The semantics and syntax of Russian pronominal structure: a feature breakdown

Elaborating one of the points of his Coling ~onn 1986 paper, the author discusses prononfn~lity, which is due to a special semantic stratum, singulatire identifieational deixis. Personal, reflexive and interrogative pronouns have additional transn[issional deictic markings, but singulative identificational pronominality alone has a direct anaphorie effect and tends to reinforce syntactically. This ,explains, for instance, German sich selbst. i. In several publications of mine /van Schooncveld 1982/, /idem forthcoming-A/, /idem forthc~ning-C/ ]i have had occasion to mention in passing the specia] nature of pronouns. Pronouns have their own type of deixis. 2. Deixis is traditionally used for the type of meaning which results from the once-occurring speech act, Sauss~e' s parole, being recodified, that is, being incorporated back into the langue. In adverbs lJJ<e here [~nd now the code refers to actual applications o--o-f--J±self-?We cannot identify the referent of here and now without taking recourse to our having T~-~tifie~-~he given speech act. 11~e speech act becomes a part of the narrated situation /Bru~nann 1904/, /Lyons 1977, pp.638 sqq./. 3. It is an empirical fact, however, that language can also indicate an identification act which takes place during the narrated situation. Thus we have to do in the preposition out with a space which l~s been identified (an in-spa~ and subsequent].y discarded as irrelevant ~ the next identification, so that "out" is the resulting meaning. What is iraportent he~. is that all identifications, subsequent ones as well as the first, may take place in the ~m~ated situation, not necessarily during the speech (the transmission) act. Do we have to do with deixis in the case of identification in the narrated situation? l~%at depends on how we use the word deixis. If we understand by deixis the reincorporation of an identification, act into the code, that is, the prerogation, by the first identifier, of the identification of the referent, then we can speak of deixis also in the second case~ when the entire identification procedure takes place Jn the narrated situation alone. But that is not the way the term deixis has been used traditJo~[].ly by linguists. In the traditional conceptualiza'i:ion, deixis is of a tranmnissional nature. If~ however, we are. to use the term deixis for any recodJfication of the initial identification of the refer(u~t, including identifiuation in the narrated situation, "then we must distinguish between mere identificational deixis (in the narrated situation), and the traditional type of deixis, which I call tran~nissional deixis. In pronouns we have to do with a deixis of the identificational variety. 4. Of both types of deixis, transmissional and identificational~ there exist two varieties: m] uTmh~rked type and a singulative tqfpe /van Schooneveld forth;oming-A/. In the singulative type~ all identifications take place at the same moment. Pronominal deixis is singulatively identificational. Singultative transmissional delxis gives rise to references to the process of the transmission, that is, the pzx~ess of pronunciation itself. It regulates~ for i[~stance, the relation between grammatical morphemes (endings) and lexical morphemes. In singulative identificational deixis all identifications in the narrated situation must take place simultaneously with the first one. 5. It is obvious that singulative ~ansn[issional deixis is the type of deixis which is at the basis of demonstrative pronouns. In "the framework of the demons±~ative pronouns our vantage point is that of an identifier operating within the narrated situation; in the personal pronom~s the speech si'ttmtion is involved at the same time. In the personal pronom%s, we have to do with a semm~tie mechanism more complex than that of the demonstrative pronouns. The personal pronouns set up objects as being on a par with speaker and receiver, since they define these objects (referents) further in terms of the speech situation. In using the first person the speaker looks at his own image in the nfirror of the singulative r~rrated situation. Mutatis mutandis "the same happens in the second and third person. 8. Pronouns in general are n~rked by singulative identificational plurality (plur"'). Singulative identificational plurality means that there is multiple synchronized identifiability of the referent. A singu]ative (mini-)narrated situation is created. The referent of the demonstrative pronoun 'that' equals a (mini-)narrated situation. Personal pronouns are, being pronouns, marked by plur"' , but a further specification (subclassification) is done by transmissional semantic tea hines. 7. At this point, I should mention t]~t I have empirically concluded that Russian semantic values can be expressed in terms of six Semantic features which occur on each of the four deictic levels mentioned; i.~., by 24 semantic features. These features constitute an ordered set in that each succeeding teatime incorporates the information given by its predecessor /van Schooneveld 1983/, /idem forthcoming-C/. .P!urality, the first feat[~e, instructs the recelver to perform more tl~nn one identification on one object or to identify more than one object. DimensJ~nality singles out from a plurality of identifications a subset which is distinct from its peers. Preidentity indicates that the first identification must be assumed to have been performed earlier than other identifications in the narrated or speech situation. Extension reidentifies an identified element and impl~elative unaffectedness by the identification situation; cancellation signalizes the complement of an originally identified set, and objec~ tiveness indicates that the referent can be at any frcm the element initially identified. • II! 8. The third person is, additlonally to plur , marked by transmissional plurality (plu~"). In the pronouns, plur" creates a reference in the speech situation which must not necessarily be identified with the speaker or the receiver but can be repeatedly (i.e. a multiple of times) identified. The second' person is, additionally to plur"' , n~rked by (non-singul~tive) transmissionS, dimensionality (dim"). Dim" says that there is a subset of elements in the speech situation which have a property in common. What else constitutes a more conspicuous subset of actants in the speech situation than those who actively participate in it? The second person indicates the direct participant in the speech situa-