My goal in this article is to compare the behavior of a variety of non clausebound types of indexical expression in English across three texts from different genres, spoken as well as written. A key distinction is the one claimed to exist between the dimensions of text and discourse, and the comparison of the indexical types demonstrates its relevance. In a given text, certain lexically-specific types of indexical bearing an anaphoric interpretation may perform particular strategic, discourse unitdemarcating roles; while others realizing a deictic value may signal a shift in referential perspective, preparing the reader or addressee for a transition to a new discourse unit or sub-unit. Particularly highlighted are the deictic, anadeictic and anaphoric roles of the various indexicals as a function of text genre, utterer's intention and the interlocutive relationships developed throughout the discourse.The article also assesses the neo-Gricean pragmatic account of (non-)coreference in discourse put forward in Levinson's (2000) Presumptive Meanings. The theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature, MIT Press. It argues that, rather than their discourse value being necessarily determined by the possibility of a choice between an attenuated and a prolix indexical type, it is the textual, contextual as well as discourse factors isolated during the earlier comparison which are adequate to describe and account for this.

There is disagreement within both linguistics and psycholinguistics concerning the use of unaccented third person pronouns to refer to implicit referents. Some researchers (e.g., Erkü & Gundel, 1987) argue that it is impossible or highly marked, while others (e.g., Yule, 1982) maintain that it is not only acceptable but commonly used in normal discourse. However, both sides in the debate may be correct: while peripheral implicit referents (which evoke the means or the instrument by which a given state of aVairs is established) are not easily referred to using pronouns, central or 'nuclear' implicit referents are. We tested this hypothesis in two experiments, involving diVerent languages (English and French). The results of both experiments show that pronominal reference to implicit referents caused slower reading times compared to explicit referents for peripheral referents only. We discuss these results with respect to Gundel, Hedberg, and Zacharski's (

In this article, I examine the ‘modal’ or ‘empathetic’ (Lyons, 1977: 677) use of the distal (or ‘nonproximal’) determiner/pronoun that: namely, where the intended referent may have just been evoked in the immediately prior discourse, but where the distal pronoun that, not the ‘in-focus’ it or the ‘activated’, proximal this is used. The rationale behind the choice of this particular type of indexical seems to be that the speaker is distancing him/herself from the referent, not wishing to ascribe actuality to it in the way that would be the case if either it or this were used instead. Examination of this particular value of that leads to the hypothesis that the principles underlying the choice of that as opposed to this or it generally are not derived ‘objectively’, as it were, from their situational use in terms of degrees of proximity of a referent or demonstratum to the speaker or hearer, nor primarily in terms of attention focus. They are, rather, social and cognitive, and play an important interactional role in the construction of discourse.

Taking English as the example language, the article begins by presenting a Scale of indexicality characterizing context-bound expression types, ranging from those signalling pure deixis at one pole, to ones expressing pure anaphora at the other. On the basis of this Scale, the article attempts to determine the specific way in which demonstratives (pronouns as well as NPs) may realize the discourse procedures of deixis and "anadeixis"-a referring procedure that involves partly anaphoric, and partly deictic reference. It is the discourse-structuring function of deictic and anadeictic indexicals that is the particular focus of the article. Textual examples are presented and analysed of anadeicticallyfunctioning demonstrative NPs (whether of the 'strict' anadeixis or the discourse-deixis type) that are either initial or non-initial within their discourse unit, and which serve either to herald a transition between major discourse units within a given text, or to actually implement one. Demonstrative expressions may also serve to switch the focus back to an earlier topical referent or discourse unit, which will have since been superseded by a more recent topic or unit. The current unit then further develops that earlier topic or discourse unit. It is the deictic property of demonstratives, coded morphologically in English via their proximal vs. distal character, along with the nature of the predicative component of the expression where it is a lexical NP, which enables such expression types to perform the discourse-structuring roles at issue here. As such, this component may not correspond to presupposed information, but rather performs a (re-)classifying or predicating function.