Hostname: page-component-5d84bcc8dc-h64zk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-08-31T22:17:22.963Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quotations as Demonstrations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Herbert H. Clark  and
Richard J. Gerrig
Herbert H. Clark*
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Richard J. Gerrig*
Affiliation:
Yale University
*
Department of Psychology, Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305
Department of Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-7447
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The theory developed here is that quotations are demonstrations that are component parts of language use. Demonstrations are unlike descriptions in two main ways. They are nonserious rather than serious actions. A person demonstrating a limp isn't actually or really limping. And they depict rather than describe their referents, though they depict only selected aspects of the referents. The demonstrator of the limp depicts some but not all of its aspects. Quotations, we argue, have all the properties of genuine demonstrations. They too are nonserious actions and selective depictions. For evidence we appeal to a wide range of phenomena in spontaneous spoken and written quotations.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 66 , Issue 4 , December 1990 , pp. 764 - 805
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 by Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

We are indebted to many colleagues for discussions on the issues presented here, especially Eve V. Clark, Jean C. Liittschwager, Geoffrey Nunberg. Michael F. Schober. and Elizabeth Wade. The research was supported in part by Grant BNS 83-20284 from the National Science Foundation.

References

Anderson, D. A., and Itule, B. D. 1984. Contemporary news reporting. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Atkinson, John M., and Heritage, John (eds.) 1984. Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Austin, John L. 1962. How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bach, Kent, and Harnish, R. Michael. 1979. Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bally, Charles. 1914. Figures de pensée et formes linguistiques. Germanisch-Romanische Monatsschrift 6. 456–70.Google Scholar
Banfield, Ann. 1973. Narrative style and the grammar of direct and indirect speech. Foundations of Language 10. 1–39.Google Scholar
Bateson, Gregory. 1972. A theory of play and fantasy. Steps to an ecology of mind, 177–93. New York: Ballantine.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Levinson, Stephen C. 1987. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger. 1958. How shall a thing be called? Psychological Review 65. 14–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruce, Bertram. 1981. A social interaction model of reading. Discourse Processes 4. 273–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bühler, Karl. 1982. The deictic field of language and deictic words. Speech, place, and action, ed. by Jarvella, Robert and Klein, Wolfgang, 9–30. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Chapman, Raymond. 1984. The treatment of sounds in language and literature. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Church, Alonzo. 1950. On Carnap's analysis of statements of assertion and belief. Analysis 20. 97–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Church, Alonzo. 1964. Introduction to mathematical logic. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. 1987. Four dimensions of language use. The pragmatic perspective, ed. by Verschueren, Jef and Bertuccelli-Papi, Marcella, 9–25. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H, and Gerrig, Richard J. 1984. On the pretense theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113. 121–26.Google ScholarPubMed
Clark, Herbert H., and Schaefer, Edward F. 1989. Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science 13. 259–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., and Wilkes-Gibbs, Deanna. 1986. Referrring as a collaborative process. Cognition 22. 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohn, Dorrit. 1978. Transparent minds: Narrative modes for presenting consciousness in fiction. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulmas, Florian. 1985. Direct and indirect speech: General problems and problems of Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics 9. 41–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulmas, Florian. 1986. Reported speech: Some general issues. Direct and indirect speech, ed. by Coulmas, Florian, 1–28. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curme, George O. 1922. A grammar of the German language (2nd rev. edition, 1964). London: F. Ungar.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1984. Quotation. Inquiries into truth and interpretation, ed. by Davidson, Donald, 79–92. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, Elizabeth. 1979. The printing press as an agent of change, Vols. 1 and 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Genette, Gerard. 1980. Narrative discourse: An essay in method (trans. by J. E. Lewin). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1974. Frame analysis. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Goodman, Nelson. 1968. Languages of art. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Goodman, Nelson. 1978. Some questions concerning quotation. Ways of worldmaking, ed. by Goodman, Nelson, 41–56. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles. 1981. Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1957. Meaning. Philosophical Review 66. 377–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1968. Utterer's meaning, sentence-meaning, and word-meaning. Foundations of Language 4. 225–42.Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. Syntax and semantics, Vol. 3: Speech acts, ed. by Cole, Peter and Morgan, Jerry L., 113–28. New York: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
Hjelmquist, Erland, and Gidlund, Åke. 1985. Free recall of conversations. Text 5. 169–85.Google Scholar
Horn, Lawrence R. 1984. Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. Meaning, form and use in context: Linguistic application, ed. by Schiffrin, Deborah, 11–42. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Hudson, Richard. 1985. The limits of subcategorization. Linguistic Analysis 15. 233–55.Google Scholar
Isaacs, Ellen A. 1989. Mutual memory for conversation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Google Scholar
Isaacs, Ellen A, and Clark, Herbert H. 1990. Ostensible invitations. Language in Society, to appear.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1924. Philosophy of grammar. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1974. Semantics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Lehrer, Adrienne. 1989. Remembering and representing prose: Quoted speech as a data source. Discourse Processes 12. 105–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, Willem J. M. 1989. Speaking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen. 1987. Minimization and conversational inference. The pragmatic perspective, ed. by Verschueren, Jef and Bertuccelli-Papi, Marcella, 61–130. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N. 1986. Direct speech and indirect speech: A functional study. Direct and indirect speech, ed. by Coulmas, Florian, 29–45. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Linnell, Per. 1982. The written language bias in linguistics. (Studies in Communication 2.) Linköping, Sweden: University of Linköping.Google Scholar
Lips, Marguerite. 1926. Le style indirect libre. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics, Vol. 1, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Macaulay, Ronald K. S. 1987. Polyphonic monologues: Quoted direct speech in oral narratives. International Pragmatics Association Papers in Pragmatics 1. 1–34.Google Scholar
Martin, James G. 1971. Some acoustic and grammatical features of spontaneous speech. The perception of language, ed. by Horton, David L. and Jenkins, James J., 47–68. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.Google Scholar
McGregor, Graham. 1986. The hearer as ‘listener judge’: An interpretive sociolinguistic approach to utterance interpretation. Language for hearers, ed. by McGregor, Graham, 153–84. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
McNeill, David. 1985. So you think gestures are nonverbal? Psychological Review 92. 350–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNeill, David, and Levy, Elena. 1982. Conceptual representations in language activity and gesture. Speech, place, and action: Studies in deixis and related topics, ed. by Jarvella, Robert and Klein, Wolfgang, 271–95. Chichester, England: Wiley.Google Scholar
Mitchell-Kernan, Claudia. 1972. Signifying and marking: Two Afro-American speech acts. Directions in sociolinguistics, ed. by Gumperz, John J. and Hymes, Dell, 161–79. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Nunberg, Geoffrey. 1990. The linguistics of punctuation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Partee, Barbara Hall. 1973. The syntax and semantics of quotation. A festschrift for Morris Halle, ed. by Anderson, Stephen R. and Kiparsky, Paul, 410–18. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Polanyi, Livia. 1985. Conversational storytelling. Handbook of discourse analysis 3: Discourse and dialogue, ed. by Dijk, Teun van, 183–202. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Polanyi, Livia. 1989. Telling the American story. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Quine, Willard V. O. 1951. Mathematical logic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quine, Willard V. O. 1969. Word and object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Searle, John R. 1969. Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Searle, John R. 1975. A taxonomy of illocutionary acts. Language, mind, and knowledge (Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science, vol. 7), ed. by Gunderson, Keith, 344–69. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Stafford, Laura, and Daly, John. 1984. Conversational memory: The effects of recall mode and memory expectancies on remembrances of natural conversation. Human Communication Research 10. 379–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sternberg, Meir. 1982. Proteus in quotation-land: Mimesis and the forms of reported discourse. Poetics Today 3. 107–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svartvik, Jan, and Quirk, Randolph (eds.) 1980. A corpus of English conversation. Lund, Sweden: Gleerup.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1989. Talking voices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ullmann, Stephen. 1957. Style in the French novel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Walton, Kendall L. 1973. Pictures and make-believe. Philosophical Review 82. 283–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, Kendall L. 1976. Points of view in narrative and depictive representation. Nous 10. 49–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1974. The semantics of direct and indirect discourse. Papers in Linguistics 7. 267–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar