|
Logophoricity is the binding relation that holds between a special class of pronouns and their antecedents. Logophoric elements, which occur in embedded clauses introduced by verbs of saying, thinking or feeling, must be bound by the antecedent whose speech, thoughts, or feelings are being reported . The phenomenon was first observed in African languages that have a distinct set of logophoric pronouns that are morphologically differentiated from regular pronouns. Logophoricity is also attested with logophoric reflexives, which are non-clause-bounded reflexive pronouns such as is found in Japanese and Icelandic . The conditions under which logophoricity may occur vary across languages. Both syntactic and semantic approaches have been used to account for logophoricity. == Background == The term logophor was introduced by to distinguish logophoric pronouns from indirect reflexive pronouns. In particular, Hagège argues that logophors are a distinct class of pronouns which refer to the source of indirect discourse: the original speaker or individual whose perspective is being communicated, rather than the speaker currently relaying this information. expanded upon this analysis, arguing that indirect reflexives serve the same function as logophoric pronouns. However, indirect reflexives do not differentiate between logophoric and non-logophoric forms, in contrast with Hagège's logophoric pronouns which fall into a morphologically separate set . For example, the Latin indirect reflexive pronoun ''sibi'' may be said to have two grammatical functions (logophoric and reflexive), but just one form , as opposed to a language that designates a separate pronoun for each function. More recent analyses of logophoricity are in line with Hagège's original account, under which indirect reflexives are considered to be logophors, in addition to those pronouns with a special logophoric form . Clements also extended the concept of logophoricity beyond Hagège's initial typology, addressing syntactic and semantic properties of logophoric pronouns. He posited three distinctive properties of logophors : # Logophoric pronouns are discourse-bound: they may only occur in a context in which the perspective of an individual other than the speaker's is being reported. # The antecedent of the logophoric pronoun must not occur in the same clause in which the indirect speech is introduced. # The antecedent specifies which individual's (or individuals') perspective is being reported. These conditions are for the most part semantic in nature. However, Clements also claimed that there are additional syntactic factors which may play a role when semantic conditions are not met, yet logophoric pronouns are still present. For example, logophoric pronouns in Ewe may only occur in clauses which are headed by the complementizer ''be'' (which designates a reportive context in this language), and may only have a second- or third-person antecedent (first-person antecedents are prohibited). Other languages impose different conditions on the occurrence of logophors, which leads Clements to conclude that there are no universal syntactic constraints which must be satisfied by logophoric forms. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Logophoricity」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|