120
involves „the place or places in which these individuals are located‟ (
ibid
.) and time
deixis covers „the time at which the communication act takes place – for this we may
need
to distinguish as the
encoding time
, the time at which
the message is sent and as
the
decoding time
, the time at which the message is received‟ (
ibid
.). Two additional
categories,
discourse
and
social
deixis, are also present in some of the most
influential work done in the area (Lyons, 1977; Levinson, 1983; Fillmore, 1997).
Discourse deixis is concerned with the „encoding of reference to portions of the
unfolding discourse in which the utterance (which includes the text referring
expression) is located‟ (Levinson, 1983: 62). Similar to anaphora or cataphora,
discourse deictics can be used to point to elements in the preceding or following
discourse. However, there are a number of differences between discourse deictics
and anaphoric or cataphoric reference (see Diessel, 1999: 100-103). As will be
explored in Sections 5.3.2 and 6.1, an anaphoric reference is used to „track‟ a
preceding noun phrase. Discourse deictics, on the other hand, can be used to „focus
the hearer‟s attention on aspects of meaning, expressed by a clause, a sentence, a
paragraph or an entire idea‟ (
ibid
: 101). Fillmore (1997) also includes deictic items
peculiar to written discourse such as
above
or
below
in discourse deixis. In addition,
Levinson (1983) specifies items such as utterance initial
but
,
therefore
,
in
conclusion
,
well
and
however
in discourse deixis.
Social deixis, on the other hand, refers to „those aspects of language structure that
encode the social identities of participants (properly, incumbents of participant-
roles) or the social relationship between them, or between one of them and persons
or entities referred to‟ (Levinson, 1983: 89). Hence, social deixis contains
information about the participants such as age, sex, kin relationship, social class or
ethnic group. Vocatives are often included within this category (see Huang, 2007;
Rühlemann, 2007) and Chapter 7 analyses the different ways in which vocative use
varies in family discourse according to the relationship between the speakers. The
sixth deictic category is often referred to as empathetic deixis. This notion was first
posited by Lyons (1977), based on the speakers choice of
this
rather than
that
,
here
rather than
there
or
now
rather than
then
, „when the speaker is personally involved
with the entity, situation or place to which he is referring or is identifying himself
with the attitude or viewpoint of the addressee‟ (p. 677). Rühlemann (2007: 192)
maintains that empathetic deixis „seems to involve preference of deictics that are
121
characterised by being, literally or metaphorically,
nearer
to the deictic origo (
here
being nearer than
there
,
now
being nearer than
then
etc.). Therefore, when a speaker
makes a choice of
that
rather than
this
, for example, he/she is signalling his/her
emotional relationship with the propositional content of the utterance. Lakoff (1974)
calls this use of demonstratives
emotional deixis
. She claims that the emotional-
deictic
that
, where the subject alluded to belongs to neither the speaker nor the
addressee, „appears to establish emotional solidarity between the two by implying
that both participants in the conversation share the same views toward the subject of
the discussion‟ (p. 352). Both Argaman (2007) and Rühlemann (2007) note that little
study has been devoted to empathetic deixis. Indeed, Rühlemann (
ibid
: 222)
concludes that „empirical research based on corpus data might potentially advance
the already existing knowledge on this intriguing type of deixis substantially.‟
As already stated, anaphoric references such as the third person pronouns
he
,
she
or
they
serve to „track‟ preceding noun phrases within the co-textual environment.
Deixis and anaphora are often considered independently, however, just how
independent they are from one another is a subject of debate (see Lyons, 1977;
Levinson, 1983; Wales, 1996; Marmaridou, 2000; Rühlemann, 2007). In relation to
discourse deixis, Levinson (1983: 89) contends that „the scope [of a proper theory of
discourse deixis]…may be very large, ranging from the borders
of anaphora to issues
of topic/comment structure.‟ He cites Lyons‟ (1977: 670) notion of
impure textual
deixis
which Lyons uses to account for noun phrases that fall between deictic and
anaphoric usage. Indeed, Lyons (
ibid
: 676) maintains that a term can be used both
deictically and anaphorically. Take the example
I was born in
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
