本研究旨在探討臺語中遠指詞「彼」的言談功能與語法化現象。本研究根
據 Himmelmann (1996)及 Diessel (1999) 兩位學者提出的指示詞分類方法，分析
臺語自然言談語料。根據兩位學者，遠指詞在篇章中的功能可分為四類，情境功
能(the situational use)、語篇功能(the discourse deictic use) 、示蹤功能 (the
anaphoric use)、以及認同功能(the recognitional use)。情境用所指的對象在於言談
現場，或者在談話所描述的事件情境中。語篇功能指出上文或下文所陳述的事件。
示蹤功能放置於名詞前，指出前文中已出現的一位對像或物品。認同功能則是指
出一位辨識性較高的談論對像，此對象已存在前文語境中，或者是存在於雙方所
共有的認知中。語料中，遠指詞在情境功能的佔少數，這顯示遠指詞的使用未必
都是情境指稱的需求。然而，遠指詞的使用，大部分是基於言談篇章上、或是情
態方面的考量。「彼」在篇章中扮演強調的功能，吸引聽者對於指涉對像的注意，
或者表達說話者的態度，或客觀轉述態度的情意功能。

This study is to examine the discourse functions of the distal demonstrative he in
Taiwanese Southern Min from a pragmatic perspective. The analysis of this study is
based on 3.4 hour natural spoken data, including daily conversation, radio interview,
and telephone calls.
In this study, the uses of the distal demonstrative fall into four categories, namely
the situational use, the discourse deictic use, the anaphoric use, and the recognitional
use. The situational use signifies the use of demonstratives to identify an entity from
others in the surrounding situation and establish the referring entity into the universe
of discourse. The discourse deictic demonstrative marks reference to the preceding,
current, or the following segments in discourse. Discourse deictic demonstratives
focus on the propositional contents instead of forms. The anaphoric demonstrative
refers to a noun phrase, mainly to a major participant in the preceding discourse. In
the recognitional use, the demonstrative refers to a referent that is assumed by the
speaker to be identifiable based on specific shared knowledge between the speaker
and the hearer exclusively.
Concerning the four discourse functions, it shows that the use of the distal
demonstrative does not necessarily encode deictic information, as in the discourse
deictic use and the anaphoric use. The distal demonstrative does not refer to any entity
in the physical world but points out a referent in discourse. In addition, the distal
demonstrative in the recognitional use may not encode the spatial contrast. The use of
the distal demonstrative refers to a referent which is assumed by the speaker to be
identifiable to the hearer. Moreover, the speaker employs the recognitional
demonstrative to point out the focal status of the referent or to express s/he attitudes.
Therefore, the distal demonstrative is developed from its basic use as a space deixis to
refer to referent in discourse, to mark a focal status, or even to express attitudes. In this way, the distal demonstrative is said to be under the path of grammaticalization.

Ariel, M. 1990. Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. London: Routledge.

Anttila, R. 1972. An Introduction to Historical and Comparative Linguistics. New
York: Macmillan.

Auer, J.C.P. 1984. “Referential Problems in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 8 :
627–648

Biq, Y.O. 1990. “Conversation, Continuation, and Connectives.” Text, 10.3: 187-208

Biq, Y.O.2007. “Lexicalization of Phrases Involving the Distal Demonstrative na in
Spoken Mandarin”. Proceedings of the 18th Annual Meeting of the North
American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL 18), J. Xing (ed.),
24-41.Los Angeles, CA: GSIL, USC.

Brown, G., & Yule, G. 1983a. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press

Bühler, K. 1934, sprachtheorie :Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Jena, Fischer.

Bybee, J. L., Pagliuca. W, & Perkins, R.D. 1991. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense,
aspect, in the modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.

Chafe, W. L.1987. “Cognitive Constraints on Information Flow.” In Coherence and
Grounding in Discourse. R.S. Tomlin (ed.), Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Chafe, W. L.1994. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement
of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.

Chao, Y. R. 1968. A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Taipei: Caves Books

Chen, R. 1990. “English Demonstratives: A Case of Semantic Expansion.” Language
Sciences 12:139-53
Chen, P. 2004. “Identifiability and definiteness in Chinese”. Linguistics, 42:1129–
1184

Cheng, R. L. 1989. Mandarin Function Words and Their Taiwanese Equivalents.
Taipei: Crane Books.

Cheshire, J. 1996. ‘That Jacksprat: An Interactional Perspective on English That.”
Journal of Pragmatics 25: 369-93.

Comrie, B.1997. “Some Problems in the Theory and Typology of Numeral Systems.”
In Palek, B. (ed.), 41-56. Prague: Charles University Press.

Christophersen, P. 1939. The Articles: A Study of Their Theory and Use in English.
Copenhegen: Munksgaard

Diessel, H. 1999. Demonstrativesː Form, Function and Grammaticalization.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Diessel, H. 2006. “Demonstratives”. In Encyclopedia of Language and
Linguistics, Keith Brown (ed.), 430-435. Elsevier: Oxford. [2nd edition]

Diessel, H. 2012. “Deixis and Demonstratives”. In An International Handbook of
Natural Language Meaning, Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger, Paul
Portner (ed.), Vol. 3, 2407-2431. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Du Bois, J.W., Schuetze-Coburn, Stephan, Cumming, Susanna, and Paolino, Danae.
1993. “Outline of Discourse Transcription”. In Talking Data: Transcription and
Coding in Discourse Research, Jane A. Edwards and Martin D. Lampert (ed.),
45-89. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum

Dryer, M. S. 1989. “Article-Noun Order”. Chicago Linguistic Society 25:82-97

Dryer, M.S. 1996. “Focus, Pragmatic Presupposition, and Activated Propositions.”
Journal of Pragmatics 26: 475-523.

Dryer, M.S. 2008. “Definite Articles”. In The World Atlas of Language Structures, M.
Haspelmath et al. (ed.),. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library
Ehlich, K. 1982. “Anaphora and Deixis: Same, Similar, or Different?” In Speech,
place and action: Studies in deixis and related topics, R. J. Jarvella & W. Klein
(ed.), 31–59, London: Wiley
Enfield, N. J. 2003. “Demonstratives in Space and Interaction: Data from Lao
Speakers and Implications for Semantic Analysis”. Language 79 (1):82-117.

Fillmore, C.J. 1971. Towards a Theory of Deixis. The PCCLLU Papers 3.4 Hawaii:
Department of Linguistics, University of Hawaii. Reprinted Fillmore, C.J. (1997):
Lectures On Deixis. Stanford: CSLI Publications

Fillmore, C. J. 1982. “Towards a Descriptive Framework for Spatial Deixis”. In
Speech, place and action: Studies in deixis and related topics, R. J. Jarvell & W.
Klein (eds.), 31–59, London: Wiley.

Fillmore, C. J. 1997. Lectures on Deixis Stanford: CSLI Publications.

Givón, T.1983. Topic Continuity in Discourse: Quantified cross-language studies.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Givón, T. 2001. Syntax, vol. 1. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.Greenberg 1978

Grenoble, L.1994. “Discourse Deixis and Information Tracking.” Berkeley Linguistics
Society 20:208-219

Grundy, P. 1995. Doing Pragmatics. London: Edward Arnold.

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

Haiman, J. 1994. “Ritualization and the Development of Language”. In Perspectives
on Grammaticalization, William Pagliuca (ed.), 3-28. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

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

Heine, B., Claudi, U., and Hünnemeyer, F. 1991. “From Cognition to Grammar.
Evidence from African Languages.” In Approaches to grammaticalization,
Traugott & B. Heine (ed.), Vol. 2.1,149-187., Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi & Frederike Hünnemeyer 1993. Grammaticalization: A
Conceptual Framework. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press

Himmelmann, N. P. 1996. “Demonstative in Narrative Discourse: A taxonomy of
Universal Uses”. In Studies in anaphora, Fox (eds.), 205-54. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.

Hopper, P.J. and Traugott E.C. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge
University Press.

Huang, S.F. 1999. “The Emergence of a Grammatical Category Definite Article in
Spoken Chinese”. Journal of Pragmatics 31: 77-94.

Huang, Y. 2007. Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University .

Kuryłowicz, J. 1965, “The Evolution of Grammatical Categories”, Reprinted in J.
Kuryłowicz 1976, Esquisses Linguistiques, vol.2, 38-54. Munich: Fink.

Lakoff, Robin (1974). “Remarks on This and That.” CLS 10:345–356.

Laury, Ritva. 1997. Demonstratives in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Lee, Y.H. 1999. Discourse Functions of He and Che in Taiwanese. MA thesis.
National Taiwan Normal University.

Lehmann, C 1985. “Grammaticalizaiton: Synchronic Variation and Diachronic
Change” Lingua eStile 20:303-318

Levinson, S. C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Levinson, S.C. 2004. “Deixis and Pragmatic”. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, L.
Horn & G. Ward (ed.). Oxford: Blackwell, 97–121.

Lichtenberk, F. 1988. “The Pragmatic Nature of Nominal Anaphora in To’aba’ita.”
Studies in Language 12: 299-344.

Lichtenberk, F. 1996. “On the Gradualness of Grammaticalization.” In Approaches to
Grammaticalization vol.1. Traugott and Heine (ed), 37-80. Amsterdam andPhiladelphia: John Benjamins.

Linde, C. 1979. “Focus of attention and the choice of pronouns in discourse”. In
Discourse and Sntax [Syntax and Semantics 12], T. Givón, editor, 12. Academic
Press.

Linde, C. and Labov, W. 1975. “Spatial Networks as a Site for the Study of Language
and Thought.” Language 51, 924-939.

Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lyons, J. 1979 “Deixis and Anaphora.” In The Development of Conversation and
Discourse, T Myers (ed.), 88-103. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Lyons, C. 1999. Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Matisoff, J. A. 1991. The Grammar of Lahu. in Linguistics 75. Berkeley: University
of California Publications

Meillet, Antoine. 1912. L’évolution des formes grammaticales. Scientia (Rivista di
Scienza) 12, No. 26, 6. Reprinted in Meillet 1968, 130-48

McNeill, D., Cassell, J., & Levy, E. T. 1993. “Abstract Deixis”. Semiotica, 95: 5-19

Prince, E. F. 1981. “Towards a Taxonomy of Given-New Information.” In Radical
Pragmatics. P. Cole (ed.), 223-255 New York: Academic Press.

Quirk, R. and Greenbaum, S.and Leech, G. and Svartvik, j. 1972. A Grammar of
Contemporary English. London: Longman.Quirk, R. S. Greenbaum.

Quirk, Randolph and Greenbaum, Sidney and Leech, Geoffrey and Svartvik, Jan.
1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.

Saeed, J. 1997. Semantics. Cambridege: Blackwell Publishers.

Schiffrin, D. 1987. Discourse Marker. Cambridge: Blackwell

Sidner, C. L. 1983. “Focusing in the comprehension of definite anaphora”. In Computational Models of Discourse, M.Brady, and R.C. Berwick (ed.), 267-230
Cambridge: MIT Press

Tao, H.Y.1999. “The Grammar of Demonstratives in Mandarin Conversational
Discourse: A Case Study.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 27.1: 69-103.
Traugott, E.C. 1982. “From Propositional to Textual and Expressive Meanings: Some
Semantic Pragmatic Aspects of Grammaticalization.” In Perspectives on
Historical Linguistics, W.P. Lehmann and Y. Malkiel (ed.), 245–271.
Amsterdam: Benjamins

Traugott, E. C. 1995. “Subjectification in Grammaticalization.” In Subjectivity and
Subjectivisation in Language, Dieter Stein and Susan Wright (ed.), 31-54.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Traugott, E.C. and E. König. 1991. “The Semantics-Pragmatics of
Grammaticalization Revisited.” In Approaches to grammaticalization, E.C.
Traugott & B. Heine (ed.), 189-218. John Benjamins.

Wald, B. 1983. “Referents and Topics within and Across Discourse Units:
Observations from Current Vernacular English.” In Discourse perspectives on
Syntax, F.Klein-Andreu (ed.), 91–116. New York:Academic Press,

Webber, B. L. 1991. “Structure and Ostension in the Interpretation of Discourse
Deixis.” Language and Cognitive Processes 6:107-135

Xu, J.D. 1990. Taiwanyu Gailun (An Introduction to Taiwanese). Taipei:
Foundation of Taiwanese Research and Development.

Yang, X.F. 1992.Taiwan Minnanyu Yufagao (Manuscript of the Syntax of Southern Min in Taiwan). Taipei: Da-an.