottom he=is=coming
one man is coming at the bottom of the hill/mountain
A well-formed dialogue, relating to the same situation, is the following:
100 VOLKER HEESCHEN
(34Y) first speaker sam yalamlange na el

first he=is=coming=(nominalizer) I knowledge
I know the one who is coming first
amik yalamlange na ekon
later he=is=coming= (nominalizer) I not=
know
I don't know the one who is coming later
second speaker: ani yalamlange na el samen pam yubo baeyalam-
siok nimi aniko
up=there he=is=coming=(nominalizer) I
knowledge years=ago pig speech he=brought=
us man that=up=there
I know the one who is coming up there, years ago
it was him, who invited us for a feast
Here again the "Symbolfeld" establishes a linguistic context before the
"Zeigfeld" can be of any precise use. I think it is rather revealing that the use
of those deictics which distinguish relative proximity is quickly dropped even
in cases, in which the situation should be clear due to a shared perceptual field.
These pairs of deictics are not dependant on ego's interpretation, but the
speaker associates a well-defined set of things, animals, and events with e.g.
dei "very far up there" and eitam "up there". Some marsupials live "very far
up there", some live "up there". The delimitation does not hinge on finding a
precise boundary between the pairs, since there are standard ways to refer to
certain things, and these ways must have been learned by every speaker. From
the Papuan perspective I find it rather tantalizing that European systems like
here!there are based solely on the feature of relative proximity.
In all the above examples the location deictics are relative to ego's momen
tary position and contemporaneous with the event referred to. What happens
if there is a temporal gap between the pointing gesture and the event? In utter
ances like
(35Y) first speaker : Oksebe Welarek biok-do
Oksebe Welarek he=went=(question)
seond speaker : Welarek biok
Welarek he=went
The first speaker may indicate the place Welarek by a pointing gesture, but
the second does not answer
ami biok
down=there he=went
but rather he answers in the way quoted above or by
dabosip biok
to=the=side=of=the=northern=lowlands he
=went
dabosibis the general term for "lowlands". If, however, the focus of at
tention is not on the past event but on the visible and pointable places where
certain things happened to occur, the obligatory copresence of the pointing
gesture and of that, what is relevant to the speaker at the time of speaking, al
lows the use of the deictics. It is good Yale to say while pointing to some place:
(36Y) anu biok anu biok anu biok....
down=there he=went etc.
The speaker's choice of focussing either the time of an event or its loca
tion, regulates the use of the deictics. Focus on past time is not compatible
with the pointing gesture. The deictics are primarily a stand-in for this gesture
and not an anaphor for the previously mentioned location. The "Bedeutungs
erfüllung" (referential specification) of which Bühler spoke, relies on the
present spatial context and does not emerge from the past, which the narrator
tries to evoke and relive. Bühler's origo of the deictic fields, the triad of "I,
now, here" is not easily transferred into the past, but only by means and medi
ation of the lasting presence and representability of the location. The reader
may have another look into Yale text (24), which starts with "Moolane up
there": the reference to the mountain gives the setting of the story, it is still
there. Structures like that have a special intonational pattern. They are often
followed by a pause, the speaker is really looking and pointing to the place,
and it seems, as if he invites the hearer to share for a moment the reassuring
presence of a setting, where events unheard of and unseen occured.
D. Another problem arises when the origo of the narrator, and the origo of
the persons or protagonists whose speech he reports, are not congruent. The
narrator of (24) gives all references to location from his viewpoint, even when
directly reporting the protagonists's speech. The village referred to by the
protagonist is not described from his viewpoint "down there" but from the
narrator's point of view anet "across there". Following the second instance of
reported speech the narrator takes the viewpoint of the protagonist, "up
there", the village now being thought of as "far down there". All transcripts I
have checked indicate that in current use the viewpoint of the narrator ec-
102 VOLKER HEESCHEN
lipses that of the protagonist. Again I would like to suggest that the people
learn to associate rather automatically certain things, places and villages as
being "up there" or "down there". The narrator of (24) assumes the usual
viewpoint of his native village. Only the narrator can point to the places: thus,
with the intonational feature I reported above, local deixis indexes, so to
speak, a universal and lasting locational framework, independent from or in
cluding reported events and the event of telling a story. The use of a pointing
gesture eliminates the problem of coordinating the narrator's and protago
nist's points of view.
The narrator's ability to assume or introduce a second viewpoint leads us
to look for the "Übersetzbarkeit aller Feldwerte des räumlichen Orientie-
rungs- und des sprachlichen Zeigsystems aus einer in eine andere Orientie
rungstafel" (Bühler 1934:131; cf. Klein 1978:24-31). For my purposes I will
distinguish only two cases of "Übersetzbarkeit": 1. transposition into other
real life places and 2. transposition into "models", similar to Bühler's "Deixis
am Phantasma".
1. Wherever the Eipo or the Yale move around, there will be a hill,
slope, valley and an opposite slope. In their native country the deictic
system always works. Having climbed up a mountain the native village
is naturally "down there" and the top is "here". But what, if the speak
er is sitting in his hut (the huts are round with an average diameter of
three to four meters, and have a fire place in the middle). Seen from
the entrance all sides have names of their own, for instance that oppo
site the entrance is the delina-tam, "the side where you put things
down". The side opposite the speaker's location can be referred to by
"down there"; everything above the level of the eyes, seen from the
normal sitting position, is "up there", even if the speaker happens to
stand and the object referred to is on the same level as the speaker's
eyes. Standing before flat ground, a pond or at one end of the village,
the opposite end is always "down there" regardless of the direction
beyond the location pointed to. Thus the opposite end of a village may
be "across there" with regard to the position in the valley: neverthe
less "down there" applies. In hilly country without high mountains
and steep slopes, "across there" prevails as the generalized "there",
where everything seems to be on the same level. If you go down a
mountain and meet a bifurcation, one way leading down gently, and
the other steeply, the first is ei-bisik "the way up there", and the other
u-bisik "the way down there". In all these situations the directional al-
ternatives are reduced, and two pairs: here against down there and up
there against down there prevail. At the same time they keep the
abstract structural relationship of the members of the original four
fold set, and they maximize the contrast: the favorite member for
there is "down there". Is the contrast between here and down there the
most fundamental one, because it is learned during language acquisi
tion in the huts? Is down there generalized, because the villages are
situated on ridges and most things in the more or less immediate envi
ronment are looked down to? As we have seen the multiplication of
alternatives leads to the use of the intrinsic system, and a reduction
leads to a system which comes close to English here and there and
which is losing the concreteness of the original set. This loss is in har
mony with the generalised anaphoric use of ane 'here' (see (23)):
What is only previously mentioned is no longer presented as being up
or down in concrete space, but as being this here without specification
of topographical location. The feature previously mentioned applies
regardless of whether the thing meant is up there or down there.
2. Why does the sun rise in June behind the northeastern lower ranges
and in December behind the southeastern higher mountains? In the
far east there is a man who has built a fence which looks like a little lat
tice. In the following story, this fence functions as a model.
(37Y) anu heng kuluklamla-sib heng ngeinge heng ak-ak lido ane
beiamla-ba iniblamla-ba kweleklamla-ba heng ak-ak lido
beiamla-ba ... ani heng walelamla-sib
down=there (on the left side of the model) sun he=is-being=
down-side sun originator sun netbag-at putting here he=is=
putting=down-while evening morning sun netbag putting he=
is putting=down-while ... (numerous repetitions) up=there
sun he=is=being=up-side
Each morning the originator of the sun puts the sun in a netbag
and hangs it on one plank of the fence. He starts on the left side
of the fence, that is the season with the sun being in the north,
he ends on the right side, that is the season, where the sun is to
the south.
ani and anu apply to the right and left side of the model and ane to each
plank of the fence. All deictics are accompanied by a pointing gesture.
VOLKER HEESCHEN
I have omitted in the text all repetitions of ak-ak lido ane beiamla-ba.
It was impossible to have the story told without the narrators pointing
to a model — it was told to me six times—which consisted in one case
of the planks of the wall, in the other of a line of used batteries, and so
on. Things and events unseen and imagined are mediated through a
concrete model. It is this model which permits the use of the deictics.
If a man tells a past warfare and of where and how an enemy was
wounded, his own body will serve as a model for pointing the location
of the other's wounds. The man (see above) who has left his native vil
lage and looked at it from the top of a mountain, now describing this
view back in the village, usually says:
(38Y) as anekona lom-aksib elilamsi
village this=here valley-at=side I=saw
I saw the village down the valley
But as the movements of his eyes and his pointing gestures create an
imaginary space and restructure the spatial arrangement of his past
experience, he may also say:
(39Y) as anekona anu elilamsi
village this=here down=there I=saw
(Among the more than twenty informants I worked with in the Eipo
and Yale speech communities, there was only one, Lekwoleb from the
village in Dingerkon in Eipomek, who used this strategy consistently.
By the movements of his hand he transformed the room in the hut into
an imaginary scene). For this state of affairs Klein (1978:28-30) has
coined the term "Analogon-Einführung", and I think it can be iden
tified with Bühler's "topomnestisches Zeigen". If the pointing gesture
is lost and the model brought to our attention by linguistic means
alone, the model is interiorized and we get the "Deixis am Phan
tasma". If language in general tends to get rid of its dependence on a
given situation or, more precisely, on the "Zeigfeld", the deictics must
get their "Bedeutungserfüllung" from the pure context of speech
units. They maintain reference to locations, but no longer point to
them. On the other hand, if the deictics are used in their original sense
as mere stand-ins for the pointing gesture, the "Analogon-Ein
führung" is a necessary procedure if one tries to explain things unseen
and past events. Perhaps human beings learn and understand more
rapidly by seeing and perceiving than by words alone. I believe that

one of the functions of the deictics is that of forcing the "Symbolfeld"
back to the "Zeigfeld" ; that is to say, leading back to the original field
of perception or to ad hoc created residues and models of the real
world, which we can perceive and grasp. Surely, there is the constant
shift from situationally dependent references to references to previ
ously mentioned items, from the "Zeigfeld" to the "Symbolfeld"; but
the inverse is also true, since by means of language we go in intentione
recta to the things themselves. Thus the deictics never completely lose
their local meaning.
One main problem remains, that is the anaphoric use of the deictic. The
otherwise closely related Eipo and Yale languages differ considerably with re
gard to anaphora. A detailed analysis must await another work. The problem
is closely related to the identification and maintenance of topic and subject in
discourse. In the Yale language deictics never substitute for a previously men
tioned item (cf. (23,24)) ; the item is always repeated. While it is quite usual to
say in European languages
(40) A man went into his house. There he said ...
the Eipo and Yale speaker would say
(41Y) nimi nhon ae-ak biok. nimi aneko ae-ak biok-di wamok-ba yubo
lelamok ...
man one house-at he=went, man this=here house-at he=went-
then he=was=still=there speech he=spoke ...
A high degree of connectivity by means of full repetition replaces the
anaphora types of other languages. The Eipo maintain reference to a previ
ously introduced topic and/or subject by using finite verb forms and a set of
discourse organizing particles (see (9,10,11)). The Yale, however, rely heav
ily, with the exception of the utterance ending finite verb, on participle like
verb forms, which do not hint at the identity of actors and things previously in
troduced. Thus there seems to be a heavy structural pressure on the Yale deic
tics to assume the function of giving coherence to a text. As shown above,
Yale texts are overcrowded with local deictics. In accordance with Ehlich
(1982) and Braunmüller (1977) who treat anaphors as a subclass of local deic
tics, the Yale deictics are not only logically such a subclass, but also, compared
to the set of local deictics, numerically, because this set is losing its concrete
features and one of its members, ane, is in the process of being generalized for
anaphoric use.
106 VOLKER HEESCHEN
4. CONCLUSION
Undoubtedly the local deictic system of the Eipo and Yale language re
flect the speaker's concrete environment. The delimitation between possible
referents is done by the nature of things and presents no problem at all.
Wherever problems of identification and coordination exist between speak
er's here and hearer's there, the languages fall back on the intrinsic systems of
reference. The local deictics serve either the "demonstratio ad oculos" of
things known from the situational context or they introduce, and force the
speaker back to such a "demonstratio" by creating ad-hoc models. A rich set
of local deictics modelled after the concrete environment probably does not
easily allow other uses. Either the possibility of the accompanying pointing
gesture — that is reference to things in the perceived space — keeps the sys
tem working, or the system is reduced. For discourse functions the Eipo use
only two of the original four members of the local deictics, and in the Yale lan
guage one member tends to be generalized for semi-anaphoric functions.
Precise directionality seems to be incompatible with anaphoric use. On the
other hand this use does not depend on, nor originate from, the local deictics,
but is interrelated with other means of identifying and maintaining subject
and topic in the discourse, for instance on the presence of 3rd person pro
nouns, finite verbs, or means of switch reference. Degrees of relative proximi
ty presuppose clear criteria for the delimitation of the pairs. If, in a speech
situation, these criteria are not fulfilled, morphemes expressing such degrees
are easily used for different functions. Thus d- "very far" serves discourse
functions in the Eipo language, or is correlated with meanings such as areas of
reference vs. points of reference and plurality in the Yale language.
The question of more basic oppositions in a rich system remains un
solved. Current use in the languages under investigation hints at speakers
maximizing a contrast and reducing the system, where only some of the availa
ble alternatives are feasible within the extra linguistic context.
Bühler's "demonstratio ad oculus" is the basic use of the local deictics. In
view of man's capacity to learn by empathy, and in view of the primacy of the
perceptual field and man's comprehension of whole situations rather than of
single utterances, I would like to stress the interdependence of "Zeigfeld" and
"Symbolfeld". A speech act focuses on one aspect of a situation, and whether
this is done by a simple there or a whole sentence, is a matter of degree and no
principal difference. On the one hand, as we have seen, any use of the deictics
presupposes common understanding of a situation and, on the other hand the
local deictics aid such an understanding by forcing the speaker to construct

models and to fall back on the perceived space. I believe that the relationships
between the "demonstratio ad oculos", the "Analogon-Einführung" and the
"Deixis am Phantasma" deserve detailed studies. With regard to the Euro
pean systems of local deixis stress should be put on real life utterances, that is
on dialogues and small conversational exchanges.
NOTES
1) Fieldwork was done in Eipomek in July 1974, December 1974-March 1975, March 1976-July
1976, June 1979, and November 1979. From May 1979 to the present (December 1980) I have
worked in Kosarek among the Yale. Fieldwork in Eipomek was financed by the Deutsche For
schungsgemeinschaft. Work in Kosarek was done while working as a linguist and anthropologist
for the Vereinigte Evangelische Mission.
For a linguistic survey of the language area and for some basic information on the languages I
have referred to, see Heeschen 1978. The Eipo and Yale language are genetically related to each
other as for instance Dutch and German or German and Danish are related.
2) E.g., W. von Humboldt: "Über den Dualis" (1827), and "Über die Verwandtschaft der Orts
adverbien mit dem Pronomen in einigen Sprachen" (1829). In W. v. Humboldt, Werke, ed. by A.
Leitzmann, Vol. 6, 4-30 and 304-330, Berlin: Behr's Verlag 1907.
3) This survey is based on the works mentioned in the bibliography. For a detailed description of
some more complicated systems see e.g. Denny (1978).
4) I will use only the following abbreviations in the word-by-word translations. Space sparates
words. "-" indicates a morpheme break within a word and is repeated in the English version; " = "
indicates that several words in the translation, connected by " = " , correspond to one word in the Ei
po or Yale text. "()" give explanations to the preceding word.
REFERENCES
Anceaux, J. (1965): The Nimboran Language. The Hague: Nijhoff.

Austing, J. & Upia, R. (1975): Highlights of Ömie Morphology. In . . Dut
ton (ed.), Studies in languages of Central and South-East Papua. Can
berra: Australian National University, 513-98.
Barth, F. (1975): Ritual Knowledge among the Baktaman of New Guinea.
Oslo: Univeritetsforlaget and New Haven: Yale University Press.
Braunmüller, . (1977): Referenz und Pronominalisierung. Tübingen: Nie
meyer.
Bromley, H.M. (1966): The Linguistic Relationship of Grand Valley Dani.
108 VOLKER HEESCHEN
Oceania 37. 286-308.

Bühler, . (1934): Sprachtheorie. Jena: Fischer.
Casad, E.D. (1975): Location and Direction in Cora Discourse. Anthropo
logical Linguistics 19. 216-41.
Clayre, I. (1973): Notes on Spatial Deixis in Melanau. Anthropological Lin
guistics 15, 2. 71-86.
Conant, F.P. (1965): Korok: A Variable Unit of Physical Social Space among
the Pokot of East Africa. American Anthropologist 67. 429-34.
Cook, E.A. (1967): A Preliminary Statement of Narak Spatial Deixis. An-
thropolgical Linguistics 9,6. 1-29.
Denny, J.P. (1978): Locating the Universals in Lexical Systems for Spatial
Deixis. In Farkas, D., Jacobson, W.M. & Todrys, K.W. (eds.), Papers
from the Parasession on the Lexicon. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society,
70-84.
Diamond, S. (1960): Anaguta Cosmography: The Linguistic and Behavioral
Implications. Anthropological Linguistics 2, 2. 31-8.
Dixon, R.M.W. (1972): The Dyirbal Language of North Queensland, Cam
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ehlich, K. (1982): Anaphor and Deixis: Same, Similar or Different. In Jarvel-
la, R.J. & Klein, W. (eds.), Speech, Place and Action. New York: Wiley.
Fillmore, (1972): Ansätze zu einer Theorie der Deixis. In F. Kiefer (ed.),
Semantik und generative Grammatik. Vol. I. Frankfurt: Athenäum, 147-
74.
Franklin, K.J. (1971): A Grammar of Kewa, New Guinea. Canberra: Aus
tralian National University.
Friedrich, P. (1970): Shape in Grammar. Language 46. 379-407.
Griffin, M. (1970): Buin Directionals. Papers in New Guinea Linguistics 13.
13-22.
Groth, C. (1977): Here and there in Canamari. Anthropological Linguistics
19.203-15.
Guy, J.B.M. (1974): A Grammar of the Northern Dialect of Sakao. Canber
ra: Australian National University.
Haarwood, F. (1976): Myth, Memory, and the Oral Tradition: Cicero in the
Trobriands. American Anthropologist 78. 783-796.
Haugen, E. (1957): The Semantics of Icelandic Orientation. Word 13.447-59.
Heeschen, V. (1978): The Mek Languages of Irian Jaya with Special Refer
ence to the Eipo Language. Irian 7,2. 3-46.
Irwin, B. (1974): Salt-Yui Grammar. Canberra: Australian National Univer-
sity.
Klein, W. (1978): Wo ist hier? Linguistische Berichte 58. 18-40.
Lang, A. (1973): Enga Dictionary. Canberra: Australian National Univer
sity.
Lawrence, Η. (1972): Viewpoint and Location in Oksapmin. Anthropologi
cal Linguistics 14. 311-16.
Lorenz, . (1973): Die Rückseite des Spiegels. München & Zürich: Piper.
Litteral, S. (1972): Orientation to Space and Participants in Anggor. Papers in
New Guinea Linguistics 15. 23-44.
McElhanon, K.A. (1972): Selepet Grammar. Part I: From Root to Phrase.
Canberra: Australian National University.
Kolia, J.A. (1975): A Balawaia Grammar Sketch and Vocabulary. In . .
Dutton (ed.), Studies in Languages of Central and South-East Papua.
Canberra: Australian National University, 107-226.
Miller, G. A. & Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1976): Language and Perception. Cam
bridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Murane, E. (1974): Daga Grammar. Norman, Okl. : Summer Institute of Lin
guistics.
Olson, M. (1975): Barai Grammar Highlights. In . . Dutton (ed.), Studies
in Languages of Central and South-East Papua. Canberra: Australian Na
tional University, 471-512.
Renck, G.L. (1975): A Grammar of Yagaria. Canberra: Australian National
University.
Shaw, R.D. & Shaw, K.A. (1973): Location. A Linguistic and Cultural Focus
in Samo. Kivung 6. 158-172.
Steinhauer, H. (1977): 'Going' and 'Coming' in the Blagar of Dolap (Pura -
Alor - Indonesia). NUS A. Linguistic Studies in Indonesian and Languages
of Indonesia 4. 38-48.
Zöllner, S. (n.d.): Wörterbuch Angguruk - Deutsch. Ms.
LOCAL DEIXIS IN TOLAI*
ULRIKE MOSEL
1. INTRODUCTION
Tolai is an Austronesian language (Capell 1971a: 261; Beaumont 1972:

12 f.) which is spoken by approximately 80,000 people in the north-eastern
coastel area of the Gazelle Peninsula, East New Britain, Papua New Guinea.
It became a written language in the eighties and nineties of the last century,
when Catholic and Methodist missionaries translated the Bible and started to
build up schools (Mosel 1980), but writing in Tolai never played a significant
role in the Tolai society.2 Therfore the present paper will deal only with the
spoken language.
The system of Tolai local deictics, i.e. roughly speaking, words that cor
respond to what are traditionally called 'deictic adverbs of place', is rather
complicated and merits the attention of linguists. The Tolai local deictics are
not only distinctive for the contrast 'here' and 'there', but can also be marked
for:
1. the level at which the indicated place is located relative to the
speaker's position, for instance, whether it is located upwards or
downwards;
2. whether the indicated place is:
(a) a place at which an action takes place (e.g. "they danced there"),
(b) a place where something or somebody is found (e.g., "he is
there"),
(c) the goal of an action (e.g. "he went there"),
(d) the source of an action (e.g. "he came from there");
3. whether or not the place pointed at is known to the hearer.
These various semantic features are marked by morphs which can be com
bined into rather complex forms consisting of two to five morphs, e.g.,
112 ULRIKE MOSEL
(1) U- -ti
goal here
hither
(2) u- -ka- -ba- -r- -a
goal further known-to there, down in direction of
the hearer action beach
there, to a place known to the hearer, somewhere further down in
the direction of the beach
Since the Tolai system of deictics is bound to the natural environment of the
Tolai people (compare, for instance, ara "there, at some place in the direction
of the beach", arä "there, at some place in the direction of the bush"), it seems
necessary to give a brief description of the Tolai area here before going into any
further details. Secondly, I will outline some basic features of Tolai grammar
in order to show how this rather unknown language works, and to help to
understand the examples.
2. THE TOLAI AREA
The Tolai people live in scattered hamlets along the coast and in the adja
cent mountainous hinterland, which in precolonial times, i.e., before 1884,
was mainly covered with bush. Due to constant warfare the people had only
little contact with each other or neighboring tribes. There were neither trade
centers nor larger communities comparable to European villages or towns
(the two towns of Rabaul and Kokopo were founded during the German rule,
1884-1914)3 nor roads nor frequently used paths which could serve as orienta-
tional aids, so that one could not say that a hamlet was situated near Rabaul or
on the coastal road and the like; the points of orientation were and still are the
seaside and the mountain- or bushside.
3. SOME BASIC FEATURES OF TOLAI GRAMMAR
Tolai is a non-inflecting language and thus does not have inflectional af
fixes indicating case, number, tense, aspect, mood, etc. The only bound mor
phemes are pronominal suffixes, derivational affixes which serve for the deri
vation of verbal nouns from verbs, causative verbs from intransitive verbs and
adjectives, nouns from adjectives, etc., and those already mentioned mor
phemes that combine to form local deictics. Number, tense, aspect and mood
LOCAL DEIXIS IN TOLAI 113
are indicated by seperate words, and in the case of imperfective aspect and
plurality of nouns, also by reduplication.
There are two main sentence types to be classified on the basis of whether
the predicate is a verbal phrase or not, i.e. verbal and non-verbal sentences.
The verbal phrase obligatorily consists of the nucleus denoting an action
or state and the so-called subject marker (compare Capell 1971:23) which pre
cedes the nucleus and refers to the subject of the action or state expressed by
the nucleus. If the nucleus is a transitive verb, it must be followed by a noun
phrase, i.e. the direct object, for example:
(3) (a) a tutana i vana the man went4
ART man he go
(b) a tutana i gire ra vavina the man saw the
ART man he see ART woman woman
Besides these obligatory constituents the VP may contain various prenuclear
tense, mood and aspect markers (abbr. TA) between the subject marker and
the nucleus, as well as postnuclear modifiers such as directional particles
(abbr. PART), adverbials etc. Another means of modification is nominal
compounding and verbal chaining, whereby up to three verbs may follow the
nucleus. Negation is expressed by negative particles preceding the subject
marker, e.g.,
(4) (a) / tar ian he has eaten
he TA eat
(b) / ga tar ian he had eaten
he TA TA eat
(c) pa i ti ian he has not eaten
not he eat
Noun phrases function as subject and object in verbal sentences, subject and
predicate in non-verbal sentences, part of prepositional phrases and adjuncts
of local deictics (see below). The nucleus may be formed by nouns, personal
pronouns, demonstrative pronouns, indefinite pronouns, possessives (e.g.,
agu "mine; my share of food"), numerals and indefinite quantifiers. Nouns
other than kinship terms are preceded by a kind of article (abbr. ART), a pos
sessive pronoun or the numeral tika "one" plus connective particle (abbr. C);
e.g.,
114 ULRIKE MOSEL
(5) (a) a tutana the man

ART man
(b) kaugu tutana my husband
( ) tika na tutana one man
(d) a ilima na tutana five man
ART five C man
The basic word order of verbal sentences is S V ( ). Only the small class of
stative sentences whose verbal phrase nucleus is a stative verb expressing the
state of being of something or somebody show V S, for example:
(6) i par kaugu tinata
it finished my speech
that's the end of my speech
There are three types of non-verbal sentences:
1) Existential sentences consist only of one noun phrase stating the ex
istence of what is referred to by that noun phrase, for example:
(7) A kilala na mulmulum (Kl 145)
ART time hunger
there was famine
2) There are two types of equative sentences. The first one consists of
two juxtaposed noun phrases ΝΡ1 NP 2 expressing that the NP1 referent is what
is denoted by NP 2 , for example:
(8) kamave tutana a umana pun (M 92)
our/pl/excl. man ART PL turtle
our husbands are turtles
The second type of equative sentences consists of a noun phrase plus a demon
strative pronoun, expressing the identity of a person or object pointed at by
the speaker, for example:
(9) a vavina nam (Kl 26)
ART woman DEM
that's a women
3) In the third type of non-verbal sentences the predicate is formed by
a prepositional phrase or a local deictic with an optional adjunct, for example:
(10) patana ta ra pal (Kl 484)

nobody in ART house
nobody was in the house
(11) iau mamati (Raluana)
I from-here R.
I am from (Raluana) here
4. THE SYNTACTIC FUNCTIONS OF LOCAL DEICTICS
Local deictics may function as predicates in non-verbal sentences (12),

adjuncts in noun (13) and verbal (14) phrases; e.g.,
(12) iau mama-ti
I from- here
I am from here
(13) a tarai mama-ti dia papalum ...
ART men from- here they/PL work
the men from here work ...
(14) dia papalum a- ti
they/PL work LOC- here
they work here
In all three cases the deictics can be followed by adjuncts specifying to which
place the deictic refers. Proper names of localities such as village names di
rectly follow the deictic, for example:
(15) dia papalum a- ti Raluana
they/PL work LOC- here Raluana
they work here in Raluana
gunan "village", uma "garden", pal "house" and ta "sea" are connected to the
deictic by the connective particle (abbr. C ) ; e.g.,
(16) dia papalum a- ti na gunan
they/PL work LOC- here village
they work here in the village
other nouns referring to places are preceded by the article; e.g.,
116 ULRIKE MOSEL
(17) dia papalum a- ti ra valían

they/PL work LOC- here ART beach
they work here at the beach
Why gunan, uma, pal and ta are constructed differently is unclear. If reference
is made to a person, the adjunct must be a prepositional phrase introduced by
pire "with, near" (which would be best translated by French "chez"), for
example:
(18) dia papalum a- r -a pire re talatala
they /PL work LOC- there -down with ART pastor
pire Mikael To Bilak
with Mikael To Bilak
a- ti pire- dat
LOC- here with-us/PL/INCL
they work down there where the pastor is, ... down there
where Mikael To Bilak is, ... here where we are
Common nouns referring to places, e.g. gunan "village", pal "house" may
also enter a prepositional construction when used as adjuncts of deictics, for
example:
(19) (a) a -r -a ta ra pal (Kl 129)
LOC -there-down in ART house
down there in the house
(b) a -ti ta kada gunan (Kl 190)
LOC -here in our/PL/INCL village
here in our village
(c) una va a -ti pire ra ίαρ (ΚΙ 475)
you/SG/TA sleep LOC -here near ART fire
sleep here near the fire
5. CLASSIFICATION OF LOCAL DEICTICS
As already mentioned in the introduction, the local deictics in Tolai are com
posed of two to five morphemes and may accordingly be grouped together
into various classes and subclasses (cf. fig. 1).
I
(here)
III ivl
(-remote; 1., 2., 3. pers. (-remote
± action) —action)
V VI VII
(location) (goal) (source)
ati uti (ma)mati akari
here hither hence here
in direction to
1 to the beach ara r ( )r akana
(downwards)
in direction to
2 the bush ar ürä ( )r akanä
(upwards)
straight
3 upwards urama ( ) r \ \akanama
over there at
4 the same level aro uro ( ) maro akano
akamana
5 there inside aria uria ( ) maria akania
6 there up inside arima urima (ma)marima\ akanima
down there 1
7 inside arika urika (ma)marika)\ akanika
8 behind there arua urua (ma)marua I akanua
V' VF vir
(location) (goal) (source)
VIII 1 IX
(+ action) 1., 2., 3. person) (— action
3.pers)
Χ XI
(± remote (-remote
l.,2.,3.pers) 3.pers)
II
(there)
± (xyz) means "neutral in respect to the feature (xyz)"

Fig.l
118 ULRIKE MOSEL
Morphemic transcription of the local deictics listed in Fig. 1:

a) ati: a -ti here
LOC- -here
ara: a -r -a down there in direction to the beach
LOC -there -down(beach)
arà\ a -r -ä up there in direction to the bush
LOC -there -up
arama.a -r -ama there straight upwards
LOC -there -straight
upwards
aro: a -r -o over there at the same level
LOC -there -same-level
aria: a -r -ia there inside
LOC -there -inside
arima: a -r -ima there up inside
LOC -there inside-up
arika: a -r -ika down there inside
LOC -there -inside-down
arua: a -r -ua behind there
LOC -there -behind
(b) uti: -ti hither
GOAL -here
r: -r -a down there in direction to the beach
GOAL -there -down-to-
the-beach
etc.
(c) (ma)mati: (ma)ma- -ti hence, from here
SOURCE -here
(ma)mara: (ma)ma -r -a from there down
SOURCE -there -down
(b each)
etc.
(d) akari: a -kari here at present near the
LOC -here-at-present- speaker
near-the-speaker
akana.a -kan -a down there (said of a thing or a
LOC -there/3.PERS -down third person
(beach)
akanä: a -kan -ä up there (said of a thing or a

LOC -there/3.PERS -up third person
(bush)
etc.
akamana: a -akamana there (said of a
LOC -there/3. PERS PROXIMATE thing or person near
speaker and hearer)
The first two classes to be distinguished are:

I. deictics indicating the speaker's position
II. deictics indicating some place which is not the speaker's position.
Class I comprises the items ati "here", uti "hither", (ma)mati "hence" and
akari "here at present". The three items ending in -ti refer to the speaker's
position as location of an action, thing or person, the goal or the source of an
action. The spatial extension of the location of the speaker referred to by the
deictics depends on the context and may vary between the point where he
stands in contrast to the addressee's position and the whole world in contrast
to heaven, for example:
(20) (a) atina pal here in the house
(b) ati na gunan here in the village
(c) ati Papua New Guinea here in Papua New Guinea
(d) ati ra rakarakanagunagunan here in the world
The prefix a- signifies that the place indicated is a place where an action, a per
son or an object is located, whereas u- and (ma)ma- mark that place as goal
and source respectively.
For example:
(21) (a) una van' ti come here
you/SG/TA go GOAL -here
(b) iau ga vana mama ti I went from here
I TA go SOURCE here
As can be seen from Fig. 1 these prefixes are found with all local deictics.
Akari "here at present" which is to be analysed as a + kari indicates a place
very close to the speaker where something is found ; it never refers to a place as
the location of an action. Thus, for instance, when pointing to the cigarettes in
one's own pocket one says:
120 ULRIKE MOSEL
Fig. 2
(22) a pinpin akari

ART cigarettes here
the cigarettes are here
Class II can be subclassified into 15 hierarchically ordered subclasses (X, XI,
VIII, IX, V', VF, VIF, 1 - 8; cf. Fig. 1 and Fig. 2).
Subclass XI consists only of the item akamana, which indicates that something
or somebody is located close to the speaker and hearer. It is typically used in
pointing to a nearby location where something may be found, for example:
(23) "Ma agu akave?"
And mine where
"Akamana ta ra iap" (Kl 452)
there on ART fire
"And where is my share (of food)?"
"There on the fire"
All items of class X share the common property of being indifferent with re
spect to the semantic feature of remoteness. Class X can be subdivided into
the two subclasses VIII and IX. The items of class VIII are marked by the stem
-r-, those of class IX by the stem -kan-. Similar to class III, class VIII can be
further subclassified into three classes ( V , VF, VIF) which are marked for
the semantic features of location, goal and source by the prefixes a-,u-, and
(ma)ma-, respectively.
The deictics of class IX refer to the location of an object, or of a person
who is neither the speaker nor the hearer, e.g.
(24) "Ba a vagam". "The moon"
PART ART moon
"Ma akave?" "And where is he?"
and where
"A -kan -ama iat ra kuba-na" "There in his hut"
LOC -there -up PART ART hut -his (Kl 403)
Though the person talked about may carry out an action, for example, eat, it is
not an action, but the person, which is indicated. In contrast, the correspond
ing forms of class VIII, i. e. the forms of subclass V' ara, arä etc., are used to in
dicate the action performed by somebody at a particular place. Compare:
122 ULRIKE MOSEL
(25) ma nam ra bul di ga kava a -r

and DEM ART child INDEF.PRON give-birth-to LOC-there-
-a (ra) valían, a tara na niuruna a -kan
down ART beach, ART PL relative-his LOC -there/3.PERS
-a V.
-down V.
INDEF.PRON = indefinite pronoun, comparable to German
man or French on
PL = plural marker
= connective particle
and that boy was born down there at the beach, his relatives (were)
down there in Vairiki (Kl 440)
(26) "Ba akaveV
PART where
"I ianian ra vudu a -kan -ama tane-
he eat ART banana LOC -there/3.PERS -up plantation
m".
-your/SG.
"Where is he?"
"He is eating bananas in your plantation up there?" (Kl 283)
The distinction between action and state is also expressed by contrasting inter
rogative pronouns. If it is the location of an action that is asked for, the inter
rogative pronoun is ave, but if one asks (as in (23), (24) and (26)), where some
body or something is, one uses akave:
(27) "Ma ra umana ngalana diat akave?"
And ART PL parent they/pl where
"Diat akanana umauma". (Kl 127)
they/pl there gardens
"Where are the parents?" "They are there in the gardens".
(28) "Dia papalum ave ?"
they/pl work where
"A -r -o Rabaul".
LOC -there-same-level R.
"Where do they work?" "In Rabaul".
Secondly, in contrast to the deictics of class V' {ara, ara...) those of class IX
(akana, akanä ... ) are not used in negative statements. In other words, if one
wants to say that something or somebody is not present at the indicated place,
one has to use the deictics of class V' instead of class IX. The reason is obvious
ly that absence implies removal, i.e. action, for example:
(29) ma pata umana tutana a -r -a ra kiki (Kl 463)
And no PL man LOC -there down ART seat
diat para -kan -ama na gunan
they/pl all LOC -there/3.PERS-up village
No men were at the meeting place. They were all in the village.
The distinction between deictics indicating the place of an action and those
pointing to the place of a person or thing (i.e. the contrast indicated by ara vs.
akana, etc.) is not found with the deictics of class VI' and VII, which indicate a
place as goal or source. This is because the notions of goal and source imply
motion, i.e. action, for example:
(30) a tutana ma -r -a Vairiki (Kl 454)
ART man SOURCE -there -down V.
a man from Vairiki, i.e. a man who has come from V (Kl 264)
"U mama -ve
you/SG SOURCE -where?"
"Iau ma -r -o Kunakunai."
I SOURCE -there same-level K.
"Where do you come from?" "I come from K."
Now it also becomes clear why the deictics of class IX (akana, akanä ...) are
never found in statements about the speaker (l.pers) or the hearer (2.per
son). For when talking about the actual present, both speaker and hearer are
present at the place referred to by ati "here", and when pointing to a place
where the speaker or hearer or both have been or will be, it is implicit that they
have moved away from that place to their present place or will move from
their present place to the other implicated place:
(31) iau/ I dor ga ki a -r -o
I you/SG we/DUALflNCL stay LOC -there-same-level
I / you / we stayed there
ina I una I dor a ki a -r -o
I-TA you-SG-TA we/DUAL/INCL stay LOC -there- same-
level
124 ULRIKE MOSEL
I / you / we will stay there

but
(32) *iaulul dorgaki - -
LOC -there/3.PERS -same level
The deictics of stem -r- and -kan- (class X) can be further subclassified into
eight subclasses5 which are distinguished by different suffixes specifying the
place indicated (cf. Fig. 1). -a (class 1) specifies the indicated place as located
somewhere in the direction of the beach, in contrast to -ä (class 2) "upwards in
the direction to the bush", or simply somewhere downwards in contrast to -
ama "straight upwards" (class 3). For example:
(33) a -r -a ra valían (M 50)
LOC -there -down ART beach
down there at the beach
(34) -r -ä ra pupui (Kl 135)
GOAL -there -up ART bush
up there to the bush
(35) "Ba dor a vana -r -a ra
valían" (M 50)
PART we/DUAL/INCL TA go GOAL -there -down ART
beach
"Let's go to the beach!"
(36) nina tikai i ga kao -r -ama liu (Kl 351)
DEM one he TA climb GOAL -there -up high-above
tikai i ga tur uka a -r -a ra pi
one he TA stand PART LOC -there -down ART ground
one climbed high up, the other remained standing on the ground
(37) / ga burau -r -a ra pi (Kl 142)
he TA fall GOAL-there -down ART ground
he fell down to the ground
(38) i 'irop mur ma -r -a na ta (M 266)
he get-out follow SOURCE -there -down sea
he climbed out of the sea following (him)
(39) i irop... ma -r -ama ra ula davai
(Kl 257)
he get-out.. SOURCE -there -up ART head tree
he climbed down the tree
Fig.3
126 ULRIKE MOSEL
- (class 4) refers to a place at the same level as the speaker's position. Thus if
one is situated in the costal village of Raluana, one uses aro, uro, (ma)maro
and akano to refer to Rabaul, which is situated on the coast as well (see Fig. 3) :
(40) / vana -r - Rabaul
he go GOAL -there same-level R.
he went to Rabaul
i lilikun mama -r -o Rabaul
he return SOURCE -there same-level R.
he returned from Rabaul
The deictics ending in -ia, -ima and -ika (class 5,6 and 7) indicate a place which
is "inside" something else, -ima means "inside above the speaker's position",
-ika "inside underneath the speaker's position" and -ia refers to the interior of
something that is neither above nor beneath the speaker's position (cf. Fig. 4).
Fig. 4
Examples:
(41) / ga kiki a -r -ia ra bala
na kunai
(M 210)
he TA sit LOC -there -inside ART interior grass
he was sitting inside the grass field
(42) ave ga gire nam ra magit a -r

we/PL/EXCL/TA see DEM ART thing LOC -there
-ima ra maup
-inside-up ART space,
we saw the thing there in the sky
(43) / ga pil me -r -ika , urika, urika
he jump with-it GOAL -there -inside-down
i ga tung (Kl 32)
it TA hole
he jumped with it deeply into the earth, it was a hole
-ua (class 8) signifies a place as situated behind or on the other side of some
thing, e.g.,
(44) a -r -ua ra rot
LOC -there -other-side ART road
there on the other side of the road
Apart from the subclasses of class VIII already discussed, there are four addi
tional subclasses which, to avoid confusion have not been described earlier.
These subclasses are derived by the affixes -ba- and -ka-.
If the place indicated as location, goal or source is near to the hearer or
has been already talked about and so is known to the hearer, the local deictics
of class VIII1 - 4 get an additional affix -ba- (this affix is not found with the
deictics of the subclasses 5 - 8, for unknown reasons), for example:
(45) a -ba -r -a
LOC -known-to-the-hearer -there -down
down there at a place near you, or that you know
(46) nurture ra ta , vana rav iau
you/SG know ART sea you/SG go lead I GOAL
-ba -r -a ta ra mama (Kl 487)
-known-to-the-hearer -there -down on ART reef
you know the sea, go and lead me to the reef
The destinative deictics of class VI', including those derived by -ba-, e.g. ura
...., ubara, can be extended by an affix -ka- which means "further on in the di
rection indicated by the simple form"; i.e. -ka- implies the notion of motion
towards a goal and therefore is not found with the deictics of class V' and V I I .
128 ULRIKE MOSEL
Examples:
(47) a -ba -r -a pata
LOC -known to the hearer -there -down not
-ka -r -a (Kl 37)
but GOAL -further-on there down
not down there (where you are), but (put it) further down
(48) una ki -ka -ba
you/SG sit GOAL -further-on -known-to-the-hearer
-r -a
-there -down
sit down farther away from that place where you are now
ma iau a ~ba -r -a
and I LOC -known-to-the-hearer -there -down
ra bit a ingarina (M 264)
ART base branch
and I (will be) at that place near the beginning of the branch where
you are now
The classes V', VI', and VII can now be subclassified as shown in Fig. 5.
(location)
( ± known to the (+ known to the

hearer) hearer)
1 ara abara
2 arä abarä
3 abarama
4 aro abaro
5 aria
6 arima
7 arika
8 ama
(goal)
(± known to the (+known to the

'hearer) 'hearer)
(± further on' (4- further on) (± further on) (+ further on)

1 ura ukara ubara ukabara
2 urä ? ubarä ?
3 urama ukarama ubarama ukabarama
4 uro ukaro ubaro ukabaro
5 una ukaria
6 urima ?
7 urika ukarika
8 urua ?
VII'
(source)
(± known to the (+ known to the

hearer) hearer)
1 (ma)mara
mabara
4 (ma)maro
5 (ma)maria mabaro
8 (ma)marua
(± xyz) means "neutral in respect to the feature indicated by 'xyz'"
Fig. 5
CONCLUSION
The class of Tolai local deictics consists of various hierarchically ordered

subclasses (cf. Fig. 6) which show different degrees of complexity.
130 ULRIKE MOSEL
Fig. 6
Thus class I ('here') is less complex than the corresponding class II ('there'),
and class XI (-remote) less complex than class X (± remote), since a place de
fined as identical with or close to the speaker's position does not need further
specification in order to be identified by the hearer, who can usually see the
speaker (the Tolai local deictics are not used for what Bühler (1934: 80) has
called 'Deixis am Phantasma').
Secondly, the class of local deictics indicating a place involved in an ac
tion (class VIII) is more complex than that class whose members refer to a
place as the location of static objects (class IX), since in the case of an action
the place must be specified as the location, goal or source of that action.
Thirdly, of the two classes of directional deictics, namely VI' and VII',
the class of destinative deictics (VI') is more complex (cf. Fig. 5). This can cer
tainly be explained by different communicative needs. It is usually more im
portant to get detailed information of the place toward which one moves than
of that from which one comes. Note in this respect that destinative deictics are
characteristically used in commands ('(go) to that place!'), which may even
lack a verb of motion, for example uro! "forward! go on!", ukara! "farther
down!", whereas maro!, etc. would not make sense.
NOTES
1) The following investigation is mainly based on data which I collected during six months field-
work in 1978, when I did research on language change and language mixing under the auspicies of
the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. Other sources are myths and legends edited by missionar
ies (Kleintitschen 1924; Meier 1909), a dictionary by Meyer (1961) and texts collected by myself in
1976 (Mosel 1977). The quoted examples are mostly taken from Meier (1909; abbr. M.) and Klein-
titschen (1924; abbr. Kl) in order to make it possible to control them in their wider context. In those
instances which show variation in the different dialects we have only taken usage in the dialect of
Raluana into account.
2) The Tolai examples are written in the orthography used by the Methodist Church, the only ex
ception being that the contrast between /a/ and which is neglected in that orthography, is ren
dered by a and ä. A brief description of Tolai phonology is given in Mosel "Tolai and Tok Pisin".
3) For further information see Mosel 1979a, 1979b, 1980.
4) The simple form refers to the past tense. Present tense is usually expressed by reduplication.
5) Bley (1912), who describes the dialect of Volavolo, mentions a further class of deictics
marked by the suffix -e, which means "sidewards".
REFERENCES
Beaumont, C.H. (1972): New Ireland languages: A Review. In papers in Lin

guistics of Melanesia No. 3. Pacific Linguistics, Series A. No. 35. Canber
ra.
Bley, B. (1912): Praktisches Handbuch zur Erlernung der Nordgazellen-
Sprache. Münster: Westfälische Vereinsdruckerei.
Bühler, K. (1934): Sprach theorie. Jena: Fischer.
Capell, A. (1971a): The Austronesian Languages of Australian New Guinea.
In Sebeok, T.A. (ed.), Current Trends in Linguistics. Vol. 8, The Hague.
Capell, A. (1971b): Arosi Grammar. Pacific Linguistics, Series B. Mono
graphs, No. 20. Canberra.
Kleintitschen, A. (1924): Mythen und Erzählungen eines Melanesier
Stammes aus Paparatava, Neu-Pommern, Südsee. St. Gabriel-Mölding.
Meier, J. (1909): Mythen und Erzählungen der Küstenbewohner der Gazelle-
Halbinsel. Münster: Aschendorff.
Meyer, O. (1961): Wörterbuch der Tuna-Sprache, MBA Vol. 34. St. Augu
stin bei Bonn. Microfilm.
Mosel, U. (1977): Tolai Texts. Kivung. Journal of the Linguistic Society of
Papua New Guinea 10, No. 1 & 2.1-XIV, 1-175.
Mosel, U. (1979a): Kultur- und Sprachwandel bei den Tolai in Papua New
Guinea. Paper read at the Institut für Indonesische und Südsee Sprachen,
132 ULRIKE MOSEL
Hamburg.
Mosel, U. (1979b): Early Language Contact between Tolai, Pidgin and Eng
lish in the Light of its Sociolinguistic Background (1875-1914). Papers of
Pidgin and Creole Linguistics No. 2, Pacific Linguistics, Series A. No. 57.
Canberra.
Mosel, U. (1980): The influence of the Church Missions on the Development
of Tolai. Paper read at Deutscher Orientalisten Tag. 24.-29.3.1980. Ber
lin.
Mosel, U. (1980): Tolai and Pisin. Pacific Linguistics, Series B. Mono
graphs. No. 73. Canberra.
THE SYSTEM OF LOCAL DEIXIS IN SPANISH
PRISKA-MONIKA HOTTENROTH
The system of local deixis in Spanish offers a remarkable variety of forms.

If we leave out of consideration the rather rare demonstrative adverbs,
aquende 'on this side (of)' and allende 'on the other side (of)', which have
practically dropped out of use in current Spanish, and the equally rare rem
nant of another subsystem1 which is no longer in existence, acullá 'yonder',
there remain five demonstrative adverbs acquí, acá, ahí, allí, allá, and three
demonstrative pronouns este, ese, aquel.
The Spanish demonstrative pronouns are entity-referring expressions,
and as such are marked as to number and gender. They constitute the follow
ing paradigm:
masculine feminine neuter
este esta esto
singular ese esa eso
aquel aquella aquello
estos estas
plural esos esas
aquellos aquellas
The singular and plural forms of the masculine and feminine demonstrative
pronouns can have both nominal and determiner function. As nomináis, they
usually carry the accent on the stressed syllable: éste, ése, acquél, etc. 2 The
neuter forms are restricted to singular, nominal use. As there is no need to dif
ferentiate between nominal and determiner functions, the neuter has no ac
cent.
The Spanish local deictic system is of special interest since it allows for
differentation between three different spatial regions. The meaning of the de
monstrative pronouns is usually specified as follows:
Este refers to an entity somewhere near the speaker:
134 PRISKA-MONIKA HOTTENROTH
este libro
this book 3
If combined with a place-referring expression, it refers to the location of the
speaker:
en este lugar (esta habitación, esta ciudad, etc.), donde yo estoy
in this place (this room, this town, etc.), where I am
Ese refers to an entity either near the addressee or at a medial distance from
the speaker:
ese libro que tienes en la mano
the book you have in your hand
esa casa ahí enfrente
the house over there in front of us
Combined with a place-referring expression, ese refers to the location of the
addressee or a location near him or at a medial distance:
en ese lugar (esa ciudad, etc.) donde tú estás
in the place (the town, etc.) where you are
Aquel is negatively defined with respect to both the speaker's and the addres
see's place or region of proximity ; it refers to an entity or—if combined with a
place-referring expression — to a place, which is neither near the speaker nor
the addressee:
aquella montaña, allí, en la lejanía
those mountains there in the distance
The fact that the series of place-referring demonstratives consists not only of
three, but of five demonstrative adverbs can be explained historically. Latin
originally possessed different series for locational and directional demonstra
tive adverbs; in the course of the development from the Latin to the Spanish
system, these semantic differentiations were lost, so that nowadays a series
ending in -i (from the Latin -ic forms 'hic', 'illic') coexists with a series ending
in -á (derived from Latin -ac forms 'hac', 'iliac'), both of which can refer to a
location as well as to the destination of movement.
The demonstrative adverbs ending in -i constitute a tripartite system of
local deixis, strictly parallel to that of the demonstrative pronouns.
Aquí is generally interpreted as referring either to, or near, the speaker's loca
tion:
aquí, en este lugar (esta ciudad, etc.), donde yo estoy
here in this place, where I am
aquí, en este lugar cerca de mí
here in this place near me
LOCAL DEIXIS IN SPANISH 135
Ahí refers either to the addressee's location, to a location near him, or to one
at a medial distance
ahí, en ese lugar, donde tú estás
there, in the place, where you are
ahí, en ese lugar cerca de tí
there, in that place near you
Allí is negatively defined with respect to the speaker's and addressee's loca
tion and their respective regions of proximity; i.e. it refers to a place neither
near the speaker nor the addressee:
allí, en aquel lugar, lejos de nosotros
there, in that place, distant from both of us4
The second series of demonstrative adverbs ending in -á constitutes only
a bipartite system. Acá refers to the speaker's location or something near him,
i.e. it is fairly equivalent to aquí. Allá is negatively defined with respect to the
speaker's location and his region of proximity; i.e. it refers to a place which is
not the speaker's, nor near him, and is thus roughly equivalent to allí. In this
series there is no medial form corresponding to ahí. Thus while the adverbs
ending in -i differentiate three spatial regions, the series ending in -á only dif
ferentiates two.
An interesting problem, much discussed in Spanish linguistics, concerns
whether a semantic difference still remains between aquí and acá, and allí and
allá, and if so what constitutes this difference. Acá and allá are generally said
to refer more vaguely to a location than do aquí and allí. This hypothesis is
supported by the fact that acá and allá admit grading (e.g. más acá, muy acá,
más allá, muy allá), which is clearly unacceptable with aquí, ahí, and allí. In
addition acá and allá are preferred in constructions containing verbs of move
ment, where they function to denote the direction or destination of the move
ment.
Yet some linguists argue that aquí and acá are equivalent in most of the
constructions in which they occur (of course with the exception of combina
tions with más and muy), and that the difference is only a question of regional
preference; e.g., in many parts of South America only acá occurs. (For an ex
tensive discussion, see Gerrard (1968)).
We will not go further into this question here, since in this paper we will
focus on the actual functioning of a system which — like the Spanish demon
strative system — maintains a differentiation between three spatial regions.
Among the major Romance languages, only Spanish and Portuguese ap-
pear to possess a tripartite system of local deixis analogous to the Latin tripar
tite system hic-iste-illic. The majority of these languages have reduced their
local deictic systems to binary ones, consisting of a differentiation between the
speaker's region of proximity and a region which is defined negatively with re
spect to the speaker; i.e. a region of non-proximity. (That is to say, if a third
element exists in the system, none of the three demonstratives indicates a re
gion which includes the addressee). For instance French differentiates be
tween ici and là, celui-ci and celui-là. It also contains a third element là-bas,
and linguists do not agree on whether the system is tripartite or bipartite (or
even if there is a tendency to further reduction of the system, cf. Frei (1944));
none of the three elements, however, relates directly to the addressee. The
case is different in both Italian and Catalan. Traditionally, grammars and dic
tionaries have described these local deictic systems as tripartite, although cur
rent use reflects only a binary system. Thus we find for Catalan the demon
strative pronouns aquest, aqueix, aquell and the demonstrative adverbs act,
aquí, allí, cf. Fabra (1932). But Badía Margarit (1952) has shown that aqueix
and aquí, which formerly referred to the addressee's region, have become
semantically equivalent to aquest and aci; all now refer to the speaker's re
gion. Aquest and aqueix as well as aci and aquí currently appear to differ only
in their regional distribution.
In Italian grammars we usually find the pronoun questo and the adverb
qui for the speaker's region, codesto and costi for the addressee's region, and
the pronoun quello and the adverb /¿negatively defined with respect to both of
these two regions (cf. Battaglia - Pernicone 1965: 257,400). But, although still
used in the Tuscanian dialects, codesto and costi have practically dropped out
of use in Standard Italian. This is not contradicted by very rare occurrences of
codesto in Standard Italian, which can be attributed to the fact that occasional
use of archaic language as well as quotations of or allusions to classical litera
ture — often as a mean of irony—play a rather extraordinary part in everyday
Italian communication. Furthermore, rare occurrences in very formal episto
lary style or legal language cannot be considered as more than vestiges of an
older state of the language.
In contrast to these languages, the Spanish system of local deixis — at
least as it is generally described and semantically analysed — is structured
consistently with and in ideal parallelism to the other deictic systems of the
personal pronouns and the possessives. By means of the personal pronouns
the speaker immediately refers to the participant-roles of the communicative
situation: speaker, addressee and "third person". Possessive pronouns imme-
diately apply to a "third person"-entity, but they relate it to one of these three
roles; e.g. "tu" in "tu madre" relates "madre" to the addressee. Similary, de
monstrative pronouns express a relation of proximity to the participant roles,
e.g. "eso libro" expresses a proximity relation between "libro" and the ad
dressee (cf. Heger 1965). Thus, there seems to be a perfect parallelism be
tween the three systems:
yo tú él
mi tu su
este ese aquel
aquí ahí allí
Our task will now be to confront this standard analysis of the system with
the behavior of individual demonstratives in actual speech.
As is well known, demonstrative pronouns and adverbs have a rich varie
ty of functions, e.g. 'deixis ad oculos', deixis to entities not present in the situa
tion, anaphora, temporal deixis, etc. The most elementary use, basic to all
other uses, is that of the canonical situation of utterance (Lyons 1977: 634):
face-to-face communication, with participants able to see each other as well as
the object to which the speaker refers. For the moment we will limit our exam
ination to this primary use of the demonstratives, what Bühler (1934: 81ff.)
has called 'demonstratio ad oculos'.
If we try to imagine in a situation of 'demonstratio ad oculos' different
possible spatial constellations which can occur between speaker, addressee
and object or place referred to, it soon becomes evident that the standard
semantic analysis of demonstratives corresponds to only two very special types
of situations. The first of these situations is that in which the speaker uses aquí
or este, along with a place-referring expression (e.g. en este lugar — in this
place), to refer to a rather limited area which includes his own immediate posi
tion, and excludes the addressee's location. Correspondingly, the region to
which he refers with ahí or ese in combination with a place-referring expres
sion, consists of a small area which includes the addressee's location. By
means of aquel and allí the speaker refers to all other locations.
The second constellation reflected in the standard analysis of the system
is, as we have seen, one in which the speaker refers by means of este and aquí
to a place or entity which does not include his immediate position, but is within
his region of proximity. In other words, the referant is either within the speak
er's immediate reach, on his body, or otherwise objectively close to him. Enti
ties or places near the addressee are referred to by means of ese or ahí and all
others by means of allí and aquel. Such a situation is given, for instance, when
each communicative participant holds the object referred to in his (her) hand:
este libro que tengo en la mano
this book which I have in my hand
ese libro que tienes en la mano
that book which you hold in your hand
aquel libro
that book (which neither you nor I hold and which is not near to either
of us)
Both of these constellations share the common property that reference to a li
mited area surrounding the speaker is made by means of este and aquí, and
reference to an equally limited area around the addressee is made using ese
and ahí; both regions can be characterized as 'regions of proximity'. The
meanings usually attributed to the demonstratives, i.e. the semantic analysis
of the system as given as above, suggest that reference to a speaker's or hear
er's region of proximity is, if not the only, at least the most typical and elemen
tary use of demonstratives in the situation of 'demonstratio ad oculos'.
It is a commonplace, however, that this is not so; i.e. neither este and
aquí, nor ese and ahí, are limited to references to the region of proximity of,
respectively, the speaker or the addressee. In fact, such cases are only rather
special instances of 'demonstrado ad oculos'. Before discussing this point fur
ther, it will be useful to clarify the concept of 'region of proximity'. It is in
structive for this purpose to examine the other important system for the ex
pression of spatial relations in our languages, that of the local prepositions. In
spite of important differences in the semantic structure and syntax of preposi
tions and demonstratives, there are some equally important analogies be
tween local references expressed by means of prepositions, and those ex
pressed by demonstratives.
Firstly, the semantic structure of both types of local expressions is funda
mentally the same, since in either case an object X is placed in a particular spa
tial relation to an object Y. In the case of local prepositional phrases, the ob
ject X, the type of relation, and the object Y are all explicitly realized,
the book (is) on the shelf
whereas in the case of demonstratives, the type of relations as well as the object
Y (speaker, addressee, or neither) remain implicit.
A second similarity regards those prepositions which organize the space
around a given object as in to the right of, to the left of above, below, in front
of, behind, etc. Such prepositions are sometimes treated as an extension of the
deictic system (for example, Vernay (1979)). But we will limit ourselves here
to that analogy between the two systems which is of the greatest significance in
the present context; namely that most prepositions which organize the space
around a given object express a local relation within a kind of 'region of prox
imity'. There are intuitively felt limits to the distances at which an object's lo
cation may be reasonably referred to as to the right of (or above, etc.) the ob
ject Y. In other words, objects X which are in spatial relations such a these to
an object Y, must at the same time be somewhat near to object Y. The boun
daries of this region of proximity are rather vague, and seem to vary from one
context to another, being determined by such factors as the relative size of the
objects referred to. There seems, however, to be a certain intersubjective
agreement concerning what may be considered 'near' an object and what is
not; even though the boundaries are blurred, there appears to be some corre
spondence to objective experience.
Although at first sight the concept of 'region of proximity' associated with
these prepositions seems to be the same as that associated with the demonstra
tives, this is not at all so, for the simple reason that neither este and aquí, nor
ese and ahí, are used only for ostensive reference to places or objects within
such a region of proximity to the speaker or hearer, respectively. A speaker
can, for instance, equally well say:
aquí, en esta habitación
here in this room
aquí, en esta ciudad
here in this town
aquí, en este país
here, in this country
aquí, en este mundo
here, in this world
This shows that the region referred to by means of este and aquí can be rather
small and thus incidentally identical with the speaker's objective region of
proximity, yet can also be so large as to extend far beyond such an objective
region.
In these examples este and aquí refer to a region which includes the
speaker's immediate location. But we can observe quite the same mechanism
when the speaker refers to entities which do not include his immediate posi
tion. Este and aquí are not used solely to refer to places and entities objective
ly near the speaker, i.e. within a region of proximity in the same sense as the
region of proximity associated with certain prepositions, but may refer to very
different distances as well. Thus the speaker can for instance use esta casa 4his
house' to refer both to a house directly in front of him as well as to houses fur
ther away in the landscape. This fact was seen quite clearly by Bühler
(1934:100).
Just as the use of este and aquí is not limited to an objective region of
proximity around the speaker, there is similarly no such region surrounding
the addressee to which the use of ese and ahí is limited. In other words, ese and
ahí can, but need not necessarily, refer to a limited area which includes the im
mediate position of the addressee, nor must they necessarily refer to an entity
or place within his region of proximity. In contrast with the first person de
monstratives este and aquí, this is not only a question of extending the region
associated with the addressee, but the use of ese and ahí quite often implies no
connection whatsoever with the second person.
If for instance the speaker says:
Salimos ahí fuera!
Let's go (there) outside!
or:
De ahí dentro no nos pueden ver
From in there they cannot see us
or:
Me voy a dar una vuelta por ahí
I'll go away for a walk
Se ha ido por ahí a no sé que sitio del extranjero
He (or she) has gone to I don't know which part of the world
it is quite clear that the place to which ahí refers, is not the addressee's loca
tion, and in fact can even be — as in the last example — a place objectively
very far removed from both speaker and addressee.
This demonstrates clearly that neither the first person demonstratives
este and aquí nor the second person demonstratives ese and ahí are positively
marked with respect to the speaker's or the hearer's region of proximity, con
trary to what is suggested by the standard semantic descriptions of the demon
stratives.
One might now be tempted to start the semantic description of the de
monstratives the other way round, by taking este and aquí, which as we have
seen can point everywhere, to be unmarked elements with respect to distances
(or any region of proximity), and ese, ahí and aquel and allí as negatively
marked elements with respect to an objectively conceived — even if only vag

uely defined — region of proximity to the speaker. Aquel and allí would then
again be negatively defined with respect to the region of ahí and ese, i.e. as
even further away. This would mean, in other words, that neither ese nor ahí
nor — much less than these — aquel nor allí, could be used by the speaker to
refer to entities somewhat close to himself, i.e. within an objective region of
proximity. The concept of proximity, then, would enter here in the negative
definition of ese and ahí and aquel and allí. In fact, this is suggested by the de
finitions usually given by dictionaries and grammars for aquel and allí, as re
ferring to an object distant from the speaker and addressee (cf. footnote 4).
However, the following example shows that this is not the correct description
of the meanings of the demonstratives. Imagine the speaker, for instance, as a
patient pointing to different places on his own body in order to show the doc
tor where he feels the pain. In this case he can use este and aquí as well as ese
and ahí and even aquel and allí, although taken objectively, all places referred
to are on his own body and therefore undoubtedly within his region of proxim
ity. The same applies when, for instance, the speaker differentiates between
different points on an object placed directly in front of him or different objects
immediately in front of him. This, too, was seen quite clearly by Bühler
(1934:100).
The preceding example shows that ese and ahí as well as aquel and allí are
not negatively defined with respect to an objective region of proximity of the
speaker. Yet there are examples which seem to contradict this statement. If,
for instance, the speaker has an object — let us say a book — in each hand, he
can differentiate them in French by referring to the one with celui-ci and to the
other with celui-là. Similarly in German the speaker may use dies and das da
(although not jener and dort), and in English, this and that. One cannot do the
same in Spanish, for it is only este and aquí which can be used here, certainly
not aquel and allí (informants differ as to whether ese and ahí can be used in
this situation). Discriminating the different objects is only possible by adding
the non-spatial element otro: este — este otro, 'this' — 'the other one'. Thus:
este libro aquí en mi derecha y este (otro) libro aquí en mi izquierda
this book here in my right hand and that book in my left
(cf. Bádía Margarit 1952:100)
This example again supports the concept of a region of proximity of the speak
er, from which aquel and allí, at least, are excluded.
If we compare these two seemingly contradictory examples, it becomes
obvious that the solution to the problem cannot be related to the speaker's ob-
jective region of proximity, because in both cases the objects or places re
ferred to are undoubtedly within such a region. In spite of this, however, the
first constellation allows the use of ese and ahí and aquel and allí, whereas the
second does not, at least, allow aquel and allí. Thus it is clear that the demon
stratives can be defined neither positively nor negatively with respect to an ob-
jective region of proximity. Attempts of this kind to determine the meaning of
the demonstratives are far too concrete and material, whereas their meaning
is in fact very abstract, being similar to a mathematical or logical formula with
constants and variables.
If we tentatively try to define the content of this formula, we must first
state that extensions of regions — and thus distances — are only variables in
the formula. For there is no objective quantitative local information available
in the demonstratives. A first constant in the formula specifies the type of in
terrelation, in the form of an opposition between each demonstrative and the
remaining two; in other words each demonstrative is negatively defined with
respect to the two others. A second constant specifies the sequential order of
the regions referred to by the demonstratives, in the egocentrically organized
space around the speaker. This space is organized as follows. The regions of
este and aquí, of ese and ahí, and of aquel and allí are taken to form concentric
circles around the ego, i.e. the speaking subject. Of these, the este-aqui region
is the innermost circle which contains the ego, or origo of the "Zeigfeld"
(Bühler, 1934). As ese and ahí refer to places or entities which are neither
within the speaker's region, nor as far away as those indexed by aquel and allí,
their region begins at the boundaries of the este-aqui region and constitutes a
second circle deliminating the speaker's region. The ese-ahi region is in turn
delimited by the aquel-alli region.
Thus, the concept of distance reappears with regard to the varying distan
ces from the speaker of these three regions. But in contrast to the definitions
of the demonstratives cited above, the concept of distance in this case is much
more abstract since it must be taken only in a relative sense; it has nothing to
do with objectively delimitable regions of proximity. This means that the rela
tion of ese and ahí to the addressee can — if we accept the formula — no long-
ger be considered part of the meaning of ese and ahí. We will return to this
point below.
As the extension of each region referred to by some demonstrative in a
given context is no more than a variable in an abstract meaning formula, the
system can work as well within a small area around the speaker as in much
larger areas which extend far beyond objective proximity.
This explains why all three demonstratives can refer to entities or places
within a very limited region — as exemplified, for instance, in the case (see
above) of a speaker indicating different places on his own body — as well as
why they can refer to objects that are objectively distant from the speaker and
perhaps also from the addressee.
It explains as well why the speaker can initially use este and aquí to point
to an entity or place and subsequently use one of the other demonstratives to
indicate the same or equi-distant objects. Take for example:
Aquí (en este habitación), hace siempre mucho calor. Pues, siéntate
ahí, a la ventana abierta.
Here (in this room) it is always very hot. Sit down there near the open
window.
Aquí here refers to the whole room; ahí then delimits a region within this
room as excluded from the speaker's region of aquí. Each time a demonstra
tive is used, the opposition and sequence of the formula is part of its meaning.
Thus it carries the complete repartition of space within itself, so that a change
in referring form from one moment to the next from aquí to ahí (and even to
allí) — reflects only the speaker's decision to change the repartition of his ego
centric space, but contains no quantitative locative information (for a relativi-
zation of this statement, see below).
If we again compare the two examples given above, that of the speaker's
references to his body vs. his references to two objects he holds in his hands,
the significant difference is that only in the first case does a differentiation of at
least minimal distances come into play between the speaker and the various
points he refers to. For it is not necessarily the speaker's whole body which is
the origo of the "Zeigfeld", but rather something much smaller which seems
to be situated in the speaker's head and most probably, from a psychological
point of view, between or behind the eyes; a point from which he can refer to
places on his own body as relatively nearer to, or further from, this centre. In
the second instance, in contrast, there are no readily perceptible differences in
distance between the speaker and a book in his one hand, vs. the speaker and a
book in his other hand.
In this regard Spanish offers a clear difference from French, English or
German. While in these latter three languages the oppositional members of
the local deictic system can be used to differentiate the objects in each hand,
the oppositional members of the Spanish system cannot be used to this pur
pose. The reason, as mentioned above, is the lack of an opposition in distance
between the two objects. Apparently the use of the different oppositional
members in Spanish presupposes that there there is a real, at least minimal op
position of distance between two (or three) indicated entities. The system of
demonstratives in Spanish seems therefore to be more concretely based, re
flecting to a greater extent the experience of real space than does English,
German or French. Although the meaning formula for demonstratives im
plies that each element stands in opposition to the other, and although the na
ture of this opposition — strictly characterized in Spanish as a sequence of
concentric circles centered on the speaker — seems to be at the basis of other
systems as well (French, English, German), the contrast has become weak
enough in these systems to allow optional use; the spatial component has been
extenuated in those uses in which celui-ci and celui-là, this and that are used to
indicate two objects which are each at the same distance from the speaker.
Such an extenuation seems also to be at the basis of such French and German
uses of the demonstratives as:
Ich bin da
Je suis là
(I am here)
or:
Ist er da?
Est-il là?
(Is he here?)
However, this can also be interpreted as a transfer of the origo from the
speaker to the addressee. We will not follow this issue here, but it must be kept
in mind that such uses of ahí or allí are strictly forbidden in Spanish.
*yo estoy ahí
*yo estoy allí
are contradictions, whereas
Está ahí?
Está allí?
simply do not have the meaning of the French and German example, i.e.
'here, in the place where we are'. As shown by Badia Margarit (1952:22ff.),
this fact appears closely related to the fact that all uses of the deictic verb venir
'to come' in Spanish presuppose that the destination of movement is the
speaker himself. This contrasts with English, French, and Catalan, in which,
while the destination is usually the speaker, under certain conditions of usage
it may be the addressee. The transfer of origo to the addressee is not possible
in Spanish. Thus, if movement is towards the addressee, venir must be re

placed by ir 'to go'. Compare for instance:
Juan, te han llamado dos veces. —Voy en seguida.
Jean, on vous a appelé deux fois. — Je viens tout de suite.
John, they called you twice. — I'll come.
It appears that the functioning of a tripartite system, such as the Spanish local
deictic system, is more dependant than bipartite systems on a material basis of
distance oppositions, and on the stability of the origo in the speaker.
If we now compare what has so far been said about the abstract formula
for demonstratives with their definitions in grammars and dictionaries, we
find that only very rarely do these definitions reflect the fact that the concept
of nearness or distance in the demonstratives is not an objective concept but a
relative one, a notion which we have tried to make explicit above. Thus we
find in the Vox Diccionario General Ilustrado de la Lengua Española (1964):
este, ... con que se designa lo que está más próximo a la persona que
habla. ...
(which refers to that which is nearer to the speaker).
ese,... con que se designa lo que está más cerca de la persona con quien
se habla.
(which refers to that which is nearer to the addressee).
Here the comparative is used to express the notion of relativeness. Yet it is
dropped in the definition of aquel and aquí:
aquel... que designa la persona o cosa que está lejos des que habla y del
que escucha.
(which refers to the person or object which is distant from the speaker
and the hearer).
aquí... señala el lugar en que se halla el que habla o próximo a él...
(signals the speaker's position or one close to it).
Ahí and allí are defined via the demonstrative pronouns: en ese lugar and en
aquel lugar respectively.
Thus, these cases suggest that the concept of distance in demonstratives
must be taken in a relative sense. But they are rare, and they never clearly and
unambiguously state that information concerning objective distance is not
part of the meaning of demonstratives.
However, the majority of grammars and dictionaries do not mention this
fact at all. Compare for instance the definitions given in the Diccionario de la
Lengua Española de la Real Academia Española (1970). A single example is
representative of all others:

este ... designa(n) lo que está cerca de la persona que habla ...
(refers to what is near the speaker)
ese ... designa(n) lo que está cerca de la persona con quien se habla
(refers to what is near the addressee)
aquel... designa(n) lo que física o mentalmente está lejos de la persona
que habla y de la persona con quien se habla
(refers to what is physically or mentally distant from the speaker and
the addressee). 5
The idea that objective and not only relative distance is implicit in the use of
demonstratives is also suggested in dictionary and grammar descriptions of se
condary meanings. Dictionary entries often give more than one meaning for a
demonstrative. Some of these different meanings correspondend to the var
ious functions of the demonstratives when transferred to other referential
fields ("Zeigfelder"); for instance their anaphoric functions or their temporal
use, etc.
These functions do not interest us here since they are only a kind of metaphor-
ic or figurative transfer of the original meaning in the 'demonstratio ad oculos'
situation to the expression of other relations conceived as analogous to this
primary situation.
But often, dictionary entries also include additional meanings of individ
ual demonstratives in 'demonstratio ad oculos', other than the primary one
quoted above. These further meanings make quite obvious the fact that there
truly is a concept of objective distance at the basis of the understanding of the
demonstratives.
For instance, the Diccionario Histórico de la Lengua Española de la Real
Academia, which treats aquí and α/iívery extensively, attributes to ahí the fol
lowing primary meaning:
8. adv. 1. En ese lugar, en lugar no lejano de la persona que habla
(in that place, in a place not far from the speaker)
and it gives examples for this use such as the following:
Ya está ahí — exclamó con voz trémula al ver (...) la (...) silueta de la
huérfana de Joseito
(There she is — she exclaimed when she saw (...) the silhouette (...) of
the orphan of Joseito . !)6
While in this and similar examples, ahí is interpreted as referring to a place in
cluded in the speaker's region, Wandruszka (1969:302) goes even further in
stating that ahí is not necessarily in opposition to aquí since ahí can refer to a
region which includes the speaker's position. He gives the following example
(p. 301; cf. also Molho 1968):
¿Qué haces por ahí a estas horas?
What are you doing here at this time of the day?
(German: Hier (or da), French: par-la)
The interpretation of these examples suggests that under certain conditions,
which are not quite clear but in which a certain vagueness in the reference to
the place is often said to play a part, ahi intrudes into the semantic domain of
aquí. Such interpretations, however, presuppose an objective extension of
the speaker's region and an understanding of where its boundaries are nor
mally to be expected.
For if one accepts what has been said above — repartition of space de
pends only on a subjective mental act of the speaker, i. e. that there is no quan
titative local information in the demonstratives—then there is no basis for the
above interpretation of these examples. If the speaker himself determines the
boundaries of his region of proximity, then what is located in the first example
is a third person (she) and in the second example the addressee (you). By us
ing ahí the speaker has placed the boundary of his region between himself and
the person he refers to.
The fact that in all these examples ahícan easily be replaced by aquí with
out a significant change of meaning regarding the locations referred to, seems
to support the hypothesis that ahí is here semantically equivalent to aquí.
But if it is the speaker's subjective decision which determines the varia
bles of extension and distance, and sets the boundaries of the oppositional re
gions , then the choice of demonstrative says more about the speaker's attitude
toward the spatial relations around him then about any objective local infor
mation; for by referring to an object or place with este or aquíthe speaker says
in some way that he has placed no boundary between himself and the object or
place referred to. Therefore in my opinion there is no unmarked element
among the demonstratives; each is negatively defined with respect to all oth
ers. By referring to an object or place with ese or ahí the speaker places a
boundary between himself and the entity or place referred to.
By the mere existence of oppositional members este and aquí imply a pos
itive interest of the speaker, since he refers to the object or place as belonging
to what he subjectively decides to be his region; whereas he could equally well
have excluded it from his region by using one of the other demonstratives. The
boundaries of the speaker's region are set up according to his interest and can
not be experienced objectively.
In contrast to aquí, ahí does not contain this positive interest, a fact con
sistent with the observation that the place referred to by ahí is often felt to be
referred to in a rather vague way (Molho 1969).
In fact, the motivation for such delimination, e.g. for choosing ese or ahí
instead of este and aquí, may be a purely emotional attitude towards the indi
cated object. This seems to be at the basis of the special, secondary meaning
which ese has developed in Spanish: it can have a decidedly pejorative effect,
especially—but not only—when it is postponed and refers to persons present
in the situation; it then expresses the speaker's negative attitude toward the
entity referred to.
¿Qué quiere el hombre ese de mí? or: ese hombre
What does that man want from me?
¡Mira ese borracho!
Look at that drunkard!
This negative meaning seems to be the result of a development which began
with the speaker's interest in signaling that the object referred to does not be
long to what he has decided to be his region; the meaning subsequently be
came independent from any local relations. It is interesting to note that it is the
demonstrative beyond the first border set by the speaker which developed this
meaning, rather than aquel.
Let us now return to our argument. If, contrary to our interpretation, the
examples of ahí cited above are interpreted as equivalent to aquí, there is a
presupposed understanding of the extension of the region to which este and
aquí normally refer. To this, the reference of ahí in this individual case is con
fronted with the result that both, objectively, refer to the same distance; with
respect to objective local information both seem to be mutually replaceable in
this particular instance. Similarly, in a sentence like
¿Usted a estas horas por aqui? — He comido ahí cerca.
You here at this time of the day? — I had supper at some place in the
neighbourhood.
ahí is interpreted as referring to a place within the region of proximity of the
speaker (see Cuervo 1886). This interpretation is due both to a presupposed
understanding of the extension of the speaker's region of proximity and at the
same time is influenced by the presence of the adverb cerca 'near'. While cerca
usually denotes a region of proximity to its reference object — in this case, the
speaker — this meaning is only accidental to ahí and not a part of its meaning.
Yet even if one considers distance information to be merely relative, and
this can explain away the examples used to support the hypothesis that the re
gions of ahí and aqui (and ahí and allí) may overlap, the question still remains:
what is the source of those definitions which state that este and aquí refer to an
entity or place near the speaker (or to his region), ese and ahí refer to an entity
or place near the addressee, and aquel and allí to an entity or place distant
from both. Why are such definitions ubiquitous?
Although the demonstratives themselves do not carry other local infor
mation than the oppositional structure of the system and the sequential order
of the regions in egocentric space, a vague expectation seems to exist in each
individual context concerning the extension of the regions, i.e. where a speaker
will most likely refer with este and aquí, ese and ahí or aquel and allí. This is re
lated to the probability of the speaker referring to a given type of object in a
given context, which in turn is determined, or at least influenced, by what has
just been talked about or by the location of the speaker and the addressee. A
listener will, for instance, have quite different expectations concerning the
distances to which a speaker will point, depending on whether speaker and lis
tener are talking about mountains in a landscape which both can see, about
houses in a street in which both are standing, about furniture in a room in
which they are sitting, or about insects they see in front of them.
However, within the range of these individual constellations there is a
sub-group of objects of given dimensions with which one has the most fre
quent physical and thus spatial interaction. Their dimensions are related to
the normal radius of perception, action and movement. There is perhaps a
vague region within which 'demonstratio ad oculos' occurs most frequently;
perhaps a repartition of this region by the demonstratives is in some manner
connected with this most frequent situation. Hypothetically this could influ
ence a hearer who has not been otherwise prepared by linguistic or extralingu-
istic context, to have a certain average expectation of the location to which este
and aquí, ese and ahí or aquel and allí will most probably refer.
It must be stressed that such a hypothesis is not intended to imply that we
drop the abstract definition of the demonstratives, attributing to them after
all information about quantitative local relations. I want to maintain that ob
jective distances are variables in the meaning of the demonstratives, since
otherwise the whole system could not function as well within extremely small
areas around the speaker as in extremely large regions. But the hypothesis
that, lacking specific information from the linguistic or extralinguistic con-
text, the hearer will have a certain avarage expectation concerning the de
monstratives, supplies an explanation for such definitions of the demonstra
tives as aquí and este referring to an entity or place near the speaker, ese and
ahí referring to a medial distance, and aquel and allí to a further distance.
And it might also explain the association of ese and ahí with the addressee's re
gion of proximity.
The delimitation of what the speaker decides as belonging to his own re
gion must necessarily play a rather important part in everyday face-to-face
communication. It is highly probable that the speaker will set up the boundar
ies of his own region between himself and the addressee and what the speaker
thinks of as belonging to him. It might be that this statistical probability has
led to the frequent connection of the second person. Another fact explained
by this hypothesis is the following. When aquel and allí are used alone, and
thus not in explicit opposition to the other demonstratives, to refer to an ob
jective region of proximity around the speaker, their use is felt to be rather un
usual , if not unacceptable (given that the hearer is not prepared for such an ex
tremely narrow repartition of space on the part of the speaker). As soon as an
explanation for such a repartition is at hand, for instance if the speaker points
to very small objects within his region of proximity (e.g. an insect), creating an
implicit or explicit opposition to things nearer than the objects referred to
with aquel or allí, then both forms are perfectly acceptable.
Thus in describing the meanings of the demonstratives we may have to
accept the role of average expectations concerning objective local informa
tion. In fact, aside from the abstract meaning of the demonstratives, which
gives no concrete local information but rather only the oppositional structure
of the demonstrative system and the sequential order of the regions referred
to in egocentric space, a kind of average expectation concerning the exten
sions of the regions referred to seems to have attained a certain independence.
This latter should perhaps be taken as a kind of stereotypical meaning which
has developed secondarily and now coexists with the basic abstract meaning of
the demonstratives.
NOTES
1) We shall also leave out the "strong" forms of este and ese, aqueste and aquese, which are no
longer used in everyday communication but occur only in poetic use.
2) According to the Nueves Normas de la Real Academia Española from 1959, cited in Moliner
(1966-1967), the accent is unnecessary if there is no risk of ambiguity.
3) The English translations given in the following are extremely literal.

4) These meaning definitions of the demonstratives follow those given in many dictionaries, for
example the dictionaries of the Real Academia Española (1970), Cuervo (1886), Corominas (1954-
1957), Martin (1965). They are also to be found in the grammars of the Real Academia Española
(1931), Bello-Cuervo (1954) and others.
Note however, that some few sources differ in the interpretation of ese. Casares (1959) for instance,
interprets ese as referring to an object or place at a medial distance from the speaker (see also
Molho 1968). Both meanings of ese — referring to an entity or place near the addressee or to an en
tity or place at a medial distance — are to be found, for instance, in Alcina Franch & Blecua
(1975:622). A variant of the definition of the demonstratives quoted above is one in which este is in
terpreted as referring to an entity or place which is nearer to the speaker, ese to an entity or place
nearer to the addressee, and aquel to an entity which is more distant from both; this is, for instance,
the definition given in Seco (1973). This definition occurs only for este, while medial distance is
given for ese and remoteness for aquel in Casares (1959), and only for ese in Corominas (1970) and
Martin Alonso (1975).
This point will be taken up below.
The meanings cited usually occur as first entries and are obviously felt to be the basic meanings.
Quite often they are the only meanings given. The only exception I have found is in the "Dicciona
rio Histórico de la Lengua Española de la Real Academia Española" (1960), where for instance the
first meaning given of ahí is:
1) Con idea de lugar
A. Sin referencia a las personas grammaticales,
ladv.l. Allí, en un lugar, real o figurado, mencionado o aludido en el contexto (p. 1159)
whereas the meaning of ese as referring to an object or entity near the addressee occurs much later
as one of the other meanings.
5) See footnote 4. A hint to the relativity of distances in the demonstratives seems also to appear
in the definition of aquel (and only here) in Real Academia Española, Diccionario de la Lengua Es
pañola, where we find: lo que física o mentalmente lejos de... and also in the definition of este in:
Diccionario de Autoridades de la Real Academia Española, Madrid 1964: este — lo que está o se
tiene presente.
6) See footnote 4. Here proximity to the speaker seems to be taken as the more basic meaning of
ese; proximity to the addressee is mentioned much later.
7) Sometimes este can have a pejorative meaning as well. In fact, in part of Latin America, for
instance, Guatemala, este usually replaces ese in this function. This seems to be related to the fact
that este developed from Latin iste.
REFERENCES
Alcina Franch, J. & Blecua, J. (1975): Gramática Española. Barcelona:

Ariel.
Alonso, A. &Henriquez Urena, P. (1938): Gramática Castellana. 2 vols. Bu
enos Aires: Losada.
Alonso, M. (1975): Diccionario del Español moderno. 5th edition. Madrid:
Aguilar.
Badía Margarit, Α. (1952): Los demostrativos y los verbos de movimiento
en iberorománico. In Estudios dedicados a Menéndez Pidal III, Madrid:
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas.
Battaglia, S. & Pernicone, V. (1965): La Grammatica Italiana. 2nd edition.
Torino: Loescher.
Bello, A. & Cuervo, R. J. (1960): Gramática de la Lengua Castellana. 6th edi
tion. Buenos Aires: Sopeña Argentina.
Casares, J. (1959): Diccionario ideológico de la lengua española. 2nd edition.
Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.
Corominas, J. (1970): Diccionario Crítico Etimológico de la Lengua Castella
na. 2nd edition. Madrid: Gredos and Bern: Francke.
Coste, J. & Redondo, A. (1965): Syntaxe de l'espagnol moderne. Paris:
SEDES.
Cuervo, R. J. (1886-1893): Diccionario de Construcción y Régimen de la Len
gua Castellana. I-II. Paris: A. Roger et F. Chervoníz.
Charaudeau, P. (1970): Description sémantique de quelques systèmes gram
maticaux de l'espagnol actuel. Paris: Centre de Documentation Universi
taire.
Fabra, P. (1968): Diccionari general de la Llengua Catalana. 5th edition.
Barcelona: López.
Fernández Ramírez, S. (1951): Gramática Española. I. Los sonidos, el nom
bre y el pronombre. Madrid: Revista de Occidente.
Frei, H. (1944): Systèmes de déíctiques. Acta Linguistica 4. 201-219.
Gerrard, A.G. (1963): A study of the usage of the Spanish locative adverbs
aquí and . Phil. Diss. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Heger, . (1965): Personale Deixis und grammatische Person. Zeitschrift für
Romanische Philologie 81. 76-97.
Lamiquiz, V. (1967): El demostrativo en español y en francés. Estudio com
parativo y estructuracion. RFE 50. 163-202.
Lyons, J. (1977): Semantics. London: Cambridge University Press.
Martinez Amador, E.M. (1954): Diccionario grammatical. Barcelona: Sope
a.
Moliner, M. (1966-1967): Diccionario de uso del español. 2 vols. Madrid:
Gredos.
Molho, M. (1968): Remarques sur le système des mots demonstratifs en es
pagnol et en français. Les Langues Modernes. 3. 335-350.
Real Academia Española (1970): Diccionario de la Lengua Española. 19th

edition. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.
Real Academia Española (1960): Diccionario Histórico de la Lengua Españ
ola. Madrid: Aguirre.
Real Academia Española (1964): Diccionario de Autoridades. Ed. Facsímil.
Bibl. Románica Hispánica. Madrid: Gredos.
Real Academia Española (1931): Gramática de la lengua castellana. Madrid:
Espasa-Calpe.
Real Academia Española (1973) : Esbozo de una nueva gramática de la lengua
española. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.
Sacks, N.P. (1954): Aquí, acá, allí, and allá. Hispania 27. 263-266.
Schmidely, J. (1975): Déictiques spatiaux de l'espagnol. Mélanges offerts à
Charles Vincent Aubrun. Paris: Éds. Hispaniques. 239-251.
Seco, M. (1973): Diccionario de dudas y dificultades de la lengua española.
6th edition. Madrid: Aguilar.
Vernay, H. (1974): Essai sur l'organisation de l'espace par divers systèmes lin
guistiques. München: Fink.
Wandruszka, M. (1969): Sprachen—vergleichbar und unvergleichlich. Mün
chen: Piper.
ON VERB DEIXIS IN H U N G A R I A N
ISTVÁN B Á T O R I
This paper does not aim at a general discussion of the theory and princi
ples of deixis; rather it will be concerned with two problems of deixis in Hun
garian which may be of interest beyond the scope of Hungarian or Finnougri-
an studies. If, however, the language-specific findings are to be comparable,
we need an interpretative framework. Thus, this paper has two parts: 1. a
general introduction, and 2. an analysis of how the universal deictic functions
are realized in Hungarian, more specifically (a) how the inflectional paradigm
of the verb is linked to "role deixis", and (b) how deictic perspective is reflect
ed in the Hungarian motion verbs jon 'to come' and megy 'to go'.
1. FUNDAMENTALS OF DEIXIS
1.1 Pointing and naming

Ob j ects may be referred to or located in two ways : 1. directly by pointing
(e.g. an arrow on a street sign or a scream that allows location of its producer),
and 2. indirectly by naming (e.g. by a zip code or by a coordinate system).
Naming does not depend on the medium and therefore permits strong gener
alization and abstraction. Pointing is simpler and crucially depends on human
perception: "demonstrado ad oculos" or "demonstratio ad aures" (Bühler's
terms). This bipartition also holds for referring by verbal signs: they too may
point or name, or in other terms (Jakobson 1956), they may be indexical or
symbolic. Typical verbal indexicals are demonstrative pronouns {this, that,
etc.) or adverbs {here, there, now, etc.). Personal pronouns belong to this
class, too, although their internal structure is more complex. They refer to a
deictic field (Zeigfeld, in Bühler 's terms), i.e. the environment which is imme
diately accessible to the communicative participants. All other words are
"naming words" (Nennwörter, as Bühler calls them), for example normal
nouns, verbs, etc.; they refer to objects within the symbolic field (Symbol-
156 ISTVÁN BÁTORI
feld), i.e. a domain not immediately accessible to sensory perception (cf.

Bühler 1934, particularly p. 102-105,149 ss.). According to Bühler's seminal
analysis, the deictic categories of language (demonstrative pronouns, person
al pronouns, etc.) are essentially symbols, too, they just point to the deictic
field; in other words: they are variables whose value is determined in the deic
tic field.
1.2 Bühler's analysis

Bühler distinguishes three demonstrative modes:
1. demonstratio ad oculos (or: aures) : direct pointing by means of ges
tures or demonstratives referring to perceptually given items;
2. anaphora: pointing by verbal means within the deictic field (or with
in the text) ;
3. deixis at phantasma: pointing in abstract space (=symbolic field),
that is in deeper layers of memory (see p. 80,123-124).
According to Bühler, the same verbal means are in principle used for all
three demonstrative modes. Different degrees of abstraction are not reflected
in differences between expressions; i.e. the same deictic words (e.g. demon
stratives) may be used in the direct mode, anaphoric mode or "at phantasma" :
switching from one domain to another only corresponds to a switch to a more
or less abstract function.
Orientation in the deictic field is based on three coordinates: ego, hie,
and nunc. Bühler links them to general psychological functions and considers
them to be universal. These universal psychological fundamentals underlying
communication determine the use of demonstrative pronouns, personal pro
nouns and indirectly the whole of language.
Deixis in this sense is a characteristic feature of natural languages; pro
gramming languages or documentation languages do not have pronouns, es
pecially no personal pronouns (ego, tu), and lack the necessity for them. 1 The
deictic system of natural languages has a universal basis in that deixis in natu
ral languages is based on sensory perception and is hence anthropocentric
(Greenberg 19662, p. 21, 154-158). Pragmatic "deep structure" has a limited
number of determinants which hold for all languages whereas their language-
specific realization in surface-structure may differ from language to language.
This holds even though we lacked — or still lack—an appropriate categorisa
tion of these abstract determinants: in an abstract sense ego (=speaker), hic
(=speaker's position), and nunc (=utterance) hold for all languages. Lan
guages do not have different concepts of "I", but only different realizations of
VERB DEIXIS IN HUNGARIAN 157
this concept.
Bühler was mainly interested in the fundamentals of deixis, but his ac
count is essentially based on descriptions of Indo-European languages, espe
cially on Brugmann's work.
1.3 Schmid's analysis

Wolfgang Schmidt (1972) has presented a comprehensive proposal for
the analysis of deixis in Indo-European languages. I will take up here his sys
tem of local deixis for two reasons:
1. reference to the deictic system of the rather well-known Indo-Euro
pean languages may be helpful for an analysis of Hungarian, and at
the same time,
2. this confrontation should relativize Schmid's system. This system,
part of a universal pragmatical component, is presented with a latent
universality claim; Schmid even refers to the Finnougrian languages.
In contrast to Bühler, Schmid works with two-valued features rather than
',vith coordinates; they are thought to be hierarchically organized. His system
is as follows:
(1)
Unique identification requires four features which Schmid labels 1.

"theme", 2. "direct relation to theme", 3. "scope", 4. "determination".
Schmid motivates his graph by diachronic arguments:
the further down a branching is, the more easily do the corresponding items
collapse in language development; thus, for example, Latin hic and iste col
lapsed in the Romance languages (just as in Latvian and Old Indian).2
1.4 Austerlitz' analysis.

Based on studies of non-Indo-European languages (in particular Paleo-
158 ISTVÁN BÁTORI
Sibérie, Japanese, Finnish, etc.), Austerlitz (to appear) developed the follow
ing system:
(2a) (2b)
It is essential to this analysis that ego and tu belong to the same branch. As
speech partners, they indeed share numerous psycholinguistic properties;
speaker and hearer, though constituting a primary opposition, are both inher
ently rooted in the deictic field, whereas the (grammatical) third person points
outside this field.
The demonstrative pronouns (2b) do not constitute an independant sys
tem, they are often implied by the personal pronouns, especially by ego.3
Let me say in advance that Austerlitz' model seems to fit the Hungarian
data quite well, too; better at least than does Schmid's system.
2. PERSONAL DEIXIS AND MOTION VERBS IN HUNGARIAN
2.1 Asymmetry of inflectional paradigm

The inflectional paradigm of the Hungarian verb exhibits an interesting
asymmetry: first and second person of the verb are marked by suffixes, the
third person is not (except for plural) (Bánhidi et al. 1960, p. 71, 94-95):
(3) kérek kérünk (I ask we ask)
kérsz kértek (you ask you ask)
kér kérnek (he/she asks they ask)
In the so-called definite conjugation, the third person is marked only by
the obj ect marker (i, j ), whereas the suffixes of first and second person directly
refer to the agent. They developed from suffixed personal pronouns:
(4) kérem kérjük (I ask it we ask it)

kéred kéritek (you ask it you ask it)
kéri kérik (he/she asks it they ask it)
This analysis is corroborated by the other Finnougrian languages: in all
cases, the verb suffixes for first and second person are derived from the corre
sponding personal pronouns, whereas the third person either has no suffix at
all, or if it does this suffix is a late development, as in Finnish:
(5) menen menemme (I go we go)
menet menette (you go you go)
han menee he menevät (he/she goes they go)
In contrast to first and second person, the third person is marked only by
lengthening the final vowel. Plural is not marked for person at all; -vat/vät is a
plural suffix, in which-va/vä (ending óf present participle) and plural marker -
t are fused. Third person preterite is only marked by the preterite marker -/,
thus we have: menim, menit, hän meni Ί went, you went, he/she went', etc.
The Hungarian facts have been accounted for in formal description by as
suming a zero suffix,4 which — analogous to the Indo-European verb para
digm — marks the third person. This allows a uniform morphological treat
ment of the three persons, but it blurs the system-inherent difference between
first and second person, vs. the third person, thus giving Hungarian an inap-
propiate "Indo-European" appearance.
A more adequate procedure is to consider the different morphological
treatment of grammatical person as a result of the underlying deictic determi
nants: the inflectional paradigm of the Hungarian verb clearly shows that a
fundamental linguistic borderline can be drawn between the (immediate)
speech participants and all others (third persons). This corroborates Auster-
litz' analysis.
An analysis based on this fundamental asymmetry among grammatical
persons is easier to integrate into a comprehensive language description than
is a zero-suffix analysis which can be justified only within a narrow morpho
logical framework.
It has to be explicitly noted that Indo-European verb inflection has no
preference for hierarchical ranking within the system of personal deixis; all
persons are placed in a line:
160 ISTVÁN BÁTORI
(6a)
Combinatorily, three hierarchical arrangements are possible:

(6b) (6c) (6d)
where (6d) is merely a theoretical speculation. Hungarian supports the arran

gement of (6b) (=Austerlitz' model), rather than (6c) (=Schmid's model).
The Hungarian inflectional system is less redundant than e.g. the Ger
man system since the person suffixes of first and second person locate the
speech participants in the deictic field; thus they have a referential function,
like noun phrases. 5 The third person is outside the deictic field and has to be
referred to by a symbolic name. Therefore, real referring occurs by name (e.g.
Karla, the High Commissioner, my neighbour etc.). Third person pronouns,
(e.g. he, she, this, that etc.) only help in finding the referent. In Hungarian, the
nominal subject is either contiguous to the verb in third person, or it is presup
posed; in neither case is the verb formally marked for subject (Schlachter
1974).
2.2 Deixis and motion verbs

The Hungarian deictic system has a strict bipolar structure. There ad ad
verbs which indicate the speaker's position, on the one hand (itt, ide, innen
'here, (to) here, from here', etc.), and there are adverbs which indicate a loca
tion distant from the speaker (ott, oda, onnan 'there, (to) there, from there',
etc.) on the other. Hungarian has no opposition like German da — dort. The
first group of adverbs is characterized by front vowels, the second group by
back vowels. If the opposition is neutralized the back vowel member is used,
for example the definite article alaz 'the' (in contrast to ez 'this') which is de
rived from a demonstrative. The opposition between the two adverbial
groups is so vital that even the modal adverb 'so' has two forms: igy 'this way'
(demonstrated or suggested by the speaker) and úgy 'that way' ('not in the
speaker's way'). This also holds for the corresponding demonstrative modifi-
er: ilyen, olyan 'such a', ('of this sort', 'of that sort').
Selection of an appropriate form is determined by the speaker's position.
The verbal prefixes are not affected: in Hungarian, there is no opposition like
German hinein and herein, hinauf and herauf, etc. The direction of motion
(relative to the speaker) is expressed by the verb only.
Deixis is an inherently nominal phenomenon — there are no "deictic
verbs" (as there are deictic nouns, for example Hungarian itthon 'at home' —
when at speaker's position — and otthon 'at home' when not at speaker's posi
tion, also in abstract use (Schlachter 1974, p.7-8). But this does not mean that
verbs are not affected by deictic categories. A particular case in question are
motion verbs. A motion may be abstractly defined by three parameters (cf.
Fillmore 1966):
(7) move (object, pos. 1, pos. 2)
an object moves — or is moved — from position 1 to position 2. This abstract
scheme, however, is only rarely realized in natural languages, as in to move,
to run, etc. A more common case are verbs in which one of these parameters is
implicit.
Thus, naming an object may fix its starting position and hence, parameter
pos. 1 is redundant. Verbs like to go and to come, on the other hand, seem to
imply the target position (=pos.2): one goes to where the speaker is not, and
one comes to where he or she is (at the time of utterance).
The deictic structure of German kommen and gehen or English 'to come'
and 'to go' cannot be generalized, however. In Hungarian, the rules are some
what different. Some examples are:
(8) A: Gyereide! 'Come here!'
B: Megyek. 'I'm coming' lit. 'I'm going'
(9) A: Megyekmoziba. 'I'm going to the movies'
: Várj egy kicsit, én is 'Wait a moment, I come (lit. go)
megyek. with you'
(10) Telephone conversation:
A: Mikor jöszhaza? 'When do you come?'
B: Nyolc óra elöttnem 'I can't come before eight', lit. 'go'
mehetek.
Tizkor megyek. 'I'll come at ten', lit. 'go'
( l i a ) Kati férjhez megy. 'Kate marries, lit. 'goes to husband'
(lib)* Katiférjhez jön.
162 ISTVÁN BÁTORI
(11c) Kati feleségül megy. 'Kate becomes wife'

(lid) Kati feleségül j ön. id.
(12) A: Hozdide alámpát! 'Bring the lamp here'
: Viszem! Ί bring it', lit. 'I take it'.
(13a) Péter megy és viszi a pénzt. Teter goes and brings the money'
(13b) Péter megy és hozza a pénzt. 'Peter goes and takes the money'
The crucial point is the determination of target position. Following formula
(7), example (8) may be represented as follows:
(8) A: Gyereide! 6 'Come here!'
jön: Imperative (B, pos. lg,pos. 2 A )
: Megyek. 'I'm coming'
megy ( , p o s . l B , pos. 2 )
that is, should move from his position pos. l g to the position of A; B's target
position is A's actual position. In his response, leaves pos. l g . His target po
sition is given implicitly: it is the actual position of his speech partner A.
In other words, in languages like English or German the perspective is
maintained: the first speaker A identifies the target position with his own posi
tion, speaker then regards the target position introduced by A as his own,
and thus "comes" there. In this sense, is talking from the listener's (=A's)
perspective.
In Hungarian, the perspective changes: executes the motion desired by
A from his own perspective: he leaves his starting position and 'goes', but im
plicitly maintaining the target position as a presupposition. In this sense, Hun
garian accepts only the speaker's perspective: whoever is currently speaking,
speaks from his own position. This holds in other cases as well. In (9) the de
termination of the target position is implicitly adopted:
(9) A: Megyek moziba 'I'm going to the movies'
megy (A, pos. 1 , pos. 2:mozi)
: ... én is megyek T m coming with you'
megy ( , pos. 1 B , pos. 2 )
Example (10) is a telephone conversation. A is waiting for at his (A's)
own position, hence jösz 'do you come?' in the question. implicitly adopts
this position marking (pos. 2 ): hence he must choose megy 'to go', which
permits determination. Example (11) is an interesting case. The idiomatic ex
pression for 'to marry' includes megy 'to go': férjhez megy 'to go to the hus-
band', and feleségül megy (to go (as) wife) ; both of them presuppose a female
subject. The verb megy may be replaced by jön 'to come', but only one of the
resulting sentences is grammatical: (lid) Kati feleségül jön (hozzám) 'Kate
marries me' ; jön implicitly has the speaker's position as pos. 2, hence the im
plication, "speaker is the marriage candidate". In Kati férjhez jön, this impli
cation is blocked by the given (allative) positional determination férjhez 'to the
husband'; thus, no additional complement pointing to the speaker (such as
hozzám 'me') would be compatible with jön. Hence, the sentence is not accep
table. Megy and jön are not the only verbs which differ from their German or
English counterparts. Another case in question is the pair hoz 'to bring' and
visz 'to take'. Formula (7) shows that they mainly differ by the presence of an
agent who causes the motion of the object; in (7) this object moves quasi by it
self:
(14) port (agent, object, pos. I, pos. 2)
Applied to (12), this scheme yields:
(15) A: portimper. (B, object: lampa, pos. l g , pos. 2 A )
: port ( , object: lampa, pos. l B , pos. 2 A )
In this case, the verb is changed in Hungarian (hozd ide - viszem); the
answer is given from the speaker's perspective. In English or German, the
verb would be repeated, that is, would take over A's perspective (=hearer's
perspective in the answer).
The implications may be strong enough to lead even to quite different ac
tions. In (13a) the money is carried away, and it is not specified whether from
the speaker's or the hearer's position,
hence: ego or: tu
In (13b), Peter first goes there and takes the money away from there,
hence: e g o t u
money
In Hungarian the verb is changed and the presuppositions are maintained, in
German or English, the perspective is — or may be — changed (from speak
er's to hearer's) and the verb is maintained. 7
SUMMARY
In the preceding remarks, we tried to make two points:

164 ISTVÁN BÁTORI
1. The analysis of Hungarian personal deixis suggests a description in

which first and second person belong to one group, i. e. like in (2a) rather than
in(l).
2. The analysis of Hungarian motion verbs like jönni 'to come', menni
'to go', hozni 'to bring' etc. relies on deictic categories. 8 A particularly inter
esting feature of these verbs is the perspective change between speech
partners; whereas in German or English the listener often adapts to the
speaker, taking his perspective, Hungarian has no such switch in perspective:
every speech partner maintains his own perspective.
NOTES
1) This is not an inherent restriction of programming languages; "demonstratio ad oculos" is

also possible in formal systems (cf. Bühler 1934, p. 106), and in many higher programming lan
guages the "cursor" may be regarded as a deictic device.
2) The status of Schmid's features is indeed not fully clear, since pronouns at the top (i.e. ego and
tu) have something in common as well as Schmid has correctly shown; for example first and second
person have no gender, in contrast to the other parts of the system.
3) Kurylowicz (1972) shows that only two of Buihler's three variables are mutually independant,
namely ego and nunc, whereas hic is implied by ego. — Austerlitz does not discuss these implica-
tional relations.
4) The inflectional paradigm of the possessives shows a similar pattern; first and second persons
have a consonantal ending, third person has a vocalic ending: házam, házad, haza 'my house', your
house, his house'.
5) In Hungarian, personal pronouns are used only for emphasis; thus, the normal, unmarked
case is Φ verb + ending φ rather than Φ pronoun φ verb + ending Φ.
6) Jon 'to come' has an irregular imperative formed with a suppletive stem.
7) There are restrictions of course; in German, the lexeme sometimes has to be changed, too;
this typically happens with the prefix-system of 'her' — 'hin'.
8) These verbs are not too numerous. Most of the motion verbs in Hungarian (jar 'to take a
walk'; fkezik 'to arrive'; forog 'to turn round', etc.) are neutral with respect to person deixis.
REFERENCES
Austerlitz,R. (to appear): Remarks on Deixis. In: Isacenko-Festgabe.

Bánhidi, Ζ., Jókay, Ζ. & Szabó, D. (1960): Lehrbuch der Ungarischen
Sprache. Budapest: Tankönyvkiadó.
Bühler, . (1934): Sprach theorie. Jena: Fischer (21965, Stuttgart: Fischer).

Fillmore, . (1966): Deictic Categories in the Semantics of come. Founda
tions of Language, 2. 219-227.
Greenberg, J. (ed.) (1966 2 ): Universals of Language. Cambridge, Mass.: The
M.I.T. Press.
Jakobson, R. (1956): Shifters, Verbal Categories and the Russian Verb. In:
Selected Writings III. 130-147. Den Haag: Mouton (1971).
Kurylowicz, J. (1972): The role of deictic elements in linguistic evolution.
Semiotica 5. 174-183.
Schlachter, W. (1974): Zur Bedeutungsstruktur von Nomen und Verbum.
Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen. I Philol.-
Hist. Klasse Jg. 1974. Nr. 1, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Schmid, W.P. (1972): Die pragmatische Komponente in der Grammatik.
Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Lit. Abh. d. Geistes- u. Sozialwiss.
Klasse Jg. 1972. Nr. 9. Mainz: Verlag der Akademie d. Wiss. und d. Lit.
DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUNS IN RUSSIAN AND CZECH —
DEIXIS AND ANAPHORA
CHRISTA HAUENSCHILD
1. AIMS OF THE PAPER
This paper aims at a description of the basic conditions of use for some de
monstrative pronouns in Russian and Czech, namely those corresponding ap
proximately to English this and that. In the two Slavic languages considered in
this paper the demonstrative pronouns of this type play a very important role:
given the non-existence of articles in these languages (as in most other Slavic
languages), these pronouns fulfill part of the tasks typical for articles in other
languages.
We want to investigate some deictic and anaphoric uses of these pro
nouns, considering anaphora not in contrast to deixis, but as a special case of
deixis. This corresponds to the basic conception of Bühler (1934). We agree
with Bühler not only in considering anaphora as belonging to deixis, but also
in assigning to the anaphoric function a crucial role in the constitution of natu
ral language texts. Therefore, an important part of this paper is devoted to the
discussion of the anaphoric function and its delimitation from the notion of
discourse deixis, a term coined by Fillmore (see especially section 4).
If we look at the catalogue of sub-tasks for the description of deixis as giv
en in Klein (1978; 1979), we are mainly concerned with the basic deictic oppo
sitions of the two Slavic languages we are considering, partially in contrast to
German and English.1
In addition, we try to contribute to an inventory of possible functions of
the deictic categories in natural languages (a desideratum posed in Fillmore
(1972)). We shall look at the problem from the viewpoint of a second-language
learner or of a linguist who is in quest of some information on the deictic sys
tems of Russian and Czech, i.e. we shall first consult grammar books and dic
tionaries and evaluate the information they convey. Then we shall present a
168 CHRISTA HAUENSCHILD
somewhat elaborated scheme of the basic uses of Russian and Czech demon
strative pronouns of the this/that-type. We shall then try to define the deictic
categories we use more precisely, including more theoretical considerations,
but without leaving the basis of our linguistic data. In the last section of this pa
per we shall return to the basic semantic oppositions assumed for Czech and
Russian demonstrative pronouns and shall try to apply them to English and
German.
2. DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVE BASIC SCHEMES OF SEMAN

TIC OPPOSITIONS
If a second-language learner or a linguist concerned, e.g., with the deictic

systems of different languages wants to get some basic information on the con
ditions of use for the main demonstrative pronouns in Russian and Czech, he
will perhaps consult a grammar written from a more or less contrastive point
of view (e.g. Bauernöppel, 1970 and Tauscher & Kirschbaum, 1968) and find
the following basic scheme of semantic oppositions:
(2.1) proximal distal
R. étot tot
C. ten onen
G. dieser jener
(E. this that) 2
This basic scheme is presented in the grammars with different (more or
less precise) definitions of what the two terms of the semantic opposition
mean (reference to the speaker, to distance in place and time, to anaphoric
use).
If the learner or the linguist already knows something about the lan
guages in question, he might also consult monolingual grammars or dictionar
ies in order to get more thorough information. He will be somewhat disap
pointed, however, as the grammars either do not convey any useful informa
tion at all on the topic (e.g. Akademija, 1970) or they describe the facts from a
very special point of view (e.g. Travnicek, 1951, where the main interest in the
treatment of demonstrative pronouns concentrates on their role in functional
sentence perspective, the rest of the description being rather unsystematic).
Monolingual dictionaries do contain a lot of information, but the generalisa
tions to be drawn from the examples are not always unequivocal and the ab
stract meaning descriptions are often unsystematic.
The data to be found in bilingual dictionaries are a little more instructive,
DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUNS IN RUSSIAN AND CZECH 169
because the translations suggested in them give supplementary hints to the

rules of use to be observed 3 , especially as they refer to the German definite ar
ticle der, which, if stressed, may be classified as a demonstrative pronoun.
In view of this data and some other considerations we shall discuss in the
following paragraphs, the learner or linguist will begin to wonder, whether the
scheme (2.1) could really be correct. In a monolingual Czech dictionary, for
example, we find the following sample sentence:
(2.2) C. Vidis ten strom tamhle nakopci?
E. Do you see this(?) tree there-look on (the) hill?
(Slovnik, 1960)
According to our basic scheme (2.1) ten will have to be translated as this,
but the interlinear translation clearly shows that this is very improbable be
cause of the adverb tamhle, which implies relative distance. In English we
should rather translate it as that forest, in German it would most likely be
translated by den Wald, the Russian equivalent would be tot les.
There are other reasons not to adopt the meaning description of Czech
ten as given in (2.1). In other functions, too, ten clearly corresponds to Rus
sian tot.4
The so-called preparative function (Brugmann, 1904; Majtinskaja, 1969)
furnishes very clear-cut examples.
(2.3) C. Mluvi otom, ze...
R. On govorit torm, cto ...
E. He speaks about that (the fact) that...
(2.4) C. To je takniha, kterou jsem chtéla koupit.
R. Éto takniga, kotoruju ja chotelakupit'.
E. This is the (that) book which I wanted to buy.
(Cesko-Nemecky, 1968)
Note that (2.4) shows that Czech to may have to be translated by Russian èto
and English this.
In the case of the demonstrative pronoun "preparing" a relative clause,
the German correspondence would be an inflected form of the article der or
the pronoun derjenige (the latter contains the distal demonstrative pronoun
jener).
It would be possible to argue that the preparative function is a special use
of the demonstrative pronoun and need not be described in the same way as
the deictic or anaphoric use. It is our aim, however, to base our description on
a homogeneous theory of deictic use in a broad sense, i.e. we want to present

our data on the deictic, anaphoric and preparative functions of the demonstra
tive pronoun in a way as uniform as possible.
It seems after all as if Czech ten had to be described in an alternative way
that allows the correspondence of ten to either Russian ètot or tot, depending
on the given context. In this connexion it is interesting to note that there has
been a discussion among Czech grammarians whether ten might possibly be
classified as a definite article.5
There are other problems in the scheme (2.1) raised by onen. It is practi
cally never used in the spoken language and very rarely in modern written lan
guage. In this respect it corresponds to German jener, which is also nearly out
of use, whereas Russian tot as well as English that are widely used in spoken
and written language. Moreover, in connexion with relative clauses onen is
semantically, but not stylistically, equivalent to ten.
(2.5) Jednota délnikû a rolnikû je
R. Edinstvo r abocich i krest ' j an j avlj aetsj a
E. (The)unity of workers and peasants is
onou(tou) silou, která přetváfi svĕt.
toj siloj, kotoraja preobrazuet mir.
that (this) force, which changes (the)world.
(Česko-Russkij,1973)
Looking for an alternative description of the meanings of demonstrative pro
nouns in Russian and Czech I found two interesting articles by H. Křízková
(Křízková, 1971 and 1972) on the systems of demonstrative pronouns in the
modern Slavic languages. There she describes the Russian language as typi
cally representative of a bipartite system, whereas Czech is considered typical
of a tripartite system of the demonstrative pronouns of the toi-type.
(2.6) proximal neutral distal
R. ètot - tot
tento ten tamten 6
Onen does not figure any more in this scheme (as it should be); rather,
there are two new elements in it. Tento (this) and tarnten (that) both contain
the element ten supplemented by the particles to (expressing stress or definite-
ness) and tam (there), respectively. In this respect, too, the scheme is more
satisfying than (2.1), for it contains at least the most frequently occuring of the
great variety of demonstrative pronouns that exist in Czech. There are many
expressive forms composed of inflected forms of ten and different particles,

e.g. tenhle (hle=look!), tenhleten, tuten (tu=here) with approximately the
same meaning as tento and tamhleten corresponding to tarnten. Tentó, ten and
tarnten are basic insofar as they can be used both deictically in a narrow sense
and anaphorically, whereas the other forms can be used only deictically and
occur very rarely in written language (in our terms "written language" does
not include rendering of spoken language in literary prose). The conditions of
use for these demonstrative pronouns will be discussed more thoroughly in
the following chapter.
3. EXTENDED SCHEME OF DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUNS
Starting from the scheme (2.6), from information extracted from gram
mars and dictionaries, and from observations on natural language texts, we
shall now try to present an extended scheme of the conditions of use for the de
monstrative pronouns in Russian and Czech. These will hopefully be of some
use to a second-language learner or a linguist working in the field of deictic
systems. There are two questions that ought to be answered by such a scheme,
namely:
1. Which demonstrative pronoun is to be used in order to express a given
"demonstrative" thought in a given context?
2. What is the meaning of a given demonstrative pronoun in a given con
text?
Even our extended scheme does not answer these questions in a fully sat
isfactory way, because it is neither complete nor does it consider all possible
contexts. It neglects, e.g., the whole sphere of temporal deixis, where the de
monstrative pronouns seem to play a crucial role in many languages. More
over, the classification of the remaining contexts is not yet sufficiently de
tailed, and some very special contexts, mainly occuring in expressive speech,
are left out of consideration.
We have extended the scheme by taking into account not only demon
strative pronouns in a narrow sense, but also some functionally equivalent
words of the languages in question in order to give a more satisfactory answer
to the first of the above-mentioned questions. By extending the scheme we
have extended the definition of demonstrative pronouns, as it were. 7
The categories applied in the following scheme are to be interpreted ap
proximately as follows:
proximal - relative proximity in space

distal - relative distance in space
neutral - without reference to proximity or distance
(We shall return to these terms in section 5).
pragmatic deixis - deictic use where knowledge of the pragmatic coordinates
of utterance is necessary for decoding
including
a) local deixis, referring to real or imagined spaces
b) discourse deixis, referring to the preceding or following text or, in
the case of self-reference, to smaller or bigger parts of the text, in
cluding the occurrence of the demonstrative pronoun in question
semantic deixis - deictic use implying coreference with another part of the
linguistic context
including the two subcategories:
a) anaphora - coreference with a part of the preceding context
b) kataphora - coreference with a part of the following text
syntactic deixis - corresponding approximately to the preparative func
tion in Brugmann (1904) and Majtinskaja (1969)
(We shall discuss these categories more thoroughly in section 4).
(3.1)
proximal distal neutral
1. pragmatic deixis
a) local deixis
R. ètot(3.2) tot (3.2) èto (2.4)
(that/this is)
vot etot von tot
(vot=look here) (von=look there)
tento tarnten ten (3.3, 2.2)
tenhle tamhleten to (je...) (2.4)
(that/this is)
tuten
ten (to) -—onen (3.2)
b) discourse deixis
ba) to preceding text
R. - - predsestvujuscij (attr.)
(the preceding)
- pfedcházející (attr.)
(the preceding)
bb) self-reference
R. - - nastojascij (attr.) (3.4)
(the present)
- - dannyj (attr.)
(the given)
- - ètot (attr.) (3.5)
c. - - tento (attr.) (3.4, 3.5)
be) to following text

R. - - sledujuscij (attr.) (3.6)
(the following)
- následující (attr.) (3.6)
(the following)
2. semantic deixis
a) anaphora
aa) coreference with noun phrases
R. ètotže vyseupomjanutyj ètot (attr.)
(this same) (attr.) (the (sometimes in post-
above mentioned) position)
= tot že (attr.)
ètot— - - tot ètot, tot (in special
cases also abs.) (3.9)
tot —-dnigoj, inoj
(the other)
poslednij— pervyj
(the latter) (the former)
tento tarnten ten (attr., in special
cases also abs.) (3.10)
tyz vyše jmenovany onen (rarely used)
(the same) (the above-men
tioned), (attr.)

druhy —jeden
(the other) (one)
ten (abs.?) onen (abs.?) tento, tentyz
(abs., coll.,
replacing the personal
pronoun)
ab) coreference with sentences or clauses

R. - èto ( .,abs.), to
( ., abs.)
ètot(attr.),tot(attr.)
- to ( ., abs.), toto
( ., abs.)
ten (attr.), tento (attr.)
b) kataphora
(coreference with sentences or clauses)
R. - votcto (abs.)
(look what) (3.8)
- sledujuscee ( ., abs)
~ sledujuscij (attr.)
(the following) (3.7)
- toto ( ., abs.)
- tento (attr.) (3.7)
3. syntactic deixis
a) correlate to restrictive relative clauses
R. - tot (2.4)
C. - ten (2.4)
onen (2.5)
b) correlate to complement clauses

R. - to (n., abs.) (2.3)
- to (n., abs.) (2.3)
Notes to the scheme:

attr. - attributive use only
abs. - absolute use only

If nothing is indicated both are possible.
n. - neuter
The items connected by dotted lines occur only in explicit or implicit syn-
tagmatic contrast to one another.
Those cases in the scheme marked by a dash do not always imply an ab
sence of means available in the language to express the respective semantic
function. In the case of discourse deixis the languages dispose of very special
instruments for expressing proximity or distance; if we consider self-refer
ence, there are various possibilities for distinguishing between smaller and
longer portions of the context in question. In these cases, however, demon
strative pronouns are not sufficient to express the respective semantic func
tion, as e.g. in "in the first chapter of this book" or "on the last page of my arti
cle".
The situation is somewhat different in the case of kataphora (semantic
deixis). "Long-distance kataphora" seems to be too difficult to decode, thus it
apparently never occurs (in any case, we did not find any examples, although
they are theoretically conceivable). We might have placed the corresponding
items in our scheme under "proximal", but it seems more plausible to classify
them as "neutral", because there is no potential contrast to a distal term, and
proximity is rather presupposed than expressed.
In this respect kataphora is similar to syntactic deixis, which seems by de
finition to exclude the possibility of non-neutral terms. The delimitation be
tween kataphora and syntactic deixis will be discussed in section 4.
Given limitations of space, we are unable to exemplify every item in our
scheme. Therefore we concentrate on the most interesting cases (numbers of
examples are indicated in the scheme).
Examples of local deixis are normally rather problematic: if nothing but
the text is at hand, it is very difficult to control the conditions of use for the de
monstrative pronouns. There are, however, some clear-cut examples, e.g.
(3.2) R. ètotsvet - totsvet (Slovar', 1960)
C. tentosvët - onensvët (Slovník, 1960)
E. this world - the other world
These are borderline cases of deictic use, as it were, but the deictic foun
dation is obvious.
The following example once more shows the neutral function of Czech
ten. If there are two books located at the same distance, the following utter
ances are possible:
(3.3) . Chci tuto knihu, ne tu.

E. I want this book, not the (one).
. Chci tu knihu, ne tamtu.
E. I want the book, not that.
. Chci tu knihu, ne tu.
E. I want the book, not the (one). (Kfízková, 1972)
The interlinear translation demonstrates the difficulty of transferring the
facts of Czech (as a representative of a tripartite system of demonstrative pro
nouns) into a language which disposes of only two terms in the respective sem
antic opposition. The same holds for the translation into Russian, where ètot
and tot can be used in both positions.
(3.4) and (3.5) are examples of self-reference. In these cases, the proxim
al term of the semantic opposition is used in Czech, whereas Russian disposes
of different means of expression.
(3.4) V teto strucné stati...
E. In this short paper... (Křízková, 1971)
R. V nastojascej stat'e...
E. In (the) present paper... (Křízková, 1972)
(These are not examples quoted by Kfízková, but they are.taken from
her text itself.)
In the Russian sentence, nastojascij might be replaced by dannyj (the
given) or ètot.
(3.5) . Tato veta obsahuje pét slov.
R. Étopredlozenie soderzit pjat' slov.
E. This sentence contains five words.
These are classical examples of self-reference in a strict sense. We did not
find any indications in dictionaries, grammarbooks or natural language texts,
but had to rely on the judgements of native speakers. 8
(3.6) and (3.7) demonstrate the difference between Czech následující
(discourse deixis, reference to following text) and tento (semantic deixis, ka-
taphora), where Russian uses sledujuščij in both cases.
(3.6) . Následuj ici odstavec obsahuj e ...
R. Sledujuscij abzac soderzit...
E. (The)following paragraph contains...
(3.7) . Recník přednesl tento návrh: ...

R. Dokladcik vydvinul sledujuscee predlozenie: ...
E. (The)speaker made (the)following motion: ...
The Czech sample sentence is taken from Křížková (1972); the Russian
and English interlinear translations are mine.
In kataphora, too, the Russian language seems to dispose of a greater
variety of possible expressions, as e.g. in
R. Ja vam skazu vot cto : ...
E. I tell you look what: ... (Isacenko, 1968)
which is more or less colloquial.
The "special cases" mentioned in connection with the absolute use of
some demonstrative pronouns under "anaphora" concern the functional sen
tence perspective of the utterances in question. According to Isacenko (1968)
the precondition for this absolute use of demonstrative pronouns is given by
ambiguity of pronominal reference. The following example shows that this
cannot be the case, because there is no ambiguity.
(3.9) R. On ogljanulsja na Varvaru. sidela...
E. He looked back at Barbara. She (the) sat...
(Slovar', 1960)
Travnicek (1951) is more instructive on this point. As a condition for the
absolute use of ten in the cases in question he states the change of theme rela
tive to the preceding sentence.
(3.10) Byl jednou jeden král. Ten(král)...
E. (There) was once one king. The (king)...
(Travnicek, 1951)
This condition seems to hold for Russian, too. There may be other possi
bilities, but these are the most clear-cut examples.
The data presented in our extended scheme (3.1) as well as the examples
(3.2) - (3.10) seem to confirm that Czech ten is correctly classified as neutral.
In view of the facts of the Russian language one might consider classifying
Russian tot as systematically neutral, too. We shall return to this question in
the fifth section.
4. DISCUSSION OF THE ESSENTIAL DEICTIC CATEGORIES
In this chapter we want to discuss the main deictic categories occurring in

the leftmost column of our extended scheme (3.1). We shall define them more
precisely, not leaving out of consideration the data as presented in our
scheme, and try to justify our notions by indicating possible applications to
other fields of deixis.
Like Kfízková we start from a tripartite system of deictic categories, but
we use other terms and try to treat more thoroughly the problem of delimita
tion between the categories. 9
Kfízková's categories are the following: 1. deixis in a strict sense, 2. rela
tive deixis or anaphora (including kataphora) and 3. grammatical functions.
They correspond approximately to the notions of pragmatic, semantic and
syntactic deixis respectively, which occur in the extended scheme. These
terms reflect our endeavour to suggest a frame of description which is as homo
geneous as possible.
In defining our terms we start from the classical definition given by Mor
ris:
syntax - relations among the signs of language,
semantics - relations between signs and their meanings,
pragmatics - relations between signs and their users.
The main criterion of delimitation between the three deictic categories is
the manner of fixing the referent of the noun phrase containing the demon
strative pronoun (in attributive use) or of the demonstrative pronoun alone
(in absolute use). Thus the definition adopts the viewpoint of the decoder.
In the case of pragmatic deixis the decoder has to know at least some of
the pragmatic coordinates of the utterance to be decoded: he has to know,
e.g., what the speaker is pointing to or where the speaker is located. These
two types of information, possibly needed for the understanding of an utter
ance containing a demonstrative pronoun in pragma-deictic function, seem to
correspond approximately to the Fillmorian notions of gestural and symbolic
use of deictic words. Nevertheless we did not adopt this distinction, because
there are many cases where the delimitation of the two uses is extremely diffi
cult. Moreover, it is doubtful whether it is a linguistic distinction at all as long
as we do not have at hand clear-cut examples from languages that in fact do
distinguish by linguistic means between the two uses. The examples given in
Fillmore (1972; 1975), are not beyond doubt: for Russian vot we have a clear-
cut counter-example with Russian vot-cto in kataphoric function; Russian von
is not very frequent, so that we are not now in a position to judge it. Concern
ing the French voici and voilà and even more so the disjunctive pronouns moi
etc., it might be preferable to describe them in an alternative way (Fillmore:
"Clear acoustic reasons").
A similar question, namely whether linguistic criteria can be found at all,
may be posed in connection with the Bühlerian distinction between "demon
stratio ad oculos" and "Deixis am Phantasma". The languages considered in
this paper use the same instruments for both and this seems to hold for many
other languages as well.
What we did adopt in our scheme is the Fillmorian notion of "discourse
deixis". It is located on the borderline between pragmatic and semantic deixis,
as it were. If we had defined "semantic deixis" as "reference to the neighbour
ing text", as might be suggested, discourse deixis would in fact belong to sem
antic deixis. In our first hand-out delivered at the 1. Conference of the
"Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft", Tübingen, 1979, we actual
ly did not distinguish between reference to the preceding text (discourse deix
is) and anaphora (semantic deixis) and accordingly between reference to the
following text and kataphora.
The criterion of delimitation between discourse deixis (in our view be
longing to pragmatic deixis) and what we call semantic deixis is the fact of
coreferentiality in the latter case: given, e.g., a demonstrative pronoun in ana
phoric function, the decoder has to search in the preceding text for a phrase
that has the same referent as the demonstrative pronoun or the phrase con
taining it, whereas in the case of discourse deixis the portion of text in question
is itself the required referent and hence there is no coreferentiality. Rather do
we have direct deixis to something given by the situation and so we subsume
discourse deixis under the notion of pragmatic deixis.10
The difference between discourse deixis and semantic deixis can be dem
onstrated in another way, too: self-reference (in any interesting sense of the
word) is possible in discourse deixis only. By the notion of self-reference we
understand not only reference to the sentence, in which the demonstative pro
noun occurs ("This sentence contains five words".), but also reference to any
portion of the uttered text, including that sentence ("... in this paper ...").
Self-reference in semantic deixis would be trivial, because every phrase is of
course coreferential with itself, and so it is natural that natural languages do
not signal this fact.
After all if we should subsume discourse deixis under the notion of sem
antic deixis, this would yield the curious effect that reference to the uttered
text itself ("... in this book... ") would be treated differently from reference to
another text ("... in my last book ..."), the latter being a clear case of pragmat
ic deixis. The two cases, however, are parallel, therefore we should classify
the second case as an instance of discourse deixis, too.11
As already mentioned above, the notion of coreferentiality is constitu
tive of our definition of semantic deixis, i.e. the demonstrative pronoun or the
phrase containing it points to another phrase in the neighbouring text and its
reference is to be fixed according to the reference of its antecedent. In our
scheme we consider two basic kinds of coreference, namely coreference with
noun phrases (mostly denoting objects) and coreference with sentences and
clauses (mainly denoting actual or potential facts).
There are, of course, noun phrases denoting potential facts, e.g. the
nominalized verbs, but this need not concern us here, because we do not as
sume an essential difference between the two cases. Rather is the distinction
based on surface considerations: in the case of coreference with sentences or
clauses the neutral form of the respective pronoun is primary.12
As we have promised to treat the problem of delimitation between our
categories thoroughly, we shall now make some annotations concerning Eh-
lich's notion of anadeixis (Ehlich, 1982). This notion was invented for those
cases where the deictic function (in a narrow sense of deixis corresponding to
pragmatic deixis in our terms) co-occurs with the anaphoric function, e.g. in "I
am now at Konstanz. Here ...". The local adverb points simultaneously to the
situational and to the linguistic context being coreferential with "at Kon
stanz" . We did not introduce a special category corresponding to Ehlich's ana
deixis, although similar cases are conceivable for demonstrative pronouns. As
we are mainly interested in texts and in the ways they are constituted and in
terpreted, we do not hold it necessary to introduce an extra category for such
cases. The constatation of coreferentiality would be sufficient for the fixation
of reference, and thus these cases would be subsumed under the notion of ana
phora. It might be useful to point out the double function of the demonstrative
pronoun in these cases, but we are not quite sure whether there truly is a lingu
istic distinction to be drawn here.
Our extended scheme contains yet another case, in which the subsump-
tion under one of the main deictic categories is problematic: Czech tento and
Russian vol cto, sledujuščij in kataphoric function. They have been classified
as belonging to semantic deixis, although one might argue that they are again
instances of reference to the text itself and hence should belong to discourse
deixis. The given classification, however, is based on the following considera-
tion: The (directly or indirectly) quoted speech announced by the demonstra

tive pronoun or the noun phrase containing it is to be considered as referring
to its content (e.g. "X" refers to X or to the proposition expressed by X or to
both) and thus it is a case of coreferentiality and hence of semantic deixis.
Now the notion of syntactic deixis remains to be defined. This is not as easy
as it might appear, because it is difficult to state how the referent is found in
these cases. We might state negatively that neither knowledge of the pragmat
ic coordinates nor the existence of a coreferential term in the neighbouring
text is presupposed for the fixation of reference. On the contrary, demonstra
tive pronouns in syntactic-deictic function point to the part of the phrase to
which they belong. In these cases the term "intrasyntactic pointing" ("inner-
syntaktisches Zeigen"), coined by Bühler for the description of the anaphoric
function, is really appropriate. In this connexion the question might arise,
whether the cases we subsume under the notion of syntactic deixis are to be
described as belonging to deixis at all, but we hold that they refer to a very
abstract kind of pointing. Moreover, we aim at a description of the conditions
of use for demonstrative pronouns which is as homogeneous as possible and it
is surely not incidental that demonstrative pronouns are used in these cases.
Another question might arise in connexion with syntactic deixis. The
cases in which the demonstrative pronoun functions as a correlate to a restric
tive relative clause are sometimes classified as kataphoric (see e.g. Harweg,
1968). We do not describe these cases as kataphoric, because in our system ka-
taphora belongs to semantic deixis, which implies coreferentiality. The cases
in question, however, do not contain any coreferential terms. 13
In the preceding paragraphs we have tried to justify our deictic categories
on the basis of the data presented in the scheme (3.1). It seems to be possible,
however, to extend the application of the given categories to other spheres of
deixis, e.g. to personal deixis in English:
pragmatic deixis: "He (pointing to a person) is a linguist".
semantic deixis: 'The man over there... He is a linguist".
syntactic deixis: "He who is a linguist... " (with generic meaning)
or the localdeixis in German:
pragmatic deixis: "Da (pointing to a place) ist mein Arbeitsplatz".
semantic deixis: "Die Universität Konstanz... Da ist mein Arbeits
platz".
syntactic deixis: "Da, wo mein Arbeitsplatz ist,..."
5. "NEUTRAL ELEMENT" VERSUS "NEUTRALIZATION"
In this chapter we shall try to specify the semantic opposition used in the
extended scheme (3.1), namely the notions "proximal", "distal" and "neu
tral". We shall not say very much about proximity and distance, but we shall
concentrate on the neutral term of the opposition.
"Proximal" and "distal" denote relative proximity or distance in a real or
imagined space, in time (these cases are not contained in our extended
scheme), in the preceding or following text (either referring to the text itself or
to the reference of some phrases in that text), In the case of self-reference in
discourse deixis the notions of proximity and distance might perhaps refer to
the fact that a smaller or larger portion of the uttered text is referred to. How
ever, our scheme does not contain any indications for these cases, as the dis
tinction in question is normally not expressed by the demonstrative pronoun
but,by the noun phrase in which it occurs (see chapter 3). For syntactic deixis it
would be pointless to introduce the terms of proximity and distance, because
the relation between the demonstrative pronoun and what it points to is al
ways located in a definite syntactic structure.
Before discussing the questions raised by our term of a neutral element,
we have to draw an important distinction concerning a further difference be
tween the basic scheme (2.6) and the extended scheme (3.1). What we present
ed in the basic scheme (quoting Kříšková) were the systematic meanings of
the demonstrative pronouns in question, i.e. their semantic position in the re
spective language systems, whereas the indications of the extended scheme
concern the actual meanings of the demonstrative pronoun in given contexts.
These two kinds of meanings are, of course, interrelated, but they are not
identical. In particular, if we classify a specific demonstrative pronoun in a
specific function as neutral in our extended scheme, this does not imply that its
systematic meaning is neutral. It is possible that a systematic semantic opposi
tion is neutralized under certain circumstances. According to Fillmore (1975)
the opposition between English this and that can be neutralized if the pointing
gesture is very precise; it can then be used to express completely different
distinctions, e.g. such belonging to the emotional sphere. 14
In principle, systematic meanings should be derived by abstraction from
actual meanings in different contexts. Thus it can be derived from the data
presented in our extended scheme that Czech ten is correctly classified as neu
tral, whereas the systematic position of Russian tot can be described either as
neutral or as distal (assuming the possibility of neutralization under special
circumstances). We are tending to classify tot as systematically neutral be

cause of its function in syntactic deixis (it seems to be a universal fact that natu
ral languages use their most neutral terms for the most abstract functions).
Then we have to assume that tot has the actual meaning of relative distance in
those cases in which the syntagmatic contrast to the proximal term of the op
position ètot is explicit or implicit.15
In an analogous way, Lyons describes the meanings of English this and
that (Lyons, 1975). According to him, that expresses relative distance only in
those cases in which it is in explicit or implicit contrast to this. He gives an anal
ogous description of English here and there.16
Considering the German demonstrative pronouns one might suggest
starting from a basic tripartite scheme: dieser (proximal) — der (neutral) —
jener (distal). This, however, is not very statisfactory, because jener practical
ly never occurs in modern spoken or written language. We should prefer an al
ternative description that does not include jener as basic, but contains der hier,
der da and der dort. Thus we suggest the following contrastive basic scheme
for the four languages considered in this paper:
(17) proximal neutral distal
R. ètot tot (tot)
C. tento ten tarnten
E. this that (that)
G. dieser der der dort
der hier der da (der da)
For a correct description of the meanings of German demonstrative pro
nouns it would be necessary to investigate their functioning in pragmatic, sem
antic and syntactic deixis.17
NOTES
1) This seems to be the only clearly language-specific sub-task in this catalogue, whereas the
other sub-tasks are more or less universal.
2) As the paper was conceived on the basis of German, e.g. on the basis of a contrast between
Russian and Czech vs. the facts of the German language, the references to English are somewhat
sketchy. In particular, I did not have at hand any grammar intended for second-language learners
with English as their mother tongue, but I suppose that these grammars would not differ very much
from those for Germans. The purpose of the references to facts of English is to show an interesting
correspondence between Russian and English (see the discussion in section 5).
3) In our opinion this is even true for the Russian-German dictionary Bielfeldt (1968), although
it is an almost literal translation φf the monolingual dictionary Ožegov (1968).
4) The inflected forms of ten and tot show the etymological identity of the two demonstrative
pronouns {ten, toho, tomu,... versus tot, togo, tomu,... ; Czech h corresponds systematically to Rus
sian g), which is also obvious from the other genders (Czech ία/fem./, ro/neutr./, and Russian tal
fem./,to/neutr./).
5) This fact may be explained by the great influence of the German language on Czech not only
in the lexical but also in the syntactic sphere.
6) The question of whether there is a neutral element in Russian will be discussed in sections 3
and 5.
7) A similar extension of a defintion based on a concept of functional equivalence in the constitu
tion of texts is to be found in Harweg (1968).
8) Usually I am rather sceptical about the reliability of native speaker's non-spontaneous utter
ances. It is very difficult, however, to obtain spontaneous utterances which are apt to resolve a very
special question, and natural language texts often do not contain any indications either. Neverthe
less, I prefer to rely on written texts, when possible.
9) Křížková's articles concentrate on the classification of the Slavic languages rather than on
problems of deixis, so that this does not imply any criticism.
10) Our data seem to confirm the distinction between discourse deixis and semantic deixis: if we
want to refer to the following text in Czech, we have to use tento to announce directly or indirectly
quoted speech (see our discussion below of this case as belonging to semantic deixis) ; and we have
to use následující in order to refer to a following part of the text itself. If tento is used in discourse
deixis, this means self-reference (see examples (3.4) - (3.7)).
11) I am not sure whether Fillmore would agree; in his writings I did not find any answer to the
question of whether discourse deixis might include reference to other texts than the one just ut
tered.
12) In these cases the inflected forms of the demonstrative pronouns in attributive use can occur
only with nouns like "fact" (or expressing facts) or with nouns like "words" etc. It may be of interest
that we did not find examples of coreference with noun phrases expressed by demonstrative pro
nouns in kataphoric function.
13) It might be possible to argue that there is coreference in the cases of syntactic deixis, too.
This, however, would evoke logical problems for the description of the meaning of restrictive rela
tive clauses: the referent of the noun phrase cannot be fixed independently of the content of the re
strictive relative clause, which is due to the properties of definite descriptions. It should be pointed
out that tot and ten in these cases imply that the relative clause is restrictive.
14) The concept of neutralization might solve some of the problems raised by Klein (see his ex
amples "Here comes my mother" and "There is my mother", where it is obvious that distance is ir
relevant).
15) We hold that this assumption does not contradict the facts exemplified in (3.2). In our view
tot svet has the meaning "the other world" only due to the fact of implicit contrast to "this world".
16) In my view the description given by Lyons is not identical to that given in Klein (1979), where
there is negatively marked as non-proximal, i.e. as referring to some space not enclosing the origo.
These are two kind of asymmetric oppositions, namely proximal — neutral versus proximal—non-
proximal. The former corresponds to our preferred description of the facts of Russian, whereas the
latter is similar to the alternative description mentioned above.
17) By the way, the problems raised in Klein (1978), concerning German da in the frame of the
tripartite system of German local adverbs hier-da-dort might be partially solved, if da were clas
sified as neutral. Such a description would also contribute to an explanation of the fact that German
da is preferably used in anaphoric and syntactico-deictic function; see our examples at the end of
section 4. The data presented by Veronika Ehrich in her paper delivered at the I. Conference of the
"Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft", Tübingen 1979, seem not to contradict to the
classification of da as systematically neutral (Ehrich, this volume).
REFERENCES
Akademija nauk SSSR (1970): Grammatika sovremennogo russkogo litera-

turnogo jazyka (red.: N.Ju. Švedova). Moskva.
Bauernöppel, J. et al. (1970): Kurze tschechische Sprachlehre. Berlin.
Bielfeldt, H.H. (1968): Russisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch. 6th edition. Berlin.
Brugmann, K. (1904): Die Demonstrativpronomina der indogermanischen
Sprachen. Abhandlungen der königl. sächs. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaf
ten. Leipzig.
Cesko-nemecky slovnik(1968). Vol. 1-2. Státní pedagogické nakladatelství.
Praha.
Cesko-russkij slovar' (1973). Vol. 1-2. Českoslovackaja Akademija nauk.
Praha-Moskva.
Ehlich, K. (1982): Anapher and Deixis: Same, Similar or Different. In Jar-
vella, R.J. & Klein, W. (eds.): Speech, Place and Action. New York:
Wiley.
Ehrich, V. (1982): Da and the system of Spatial Deixis in German. In this vol
ume
Fillmore, Ch. (1972): Ansätze zu einer Theorie der Deixis. Kiefer, F. (ed.):
Semantik und generative Grammatik I. 147-174. Frankfurt.
Fillmore, Ch. (1975): Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis. (Delivered 1971).
Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
Harweg, R. (1968): Pronomina und Textkonstitution. Beihefte zu Poetica 2.
München: Fink.
Isacenko, A.V. (1968): Die russische Sprache der Gegenwart. Teil I: For
menlehre. 2nd edition. Halle, Saale.
Klein, W. (1978): Wo ist hier? Präliminarien zu einer Untersuchung der lokal
en Deixis. Linguistische Berichte 58. 18-40.
Klein, W. (1979): Local Deixis in Route Directions. Trier: L.A.U.T.

Křížková, H. (1971): Zájmena typu "ten" a "takovy" ν soucasnych
slovanskych jazycích. Slavica Slovaca 1. 15-30. Bratislava.
Kfízková, Η. (1972): Zamecanija o sisteme ukazatel'nych mestoimenij ν sov-
remennych slavjanskich literaturnych jazykach. Russkoe i slavjanskoe ja-
zykoznanie. 144-153. Moskva.
Lyons, J. (1975): Deixis as a source of reference. In Keenan, E.L. (ed.): For
mal Semantics of Natural Language. 61-83.Cambridge: Cambridge Uni
versity Press.
Majtinskaja, K.E. (1969): Mestoimenija ν jazykach raznych sistem. Aka-
demija nauk SSSR. Institut jazykoznanija. Moskva.
Ozegov, S.I. (1968): Slovar' russkogo jazyka. 7. izdanie. Moskva.
Pfírucní slovník nëmeckocesky - Deutsch-Tschechisches Handwörterbuch
(1936-1938). Vol. 1-4. Prague.
Pul'kina, I.M. &Zachava-Nekrasova,E.B. (1968): Ucebnik russkogo jazyka
dlja studentov-inostrancev. 4. izdanie. Moskva.
Slovar' russkogo jazyka (1960): Akademija nauk SSSR. Moskva.
Slovník spisovného jazyka ceského (1960). Vol. 1-2. Tschechische Akademie
der Wissenschaften. Prague.
Tauscher, E & Kirschbaum, E.G. (1968): Grammatik der russischen
Sprache. 8. Auflage, Düsseldorf.
Travnicek,F. (1951): Mluvnice spisovné cestiny II. Slovanské nakladatelství.
Praha.
DEIXIS AND ANAPHORA IN GERMAN DIALECTS:
THE SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS OF TWO DEFINITE
ARTICLES IN DIALECTAL VARIETIES
DIETRICH HARTMANN
1. INRODUCTION: THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM
For various reasons I consider the study of dialects in German — as in

other languages as well — to be a very fruitful field both for exploring deictic
phenomena and for developing an empirically founded theory of deixis.
(a) In this paper a dialect will be understood to be a variety of a given lan
guage among other varieties of that language. Dialectal varieties are specified
by their regional limitation. Furthermore by definition a dialect exists primar
ily as a spoken variety; dialectal speech in written language (poems, quota
tions, etc.) is secondary. Since dialects are used for oral communication only,
they can be expected to contain frequently used deictic elements. This is
shown by many transcriptions of spoken language.
(b) In contrast to Standard German dialects often have developed not one
but two different paradigms of the definite article. The morphological dif
ferentiation of the two paradigms corresponds to different semantic and prag
matic functions. The relevance of the two kinds of definite article in dialects
has been hardly recognized by linguists and not even by dialectologists. If the
existence of these two paradigms has been taken into account at all, the obser
vations have not been dealt with as an important empirical basis for establish
ing a theory of deixis.! In this paper I shall briefly outline the morphology and
the functions of the articles used in a certain dialect of the Rhinelands. This
analysis will not be exhaustive. A comparison between form-function rela-
188 DIETRICH HARTMANN
tions in dialect and Standard German will systematize the differences so that a
proposed way of classifying the article functions in dialect and Standard Ger
man becomes clearer.
(c) The use of two sets of article forms is not an exotic quality of a single Ger
man dialect. Once the linguist's attention has been focused on these sets fur
ther double paradigms of the definite article will emerge in German dialects.
In Standard German other analogous morphological and semantic phenome
na can be found as well, e.g. contractions of articles and prepositions like am
< an dem, beim < bei dem, etc. The opposition between such contractions
and full forms of the definite article corresponds to analogous functions of the
two article paradigms in the dialects. Describing and classifying the above
mentioned observation will lead to a new way of classifying deictic forms in
general. The analysis offers a contribution for handling general problems in
deictic theory. I shall start with Bühler's notion of deixis, discussing his view
and classification of ways of pointing to objects. A new proposal for subdivid
ing deictic functions will follow this discussion.
Bühler (1934) distinguishes three kinds of deictic pointing which make
use of articles and other more or less deictic elements. His "demonstratio ad
oculos" is said to be the "real" way of pointing to something. The speaker
points to a given object with his finger or other means. The simultaneous ut
terance of one or more verbal deictic elements has to correspond to the non
verbal ones to be understood as a whole by the hearer. The second deictic
function is Bühler's anaphoric function, which is "the most curious and typi
cally linguistic way of pointing" (cf. Bühler 1934, p.81). Here linguistic ele
ments only refer to symbolically represented objects which belong to the lin
guistic context of an utterance. Using linguistic units in anaphoric function
turns the context of speech itself into the "Zeigfeld" in Bühler's terminology.
Obviously the anaphoric use of linguistic units can be considered as an activity
for short term memory. It contrasts with the third mode of pointing called
"Deixis am Phantasma" (deictical reference to "objects" remembered or
created from constructive imagination) which could be seen as an activity of
long term memory.
However, Bühler's expressions "deixis" or "pointing to something" be
come ambiguous and vague, since they are used for these many semantically
different functions. Deictic particles like the definite article may be used both
as mechanisms of local deixis (in "demonstratio ad oculos") and to fulfill other
functions, as well. Thus, the term "deixis" becomes more and more
metaphoric and ambiguous. The ambiguity of the term deixis (real deixis,
DEIXIS AND ANAPHORA IN GERMAN DIALECTS 189
anaphoric deixis, "Deixis am Phantasma") becomes quite obvious in Burner's

treatment of "demonstratio ad oculos" as "real" deixis, in comparison to
other kinds of deixis. The relationship between "real" deixis and other deictic
modes of pointing, e.g. the relationship between real deixis and "Deixis am
Phantasma", is far from clear.
Lyons similarly argues "that reference by means of definite descriptions
depends ultimately upon deixis", including anaphorical use of the definite ar
ticle (Lyons 1977, 2, p.657). Referring to deictic components in anaphorical
functions of the definite article, Lyons considers deixis the basis of anaphora
and other varieties of the definite article. Of course, there exist clear differen
ces between deictic elements like this and that vs. the. In opposition to this and
that, the cannot be interpreted with respect to the basic reference point
(Buhler's "origo") of the context, normally the temporal and local position of
the speaker.
In contrast to Bühler the aim of this paper is to present some arguments
for a clear distinction between the deictic and the anaphoric function on the
one hand, and other non-generic uses of the definite article on the other. In
order to provide the prerequisites for the analysis of dialectical uses, I will
begin with an outline of the semantics (reference) and pragmatics of the defi
nite article in Standard German.
2. FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF LINGUISTIC EXPRESSIONS

CONTAINING THE DEFINITE ARTICLE
2.1 Generic reference

By functional analysis of linguistic elements containing forms of the defi
nite article I mean both the study of the functions of reference and of the spe
cial and characteristic constraints of the verbal and non-verbal context of those
linguistic elements (semantic and pragmatic functions). With respect to the
semantics of definite nominais the following terminological conventions are
proposed here. 2
(1) a. Die Gans schnattert
b.. Der Walfisch ist ein Säugetier
In (1) a. the expression die Gans can be generic and specific. In generic inter
pretation the expression refers to the whole set of geese. It is true of each indi
vidual that if it is a goose, it cackles. Likewise in (1) b. der Walfisch refers to
the set of all whales; however, the nominal der Walfisch can only be under-
stood in the generic interpretation. Truth conditions for (1) a. are: the state
ment is true for all members of this set (condition of multiplicity) and objects
of this kind exist (condition of existence).
2.2 Generic reference to concepts

(2) a. Der Deutsche ist fleißig
b. Der Amerikaner war als erster auf dem Mond
c. Der Südländer ist temperamentvoller als der Nordländer
Generic interpretations of nominais as in (2) differ from generic interpreta
tions as in (1) in sofar as predicates like "ist fleißig", "ist als erster auf dem
Mond", and "ist temperamentvoller als" hold only for one or more (or most)
but in no case for every individual belonging to the set referred to. In (2) a. the
intension of a stereotypic concept is made explicit: the quality of being indus
trious belongs to the concept of a German in this categorization of a speaker or
a speech community. Generic reference to concepts as in (2) a. and (2) c. is
often used for implicit or explicit stereotypes referring to members of nations,
races, religious and ethnic groups etc. 3
2.3 Specific reference

Definite nominais as die Gans in (1) a. and der Deutsche in (2) a. may be
used not only in a generic but also in a specific interpretation. A linguistic unit
containing the definite article is specific if this expression refers to exactly one
object so that the hearer is able to identify the object as the only one intended.
Definite nominais which are interpreted in the specific sense often presup
pose that there is exactly one object of the kind in the real world (the President
of the USA) (condition of uniqueness) and that this object exists (condition of
existence).
As is well known the use of the definite article depends on certain condi
tions of the non-verbal, i.e. situational or verbal context (context andcotext). 4
2.4 The definite article in deictic use

An object is situated in the perceptual field shared by speaker and hearer.
This object has to be identified by the hearer only by means of visual percep
tion; there are no preceding or following cotextual directions for its identifica
tion (cf. 3a-c):
(3) a. Was kostet der Blumenstrauß? (in a flowershop)
b. Die Bluse (da) gefällt mir (in front of a store)
c. Stell den Topf bitte auf den Herd (instructions to a person as
sisting in the kitchen)
(3) a. may be said by a costumer to a florist. Adequate situations for the use of
sentences as (3) a. and b. can be easily found. The referential identification of
the intended object in (3) a - must be supported by accompanying gestures
like direction of gaze and/or pointing with a finger to something. In referring
expressions like those in (3) a - the definite article can be replaced by a de
monstrative pronoun like dieser. So the use older, etc. may often be synonym
ous with attributive demonstratives. Definite articles such as those italicized
in (3) a - are generally considered to function deictically (Lyons 1977, 2, p.
655).5
2.5 The definite article in anaphorical use

Even a not very detailed analysis has to consider at least the following
conditions in order to explain anaphoric relations. As opposed to the deictic
use of the article in definite nominais the reference of definite nominais in ana
phorical use is indirectly based upon a syntactic and semantic relation to a
linguistic unit which is part of the foregoing cotext. It is also based on the refer
ence of this linguistic unit (phenomenon of coreference).
(4) Es war einmal ein Fischer una seine Frau. Die wohnten zusammen
in einer kleinen Hütte direkt an der See und der Fischer ging alle
Tage dorthin und angelte. 6
(Once upon a time there were a fisherman and his wife. They lived
together in a small cottage next to the sea and the fisherman went
there every day to fish.)
In sequences like (4) the use of supporting gestures as in (3) is less accepta
ble and less likely. In the anaphorically used unit of (4) {der Fischer corefer
ring with ein Fischer) the definite article is hardly replaceable by a demonstra
tive pronoun as in (3) a., (3) b., and (3)
The delimitation of the anaphorical use from the non-anaphorical (in a
very limited sense of the word) non-generic and also non-deictic use of the
definite article as in (5), is obviously interesting, but cannot be pursued fur
ther here.
(5) Hans mähte gestern den Rasen. Das Gras war schon sehr hoch.
For practical reasons I consider cases like (5) to be anaphorical. A theoretical
ly based explanation for handling the unit das Gras as a resumption of den
Rasen (the lawn), and therefore as an anaphorically used unit must be left
open here.
2.6 The definite article in nominais referring to unique objects

It is often emphasized that the phenomenon of uniqueness of referred ob
jects is context-dependent because the speaker always provides the informa
tion not given in the situation "that is necessary for the addressee to identify
the individual in question" (Lyons 1977, 2, p. 655).7 The described use of the
definite article concerns nominais within text sequences whose referents are
thought of as unique with respect to a certain common knowledge. In (6) a
couple is leaving an apartment house uttering the following questions or state
ments with definite descriptions (preceding introductory remarks of the ob
ject referred to are possible but not necessary):
(6) a. Ist die Wohnungstür abgeschlossen?
b. Die Wohnung ist wirklich zu klein für uns.
Kennst du den Oberbürgermeister von Köln!
d. Das Rathaus findest du am Marktplatz.
The hearer is capable of referring to an individual object knowing that an
apartment has one and only one front door (a), that the couple is going to rent
an apartment and therefore has to evaluate the apartment just seen (b). The
reference of the definite nominais is also based upon the ability of drawing
conclusions on the basis of part-whole-relations (door-apartment). This use
of definite nominais does not differ semantically from anaphorically used
nominais. There is a pragmatic difference, however, since an explicit intro
duction in the preceding cotext is missing.
The difference between usages represented in (6) a. and (6) respective
ly is the following: The uniqueness of the referent in (6) is not given by a
common perceptual field or context. Instead it belongs to a general knowl
edge about administrations, institutions, municipal "spaces" of all kinds. In
habitants of a city or a village having only one mayor, city hall, market place,
etc. are able to refer to these objects using the definite article, since they share
a common knowledge in which the uniqueness of the persons and institutions
in question is represented. For the same reason members of a family speak
about the father, the mother, the grandmother, etc. relative to a certain con
text. Unica as in (6) and (6) d. are very important in everyday life communi
cation when speakers presuppose an implicitly defined context and knowl
edge of this context which determines their use of definite nominais (cf. Haw
kins 1977, Quasthoff 1978, Hartmann 1980).8
Karl Bühler considers all ways of pointing to objects as modes of deixis.

So all of the discussed uses of the definite article in non-generic interpreta
tions would have to be considered as more or less deictic. In contrast to that
view we shall propose another classification of deictical functions based upon
the results of the following analysis of the dialectal use of articles.
3. TWO PARADIGMS OF THE DEFINITE ARTICLE AND THEIR

FUNCTIONS IN A DIALECT OF THE RHINELAND
3.1 List of the definite articles

Definite articles are principally unstressed word forms; a stressed form is
to be understood as demonstrative pronoun. As a starting point for the dialec
tal analysis we shall take the description 9 of the definite article in the author's
own dialect of Mönchengladbach which is situated between Cologne and Düs
seldorf near the German-Dutch border. In contrast to Standard German the
dialect of Mönchengladbach has not one but two morphologically distinct pa
radigms of the definite article. The forms are morphologically marked with re
spect to gender and number. As in English, but in opposition to Standard Ger
man, cases are not marked. Historically this, like other dialects, has lost in
flection. For practical reasons the two paradigms of the definite article are
named according to the singular masculine forms (cf. Table 1), i.e. dәr -article
and dε -article.
1 names of number singular plural ]

paradigms gender masculine feminine Ineuter
dor -article [dәr] [dә] [әt][t][dә]

de -article [dε] [dr] [dat] [di:]
(unstressed)
indefinite [әnә] [әn] [ә]

article
demonstrative [dε] [dr] [dat] [dr:]

pronoun (stressed) ,
Table 1: Two paradigms of the definite article in the dialect

of Mönchengladbach
In opposition to the definite article the attributive demonstrative pronoun

often is accompanied by a deictic particle [do] like 'there' or 'over there'. Thus
the deictic force is strengthened:
(7) a. [zysto dε man do?]
'Do you see the man over there?'
b. [zysto di εk do?]
'Do you see the corner over there?'
c. [zysto dat kegk do?]
'Do you see the child over there?'
Apparently there are variants, especially of the dor -article (e.g. in neuter sin
gular: t, әt), which are dependent on the phonetic environment and have to be
explained phonologically/phonetically. The particular form depends on pho
netic conditions like "weakness" of tone and other conditions, e.g. after pre
positions. I cannot go into morphological details here.
3.2 dor-article. Kinds of reference

3.2.1 dor-article in generic reference
The choice of the definite articles does not depend on properties of the
following noun. Rather it depends on both the intended referent and certain
presupposed conditions of the non-verbal or verbal co(n)text. Furthermore
the definite article de obviously has a greater deictic force than the article dor,
which does not have deictic quality at all. Although there are certain phonetic
variants of the forms, the use of those articles is not generally determined by
phonetic conditions, i.e. by the phonetic environment.
In general, expressions containing a form of the article dor can be used
both in generic and in specific interpretation. However, only one kind of spe
cific reference is possible. In other words it is not possible to use the article dor
in any sense deictically or anaphorically. I shall begin with phenomena of ge
neric reference: whenever the speaker refers to a specific object or to a set of
objects using nominais with dor, he assumes that the referent could be identi
fied by the hearer without the assistance of any co(n)textual hints or direc
tions. So nominais with dor as in (8) have generic reference. They do not occur
very frequently in dialectical speech (with the exception of proverbs, idioms,
etc.).
(8) a. [dor mœn∫ mot ∫tεaVә]
'The man has to die.'
b. [vi: ∫te:tdor ve:t?]

'How is the wheat growing this year?'
c. [at pε:at lœpt floto as do rhor k.]
4
A horse runs faster than a dog.'
When referring to a visible or just mentioned object, i.e. when intending a
specific reference, the speaker has to choose the article de as in (8) d.
(8) d. [dat pε:at lœpt flctc as dε hor k.]
T h e horse runs faster than the dog.' or
'This horse runs faster than the dog.' etc.
Heinrichs (1954, p.96) has pointed out that forms of the definite article dor
often occur in proverbs and proverblike sentences, in general in formulaic
speech:
(9) [ot o:x es jrγta as do ∫nu:t.]
'The eye is bigger than the mouth.'
3.2.2 The dor-article in generic reference to concepts

Similarly to its use in generic expressions, dor lacks a deictic component
when used in referring to concepts as in (10) a. By means of the "definite" arti
cle dor, one often denotes a well known person or a typical exponent of a
specific occupation, profession or business, etc. who is imagined in a typical
situation or equipped with typical qualities.
(10) a. [dәr ∫arytәkεrәa εs ∫ vat.]
'The chimney-sweep is black.'
b. [dәr dœmstә bu: a krit do dεkstә εapәlә.]
'The most stupid peasant will get the biggest potatoes.'
3.2.3 The dor-article in specific reference referring to unique objects

Forms of the definite article dor are used not only in generic interpreta
tions but even more frequently in specific ones. This holds especially for ex
pressions referring to unica. As mentioned above unica are unique only in re
lation to a specific context presupposed by the speaker. With regard to this
context an object is assumed to be identifiable by the intended hearer. Listing
some of those contexts in relation with corresponding nominais can give much
information about individual or collective relevance-systems, interests, per
ceptions and experiences. Thus the occurrence of the article dor in nominais
hints not only at uniqueness but also at assumed mutual knowledge of a specif
ic person, thing, institution, etc. Thus in contrast to Standard German even
proper names can take the definite article dor as in (11). The article communi
cates that the person referred to is known in relation to the presupposed con
text of a village, a family or a social group, etc.
(11) a. [dәr pita kyt.]
'Peter is coming.'
b. [әt valt rout kyt os bәzæ ә. ]
'Waltraut shall visit us.'
c. [mә farә an dәi ri:n.]
'We are going to the Rhine'.
The article de can also be used in connection with proper names. If a certain
person was mentioned and the speaker is annoyed about her or him, he may
say something like (11) d., now using the article de in a kind of emotive
speech-function:
(11) d. [dat valtrout es εl dc.]
'Waltraut is already here.'
In relation to the speaker's body as a possible context10, parts like head, nose,
etc. can be conceived as unica. Linguistic expressions containing the article
dor which refer to parts of a body like head, arms, eyes, le ftc etc. usually refer
to the speaker's own head, etc. (cf. 12a.).
(12) a. [dәr kcp dεt mεχ vi:ә.]

'My head is aching.'
b. [әt hε:at εs em am blcdә.]
'His heart is bleeding.' (metaphorical use, speech formula)
If the speaker does not refer to himself like in (12)b. he has to give a special in
dication to that effect. Generalizing the described observations on the use of
the two definite articles in the dialect of Mönchengladbach will shed some
more light on the cognitive and communicative relevance of these nominais.
Let us consider in detail the opposition of the articles as shown in (13) a. and
(13) b.
(13) a. [et kε k ΕS am jri:әnә.]
'The child (also: my, our ... child) is crying'.
b. [dat kε k εs am jri әnә].
'The (that) child is crying now.'
Even if utterance (13) a. is spoken outside of the speaker's house, family, the
common living area of the speaker and child, [et kε k] always refers to a child
unique in a mutually presupposed context, i.e. in most cases to the speaker's
own child. The use of the article dor marks the person referred to as well
known and identifiable in relation to the presupposed context. So the speaker
utterring (13) a. can be said to take a certain context with him wherever he
goes. The same holds for the case in which the place of utterance is not identi
cal with the speaker's house, apartment, etc. which is referred to. In terms of
deictic theories the speaker's basic reference point (Bühler's "origo") does
not correspond to the local coordinates of the utterance point, because the
"deictic space" presupposed by the speaker is different from the perceptual
field shared by speaker and hearer during the time of the utterance.
When using the other kind of definite article, de as in (13) b., the speaker
refers to a certain child known and identifiable to the hearer by preceding ver
bal cotext (anaphorical use) or by a situation common to speaker and hearer
(deictic use). So the meaning of a sentence like (13) a. may be analyzed in
terms of reference and presupposition:
(14) Reference: There is exactly one object such that the speaker refers
to it by means of the definite nominal.
Presupposition: The speaker presupposes that there is a suitable
non-verbal context of which the speaker is a part, so that the object
to which the speaker refers can be identified in relation to this con
text without further information (e.g. without a pointing gesture
or previous introduction of this object into the discourse). The
quality of this context needs not to be specified. The speaker be
lieves that the hearer knows the object to which the speaker refers.
3.3 dε - article. Kinds of reference

3.3.1 Deictic reference
Unlike the article dәr the definite article de and the forms belonging to
that paradigm can only be used in definite nominais with specific reference. A
second difference in comparison to the dor - article has to do with the stronger
deictic force of the de - article. Third, when the article de is used, the objects
referred to cannot be identified on the basis of a presupposed context as de
scribed in the previous section 3.2. On the contrary, many specific references
with the article de can only be interpreted by starting from the basic reference
point, i.e. the utterance point. Fourth, the definite article de points to an ob-
ject at close range. This does not hold at all for the use of the article dor. So the
fact is not amazing that the most important uses of the definite article de are
deictical and anaphorical (see section 2 above).
(15) a. [drε:χt dat i:s al?]11
'Is this ice strong enough to walk on top of it?
b. [drε:χt әt i:s al?]
'Is this ice strong enough to walk on top of it?'
Uttered in front of a frozen lake, (15) a. with the article de fits very well since
there is a visible object (ice) referred to and pointed out by a characteristic
gesture. Another situation must be assumed for the adequate uttering of (15)
b. In the wintertime a friend reports of a walk to me. So I refer to the frozen
lakes in general when I ask him the question (15) b. using dor.
3.3.2 Anaphorical reference (coreference)

The main domain of the definite article de and corresponding forms in
our dialect is anaphora. A sequence of utterances as in (16) may be taken as
the beginning of an everyday life conversational narrative.
(16) [jistәrә hadәt an dә dœa jәklcpt.eχ lu:a du:rәt fεnsta εη za: enә
mand r u . t ә∫tcn.εxma:kdi: dæa cp εn dε man zε:t fœe mε∫....]
'Yesterday someone knocked at the door. Looking out of the win
dow I saw a man standing there. I opened the door and the man
told me....'
The speaker uses the definite article de instead of der indicating that there is a
specific object to be identified on the basis of the preceding verbal context. In
opposition to nominais with the dialectical article dor whose reference has to
be established by means of a presupposed and therefore implicit context, in
(16) the definite nominal de man has to be interpreted in relation to a more or
less explicit verbal cotext (anaphoric relation). It is important to emphasize
the difference between an implicit, presupposed context as a speaker-bound
frame of reference which takes dor, and a verbalized or visible cotext which
takes de. In the case of dor the basic reference point is quite independent of the
speaker's "real" present origo when uttering such a sentence. The speaker's
deictic space is not the one visible to him and the hearer or — in the case of de
— the one that can be read or heard as a verbal cotext. The question is whether
in case of the article der the assumed context (family, village, institution etc.)
can be called "deictic space" at all. However, with de the basic reference point
equals the utterance point:
(17) a. [әt le:χ εs am brεnә.]

T h e light is on.'
b. [dat le:χ εs am brεnә.]
'The lamp is on.'
(17) a. may be uttered by someone standing in front of a house at night trying
to figure out if his/her friends are home or not. The nominal in (17) a. does not
refer to a specific referent. The house in question may have one or more lights
on; the nominal in (17) a. refers only to light in general as a well known part of
a house and nothing else. This holds although the interpretation with refer
ence to only one light may sound very reasonable. There is a presupposed
epistemic context according to which a house has lights as well as doors, win
dows, etc. On the basis of this context the nominal in (17) a. make use of the
fact that the object in question is well known. In (17) b. the nominal [dat le:x]
refers to a specific object to be identified by the verbal or non-verbal context
hic und nunc (either deictic or anaphorical use). 12 If we assume an anaphorical
use of the article dein (17) b. we may analyse the semantics of (17) b. as speci
fied in (18). In contrast to the corresponding analysis of (14) (nominais with
the article dor) in (18) the special condition of the presupposed context is miss
ing here.
(18) Reference', same as in (14)
Presupposition'. The speaker presupposes that there is a verbal
ized context (cotext) so that the object he refers to can be identi
fied in relation to this verbalized cotext, i.e. there is a relevant
foregoing information denoting the intended object.
4. REFERENCE OF THE DEFINITE ARTICLE IN DIALECT AND

STANDARD
Let us schematize some of the results concerning the referential uses of

the definite articles in dialect and Standard German. In addition to different
kinds of reference we also take into account here different relations to context
and cotext.13 (See Table 2).
relations to context reference Standard two articles

orcotext German in the
dialect
verbalized or presupposed
situational context
context re
ferred to
- + generic (in der dsr

sense of 2.1)
- + generic (in der dar
sense of 2.2)
+ specific (unica) der dar
deictic - specific der de
anaphorical - specific der de
cataphorical - specific der de
Table 2: Functions and paradigms of the definite article in

Standard German and in a dialect (Mönchengladbach)
The observations on the different uses of articles presented above allow us to

draw some conclusions with respect to a reasonable classification of types of
reference associated with the corresponding nominais. Starting from the dif
ferent functions of the definite article in Standard German, a system like in
Table 3 seems plausible:
Table 3: References of nominais with the definite article in

Standard German
On the basis of Standard German alone the taxonomy of Table 3 seems quite
adequate. But if we take into consideration the various dialectical uses of the
two articles we obtain a classification as in Table 4.
Table 4: References of nominais with two different articles in a

dialect
The opposition between specific and generic reference is decisive for the clas
sification of reference in Table 3 because it seems to be typical for Standard
German. However, even for Standard German this classification is not entire
ly adequate: The additional forms of reference found in dialectal speech also
account for use of the definite article in Standard German and in other varie
ties and languages. In dialect the decisive opposition is the contrast between
deictical and non-deictical use, as Table 4 shows.14 As a consequence of the

classification shown in Table 4 we cannot accept Bühler's classification of the
"Zeigarten". The dialectal use of two articles suggests a clear distinction be
tween deictic and anaphorical use on the one hand and generic use and refer
ence to unica on the other hand. Without going into details here 15 the reported
results are to be interpreted in such a way that the use of the article dor, refer
ring to unica and to concepts and sets of individuals represents only non-deic
tical usages. In this respect obviously Bühler's conceptual subdivision of the
term "Deixis (am Phantasma)" is obviously incorrect and should be replaced
by the proposed one.
5. EVIDENCE FROM A BROADER DATA BASIS: DOUBLE

PARADIGMS OF THE DEFINITE ARTICLE IN OTHER DIA
LECTS AND IN STANDARD GERMAN
The dialect of Mönchengladbach with its two paradigms of the definite

article turns out not to be an exotic exception. Looking for more examples we
will find many dialects and languages which use two "definite" articles.
Elsewhere I reported the relevant information grammars, dictionaries, and
monographs can give in this respect. 16 A survey of the results is presented in
Hartmann (1967:114-124) giving evidence to the fact that there are numerous
dialectal varieties which have two articles. For instance, Heinrichs (1954) and
Ebert (1971) describe similar conditions in a Rhineland and a Frisian dialect
respectively.
Based upon the works of grammarians we may obviously assume that the
use of two articles is a very widespread phenomenon in dialects and lan
guages. In addition I show in some recent studies that there is a corresponding
morphological tendency in Standard German as well: these are forms consist
ing of parts of prepositions and articles as am, beim, ins, aufs, etc. vs. full ex
pressions as an dem, bei dem, in das, auf das, etc. (for details see Hartmann
1978 and 1980), cf. (19).
(19) a. Hans geht ins Kino
b. Hans geht in das Kino
Two interpretations can be given for (19) a. : ins Kino may be understood eith
er in a generic or in a specific sense. If used specifically it refers to a special ob
ject, presupposing that there is only one cinema within a presupposed context
like a small town. Ins Kino is interpreted then as an unicum in relation to a spe-
cific context. In opposition to (19) a., (19) b. cannot be understood in a gener

ic interpretation but only in a specific one. (19) b. is anaphorically used if there
are corresponding conditions of the cotext. So what we discovered is the fact
that Standard German has also developed a way of expressing very economi
cally semantic and pragmatic differences for definite nominais. In view of the
concept of deixis it is comparable to the dialects disccussed above.
6. CONCLUDING STATEMENT: DEIXIS REVISITED
Dialects have developed morphological and syntactic devices to differen

tiate between deictical use (=deictic and anaphorical reference) and non-
deictical use (generic reference and reference to unica) by means of two arti
cles. As described above, this distinction is much more clear-cut than in
Standard German. As briefly mentioned above these results give reason to re
consider the relationship between the various kinds of deixis Bühler (1934)
has proposed (demonstratio ad oculos, anaphora, "Deixis am Phantasma").
First, it seems rather difficult to incorporate reference to unica into this frame
work. The way the described dialectal article refers to unica seems to be quite
different in comparison to Bühler's "Deixis am Phantasma" which is to be in
terpreted in relation to memory etc. Second, the numerous reports of gram
marians about two article-paradigms suggest another modification of
Bühler's system: with respect to these results "demonstratio ad oculos" and
"anaphora" should be united and separated from reference to unica and ge
nerics. This subdivision seems reasonable especially with respect to the basic
reference point. To take an example: As shown above, unica (being unique in
relation to a presupposed context) may take the article in deictical function.
Not speaking within the borders of his village a speaker may talk about de Bür
germeister so that he does not refer to the mayor of his own village; rather he
refers to the mayor who belongs to the area where the speaker is at the mo
ment. In this case the speaker's "real" basic reference point is operating. Us
ing the dor - article, however, the speaker refers to the mayor of his own vil
lage. In connection with this kind of "definite" article the question arises
whether there is any basic reference point, because the local position of the
speaker is certainly not it. Should we therefore accept a basic reference point
of a "generalized speaker"? Is there such a thing as a typical speaker in rela
tion to a particular context? If we accept such an idea we have to introduce
another concept of basic reference point and therefore of deixis; if we reject
this notion—which I think is necessary to do—we have to restrict the concept
of deixis to deictic and anaphorical use only. That means that for the other
non-generic use of the definite article a new theory outside the conceptual sys
tem of deixis has to be developed.
NOTES
1 ) For more details concerning previous research on the occurrence of two articles in dialects see
section 5 below and Hartmann (1967: 114ff.).
2) Due to the limited space it is not possible to discuss all the numerous treatments of the seman
tics and pragmatics of the definite article here. For our purpose the general idea of how to analyse
the semantics of definite nominais presented here should be sufficient.
3) For analysis of explicit verbal stereotypes see the very detailed analysis by U. Quasthoff
(1973).
4) Again I do not intend to give an exhaustive analysis of these conditions. Some remarks as to
the terminological use have to be enough.
5) Cf. also parallel terms like "demonstratio ad oculos" (Bühler 1934); "monstrative Funktion"
(Heinrichs 1954: 100); "situational use of the definite article or visible situation use" (Hawkins
1977: 6,11) etc.
6) This is the beginning of a well known fairy tale which belongs to the famous collection of fairy
tales edited by the Grimm Brothers.
7) For more details with respect to the frequent use of unica see particularly Hawkins (1977);
Quasthoff (1978) and Hartmann (1980).
8) The so-called cataphoric use of the definite article followed by a relative clause is not dis
cussed here; cf. Hawkins (1977); Ebert (1971).
9) For a more detailed description of the morphology and semantics of two article-forms in dif
ferent dialects see Heinrichs (1954: 85-103); Hartmann (1967); Ebert (1971).
10) A more detailed but linguistically not very systematic survey of context relevant phenomena
is given by Heinrichs (1954: 89ff.).
11) This example is taken from Heinrichs (1954:100).
12) I do not discuss the difficult question of the so-called "emotional" use of the definite article
here. The problem is how to establish a deictic space for the referent. In the discussed dialect the ar
ticle dε is preferred in exclamations, etc. For details see Heinrichs (1954: 100); Hartmann (1967:
184ff.).
13) Generic reference and reference to unica are both incorporated in the category "presup
posed context". This may be justified by the use of the same article paradigm for both kinds of refer
ents. Aside from this both usages have certain properties in common. They have to do with the con
ditions of the preceding text.
14) Beside the term deictic I am introducing the term deictical as the superordinated concept of
deictic reference including anaphorical reference.
15) From a philosophical and historical point of view it seems very interesting to analyse the use
of a dialectal article dor both for general concepts and for unica. The parallelism may indicate that
there a common origin is to be assumed for both.
16) I started my research looking for publications at the well equipped library of the "For
schungsinstitut für deutsche Sprache" (Deutscher Sprachatlas) at Marburg. Articles and grammars
since 1966 were checked. Of course, most of the older grammarians who describe dialects were not
interested in syntax, semantics and pragmatics of the definite article. But there are exceptions;
many of them have also made very fine observations with respect to the semantics and pragmatics of
two articles in dialects. Very clear remarks on the pragmatics of two articles in the dialect of Mainz
are to be found (Reis 1891: 45ff.), see also Pfeifer (1927). For a former Bavarian dialect in Cze
choslovakia see also Schiepek (1908: 346f.), for the Rhineland see also Welter (1929). The dialect
of Cologne has two articles too, according to my data. For more detailed studies new tape record
ings of these other dialects should be studied for further results in this field.
REFERENCES
Bühler, . (1934): Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Je

na.
Donellan, K. (1966): Reference and definite descriptions. Philosophical Re
view 75. 281-304.
Ebert, . (1971): Zwei Formen des bestimmten Artikels. In: D. Wunderlich
(ed.), Probleme und Fortschritte der Transformationsgrammatik. Mün
chen. 159-174.
Hartmann, D. (1967): Studien zum bestimmten Artikel in 'Morant und Galie'
und anderen rheinischen Denkmälern des Mittelalters. Giessen.
Hartmann, D. (1978): "Verschmelzungen als Varianten des bestimmten
Artikels?" In: D. Hartmann, H.-J. Linke, and O. Ludwig (eds.). 68-81.
Hartmann, D. (1980): Über Verschmelzungen von Präposition und bestimm
tem Artikel. Untersuchungen zu ihrer Form und Funktion in gesprochenen
und geschriebenen Varietäten des heutigen Deutsch. Zeitsch. für Dialek
tologie und Linguistik 47.160-183.
Hartmann, D., Linke, H.-J., and Ludwig, O. (eds.) (1978): Sprache in Gegen
wart und Geschichte. Festschrift für Heinrich Matthias Heinrichs. Köln.
Hawkins, J.A. (1977): The Pragmatics of Definiteness. Part. I, II. Linguis
tische Berichte 47.1-27 and 48.1-27.
Heinrichs, H.M. (1954): Studien zum bestimmten Artikel in den germani
schen Sprachen. Giessen.
Klein, W. (1978): Wo ist hier? Präliminarien zu einer Untersuchung der loka
len Deixis. Linguistische Berichte 58.18-40.
Klein, W. (1979): Local deixis in route directions. L.A.U.T. Series B, Paper

No. 41. Trier University.
Lieb, H.-H. (1977): Principles of semantics. In: F. Heny and H. Schnelle
(eds.), Semantics for natural languages. Papers from the 3 rd Groningen
Round Table. New York.
Lyons, J. (1977): Semantics. 2 Volumes. Cambridge.
Pfeifer, A. (1927): Beiträge zur Laut- und Formenlehre der Mainzer Mun
dart. Giessen.
Quasthoff, U.M. (1973): Soziales Vorurteil und Kommunikation. Eine
sprachwissenschaftliche Analyse des Stereotyps. Frankfurt.
Quasthoff, U.M. (1978): Bestimmter Artikel und soziale Kategorisierung.
Zum Mechanismus von Referenz und Kohärenz. In: D. Hartmann, H.-J.
Linke, and O. Ludwig (eds.), 154-173.
Rauh, G. (1978): Linguistische Beschreibung deiktischer Komplexität in nar-
rativen Texten. Tübingen.
Reis, H. (1891): Beiträge zur Syntax der Mainzer Mundart. Mainz.
Schiepek, J. (1899-1908): Der Satzbau der Egerländer Mundart. 2 Volumes.
Prag.
Welter, W. (1929): Studien zur Dialektgeographie des Kreises Eupeh. Bonn.
SOME REMARKS ON J A P A N E S E DEICTICS
FLORIAN COULMAS
Oral communication depends to a large extent on anchoring speech in the

extra-linguistic situation, and thus making specific the meanings of utteran
ces. An understanding of how this anchoring works is essential for proper
communication, because the deictic devices on which it relies organize the
world and our utterances in it. Without making the appropriate links, the
simplest sentences remain quite unspecific, as shown by any number of ordi
nary sentences, such as (1) - (5).
(1) (kanojo wa) sanjippun de kaerimasu.
she TOP 30 minutes in come back
She will be back in half an hour.
(2) (anata wa) sen shū no kinyōbi ni doko ni ikimashitaka.
you TOP last week GEN Friday at where at gone INTER
Where have you been last Friday?
(3) (watashitachi wa) koko ni imasu.
we TOP here at be
We are here.
(4) mukō ni oite.
over there at put
Put it over there.
(5) kore wa are yori chiisai.
this TOP that more small
This is smaller than that.
If decontextualized, these sentences do not provide us with much infor
mation. They are underdetermined in the sense that their meaning is not fully
explicable on sentence-internal grounds alone 1 (cf. Feldman 1971). From (1)
we can tell that someone says of some female person that she will be back —
210 FLORIAN COULMAS
presumably, but not necessarily, at the place of the utterance — a half an hour
from the time of the utterance of (1). What we don't know is the referent of ka
nojo (she), and the time and the location of the utterance. Without this addi
tional information, which cannot be extracted from the sentence itself, it can
not be assigned a definite interpretation. The same holds for sentences (2) -
(5) where we lack the necessary information for specifying the predicate or
identifying its referent.
Language is essentially a product of dynamic cooperation in which a min
imum of two speakers take part. They can rely on their mutual awareness of
themselves as well as the situation into which their speech activity is em
bedded. The pervasiveness of deictic elements in actual languages use outside
the grammarian's laboratory bears ample testimony to the fact that speakers
do indeed rely most heavily on situational information not encoded in what is
said. By doing so they comply with the practical necessities of verbal commun
ication. As the world is in permanent flux, and moreover, as our perspective
of it and ourselves in it is constantly changing, we have to be able, for econom
ical reasons, to refer by means of the same expression to different objects,
events, etc. at different times and locations. Conversely, it is also necessary to
refer to the same object, event, etc. by means of different expressions, in
order to relate that object, event, etc. appropriately to the hic et nunc of our
utterances.
All languages have devices for determining the links of utterances with
their spatio-temporal context, and while they differ considerably in the ways
that deictic functions are carried out, it is generally true that deictic informa
tion is incorporated into lexical material. There are, in other words, lexical
items whose use is typically deictic.
The lexicalization pattern of Japanese deictics is quite complex, involv
ing words of virtually every form class.2 In addition to numerous morphologi
cally opaque deictic nouns, verbs, personal pronouns, adverbs, etc. Japanese
has a very nice paradigm of regularly composed deictic expressions whose
deictic character is revealed by virtue of their form, although they range
across a number of form classes, too. These expressions form a fairly consist
ent system providing the structure of the various ditterent deictic spaces as re
flected in the Japanese language. This paradigm is well-accounted for in refer
ence grammars and standard textbooks. In the description that follows I draw
heavily on Martin 1975.I will then go on to discuss some peculiarities and un
predictable conditions on the use of some of the terms of the paradigm.
JAPANESE DEICTICS 211
In English we can recognize a rudimentary tripartite paradigm of spatial,

directional, and temporal deictic terms.
(6) here there where
hence thence whence
hither thither whither
Except for the terms for proximal, distal and indefinite spatial deixis the ex
pressions forming the paradigm are to a greater or lesser extent outmoded and
rarely used. The corresponding Japanese paradigm is more fully developed
and its terms furnish the most important lexicalized means of deictic refer
ence. 3 The paradigm is quadripartite consisting of the stem-morphemes ko-,
so-, a-, and do-.
First consider the demonstrative kore, sore, are, dore. Taking a pivot ap
proach as proposed by Bühler (1934) and further developed by Fillmore
(1966,1968) they can be described as follows.
(7) kore speaker pivot: proximal
sore hearer pivot: proximal; speaker pivot: medial
are speaker pivot and hearer pivot: distal
dore indefinite
English equivalents are roughly this, that, that, and which, in this order. In fig
ure 1 kore is seen as somewhere close to the speaker, sore is close to the hear
er, and are is distant from both speaker and hearer, that is, somewhere
beyond the dotted line. Thus, while that is used to refer to some object
a-
Fig.l
which is either close to the hearer or distant from both speaker and hearer,
Japanese has two different demonstratives to distinguish these uses.
In a parallel fashion the local deictics incorporate a distinction between
the place where I am, ko ko (here), the place where you are, so ko (there), a
212 FLORIAN COULMAS
definite place distant from you and me, asoko (yonder), and an indefinite
place, doko (where). These local deictics are nouns. 4 This place, that place,
etc. may thus be more suitable renditions of the underlying concepts than
here, there, etc.
Consider sentence (3) above. I could only elicit it in a situation where my
informant and I were looking at a map and where he was pointing out our posi
tion on that map. Otherwise such a sentence would not be used. Notice that
the personal pronoun and the topic marker are in brackets. This is to indicate
that in natural speech they would be omitted, in accordance with a general
tendency in Japanese to omit the obvious. The reason why (3) is not used for
identifying the speaker's location to a hearer is that it sounds too tautologous:
'We are where we are'. Yet, we can easily think of a reasonable interpretation
of we are here, such as 'it is from where the sound of my voice comes that we
are.' For this purpose, however, the speaker of Japanese would focus on the
place and not mention the person at all, using a sentence such as (3') which
clearly exhibits the nominal character of the local demonstratives.
(3') Koko da!
here copula
In exclamations of this kind particles are omitted. Otherwise, locational deic
tics like other place nouns are attached the stationary place-marker - . The
directional or target particle -e can also be attached, as in (8) and (9).
(8) Doko e iku no?
where to go INTER
Where are you going?
(9) Makoto mo asoko e iku ka?
too there to go INTER
Will Makoto j go there too?
) come
This usage overlaps with that of the directional deictics of the paradigm: -
chira, sochira, achira, dochira. Thus doko in (8) and asoko in (9) could be re
placed by dochira and achira, respectively. Although the directional aspect is
part of the meaning of these deictics they take the directional particle as well.
The common greeting formula dochira e thus literally means 'what direction
to' (are you going, that is), corresponding, incidentally, exactly to the archaic
witherward. It is interesting to note in passing how these directional deictics as
well as the local deictics in combination with the directional particle interact
with the verbs of motion iku (go) and kuru (come). Like their English counter
parts (cf. Fillmore 1966) these words are deictically specified. Iku means 'go
there', and kuru means 'come here'. The deictic switches involved in changes
of the relative positions of speaker and hearer, however, differ markedly from
the usage of English, German, or other Indoeuropean languages (cf. Morita
1968).
(10) A: Can you come over for a minute?
B: O.K., I'm coming.
In (10) adopts A's perspective in his reply. The same event that can be re
ported as he's coming by A where the motion is directed toward A, i.e. the
speaker, is typically announced by in the form given in (10), in which case
the motion is also directed toward A and hence away from the speaker, B. In
Japanese the first person cannot be the subject of kuru under analogous cir
cumstances. Instead, an appropriate reply requires the use of the verb iku.
(11) A. Chotto kochira e kite kudasaimasenka?
Just here to come (gerund) please AUX NEG INTER
: Hai,ikimasu
yes, go
Kuru is used when the movement is directed toward the place where the
speaker is at. Typically it goes together with koko e or kochira e. It is possible
to imagine conditions where kuru is acceptably used with reference to a place
other than the speaker pivot. Thus, given the appropriate circumstances, (9')
could be used instead of (9), for instance when A asks whether Makoto will
also come to a party which is scheduled to take place at C's house.
(9') Makoto mo asoko e kuru ka?
too there to come INTER
The use of kuru in (9') presupposes that at least one A or B, will be at the par
ty, but even given these conditions (9) is much more likely to occur. If, how
ever, the question is asked by A who is already at the party, (9') is appropriate.
Another noticeable feature of the directional terms of the paradigm is
that they are also used like personal pronouns. Kochira, for instance, is fre
quently used for auto-reference in identifying oneself on the telephone.
(12) Kochira wa Tanaka desu.
This side TOP copula.
This is Tanaka.
214 FLORIAN COULMAS
Similarly, sochira can be used for second person reference and for this pur
pose the honorific title -sama can be attached. Dochirasama is accordingly a
polite expression for "who" which is used where the question involves the
choice of an alternative, as in a restaurant when the waiter asks who ordered
the fried chicken.
(13) Yakitori wa dochirasama desu ka?
fried chicken TOP which side copula INTER
Who's the fried chicken for? / Who's the fried chicken?
Literally dochira means 'which side' or 'which direction'. Using sochira (sa
ma) as a form of address is a rather oblique and hence polite reference to the
second person. As explained above, the s o terms of the paradigm are those
with a proximal hearer pivot, which seems to be the most obvious choice for
second person reference. However, there is also an α-term which is used for
addressee-reference. As a matter of fact, in modern Japanese anata is one of
the most frequent second person pronouns (cf. (2) above). It was chosen out
of deference for the addressee from the distal rather than from the hearer-
proximal part of the paradigm. 5 Donata which is the indefinite counterpart of
anata is an exalting expression for "who". Like dochira it can be appended the
honorific title -sama.
Morphologically the other two terms of this series of the paradigm, kona-
ta and sonata are of course possible and entirely regular, but they are not being
used nowadays. 6 Donata and anata are contractions that were derived from
the adnominal forms of the paradigm and the word kata (person). The adnom
inal forms are kono,sono, ano, dono. The idiomatization of the contraction of
ano kata has not caused disuse of the uncontracted form, but a semantic differ
entiation has evolved, and today both forms exist side by side with different
meanings: anata (you), ano kata (that person (over there)).
Another a-term of the adnominal forms is used much like a third person
pronoun: ano-hito. Hito resembles kata and means 'person', 'human being'.
The adnominal forms invariably precede an NP. In some cases, however, they
occur in succession, as in sono ano-hito (that him). Rather than being an ex
ception to the general pattern, this usage indicates that ano-hito functions as a
pronominal unit which can be modified by demonstratives as is also possible
with other personal pronouns. But while it is true that the unity rather than the
internal structure of ano-hito is foregrounded and decisive for its use, the form
sono ano-hito also indicates that the neatness of the paradigm exemplified by
the pronominal demonstratives discussed above is slightly distorted and not
quite as clear in the case of adnominal forms.
Obviously, physical proximity and spatial relations between speaker,

hearer, and reference object cannot serve as a universal parameter regulating
the use of adnominal demonstratives. Its applicability depends largely on the
nature of the reference object. As long as the spatial location of an object is
pertinent to the act of referring to it the criteria described above are applica
ble. Thus the interpretation of expressions such as kono uchi (this house), so
no tokoro (that place), ano ki (that tree (over there)), dono eki (which station)
is straightforward according to the model given in figure 1. If, however, the
reference object is not visible it is no longer a fit.
The easiest adaption is a temporal extension of the model. Some of the
pronominal demonstratives can have a temporal meaning. Kore kara, for ex
ample, may be read as meaning either 'from this one' or 'from now on'. It is a
very common practice to use spatial metaphors for referring to temporal
events or relations. Accordingly, adnominal demonstratives concatenated
with words designating temporal units or "points" of time, such as, kono hi
(this day), sono toki (that time), ano tabi (that occasion), etc., do not cause
any particular difficulties. Still, the meaning of such terms is not always pre
dictable. This is due basically to two factors. One is that time as visualized
from the speaker pivot extends in two directions, and the other reason is that
the term in question can be used, deictically as well as anaphorically, to create
a certain perspective in the hearer instead of faithfully depicting the speaker
perspective. Kono toki, for instance, in its basic reading means 'this time'
(speaker pivot proximal), but it can also be used to evoke a sense of immedi
acy where the reference time is not close to or identical with the time of the ut
terance. It can also refer to the last one of a series of similar occasions, and an
aphorically it can mean 'then' or 'there-upon'. Similarly, kono goro may be
used to mean any of the following, 'now', 'nowadays', 'recently', and kono ai
da means 'the other day' or 'a few days ago' {aida = 'time', 'a period'). The
range of ko- seems to be less clearly delimited with regard to temporal than
with spatial reference objects. The situation gets even more complicated
where the reference objects are neither spatially nor temporally fixed. How,
then, can the categories "proximal", "medial", and "distal" be interpreted for
abstract reference objects?
Kuno (1973) has suggested that the anaphoric usage of demonstratives is
regulated by the locus of a reference object in the universe of knowable ob
jects, with a speaker and hearer pivot. Accordingly, the a-terms are used only
when speaker and hearer know the referent of the demonstrative, and, as we
might add, when the speaker has reason to believe that such is the case. This
216 FLORIAN COULMAS
usage does not conform with the interpretation of pronominal and local deic-
tics, where a- is characterized by a distal speaker and hearer pivot. In a similar
fashion the spatial interpretation fails as a model for the s o terms. Thus we
cannot just metaphorically transpose the speaker-centered coordinates of the
system of Japanese deictics given in (7) into the realm of the knowable, in
order to capture reference to invisible objects. Deictically speaking, the a-
terms are the distal terms, but to the anaphoric usage this criterion does not
apply.
The use of demonstratives seems to be covered exhaustively if everything
that is not deictic is considered anaphoric. This view presupposes a rather
wide notion of anaphora encompassing the use of all demonstratives whose
referent cannot be pointed at in the speech situation. The criterion regulating
anaphoric pronominalization in the strict sense is prior mention of the refer
ent. This criterion can, however, not explain those uses of demonstratives that
occur without prior mention of the referent, such as, e.g.,
(14) Are!
that
uttered by a husband who has just come home from work and flung himself in
to a chair. His wife, to whom such an elliptical utterance might be addressed,
is then supposed to and usually does know what are refers to, for instance a
beer, etc. In a situation like that sore could not be used, although the utterance
refers to something that the wife should bring to the husband and which is
thus, actually or supposedly, close to her, i.e. the hearer. This shows that the
proximity criteria do not hold here. But neither was the referent explicitly
mentioned prior to being referred to by means of the demonstrative nor was
the reference object directly pointed at. A more general criterion than prior
mention is the familiarity of the referent. Non-deictically the α-terms of the
paradigm are used for referring to things about which speaker and hearer
share the same knowledge. An expression such as
(15) Ano hito no koto dakara...
that man 's thing is therefore
that man being as he is
is used to refer to someone's characteristics which the speaker expects the
hearer to know. The use of so-terms, on the other hand, generally presup
poses that there is no shared experience about the referent.
(16) Kinō atarashii restauran de tabete kimashita

yesterday new restaurant at eat (gerund) went
Sono mise no chukasoba wa...
That place 's Chinese noodles TOP
Yesterday I went to eat at a new restaurant. The Chinese noodles
at that place ...
In (16) ano could not be used instead of sono, because the referent is not be
lieved to be known by the hearer. Thus, the criteria listed in (7) have to be sup
plemented by (17).
(17) so- speaker does not know referent or believes that hearer does
not know it
a- speaker believes that both speaker and hearer know referent
Notice, moreover, that the s o terms are by far the most frequent anaphoric
terms. So- is, in a manner of speaking, the unmarked case, whereas ko-con-
veys a sense of immediacy and obviousness, and α-emphasizes the familiarity
of the reference object. These conditions also apply to those two sets of de
monstratives that have not been mentioned in the above discussion: the adjec
tival and the adverbial demonstratives.
The former refer to the quality or kind of an object, being roughly equiva
lent to 'such ... ' or '... like this/that'. Morphologically they are formed by suf
fixing -nna to the stems of the paradigm forms: konna, sonna, anna, donna.
As an example consider (18) where both the adnominal and the adjectival
forms are used with reference to the same object.
(18) Sono hon wa donna hon desu ka.
That book TOP what kind book is INTER
What is that book like? / What kind of a book is that?
When the adj ectival demonstratives are attached the particle -ni they function
as adverbs modifying adjectives: sonna-ni isogashii (that busy), konna-ni at-
sui (this not). For modifying verbs in a similar fashion the adverbial demon
stratives kō, sō, ā, dō are used, as exemplified in (19) and (20).
(19) Hiroshima e wa do ikimasuka.
to TOP how go INTER
How do I go to Hiroshima?
(20) Kō shite...
this manner doing
Doing it like this ...
218 FLORIAN COULMAS
Again it is obvious that the spatial criteria governing the prototypical deictic
usage of the pronominal demonstratives kore, sore, are, dore cannot fully ex
plain the use of these adjectival and adverbial demonstratives. While some of
them, as for instance, kö in (20), can be used deictically, the distinction be
tween deictic and anaphoric usage is not always very clear where manner is
concerned.
Furthermore, some of the adverbial terms have become frozen elements
that are considered lexical items by many lexicographers. The expression sō-
suruto, for example, which is composed ōf the adverbial demonstrative sō, the
verb suru (do) and the particle to (when), means 'then', and similarly, sōsure-
ba which incorporates the same adverbial demonstrative and the conditional
form of the same verb suru means 'if, 'in that case'. Dō shite (shite = gerund of
suru) is not lexicalized, but it is a fixed phrase which is mostly used to mean
'why'! 'what's happening'. The more literal meaning, 'how', is, however, also
possible. Other fixed phrases are döka-köka, 'somehow or other', sore mo
kore mo, 'all these things', and achi kochi, 'to and fro'. These are only a few
examples of the many frozen expressions containing or combining demonstra
tives. Their meanings are not always predictable, but, in general, the rationale
of their composition is clear.
To conclude, the paradigm of Japanese demonstratives summarized in
the chart below is very consistent. The easiest part are the indefinite do-terms
which are also used in interrogatives. The fco-terms indicate speaker-proximi
ty and, more generally, immediacy and obviousness. Deictically they refer to
"things" close to the speaker, and if two speakers are spatially very close to
each other and to the reference object they can both use /co-terms for referring
to it. This does not seem to be the case in anaphoric usage where a speaker has
to use so- or α-terms once the referent has been referred to with ko- by another
speaker. The anaphoric use of so- and a- is determined by the principle of
shared knowledge about the referent according to which a- is to be used whe
never the referent is known by both (all) parties involved. The deictic use of
these terms, on the other hand is guided by the proximity principle, the tem
poral interpretation being 'that earlier/later time' for so- and 'that remote
time' for a-. In spatial deixis, so- is close to the hearer and a- is distamt from
speaker and hearer.
ko so- a- do- Ι
pronominal kore sore are dore
adnominal kono sono ano dono
adjectival konna sonna anna donna
adverbial kō sō à dō
local koko soko asoko doko
directional kochira sochira achira dochira
NOTES
1) Bar-Hillel (1954) argued that sentences are in general underdetermined and hence context-
dependent in their meaning. In this regard, deixis can be considered a special case of indexicality.
2) Some of them have received much attention. A lot has been written, for instance, about per
sonal pronouns in Japanese (cf. Hinds 1971, Suzuki 1977, Vorderwülbecke 1976, for further refer
ences). The reflexive pronoun jibun is investigated in Kuno 1972. Hattori 1968 discusses certain pe
culiarities of demonstrative pronouns, and their*anaphoric use is examined in some detail in chap
ter 24 of Kuno 1973. An account of some Japanese deictic verbs of motion can be found in Morita
1968.
3) There are non-lexical means, too, the most eminent one being the intricate system of honorif-
ics. I have argued elsewhere (Coulmas 1980) that Japanese honorifics are not mere stylistic filigree;
rather they carry important grammatical and referential functions. An interesting question in this
connection is that of why the Japanese make only scarce usage of personal pronouns in spite of the
unusually rich repertoire of pronouns for self- and addressee-reference. More explicitly put, how
can the speakers of an agglutinative language with no person marking at the verb dispense with per
sonal pronouns at all? In the above mentioned paper"! have argued that this is possible partly thanks
to certain honorific forms that always allow the identification of the source, object, or recipient of
an action although it is not explicitly marked. (Notice that the personal pronouns in sample senten
ces (1) - (3) are bracketed, because in normal speech the sentences would be uttered without them.
This is in sharp contrast with English where only imperative sentences such as (4) are realized with
out a surface subject. In Japanese subjectless sentences are very common). The interesting point
here is that a linguistic subsystem whose stylistic functions are very obvious, upon closer investiga
tion, turns out to serve important grammatical and pragmatic functions as well.
220 FLORIAN COULMAS
4) Sentences such as (i) are standard Japanese.

(i) Koko wa doko desu ka.
here TOP where is INTER
lit.: Where is here?
Compare this with the oddity of (ii), a sentence that Wolfgang Klein (1978)
(ii) Wo ist hier?
once choose as the title of an article. The most likely interpretation of (ii) is a meta-linguistic one,
namely taking it as the question as to what the meaning of hier is or what the word hier refers to, and
this is of course what the paper is about, (i), by contrast, is a straightforward question referring to
the location of the speaker at the time of the utterance: Where am ΙΊ or Which place is this? I think
that this contrast has to do with the formclass of the words used for designating the speaker's loca
tion or an indefinite location. The Japanese words are nouns and can hence function as the subject
of a sentence. The German words are not, but in order to assign an interpretation to (i) one has to
consider hier as an NP, which is possible if hier is taken as a meta-linguistic expression that is short
for'the w o r d i e r ' .
5) Cf. the archaic use of third person pronouns for addressee reference in German.
6) Kata is a polite word for 'person'. This may in part explain why konata (the contracted form of
kona kata) is, or rather was, not used for self-reference, but rather for referring to a person sitting or
standing immediately next to the speaker. Kochira (lit. 'this side'), on the other hand, is used for
self-reference as well as for referring to other persons close to the speaker.
REFERENCES
Bar-Hillel, Y. (1954): Indexical Expressions. Mind 63. 359-79.

Bühler, . (1934): Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Je
na: Fischer.
Coulmas, F. (1980): Zur Personaldeixis im Japanischen. Papiere zur Linguis
tik 23, 2. 3-19.
Feldman, L. (1975): The interaction of sentence characteristics and mode of
presentation in recall. Language and Speech 14. 18-25.
Fillmore, C. (1966): Deictic categories in the semantics of come. Foundations
of Language 2. 219-227.
Fillmore, (1968): The case for case. In: E. Bach and R.T. Harms (eds.), Uni
versals in Linguistic Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1-88.
Hattori, S. (1968): Kore, Sore, Are and This, That. In: S. Hattori (ed.), A
study of the basic vocabulary of English. Tokyo: Sanseido, 73-113.
Hinds, J. (1971): Personal Pronouns in Japanese. Glossa 5.145-155.
Hinds, J. (1973): Anaphoric demonstratives in Japanese. Journal of the As
sociation of Teachers of Japanese 8. 1-14.
Hinds, J. (1976): Aspects of Japanese Discourse Structure. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.

Klein, W. (1978): Wo ist hier? Linguistische Berichte 58. 18-40.
Kuno, S. (1972): Pronominalization, reflexivization, and direct discourse.
Linguistic Inquiry 3. 161-196.
Kuno, S. (1973): The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press.
Martin, S.E. (1975): A Reference Grammar of Japanese. New Haven and
London: Yale University Press.
Morita Yoshiyuki (1968): Tku, kuru' no yōhō. Kokugogaku 75. 75-87.
Suzuki, T. (1977): Japanese and the Japanese. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.
Vorderwülbecke, . (1976): Anredeformen und Selbstbezeichnungen im
Deutschen und Japanischen. In: G. Stickel (ed.), Deutsch-japanische
Kontraste. Forschungsbericht des Instituts für Deutsche Sprache 29.
Tübingen: Narr.
HOPI PERSON DEIXIS 1
ECKEHART MALOTKI
Speech acts in natural languages are typically lodged in a social context,

with context defined "in such a way as to identify the participants in the com
munication act, their location in space, and the time during which the com
munication act is performed" (Fillmore 1975:38). Elements referring to the
spatial, temporal, and personal aspects of the typical language utterance are
commonly termed 'deictic'. Accordingly, a speech situation may be viewed
along the lines of place deixis, time deixis, and person deixis.
The present paper presents the Hopi deictic signs that pertain to the
grammatical category of person. Among the aspects of reality captured by the
category of person are most importantly the speaker, utterer, or sender of the
message ('first person') and the hearer, addressee, or recipient of the message
('second person'). Speaker and hearer are the actual interlocutors in the act of
the language drama. Compared with them the role of 'third person' is less
significant. It relates to animate and inanimate discourse entities which are
negatively defined with respect to 'first person' and 'second person', as they
constitute neither speaker nor hearer. 'Hopi person deixis' is thus understood
here to deal with the description and analysis of both personal and demonstra
tive pro forms that together comprise the deictic person system in Hopi.
1. THE HOPI DEICTIC PERSON SYSTEM

1.0 Introduction
Person deixis in Hopi consists of two sets of free personal pronouns. The
first set of lexicalized units contains the deictic pro forms that capture the roles
of speaker and addressee (1.1). The second set relates to the grammatical con
cept of 'third person', that is, the human being, animal, or thing talked about.
It differs from the first set in that its respective lexemes are not personal but
demonstrative in nature (1.2).
224 ECKEHART MALOTKI
1.1 Personal pronoun set

1.1.1 Simple forms. The basic inventory of Hopi personal pronouns is made
up of four simple forms. They are termed 'simple', as opposed to subsets of
more complex forms affected by the morphological devices of case, reduplica
tion, and pausal inflection. The four simple Hopi subject pronouns are nu' 'I',
urn 'you', itam 'we', and uma 'you': NSG (non-singular). They are definite
and necessarily refer to human beings. In narrative contexts, however, they
can also identify animals if the latter are anthropomorphized, that is, if human
personality is attributed to them.
Traditionally, nu" arid urn are classified as singular forms, and itam and
uma as their corresponding plural or, more accurately, non-singular compan
ions. While itam 'we' displays lexical plural in regard to nu' T , uma 'you':
NSG seems to stand in some morphological relation to urn 'you': SG, a rela
tion which is not amenable to analysis from a synchronic perspective. In re
gard to the established nomenclature of 'first person singular', 'first person
plural' and their implied relationship, Lyons has pointed out that this termi
nology is rather misleading. "It is clear, for instance, the we ... does not nor
mally stand in the same relationship to /... as boys, cows, etc. do to boy, cow,
etc. The pronoun we is to be interpreted as 'I, in addition to one or more other
persons;' and the other persons may or may not include the hearer. In other
words, we is not 'the plural of I': rather, it includes a reference to Τ and is plu
ral" (1968:277). Accordingly, person deixis may be endowed with the feature
inclusive ("I and you") — exclusive ("I and he/they") for the first person plu
ral. Itam always has the force of 'we-inclusive'. Sentences (1-4) illustrate the
basic set of simple pronouns (see list of Graphic Symbols and Abbreviations).
(1) nu' itse-he'-ma-y' -ta
I dirty-ABS-hand-POSS-IMPRF
'I have dirty hands'
(2) askwali urn pitu
thanks you arrive
F
'Thanks, you have arrived [home].'
(3) qa hi-ng-qaw-lawu-'u itam noo-nova
NEG some-way-say-CONT-IMP we RDP-food
PL eating
'Shut up, we are eating'
(4) urna hi-n-tsak-num-ya?

you which-way-do-CIRCUMGR-PL
NSG
'What are you doing around?'
Interestingly enough, no phonologically separate pronouns are attested in
Hopi for the number concept 'dual', although this concept is realized in other
nominais by the suffixation of special dual markers. Since verbs do not display
special dual forms either, sentences with pronominal plural subjects are auto
matically understood to be dual if their predicates are singular. Thus, for (3)
and (4) to transform into dual clauses, both itam and uma are retained as plu
ral forms while suppletive noonova in (3) changes to singular tuumoyta 'he is
eating' (5) and hintsaknumya in (4) sheds its plural suffix -ya (6).
(5) qa hi-ng-qaw-lawu-'u, itam tuumoyta
NEG some-way-say-CONT-IMP we eat
'Shut up, we DL are eating.'
(6) uma hi-n-tsak-numa?
you which-way-do-CIRCUMGR
NSG
'What are you DL doing around [here]?'
Note that the examples quoted above also demonstrate that singular verb
forms are not inflected for person, i.e., they do not display specific person
markers. Plural verb forms are generally marked by displaying either redupli
cation, stem suppletion, attachment of plural markers or combinations of
these morphological devices.2 Both suppletion and plural marking are em
ployed in the pluralization of (1) and (2), as may be gathered from (7-8).
(7) itam itse-he' -ma-y' -yungwa
we dirty-ABS-hand-POSS-IMPRF
PL
'We have dirty hands.'
(8) askwali uma ōki
thanks you arrive
F NSG PL
'Thanks, you have arrived [home].'
Note also, that "person deictic copying" (Ingram 1978:233) in the sense of ob
ligatorily marking the deictic subject unit onto the predicate is absent in Hopi.
Nor is a distinction made between honorific and nonhonorific pro signs. Social
status or superiority are neither lexicalized nor grammaticalized in Hopi.
1.1.2 Case forms. Both singular and plural personal pro forms are affected
by the inflectional category of case. Two types of case inflection need to be dis
tinguished. Type I inflection is "grammatical" (Lyons 1968:295) and only con
cerns the accusative case in Hopi. It is employed, for example, to mark the
pronouns as objects of transitive verbs, as is readily seen in sentences (9-12).
(9) ya qa hak nu-y hep-numa?
Q NEG someone I-ACC look-CIRCUMGR
for
'Has nobody been looking [i.e., asking] for me?'
(10) pas nu' ung naawakna
very I you desire
ACC
'I desire [i.e., love] you very much.'
(11) uma itamu-y po-pta-ya-ni, yooyangwu-y akw-áa'
you we-ACC RDP-check-PL-FUT rain-ACC with-PS
NSG visit
'You [i.e., the kachinas] come visit us with rain.'
(12) pay pi nu' umu-y aa'awna
well FACT I you-ACC announce
NSG
'Well, I told you [so].'
Type II inflection is "local" (Lyons 1968:295) and occurs on specially lexi-
calized pronominal base forms. The case markers encountered, originally
postpositional elements, convey the spatial concepts of location, destination
(metaphorically also indirect object) and source. Their respective case labels
are 'locative', 'destinative', and 'ablative', with the locative and destinative
showing a twofold subcategorization according to a concept of 'extreme dis
tance and/or location' and the locative displaying a fourfold subcategorization
in connection with a 'field' concept. 3 Table I lists the pronominal base forms of
the four personal pronons and shows them in conjunction with their type II in
flectional endings. Representative examples, illustrating all of the seven pos
sible case markers on various pro bases, are given in (13-19).
227
1 SPATIAL 1 SUBCATEGORIZING CONCEPT 1 CASE 1 PERSON PRONOUN ASES

CONCEPT Γ "FIELD" 1 "DISTANCE "and/or ] Γ SINGULAR NONSINGULAR Ί
I 1 "POSITION" 1 1st PERSON 1 2nd PERSON Ι 1st PERSON 2nd PERSON
1 LOCATION PUNCT l-EX LOCATIVE inùu-pe uu-pe itamùu-pe umùu-pe
'on me' 'on you' 'on us' 'on you'
PUNCT + EX EXTREME- inùu-peq
LOCATIVE 'on me'
ùu-peq itamùu-peq umùu-peq
(EX)
HOPI PERSON DEIXIS
DIF -EX DIFFUSIVE inùu-pa

'on me'
ùu-pa itamùu-pa umùu-pa
(DIF)
DIF + EX EXTREME- inùu-paqe
DIFFUSIVE 'on me'
ùu-paqe itamùu-paqe umùu-paqe
(EX-DIF)
1 GOAL l-EX 1 DESTINATIVE inu-mi uu-mi itamu-mi umu-mi
'tome' 'to you' 'tous' 'to you'
+ EX EXTREME- inu-miq uu-miq itamu-miq umu-miq
DESTINATIVE 'to me'
(EX)
'into me'
SOURCE 1 ABLATIVE inu-ngaqw uu-ngaqw itamu-ngaqw umu-ngaqw
'from me' 'from you' 'from us' 'from you'
'in me' 'in you' 'in us' 'in you'
(3-DIM) (3-DIM) (3-DIM) (3-DIM)
TABLE I
(13) parti inùu-pe wiwa

that I-on trip
one
'He tripped over me.'
(14) umuu-pe-q hi-sa-t tiikive-ni?
you-at-EX which-QNT-time dance-FUT
NSG when
'When will there be a dance at your [village]?'
(15) um hi-n-ti-qw pas inùu-pa naa-rukwa-n-ta?
you which-way-R-SUBR very I-on REFL-rub-n-IMPRF
DS DIF
why
'Why are you rubbing yourself against me?'
(16) peep itamuu-pa-qe tongo
almost we-on-EX touch
DIF
'He almost sideswiped us [in his car].'
(17) oovi nu' uu-mi hiita tutap-ta-qa-t
therefore I you-to something instruction-CAUS-REL-ACC
ACC
urn sutsep u'ni-y'-ta-ni
you always remember-POSS-IMPRF-FUT
'Therefore you always remember what I instructed you [to do].'
(18) uu-mi-q nu' siro-k-na-ni6
you-to-EX I slide-k-CAUS-FUT
Til slide it [down] to you.'
(19) pay hi-sa-t son uma qa piw itamu-ngaqw
well some-QNT-time NEG you NEG again we-from
some time NSG
definitely
navot-ni
hear-FUT
'You'll definitely hear from us again some day.'
1.1.3 Reduplicated forms. The non-singular forms itam 'we' and uma 'you'
may undergo initial reduplication which serves here to express the notion of
distributive plurality. Thus, while nonreduplicated itam 'we' conveys the idea
of a single 'we-group', reduplicated ii'itam pays attention to the plurality of in
dividuals that make up the 'we-group'. Reduplicated pro forms, one of them
inflected for direct object, are shown in (20-22).
(20) ii-'itam pi as umu-y i-t
RDP-we FACT IMPOT you-ACC this-ACC
NSG
tu-tuqay-na-ya-ni-kyàa-kyangw qa
RDP-listen-CAU5-PL-FUT-RDP-SIMUL NEG
teach SS
pa-n-tsa-tsk-ya
that-way-RDP-do-PL
'[The various individuals composing the] we should be teaching
you this but we are not doing it.'
(21) ii-'itamu-y pi as itàa-wu-wuyo-m
RDP-we-ACC FACT IMPOT our-RDP-old-PL
hii-hîita
RDP-something
ACC
su-'a-n-ta-qa-t
exact-REF-like-lMVWB-IZEL-ACC
the right way
aawin-wis-ni-kyangw
announce-PROGR-FUT-SIMUL
PL SS
soq itamu-mi hii-hiita kyàa-kyaw-na-ya
PARADOX we-to RDP-something RDP-STEM-CA US-FL
ACC hold on in stingy way
Our elders should be teaching [the various individual] us all kinds
of things that are right and yet, paradoxically, they are keeping all
these different things from us.'
(22) uu-'uma pi as put a-w
RDP-you FACT IMPOT that it-to
NSG ACC
tunatya-1-toti-ni-kyàa-kyangw pay uma pas
attention-PASS-R-FXJT-RDP-SIMUL ASSR you very
PL SS NSG
suu-s put maatatve

one-times that release
for good ACC PL
'[All] you [different individuals] should have guarded that [i.e.,
the cultural institutions] but you let it go for good.'
1.1.4 Pausal forms. A number of Hopi word and form classes, among them
postpositions, particles, pronouns, inflected nomináis, subordinator
markers, etc., undergo inflection in utterance final position. The inflectional
devices are customarily termed 'pausal'. Two types of pausal endings need to
be differentiated: the 'strong' or stressed type, which generally affixes -?V,
and the 'weak' or unstressed type, which appends -V or simply -'. With the ex
ception of the reduplicated plural pronouns, which do not seem to be attested
in sentence final position, the remaining pro forms occur both with strong and
weak pausal affixes (see Table II). While this is not the place to elaborate the
rules governing the distribution of weak or strong pausal variants, examples
(23-30) present a sampling of various pro forms with both types of pausal in
flection.
(23) A: urn yaw ùu-kwa-y siiva-yat uu'uyi
you QUOT your-grandfather-ACC money-his steal
ACC
B: nuu-'u?
I-PS
'I heard you stole your grandfather's money.' 'Me?'
(24) A: ya hak kur piw inu-ngem îi-kye' paas
Q who EV again I-for outside-DIF thoroughly
pas-ta? B: nuu-'ú
field-CAUS I-PS
'Who hoed [the weeds] for me outside [the house] so thoroughly
again?"I[did].'
(25) is itse, um-i'
oh dirty you-PS
'Darn you!'
(26) okiw híi-tu itam-'ú
COMPASS being-PL we-PS
'Poor us!'
(27) A: umu-y naa-tupko-mu-y yaw mo-mi-q

you-ACC RCPR-brother-PL-ACC QUOT front-to-EX
NSG
tavi-ya B: itamü-y-u?
place-PL we-ACC-PS
Ί heard that they put you [two] brothers in front [of the kachina
line dance].''Us?'
(28) is uti, ya pay piw uma-'?
oh surprise Q ASSR again you-PS
EXCLM NSG
Oh, is it you again?'
(29) is haw pi nuu-'u-y
oh wow FACT I-PS-EXCLM
M
'Wow, look at me!'
(30) qa sōōwu-ya-ni uma-'á-y
NEG tardy-PL-FUT you-PS-EXCLM
NSG M
'Don't be so slow!'
To conclude this section, Table II summarizes all of the lexicalized and
grammaticalized data concerning first and second-person pronouns in Hopi.
232
Γ PERSON Ί NUMBER ICASE 1 SIMPLE REDUPICATED Ρ AUS AL FORMS PRONOMINAL

FORM FORM STRONG 1 WEAK 1 BASE FORMS
NOM [ ' ' nuu'ú nuu'u inuu-linu-

SG
ACC nuy 'me' nuy'ú4 nuy'u
I lot
NOM [ itam 'we' ii'itam itam'ú itamu itamùu-litamu-
NSG
ACC itamuy 'us' ii'itamuy itamuy'ú itamuyu
NOM urn 'you' um'i umi' ùu-luu-

SG
ACC ung 'you' ung'i ungi'
ECKEHART MALOTKI
2nd
INOM I urna 'you' uu'urna uma'á uma' -lumu-
NSG
ACC umuy 'you' uu'umuy umuy'ú úmuyu
TABLE II
1.2 Demonstrative pronoun set

1.2.1 Simple forms. This subsection of Hopi person deixis deals with the
grammatical category of 'third person'. By function and nature, the domain of
'third person' differs strikingly from that of 'first' and 'second person'. Benve-
niste (1971) actually calls it a "non-person" because it "is the only mode of ut
terance possible for the instances of discourse not meant to refer to them
selves but to predicate the process of someone or something outside the in
stance itself" (1971:221). Lyons defines it as "essentially a negative notion"
because "unlike first and second person, it does not necessarily refer to partic
ipants in the situation of utterance" (1968:277).
As is the case in many other languages, Hopi completely lacks a third-
person pronoun. Third person basically establishes itself by the absence of the
formal markers for first and second person. The syntactic cooccurrence of the
predicator with a first or second-person personal pro form thus rules out an in
terpretation of third person. Third-person pro-referents are notably absent in
situations where the subject of the discourse is impersonal or where the refer
ent object is inanimate (31-38).
(31) A: pas hapi kwàngqat-a : hep owi, niikyangw
very EMPH plesantly-PS CFIRM yes and
warm SIMUL
pay piw huk-va
ASSR again blow-R
'It's very pleasantly warm.' 'Yes, indeed, but it started blowing
again.'
(32) paamuy-ngahaqa-qw yoo-yok-t naat qa yaala
paamuya-INDEF-from RDP-rain-PRIOR still NEG stop
month SS
'It has been raining ever since the month of Paamuya and has not
ceased yet.'
(33) e-p=haqa-m hotvel-pe-q kitsok-ti-qw sino-m
REF-at=INDEF-at PN-at-EX village-R-SUBR person-PL
DS
kyaa-na-napta
formidable-RDP-STEM
they notice
'At the time when a village was [established] at Hotevilla the peo
ple suffered great hardships.'
(34) yaw maak-iw-ni

QUOT hunt-IMPRS-FUT
Ί heard that there is going to be a hunt.'
(35) tihu-law-qw puutse-'eway-ni-ngwu
kachina-CONT-SUBR disgusting-ADJR-NEX-HAB
doll DS
'When carving kachina dolls [over a long period of time] it gets to
you [i.e., it is frustrating and you get sick and tired of it].'
(36) pas loma-hi-n-ta
very beautiful-some-way-IMPRF
I t [i.e., the wicker plaque] is beautiful.'
(37) pas a'ni halayvi-t pusu-ki-n-ta
very a lot fast-ACC drum-ki-CAUS-IMPRF
'He [i.e., the drummer] is drumming very fast.'
(38) pas suu-su-s yayva-n-ta
very RDP-one-times climb-n-IMPRF
slowly up
PL
They [i.e., the runners] are slowly coming up [the hill].'
When pronominal specification of the animate or inanimate subject of
discourse (other than the speaker or addressee) becomes necessary, Hopi
draws on its stock of demonstrative pronouns. The Hopi set of demonstrative
pro forms consists of the three lexemes V 'this', pam 'that' and mV 'yon'. The
spatial distinction adhering to them depends on the category of proximity "to
the zero-point of the deictic context" (Lyons 1977:646), that is, the speaker.
Thus, i' means 'the one here near to the speaker', pam 'the one there farther
from the speaker and/or close to the hearer, 'm/' 'the one over there extremely
far from the speaker and/or the hearer. ' Terminologically, this tripartite set of
third-person deictics is labelled 'proximal', 'distal', and 'extreme-distal.'
The subject forms i\pam, and mi', whose corresponding plural, or rath
er, non-singular shapes are ima 'these',puma 'those', and mima 'the ones over
there/yon:NSG', belong to the definite category, as against hak 'someone',
himuwa 'one of two or more', himu 'something' (AN/INAN), which are indef
inite and are excluded from this paper. As noun substitutes they may relate to
human beings, animals, and things, and they do so without distinction for
gender.
(39) i' i-nōma

this my-wife
one
This one [i.e., she] is my wife.'
(40) pam uu-kwa-y pumu-y kii-'am
that your-grandfather-ACC those-ACC house-their
one
That is your grandfather's house.'
(41) ayá-m mi' pay e-ngem yaw-ma-ni
over-at yonder ASSR he-for hold-PROGR-FUT
there
That one over there will carry it for him.'
(42) ima háki-m-u?
these who-PL-PS
'Who are these?'
While in (39-42) the referent singled out deictically by the demonstratives
is visible and may optionally receive paralinguistic support (in Hopi customar
ily by pointing, not with the hand or finger, but with the protruded lips of the
mouth), (43) constitutes an example in which the demonstrative pronoun acts
anaphorically to an antecedent. No concomitant body gesture is possible in
such a case.
(43) pe-p yaw hisat sino-m wuko-yes-iwa;
there-at QUOT at person-PL big-sit-IMPRS
some PL
time
puma yaw pe-p hîita a'ni aniwna-ya-ngwu
those QUOT there-at something a grow-PL-HAB
ACC lot crop
4
A great number of people were living there once; they were grow
ing a lot of crops there.'
Under certain conditions the antecedent, which normally precedes the corre
lated anaphoric pro form, may occur extraposed to it. In such a case the ana
phoric reference is not backward-looking but forward-looking, and may be
termed cataphoric.
(44) pu' yaw taalaw-'iw-ma-qw pu' yaw

then QUOT daylight-STAT-PROGR-SUBR then QUOT
DS
puma a-w tiiva-ni, po-pko-t, put tiyo-t
those REF-to dance-FUT RDP-dog-PL that boy-ACC
PL ACC
a-w-i'
he-to-PS
Then when it was getting daylight they were going to dance for
him, the dogs, for that boy.'
As in the case of the personal pronouns, demonstrative pronouns display
no separate dual forms. It is then the morphological number change in the
predicator, and occasionally also the dual suffix on inanimate nouns, which
provide clues to the appropriate semantic interpretation of the plural pro
form. (45-47) reveal such grammaticalized changes for dual and plural inter
pretations. (45) and (46) present a minimal sentence pair.
(45) pà-n-ti yaw puma-nîi-qe pu' puma
that-way-do QUOT those-NEX-CAUSAL then those
SS
pàa-piy piw pa-n-kyangw qatu
there-away again that-way-SIMUL sit
from SS
This is what they DL did and then from there on they were living
like that again.'
(46) pà-n-toti yaw puma-nii-qe pu' puma
that-way-do QUOT those-NEX-CAUSAL then those
PL SS
pàa-piy piw pa-n-kyàa-kynagw yeese
there-away again that-way-RDP-SIMUL sit
from SS PL
'this is what they did and then from there on they were living like
that again.'
(47) ima ye-p i-vasa-t-'u
these here-at my-field-DL-PS
These here are my DL fields.'
Declined as well as nondeclined, singular and plural demonstratives are

identical in shape when functioning either as pronouns or pro adjectives. Ta
ble III illustrates all of the demonstratives as adjectival modifiers in subject
and object position.
NUMBER CASE ANIMATE NOUN INANIMATE NOUN 1
V moosa 'this cat' i' tihu 'this doll'

NOM pam moosa 'that cat' pam tihu 'that doll'
mi' moosa 'yon cat' mi' tihu 'yon doll'
SG
itmoosat it tihut
ACC putmoosat put tihut
mitmoosat mit tihut J
ima moosat 'these DL cats' ima tihu(t) 'these DL dolls'

NOM puma moosat 'those DL cats' puma tihu(t) 'those DL dolls'
mima moosat 'yon DL cats' mima tihu(t) 'yon DL dolls'
DL
imuy moosatuy imuy tihut(uy)
ACC pumuy moosatuy pumuy tihut(uy)
mimuy moosatuy mimuy tihut(uy)
ima moomost 'these cats' i' tithu 'these dolls'

NOM puma moomost 'those cats' pam tithu 'those dolls'
mima moomost 'yon cats' mi' tithu 'yon dolls'
PL
imuy moomostuy it tithut
ACC pumuy moomostuy put tithut
mimuy moomostuy ! mit tithut
TABLE III
Note that the synchronic dual picture for inanimate nouns is rather 'messy',
which is not unusual in morphological change. The transition from unmarked
inanimate dual nouns to overtly marked ones can still be monitored in all its
phases. Thus, one encounters inanimate nouns completely lacking an overt
dual marker (ima tuva 'these DL nuts'), inanimate nouns with dual marker
only in subject position (puma kohot 'those DL sticks', *pumuy kohotuy but
pumuy kohot), and inanimate nouns with dual markers in both subject and
object position (mima kweewat 'those DL belts' and mimuy kweewatuy). The
demonstrative non-singular modifier cooccurring with inanimate dual nouns
seems to have been the only clue to the dual interpretation in the first stage.
Note also that the plural subject forms / , puma, and mima as well as
their respective object shapes imuy,pumuy, and mimuy are constrained from
cooccurring with plural nouns grammatically classified as inanimate. Instead,
a plurality of inanimate entities considered to constitute a group of the same
kind, is modified attributively (or referred to anaphorically) by employing
singular demonstratives. Predicators in such a case are usually marked for plu
ral (48-49).
(48) mi' ay-é' kii-ki-hu
yonder over-DIFRDP-house-ABS
there
sapu-m-'iw-ma
collapse-MULTI-STAT-PROGR
Those houses over there are about to collapse'.
(49) noq yaw naat pu' pam uuyi-'am
and QUOT still now that corn-their
SI plant
tayva-ya-qw pay yaw tuusungw-ti
become-PL-SUBR ASSR QUOT freeze-R
mature DS
Their corn had just started to mature when it got ice-cold again.'
Additional sentences exemplifying the attributive usage of demonstrative pro
nouns are given in (50-54). Note the syntactic discontinuity in (52-54) with
(53) displaying double discontinuity.
(50) noq pu' yaw i' hak wùuti kuy-to-ni
and then QUOT this someone woman water-PREGR-FUT
SI
'And then this woman, whoever she was, was going to go get wa
ter.'
(51) noq ima hikiyo-m pe-qvw u-ngk-ya-qa-m
and these few-PL here-to you-after-PL-REL-PL
SI EX
pay áhoy-ya
ASSR back-PL
to
'And these few that followed you here [went] back [i.e., home].'
(52) pam pe-p kii-hu qōōtsa

that there-at house-ABS white
That house there is white.'
(53) noq pu' yaw pam put taaqa nōōma-y yaw a-w
and then QUOT that that man wife-ACC QUOT she-to
SI ACC
pà-ng-qawu yaw naa-vahom-ni
that-way-say QUOT REFL-bath-FUT
'And then that man said to his wife that she should take a bath.'
(54) mima ay-é' yaa-kye' kî-y'-yung-qa-m
yonder over-DIF far-DIF house-POSS-IMPRF-REL-PL
PL there away PL
pas hi-n-wat yu'a-'a-tota
very some-way-SPEC talk-RDP-IMPRF
different PL
'Yonder [people] that have their houses over there far away talk
[a] different [language].'
A syntactically interesting phenomenon in this connection is the occur
rence of two demonstrative pronouns functioning as a unitary modifying
phrase. 'Doubly' demonstrative phrases in attributive position seem to be li
mited to distal forms preceding either proximal or extreme-distal forms (55-
57). Note the discontinuity of the two demonstratives in (57).
(55) pà-n-ti-qw pam mi' himu ura
that-way-R-SUBR that yonder something MEMO
DS
hïita nàapi-'at-'eway yaw a-ng ay-ó' lōhō
something leaf-its-like QUOT REF-on over-to fall
ACC ADJR DIF there PL
'When that had happened, those things which were like the leaves
of something, fell off it.'
(56) ya puma mima yōngōsona-y'-ta-qa-t?
Q those yonder turtle-POSS-IMPRF-REL-DL
PL shell
'Those two [kachinas] over there that wear turtle shell rattles?'
(57) pam yaw i' wàl-pi hak-i', paatala

that QUOT this PN-person someone-PS PN
That stranger from Walpi [lit.: that Walpi person whoever] that
was Paatala.'
Since demonstratives do not differentiate gender and have not developed
a specialized anaphoric pattern where one would refer to the more remote and
the other to the closer of two possible antecedents (cf. German 'jener': 'dies
er'), sentences with several identical demonstratives must be carefully ana
lyzed according to the underlying reality. Two typical examples along these
lines are (58) and (59).
(58) yaw haqa-mi pi yaw pam-ni-qw pa-ngqw
QUOT somewhere-toFACTQUOT that-NEX-SUBRthere-from
don't know where DS
and
pam yaw a-ngk na-n'uyi-y'-ma
that QUOT he-after RDP-secretly-POSS-PROGR
'Where she was going he didn't know and he followed her secret-
ly'.
(59) puma yaya'-t pay puma piw tsu-tsku-t
those Yaya'-PL well those also RDP-clown-PL
society
as-a'; tsu-tsku-t-nii-qe oovi pay
IMPOT-PS RDP-clown-PL-NEX-CAUSAL therefore ASSR
SS
piw pa-n puma yuwsi-y -yungwa,
also that-like those dress-POSS-IMPRF
PL
sikyàngpu-t
yellow-ACC
color
tsōqa-'asi-y'-yungwu; pas puma puma-'
clay-wash-POSS-IMPRF very those those-PS
PL
'Those Yaya society initiates, well they are also clowns; being
clowns they therefore are also dressed in that way, [and] they have
their bodies washed with yellow clay; those [i.e., Yaya' initiates]
are really those [i.e., clowns].'
241
[ NUMBER PROXIMITY ¡CASE DEMONSTRATIVE PAUS AL FORMS

| NOMINATIVE ACCUSATIVE NOMÏNAT IVE ACCUSATL /E
HOPI PERSON DEIXIS
STRONG WEAK STRONG WEAK

PROXIMAL /' 'this' it Vi Vi it'á ita
SG DISTAL pam 'that' put pam'í pamV put'á puta'
EXTREME-DISTAL w/"yon' mit mVí mVi mifá mita
. J
. PROXIMAL ima 'these' imuy ima'á ima' imuy'ú ímuyu
NSG DISTAL puma 'those' pumuy puma'á puma pumuy'ú púmuyu
EXTREME-DISTAL mima 'yon' m i mu y mimaá mima mimuy'ú mímuy
TABLE IV
1.2.2 Case forms. The two types of case inflection ('grammatical' and 'lo
cal') found with personal pronouns are also found with demonstratives. Type
I pertains to the accusative, the case of the direct object and the postpositional
object; it produces the accusative forms on the actual stems of the demonstra
tive pronouns. Table IV tabulates the respective form.
Unlike the personal pronouns, which supply a special inventory of base
forms to permit type II, i.e., 'local' inflection, the demonstrative pronouns
undergo no further declension. To construct them with the grammatical con
cepts embodied in the locative, destinative, and ablative cases, Hopi draws on
a special set of free postpositions which are generated on the deictically neu
tral base form a- (variant e-). As a- stands outside the spatial category of prox
imity, it actually represents the category of the third-person pronoun, which is
realized by zero in Hopi. Due to its deictic neutrality and its spatial position in
termediate between proximal and distal, a- is termed 'medial'. Table V pres
ents the Hopi pro bases of all definite third-person pronouns. Note that amu-
(variant -) is the plural base corresponding to third person singular a-
ande-.
PROXIMITY 3rd PERSON 3rd PERSON 1

PRONOUN PRO BASE
PROXIMAL V ya-
MEDIAL 0 SG: a-le- 1

NSG: amu-lamùu-
DISTAL pam pa-
EXTREME-DISTAL mï ayá-
TABLE V
The free postpositions generated on the medial third person bases are tabulat
ed in Table VI.
243
CASE POSTPOSITIONS Ρ AUS AL FORMS POSTPOSITIONS PAUS AL FOR MS 1

SINGULAR BASE NONSINGULAR BASE
a-le- STRONG WEAK amu-lamùu STRONG WEAK Ι
LOCATIVE 1 ep 'in, on, at him/ ep'é ' , on, amùupe'e amùupe'
(at) there at them'
EXTREME epeq epeq'á epeqa' amùupeq amùupeq'a amùupeqa'
LOCATIVE
HOPI PERSON DEIXJS
DIFFUSIVE ang ang'á anga' amùupa amùupa'a amùupa'

EXTREME- àngqe àngqe'é àngqe' amùupaqe amùupaqe'e amùupaqe'
DIFFUSIVE
DESTINATIVE 1 aw 'to him/ aw'i awï amumi 'to them' amumi'i amumi'
(to) there'
EXTREME aqw aqw'á aqw a' amumiq amumiq a amumiqa
DESTINATIVE
ABLATIVE 1 angqw 'in him' angqo angqö amungaqw 'in there' amungaqw'ö amungaqö
(3-DIM) (3-DIM)
'in there'
(3-DIM)
TABLE VI
As was said above, the postpositions listed in Table VI permit the appli
cation of the various concepts of type II inflection to the demonstrative pro
nouns. The medial pro bases then act as pronoun copies of the demonstrative
antecedents. Postpositions in Hopi require the nominal antecedent to be in
flected for accusative, as may be gathered from the examples shown in (60-
63). Note the spatio-temporal usage of the postposition ep in (60).5
(60) i-t pi e-p uma tuwat yàasangw-lalwa-ngwu
this-ACC FACTREF-at you in year-CONT-HAB
PL turn PL
'At this [time] you in turn celebrate the [new] year.'
(61) pu' put kwasa-y a-ng paki
then that dress-ACC it-on enter
ACC DIF
'Then she put that dress of hers on.'
(62) ayá-m mi-t yungyap-sivu-t a-ngqw
over-at that-ACC wicker-vessel-ACC it-in
there basket 3-DIM
paki-w-ta
enter-STAT-IMPRF
'It is over there in that deep wicker basket.'
(63) pam pumu-y amuu-pa-qe na-tōng-pi-y
that those-ACC they-on-EX REFL-prop-INSTR-ACC
one up
staff
rukw-ni-y'-ma
rub-CAUS-POSS-PROGR
'He is going along and rubbing his staff against them.'
Example (64) demonstrates the use of postpositional àape, a variant form of
ep, in a typical comparative construction. Optionally, the petrified adverbial
clause constructions àa-pe-nii-qe (REF-on-NEX-CAUSAL:SS) and e-p-nii-
ge (REF-on-NEX-CAUSAL:SS) may be employed instead of the postposi
tions àape and ep in the same role.
(64) i' owa mi-t-wa-t àa-pe wuuyoq-a
this rock that-ACC-SPEC-ACC it-on big-PS
over
there
'This rock is larger than that one over there'.
When not functioning as postpositions, the forms listed in Table VI simply ref
er to the concept of the third-person pronoun, which in type I inflection (sub
ject and direct object form) is realized as zero in Hopi. (65-68) illustrate this
usage.
(65) nu' amu-mi lavày-ti
I they-to word-do
speak
Ί spoke to them.'
(66) pay nu' amùu-pa oyàa-ta
well I they-at put-CAUS
DIF PL PL
OBJ OBJ
'I delivered them among them.'
(67) pu' puma a-qw haawi
then those REF-to climb
EX down
Then they climbed down to him.'
(68) a-ng piita
REF-at get
DIF stuck
'It got stuck [i.e., because sticky] on him.'
1.2.3 Reduplicated forms. Reduplicated third-person deictics convey the
notion of distribution as was also observed for the reduplicated plural forms of
the first and second-person pronouns (see 1.1.3). While Table VII surveys the
existing forms, sentences (69-74) illustrate a few in context. Note that redupli
cated singular demonstratives are used in reference to inanimate entities, and
reduplicated plural demonstratives in regard to animate entities only. None of
them occur in attributive function.
246
1 PROXIMITY 1 GENDER | NONREDUPLIC ATED PRO FORMS REDUPLICATED PRO FORMS
CASE CASE
NOMINATIVE Γ ACCUSATIVE NOMINATIVE 1 ACCUSATIVE
1 PROXIMAL i' 'this' it ii'i 'these different it'it

things'
DISTAL INANIMATE pant 'that' put paavam 'those diff. puuvut
things'
EXTREME-DISTAL mi' 'yon' mit miimi' 'yon different miimit
things'
PROXIMAL ima 'these' NSG imuy iVima 'these diff. ii'imuy

individuals'
DISTAL ANIMATE puma 'those' NSG pumuy puuvuma 'those diff. puuvumuy
ECKEHART MALOTKI
individuals'
EXTREME-DISTAL mima 'yon' NSG mimuy miimima 'yon diff. miimimuy
individuals'
TABLE VII
(69) pay ii-'i-t yaw puma pa-ngqw naa-mi

well RDP-this-ACC QUOT those there-in RCPR-to
3-DIM
yu'a-'a-ta-qe taya-'iw-ta
talk-RDP-IMPRF-CAUSAL laugh-STAT-IMPRF
SS
'About [all] these [different] things they were talking about to
each other in there and they were laughing.'
(70) paa-vam pu' pay sulawu
RDP-that now ASSR empty
'Those [different] things are no more [i.e., do not exist anymore]
today.'
(71) ay-é' pam mii-mi-t pongi-ta
over- at that RDP-that-ACC pick-IMPRF
there DIF over up
there
'In that area over there he is picking up [all] those things.'
(72) ii-imu-y nu'pi as amu-mum tu-tuqay-ngwu
RDP-these-ACG I FACT IMPOT they-with RDP-listen-HAB
learn
'With these [individuals] I used to go to school.'
(73) puu-vuma pi ya-ng kiiqō-t a-ng hii-hiita
RDP-those FACT here-at ruin-ACC it-at RDP-something
DIF DIF ACC
u-'uyingw-ya
RDP-steal-PL
'Those [different individuals] are stealing all sorts of things in the
ruins of this area.'
(74) ura mii-mimu-y pi hisat hopii-t
MEMO RDP-those-ACC FACT long PN-PL
over ago
there
tuwqa-y'-yungwu
enemy-POSS-IMPRF
PL
HAB
'Remember that the Hopi had all those [different people] as
enemies long ago.'
1.2.4 Pausal forms. Almost all the forms making up the complex demonstra
tive pronoun set with the exception of the reduplicated forms (i.e., subject
and object forms), singular and plural forms, as well as local case forms, may
be affected by pausal inflection. For surveys of the individual pausal endings
see Tables IV, VI and VII. For lack of space, only a handful of additional
examples illustrating the various demonstratives can be presented here with
pausal suffixes.
(75) "pay pi songqa i-'i-y," yaw pam
well FACT probably this-PS-EXCLM QUOT that
M
ya-n wuuwa
this-like think
'"This is probably it." This is what he thought.'
(76) kur hi-n-tsa-n-ni yaw pam put-a'
EV some-way-do-CAUS-FVT QUOT that that-PS
cannot ACC
'There was nothing he could do to him.'
(77) pas pi yaw kyaasta puma-'a, po-pwaq-t
very FACT QUOT incredibly those-PS RDP-sorcerer-PL
many
'They were there in a great number, the sorcerers.'
(78) kur piw a-hoy a-ng-'á
EV again it-back REFon-PS
to DIF
'Go back over it again [i.e., read it once more].'
(79) pu' yaw pam ki-y a-ngqw nakwsu-kyangw
then QUOT that house-ACC it-from start-SIMUL
out SS
pu' pas-mi-q yu-mu-y amu-mi-q-'a
then field-to-EX mother-DL-ACC they-to-EX-PS
parents
'Then he started out from the house and went to the field to his
parents.'
NOTES
1) The analysis of Hopi person deixis is based on the dialect as prevalent throughout the area of
Third Mesa. It comprises the villages of Hotevilla, Bakabi, Moenkopi, Old Oraibi, and New Oraibi
and constitutes the majority dialect.
I sincerely wish to thank Ronald Langacker and Walter Olson for reading the manuscript and mak
ing useful comments. The Hopi data listed throughout this paper reflect the idiolect of my long-time
consultant Michael Lomatewama to whose mastery of Hopi I am greatly endebted.
2) For example: nōōsa (PL nōō-nōsa) 'he ate a meal' (full reduplication), tuwa (PL tu-twa) 'he
found it/spotted it' (partial reduplication), pa'angwa (PL pa'angwa-ya) 'he helped' (plural
marker), tumàl-ta (PL tumàl-tota) 'he worked' (plural marker), wari (PL yùutu) 'he ran' (supple-
tion), puuwi (PL took-ya) 'he is sleeping' (suppletion and plural marker).
3) For an in-depth account of all aspects of the regular Hopi 'local' case system see Malotki
1979b:85-99.
4) Older Hopi speakers show preference for nuuyu as pausal shape instead of nuy'ú.
5) For a more detailed study of the spatio-temporal metaphor in conjunction with the Hopi pro
nominal locators see Malotki 1979a.
6) Primary stress, which is indicated by the acute, is marked only when the general Hopi stress
rule is not met. Typically, a bisyllabic word will be stressed on the first syllable. Multisyllabic words,
i.e., words with three syllables or more, receive initial stress if the first syllable is long by nature
(i.e., featuring a long vowel or diphthong) or long by position (i.e., featuring two consonants fol
lowing the short vowel of the first syllable). Stress is on the second syllable if the first is not long.
GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
— marks morpheme boundaries and separates glosses in the interlinear
glossing stage
: morpheme boundaries within line-internal glossing
= clitic boundaries
primary stress
falling tone
[ ] culture or context-relevant additions in the translation stage
ABBREVIATIONS OF ABSTRACT GLOSSES:
ABS = absolutive
ACC = accusative
ADJR = adjectivalizer
AN = animate
ASSR = assertive
CAUS = causative
CAUSAL causal
CFIRM confirmation
COMPASS compassion
CONT continuous
DIF diffuse
DIM diminutive
DL dual
DS different subject
EMPH emphatic
EV evidential
EX extreme
EXCLM exclamation
F female speech
FACT factual
FUT future
HAB habitual
IMP imperative
IMPOT impotential
IMPRF imperfective
IMPRS impersonal
INAN inanimate
INDEF indefinite
INSTR instrument
M male speech
MEMO memory
MULTI multitude
NEG negator
NEX nexus
NOM nominative
NSG non-singular
OBJ object
PARADOX paradoxical
PN proper name
PS pausal
PASS passive
PL plural
POSS possessive
PREGR pregressive
PRIOR = priority
PROGR = progressive
PUNCT = punctual
Q = question
QNT = quantity
QUOT = quotative
R = realized
RCPR = reciprocal
RDP = reduplication
REF = reference
REFL = reflexive
REL = relative
SI = sentence introductory
SIMUL = simultaneity
SG = singular
SPEC = specificator
SS = same subject
STAT = stative
SUBR = subordinator
3-DIM = three-dimensional
REFERENCES
Benveniste, E. (1971): Problems in General Linguistics. Translated by Mary

E. Meek. Miami Linguistics Series No. 8. Coral Gables, Florida: Universi
ty of Miami Press.
Fillmore, C. (1975): Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis. Bloomington, Indiana:
Indiana University Linguistics Club. (Delivered 1971).
Ingram, D. (1978): "Personal Pronouns." In: J.H. Greenberg (ed.), Univer
sals of Human Language. Vol. 3. Word Structure. Stanford, Calfornia:
Stanford University Press.
Lyons, J. (1968): Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cam
Lyons, J. (1977): Semantics. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Malotki, E. (1979a): "Spatio-temporale Merkmale im Bereich der Pro
nominalokatoren der Hopi-Sprache." In: E. Bülow & P. Schmitter (eds.),
Integrale Linguistik. Festschrift für Helmut Gipper. 493-518.
Malotki, E. (1979b): Hopi-Raum: Eine sprachwissenschaftliche Analyse der

Raumvorstellungen der Hopi-Sprache. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
ZUR HISTORISCHEN ENTWICKLUNG DER
PERSONENDEIXIS IM CHINESISCHEN
FRITZ PASIERBSKY
1. EINIGE VORBEMERKUNGEN ZUR PERIODISIERUNG DER

CHINESISCHEN SPRACHENTWICKLUNG
Chinesisch als eine der ältesten Kultursprachen ist für historische Sprach
untersuchungen besonders interessant: Immense Sprachdenkmäler aus ei
nem Zeitraum von über 3000 Jahren ermōglichen ein nahezu lückenloses Bild
von den einzelnen Entwicklungsetappen und Funktionalstilen der chinesi
schen Sprache von den ersten schriftlichen Einritzungen in Orakelknochen
und Schildkrōtenpanzer bis zum mündlichen und schriftlichen Sprachge
brauch in der Gegenwart. Besonders aber auch für die Allgemeine und Ver
gleichende Sprachforschung stellt das Chinesische mit seinen historisch aus
geprägten typologischen Merkmalen eine wichtige Erkenntnisquelle dar.
Manche verabsolutierende Verallgemeinerung in der Sprachwissenschaft
hätte bei Berücksichtigung des Chinesischen sicherlich vermieden werden
kōnnen. In diesem Zusammenhang muß auch Bühlers Lehre von dem Zeig
feld "der" Sprache und "den" Zeigwōrtern kritisiert werden, da hier auf der
Grundlage indoeuropäischen Sprachmaterials und auf einer zu schmalen,
psychologisierenden Erkenntnisbasis Aussagen über das Deixissystem der
Sprache schlechthin gemacht werden (siehe Näheres unten Abschnitt 4).
Für die historische Untersuchung einzelner sprachlicher Erscheinungen
wie der Personendeixis ist bei der Charakterisierung einzelner Entwick
lungsetappen des Chinesischen (siehe folgende Tabelle) von besonderem In
teresse
erstens die kontrastive Gegenüberstellung der sprachlich ausgeprägtesten
und historisch wirksamsten Funktionalstile wie z.B. die Wahrsagetexte des
archaischen Chinesisch (vor allem des 11. Jahrhunderts v. u. Z.) mit den phi
losophischen Grundtexten der klassischen Hōchstentwicklungszeit (des 4.
254 FRITZ PASIERBSKY
und 3. Jahrhunderts v.u.Z.) und den Gebrauchstexten der modernen chine

sischen Gegenwartssprache (in der vorrevolutionären Phase der ersten Hälfte
dieses Jahrhunderts und in der aktuellen Entwicklungsphase seit 1949);
zweitens die Umbruchsphasen in der chinesischen Geschichte, die auch tief
greifende Umbrüche im Sprachbau bewirkten. Folgende Tabelle soll eine
Orientierung geben, wie die im folgenden benutzten Ausdrücke "archaisches
Chinesisch", "vorklassisches Chinesisch" usw. im Rahmen einer allgemeinen
Periodisierung der chinesischen Geschichte eingeordnet werden kōnnen. Die
zweite Tabelle stellt einen klassischen Text aus Han Feizi (politischer Philo
soph aus der Schule der Legalisten, gest. 233 v.u.Z.) mit seinem Äquivalent
in moderner Gegenwartssprache vor. An diesen beiden Texten sollen einige
Merkmale des Sprachwandels aufgezeigt werden (Abschnitt 2), vor deren
Hintergrund die Entwicklung der Personaldeixis skizziert werden soll (Ab
schnitt 3).
historische Perioden historische Umbruchszeiten sprachgeschichtliche Entwicklung
1
255
1 — • '
21.-
16. Jh. v.u.Ζ Xia-Dynastie
1 \
}6¿Jh.- Shang-Dyn. archaisches Chinesisch
\Knochenorakel
Iff6- Westl.Zhou-Dyn. lBronzeinschriften J
770 -
» vorklassisches Chinesisch \
256) Ostl.Zhou-Dyn. 776.Jh.: Land in Privatbesitz ) Altchinesisch
ι den (Shujing) /
2- Chun-Qiu Beginn der Eisenverarbeitung
' Buch der Urkunden (Shujing) 1
große Wasserbauregulierungen
PERSONENDEIXIS IM CHINESISCHEN
221" Zhanguo staatliche Zersplitterung klassisches Chinesisch

kulturelle Blütezeit 1 philosophische Schulen:
§j¿" Qin-Dyn.
206 v. - _ 1 Konfuzianer, Mohisten,
23 n. West.Han-Dyn. 2./l.Jh.: Ende des alten Feudal jLegalisten usw.
systems, Entstehung des bürokra 1
220 η '. Östl. Han-Dy η. tischen Feudalismus
1
220-
280 Drei-r> ·
Reiche Zerfall der Reichseinheit
Eindringen des Buddhismus (klassisches Chinesisch bis in j
¡dieses Jahrhundert als Schrift- \ Mittelchinesisch
907 " Tang-Dynastie spräche benutzt (
Uimmense Sprachdenkmäler aus]
lallen historischen Perioden)
1279-
1368 / ΪΛ •·
Yuan-Dynastie Mongolenherrschaft in China
f neueres Chinesisch
}§Jj" Qing-Dynastie 1840: Opiumkrieg, Eindringen des
ausländischen Kapitals in China
gJ2- Republik 1911: bürgerlich-demokratische f chinesische Gegenwartssprache
1949 Volksrepublik Revolution
1919: 4. Mai-Bewegung
neudemokratische Revolution
Tabelle 1 : Politische und sprachgeschichtliche Entwicklung
(i)
Song ren you gengzhe
Song Mensch- hab- Pflüger-
Ein Mann aus Song war einmal beim Pflügen.
(2)
tian zhong you zhu, tu zou
Feld-Mitte- hab- Baumstumpf- Hase-lauf-
Mitten auf dem Feld war ein Baumstumpf. Da kam ein Hase gelaufen,
(3)
chu zhu, zhe jing er si.
stoß- Baumstumpf- brech- Hals- ("und") sterb
er stieß sich an dem Baumstumpf, brach sich das Genick und war tot.
(4)
Yin shi qi lei er
Grund-lōs- (Dem.Pron.) Pflugschar- ("und")
Daraufhin ließ nun der Pflüger seine Pflugschar los und
(5)
shou zhu, ji fu de tu,
beobacht- Baumstumpf- hoff- wieder bekomm- Hase-
beobachtete den Baumstumpf. Er hoffte, noch einen Hasen zu bekommen.
(6)
Tu bu ke fu de,
Hase- nicht kōnn- wieder bekomm-
Einen Hasen konnte er jedoch nicht wieder bekommen,
(7)
er shen wei Songguo xiao.
("und") Person- werd- Song-Land- lach-
vielmehr wurde er zum Gespōtt in Song.
(a)
PERSONENDEIXIS IM CHINESISCHEN 257
(1)
Songguoren zhong you yige zhongdi - de ren,
Song-Land-Mensch-Mitte-hab- ein(ZEW) bebau-Erde-(Attr.) Mensch-
(2)
di li you yige shuzhuangzi, yizhi tuzi paoguolai,
Erde-in hab- ein(ZEW) Baumstumpf- ein (ZEW) Hase- Lauf-vorbeikomm
(3)
peng zai shuzhuangzi shang, zheduan- le bozi, si- le.
stoß- an Baumstumpf auf brech- (Perf.) Hals- sterb- (Perf.)
(4)
Ta yinci jiu fangxia tade liba,
Er daher dann werf-hin sein- Pflugschar-
(5)
kanshou- zhe shuzhuangzi, xiwang zai dedao tuzi.
beobacht- (Durativ) Baumstumpf hoff- wieder bekomm- Hase-
(6)
Keshi ta zai ye de- bu- dao tuzi,
Aber er wieder auch bekomm- nicht- kōnn- Hase
(7)
faner bei Songguoren xiaohua- le.
sondern (Passiv) Song-Land-Mensch- verlach- (Perf.)
(b)
Tabelle 2: Klassische (a) und moderne (b) Version eines Textes von Han Fei zi, gest. 233 v.u.Z.
2. EINIGE MERKMALE DES SPRACHWANDELS
Trotz der erheblichen Veränderungen, die das Chinesische sowohl im

Sprachbau als auch auf der Bedeutungsebene erfahren hat, sind einige typo
logische Merkmale der Sprache erhalten geblieben, wie z.B.:
- das Verhältnis von Sprechsilbe : Morphem : Schriftzeichen, das in alter
wie in neuer Zeit fast immer 1: 1 : 1 ist;
- die bedeutungsdifferenzierende Tonalität der einzelnen Silbenmorphe
me, die trotz erheblicher Verschiebungen im Tonsystem nach wie vor das
Chinesische als Tonsprache charakterisiert;
- die meisten Satzbaupläne, usw.
An Veränderungen lassen sich anhand des Textes folgende drei Merk
malgruppen beobachten:
- Der Übergang vom weitgehend amorphen Sprachbau zu vorherrschenden
Kompositionsverfahren im Sprachbau mit Ansätzen zur Agglutination.
Hierzu gehōren:
im Wortschatz der Gebrauch von Affixen zur Kennzeichnung der Wortart
kategorien (ver gl. shuzhuangzi, tuzunZeile2,
bozi in Zeile 3) und die Anwendung von Kompositionsverfahren in der
Wortbildung (z.B. die Verknüpfung zweier lexikalischer Morpheme yfi-^
shu + zhuang / "Baum" + "Stumpf', im Unterschied zum einmor-
phemigen zhu "Stumpf"); in der Grammatik der Gebrauch von Affi
xen u.a. zur Kennzeichnung aspekt-temporaler Kategorien (z.B.
zheduan/e in Zeile 3), zum Ausdruck der Aktionsart (z.B pao-
guolai in Zeile 2) ; im Bereich des Substantivs gibt es einen besonderen Be-
zeichner der Attributbeziehung (nämlich : zhongdi-de ren,
Zeile 1) und ein ausgebautes System von Präpositionen und Postpositio
nen (z.B. peng zai shuzhuangzi shang, Zeile 3).
- Entwicklung und Ausbau kategorialer Systeme, u.a. eines verzweigten
Netzes von Zähleinheitswōrtern (ZEW), die beim Zählen oder bei De-
monstrativa obligatorisch sind (z.B. y ige ... ren, Zeile 1
oder yizhi tuzi, Zeile 2), ferner einer evidenten Passivkatego
rie (z.B. durch "bei" ausgedrückt, Zeile 7).
- Aufgabe des im Altchinesischen vorherrschenden monosyllabischen Prin
zips zugunsten eines Bisyllabismus, wobei sich das Verhältnis des Vorkom
mens von ein- bzw. zweisilbigen Wōrtern in etwa umgekehrt haben dürfte
( 7 : 3 , jetzt aber 3 : 7 ) .
Als Gesamtbild des Vergleichs der beiden Sprachstadien ergibt sich also
erstens ein Ausbau und eine Komplizierung des morphologisch-syntakti
schen Bereichs und
zweitens eine Differenzierung des grammatisch-kategorialen Systems.
In dieses Gesamtbild der Sprachentwicklung paßt sich nun das Bild, das
wir uns heute von der Entwicklung der Personendeixis machen kōnnen, nur
grob und zum Teil in widersprüchlicher Weise ein.
3. GRUNDZÜGE DER PERSONENDEIXIS IM CHINESISCHEN
Es ist auch hier zweckmäßig, zunächst einige durchgängige Züge der Per
sonendeixis im Chinesischen zu charakterisieren, also derjenigen Merkmale,
die sich im Laufe der Geschichte nicht oder nur unwesentlich geändert haben
und das Chinesische als Ganzes sprachtypologisch charakterisieren. Danach
sollen die wichtigsten Veränderungen im System der Personendeixis skizziert
werden und schließlich noch einmal die wesentlichsten Kategorien der Perso
nalpronomina hervorgehoben werden.
3.1 Zu den sogenannten "konstanten Grundzügen" der Personendeixis

Hierzu mōchte ich drei Punkte ausführen:
Erstens: Typisch für das Chinesische in den historisch beobachtbaren Zeiträu
men ist es, daß die Personendeixis niemals im Verbalbereich verankert wurde
(es gibt weder eine äußere oder innere Personalflexion am Verb wie in den se
mitischen oder in unseren Sprachen, noch besondere affigale Personenanzei
ger wie in den agglutinierenden Sprachen). Daher ist die von J. Lyons (1968,
S. 280 f.) gestellte Frage, ob die Person eine Kategorie des Verbs sei, für das
Chinesische nicht relevant. Vielmehr gibt es ein differenziertes System syn
taktisch selbständiger Personalmorpheme, vergleiche z.B.:
(1) (klass.)
Er heceng bi yu yu shi?
du warum denn vergleich- ich mit dies-
Warum vergleichst du mich denn mit ihm? (Mengzi 2 AI)
(modern)
Ni weishenme jing na wo gen ta xiangbi?
du warum eigentlich (Obj.) ich mit er vergleich-
Erst in neuerer Zeit ist eine gewisse phonologische Annäherung des Personal
pronomens an das Verb in speziellen syntaktischen Fällen zu beobachten,
nämlich wenn das Personalpronomen in postverbaler Stellung als Objekt des
Satzes fungiert; in diesem Falle verliert es seine Tonqualität und wird enkli
tisch, vergleiche z.B. folgendes Beispiel:
(2)
Qin ni gaosong women mai diar shenme dongxi
bitt- du mitteil- wir kauf- einige welche Ding-
(modern)
song ta.
schenk- er
(Ich) bitte dich, uns mitzuteilen, welche Dinge wir ihm kaufen und
schenken sollen. (Zhao Yuanren 1968, S. 630)
Zweitens: Das Chinesische vom Altertum bis zur Gegenwart ist trotz der ge
nannten Zunahme der Ausdrucksmittel im morphologisch-syntaktischen Be
reich äußerst ōkonomisch geblieben: Viele grammatische Kategorien werden
nur dann morphologisch ausgedrückt, wenn aus dem Kontext (Gesprächs
kontext, sprachlicher Kontext) nicht klar hervorgeht, wovon die Rede ist. An
diesem Prinzip der ōkonomie haben grundsätzlich auch die Ausdrucksmittel
der Personendeixis Anteil: Sehr häufig werden Sätze ohne jeden Personal
ausdruck gebildet und der Hōrer/Leser muß die richtige Person aus dem Ge
samtkontext erschließen. Vergleiche z.B. folgende Sätze aus dem archai
schen, klassischen und modernen Chinesischen:
(3) (archaisch)
Wei lu huo wei lang ?
nun Hirsch- jag- nun Wolf-
Sollen wir nun Hirsche jagen oder Wōlfe? (M. V. Kr'ukov 1978, S. 52)
(klass.)
Gou zhi shi ren si, er bu zhi jian.
Hund- Schwein ess- Mensch- Ess- und nicht kenn- beschränk-
Deine Hunde und Schweine fressen den Leuten das Essen weg und du
kennst keine Beschränkung. (Mengzi 1A3)
Fugui renjia-de zhu gou chidiao - le

reich-vornehm Leute (Attr.) Schwein- Hund- ess-weg (Perf.)
baixing-de liangshi, que bu jiayi jiancha he

Volk-ÍAttr.) Ess- aber nicht hinzufüg- untersuch- und
(modern)
zhizhi.
beschränk- (Text wie oben)
Durch den Einfluß westlicher Literatur in China seit der zweiten Hälfte des
19. Jahrhunderts nimmt im modernen Chinesischen aber der Gebrauch von
Personalpronomina allgemein zu.
Drittens: Im Altertum wie in der Neuzeit wird das System der pronominal aus
gedrückten Personendeixis überlagert von einem soziativen System, das vie
lerlei Parallelen zu soziativen Kategorien im Japanischen, Koreanischen und
Vietnamesischen aufweist. Dies bewirkt zum einen, daß die Personalprono
mina in der geschichtlichen Entwicklung der chinesischen Sprache nur in
geringem Grade die neutrale Bedeutung gehabt haben, die Bühler (1965, S.
102 ff.) in der raum-zeitlichen Einbettung hier/jetzt/ich angenommen hat. Viel
mehr zum Tragen kommt im Chinesischen die Tatsache, daß in einem entwik-
kelten System von Hōflichkeitsstufen die Gesprächspartner den tatsächli
chen oder fiktiven gesellschaftlichen Rang der Person, ihre berufliche Stel
lung, ihren festen Platz im weit verzweigten, hierarchisch geordneten Ver
wandtschaftssystem zum Ausdruck bringen. Raum-zeitliche Kategorien tre
ten demgegenüber vōllig in den Hintergrund. Zum anderen bewirkt diese
Überlagerung, daß die verschiedenen Bezeichnungsmittel von Rang, Stel
lung und Verwandtschaft im Sprachgebrauch die Verwendung von Personal
pronomina aufheben, da sie selbst bereits eindeutig auf die eine oder andere
Person bezogen sind; vergleiche z.B. :
(4) (klass.)
Wang wen chen.
Kōnig frag- Untertan-
Du (Kōnig) hast mich (deinen Untertan) gefragt.(Mengzi 5B9)
Im Dialog drückt die Gegenüberstellung. "wang" : "chen" nur den ka-
tegorialen Kontrast "2. Person" : " 1 . Person" aus (wie oben im Text). In be
richtender Rede wäre natürlich auch der Kontrast "3. Person" : " 3 . Person"
mōglich, z.B. in einem Textzusammenhang mit der Bedeutung "... und der
Kōnig fragte den Untertan...".
Ungebräuchlich dagegen ist der Kontrast " 1 . Person" : "2. Person", zum
Beispiel in der Bedeutung "Ich (der Kōnig) frage dich (den Untertan)". Denn
zur Eigenbezeichnung stehen dem Kōnig wieder andere soziative Sprachmit
tel zu, z.B. die Kennzeichnung a l s g u a r e n ("geringer Mensch"); ver
gleiche z.B.
(klass.)
guaren you ji, guaren hao se
meine-Wenigkeit hab- Schwäche- meine-Wenigkeit lieb- Schōnheit-
Ich habe eine Schwäche: Ich liebe schōne (Frauen). (Mengzi 1B5)
In einer solchen soziativ bestimmten Personaldeixisfunktion tritt sehr
früh auch schon das Wort xiansheng ("Erst-Geborener") auf, daß in
der konfuzianischen Klassik die Bedeutung "Sie, mein Lehrer" gewinnt, ver
gleiche z.B.:
( 5 ) ( k l a s s . )
Xiansheng he wei chu ci yan ye.
früher-gebor- wie mach- erzeug- dies- Rede- (Finalpart.)
Mein Lehrer, warum redest du so? (Mengzi 4A24)
In der modernen Sprache hatte sich das Wort nochmals gewandelt und bedeu
tet 3. Person: "er, der werte Herr", oder 2. Person: "Sie, mein Herr", verglei
che z.B.:
(6) (modern)
Zhang xianshen lai - le.
Zhang Lehrer-Herr- komm- (Perf.)
Herr Zhang ist gekommen.
(modern)
Ya, Zhang xiansheng hao a!
Hallo Zhang Lehrer-Herr- gut- ja?
Hallo Herr Zhang, wie geht es Ihnen?
An der soziativ bestimmten Personendeixis sind auch verschiedene lexikali
sche Mittel beteiligt, die sich nicht direkt auf Rang, Stellung und Verwandt
schaft beziehen, z.B. die A d j e k t i v e g u i "wert, kostbar" u n d b i
"niedrig", vergleiche z.B.:
(7) Frage: (modern)
Xiansheng gui guo?
Lehrer-Herr- wert- Land-
Aus welchem werten Lande kommen Sie, mein Herr?
Antwort: (modern)
Bu gan dang, bi guo Deguo.
nicht würdig- niedrig Land- Deutschland
Ich bins nicht würdig (zu antworten), mein niedriges Land ist
Deutschland.
In der Gegenwartssprache lautet (7):
Frage:
Ni shi neiguoren?
du Kopula welch-Land-Mensch-
Woher kommst du?
Antwort:
Wo shi Deguoren.
ich Kopula Deutsch-Land-Mensch-
Ich bin Deutscher.
Aus der großen Zahl der chinesischen Verwandtschaftstermini, die die Perso-
nendeixis soziativ bestimmen, will ich nur zwei nennen:
Zur Anrede an eine männliche Person, die jünger als der Sprecher ist, wird
verwendet daxiongdi "großer Bruder", für die ehrende Anrede ei
ner älteren männlichen P e r s o n d a s h u "Onkel", eigentlich: "Vaters
jüngerer Bruder".
3.2. Veränderungen im System der Personendeixis
Der krasseste Unterschied des Altchinesischen gegenüber allen späteren

Sprachstufen und gleichzeitig auch die eigenartigste Erscheinung in einer
sonst weitgehend amorphen Sprachumgebung ist das Vorhandensein eines
Flexionssystems bei den Personalpronomina.
Im altchinesischen Satzbauplan kōnnen bei Handlungsverben drei Stellen
pronominal besetzt werden:
die präverbale Stelle durch ein Agenspronomen,
die postverbale Stelle durch ein Objektpronomen
und die erste Stelle innerhalb einer nominalen Aktantengruppe durch ein At
tributpronomen.
Im archaischen Chinesischen haben wir von den Schriftzeichen her gese
hen ein Suppletivsystem (vergleiche z.B. Wang Li 1958, Bd. 2, S. 261; W.
Dobson 1962, S. 112; M.V. Kr'ukov / Huang Shuying 1978, S. 36):
['•'
ι Agens (präverbal) Attribut

Objekt (postverbal) (pränominal)
1. Person yu (*d a) zhen (*d'j'әm)
2. Person ru ( n at) na i (*nә)
Eine weitere funktionale Differenzierung tritt in vorklassischer Zeit ein, in

der bei der ersten Person eine Aufteilung in Agensfunktion wu ("ich")
und in Objekt/Attributfunktion wo ("mich"/"mein") stattfindet (verglei
che B. Karlgren 1951, S. 118, Anm. 1). Für die zweite Person ist eine entspre
chende funktionale Differenzierung noch umstritten (siehe Wang Li ebd.).
Für die "3. Person" (siehe unten Punkt 3.3) ist eine Differenzierung zwi
schen Attribut- und Objektfunktion festzustellen, während es noch kein
Agenspronomen der 3. Person gibt, siehe folgende Tabelle:
Agens Attribut Objekt
"3. Person" --
Daß es sich tatsächlich um ein Flexionssystem und nicht bloß um einen Supp
letivismus handelt, hat am klarsten Wang Li herausgearbeitet, der für das Alt
chinesische folgendes phonologisch-morphologisches Ordnungssystem auf
stellt:
l.Pers.
2. Pers.
1 3. Pers.
Im klassischen Chinesisch entwickelt sich dann in der ausgehenden altchinesi

schen Zeit das System der Personalpronomina dahingehend, daß die Fle
xionsfunktionen aufgegeben werden: Praktisch kōnnen alle Formen in allen
syntaktischen Funktionen auftreten. In dem Konkurrenzkampf der verschie

denen Formen werden einige Pronomina dominant, im modernen Chinesi
schen schließlich gibt es für jede Person in allen syntaktischen Funktionen nur
noch eine feste Form:
(11) Agens/Objekt/Attribut: wo (ich), ni (du), ta (er)
3.3 Kategorien der Personalpronomina

Bis in die späte Zeit des Altchinesischen hinein ist auffällig, daß es kein
eigentliches Pronomen der 3. Person gibt. Hier ließen sich interessante Paral
lelen zu den von E. Benveniste (1974, S. 279 ff.) und anderen untersuchten
Erscheinungen des Personenausdrucks in Sprachen unterschiedlichen typo-
logischen Baus herstellen.
An der Entstehung des Ausdrucks der 3. Person im Chinesischen ist nun
nicht so sehr interessant, daß hier zunächst ein Demonstrativpronomen per
sonell verwendet wird — ähnliche Erscheinungen finden sich in vielen Spra
chen, z.B. beim slavischen on/5). Von einem eigentlichen Personalpronomen
im Chinesischen kann man erst von der ausgehenden ōstlichen Han-Dynastie
an rechnen (vergleiche M.V. Kr'ukov / Huang Shuying 1978, S. 304). Viel in
teressanter daran ist aber, daß sich hier zuerst die Objektiv- und Attribut
funktionen des Personalpronomens herausbilden und erst relativ spät (d.h.
erst im Übergang zum Mittelchinesischen) sich entsprechende Pronomina mit
Agentivbedeutung herausbilden — hier geht sozusagen der Akkusativ dem
Nominativ zeitlich-historisch voraus, eine Erscheinung, die aus der Entwick
lung verschiedener Deklinationssysteme in flektierenden Sprachen wohl be
kannt ist (z.B. im Vulgärlatein). Im Chinesischen liegt hier offenbar eine alte
semantische Opposition zugrunde:
"belebter, aktiv an der Handlung beteiligter Faktor" :
"unbelebter, von der Handlung nur betroffener Faktor".
Am klarsten ist diese Opposition im archaischen und auch noch im vorklassi
schen Chinesisch ausgeprägt, vergleiche z.B.: (vorklassisch)
(12)
Tuo ren you xin, yu cunduo zhi.
ander- Mensch- hab- Herz- ich ausmess- es
Andere Menschen haben in ihrem Herzen Gedanken, aber ich kann sie
ermessen. (Shijing, Qiao an)
Eine weitere Opposition, die ihre Spuren in der kategorialen Gliederung des
Personalpronomensystems bis in neueste Zeit hinterlassen hat, ist:

"direkter Handlungsfaktor" (Agens / Objektiv):
"indirekter Handlungsfaktor" (Attributiv).
Hier wird anhand des Pronomens der 3. Person im Chinesischen eine Beson
derheit der Personendeixis sichtbar: Attributive Pronomina treten als Agens
subjekt oder Objekt von Sätzen auf, wenn diese Sätze eingebettet sind (d.h.
Subjekts-, Objekts- oder Attributssätze sind); vergleiche z.B.:
(13) (klassisch)
Wu bu ren qi husu.
ich nicht ertrag- sein- ängstlich-blōk-
Ich ertrage sein (des Rindes) ängstliches Blōken nicht. (Mengzi 1A7)
Hieraus entwickelt sich im Chinesischen die spätere Agensfunktion des Pro
nomens der 3. Person, paraphrasiert an dem letzten Beispielsatz etwa: Ich er
trage nicht, (daß) es blōkt. Auf diese Doppelfunktion der Pronomina macht
Zhao Yuanren auch noch in bezug auf die gesprochene Gegenwartssprache
aufmerksam; er spricht hier von "pivotal constructions" (Zhao Yuanren
1968, S. 633); vergleiche seinen Beispielsatz:
(14)
Fanshi ting - le yige xiaoxi, ni dei
immer hōr- (Perf.) ein (ZEW) Nachricht- du müss-
zhidao tade laiyuan, cai neng duanding ta

wiss- ihr- Quelle- erst- kōnn- beurteil- sie
shi zhende haishi jiade. (gesprocheneGegenwartssprache)

Kopula wahr- oder falsch,
Immer wenn du eine Nachricht hōrst, mußt du erst ihre Quelle kennen, bevor
du beurteilen kannst, ob sie wahr oder falsch ist (=• bevor du sie als wahr oder
falsch beurteilen kannst). (Zhao Yuanren 1968, S. 633)
An dieser Besonderheit des Personalpronomens kann eine Eigenart der
chinesischen Sprachentwicklung aufgezeigt werden: Eine Reihe von hypo
taktischen Konstruktionen ist nicht aus dem Zusammenrücken paratakti
scher Einzelsätze entstanden, sondern durch die doppelte funktionale Bela
dung des Pronomens. Ein eingehender historischer Sprachvergleich müßte
hier nicht nur unsere daß-Konstruktionen, ob-Konstruktionen usw. mit dem
Chinesischen kontrastieren, sondern vor allem auch die verschiedenen Infini

tivkonstruktionen mit doppelfunktionalem Pronomen der Art:
Κελεύω σε ίέναι.
Ich heiße dich kommen.
Ich befehle, daß du kommst.
Nachdem im klassischen Chinesisch die genannten Flexionsunterschiede
verwischt waren, bildeten sich für den attributiven Gebrauch der Personal
pronomina (u.a. zum Ausdruck der Kategorie "Possessiv") neue morphologi
sche Repräsentanten heraus, vor allem die Verbindung Personalpronomen -f
zhi (als Attributindikator), z.B. wozhi "mein" wuzhi
"mein", erzhi "dein" usw. (vergl. W. Dobson 1964, S. 4). Allerdings
finden wir auch schon in vorklassischer Zeit vereinzelte Ausdrücke von Pos
sessi vkategorien , vergleiche z.B.:
(15) (vorklassisch)
Wo zhi huai yi
ich Attr.Indik. an-die-Brust-drück- (Finalpart.)
mein Geliebter (Shijing, Xiong zhi)
In der modernen Sprache haben sich als feste Verbindungen herausentwik-
kelt:
wode "mein"
nide "dein"
tade "sein"
usw.
Aber auch noch in allerneuester Zeit treten Personalpronomina in mor
phologisch unveränderter Form attributiv auf, besonders in phraseologischen
Wendungen oder in festen Verbindungen wie z.B. bei der Bezeichnung von
Verwandtschaftszugehōrigkeiten, vergleiche :
wo fuqin
mein Vater
wo guo
unser Land
Dieses letzte Beispiel führt zur Betrachtung einer weiteren Personal
kategorie: des Numerus.
Die chinesischen Personalpronomina sind zunächst indifferent gegenüber ei

ner Unterscheidung Singular : Plural, vergleiche z.B.:
(vorklass.)
Wo gu zhuo bi jin lei.
ich- inzwischen- ausschenk- jen- Bronze- Gefäß-
Ich schenke inzwischen aus jenem Bronzegefäß aus. (Shijing, Juan er)
(vorklass.)
Wo wu ling ren.
wir- nicht-hab- edel- Mensch-
Unter uns gibt es keinen edlen Menschen. (Shijing, Kai f eng)
Erst in der Han-Zeit treten Indikatoren für "Plural" auf, z . B , w o s h u
"wir" (siehe M.V. Kr'ukov / Huang Shuying 1978, S. 254).
In der modernen Gegenwartssprache gibt es für alle Personalpronomina ein
heitlich das Pluralsuffix men :
women "wir"
nimen "ihr"
tarnen "sie".
Erst sehr zōgernd setzt sich (unter dem Einfluß der ins Chinesische über
setzen westlichen Literatur) durch, tarnen "sie" auch als Vielheitsbezeich
nung von Sachen zu gebrauchen. In einigen Grammatiken heißt es noch im
mer, eine solche Pluralform sei nicht mōglich (Lü Shuxiang 1954, Bd. 2, S.
20), in anderen dagegen wurde die Form bereits voll integriert (z.B. V.
Gorelov l974,S. 19).
Warum sich das Personalpronomen der 3. Person gegen eine Pluralset
zung bei Sachbezeichnungen sträubt, hat seinen historischen Grund darin,
daß hier eine alte Kollektivbedeutung dominiert. Vergleiche analoge Er
scheinungen in einigen flektierenden und agglutinierenden Sprachen, in denen
bei einem Substantiv im Neutrum Plural das zugehōrige Prädikatsverb nicht
konkordiert, sondern im Singular auftritt, z.B.
(altgriechisch)
Die Blätter (=Laub) fallen.
(georgisch)
Sad aris tsignebi?
Wo sind (=ist) die Bücher?
Sachplural wird hier semantisch nicht als "Vielheit", "Mannigfaltigkeit" auf-
gefaßt, sondern als "Einheit". Daher erscheint nur die Singularform.

Die Kategorie des Genus fehlt durchgehend im System der chinesischen
Personalpronomina (unüberprüft blieb bislang ein Hinweis Legges zum Pro
nomen anang, das eventuell im Altchinesischen feminin benutzt wurde, ver
gleiche J. Legge: The Chinese Classics. Vol. IV, part IL London 1893, S.
695).
Erst in allerneuester Zeit ist unter dem Einfluß der aus west-europäischen
Sprachen übersetzten Literatur eine graphematische Unterscheidung
eingetreten, die aber für die Aussprache und für die Grammatik ohne Be
deutung geblieben ist. Man unterscheidet heute:
ta "er" maskulinum,
ta "sie" femininum,
ta "es" neutrum,
ta "es" (bei Tieren).
Zum Schluß soll auf eine weitere kategoriale Unterscheidung im System
der chinesischen Personendeixis hingewiesen werden, die sich erst im Über
gang zum Mittelchinesischen herausgebildet hat, nämlich die Unterscheidung
"exklusiv" : "inklusiv" für die erste Person Plural, vergleiche:
zanmen: schließt immer die 2. Person ein: "du und ich" ;
women: schließt nicht selten die 2. Person aus: "er und ich", "wir
und er", "wir und sie (PI.)"·
4. KRITISCHE ANMERKUNGEN ZU K. BÜHLER
Auf Grund der skizzierten Merkmale der chinesischen Personendeixis

lassen sich einige kritische Anmerkungen zu Bühlers Theorie vom Zeigfeld
der Sprachje und von den Zeigwōrtern (siehe seine "Sprachtheorie" S. 79 -
148) machen.
Erstens: Bühlers Aussagen zur Personendeixis in seinem Origo-Modell
(Sprachtheorie S. 102 ff.) sind einseitig räumlich orientiert. Zwar mōgen ety
mologisch die personalen Zeigwōrter in vielen Sprachen letztlich von räumli
chen Vorstellungen herrühren, doch darf daraus nicht geschlossen werden,
daß eine solche räumliche Beziehung auch im Sprachsystem relevant sein
müsse. Vielmehr zeigt z.B. das Chinesische, daß hier die soziative Deixis ein
solch dominierender Faktor sein kann, daß räumliche Bedeutungskompo
nenten dahinter vōllig zurücktreten kōnnen. Nicht das Ich in objektiv-räum
lich vorgegebenen, mathematisch darstellbaren Koordinaten muß für das
sprachliche Zeigfeld Ausgangspunkt sein, sondern es kōnnen die von einer

Gesellschaft vorgegebenen Koordinaten der sozialen Ordnung sein, die hier
das System bestimmen. Bühlers indoeuropäische Materialbasis ist hier viel zu
schmal, als daß von der "absoluten Funktion" (Sprachtheorie, S. 107) der
Grundzeigwōrter Hier, Jetzt und Ich gesprochen werden kann.
Zweitens beschränkt sich Bühler bei der Bestimmung der Personalpronomen
Ich und Du auf ihre eine Funktion, nämlich daß sie auf die "Rollenträger im
aktuellen Sprechdrama", auf die "Rollenträger der Sprechhandlung"
(Sprachtheorie S. 113) hinweisen. Nicht nur von Bühler, sondern auch von
der modernen Informations- und Kommunikationstheorie wie auch von der
durch de Saussure beeinflußten modernen Linguistik wird das zu simple
Kommunikationsmodell perpetuiert:
ich = der Sprecher / Sender / Kommunikator usw.,
du = der Hōrer/Empfänger/Rezipient usw.
Eine grundsätzliche Kritik an diesem zu simplen Sprecher/Hōrer-Modell
wurde bereits an anderer Stelle geübt (siehe I. u. W. Kummer / F. Pasierbs-
ky). Anhand des chinesischen Sprachmaterials läßt sich hier noch speziell ge
gen Bühler folgendes kritisch einwenden: Das Bühlersche Modell wie jedes
simplifizierende Sprecher/Hōrer-Modell geht davon aus, daß der Sprecher in
der Gesprächssituation faktisch eine linguistische Analyse vornimmt und sich
selbst in der Rolle des Sprechenden begreift wie entsprechend den Hōrer in
der Rolle seines Kommunikationspartners. Diese kommunikativen Funktio
nen der an einem Gespräch Beteiligten müssen aber durchaus nicht im Blick
punkt seines Interesses stehen, schon gar nicht müssen sie im Sprachsystem
ausgeprägt sein. Vielmehr kōnnen hier soziale Funktionen ausschlaggebend
sein: Anstatt "Ich, der Sprecher" z.B. "Ich, der (auf Grund der sozialen Stel
lung, der sozialen Anerkennung, des Alters usw.) weniger Wichtige, aus Hōf
lichkeit hinter dem anderen Zurücktretende" usw.
Im konfuzianisch geprägten alten China waren die Fünf Beziehungen
(wu lun), die das gesamte zwischenmenschliche Verhalten regeln sollten,
sämtlich soziale Beziehungen und keinerlei nur auf die Kommunikation be
schränkte Sprecher/Hōrer-Beziehungen: Fürst : Untertan; Vater : Sohn;
Mann : Frau; Ältere : Jüngere; Freund : Freund. Wieweit ein individuelles
Ego überhaupt hervortreten und sich sprachlich zu Wort melden durfte, war
durch die strengen Regeln der konfuzianischen Ethik geregelt. Im Lunyu
(Gespräche des Konfuzius, Kap. 14, 29) heißt es: Der Edle ist in seinem
Reden befangen und in seinem Handeln forsch.
Drittens: Die schwächste Stelle in Bühlers Auffassung vom Zeigfeld der Spra
che und von den Zeigwōrtern ist aber sein egozentrisches Weltbild: Die ge
samte Personendeixis wird vom singulären Ich-Individuum aus bestimmt.
Das Ich zusammen mit dem Hier und Jetzt stellt den "Koordinatenausgangs
punkt" (Sprachtheorie S. 102) dar und ist in seiner "absoluten Funktion" eine
sprachliche "Individualmarke" (neben der "Ortsmarke" Hier und der "Zeit
marke" Jetzt).
Im Sinne eines logischen Konstrukts von der Sprache scheint es in der Tat
evident zu sein, folgendes anzunehmen: Ausgangspunkt der Personendeixis
ist das singuläre Ich, von dem aus sich nicht nur das ebenfalls singuläre Du be
stimmt, sondern auch das kollektive Wir, gleichsam als der Zusammenschluß
der vielen individuellen Ichs. Ganz im Sinne von Rousseaus Gesellschaftsver
trag. Diese Auffassung läßt sich auch mit sprachlichen Erscheinungsformen
in Einklang bringen, in denen Wir sprachlich tatsächlich aus Ich abgeleitet
wird (siehe oben beschriebene Beispiele aus dem modernen Chinesischen).
Die Sprache kann im Gebrauch von Ableitungssuffixen ohne Zweifel den
Weg vom Ich zum Wir gehen.
Wird die Sprachentwicklung aber über längere Zeiträume hin betrach
tet, ergibt sich ein vōllig anderes Bild: Zunächst gibt es keine Scheidung von
Ich und Wir, das Wir ist mit dem Ich identisch, die Daseinsweise des individu
ellen Ich besteht in einem Gruppen-Ego. Erst allmählich (in China beobacht
bar während der Han-Zeit) beginnt die sprachliche Differenzierung von Ich
und Wir (siehe oben Abschnitt 3.3). Daß sprachlich am Anfang das räumlich
orientierte, kommunizierende und vereinzelte Ich gesehen wird, eine solche
Auffassung kann aus den besprochenen sprachlichen Tatsachen nicht abge
leitet werden und ist selbst wohl als das Produkt des europäischen Indi
vidualismus auzusehen.
VERWENDETE LITERATUR
Benveniste, E. (1974): Probleme der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft. Mü-

chen.
Bühler, K. (1965): Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. 2.
Aufl. Stuttgart.
Chen Qitian (1958): Han Feizi xiaoshi. Taibei.
Chen Qiyou (1974): Han Feizi jishi. 2 Bde. Shanghai.
Dobson, W. (1962): Early Archaic Chinese. A Descriptive Grammar. To-
ronto.
Dobson, W. (1962): Late Archaic Chinese: A Grammatical Study. Toronto.
Dobson, W. (1964): Late Han Chinese. A Study of the Archaic Han Shift. To
ronto.
Gorelov, V. (1974): Grammatika kitajskogo jazyka. Moskau.
Gorelov, V. (1979): Stilistika sovremennogo kitajskogo jazyka. Moskau.
Gurevic, J.S. (1974): Ocerk grammatiki kitajskogo jazyka III-V w . Moskau.
Harvard-Yenching Institute Sinological Index Series Supplement No. 17: A
Concordance to Mêng Tzu. Taibei 1966 (Reprint).
Jachontov, S.E. (1965): Drevnekitajkskij jazyk. Moskau.
Karlgren, B. (1951): Excursions in Chinese Grammar. In Bulletin of the Mu
seum of Far Eastern Antiquities. Vol. 23.
Klein, W. (1978) : Wo ist hier? Präliminarien zu einer Untersuchung der loka
len Deixis. Linguistische Berichte 58. 18-40.
Kr'ukov, M.V. (1973): Jazyk in'skich nadpisej. Moskau.
Kr'ukov, M.V. & Huang Shuying (1978): Drevnekitajskij jazyk. Teksty,
grammatika, leksiceskij kommentarij. Moskau.
Kummer, I., Kummer, W. & Pasierbsky, F. (1975): St. Robinson - Schutz
heiliger der Linguistik. Eine Kritik des Sprecher-Hōrer-Modells. In
J. Pleines, (Hrsg.), Linguistik und Didaktik, Kronberg, Taunus.
Legge, J. (1893): The Chinese Classics. With translation, critical and exegeti-
cal notes, prolegomena, and copious indexes. 7 Bde. Oxford.
Li Bingying (1959): Mengzi wenxuan. Beijing.
Lü Shuxiang (1954): Zhongguo wnefa yaolüe. 3 Bde. Shanghai.
Lyons, J. (1968): Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge.
Mengzi yizhu. Hrsg. von Lanzhou daxue Zhongwenxi Mengzi yizhu xiaozu.
Hongkong o.J. (Reprint).
Shijing — The Book of Odes (1974): Chinese Text, Transcription and Trans
lation, by B. Karlgren. Stockholm.
Wang Li (1958): Hanyu shigao. 3 Bde. Beijing.
Wang Li (1962): Gudai Hanyu. 2 Bde. Beijing.
Wang Li (1976): Gu Hanyu changyong ci cidian. Reprint Hongkong.
Zhang Wenxu (1978): Mengzi xin yi. Hongkong.
Zhao, Yuanren (Chao Yuen Ren) (1968). A Grammar of Spoken Chinese.
Berkeley, Los Angeles.
Zograf, I.T. (1979): Srednekitajskij jazyk. Stanovlenie i tendencii razvitija.
Moskau.
THE DEICTIC SYSTEM OF DIYARI
PETER AUSTIN
1. INTRODUCTION1
Diyari is an Australian Aboriginal language formerly spoken near Lake

Eyre in the north of the state of South Australia. It currently has about a dozen
fluent speakers, all of whom are over fifty years of age, and is no longer being
learnt by children. Diyari is spoken in two dialect forms, Diyari proper and
Dhirari; there is a detailed discussion of the phonology, morphology and syn
tax of both dialects in Austin (1981).
The present paper is an overview of the mechanisms by which the person
al, temporal and spatial deictic aspects of Diyari speech events are signalled.
Personal deixis, the identification of the participants in the speech event, is
coded by a set of personal pronouns (2.1). Temporal deixis, marking temporal
location and duration with respect to the time of the utterance, is specified
through verb tense marking (3.2) and a set of temporal location nouns (3.1).
Spatial deixis, the expression of directional orientation and the location of ob-
jects and events in space with respect to the location of the speech event and
the participants in it, is signalled by spatial and directional nouns (4.1), to
gether with a set of deictic suffixes attached to them and also to the third per
son pronouns (2.1). The form and functioning of these mechanisms is dis
cussed and exemplified in the following sections; the influence of the theoreti
cal foundations laid by Fillmore (1975) and Lyons (1977) will be apparent.
2. PERSONAL DEIXIS
2.1 Pronominal categories
Identification of the participants in a speech event, namely speaker or
sender (first person) and addressee or receiver (second person), and of non-
participants (third person), is accomplished in Diyari by the use of personal
pronouns. These pronouns mark the categories of person (1st, 2nd and 3rd)
274 PETER AUSTIN
and distinguish three numbers, singular, dual and plural. In the first person
dual and plural there is a contrast between inclusive reference (including the
addressee(s)) and exclusive reference (excluding the addressee(s))2. Third
person singular pronouns also distinguish feminine and non-feminine gender;
gender is based on natural sex distinctions and is not grammaticized as in Eu
ropean languages such as French and German. Feminine is the marked term in
the opposition and is applied only to distinctly female humans and other ani
mates (women, girls, bitches, mares etc.); non-feminine is used for all others,
that is, male humans and animates, non-female animates, non-sexed ani
mates and all inanimates. In the dual and plural there is no gender contrast.
Table 1 sets out the citation forms for all the pronouns.3
Table 1
Personal pronouns — citation forms
Singular Dual Plural
inclusive ngalda ngayani

First person nganhi
exclusive ngali ngayana
Second person yini yula yurra
feminine nhani
Third Person pula thana
non-feminine nhawu
Third person pronouns may be followed optionally by one of a set of deic

tic suffixes; these are not attached to first and second person pronouns. One
suffix, -ka, indicates that the speaker is separating out a set of intended refer
ents (which may be the unitary set) as a subset of some group of possible refer
ents established by the linguistic or extralinguistic context. An illustrative ex
ample is (for the various case forms see 2.2):
THE DEICTIC SYSTEM OF DIYARI 275
(1) Q: warli yinanha nanda-rna warrayi?

who-erg you-acc hit-participle aux
'Who hit you?'
A: nhandu-ka nganha nanda-rna warrayi
she-erg-subset me-acc hit-participle aux
'She (of a group) hit me.'
There are three other deictic suffixes indicating location of the intended refer
e n t s ) with respect to the speaker: 4
-rda in the immediate vicinity, usually up to a few meters away
-να close by and visible
-wa distant, including distant and invisible
Examples of the use of these suffixes may be found below.
Third person pronouns also have demonstrative type functions in that
they can occur in noun phrases preceding a head noun indicating that it has
definite reference. That is, the speaker assumes the addressee(s) can uniquely
identify the intended referent(s) of the NP (Chafe 1976:39). NPs not contain
ing such pronouns may be definite or indefinite, depending upon the context.
Examples are:
(2) nhani-ya wilha thurrara-yi
she-nom-close woman-abs sleep-nonpast
'That woman is asleep.'
(3) nhawu-rda kupa munja
he-nom-vicin child-abs sick
'This (male) child (here) is sick.'
(4) juju-yali nganha matha-ya
snake-erg me-acc bite-past
'A snake bit me.'
2.2 Case forms
Like most other Australian languages, Diyari has a complex nominal case
system for expressing syntactic relationships. For the major functions of in
transitive subject, transitive subject and transitive object nouns and pronouns
inflect according to a split-ergative system (Silverstein 1976, Dixon 1979).
Pronouns have two paradigms:
(i) nominative-accusative, where nominative marks transitive and in
transitive subject functions while accusative marks transitive object function.
Non-singular first and second person pronouns inflect this way.
276 PETER AUSTIN
(ii) three way, where there are separate forms for transitive subject
(ergative), intransitive subject (nominative) and transitive object (accusa
tive). All other pronouns follow this system. Singular nouns have an ergative-
absolutive paradigm where ergative marks transitive subject and absolutive
marks both intransitive subject and transitive object.
Non-singular (dual and plural) nouns inflect three way ((ii) above). That
is, we have:
transitive intransitive transitive
subject subject object
1st and 2nd non-

1 nominative accusative
singular pronouns
all other pronouns

ergative nominative accusative
non-singular nouns
singular nouns ergative absolutive
In addition to these cases, pronouns also inflect for dative (marking pos
sessor), locative/allative (marking location at a place and direction towards a
place) 5 and ablative (marking direction from a place). Dative pronouns op
tionally can be further inflected for each of these cases in agreement with a
possessed noun. They then take the usual singular noun case suffixes, for ex
ample , 'in my camp' is ngakarni ngurranhi or ngarkarnanhi ngurranhi. Table 2
sets out the case paradigms for all the pronouns.
277
Table 2
Personal pronouns — case forms
Ergative Nominative Accusative Dative Locative/Allative Ablative
THE DEICTIC SYSTEM OF DIYARI
lsg ngathu nganhi nganha ngakarni ngakangu ngakangundu

ldlincl ngalda ngaldanha ngaldarni ngaldangu ngaldangundu
ldlexcl ngali ngalinha ngalirni ngalingu ngalingundu
lplincl ngayani ngayaninha ngayanirni ngayaningu ngayaningundu
lplexcl ngayana ngayananha ngayanarni ngayanangu ngayanangundu
2sg yundu yini yinanha yingkarni yingkangu yingkangundu
2dl yula yulanha yularni yulangu yulangundu
2pl yurra yurranha yurrarni yurrangu yurrangundu
3sgf nhandu nhani nhanha nhangkarni nhangkangu nhangkangundu
3sgnonf nhulu nhawu nhinha nhungkarni nhungkangu nhungkangundu
3dl pulali pula pulanha pularni pulangu pulangundu
3pl thanali thana thananha thanarni thanangu thanangundu
278 PETER AUSTIN
Examples of their use are (1) - (4) above and:

(5) ngathu yinanha nhayi-rna warrayi pularni-ya
I-erg you-acc see-participle aux they-2-dat-close
ngurra-nhi
camp-loc
Ί saw you in their camp nearby.'
(6) ngalda nhanha mani-lha nganayi
we-2-incl-nom her-acc get-future aux
'We will get her.'
With first person non-singular exclusive pronouns it is possible to specify the
identity of the third person(s) included by using an ergative case marked
noun, or pronoun, regardless of the syntactic function of the exclusive pro
noun. Thus, in the following example ngali is an intransitive subject:
(7) ngali yatha-rna wanthiyi ngakarni-yali nhiyi-yali
we-2-excl-nom say-participle aux my-dat-erg brother-erg
'We said (it), my brother (and I) long ago.'
3. TEMPORAL DEIXIS
Location in time with respect to the time of the speech event is expressed
in two ways in Diyari, by means of a temporal location noun (3.1) and/or verb
tense marking (3.2).
3.1 Temporal location nouns
Location nouns in Diyari can be distinguished from other nouns in that
they only occur in locative, allative and ablative case functions and also the un-
inflected stem serves as the locative form. Locational nouns with deictic tem
poral reference are:
karrari now, today
ngarda later, next
warm long ago, before
waldawirti yesterday
thangkuparna tomorrow
The last two can be followed by the noun nguru meaning 'one day beyond':
waldawirti nguru the day before yesterday
thangkuparna nguru the day after tomorrow
Allative case -ya attached to these forms indicates time 'until' and ablative
-ndu time 'since'. Examples of the use of these deictic elements are:
(8) nhawu nhaka ngama-yi warru-ndu
he-nom there live-nonpast long ago-ablative
'He has lived there since long ago.'
(9) thangkuparna-ya nhandu wilha-li jukudu
tomorrow-all she-erg woman-erg kangaroo-abs
wayi-yi
cook-nonpast
'The woman will be cooking a kangaroo until tomorrow (mor
ning).'
(10) karrari ngayani wapa-yi
now-loc we-all-incl-nom go-nonpast
'We are going now.'
3.2 Verb tenses
Diyari has two systems of temporal deictic specification by tense mark
ing, a simple tense system marked by direct suffixation to the verb stem and a
compound tense system involving auxiliary verbs. The simple tense system
has a two term contrast, -ya 'past' (and 'perfective aspect') for events occur
ring prior to the event of speaking (and completed by that time) versus -yi
'nonpast' for events occurring during or after the speech event — see exam
ples (2), (4) and (8)-(10). Generic statements, which are interpreted as tem
poral (or timeless (Lyons 1977:680)), take -yi as the verb suffix, as in:
(11) paya parrjarna thada-yi
bird all-abs fly-nonpast
'All birds fly.'
In order to indicate that some event is occurring at the very moment of speak
ing the post-inflectional clitic -lha 'new information' is added after -yi:
(12) nganhi wapa-yi-lha
I-nom go-nonpast-new information
'I'm going right now.'
-lha can be suffixed to nouns to mark the addition of a new participant to the
discourse:
(13) nganhi thurrara-rna warrayi ngarda nhawu-lha
I-nom sleep-participle aux then he-nom-new
information
280 PETER AUSTIN
wapa-yi
come-nonpast
Ί was asleep and then he came along/
The compound tense system consists of a set of six auxiliary verbs, one fu
ture and five past (with imperfective aspect marking also). 6 These auxiliaries
follow the main verb which takes a non-finite inflection, -rna 'participle' or
-lha 'future'. The auxiliaries historically derive from full lexical verbs and end
in what appear to be simple tense suffixes. Their forms and functions are set
out in Table 3 (t indicates the moment of speaking or the temporal anchor for
tense deixis) — ?or examples of their use see (1), (5), (6), (7) and (13).
Table 3
Auxiliary verbs
Non-finite inflection Auxiliary Function
-lha nganayi future, any time after t
-rna wanthiyi distant past

-ma wapaya intermediate past 7 , up to one or two
months prior to tQ
-rna padaya recent past, up to some weeks prior to tQ
-lha widiyi yesterday past, up to one day prior to tQ
-rna warrayi immediate past, events immediately
prior to t0
Diyari also has a set of non-finite subordinate clause suffixes and these mark
relative tense (relating the temporal reference of the subordinate clause as fu
ture or non-future with respect to the temporal anchor specified by the tense
of the main clause). Two examples are (for further discussion see Austin 1981,
Chapter 5) :8
(14) nhani-wa wapa-lha widiyi, dij i durnka-rnanthu

she-nom-dist go-future aux sun-abs rise-relative futureds
'She went away before the sun rose.'
(15) nhawu pali-rna padaya, nganthi thayi-rna
he-nom die-participle aux meat-abs eat-relative nonfuturess
'He died while/after eating some meat.'
4. SPATIAL LOCATION DEIXIS
In contrast to temporal deixis, the spatial deictic system of Diyari is quite

simple. There are two deictic directionals which indicate direction of motion,
or induced motion, with respect to the speaker or sender in the speech event,
namely:9
yarra this way, towards the speaker
yada that way, away from the speaker
These two forms do not take case inflections. Examples of their use are:
(16) ngathu nhinha nganthi yada dama-yi nguda muku-ndu
I-erg him-acc meat-abs that way cut-nonpast shin bone-abl
'I cut the meat that way off the shin bone.'
(17) yarra wapa-mayi
this way come-imperative
'Come here!'
There are also two deictic locationals which are spatially anchored with
respect to the speaker or sender. Like other locationals (3.1), they only occur
in locative, allative and ablative case functions and the locative form is the un-
inflected stem. The two roots are proximate nhingki- 'here' and distal nhaka
'there' ; the former must be followed by one of the set of three locational deic
tic suffixes mentioned in 2.1.10 If an allative (-nhi) or ablative (-ndu) case suf
fix is required it must follow the deictic suffix. Distal nhaka does not cooccur
with these suffixes; the full paradigm is set out in Table 4.
282 PETER AUSTIN
Table 4
Spatial location deictics
Reference Locative Allative Ablative

Proximate- vicinity nhingkirda nhingkirdanhi nhingkirdandu
close nhingkiya nhingkiyanhi nhingkiyandu
distant nhingkiwa nhingkiwanhi nhingkiwandu
Distal nhaka nhakanhi nhakandu
Examples of the use of some of these forms are:

(18) nhingki-rda ngama-mayi
here-vicin-loc sit-imperative
'Sit here!'
(19) nhaka-ndu nhawu wapa-ya nhingki-ya-nhi
there-abl he-nom go-past here-close-all
Trom there he went to here.'
Non-deictic locational or directional specification is marked with common
nouns inflected for locative, allative or ablative cases, for example ngurranhi
'in the camp', ngurraya 'to the camp', ngurrandu 'from the camp'. There is an
instance of a locative in example (5) above. These case marked nouns can
cooccur with deictic nouns, as in:
(20) yini nhingki-rda pirrki-yamayi warli-nhi
you-nom here-vicin-loc play-imperative house-loc
'You play here in the house!'
5. CONCLUSION
Deixis in Diyari is signalled through the use of pronominal and noun

stems together with sets of suffixes. Person deixis is marked by personal pro
nouns which distinguish the categories of person, number and, in the third
person, gender. The third person pronouns can take suffixes specifying rela
tive distance from the speaker. Temporal deixis is marked by temporal loca
tion nouns and/or by verb tenses. Spatial deixis involves the use of spatial loca
tion nouns, some forms of which obligatorily take suffixes indicating distance
from the speaker. These same suffixes are optionally attached to the third per
son pronouns.
NOTES
1) I am indebted to Ben Murray, Rosa Warren and the late Frieda Merrick for their assistance in
teaching me Diyari and Dhirari. Fieldwork was carried out in 1974-77 and was supported by the
Australian National University.
2) Roughly half of the languages of Australia make the distinction between inclusive and exclu
sive reference in the first person non-singular (Dixon 1980:276). Most also distinguish three
numbers and a few in the north have trial or paucal numbers in addition.
3) The transcription system for Diyari is as follows: th, nh and Ih represent lamino-dental stop,
nasal and lateral respectively;/, ny and ly are lamino-palatals; rt, rd, rn and rlare apico-domals (ret-
roflexes); r is a post-alveolar continuant; rr an apico-alveolar tap and ng a dorso-velar nasal. Inter-
vocalically d represents an apico-alveolar trill, following η and / it is realized as a voiced apico-al
veolar stop with trill release [dr]. In homorganic consonant clusters the digraph indicating place of
articulation is written once only, thus nth equals nhth and rntequals rnrt. There are three vowels i,
and α without distinctive length.
4) There is a fourth suffix -pada whose exact function remains unclear.
5) Locative and allative cases are distinguished for singular nouns (suffixed -nhi and -ya respec
tively) but syncretised for pronouns.
6) The Diyari compound tense system is highly unusual for an Australian language; most have
only simple suffixed tense markers. For further discussion see Austin 1981, Dixon 1980.
7) There is another auxiliary wapayi; however it indicates habitual mood and does not have a
temporal deictic function.
8) The subordinate clauses also mark whether or not their subject is coreferential with the sub
ject of the main clause (ss — 'same subject', ds — 'different subject') — see Austin 1981.
9) Most languages of central and western Australia have directional deictics showing speaker
orientation. Warlpiri (Laughren 1978:2), for instance, has suffixes -rni 'towards speaker' and -rra
'away from speaker' and also -mpa 'past speaker, across the speaker's line of sight'.
10) There is a form nhingkipada but its reference and deictic function is unclear (cf. footnote 4).
REFERENCES
Austin, P. (1981): A grammar of Diyari, South Australia. Cambridge: Cam

Chafe, W. (1976): Giveness, contrastiveness, definiteness subjects, topics
and points of view. In: Ch. Li (ed.), Subject and Topic, 25-56. New York:
Academic Press.
284 PETER AUSTIN
Dixon, R.M.W. (1979): Ergativity. Language 55, 59-138.

Dixon, R.M.W. (1980): The languages of Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Fillmore, C. (1975): Santa Cruz lectures on deixis. Bloomington, Indiana: In
diana University Linguistics Club. (Delivered 1971).
Laughren, M. (1978): Directional terminology in Warlpiri, a Central Austral
ian Language. Working papers in Language and Linguistics No. 8. Laun-
ceston, Tasmania: Tasmanian College of Advanced Education.
Lyons, J. (1977): Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Silverstein, M. (1974): Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In: R.M.W. Dix
on (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages, 112-171. Can
berra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
CONTRIBUTORS
Peter Austin Dietrich Hartmann

La Trobe University Germanistik
School of Humanities Gebäude 4/153
Division of Linguistics Ruhr-Universität
Bundoora / Victoria Universitätsstr. 150
Australia 3083 4630 Bochum 1
Germany
István Bátori
Erziehungswissenschaftliche Christa Hauenschild
Hochschule Rheinland-Pfalz Universität Konstanz
Abtlg. Koblenz SFB99-E2
Rheinau 3-4 Postfach 5560
5400 Koblenz-Oberwerth 7750 Konstanz / Germany
Germany
Volker Heeschen
Florian Coulmas Max-Planck-Institut für
The National Language Research Verhaltensphysiologie
Institute 8131 Seewiesen
3-9-14 Nisigaoka Kita-Ku Germany
Tokyo 115, Japan
Clifford Hill
Veronika Ehrich Teachers College
Max-Planck-Institut Columbia University
für Psycholinguistik Box 66
Berg en Dalseweg 79 New York/N.Y. 10027
6522-BC Nijmegen USA
The Netherlands
286 CONTRIBUTORS
Priska-Monika Hottenroth Hubertus Opalka

Universität Konstanz Universität Bielefeld
Fachbereich Allg. Sprachwissen Fakultät für Linguistik
schaft und Literaturwissenschaft
Postfach 5560 Postfach 8640
7750 Konstanz 4800 Bielefeld 1
Germany Germany
Wolfgang Klein Fritz Pasierbsky

Max-Planck-Institut Universität Paderborn
für Psycholinguistik Fachbereich 3 - Sprachwissenschaft
Berg en Dalseweg 79 Warburger Straße 100
6522-BC Nijmegen Gebäude H
The Netherlands 4790 Paderborn
Germany
Eckehart Malotki
Northern Arizona University Jürgen Weissenborn
Department of Modern Languages Max-Planck-Institut
Box 6004 für Psycholinguistik
Flagstaff, Arizona 86011 Berg en Dalseweg 79
USA 6522-BC Nijmegen
The Netherlands
Ulrike Mosel
Universität Kōln
Institut für Sprachwissenschaft
5000 Kōln 41
Germany
INDEX OF NAMES
Aal, S. 11 Bromley, H.M. 95,707

Alcina Franch, J. 151,151 Brugmann, . 157,169,172,185
Allen, R. 33,41 Bühler, . 2f., 5f., 9f., 72, 43f., 49f.,
Alonso, A. 151 62,65f., 79, 81,95,98, lOlf., 104,
Alonso, M. 151,757 106, 108, 130, 737, 137, 140ff.,
Anceaux, J.C. 82,107 752, 155ff., 164, 765, 167, 179,
Anderson, P. 65 181, 7S5, 188f., 193, 197, 203ff.,
Arns, M. 11 206,211,220,253,261,269,270f.,
Asch,S.E.38,42 277
Ashton,E.O.70f., 74, 78, 79 Bülow, E. 257
Austerlitz, R. 157ff., 164,164
Capell,A. 111,113,737
Austin, P. 11, 273, 280, 283,283
Casad, E.D. 108
Austing, J. 107
Casares, J. 151, 752
Badia Margarit, A. 136,141,144,752 Chafe, W. 59,283
Bánhidi,Z. 158,764 Charaudeau, P. 752
Bar-Hillel, Y. 219,220 Chen Qitian 277
Barth, F. 82,107 Chen Qiy ou, 277
Bátori,L 8 f . , l l , 1 5 5 Clark, H. 5,72
Battaglia, S. 136,752 Clayre, 1.108
Bauernōppel, J. 168, 785 Conant, F.P. 70S
Beaumont, C.H. 111,737 Cook, E.A. 70S
Bello, A. 151,752 Corominas, J. 151, 752
Bennett, D. 13,24,40,47 Coste, J. 752
Benveniste, Ε. 8, 77, 223, 257, 265, Coulmas, F. 10, 209, 219,220
277 Cuervo, R.J. 148,151,752
Berlin, . 4, 77
Denny, J.P. 4f., 8, 72, 82,107, 70S
Bielfeldt, H.H. 184,185
Diamond, S. 70S
Blecua, J. 151,757
Dixon, R.M.W. 70S, 275, 283,284
Bley,B.131,737
Dobson,W. 263,277
Brauner, S. 70, 78, 79
Donellan, K. 206
Braunmüller, . 105,707
Dutton, . . 107,709
288 INDEX OF NAMES
Ebert,K. 203,205,206 Heger, K. 137, 752

Ehlich, K. 9,12, 51, 59, 62, 62, 105, Heinrichs, H.M. 195,203, 205,206
108,180,185 Henríquez Urena, P. 151
Ehrich,V. 6,43,185,185 Heny, F. 207
Herms, I. 70,78, 79
Fabra, P. 136,152
Hill, 4ff., 13, 33, 36, 39f., 41f.
Farkas,D.705
Hinds, J. 219,220
Farsi, S.S. 79, 79
Hōftmann, H. 79, 79
Feldmann, L. 209,220
Hottenroth, P.M. 8f., 133
Fernández Ramírez, S. 152
Huang Shuying 263,265
Fillmore, . 8f., 12,24,38ff., 42,108,
Humboldt, W.v. 81,107
161,765,167,178f., 182,184,755,
211, 213,220, 223,257, 273,284 Ingram, D. 225,251
Franklin, K.J. 108 Irwin, B. 108
Frei, Η. 136, 752 Isacenko,A.V. 177,755
Friedrich, P. 82,108 Isma'il,T.33,36,39,41,42
Gerrard,A.G. 135,152 Jachontov, S.E. 272
Givon, T. 63 Jacobson, WM, 108
Gorelov,V. 268,272 Jakobson, R. 155, 765
Greenberg, J.H. 156,165,251 Jamison, J. 37
Griffin, M. 108 Jarvella, R. 72,62f., 108,185
Groth, . 108 Johnson-Laird, P.N. 24,42, 81,109
Gurevic, J. S. 272 Jókay, Z. 764
Guy, J.B.M. 108
Karlgren, . 264,272
Haarwood, F. 82,108 Katz, J. 5, 12
Halliday, M.A.K. 40, 42 Kay, P. 4, 77
Han Feizi 254,257,277 Keenan,E.L. 4L, 12,186
Harries, L. 79 Kiefer, F. 108,185
Hartmann, D. 9f., 187,192,203,205, Kirschbaum, E.G. 168, 186
206f. Klein, W. 1, 72, 44, 62f., 78, 79, 81,
Harweg,R. 181,184,155 102, 104, 108/., 167, 184f., 185,
Hasan, R. 40,42 206,220,227,272
Hattori, S. 220 Kleintitschen, A. 131,131
Hauenschild, Ch. 9,167 Kolia, J.A. 109
Haugen, E. 108 Konfuzius 270
Hawkins, J. A. 192,205,206 Kfizková, Ε. 170,177f., 182,184,756
Heeschen, V. 7f., 11, 81,107, 705 Kr'ukov, M.V. 260,263,265,268,
272
INDEX OF NAMES 289
Kummer, W. 270,272 Merrick, F. 283

Kuno,S.215,219,227 Meyer, . 131,737
Kurytowicz, J. 164,165 Miller, G.Α. 24, 42, 81, 109
Molho,M. 147f.,151,752
Lamiquiz, V. 152
Moliner, M. 150, 752
Lang,A. 82,109
Morita Yoshiyuki 213, 219,227
Langacker, R. 249
Morris, Ch. 178
Lanzhou 272
Mosel, U.7f., 11,111,131, 131f.
Larsen, E. 37
Murray, B. 283
Laughren, M. 283,284
Muräne, E. 109
Lawrence, H. 109
Legge, J. 269,272 Noguchi, T. 33
Leitzmann, A. 107 Oison, M. 109
Leopold, W.F. 43, 63 Olson, W. 249
Levy, E. 11 Opalka,H. 5ff.,65
Li, Ch. 283 Ozegov,S.I.184,7S6
Li Bingying 272
Lieb, H.H. 207 Pasierbsky, F. 11, 65, 253, 270,272
Linde, Ch. 59, 63 Pearson, E. 37
Linke, H.J. 206f. Pernicone, V. 136, 752
Littéral, S. 109 Perkins, R. 4, 72
Lockwood, W.B. 78, 79 Pfeifer, A. 206,207
Lomatewama, M. 249 Pleines, J. 272
Lorenz, . 81,709 Pul'kina, LM. 186
Ludwig, . 206f. Quasthoff, U.M. 192,205,207
Lü Shuxiang 268,272
Lyons, J. 66, 79,137,752,183f.,7<56, Rauh, G. 207
189, 191f., 207, 224, 226, 233f., Redondo, A. 752
257,259,272,273,279,284 Rehbein, J. 56, 63
Majtinskaja, K.E. 169,172,186 Reichenbach, H. 6, 72, 49, 63
Malotki, E. 10f., 72, 223, 249,257 Reis, H. 206,207
Martin, S.E. 151,210,227 Renck, G.L. 709
Martinez Amador, E.M. 752 Rousseau, J.-J. 271
McElhanon, Κ.Α. 109 Sacks, N.P. 753
Meek, M.E. 257 Saussure, F. de 270
Meier, J. 131,737 Schiepek,J. 206,207
Meinhof, . 70ff., 78, 79 Schlachter, W.160f, 165
Mengzi260ff., 266,272 Schmid, W.P. 157f., 160,164,165
290 INDEX OF NAMES
Schmidely, J. 153 Vernay,H. 139,153

Schmitter, P. 251 Vorderwülbecke, . 221
Schnelle, H. 207 Wandruszka, M. 146,153
Selbok, T. A. 131 Wang Li 263f., 272
Seco, M. 151,255 Warren, R. 283
Shaw, R.D. + K.A. 82,709 Weissenborn, J. 1
Silverstein, M. 275,254 Welter, W. 206,207
Stechow, A. v. 43,63 Witkin, H.A. 38,42
Steinhauer, H. 109 Wunderlich, D. 206
Stickel, G. 221
Suzuki, T. 219,222 Zachava-Nekrasova, E.B. 186
Szabó,D. 264 Zhang Wenxu 272
Zhao, Yuanren (Chao Yuen Ren)
Tanz, . 38f., 41, 42 260, 266,272
Tauscher, E. 168,186 Ziervogel, D. 78, 79
Todrys, K.W. 108 Zōllner, S. 109
Travnícek, F. 168,177,186 Zograf, LT. 272
Upia, R. 107
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
action 111, 117ff, 122f collective 90

see also deictic parameter: common knowledge 192,196,
static vs dynamic 216ff
adverb complement clause 174
deictic 44 context
demonstrative 48, 78,133f, attributive 59ff
136,156,217 distributive 59ff
directional 134 contraction 188
locational 134 coordination
agent 158 of deictic spaces 81,102
agglutination 258, 268 coreference 179f, 198
anadeixis 59,180 decentering 37,41
Analogoneinführung 104 definite conjugation 158
see also deictic space: model definite description 189
of
deictic 40
anaphora 2,43,56ff, 85,101,103,
gestural use of 178
105,156,167ff, 172f, 177,
symbolic use of 178
179,188f, 197ff, 215f, 235
deictic modes (Zeigarten) 5, 66,
strict 43ff, 57, 59, 62
156,203
animacy 234,237
imaginative 43
article 187ff, 193ff
objective 43
anaphoric use 191f, 200ff
syntactic 43
deictic use 190f, 197f, 200ff
deictic opposition 51, 53
case deictic parameter
ablative 226f, 242f, 279,282 determination 157
absolutive 276 dimension 70, 76
allative 276,279,282 direction 82f
destinative 226f, 242f distal 168,172ff, 182f,211,
diffusive 227 214, 216, 234,241f,
ergative 276 282
locative 226f, 242f, 276, 282 distance 70,76, 83
292 INDEX OF SUBJECTS
extreme distal 226,234,241f and perception 156

goal 111, 117ff, 123,127,134 and reality 3,82,106,112
indefiniteness 70, 76, 211 discourse 59,167,172ff, 179
location 117ff hierarchy of parameter 4
medial 135, 211, 241 in negative statements 123
mentioned 83, 85, 88, 91f, local 2ff, 172,181,211,281f
103,127ff, 195 narrative 51
neutral 172ff, 177,182f personal 2ff, 181,223ff,
presence vs absence 83,123 253ff, 273ff
proximal 168,172ff, 182f, pragmatic 172,178f
211,214,234,241f, programming languages 156
282 secondary 2
proximity 83, 88f, 95,100, semantic 172f, 178f
121,134,136,175, social 261,269
182,215f, 218 strict 43ff, 57, 62
remote 117,120f syntactic 172,174,178,181
scope 157 temporal 2ff, 46,171,215,
source 111, 117ff, 123,127 278ff
static vs dynamic 23 temporal location noun 278
theme 157 demonstratio ad awes 155f
visible vs invisible 23,37,39, demonstratio ad oculos 43,106,
83,96,195,215f,275 137,146,149,155f, 179,188,
deictic particle 192 204
deictic space 197ff, 210 demonstrative 21 Iff
coordination of 81,96ff, 102 see also adverb, pronoun
model of 102ff pejorative meaning of 148
specification of 83 unmarked 147
deictic system destination
bipartite 136,145,170 see goal
parallelism of deictic systems destinative
136 see goal
quadripartite 211 dialect 187ff
reduction of 136 dimension 70,76
tripartite 136,145,170,211, direction 82, 276,281
234 directional 212
Deixis am Phantasma 44,102,130, see also goal, source
156,179,188,203f discourse 57, 91,93,105
deixis 2ff function 88,92,106,167
INDEX OF SUBJECTS 293
distance 56,70,76,134,139,142, old 29, 31, 33, 40f

147,175 intonation 101
see also deictic parameter: intrinsic
distal, medial, proximity, see orientation
etc. kataphora 172,174f, 179f, 200,
relativity of 145
235
distributive plural 229 known
dual67, 90, 225,236, 274
see deictic parameter: men
egocentrism 41,66,142f, 149f, 271 tioned
endophorical 41 languages
existence 78,190 development of 157
exophorical 41 Afro-Asiatic 31, 33
extension 147,149 Angguruk 7,83,95ff
Arabic 75, 79
face-to-face communication 150
Austronesian 111
feminine 274
Bantu 67,69ff,78
field concept 226
Catalan 136,144
focus 59
Chinese 11,253ff
formulaic speech 195
Czech 9,167ff
function
Danish 107
rhematic 62
Dhirari 273
thematic 62
Diyarill,273ff
functional sentence perspective
Dutch 107
168,177
Eipo7,83ff,89,107
goal 111, 117ff, 123,127,226 English 5f, 9,13ff,49,70,
see also deictic parameter 72f,77f, 103,141,
143f, 167ff
honorative 67
181ff,213,219
honorific 219,225
American dialects 37
identification problem 98ff Black English 41
indefiniteness 70, 76 British dialects 37
indexical field2,70, 81 Eskimo 8
see also Zeigfeld Finnougrian 155,157,159
inflection Finnish 158f
grammatical 226,242 French 29,37,136,141,143f,
local 226, 242 179, 274
information Frisian 203
new 29, 31, 33, 41
German 5f,9,43ff,70,72f, markedness 37,140,147, 274

77f,107,141,143f, meaning
160ff, 167ff, 181, actual 182
183f,187£f,213,220, systematic 182
240,274 memory
Great Dani 95 long term 188
Hausa 5f, 13ff short term 188
Hopi 10, 223ff mentioned
Hungarian 8,155ff see deictic parameter
Indo-European 3, 6, 24, 31, motion 161
33,78,157,159,213, multiplicity 190
270
naming 155f
Italian 136
neutralization 182f
Japanese 10, 33,158, 209ff
noun phrase
Kihuyu 8
attributive 57
Latin 134,136,151,157
distributive 57
Latvian 157
Mek 91,95 objects marker 158
Old Indian 157 orientation 13ff, 38, 65, 70,156
Paleo-Siberian 158 aligned field of 16, 39, 41
Papuan 7, ll,81ff and body axis 13ff
Portuguese 135 development 38
Proto-Bantu 70f, 77 facing field of 20, 39,41
Romance 8,135,157 field of 16, 25, 39
Russian 9,167ff frame of 67, 70, 73, 77f
Slavic 167, 265 intrinsic 14, 33, 39,103
Spanish 8,133ff formal 38
Swahili 5f, 65ff functional 38
Tok Pisinl31 social 67
Tolai 7, lllff vertical 28, 38
Vulgar Latin 265 origo 2, 49, 56, 65ff, 101,142ff,
Yale 7, 83, 88ff, 95,107 189,197
location 78,117ff, 134,160, 226, transfer of 144
276 see also deictic
see also deictic parameter space: model of
locative class 70, 72 of narrator 101
locative préfixe 70 of protagonist 101
transposition 102
INDEX OF SUBJECTS 295
ostensive reference 139 pausal form 230f, 248ff

overgeneralization 24 personal 44, 58,156, 223ff,
perception 156 253ff, 273ff
perceptual conditions proper name 196
see deictic parameter prototype 218
perceptual field 197 proximity
see deictic parameter
see also indexical field
person reduplication 113, 245ff
third 158f,223ff, 233, 265, reference 197,199
274 generic 189f, 194f, 200ff
deictic copying 225 specific 189f, 194f, 197,200ff
perspective 162ff, 213 region of proximity 138ff
pivot approach 211 delimitation of 142
pivotal construction 266 boundary of 139
place-marker 212 relative clause 174,181
pointing 155f
saliency 38
see also deictic modes
self-reference 172f, 176,179,182
and past reference
semantic relativity 4
lOOf, 104
shared experience
gesture 93, 96,100
see common knowledge
intrasyntactic 181
source 111, 117ff, 123,127
field
see also deictic parameter
see Zeigfeld, indexi
space 81
cal field
and time 37, 40, 74f, 82, 244
possessive 267
denotation space 49f, 52
postposition 243f
reference space 49f, 52, 56
pragmatics 156
see also origo
preparative function 169
split-ergative system 275
preposition
stereotype 150
local 138f
strategy
presupposition 197,199
aligned 35
pronoun
conflict between strategies
demonstrative 44, 58, 78,
27,33,38
133,136,138ff,155f,
deictic 23, 27, 33ff,40f
158,167ff, 172ff,
facing 36
193,223,233ff
field-based vs participant-
of laziness 57
based 40
linguistic marking of topicalization 58ff

strategies 29,31,33, topomnestisches Zeigen 104
40 see also Analogoneinführung
non-deictic 24, 27, 33ff, 40f translatability 5,72, 77,176
object-centered 36f
uniqueness 190,192,195, 200ff
observer-centered 36f
suppletion 264 verbs of motion 82,144,155,
symbolic field (Symbolfeld) 65, 158ff, 213
98,100,105f, 155
we
target particle 212 exclusive 67,224,269,274
time inclusive 67,224,269,274
see also space
Zeigarten
event time 49f
see deictic modes
reference time 49f
Zeigfeld 65,100,104ff, 142f,
speech time 49f
155f, 158,188,271
topic
see also indexical field
and comment 87
zero-suffix 159
maintenance 88, 92,105
Zweifelderlehre 65

Here and There

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Here and There

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HERE AND THERE

Pragmatics & Beyond

Editorial Assistant & Editorial Address:

Jürgen Weissenborn and Wolfgang Klein (eds.)

Here and There

Jürgen Weissenborn & Wolfgang Klein (eds.)

JOHN BENJAMINS PUBLISHING COMPANY

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint,

Jürgen Weissenborn & Wolfgang Klein

JÜRGEN WEISSENBORN - WOLFGANG KLEIN

Natural language is always used in certain situations — at a certain time

something is uttered depends on the linguistic form of the utterance, on fea­

One reason why our present knowledge of deixis is still so fragmentary

that it is necessary to observe language use in context, varying experimentally

The initial contribution, Clifford Hill's 'Up/down, front/back, left/right'.

(a) by pure translation ;

to be too narrowly associated to the speaker. Opalka bases his argumentation

dialect of Mönchengladbach in the Rhineland has two morphologically dis­

paradigm in that to non-deictic spatial distinctions already present in the first

Benveniste, E. (1966): Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: Gallimard.

Evolution. Berkeley: University of California Press.

"When he wanted to show that I was

up/down > front/back > left/right

tries, either formal or functional, which are perceived as analogous to those

A similar parallelism is reflected in the relation between the originating

it is, as it were, facing back toward that field (fig.4):

This FACING field is constructed by the great majority of native speakers of

Ga cokali can baya da k'warya. Ga k'warya can gaba da cokali.

Go kwallo can baya da itace.

There's your pen in front of the telephone.

Ga bironka can gaba da telefoni.

There's your pen in front of the telephone.

That's my sister to the left of John

Look! There's a wasp just above his knee

Given this conflict between deictic and non-deictic strategies, it is of in­

C'est ma soeur à la gauche de Jean

That's my sister to the left of John'.

Just as Indo-European languages make use of the article in marked struc­

Ga yarona can a hagun Tijjani.

Ga yarona can a hagu da Tijjani.

[ HAUSA STUDENTS AMERICAN STUDENTS 1

74.4% 63.3% 40.0%

The pen is the sandals

1 -HAUSA STUDENTS AMERICAN STUDENTS 1

The ball is. the rock.

Fillmore, . (1975): Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis. Bloomington: Indiana

Da is certainly one of the most frequent words in spoken German and.it

e.g. to places they remember or to persons in a narrated world; Bühler calls

1. DA AND THE FIELD OF DEICTIC EXPRESSIONS IN GERMAN

Hypothesis A has been questioned in Klein (1978). In giving arguments

(3) Question: Wo ist Peter? (Where is Peter?)

(5) Laß uns gerade noch einen Sherry trinken.

(7) a) Um Gotteswillen, da (hier)* ist eine Maus im Schrank.

e) Ich bin auch als Standesbeamte bestellt. Der beamtete Standes­

2. DA AND THE FIELD OF STRICT SPATIAL DEIXIS IN GERMAN

* I leave aside aspect as expressed by the progressive form.

Table 1: Oppositions in spatial deixis

According to the traditional analysis, the speaker's place must be included in

Fig. 4a: "Hier ist eine Maus im Schrank"

Fig. 4b: "Da ist eine Maus im Schrank"

Fig. 4c: "Dort ist eine Maus im Schrank"

In fact, either S or D may be included in R, but not both. In thefirstcase the da

(12') Achtung, dort ist eine Maus im Schrank

something is uttered depends on the linguistic form of the utterance, on fea

dialect of Mönchengladbach in the Rhineland has two morphologically dis

Given this conflict between deictic and non-deictic strategies, it is of in

Just as Indo-European languages make use of the article in marked struc

e) Ich bin auch als Standesbeamte bestellt. Der beamtete Standes

Continuation (a) is only appropriate when the sentence is uttered in Nijme

The investigation of deictic systems in given languages has often pro

A literal translation would be: "(The) sea-within-ness it with animal/anim

low degree of man-made environment and large spatial deictic sys

weitgehendes Miterfassen der gegebenen Situationsmomente fordert". In