It's just this and that, isn't it?

[Attila]

Back to metal's first example:
Q. Is that a picture of your family?
A. Yes. This is my dad; this is my sister Madge...

But...
Q. Who are the people in the picture?
A. Well, that is my dad; that is my sister Madge...

The first is like an introduction and the second is identification; or is my example specific to my own area (SE England)?

[LarryLatham]

But...couldn't it just as easily be the other way around?

Larry Latham

[Attila]

But...couldn't it just as easily be the other way around?

Larry Latham

It would sound a little strange to my ears, that's all. I would only use this to introduce someone or something.

"Fred, let me introduce you to someone. This is my wife."
Fred immediately begins to fondle her...
"Oi! That's my wife you're groping!"

[LarryLatham]

Wouldn't it depend mostly on the spatial arrangement of the situation? For example, suppose you come into a big family gathering with a new girlfriend. You start introducing the members of your family to your lady:

"That's (pointing) my uncle Harry, and next to him is Aunt Eunice. Over there is cousin Fred, and that's his son Jimmy in front of him..."

Larry Latham

[Norm Ryder]

I'm inclined to agree with Attila, Larry, namely that "This is my Dad" is like what you use in an introduction, and "That's Uncle Harry" is more like simple identification of the person across the room. With the introduction you're inviting a rather more intimate relationship.

Or perhaps another way of looking at your original example could be: when you say "this" you're thinking of the image you have your finger on; but when you say "that" you could be taking your friend's mind more to the person the image represents. Which is probably more or less what others have said, anyway.

Maybe that too is just my cultural orientation, as I suggested in Andrew's thread on gerundives in answering metal's question on the use of resent.

Andrew might be interested in tracking down a book on pragmatics by Anna Wierbiczka in which she compares English, Polish and Jewish interpretations of the sorts of things this thread has been discussing. Unfortunately I can't put my finger on the title right now, Andrew, so I'll have to hunt it up and post it later (it's probably more appropriate for revel's other thread anyway!)

Cheers.

Norm

[Duncan Powrie]

Ooh, is this the first time Anna Wierzbicka's been mentioned on Dave's? You can find the book Norm is referring to at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Wierzbicka

Have you read her 1996 book, Semantics: Primes and Universals (OUP), Norm? I've only learnt about some of what she has to say in a paper by Cliff Goddard ("Polysemy: A Problem of Definition", pp. 129 - 151 in Yael Ravin and Claudia Leacock, Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches, Oxford University Press, 2000), and I was wondering if it was worth getting hold of (that is, specially ordering) her original work (it appears to be out of print at the moment).

[LarryLatham]

I'm inclined to agree with Attila, Larry, namely that "This is my Dad" is like what you use in an introduction, and "That's Uncle Harry" is more like simple identification of the person across the room. With the introduction you're inviting a rather more intimate relationship.

Or perhaps another way of looking at your original example could be: when you say "this" you're thinking of the image you have your finger on; but when you say "that" you could be taking your friend's mind more to the person the image represents. Which is probably more or less what others have said, anyway.

Actually, I wouldn't really disagree with you and Attila, Norm, but rather than couch it in the terms you both have used with respect to particular uses for which "this" and "that" might be employed, I'd rather see the more fundamental meaning (I believe) difference between the two words emphasized. When particular usage situations are catalogued, the list can, theoretically, at least, go on and on. It imposes a very great learning burden on students. Whereas, if a fundamental difference can be identified which applies to all uses of the terms, a substantial economy can be achieved. English has a lot of dichotomous choices like this one, and a user makes his choice by considering the differences (rather than the specific uses). Here, in this case, "this" can always be considered to assert or imply a relative closeness when compared to "that". What must be understood, however, is that there are several distinct varieties of "closeness". It can have a spatial connotation, or temporal, or emotional, to name the obvious ones. So, when you say that "...this is my wife" sounds like an introduction, I wouldn't disagree, but that is only because it might be either because your wife was standing right next to you, or that you wished to imply (perhaps subconsciously) that your feeling for her is intimate. If you say, when looking at a photograph, "...that's my Uncle Charlie...", I believe that implies a certain distancing, even if it may be difficult to pinpoint the exact nature of the distance. Maybe only because the photo is not one the speaker has seen before now.

The apparent ambiguity of possible meanings is not unusual, as I'm sure you know. That's why our language has, "Huh?" in it.

Larry Latham

[Attila]

I am not in disagreement over the spatial arrangement; I was just concentrating on a subtle (possible) difference between this and that when the 'spatial connotation, or temporal, or emotional' is the same.
I'm sorry for stealing your words, but they're better than mine.

[metal56]

The first is like an introduction and the second is identification; or is my example specific to my own area (SE England)?

Mmm? There something in that. I'll have to ponder it.

Thanks.

[metal56]

Wouldn't it depend mostly on the spatial arrangement of the situation? For example, suppose you come into a big family gathering with a new girlfriend. You start introducing the members of your family to your lady:

"That's (pointing) my uncle Harry, and next to him is Aunt Eunice. Over there is cousin Fred, and that's his son Jimmy in front of him..."

Larry Latham

Same again, it may be reversed. If the family members were looking at my girl, I might use "this is". If one of them was busy making punch or just in view beyond the room and in the kitchen, I might use "and that's..."
If little cousin willy, a lovable monster, was close, looking at us, I still might use "and that, that, is cousin Willy". Just to tease him a little.

[metal56]

I'm inclined to agree with Attila, Larry, namely that "This is my Dad" is like what you use in an introduction, and "That's Uncle Harry" is more like simple identification of the person across the room. With the introduction you're inviting a rather more intimate relationship.

Or perhaps another way of looking at your original example could be: when you say "this" you're thinking of the image you have your finger on; but when you say "that" you could be taking your friend's mind more to the person the image represents. Which is probably more or less what others have said, anyway.

Maybe that too is just my cultural orientation, as I suggested in Andrew's thread on gerundives in answering metal's question on the use of resent.

Andrew might be interested in tracking down a book on pragmatics by Anna Wierbiczka in which she compares English, Polish and Jewish interpretations of the sorts of things this thread has been discussing. Unfortunately I can't put my finger on the title right now, Andrew, so I'll have to hunt it up and post it later (it's probably more appropriate for revel's other thread anyway!)

Cheers.

Norm

With the introduction you're inviting a rather more intimate relationship.

Mostly, but not always:

And that, sitting right here on Mum's prized dresser and smiling at us like a big lovable buffoon, is Uncle Henry. He's mad, but great!

[Norm Ryder]

As Andrew and Duncan will have gathered, my Polish is non-existent. I should have got Anna Wierzbicka's name right, though, as she is a Professor in Linguistics at the Australian National University only about 10k's from where I'm sitting at this moment.

The book I was thinking of, Andrew, was an earlier one than that Duncan referred to, Cross-cultural Pragmatics (1991), and as it was published in Germany (Berlin, Mouton De Gruyter) you might be able to get your hands on it more easily.

Professor Wierzbicka also has a more recent one, (1999) Emotions Across Languages and Cultures, (Cambridge University Press) which also sounds as though it chimes in with some of the interests this thread has raised. You'll find it all if you type (anything close to!) Wierzbicka in Google.

Friends, I promise to conquer the system of quoting in this forum before the end of this week. Honestly.

And yes, Larry, your right: we'd better not introduce any of this subtlety to our beginners - leave that for finishing school.

Cheers

Norm.