Abstract
In this paper I show that a close look at the use of demonstrative pronouns (DPros) of the der/die/das paradigm in the crime novel Auferstehung der Toten (‘Resurrection of the dead’) by Wolf Haas allows us to gain a deeper understanding of the interplay of the narrator’s and the main protagonist’s perspective in narrative texts. At the same time, it provides an indirect argument against the assumption that the distribution of DPros can be fully derived from anti-logophoricity (Hinterwimmer and Bosch 2017) and in favor of an analysis sketched as an alternative in that paper: DPros avoid maximally prominent discourse referents as antecedents, where not only protagonists, but also narrators can be discourse referents. In text segments where the narrator’s perspective becomes prominent in virtue of evaluations, comments etc., the narrator is the maximally prominent discourse referent, while in text segments involving Free Indirect Discourse or other forms of protagonist’s perspective-taking such as Protagonist Projection (Holton 1997, Stokke 2013) or Viewpoint Shifting (Hinterwimmer 2017), the respective protagonist is the maximally prominent discourse referent. Finally, in text segments involving neutral narration where neither the narrator’s nor a protagonist’s perspective is salient, the respective discourse topic is the maximally prominent discourse referent.
Verwendete literarische Werke
Haas, Wolf (1996). Auferstehung der Toten. Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt.Search in Google Scholar
Haas, Wolf (1999). Silentium! Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt.Search in Google Scholar
Literatur
Abraham, Werner (2002). Pronomina im Diskurs: deutsche Personal- und Demonstrativpronomina unter ‚Zentrierungsperspektive‘. Grammatische Überlegungen zu einer Teiltheorie der Textkohärenz. Sprachwissenschaft 27.4, 447–491.Search in Google Scholar
Abrusán, Márta (2018). Protagonist projection. Vortrag auf dem Workshop Once upon a time … Semantic approaches to fiction, literature, and narrative. Universität Groningen, 17.–18. September 2018.Search in Google Scholar
Altshuler, David & Emar Maier (erscheint). Death on the freeway: Imaginative resistance as narrator accommodation. In I. Frana, P. Menendez Benito & R. Bhatt (Hrsg.), Making Worlds Accessible: Festschrift for Angelika Kratzer. Amherst: UMass ScholarWorks.Search in Google Scholar
Banfield, Ann (1982). Unspeakable sentences: Narration and representation in the language of fiction. Boston: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Bosch, Peter, Graham Katz & Carla Umbach (2007). The non-subject bias of German demonstrative pronouns. In M. Schwarz-Friesel, M. Consten & M. Knees (Hrsg.), Anaphors in text, 145–164. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.86.13bosSearch in Google Scholar
Bosch, Peter & Carla Umbach (2006). Reference determination for demonstrative pronouns. In D. Bittner & N. Gagarina (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the conference on intersentential pronominal reference in child and adult language (ZASPiL 48), 39–51. Berlin: Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Sprachtypologie und Universalforschung.10.21248/zaspil.48.2007.353Search in Google Scholar
Bühler, Karl (1934). Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Jena: G. Fischer.Search in Google Scholar
Canisius, Peter (2005). Logophorische Pronomina im Deutschen. In R. Harweg & P. Canisius, Studien zu Pronomina, 225–231. Aachen: Shaker.10.1515/9783111566658.3Search in Google Scholar
Canisius, Peter (2006). Pronomina, Personen, Perspektiven. Zum Reflektorpronomen der erlebten Rede. In H. Blühdorn, E. Breindl & U. W. Wassner (Hrsg.): Text – Verstehen. Grammatik und darüber hinaus, 126–143. Berlin / New York: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Clements, George N. (1975). The logophoric pronoun in Ewe: Its role in discourse. The Journal of West African Languages 10, 141–177.Search in Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard (1997). Pragmatic binding: Demonstratives as anaphors in Dutch. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society Vol. 23, 50–61.10.3765/bls.v23i1.1281Search in Google Scholar
Van Dijk, Teun A. (1977). Sentence topic and discourse topic. Papers in Slavic Philology 1, 49–61.Search in Google Scholar
Dirscherl, Fabian & Jürgen Pafel (2015). Die vier Arten der Rede- und Gedankendarstellung. Zwischen Zitieren und Referieren. Linguistische Berichte 241, 3–47.Search in Google Scholar
Dowty, David (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67, 547–619.10.1353/lan.1991.0021Search in Google Scholar
Dubinsky, Stanley & Robert Hamilton (1998). Epithets as antilogophoric pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 29, 685–693.10.1162/002438998553923Search in Google Scholar
Eckardt, Regine (2014). The semantics of free indirect discourse. How texts allow to mind-read and eavesdrop. Leiden: Brill.Search in Google Scholar
Eckardt, Regine (2015). Speakers and narrators. In D. Birke & T. Köppe (Hrsg.), Author and narrator: Transdisciplinary contributions to a narratological debate, 153–186. Berlin / New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110348552.153Search in Google Scholar
Fludernik, Monika (1993). The Fictions of Language and the Languages of Fiction: The Linguistic Representation of Speech and Consciousness. Boston: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Hamburger, Käthe (1957). Die Logik der Dichtung. Stuttgart: Klett.Search in Google Scholar
Holton, Richard (1997). Some telling examples: A reply to Tsohatzidis. Journal of Pragmatics 28, 625–628.10.1016/S0378-2166(96)00081-1Search in Google Scholar
Hinterwimmer, Stefan (2015). A unified account of the properties of German demonstrative pronouns. In P. Grosz, P. Patel-Grosz & I. Yanovich (Hrsg.), The proceedings of the workshop on pronominal semantics at NELS 40, 61–107. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.Search in Google Scholar
Hinterwimmer, Stefan (2017). Two kinds of perspective taking in narrative texts. In D. Burgdorf, J. Collard, S. Maspong & B. Stefánsdóttir (Hrsg.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 27, 282–301.10.3765/salt.v27i0.4153Search in Google Scholar
Hinterwimmer, Stefan (2018). Der Brenner und die Perspektive: Zum Gebrauch von Demonstrativpronomen in den Brenner-Romanen von Wolf Haas. In C. Hamann, A. Babakhani & M. Genç (Hrsg.), Das Rätsel der Unterhaltung. Deutschsprachige Kriminalliteratur der Gegenwart: Produktion – Vermittlung – Kritik, 123–142. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.Search in Google Scholar
Hinterwimmer, Stefan (2019). Prominent Protagonists. Journal of Pragmatics 154, 79–91.10.1016/j.pragma.2017.12.003Search in Google Scholar
Hinterwimmer, Stefan & Peter Bosch (2016). Demonstrative Pronouns and Perspective. In P. Patel & P. Patel-Grosz (Hrsg.), The Impact of Pronominal Form on Interpretation (Studies in Generative Grammar), 189–220. Berlin / New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9781614517016-008Search in Google Scholar
Hinterwimmer, Stefan & Peter Bosch (2017). Demonstrative pronouns and propositional attitudes. In P. Patel-Grosz, P. G. Grosz & S. Zobel (Hrsg.), Pronouns in embedded contexts (Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy), 105–144. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-56706-8_4Search in Google Scholar
Hinterwimmer, Stefan & Sara Meuser (2019). Erlebte Rede und Protagonistenprominenz. In S. Engelberg, C. Fortmann & I. Rapp (Hrsg.), Rede- und Gedankenwiedergabe in narrativen Strukturen – Ambiguitäten und Varianz (= Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 27), 177–200.Search in Google Scholar
Kaplan, David (1989). Demonstratives. In J. Almog, J. Perry & H. Wettstein (Hrsg.), Themes from Kaplan, 565–614. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kuroda, Sige-Yuki (2014). Reflections on the foundations of narrative theory, from a linguistic point of view. In S. Patron (Hrsg.), Toward a poetic theory of narration. Essays of S.-Y. Kuroda, 71–101.Berlin / New York: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Maier, Emar (2015). Quotation and unquotation in free indirect discourse. Mind & Language 30(3), 345–373.10.1111/mila.12083Search in Google Scholar
Maier, Emar (2017). The pragmatics of attraction. Explaining unquotation in direct and free indirect discourse. In P. Saka & M. Johnson (Hrsg.), The Semantics and Pragmatics of Quotation, 259–280. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-68747-6_9Search in Google Scholar
Nindl, Sigrid (2009). Wolf Haas und sein kriminalliterarisches Sprachexperiment. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.Search in Google Scholar
Nishigauchi, Taisuke (2014). Reflexive binding: Awareness and empathy from a syntactic point of view. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 23, 157–206.10.1007/s10831-013-9110-6Search in Google Scholar
Patel-Grosz, Pritty (2014). Epithets as de re pronouns. In C. Piñón (Hrsg.), Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 10, 91–106.Search in Google Scholar
Patel-Grosz, Pritty & Patrick G. Grosz (2017). Revisiting pronominal typology. Linguistic Inquiry 48, 259–297.10.1162/LING_a_00243Search in Google Scholar
Pearson, Hazel (2015). The Interpretation of the logophoric pronoun in Ewe. Natural Language Semantics 23, 77–118.10.1007/s11050-015-9112-1Search in Google Scholar
Primus, Beatrice (1999). Cases and thematic roles – ergative, accusative and active. Tübingen: Niemeyer.10.1515/9783110912463Search in Google Scholar
Primus, Beatrice (2006). Hierarchy mismatches and the dimensions of role semantics. In I. Bornkessel, M. Schlesewsky & B. Comrie (Hrsg.), Semantic role universals and argument linking. Theoretical, typological and psycholinguistic perspectives, 53–88. Berlin / New York: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen F. (1992). The ZPG Letter: Subjects, definiteness and information status. In S. Thompson & W. Mann (Hrsg.) Discourse description: Diverse analyses of a fund raising text, 295–325. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.16.12priSearch in Google Scholar
Rauh, Gisa (1978). Linguistische Beschreibung deiktischer Komplexität in narrativen Texten. Tübingen: Narr.Search in Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya (1981). Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica 27, 53–94.10.21825/philosophica.82606Search in Google Scholar
Schlenker, Philippe (2004). Context of thought and context of utterance. A note on free indirect discourse and the historical present. Mind and Language 19, 279–304.10.1111/j.1468-0017.2004.00259.xSearch in Google Scholar
Schumacher, Petra B., Leah Roberts & Juhani Järvikivi (2017). Agentivity drives real-time pronoun resolution: Evidence from German er and der. Lingua 185, 25–41.10.1016/j.lingua.2016.07.004Search in Google Scholar
Sells, Peter (1987). Aspects of logophoricity. Linguistic Inquiry 18, 445–479.Search in Google Scholar
Sharvit, Yael (2008). The puzzle of free indirect discourse. Linguistics and Philosophy 31, 353–395.10.1007/s10988-008-9039-9Search in Google Scholar
Stokke, Andreas (2013). Protagonist Projection. Mind & Language 28(2), 204–232.10.1111/mila.12016Search in Google Scholar
Wiltschko, Martina (1998). On the syntax and semantics of (relative) pronouns and determiners. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 2, 143–181.10.1023/A:1009719229992Search in Google Scholar
Yashima, Yun (2015). Antilogophoricity: In conspiracy with the binding theory. Unveröffentlichte Dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA).Search in Google Scholar
Zifonun, Gisela, Ludger Hoffmann & Bruno Strecker (1997). Grammatik der deutschen Sprache. Berlin / New York: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
