PRONOUNS

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 669.

§ 139. It has been shown above that words fall into classes known as parts of speech in accordance with their lexico-grammatical meanings, morphological categories, typi­cal stem-building elements, combinability and functions.

The peculiarity of pronouns as a class of words is that they are not united by any of the above-mentioned features. True, they have certain grammatical peculiarities, but what unites them is the way they denote reality.

Pronouns are words serving to denote substances, qualities, quantities, circumstances, etc. not by naming or describing them, but by indicating them.

As words of the vocabulary pronouns have extremely general meanings. But in speech pronouns indicate particular objects or qualities. When a speaker says I, he refers to himself, i. e. to a particular person of definite age, height, colour of hair, etc. When another speaker says I, he also refers to himself, but this time it is another person with other fea-tures. Thus, the meaning of I, general as it is, remains the same, but the objects referred to are different.

The meaning of the pronoun such is "of the same kind", but one speaker may use such to indicate a definite colour, ' another speaker may use it with reference to some size, a third qbe to indicate a particular temperature, etc.

On the other hand, one and the same person may be re­ferred to as I, you or he, depending upon who speaks. This and that may indicate the same object, depending on the rela­tive position of the speaker and the object. Thus, pronouns can be defined as words whose meanings are very general and stable, but whose references in speech are particular, vari­able and relative with regard to the speaker and the situation of speech.

We insist on the stability of meaning and the variability and relativity of reference, because many authors speak of the relative m e a n i n g of pronouns. But when we ask. What is this? referring now to the blackboard, now to a piece of chalk, we use the word this with the same meaning, "the object I point at" or "the object I demonstrate", and not with the meanings of "blackboard", "piece of chalk", etc. Those arе only the objects of reference and not the meanings of the word this.

§ 140. Etymologically the word 'pronoun' means "a word used instead of a noun". This meaning reflects, to some extent, the role of pronouns in language. Owing to the exceptional variability of reference a pronoun may replace hundreds of nouns with comparatively stable or limited references. This explains the fact that pronouns are used very frequently and form a considerable part of any text; though as a class of words they are not numerous.

But the role of pronouns is much greater than it can be inferred from the meaning of the word pronoun. It is not always that a pronoun is substituted for a noun. For in­stance, what noun does the pronoun it replace in It rains? But what is more important, pronouns can be substituted not only for nouns, but for other parts of speech as well. Traditionally, pronouns are divided into 'noun pronouns' and 'adjective pronouns'. In reality pronouns may also be used instead of numerals (Cf. twenty books — several books, many books) and adverbs (here, there, now, then). Using the prefix pro- in its meaning "instead of", we may, therefore, classify pronouns with regard to the parts of speech into pro-nouns, pro-adjectives, pro-numerals and pro-adverbs.

Thus, pronouns are a collection of words correlated with different parts of speech, which accounts for their not being united by any morphological categories or syntactical func­tions.

§ 141. Sometimes a pronoun is correlated with one part of speech only. But very often this is not so. In a part of speech, as we know, variants of the same lexeme may belong to different subclasses. The peculiarity of pronouns is that variants of the same lexeme may be correlated with different parts of speech. This in the sentence Is this the bike? (Saroyan) is a pro-noun, while in the sentence He gave me this bike? (Ib.) it is a pro-adjective. Here in He lives here is a pro-adverb, but in from here to Moscow it is a pro-noun.

§ 142. As pointed out by A. I. Smirnitsky, the bounda­ries of pronouns and those parts of speech with which they are correlated are rather fluid. The word this in this bike may be regarded both as an adjective pronoun and as a pro­nominal adjective, the word here — as a pronominal adverb and as an adverbial pronoun.

The relative references of the words to-day, yesterday, to-morrow are somewhat akin to those of pronouns, yet they are not relative enough because the words denote definite units of time, days. Cf. now or then.

It is no wonder, therefore, that there exist many words which are regarded as pronouns by some authors and as nouns or adjectives by others.

§ 143. Since pronouns form a class chiefly on the basis of their semantical peculiarities, it is but natural that the subdivision of pronouns into groups should be carried out on the same basis, though some grammatical peculiarities of each group are also taken into consideration.

Pronouns may be divided into

1) personal,

2) possessive,

3) reflexive,

4) demonstrative,

5) interrogative,

6) connective,

7) reciprocal,

8) indefinite,

9) negative,

10) generalizing,

11) quantitative,

12) contrasting.

It must be borne in mind, however, that a pronoun may belong to more than one group at the same time. The pro­noun whose may be treated as interrogative (or connective) and possessive. The pronouns one, one's, oneself may be grouped together as indefinite personal, or they may be classified separately: one as personal, one's as possessive, oneself as reflexive, etc.

Personal Pronouns

§ 144. The personal pronouns are the nucleus of the class. They are: I (me), thou (thee)¹, he (him), she (her), it, we (us), you, they (them).

The personal pronouns serve to indicate all persons and things from the point of view of the speaker who indicates himself or a group of persons including him by means of the personal pronouns of the first person — /, we. He indi­cates his interlocutor or interlocutors by means of the pro-. nouns of the second person — thou (archaic) and you. All other persons or things are indicated by him with the help of the pronouns of the third person — he, she (for persons), it (for things), they (for both).

^{_________________________________________}

¹ Archaic.

§ 145. Though all the personal pronouns are said to be noun pronouns or pro-nouns, it is only the pronouns of the third person that can be used anaphorically, instead of a noun mentioned previously.

E. g. The dark thing was Ferse ... he was dead. (Gals­worthy). The personal pronouns of the first and the second person do not in fact replace any names. In the sentence I am sure of it the pronoun I is not substituted for any noun because no noun can be used with the verb am, no noun can denote the first person.

§ 146. In Modern English the personal pronouns have the category of case represented in two-member opposemes. But these opposemes differ from the case opposemes of nouns. The general meaning of "case" manifests itself in the partic­ular meanings of the "nominative" and "objective" cases.

Ps	Sg.	Pl.
I	I — me	we — us
II	thou — thee	you — you
III	he — him
she — her	they — them
it - it

Case, as we know, is a morphological category with syntac­tical significance. The opposition of the nominative and the objective case is realized syntactically in the opposition of the subject and the object of the sentence.

E. g. She asked her.

With nouns it is different because a noun in the common ease fulfils the functions of both the subject and the object. The pronouns you and it having only one form for both cases seem to resemble nouns in this respect. But by analogy with the majority of the personal pronouns you and it may be interpreted as having two homonymous forms each.

The pronoun of the second person singular (thou — thee) was formerly used in address as a form of endearment and familiarity and so came to imply contempt and has been ousted by you. Thou is no longer used in everyday speech, but still lingers in poetry and elevated prose.

Hail to thee (a skylark), blithe spirit — Bird thou never wert.

(Shelley).

You was formerly the objective case, the nominative being ye. Ye is now used only in appeals and exclamations found in poetry and elevated prose.

Nor ye proud, impute to them the fault.

(Gray).

§ 147. Some Facts point to serious changes in the correla­tion between the nominative and objective cases taking place in Modern English. The objective case pronouns seem to encroach on their case opposites. We observe a peculiar trend which is steadily gaining ground, to use the objective case instead of the nominative when the pronoun is used predica-tively or when it is separated from the predicate-verb, as in Me and my wife could have fed her anyhow. (Caldwell). It is me (instead of It is I) has established itself as a literary norm. It is him, her, etc. are still avoided by careful speakers ¹. I didn't leave little Sheila, it was her who left me (O'Casey).

The nominative case is regularly preserved when an unstressed personal pronoun is used with a verb as the subject of a sentence to show the person and the number of the agent the action of the verb is associated with.

In B. A. Ilyish's opinion, the unstressed personal pronouns in cases like he read, they worked are well advanced on the way towards becoming a kind of verbal prefixes ² of person and number. B. A. Ilyish is inclined to think that Modern English gradually develops a system of the personal pronouns similar to that of Modern French in which the unsteressed conjoint personal pronouns ('pronoms conjoints') je, tu, il, ils, directly precede the verb, and the stressed absolute per­sonal pronouns ('pronoms absolus') moi, toi, lui, eux are used in all other cases, including the predicative function (c'est moi — it's me) and cases like Moi et mon pere, nous aimons ... — Me and my father, we .....

However that may be, at the present stage the unstressed personal pronouns can hardly be regarded either as being or as tending to become verbal morphemes similar to the -(e)s morpheme of the third person singular³.

1. They may be used, not only as subjects — That was he. It is she. John is taller than I.

2. They can be coordinated with the help of conjunctions, which is not typical of morphemes. Neither he nor I am likely to be present at the meeting (Hornby).

3. They can be coordinated with nouns. Ma and I both ran inside. (Caldwell).

4. They have some freedom of distribution. I forget. Do I ever forget? I do not easily forget, etc.

Neither can they be treated as word-morphemes partici­pating in the formation of analytical words. This is proved by the absence of a personal pronoun when a verb has a noun-subject. Thus we have Tom came, but not * Tom he came, which would be natural, if he came were an analytical word.

Thus it seems in keeping with language facts to treat the unstressed personal pronouns in the nominative case as in­dependent words.

^{_______________________________________}

¹ But see Deskbook of Correct English by Michael West and P. F. Kim-ber, Л., 1963, p. 130: "It is I" should be used in all formal writing,and where "I" is followed by "who" ("It's I who —"), but "It's me" may be used in conversational contexts where no relative clause follows. So also "It's her, — him, — us, — them!"

§ 148. As to the category of number, it should be observed that strictly speaking, the personal pronouns have no cate­gory of number. I and we or he and they cannot be treated as number opposites inasmuch as they differ from each other not only grammatically, but lexically as well. We is not I+I but rather I and you, I and she, I and they, etc. They is not always he + he, it may as well mean he + she. You is said to indicate both the singular and the plural. So it ought to be similar to cases like sheep, deer. But it is not. 2 sheep = 1 sheep + 1 sheep, in other words, sheep pl. = sheep sg. + sheep sg. With you it is different. You pl. does not always indicate you sg. + you sg. It may indicate you sg. + he, you sg. + they, etc.

Since I and we differ lexically, they do not belong to the same lexeme, they do not form an opposeme, and their num­ber meanings are not grammatical. But I, he, she, it form a group of words whose combinability resembles that of "singular" nouns. Cf. I, he, she, it, John, the student ... was (not were)... The pronouns we, you, they, on the contrary, have the combinability of "plural" nouns. We may then regard the pronouns of the first group as singularia tantum, and those of the other group as pluralia tantum ¹. In other words, the personal pronouns possess oblique or lexico-. grammatical meanings of number.

Similarly, we may speak of the lexico-grammatical mean­ing of person. The words I, me, we, us (as well as pronouns of other groups: my, mine, our, ours, myself, ourselves) are united by their reference to the first person, the speaker. Of these only I has grammatical combmability with am. Only the "singulars" (I, me, my, mine, myself) refer to the first person alone. The "plurals" include, besides the first person, reference to the second (I and you), or the third (I and he, she, or they), or both.

The words you, your, yours, yourself, yourselves are united by their reference to the second person, the hearer. But all of them (except yourself) may include reference to the third person as well (you and he, she or they). So in fact they are united negatively by not including reference to the first person.

The words he, him, she, her, it, they, them (also pronouns of other groups) are united by their reference to the third person, the 'spoken-of' ^l, or negatively by not including reference to the first and second persons, the speaker and the hearer. Of these words he, she and it have explicit grammati-cal combinability (he speaks, she has ..., it is...).

The oblique grammatical meaning of 'third person' does not unite pronouns alone. All the nouns and noun equivalents are associated with this meaning.

Cf. He (she, it, John, Mary, milk) is..., not am.

This is the reason why nouns can be replaced by the pro­nouns he, she, it, they, but not by I, we, or you.

As to gender it is possible to discuss, for instance, the lexico-grammatical subclass of the masculine gender only in case we include pronouns of other groups, such as his, himself, besides he (him).

The pronoun it is the only "personal" pronoun which in­dicates lifeless things or "non-persons". Together with its, itself, what, which, something, etc. it forms a subclass opposed to another subclass indicating persons (I, he, she, my, his, myself, herself, who, somebody, etc.).

^{_____________________________________}

¹ See "Nouns", § 74.

§ 149. The combinability of the personal pronouns dif­fers from that of nouns. The reference to a particular person or thing makes all descriptions and limitations unnecessary. Such phrases as * The handsome it or * the he sound uncommon. On the other hand, a personal pronoun usually replaces a noun with all its attributes.

You feel ill at ease when your old friend tells you that he can't place his short stories. (Maugham).

When used in speech most of the personal pronouns (we, you, they, he) may acquire a generalizing force, as in the examples We don't kill a pig every day (proverb). You cannot get blood from a stone (proverb). They say she is breathtakingly beautiful. (The Times). He who pays the piper calls the tune (proverb).

Possessive Pronouns

§ 150. The possessive pronouns are usually treated as adjective pronouns, whereas they are in reality noun pronouns or pro-nouns, but they replace only possessive case nouns with which they are correlated. Cf. This is the teacher's (his, her) bicycle. This bicycle is the teacher's (his, hers).

The combinability and functions of the possessive pronouns and the 'possessive case' nouns are almost identical, which justifies the view that the pronouns in question are possessive case opposites of the personal pronouns. The only argument we can put forward against that view and in favour of the opinion that the possessive pronouns are a separate group, is as follows.

§ 151. Modern English differs from Old English and from other Modern Germanic languages in having two sets of pos­sessive pronouns — the conjoint possessive pronouns my, thy, his; her, its, our, your, their and the absolute possessive pronouns mine, thine, his, hers, ours, yours, theirs. :

'Possessive case' nouns, as we know (§ 97) can also be used absolutely (the idea was George's), but with them it is only a matter of. usage in speech, since it is not fixed in any language forms. It is quite different with the pronouns. The pairs my — mine, thy — thine, our — ours, your — yours, etc. can be regarded as opposemes of a grammatical category. It is difficult to find a name.for that category, but it resem­bles the category of case. As shown (§ 82), a case opposeme be­longs to the morphological system of the language, but it reflects speech combinability and syntactical functions. The same can be said about an opposeme like my — mine. The difference between its members is in combinability and function. My has right-hand connections with nouns and func­tions as an attribute. Mine has other connections and other functions in the sentence. Now if we assume that both my and mine are 'possessive case' opposites of I, we have then to speak of a case opposeme within the possessive case, There­fore, it would, probably, be more in keeping with language facts (a) to treat my (mine), her (hers), our (ours), etc. not as the possessive case of personal pronouns but as a sub­class of pronouns; (b) to regard my - mine, her — hers_r etc. as a kind of case opposemes. It is obvious that further research is vitally necessary.

§ 152. The possessive pronouns of the first and second persons (as well as the corresponding personal pronouns) do not in fact replace any nouns, but their usage does not dif-fer from that of the third person pronouns. The pronoun its has a much wider application than the possessive case of nouns denoting inanimate things.

Cf. The atmosphere of the room, rarely the room's atmos­phere, but its atmosphere.

Its has no 'absolute' opposite. The 'absolute' and 'con­joint' his may be regarded as homonyms.

Cf. Her (his) friend, a friend of hers (his).

§ 153. One of the peculiarities of Modern English is the extensive use of conjoint possessive pronouns. When used in cases like He entered with his eyes shining and his hair in disorder, they add very little information. In fact their function is to specify nouns in the way the definite article does. They might be treated as pro-art icles, but (a) they are correlated only with the definite article, (b) the meaning of the definite article is much more general than that of his or her.

Reflexive Pronouns

§ 154. They are compound noun pronouns whose second element -self expresses the anaphorical relation of the first element, i. e. it shows that the first element refers to the person mentioned previously in the sentence. Thus, I ... myself, thou ... thyself, he (or John) ... himself, she (or Mary) ... herself, it (or bird) ... itself „we ... ourselves, you ... your­self (yourselves), they (or the children) ... themselves, one ... oneself.

§ 155. Like the personal and the possessive pronouns, the reflexive pronouns distinguish the lexico-grammatical meanings of person, number and gender.

Some linguists are of the opinion that in myself—ourselves, yourself — yourselves number is expressed grammati­cally. But this is an illusion caused by the correlation self — selves. As ourselves is not myself + myself, but my­self + yourself or myself + yourselves, or myself + himself, or myself + herself, or myself + themselves, we are to regard myself and ourselves as different lexical units, just as I and we, my and our. As to the so-called reflexive voice, see § 211.

§ 156. The anaphorical use of the reflexive pronouns accounts for the fact that they do not occur in the function of subjects, their usual function being that of prepositionless or prepositional objects.

When I first met Hickson, I could have kissed his beauti­ful boots. I loved them for themselves. (Cary).

You may be letting yourselves out nicely, but I can't. Nor can mother. (Priestley).

§ 157. Self-pronouns are often used in apposition for emphasis. Dickson's view on the Middle Ages them­selves would have to wait until another time. (Amis).

Some linguists regard the self-pronouns used for emphasis as a separate group of emphaticpronouns. In colloquial speech there is a marked tendency to use emphatic pronouns as synonyms of personal ones. Perhaps, the usage is caused by the fact that self-pronouns are felt to carry more weight than unstressed personal pronouns.

E. g. My wife and myself were left behind. (Daily Worker).

Demonstrative Pronouns

§ 158. Usually only the pronouns this (these), that (those), such and (the) same-are regarded as demonstrative. But even this small group is not homogeneous. The pronouns this — that (these — those) are correlative. The sphere of this or these is the space or time close to the speaker and the moment of speech, whereas the sphere of that and those is the time or space farther away from the speaker and the moment of speech.

The pronouns such and (the) same have no correlative pronouns. They indicate objects or qualities by comparison with those pointed at by the speaker.

Now similar relations can be found in other pronouns. The words here and there meaning 'in this (that) place', now and then meaning 'at this (that) time', hence and thence mean­ing 'from this (that) time (place)' are similar to this and that m their relations to the speaker and the moment of speech. Since they do not name any place or time, but indi­cate it, and this indication is particular, variable and rela-tive with regard to the speaker and the situation of speech, they are pronouns.

The words so and thus in the meaning 'in this way' are pronouns like such and (the) same. They have no correlative words and indicate the manner of actions by comparison with those pointed at by the speaker.

§ 159. Demonstrative pronouns can be:

Pro-nouns: Since the interval she had left him alone and illogically he regretted that. (Randall). Т h i s is pretty slick, eh? (Lewis);

Pro-adjectives: These continental rooms are always overpoweringly stuffy. (Randall). He was entering a year of such activity as he had never known. (Lewis);

Pro-adverbs: My aunt has grown accustomed to the atmosphere, but I can never do s o. (Randall). Thus nobly endowed, he was popular with audiences. (Lewis).

§ 160. This — these, that — those are number opposemes. The grammatical meanings of 'singular' and 'plural number are also preserved when these pronouns are used as pro-adjectives, thus involving grammatical combinability: this book, these books.

As elsewhere the 'singular' members of the opposemes occur in speech much more often than the 'plural' opposites, the ratio being approximately 9:1.

Interrogative Pronouns

§ 161. The meaning that unites the interrogative pronouns is "an inquiry" about some object (what, who), its properties (whose, which, what), place of some event (where), its time (when), cause (why), manner of existence (how).

As seen from the above, this group embraces pro-nouns (what, who, which, whose), pro-adjectives (what, which) and pro-adverbs (where, when, why, how).

Who and what are regularly used to distinguish "persons" and "non-persons". What is, however, used in reference to living beings as well when the inquiry concerns the occupa­tion of the person spoken about, as in What is he? He is a student.

§ 162. The pronoun who is the only interrogative pronoun which has a case opposite, whom, as in Whom did you meet?

However we observe here a distinct tendency to substi­tute the nominative case (who) for thе objective (whom), which may eventually bring about the obliteration of case distinctions in the interrogative pronouns.

E. g. I went to the pictures. Who with? ¹ Who are you trying to deceive? (Buck)

Note. The unmarked member of the case opposeme who — whom occurs, as Usual, more often than the marked member (whom). The ratio is approximately 9:1.

^{_____________________________________}

¹ See M. West and P. F. Kimber. Deskbook of Correct English, Lnd., 1957, p. 168: "To whom did you give if?" is correct, but stilted; it should be used only in formal writing, or in speeches, sermons, etc. Elsewhere "Who did you give it to?" is the accepted form. "Whom did you give it to?" is a hybrid and has no justification.

§ 163. The interrogative pronouns are used to form a definite type of sentence — special questions.

Who told you that? What is the charge? (Hanley), Charles Fries writes: "The expression Who came? signals a question not because of a different arrangement, but solely because the signal of question is in the word who as a word".

Connective Pronouns

§ 164. The pronouns who, what, which, whose, thai, where, when, why, how are called 'connective' when they serve to connect clauses in complex sentences. At the same time they retain their meanings and functions of pro-nouns, pro-adjectives or pro-adverbs. This combination of functions is a typi-cal feature of the connective pronouns.

In accordance with their meaning and the types of clauses they introduce they fall into two groups: conjunctivepro­nouns and relative pronouns.

§ 165. Conjunctive pronouns serving to introduce subject, predicative object and appositive clauses (sometimes united under the general name of "noun clauses" ') present a curious combination of a demonstrative meaning with that of a con­junction. In W h a t he knows is no longer a secret (Christie) what is equivalent to the Russian то, что... . Hence the term condensed pronouns used by some authors. The essence of the matter is that the antecedent of such a pronoun is not expressed either by a noun or a noun equivalent, the pro­noun itself doing duty for the antecedent as well.

Compound conjunctive pronouns in -ever (whoever, whatever, wherever, etc.) have an emphatic nature owing to which they may be used to introduce adverbial clauses of concession as well.

Don't change your plans, whatever happens. (Hornby).

Whatever he says is of no importance.

§ 166. Relative pronouns are likewise used to introduce subordinate clauses. What makes them different from conjlmc-tive pronouns is a) that they serve to introduce but one type of subordinate clauses — the so-called 'relative' clauses — a variety of attributive clauses, -and b) that they are always correlated with some antecedent in the principal clause.

E. g. All the while these two solitary strollers did not for a moment think on coincidence, which lingers at man's elbow with every crowd in every town. (Bradbury).

Antonio walked from the lumberyard to a window where stood fine new beds. (Ib.).

One. of those few e v e n i n g s w h e n he worked late she visited with any one of several neighbours. (Bradbury).

Relative pronouns, like interrogative and conjunctive ones, distinguish 'person' and 'non-person' in opposing who used in reference to persons to which used in reference to non-persons.

Whose and that are applied both to persons and things.

§ 167. As mentioned above, both conjunctive and rela­tive pronouns fulfil a double syntactical function in the sen­tence: they are used as some part of the subordinate clause and as a connective structural element at the same time.

E. g. They all smiled upon that genius who now circled them with his arms. (Bradbury).

The relative pronoun who introducing the attribute clause is the subject of the subordinate clause.

Reciprocal Pronouns

§ 168. These are the group-pronouns — each other and one another. They serve to express mutuality, as in They helped each other (one another).

It is traditionally maintained that each other implies only two and one another more than two, but this rule is often ignored, one another and each other becoming interchange­able.

We (two persons) ran across one another one morning near the Menin Gate — the place they called Hell Fire Corner. (Oxenham).

§ 169. The reciprocal pronouns share the noun case system.