The interpretation of [+distal] in demonstratives and complementizers

Abstract

AbstractThis article argues that the [+distal] feature of demonstrativethatis also present in complementizerthat, and has not bleached away. In particular, we argue that complementizerthatis referential: it refers to an element in theShared Discourse Space(an extension of the Common Ground) that can be seen as distal. This allows us to explain (i) that direct speech patterns with [−distal] (Sue said this/#that: “It is raining”) while indirect speech patterns with [+distal] (Sue said*this/that it is raining); (ii) the use ofthatin exclamatives (That bio industry is still allowed!); and (iii) that optionalthatis more frequently used when there is some sort of context between Speaker and Addressee. This last phenomenon has parallels in Romance complementizers derived from Latinquod, which can likewise be seen as [+distal]. We propose that [+distal] is a marker ofAddressee involvement, which can account for all these phenomena, and can be extended to demonstrative uses ofthat. In exophoric contexts, [+distal] additionally marksactual distance. The interpretation of Addressee involvement and actual distance depends on context; we propose that it is derived from the interaction between the syntactic DP/CP domain and the pragmatic exophoric/endophoric distinction.