Cover not available
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. 379–416

A pragmatic analysis of german impersonally used first person singular ‘ICH’

The German first and second person singular pronouns ich and du allow for a referential use and an impersonal use. In their impersonal use, both pronouns behave like the impersonal pronoun man (Engl. one) in generic sentences. I argue that the aspect of impersonally used singular personal pronouns that distinguishes them (i) from each other, (ii) from impersonal pronouns, and (iii) from “ordinary” generic sentences is their pragmatic effects. The semantic contribution of the three pronouns and their containing utterances is discussed before a comparative analysis of the pragmatic effects of impersonally used ich and du and impersonal man is given. The analyses are illustrated with naturally occurring data from a self-compiled data collection. Turning to a more practical topic in the second part of the paper, I discuss a methodological issue regarding corpus-based analyses of low-frequency phenomena, such as impersonally used ich in the second part of this paper by reporting a small-scale corpus study.
Keywords: German 1st person singular, Non-standard uses of personal pronouns, Pragmatic effects, Impersonal/generic 1st person singular, Corpus-based analysis, Comparative study
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 1 September 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.26.3.03zob
References (36)
Alonso-Ovalle, Luis (2002) Arbitrary pronouns are not that indefinite. In C. Beyssade, R. Bok-Bennema, F. Drijkoningen, and P.Monachesi (eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2000. Amsterdam: John BenjaminsPublishing Company, pp. 1-15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Amaral, Patricia Matos, Craige Roberts, and E. Allyn Smith (2007) Review of ‘The Logic of Conventional Implicature’ by Chris Potts. Linguistics and Philosophy 301: 707-749. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro (1995) The variability of impersonal subjects. In E. Bach, E. Jelinek, A. Kratzer, and B.H. Partee (eds.), Quantification inNatural Languages. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishing, pp. 107-143.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo (1988) On “si”constructions and the theory of arb. Linguistic Inquiry 191: 521-581.Google Scholar
Condoravdi, Cleo (1989) Indefinite and generic pronouns. In E. Jane Fee, and K. Hunt (eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth WestCoast Conference on FormalLinguistics, pp.71-84.Google Scholar
Grice, Paul (1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, and J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press, pp. 41-58.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Grimberg, Mary Lou (1994) On Nunberg on indexicality and deixis. UCL Working Papersin Linguistics 61:1-38.Google Scholar
Grice, Paul (1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, and J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press, pp. 41-58.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Grimberg, Mary Lou (1994) On Nunberg on indexicality and deixis. UCL Working Papersin Linguistics 61:1-38.Google Scholar
Gruber, Bettina (2011) Indexical pronouns: Generic uses as clues to their structure. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 471: 331-360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Helmbrecht, Johannes (2015) A typology of non-prototypical uses of personal pronouns: Synchrony and diachrony. Journal of Pragmatics 881: 176-189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hugo Rojas, Evelyn (2011) Las formas de segunda persona singularcomo estrategias evidenciales [The forms of second singular person as evidential strategies]. Revista de Linguistica Teorica y Aplicada Concepcion (Chile) 491: 143-167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kamp, Hans (2008) Discourse structure andthe structure of context. Ms., IMS Universität Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Kaplan, David (1989) Demonstratives. In J. Almog, J. Perry, and H. Wettstein (eds.), Themes from Kaplan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 481-563.Google Scholar
Kitagawa, Chisato, and Adrienne Lehrer (1990) Impersonal uses of personal pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 141: 739-759. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred, Francis Jeffry Pelletier, Gregory N. Carlson, Alice ter Meulen, Gennaro Chierchia, and Godehard Link (1995) Genericity: An introduction. In G. Carlson, and J. Pelletier (eds.), The Generic Book. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 1-124.Google Scholar
Laberge, Suzanne, and Gillian Sankoff (1979) Anything youcan do. In T. Givón, (ed.), Discourse and syntax. New York: Academic Press, pp. 419-40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malamud, Sophia A. (2006) Semantics and pragmatics of arbitrariness. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
. (2012) Impersonal indexicals: One, you, man, and du . Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 151:1-48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moltmann, Friederike (2006) Generic one, arbitrary PRO, and the first person. Natural Language Semantics 141: 257-281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) Relative truth and the first person. Philosophical Studies 1501: 187-220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Two kinds of first-person-oriented content. Synthese 1841:157-177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nunberg, Geoffrey (1993) Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 161: 1-43. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Potts, Chris (2005) The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, Anna (2004) Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tarenskeen, Sammie (2010) From you to me (and back):The flexible meaning of the secondperson pronoun in Dutch. Master’s thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Thurmair, Maria (1989) Modalpartikeln und ihreKombinationen. Linguistische Arbeiten 223. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Zifonun, Gisela (2000) Man lebt nur einmal. Morphosyntax und Semantik des Pronomens “man”. Deutsche Sprache 281: 232-253.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, Malte (2011) Discourse particles. In C. Maienborn, K. vonHeusinger, and P. Portner (eds.), Handbook Semantics (HandbücherzurSprach-und Kommunikationswissenschaft HSK 33.2). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 2011-2038.Google Scholar
Zobel, Sarah (2010) Non-standard uses of German 1st person singular pronouns. In K. Nakakoji, Y. Murakami, and E. McCready (eds.), JSAI-isAI, LNAI 62841, pp. 292-311.Google Scholar
(2014) Impersonally Interpreted Personal Pronouns. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Göttingen. Available at [URL]
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

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
Kluge, Bettina
2019. Laure Gardelle and Sandrine Sorlin (eds), The Pragmatics of Personal Pronouns . English Text Construction 12:1 ► pp. 154 ff. DOI logo
Kluge, Bettina
2022. Generic uses of the second person singular – how speakers deal with referential ambiguity and misunderstandings. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 501 ff. DOI logo
Auer, Peter & Anja Stukenbrock
2018. When ‘You’ Means ‘I’: The German 2Nd Ps.Sg. Pronoun Du between Genericity and Subjectivity. Open Linguistics 4:1 ► pp. 280 ff. DOI logo
Van Olmen, Daniël & Adri Breed
2018. Human impersonal pronouns in West Germanic. Studies in Language 42:4 ► pp. 798 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 21 september 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.