Indexical demonstratives in Hungarian: an experiment
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper examines various hypotheses regarding the choice of Hungarian proximal and distal indexical demonstratives in an experimental framework. More specifically, three factors (i.e. distance, accessibility and contrastive vs. non-contrastive contexts) that might influence the selection of indexical proximals vs. distals are defined and their role in influencing the choice of demonstratives in a production study is examined. Using the so called scripted dialogue technique it is shown that there is a significant difference between the choice of indexical demonstratives depending on the nature of context (contrastive vs. non-contrastive). In non-contrastive contexts distance plays a crucial role, while accessibility as a governing factor influencing the choice of indexicals is ruled out. However, in contrastive contexts the pattern of demonstratives changes, distals are selected even when the entity being referred to is close to the speaker, i.e. in contrastive contexts distance as a factor competes with some other factor.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Ariel, Mira 2001. Accessibility theory: An overview. In Ted Sanders – Joost Schilperoord – Wilbert Spooren (szerk.) Text Representation: Linguistic and Psycholinguistic Aspects. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 29–87.
Boronkai Dóra 2010. A deixis szerepe a nézőpont jelölésében. Magyar Nyelv 134/4:436–452.
Burenhult, Niclas 2003. Attention, accessibility, and the addressee: The case of the Jahai demonstrative ton. Pragmatics 13/3–4:363–379.
Chafe, Wallace L. 1994. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.
Clark, Herbert H. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Clark, Herbert H. – Adrian Bangerter 2004. Changing ideas about reference. In Ira A. Noveck – Dan Sperber (szerk.) Experimental Pragmatics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 25–49.
Coventry, Kenny R. – Berenice Valdés – Alejandro Castillo – Pedro Guijarro-Fuentes 2008. Language within your reach: Near–far perceptual space and spatial demonstratives. Cognition 108/3:889–895.
Diessel, Holger 2006. Demonstratives, joint attention, and the emergence of grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 17/4:463–489.
Diessel, Holger 2012. Deixis and demonstratives. In Claudia Maienborn – Klaus von Heusinger – Paul Portner (szerk.) An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning Vol. 3. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. 2407–2431.
Diessel, Holger 2013. Where does language come from? Some reflections on the role of deictic gesture and demonstratives in the evolution of language. Language and Cognition 5/2-3:239–249.
D. Mátai Mária 1999. A névmások története a középmagyar kor végéig. Magyar Nyelvőr 123/4:438–464.
É. Kiss, Katalin 1998. Identificational focus versus information focus. Language 74/2:245–273.
É. Kiss Katalin 2003. Mondattan. In É. Kiss Katalin – Kiefer Ferenc – Siptár Péter Új magyar nyelvtan. Budapest: Osiris Kiadó. 17–186.
Enfield, Nick 2003. Demonstratives in space and interaction: Data from Lao speakers and implications for semantic analysis. Language 79/1:82–117.
Fillmore, Charles J. 1971. Towards a Theory of Deixis. In Charles J. Fillmore Lectures On Deixis. Reprint. 1997. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Hanks, William F. 2009. Fieldwork on deixis. Journal of Pragmatics 41/1. (Towards an Emancipatory Pragmatics):10–24.
Jarbou, Samir Omar 2010. Accessibility vs. physical proximity: An analysis of exophoric demonstrative practice in spoken Jordanian Arabic. Journal of Pragmatics 42/11:3078–3097.
Kahneman, Daniel 2003. A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist 58/9:697–720.
Kaiser, Elsi 2010. Salience and contrast effects in reference resolution: The interpretation of Dutch pronouns and demonstratives. Language and Cognitive Processes 26/10:1587–1624.
Kemmerer, David 1999. “Near” and “far” in language and perception. Cognition 73/1:35–63.
Kocsány Piroska 2009. A közelre mutató névmás szövegalkotó szerepben. Acta Academia Paedagogicae Agriensis. Sectio Linguistica Hungarica 36:203–209.
Kugler Nóra – Laczkó Krisztina 2000. A névmások. In Keszler Borbála (szerk.) Magyar grammatika. Budapest: Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó. 152–175.
Laczkó Krisztina 2003. A mutató névmások funkcionális vizsgálata. Magyar Nyelvőr 127/3:314–325.
Laczkó Krisztina 2008. A mutató névmási deixisről. Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok XXII. 309–347.
Laczkó Krisztina – Tátrai Szilárd 2012. Személyek és/vagy dolgok. A harmadik személyű és a mutató névmási deixis a magyarban. In Tolcsvai Nagy Gábor – Tátrai Szilárd (szerk.) Konstrukció és jelentés. Tanulmányok a magyar nyelv funkcionális kognitív leírására. Budapest: ELTE. 231–258.
Laczkó, Krisztina 2012. Spatial deixis and demonstrative pronouns in Hungarian. In Christopher Hart (szerk.) Selected Papers from the 3rd UK Cognitive Linguistics Conference Vol. 1. 289–301.
http://uk-cla.org.uk/files/proceedings/Laczko.pdf (2010. 10. 30.).
Levinson, Stephen C. 2004. Deixis. In Laurence Horn – Gergory Ward (szerk.) Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. 97–121.
Luz, Saturnino – Ielka van der Sluis 2011. Production of demonstratives in Dutch, English and Portuguese dialogues. In Claire Gardent – Kristina Striegnitz (szerk.) Proceedings of the 13th European Workshop on Natural Language Generation. Stroudsburg, PA, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics. 181–186.
Lyons, John 1977. Semantics. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O’Keeffe, Anne – Brian Clancy – Svenja Adolphs 2011. Introducing Pragmatics in Use. New York: Routledge.
Piwek, Paul – Robbert-Jan Beun – Anita Cremers 2008. ‘Proximal’ and ‘distal’ in language and cognition: Evidence from deictic demonstratives in Dutch. Journal of Pragmatics 40/4:694–718.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1984. On some gestures’ relation to talk. In J. Maxwell Atkinson – John Heritage (szerk.) Structures of Social Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 266–298.
Sidnell, Jack 2009. Deixis. In Jef Verschueren – Jan-Ola Östman (szerk.) Key Notions for Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 114–138.
Strauss, Susan 2002. This, that, and it in spoken American English: A demonstrative system of gradient focus. Language Sciences 24/2:131–152.
Szalamin Edit 1988. Az ún. témaismétlő névmások kérdéséhez. In Kontra Miklós (szerk.) Beszélt nyelvi tanulmányok. Budapest: MTA Nyelvtudományi Intézet. 90–101.
Tátrai Szilárd 2011. Bevezetés a pragmatikába. Funkcionális kognitív megközelítés. Budapest: Tinta Kiadó.
Tomasello, Michael 1999. The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tóth Enikő 2013. A főnévi mutató névmások deiktikus használata a magyar és az angol nyelvben. Argumentum 9:311–320.
Tóth Enikő 2014. A főnévi mutató névmások indexikális használatáról egy kísérlet kapcsán. In Ladányi Mária – Vladár Zsuzsa – Hrenek Éva (szerk.) MANYE XXIII. Nyelv - társadalom - kultúra. Interkulturális és multikulturális perspektívák. Budapest: MANYE, Tinta Könyvkiadó. 475–482.
Traunmüller, Hartmut 1996. Sound symbolism in deictic words. Speech, music and hearing: quarterly progress and status report 1996/2:147–151.
Wolter, Lynsey 2009. Demonstratives in Philosophy and Linguistics. Philosophy Compass 4/3:451–468.