type:Text

本稿では，主節に埋め込まれずに独立して生じる非制限的関係詞節のwhich節（Which means what? / Which reminds me. など；以下，Which節）および Speaking of which の２種類の表現における非制限的関係詞whichと代名詞it/thatを機能的・語用論的観点から比較することによって，文頭に生じるwhichの指示特性を明らかにする．Which節と Speaking of which のwhichは，その代名詞的な性質ゆえにit/that と共通した指示特性を持つ一方で，それ自体で特異な分布と指示特性を持つ．これについて，神尾（1990），Kamio and Thomas（1999）による代名詞の機能上・語用論上の指示特性に沿って検討を加える．その結果，whichは話し手にとって必ずしも既獲得情報を指す必要はなく，指示集中的である必要もないこと，特に，指示対象が話し手にとって既獲得情報ではなく，whichが指示集中的ではない部分がit/thatとの違いを際立たせるwhichの特異な一面であると主張する．また，その特異性が現れやすい環境としては，その場で示された未処理の情報を受け，その情報とは別のことにも注意を向けながら会話を進める場合が相応しいことを示す．

This paper is concerned with some referential properties of the sentence-initial nonrestrictive relative pronoun which that occurs in unembedded subordinate clauses (e.g. Which means what? / Which reminds me.) and in the idiomatic phrase Speaking of which. Unlike in the case of restrictive relative pronouns, the referential properties of nonrestrictive which have been generally regarded as the same as those of the anaphoric pronouns it and that, which makes one assume that all three can be used interchangeably. In fact, apart from some shared properties, there are several functional and pragmatic differences among them, and the relative pronoun which has some referential properties of its own. In order to demonstrate the distinctiveness of the sentence-initial which expressions, I will show the differences in frequency between the whichexpressions and those with it/that substituted for which in certain circumstances. Then, some functional-pragmatic properties of which are examined in terms of “prior knowledge” and “wide/narrow reference” (referring to the referent widely / specifying it narrowly) introduced by Kamio (1990) and Kamio and Thomas (1999), in which referential differences between it and that are discussed in depth. In conclusion, I argue that which need not refer to the referent widely, which means that which is similar to that in terms of prior knowledge. I also argue that typically which refers to its preceding information vaguely, which is taken as a cue to combine it with part of the speaker’s knowledge and contextual information available on the spot, and derives an improvised utterance such as an interrogative, a recollection, etc.