Article published In:
The referential ambiguity of personal pronouns and its pragmatic consequences
Edited by Barbara De Cock and Bettina Kluge
[Pragmatics 26:3] 2016
► pp. 351360
Abbott, Barbara
(2010) Reference. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile
(1966) Problèmes de linguistique générale, vol. 11. Paris: Gallimard.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Biq, Yung-O
(1991) The multiple uses of the second person singular pronoun ni in conversational Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics 161: 307-321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
(1979) To catch a metaphor: You as a norm. American Speech 541: 194-209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borthen, Kaja
(2010) On how we interpret plural pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 42.7: 1799-1815. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Boutet, Josiane
(1986) La référence à la personne en français parlé: Le cas de ‘on’. Langage et société 381: 19-50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bravo, Diana
(1999) ¿Imagen 'positiva' vs. imagen 'negativa'? Pragmática socio-cultural y componentes de face. Oralia 21: 155-184.Google Scholar
Brisard, Frank
(2002) Grounding. The epistemic footing of deixis and reference. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson
(1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge Univesity Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brumme, Jenny
2007) Praktische Grammatik der katalanischen Sprache. Wilhelmsfeld: Gottfried Egert Verlag.Google Scholar
Bühler, Karl
(1982) [1934] Sprachtheorie. Stuttgart: Fischer.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia
(2003) ‘Arbitrary’ readings of 3pl pronominals. In Matthias Weisgerber (ed.), Proceedings of the conference ‘sub7 – Sinn und Bedeutung’. Arbeitspapier Nr. 114 des FB Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Konstanz. [URL]Google Scholar
Cysouw, Michael
(2003) The paradigmatic structure of person marking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dancygier, Barbara, and Eve Sweetser
(2005) Mental spaces in grammar. Conditional constructions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Cock, Barbara
(2011) Why we can be you: The use of 1st person plural forms with hearer reference in English and Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics 43.11: 2762-2775. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
de Hoop, Helen, and Lotte Hogeweg
(eds.) (2015)  The flexibility of pronoun reference in context . Special issue in Journal of Pragmatics vol. 881.Google Scholar
de Hoop, Helen, and Sammie Tarenskeen
(2015) It’s all about you in Dutch. Journal of pragmatics 881: 163-175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeMello, George
(2000) ‘Tú’ impersonal en el habla culta. Nueva revista de filología hispánica 48.2: 359-372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Devís Márquez, Pablo
(2003) La impersonalidad y las denominadas construcciones impersonales en español. Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie 199.3: 393-442.Google Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald
(1984) Le dire et le dit. Paris: Minuit.Google Scholar
(2005) Duden. Vol. 4: Die Grammatik 7, völlig neu erarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage. Mannheim u.a.: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Enfield, Nick, and Tanya Stivers
(2007) Person reference in interaction. Linguistic, cultural and social perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles
(1985) Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge/Mass.: The MIT Press [reprinted 1994 Cambridge: CUP].  BoPGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner
(2002) The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Gast, Volker, and Johan van der Auwera
(2013) Towards a distributional typology of human impersonal pronouns, based on data from European languages. In Dik Bakker, and Martin Haspelmath (eds.), Languages across boundaries: Studies in the memory of Anna Siewierska. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 119-158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garrido, Joaquín
(1998) Relevancia frente a retórica: Reivindicación del arte de hablar. In Tomás Albadalejo Mayordomo, Emilio del Río Sanz, y José Antonio Caballero (eds.), Quintiliano: Historia y actualidad de la retórica. Actas del Congreso Internacional. Logroño: Instituto de Estudios Riojanos, pp. 577-587. Reproduced in [URL]Google Scholar
Gelabert-Desnoyer, Jaime
(2006) Registro y funciones de "nosotros" en el discurso parlamentario español. Lingüística en la Red 41: 1-21.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving
(1979) Footing. Semiotica 25.1-2: 1-29. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Gruber, Bettina
(2014) The spatiotemporal dimensions of person. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K
(1994²) An introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Helmbrecht, Johannes
(1999) The typology of 1st person marking and its cognitive background. In Masako K. Hiraga, Chris Sinha, and Sherman Wilcox (eds.), Cultural, psychological and typological issues in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 285-97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) A typology of non-prototypical uses of personal pronouns: Synchrony and diachrony. Journal of pragmatics 881: 176-189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Eric
(2004) The indefinite YOU. English Studies 21: 161-176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jensen, Mikkel Hollænder
(2002) La referencia en algunos expresiones impersonales - Diferentes lecturas de uno y la segunda persona del singular. Romansk Forum - XV Skandinaviske romanistkongress, pp. 127-38.Google Scholar
Kitagawa, Chisato, and Adrienne Lehrer
(1990) Impersonal uses of personal pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 141: 739-759. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Kibrik, Andrej
(2011) Reference in discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kluge, Bettina
(2012) Referential ambiguity in discourse. The generic use of the second person singular in the Romance languages. Habilitation thesis, Universität Bielefeld.Google Scholar
Laberge, Suzanne
(1977) Étude de la variation des pronoms sujets définis et indéfinis dans le français parlé à Montreal. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Montreal: University of Montreal.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George
(1996) Sorry, I’m not myself today: The metaphor system for conceptualizing the self. In Gilles Fauconnier, and Eve Sweetser (eds.), Spaces, worlds, and grammar. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 91-123.  MetBibGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W
(2009) Investigations in cognitive grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logo  MetBibGoogle Scholar
Lavandera, Beatriz
(1984) Creative variation. Shifting between personal and impersonal in Spanish discourse. Arbeitspapier Nr. 103 des Sonderforschungsbereichs 99. Konstanz: Konstanz University.Google Scholar
Lyons, John
(1982) Deixis and subjectivity: Loquor, ergo sum? In Robert J. Jarvella, and Wolfgang Klein (eds.), Speech, place and action: Studies in deixis and related topics. Chichester: Wiley, pp.101-124.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Malamud, Sophie
(2006) Semantics and pragmatics of arbitrariness. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Malamud, Sophia
(2007) Impersonal indexicals: You, man, si . URL: [URL]
(2012) Impersonal indexicals: One, you, man, and du . Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 15.1: 1-48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej, and Anna Siewierska
(2011) Impersonal constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Myhill, John
(1997) Towards a functional typology of agent defocusing. Linguistics 351: 799-844. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik
(1985) A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Real Academia Española
(2009) Nueva gramática de la lengua española. 2 vols1. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Rubba, Jo
(1996) Alternate grounds in the interpretation of deictic expressions. In Gilles Fauconnier, and Eve Sweetser (eds.), Spaces, worlds and grammars. Chicago: University Press, pp. 227-261.Google Scholar
Sansò, Andrea
(2006) ‘Agent defocusing’ revisited. Passive and impersonal constructions in some European languages. In Werner Abraham, and Larisa Leisiö (eds.), Passivization and typology. Form and function. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 232-273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheibman, Joanne
(2002) Point of view and grammar. Structural patterns of subjectivity in American English conversation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
(2004) Inclusive and exclusive patterning of the English first person plural: Evidence from conversation. In Michel Achard, and Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Language, culture and mind. Stanford: CSLI, pp. 377-96.Google Scholar
Siewierska, Anna
(2004) Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) Overlap and complementarity in reference impersonals: MAN-constructions vs. third person plural-impersonals in the languages of Europe. In Andrej Malchukov, and Anna Siewierska (eds.), Impersonal constructions: A cross-linguistic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 57-90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, Anna, and Maria Papastathi
(2011) Towards a typology of third person plural impersonals. Linguistics 49.3: 575-610. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stewart, Miranda
(1992) Personal reference and politeness strategies in French and Spanish: A corpus-based approach. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Edinburgh: Heriot-Watt University, Department of Modern Languages.Google Scholar
Tarenskeen, Sammie
(2010) From you to me (and back). The flexible meaning of the second person pronoun in Dutch. Master’s thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen. URL: [URL]Google Scholar
Temmerman, Martina
(2008) “Today, we’re all Danes”. Argumentative meaning of the 1st and 2nd person pronouns in newspaper editorials on the Muhammad cartoons. L’Analisi Linguistica e Letteraria XVI.1: 289-303.Google Scholar
Traugott Closs, Elizabeth
(2003) From subjectification to intersubjectification. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Motives for language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 124-139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wechsler, Stephen
(2010) What 'you' and 'I' mean to each other: Person indexicals, self-ascription, and theory of mind. Language 86.2: 332-365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 10 other publications

Aijón Oliva, Miguel Á.
2019. La elección de segunda persona y la construcción de identidades contextuales en el discurso radiofónico de una comunidad peninsular . Pragmática Sociocultural / Sociocultural Pragmatics 7:2  pp. 125 ff. DOI logo
Günthner, Susanne
2021. WIR im interaktionalen Gebrauch: Zur Verwendung des Pronomens der 1. Person Plural in der institutionellen Kommunikation – am Beispiel onkologischer Aufklärungsgespräche. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 49:2  pp. 292 ff. DOI logo
Hendricks, Dominic & Wolfgang Imo
2023. Ärztliche Therapieentscheidungsempfeh-lungen in der Onkologie und die Rolle des Personalpronomens wir bei der Aushandlung ärztlicher agency . Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik 2023:79  pp. 163 ff. DOI logo
Hernández, Nuria
2021. Personal Pronouns: Variation and Ambiguity. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 69:3  pp. 237 ff. DOI logo
Kluge, Bettina
2019. Laure Gardelle and Sandrine Sorlin (eds), The Pragmatics of Personal Pronouns . English Text Construction 12:1  pp. 154 ff. DOI logo
Mostovaia, Irina, Victoria Fedorovskaya & Wolfgang Imo
2023.  Wir beide und мы с вами (‚wir mit Ihnen‘): Strategien zur Vagheitsreduktion im Gebrauch des Personalpronomens der 1. Person Plural in deutschen und russischen Diagnosemitteilungs- und Therapieplanungsgesprächen . Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 51:1  pp. 88 ff. DOI logo
Parodi, Giovanni & Gina Burdiles
Suomalainen, Karita & Mikael Varjo
2020. When personal is interpersonal. Organizing interaction with deictically open personal constructions in Finnish everyday conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 168  pp. 98 ff. DOI logo
Varjo, Mikael & Karita Suomalainen
2018. From zero to ‘you’ and back: A mixed methods study comparing the use of two open personal constructions in Finnish. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 41:3  pp. 333 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 may 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.