That pronoun is a tricky question. I think "
someone = his"
would be unclear, and languages tend to avoid ambiguity, so sentences have one clear meaning and don't need to be interpreted.
The closest thing to an explanation I can offer is the lack of proximity between the noun and its pronoun, making "
someone = his"
impossible. Pronouns tend to imply a logical link, so to avoid confusions, but here there would be no direct link. Someone is not next to the pronoun, unlike a sentence like "
Someone has forgotten his (or their) jacket"
, where the pronoun immediately follows its noun. Ssomeone is also not the subject of the first sentence (Ungred is the subject), whereas his would be: "
Ungrid found a glass of milk at the place to his other side"
(or developping the passive form: "
The glass of milk was found by Ungrid at the place to his other side"
).
On another note, if his was someone, there would have been no need to start another sentence: instead, a relative clause like "
who found a glass of milk to his other side"
could have been written. On the other hand, the current sentence requires a break somewhere, creating two propositions that could be independent (possibly introduced by and, "
and to his other side he found the glass of milk"
).
So, I think the pronoun is too far away from someone for them to be connected, and a change in the perspective would have been probably better emphasised, with a break in the sentence(s) or a phrase like "
as for himself"
, "
this person"
, or some such. Still, while I had no doubt about who was him, it *is* a lot harder to explain why it is so. Well, at least I tried.
[Last edited by Alneyan at 11-04-2005 01:02 PM]
?