Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T01:11:15.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Two notes on the theory of definiteness1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Renaat Declerck
Renaat Declerck
Affiliation:
University of Leuven, Campus Kortrijk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The terms definite and indefinite, when used in relation to NPs, can be handled in two different ways. One can treat definiteness as a formal (syntactico-morphological) category and make use of the syntactic features [±definite], as in Chomsky (1965). One can also go into the question of how definite and indefinite NPs are used, i.e. the question of when and why a (formally) definite NP is preferred to an indefinite one, or vice versa. If we take the latter approach, we are investigating definiteness as a semantico-pragmatic category.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , March 1986 , pp. 25 - 39
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Akmajian, A. (1979). Aspects of the grammar of focus in English. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Bach, E. (1968). Nouns and noun phrases. In Bach, E. & Harms, R. (eds), Universals in linguistic theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. 91–122.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1972). A look at equatives and cleft sentences. In Firchow, E. S. et al. (eds), Studies for Einar Haugen. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Burton-Roberts, N. (1981). Review of Hawkins (1978). Lg 57. 191–195.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Christophersen, P. (1939). The articles: a study of their theory and use in English. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Cruse, D. A. (1980). Review of Hawkins (1978). JL 16. 308–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, R. (1983a). ‘It is Mr. Y’ or ‘He is Mr. Y’? Lingua 59. 209–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, R. (1983b). Predicational clefts. Lingua 61. 9–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, R. (1984b). Some restrictions on clefts that highlight predicate nominals. JL 20. 131–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, R. (1984b). The pragmatics of it-clefts and WH-clefts. Lingua 64. 433–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donnellan, K. S. (1966). Reference and definite descriptions. The Philosophical Review 75. 281–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Givón, T. (1973). Opacity and reference in language: an inquiry into the role of modalities. In Kimball, J. P. (ed.), Syntax and semantics, 2. New York: Seminar Press. 95–122.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1967). Notes on transitivity and theme in English. Part 2, JL 3. 199–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, J. A. (1978). Definiteness and indefiniteness: a study in reference and grammaticality prediction. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Higgins, F. R. (1976). The pseudo-cleft construction in English. Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Huddleston, R. D. (1971). The sentence in written English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Karttunen, L. (1968). What do referential indices refer to? RAND Corporation Report P-3854.Google Scholar
Klein, E. (1980). Locating the articles. (Review of Hawkins, 1978). Linguistics 18. 147–157.Google Scholar
Kuno, S. (1970). Some properties of non-referential noun phrases. In Jakobson, R. & Kawamoto, S. (eds), Studies in general and oriental linguistics. Tokyo: TEC Corporation for Language and Educational Research.Google Scholar
Kuno, S. & Wongkhomthong, P. (1981). Characterizational and identificational sentences in Thai, SLang 5. 65–109.Google Scholar
Lyons, C. G. (1980). The meaning of the English definite article. In Van der Auwera, J. (ed.), The semantics of determiners. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Prince, E. F. (1981). On the interferencing of indefinite this NPs. In Joshi, A. K., Webber, B. L. & Sag, I. A. (eds), Elements of discourse understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. & Svartvik, J. (1972). A grammar of contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Russell, B. (1905). On denoting. Mind 14. 479–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. (1969). Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. (1964). Determiners and relative clauses in a generative grammar of English. Lg 40. 37–52.Google Scholar
Stockwell, R. P., Schachter, P. & Partee, B. (1973). The major syntactic structures of English. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Strawson, P. F. (1950). On referring. Mind 59. 320–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweet, H. (1891). A new English grammar, logical and historical. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
van Langendonck, W. (1971). Over zgn. generische determinatoren. Studia Neerlandica 2. 351–384.Google Scholar