From deixis to politeness: the evolution from the egocentric to the duocentric “I” of verbal interaction
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25267/Pragmalinguistica.2009.i17.07Info
Abstract
Not even the most recent studies about linguistics theories consider that there is a necessary and intrinsic relation among the different tools used by speakers. This paper intends to find a possible relation between two apparently different concepts, deixis and politeness, by doing a diachronic revision of theories in order to show how they are eventually connected through the second person, the listener. Taking this connection into account, we consider the possibility that deictic theories develop towards the analysis of interaction, which must take into account the importance of the listener in the linguistic choice of speaker. This fact explains that the abstract ego of deixis theories has turned into an ego who interacts with a you; this is why we claim the evolution from egocentrism to duocentrism, studying social deixis and other deictic uses, connected with politeness, in interaction and, obviously, in pragmatics.
Keywords
Downloads
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2009 Pragmalingüística

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Benveniste, E. (1974). “De la subjetividad en el lenguaje”, en Problemas de Lingüística General, Madrid: Siglo XXI. 180-185.
Brown, P. & S. Levinson (1978, 1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bühler, K. (1950, 1967). Teoría del lenguaje. Madrid: Revista de Occidente.
Escavy Zamora, R. (1987). El pronombre. Categorías y funciones en la teoría gramatical. Murcia: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia.
Fillmore, CH. J.(1982). “Towards a Descriptive Framework for Spatial Deixis”, en Jarvella, R. & Klein (eds.), Speech, Place and Action. Chichester: John Wiley. 31-59.
— (1997). Lectures on Deixis. Stanford, California: CSLI, Publications.
Grice, H.P. (1975). “Logic and Conversation”, en P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.),Syntax and Semantics, vol. 3, Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press. 41-58.
Habermas, J. (1994). Teoría de la acción comunicativa: complemento y estudios previos.Madrid: Cátedra.
Kerbratt-Orecchioni, K. (1980). L’énonciation,de la subjectivité dans le langage. París: Armand Colin.
— (1990). Les interactions verbales. Paris: Armand Colin.
Lakoff, R. (1973). “La lógica de la cortesía o acuérdate de dar las gracias”, en M.T. Julio & R. Muñoz (eds.), Textos clásicos de Pragmática. Madrid: Arco/Libro. 1998: 259-280.
Leech, G.N. (1983). Principios de Pragmática. La Rioja: Publicaciones Universidad de la Rioja. 1997.
Levinson, C. S. (1983, 1989). Pragmática. Barcelona: Teide.
— (2004). “Deixis”, en Laurence R Horn & Gregory Ward (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics, Oxford: Blackwell. 97-121.
Lyons, J. (1977). Semántica. Barcelona: Teide. 1980.
— (1982). “Deixis and Subjectivity: Loquor ergo sum?”, enJarvella & Klein (eds.), Speech, Place and Action. Chichester: John Wiley. 101-124.
Prince, E.F. (1981). “Hacia una taxonomía de la información dada-nueva”, en María Teresa Julio y Ricardo Muñoz (eds.) Textos clásicos de pragmática. Madrid: Arco/Libro. 1998: 215-278.
Saussure, F. (1973). Curso de Lingüística General. Buenos Aires: Losada.
Vicente Mateu, J.A. (1994). La deixis. Egocentrismo y subjetividad en el lenguaje. Murcia: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia.

