语用认知视角下的指称研究
摘要
指称是语言学及认知科学研究的一个重大课题。在传统的语义学中,指称理论研究的是语言表达式与指称对象之间的关联,即语言和现实之间所具有的某种对应的或映射的关系。这一研究方向在相当长的时间内决定了指称理论的命运。然而,由于这种研究本身固有的局限性,指称理论正在不断地演变,指称从绝对的确定性到相对的非确定性,研究方法从反心理主义到意向性,开始朝着语用和认知两大方向转变。本文不再只是对专名和通名的对象作出静态的描述性说明,不再仅从语言的内部去探究语词的指称性,而更多地追求在动态的语境中语词的指称意义。
本研究从语用和认知的角度出发,对语言中指称表达式进行尽可能全面的描写和梳理。基于对传统指称理论的分析和补充,本文利用当代语言学最新研究成果,重新探讨指称现象背后的语用认知机制,最终在关联激活和认知概念的理论框架下建构起一个新的有关指称运作的认知模型。本文是以语用指称性为主线,对指称现象从意义、语境、认知等方面进行多维度的综合考察。本文首先回顾了历史上具有代表性的指称理论,指出了指称研究转向语用和认知的必然性。本文的前半部分是从指称性定义、话语规则和指索词应用三个方面来阐述指称表达式的普通用法中语用指称性的问题。在第二章中,本文从陈平先生(2009)的《指称性的各方面》(Aspects of referentiality)一文出发,主要讨论了语用指称性的相对不确定性,并总结出指称性的语用制约条件。第三章谈的是如何在话语范围内确定和保持指称,本文从黄衍先生(1994/2007a)所构建的回指理论出发,探讨了零形回指(zero anaphora)先行词的搜索过程。第四章讨论的是指索词(indexical)的指称,探讨了语义解码和语用推理在指索词的理解过程中所起的作用。本文后半部分是在语用认知的视角下对指称表达式的特殊用法——延指——的语用指称性问题所作的初步探讨。第五章揭示了延指这一现象的产生机制,并介绍了其意象图式结构——延指等价句(deferred equative)。在此基础上,第六章将隐喻指称和转喻指称也归入延指,分析了它们之间的共性和差异,提出认知概念与关联刺激能够很好地结合在一起来解决延指理解的问题。本文最后在“指称是一种语用行为”论断的基础上,勾画了对指称作进一步研究的未来方向。
本文阐释的重点是延指现象。这一概念是南博格(Nunberg,1978)首次提出的,至今仍是国际语言学家讨论的热点。然而,还未曾有人试图从语用认知的角度讨论过这一现象的产生机制。而本文就是要揭示延指现象的语用认知机制：表达的经济性→语义的异常性→缺陷可修补性→话语可接受性,而且指出它在言语交际中呈现出一种规约化、普遍化的语用趋势。
延指也是一种普遍的语言现象,在世界各种语言中都有不同程度的表现。本文从已有的英语指称研究入手,对汉语指称表达式的应用进行分析,是一个英汉对比的研究。本文的语料英汉交叉,相互补充,力求为“语言是如何生成和理解的”这一重大问题的研究找到某种新的理据,以此探讨人类认知和语言规则的普遍性。
Reference is one of the major topics in linguistics and cognitive science. In traditional semantics, reference theories aim to study the relationship between linguistic expressions and their referents, i.e. a correspondence or mapping between language and reality. This kind of research has been determining the fate of reference theory for a long time. However, due to the inherent limitations of this research, theories of reference have been evolving towards the pragmatic as well as cognitive perspectives:referring expressions are from absolutely definite to relatively indeterminate; the research methods are from anti-mentalist to intentional. The central theme of the study of reference is not only a static description of proper and general names, or an exploration of referentiality inside language, but a pursuit for the referent of words in the dynamic context.
From the perspectives of pragmatics and cognition, this thesis describes and classifies referring expressions in language as comprehensively as possible. By presenting an overview of traditional theories of reference, and drawing insights from the latest developments in contemporary linguistics, this thesis explores both the pragmatic and cognitive mechanisms underlying a variety of referential phenomena with a view to constructing a novel pragmatic-cognitive model of reference under the theorectical framework of relevance activation and cognitve concept. By addressing the interaction between meaning, context and cognition, the thesis is a multidimensional survey of reference with a special focus on pragmatic referentiality. It begins with a critical review of some classic theories on reference and points out the inevitability of the pragmatic-cognitive turn in the study of reference. The first half of the thesis analyzes pragmatic referentiality with regard to referring expressions from the aspects of its definition, discourse principles and applications to indexicals. Starting from "Aspects of referentiality" (Chen,2009), the thesis primarily discusses the relative indeterminacy of pragmatic referentiality and spells out the pragmatic constraints on referentiality in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 explores how to determine the referent and maintain reference in spoken discourse. Following the theory of anaphora that Huang (1994/2007a) has constructed, the thesis delineates the antecedent search procedure for zero anaphors. Chapter 4 contributes to the discussion of the reference of indexicals, exploring what roles semantic decoding and pragmatic inference play in the interpretation of indexicals. The second half makes tentative research on a special use of referring expressions—deferred reference—from the perspectives of pragmatics and cognition. Chapter 5 seeks to discover the productive mechanism behind this phenomenon and introduces its image schema structure—deferred equative. Based on the previous conclusion, Chapter 6 points out that metaphoric reference and metonymic reference are different forms of deferred reference. The author analyzes the similarities and differences between them, and argues that the combination of cognitive concept and stimulus of relevance can be a good resolution to the interpretation of deferred reference. At last, based on the statement that "referring is a pragmatic act", the thesis outlines the future orientation in the field of pragmatic and cognitive studies on reference.
The thesis puts an emphasis on deferred reference, which was first introduced by Nunberg (1978). It remains a hot topic in the study of linguisitics all over the world, but no one seems to seek the productive mechanism of this phenomenon from the perspecives of pragmatics and cognition. Therefore, the aim of the thesis is to discover its pragmatic and cognitive mechanism spelling out as:functional economy→semantic anomaly→defective repair-ability→utterance acceptability, which is a conventionalized, universal, pragmatic tendency in verbal communication.
Deferred reference is also a universal language phenomenon, diversely displayed in different knids of languages around the world. Starting from the previous research on reference in English, the thesis also analyzes the application of referring expressions in Chinese. Thus, it becomes a comparison study between English and Chinese. The data are from English and Chinese, which can be complementary to each other. The thesis tries to find new evidences for the study of "how lanugage is generated and understood", for the purpose of exploring the universality in human cognition and language rules.
本研究从语用和认知的角度出发,对语言中指称表达式进行尽可能全面的描写和梳理。基于对传统指称理论的分析和补充,本文利用当代语言学最新研究成果,重新探讨指称现象背后的语用认知机制,最终在关联激活和认知概念的理论框架下建构起一个新的有关指称运作的认知模型。本文是以语用指称性为主线,对指称现象从意义、语境、认知等方面进行多维度的综合考察。本文首先回顾了历史上具有代表性的指称理论,指出了指称研究转向语用和认知的必然性。本文的前半部分是从指称性定义、话语规则和指索词应用三个方面来阐述指称表达式的普通用法中语用指称性的问题。在第二章中,本文从陈平先生(2009)的《指称性的各方面》(Aspects of referentiality)一文出发,主要讨论了语用指称性的相对不确定性,并总结出指称性的语用制约条件。第三章谈的是如何在话语范围内确定和保持指称,本文从黄衍先生(1994/2007a)所构建的回指理论出发,探讨了零形回指(zero anaphora)先行词的搜索过程。第四章讨论的是指索词(indexical)的指称,探讨了语义解码和语用推理在指索词的理解过程中所起的作用。本文后半部分是在语用认知的视角下对指称表达式的特殊用法——延指——的语用指称性问题所作的初步探讨。第五章揭示了延指这一现象的产生机制,并介绍了其意象图式结构——延指等价句(deferred equative)。在此基础上,第六章将隐喻指称和转喻指称也归入延指,分析了它们之间的共性和差异,提出认知概念与关联刺激能够很好地结合在一起来解决延指理解的问题。本文最后在“指称是一种语用行为”论断的基础上,勾画了对指称作进一步研究的未来方向。
本文阐释的重点是延指现象。这一概念是南博格(Nunberg,1978)首次提出的,至今仍是国际语言学家讨论的热点。然而,还未曾有人试图从语用认知的角度讨论过这一现象的产生机制。而本文就是要揭示延指现象的语用认知机制：表达的经济性→语义的异常性→缺陷可修补性→话语可接受性,而且指出它在言语交际中呈现出一种规约化、普遍化的语用趋势。
延指也是一种普遍的语言现象,在世界各种语言中都有不同程度的表现。本文从已有的英语指称研究入手,对汉语指称表达式的应用进行分析,是一个英汉对比的研究。本文的语料英汉交叉,相互补充,力求为“语言是如何生成和理解的”这一重大问题的研究找到某种新的理据,以此探讨人类认知和语言规则的普遍性。
Reference is one of the major topics in linguistics and cognitive science. In traditional semantics, reference theories aim to study the relationship between linguistic expressions and their referents, i.e. a correspondence or mapping between language and reality. This kind of research has been determining the fate of reference theory for a long time. However, due to the inherent limitations of this research, theories of reference have been evolving towards the pragmatic as well as cognitive perspectives:referring expressions are from absolutely definite to relatively indeterminate; the research methods are from anti-mentalist to intentional. The central theme of the study of reference is not only a static description of proper and general names, or an exploration of referentiality inside language, but a pursuit for the referent of words in the dynamic context.
From the perspectives of pragmatics and cognition, this thesis describes and classifies referring expressions in language as comprehensively as possible. By presenting an overview of traditional theories of reference, and drawing insights from the latest developments in contemporary linguistics, this thesis explores both the pragmatic and cognitive mechanisms underlying a variety of referential phenomena with a view to constructing a novel pragmatic-cognitive model of reference under the theorectical framework of relevance activation and cognitve concept. By addressing the interaction between meaning, context and cognition, the thesis is a multidimensional survey of reference with a special focus on pragmatic referentiality. It begins with a critical review of some classic theories on reference and points out the inevitability of the pragmatic-cognitive turn in the study of reference. The first half of the thesis analyzes pragmatic referentiality with regard to referring expressions from the aspects of its definition, discourse principles and applications to indexicals. Starting from "Aspects of referentiality" (Chen,2009), the thesis primarily discusses the relative indeterminacy of pragmatic referentiality and spells out the pragmatic constraints on referentiality in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 explores how to determine the referent and maintain reference in spoken discourse. Following the theory of anaphora that Huang (1994/2007a) has constructed, the thesis delineates the antecedent search procedure for zero anaphors. Chapter 4 contributes to the discussion of the reference of indexicals, exploring what roles semantic decoding and pragmatic inference play in the interpretation of indexicals. The second half makes tentative research on a special use of referring expressions—deferred reference—from the perspectives of pragmatics and cognition. Chapter 5 seeks to discover the productive mechanism behind this phenomenon and introduces its image schema structure—deferred equative. Based on the previous conclusion, Chapter 6 points out that metaphoric reference and metonymic reference are different forms of deferred reference. The author analyzes the similarities and differences between them, and argues that the combination of cognitive concept and stimulus of relevance can be a good resolution to the interpretation of deferred reference. At last, based on the statement that "referring is a pragmatic act", the thesis outlines the future orientation in the field of pragmatic and cognitive studies on reference.
The thesis puts an emphasis on deferred reference, which was first introduced by Nunberg (1978). It remains a hot topic in the study of linguisitics all over the world, but no one seems to seek the productive mechanism of this phenomenon from the perspecives of pragmatics and cognition. Therefore, the aim of the thesis is to discover its pragmatic and cognitive mechanism spelling out as:functional economy→semantic anomaly→defective repair-ability→utterance acceptability, which is a conventionalized, universal, pragmatic tendency in verbal communication.
Deferred reference is also a universal language phenomenon, diversely displayed in different knids of languages around the world. Starting from the previous research on reference in English, the thesis also analyzes the application of referring expressions in Chinese. Thus, it becomes a comparison study between English and Chinese. The data are from English and Chinese, which can be complementary to each other. The thesis tries to find new evidences for the study of "how lanugage is generated and understood", for the purpose of exploring the universality in human cognition and language rules.
引文
①文中首次出现的外国名字统一用中文(英文)表示,而后再出现均用中文。
②柏拉图认为,自然界中有形的东西是流动的,但是构成这些有形物质的“形式”或“理念”却是永恒不变的；我们唯一能够真正了解的,只有那些能够运用理智来了解的“形式”或者“理念”。亚里士多德是柏拉图的学生,但他对柏拉图的这一观点作出了批评：他虽然同意一个事物的“形式”是亘古不变的,但他认为这个“形式”本身并不存在,而是人们在感受到实物后形成的概念。
③ Bach, Kent. On referring and not referring. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (Eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:15.
① Martinich, A. P. The Philosophy of Language,3rd edition. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1996:18.
② Frege, Gottlob.Uber Sinn und Bedeutung. in Zeitschrift fur Philosophie und philosophische Kritik 1892(100):
25-50. Translated as On sense and nominatum. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:199-211.
①柏拉图著、严群译,《泰阿泰德智术术之师》,北京：商务印书馆,1963年。
② Frege, Gottlob. Logic. In Hans Hermes, Friedrich Kambartel& Friedrich Kaulbach (Eds.), Posthumous Writings. Oxford:Blackwell,1897/1979:126-151.
① Russel, Bertrand. On denoting. Mind 1905(14):479-93. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:212-220.
②赵春曦,语言悖论的哲学问题,《学术交流》2009年第3期,第27页。
③ Russel, Bertrand. Descriptions. Ch.16 of Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy. London:George Allen and Unwin,1919:167-180. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996: 221-227.
① Strawson, Peter F. On referring. Mind 1950(59):323. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:231.
② Frege, Gottlob, The Foundations of Arithmetic (Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik). John L. Austin (Trans.), Oxford:Blackwell,1959:x.
③斯特劳森,《论指称》,载于A.P马蒂尼奇编、牟博等译,《语言哲学》,北京：商务印书馆,1998年,第423页。
① Kripke, Saul.. Naming and necessity. In Gilbert Harman& Donald Davidson (Eds.), Semantics of Natural Language. Dordrecht:Reidel,1972:253-255. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:272-287.
①《中国大百科全书》哲学卷,北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1985年,第1063页。
②史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第731页。
③史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第72页。
④孙通海译注,《庄子》,北京：中华书局,2007年,第221页。
①楼宇烈,《王弼集校释》,北京：中华书局,1999年,第311页。
②史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第1106页。
③史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第2331页。
④冯友兰,《中国哲学简史》,北京：北京大学出版社,1985年,第100页。
⑤孙通海译注,《庄子》,北京：中华书局,2007年,第383页。
①《公孙龙子·齐俗训·史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第5029页。
②史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第4376页。
③史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第4329页。
①黄娴、张克亮,汉语零形回指研究综述,《中文信息学报》2009年第4期,第11页。
②朱德熙,《语法讲义》,北京：商务印书馆,1982年,第101-102页。
①陆俭明,《八十年代中国语法研究》,北京：商务印书馆,1993年,第94页。
②本书是由1998年首版的,而本文参考的是以下版本：张斌,《汉语语法学》,上海：上海教育出版社,2003年,第90页。
③王淑华,现代汉语指称与陈述问题研究综述,《广西社会科学》2005年第5期,第153页。
①言语行为的三分法在很多文献(如何兆熊1999年出版的《新编语用学概要》)中通常被译为言内、言外和言后行为,为免引起混淆,故作者在此也沿用这种译法。但是姜望琪(2000)认为,illocutionary act"中的“il-”不是否定的意思,而是"in, within"的意思。因此,他对奥斯汀的“言外行为理论”的翻译问题进行了纠正,把"illocutionary act"翻译成“行事行为”。
② Firth, John. R. Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951. London:Oxford University Press,1957:11.
③ Frege, Gottlob,. The Foundations of Arithmetic (Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik). John L. Austin (Trans.), Oxford:Blackwell,1959:ⅹ.
①J.R.塞尔著,刘叶涛译,《意向性》,上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年,第239页。
① Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1657-1674.
① Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1659.
② Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1659.
① Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1658.
② Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):.1659.
③ Mey, Jacob L. Pragmatics:An Introduction. Oxford:Blackwell,1993:89-99.
① Mill. John S. A Svstem of Logic, definitive 8th edition. London:Longmans. Green and Company.1872/1949:20.
② Russel, Bertrand. Descriptions. Ch.16 of Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy. London:George Allen and Unwin.1919:175.
③ Donnellan, Keith S. Reference and definite descriptions. Philosophical Review 1966(75):297
④ Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1660.
① Bach, Kent. On referring and not referring. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy. Hedberg (Eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:13.
② Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1665.
①Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1660.
②见2009年2月9日《文汇报》,题为“回荡大巴山的呼唤”的报道。
①见2005年8月4日《钱江晚报》D16版。
②见 Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1662,例(13)、(14)。陈平论述道：TheNPs in nonspecific use in (13) and (14)...prepuspposes the existence of an entity by the description of the NP.
①Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1662.
②Lyons, Christopher. Definiteness. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1999:7.
①见Chen,Ping.Aspects of referentiality.Journa of Pragmatics 2009(8):1665.原引自Lyons,John.Semantics. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1977:189.
②Chen,Ping.Aspects of referentiality.Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1665.
①Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8) 1663.
②同上。
①改编自陈平的论述："The description may not fit the entity in question as a matter of fact in the actual world.ormay only be employed in a scarstic or joking manner, as when an actual usurper is referred to as 'the king', or the term 'boss' is used by a husband to refer to his wife." 见 Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1660.
① Bach, Kent. On referring and not referring. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy. Hedberg (Eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:20.
① Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora:a partial pragmatic reduction of binding and control phenomena. Pragmatics Journal of Linguistics 1987(23):401-402.
① Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora:a partial pragmatic reduction of binding and control phenomena. Pragmatics Journal of Linguistics 1987(23):401-402.
① Prince, Ellen F. The ZPG letter:Subjects, definiteness, and information status. In Sandra Thompson& William C. Mann (Eds.), Discourse Description:Diverse Analyses of a Fund-Raising Text. Amsterdan: John Benjamins, 1992:304.
②同上。
③同上。
① Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 205.
②同上。
③ Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 206-207.
①见2009年12月20日新华社,题为“新当选的欧洲理事会常任主席范龙佩”的报道。
②陈平,汉语零形回指的话语分析,《中国语文》1987年第5期,第367页。
③同上。其中T是Topic(主题)的缩写,C是Comment(评述)的缩写。
① Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora:a partial pragmatic reduction of binding and control phenomena. Pragmatics Journal of Linguistics 1987(23):401-02.
① Airel, Mira. Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. London:Routledge,1990:73.
② Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora:a partial pragmatic reduction of binding and control phenomena. Pragmatics Journal of Linguistics 1987(23):401-402.
① Coulthard, M. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. London:Longman,1977:74.
② Gundel, Jeanette, Hedberg, Nancy& Zacharski, Ron. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 1993(69):275.
① Gundel, Jeanette, Hedberg, Nancy& Zacharski, Ron. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 1993(69):275.
②见2009年20期《新民周刊》,题为“满城争说周立波”的报道。
③见2009年2月9日《文汇报》,题为“回荡大巴山的呼唤”的报道。
①陈平,释汉语中与名词性成分相关的四组概念,《中国语文》1987年第2期,第86页。
① Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 115.
② Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 145.
③ Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 149-150.
①见2009年10月10日《文汇报》,题为“‘云计算’正开始大规模推广应用”的报道。
② Xu, Liejiong.& Langendoen, D. Terence. Topic structures in Chinese. Language 1985(61):1-27.
③ Shi, Dingxu. Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language 2000(76):383-408.
① Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 152.
② Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 145.
①由" indexical"一词翻译而来,国内学者有将其译为指索词、标示词、索引词等等,作者认为该词类既有索引的成分,又有指示的功能,因此在本文中以“指索词”相称。
②见2009年6月9日《新快报》题为“贡米的命运是‘快女’的最大看点”的报道。
③见2007年2月16日《纽约时报》2008年美国总统候选人鲁迪·朱利安尼(Rudy Giuliani)的高级顾问安东尼·卡波内提(Anthony Carbonetti)的讲话。
④ Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):20.
① Donnellan, Keith S. Reference and definite descriptions. Philosophical Review 1966(75):281-304.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Descriptive indexicals and indexical descriptions. In Marga Reimer& Anne Bezuidenhout (Eds.), Descriptions and Beyond:An Interdisciplinary Collection of Essays on Definite and Indefinite Descriptions and Other Related Phenomena. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2004a:261.
① Kripke, Saul. Naming and necessity. In Gilbert Harman& Donald Davidson (Eds.), Semantics of Natural Language. Dordrecht:Reidel,1972:253-255.
①Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):14.
②Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):8-9.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):15.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):21.
③同上。
①Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):29.
① Wilson, Deirdre& Sperber, Dan. Linguistic form and relevance. Lingua 1993(90.1/2):20.
② Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Relevance:Communication and Cognition. Oxford:Blackwell,1986/1995: 270.
①Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):14.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):21.
②改编自：Mick Jagger over there wants to buy you a drink. 见 Bezuidenhout, Anne. Pragmatics, semantics underdetermination, and the referential-attributive distinction. Mind 1997(106):376.
①陆俭明,隐喻、转喻散议,《外国语》2009年第1期,第47页。
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):7.
②王天华,第一人称指索词的非指示现象分析,《黑龙江社会科学》2008年第3期,第129页。
③同上。
③王天华,第一人称指索词的非指示现象分析,《黑龙江社会科学》2008年第3期,第130页。
① Borthen, Kaja. On how we interpret plural pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 2010(7):1812-1813.
② Borthen, Kaia. On how we interpret plural pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 2010(7).1799.
③ Borthen, Kaja. On how we interpret plural pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 2010(7):1811.
①Pullum,K.Geoffrey.The next president and their pronoun gender.2008年1月8日张贴在以下网址: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/～myl/languagelog/。
①政治正确性是指为了避免真实存在的或所谓的不公正的歧视而采用的变换另一种称呼的行为,例如为了避免出于种族、性别、性取向、身体残障、宗教或政治观点的不同而产生的歧视或不满。
② Xu, Liejiong. A special use of the third person singular pronoun. Cahiers de Linguistique—Asie Orientale 1999(28):5.
②如果(61)中的单数代词“他”被替换成复数形式“他们”,那么这个复数代词的指称就不可能被理解为一个集合,而是不同的个体,如单独行动的小偷,这样就违背了言者把那些小偷归于一个集合一“这帮小偷”—的意图。
②Chierchia, Gennaro. Dynamics of Meaning. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1995:116.
① Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:73.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. The pragmatics of deferred interpretation. In Laurence R. Horn& Gregory Ward (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford:Blackwell,2004b:356.
③2010年9月22日《南都周刊》2010年度第36期,见http://www.nbweekly.com/Print/Article/11198 O.shtml。
④见2009年2月27日《每日商报》第12版教育·职场,题为“阿里巴巴周末又有招聘会”的报道。
⑤见2006年11月6日《每日商报》第10版健康。
③ Nunberg, Geoffrey. The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions:polysemy. Linguistics and Philosophy 1979(3): 182.
①从南博格的例句改编而来,原句为：The ham sandwich is sitting at table 20. 见 Nunberg, Geoffrey. The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions:polysemy. Linguistics and Philosophy 1979(3):149.
① Grice, H. Paul. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole& Jerry Morgan (Eds.) Syntax and Semantics, Volume 3. New York:Academic Press,1975:45.
② Clark, Herbert H.& Wilkes-Gibbs, Deanna. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition 1986(22):1. Clark, Herbert. H. Using Language. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1996:20-24.
① Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Relevance:Communication and Cognition. Oxford:Blackwell,1986:158.
② Davis, Wayne. Nondescriptive Meaning and Reference:An Ideational Semantics. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2005:71-119.
① Searle, John R. Metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1979b:114.
①2009年2月9日《瞭望东方周刊》,题为“尴尬的候鸟天堂”的报道,见http://www.lwdf.cn/oriental/cover_story/ 2009020916361398.htm。
②文学作品网“鱼与鸟的故事”,见http://www.9c99.com/wenxue/gushihui/aiqin/18633.html。
③见2008年4月20日《杭州日报》第5版都市·热线新闻,题为“牵手”的报道。
④小书房公益儿童文学网“随风而来的玛丽阿姨”第七章“鸟太太”,见http://www.dreamkinland.cn/cpth/mlay/ 007.htm。
⑤ Moreno, Rosa E. Vega. Creativity and Convention:The Pragmatics of Everyday Figurative Speech. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2007:116.
①这是作者与朋友在西餐厅各自点了牛排和羊排套餐,服务员上菜时间的一句话。
②刘耀武,一种句式的五种观点—“鳗”句论战的始末,《日语学习与研究》1996年第2期,第1页。
③ Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):109.
④ Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):111.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):112. Nunberg, Geoffrey. The pragmatics of deferred interpretation. In Laurence R. Horn& Gregory Ward (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford:Blackwell,2004:351.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):109.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions:polysemy. Linguistics and Philosophy 1979(3): 156.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):115.
② Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:77.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):129.
②同上。
①同上。
② Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:81.
① Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:74.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):115.
①由于(91)a-c是包含关系从句的句子,为方便上下的中英文对照,所以作者只是对它们作了字面翻译,并不是其英文表达的实义。实义应该如下：(91a)约翰是看起来很好吃的泰式炒粉。(91b)*约翰是开了一辆劳斯莱斯的泰式炒粉。(91c)约翰在跟开了一辆劳斯莱斯的那个泰式炒粉说话。从以上例句来看,将英文的延指等价句/非等价句译为中文似乎都是不适用的。
② Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:88.
①余小强和邹颖娟(2005)指出,同位基是等价句中两名词短语间等值关系之所以存在的基础,即决定在何范围内两个名词短语间的等值关系成立的因素。见余小强、邹颖娟,论同位关系,《湖南大学学报(社会科学版)》2005年第2期,第94页。
① Morgan, Jerry L. Observations on the pragmatics of metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought, 2nd edition. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1993:133.
②《新周刊》主编,《2003语录》,上海：文汇出版社,2003年,第11页。
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):109.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):111.
③ Jakobson, Roman. Two Aspects of Language and Two Types of Aphasic Disturbances. In Roman Jakobson& Morris Hallie (Eds.), Foundamentals of Language. The Hague:Mouton,1956:90.
①译自life is a journey, 见 Lakoff, George& Turner, Mark. More Than Cool Reason:A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1989:63-64。
①《新周刊》主编,《2003语录》,上海：文汇出版社,2003年,第170页。
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):112-113.
①英语陪生教育出版公司编,《朗文当代高级英语词典》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2004年,第1766页。
②见2005年8月6日,《钱江晚报》第B8版财富·证券。
③《新周刊》主编,《2003语录》,上海：文汇出版社,2003年,第4页。
①束定芳,论隐喻的运作机制,《外语教学与研究》2002年第2期,第99页。
① Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Rhetoric and relevance. In John Bender& David E. Wellbery (Eds.), The Ends of Rhetroic:History, Theory, Practice. Standford:Stanford University Press,1990:149.
①改编自陆的例句：“那家伙,老狐狸一个!”,见陆俭明,隐喻、转喻散议,《外国语》2009年第1期,第45页。
①Lakoff, George& Johnson, Mark. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980:30.
① Lakoff, George. The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thoughts (2nd edition). New York:Cambridge University Press,1993:125.
① Gibbs, Raymond. The Poetics of Mind. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994:5.
② Gibbs, Raymond W.& Tendahl, Markus. Cognitive effort and effects in metaphor comprehension; relevance theory and psycholinguisitcs. Mind and Language 2006(3):379.
① Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Relevance:Communication and Cognition. Oxford:Blackwell,1986:158.
② Carston, Robyn. Thoughts and Utterances:The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford:Blackwell, 2002a:353.
① Moreno, Rosa E. Vega. Creativity and Convention:The Pragmatics of Everyday Figurative Speech. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2007:96.
②见2005年8月2日《钱江晚报》第A12版每日新闻·传媒。
③《新周刊》主编,《2003语录》,上海：文汇出版社,2003年,第17页。
④淘宝门户帮派妈咪宝贝论坛http://bangpai.taobao.com/group/thread/42166-1277056.htm?page=1
① Wilson, Deirdre& Sperber, Dan. Truthfulness and relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 2000(12): 245.
①Lakoff, George& Johnson, Mark. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980:30.
①陆俭明,隐喻、转喻散议,《外国语》2009年第1期,第44页。
②陆俭明,隐喻、转喻散议,《外国语》2009年第1期,第45页。
①茅盾,《子夜》(语文新课标必读丛书：增订版),北京：人民文学出版社,2009年,第375页。
②选自2005年8月《钱江晚报》新闻标题。
①冉永平,词汇语用学及语用充实,《外语教学与研究》2005年第5期,第347页。
②改编自“前申花球员郜林骂朱骏是‘猪头’”,见2010年8月30日中国新闻网题为“为了炒作自己申花俱乐部老板朱骏甘当‘猪头’”的报道,http://www.chinanews.com.cn/ty/2010/08-30/2499892.shtml。
①Lakoff, George& Johnson, Mark. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980:35-39.
②见2009年8月5日《都市快报》第50版汽车·生活,题为“小区车库(位)要不要买?”的报道。
① Wilson, Deirdre& Sperber, Dan. Truthfulness and relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 2000(12): 245.
Abbott, Barbara. Definiteness and indefiniteness. In Laurence R. Horn& Gregory Ward (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford:Blackwell,2004:122-149.
Airel, Mira. Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. London:Routledge,1990.
Apresjan, Ju. Regular polysemy. Linguistics 1973(142):5-32.
Austin, John L. How To Do Things with Words. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1962.
Bach, Kent. Intentions and demostrations. Analysis 1992(52):140-146.
Bach, Kent. On referring and not referring. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy. Hedberg (Eds.), Reference:Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:13-60.
Barsalou, Lawrence W. Ad hoc categories. Memory and Cognition 1983(11): 211-227.
Beaugrande, Robert de& Dressler, Wolfgang. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London:Longman,1981.
Beaugrande, Robert de. Linguistics as discourse:A case study from semantics. Word 1984(35):15-57.
Beaugrande, Robert de. Text, Discourse, and Process:Toward a Multi-disciplinary Science of Texts. Norwood, N.J.:Ablex,1980.
Berckmans, Paul. Demonstrative utterances. Philosophical Studies 1990(60): 281-295.
Bezuidenhout, Anne. Pragmatics, semantics underdetermination, and the referential-attributive distinction. Mind 1997(106):375-10.
Blackmore, Diane. Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford:Blackwell,1987.
Blakemore, Diane. Understanding Utterances:The Pragmatics of Natural Language. Oxford:Blackwell,1990.
Borthen, Kaja. On how we interpret plural pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 2010 (7): 1799-1815.
Brentano, Franz, Psychology from an empirical standpoint,2nd English edition, Antos C. Rancurello, D. B. Terrell& Linda L. McAlister (Trans.), New York: Routledge,1874/1995.
Bresnan, Joan. Control and complementation. In Bresnan, Joan. (Ed.), The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press, 1982:282-390.
Carnap, Rudolf. Introduction to Semantics. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press,1942.
Carston, Robyn& Wilson, Deirdre. The pragmatics of metaphor:the "emergent property" issue. Paper presented at Metaphor:an Interdisciplinary Conference. University of London, January 2005.
Carston, Robyn. Enrichment and loosening:complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed. UCL Working Papers in Linguistic 1996(8):61-88.
Carston, Robyn. Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics. In Ruth Kempson (Ed.), Mental Representations:the Interface between Language and Reality. Cambridge:Cambridge Press,1988:155-181.
Carston, Robyn. Linguistic meaning, communicated meaning and cognitive pragmatics. Mind and Language 2002b(17):127-148.
Carston, Robyn. Thoughts and Utterances:The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford:Blackwell,2002a.
Chen, Jing& Wu, Yicheng. Less well-behaved pronouns:Singular they in English and plural ta'it/he/she' in Chinese, Journal of Pragmatics 2011(1):407-410.
Chen, Jing, Huang, Huaxin& Wu, Yicheng. Aspects of pragmatic referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2010(3):870-874.
Chen, Jing, Huang, Huaxin& Wu, Yicheng. Topic expression, information saliency and anaphora resolution. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(9):1703-1706.
Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1657-1674.
Chierchia, Gennaro. Dynamics of Meaning. Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Chomsky, Noam. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht:Foris,1981.
Clark, Herbert H.& Wilkes-Gibbs, Deanna. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition 1986(22):1-39.
Clark, Herbert H. Making sense of nonce sense. In Herbert. H. Clark (Ed.), Arenas of Language Use. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1993:305-340.
Clark, Herbert H. Using Language. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1996.
Copestake, Ann& Briscoe, Ted. Semi-productive polysemy and sense extension. Journal of semantics 1995(1):15-68.
Culicover, Peter W.& Jackendoff, Ray. Control is not movement. Linguistic Inquiry 2001(32):493-512.
Culicover, Peter W.& Wilkins, Wendy. Control, PRO, and the projection principle. Language 1986(62):120-153.
Davis, Wayne. Nondescriptive Meaning and Reference:An ideational semantics. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2005.
Dewey, John. Peirce's Theory of Linguistic Signs, Thought, and Meaning. The Journal of Philosophy 1946(4):85-95.
Donnellan, Keith S. Reference and definite descriptions. Philosophical Review 1966(75):281-304.
Donnellan, Keith S. Speaker reference, descriptions, and anaphora. In Peter Cole (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics 9:Pragmatics. New York:Academic Press,1978:47-68.
Donnellan, Keith S. The contingent a priori and rigid designators. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 1977(2):12-27.
Fauconnier, Gilles& Turner, Mark. Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science 1998(2):133-187.
Fauconnier, Gilles. Mapping in Thought and Language. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1997.
Fauconnier, Gilles. Mental Spaces. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press,1994.
Firth, John R. Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951. London:Oxford University Press, 1957:11.
Fodor, Janet D.& Sag, Ivan. Referential and quantificational indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy 1982(5):355-398.
Frege, Gottlob, The Foundations of Arithmetic (Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik) John L. Austin (Trans.), Oxford:Blackwell,1959.
Frege, Gottlob. Logic. In Hans Hermes, Friedrich Kambartel& Friedrich Kaulbach (Eds.), Posthumous Writings. Oxford:Blackwell,1897/1979:126-151.
Frege, Gottlob. Uber Sinn und Bedeutung. in Zeitschrift fur Philosophie und philosophische Kritik 1892(100):25-50. Translated as On sense and nominatum. In A. P. Martinich (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press, 1996:199-211.
Geluykens, Ronald. Information flow and conversational discourse:a new approach to the given-new distinction. In Eija Ventola (Ed.), Functional and Systemic Linguistics. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter,1991:141-168.
Gibbs, Raymond W.& Tendahl, Markus. Cognitive effort and effects in metaphor comprehension; relevance theory and psycholinguisitcs. Mind and Language 2006(3):379-403.
Gibbs, Raymond W. The Poetics of Mind. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Givon, Talmy. Topic Continuity in Discourse:A Quantitative Cross Language Study. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,1983a.
Givon, Talmy. Topic continuity in discourse:An introduction. In Talmy Giv6n (Ed.), Topic Contiuity in Discourse:A Quantitative Cross-Language Studies. Amsterdam& Philadelphia:John Benjamins,1983b:1-44.
Glucksberg, Sam& Keysar, Boaz. How metaphors work. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought,2nd edition. New York:Cambridge University Press, 1993:401-24.
Glucksberg, Sam& Keysar, Boaz. Understanding metaphorical comparisons:beyond similarity. Psychological Review 1990(1):3-18.
Glucksberg, Sam, Manfredi, D.& McGlone, Matthew. Metaphor comprehension: how metaphors create new categories. In T. Ward, S. Smith& J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative Thought:an Investigation of Conceptual Structures and Processes. Washington, D.C:American Psychological Association,1997:327-350.
Goldblatt, Robert. Mathematical modal logic:A view of its evolution. In Dov Gabbay & John Woods (Eds.), Handbook of the History of Logic, Vol.7:Logic and the Modalities In the Twentieth Century. Amsterdam:Elsevier BV,2006.
Grice, H. Paul. Logic and conversation, In Peter Cole& Jerry Morgan (Eds.) Syntax and Semantics, Volume 3. New York:Academic Press,1975:41-58.
Grice, H. Paul. Vacuous name. In Donald Davidson& Jaako Hintikka (Eds.), Words and Objections. Dordrecht:Reidel,1969:118-145.
Gundel, Jeanette, Hedberg, Nancy& Zacharski, Ron. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 1993(69):274-307.
Gundel, Jeanette. K.1988. Universals of topic-comment structure. In Michael Hammond, Edith A. Moravcsik& Jessica R. Wirth (Eds.), Studies in Syntactic Typology. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,1988:209-239.
Halliday, M. A. K. Comparison and translation. In M. A. K. Halliday, Angus McIntosh & Peter Strevens (Eds.), The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. London:Longman,1964.
Horn, Laurence R.& Ward, Gregory. The Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell,2005.
Hornstein, Norbert. Movement and control. Linguistic Inquiry 1999(30):69-96.
Huang, C.-T. James. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguisitc Inquiry 1984(4):531-574.
Huang, C.-T. James. Pro drop in Chinese:a generalized control approach. In O. Jaeggli& K. Safir (Eds.), The Null Subject Parameter. Dordrecht:D. Reidel, 1989:185-214.
Huang, C.-T. James. Remarks on empty categories in Chinese, Linguistic Inquiry 1987(18):321-337.
Huang, Yan. Anaphora:A Cross-linguistic Study. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2000.
Huang, Yan. Pragmatics. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2007b.
Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a.
Jackendoff, Ray& Culicover, Peter W. The semantic basis of control in English.
Language 2003(79):517-556.
Jackendoff, Ray& Culicover, Peter W. Turn over control to the semantics! Syntax 2006(9):131-152.
Jackendoff, Ray. The Foundations of Language. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2002.
Jackson, Roy. Plato:A Beginner's Guide. London:Hoder& Stroughton,2001.
Jakobson, Roman. Two Aspects of Language and Two Types of Aphasic Disturbances. In Roman Jakobson& Morris Hallie (Eds.), Foundamentals of Language. The Hague:Mouton,1956:67-96.
Kaplan, David. Afterthoughts. In Joseph Almog, John Perry& Howard Wettein (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan. New York:Oxford University Press,1989:565-614.
Kaplan, David. Demonstratives. In Joseph Almog, John Perry& Howard Wettein (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan. New York:Oxford University Press,1977: 481-563.
Kripke, Saul. Naming and necessity. In Gilbert Harman& Donald Davidson (Eds.), Semantics of Natural Language. Dordrecht:Reidel,1972:253-255. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996: 272-287.
Kripke, Saul. Speaker's reference and semantic reference. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 1977(2):255-276.
Lakoff, George& Johnson, Mark. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980.
Lakoff, George& Turner, Mark. More Than Cool Reason:A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1989.
Lakoff, George. The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thoughts (2nd edition). New York:Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Lakoff, George. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things:What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1987.
Landau, Idan. Elements of Control:Structure and Meaning in Infinitival Constructions. Dordrecht:Kluwer,2000.
Larson, Richard. Promise and the theory of control. Linguistic Inquiry 1991(22): 103-139.
Leech, Geoffrey N. Principles of Pragmatics. London:Longman,1983.
Leech, Geoffrey N. Semantics. Harmondsworth:Penguin Books,1974.
Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora:a partial pragmatic reductiono f binding and control phenomena. Pragmatics Journal of Linguistics 1987(23):379-431.
Levinson, Stephen C. Presumptive Meanings:The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press,2000.
Levinson, Stephen. C. Pragmatics. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1983.
Li, Charles N.& Thompson, Sandra A. Mandarin Chinese:A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley& Los Angeles:University of California Press,1981.
Li, Charles N.& Thompson, Sandra A. Subject and topic:a new typology of language. In Charles N. Li (Ed.), Subject and Topic. New York:Academic Press,1986: 457-489.
Liberman, Mark.2006. "Singular they":God said it, I believe it, that settles it. [September 13th 2006] http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/-myl/languagelog/.
Lyons, Christopher. Definiteness. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1999.
Lyons, John. Semantics. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1977.
Martinich, A. P. The Philosophy of Language,3rd edition. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1996.
Mey, Jacob L. Pragmatics:An Introduction. Oxford:Blackwell,1993.
Mill, John S. A System of Logic, definitive 8th edition.1949 reprint. London: Longmans, Green and Company,1872.
Moreno, Rosa E. Vega. Creativity and Convention:The Pragmatics of Everyday Figurative Speech. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2007.
Morgan, Jerry L. Observations on the pragmatics of metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought,2nd edition. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1993:124-134.
Morgan, Jerry L. Two types of convention in speech acts. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics 9:Pragmatics. New York:Academic Press,1978:261-280.
Morris, Charles W. Foundations of the Theory of Signs. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1938.
Nunberg, Geoffrey& Zaenen, Annie. Systematic polysemy in lexicology and lexicography. In Hannu Tommola, Krista Varantola, Tarja Salmi-Tolonen& Jurgen Schopp (Eds.), Proceedings of Euralex II. Tampere, Finland:University of Tampere,1992.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. Descriptive indexicals and indexical descriptions, In Marga Reimer& Anne Bezuidenhout (Eds.), Descriptions and Beyond:An Interdisciplinary Collection of Essays on Definite and Indefinite Descriptions and Other Related Phenomena. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2004a: 261-279.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16): 1-43.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality in contexts. Paper delivered at the conference on philosophy and cognitive science, Cerisy-la-Salle, France, June 1990.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions:polysemy. Linguistics and Philosophy 1979(3):143-184.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. The pragmatics of deferred interpretation. In Laurence R. Horn& Gregory Ward (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford:Blackwell,2004b: 344-364.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. The Pragmatics of Reference. Bloomington:Indian University Linguistic Club,1978.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):109—132.
Ostler, Nicholas& Atkins, B. T. S. Predictable meaning shift:Some linguistic properties of lexical implication rules. In James Pustejovsky& Sabine Bergler (Eds.), Lexical Semantics and Knowledge Representations. Berlin:Springer Verlag,1992:87-100.
Partee, Barbara. H. Opacity, coreference, and pronouns. Synthese 1970(21):359-385.
Pierce, Charles S. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Volume 7. Burks, Arthur W. (Ed.), Cambridge:Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,1958.
Posner, Roland. Charles Morris and the Behavioral Foundations of Semiotics. In Martin Krampen, Klaus Oehler, Roland Posner, Thomas. A. Sebeok& Thure. von Uexkull (Eds.), Classics of Semiotics. New York:Plemun Press,1987:25.
Powell, George. The deferred interpretation of indexicals and proper names. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 1998(10):143-172.
Prince, Ellen F. The ZPG letter:Subjects, definiteness, and information status. In Sandra Thompson& William C. Mann (Eds.), Discourse Description:Diverse Analyses of a Fund-Raising Text. Amsterdan: John Benjamins,1992:295—325.
Pullum, K. Geoffrey.2008. The next president and their pronoun gender. [January 8th 2008] http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/～myl/languagelog/.
Radford, Andrew. Transformational Syntax. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1981.
Recanati, Francois. Direct Reference:From Language to Thought. Oxford:Blackwell, 1993.
Recanati, Francois. Literal Meaning. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003.
Russel, Bertrand. Descriptions. Ch.16 of Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy. London:George Allen and Unwin,1919:167-180. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:221-227.
Russel, Bertrand. On denoting. Mind (1905)14:479-493. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:212-220.
Russell, Bertrand. Meinong's theory of complexes and assumptions. Mind 1904(13): 204-219.
Sacks, Harvey& Schegloff, Emmanuel A. Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In George Psathas (Ed.), Everyday Language:Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York:Irvington Press,1979:15-21.
Saeed, John I. Semantics. Oxford:Blackwell,2003.
Sag, Ivan.& Pollard, Carl. An integrated theory of complement control. Language 1991(67):63-113.
Sag, Ivan. Formal semantics and extralinguistic context. In Peter Cole (Ed.), Radical Pragmatics. New York:Academic Press,1981:273-294.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. Cours de linguistique generale. Edited by C. Bally& A. Sechehaye with the collaboration of A. Riedlinger. Lausanne/Paris:Payot,1916. English version:W. Baskin (Trans.), Course in General Linguistics. Glasgow: Fontana/Collins,1977.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. Course in General Linguistics. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2001.
Searle, John R. Metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1979:92-123.
Searle, John. R. Speech Acts:An Essay in the Philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1969.
Shi, Dingxu. Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language 2000(76):383-408.
Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Relevance:Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell,1986/1995.
Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Rhetoric and relevance. In John Bender& David E. Wellbery (Eds.), The Ends of Rhetroic:History, Theory, Practice. Standford: Stanford University Press,1990:140-155.
Strawson, Peter F. Identifying reference and truth value. Theoria 1964(ⅩⅩⅩ):96-108. Reprinted in:Zabeeh et al. (Eds.), Readings in Semantics. Urbana:University of Illinois Press,1964:193-216.
Strawson, Peter F. On referring. Mind 1950(59):320-344.
Tao, Liang. Zero Anaphora in Chinese:Cognitive Strategies in Discourse Processing. Boulder:University of Colorado, PhD dissertation,1993.
Ward, Gregory, Sproat, Richard& McKoon, Gail. A pragmatic analysis of so-called anaphoric islands. Language 1991(67):439-474.
Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference:Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:73-92.
Warren, Beatrice. An alternative account of the interpretation of referential metonymy and metaphor. In Dirven Rene& Ralf Porings (Eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. Berlin/New York:Mouton de Gruyter,2002: 113-130.
Wilson, Deirdre& Sperber, Dan. Linguistic form and relevance. Lingua 1993(90.1/2): 1-25.
Wilson, Deirdre& Sperber, Dan. Truthfulness and relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 2000(12):215-254. Reprinted in Mind 2002(443):583-632.
Wilson, Deirdre. Reference and relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 1992(4):167-192.
Wilson, Deirdre. Relevance and lexical pragmatics. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 2004(16):343-360.
Wu, Yicheng& Matthews, Steven. How different are expletive and referential pronouns—A parsing perspective. Lingua 2010(7):1805-1820.
Xu, Liejiong.& Langendoen, D. Terence. Topic structures in Chinese. Language 1985 (61):1-27.
Xu, Liejiong. A special use of the third person singular pronoun. Cahiers de Linguistique—Asie Orientate 1999(28):3-22.
Xu, Liejiong. Free empty categories. Linguistic Inquiry 1986 (1):75-93.
Xu, Liejiong. Toward a lexical-thematic theory of control. The Linguistic Review 1985(5):345-376.
Yule, George. The Study of Language, the 2nd edition. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1996.
北京大学哲学系中国哲学教研室,《中国哲学史》,北京：北京大学出版社,2003年。
柏拉图著、严群译,《泰阿泰德 智术之师》,北京：商务印书馆,1963年。
陈嘉映, 《语言哲学》,北京：北京大学出版社,2003年。
陈平,汉语零形回指的话语分析,《中国语文》1987年第5期：363-378。
陈平,释汉语中与名词性成分相关的四组概念,《中国语文》1987年第2期：81-92。
陈新仁,“转喻”指称的认知语用阐释,《外语学刊》2008年第2期：84-89。
邓莉、杨晓军,语言哲学指称论的对比分析,《外语与外语教学》2004年第5期：54-57。
邓丽娜,英文指称理论的语用化演变,《华中师范大学研究生学报》2008年第2期：82-96。
董宽、陈娜,王弼与欧阳建言意观之异同,《内蒙古电大学刊》2008年第4期：20-22。
fatcat1997,2009年,结婚十年,我捂热了婆婆这块冷硬的石头,淘宝门户帮派妈咪宝贝论坛,[2009年9月13日],http://bangpai.taobao.com/group/thread/ 42166-1277056.htm?page=1
冯友兰,《中国哲学简史》,北京：北京大学出版社,1985年。
冯志伟,《现代语言学流派》,西安：陕西人民出版社,1999年。
弗雷格,《弗雷格哲学论著选辑》,北京：商务印书馆,2006年。
郭贵春、殷杰,论指称理论的后现代演变,《哲学研究》1998年第4期：58-65。
韩丹、许宁云,指称转喻的回指照应机制,《解放军外国语学院学报》2006年第2期：6-10。
何莲珍,指称理论的不同观点评述,《浙江大学学报》1997年第3期：93-96。
何兆熊,《新编语用学概要》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2000年。
何自然,《认知语用学：言语交际与认知》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2006年。
何自然,《语用学概论》,长沙：湖南教育出版社,1988年。
何自然、陈新仁,《当代语用学》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2004年。
胡壮麟,《认知隐喻学》,北京：北京大学出版社,2004年。
胡壮麟,《语篇的衔接与连贯》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,1994年。
胡壮麟,语言·认知·隐喻,《现代外语》1997年第4期：47-59。
黄华新、陈宗明,《描述语用学》,长春：吉林人民出版社,2005年。
黄华新、徐慈华,隐喻表达与经济性原则,《浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)》2006年第3期：22-28。
黄娴、张克亮,汉语零形回指研究综述,《中文信息学报》2009年第4期：10-15。
姜望琪,《语用学——理论及应用》,北京：北京大学出版社,2000年。
姜望琪,篇章与回指,《外语学刊》2006年第4期：33-40。
贾可春,罗素的摹状词理论,《哲学研究》2004年第9期：78-81。
蒋勇,特别概念结构的借代功能,《外国语》2003年第6期：30-37。
景秀辉,从罗素到斯特劳森——简论指称理论的发展,《江苏大学学报(社会科学版)》2007年第3期：80-82。
焦海明,先秦名辩思潮说略,《陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会版)》2009年第7期：91-93
瞭望东方周刊,2009年,尴尬的候鸟天堂,[2009年2月9日],http://www. lwdf.cn/oriental/cover_story/2009020916361398.htm。
刘家荣、文旭,话语中代词的功能及其释义问题, 《四川外语学院学报》1996年第1期：52-59。
刘露营,显著度与名词转喻指称的限制,《四川外国语学院学报》2007年第3期：53-56。
刘耀武,一种句式的五种观点——“鳗”句论战的始末,《日语学习与研究》1996年第2期：1-7。
刘正光,论转喻与隐喻的连续体关系,《现代外语》2002年第1期：61-70。
楼宇烈,《王弼集校释》,北京：中华书局,1999年。
陆俭明,《八十年代中国语法研究》,北京：商务印书馆,1993年。
陆俭明,隐喻、转喻散议,《外国语》2009年第1期：44-50。
吕叔湘, 《近代汉语指代词》,上海：学林出版社,1985年。
吕叔湘主编,《现代汉语八百词(增订本)》,北京：商务印书馆,1999年。
罗赞,指称问题及其关联理论概述,《国外社会科学》2003年第4期：31-34。
A.P.马蒂尼奇编、牟博等译,《语言哲学》,北京：商务印书馆,1998年。
马庆株,《汉语语义语法范畴问题》,北京：北京语言文化大学出版社,1998年。
茅盾,《子夜》(语文新课标必读丛书：增订版),北京：人民文学出版社,2009年。
彭可君,关于陈述和指称,《汉语学习》1992年第2期：16-20。
彭可君,谓词性宾语补议,《语言教学与研究》1990年第1期：23-33。
齐沪扬、葛新,汉语研究中信息分类的若干问题,《修辞学习》2003年第1期：22-24。
冉永平,词汇语用学及语用充实,《外语教学与研究》2005年第5期：343-350。
J.R.塞尔著,刘叶涛译,《意向性》,上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年。
沈家煊,转指与转喻,《当代语言学》1999年第1期：3-15。
史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年。
E.C.斯坦哈特著,黄华新、徐慈华等译,《隐喻的逻辑》,杭州：浙江大学出版社,2009年。
束定芳,《隐喻学研究》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2000年。
束定芳,论隐喻的运作机制,《外语教学与研究》2002年第2期：102-106。
孙通海译注,《庄子》,北京：中华书局,2007年。
P.L.特拉弗斯,2007年,随风而来的玛丽阿姨,第七章鸟太太,小书房·公益儿童文学网,http://www.dreamkinland.cn/cpth/mlay/007.htm。
涂纪亮,西方语言哲学研究的现状与前景,《外语教学与研究》2003年第5期：323-330。
汪少华,隐喻推理机制的认知性透视,《外语与外语教学》2000年第10期：14-17。
王莉莉,指称性主语、陈述性主语分类质疑,《山西大学学报》2000年第1期：91-95。
王路,语言哲学研究述评(上),《国外社会科学》1997年第6期：2-8。
王路,语言哲学研究述评(下),《国外社会科学》1998年第1期：7-10。
王勤玲,概念隐喻理论与概念整合理论的对比研究,《外语学刊》2005年第1期：42-46。
王天华,第一人称指示语的非指示现象分析,《黑龙江社会科学》2008年第3期：128-130。
王淑华,现代汉语指称与陈述问题研究综述,《广西社会科学》2005年第5期：151-154。
魏在江,概念整合、语用推理与转喻认知,《四川外语学院学报》2007年第1期：90-95。
魏在江,概念转喻与语篇衔接：各派分歧、理论背景及实验支持,《外国语》2007年第2期：29-36。
文学作品网,2010年,鱼与鸟的故事,[2010年4月8日],http://www.9c99.com/ wenxue/gushihui/aiqin/18633.html。
项成东,间接照应及其认知推理,《西安外国语学院学报》2004年第2期：5-8。
项成东,认知观照下的含义、显义区分,《四川外语学院学报》2008年第6期：51-57。
萧国政,现代汉语宾语谓词指称性用法考察,《现代汉语语法问题研究》,武汉：华中师范大学出版社,1997年：24-33。
《新周刊》主编,《2003语录》,上海：文汇出版社,2003年。
熊学亮,《认知语用学》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2001年。
徐慈华,《选择与适应：汉语隐喻的语用综观研究》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2009年。
徐慈华,科学隐喻的双重指称,《自然辩证法研究》2008年第9期：1-6。
徐慈华、李恒威,溯因推理与科学隐喻,《哲学研究》2009年第7期：94-99。
许宁云、韩丹,非常规间接前指照应的释义策略,《外语学刊》2005年第2期：50-53。
许余龙,汉英篇章中句子主题的识别,《外国语》1996年第6期：3-9。
许余龙,英汉指称词语表达的可及性,《外语教学与研究》2000年第5期：321-328。
许余龙,语篇回指的认知语言学探索,《外国语》2002年第1期：28-31。
亚里士多德,《诗学·诗艺》,上海：三联书店,1991年。
亚里士多德,《修辞学》,上海：三联书店,1991年。
杨成虎、赵颖,认知语义学中语义变化机制研究中概念转喻取向,《天津大学学报(社会科学版)》2009年第2期：158-161。
杨早,2010年,鲁迅早就从课本里撤走了,《南都周刊》,[2010年9月22日],http://www.nbweekly.com/Print/Article/11198_0.shtml。
英语陪生教育出版公司编,《朗文当代高级英语词典》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2004年。
余小强、邹颖娟,论同位关系,《湖南大学学报(社会科学版)》2005年第2期：93-96。
曾衍桃,词汇语用学引论, 《外语学刊》2006年第5期：59-64。
张斌, 《汉语语法学》,上海：上海教育出版社,2003年。
赵春曦,语言悖论的哲学问题, 《学术交流》2009年第3期：25-28。
赵秀凤、裴文斌,指称对隐性语篇视角的认知构建,《外语学刊》2009年第2期：44-47。
中国大百科全书出版社编,《中国大百科全书》哲学卷,北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1985年。
中国新闻网,2010年,为了炒作自己,申花俱乐部老板朱骏甘当“猪头”,[2010年8月30日],http://www.chinanews.com.cn/ty/2010/08-30/2499892.shtml.
周昌忠, 《西方现代语言哲学》,上海：上海人民出版社,1992年。
朱德熙, 《语法讲义》,北京：商务印书馆,1982年。
②柏拉图认为,自然界中有形的东西是流动的,但是构成这些有形物质的“形式”或“理念”却是永恒不变的；我们唯一能够真正了解的,只有那些能够运用理智来了解的“形式”或者“理念”。亚里士多德是柏拉图的学生,但他对柏拉图的这一观点作出了批评：他虽然同意一个事物的“形式”是亘古不变的,但他认为这个“形式”本身并不存在,而是人们在感受到实物后形成的概念。
③ Bach, Kent. On referring and not referring. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (Eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:15.
① Martinich, A. P. The Philosophy of Language,3rd edition. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1996:18.
② Frege, Gottlob.Uber Sinn und Bedeutung. in Zeitschrift fur Philosophie und philosophische Kritik 1892(100):
25-50. Translated as On sense and nominatum. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:199-211.
①柏拉图著、严群译,《泰阿泰德智术术之师》,北京：商务印书馆,1963年。
② Frege, Gottlob. Logic. In Hans Hermes, Friedrich Kambartel& Friedrich Kaulbach (Eds.), Posthumous Writings. Oxford:Blackwell,1897/1979:126-151.
① Russel, Bertrand. On denoting. Mind 1905(14):479-93. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:212-220.
②赵春曦,语言悖论的哲学问题,《学术交流》2009年第3期,第27页。
③ Russel, Bertrand. Descriptions. Ch.16 of Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy. London:George Allen and Unwin,1919:167-180. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996: 221-227.
① Strawson, Peter F. On referring. Mind 1950(59):323. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:231.
② Frege, Gottlob, The Foundations of Arithmetic (Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik). John L. Austin (Trans.), Oxford:Blackwell,1959:x.
③斯特劳森,《论指称》,载于A.P马蒂尼奇编、牟博等译,《语言哲学》,北京：商务印书馆,1998年,第423页。
① Kripke, Saul.. Naming and necessity. In Gilbert Harman& Donald Davidson (Eds.), Semantics of Natural Language. Dordrecht:Reidel,1972:253-255. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:272-287.
①《中国大百科全书》哲学卷,北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1985年,第1063页。
②史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第731页。
③史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第72页。
④孙通海译注,《庄子》,北京：中华书局,2007年,第221页。
①楼宇烈,《王弼集校释》,北京：中华书局,1999年,第311页。
②史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第1106页。
③史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第2331页。
④冯友兰,《中国哲学简史》,北京：北京大学出版社,1985年,第100页。
⑤孙通海译注,《庄子》,北京：中华书局,2007年,第383页。
①《公孙龙子·齐俗训·史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第5029页。
②史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第4376页。
③史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年,第4329页。
①黄娴、张克亮,汉语零形回指研究综述,《中文信息学报》2009年第4期,第11页。
②朱德熙,《语法讲义》,北京：商务印书馆,1982年,第101-102页。
①陆俭明,《八十年代中国语法研究》,北京：商务印书馆,1993年,第94页。
②本书是由1998年首版的,而本文参考的是以下版本：张斌,《汉语语法学》,上海：上海教育出版社,2003年,第90页。
③王淑华,现代汉语指称与陈述问题研究综述,《广西社会科学》2005年第5期,第153页。
①言语行为的三分法在很多文献(如何兆熊1999年出版的《新编语用学概要》)中通常被译为言内、言外和言后行为,为免引起混淆,故作者在此也沿用这种译法。但是姜望琪(2000)认为,illocutionary act"中的“il-”不是否定的意思,而是"in, within"的意思。因此,他对奥斯汀的“言外行为理论”的翻译问题进行了纠正,把"illocutionary act"翻译成“行事行为”。
② Firth, John. R. Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951. London:Oxford University Press,1957:11.
③ Frege, Gottlob,. The Foundations of Arithmetic (Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik). John L. Austin (Trans.), Oxford:Blackwell,1959:ⅹ.
①J.R.塞尔著,刘叶涛译,《意向性》,上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年,第239页。
① Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1657-1674.
① Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1659.
② Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1659.
① Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1658.
② Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):.1659.
③ Mey, Jacob L. Pragmatics:An Introduction. Oxford:Blackwell,1993:89-99.
① Mill. John S. A Svstem of Logic, definitive 8th edition. London:Longmans. Green and Company.1872/1949:20.
② Russel, Bertrand. Descriptions. Ch.16 of Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy. London:George Allen and Unwin.1919:175.
③ Donnellan, Keith S. Reference and definite descriptions. Philosophical Review 1966(75):297
④ Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1660.
① Bach, Kent. On referring and not referring. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy. Hedberg (Eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:13.
② Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1665.
①Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1660.
②见2009年2月9日《文汇报》,题为“回荡大巴山的呼唤”的报道。
①见2005年8月4日《钱江晚报》D16版。
②见 Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1662,例(13)、(14)。陈平论述道：TheNPs in nonspecific use in (13) and (14)...prepuspposes the existence of an entity by the description of the NP.
①Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1662.
②Lyons, Christopher. Definiteness. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1999:7.
①见Chen,Ping.Aspects of referentiality.Journa of Pragmatics 2009(8):1665.原引自Lyons,John.Semantics. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1977:189.
②Chen,Ping.Aspects of referentiality.Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1665.
①Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8) 1663.
②同上。
①改编自陈平的论述："The description may not fit the entity in question as a matter of fact in the actual world.ormay only be employed in a scarstic or joking manner, as when an actual usurper is referred to as 'the king', or the term 'boss' is used by a husband to refer to his wife." 见 Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1660.
① Bach, Kent. On referring and not referring. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy. Hedberg (Eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:20.
① Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora:a partial pragmatic reduction of binding and control phenomena. Pragmatics Journal of Linguistics 1987(23):401-402.
① Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora:a partial pragmatic reduction of binding and control phenomena. Pragmatics Journal of Linguistics 1987(23):401-402.
① Prince, Ellen F. The ZPG letter:Subjects, definiteness, and information status. In Sandra Thompson& William C. Mann (Eds.), Discourse Description:Diverse Analyses of a Fund-Raising Text. Amsterdan: John Benjamins, 1992:304.
②同上。
③同上。
① Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 205.
②同上。
③ Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 206-207.
①见2009年12月20日新华社,题为“新当选的欧洲理事会常任主席范龙佩”的报道。
②陈平,汉语零形回指的话语分析,《中国语文》1987年第5期,第367页。
③同上。其中T是Topic(主题)的缩写,C是Comment(评述)的缩写。
① Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora:a partial pragmatic reduction of binding and control phenomena. Pragmatics Journal of Linguistics 1987(23):401-02.
① Airel, Mira. Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. London:Routledge,1990:73.
② Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora:a partial pragmatic reduction of binding and control phenomena. Pragmatics Journal of Linguistics 1987(23):401-402.
① Coulthard, M. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. London:Longman,1977:74.
② Gundel, Jeanette, Hedberg, Nancy& Zacharski, Ron. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 1993(69):275.
① Gundel, Jeanette, Hedberg, Nancy& Zacharski, Ron. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 1993(69):275.
②见2009年20期《新民周刊》,题为“满城争说周立波”的报道。
③见2009年2月9日《文汇报》,题为“回荡大巴山的呼唤”的报道。
①陈平,释汉语中与名词性成分相关的四组概念,《中国语文》1987年第2期,第86页。
① Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 115.
② Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 145.
③ Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 149-150.
①见2009年10月10日《文汇报》,题为“‘云计算’正开始大规模推广应用”的报道。
② Xu, Liejiong.& Langendoen, D. Terence. Topic structures in Chinese. Language 1985(61):1-27.
③ Shi, Dingxu. Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language 2000(76):383-408.
① Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 152.
② Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a: 145.
①由" indexical"一词翻译而来,国内学者有将其译为指索词、标示词、索引词等等,作者认为该词类既有索引的成分,又有指示的功能,因此在本文中以“指索词”相称。
②见2009年6月9日《新快报》题为“贡米的命运是‘快女’的最大看点”的报道。
③见2007年2月16日《纽约时报》2008年美国总统候选人鲁迪·朱利安尼(Rudy Giuliani)的高级顾问安东尼·卡波内提(Anthony Carbonetti)的讲话。
④ Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):20.
① Donnellan, Keith S. Reference and definite descriptions. Philosophical Review 1966(75):281-304.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Descriptive indexicals and indexical descriptions. In Marga Reimer& Anne Bezuidenhout (Eds.), Descriptions and Beyond:An Interdisciplinary Collection of Essays on Definite and Indefinite Descriptions and Other Related Phenomena. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2004a:261.
① Kripke, Saul. Naming and necessity. In Gilbert Harman& Donald Davidson (Eds.), Semantics of Natural Language. Dordrecht:Reidel,1972:253-255.
①Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):14.
②Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):8-9.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):15.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):21.
③同上。
①Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):29.
① Wilson, Deirdre& Sperber, Dan. Linguistic form and relevance. Lingua 1993(90.1/2):20.
② Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Relevance:Communication and Cognition. Oxford:Blackwell,1986/1995: 270.
①Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):14.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):21.
②改编自：Mick Jagger over there wants to buy you a drink. 见 Bezuidenhout, Anne. Pragmatics, semantics underdetermination, and the referential-attributive distinction. Mind 1997(106):376.
①陆俭明,隐喻、转喻散议,《外国语》2009年第1期,第47页。
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16):7.
②王天华,第一人称指索词的非指示现象分析,《黑龙江社会科学》2008年第3期,第129页。
③同上。
③王天华,第一人称指索词的非指示现象分析,《黑龙江社会科学》2008年第3期,第130页。
① Borthen, Kaja. On how we interpret plural pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 2010(7):1812-1813.
② Borthen, Kaia. On how we interpret plural pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 2010(7).1799.
③ Borthen, Kaja. On how we interpret plural pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 2010(7):1811.
①Pullum,K.Geoffrey.The next president and their pronoun gender.2008年1月8日张贴在以下网址: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/～myl/languagelog/。
①政治正确性是指为了避免真实存在的或所谓的不公正的歧视而采用的变换另一种称呼的行为,例如为了避免出于种族、性别、性取向、身体残障、宗教或政治观点的不同而产生的歧视或不满。
② Xu, Liejiong. A special use of the third person singular pronoun. Cahiers de Linguistique—Asie Orientale 1999(28):5.
②如果(61)中的单数代词“他”被替换成复数形式“他们”,那么这个复数代词的指称就不可能被理解为一个集合,而是不同的个体,如单独行动的小偷,这样就违背了言者把那些小偷归于一个集合一“这帮小偷”—的意图。
②Chierchia, Gennaro. Dynamics of Meaning. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1995:116.
① Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:73.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. The pragmatics of deferred interpretation. In Laurence R. Horn& Gregory Ward (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford:Blackwell,2004b:356.
③2010年9月22日《南都周刊》2010年度第36期,见http://www.nbweekly.com/Print/Article/11198 O.shtml。
④见2009年2月27日《每日商报》第12版教育·职场,题为“阿里巴巴周末又有招聘会”的报道。
⑤见2006年11月6日《每日商报》第10版健康。
③ Nunberg, Geoffrey. The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions:polysemy. Linguistics and Philosophy 1979(3): 182.
①从南博格的例句改编而来,原句为：The ham sandwich is sitting at table 20. 见 Nunberg, Geoffrey. The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions:polysemy. Linguistics and Philosophy 1979(3):149.
① Grice, H. Paul. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole& Jerry Morgan (Eds.) Syntax and Semantics, Volume 3. New York:Academic Press,1975:45.
② Clark, Herbert H.& Wilkes-Gibbs, Deanna. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition 1986(22):1. Clark, Herbert. H. Using Language. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1996:20-24.
① Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Relevance:Communication and Cognition. Oxford:Blackwell,1986:158.
② Davis, Wayne. Nondescriptive Meaning and Reference:An Ideational Semantics. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2005:71-119.
① Searle, John R. Metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1979b:114.
①2009年2月9日《瞭望东方周刊》,题为“尴尬的候鸟天堂”的报道,见http://www.lwdf.cn/oriental/cover_story/ 2009020916361398.htm。
②文学作品网“鱼与鸟的故事”,见http://www.9c99.com/wenxue/gushihui/aiqin/18633.html。
③见2008年4月20日《杭州日报》第5版都市·热线新闻,题为“牵手”的报道。
④小书房公益儿童文学网“随风而来的玛丽阿姨”第七章“鸟太太”,见http://www.dreamkinland.cn/cpth/mlay/ 007.htm。
⑤ Moreno, Rosa E. Vega. Creativity and Convention:The Pragmatics of Everyday Figurative Speech. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2007:116.
①这是作者与朋友在西餐厅各自点了牛排和羊排套餐,服务员上菜时间的一句话。
②刘耀武,一种句式的五种观点—“鳗”句论战的始末,《日语学习与研究》1996年第2期,第1页。
③ Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):109.
④ Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):111.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):112. Nunberg, Geoffrey. The pragmatics of deferred interpretation. In Laurence R. Horn& Gregory Ward (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford:Blackwell,2004:351.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):109.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions:polysemy. Linguistics and Philosophy 1979(3): 156.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):115.
② Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:77.
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):129.
②同上。
①同上。
② Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:81.
① Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:74.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):115.
①由于(91)a-c是包含关系从句的句子,为方便上下的中英文对照,所以作者只是对它们作了字面翻译,并不是其英文表达的实义。实义应该如下：(91a)约翰是看起来很好吃的泰式炒粉。(91b)*约翰是开了一辆劳斯莱斯的泰式炒粉。(91c)约翰在跟开了一辆劳斯莱斯的那个泰式炒粉说话。从以上例句来看,将英文的延指等价句/非等价句译为中文似乎都是不适用的。
② Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:88.
①余小强和邹颖娟(2005)指出,同位基是等价句中两名词短语间等值关系之所以存在的基础,即决定在何范围内两个名词短语间的等值关系成立的因素。见余小强、邹颖娟,论同位关系,《湖南大学学报(社会科学版)》2005年第2期,第94页。
① Morgan, Jerry L. Observations on the pragmatics of metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought, 2nd edition. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1993:133.
②《新周刊》主编,《2003语录》,上海：文汇出版社,2003年,第11页。
① Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):109.
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):111.
③ Jakobson, Roman. Two Aspects of Language and Two Types of Aphasic Disturbances. In Roman Jakobson& Morris Hallie (Eds.), Foundamentals of Language. The Hague:Mouton,1956:90.
①译自life is a journey, 见 Lakoff, George& Turner, Mark. More Than Cool Reason:A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1989:63-64。
①《新周刊》主编,《2003语录》,上海：文汇出版社,2003年,第170页。
② Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):112-113.
①英语陪生教育出版公司编,《朗文当代高级英语词典》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2004年,第1766页。
②见2005年8月6日,《钱江晚报》第B8版财富·证券。
③《新周刊》主编,《2003语录》,上海：文汇出版社,2003年,第4页。
①束定芳,论隐喻的运作机制,《外语教学与研究》2002年第2期,第99页。
① Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Rhetoric and relevance. In John Bender& David E. Wellbery (Eds.), The Ends of Rhetroic:History, Theory, Practice. Standford:Stanford University Press,1990:149.
①改编自陆的例句：“那家伙,老狐狸一个!”,见陆俭明,隐喻、转喻散议,《外国语》2009年第1期,第45页。
①Lakoff, George& Johnson, Mark. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980:30.
① Lakoff, George. The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thoughts (2nd edition). New York:Cambridge University Press,1993:125.
① Gibbs, Raymond. The Poetics of Mind. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994:5.
② Gibbs, Raymond W.& Tendahl, Markus. Cognitive effort and effects in metaphor comprehension; relevance theory and psycholinguisitcs. Mind and Language 2006(3):379.
① Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Relevance:Communication and Cognition. Oxford:Blackwell,1986:158.
② Carston, Robyn. Thoughts and Utterances:The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford:Blackwell, 2002a:353.
① Moreno, Rosa E. Vega. Creativity and Convention:The Pragmatics of Everyday Figurative Speech. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2007:96.
②见2005年8月2日《钱江晚报》第A12版每日新闻·传媒。
③《新周刊》主编,《2003语录》,上海：文汇出版社,2003年,第17页。
④淘宝门户帮派妈咪宝贝论坛http://bangpai.taobao.com/group/thread/42166-1277056.htm?page=1
① Wilson, Deirdre& Sperber, Dan. Truthfulness and relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 2000(12): 245.
①Lakoff, George& Johnson, Mark. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980:30.
①陆俭明,隐喻、转喻散议,《外国语》2009年第1期,第44页。
②陆俭明,隐喻、转喻散议,《外国语》2009年第1期,第45页。
①茅盾,《子夜》(语文新课标必读丛书：增订版),北京：人民文学出版社,2009年,第375页。
②选自2005年8月《钱江晚报》新闻标题。
①冉永平,词汇语用学及语用充实,《外语教学与研究》2005年第5期,第347页。
②改编自“前申花球员郜林骂朱骏是‘猪头’”,见2010年8月30日中国新闻网题为“为了炒作自己申花俱乐部老板朱骏甘当‘猪头’”的报道,http://www.chinanews.com.cn/ty/2010/08-30/2499892.shtml。
①Lakoff, George& Johnson, Mark. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980:35-39.
②见2009年8月5日《都市快报》第50版汽车·生活,题为“小区车库(位)要不要买?”的报道。
① Wilson, Deirdre& Sperber, Dan. Truthfulness and relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 2000(12): 245.
Abbott, Barbara. Definiteness and indefiniteness. In Laurence R. Horn& Gregory Ward (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford:Blackwell,2004:122-149.
Airel, Mira. Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. London:Routledge,1990.
Apresjan, Ju. Regular polysemy. Linguistics 1973(142):5-32.
Austin, John L. How To Do Things with Words. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1962.
Bach, Kent. Intentions and demostrations. Analysis 1992(52):140-146.
Bach, Kent. On referring and not referring. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy. Hedberg (Eds.), Reference:Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:13-60.
Barsalou, Lawrence W. Ad hoc categories. Memory and Cognition 1983(11): 211-227.
Beaugrande, Robert de& Dressler, Wolfgang. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London:Longman,1981.
Beaugrande, Robert de. Linguistics as discourse:A case study from semantics. Word 1984(35):15-57.
Beaugrande, Robert de. Text, Discourse, and Process:Toward a Multi-disciplinary Science of Texts. Norwood, N.J.:Ablex,1980.
Berckmans, Paul. Demonstrative utterances. Philosophical Studies 1990(60): 281-295.
Bezuidenhout, Anne. Pragmatics, semantics underdetermination, and the referential-attributive distinction. Mind 1997(106):375-10.
Blackmore, Diane. Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford:Blackwell,1987.
Blakemore, Diane. Understanding Utterances:The Pragmatics of Natural Language. Oxford:Blackwell,1990.
Borthen, Kaja. On how we interpret plural pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 2010 (7): 1799-1815.
Brentano, Franz, Psychology from an empirical standpoint,2nd English edition, Antos C. Rancurello, D. B. Terrell& Linda L. McAlister (Trans.), New York: Routledge,1874/1995.
Bresnan, Joan. Control and complementation. In Bresnan, Joan. (Ed.), The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press, 1982:282-390.
Carnap, Rudolf. Introduction to Semantics. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press,1942.
Carston, Robyn& Wilson, Deirdre. The pragmatics of metaphor:the "emergent property" issue. Paper presented at Metaphor:an Interdisciplinary Conference. University of London, January 2005.
Carston, Robyn. Enrichment and loosening:complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed. UCL Working Papers in Linguistic 1996(8):61-88.
Carston, Robyn. Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics. In Ruth Kempson (Ed.), Mental Representations:the Interface between Language and Reality. Cambridge:Cambridge Press,1988:155-181.
Carston, Robyn. Linguistic meaning, communicated meaning and cognitive pragmatics. Mind and Language 2002b(17):127-148.
Carston, Robyn. Thoughts and Utterances:The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford:Blackwell,2002a.
Chen, Jing& Wu, Yicheng. Less well-behaved pronouns:Singular they in English and plural ta'it/he/she' in Chinese, Journal of Pragmatics 2011(1):407-410.
Chen, Jing, Huang, Huaxin& Wu, Yicheng. Aspects of pragmatic referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2010(3):870-874.
Chen, Jing, Huang, Huaxin& Wu, Yicheng. Topic expression, information saliency and anaphora resolution. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(9):1703-1706.
Chen, Ping. Aspects of referentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 2009(8):1657-1674.
Chierchia, Gennaro. Dynamics of Meaning. Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Chomsky, Noam. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht:Foris,1981.
Clark, Herbert H.& Wilkes-Gibbs, Deanna. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition 1986(22):1-39.
Clark, Herbert H. Making sense of nonce sense. In Herbert. H. Clark (Ed.), Arenas of Language Use. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1993:305-340.
Clark, Herbert H. Using Language. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1996.
Copestake, Ann& Briscoe, Ted. Semi-productive polysemy and sense extension. Journal of semantics 1995(1):15-68.
Culicover, Peter W.& Jackendoff, Ray. Control is not movement. Linguistic Inquiry 2001(32):493-512.
Culicover, Peter W.& Wilkins, Wendy. Control, PRO, and the projection principle. Language 1986(62):120-153.
Davis, Wayne. Nondescriptive Meaning and Reference:An ideational semantics. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2005.
Dewey, John. Peirce's Theory of Linguistic Signs, Thought, and Meaning. The Journal of Philosophy 1946(4):85-95.
Donnellan, Keith S. Reference and definite descriptions. Philosophical Review 1966(75):281-304.
Donnellan, Keith S. Speaker reference, descriptions, and anaphora. In Peter Cole (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics 9:Pragmatics. New York:Academic Press,1978:47-68.
Donnellan, Keith S. The contingent a priori and rigid designators. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 1977(2):12-27.
Fauconnier, Gilles& Turner, Mark. Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science 1998(2):133-187.
Fauconnier, Gilles. Mapping in Thought and Language. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1997.
Fauconnier, Gilles. Mental Spaces. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press,1994.
Firth, John R. Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951. London:Oxford University Press, 1957:11.
Fodor, Janet D.& Sag, Ivan. Referential and quantificational indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy 1982(5):355-398.
Frege, Gottlob, The Foundations of Arithmetic (Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik) John L. Austin (Trans.), Oxford:Blackwell,1959.
Frege, Gottlob. Logic. In Hans Hermes, Friedrich Kambartel& Friedrich Kaulbach (Eds.), Posthumous Writings. Oxford:Blackwell,1897/1979:126-151.
Frege, Gottlob. Uber Sinn und Bedeutung. in Zeitschrift fur Philosophie und philosophische Kritik 1892(100):25-50. Translated as On sense and nominatum. In A. P. Martinich (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press, 1996:199-211.
Geluykens, Ronald. Information flow and conversational discourse:a new approach to the given-new distinction. In Eija Ventola (Ed.), Functional and Systemic Linguistics. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter,1991:141-168.
Gibbs, Raymond W.& Tendahl, Markus. Cognitive effort and effects in metaphor comprehension; relevance theory and psycholinguisitcs. Mind and Language 2006(3):379-403.
Gibbs, Raymond W. The Poetics of Mind. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Givon, Talmy. Topic Continuity in Discourse:A Quantitative Cross Language Study. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,1983a.
Givon, Talmy. Topic continuity in discourse:An introduction. In Talmy Giv6n (Ed.), Topic Contiuity in Discourse:A Quantitative Cross-Language Studies. Amsterdam& Philadelphia:John Benjamins,1983b:1-44.
Glucksberg, Sam& Keysar, Boaz. How metaphors work. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought,2nd edition. New York:Cambridge University Press, 1993:401-24.
Glucksberg, Sam& Keysar, Boaz. Understanding metaphorical comparisons:beyond similarity. Psychological Review 1990(1):3-18.
Glucksberg, Sam, Manfredi, D.& McGlone, Matthew. Metaphor comprehension: how metaphors create new categories. In T. Ward, S. Smith& J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative Thought:an Investigation of Conceptual Structures and Processes. Washington, D.C:American Psychological Association,1997:327-350.
Goldblatt, Robert. Mathematical modal logic:A view of its evolution. In Dov Gabbay & John Woods (Eds.), Handbook of the History of Logic, Vol.7:Logic and the Modalities In the Twentieth Century. Amsterdam:Elsevier BV,2006.
Grice, H. Paul. Logic and conversation, In Peter Cole& Jerry Morgan (Eds.) Syntax and Semantics, Volume 3. New York:Academic Press,1975:41-58.
Grice, H. Paul. Vacuous name. In Donald Davidson& Jaako Hintikka (Eds.), Words and Objections. Dordrecht:Reidel,1969:118-145.
Gundel, Jeanette, Hedberg, Nancy& Zacharski, Ron. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 1993(69):274-307.
Gundel, Jeanette. K.1988. Universals of topic-comment structure. In Michael Hammond, Edith A. Moravcsik& Jessica R. Wirth (Eds.), Studies in Syntactic Typology. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,1988:209-239.
Halliday, M. A. K. Comparison and translation. In M. A. K. Halliday, Angus McIntosh & Peter Strevens (Eds.), The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. London:Longman,1964.
Horn, Laurence R.& Ward, Gregory. The Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell,2005.
Hornstein, Norbert. Movement and control. Linguistic Inquiry 1999(30):69-96.
Huang, C.-T. James. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguisitc Inquiry 1984(4):531-574.
Huang, C.-T. James. Pro drop in Chinese:a generalized control approach. In O. Jaeggli& K. Safir (Eds.), The Null Subject Parameter. Dordrecht:D. Reidel, 1989:185-214.
Huang, C.-T. James. Remarks on empty categories in Chinese, Linguistic Inquiry 1987(18):321-337.
Huang, Yan. Anaphora:A Cross-linguistic Study. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2000.
Huang, Yan. Pragmatics. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2007b.
Huang, Yan. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994/2007a.
Jackendoff, Ray& Culicover, Peter W. The semantic basis of control in English.
Language 2003(79):517-556.
Jackendoff, Ray& Culicover, Peter W. Turn over control to the semantics! Syntax 2006(9):131-152.
Jackendoff, Ray. The Foundations of Language. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2002.
Jackson, Roy. Plato:A Beginner's Guide. London:Hoder& Stroughton,2001.
Jakobson, Roman. Two Aspects of Language and Two Types of Aphasic Disturbances. In Roman Jakobson& Morris Hallie (Eds.), Foundamentals of Language. The Hague:Mouton,1956:67-96.
Kaplan, David. Afterthoughts. In Joseph Almog, John Perry& Howard Wettein (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan. New York:Oxford University Press,1989:565-614.
Kaplan, David. Demonstratives. In Joseph Almog, John Perry& Howard Wettein (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan. New York:Oxford University Press,1977: 481-563.
Kripke, Saul. Naming and necessity. In Gilbert Harman& Donald Davidson (Eds.), Semantics of Natural Language. Dordrecht:Reidel,1972:253-255. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996: 272-287.
Kripke, Saul. Speaker's reference and semantic reference. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 1977(2):255-276.
Lakoff, George& Johnson, Mark. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980.
Lakoff, George& Turner, Mark. More Than Cool Reason:A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1989.
Lakoff, George. The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thoughts (2nd edition). New York:Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Lakoff, George. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things:What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1987.
Landau, Idan. Elements of Control:Structure and Meaning in Infinitival Constructions. Dordrecht:Kluwer,2000.
Larson, Richard. Promise and the theory of control. Linguistic Inquiry 1991(22): 103-139.
Leech, Geoffrey N. Principles of Pragmatics. London:Longman,1983.
Leech, Geoffrey N. Semantics. Harmondsworth:Penguin Books,1974.
Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora:a partial pragmatic reductiono f binding and control phenomena. Pragmatics Journal of Linguistics 1987(23):379-431.
Levinson, Stephen C. Presumptive Meanings:The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press,2000.
Levinson, Stephen. C. Pragmatics. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1983.
Li, Charles N.& Thompson, Sandra A. Mandarin Chinese:A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley& Los Angeles:University of California Press,1981.
Li, Charles N.& Thompson, Sandra A. Subject and topic:a new typology of language. In Charles N. Li (Ed.), Subject and Topic. New York:Academic Press,1986: 457-489.
Liberman, Mark.2006. "Singular they":God said it, I believe it, that settles it. [September 13th 2006] http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/-myl/languagelog/.
Lyons, Christopher. Definiteness. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1999.
Lyons, John. Semantics. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1977.
Martinich, A. P. The Philosophy of Language,3rd edition. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1996.
Mey, Jacob L. Pragmatics:An Introduction. Oxford:Blackwell,1993.
Mill, John S. A System of Logic, definitive 8th edition.1949 reprint. London: Longmans, Green and Company,1872.
Moreno, Rosa E. Vega. Creativity and Convention:The Pragmatics of Everyday Figurative Speech. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2007.
Morgan, Jerry L. Observations on the pragmatics of metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought,2nd edition. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1993:124-134.
Morgan, Jerry L. Two types of convention in speech acts. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics 9:Pragmatics. New York:Academic Press,1978:261-280.
Morris, Charles W. Foundations of the Theory of Signs. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1938.
Nunberg, Geoffrey& Zaenen, Annie. Systematic polysemy in lexicology and lexicography. In Hannu Tommola, Krista Varantola, Tarja Salmi-Tolonen& Jurgen Schopp (Eds.), Proceedings of Euralex II. Tampere, Finland:University of Tampere,1992.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. Descriptive indexicals and indexical descriptions, In Marga Reimer& Anne Bezuidenhout (Eds.), Descriptions and Beyond:An Interdisciplinary Collection of Essays on Definite and Indefinite Descriptions and Other Related Phenomena. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2004a: 261-279.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 1993(16): 1-43.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. Indexicality in contexts. Paper delivered at the conference on philosophy and cognitive science, Cerisy-la-Salle, France, June 1990.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions:polysemy. Linguistics and Philosophy 1979(3):143-184.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. The pragmatics of deferred interpretation. In Laurence R. Horn& Gregory Ward (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford:Blackwell,2004b: 344-364.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. The Pragmatics of Reference. Bloomington:Indian University Linguistic Club,1978.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 1995(12):109—132.
Ostler, Nicholas& Atkins, B. T. S. Predictable meaning shift:Some linguistic properties of lexical implication rules. In James Pustejovsky& Sabine Bergler (Eds.), Lexical Semantics and Knowledge Representations. Berlin:Springer Verlag,1992:87-100.
Partee, Barbara. H. Opacity, coreference, and pronouns. Synthese 1970(21):359-385.
Pierce, Charles S. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Volume 7. Burks, Arthur W. (Ed.), Cambridge:Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,1958.
Posner, Roland. Charles Morris and the Behavioral Foundations of Semiotics. In Martin Krampen, Klaus Oehler, Roland Posner, Thomas. A. Sebeok& Thure. von Uexkull (Eds.), Classics of Semiotics. New York:Plemun Press,1987:25.
Powell, George. The deferred interpretation of indexicals and proper names. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 1998(10):143-172.
Prince, Ellen F. The ZPG letter:Subjects, definiteness, and information status. In Sandra Thompson& William C. Mann (Eds.), Discourse Description:Diverse Analyses of a Fund-Raising Text. Amsterdan: John Benjamins,1992:295—325.
Pullum, K. Geoffrey.2008. The next president and their pronoun gender. [January 8th 2008] http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/～myl/languagelog/.
Radford, Andrew. Transformational Syntax. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1981.
Recanati, Francois. Direct Reference:From Language to Thought. Oxford:Blackwell, 1993.
Recanati, Francois. Literal Meaning. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003.
Russel, Bertrand. Descriptions. Ch.16 of Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy. London:George Allen and Unwin,1919:167-180. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:221-227.
Russel, Bertrand. On denoting. Mind (1905)14:479-493. In Martinich, A. P. (Ed.), The Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press,1996:212-220.
Russell, Bertrand. Meinong's theory of complexes and assumptions. Mind 1904(13): 204-219.
Sacks, Harvey& Schegloff, Emmanuel A. Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In George Psathas (Ed.), Everyday Language:Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York:Irvington Press,1979:15-21.
Saeed, John I. Semantics. Oxford:Blackwell,2003.
Sag, Ivan.& Pollard, Carl. An integrated theory of complement control. Language 1991(67):63-113.
Sag, Ivan. Formal semantics and extralinguistic context. In Peter Cole (Ed.), Radical Pragmatics. New York:Academic Press,1981:273-294.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. Cours de linguistique generale. Edited by C. Bally& A. Sechehaye with the collaboration of A. Riedlinger. Lausanne/Paris:Payot,1916. English version:W. Baskin (Trans.), Course in General Linguistics. Glasgow: Fontana/Collins,1977.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. Course in General Linguistics. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2001.
Searle, John R. Metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1979:92-123.
Searle, John. R. Speech Acts:An Essay in the Philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1969.
Shi, Dingxu. Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language 2000(76):383-408.
Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Relevance:Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell,1986/1995.
Sperber, Dan& Wilson, Deirdre. Rhetoric and relevance. In John Bender& David E. Wellbery (Eds.), The Ends of Rhetroic:History, Theory, Practice. Standford: Stanford University Press,1990:140-155.
Strawson, Peter F. Identifying reference and truth value. Theoria 1964(ⅩⅩⅩ):96-108. Reprinted in:Zabeeh et al. (Eds.), Readings in Semantics. Urbana:University of Illinois Press,1964:193-216.
Strawson, Peter F. On referring. Mind 1950(59):320-344.
Tao, Liang. Zero Anaphora in Chinese:Cognitive Strategies in Discourse Processing. Boulder:University of Colorado, PhD dissertation,1993.
Ward, Gregory, Sproat, Richard& McKoon, Gail. A pragmatic analysis of so-called anaphoric islands. Language 1991(67):439-474.
Ward, Gregory. Equatives and deferred reference. In Jeanette K. Gundel& Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference:Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:Oxford University Press,2008:73-92.
Warren, Beatrice. An alternative account of the interpretation of referential metonymy and metaphor. In Dirven Rene& Ralf Porings (Eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. Berlin/New York:Mouton de Gruyter,2002: 113-130.
Wilson, Deirdre& Sperber, Dan. Linguistic form and relevance. Lingua 1993(90.1/2): 1-25.
Wilson, Deirdre& Sperber, Dan. Truthfulness and relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 2000(12):215-254. Reprinted in Mind 2002(443):583-632.
Wilson, Deirdre. Reference and relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 1992(4):167-192.
Wilson, Deirdre. Relevance and lexical pragmatics. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 2004(16):343-360.
Wu, Yicheng& Matthews, Steven. How different are expletive and referential pronouns—A parsing perspective. Lingua 2010(7):1805-1820.
Xu, Liejiong.& Langendoen, D. Terence. Topic structures in Chinese. Language 1985 (61):1-27.
Xu, Liejiong. A special use of the third person singular pronoun. Cahiers de Linguistique—Asie Orientate 1999(28):3-22.
Xu, Liejiong. Free empty categories. Linguistic Inquiry 1986 (1):75-93.
Xu, Liejiong. Toward a lexical-thematic theory of control. The Linguistic Review 1985(5):345-376.
Yule, George. The Study of Language, the 2nd edition. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1996.
北京大学哲学系中国哲学教研室,《中国哲学史》,北京：北京大学出版社,2003年。
柏拉图著、严群译,《泰阿泰德 智术之师》,北京：商务印书馆,1963年。
陈嘉映, 《语言哲学》,北京：北京大学出版社,2003年。
陈平,汉语零形回指的话语分析,《中国语文》1987年第5期：363-378。
陈平,释汉语中与名词性成分相关的四组概念,《中国语文》1987年第2期：81-92。
陈新仁,“转喻”指称的认知语用阐释,《外语学刊》2008年第2期：84-89。
邓莉、杨晓军,语言哲学指称论的对比分析,《外语与外语教学》2004年第5期：54-57。
邓丽娜,英文指称理论的语用化演变,《华中师范大学研究生学报》2008年第2期：82-96。
董宽、陈娜,王弼与欧阳建言意观之异同,《内蒙古电大学刊》2008年第4期：20-22。
fatcat1997,2009年,结婚十年,我捂热了婆婆这块冷硬的石头,淘宝门户帮派妈咪宝贝论坛,[2009年9月13日],http://bangpai.taobao.com/group/thread/ 42166-1277056.htm?page=1
冯友兰,《中国哲学简史》,北京：北京大学出版社,1985年。
冯志伟,《现代语言学流派》,西安：陕西人民出版社,1999年。
弗雷格,《弗雷格哲学论著选辑》,北京：商务印书馆,2006年。
郭贵春、殷杰,论指称理论的后现代演变,《哲学研究》1998年第4期：58-65。
韩丹、许宁云,指称转喻的回指照应机制,《解放军外国语学院学报》2006年第2期：6-10。
何莲珍,指称理论的不同观点评述,《浙江大学学报》1997年第3期：93-96。
何兆熊,《新编语用学概要》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2000年。
何自然,《认知语用学：言语交际与认知》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2006年。
何自然,《语用学概论》,长沙：湖南教育出版社,1988年。
何自然、陈新仁,《当代语用学》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2004年。
胡壮麟,《认知隐喻学》,北京：北京大学出版社,2004年。
胡壮麟,《语篇的衔接与连贯》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,1994年。
胡壮麟,语言·认知·隐喻,《现代外语》1997年第4期：47-59。
黄华新、陈宗明,《描述语用学》,长春：吉林人民出版社,2005年。
黄华新、徐慈华,隐喻表达与经济性原则,《浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)》2006年第3期：22-28。
黄娴、张克亮,汉语零形回指研究综述,《中文信息学报》2009年第4期：10-15。
姜望琪,《语用学——理论及应用》,北京：北京大学出版社,2000年。
姜望琪,篇章与回指,《外语学刊》2006年第4期：33-40。
贾可春,罗素的摹状词理论,《哲学研究》2004年第9期：78-81。
蒋勇,特别概念结构的借代功能,《外国语》2003年第6期：30-37。
景秀辉,从罗素到斯特劳森——简论指称理论的发展,《江苏大学学报(社会科学版)》2007年第3期：80-82。
焦海明,先秦名辩思潮说略,《陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会版)》2009年第7期：91-93
瞭望东方周刊,2009年,尴尬的候鸟天堂,[2009年2月9日],http://www. lwdf.cn/oriental/cover_story/2009020916361398.htm。
刘家荣、文旭,话语中代词的功能及其释义问题, 《四川外语学院学报》1996年第1期：52-59。
刘露营,显著度与名词转喻指称的限制,《四川外国语学院学报》2007年第3期：53-56。
刘耀武,一种句式的五种观点——“鳗”句论战的始末,《日语学习与研究》1996年第2期：1-7。
刘正光,论转喻与隐喻的连续体关系,《现代外语》2002年第1期：61-70。
楼宇烈,《王弼集校释》,北京：中华书局,1999年。
陆俭明,《八十年代中国语法研究》,北京：商务印书馆,1993年。
陆俭明,隐喻、转喻散议,《外国语》2009年第1期：44-50。
吕叔湘, 《近代汉语指代词》,上海：学林出版社,1985年。
吕叔湘主编,《现代汉语八百词(增订本)》,北京：商务印书馆,1999年。
罗赞,指称问题及其关联理论概述,《国外社会科学》2003年第4期：31-34。
A.P.马蒂尼奇编、牟博等译,《语言哲学》,北京：商务印书馆,1998年。
马庆株,《汉语语义语法范畴问题》,北京：北京语言文化大学出版社,1998年。
茅盾,《子夜》(语文新课标必读丛书：增订版),北京：人民文学出版社,2009年。
彭可君,关于陈述和指称,《汉语学习》1992年第2期：16-20。
彭可君,谓词性宾语补议,《语言教学与研究》1990年第1期：23-33。
齐沪扬、葛新,汉语研究中信息分类的若干问题,《修辞学习》2003年第1期：22-24。
冉永平,词汇语用学及语用充实,《外语教学与研究》2005年第5期：343-350。
J.R.塞尔著,刘叶涛译,《意向性》,上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年。
沈家煊,转指与转喻,《当代语言学》1999年第1期：3-15。
史仲文主编,《中华经典藏书》,北京：北京出版社,1999年。
E.C.斯坦哈特著,黄华新、徐慈华等译,《隐喻的逻辑》,杭州：浙江大学出版社,2009年。
束定芳,《隐喻学研究》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2000年。
束定芳,论隐喻的运作机制,《外语教学与研究》2002年第2期：102-106。
孙通海译注,《庄子》,北京：中华书局,2007年。
P.L.特拉弗斯,2007年,随风而来的玛丽阿姨,第七章鸟太太,小书房·公益儿童文学网,http://www.dreamkinland.cn/cpth/mlay/007.htm。
涂纪亮,西方语言哲学研究的现状与前景,《外语教学与研究》2003年第5期：323-330。
汪少华,隐喻推理机制的认知性透视,《外语与外语教学》2000年第10期：14-17。
王莉莉,指称性主语、陈述性主语分类质疑,《山西大学学报》2000年第1期：91-95。
王路,语言哲学研究述评(上),《国外社会科学》1997年第6期：2-8。
王路,语言哲学研究述评(下),《国外社会科学》1998年第1期：7-10。
王勤玲,概念隐喻理论与概念整合理论的对比研究,《外语学刊》2005年第1期：42-46。
王天华,第一人称指示语的非指示现象分析,《黑龙江社会科学》2008年第3期：128-130。
王淑华,现代汉语指称与陈述问题研究综述,《广西社会科学》2005年第5期：151-154。
魏在江,概念整合、语用推理与转喻认知,《四川外语学院学报》2007年第1期：90-95。
魏在江,概念转喻与语篇衔接：各派分歧、理论背景及实验支持,《外国语》2007年第2期：29-36。
文学作品网,2010年,鱼与鸟的故事,[2010年4月8日],http://www.9c99.com/ wenxue/gushihui/aiqin/18633.html。
项成东,间接照应及其认知推理,《西安外国语学院学报》2004年第2期：5-8。
项成东,认知观照下的含义、显义区分,《四川外语学院学报》2008年第6期：51-57。
萧国政,现代汉语宾语谓词指称性用法考察,《现代汉语语法问题研究》,武汉：华中师范大学出版社,1997年：24-33。
《新周刊》主编,《2003语录》,上海：文汇出版社,2003年。
熊学亮,《认知语用学》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2001年。
徐慈华,《选择与适应：汉语隐喻的语用综观研究》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2009年。
徐慈华,科学隐喻的双重指称,《自然辩证法研究》2008年第9期：1-6。
徐慈华、李恒威,溯因推理与科学隐喻,《哲学研究》2009年第7期：94-99。
许宁云、韩丹,非常规间接前指照应的释义策略,《外语学刊》2005年第2期：50-53。
许余龙,汉英篇章中句子主题的识别,《外国语》1996年第6期：3-9。
许余龙,英汉指称词语表达的可及性,《外语教学与研究》2000年第5期：321-328。
许余龙,语篇回指的认知语言学探索,《外国语》2002年第1期：28-31。
亚里士多德,《诗学·诗艺》,上海：三联书店,1991年。
亚里士多德,《修辞学》,上海：三联书店,1991年。
杨成虎、赵颖,认知语义学中语义变化机制研究中概念转喻取向,《天津大学学报(社会科学版)》2009年第2期：158-161。
杨早,2010年,鲁迅早就从课本里撤走了,《南都周刊》,[2010年9月22日],http://www.nbweekly.com/Print/Article/11198_0.shtml。
英语陪生教育出版公司编,《朗文当代高级英语词典》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2004年。
余小强、邹颖娟,论同位关系,《湖南大学学报(社会科学版)》2005年第2期：93-96。
曾衍桃,词汇语用学引论, 《外语学刊》2006年第5期：59-64。
张斌, 《汉语语法学》,上海：上海教育出版社,2003年。
赵春曦,语言悖论的哲学问题, 《学术交流》2009年第3期：25-28。
赵秀凤、裴文斌,指称对隐性语篇视角的认知构建,《外语学刊》2009年第2期：44-47。
中国大百科全书出版社编,《中国大百科全书》哲学卷,北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1985年。
中国新闻网,2010年,为了炒作自己,申花俱乐部老板朱骏甘当“猪头”,[2010年8月30日],http://www.chinanews.com.cn/ty/2010/08-30/2499892.shtml.
周昌忠, 《西方现代语言哲学》,上海：上海人民出版社,1992年。
朱德熙, 《语法讲义》,北京：商务印书馆,1982年。