Confusing Construing Participants With Reference

Martin (1992: 112):

The final set of distinctions relevant to presuming reference covers the of [sic] these have the function of combining relevance with reminding phoricity in the context of [undirected] groups. The classes of item in question are:

phoric Deictics:                  both, either, neither, each, which

ordinative Numeratives:     first, second, third etc.; next, last etc.

superlative Epithets:           biggest, most enormous etc.

Each of these items has the function of referring to a group of participants relevant to the participant being identified by virtue of including it as a member.  So, within undirected reference there is a contrast between presuming the identity of the participant being realised and optionally presuming the identity of group [sic] of participants to which it belongs.

Blogger Comments:

[1] Trivially, the typographical errors here suggest that the editor of the draft had, by this stage, given up trying to understand the text.

[2] This is a bare assertion, unsupported by argument or evidence.

[3] This confuses the experiential construal of participants, realised by nominal groups, with the textual system of reference (the purported concern of the chapter).

[4] This confuses reference in the transcendent sense of language referring to categories (meanings) outside language with reference in the sense of referring to elements in the co-text.  Moreover, this again is a bare assertion, unsupported by argument or evidence.

[5] This misconstrues distinctions between potential referents as distinctions in the system that is the means of referring.  Moreover, this again is a bare assertion, unsupported by argument or evidence.