Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Pronouns, metonymy, and identity
View through CrossRef
AbstractAlthough formal linguists have focused on the deictic and (co)referential functions of pronouns, social categorization and identity are deeply involved in pronominal usage. I argue here that even the understanding of pronounreferencerequires us to go beyond extensional (co)-reference. The extensive literature on linguistic categorization has focused on nouns more than on verbs, as has work on metonymy – but not on pronouns. Here I present two case studies, one of third-person pronouns and one of first-plural pronouns. In one I argue that cognitive science findings on categorization make it impossible for a masculine noun/pronoun usage to be truly “generic” in gender reference. The other examines the ways in which identity and group structure shape the possibilities for plural pronoun reference, in particular with respect to first-person plural (we) uses. To understand the principles of reference for these pronouns, we need to apply theoretical frameworks developed for lexical meaning: frames, category structure, prototypes, categorial metonymy and frame metonymy.
Title: Pronouns, metonymy, and identity
Description:
AbstractAlthough formal linguists have focused on the deictic and (co)referential functions of pronouns, social categorization and identity are deeply involved in pronominal usage.
I argue here that even the understanding of pronounreferencerequires us to go beyond extensional (co)-reference.
The extensive literature on linguistic categorization has focused on nouns more than on verbs, as has work on metonymy – but not on pronouns.
Here I present two case studies, one of third-person pronouns and one of first-plural pronouns.
In one I argue that cognitive science findings on categorization make it impossible for a masculine noun/pronoun usage to be truly “generic” in gender reference.
The other examines the ways in which identity and group structure shape the possibilities for plural pronoun reference, in particular with respect to first-person plural (we) uses.
To understand the principles of reference for these pronouns, we need to apply theoretical frameworks developed for lexical meaning: frames, category structure, prototypes, categorial metonymy and frame metonymy.
Related Results
A REVIEW OF CONCEPTUAL METONYMY - METHODS, THEORY AND DESCRIPTION
A REVIEW OF CONCEPTUAL METONYMY - METHODS, THEORY AND DESCRIPTION
This paper systematically reviews the main content and academic contributions of Conceptual Metonymy - Methods, Theory and Description. As Volume 60 of the "Human Cognitive Process...
PRONOMINA BAHASA KOMERING
PRONOMINA BAHASA KOMERING
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan bentuk pronomina persona, pronomina penunjuk, dan pronomina penanya dalam bahasa Komering. Penelitian dilaksanakan dengan menggunaka...
The Emergence of Male and Female Personal Pronouns in the Thai Language: A Historical Linguistics Study
The Emergence of Male and Female Personal Pronouns in the Thai Language: A Historical Linguistics Study
Background and Objectives: A personal pronoun is a word that serves a grammatical function; when it stands alone, it conveys meaning or features related to person. Regarding gender...
Metonymy in word-formation
Metonymy in word-formation
Abstract
A foundational goal of cognitive linguistics is to explain linguistic phenomena in terms of general cognitive strategies rather than postulating an autonomo...
On Conceptual Metonymy Represented Across Two Languages
On Conceptual Metonymy Represented Across Two Languages
Metonymy in cognitive linguistic studies is conceptual. But it is frequently represented by means of language. The previous studies focus on the metonymy of one single language and...
Towards a grammar of the Semnāni language
Towards a grammar of the Semnāni language
Semnāni is a North-Western Iranian language according to the traditional subdivision of Iranian languages, spoken by 21,099 people in Semnān Province and its counties. Semnāni can ...

