Cover not available

In:The Documentarist Turn: From observable linguistic behaviour to typological generalizations
Edited by Sonja Riesberg, Uta Reinöhl and Birgit Hellwig
[Studies in Language Companion Series 240] 2026
► pp. 704–723

Chapter 25
Bridging demonstratives in recognitional use

ORCiD logo with link | University of Cologne
ORCiD logo with link | University of Cologne
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
Abstract
Reference to an implicit argument in a bridging context is made by definite determiner phrases (DPs) (a book... the author), and it is assumed that demonstrative DPs are not felicitous in such contexts (a book... #that author). However, the literature reports bridging contexts with demonstrative DPs. We argue that the recognitional use of demonstratives, first described in Himmelmann (1996, 1997), can license demonstrative DPs in such contexts. Bridging contexts rely on general knowledge, making definite DPs the default in the “larger situational use” (Hawkins 1978). We argue that demonstrative DPs are possible in such contexts if they signal special shared knowledge between speaker and hearer, i.e. if they are recognitional. Two rating tasks with evaluative adjectives provide evidence for the recognitional function of bridging demonstratives.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Demonstratives and inferable referents
    • 2.1Demonstrative and definite articles
    • 2.2Uses of demonstratives
    • 2.3Recognitional use
    • 2.4Bridging inferences
    • 2.5Demonstratives in bridging context as recognitional use
  • 3.Demonstratives in bridging context: Metalinguistic judgments
    • 3.1Experiment 1
    • 3.2Experiment 2
    • 3.3Discussion
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
References (36)
References
Apothéloz, Denis, and Marie-José Reichler-Béguelin. 1999. “Interpretations and Functions of Demonstrative NPs in Indirect Anaphora.” Journal of Linguistics 24: 363–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Auer, Peter. 1984. “Referential Problems in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 8: 627–648. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, Harald, Douglas Bates, Reinhold Kliegl, and Shravan Vasishth. 2015. RePsychLing: Data Sets from Psychology and Linguistics Experiments. [URL]
Becker, Laura. 2021. Articles in the World’s Languages. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burkhardt, Petra. 2006. “Inferential Bridging Relations Reveal Distinct Neural Mechanisms: Evidence from Event-related Brain Potentials.” Brain and Language 98 (2): 159–168. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Rong. 1990. “English Demonstratives: A Case of Semantic Expansion.” Language Sciences 12 (2–3): 139–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. 1975. “Bridging.” In Proceedings of the 1975 Workshop on Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing, ed. by Bonnie L. Nash-Webber, and Roger Schank, 188–193. Cambridge, MA: Yale University Mathematical Society Sciences Board. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Doran, Ryan B. 2012. Definiteness, Specificity, and the Multiple Uses of Demonstrative Expressions. PhD thesis, Northwestern University.
Doran, Ryan B., and Gregory Ward. 2019. “A Taxonomy of Uses of Demonstratives.” In The Oxford Handbook of Reference, ed. by Jeanette Gundel, and Barbara Abbott, 236–259. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013. “Order of Demonstrative and Noun.” In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, v2020.4, ed. by Matthew S. Dryer, and Martin Haspelmath. Zenodo. (available online at http://wals.info/chapter/88).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fraurud, Kari. 1990. “Definiteness and the Processing of NPs in Natural Discourse.” Journal of Semantics 7: 395–433. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goddard, Cliff. 1983. A Grammar of Yankunytjatjara. Alice Springs: Institute for Aboriginal Development.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gundel, Jeanette, Nancy Hedberg, and Ron Zacharski. 1993. “Cognitive Status and the Form of Referring Expressions in Discourse.” Language 69 (2): 274–307. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. “Cognitive Status and the Form of Indirect Anaphors.” Verbum 22 (1): 79–102. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, Jesse A., and Christopher Potts. 2009. “Perspective-shifting with Appositives and Expressives.” Linguistics and Philosophy 32 (6): 523–552. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1978. Definiteness and Indefiniteness. A Study in Reference and Grammaticality Prediction. Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1980. “Nunggubuyu Deixis, Anaphora, and Culture.” In Papers from the Parasession on Pronouns and Anaphora, ed. by Jody Kreiman, and Almerindo E. Ojeda, 151–165. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
von Heusinger, Klaus. 2011. “Specificity, Referentiality and Discourse Prominence: German Indefinite Demonstratives.” Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 15, 9–30. (Available online at [URL].)
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 1996. “Demonstratives in Narrative discourse: A Taxonomy of Universal Uses.” In Studies in Anaphora, ed. by Barbara Fox, 205–254. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1997. Deiktikon, Artikel, Nominalphrase. Zur Emergenz syntaktischer Struktur. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1998. “Documentary and Descriptive Linguistics.” Linguistics 36: 161–195. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinterwimmer, Stefan. 2019. “How to Point at Discourse Referents: On Anaphoric Uses of Complex Demonstratives.” Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 23, 487–505. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Khachaturyan, Maria. 2019. “Knowing is Belonging: Recognitional Deixis and Emergence of Common Ground in Religious Conversion.” Signs and Society 7 (2): 186–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1974. “Remarks on this and that.” In Papers from the 10th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, ed. by Michael W. La Galy, Robert A. Fox, and Anthony Bruck, 345–356. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, Steven C. 2004. “Deixis and Pragmatics.” In The Handbook of Pragmatics, ed by Laurence Horn, and Gregory Ward, 97–121. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maes, Alfons, Emiel Krahmer, and David Peeters. 2022. “Understanding Demonstrative Reference in Text: A New Taxonomy Based on a New Corpus.” Language and Cognition 14 (2): 185–207. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Mulder, Walter, and Anne Carlier. 2011. “The Grammaticalization of Definite Articles.” In The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization, ed. by Heiko Narrog, and Bernd Heine, 522–534. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nunberg, Geoffrey. 1993. “Indexicality and Deixis.” Linguistics and Philosophy 16: 1–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poesio, Massimo, and Renata Vieira. 1998. “A Corpus-based Investigation of Definite Description Use.” Computational Linguistics 24 (2): 183–216.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen F. 1981a. “On the Inferencing of Indefinite-this NPs.” In Elements of Discourse Understanding, ed. by Bonnie Webber, Aravind K. Joshi, and Ivan Sag, 231–250. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1981b. “Toward a Taxonomy of Given-new Information.” In Radical Pragmatics, ed. by Peter Cole, 223–255. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwarz, Monika. 2000. Indirekte Anaphern in Texten: Studien zur domänengebundenen Referenz und Kohärenz im Deutschen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skilton, Amalia, and David Peeters. 2021. “Cross-linguistic Differences in Demonstrative Systems: Comparing Spatial and Non-spatial Influences on Demonstrative Use in Ticuna and Dutch.” Journal of Pragmatics 180: 248–265. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilkins, David P. 1989. Mparntwe Arrernte (Aranda): Studies in the Structure and Semantics of Grammar. Canberra: The Australian National University. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wolter, Lynsey. 2006. “Bridging Demonstratives at the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface.” Presentation, LSA Annual Meeting, Albuquerque, 5–8 January 2006.
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue