eesti teaduste
akadeemia kirjastus
SINCE 1965
Linguistica Uralica cover
Linguistica Uralica
ISSN 1736-7506 (Electronic)
ISSN 0868-4731 (Print)

Reference in the Borderline of Space and Discourse: a Free Production Experiment in Estonian, Finnish and Russian; pp. 185-208

Full article in PDF format |

Maria Reile, Piia Taremaa, Tiina Nahkola, Renate Pajusalu


This study explores spatial reference in three different languages: ­Estonian, Finnish and Russian. We concentrate on the use of demonstratives (i.e. pronouns and adverbs), and the association between the demonstrative pronoun system (i.e. two- and three-term system) and the use of other referential devices (e.g. noun phrases and third person pronouns). More specifically, we test the influence of the distance of the referent from the speaker and change in the deictic field on the use of demonstratives. We show using a free production experiment that the use of demonstratives has a different susceptibility to these factors in different languages. Furthermore, in these languages, there is an association between the elaborateness of the demonstrative pronoun system and the use of other referential devices.


Abbott, B. 2017, Reference. — The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, Oxford, 240—258.

Anderson, S. R., Keenan, E. L. 1985, Deixis. — Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Volume III: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, Cambridge, 259-308.

Ariel, M. 2001, Accessibility Theory. An Overview. - Text Representations. Linguistic and Psycholinguistic Aspects, Oxford, 29-87.

Bonfiglioli, C., Finocchiaro, C., Gesierich, B., Rositani, F., Vescovi, M. 2009, A Kinematic Approach to the Conceptual Represen­tations of this and that. - Cognition 111 (2), 270-274.

Burenhult, N. 2003, Attention, Accessibility, and the Addressee: the Case of the Jahai Demonstrative ton. - Pragmatics 13 (3), 363-379.

Clark, E. V., Sengul, C. J. 1978, Strategies in the Acquisition of Deixis. - Journal of Child Language 5, 457-475.

Cohen, J. 1988, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Mahwah-London.

Coventry, K. R., Griffiths, D., Hamilton, C. J. 2014, Spatial Demonstratives and Perceptual Space: Describing and Remembering Object Location. - Cognitive Psychology 69, 46-70.

Coventry, K. R., Valdés, B., Castillo, A., Guijarro-Fuentes, P. 2008, Language within Your Reach: Near-Far Perceptual Space and Spatial Demonstratives. - Cognition 108 (3), 889-895.

Diessel, H. 1999, Demonstratives. Form, Function and Grammaticalization, Amsterdam-Philadelphia (Typological Studies in Language 42).

Diessel, H. 2006, Demonstratives, Joint Attention, and the Emergence of Grammar. - Cognitive Linguistics 17 (4), 463-489.

Diessel, H. 2012, Deixis and Demonstratives. - An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning. Volume 3, Berlin, 2407-2431.

Diessel, H. 2013, Distance Contrasts in Demonstratives. - The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Leipzig.

Dixon, R. M. W. 2003, Demonstratives. A Cross-Linguistic Typology. - Studies in Language 27, 61-112.  

Enfield, N. J. 2003, Demonstratives in Space and Interaction: Data from Lao Speakers and Implications for Semantic Analysis. - Language 79, 82-117.

Etelämäki, M. 2006, Toiminta ja tarkoite - tutkimus suomen pronominista tämä, Helsinki (SKST 1008).

Etelämäki, M. 2009, The Finnish Demonstrative Pronouns in Light of Interaction. - Journal of Pragmatics 41, 25-46.

Field, A., Miles, J., Field, Z. 2012, Discovering Statistics Using R, London.

Fillmore, C. J. 1997, Lectures on Deixis, Stanford.

Freundschuh, S. M., Egenhofer, M. J. 1997, Human Conceptions of Spaces: Implications for Geographic Information Systems. - Transactions in GIS 2 (4), 361-375.

Greenacre, M. 2007, Correspondence Analysis in Practice, Boca Raton-London-New York (Interdisciplinary Statistics Series).

Gudde, H. B., Coventry, K. R., Engelhardt, P. E. 2016, Language and Memory for Object Location. - Cognition 153, 99-107.

Gundel, J. K., Bassene, M., Gordon, B., Humnick, L., Khalfaoui, A. 2010, Testing Predictions of the Givenness Hierarchy Framework: A Crosslinguistic Investigation. - Journal of Pragmatics 42 (7), 1770-1785.

Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., Zacharski, R. 1993, Cognitive Status and the Form of Reffering Expressions in Discourse. - Language 69, 274-307.

Hakulinen, A. 1985, On Cohesive Devices in Finnish. - Text Connexity, Text Coherence. Aspects, Methods, Results, Hamburg (Papiere zur Textlinguistik 49), 337-362.

Hakulinen, A., Vilkuna, M., Korhonen, R., Koivisto, V., Heinonen, T. R., Alho, I. 2004, Iso suomen kielioppi, Helsinki (SKST 950).

Halliday, M. A. K., Hasan, R. 1976, Cohesion in English, London.

Hanks, W. F. 1992, The Indexical Ground of Deictic Reference. - Rethinking Context. Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, Cambridge, 43-76.

Hanks, W. F. 2011, Deixis and Indexicality. - Foundations of Pragmatics, Berlin-Boston (Handbooks of Pragmatics 1), 315-346.

Himmelmann, N. P. 1996, Demonstratives in Narrative Discourse. - ­Studies in Anaphora, Amsterdam-Philadelphia (Typological Studies in Language 33), 205-254.

Huang, Y. 2014, Pragmatics, Oxford.

Kaiser, E. 2010, Salience and Contrast Effects in Reference Resolution. The Interpretation of Dutch Pronouns and Demonstratives. - Language and Cognitive Processes 26 (10), 1587-1624.

Khalfaoui, A. 2007, A Cognitive Approach to Analyzing Demonstratives in Tunisian Arabic. - Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XX, Amsterdam-Philadelphia (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 290), 169-186.

Kibrik, A. A. 1996, Anaphora in Russian Narrative Prose. A Cognitive Calculative Account. - Studies in Anaphora, Amsterdam-Philadelphia (Typological Studies in Language 33), 255-304.

Kibrik, A. A. 2011. Reference in Discourse, Oxford.

Küntay, A. C., Özyürek, A. 2006, Learning to Use Demonstratives in Conversation: What Do Language Specific Strategies in Turkish Reveal? - Journal of Child Language 33 (02), 303-320.

Larjavaara, M. 1990, Suomen deiksis, Helsinki (Suomi 156).

Larjavaara, M. 2007, Pragmasemantiikka, Helsinki (SKST 1077).

Laury, R. 1996, . Pronouns and Adverbs, Figure and Ground. The Local Case Forms and Locative Forms of Finnish Demonstratives in Spoken Discourse. - SKY Yearbook of the Linguistic Association of Finland, 65-92.

Laury, R. 1997, Demonstratives in Interaction. The Emergence of a Definite Article in Finnish, Amsterdam-Philadelphia.

Le, S., Josse, J., Husson, F. 2008, FactoMineR: An R Package for Multivariate Analysis. - Journal of Statistical Software 25, 1-18. http://dx.doi. org/10.18637/jss.v025.i01.

Levinson, S. C. 2006, Deixis. - The Handbook of Pragmatics, Oxford, 97-121.

Levinson, S. C. 2018. Introduction: Demonstratives: Patterns in Diversity. - Demonstratives in Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Cambridge (Language Culture and Cognition 14), 1-42.

Lüdecke, D. 2017, sjPlot: Data Visualization for Statistics in Social Science.

Lyons, J. 1977, Semantics. Volume 2, Cambridge.

Maes, A. A., de Rooij, C. 2007, (How) Do Demonstratives Code Distance. - Proceedings of the 6th Discourse Anaphora and Anaphora Resolution Colloquium DAARC 2007, Lagos, 83-89.

March, E. G., Pattison, P. 2014, The Role of Language System in Context-Dependent Language Use in Turkish-Speaking Versus English-Speaking Older Adults. - Applied Psycholinguistics 35, 1087-1108.

Meira, S., Terrill, A. 2005, Contrasting Contrastive Demonstratives in Tiriyó and Lavukaleve. - Linguistics 43 (6), 1131-1152.

Mendoza, I. 2015, Distance in Discourse: Evidence from Polish, Russian and German. - Distance in Language. Grounding a Metaphor, Cambridge.

Pajusalu, R. 2006, Death of a Demonstrative: Person and Time. The Case of Estonian too. - LU XLII, 241-253.

Pajusalu, R. 2009, Pronouns and Reference in Estonian. - Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 62 (1/2). 122-139.

Pajusalu, R. 2017, Viiteseosed. - Eesti keele süntaks, Tartu (Eesti keele varamu 3), 566-589.

Priiki, K. 2017, Hän, se, tää vai toi? Vuorovaikutussosiolingvistinen tutkimus henkilöviittauksista Kaakkois-Satakunnan nykypuhekielessä, Turku (Annales Universitatis Turkuensis C 432).

R Core Team 2017, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.

Reile, M. 2015, Space and Demonstratives: an Experiment with Estonian Exophoric Demonstratives. - ESUKA 6 (2), 137-165. article/view/jeful.2015.6.2.06/98.

Reile, M. 2016, Distance, Visual Salience and Contrast Expressed through Different Demonstrative Systems: an Experimental Study in Estonian. - SKY ­Journal of Linguistics 29, 63-94. SKYJoL29_Reile.pdf.

Seppänen, E.-L. 1998, Läsnäolon pronominit. Tämä, tuo, se ja hän viittaamassa keskustelun osallistujaan, Helsinki (SKST 715).

Timberlake, A. 2004, A Reference Grammar of Russian, New York.

Tóth, E., Csatár, P., Banga, A. 2014, Exploring Hungarian and Dutch Gestural Demonstratives. - Complex Visibles Out There. Proceedings of the Olomouc Linguistics Colloquium 2014: Language Use and Linguistic Structure, Olomouc (Olomouc Modern Language Series 4), 607-626.

van Peer, W., Hakemulder, F., Zyngier, S. 2012, Scientific ­Methods for the Humanities, Amsterdam-Pholadelphia (Linguistic Approaches to Literature 13).

Vogels, J., Krahmer, E., Maes, A. 2013, Who is Where Referred to How, and Why? The Influence of Visual Saliency on Referent Accessibility in Spoken Language Production. - Language and Cognitive Processes 28 (9). 1323-1349.

Апресян, Ю. 1986, Дейксис в лексике и грамматике и наивная модель мира. / Семиотика и информатика 28, 5/33.

Шелякин, М. А. 2002, Русский язык. Справочник, Таллинн.

Back to Issue