In the study of pragmatics, few concepts are as fundamental as deixis and reference, which together enable speakers to connect language to the world around them. Deixis allows us to “point” to people, places, times, and social roles through context-dependent expressions, while reference resolution ensures listeners can identify what or whom these expressions refer to. For MA students in applied linguistics, understanding these phenomena is essential for analyzing how communication unfolds in real-world contexts, from casual conversations to digital discourse. This reading provides a comprehensive exploration of deixis and reference, covering types of deixis (person, place, time, social), the critical role of context in deictic interpretation, sources of ambiguity in deictic expressions, the process of reference resolution, and the dynamic interplay between deixis and reference. By weaving together theoretical insights, practical examples, and research applications, this resource equips you to investigate how language anchors meaning and to apply these concepts to discourse analysis, intercultural communication, language acquisition, and beyond.

1. Understanding Deixis: Pointing Through Language

What is Deixis?

Deixis, derived from the Greek word for “pointing,” refers to linguistic expressions whose meaning depends on the context of the utterance. These expressions act as verbal pointers, directing attention to elements in the situational, social, or discourse context. Unlike words with fixed meanings (e.g., “table” or “run”), deictic expressions like “I,” “here,” or “now” shift their reference based on who is speaking, where, when, and to whom. Deixis is a cornerstone of pragmatics because it reveals how language is tethered to the speaker’s perspective and the immediate communicative environment.

Types of Deixis

Deictic expressions are categorized by the type of entity they point to, each playing a distinct role in communication:

• Person Deixis: Refers to participants in the conversation, such as the speaker, listener, or others. Common person deictics include pronouns (“I,” “you,” “we,” “they”) and possessive forms (“my,” “your”).
  • Example: In “I’ll call you later,” “I” points to the speaker, and “you” to the listener, with meaning clarified by the conversational context.
• Place Deixis: Indicates spatial locations relative to the speaker’s position, using terms like “here,” “there,” “this,” “that,” or directional phrases (“over there,” “behind you”).
  • Example: “Put the book here” directs attention to a location near the speaker, but “here” is meaningless without knowing the speaker’s position.
• Time Deixis: Refers to temporal points or periods relative to the moment of speaking, including “now,” “then,” “yesterday,” “soon,” or tense markers (e.g., past, present).
  • Example: “We’re leaving tomorrow” anchors the action to the day after the utterance, requiring the listener to know the current date.
• Social Deixis: Encodes social relationships, roles, or hierarchies, often through honorifics, titles (“Professor,” “Your Honor”), or politeness markers.
  • Example: “Doctor, your patient is ready” uses social deixis to signal respect for the doctor’s professional role, grounded in cultural norms.

Why Deixis Matters

Deictic expressions are ubiquitous in language, shaping how we navigate conversations, narrate events, and establish social connections. Their reliance on context makes them both powerful and prone to misinterpretation, particularly in cross-cultural or digital settings where contextual cues may be limited. By studying deixis, we gain insight into how language functions as a dynamic, context-sensitive tool.

This understanding of deixis sets the stage for exploring how context shapes interpretation, as deictic expressions are only meaningful when grounded in the communicative environment.

2. The Role of Context in Deictic Interpretation

Why Context is Crucial

Deictic expressions are inherently context-dependent, deriving their meaning from the situational, social, and discourse context of the utterance. Without context, terms like “here,” “now,” or “you” are vague or uninterpretable, as their referents shift with each new speaker or setting. Context provides the anchor that allows listeners to decode deictic meanings, making it a linchpin of pragmatic analysis.

Types of Context

Several dimensions of context influence deictic interpretation:

• Situational Context: The physical environment, including the speaker’s location and visible objects. For example, “this chair” points to a specific chair in the speaker’s vicinity.
• Discourse Context: The preceding conversation or shared knowledge, which helps interpret anaphoric deixis (e.g., “that” referring to a topic discussed earlier).
• Social Context: Cultural norms, relationships, and power dynamics that shape social deixis (e.g., using “Sir” in a formal setting).
• Temporal Context: The time of speaking, which determines the meaning of time deictics like “yesterday” or “soon.”

Examples in Context

• Utterance: “Come here now!”
  • Situational Context: “Here” = the speaker’s location (e.g., a kitchen).
  • Temporal Context: “Now” = the present moment.
  • Interpretation: The listener must know the speaker’s position and the current time to respond appropriately.
• Utterance: “As I said earlier, that was a mistake.”
  • Discourse Context: “That” refers to an event mentioned previously, resolved through shared conversational history.
• Utterance: “Your Excellency, please proceed.”
  • Social Context: “Your Excellency” signals respect for a high-ranking official, grounded in cultural conventions.

Challenges of Context

When context is unclear or misaligned between speaker and listener, deictic expressions can lead to confusion. For instance, in a video call, “here” may be ambiguous if participants are in different locations. Similarly, social deixis (e.g., honorifics) may be misinterpreted across cultures with differing norms. These challenges highlight the need to study context in pragmatic research, particularly in diverse communicative settings.

The reliance on context naturally leads to the issue of ambiguity, as deictic expressions can sometimes point to multiple possible referents or lack clarity.

3. Ambiguity in Deictic Expressions

What is Deictic Ambiguity?

Ambiguity arises when a deictic expression’s referent is unclear, either because the context is insufficient or because multiple entities could fit the description. Deictic ambiguity is a common source of miscommunication, as listeners struggle to identify what the speaker is pointing to.

Sources of Ambiguity

• Vague Reference: Terms like “this,” “there,” or “he” may lack specific anchors. For example, “Put it there” in a room with multiple surfaces can confuse the listener.
• Multiple Referents: When several entities match the deictic term, such as “she” in a conversation about multiple women.
• Context Misalignment: Speaker and listener may assume different contexts, especially in asynchronous communication (e.g., “now” in an email sent hours ago).
• Cultural or Linguistic Differences: Social deixis, like honorifics, may be ambiguous across cultures (e.g., “Professor” in a language where titles vary by context).
• Lack of Nonverbal Cues: In text-based or remote communication, missing gestures or eye contact can obscure deictic intent (e.g., “this” in a chat without visual reference).

Examples of Ambiguity

1. Utterance: “That was a great idea.”
   • Ambiguity: “That” could refer to a recent suggestion, an earlier topic, or be sarcastic, depending on tone and context.
   • Resolution: Nonverbal cues (e.g., nodding toward a person) or prior discourse clarify the referent.
2. Utterance: “Meet me here later.”
   • Ambiguity: “Here” is unclear in a text message unless the speaker specifies their location.
   • Resolution: Additional context (e.g., “at the library”) or shared knowledge resolves the ambiguity.
3. Utterance: “We need to talk about him.”
   • Ambiguity: “Him” could refer to any male mentioned earlier, causing confusion without clear discourse context.

Addressing Ambiguity

Speakers often disambiguate deixis through gestures, intonation, or additional clarification (e.g., “this book, not that one”). Listeners, in turn, rely on shared knowledge or contextual cues to interpret correctly. Studying ambiguity is crucial for understanding communication breakdowns and designing effective language teaching or AI systems.

The issue of ambiguity ties directly to reference resolution, the cognitive process by which listeners pinpoint the intended referents of deictic and other referring expressions.

4. Reference Resolution: Identifying Referents in Discourse

What is Reference Resolution?

Reference resolution is the cognitive and linguistic process through which listeners identify the referents—people, objects, events, or concepts—that deictic or referring expressions (e.g., pronouns, definite descriptions) point to in discourse. This process is central to comprehension, as it ensures that listeners understand who or what the speaker is talking about.

How Reference Resolution Works

Reference resolution involves integrating multiple sources of information:

• Linguistic Cues: Grammatical agreement (e.g., “she” for a female referent), word choice (e.g., “the book” for a specific item), or anaphoric links (e.g., “it” referring to a previously mentioned object).
• Contextual Cues: Situational context (e.g., visible objects), discourse context (e.g., prior mentions), or shared knowledge (e.g., cultural references).
• Nonverbal Cues: Gestures, eye gaze, or pointing that clarify referents (e.g., nodding toward a person when saying “he”).
• Cognitive Inference: Listeners build mental models of the discourse, updating them as new referents are introduced or clarified.

Types of Reference

• Anaphoric Reference: Refers to an entity mentioned earlier in the discourse (e.g., “John arrived. He was tired.”).
• Exophoric Reference: Refers to something in the situational context (e.g., “This is heavy,” pointing to a box).
• Cataphoric Reference: Refers to something introduced later (e.g., “Here’s the plan: we’ll meet tomorrow.”).

Examples

1. Utterance: “I saw Maria yesterday. She was at the café.”
   • Reference Resolution: “She” = Maria, resolved via anaphoric reference to the prior mention and gender agreement.
   • Context: Discourse context (previous sentence) provides the referent.
2. Utterance: “Take this to the office.”
   • Reference Resolution: “This” = a specific object (e.g., a document), resolved via exophoric reference to the situational context (e.g., the speaker holding a document).
   • Context: Visual or situational cues are critical.
3. Utterance: “The president announced a new policy.”
   • Reference Resolution: “The president” = a specific leader, resolved via shared knowledge (e.g., the current national leader).
   • Context: Cultural or temporal context clarifies the referent.

Challenges in Reference Resolution

• Ambiguity: Multiple possible referents (e.g., “it” in a cluttered discourse).
• Lack of Context: Missing shared knowledge or situational cues (e.g., in digital communication).
• L2 Difficulties: Non-native speakers may struggle with anaphoric or cultural references.
• Complex Discourse: Long conversations or texts with multiple referents increase resolution difficulty.

Why It Matters

Reference resolution is essential for coherent communication and is a key area of study in pragmatics, as it reveals how listeners navigate ambiguity and context to maintain understanding. Its challenges are particularly pronounced in L2 learning, intercultural communication, and computational linguistics.

The processes of deixis and reference resolution are deeply interconnected, as deictic expressions often serve as the starting point for identifying referents in discourse.

5. Interaction Between Deixis and Reference

How Deixis and Reference Interconnect

Deixis and reference are two sides of the same coin: deixis provides the mechanism for pointing to entities in context, while reference resolution interprets what is being pointed to. Deictic expressions frequently function as referring expressions, and successful reference resolution depends on the contextual cues that deixis exploits. This interplay is central to how language maintains coherence and clarity in communication.

Key Interactions

• Deictic Expressions as Referring Expressions: Terms like “I,” “here,” “this,” or “Your Honor” both point to context and refer to specific entities. For example, “this book” uses place deixis to point to a nearby object and refers to a particular book.
• Context as a Mediator: Deictic expressions rely on context for meaning, and reference resolution uses that same context to identify referents. For instance, “there” in “Put it there” requires the listener to know the speaker’s location to resolve the referent (e.g., a specific shelf).
• Discourse Coherence: Deixis helps maintain reference across a conversation. For example, person deixis (“he”) can link back to an earlier mention, enabling anaphoric reference.
• Disambiguating Ambiguity: Deictic cues like gestures or intonation often clarify ambiguous references. For example, pointing while saying “that one” resolves which object is meant.

Examples

1. Discourse: “I met Sarah at the park yesterday. She was reading.”
   • Deixis: “I” (person), “yesterday” (time), “the park” (place).
   • Reference Resolution: “She” = Sarah, resolved via anaphoric reference and person deixis; “the park” = a specific location, resolved via shared knowledge.
   • Interaction: Time and place deixis anchor the context, enabling the listener to resolve “she” and “the park” accurately.
2. Utterance: “This is for you.”
   • Deixis: “This” (place), “you” (person).
   • Reference Resolution: “This” = a specific object (e.g., a gift), “you” = the listener, resolved via exophoric reference to the situational context.
   • Interaction: Place and person deixis point to the object and recipient, guiding reference resolution.
3. Utterance: “His speech was inspiring.”
   • Deixis: “His” (person, social).
   • Reference Resolution: “His” = a specific male speaker, resolved via discourse context (e.g., a prior mention) or shared knowledge (e.g., a known figure).
   • Interaction: Social deixis (possessive pronoun) links to the referent, clarified by context.

Why It Matters

The interplay between deixis and reference is crucial for understanding how speakers create coherence and how listeners interpret meaning. Misalignments in this interplay—due to cultural differences, L2 challenges, or digital constraints—can disrupt communication, making it a rich area for pragmatic research.

Building on these theoretical foundations, the next section explores how deixis and reference can be studied through applied linguistics research, offering practical tools and questions to guide your investigations.

6. Research Applications in Applied Linguistics

Deixis and reference are dynamic areas for research in applied linguistics, providing insights into how language users navigate context, resolve ambiguity, and maintain coherence in diverse communicative settings. By studying these phenomena, researchers can address questions about discourse structure, cultural variation, language learning, and technological applications. Below are key research areas, methodologies, example questions, and practical tips to inspire your work.

Research Areas

1. Discourse Analysis

   • Focus: How deixis and reference contribute to coherence and structure in specific genres, such as narratives, academic writing, or social media posts.
   • Example Question: How do time deictic expressions create temporal coherence in oral storytelling across languages?
   • Methodology: Qualitative coding of deictic types (person, place, time) and reference chains (anaphoric, exophoric) in a corpus, using software like UAM CorpusTool or NVivo. Analyze patterns in referent introduction and tracking.
   • Application: Informs how writers and speakers structure texts to guide audience understanding, with implications for editing or teaching discourse strategies.

2. Intercultural Communication

   • Focus: How deictic and referential practices vary across cultures, potentially causing miscommunication in multilingual or cross-cultural settings.
   • Example Question: How do social deictic markers (e.g., honorifics) influence reference resolution in formal vs. informal Korean-English interactions?
   • Methodology: Comparative analysis of conversation data or parallel texts from two languages, supplemented by ethnographic interviews to explore cultural norms. Use coding schemes to categorize deictic functions and referential clarity.
   • Application: Enhances intercultural training by identifying pragmatic differences and designing communication strategies.

3. L2 Pragmatics and Language Acquisition

   • Focus: How L2 learners interpret and produce deictic expressions and resolve references, including errors due to L1 transfer or contextual challenges.
   • Example Question: What strategies do intermediate L2 English learners use to resolve ambiguous place deixis in spoken discourse?
   • Methodology: Experimental studies using comprehension tasks (e.g., matching deictics to referents) or longitudinal corpus analysis of learner speech/writing. Compare L2 and native speaker performance to identify gaps.
   • Application: Informs L2 pedagogy by developing targeted activities to improve pragmatic competence in context-sensitive language use.

4. Digital Communication

   • Focus: How deixis and reference function in text-based, asynchronous, or multimodal digital contexts where physical context is limited.
   • Example Question: How do emojis or hyperlinks function as deictic tools to facilitate reference resolution in Twitter threads?
   • Methodology: Mixed-methods analysis combining quantitative counts of deictic markers (e.g., “this,” emojis) with qualitative interpretation of referential success in digital texts. Use tools like Python for text mining.
   • Application: Improves design of digital communication platforms by enhancing clarity in reference and context signaling.

5. Computational Linguistics

   • Focus: Developing algorithms for automatic detection of deictic expressions and resolution of referents in natural language processing (NLP) systems.
   • Example Question: Can deep learning models accurately resolve anaphoric person deixis in multilingual news articles?
   • Methodology: Train NLP models on annotated datasets (e.g., OntoNotes or CoNLL-2012 for coreference resolution), evaluating performance with metrics like precision, recall, and F1-score. Incorporate contextual features (e.g., discourse history) to improve accuracy.
   • Application: Enhances AI applications like chatbots, machine translation, and automated summarization by improving context-sensitive interpretation.

Practical Research Tips

• Corpus Analysis: Build a small corpus of authentic texts (e.g., podcasts, emails, or classroom interactions) and annotate for deictic categories (person, place, time, social) and reference types (anaphoric, exophoric, cataphoric). Use tools like ELAN for multimodal data or AntConc for text analysis to identify patterns.
• Qualitative Coding: Develop a detailed coding scheme for deixis (e.g., type, function) and reference (e.g., referent type, resolution success), testing inter-rater reliability with peers to ensure consistency.
• Cross-Cultural Studies: Collect parallel data from two languages or cultural contexts (e.g., English and Mandarin) to compare deictic strategies and referential ambiguity. Use interviews to explore how cultural norms shape interpretation.
• Experimental Design: Create tasks like referent identification (e.g., matching “this” to an object in a scenario) or cloze tests to assess deictic comprehension under controlled conditions. Vary contextual cues to test their impact.
• Multimodal Analysis: Record naturalistic conversations or video calls to study how nonverbal cues (gestures, eye gaze) aid deictic and referential clarity, using software like Praat for audio-visual alignment.
• Ethical Considerations: Ensure participant consent for recorded data and anonymize sensitive information in corpora to protect privacy.

Example Research Project

• Title: Reference Resolution of Place Deixis in L2 English Video Conferencing
• Research Question: How do L2 English learners resolve ambiguous place deictic expressions (e.g., “here,” “there”) in video-based academic discussions, and what role do nonverbal cues play?
• Method: Record 15-minute video discussions among L2 learners, transcribe and code for place deixis and referent resolution, and analyze nonverbal cues (e.g., pointing, screen-sharing) using ELAN. Survey participants on their interpretation strategies.
• Analysis: Quantify resolution accuracy and qualitatively describe how gestures or context clarify ambiguity. Compare L2 and native speaker performance to identify learner challenges.
• Relevance: Informs online L2 pedagogy by suggesting strategies to teach context-sensitive deixis and improve digital communication skills.

7. Reflection Questions

1. Identify a deictic expression and its referent in a recent conversation, text, or digital interaction. How did contextual cues (e.g., discourse, gestures, shared knowledge) facilitate or complicate reference resolution?
2. How might ambiguity in deictic expressions or challenges in reference resolution impact your research area (e.g., sociolinguistics, language teaching, computational linguistics)?
3. Consider a cross-cultural, digital, or L2 communication scenario. How could differences in deictic practices or reference resolution strategies lead to misunderstandings, and what research methods could explore these issues?

8. Further Reading

• Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press. (Comprehensive exploration of deixis and its role in pragmatics.)
• Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics, Vol. 2. Cambridge University Press. (In-depth analysis of deictic categories and reference.)
• Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). “Grounding in Communication.” In Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. APA Books. (Foundational work on reference resolution and shared context.)
• Huang, Y. (2014). Pragmatics (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. (Detailed discussion of deixis and reference with cross-linguistic examples.)
• Mitkov, R. (2002). Anaphora Resolution. Longman. (Technical overview of reference resolution for computational linguistics.)

Conclusion

Deixis and reference are essential mechanisms for anchoring language to context and ensuring coherent communication. By mastering these concepts, you will develop a nuanced understanding of how speakers point to the world and how listeners interpret those pointers, often navigating ambiguity and cultural differences. The research applications outlined here provide a roadmap for exploring these phenomena in diverse contexts, from classroom discourse to AI development. As you engage with these ideas, consider how deixis and reference shape the communicative practices you encounter in your academic and professional work, and how your research can contribute to the broader field of applied linguistics.