This article is a critical examination of Dik’s (1997b: ch. 10) account of discourse anaphora, within the framework of the theory of Functional Grammar (but it highlights features of anaphora theory which hold more generally). I show first that Dik’s definitions of the phenomenon involve two contradictory conceptions of this discourse procedure (the anaphor refers to a mental representation of its referent within a mental model of the ongoing discourse, yet at the same time needs first to connect up with a segment of co-text- its linguistic antecedent); second, that Dik’s account of the relationship between given (pronominal) anaphor types and the “entity-order ” of their potential referents is both too rigid and too narrow; and third, tha...