Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007

International JournalofPhilosophicalStudies all walksoflifeareentitled toanswer.Politicians,advertisers,lawyers, abandonment wouldnolongerberealistic. pronouns, manwouldhavebecomesodependenton theirusethat ment oflanguagewentsofarastohaveexhaustedthe powerandwealthof pronouns. Whatremainsinterestingisonlythefactthat, oncethedevelop- even allpronounswereleftout. Wittgenstein oncespeculatedonwhatlanguagewouldlooklikeifthe‘I’or Taylor andFrancisRIPH_A_238247.sgm10.1080/09672550701383582InternationalJournalofPhilosophicalStudies0967-2559(print)/1466-4542(online)[email protected] persons, includingitself. child approachingtheageof2toberelyingstillonproper namestorefer child’s languagedevelopment.Therefore,itisperfectly imaginablefora professional linguists,theuseofpronounscomesata rather latestageina language acquisition.Aswecanallwitnessourselves, or asdocumentedby complete absenceofpronounsisindeedthecaseatbeginning challenge uswithsuchathoughtexperiment,forthisscenarioofthe In whatwayarepronounsimportant?Thisisaquestion thatpeoplefrom ences, socialrelationships,thephilosophyofrights,andsoforth. issues includingspatialorientation,dialectics,,existentialexperi- played apartintheformulationandadvancementofimportantphilosophical some classicalphilosophicalproblemstoshowhowdealingwithpronounshas great dealtodowithphilosophyaswell.Thispaperpresentsabriefsketchof demonstrative, etc.Butacloserlookattheissuerevealsthatpronounshave perform: forinstance,deicticoranaphoric,definiteindefinite,personal pronouns areclassifiedaccordingtothevariouslinguisticfunctionsthey For mostpeople,pronounsarejustamatterforlinguists.Inlinguistics, Keywords: Towards aPhenomenologyof I For ElmarHolensteinonhisSeventiethBirthday ISSN 0967–2559print1466–4542online ©2007Taylor&Francis Introduction: TheThematicandtheNon-Thematic phenomenology; pronouns/pronominology;personal/impersonal; International JournalofPhilosophical Studies DOI: 10.1080/09672550701383582 Tze-wan Kwan http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals possessive; deixis;reflexive 2

Pronouns* In otherwords,languagedoesworkwithout 1 Abstract

In fact,wedonotneedWittgensteinto Vol.15(2),247–268 Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007

and case. major characteristicsattributabletonouns,including number,gender, tutes’ fornounsornounphrases.Forthisreason,pronouns carryallthe Astheterm‘pronoun’suggests,pronounsarebydefinition ‘substi- a. pronouns: so thatwecanhavesomepointsofreferenceregardingthebasicfeatures following istomakesomeverybriefsketchesfromalinguisticstandpoint, Since pronounsinvolveprimarilyalinguisticissue,whatIwilldointhe significant waterisforitsexistence. even havebeenconsciousofthis,justasafishmightnotknowhow always beenswimminginthewatersofpronouns,althoughtheymightnot very differentwithouttheircontribution.Inasense,philosophershave is sooverwhelminglyimportantthatthehistoryofphilosophywouldlook pronouns thetargetoftheirstudy.Despitethis,roleplayedby produced manyideasrelatedtopronounswithoutactuallymaking thematic manner.Inotherwords,generationsofphilosophershave the philosophicaltradition,pronounshavebeentreatedmainlyinanon- proper haslittletodowithpronouns,butrathertherealizationthat,in refers tothereplacement of anounmentionedearlier(antecedent)in divided mainlyintoanaphoric pronounsanddeicticpronouns.Anaphora Asfarasthemajorfunctionalpropertiesare concerned,pronounsare c. ‘they’, etc.). pronouns referbydefinitiontopersonsonly(‘I’,‘you’, ‘he’/‘she’/‘it’,‘we’, to whichthespeakercanpoint(e.g.,‘this’/‘these’,‘that’/‘those’), personal demonstrative pronounsrefertosomethingimmediately beforethesenses, distinguished intodemonstrativepronounsandpersonal pronouns.While Asfarastheobjectofreplacement isconcerned,pronounscanbe b. in morphology. pronouns takesplaceinparalleltothatofnouns,showing aconsistency extent. or Dewey,haveseldomreflecteduponpronounsthematicallytoanygreat Philosophers, onthecontrary,apartfromveryfewexceptionssuchasPeirce linguists whohavetreatedpronounsinathematicortopic-focusedmanner. for linguiststhanphilosophers.Indeed,themostpart,itis philosophers themselves. have madetothedisciplineofphilosophy,withorwithoutnotice The purposeofthispaperistoshowthegreatcontributionthatpronouns priests, teachers,poets,andothersshouldallhaveinterestingthingstotell.

This, however,shouldnotleadustothepreconceptionthatphilosophy For mostpeople,pronounsshouldbeamatterofconcern,butmuchmore 3 INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOFPHILOSOPHICALSTUDIES 4

In manyIndo-Germaniclanguages,thedeclension of IPronounsfromaLinguisticPointofView II 248 Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 Grammaire .Intraditionallinguistics(includinginthefamous d. philosophically; itwillbecoveredlater. be thespeakerorhis/her‘body’.Thisisanissueofutmostimportance often treatedbyphilosophersnowadaysundertheheadingof philosophy. Itisalsonoteworthythatthelinguisticphenomenonof amount ofemphasisisplacedon ing pronouns,butinmodernandcontemporarylinguistics,anincreasing all thedeicticwordsgettheirreference.The features of forth indiscoursesareallexamplesofthissort. manner. Theusesof‘I’,‘this’,‘that’,‘now’,‘then’,‘here’,‘there’,andso pronouns canbehavedeicticallyaslongtheyfunctioninthisdeictic ral, personal(especiallythefirstandsecondperson),otherreferences, deictic fieldthatinvolvesextra-linguisticsituations,includingspatio-tempo- linguistically withinthecontextofutteredsentence, ‘tiger’. was hungry’,theword‘it’anaphoricallyrefersbacktoantecedent linguistic utterance.Inthesentence‘Thetigerattackedpeoplebecauseit in ordertomakefullsense. main types. pronouns, andothers,whicharederivativesofthetwopreviouslynamed tive pronouns(‘which’,‘who’,‘whom’,etc.),reflexivepronouns,possessive ‘whoever’), indefinitepronouns(‘one’,‘everyone’, pronouns, includingrelativepronouns(‘that’,‘which’,‘who’,‘whom’, Inadditiontothosementionedabove,therearestillotherspeciesof e. signs. term traceabletoPeirce’snotionofthe‘index’asonethreetypes .Demonstrative pronounsarebasicallydeicticinnature.Butevenamong 1. types. will gooverthetwomaintypesofpronouns,aswell someofthederived played certainimportantrolesinphilosophy.InthesectionIIIbelow,we

no wonderthatHegelstarted his ‘I’. long beforetheydevelopthe abilitytohandlepersonalpronounssuchas dren dorelyon‘this/that’to identifyobjectsandtoorientatethemselves to identifytheobjectsthataremeant.AsHolenstein pointed out,chil- through theuseofdirectpointers(suchasafinger,glance, orgestures) deictic pronouns,demonstrativesdistinguishthemselves additionally

12

14

5

I ClassicalPhilosophicalScenariosInvolvingPronouns III While anaphoricpronounscanbefullyunderstoodpurelyintra- Given theuncontestableprimacy ofdemonstrativepronouns,itis

deixis 10

13

) thefocushaslargelybeenconfinedtoanaphorawhentreat-

TOWARDS APHENOMENOLOGYOFPRONOUNS Marginal astheymightappear,thesepronounshavealso

is theconceptof

A

8 Demonstrative Pronouns

Interestingly, bothdemonstrativeandpersonal deixis origo 249 Phänomenologie desGeistes , whichhasmuchmorerelevanceto , ortheplaceoforiginfromwhere origo 9

One ofthemostimportant

jemand is usuallyconsideredto 6

, etc.),interroga- deixis indexicals Port-Royal

requires a with ‘this’ deixis , 11

a is 7 Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Thisnotionofthe 4. Ifdemonstrativesarereferredbacktotheperson,question of 3. Thequestionof 2. of spatialorientation.Regardingthephenomenon oforientation, bounds, butalsofailstoprovideanexplanationofthe truemechanism personal subjectnotonlyconfineshimwithinhisownegocentric between manandcanworkatall. place toanother),andthatspatialotheraspectsof communication from spottocanbetrulypossible(thinkabout driving fromone centres. Itisonlythroughsuch‘polycentricgivenness’ thatorientation stops, etc.,ofwhichmy me, thisorthathouseIknow,certainuniversitycampuses, somebus objects’ orperceptualfocuses–includingthisthatperson addressing Nullpunkt Holenstein maintainedthat,insteadofrelyingonone singlesubjective Husserl’s ‘unreflected’emphasisontheroleof beginning ofthe1970s. influence felttothisday, other persons. further questionsconcerning themulti-focalrelationbetweenIand tic Husserl notonlyrevolutionized themainstreamunderstandingofdeic- should theselforpersonserveas is onlyhalfanswered.Forinwhatway,orthroughmechanism, person, isunderlined. history ofconsciousness. and relatedadverbssuchas‘here’‘now’inhistreatmentofthe the worldofexperience. oculomotor musclestoorientatehimselfkinaestheticallyinthemidstof Nullpunkt question of the ‘zero pointoforientation’canbeconsideredasasolutiontothe person. ItisalongthislineofthoughtthatHusserl’snotion glance, thefacialgesture,etc.,orinaword,toverybody( pointing activityshouldbetracedbacktothe demonstratives involveapointingactivity,anobviousansweristhatthis self. person, eventhoughthepersonmightnotbeconsciousofhis/hervery instance ofthediscourseactivitiesspeaker,primarilyfirst demonstrative pronouns‘ispointless…unless’referenceismadetothe oftheissue.ForBenveniste,suchadeicticdefinition strative pronounsthroughtheconceptof this regard,Benvenistemaintainedthattheusualdefinitionofdemon- pronouns, raisethequestionof origo 16

INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOFPHILOSOPHICALSTUDIES In thisway,theimportanceof‘person’,especiallyfirst

as rootedintheself, , manorientateshimselfratherthroughendless‘eye-catching

is thepointofdeparture,fromwhichsubjectexerciseshis origo . origo 17 Leib ForHusserl,the

: Demonstratives,asthemostprimitivedeictic

18 as

15

19

Leib

20

Nullpunkt derOrientierung

was severelycriticizedbyHolensteinatthe

Holenstein’s maincomplaintwasthat

23

origo is onlyoneoutofmanysuchpossible

250 but alsohelpspavetheway toraising

, thesourceofdeicticreferences.In Leib

origo

(oreventhe‘head’(

deixis

22

of deicticreference?Since

Holenstein’s critiqueof

shows onlyasuperficial

pointer

Leib , whilehavingan , thefinger,

of thefirst- Leib Kopf Leib ) ofthe origo )) as

as 21 Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Heidegger’s critiqueofsubjectivity: 3. ForBenveniste,themostinterestingthingaboutpronounsis that‘they 2. Withrespecttopersonalpronouns,Humboldtwroteashortbutimpor- 1. foreign intellect. acquire trueclarityandcertaintyonlythroughitsreflectionfroma corresponds tothe“I”.’ForHumboldt,man’sconceptualthinkingwill tional relations,man,forthesakeofthought,longsa“thou”who an inclinationtowardssocialexistence.Besidesallthebodilyandsensa- ( possibility ofspeechitselfisdeterminedbyaddressingandreplying the primordialessenceoflanguageanunalterabledualism,and modern subjectivismashaving largelytransgressedhumanfinitude reason’, terized asthe‘dominance ofthesubject’, stance towardsthetheoryof subjectivity,whichhereproachfullycharac- has beenundeniable.ItiswellknownthatHeideggertook averycritical and toHusserl,thecrucialroleplayedby person singular‘I’.SincethedaysofDescartes,through Fichte,Hegel, modern Westernphilosophygivesagreatdealofpriority tothefirst- and the‘I–It’. distinction betweenthetwoutterlydifferentrelations ofthe‘I–Thou’ tions byBenvenisteshowastrongresemblanceto MartinBuber’s a ‘thing’,ortobe‘de-personalized’ true personhood;thethirdperson(he/she/it)isdoomed tobereifiableas ‘unmarked’. ForBenveniste,onlythefirstandsecond personexhibit they couldrefertoimpersonalthings,andtheirusesarenon-uniqueor person, ‘I’.Third-personpronounsdonotnecessarilypointtopersons; third personaretheonlypronounsthatcanreferto‘objects’offirst alities involvedinthediscourse. of ‘reversibility’,andtheyrepresentuniquelythetwopartiesorperson- the firstandsecondperson(the‘I’‘you’)exhibitclearfeature indexicals mean.ToBenveniste,amongthepersonalpronouns,thoseof according tothesituationofdiscourse.Thisisexactlywhat do notrefertoaconceptoranindividual’, and avirtual‘you’. usually callthinkingisinfactnothingbutthedialoguebetween‘I’ always referstothe‘I’and‘you’,linguisticpartner.Evenwhatwe human speechisimpossiblewithoutpartners.Dualityatadeeplevel dialogue’ ( Humboldt maintainedthatdualityisrootedfinallyinthe‘principleof the ‘dual’number( tant treatise, Anrede undErwiderung 32

or asthe‘mythologyofan intellect’. das dialogischePrinzip TOWARDS APHENOMENOLOGYOFPRONOUNS Über denDualis 25 24

Humboldt thereforeconcludedthat,‘Thereliesin numerus B ). Humanthoughtisbynatureaccompanied Personal Pronouns , whichdiscussestheoriginalpresenceof ) besidesthesingularandplural. 251 27 ). ForHumboldt,thephenomenonof

28 In contrasttothis,pronounsofthe

as a‘non-person’. 30

Of allthepersonalpronouns, 26 ego

but changetheirreference 31

, 33 as the‘deificationof das Ich

Heidegger regarded

29

, orsubjectivity These observa-

deixis

34

and

or

Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Marcel:Thetheoreticallyintricate relationshipbetweenthepronounsI, 6. Buber:Asfaraspronounusageisconcerned,MartinBuber is famousfor 5. Ontheotherhand,inalternativetraditionofpersonalism,wewitness 4. Christiane marriesnotfor love, butmerelyforsocialreasons.Beinga dramas, Marceltellsthestory ofacouple,ChristianeandLawrence. called Thou, andHe/She/Ithasbeen nicelydramatizedbyMarcel. role wouldbeadifferentone. Therefore, eveninpersonalism,theImuststillbeplace, althoughits demonstrate suchcaringattitudes,orbecondemned fornotdoingso. most importantissue,westillhavetosingleoutan‘I’who wouldactually For evenifweconsiderthecare,love,andrespectfor Thoutobethe was forhimbynomeanslessimportantanissuethanthat ofthe‘Thou’. propounder ofthepersonalistictradition,existential fateofthe‘I’ utterly different.Therefore,althoughBuberisregarded asamajor in whichhisvalues,behaviour,andrelations withothersare This twofoldnessoftheIsuggeststhatmancanindeed live intwoworlds, of thebasicwordI–It’.Or,asBuberputit:‘theImanisalsotwofold’. observation that‘theIofthebasicwordI–Thouisadifferentfrom It. Oneofthemostimportantinsightsbook fore, likeBenveniste,BuberclassifiedtheHeandShetogetherwith be degradingmyintimacywiththat‘Thou’throughdistantiation.There- made the‘Thou’throughobjectivationa‘Him’or‘Her’,Iwouldinfact relations towardsothersthroughlove,care,andrespect.ForBuber,ifI towards inanimateobjectsortoothers,I–Thoupointsman’sintimate ity. types ofrelationstopeopleor,aswewouldputit,twoattitudesalter- which amounttowhathecalledtwo‘basicwords’or‘wordpairs’, having leftbehindthetwopronominalbifurcations‘I–It’and‘I–Thou’, question toshowthattheanswerisnotaneasyone. question oflastingimportance.Inthefollowingwewilltrytounfold confrontation between‘identityandalterity’.Thisis,willremain,a onism betweensubjectivismandpersonalismcanberegardedasa ‘Thou’, doesthismeanthattheroleof‘I’willbeeclipsed?Theantag- some changewasneeded.Butnow,giventhiscompetingroleofthe the centuries-longspellofsubjectivismmighthaveledtofeelingthat might haveledtothispreferencefortheThouoverI;presumably, of BuberorMarcel.Understandably,somesocio-ontologicalfactors a shiftofemphasisfromtheItoThou,asiswellknowninworks be sonegativelyconceived,assuggestedbyHeidegger? the questionis,shouldnotionofsubjectorrole‘I’really become athreattohumanexistenceandsocietiesnowadays.But many crises,whethernatural-ecologicalorsocial-political,thathave felt thatthe 35

Whereas I–Itsignifiesman’smaterialisticandobjectivisticrelations INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOFPHILOSOPHICALSTUDIES The BrokenWorld hybris

that comeswithitshouldbeheldresponsibleforthe , whichisrepresentativeof hisexistentialist 252 I andThou 36

lies inthe In aplay

Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 ● much incommonwiththe Western idealofpersonalism.TheTaoisttradi- the self,andthatoftolerance andconsiderationforothers,whichhaveso tradition inparticularadvocates theattitudesofrestraintandcriticism self. Amongthevariousschools ofChinesephilosophy,theConfucian self-awareness revealsadeepacknowledgementof the finitenessof tion, butmainlywithpracticalprinciplesandwisdom aboutlife. , theawarenessofselfisseldomconnected with objectivecogni- From theabove,wecanmakefollowingobservations. FortheChinese ● ● ● ● ● Thepronominaluseof‘I’orthe‘self’intraditionalChinese philosophy: 7. non-engagement andreleaseoftheself. self-detachment andaestheticcontemplation; selflessness, self-forgetfulness,andself-sacrifice; the selfexhibitingconsiderationandtoleranceofothers; self-reflection, self-responsibility,andself-reproof; self-control, self-discipline,orautonomy; wo Chinese charactersthatbearthemeaningof‘I’or‘self’( makes agoodcontrast.Inanearlierpaper,Iidentifiednumberof the pronominaluseof‘I’or‘self’intraditionalChinesephilosophy hand andthechallengeofWesternpersonalismonother,areview Against thebackdropofHeideggeriancritiqueIonone mation ofhervery‘I’. It relationshiptoanI–Thouone,theprotagonistexperiencesatransfor- important messageconveyedbytheplayisthatswitchingfromanI– freed…. It’sasifanunbearablenightmarehasended.’Forme,themost ‘(Solemnly) Isweartoyouthatnowbelongonlyyou.havebeen ‘Thou’ inChristiane’seyes,asrevealedbyherwordstheclosingscene: husband Lawrence,whonowfinallybecomes(orisupgradedto)a upon herwholelife,leadingtorebuildacloserelationshipwith Christiane. ThisstrikingmessageinducesChristianetoreflectanew message ofherdeceasedbrother’ssilentbut‘religious’loveandcarefor sudden appearanceofJacques’ssister,Genevieve,toconveythe heart-broken ina‘brokenworld’.Theturningpointofthestoryis Jacques, amanwhohaschosentobeBenedictinemonk,leavingher Marcel revealsthesecrethistoryofChristiane’sunrequitedlovefor recent romancesanddescribingsometensionsbetweenthecouple, as ‘Thou’,butliterallyonly‘Him’.AftertracingsomeofChristiane’s talented andattractivewoman,sheisnotpreparedtotreatherhusband when theChinesetalkabout‘I’or‘self’.Thesebasicattitudesare: that anumberofcharacteristicattitudestolifecanindeedbeidentified these wordsplayincontext.Afteranextensiveinvestigation,Idiscovered (philosophical aswellliterary)wasthenundertakentoseewhatroles

in particular).AsearchthroughsomeclassicalChinesecorpora TOWARDS APHENOMENOLOGYOFPRONOUNS 253 ji

38 ,

zi Chinese

, and 37

Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Reflexive pronouns areaspecialkindofpersonalpronounwhosefunc- 1. consequences, andsoon. making moraljudgements,shoulderingresponsibilities, bearinglegal are capableofcaringaboutandlovingothers,appreciating beauty, who, besidespossessingknowledgeandtheabilitytojudgeobjectively, dimensional, multi-facetedhumansociety,whatweneedisindividual‘I’s cognitive functionofthesame‘I’shouldnotbeneglected.Inamulti- sential, andthatwithoutdetrimenttootherfunctionsofthe‘I’,thisvery hand, italsoshowsusthatthecognitiveaspectofIisindeedquintes- or self-importance,assuggestedbyHeidegger’scriticism;ontheother that thestresson‘I’doesnotnecessarilyamounttoself-centredness hood’ seemstohavetaughtustwolessons.Ontheonehand,itteaches subject-objectivism. suffering fromanexcessof‘personalism’togetherwithashortage fore, contrarytowhatprevailsintheWest,Chinesecultureisprobably the ThouatexpenseofacomprehensivecultivationI.There- ficed. thing ‘toopersonal’,totheextentthatobjectivestandardscouldbesacri- shortcomings ofChinesecultureliespreciselyinitshavingmadeevery- However, historyhastaughtusthatoneofthemainsocio-political with thoseofWesternpersonalism(apartfromitsChristianaspect). and Chinesepolitics.traditionalvaluesarebasicallycompatible ity, whichispreciselywhatwantinginChineseculture,society, subject, anditisthisshortfallthatleadstopovertyinthesenseofobjectiv- notions ofselfhood,Chineseculturefallsshorttheepistemological token, weshouldalsobemindfulofthefactthat,givensuchalternative Heidegger) istotallyirrelevantinChinesephilosophy.Butbythesame and aggressionrevealedbytheepistemological‘subject’(asunderstood of theseareconsidered,itbecomesquiteclearthatthesorthegemony worldly bondagesoastoattainthestateof whereas theBuddhisttraditionadvocatesliberationofone’sselffrom tion favoursadetachedandquasi-aestheticappreciationofnaturelife, This contrastbetweentheChineseandWesternconceptionsof‘self- in Latin,andsoforth. As thequasi- tion cannotbefullyunderstoodapartfromthereflexive verbsinvolved. such as‘-self’inEnglish, pronouns areeasilyidentifiable bysuffixesormorphologicalelements when someoneisdoing something uponhim(her/it)self.Reflexive the agentofanactionissameasrecipient action;thatis, 39

In otherwords,theChinesepeoplemighthaveover-emphasized INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOFPHILOSOPHICALSTUDIES optical

term implies,wecomeacross‘reflexives’whenever C mich/dich/sich Reflexive Pronouns 254

in German, asamskrta

me/te/se or nirvana

in French, . Whenall se Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Afterthe Kantianrevolution,thereflexivepronouncontinuedtoexert 3. Inphilosophy,thenotionof‘self’or‘selfsameness’hasaverywideappli- 2. but alsoaboutthespeculative philosophyofhismaturedsystem. that enabledhimtotalknot onlyaboutdialecticsinthenarrowsense, ( of thispairconceptstogether withtheirsynthesisinto‘inandforitself’ Aristotle’s conceptualdoubletpotentiality–actuality.With theinterplay the ‘for-itself’( Absolute Spirit.Byallowing the developmentalprocessofconsciousactivity,which ledfinallytothe leaving the revival ofthe‘in-itself’( its poweroverphilosophy.Onemostdramaticscenario wasHegel’s hallmark ofthehumanperspective. first-person pluralpersonalpronoun‘we’,whichis nothingbutthe reflexive pronoun In thisway,Kaulbachdemonstratedthat,forKant,thethird-person one between‘thingsforus’( Kantian distinctionbetweenappearanceandthings-in-themselvesas expression ‘thing-in-itself’,Kaulbachsuccinctlyreformulatedthe soil ofwhatitcanbe.Takingnotethisnegativebutsubtleusethe experience experience’, tried todoispreciselyputphilosophybackthe‘fruitfulbathosof did). Withthebasicattitudeofempiricalrealisminmind,whatKant intend todenigratesensibleexperienceasunrealorillusive(asPlato they areinthemselves’.Withthistheoreticalmanoeuvre,Kantdidnot sensed shouldbereckonedasthings‘astheyappeartous’andnot of whichistocurbthepretensionssensibility’, but onlynegativelyasa‘limitingconcept’( be usedpositivelytodenoteindependentexistenceashithertothought, itself’, togetherwiththerelatednotionof‘noumenon’,shouldnolonger the ‘negative’ manner. precisely theoppositemanneror,ashehimselfpreferredtoputit,ina line ofthoughtasoutlined,Kantunderstoodthething-in-itselfin underwent acompleterevolution,becauseinsteadoffollowingthesame or independentexistence.Yet,inKant,thistraditionof‘in-itself-ness’ the in Aristotle, for anindependentdomainofreality.Thinkaboutthe an sich Among thevariousconceptualconstructs,Kant’s‘thing-in-itself’( cation, andaccountsforsomeofthemostimportantphilosophicalissues. Anundfürsichsein causa sui meaning ) roundedupawholetraditionofthemetaphysicalurgeandquest TOWARDS APHENOMENOLOGYOFPRONOUNS cannot An-sich 40 45

of ‘thing-in-itself’,butnotits in Spinoza,

or the and hedidsopreciselybynegativelysettinglimitstowhat Für-sich

), Hegelfurnishedhimself with aconceptualscheme be (things-in-themselves)soastosecureitonthefirm 43 sich

to outwardexternality,heabsorbedthe

Kant wasoftheopinionthatwecanonlytalkabout per se

in thesenseof ), Hegelbuiltupaconceptualpaircomparableto 42 An-sich

which allsharetheveryideaofself-sufficiency

from AlberttheGreatthroughAquinas, Dinge füruns An-sich ) immediatelyafterKant.Butinsteadof 255 47

to contrastwithandbefollowedby Ansichsein ) and‘things-in-themselves’. reference Grenzbegriff 44

has togivewaythe

. ForKant,‘thing-in- so thatwhatisbeing ), ‘thefunction An-sich Ding

41 into

or 46 Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Aphilosophicalaccountofthereflexivewouldnotbecompletewithout 4. .Notwithstanding thecentralpositionofdoctrinecategoriesfor 5. te ad orthemiddlevoice,whichisakindofreflexiveverb, () has todealwiththeself-generatingactivitiesof naturalthings other hand, of theagentandrecipientcertainman-initiated activities.Onthe ,the of theverb-matrixinAristotle’stablecategoriesasfollows. and From Benveniste’snewinterpretation,wecanreconstructthemeaning verbs inGermanorFrench(andtotheintransitiveverbEnglish). represents theirmiddlevoice,whichisroughlyequivalenttoreflexive thetruenatureofwhichheconsideredhithertomisunder- stood. and esting partofBenveniste’sinsightliesinhisreinterpretation last twoareobviouslyactiveandpassiveverbforms.Andthemostinter- change. Ofthefourcategories categories’, whichhavetodo,inonewayoranother,withmotion atives ofnouns),butidentifiedtheremainingfourasnothing‘verbal Benveniste statedthatthefirstsixcategorieswerenominalforms(deriv- of view,butalsofromadynamicanddevelopmentalperspective. experience canbesystematicallydescribed,notonlyfromastaticpoint aspects oftheusageGreeklanguageinparticular,withwhich of beingaschemefortheclassificationentities,tencategoriesare lematic. surpassed Kantintermsofthebreadthandgenerallayouthisprob- tolerance forphilosophicaldiscoursesbyalongway,Hegelinreturn Although Hegel’smetaphysicaluseofthereflexivetransgressedKant’s ics’, ),hencetheneedforasetofverb-formsafter and first sixstatic,nominalcategories.Ofthefourverb forms, changes ( description thatexplainsnotonlyallstaticphenomena,butmundane entities (incontrasttoPlato),Aristotlehadfurnishaschemeof pied withhisintentiontorehabilitatethemundaneworldandindividual nature ofAristotle’stablecategories. Benveniste’s greatestmerittohaveclarifiedsystematicallythetrue the contextforustodothisliesinAristotle’stheoryofcategories.Itwas taking intoconsiderationthemiddlevoiceofGreeklanguage.And little use’(‘trèspeuutile’) . in thelatenineteenthspoke ofAristotle’stablecategoriesas‘ofvery sense ofit.WhileArnauld in theseventeenthcenturyandWindelband Aristotle, traditionalscholarshiphasuntilveryrecently failedtomake and cardinal conceptualpair: signal thedevelopmentaldimensionofchangeasdepicted byAristotle’s 53 itwasBenvenistewhoatlong lastrehabilitatedit.Andhedidthis 50 INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOFPHILOSOPHICALSTUDIES

48 hra denotestheperfecttenseofGreekverbs, Whereas

oe riat )respectivelyfromthestandpoints cover artifacts(

ngnrl n,fnly orthe‘perfect’isputthereto in general.And,finally, 52

and ashaving‘noimportance inmetaphys- 256 49

His basicinsightwas:instead 51

Preoccu- Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Kantoncedefined 2. InthehistoryofWesternphilosophy,Ihavefoundnoother philosopher 1. transgress. us thathumanfinitudewas thelastthinghewouldevertryto extreme subjectivist.Inthis regard,Kantleftbehindenoughhintstotell sive pronoun‘my’shouldnot misleadusintomisinterpretingKantasan twist ofappearanceinto‘thingsforus’.Ofcourse,this useoftheposses- as man of transcendentalphilosophyistomakesensetheworld ofexperience With thismanoeuvre,whatKantwantedtoshowisobvious: thewhole me.’ representation wouldbeimpossible,oratleast benothingto which couldnotbethoughtatall,andthatisequivalent tosayingthatthe representations; forotherwisesomethingwouldberepresented inme sentence: ‘Itmustbepossibleforthe“Ithink”toaccompanyallmy compress hiswholetranscendentalargumentintothefollowing sentations’. Thisjuxtapositionofthe‘I’and‘my’allowedKantto Kant laypreciselyinhisuseatthisjunctureoftheexpression‘myrepre- rally, itshouldbeexperience,,orthelike.Butingenuityof of Apperception’.What,then,didKantputontheempiricalside?Natu- posited the‘Ithink’( be furtherinterpretedasfollows.Onthetranscendentalside,Kant conditions ofthepossibilityempiricalreality.Thisjuxtapositioncan necessity ofthetranscendental,whichwasforKantnothingbut synthetic combinationsinvolved)empiricallyreal,beforearguingforthe Kant’s tacticwastodeclareempiricalgivenness(togetherwithall ical strategy–thejuxtapositionoftranscendentalandempirical. possible?’ vocation oftranscendentalphilosophyis[toask]:Howexperience philosophies. did Kant.Andthisappliesbothtohistheoreticalandpractical who hasexploitedthepowerofpossessivepronounsasingeniously isfurtherrelatedto‘naturalthings’(asopposedman- overemphasis onsubjectivismisbroughttolight. made artifacts),thebasicGreekphilosophicalinsightofavoidingan asalinguisticstructurethat tation of corresponds towhatwenowcallthe‘reflexive’.IfBenveniste’sinterpre- by recoveringthetruemeaningof times, withthelittleword the followingpagesin‘TranscendentalDeduction’ atleasteight argument, Kantusedthephrase‘ 56

To pronouncetheinnerlogicofthis,franklyspeaking, obscure possesses 55 58 TOWARDS APHENOMENOLOGYOFPRONOUNS

This lapidarystatementclearlyrevealsKant’sbasictheoret-

it. ThisagainremindsusofthewisdominKaulbach’s Transzendentalphilosophie Ich denke D Possessive Pronouns my ) torepresentthe‘originalsyntheticunity ( 257 meine my

representations’ oritsvariantsin ) typographicallyemphasized.

as follows:‘Thehighest 54 57 Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Fromtheabove,wecanexplainKant’s basicpositionasfollows.By 5. Inhis 4. Inhispracticalphilosophyor,tobeexact,inlegaldoctrines,Kant 3. inter-personal approachis mandatory,orthatnoegoisticperspective Kant wasclearlydeclaring that,inpointoflawandjustice,amulti-or Kant elsewhereputit,amatterofjustice( ence orreciprocity,canonlybeaprincipleofequality ( putting bothpossessivepronouns universal law.’ Willkür cancoexistwiththefreedomofeveryoneinaccordance witha gesetz what Kantcalledthe‘universallawofjustice’( through legalmeans.But,inthefinalanalysis,bothkinds ofrightsobey rights asmultipleandcontroversial,having to beestablished innate right(naturalright)issingularandsimple,Kant sawacquired considered sociallyinaccordancewithan rights (law/justice)’. expression is,wehavetoputitintoKant’scontext. man’s possessioningeneral.Buttobetterunderstandwhatthistwin Dein often useditasa‘lumpsum’thattakesjustsinglearticle– ‘possession’, respectively.IcallthisatwinexpressionbecauseKantvery Dein Kant introducedapossessive-pronominaltwinexpression his made stillmoreingenioususeofpossessivepronouns.Inthefirstpart ihs(codn ote tradition)intonaturalrightand right’ ( division ofrightsinto‘innateright’( positive right,butthenimmediatelyswitchedallemphasistotheparallel rights (accordingtothe und Dein and ashaving‘intrinsicvalue’or‘dignity’( in hisearlierdoctrinesofthepersonas virtue ofhishumanity’.ThisisabasicpositionalreadydeclaredbyKant mine oryours,‘belongs’,bydefault,tome,you,and‘toeveryman definitely aright.Freedomasaninnateright,orwhatisinternally freedom frombondagebyothersmightnotbeafact,butistherefore Kant, therewasonlyoneinnateright,namely,freedom.Forman’s multiple mannerfromvariousangleswillcoversocietyasawhole.For ‘rights’ fromaninter-personalperspective.‘Mineoryours’usedina Mein undDein rights, whichdealwithwhatare‘externallymineoryours’.Notethat stood aswhatis‘internallymineoryours’distinctfromacquired Metaphysik derSitten . Whatdoesthistwinexpressionmean? , whichhasbeentranslatedintoEnglishas‘mineoryours’and ), whichgoeslikethis:‘soactexternallythatthefree useofyour INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOFPHILOSOPHICALSTUDIES Rechtslehre das erworbeneRecht

comes in.ForKant,theinnaterightofmancouldbeunder- 62

here isageneralexpressionthatKantusedtodepict , Kantwasconfrontedwiththetaskofa‘division 59

What hedidwasadoubledivision:firstdivided , namely,thepartknownas ). Itisatthisjuncturethatthenotionof 258 Mein das angeboreneRecht end-in-itself

and a priori Würde Dein Gerechtigkeit Mein undDein das allgemeineRechts-

). rather thanas

next tooneanother, principle ofcoexist- 60

Human freedom, Gleichheit ) and‘acquired das Meinund ). Rechtslehre 61 Mein und

Whereas signifies means ), oras Mein , , Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Regardingtheemploymentofindefinitepersonalpronounsin philoso- 2. Linguistically,indefinitepronounsarebydefinition‘indefinite personal 1. .Beinganindefinitepronoun,theword 3. one. made intonouns, tively. Thesetwopronounsaresoimportantthattheyhaveevenbeen principle ofequalityandmutualfreedom. condition forpeacefulcoexistencebetweenmanandman,basedonthe through tion wasnotattainable,thelawhadtouseanironhandenforce Kant thelegalphilosopherhadtomakesurethat,sinceidealsitua- table manners.Toreprimand herdaughter,themothermightsayto norm. (c)Imaginethata mother spottedherdaughternotobserving his ownchoicetoidentify himself withacommonlyacceptedvalueor The girlwouldbeverylikelytosay‘Nein, ments: (a)Imaginethataboyiskissinggirlinpark and isaboutto… ‘we’, ‘you’,and‘they’.Wemayexplainthiswithsome thoughtexperi- will revealthefactthatmeaningof fluctuating meaning.Infact,acasuallookatfewGermandictionaries authenticity. Thesetwopronounsare:(i) super-definite, whichpertaintowhathecalledinauthenticityand und Zeit phy, Heideggerisprobablythebestcandidate.Inhismagnumopus certain here,isnothingbutthereferencetoperson. pronouns’ becausetheindefinitenessinvolvedhere,orwhatisnot legislation consider itidealifmencouldactmorallyfromrespectorthrough Rechtsgesetz sive man might reactinexcitementbysaying‘Ja,daskann to dokilltime.Nowsomeonemightsuggest‘soandso’, andeverybody everything. (b)Imagineabunchoflazychumpstrying to figureoutwhat role ofsomeinvisiblenormsthatwouldsupposedly keepaneyeon there mightevenbenooneelseintheparkatall.Here, man others orof dom shouldnotbecome‘heedless’,butalsotakethefreedomof inalienable rightofeveryonewithanindividual should beallowed.Eveniffreedomregardedasaninnate, 63

we becomes ‘ carries themeaningof‘ ’. Foritisthroughthisuse of , Heideggercoinedtwopronouns,oneindefiniteandtheother external legislation . Butbecausethathuman TOWARDS APHENOMENOLOGYOFPRONOUNS

is allabout.Ofcourse,Kantthemoralphilosopherwould alterity we E ’ –andindeedwhatthelinguistswouldcallan‘inclu- das Man

Indefinite (Personal)Pronouns into account.Thisisexactlywhattheuniversal

and sanctionsthatminimaljusticeisthe

and people 259 Jemeinigkeit ’ or‘they’,whichisindefinite,for man Willkür man man ( man

also hasaveryindefiniteand we man

oscillates between‘people’, . Iwillstartwiththefirst

) thateverybodygivesup

is bynatureambivalent, and (ii)

sieht das!’Inthiscase, man je meines

machen!’ Here, , thisveryfree- people

play the

respec- Sein self- Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Heidegger’scoinageof 4. .ForHeidegger,therehadtobeawayoutofthiskinddictatorship. 5. .Theconcept of‘existential 6. ‘disquieting thought’( tivistic philosophers,foundthe one intoa Jemeinigkeit before one’sownchoices.Incontrasttotheinauthentic‘lostinthey’, from the‘at-home’backto‘anxiety’and‘uncanny’,putsone one infrontofthepossibilityone’s ownmost existence.ForHeidegger, speaking, pronoun, whichistheantipoleofindefinite‘man’.Philosophically ‘Unself-constancy’ ( tion’. ThisinauthenticmodeoflifewasdescribedbyHeideggeras: up theirchoicesandfeelcomfortableundersuch‘temptingtranquilliza- is thebasicnorm,innovationnotencouraged,andaveragepeoplegive about ‘gettinglostintheThey’.Insuchan‘average’society,conforming ‘levelling down’trendof‘publicness’,about‘talkativefraternizing’,and ( also beinplace.Forexample,Heideggertalkedaboutthe‘fall’ the conceptof secretly controlsthemasses. a definitehumanindividualatall,theindefinitepronoun authority ornorms.Theseexamplesshowonethingclearly:sinceitisnot purpose isobviouslytorequirethedaughtersubmitsomeexisting ‘Ach! Dastut Verbrüderung others inauthenticallythrough ‘talkativefraternizing’( requires onetocaregenuinely aboutothersratherthanjustappeasing sism doesnotcutoneoff fromone’sfriends;onthecontrary,it case-mineness’. Grammaticallyspeaking, And theclueliesin They’ ( ipse feared andavoidedbysubjectivism.Inanutshell,the existential ture, isnota is nothingbuttopaveawayfromtheinauthentic authentic. afford toadvocateakindof‘existentialsolipsism’,the purposeofwhich Seinkönnen that one’sauthenticlifeworldcanberecovered,with alltheauthentic ( less I,existentialsolipsismsotospeakinducestheself to‘individuate’ one’, ortheUnself( Verfallen vereinzeln

is setoverandagainsttheinauthentic‘They’,anonymous ‘no INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOFPHILOSOPHICALSTUDIES Diktatur desMan ) andabout‘averageness’( solus ipse ) itselffromoutoftheanonymityThey(Unself), so Jemeinigkeit

laid barebeforeone. cuts oneofffromalltheinauthentic‘fraternity’andrenders solus ipse ). das Man man 68

. Interestinglyenough,whileHusserl,likeallsubjec- Unselbst-Ständigkeit nicht!’ Here, Un-selbst Jemeinigkeit

is formed,ahostof‘inauthentic’phenomenawill

unberuhigende Bedenken in thesenseofa‘worldlessI’( das Man ). reveals one’sbeingsituatedbefore 65 solus ipse ). Ratherthanrenderingtheselfaworld- 260

is crucialforhistheory,becauseonce , whichcanbetranslatedas‘in-each- solus ipse man 67

’, againanotherpronominalstruc- Jemeinigkeit For Heidegger,existentialsolip- own

Durchschnittlichkeit transfigures into‘ ),

64 death andfinitude,takesone je meines

or the‘dictatorshipof or solipsismingenerala

), ‘authentically’ places 66

is asuper-definite Heidegger could das weltloseIch you ); aboutthe ’, andthe das Man redselige solus ) Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Theword‘impersonal’(aswellasthe‘personal’)isavery ambigu- 1. .Heidegger iswellknownforhisanti-subjectivisticposition(thefirst 3. Inordinarylanguage,thepronoun‘it’isoftenusedtodenotethis sense 2. Ofcourse,Heidegger’sentiretheoryof 7. numerus ‘impersonal’. However,‘person’asagrammaticalcategory(adjacentto third person(he/she/it),whodoesnottakepartinthediscourse,as one another.ItwasforthisveryreasonthatBenvenisteregardedthe intimate inter-humanrelationshipscharacterizedbymindfullisteningto ous .Etymologicallyspeaking,theLatinterm ‘Time’ as again stressedorliterally‘capitalized’, “There is/ItgivesBeing.”’ grants itselfanabodeandproceedstoit,sothatprecisely asaresult is nothinghuman.IttheabodeofadventBeing, whichasadvent there’ ( out ‘Being’(andlater Being throughthehumanperspective,Heideggerresorted tosingling agent hastobeunderplayedasmuchpossible.Instead ofexplaining now calledthe‘thinkingofbeing’( Heidegger thematizedthephrase anthropocentric. Aftertheso-called approach of person I).Thisbasicattitudeledtohisowncriticism of thetheoretical emphasis onthe‘it( important exampleofsuchause‘impersonalpronouns’isHeidegger’s turns outthat’,andsoforth.Incontemporaryphilosophy,themost of impersonality.Considerphraseslike‘itrains’,happensthat’,or that isphilosophicallythemostimportant. human(s) asagent(s).Itseemsthatitisthismeaningof‘impersonality’ to regard‘impersonal’assimplyreferringthenon-involvementof ena. word ‘impersonal’couldrefertoutterlydifferentgrammaticalphenom- of view,thethirdpersonisbydefinitiongrammaticallypersonal,and person), andthatwhichisspokenabout(thirdperson).Fromthispoint differentiate betweenthespeaker(firstperson),addressee(second there isnoroomtodothathere. Becker, Ihavetriedtoraisequeriesagainstthiswholeapproach,but Nietzsche’s notionofthe‘maladyhistory’andsomeideasOskar isnotwithoutproblems.Inanearlierpaper,drawingupon and aspertainingtothesingular 71

Between thesetwoextremepositions,wecantakeamiddlestance es gibt , Sache desDenkens casus TOWARDS APHENOMENOLOGYOFPRONOUNS Sein undZeit ). Inhisbook , tempus es F Ereignis )’, asusedinthephrase , modus Impersonal Pronouns , whichherealizedretrospectivelywasstilltoo 75 Nietzsche II .

77 This same 74 Inshort,itwasbywayofthe impersonal , etc.)isamuchlooserconcept.Ithelps ) asthesingular 70 261 Sachverhalt es gib Seinsdenken Kehre , Heideggerwrote:‘Thatessence 76 t. Es 73

was describedas‘mysterious’

das Man This suggeststhat,inwhathe , amongvariousothertactics , whichHeideggeragainand

that embraces‘Being’and es gibt ), theroleofhuman factum 69 .

72 and ofexistential persona , whichsimply‘is

refers to Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 .Fromacultural-criticalpointofview,itisfullyunderstandablewhy 4. philosophy, givingeachdoctrine its personal-humanistic concerns havebeenprecipitatedintothedisciplineof various pronominalforms andstructures,weseehowdecisivelysuch inauthentic crowd,oranticipating itsauthenticindividuation.Throughthe Being; whetherwearelamentingits‘fall’and‘loss’ inthemidstof tively byadvocatingitsretreatinthefaceofunfathomable abyssof ing withtheboundariesandtensionbetweenthem,or dealingwithitnega- by articulatingthemeaningofthreegrammatical‘persons’ andreckon- persons or,inaword,humanity,whetherwearetalking aboutitpositively refer to–nouns,whichfurtherturnout,stepbystep, tobenothingbut truly hiddenphenomenonisnotpronounsthemselves, butthatwhichthey to us?AsIthoughtinthisdirection,itsuddenlybecame cleartomethatthe all thoselinguistictechnicalities?Inwhatwaydopronouns actuallymatter philosophically today?Whydon’twejustleaveittothe linguiststodealwith traditional philosophy.Butwhy,infact,doweneedto thematizepronouns theme ofthispaper–pronounswhichhasremainedlargely Urphänomen obviously thethemeofhislifetime– When Heideggerwrotetheabovepassage,whathehadinmindwas that lies mally andforthemostpartdoesnotshowitselfatall:itissomething exhibit something What isitthatbyitsveryessence which dealsmainlywithpronouns. But againthesequestionsliebeyondthescopeofpresentpaper, Heidegger regardedas‘thinking’toovershadowallotherdiscourses? (b) Istheroleofphilosophyreallyatitsend,andshouldweallowwhat (a) Istheroleof‘I’reallyasnegativewassuggestedbyHeidegger? questioned. Andformesuchquestioningcanfollowtwolinesofthought: criticism ofculture,theentireprogrammehislaterthoughtshouldbe this? Iamafraidnot.Itseemstomethat,withallrespectHeidegger’s him thesourceofcrisesmodernity.ButwasHeideggerrightinall ously insufficienttocounterbalancetheeffectof‘I’,whichwasfor istic ‘I’.ForHeidegger,the‘Thou’inBuber’sorMarcel’ssenseisobvi- Heidegger resortedtosinglingoutthe‘It’asanantidotesubjectiv- of thinkingthatescapesallreason. tivistic, anti-anthropocentric,butalsomisologicalandtautologicalway ‘It ( VConclusion:PronounsasPhenomenologicalExperience IV Es )’ thatHeideggerfoundexpressionforhissomewhatanti-subjec- INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOFPHILOSOPHICALSTUDIES hidden . Itseemsthatwecanreadilyborrowhiswordstoreferthe . 78 explicitly ? Manifestly,itissomethingthatproxi- 262 Gestalt necessarily Sein , whichheoncedepictedasthe . Throughthethematization of

the themewheneverwe hidden

from Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 in China,andfromthegreaterPEACEcommunity. Dermot Moran,BernhardWaldenfels,andwithhismanycolleagues inHongKong, Becker, RudolfBernet,Kah-KyungCho,StevenCrowell, ElmarHolenstein, other occasions,theauthorhasbenefitedmuchfromdiscussionswithGerhold Katholieke UniversiteitLeuven.Inthecourseofwritingthispaperandonmany University CollegeDublin,andon26October2005attheHusserlArchive paper waspresentedagainon17October2005atthePhilosophyDepartmentof first meetingofthePhenomenologyforEastAsianCircle(PEACE).Thesame ity: PhenomenologyandCulturalTraditions’heldinMay2004HongKongasthe *This paperwasfirstpresentedattheinternationalconference‘IdentityandAlter- with Heidegger’sproblemof ‘What isman?’oneofthemostfundamentalinphilosophy.Compared pronouns, weindirectlytestifiedtoKant’sconvictionthatthequestion The ChineseUniversityofHongKong provided onlysomegroundwork. sure foranyfuture‘phenomenology[ofpronouns]’,towardswhichIhave a richveinofphenomenologicalexperience,andwillbeaninvaluabletrea- philosophical discoursesandtechnicalitieswrappedaroundthem,areforus lation oreventransformation.Thesepronouns,togetherwiththewealthof varied humanexperiencesandhumanisticphenomenafindwaysofarticu- demonstrated howpowerfulandversatilepronounsareinhelpingthemost philosophy shouldhavebeenmademanifest.Fortheseexamples chance? of ontology–whyshouldwenotgivepronouns,orpronominology,a spend two-and-a-halfmillenniastudyingtheverb‘tobe’–undername speaking, pronounsaremuchlessmythical.IfWesternphilosopherscan trated everycornerofeverydayhumanexistenceand,morphologically ‘unfriendlier’. Thisisbecausepronouns,liketheverb‘tobe’,haveinfil- 4 3 1 2 In theabovebriefsketches,immanentroleplayedbypronounsin See AntoineArnauldandClaude Lancelot, philosophers. However, theyhavedonethis mainlyintheircapacityaslinguistsratherthan Humboldt, Benveniste,orBühlerwhohavehandledpronouns thematically. If philosophyistakeninaverybroadsense,thentherehave beenpeoplelike pp. 244–8. Ludwig Wittgenstein, pp. 92ff. trans. JacquesRieuxandBernard E.Rollin(TheHague:Mouton,1975), of theFirstandSecondPerson’, Papa (=you)toseeGrandmaher).’SeeBlake,‘TheOriginofPronouns with Frank R.Blakegivestheclassicexampleofthis:‘Johnnie (=I)wantstogo Ambrose (Oxford:Blackwell,1979),Sections11,18. TOWARDS APHENOMENOLOGYOFPRONOUNS Wittgenstein’s Lectures,Cambridge1932–1935 Sein American JournalofPhilology , thequestionofpronounsisatleastnot Notes 263 The Port-RoyalGrammar , 55(3)(1934), , ed.Alice , ed.and Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 0Infact,boththe 10 4SeeElmarHolenstein, ‘DieeigenartigeGrammatikdesWortes“ich”’,in 14 Itisforthisreasonthat KarlBühlerhaspreferredtogroupthederivatives 13 SeeC.S.Peirce, 12 Forthecontemporarydevelopmentoftheoryindexicals,seeDavidBraun, 11 5Hegel, 15 8Thisideaof 18 SeeHusserl, 17 EmileBenveniste,‘The NatureofPronouns’,in 16 9 8 7 6 5 verbien mitdemPronomenineinigenSprachen’, pronouns. SeeWilhelmvonHumboldt,‘ÜberdieVerwandtschaftderOrtsad- most importantly,manylinguistsconsiderthemtohavethesameoriginas time andplaceratherthanpronouns,buttheydobelongto‘demonstratives’and, Grammatically speaking,‘now’,‘then’,‘here’,‘there’,andsoforthareadverbsof pp. 20–1. Slavic Papers;Vol.4(Columbus,Ohio:SlavicaPublishers,1980),pp.29f;also Hemispheres andLinguisticStructureinMutualLight Jakobson, withtheassistanceofKathySantilli: is abridgeconnectingthespeakertoextra-linguisticreality.SeeRoman Roman Jakobson,thinkingalongsimilarlines,hasremarkedthattherightbrain (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress,1968),pp.275ff. Ibid., p.135.SeealsoJohnLyons, (Amsterdam: JohnBenjamin,1990),pp.438ff. Representational FunctionofLanguage contributing to‘thejointsofspeech’.SeeKarlBühler, For thisreason,Bühlerassignedtoanaphoratheimportantfunctionof dia.org/wiki/Anaphora, lastaccessed18May2004). ‘anaphora’ in Theory ofLanguage Heidegger, VI (Berlin:PreußischeAkademiederWissenschaften),pp.304–30;citedby world. used toreferpronominalreferences‘outside’thesentence,i.e.,inreal preceding orfollowingtext.Overagainstendophora,theterm‘exophora’isalso anaphora andcataphoradependingonwhetherthereferenceismadeto which arereferred‘within’thesentence.Endophoraisfurtherdividedinto Some linguistsprefertheterm‘endophora’tosignifyallpronominalstructures, Menschliches Selbstverständnis possessive pronouns.SeeBühler, cation: (1)demonstrativeandinterrogativepronouns, (2)personaland together withthetwomaintypesofpronoun,whichresultsin thefollowingbifur- Symbol’, pp.156ff. (Bristol: ThoemmesPress,1998),Book2,Ch.3on‘TheIcon,Index,and http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/indexicals/ (lastaccessed23May2004). ‘Indexicals’, section onpronounsthatbasicallycoversonlyanaphoricstructures. stellung 1952), §41,p.158;§54,213. §150, pp.370f.;moreimportantly, Philosophie, ErstesBuch trans. MaryE.Meek(CoralGables:UniversityofMiamiPress, 1971),pp.218–20. Suhrkamp, 1970),pp.82–5.Seethechapteron‘SenseCertainty’. INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOFPHILOSOPHICALSTUDIES ( Exophora Phänomenologie desGeistes Ideen I Sein undZeit Stanford EncyclopediaofPhilosophy Nullpunkt Wikipedia: TheFreeEncyclopedia Ideen zueinerreinenPhänomenologieundphänomenlogischen , p.371);thenalsohis Collected Papers , therefore,isanothertermfor Port-Royal Grammaire , pp.122ff.

was forHusserleventhekeyto (

Ideen I (Tübingen: Niemeyer,1972),p.119.SeealsoBühler, (Frankfurt/Main:Suhrkamp,1985),p.74. ), ed.WalterBiemel(TheHague:Nijhoff,1950), , Vol.2,ed.CharlesHartshorneandPaulWeiss Ideen II Theory ofLanguage 264 , Phänomenologie desinnerenZeitbewusst- Introduction toTheoreticalLinguistics Werke , ed.MarlyBiemel(TheHague: Nijhoff,

, trans.DonaldFraserGoodwin and , Band3(FrankfurtamMain: Problems inGeneralLinguistics

(Web Edition:http://en.wikipe- Port-Royal Logique Brain andLanguage:Cerebral , ed.EdwardZalta.WebURL: Gesammelte Schriften deixis , p.133. Theory ofLanguage:The Ursprung derRaumvor- , NewYorkUniversity . Seetheentryfor

include a , Band , Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 2Inhispaper‘DieeigenartigeGrammatikdesWortes“ich”’,Holensteinagain 22 BernhardWaldenfels,byquotingKant,remarkedthat,afterall,theveryconcept 21 ElmarHolenstein,‘DerNullpunktderOrientierung:EineAuseinandersetzung 20 5WilhelmvonHumboldt, 25 Platodepictedthinkingasthemind’sdialoguewithitself. 24 Purelylinguistically,thesamequeryaboutnatureof 23 JürgenHabermas, 19 7ElmarHolensteinfurther stressedthattheusesof‘I’and‘you’aremarkedly 27 Benveniste,‘Subjectivity inLanguage’, 26 0Foramoredetailedanalysisbythepresentauthor,seeTze-wanKwan,‘Heidegger’s 30 Benveniste,‘TheNature ofPronouns’,in 29 Benveniste,‘Relationships ofthePersoninVerb’, 28 3Heidegger, 33 1Heidegger, 31 2Heidegger, 32 Menschliches Selbstverständnis further elaboratedtheroleoforientationininter-personalunderstanding.See devoted asectiontotheissueof‘DerNullpunktderOrientierung’,inwhichhe CU Press,2007),p.115. Chinese UniversityofHongKong(NewYorkandKong:SUNYPress Waldenfels, most eye-catchingobjectbecomesthedecisivefactorfororientation.See of ‘orientation’isderivedfromtheword‘orient’(theEast),wheresunas menen Raum’,pp.14–58. Suhrkamp, 1985),withthenewsubtitle‘DiePlazierungdesIchimwahrgenom- revised andincludedinHolenstein, wahrnehmung’, mit derherkömmlichenphänomenologischenTheseegozentrischenRaum- Suhrkamp, 1981),p.187. Sophist Bühler: see Husserl’s theorytoexplainthedimensionalityoforientatedspace. Neudruck (Tübingen:Niemeyer,1973),pp.70ff.Here,Beckerwasusing gischen BegründungderGeometrieundihrerphysikalischenAnwendung Bänden lung desMenschengeschlechts heit desmenschlichenSprachbauesundihrenEinflussaufdiegeistigeEntwick- Böhler (Stuttgart:Reclam,1973),pp.21–29.Seealsohis Null-Körper Raukonstitution’, dated1917,Husserlalsoexpoundedontheideaofbodyas the poleofreferenceforallspatialorientation.Inpaper‘Systematische seins Menschliches Selbstverständnis reversible ( Buchgesellschaft, 1979),pp.429–30. Habilitationsschrift 1973), pp.303,326,328ff.ThisveryideawasabsorbedbyOskarBeckerinhis Quest fortheEssenceofMan’, pp. 217f.,221. Linguistics etc. SeeHusserl, Klostermann, 1979),p.98. , whereHusserlmaintainedthatperceptionthroughthebodyconstitutes 263e. , Band3, , pp.199–200. Nietzsche II Grundbegriffe Theory ofLanguage umkehrbar Prolegomena zurGeschichte des Zeitbegriffs TOWARDS APHENOMENOLOGYOFPRONOUNS

The QuestionoftheOther,2004TangChun-ILectures occupying a Tijdschrift voorFilosofie Schriften zurSprachphilosophie Ding undRaum

Theorie deskommunikativenHandelns (supervised byHusserl)entitled ) andinterchangeable( (Pfullingen:Neske,1961),pp. 141ff. Über denDualis Nullstellung (FrankfurtamMain:Klostermann, 1981),p.90. , betterknownasthe‘Kawischrift’, , pp.71ff. , p.67. Analecta Husserliana , pp.122–3. , Husserliana,BandXVI(DenHaag:Nijhoff, 265 Menschliches Selbstverständnis

and servingtheroleof Problems inGeneralLinguistics , 34(1972),pp.28–78.Thispaperwas

in Schriften zurSprache Problems inGeneralLinguistics ausgetauscht

(Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche , 17(1984),pp.47–64. Beiträge zurphänomenolo- origo

Über dieVerschieden- Theaetetus (Frankfurt amMain: , BandII(Frankfurt: Problems inGeneral ). SeeHolenstein,

has beenraisedby Nullorientierung Werke infünf , ed.Michael

(Frankfurt: 189e–190a; held atthe

, p.226. (1923), , , Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 7Inpreparingthislist,thefollowingsourceshavebeenused:(1)Electronic 37 SeeGabrielMarcel, 36 9Inthisregard,Rescher’sfairlyrecentworkonobjectivityprovestobevery 39 Insayingthis,Idonot,ofcourse,meanthattheChinesemindfailstocognize 38 MartinBuber, 35 InhisconversationwithDorionCairnsinthe1930s,EugenFinkunderlined 34 1SeeEtienneGilson, 41 Aristotle, 40 5Kant, 45 Ibid.,A255/B311. 44 6FriedrichKaulbach, 46 Kant, 43 BaruchdeSpinoza, 42 7Formoredetailsonthis topic,seeTze-wanKwan,‘OnKant’sReal/Problematic 47 8ForsomeinspiringthoughtsonHegel’s 48 kwang’s Humanities Computing,theChineseUniversityofHongKong;and(4)LaoSze- Confucians oftheNorthernSongDynasty,preparedbyResearchCentrefor the MinistryofEducationRepublicChina;(3)Electroniccorpora Academia Sinica;(2)Theelectronicversionofthe corpora ofChineseclassicspreparedbytheInstituteHistoryandLinguistics, kee: MarquetteUniversityPress,1998). Smith, 2ndedn(NewYork:Scribner’sSons,1958). realms. SeeThomasNagel, subjective viewcanbereconciledwithimpersonalandmoreorlessobjective similar manner,ThomasNagelraisedthequeryastohowpersonal, Reason relevant. SeeNicholasRescher, systematic philosophicalreflection. mind veryseldomputstheissueofobjectivecognitiononlevelseriousand of theChinesemindinscienceandtechnology.WhatImeanisthat natural objects:JosephNeedhamhasexplainedsomuchaboutthecontributions CUHK, 1968–81). Husserl etlaPenséemoderne humanity inanyidealisticmanner’.SeeEugenFink,‘WeltundGeschichte’, this wasbecauseHeideggerwantedto‘avoidthedangerofdeifying( (Den Haag:Nijhoff,1976),p.25.Manyyearslater,Finkfurtherexplainedthat Husserl andHeidegger.SeeDorionCairns, view thatthequestionofinfinitudeorfinitudeisgreatlinedividebetween pp. 171f. Press, 1986),especiallythesectionon‘PersonalValuesandImpartiality’, Kant veryfrequentlyemployedexpressionssuchas Kant’s basicposition.Ondescribingthedomainofphenomena orappearance, Kaulbach’s redefinitionofappearanceas Philosophiegeschichte York: RandomHouse,1954),p.393.SeealsoErnstBloch, menschliche Gruyter, 1903,1968),p.373:‘MeinPlatzistdasfruchtbareBathos derErfahrung.’ Distinction betweenPhaenomenaandNoumena’, (Oxford: Blackwell,1992),pp. 133–6, For, andInItself,Himself, etc.’,inMichaelInwood, pp. 173–209. Prolegomena Critique ofPureReason INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOFPHILOSOPHICALSTUDIES

(Notre DameandLondon:UniversityofNotrePress,1997).Ina History ofChinesePhilosophy Met …,andsoforth( . BookVIII,1049b10–11. I andThou , in Ethica The BrokenWorld History ofChristianPhilosophyintheMiddleAges (Frankfurt/Main:Suhrkamp,1977),p.116. Immanuel Kant Kant’s GesammelteSchriften , withaPostscriptbytheauthor,trans.RonaldGregor , PartI,Def.1. The ViewfromNowhere , Phaenomenologica2(DenHaag,1959),pp.155–7. Kritik derreinenVernunft , A253/B309;A255–6/B311–12. Objectivity: TheObligationsofImpersonal 266 , trans.KatharineRoseHanley(Milwau-

(Berlin: deGruyter,1969),p.129. sich

Dinge füruns (Hong Kong:ChungChiCollege, Conversation withHusserlandFink -expressions, seetheentryon ‘In, ( Tunghai Journal

(Oxford: OxfordUniversity Guoyu Cidian KGS unser(e) , A34–5/B50–2).

is certainlyinlinewith Zwischenwelten inder ), BandIV(Berlin:de A HegelDictionary , für uns

prepared by , 26(1985), vergotten , unsere

(New ) Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 7Inthisconnection, thejuxtapositionofindefinite 67 Husserl, 66 Ibid.,pp.126–7. 65 Heidegger, 64 Fordetails,seeTze-wan Kwan,‘From“DictatorshipoftheThey”to“Existential 63 Ibid.,p.231. 62 Kant, 61 Kant, 60 Kant, 59 SeeTze-wanKwan,‘SubjectandPersonastwoSelf-ImagesofModernMan: 58 respectivelyas‘posi- and Mostcontemporaryinterpretersrender 50 ThefollowingsectionisasummaryofthreeBenveniste’spapersinhis 49 7SeeKant’s‘TranscendentalDeduction’(Bedition), 57 Kant, 56 Kant, 55 Iverypleasedtobeablenotethatinthefirstkeynotespeechdeliveredby 54 2ArnauldandNicole, 52 8SeeHeidegger’sconceptof 68 Windelband, 53 FormoredetailsaboutafurtherdevelopmentofBenveniste’sinterpretation,see 51 (Taipei, 1991),pp.113–64. solus ipse Gruyter, 1903,1968),pp.434–5. publication. Symposium, held17–20May2004atPekingUniversity,China.Paperpending Contribution toNaturalLawDebates’,presentedattheInternationalKant 237ff. Foradetaileddiscussionofthisissue,seeTze-wanKwan,‘Kant’sPossible especially thesectionon‘Kant’sSpecialPlaceinSubjectivisticTradition’. held inPragueNovember2002andpublishedatwww.o-p-o.net2003;see Some CrossCulturalPerspectives’,paperpresentedatthefirstOPOconference B132–9. back asAntoineArnauldandPierreNicole’s tion/posture’ and‘state’.Suchaninterpretationcanarguablybetracedasfar (3) ‘TheLinguisticFunctionsof“Tobe”andhave”.’ ries ofThoughtandLanguage’,(2)‘ActiveMiddleVoiceintheVerb’, Problems inGeneralLinguistics sized subjectivism’. voice, whichChodepictedasevidencefortheGreekexperienceofa‘de-empha- the ChineseUniversityofHongKong,referencewasmadetoGreekmiddle Professor Kah-KyungChoattheconference‘IdentityandAlterity’,hostedby 1901), p.142. tionis Heidegger’s contributiontothe millennia-oldquestionof je meines Kluwer, 1995),pp.243–302,especially259–63. Arnauld, Prolegomena toanOntologyofCulture’,in Tze-wan Kwan,‘TheDoctrineofCategoriesandtheTopologyConcern: Philosophie be responsibleformorerecentinfluences.Seehis other hand,Windelband’sinterpretationfollowedthesamedirectionandshould Zeit , p.122. . SeeHeidegger, Metaphysik derSitten Critique ofPureReason Preisschrift Metaphysik derSitten Grundlegung zurMetaphysikderSitten Pariser Vorträge

and thetransformationofformertolattercanbeconsidered as La LogiqueouL’ArtdePenser ”: AHeideggerianProblematicofLife-world’, Sein undZeit , ed.HeinzHeimsoeth(Tübingen:Mohr,1957),p.121. TOWARDS APHENOMENOLOGYOFPRONOUNS A HistoryofPhilosophy , in KGS Logique dePort-Royal Sein undZeit , pp.322f.,332. , Husserliana,BandI(TheHague:Nijhoff,1950),p.34. , BandXX(Berlin:deGruyter,1942),p.275. , p.302. vorausspringen , in , B131–2,trans.NormanKempSmith. : inorderofrelevancetothetopic,(1)‘Catego- KGS , pp.38,188ff.,265ff.,336ff. 267 , transJamesTufts(NewYork,Macmillan, , BandVI(Berlin:deGruyter,1907),pp.

(Paris: J.Vrin,1981),pp.49f.Onthe , incontrastto , p.51. Logique dePort-Royal Analecta Husserliana , in Lehrbuch derGeschichte KGS man Critique ofPureReason , BandIV(Berlin:de

and thesuper-definite principium individua- einspringen Legein Bulletin

(Dordrecht:

(1662). See , Sein und , 6 , Downloaded By: [Kwan, Tze-wan] At: 05:37 10 July 2007 4Heidegger, 74 73 SeeHeidegger, 72 Ingrammar,‘grammaticallyimpersonal’isoftensynonymouswith‘indefinite’. 71 SeeTze-wanKwan,‘TheHumanSciencesandHistoricality:Heideggerthe 70 5Heidegger, 75 ForacriticalappraisalofHeidegger’snotion 69 6Heidegger, 76 8Heidegger, 78 Ibid.,pp.46,17. 77 original, theimpersonal Harper &Row,1987,Vol.3/4,pp.232–3),itshouldbenotedthatinHeidegger’s Es gibt Impersonalien undalssubjektloseSätze.’ gibt sein,esZeit.…DieGrammatikundLogikfassendaherdieEs-Sätzeals impersonal’. One typicalexampleisthepluralformof‘you’beingdepictedas‘grammatically Cheung (eds) Self-Positioning oftheWesternHumanisticTradition’,inDavidCarrandC.F. ches Selbstverständnis dass “Es”–demzufolgeundnurso“dasSeingibt”.’ Ankunft desSeins,dassichalsdiesemitjenerbegabtundinsiebegibt,so translation: ‘DiesesWesenistnichtsMenschliches.EsdieUnterkunftder (literally‘itgives’)isequivalentto‘thereis’inEnglish. INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOFPHILOSOPHICALSTUDIES Zur SachedesDenkens Zur SachedesDenkens Sein undZeit Nietzsche II Time, SpaceandCulture Zur SachedesDenkens , p.75. , p.377.ThetranslationcitedisbyKrell(SanFrancisco: , p.35. Es

is expressedmoreprominentlythanintheKrell , pp.46–7. , p.5. 268 (Dordrecht:Kluwer,2004),pp.31–55.

(Tübingen: Niemeyer,1969),p.18:‘Es man , seeHolenstein, Menschli-